Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship: How Race, Ethnicity, and Culture Shape Sense of Belonging 1593325037, 9781593325039

Citation preview

The New Americans Recent Immigration and American Society

Edited by Steven J. Gold and Rubén G. Rumbaut

A Series from LFB Scholarly

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship How Race, Ethnicity, and Culture Shape Sense of Belonging

Diem T. Nguyen

LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC El Paso 2012

Copyright © 2012 by LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC All rights reserved. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Nguyen, Diem T. Vietnamese immigrant youth and citizenship : how race, ethnicity, and culture shape sense of belonging / Diem T. Nguyen. p. cm. -- (The new Americans: recent immigration and American society) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59332-503-9 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Vietnamese American teenagers--United States--Ethnic identity. 2. Vietnamese American teenagers--United States--Attitudes. 3. Teenage immigrants--United States. 4. Citizenship--United States. I. Title. E184.V53N345 2012 305.9'069120835--dc23 2011036555

ISBN 978-1-59332-503-9 Printed on acid-free 250-year-life paper. Manufactured in the United States of America.

Table of Contents

List of Tables .......................................................................................vii Acknowledgements............................................................................... ix CHAPTER ONE: Introduction .............................................................. 1 CHAPTER TWO: From Displacement to Diaspora: Background on the Changing Patterns of Migration and Adaptation of Vietnamese Immigrants in the United States................................ 31 CHAPTER THREE: Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants... 43 CHAPTER FOUR: Becoming Racialized: Engaging with Racialized Discourses and Meanings............................................ 77 CHAPTER FIVE: “Becoming American:” How the Vietnamese Immigrant Youth Differentiate and Construct Notions of Americanness and Citizenship.................................................... 119 CHAPTER SIX: In-Between Spaces: Suturing Identities and Sense of Belonging from Multiple Social, Cultural, and National Contexts ...................................................................................... 157 CHAPTER SEVEN: Summary, Implications, and Conclusion ......... 199 Definition of Terms ........................................................................... 213 Appendices ........................................................................................ 219 References.......................................................................................... 225 Index .................................................................................................. 241

v

List of Tables

Table 3.1: Immigration by region and selected country of origin (1891-2000) ........................................................................... 46 Table 3.2: Educational Attainment of the U.S. Population Age 25 and Older .......................................................................... 48 Table 3.3: Major Occupation Group of Immigrant Workers ............... 49

vii

Acknowledgements

The completion of this book was possible because of the tremendous support, guidance, and encouragement of a great deal of many people. First, I wish to acknowledge and thank all of my participants – teachers, students, and parents – who shared so much of themselves – their experiences, insights, questions, concerns, and future outlook. I am forever grateful to all of the students for allowing me to accompany them along their initial journeys to understanding schooling and life in the United States. I thank them for bringing me into the folds of their lives and for trusting me with their stories. I wish to thank Dr. James A. Banks for all the guidance that he had given me throughout the writing of this book. I wish to acknowledge and thank Dr. Tom Stritikus for introducing me to and guiding me on this inquiry journey. I will always be grateful to him for his encouragement and support in both my academic and community interests and work. I would also like to thank Dr. Ed Taylor and Dr. David Allen for all of their guidance and support. And last but not least, I want to thank my family for their generous support and understanding throughout this long journey. I especially want to thank Genji, my husband, for his endless patience, support, and love. His presence, sense of humor, and encouragement helped me to keep moving forward. And, finally I want to thank my mother for instilling in me the belief that education is the path to freedom. Her strength, wisdom, love, and courage have and will always be my source of inspiration.

ix

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

The “Pledge of Allegiance” was part of the school-wide morning announcements. Every morning as the student-led pledge was recited over the P.A. system, Mr. Kent directed his ESL students to place their right hands on their chests, face the flag, and follow along the recitation. Most of the students in Mr. Kent’s 10th grade science class recited as much of the pledge as they could. But after the initial phrase, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,” they trailed off to an almost inaudible level. While they were not able to recite the entire pledge, the students remained standing and facing the flag. After the announcements, I asked two Vietnamese immigrant students what they thought of the “Pledge of Allegiance.” Hai, a 19year-old male student, who has been in the U.S. for two years replied: It is important to learn the pledge to the flag because it displays an appreciation for America. America took me in and I live here now. I want to express my appreciation. I will become a citizen of America one day; however, I don’t see myself becoming an American on the inside. I could never forget my roots or my language. But I will become a citizen... Besides, how can a Vietnamese immigrant ever be an American? We are Vietnamese and will not be seen as Americans. Linh, a 16-year-old female student, responded: Becoming an American is an opportunity to help me to be more successful. I want to learn English and American culture so that I can succeed in school and find a good and important 1

2

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship job. Even though I miss Vietnam and want to go back someday, there is more freedom for girls and women here in America than in Vietnam. I think it is important to learn American culture and English. Saying the “Pledge” is a good way to learn more about American culture. (Field notes, October 2005)

The process for Vietnamese immigrant youth in the United States to become American and develop citizenship takes on multiple dimensions and purposes and is tied to a struggle between pursuing a new life and maintaining their cultural “roots.” As the immigrant youth become exposed to and engaged with the different discourses on American culture, social practices, and notions of citizenship from their peers and teachers in school, family and community members, and the media – print, television, and internet – their interpretation of what it means to become American continues to shift to reflect these new ideas and practices. Everyday social practices and routines become powerful symbols and part of the process of becoming American. The excerpts above provide an example of how Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study engage with everyday occurrences and connect them with their notions of citizenship and becoming American. After the morning exercise of reciting the “Pledge of Allegiance” at their school, two Vietnamese immigrant students, Hai and Linh, interpreted the procession as connected to the process of “becoming American.” However, their interpretations of what it means to become American contrast with each other and focus on different priorities. Hai highlighted his appreciation for his adopted nation but also acknowledged that citizenship is connected to cultural roots. He interpreted the act of becoming a naturalized citizen as an external display of appreciation and loyalty for his adopted nation; however, he did not consider himself as an American on a cultural level – that is accepting American values and traditions. Becoming an American culturally represents a relinquishment of his ethnic and cultural Vietnamese identity. And, even if he did consider himself an American, Hai believed that society would not accept him as one; he would always be seen as an immigrant, an outsider, or an “other.” Learning to become American for Hai and other Vietnamese immigrant students is

Introduction

3

met with the realizations of social, cultural, and racial exclusions and discrimination. In contrast, Linh, a 16-year-old female student, viewed the process of citizenship formation as connected to language and cultural knowledge acquisition, which is critical for social and economic achievement. As a female who had fewer opportunities in her native country, Linh wanted to capitalize on the opportunities offered to women in the United States. The meanings that both Hai and Linh derived from many of the daily practices in their school, such as the “Pledge of Allegiance,” reminded them of the constant tensions between cultural identity development and the process of becoming American. Citizenship is a significant aspect of immigrants’ adaptation as they contemplate and reconcile the meaning and significance of becoming a citizen in their host country while maintaining connections to their cultures, languages, histories, and countries of origin. While citizenship is mainly positioned within the legal and political realms of a nation-state, it also interfaces with other social and cultural institutions and practices within society (Benihabib, 2002; Hall, 2002; Lowe, 1997; Oboler, 2006; Ong, 2003). Lowe (1997) defines citizenship as situating within a space that is at once, juridically legislated, territorially situated, and culturally embodied. Although the law is perhaps the discourse that most literally governs citizenship, U.S. national culture – the collectively forged images, histories, and narratives that place, displace, and replace individuals in relation to the national polity – powerfully shapes who the citizenry is, where they dwell, what they remember, and what they forget. (p. 2) Citizenship not only conveys a person’s legal standing and membership to a nation-state, but also his/her sense of cultural belonging and connection to a shared national narrative and history. However, in many multicultural and multiethnic nation-states, the sense of cultural belonging and shared national history often becomes ruptured and incongruent as the narratives and experiences of mainstream and minority groups develop along different paths. Issues

4

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

of race, ethnicity, language, and culture become critical factors in citizenship development, and minority groups are often subjected to discrimination and other forms of exclusion preventing them from becoming full and whole citizens (Castles, 2000; Coll, 2010; Foner, 2008; Ladson-Billings, 2004a; Oboler, 2006; Ong, 2003). Citizenship formation for minority groups within multicultural and multiethnic nation-states is often tied to the struggles for equal rights, recognition, and in forging a sense of belonging. The process of becoming a citizen for immigrants is further complicated by the struggle to balance between adaptation and maintenance of cultural traditions and beliefs. Immigrant adaptation is connected to the social, cultural, and political forces both in the larger mainstream society as well as in their ethnic, cultural, and transnational communities. Their ideas and interpretations of citizenship move beyond simply becoming a part of the mainstream culture, language, and national narrative; citizenship is also intertwined with their culture, heritage, history, and community (Reed-Danahay, 2008; Hall, 2002). Citizenship formation for immigrants is also becoming increasingly connected to globalization. Globalization, Immigration, and Citizenship The path that globalization has carved across the world has not only helped to increase socio-economic, political, and cultural exchanges among nations, it has also led to increases in human migration – both within and across nation-states (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Castles & Miller, 2003). The pattern of global human migration has shifted as growing numbers of people travel in search of educational and employment opportunities while continuing to maintain family ties and citizenship status with their homelands (Ong, 1999; Rizvi, 2000; Wong, 2008). Immigration, traditionally, viewed as a permanent move from one country to another (Rizvi, 2000) has become a temporary component of work, study, and leisure for many people, in particular among the elite. While international travel is not new, ease and affordability of transportation and closer social, economic, and political ties among nations have made it more accessible and have helped to transform the function and meaning of citizenship for many people.

Introduction

5

Notions of national belonging and citizenship are becoming more flexible (Ong, 1999, 2003, 2004) as people are no longer identifying citizenship as having membership to one particular nation-state. Currently, there are millions of international travelers who possess dual or multiple citizenships, making them part of the growing population of flexible citizens (Ong, 2003, 2004) or transnational communities (Bhabha, 1996; Brittain, 2002; Rizvi, 2000), in contrast to millions of others who do not have citizenship in the nation in which they have settled (Castles, 2004; Ong, 2003; Reed-Danahay & Brettell, 2008). The growing numbers of immigrants who hold multiple passports and citizenships are redefining the meaning and function of citizenship. Those who possess multiple citizenships have membership, access, and privileges to social, economic, and physical mobility in multiple nationstates. Immigrants who cross international borders without citizenship or those who are not part of the social elite are often socially and politically vulnerable and marginalized (Ong, 2003). Ong writes that for disadvantaged newcomers, citizenship is not a matter of acquiring multiple passports or identifying business opportunities, real estate deals, or top universities in global cities, but rather a matter of figuring out the rules of coping, navigating, and surviving the streets and other public spaces of the American city. (p. xiv) The expanding categories of citizenship to which global migrants belong significantly alter the social, political, and educational landscapes of the host nation-states, such as the United States, as these citizenship categories suggest and generate varying needs and expectations from schools and other social institutions. As new perspectives on citizenship continue to emerge, they push the discussion of citizenship and citizenship education to a crossroad between maintaining a traditional sense of national and cultural belonging and forging new meanings and purpose in the face of growing diversity. Integrating newcomers becomes even more challenging as the meanings and purposes defined by conventional ideas of citizenship no longer hold true for everyone in this constantly changing demographic context.

6

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Citizenship has not only generated attention and discussion among policymakers, educators, and scholars focusing on immigrants and their children, but around the world, citizenship has also become a focal point of debate across different academic disciplines – from political science and economics to philosophy and education. As the forces of globalization create more connections and interdependence among different nation-states and push against the socio-economic, political, and cultural boundaries that have previously defined and separated these nations, normative understandings of citizenship become challenged and unraveled. The notion of citizenship is contested in two main areas: the physical and political boundaries that separate citizenship (single nation-state vs. global citizenship) and the tension between individual and group rights (Isin & Wood, 1999). Multiple Perspectives of Citizenship The modern western conception of citizenship has been widely recognized as having membership to a single nation-state with clear border demarcations (Cairns, 1999; Nussbaum, 2002). Additionally, citizenship in nation-states grants membership status to a national group identity and all the rights, duties, and protection expressed under the law (Delanty, 1999; Isin & Wood, 1999; Soysal, 1994). The basis of modern western conception of citizenship is built on the idea that an individual belongs to a single nation-state and enjoys the rights, privileges, and responsibilities designated to members of that particular nation-state. This concept of citizenship is structured around the notion of a single-nation state. However, forces of globalization have begun to reshape aspects of cultural practices and socio-economic and political structures within national boundaries, including the meanings and function of citizenship. Emerging ideas and theories of citizenship are transforming not only the debate on citizenship but also the ways in which people incorporate these ideas into their everyday practices. The notion of global citizenship or cosmopolitanism (Nussbaum, 2002), for example, which proposes for citizenship to be organized around principles of cosmopolitanism or global citizenship rather than national belonging, has gained noticeable attention in the debate on citizenship. Cosmopolitanism and other forms of citizenship that push for the restructuring of citizenship around the principles of global community

Introduction

7

contrast sharply with the existing model of single-nation state citizenship in which members have specific national membership. While cosmopolitanism argues for the restructuring of citizenship to include universal rights for all individuals throughout the world, group rights advocates recognize cultural citizenship within multicultural nation-states (Flores & Benmayor, 1997; Isin & Wood, 1999; Kymlicka, 2000, 2004; Rosaldo, 1997). Group rights, which have been supported by many multiculturalists to recognize the rights and cultures of indigenous and ethnic minority groups within diverse multicultural nation-states, go explicitly against the ideas of individual rights citizenship. As forces of globalization decenter cultural, political, and economic boundaries among nation-states, different theories of citizenship continue to emerge and push against traditional perceptions and understandings of citizenship. While the notions of globalization, increased immigration, and citizenship are generating many ideas, opinions, and thinking in different disciplines, few studies provide empirical evidence that speak to the intersection of these social forces, particularly studies that focus on the connection between immigrant students and the role that schools function in shaping their citizenship. Schools in the United States are becoming more racially, culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse due to increased immigration (Suarez-Orozco, 2004). While issues of immigration and diversity are not new for U.S. schools, the question of how to incorporate immigrant students into the larger social, cultural, and civic life remains a challenge. What kind of citizens should schools help to prepare immigrant students to become? Do the ways that social institutions, such as schools, interpret the meanings of citizenship and citizenship education connect with how immigrants perceive and understand them? How are the different ways in which immigrants perceive and enact citizenship challenging conventional understandings of citizenship and other social, cultural, and political structures in U.S. society? These questions on immigration, citizenship, and education are becoming increasingly urgent in light of growing numbers of immigrants – both documented and undocumented – arriving to the United States.

8

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

THE STUDY This study examines the processes that immigrant youth undergo as they transition to their new school contexts and begin to engage with issues of race, culture, ethnicity, gender, and ideas of citizenship. More specifically, highlighting the experiences, conversations, and thought processes of a group of Vietnamese immigrant youth through an ethnographic study, this research project examines the ways in which immigrant youth interpret and employ the cultural contexts, social encounters, and discourses around them to negotiate cultural, academic, civic, and national identities. Citizenship formation for the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study is a complex process that raises questions about balancing between their two cultural worlds – their traditional cultural practices and the new ideas and practices they encounter in the United States. Citizenship also hinges on issues of race, ethnicity, class, culture, gender, and language, which complicate the narrow view that citizenship is a matter of law and national membership – either you are a citizen or you are not (Ong, 2003). While each individual immigrant youth’s interpretation of citizenship reflects a different meaning, idea, and feeling about citizenship; their collective narrative tells a larger story of adaptation, cultural identity maintenance, and the struggle to belong – socially, culturally, and nationally. Part of the immigrant youth’s struggle to become what Ong (2003) suggests as “good enough citizens” is learning to become adept at reading and deciphering the different messages, cultural practices, rules, and regulations around them in order to create a sense of connection not only to the mainstream culture but also to their ethnic community. This study attempts to capture the ways in which the youth engage with and decipher these different ideas and practices that exist in their multiple cultural sites. Description of the Research This ethnographic study focuses on the ways in which recent Vietnamese immigrant youth understand and represent their social, cultural, and national identities. The study addresses the following research questions:

Introduction ƒ ƒ

9

How do Vietnamese immigrant youth make sense of the complex interactions among race, ethnicity, culture, and citizenship? How do the ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth understand their social, cultural, and national identities influence how they talk about their future opportunities and sense of belonging – socially, culturally, and politically?

Using ethnography allowed me to capture the social interactions, accounts, and discourses of the Vietnamese immigrant youth in their different cultural contexts. I wanted to see the ways in which the youth embodied and enacted citizenship in their everyday social and cultural routines. Immigrant youth’s lives are structured across multiple cultural contexts (Hall, 2002; Olsen, 1997; Rumbaut & Portes, 2001; Sarroub, 2005; Stritikus & Nguyen, 2007; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008; Zhou, 2001; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998; Waters,1996, 1999) and to more fully capture and understand the ways in which they move across different spaces – between home and school, peer groups, classrooms – this study included observations of the youth in school, home, and community spaces. It focused mainly on the school context as it was one of the sites where immigrant youth learned and engaged with mainstream cultural ideas as well as interacted with peers and teachers. Observing the youth within a school context is important as schools continue to play a critical role in socializing and integrating newcomers into the mainstream culture (Hall, 2002; Olsen, 1997). Hall (2002) writes: Schools are sites in which people come together from various social worlds to construct and enact the rituals and routines of schooling in everyday practice. These rituals and routines entail two distinctive but related educational processes: the intentional or overt pedagogical practices, or direct teaching and learning in classrooms, and…the values, beliefs, and norms that are enacted during day-to-day life in schools. These normative routines and rituals of schooling are central mechanisms in processes of subject formation. (p. 88) In framing, implementing, and analyzing this project, I took into consideration many of the ideas, concerns, and tenets of ethnographic

10

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

research, in particular, the role and function of the researcher. The researcher in ethnographic research becomes an instrument of the study (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Wolcott, 1997) and one of her roles is to capture the “social discourses” of the group or community (Geertz, 1973). The role of the researcher in doing ethnography, Geertz (1973) elaborates, is establishing rapport, selecting informants, transcribing texts, taking genealogies, mapping fields, keeping a diary, and so on. But it is not these things, techniques and received procedures, that define the enterprise. What defines it is the kind of intellectual effort it is: an elaborate venture in…“thick descriptions.” (p. 6) This ethnographic study involved observing and interacting with recent Vietnamese immigrant students in a high school, home, and in community settings. Profile Sketch of the School: The main setting for this study took place at a high school called Englewood High1 in an urban Pacific Northwest school district. The school district was highly diverse. Fifty-eight percent of the student population was made up of racial and ethnic minority student groups. The ethnic make-up of the student population was: 22 percent African American; 23 percent Asian and Pacific Islander; 11 percent Latino; 2.4 percent Native American; and 41 percent White for the year 20042005. The English language learner (ELL) student population of the school district consisted of 21.4 percent of the total school age population. Englewood High School was chosen as the site for this research study because a significant number of immigrant students – particularly Vietnamese immigrant students – were enrolled there. Englewood High was a comprehensive 9-12 high school located in a mixed income neighborhood serving 1,167 students. Englewood had one of the larger ESL departments in the district with 15 percent of the total student population classified as ELL. The large ELL student 1

The school and participants’ names in the study have been changed to maintain participants’ anonymity.

Introduction

11

population contributed to the school’s high level of diversity. Thirtyfour percent of the student body was Asian and Pacific Islander, 34 percent was Caucasian, 22 percent was African-American, and nine percent was Latino.2 Englewood High was located approximately 20 miles north of where many of the immigrant students lived in the southern end of the city. Many of the immigrant students were bussed to and from school, at a distance of 17-22 miles. While there were several large high schools available in their own neighborhood, many immigrant students chose Englewood High for its academic reputation and also because the school had a large immigrant population. The school was a sprawling one-story building with six different wings. The entire school and its surrounding property of big green fields, pine trees, and large parking lot took up over three blocks. Space was not an issue at Englewood. Hallways were often spaces where students congregated during breaks, before school, and during lunch, making them the main spaces for social interactions. In between class and during breaks, hallways were always filled with student activities, from drumming sessions and dancing groups to poetry reading and martial arts practice. There were many displays showcasing students’ academic achievement, community service, and athleticism. Photographs of student activities, trophies, and student work were part of the school’s decorations. Departments were clustered together in different hallways – with the ESL department consisting of four different classrooms – taking up one small corner of the southwest wing of the school. While the diversity was visible in the corridors of the school, the student groups at the end of the southwest wing were differentiated by racial, ethnic, and language groups. This hallway became the “international space” filled with many of the different languages that the spoken in the school. Throughout the school, there was a sense that it was an older school trying to grow and accommodate new ideas, students, and activities.

2

Statistics gathered from School District Demographic Information.

12

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Theoretical Frame: Theorizing Citizenship Construction of Immigrant Youth This study examines the ways in which the youth define and form meaningful citizenship and sense of belonging as they navigate between the two cultural systems of what Hall (2002) distinguishes as the public and private domains of their lives. While citizenship is commonly associated with the political and legal spheres, the different bodies of literature on immigrant adaptation and education, citizenship theories, globalization and citizenship, in particular works by Hall (2002), Lowe (1996), and Ong (2003), consider citizenship formation as a complex social incorporation or integration process that intersects with multiple social, cultural, and political dimensions in the lives of immigrants. Lowe (1996) explains that the national cultural landscape plays a critical role in defining and sustaining citizenship – or national identity. She describes the formation of the American cultural landscape and the ways it shapes the American identity: [The cultural terrain is] introduced by the Statue of Liberty, discovered by the immigrant, dreamed in a common language, and defended in battle by the independent, self-made man. The heroic quest, the triumph over weakness, the promises of salvation, prosperity, and progress: this is the American feeling, the style of life, the ethos and spirit of being. It is in this passing by way of this terrain of culture that the subject is immersed in the repertoire of American memories, events, and narratives and comes to articulate itself in the domain of language, social hierarchy, law, and ultimately, political representation. (p. 2) The cultural terrain contributes to the collective narrative and language that defines the meanings, values, and ideals of a national identity. While the legal and political dimensions of citizenship tend to refer to an individual’s national status and civic responsibilities and activities, the cultural dimension of citizenship conveys a sense of national connectedness and belonging. Lowe (1996) explains: “It is

Introduction

13

through culture that the subject becomes, acts, and speaks of itself as ‘American’” (p. 3). Similar to Lowe, Hall (2002) defines citizenship as a form of cultural production, which occurs as individuals, such as the British Sikh immigrant youth in her study, navigate between the private and public domains of their everyday life. Hall (2002) writes: These [citizenship] processes entail complex and multiple forms of cultural politics, which…play out across a number of sites within the public sphere of democratic capitalist nations, in law and policy, education and the media, as well as in families and ethnic communities. In the context of these cultural politics, ‘immigrants’ are produced as multiple types of subjects associated with distinctive ‘minority’ statuses that classify those so defined in racial, ethnic, religious, linguistic, generational, and gendered terms. It is here…within the varied form of cultural production at work in the public sphere, that identities and subjectivities are ‘made.’ (p. 2) The Sikh immigrant youth’s subjectivities are produced and reproduced through the acts of “translations” and negotiations as they cross between their different social and cultural worlds (Hall, 2002). These various forms of cultural productions – the interpretation, re-enactment, and reification of social and cultural ideas, values, and practices – that take place in both the private and public arenas help to create the different social identities of the immigrant youth – their racial, ethnic, cultural, gender, class, linguistic, religious, and national identifications. Approaching the citizenship formation of immigrant youth as a multi-dimensional social incorporation process created opportunities for me to examine the various ways in which citizenship played out in their lives. It reduced the tendency to simply classify the youth under their nationality or ethnicity. This frame of multi-dimensional citizenship instead pushed me to explore the meanings that the youth attributed to the different identities that they have constructed – such as Vietnamese, Asian, Vietnamese American, Asian American, and American. My challenge was to understand what these different identities represented for the youth – socially, culturally, and politically? How did they arrive at these different categories? How did

14

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

these different racial and ethnic identities contribute to their sense of belonging? Citizenship as Identity Formation Becoming a citizen is an integral part of the larger social, cultural, and political identity formation process (Hall, 2002; Lowe, 1996; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999). Identity in this study is defined as the ways in which immigrant youth come to be in the world – how they situate themselves in relation to both the interweaving and at times competing discourses of race, culture, ethnicity, gender, class, and nation. Drawing on Foucault (1994), Hall (1996), Hall (2002), McAfee (2000), and Raissiguier (1999) identity formation and subjectivity is defined as relational and in-process as opposed to fixed or complete. Relational subjectivity is a subject-in-the making. McAfee (2000) explains that the subject that is in-process works in deeper and more interconnected ways: [O]ur very subjectivity is constituted relationally, in the relation between conscious and unconscious, semiotic and symbolic, self and other; also in the various political identities that we hold simultaneously. All these relations involve tension, yet at the same time they are productive. As relational subjectivities we are always ‘under construction,’ always producing ourselves and each other. (p. 129)

Raissiguier (1999) suggests that as a relational process, subjectivity or identity formation should be interpreted and analyzed within a sociohistorical and cultural location “mediated through the cultural and discursive context to which [the immigrant youth] have access” (p. 140). In sum, identity in this study is defined as never complete, always ‘in-process’ and emerging out of discursive practices as new discourses are incorporated into the youth’s everyday social and cultural routines and practices (Hall, 1996; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999). Citizenship, Identity, and Discourse Discourse has multiple meanings. In general terms, it refers to linguistic meanings – both written and spoken (Gee, 1999; Sunderland,

Introduction

15

2004). Discourse can be used to distinguish the different languages and meanings in various social or institutional settings (Fairclough, 1992). Individuals can have access to numerous discourses as they may be associated with or belong to a variety of social, cultural, or political groups or communities. As a form of language, discourse signifies meanings, knowledge, and beliefs. However, language alone does not constitute identity or subjectivity. It is the language in combination with the “non-language ‘stuff’” that contributes to the formation of identity. In defining the multiple layers of discourse, Gee (1999) includes the language one uses and “one’s body, clothes, gestures, actions, interactions, symbols, tools, technologies…values, attitudes, beliefs, and emotions” as well as the time frame and context (p. 7). These activities, which Gee calls small “d” discourse, acting in combination with each other help to form a subject or big “D” Discourse. For Foucault (1984, 1990), discourses refer to different ways of structuring knowledge and constituting the subject. Discourses also serve as mechanisms for enacting and channeling power. Foucault (1990) explains the ways in which discourses interact with power: We must make allowance for the complex and unstable process whereby discourse can be both an instrument and an effect of power, but also a hindrance, a stumbling-block, a point of resistance and a starting point for an opposing strategy. Discourse transmits and produces power; it reinforces it, but also undermines and exposes it, renders it fragile and makes it possible to thwart it. (pp. 100-101) In this study, while I occasionally use discourse to mean the general language usage, I mainly refer to it as a way of seeing and interpreting social life and one’s connection to, role, and function in it. This frame builds on Sunderland’s (2004) notion of discourse as a “broad constitutive systems of meaning” and the knowledge, values, practices, and power structure connected with that social context (p. 6). While they function as linguistic apparatuses for representing experience, knowledge, and reality, discourses should be understood and analyzed within social, cultural, and historical contexts (Raissiguier, 1999). Discourse is both constructed – as part of a social

16

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

or institutional structure – and constructing, as it shapes meanings, ideas, and knowledge and influences the ways in which people describe and represent themselves. The different discourses that the immigrant youth absorb from their cultural contexts and use to articulate and represent their social, cultural, and political identities are also indications of how processes of socialization and integration are taking place in their lives. The discourses produced within the institutional setting – school – becomes a medium of power as it actively works to produce the ways in which the youth construct meanings, knowledge, and ideas of themselves (Foucault, 1976, 1978). However, as discourse can serve to define meanings and representations for students, it can also be an element of counter-force or resistance. Foucault (1978) writes: There is not, on the one side, a discourse of power, and opposite it, another discourse that runs counter to it…there can exist different and even contradictory discourses within the same strategy; they can, on the contrary, circulate without changing their form from one strategy to another, opposing strategy. (p. 102) Foucault’s notion of discourse as both conveying and resisting power suggests that the social, cultural, and national identities that the immigrant youth construct and represent through their discourse may be informed by both the institution’s discourses as well the students’ home culture and values. The ways in which the multiple layers of discourses play out in the youth’s everyday routines can provide them with the knowledge, ideas, and skills to navigate in their different social and cultural worlds as well as create enormous tensions among these different dimensions of their lives (Hall, 2002). The different theoretical lenses on the interconnectedness of citizenship, subjectivity, and discourse form a frame to examine and interpret the ways in which immigrant youth develop their social, cultural, and national identities. Citizenship is conceptualized as part of identity formation, which is defined as a fluid and contextual process. As an evolving process, identity is negotiated between the various social and cultural interactions and discursive practices (Hall, 1996, 1997; Holland et al., 1998; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999). Identity

Introduction

17

becomes a dual process of “self-making and being made” (Ong, 1996, cited in Maira, 2004, p. 216) in which constant improvisations take place to create a sense of self. Identity formation is also about forging a sense of belonging or about with whom one chooses to align oneself in particular social and political circumstances. It concerns how one constructs oneself in alignment or in association with a group. Connecting citizenship to this notion of subjectivity or identity formation allows me to more accurately capture, understand, and analyze the ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant students negotiate and construct social, cultural, and national identities as they engage with the different meanings and discourses on race, cultural identity, gender, and nationality in both the public and private domains of their lives. This frame helps me to focus on the process of citizenship formation as opposed to the status of nationality or racial and ethnic identity. It challenges me to understand the ways in which discourses of race, ethnicity, culture, gender, and nationality influence how the immigrant youth construct citizenship and imagine their future possibilities. Data Collection Data collection took place through participant observation, classroom observation, students’ schoolwork (documentary analysis), informal interviews, and semi-structured interviews. These different data collection strategies served as important ways for the researcher to become immersed in the community and see participants in their everyday social and cultural surroundings (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Geertz, 1973; Wolcott, 1997). They provided opportunities to interact and follow-up with participants. In addition, these various techniques helped to triangulate data sources, enhancing data reliability and validity. Participant Observation Classroom observations included data on students’ responses to classroom teaching and data on their behavior and actions in classrooms. These observations focused on how students engaged with the teachers’ instructing techniques and how they responded to the classroom learning context. My observations also focused on students’

18

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

interactions with each other to understand with whom and how they engaged with their peers. I conducted classroom observations in a government, senior project, and language arts classroom four times a week during the first semester and three times a week during the second semester of the 2005-2006 school year. General school community observations consisted of participant observation of students during their lunch hour and during some informal social gatherings in-between classes. I also observed the students when the Vietnamese American Student Association met. Interacting with students outside of their classrooms allowed me to see them in their day-to-day social contexts. It helped me to understand how students navigated within the school – in the physical, social, and cultural sense. I also observed how students engaged with the larger school community and culture and how they made use of out-of-class time. Observations were recorded in field notes and then typed as transcripts. Many of the students’ informal conversations were audiorecorded when appropriate. Many of the youth’s conversations in the hallways, library, and in the car were also audio-recorded. In total, I spent 250 hours observing the participants in their social contexts in school. I also spent time observing students in their homes and community settings (temple, eateries, grocery stores, etc.) to further understand how their home life and community contexts influence the ways in which they thought about culture, and citizenship, and sense of belonging. In addition, observing students in their social spaces outside of school such as provided opportunities for me to see students’ social behaviors and interactions with peers outside of school. Interviews Interviews were useful in capturing how students articulated their thoughts and ideas. I conducted both informal and semi-structured interviews. Informal interviews were more spontaneous flow of conversations whereas semi-structured interviews followed a protocol (see Appendix B for protocol). Informal interviews with teachers followed classroom and outside-of-class observations. Informal interviews with students took place in classrooms, in the hallways, lunchroom, or other social settings. These informal interviews with students helped me to further understand how they perceived

Introduction

19

instruction and the messages they have gained from the classroom or other social contexts in the school. Informal interviews with teachers were occasions to follow-up and clarify classroom instruction and to better grasp teachers’ goals and expectations. Both observations and informal follow-up interviews generated data on classroom learning and students’ ideas of learning and schooling. Semi-structured interviews with students provided a more formal time for talking with them about issues related to their learning, adaptation process, and future hopes and goals. I conducted between 13 semi-structured interview sessions with a total of 12 students. Each of these interviews lasted between 45-50 minutes. Interviews were conducted during students’ study hall periods. In some cases, students did not have study hall, so I sought permission from one of their teachers to conduct the interview. I also conducted two of interviews after school since they were the best times for these particular students. All interviews with students were conducted in Vietnamese to lessen students’ anxiety and fear about speaking extensively in English. The interviews were then translated and transcribed by me. After the interviews were translated and transcribed, I had them reviewed by another person for accuracy and consistency. Data Analysis The analysis for this ethnographic project was on-going and took place throughout the data-collection process, rather than after the datacollection. This is a way to interact with the data on an on-going basis. The initial stage of analysis included critical commentaries, which are my notes, ideas, reflections, and follow-up questions that I wanted to pursue with the participants (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995). This process of meaning-making was a key analytical step of ethnography. Classification or coding the data followed. These next steps of theorizing helped to manage and reduce the amount of data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Using a computer software program, Atlas ti, codes were generated consisting of single words, phrases, or sentences. These codes were then attached to the actual data as I read through each transcription. The linking of codes to the data “is a mixture of data reduction and data complication” (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996, p. 30). In analyzing ethnographic data, codes are initially generated from the conceptual framework, the research questions, and existing research

20

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

literature (Thomas, 1993). These initial codes provided a starting list, which were refined and added to during the process of data coding and analysis (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994). The coding or data categorization process generated themes and patterns (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Stringer, 2004). As patterns and themes emerged from the data set, Miles and Huberman ( 1994) suggest moving from the particulars to the general or more abstracted level, after the themes and patterns are somewhat clustered. They write, “Subsuming particulars into more general classes is a conceptual and theoretical activity in which you shuttle back and forth between firstlevel data and more general categories that evolve and develop through successive iterations until the category is ‘saturated’ (p. 256). The general abstractions that arose from the data were then examined and interpreted within the broader sociocultural and historical context (Kincheloe & McLaren, 2002). In addition, another layer of discursive analysis was used to illustrate how language is used to represent students, their knowledge, and sense of self and the meanings that can be drawn from these representations (Naples, 2003; Raissiguier, 1999). Participants: Participants for this study were 23 Vietnamese students, two teachers, and two instructional aides.3 Vietnamese students were chosen for this study to eliminate the language barrier.4 They were also the focus of this study because over the past two decades Vietnamese immigrant students have increasingly make up a large part of the ELL student population in this school district as well as throughout the U.S., yet few research studies have been conducted to examine the Vietnamese immigrant students’ social, cultural, and academic adjustments. I observed and shadowed all 23 student participants and conducted follow-up interviews with 12 of them, six females and six 3

Most of the student participants were from the previous study (Immigrant Student Adaptation at the Newcomer Center) in which I had served as a research assistant. I had been tracking the students’ progress and socialization process since the first day that they had entered school at the Newcomer Center. 4 All interviews and interactions with students were initiated in Vietnamese. Over time, students began to respond in the language that was most comfortable to them. They began to switch back and forth between Vietnamese and English to express their ideas and thoughts.

Introduction

21

males, for a period of one academic year, starting in September, 2005 and ending in June, 2006. The range of participants’ age and mix of gender allowed important contrast and variations in the study. Having this range and mix of participants provided opportunities to establish emerging patterns shared by the students. I chose high school age students because I was also interested in learning how immigrant youth perceived and negotiated between different languages and cultural contexts to construct their social, cultural, and national identities in a school site. Most of the Vietnamese immigrant youth had been in the U.S. for less than five years. As immigrant students continue to remain in school, they will continue to change socially, culturally, and linguistically. Research findings suggest that length of residency in the U.S. is associated with decline in school achievement, aspirations, and health status (Ogbu, 2001; Rumbaut & Portes, 2001; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008; Zhou, 1997). Research indicates a correlation between longer length of stay in the U.S. and lower academic achievement and lack of future aspirations for many immigrant groups. Because this is a pattern that emerges over time, examining students at an early stage of their transition may provide some insight into this emerging phenomenon. Positionality: Negotiating researcher and community member roles A growing number of scholars are drawing attention to the fact that researchers have, for long, contributed to the exploitation and objectification of people and communities in which they studied (Naples, 2003; Smith, 1999; Villenas, 1996). Research serves as a powerful mechanism for defining and sanctioning ideas and beliefs. It has played a prominent role in constructing and sustaining the notion of minority groups as the “Other” (Smith, 1999; Villenas, 1996). Many scholars are calling ethnographic and qualitative researchers to examine their social, cultural, race, gender, age, and class backgrounds – or their positionality – in the process of observing, transcribing, analyzing, and writing about women and minority groups as ways to reduce the tendency to essentialize these groups or categorize them as the “Others” (Banks, 1998; Code, 1991; Naples, 2003; Smith, 1999; Villenas, 1996). Smith (1999) writes:

22

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Research is one of the ways in which the underlying code of imperialism and colonialism is both regulated and realized. It is regulated through the formal rules of individual scholarly disciplines and scientific paradigms, and the institutions that support them (including the state). It is realized in the myriad of representations and ideological constructions of the Other in scholarly and ‘popular’ works, and in the principles which help to select and recontextualize those constructions in such things as the media, official histories and school curricula. (p. 7)

As researchers, our positionality will always influence how we interpret and represent the people and communities in which we research. Examining and making transparent our personal and political positions and the different ways that they influence how we design, implement, and interpret our research is a critical piece in decreasing the chances of further exploiting and objectifying these communities (Villenas, 1996). Researchers who are members of the communities in which they study, may find themselves in a position of both “insider” and “outsider.” They often encounter the problem of serving as a part of both the dominant mainstream as well as the marginalized community – a dilemma that creates high levels of tension for the researcher as well as between the researcher and researched participants. Villenas (1996), a Chicana ethnographer who studied Latino communities, describes her dilemma as being both colonized and colonizer. She writes: I am the colonized in relation to the greater society, to the institution of higher learning, and to the dominant institution of higher learning, and to the dominant majority culture in the research setting. I am the colonizer because I am the educated, ‘marginalized’ researcher, recruited and sanctioned by privileged dominant institutions to write for and about Latino communities. I am a walking contradiction with a foot in both worlds – in the dominant privileged institution and in the marginalized communities. (p. 714)

Introduction

23

Researchers – such as Villenas and myself – who are positioned in both “the dominant privileged institution and the marginalized communities”– must learn to “unveil” and discuss these connections (Villenas, 1996, p. 716). This “unveiling” process challenges me to examine the power, privilege, and responsibility that I have as a researcher in constructing the knowledge and perceptions of the people and community that I study. My Dual Position as “Insider” and “Outsider” As a Vietnamese American conducting research on a group of recent Vietnamese immigrant youth, my position as both an “insider” and “outsider” was constantly shifting as I crossed between the different social, cultural, and linguistic boundaries throughout my study. My position as an adult, university researcher, woman, and someone who has been in the United States longer also created many power dynamics between me and the student participants. Being Vietnamese and knowing the Vietnamese language positioned me as an “insider,” which was useful during the data collection phase as I was able to build a reciprocal relationship with students. My access to the students’ cultural knowledge and their first language provided an important exchange between us. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant students were not yet able to describe and explain fully their ideas and thoughts in English. I was able to observe and witness how students behaved and expressed themselves in their first language. These events often gave a very different picture of the students – they were more active and interactive with peers when they communicated in their primary language. I considered my “insider” position as a privilege, which allowed me to connect with the youth on a deeper level. However, there were numerous moments during my observations and engagement with the youth when I felt like a complete “outsider,” both due to my status as an adult and because I was unfamiliar with many aspects of the Vietnamese popular culture. I often experienced this feeling of “outsider” when the youth used Vietnamese slang. I had grown up in the United States and was unfamiliar with many of the Vietnamese euphemism or slang phrases. This sense of being an “outsider” reminded me that I was not an expert or a voice of authority for the Vietnamese culture and community. It also made me more aware of

24

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

how the youth may have felt when they were in mainstream cultural contexts and could not relate to the ideas and practices expressed by their U.S.-born peers. This awareness helped me to think about the connections among issues of power, culture, and language and the ways in which they reinforce notions of identity and sense of belonging. As ways to counter-balance the power that I had as a researcher, adult, teacher, mentor, and advocate, I tried to diminish my voice and created different opportunities for the youth to describe and interpret their experiences in their own words. Two of the strategies that I used included asking clarifying or follow-up questions and observing the youth in multiple contexts. Asking the youth clarifying and follow-up questions throughout the study created opportunities for them to interpret and express their meanings and ideas in more depth. It prevented me from simply interpreting their actions based on my “insider” perspective and assumptions (Villenas, 1996). Observing the youth in multiple contexts – classrooms, peer group space, individually (shadowing), in their home, and community spaces – helped to contextualize their experiences (Smith, 1999). The multiple sites deepened my understanding of how the youth negotiated between the different cultural sites and, again, limiting my opportunities as a researcher to simply classify the youth into dichotomous categories – such as assimilated or acculturated and good or bad students. I also purposely excluded many observations and conversations in which I served as an advocate or teacher5. I also excluded encounters that were too personal and emotional. While I always asked permission to record students, there were occasions when the conversations became too personal and emotional, and I turned off the audio recorder. Through these processes, my “insider” knowledge of the culture, immigrant experience, and the Vietnamese language gave me different opportunities to connect with the youth. However, I quickly realized that my experiences and perspectives could not be imposed onto the youth’s lives and experiences – their everyday social and cultural 5

In 2002 I established and directed a Saturday Vietnamese Immigrant Youth Academic and Civic Engagement Program. Many of the participants in this study participated in the program, which lasted until 2005. During this program, I simply served as the program director and teacher. I did not observe or record any of the students as research participants. I felt that it was important for me to simply be there as their teacher.

Introduction

25

routines and practices were drastically different from mine. I was far from speaking as an “expert” for the youth’s everyday life. My position as both an “insider” and “outsider” is not unique to the Vietnamese community; I am similarly situated in the dominant mainstream culture. I consider myself knowledgeable of American culture, values, and practices. On an everyday basis, I feel more immersed in the American mainstream cultural context than in the Vietnamese community as my work and place of residency are located within more mainstream cultural contexts. However, this does not suggest that I do not encounter racial or cultural marginalization as an Asian American woman – I experience this feeling of “otherness” on a daily basis. While I considered myself as someone whose life is structured across both cultural contexts – not fully immersed in either cultural site – the Vietnamese immigrant youth interpreted my ability to move from one culture to the next as someone who is fully immersed in both. They saw me as a cultural and linguistic mediator – a bridge between the two cultural worlds. As many of the students, in particular the females, began to experience tensions between the two sets of cultural values and practices, they recognized me as a role model for cultural negotiation. In many of the conversations with the female students, questions of gender roles and expectations arose and they became increasingly interested in how I negotiated between my two sets of cultural values. My role as cultural mediator also became critical when male and female students engaged in conversations around gender and achievement. Many of the female students, again, used my status and background – someone who they perceived as an authority figure, female, married, and also academically successful – as an example to build their arguments. My status, actions, and beliefs broke many cultural barriers for them. There were many incidents where female students would invoke their perception of my experiences to give them leverage in their arguments against the male students. In the beginning of my project, I often felt inadequate when I was exposed as an “outsider” among the youth. Over time, I realized that while the “insider” position helped me to engage with the youth, my “outsider” perspective or connection to the mainstream culture benefited the youth. They saw me as a resource in their social, cultural, and academic adjustment process. My “outsider” position also created

26

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

opportunities for the youth to become the “experts” and my teachers as they described or explained the meanings of different Vietnamese practices. Both the “insider” and “outsider” perspectives helped me to serve the youth in different capacities. I was not only a researcher, but also at times, teacher, mentor, cultural mediator, advocate, and learner. The exchanges and bond that I had with the youth took time, patience, and a great deal of honesty on my part. Admitting that I didn’t know or understand something broke some of the power dynamics between me and the youth. The tensions between “insider” and “outsider” would have been problematic if I had not been actively aware of the ways in which they played out throughout the study. In reflecting back on my research project, checking my epistemological approaches, decisions, and interpretations became a constant concern because of my “insider” perspective. There were moments when I simply wanted to believe that my reading of the situation was universal or true of all Vietnamese youth because I was and “insider” to the Vietnamese culture. I used several techniques to manage the inclination to reduce the participants’ accounts to simple categories of truths. One strategy was to include the process of reflexivity (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Hesford, 1999; Naples, 2003), which involves reflecting upon and questioning my interpretations of accounts of and by students. Reflexivity, Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw (1995) state, is a recognition that “an account of reality does not simply mirror reality but rather creates or constitutes as real in first the place whatever it describes” (p. 213). When I captured the experiences of the participant – whether through my observations or based on a participant’s verbal accounts – I tried to acknowledge that those accounts or narratives did not necessarily constitute reality or truths (Canning, 1999; Scott, 1999). The process of reflexivity reminded me that the captured accounts were not simply truths because of my “insider” perspective or because they came from the participants. Those accounts had undergone at least two layers of interpretation – the youth’s reconstituting of the events or incidents and my recording of them. Including the notion of reflexivity enhanced the data collection and analysis as it challenged me as a researcher to include multiple strategies of capturing and analyzing similar experiences or ideas. Another method that I used to help distinguish between my observations and interpretations was in the ways in which I recorded

Introduction

27

the field notes. I separated my own thoughts and interpretations from the observations of students and classroom practices in the field notes (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995). Each record of field notes has two separate sections – the top was the observation notes with many verbatim recordings of the youth’s conversations, and the bottom was my questions and reflections. While I served as different roles for the youth – researcher, cultural mediator, and mentor – I constantly questioned the purpose of my engagement with the youth as a way to clarify my role. When I was in conversations where students saw me as a cultural mediator, I only answered when students asked me a question and did not direct the conversation. I tried to capture their experiences and separate my interpretations of the events from them. These were the different strategies I used to try to check and control my biases and tensions between my “insider” and “outsider” positions. Layout of the book The book is organized into seven chapters. The first three chapters, including this one, discuss the background and rationale for this research study, historical context of the Vietnamese American community, and a more in-depth examination of the literature on immigrant adaptation, citizenship theory, immigrant students’ social, cultural, and academic adaptation. Chapters four – six focus on the findings, which are outlined in more details below. And chapter seven provides a summary, implications, and conclusion. Each chapter is outlined in more details below. Chapter two provides a brief historical background on the formation of the Vietnamese American community. It describes the interconnectedness between U.S. foreign policies and the Vietnamese American community – how relations between the U.S. and Vietnam can influence the lives of millions in both nations. This chapter also examines the changing context of the Vietnamese American community – moving from the crisis of the refugee era to a now growing and thriving diasporic community – over the past 30 years. Chapter three examines in more depth the literature on patterns of global migration, immigrant adaptation and education, and the

28

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

influences of globalization on nation-states. It also discusses the different theories and approaches to citizenship, in particular concepts of citizenship that connect to globalization and migration. Vast amount of work has been done in each of these bodies of literature; however, studies that connect these different areas remain limited. This chapter attempts to connect these different bodies of literature, particularly focusing on how these areas of research inform the process of citizenship formation for immigrant youth. Findings Chapters: Citizenship construction for the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study involves a complex meaning-making process that intersects with other social processes, such as socialization to U.S. schooling and society, racialization, and ethnic identity and cultural maintenance. Citizenship not only provides legal and national membership, it also represents a formation of a social and cultural sense of belonging (Benihabib, 2002; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Kymlicka, 1995; Lowe, 1999; Ong, 2003). However, as race and processes of racialization often work to position immigrant youth of color into a racialized structure (Lee, 2005; Olsen, 1997; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Waters, 1999) and construct them as the “Other,” “nonAmerican,” and outside of the American mainstream, developments of social, cultural, and national identities diverge and take shape along different paths, creating multiple dimensions of social identities – racial, ethnic, cultural, and national. Citizenship construction for immigrant youth emerges as a site of struggle between resisting to become assimilated into a racialized structure and attempting to define a sense of belonging while engaging with ideas and practices from different social, cultural, and national contexts in their lives. The findings are organized into three chapters. Chapter Four - Becoming racialized: Race serves as a powerful socializing and categorizing apparatus, which works to shape the ways in which the youth perceive themselves, construct social groups, and form a sense of belonging – both within the school as well as in larger U.S. society. The data in this chapter describe the ways in which race intersects and influences the various contexts of the personal, social, and public life of the immigrant youth.

Introduction

29

Chapter Five – “Becoming American:” The process of citizenship formation for the Vietnamese immigrant youth intersects with the question of “becoming American.” Race plays a critical factor in structuring and maintaining the marginal and “non-American” status of the immigrant youth. Immigrant youth internalize these normative social, cultural, and racial codes to mean that they are “outsiders” who cannot become “real Americans.” As such, the youth strategically define citizenship within the context of acquiring legal and national membership status while looking to other dimensions of their lives to fulfill the social and cultural sense of belonging – a critical component of citizenship construction. This chapter examines how the Vietnamese immigrant youth imagine and define citizenship as it connects to the process of “becoming American.” Chapter six – Constructing meanings and identities: While the Vietnamese immigrant youth view their lives and social identities as linked to the United States, they also value and rely on their ethnic and cultural communities – located both in the United States and in Vietnam. Ethnic and cultural spaces and identities play a critical role in influencing how they think about citizenship – or sense of social, cultural, and national belonging. This chapter discusses how the youth maneuver and negotiate among racial, ethnic, and cultural spaces and identities while trying to construct their citizenship and forge a sense of belonging. The findings illustrate the ways in which Vietnamese immigrant youth both acquired and resisted the processes of Americanization, assimilation, and racialization while constructing citizenship and a sense of social, cultural, and national belonging. As they encounter and incorporate the different discourses on citizenship, nationality, race, ethnicity, and culture from the multiple social contexts in their lives, the immigrant youth continue to form new meanings and ideas connected to their social identities. Their complex processes of meaning-making and negotiation are often met with various points of tension and contradiction – both on a personal level as well as within groups – as meanings, ideas, and practices conflict and compete among the different social and cultural settings. The findings reveal the

30

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

different factors that contributed to the Vietnamese immigrant youth’s citizenship construction process, the multiple meanings that they attributed to citizenship, and the points of tensions they faced while trying to adapt and construct a sense of belonging in their new host nation. Limitations of the Study: While this study provides some clarifications and answers to the questions of how immigrant students perceive and negotiate their social, cultural, and national identities, there are two main limitations to this study. First, because of time constraints, the study is narrow in scope. It could have benefited from more observations of community settings. I limited most of the community observations to special events and celebrations. Having more data on community settings could provide a better understanding of the ways in which the larger Vietnamese community influences how students view themselves and their opportunities. The project could have also been strengthened if it incorporated a group of second generation Vietnamese Americans to provide comparisons with the new immigrants. This would have allowed me to better understand how length of stay in the U.S. influences academic achievement. A general limitation of ethnographic research, which is true of this study, is that the findings cannot be generalized beyond the population studied. However, my findings may be used for analytical generalization, which is to generalize the results to some broader theory (Yin, 1984). Specifically, the findings from this study discuss the various ways in which immigrant students push the boundaries of a traditional concept of citizenship as they try to define and enact it in their everyday contexts. This study can be considered as a project that tests the different conceptual frameworks on identity formation, immigrant adaptation, and citizenship formation, which allow for many opportunities for follow-up studies.

CHAPTER TWO

From Displacement to Diaspora: Background on the Changing Patterns of Migration and Adaptation of Vietnamese Immigrants in the United States

Migration Accounts of Recent Vietnamese Immigrants My family had known that we would leave Vietnam and go to America ever since I was two years old. My father had left for Vietnam on a boat earlier and arrived in America in 1991. Since then, he had been working hard and preparing for the rest of the family to join him in America. In Vietnam, I lived with my grandparents, mother, two brothers, and my sister. Since I was little I had been studying English at school and learning about American culture from TV to prepare for my new life in America. I was very excited on the day that we left Vietnam. I had never been on an airplane before. I couldn’t sleep the night before because I was happy about seeing my father again. He only saw me as a baby and I didn’t really remember him. I was also sad about leaving my home, my sister, grandparents and friends behind, but I told myself that I would be back to visit in a few years. I felt bittersweet when I found out that I was going to America. (Hieu, 13-year-old male student) 31

32

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship I came to America in April 2003. My aunt (my mother’s sister) sponsored my family here. I lived in a small town near Bien Hoa, which is near the City [Ho Chi Minh City]. My family is ethnic Chinese and lived in the Chinese part of town. My parents were farmers and we grew everything from peaches to peanuts. Since I was a young girl, my parents did not want me to help with the farm work. Instead, they wanted me to go to school to learn English because they said we were leaving for America one day. When we found out that we were going to America, I was sad about leaving my friends and home. But I knew that my life would be better in America. In America, I could go to college. In my town, there has never been a girl that has gone to college. It is very difficult, especially if you are ethnic Chinese. As the departure date drew close, I got more excited about the new life ahead of me. I had heard that America is the land of freedom and opportunities and if I work hard, I could go to college. Perhaps I will be the first girl from my town to go to college. (Hong, 15-year-old female student)

The stories that Hieu, Hong, and other Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study shared about their journey to the United States seem typical of most stories of immigrants as they recalled the excitement of boarding an airplane for the first time and the nervousness of moving to a new country. These characteristic immigration stories of the recent Vietnamese immigrant youth are incredibly different from those of the Vietnamese refugees in the 1970s and 1980s. Over the past 30 years since the first large wave of Vietnamese refugees settled in the United States, the immigration patterns and the context of their community have changed dramatically, transforming them from a group of displaced refugees seeking for re-settlement and acceptance in their new host country to a now growing and thriving diasporic community with re-established ties to their homeland and other Vietnamese communities around the world. To outsiders today the vibrant business centers from Boston to Orange County, often referred to as “Little Saigon,” show few signs that the Vietnamese Americans were not too long ago a group of scattered and wounded people who were uncertain and fearful of their future. The growth of businesses and social support

From Displacement to Diaspora

33

structures indicate a sense of renewal and unity among the Vietnamese as they strive to move forward in redefining their lives and community. However, this sense of oneness is fragile and in constant threat of unraveling. Underneath the common layer of ethnic and historical ties that binds them, deep scars, suppressed grief, survivor-guilt, untold stories of tragedies, and political tension are waiting to surface and rip apart the delicate alliances. Many look to their children for hope and healing while continuing to bury their own wounds and stories. The migration stories and transformation of the Vietnamese Americans as a community, in many ways, are connected to the social, political, and economic conditions of the global arena. Their lives have been and continue to be intertwined with the geopolitics between the United States and Southeast Asia. The stories and experiences of the Vietnamese refugees and immigrants reveal how global policies and actions shape lives and conditions at the local level. In this chapter, I examine in more depth the Vietnamese American experiences – the historical contexts that led to the flight from their homeland, the strategies they used to rebuild their lives and sense of community in the United States and abroad, and the issues and concerns that continue to threaten their sense of unity and community. Patterns of Migration among Vietnamese Refugees and Immigrants Unlike the history of other Asian immigrants in the United States, the Vietnamese and other Southeast Asians (Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong) were initially not immigrants but refugees; they came to the United States because they had very little choice (Takaki, 1989). The political fallout from the Vietnam War, in which the United States played a major political and military role, led to social and economic upheavals, causing hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese to flee from their homeland. This massive exodus began in early April of 1975 as the Vietnamese Communist Party was on the verge of the taking over Saigon and the U.S. military was withdrawing the last of its troops from Vietnam. Over the next three decades after the Communist regime was established in South Vietnam, nearly two million Vietnamese devised different strategies and paths to leave their homeland (Higgins & Ross, 1986). The exodus of the Vietnamese people during these three

34

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

decades made it the highest levels of emigration that Vietnam had ever experienced (Do, 1999; Takaki, 1989; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Their departures took place over three major periods. The first period of emigration took place between 1975 and 1977, with three successive waves of migration. The first group of Vietnamese that left in April of 1975 consisted of military personnel and their families, members of the social and educational elites, and many wealthy business people (Takaki, 1989). Using their connections and financial resources, they fled a few weeks before the final collapse of the South Vietnamese government. Then, during the last days of April, an additional 86,000 people, again made up of military personnel and their families, professionals, and members of the Catholic Church, were evacuated by U.S. aircrafts. Former South Vietnam Premier, Nguyen Cao Ky, who is now living in exile in the U.S., recalls the morning of his last day in Vietnam (cited in Takaki, 1989). That morning, April, 29, I found myself alone at the big headquarters of the general staff…At noontime, all the American helicopters came in for the final, big evacuation. On the ground, there were hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, running – right, left, every way, to find a way to escape. My bodyguard said to me, ‘Well, General, it’s time for us to go, too.’ (p. 449) In the streets of Saigon, there was widespread panic and fear as gunfire and bombs continued to go off throughout the city (Takaki, 1989). People scattered and ran searching for U.S. military personnel in hope of being airlifted out. Those who were fortunate were transported to Guam and later to refugee camps temporarily set up at military bases in the U.S. Most of the people who fled immediately after the fall of Saigon were highly educated, came from urban centers, and had exposure to and knowledge of Western culture. In May of 1975, weeks after the Communist Party established itself as the new government, an additional 60,000 people left the shores of Vietnam in small, mostly homemade, wooden boats. Many of the refugees were rescued by U.S. Naval ships and were transferred to refugee camps in the Philippines and Guam where they awaited their fate. This group’s make-shift attempts to escape marked the last wave

From Displacement to Diaspora

35

of the first period of emigration. Kim-Phuong, a university student, recalls her family’s hasty escape from Vietnam (cited in Do, 1999): I remember my mom telling us to pack all our stuff and we were supposed to meet our father at the beach outside of Saigon. Our dad…had access to a boat so he met us there. I was only five but I remember it took a long time to get to where we wanted to go. I think we walked for a day…I just remember rushing and rushing…We got on a boat and we just went out of the water, we didn’t know where we were going, we were just going out toward the ocean. We were finally picked up by an American ship. (p. 27) The majority of the Vietnamese in refugee camps were eventually sponsored by family members, who had evacuated earlier with the U.S. military, or by relief agencies from countries around the world, such as the U.S., Canada, France or Australia. Some refugees, however, waited in camp for over ten years and were later forced to repatriate back to Vietnam. After the Communist regime gained control of South Vietnam, sweeping social, political, and economic reforms created new hardships for many, particularly for those who were once affiliated with the South Vietnamese regime. Ai-Van Do, a child of the “boat people” recounts life under the Communists in Vietnam (cited in Cargill & Huynh, 2000). [T]he new government became more severe and used collectivism for every type of production. The people did not own their fields, their boats, or any of the things they used to earn a living…The Communists stripped the people of all their basic freedoms. Of course, they dealt more severely with former soldiers and former civil servants such as my parents. Typically they forced such people to perform hard labor in harsh mountain regions for several months a year. Because of rough treatment, the people felt as though the Communists were punishing them and getting revenge. (p. 10)

36

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Many of the men who served under the former South Vietnamese regime were sent to concentration camps as part of the communist inculcation process (Kibria, 1993). Their homes and property were confiscated by the government and their families were sent to the New Economic Development zones where they were to develop the harsh lands that were not cultivatable (Cargill & Huynh, 2000). While domestic policies made life difficult, the Khmer Rouge crisis in Cambodia began to cross into Vietnam, causing further panic and fear among the already distressed Vietnamese population. In 1978, the Vietnamese Communist government responded to the Khmer Rouge with military actions while the rest of the world remained silent. China became wary of Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia and allied with the Khmer Rouge to attack northern Vietnam (Chan, 2005; Do, 1999). Although the military conflict with China did not last long, the war on the different fronts combined with internal crises – ranging from economic and political repression to natural disasters, poor harvest, and shortage of food – made life unbearable for many Vietnamese. These increasingly poor and repressive conditions triggered the second major period of emigration, which began in 1978 and lasted until the mid 1990s. Many scholars refer to this second period of Vietnamese migration as the flight of the “boat people” as images of tattered and dehydrated looking people crowded small rickety wooden boats made headlines and lasting impressions around the world (Do; 1999; Takaki, 1989; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). During this second exodus, an estimated 400,000 refugees left Vietnam. Among them were over 200,000 ethnic Chinese Vietnamese, many of whom were ordered to leave after the Chinese attacked Vietnam (Do, 1999; Takaki, 1989). Unlike those who left earlier, most of the people in this group did not speak English, were less educated, and did not have as much exposure to Western culture. Most of the people who fled during this period went by boat, but others, including young children, headed out on foot, walking hundreds of miles through the thick jungles to reach Thailand (Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Many were unprepared for the dangers that the jungles posed and thousands suffered from diseases, poisonous snake bites, and other animal attacks. Those who took the sea routes were met with challenges of their own. Lack of navigational skills, poorly constructed boats, limited supplies of food and water, and numerous attacks by Thai pirates generated a

From Displacement to Diaspora

37

high death toll among the boat people (Cargill & Huynh, 2000; Do, 1999). The numbers of people who lost their lives at sea remain unknown. Estimates range from 15 to 40 percent of those who began the boat journey (Do, 1999). The third period of Vietnamese migration began in the mid-1990s. After President Clinton signed the policy to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam and began normalizing relations between the two countries in 1994, the flow of refugees into the U.S. ended. Many of the “boat people” who were still in refugee camps in the Philippines, Thailand, or Guam either repatriated to Vietnam on their own or were forced (Takaki, 1989). Vietnamese who arrived in the U.S. after the normalization between the two nations came under the family reunification provision. This period of Vietnamese migration marked the end of the Vietnamese refugee plight and the beginning of their immigrant status. The students in this study are in this category of Vietnamese migration. They arrived under the family reunification provision. In sum, the events that took place between the United States and Vietnam changed the course of life for hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, leading them to find safety outside of their homeland. Thousands perished during their escape and many more suffered from grief and trauma. Surviving the journey itself was a herculean task. However, as they settled in their new host country, the refugees confronted more new challenges. U.S. Resettlement Experience In 2007, there were approximately 1.2 million Vietnamese living in the U.S. (Asian Nation, 2007). The Vietnamese Americans make up one of the largest refugee communities in the U.S. The presence of Vietnamese towns and “Little Saigon” in many large cities – from Boston, New York to Orange County and Seattle – are indications of the growth and stability of the population. Today, these Vietnamese towns seem to be a normal part of the established community to the new Vietnamese immigrants and second generation U.S. born Vietnamese Americans. However, the path to creating these communities was met with many challenges – both from outside as well as inside of the Vietnamese community. Issues ranging from

38

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

racism in the larger community to social and political conflicts within their own population threatened to tear apart these fragile communities. When the Vietnamese refugees were first transported to the United States in 1975, they were not welcome. The arrival of the Vietnamese refugees exacerbated the anger and resentment which many Americans had about the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War, Lowe (1996) writes, “shook the stability and coherence of America’s understanding of itself. An ‘unpopular’ war contested by social movements, the press, and the citizenry, a disabling war from which the United States could not emerge ‘victorious’” (p. 3). The arrival of the refugees to the United States reminded people of these tensions and division among the American public. A public opinion poll conducted in May 1975 indicated that 54% of the American public did not want the refugees in the United States (Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). With 57,692 American men and women dead and 2,000 more missing in action, the American public continued to remain deeply divided. In addition, economic recession left many feeling vulnerable and fearful that public assistance for new refugees would add an additional financial burden on the American people (Do, 1999). While economic concerns and anger about the war fueled the antirefugee sentiment, racism and xenophobia also played a part in shaping public opinion. In a Newsweek article (May 12, 1975), a woman from Arkansas made her feelings clear about the Vietnamese refugees: “They say it is a lot colder here than in Vietnam. With a little luck, maybe all those Vietnamese will take pneumonia and die” (cited in Do, 1999, p 30). This animosity was also shared by some public officials. In the same Newsweek article, California Congressman, Burt Talcott, expressed his thoughts about Asian immigrants in his state: “Damn it, we have too many Orientals already. If they [Vietnamese refugees] all gravitate to California, the tax and welfare rolls will get overburdened and we already have our share of illegal aliens” (cited in Do, 1999, p. 30). The Vietnamese refugees’ initial settlement period was made even more difficult without a pre-existing ethnic community, which, for other Asian immigrants, has often served as social and cultural support structures. Without these structures in place, the Vietnamese refugees became dependent on the U.S. government and the good will of charity organizations and ordinary American citizens. In the U.S., refugee

From Displacement to Diaspora

39

camps were temporarily created to provide for the basic needs of the newcomers. The four temporary camps were built on military bases located in California, Arkansas, Florida, and Pennsylvania. The camps were scattered across the U.S. purposefully to help diffuse the incoming refugees from settling in one area. Many different services were provided in these camps to help transition the refugees to U.S. society. Besides housing, the camps also provided food, medical treatments, and other basic and educational services. Once a family showed proof of financial independence or had a sponsor to provide for them, they could leave the camp. Thousands also chose to repatriate back to Vietnam because they could not adjust to the new culture or weather. Many ordinary American citizens became involved and sponsored thousands of the Vietnamese refugees from camps located in both the U.S. and abroad. After their initial resettlement, usually in small towns or suburbs with few other Vietnamese, many of the refugees felt socially, culturally, and linguistically isolated. Depression and posttraumatic distress symptoms emerged, particularly among the older people who were isolated from other Vietnamese (Do, 1999). Once the reality of their refugee status set in, grief and survivor-guilt culminated with language barriers, lack of financial stability, loss of social community, and feelings of helplessness to create high levels of depression. While they remained grateful to their sponsors’ support, financial dependency worsened some of the refugees’ sense of selfworth, particularly among the men, who had previously provided for their families. Many of the refugees’ previous education, training, and knowledge were not transferable. People who were doctors, lawyers, and teachers in Vietnam could no longer practice without having to go through additional education and training. To relieve this sense of social, cultural, and linguistic isolation, many of the refugees began their secondary migration to areas with larger concentration of Vietnamese, usually in urban areas. The new redistribution of the Vietnamese population set the stage for the future development of “Little Saigon” or Vietnamese Town in large urban areas throughout the United States, including Houston, Chicago, Orange County, and Seattle. California became the main destination for secondary migration among Vietnamese refugees. In 1978, 27% of the Vietnamese refugee population settled in California (Do, 1999). By

40

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

1990, with both secondary migration and continuing settlements from incoming Vietnamese refugees, almost half of the Vietnamese population made California their new home. In 2000 more than 70% of the entire Vietnamese population resided in just nine states: California, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Washington, (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). As they focused on re-establishing their lives, conflicts and problems – both from the larger mainstream community and within their community – arose to further complicate their adjustment process. In the early period of the Vietnamese settlement in the United States, incidents of racial prejudice, discrimination, and harassment against them were high. In Texas, Louisiana, and California, tension rose between White fishermen and the newcomers. To intimidate and keep the refugees away, the Ku Klux Klan began to target them in Louisiana and Texas (Do, 1999). In other parts of the United States, cases of racial harassment and discrimination were also reported. Within their community, politics of exile came to dominate the political sphere, spreading fear and tension among the group that was struggling to rebuild their lives. Many of the people who were heavily involved with the former South Vietnam regime proclaimed responsibility for organizing the overthrow of the Vietnamese Communist regime (Zhou & Bankston III, 1999). By the early 1980s, Southern California alone had over a 100 Vietnamese political organizations, most with strong anti-communist agendas (Zhou & Bankston III, 1999). These organizations, often with vocal leaders, made clear their lack of tolerance for anyone who expressed sympathy for the Communist regime. Those who dissented from this viewpoint were deemed traitorous. The fear of being labeled communist kept many silent and wary of politics, leadership roles, or discussions about Vietnam. The tension over political difference came to a boiling point in 1994 with President Clinton’s move to lift the 19-year-old trade embargo and began proceedings to normalize relations with Vietnam (Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Demonstration against Clinton’s intended foreign policies was high. At the same time, many who had previously been silent now felt emboldened by Clinton’s policy intentions and began to voice their support for normalization. Demonstrations in favor of normalization became highly visible in California. As political

From Displacement to Diaspora

41

differences increased in the community, crime rates also rose to a new level in the Vietnamese community with the increase of murder, kidnap, and death threats against those who favored normalization. However, these different forms of danger and intimidation did not deter many of the Vietnamese refugees from voicing their support for normalization. They believed that normalization would help to improve the lives of people in Vietnam and would force Vietnam to be more opened and accountable to the world through diplomatic relations. Even Nguyen Cao Ky, former South Vietnam Premiere, came out in support of normalization (Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Many seized this opportunity as a chance to move forward and put the past behind them. In 1994, a poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times indicated that the majority of the Vietnamese American community was on its way to putting the past behind them and moving forward. Fifty-four percent of the Vietnamese Americans in Southern California supported President Clinton’s plan to normalize relations with Vietnam and lifting the 19-year-old trade embargo (cited in Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). The Vietnamese youth, who consist of 1.5 and second generation, also played an important role in this debate on normalizing relations with Vietnam (Do, 1999; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Having grown up during an era of broken social, cultural, and diplomatic ties between the United States and Vietnam, the experiences that many of the youth had in discussing or learning about Vietnam often turned emotional and divisive. Parents would often shield their children from the political past by emphasizing their education and future (Kibria, 1993; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). The lack of opportunities for the Vietnamese youth to actively engage in the discussion about Vietnam contributed to their general sense of disconnect from their community and history. They viewed the process of normalization as an opportunity to reconnect with their ancestral home and learn more about their people’s history and struggles. While the political discussions that took place during the normalization process became contentious and triggered violent reactions at times, it also created a forum for the community to confront the anger, resentment, and guilt that the Vietnamese refugees had suppressed for almost 20 years. In a sense, these difficult discussions also allowed the tension to blow over and for the community to begin the process of healing and becoming more whole.

42

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

The process of normalization between the United States and Vietnam has altered the Vietnamese American community in significant ways. Thousands of Vietnamese Americans now make annual journeys back to Vietnam. Many are living diasporic and transnational lives as they rebuild relationships with friends and families in Vietnam. Younger Vietnamese are discovering or rediscovering their ancestral home and finding ways to incorporate this aspect of themselves into their daily lives in the U.S. The youth continue to find ways to strengthen and expand the diasporic community through travel, media, and the growing diasporic entertainment industry. Summary of Chapter In sum, over the course of the past 30 years, the social, political, and economic relationship between the U.S. and Vietnam has influenced the lives of millions of Vietnamese, in both the United States and Vietnam. As developments between the two nations continue to change and take on new directions, it is critical to continue to examine these new relationships and their influences on the people, in the U.S. as well as in Vietnam. This study is an attempt to further understand the different ways in which the new generation of immigrants from Vietnam, who entered the U.S. under the family reunification provision, understands, defines, and represents their sense of community, social and cultural identity, and citizenship in the context of global social, political, and economic shifts.

CHAPTER THREE

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

Global Migration and its Challenges for Citizenship Immigration levels to the United States have been on the rise since the 1990s, where more than one million immigrants arrived to the United States each year. The level of immigration increased by over 30 percent from 1990 to 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). By the year 2000, the United States had the largest number of immigrants in its history, consisting of 20 percent (55.9 million) of the total U.S. population. Immigrant children are currently the fastest growing sector of the U.S. population. Nationwide, one in five children come from an immigrant household and more than 3.5 million English Language Learner (ELL) students are enrolled in U.S. schools (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2003). These extensive demographic shifts in the U.S. are connected to the current forces of globalization (Castles, 2004; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Suarez-Orozco, 2001). Globalization is a phenomenon in which worldwide cultural, political, and economic relations are becoming increasingly interconnected and interdependent through the convergences of economic and political structures and aided by advanced technology and systems of transportation, (Burbules & Torres, 2000; Torres, 1998). While globalization is not a new phenomenon, the current ways in which it manifests does not have one specific centralizing focus as in the past with emphasis on empire expansion or trade. Instead, Rizvi (2000) describes the flow of global cultural, economic, and political forces moving in “uneven and chaotic ways.” The ways in which these forces of globalization influence different aspects of social life are quite 43

44

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

visible and abundant, such as the way local economies are quickly merging with the growing free trade market or the ways that cultural products such as films, music, news, clothing, and other material goods are distributed worldwide, allowing McDonalds, Starbucks, and internet cafés to prosper in distant and remote areas of the world. Suarez-Orozco and Qin-Hillard (2004) sum up the far-reaching effects of globalization: “From terrorism, to the environment, HIV-AIDS to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), free trade to protectionism, population growth to poverty and social justice, globalization seems deeply implicated in nearly all of the major issues of the new millennium” (p. 1). Globalization has both positive and negative impacts. It creates a rise in the internationalization of productivity and consumption throughout the world. The internationalization of markets has generated and distributed jobs, opportunities, basic medical supplies, and other material goods for people all over the world (Burbules & Torres, 2000). At the same time, global markets have widened the social and economic gaps between the world’s wealthiest and poorest populations (Delanty, 2000; Kellner, 2000). Globalization has also helped to make national borders less distinct by creating more dependence and connections among nation-states. It has weakened the national autonomy of many nation-states. Burbules and Torres (2000) state that the “erosion of national sovereignty” has put into question “the notion of the ‘citizen’ as a unified and unifying conception” (p. 14). As cultural knowledge, ideas, and products are shared and consumed globally, the process of cultural confluence or homogeneity is taking place rapidly (Burbules & Torres, 2000). Globalization shapes people’s choices, ideas, taste, and patterns of consumption with the help of the media, technology, and an increase in the availability of material goods. At the same time, it has also worked to preserve more cultures, languages, and ethnic groups that were bound for extinction as people become more aware and appreciative of cultural and linguistic diversity and group rights (Delanty, 2000). A complex phenomenon, globalization defies any simple definition as it continues to expand and impact people’s lives. Globalization has led to the unprecedented increases in mass global migration (Baubock, 1994; Castles, 2003; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Suarez-Orozco, 2001). While immigration is not a new issue,

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

45

particularly for the United States, the current pattern of immigration is changing the demographic make-up of many nation-states throughout the world, adding to greater levels of racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and religious diversity (Castles & Davidson, 2000). In the United States, the current wave of immigrants differs significantly from those who arrived prior to 1965 (Olneck, 2004; Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Yang, 1995). The large increase in immigration and the changes in the immigrants’ countries of origin mark two important distinctions between the pre- and post-1965 immigration waves to the United States. Between the years 1901 to 1960 – when U.S. immigration policies of selective exclusion were in practice – more than 75% of the immigrant population arrived from Europe. Since the national quotas act was repealed in 1965, the majority (82.7%) of the immigrants to the U.S. are from third world nations, mostly from Latin and South America, Asia, the Caribbean Islands and growing numbers from Africa (see Table 3.1). The changes in the countries of origin have altered the racial, ethnic, cultural, language, and religious make-up of U.S. immigrants and their children. In the year 2000, 76% of the immigrant children were Hispanic (52%), Asian (18%), and Black (6%) (Hernandez, 2004). The wave of immigrants who arrived to the United States in the 2000s is heterogeneous in terms of country of origin, ethnicity, culture, religion, socio-economic status, occupational skill level, and educational background, defying facile generalizations about them. They represent over a hundred different countries of origin (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2003). Immigrants include highly educated, skilled workers who were recruited specifically for their technical and professional expertise. Some groups, such as the Asian Indians, Taiwanese, Korean, and Arab immigrants have more advanced degrees than their U.S.-born counterparts (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996). Suarez-Orozco (2001) notes that “never in the history of U.S. immigration have so many immigrants advanced so fast – both in terms of educational attainment and status mobility” (p. 350). At the same time, 33 percent of U.S. immigrants – age 25 and older – have less than a high school education compared to only 13 percent of U.S.-born population, as indicated in Table 3.2. Among the immigrant population – age 25 and older – citizenship status is an important indicator of educational attainment.

3,555,352 592,707 30,770 505,152 388,416 651,893 96,720 505,290 271,538

Europe… Austria-Hungary France Germany Ireland Italy Poland Soviet Union United Kingdom

Asia… 74,862 China 14,799 Hong Kong India 68 Japan 25,942 Korea Philippines Vietnam Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000

8,795,386

3,678,564

4,713 129,797

323,543 20,605

1,597,306 525,950

8,056,040 2,145,266 73,379 341,498 339,416 2,045,877

1901-10

1891-1900

Region and selected countries of origin All Countries

566,167 82,479 15,541 8,204 167,052 6,338 24,526 335

9,079,521 1,103,386 214,060 1,345,548 436,539 1,876,019 267,129 985,555 1,054,680

13,921,969

1911-60

427,642 34,764 75,007 27,189 39,988 34,526 98,376 4,340

1,123,492 26,022 45,237 190,796 32,966 214,111 53,539 2,465 213,822

3,321,677

1961-70

Table 3.1: Immigration by region and selected country of origin (1891-2000)

1,588,178 124,326 113,467 164,134 49,775 267,638 354,987 172,820

800,368 16,028 25,069 74,414 11,490 129,368 37,234 38,961 137,374

4,493,314

1971-80

2,738,157 346,747 98,215 250,786 47,085 333,746 548,764 280,782

761,550 24,885 32,353 91,961 31,969 67,254 83,252 57,677 159,173

7,338,062

1981-90

2,795,672 419,114 109,779 363,060 67,942 164,166 503,945 286,145

1,359,737 24,882 35,820 92,606 56,950 62,722 163,747 462,874 151,866

9,095,417

1991-2000

350

Africa…

Oceania… 3,965 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000

1,075

South America…

49,642 107,548

971 33,066

13,024

7,368

17,280

8,192

361,888 179,226

38,972 3,311

549

1901-10

1891-1900

Central America…

Region and selected countries of origin America… Canada & Newfoundland Mexico Caribbean

52,163

37,938

205,376

105,205

1,061,010 436,366

4,172,172 2,324,897

1911-60

25,122

28,954

257,940

101,330

453,937 470,213

1,716,374 413,310

1961-70

41,242

80,779

295,741

134,640

640,294 741,126

1,982,735 169,939

1971-80

Table 3.1 Continued: Immigration by region and selected country of origin (1891-2000)

45,205

176,893

461,847

468,088

1,655,843 872,051

3,615,225 156,938

1981-90

55,845

354,939

539,656

526,915

2,249,421 978,787

4,486,806 191,987

1991-2000

Total 175.2 Native born 52.8 Foreign born 22.4 Length of Residence in U.S. Less than 10 years 6.8 20 years or more 6.6 Citizenship Status Naturalized Citizen 9.8 Not a Citizen 12.6 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000

Population (millions)

33.1 34.3 25.0 24.0 26.4 26.4 23.9

33.0 35.5 23.8 40.2

Percentage with a high school degree

15.9 13.4 33.0

Percentage with less than high school degree

19.1 13.9

14.0 15.1

Percentage with less than a bachelor’s degree 25.4 26.7 16.2

Table 3.2: Educational Attainment of the U.S. Population Age 25 and Older

30.7 22.0

29.0 23.0

25.6 25.6 25.8

Percentage with a bachelor’s degree

76.2 59.8

67.0 64.5

Total Percentage of high school graduate or more 84.4 86.6 67.0

Total Europe Asia Africa Latin America Caribbean Central America Mexico 4.5 Other 1.3 South America 1.2 North America 0.4 (Canada & Newfoundland) Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000 6.3 9.4 23.2 46.3

Workers Percent in (in millions) managerial and professional group 16.5 24.7 2.3 38.1 4.3 38.7 0.4 36.5 8.5 12.1 1.6 22.6 5.8 7.0 11.2 17.7 24.0 24.9

Percent in technical, sales, and administrative support 20.9 23.9 27.5 22.1 16.5 25.1 12.7

Table 3.3: Major Occupation Group of Immigrant Workers

21.8 26.7 23.0 8.3

19.2 15.0 15.0 19.6 22.9 22.6 22.9

Percent in service

19.2 15.2 13.7 9.3

12.1 12.2 5.9 4.2 15.9 9.0 18.3

Percent in production craft, and repair

28.6 26.5 15.2 9.5

18.6 10.2 12.0 17.1 24.8 19.9 28.1

Percent as operators, and laborers

12.9 4.5 0.9 1.7

4.5 0.6 0.8 0.5 7.8 0.8 11.1

Percent in farming, and fishing

50

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

In the year 2000, there were 16.5 million documented immigrants in the U.S. labor force. Their skills and training varied significantly, ranging from professional to unskilled workers (see Table 3.3). The majority of immigrants from Europe (62%), Canada (71%), Asia (66%), and Africa (58.6%) contributed to professional and skilled level jobs while immigrants from the Latin America (71%), Mexico (80%), and South America (53%) occupied mostly low-level skilled jobs. Most immigrants from Mexico, the Caribbean Islands, and South America usually ended up in poorly paid and dead-end jobs and remained isolated culturally, linguistically, and politically from the American mainstream (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996). While the increased levels of diversity from the current wave of immigration adds a sense of dynamism and vibrancy to social and cultural life, it also creates significant challenges for existing social institutions in the United States. Diversity challenges and makes more difficult the process of social integration and citizenship formation for immigrants. As the United States continues to face increasing levels of diversity, it will have to reconsider the ways in which it integrates newcomers and minorities into the larger social, cultural, and civic community in order to balance between individual and ethnic group rights. As a nation, the United States has to work towards, what Banks (2004a) suggests, a balance between diversity and unity among the people in the nation. Social Integration of Newcomers: Debate between Assimilation and Ethnic Pluralism Numerous waves of immigrants have arrived at U.S. shores and borders throughout its history. However, as a nation, we continue to grapple with the difficult question of how to incorporate newcomers into the larger social, cultural, economic, and political life. The discussion of social integration is connected to the debate between assimilation and acculturation or ethnic pluralism. This debate remains on-going and at times contentions among scholars, educators, policymakers, and the public at large. Many scholars examining issues of immigrant adaptation have established that the process of assimilation is not only an ineffective method of integrating immigrants but also has the tendency to perpetuate structures of racial and economic inequality

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

51

(Gibson, 1988; Ogbu, 1991; Lee, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996, 2004; Rong & Preissle, 1998; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008; Valenzuela, 1999). However, assimilation remains a popular strategy for responding to newcomers in many U.S. social and public institutions. The public sentiment regarding assimilating or Americanizing immigrants, which dates back to the late 19th century, has been consistently strong (Gordon, 1964; Olneck, 2004; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Tyack, 1976). Proponents of this approach believe that assimilating newcomers will help to preserve the nation’s character and values (Cubberley, 1909). The goal of assimilation is to lead to an eventual decline in ethnic, cultural, and social differences as ethnic minority groups conform to the majority culture. Castles and Miller (2003) state that assimilation is a one-sided process in which newcomers “are expected to give up their distinctive linguistic, cultural or social characteristics and become indistinguishable from the majority population” (p.250). Similarly, Gordon (1964) describes assimilation as a “melting pot,” which works to ‘melt’ away the various cultures of the new immigrants into the host country’s culture, “without leaving any cultural traces at all” (p. 125). Assimilation can only be achieved if there are very low levels of prejudice or discrimination. In the case of multicultural and multiethnic nation-states, such as the United States, the notion of assimilation and the melting pot are considered myths because different groups continue to be categorized by ethnic, racial, class, religious, cultural, and linguistic differences and discrimination and racism persist (Gordon, 1964). Although most scholars find assimilation problematic, they agree that a system of social integration is necessary and important to sustain a sense of unity within the larger society and civic community (Banks, 2004a; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996). Since the 1960s’ Civil Rights Movement, alternative ideas have arisen to challenge the assimilationist approaches to integrating immigrants and students of color. Advocates of ethnic and cultural pluralism argue that the assimilationist conception maintains racist and oppressive social, economic, and political structures (Olsen, 1997). Many scholars suggest that acculturation (Gibson, 1988; Rong & Preissle, 1998) or ethnic pluralism (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996, 2004) as alternatives to assimilation. Rong and Preissle (1998) define acculturation as a process

52

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

that results from two or multiple groups having sustained contact with each other. The authors write: “It is the exchange and adaptation of practices, beliefs, knowledge, and skills among different groups – the result of the borrowing is a recombining of the old into something new” (p. 81). The U.S. cultural context is a result of sustained periods of cultural exchanges and borrowing between numerous groups – it is an “amalgamation” of the many different cultures that exist within the United States. Banks (2006a) calls the process of cultural exchanges taking place between multiple groups as “multiple acculturation.” In describing the cultural exchanges between White Anglo-Saxons and ethnic minority groups in the United States, Banks (2001) writes: “What was experienced in the United States, and what is still occurring, is multiple acculturation and not a kind of unidirectional type of cultural assimilation whereby the African American culture was influenced by the WASP culture and not the other way around” (p. 124). Cultural contacts and exchanges have taken place on many different levels over the years to create the different cultural blends and traditions that exist in the United States today. Many immigrants view acculturation as a positive process. They consider acquiring new skills and incorporating aspects of American cultural practices into their lives while maintaining cultural traditions and ethnic identity to be important and positive (Gibson, 1988). In her 1988 study in which she examines the adaptation process of Sikh Indian immigrant’s experiences in the California valley area, Gibson concludes that Sikhs resisted assimilation by pursuing a process of accommodation and acculturation. Sikh Indians in her study rejected the notion that Americanization meant giving up their culture or group identity. In fact, Sikh parents encouraged their children to adopt the “good” ideas of “the Americans” while also maintaining their cultural identity. The Sikhs adjusted to their new host country through the process of acculturation in which they selectively adopted aspects of American culture and practices that helped them to function in the mainstream culture as well as to maintain their own cultural traditions. Having a strong community – which fosters language usage and cultural practices – was an important factor in helping the Sikh Indian immigrants to achieve acculturation. Gibson’s (1988) study illustrates that acculturation involves immigrant community members participating in the process of

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

53

redefining cultural practices and their meanings. The Sikh Indians in this study believed that aspects of Americanization were meaningful and important for their success in adjusting to U.S. life and culture. Yet, they did not consider incorporating those practices that are part of the Americanization process to mean a rejection of their cultural practices and ethnic identity. The Sikh Indian immigrants in the Gibson study participated in the Americanization process on their own terms and thus re-defined its intentions and purpose. While many scholars make important distinctions between assimilation and acculturation, Portes and Rumbaut (1996) assert that the two concepts are closely related. They define acculturation as an initial step towards assimilation. Portes and Rumbaut pay close attention to the different patterns of immigrant adaptation, which they differentiate as dissonant acculturation, consonant acculturation, selective acculturation, and segmented assimilation. Dissonant acculturation occurs when the immigrant children’s acquisition of language and American culture have surpassed their parents’. As the children learn and adapt to the mainstream culture, parents continue to maintain their language and cultural practices, resulting in different patterns of adaptation between parents and children. This pattern of acculturation often leads to role-reversal as lack of English language skills and mainstream American cultural knowledge diminish parents’ roles as adults in the certain circumstances, particularly in mainstream society. Children then take on the responsibilities of translating and navigating the new cultural context for their families. Consonant acculturation is the opposite of dissonant acculturation. In this process, acculturation between parents and children occurs at similar rates. Consonant acculturation tends to lead to an abandoning of ethnic cultural identity and native language and the adoption of mainstream culture and language. This pattern of adaptation closely connects to the more traditional definition of assimilation, as discussed above. Selective acculturation is the most ideal form of adaptation. It “takes place when the learning process of both generations is embedded in a co-ethnic community of sufficient size and institutional diversity to slow down the cultural shift and promote partial retention of the parents’ home language and norms” (Rumbaut & Portes, 2001, p. 54). Similar to Gibson’s notion of accommodation and acculturation, selective acculturation creates less fragmentation between parents and

54

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

children. Patterns of adaptation that lead to the downward spiral of socio-economic status is referred to as segmented assimilation (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Sassler, 2006). Assimilation theory assumes that as immigrants overcome language and cultural barriers, they obtain academic and economic achievement with successive generations (Ong, 2003; Sasler, 2006). However, research shows that increasing numbers of immigrant students, particularly second generation immigrants, are underachieving academically and experiencing segmented or downward assimilation (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996). Social Integration of Immigrants and Public Education The debate between assimilation and acculturation has important implications for public schools since they serve as one of the most important social institutions to absorb and socialize immigrant students to become part of the mainstream U.S. society (Gibson, 1988; Olneck, 2004; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Rong & Preissle, 1998; Tyack, 1976). Urban schools, in particular, have had this responsibility since the 19th century as millions of immigrants and their children settled in urban areas (Gibson, 1988; Rong & Preissle, 1998). In the late 1800s, when the first large influx of immigrants arrived from Southern, Central, and Eastern Europe, the fear that the new European immigrant groups would corrupt the existing Anglo-Saxon culture rose to a high level. Many “old” Anglo-Saxon Whites believed that the “new” European immigrants were too different and alien to adapt to the new life and culture in the United States. This fear led schools to adopt assimilation as a model for integrating students (Berrol, 1995; Garcia, 2004; Gibson, 1988; Olsen, 1997). The assimilationist approach to education was led by school leaders, such as Ellwood P. Cubberley, a superintendent of San Francisco school district and later first dean of the School of Education at Stanford University (Rong & Preissle, 1998). Cubberley (1909) argued that assimilation or Americanization required that immigrant groups and ethnic settlements be broken up and assimilated into the dominant mainstream American culture. In the process, the immigrant children’s cultural values would be replaced by American values of righteousness, law, and order. Characterizing the immigrants from Southern, Central, and Eastern European nations, Cubberley (1909) wrote:

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

55

These southern and eastern Europeans are of a very different type from the north Europeans who preceded them. Illiterate, docile, lacking in self-reliance and initiative, and not possessing…conceptions of law, order, and government, their coming has served to dilute tremendously our national stock, and to corrupt our civic life…Everywhere these people tend to settle in groups or settlements, and to set up here their national manners, customs, and observations. Our task is to break up these groups or settlements, to assimilate and amalgamate these people as part of our American race, and to implant in their children, so far as can be done, the Anglo-Saxon conception of righteousness, law and order, and popular government… (p. 15) The perception that newcomers and their unfamiliar languages, values, and practices would “corrupt our civic life” served as the driving force behind the movement to assimilate immigrants and their children. Assimilationists, such as Cubberley, believed that Americanizing immigrant children would help to preserve the nation’s character and values while eliminating unwanted ethnic cultural practices from newcomers. Educators who use the assimilationist approaches believe that teaching culturally diverse students English and American values will help to reduce school failure (Garcia, 2004). Research evidence has proven differently. Assimilation has, in fact, contributed to maintaining the achievement gap between Whites and many students of color (Garcia, 2004; Lomawaima, 2004; Olsen, 1997; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999). As immigrant students learn English and adopt American values, cultural norms, and behaviors, they also abandon their language and cultural identity (Olsen, 1997; Wong Fillmore, 1991). As immigrant students undergo the process of Americanization, many of them become marginalized academically and socially (Olsen, 1997; Valenzuela, 1999). Consequently, assimilation erases immigrant students’ first language, culture, and ethnicity, often placing them into ambiguous in-between social and cultural spaces, without a clear sense of belonging.

56

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Modes of Assimilation in School Today Although schools today do not have explicit assimilationist goals, many educators continue to encourage newcomers to adopt the American way of life (Garcia, 2004; Gibson, 1988; Lee, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Valenzuela, 1999; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). As part of their educational experience, most immigrant and other students of color face tremendous pressure – both from teachers and peers – to adopt mainstream American values, norms, and behaviors. In many cases, the student’s ability to assimilate into the mainstream influences his/her educational success. Olneck (2004) states that throughout the history of education in the U.S. teachers have categorized and evaluated immigrant students based on their ability to conform to “prevailing definitions of the ‘good student’” (p. 387). In other words, to be considered a “good student” an immigrant student has to conform to the teacher’s standards and expectations. While in classrooms, conformity becomes a standard for academic success, outside of the classroom, social and cultural conformity helps to prevent immigrant students from being objectified and ridiculed. The pressure to conform to the American cultural norms becomes part of the day-to-day educational experience of most immigrant students, both inside and outside of school (Lee, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Valenzuela, 1999). Olsen’s (1997) study illustrates the various ways in which immigrant students experience the pressure to conform and adopt mainstream cultural values, norms, and behaviors. The ways that students talk, dress, and behave serve as markers of adaptation, social identification, and signifiers of being American or part of the “other.” Students in Olsen’s study explain that if they dress like Americans “it leads to acting American; it sends American signals” (p. 47). In this school, as in many schools throughout the U.S., clothes signal cultural identity and social status; it is difficult for immigrant students to dress differently and stand out from the pervasive mass of blue jeans and teeshirts – the unspoken student dress code. Learning to read this and other codes – both spoken/written and unspoken/written – becomes an important component of surviving at the school. An immigrant student from Brazil talks about the pressure to conform to avoid ridicules (cited in Olsen, 1997):

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

57

I used to dress different, and people were treating me different because of how I dress and making fun of me. In Brazil, we wore short skirts and we liked to walk with our hips. Here girls dress like boys in long pants and shirts. If a girl puts on a dress they just talk about her legs. To me, that is the way girls are supposed to dress – to wear skirts and to swing your hips. Now I dress and walk like an American (p. 47). The Brazilian immigrant student indicated that her classmates often made fun of her when she wore skirts to school. This “making fun” consisted of name calling, which included derogatory sexual remarks. Her clothing became a symbol of “open sexuality,” making her a target for harassment. The constant harassment caused the student much shame and soon she soon gave up dressing the way she did in Brazil and adopted an androgynous style to not call attention to her gender. Assimilation and Racialization Another important aspect of social conformity takes place through the process of racialization. Schools are sites where immigrant students face the pressure to fit into the different racial categories (Lee, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Valenzuela, 1999; Waters, 1996). Race and racialization are deeply embedded in both social structures and the cultural discourses in the United States (Omi & Winant, 1994). In the context of the school as a social and cultural institution, race gets reproduced at both the structural levels (i.e., policies, curriculum) and in the day-today representations, conversations, and practices of teachers, staff, and students (Lee, 2005; Olsen, 1997). As immigrant students come faceto-face with the racial discourses in school, the pressure to conform to and adopt these discourses becomes an important part of their school experience (Lee, 1996, 2005; Olsen, 1997; Valenzuela, 1999; Waters, 1996). The conflict between conforming to a racial category and maintaining an ethnic identity is intense and at times confusing. Many students resist racial categorization and develop an oppositional identity (Ogbu, 1991, 2001). In rejecting racialization and embracing an oppositional identity, Ogbu (1991) argues that students may also reject school, which they see as a part of the assimilation process. West (1993) points out that minority youth who adopt oppositional identities

58

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

– such as African Americans adopting Afrocentrism – are misled and believe that they can overcome racial and cultural assimilation by rejecting school. Consequently, these youth who have continued to reject school as they developed an oppositional identity to Whiteness and assimilation become at-risk academically and eventually at-risk of becoming a part of the downward or segmented assimilation process (Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Sassler, 2006). As immigrant students face the reality of race and racialization in their lives, they become aware of the pressure to become a part of the school’s racial structure. Accepting their racial identity then serves as a strategy of social survival for many immigrant students. Undergoing the process of racialization is a way for immigrant students to be accepted by their native-born peers and teachers, but at the cost of rejecting their own ethnic and cultural identities. Olsen (1997) writes: “For most immigrants, Americanization means leaving behind their fuller national, cultural, and language identities, and abandoning hope that others will see and accept them in their full humanness” (p.197). Those who resist this racial categorization process find they are isolated and without a clear sense of belonging. Sandra, an immigrant student from Brazil, feels this sense of isolation in her struggle to understand the American racialization project. She describes her isolation (cited in Olsen, 1997): I am Brazilian. I am not black, I am not Latin, I am not white, I am not Mexican, as many of you think. I am Brazilian…Here every culture wants to be with people from their culture. And people see me and wait for me to be with my culture. But I don’t have one here. Some see my skin and think I am white. They think I belong to Latin culture. But the whites hear me and think I am Latin. They think I belong to Latin culture. I do not belong anywhere here. (p.106) It is difficult for immigrant youth to resist racial categorization without incurring social alienation. However, the process of racialization is itself a form of social division, which often leads immigrant students towards the path of segmented assimilation. A study by Valenzuela (1999) provides an important illustration of how Latino students become racialized and structured into the bottom of the

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

59

socioeconomic ladder in school and society at large. Valenzuela believes that schooling becomes a “subtractive” process for many immigrant students because it “divests these youth of important social and cultural resources, leaving them progressively vulnerable to academic failure” (p. 3). In her observations at Seguin High School, Valenzuela notes that instead of “functioning as a conduit for the attainment of the American Dream, this large, overcrowded, and underfunded urban school reproduces Mexican youth as a monolingual, English-speaking, ethnic minority, neither identified with Mexico nor equipped to function competently in America’s mainstream” (p. 3). The author states that the process of schooling for Latino students becomes subtractive to the point where many students, in order to resist conformity, develop oppositional identities to the mainstream’s representations of them. Some students engage in counter-culture activities, such as rejecting school, to confront assimilation. In addition, students’ general perception of the lack of caring on the part of the school and teachers contributes to their negative attitude towards school. This lack of caring in teachers is demonstrated by teachers’ low expectations of students, as illustrated in the excerpt below (cited in Valenzuela, 1999). The main problem with these kids is their attitude. They’re immature and they challenge authority. Look at them, they’re not going anywhere. I can tell you right now, a full quarter of these students will drop out of school come May. (p. 64) Students become discouraged and disinterested in school as they have experiences with teachers whom they perceive as lacking compassion and a sense of authentic caring. One student in Valenzuela’s study (1999) summed his perspective about school with this statement. “If the school doesn’t care about my learning, why should I care?” (p. 3). Many students internalize low teachers’ expectation or construct counter-cultural identities as a way to resist this “uncaring” environment. Other students absorb the negative images reflected from the social mirroring and internalize these negative messages (Suarez-Orozco, 2001). The low opinions of teachers and others influence the immigrant students’ social and academic identity, which eventually become a self-fulfilling prophecy as students accept

60

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

these messages to be true and act on them. In this process of accepting the negative messages around them, their academic expectation and achievement drop and they eventually become part of the social underclass. Valenzuela’s (1999b) study is also an important case which illustrates the variability and complexity of immigrant student adaptation. While the Mexican American students in her study are fully aware of the discrimination they face in and outside of school (Lopez & Staton-Salazar, 2001), many make a conscious choice to resist assimilation. They recognize that assimilating into a racialized structure will strip them of their cultural and linguistic identity and pride. Yet, in the process of resisting assimilation, they lack the important skills needed to navigate the social, cultural, and economic mainstream and experience downward assimilation. These immigrant students’ adaptation process, or lack thereof, defy any specific classification of either assimilation or acculturation – they become caught in an ambiguous in-between social, cultural, and linguistic spaces. Immigrant Youth Occupying In-Between Spaces Adjusting to the in-between social, cultural, and linguistic spaces is an aspect of immigrant adaptation to life in the United States. Zhou’s (2001) study of Vietnamese refugee youth discusses the ways in which students address the tensions that exist among the multiple contexts in their lives. The Vietnamese refugee youth in her study learned to adjust to U.S. society by straddling between their two cultural worlds – home and school cultures. While many of the youth dropped the Vietnamese language as they adopted English, they also continued to maintain their ethnic identity and many of their cultural traditions. The youth developed practices that were connected to the larger U.S. mainstream society as well as to their ethnic community. While some may argue that dropping your native language is a form of assimilation, these Vietnamese refugees continued to remain strongly connected to their ethnic community. The youth also formed an important social, cultural, and ethnic community amongst each other. Their pattern of adaptation does not fit with a straight-line model of assimilation. They learned to straddle in-between the U.S. mainstream culture and their community spaces. The youth developed a strategy to both adapt to the mainstream

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

61

culture as well as engage with parents and other members of their ethnic community. Zhou’s study provides an important example of how immigrant youth participated in creating a path of adaptation that is meaningful and functional for their social circumstances. Sarroub’s (2005) study of a group of Yemeni girls in a suburb of Michigan provides another case study of immigrant youth learning to straddle between two cultural worlds. The study gives an account of the various ways that cultural and religious beliefs and practices were incorporated into the personal and public life of the Yemeni immigrant girls. With one foot in the U.S. culture and another steep in a traditional home life, the girls strived to meet the expectations of both contexts in meaningful ways. To achieve success in both social and cultural domains – such as being able to pursue higher education while maintaining home and community responsibilities – the Yemeni girls learned to negotiate between their two cultural worlds and cross these social, cultural, and political boundaries on a daily basis. While many of the Yemeni girls made important strides in school, maintaining Yemeni cultural sensibility and traditions was seen as equally if not more important in their homes and community. Ideas of success and academic achievement in the mainstream culture had to be balanced by cultural and religious beliefs and traditions. The challenge for Yemeni girls in adapting to American cultural norms and way of life was to continue to demonstrate their abilities to adhere to and fulfill the expectations of their families and community. In the case of the Yemeni immigrants, having strong cultural and transnational communities helped to maintain social, cultural, and political distance from the mainstream society as opposed to encouraging the process of acculturation. Assimilation, Racialization, and Citizenship Construction of Immigrant Children The processes of assimilation and racialization are not only present in schools but are also structured in other public institutions and policies, including citizenship development (Lowe, 1996; Morrison, 1992; Ong, 2003). In particular, race and racialization have been consistent factors throughout the history of the United States. As a social invention, race has been deeply embedded into the American social psyche and

62

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

knowledge, and has helped to shape the social and cultural identity, public policies, and institutional practices throughout the course of U.S. history (Omi & Winant, 1993, 1994). Race has been an integral part of the U.S. educational process (Hatcher & Troyna, 1993; LadsonBillings, 2004a, 2004b; Olsen, 1997) and has become a ubiquitous element of the popular media, art, and entertainment industries (Cortes, 2001, 2004; Giroux, 1996). It has become so present and common that it becomes normal and expected in U.S. culture and society. Morrison (1992) writes: Race has become metaphorical – a way of referring to and disguising forces, events, classes, and expressions of social decay and economic division far more threatening to the body politic than biological ‘race’ ever was…It seems that it has a utility far beyond economy, beyond sequestering of classes from one another, and has assumed a metaphorical life so completely embedded in daily discourse that it is perhaps more necessary and more on display than ever before. (p. 63) Since its inception, citizenship in the United States has always been imagined and defined along racial lines. Images and ideas of what is American have been created in contrast to ethnic minorities and their experiences (Morrison, 1992). In an essay entitled What America would be like without Blacks, Ralph Ellison (Callahan, 1995) writes: Since the beginning of the nation, white Americans have suffered from a deep inner uncertainty as to who they really are. One of the ways that has been used to simplify the answer has been to seize upon the presence of black Americans and use them as a marker, a symbol of limits, a metaphor for the ‘outsider.’ Many whites could look at the social position of blacks and feel that color formed an easy and reliable gauge for determining to what extent one was or was not American. (pp. 582-583) The narrative of American identity and nationhood are tied to the enslavement, oppression, and struggles of people of color, particularly of Black people. In every significant historical moment that defines

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

63

U.S. history, character, and national identity, racial differentiation and/or racism has played a role, whether prominent or secondary, from the creation of the U.S. constitution to the Westward Expansion and annihilation of the Native Americans; from the Civil War to policies of exclusive immigration; from the internment of Japanese American citizens to the Civil Rights Movement. Race and racialization continue to define U.S. society today. Race and Nation-State Development The processes of racialization and assimilation have been integral in the construction of the United States into a single nation-state. As a polity, whose peoples come from places all over the world, the United States is, by definition, not a single nation-state but is either a multinationstate (Kymlicka, 2000), polyethnic nation-state (Castles, 2000), or multicultural nation-state (Banks, 2004a). The concept of nation-state, developed in the 18th century, is based on the idea of cultural and political unity or homogeneity (Castles, 2000; Castles & Miller, 2003). Many nations have used the notion of ethnic homogeneity – which includes a shared language, cultural practices, and history – as a basis for constructing a nation-state. Castles and Miller (2003) state that for many nation-states, the idea of “unity has often been fictitious – a construction of the ruling elite – but it has provided powerful national myths” (p. 15). The United States has adopted this model of single nation-state with a dominant culture and language, but its history suggests that it is a polyethnic multicultural nation-state consisting of many ethnic and cultural groups from all over the world. Adopting the concept of a single nation-state allows the United States to project the idea of single culture (Kymlicka, 2000). This single culture and language do not exist; instead what the United States has constructed, through the process of racialization and assimilation, is a dominant White culture and poly-ethnic minority cultures (Kymlicka, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 2004a). Having an image of single nation-state provides justification for what Castles (2000) describes as the “ethnocultural homogenization of the population” (p. 134). This nation-state status allows the United States to adopt and implement assimilationist policies and practices. The process of racialization has acted to combine the cultures, customs, histories, and languages of different European ethnicities to

64

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

create an image of uniformity and commonality – monolithic White. In building a monolithic White culture, the dominant culture has constructed itself in contrast to the other distinctive ethnic minorities. The ambiguous and fluid White category also allows the group to expand and change over time to maintain its majority status, as it has done throughout the course of U.S. history. During the mid-1800s when immigrants from non-European nations, particularly Chinese immigrants, began to arrive in large numbers, the White racial category expanded to include European groups that were earlier classified as non-White. Irish, Italians, Poles, and other European immigrants who were distinctly separated in the mid-1800s became White with the increase of non-European immigrants (Brodkin, 1998; Jacobson, 1998), allowing the White racial category to expand and maintain its majority status. The “racial chasm” that once divided and fractured AngloSaxons and other non-White European immigrants was slowly mended as these newer European immigrants were brought into the folds of the White majority (Jacobson, 1998). The White racial category also expanded after WWII when it similarly reclassified Jews as Whites (Brodkin, 1998). While racial construction has served to benefit the members of the White dominant group, it has marginalized people of color and pushed them into minority status. Castles and Miller (2003) write: “Becoming an ethnic minority is not an automatic result of immigration, but rather the consequence of specific mechanisms of marginalization” (p. 35). Today, it is difficult and nearly impossible to reverse racial and ethnic minority status as those categories are firmly established into many Western nations, including the United States (Castles, 2000). Nation-Sate and Assimilationist Model of Citizenship Development Having a White majority group and single nation-state status provide justification for the United States to adopt an assimilationist model of citizenship in which ethnic groups become assimilated and structured into a social, cultural, economic, and political hierarchy (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Kymlicka, 2000). Part of citizenship is having membership to, what Parsons (1965) calls, a “societal community” (cited in Ladson-Billings, 2004a, p. 101). This societal community membership means “having access to society’s resources and capacities that allow for social mobility and comfort. Thus, access to health care

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

65

services, education, employment, and housing without discrimination are part of a social citizenship” (Ladson-Billings, 2004a, p. 101). The assimilationist model of citizenship formation and citizenship education have not been effective in helping to integrate national ethnic minorities and immigrants into the larger societal community, and has occurred, Banks (2004a) writes, “without these groups attaining social and economic equality” (p. xx). Assimilation often disregards and discriminates against the cultural differences of minority groups whose values and ideas are not parallel to those of the dominant cultural norms (Ong, 2004). Furthermore, assimilation acts to classify and sort minorities and immigrants into the bottom rungs of the racial hierarchy (Ong, 2003) and has helped to maintain the social, economic, and political interests of the dominant group (Banks, 2004a; Castles, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2004). The assimilationist approach, Banks (2004b) states, leads to hegemony. He writes: “Unity without diversity results in hegemony and oppression; diversity without unity leads to Balkanization and the fracturing of nation-state” (Banks, 2004b, p. xx). The connections between assimilation, racialization, and citizenship formation create social and political pitfalls for people of color as they seek citizenship. The assimilationist process requires ethnic minorities to conform to the dominant culture and to adopt the dominant language while the racialization factor becomes a factor that excludes minorities from full membership in the societal community. Assimilation provides a partial form of citizenship for a person of color; Whiteness becomes a criterion for societal membership. LadsonBillings (2004a) states that Whiteness “allows an almost seamless melding of the cultural and the civic for the dominant group” (p. 113). This “seamless melding” permits Whites to switch their racial identity to national identity, such as in the U.S. where White is synonymous with “American.” Ladson-Billings (2004a) further points out that the American identity allows Whites to be “viewed as more loyal, more patriotic, and more committed to the public good. Citizens of color in the United States frequently are accused of being ethnocentric and less patriotic” (p. 113). A White individual is automatically assumed and perceived to be American while a person of color casts doubt and suspicion about his/her nationality and loyalty. The process of citizenship formation continues to be a practice in which race and assimilation remain significant factors.

66

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Globalization, Migration, and Citizenship Globalization and increased immigration have been slowly distorting and dissolving the social, cultural, and political boundaries that separate and make distinct nation-states. Along with the erosion of national boundaries, growing levels of racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic diversity created by increased immigration, are challenging and redefining conventional understandings of citizenship (Banks, 2004a; Baubock, 1994, 1998; Capella, 2000; Castles, 2004; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Kymlicka, 2004; Ong, 2004). These different social, economic, and political forces are working to shift the core of the traditional conception of citizenship – the social and political boundaries that define nation-states as well as the meaning and purpose of citizenship structured around the protection of individual rights. In the context of global connectedness, notions of nationhood and citizenship are increasingly moving to a point where an individual can have membership to multiple nation-states instead of being bound in one specific nation-state. This shift in citizenship is captured by Soysal (1994): The state is no longer an autonomous and independent organization closed over a nationally defined population. Instead, we have a system of constitutionally interconnected states with a multiplicity of membership…Individual rights and obligations, which were historically located in the nationsate, have increasingly moved to a universalistic plane, transcending the boundaries of particular nation-states. (pp. 163-4) The notion of citizenship has generated new ideas meanings and directions of where it should head, such as the debate between single nation-state and global citizenship and individual and ethnic group rights. The new theories of citizenship not only challenge existing and familiar conceptions of citizenship; they also contrast one another in meaning and purpose. One of the theories that has become a consistent part of the debate is the notion of cosmopolitanism or global citizenship (Nussbaum, 2002), which suggests that citizenship be organized around principles of cosmopolitanism or global citizenship rather than national membership. Cosmopolitanism connects to the idea of having or being

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

67

informed by a worldwide perspective as opposed to thinking within a local, national, or provincial scope. A cosmopolitan, according to Nussbaum (2002) is someone who “transcends national borders and pledges allegiance to the worldwide community of human beings” as opposed to a single-nation state or a specific ethnic community (p.4). The educational goal of cosmopolitanism, according to Nussbaum, is to foster in students the ability “to recognize humanity wherever they encounter it” (p. 9). The ideas and goals of cosmopolitanism challenge existing notions of nation-state and allegiance by suggesting a reconfiguration of the global community without clear social, cultural, or political borders. While questions of applicability and logistics regarding cosmopolitanism and global citizenship continue to position these ideas within the theoretical realm (Delanty, 1999), the constant and heavy global traffic created by migrants generates increasing numbers of new and complex ideas about the boundaries and purpose of citizenship. The current wave of global immigration consists of groups who are not only diverse in terms of culture, language, religion, socio-economic and political affiliations, but also in terms of their migration and citizenship status, ranging from temporary to permanent settlers and from multiple citizenship or green card holders to undocumented immigrants. These various categories of migrants, each with different and sometimes competing sets of social, economic, and educational needs and interests complicate existing processes of social integration, in particular education for citizenship. Immigrants who come to settle permanently in the United States and who join forces with other racial or ethnic minorities tend to push for educational and social policies that include equality and cultural pluralism (Ong, 2004). However, many flexible citizens (Ong, 1999, 2004), who are considered transnational, seek to alter education to encompass the goals of helping their children to gain transferable skills and strategies for the accumulation of social and other forms of capital (Mitchell, 2001, cited in Ong, 2004). Flexible and transnational citizens may not necessarily feel the need to be fully integrated into the larger society since they tend to focus on skills and knowledge that will help them to maintain social, cultural, linguistic, and political connections with multiple nation-states (Ong, 2003; Rizvi, 2000).

68

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Flexible citizenship is created with the increase of temporary migration. Historically, immigration has been a permanent move for people. Migrants would leave one location and settle in another, and were often, as Rizvi (2000) argues, “forced to assimilate into their new cultural milieu” (p. 209). However, in this new global era, migration patterns have become increasingly temporary, and the maintenance of one’s culture and language is essential. While many scholars suggest that the definitions of nation-state and its membership have been challenged by increased diversity, Ong (2004) raises the concern that the growing numbers of politically and economically connected flexible citizens may challenge the goals and ideals of democratic education and thus democracy itself. Flexible citizenship empowers a particular group of people – generally the social and economically elite – to determine their own citizenship and cultural identity. However, it greatly impedes the process of education for democracy within existing democratic nation-states. Ong (2004) argues that as flexible citizens seek to change the goals of education, their social status, political connections, and economic power can influence educational institutions to adopt more neoliberal principles, helping their children to gain skills to adjust to different market economies throughout the world. As more and more immigrants become flexible citizens, the likelihood of them wanting to invest and participate socially, culturally, and politically in their host country or countries grows slim, thus placing the notion of participatory democracy or civic citizenship in jeopardy. Immigrants whose citizenship and cultural ties transcend a single nation-state also belong to the growing diasporic communities or groups – “displaced peoples who share cultural, ethnic or religious ties [who are] are increasingly able to maintain linkages as social relations become ‘stretched’ over time and space” (Nayak, 2003, p. 35). People who are a part of diasporic communities tend to belong to or connect with transnational or transcultural contexts. Brittain (2002) defines transnational spaces to mean: “a human collectivity of immigrant students from a particular country where students engage in activities that cross the boundaries of two nation-states…and create a sense of belonging that overlaps these two nation-states” (p. 49). The physical and symbolic boundaries that immigrants cross on a daily basis reveals a complex practice of re-assessing the meanings of cultural and ethnic identity as they engage with the different cultural spaces. These

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

69

transnational spaces can be both physical as well as those recalled from memory – such as a sense of nostalgia for their homeland (Brittain, 2002). As different ethnic groups try to maintain connections with their home culture while adapting to their host nation, they form hybrid cultural identities and practices. Similar to acculturation, hybridity takes place through the composition or fusion of diverse cultures and identities and reflects their pluralistic origins. It is a cultural mélange as opposed to cultural assimilation (Rizvi, 2000). Hybridity offers an alternative for migrants to define their own cultures and identities, combining multiple cultures instead of assimilating into existing categories constructed based on oppositions such as us/them or insider/outsider (Bhabha, 1996). Hybridity is most often used to describe populations or groups who have formed transnational identity and maintain a strong connection to transnational spaces or communities. It has usually been associated with social elite world travelers, not necessarily poor migrants. Even though most people in the world continue to be citizens of one particular nation-state, the numbers of people who have affiliations or membership to more than one nation-state are increasing (Baubock, 1994; Ong, 1999, 2004; Rizvi, 2000). Having multiple citizenship in nation-states usually requires financial resources and social and political connections, which most ordinary people in the world do not have. Cosmopolitan and other transnational citizenship as more than just a political or national identity; it is a way of life, one that few can afford (Baubock, 1994; Ong, 1999; Rizvi, 2000). On the other hand, immigrants who seek better a better life but have little access to social capital, make up some of the minority groups who experience a profound sense of “otherness.” The continual structural exclusion of minority racial, ethnic, and language groups in many nation-states (Benhabib, 2004; Castle & Davidson, 2000; Flores & Benmayor, 1997; Kymlicka, 1995) has created growing concerns among scholars and community leaders regarding the tension between diversity and citizenship. Kymlicka (1995) states that the current conditions of marginalized minority groups in Western nation-states demand a policy change in which individuals belonging to these groups have both individual as well as group rights. These group rights include: “the right to practice cultures

70

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

and religions; the right to certain land claims from past broken agreements; and the use of their languages should be recognized along with universal human rights” (Banks & Nguyen, 2008). Kymlicka (1995) describes the nations that have implemented policies incorporating universal human rights, individual rights, and group differentiated rights as the implementation of “multicultural citizenship.” This model of citizenship will create opportunities for racial, ethnic, and cultural minority groups to maintain a sense of cultural and linguistic identity while trying to become a part of the larger society. At the core of the debate on citizenship is a struggle that many multicultural nation-states are undergoing to address issues of growing diversity and fluctuating social, cultural, economic, and political boundaries among nation-states. Many nation-states are experiencing, in a sense, an identity crisis as they try to maintain existing or traditional national character and identity while grappling with global changes. The United States, for example, is experiencing these tensions as war, increased immigration, border security, economic crises, and academic underachievement confront scholars and political leaders. Theses tensions are acutely felt in school as politicians and theorists from different ends of the political spectrum debate over the direction of education, particularly citizenship education. While traditional conservative groups propose the implementation of national standards and a “return” to the “Western” tradition of education (Apple, 2000, 2001; Ravitch, 1990, 1995; Schlesinger, 1998), multicultural theorists argue that citizenship education should focus on issues of social justice, equality, and actualize cultural democracy (Kymlicka, 2000, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2004a). Added to this mix of ideas, growing numbers of transnational and flexible citizens expect schools to teach students skills and strategies that can be transported outside of a single nationstate as opposed to focusing on citizenship education (Ong, 2004). These contrasting approaches to education connect to the larger struggle over the meaning and function of citizenship and, by extension, a struggle over the core value and ideals of the nation-state.

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

71

Citizenship Construction and Immigrant Youth Young people are important social actors at the intersection of globalization, education, and citizenship construction. They are avid consumers and stimulators of the global economy, media, technological innovations, and popular cultural productions (Hall, 2002; Jenkins, 2004; Maira, 2004; Nayak, 2003). They are often targets of the farreaching media and fast expanding consumer culture that move to standardize tastes, consumption patterns, and everyday practices throughout the world (Giroux, 1996). Many immigrant youth are further defined by globalization as they continue to maintain ties and attachments to diasporic or transnational communities (Rizvi, 2000). These youth often struggle to understand their sense of belonging in this socially, culturally, economically, and politically interwoven world that also seems, at times, to be fraught with contradictions and fragmentations. While many immigrant youth’s lives are at the crossroads of globalization, immigration, education, and citizenship, studies that focus on these intersections are limited. The few studies that do exist provide important insights into the ways in which immigrant youth’s social, cultural, and national identities often transcend national boundaries and position them within a global context (Hall, 2002; Maira, 2004; Nyak, 2003; Rizvi, 2000). Maira’s (2004) study of South Asian working-class youth in the United States describes how aspects of globalization, in particular technology, popular culture, and the media, help to strengthen their ties to transnational communities and cultural practices. Citizenship formation is strongly linked to the cultural practices and identity of the South Asian youth in Maira’s study. Traditionally, citizenship formation of youth involves a process of socialization, whereby they are expected to engage in the form of citizenship that the adults practice – defined in economic, political, and civic terms (Maira, 2004). However, as they participate in different social, cultural, and political practices many of the youth learn to negotiate their own idea of citizenship (Maira, 2004; Nayak, 2003) and sense of home and community life (Hall, 2002; Sarroub, 2005; Zhou, 2001). The South Asian youth in Maira’s study, for example, used telecommunications and media products, such as films and music, to engage in global cultural practices and to make connections with other

72

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

South Asians around the globe, forming a diasporic South Asian community. Through these technological advances and popular cultural products, the South Asian youth in Maira’s study were able to form networks and communities beyond the nation-state in which they resided. They constructed a transnational cultural identities and practices that transcended the single nation-state boundaries. In a study examining the various ways in which culture and ethnicity influence civic and national identity formation, Hall (2002) explores how multiple dimensions of citizenship are woven into the lives of young Sikh Indians in Great Britain. Hall suggests that the story of immigration and citizenship formation is closely connected to the story of nation formation. Citizenship formation of immigrant youth is, in many ways, reflections of the larger societal responses to its growing immigrant populations. Citizenship formation is more than the acquisition of national membership and issues of legality; citizenship is also tied to their community’s historical struggles and the maintenance of cultural traditions. Hall writes: “These processes entail complex and multiple forms of cultural politics, which…play out across a number of sites within the public sphere of democratic capitalistic nations, in law and policy, education and the media, as well as in families and ethnic communities” (p. 2). Citizenship formation for the Sikh Indian youth in Hall’s study was molded by multiple social, cultural, and political sites – both in the public and private spaces of their lives. As they moved one from social, cultural, and political context to the next, different dimensions of citizenship – such as the legal, political, or cultural form of citizenship – came into focus. Their paths toward creating social, cultural, civic, and national identities were often met with obstacles and contradictions and learning to negotiate among these different cultural sites became a critical component of their process. The meanings, ideas, and practices they drew from the different dimensions of their social, cultural, and political lives informed the ways in which these immigrant youth embodied and performed citizenship. Understanding how immigrant youth conceptualize and construct citizenship as they connect ideas and practices from their different social and cultural worlds – both in school and home – provides us with better insights into the question of how citizenship is mediated between the multiple cultures, social practices, and discourses that exist in their

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

73

lives. The youth’s perceptions and enactments of citizenship in their everyday lives are also reflections of how public institutions and other mainstream sites respond to issues of global change, migration, and diversity. Maira (2004) and Hall’s (2002) studies help to shed some light on the complex relationships among the various dimensions of immigrant youth’s lives, particularly between home and school cultures – including transnational, transcultural, and diasporic spaces. These transnational and diasporic communities serve as critical sites in the social, cultural, and national identity formation of many immigrant youth. Increasingly, immigrant youth’s everyday social and cultural practices and routines are becoming interconnected with the global context. While immigrants maintaining relationships with their countries of origin is not new, technological advances and transportation have helped to build and maintain stronger connections among migrants and their homelands (Maira, 2004; Rizvi, 2000). Transnational and diasporic communities are becoming increasingly important spaces as they help to forge a sense of belonging and connection for migrants who otherwise feel displaced and culturally and linguistically isolated (Rizvi, 2000). However, this growing trend, particularly among the immigrant youth, of establishing ties and attachments to transnational and diasporic communities raises some important questions regarding the direction of social integration, citizenship, and citizenship education. •

•

•

How do the increasing levels of engagements with transnational and diasporic communities – via travels, the internet, or other media sources – affect the processes of integrating newcomers into the larger U.S. mainstream social, cultural, and civic life? How should schools address the process of educating culturally diverse students to become active citizens in a nation-state while the notions of citizenship and nation-state are being transformed by forces of globalization? How do immigrant youth interpret citizenship – its meanings and functions – in their lives?

These are some of the questions that remain under-explored in the research literature. This study will attempt to address of these issues.

74

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Summary of Chapter Issues of globalization, migration, and diversity touch upon every major spheres of U.S. society – the social, cultural, economic, and political domains (Burbules & Torres, 2000; Hall, 2002; Torres, 1998). They also generate discussions and debate within and among various academic fields, including education, political science, sociology, and anthropology. Drawing from these different disciplines, this chapter highlighted some of the scholarship and theories on globalization, immigrant education, and citizenship formation. While the research focusing on each area – immigrant adaptation (Gibson, 1988; Lee, 1996; Olsen, 1997; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996, 2001; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999; Zhou, 2001; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998), citizenship theory in a global context (Baubock, 1994; Delanty, 2000; Ichilov, 1998a, 1998b; Nussbaum, Ong, 1999; Rizvi, 2000; Soysal, 1994), and citizenship and diversity (Banks, 2004a; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Hall, 2002; Kymlicka, 2000, 2003, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2004a; Ong, 2003; Rosaldo, 1997) – is extensive, studies that connect them remain limited. The few studies that specifically address the citizenship formation of immigrant youth, namely Maira (2004) and Hall (2002), emphasize the relationship between the immigrants’ everyday social and cultural routines and the larger social structures. Adjusting and renegotiating their social, cultural, and political perspectives become a critical component of adaptation as the immigrants cross and re-cross different cultural spaces in their everyday routines. As social actors whose lives are informed by and structured across these different cultural contexts, immigrants develop multiple identities and forms of citizenship (Hall, 2002). More than a notion of national membership, Hall (2002) defines citizenship as a cultural production, which shifts and changes as it encounters other social, cultural, and political institutions and processes. Building upon the existing research literature, my study incorporates concepts and ideas from these different disciplines to construct a lens for examining how a group of recent Vietnamese immigrant students interpret and enact citizenship in their lives – particularly, what it means to become American. This study tries to capture the ways in which the youth perceive, interpret, and engage with different American normative assumptions, cultural values,

Social and Cultural Integration of Immigrants

75

practices, and social structures as they move from school to home and community settings. While they encounter and absorb the different discourses on freedom, individuality, opportunities, and the “American Dream,” the Vietnamese immigrant youth also acknowledge and discuss the presence of social inequalities, discrimination, and racism and how these social forces inform their perceptions of becoming American. Added to this already complex process of social and cultural adaptation, their connections to the Vietnamese transnational communities – both in the United States and Vietnam – also generate questions about their sense of belonging and, in general, the roles and purposes of citizenship. Overall, this study attempts to understand how immigrant youth construct meaningful citizenship and forge a sense of belonging while other social forces and processes – such as transnationalism, cultural maintenance, racialization, assimilative and national ideology, and exclusionary and discriminatory practices – are acting on them.

CHAPTER FOUR

Becoming Racialized: Engaging with Racialized Discourses and Meanings

The findings in this chapter on “becoming racialized” illustrate the different ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth encountered, internalized, and resisted race and the process of racialization in their everyday academic and social routines and practices, particularly in the school. The different discourses on race that the immigrant youth learned and absorbed from their new environment along with other ongoing processes of racialization influenced how they perceived and defined themselves – both on a personal level as well as in relation to other immigrant and U.S.-born peers. Many scholars connect this racialization process to the larger project of Americanization, whose goal is to structure immigrants into a racial system as well as position them outside of the American mainstream culture (Gibson, 1988; Gordon, 1964; Lee, 2005; Olsen, 1997; Rumbaut & Portes, 2001). It is a project in which processes of assimilation and exclusion are taking place (Castles & Davidson, 2000). The ways in which these social, cultural, and racial processes manifested in the lives of these immigrant youth often defined and categorized them as “Other,” isolating them from other racial groups and mainstream American cultural contexts. To counter the feelings of marginalization and alienation, many of the Vietnamese immigrant students focused on social groups that centered on ethnic and cultural spaces and identities – or transcultural and transnational social spaces (Brittain, 2002; Castles, 2000; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Pries, 1999). While their ethnic and cultural groupings may be perceived by those outside of their circles as the 77

78

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

youth’s unwillingness to become integrated into mainstream culture, their actions were often responses to the existing racial and cultural isolation and divisions within their school. This chapter describes how the Vietnamese immigrant youth incorporated as well as resisted race and racialization in the various aspects of their personal, social, and academic lives. It illustrates how race works to infiltrate and shape the ideas, meanings, and everyday social practices of the immigrant youth. To contextualize the meanings and interpretations which the youth assigned to notions of Americanism, race, ethnicity, culture, and citizenship, the findings include an examination of their initial encounters with these concepts, particularly at their school. As the youth became familiar with the physical layout of their new school, learning to navigate the social and cultural landscapes also became a significant aspect of their adaptation and schooling experience. The findings begin with some of my observations and descriptions of the general student population at Englewood High School. These observations are then followed by some of the Vietnamese immigrant students’ initial perceptions and encounters with different discourses and structures of race at their school. It discusses how the youth mapped out the various racial, ethnic, and linguistic spaces and their positions in relation to those spaces within the school. Mapping the Social, Cultural, and Racial Terrains at Englewood High I arrived at Englewood High School on a cool morning in early autumn. School had started two weeks earlier. I had driven 15 miles north on the Interstate to reach the school, which is located in a mixed-income suburban neighborhood in the northern part of the city. As I drove on the busy highway to get to Englewood, I often thought about the many immigrant youth who lived even further south than me and how much longer their commute must be. Most of the ESL students who attended Englewood lived in the southern part of the city and commuted approximately 20 miles to and from school. Some of the students rode the school bus but many took the metro bus and had to make one or two transfers. It took some students more than an hour and a half to get to school. I pulled into the parking lot at 7:30 AM. The first period starts at 7:45 AM. I parked my car in the visitors’ parking lot. The lot

Becoming Racialized

79

was as usual crowded with students pulling in and parents dropping off their kids. Upon entering the building, the noise level indicated that students had not yet made their way to class. I had been to this school many times in over the past year and was familiar with its physical layout. I stopped at a girls’ restroom before heading to the main office. A group of White female students were chatting and laughing as they put on their make-up. Making my way towards the main office to sign in as a visitor, it was difficult not to notice the plaque on a wall near the bathroom stating the school’s mission: To empower multiethnic urban youth to participate fully in high school training; the world of work; and society in order to become to become productive, responsible citizens in our local and global community. It’s a matter of pride. (Mission Statement of Englewood High School) The students in the hallways throughout the school reflected the multiethnic population stated in the school’s mission. There were students of many different racial and ethnic backgrounds socializing in various groups. The “matter of pride” in the school’s diversity seemed to reverberate throughout the school. Artwork, student work, and awards displayed on walls, in glass cases, and on classroom doors exemplified the sense of pride in the racially and culturally diverse student population at Englewood High. Students filled the hallways and were engaged in conversations and various activities. Some were talking and laughing while others sat along the corridors reading and going over their class notes. Many students were talking on their cell phones or listening to their ipods. Some of the students were yelling over each other’s voices. Continuing towards the main office, I spotted a group free-style dancers performing in the hallway. Their performance drew a crowd. I stopped to watch as I had done on previous occasions. The crowd applauded and cheered as one of the dancers spun on his head and another did some back flips. The dancers were comprised of students of different racial backgrounds. There were two White males, an African American male, an Asian male, two White females, and a Latino female student. The crowd that they drew was just as diverse. These initial observations

80

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

seemed to indicate that students at Englewood High were able to cross racial and gender lines to engage and interact with one another. While I was observing the different activities that were going around in this part of the school, I felt a slight tap on my shoulder. It was Dao Li, one of the Vietnamese immigrant youth in my study. I had been working with Dao for the past three and a half years since the first week that he had enrolled in school in the school district. Dao, a 21-year-old student, immigrated to the United States with his family three-and-a-half years ago. Dao was the second of three children in his family. His older brother had recently dropped out of high school because of his age. Students have to be less than 22 years of age to enroll in high school in the district in which Englewood is located. Dao had been feeling the pressure to finish high school this year. He was starting to feel “too old to be with these young students.” Like many of the other young Vietnamese immigrant men in the study, Dao worked after school and on the weekend. He and his older brother had been contributing to their family’s income since the first few months of their arrival to the United States. Dao earned a decent wage as a painter. Dao had always been a motivated student. Learning English and going to college was an important priority for him. He wanted to be the “first in [his] family to go to college.” However, since the beginning of the school year, Dao had been feeling that school did not seem to matter to students at his school. He believed that students liked to “mess around” more than study. He was slowly losing his motivation to remain in school and was becoming less sure that he can graduate and go to college. Dao shared some of his observations about his school and fellow students in a conversation below. Dao greeted me in the crowd of students: Good morning, Co Diem.6 DN: Hi Dao. What do you think of these dancers? Dao: I see them in this hallway a lot. They are good. He paused to watch and then added: Oh man! They are good! I can’t dance like that. 6

All the student participants called me “Co Diem” which translates to “teacher” or “auntie.” This form of address extends to all females affiliated with the school.

Becoming Racialized DN: They are very good. Do you like to dance? Dao laughed: No. I don’t do that. [He watched again and shook his head]. They are so good. Students have a lot of skills. In Vietnam, these students would be seen as disruptive and would be sent home…Here it is different. It seems that students can be free to do what they like. But sometimes too much freedom can make students go crazy too. [We started to walk towards the main office where I needed to sign in everyday.] DN: What do you mean by going crazy? Dao: Sometime things can get out of control. Many of the students don’t respect the school. They mess around a lot…There are lots of fights here too. DN: Fights? Do they happen frequently? Dao: Oh, last year there were fights almost every week. The students like the White ones do not get along with the Black ones or something like that. I don’t know. There were some Asian students that fought with the Black and White students too. We don’t know how to be with each other…This year has not been as bad. There have been fewer fights. But the students…I don’t know. I guess we avoid each other. DN: All the students avoid each other? Dao: There are some groups that get along but most groups don’t talk to each other. Black American students stay in their own group. Asian – like the Chinese, Vietnamese, and Filipinos, we don’t mix with other people too much. White students have many of their own groups. DN: Why do you think these dancers get along? Dao: Well, I don’t know. Maybe they have something in common. Like my soccer team has many kinds of people. We like soccer. Many sports groups have different kinds of people. But outside of those groups, we don’t really know how to get along. After soccer, students go off to their own groups. DN: Their own groups, you mean with their friends? Dao: Their friends…yeah, but I mean like their White or Black or Asian groups. But Asians have their own smaller groups too – like the Vietnamese, Chinese, and Filipinos.

81

82

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Dao turned down a wall. He commented: This is considered the ‘international language’ hallway. There are students from ESL classes. There are a lot of languages here, like Vietnamese, Chinese, Spanish, and many other languages from African countries that I don’t know. Many of these students are in my ESL classes. We each have our little corner or spot. You know where the Vietnamese spot is. [Dao pointed to the small area near an exit sign where the Vietnamese students usually congregated. A few students were still hanging around playing cards.] DN: And do you hang out in other spaces in the school? Dao: We go outside when it is nice out but just in front of that door. [Dao pointed to the lawn outside where several Vietnamese male students were sitting]. We have a couple of tables in the lunchroom. All the tables in the lunchroom are for different groups. We don’t take other people’s tables and they don’t take ours. Just like our tables in the lunchroom, this is our spot in the hallway and other people don’t come here too much. (Fieldnotes, September, 2005)

When newcomers arrive to schools, they enter into and engage with an existing institutional culture, history, and patterns of social and educational practices (Olneck, 2004). One of the most prominent patterns of thinking and social behaviors that the Vietnamese immigrant youth began to witness at Englewood High School connected to the physical segregation among student groups. As Dao and the other Vietnamese immigrant youth became more familiar with the physical and cultural landscapes of the school, they also began to note the disconnect among the different student groups, in particular across racial and ethnic lines. While the levels of diversity were highly visible, each racial, ethnic, and linguistic group generally occupied a separate location within the school. Dao acknowledged that some students were able to form connections across cultural, ethnic, and racial lines but these interactions often involved participating in an organized activity, such as sports. Outside of these organized activities, the majority of the students continued to congregate in their race or ethnic specific groups.

Becoming Racialized

83

These separations impeded meaningful interactions among different groups of students and added another challenge to the process of adjusting to school and social life for new immigrant students. The initial issues of language and cultural barriers that prevented many of the immigrant youth from interacting with their U.S.-born peers were further reinforced by racial differences. Immigrant youth quickly learned that race played a central component for organizing social, cultural, and academic life at Englewood High. Race both shapes and is shaped by social and cultural life (Omi & Winant, 1994; Rothenberg, 2001). It influences the ways in which students construct and situate social groups within school as well as how group members perceive and interact or not interact with each other within and across group boundaries. These different interactions or lack of interactions not only reinforce existing racial, ethnic, linguistic, and gender boundaries but also serve to reproduce new discourses and structures within the institution. As they adjust to their everyday life in school and society at large, the immigrant youth adopt aspects of speech and actions that connect to the larger racial formation project that is taking place around them in school. Omi and Winant (1994) define racial formation as “a process of historically situated projects in which human bodies and social structures are represented and organized” (p. 55-6). They argue that racial formation serves as a foundation from which social structures and life is organized and regulated. Adjusting to school and life in the United States for immigrant youth inevitably leads to racial identity construction and conformity – consequences of the larger racial formation process. Learning to Read the Signs of Race Learning to read the signs of race – both the overt and subtle ways in which it manifests – and navigating the racialized structures within their school become important social adaptation strategies for immigrant youth. The following data excerpts illustrate the various ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth encounter and respond to the racial structures, practices, and discourses within their school. Hanh, an 18 year-old junior, immigrated to the United States three years ago. Similar to other students, when Hanh first arrived to the

84

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

United States, she enrolled at the Northwest Newcomer Center (NWNC) to learn English. While at the newcomer center, her sense of excitement about school was almost palpable. Hanh often indicated how much she enjoyed school and learning. She stated: I like going to school here. I like the American way of life. There are laws…laws that protect children and women. The teachers do not mistreat the students. (Interview, May, 2003) This sense of fairness towards women and children helped to motivate Hanh to learn and engage in school. She often acknowledged that she was fortunate to have the opportunity to go to school and not be mistreated or excluded because of her gender. After a year at NWNC, Hanh transferred to Englewood High. She had looked forward to going to a “regular school” so she could “speak more English and interact with more Americans.” Hanh: I was so scared! I took the bus here. I had gotten up very early that morning with a funny nervous feeling inside. I was both excited and nervous about school. I felt like this day was going to change my life somehow. I thought that I was going to become more a part of the real America because I was going to a regular American school. I was no longer at a school for immigrants even though I liked NWNC. I thought maybe I could meet some Americans and we could be friends…When I got to this school, I thought, ‘Wow! This school is so big!’ And, there were so many people! I didn’t know where to go. I thought if I got lost, how would I get home? I was so scared. I waited in the lunchroom. It felt like a long wait. I felt even more scared seeing so many people. There were people rushing everywhere and talking really loud. I couldn’t understand them...After about 20 minutes, some people came by and led me to the library. When I got to the library, I saw my friends! I saw Thai, Tuyet, Dao, and many other people. Oh my God! I was so happy! Hanh laughed and continued: The rest of the day I felt safer with my group of friends, but I still could not understand what was happening around me. The American students seemed to

Becoming Racialized

85

laugh and talk loudly. They seemed like they belong in the school, and I kept feeling like I didn’t belong. I wanted to talk with some of them, but I didn’t know how. Most of my classes were ESL classes, and I didn’t have many opportunities to talk to the American students. We were not really together…we had separate classes and groups. I thought I would have more opportunities to be in classes with American students. (Interview, April, 2004) As she adjusted to Englewood, Hanh began to realize that the divisions among the students persisted and were beyond the division of ESL and mainstream classes. Classrooms, activities, and spaces that were initially created for ESL immigrant youth eventually pigeonholed them. Hanh noted this continual separation after having been at the school two years. Hanh: There is racial and ethnic congregation at this school. I don’t really know why. I don’t know if other schools are like this, but here it is like that. Different racial and ethnic groups just hang out together, separate from each other. The Black Americans are in one group. One hallway belongs to them. The Vietnamese also has a small hallway – you know where you see us every day near the ESL classes. We are there all the time…that is our part of the hallway. That is where we feel like we belong and can be ourselves. The hallway down from us belongs to the Black Americans. The Spanish [Latinos] hang out in another hallway. The Chinese are not too far from us. The Whites don’t come into the Asian and Black hallways during breaks. They have their own spots. They are in different spaces in the school. (Interview, March, 2006) While at Englewood, Hanh quickly picked up and began to incorporate racialized language and ideas in her descriptions of student relations at her school. She and other Vietnamese immigrant youth realized that not only were classrooms divided between “regular” mainstream or proficient English language speakers and immigrant ESL students, but spaces in the hallways, cafeteria, and school grounds were also unofficially claimed and sectioned into different racial and

86

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

ethnic territories. Each racial group had its own location within the school and the youth learned not to not trespass on territories that were claimed and occupied by other racial or ethnic groups. Among the Asians, many of them were also segregated by their ethnicity or language. While it was common for students to break into different social groups at the school, the racial and ethnic divisions not only created physical segregation for the Vietnamese immigrant youth; they spoke to the larger social and cultural borders that existed among the students within the school. Racial categorization plays a large role in creating separate isles and streams in the social and cultural life of the United States. It not only separates groups and maintains existing social, economic, and political power structures, it also acts as an instrument of psychological domination as racial and ethnic groups internalize images, narratives, and stereotypes of themselves as inferior (Lee, 2005; Suarez-Orzco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Weedon, 1999). People become objectified and defined through these stereotypes, which are embedded in almost every facets of social life in the United States. The existence of stereotypes within a culture and society reveal “the always present, already active link between our view of the social structure – its demography, its laws, its customs, its threats – and our conception of what race means” (Omi & Winant, 1994, p. 60). Weedon (1999) describes some of the prevailing stereotypes of minority groups in the United States: Western racism has tended to define people from the East as exotic, sensual, irrational and sometimes violent…People of African descent are more often characterized as lazy, less intelligent, hypersexual, physically strong, likely to excel in sports and empowered by natural rhythm. These racist definitions of people who are classified as non-whites are produced via sets of binary oppositions. The unspoken counterparts to the qualities attributed to people of colour – for example rationality, enterprise and suppression of emotion – are assumed to be quintessentially White. (p. 154) The perpetuation of these stereotypes continues to position racial and ethnic minorities as “Others” and deny them the opportunities to be

Becoming Racialized

87

seen as whole and complex human beings. Weedon (1999) explains that racial categorization and stereotypes - whether implicitly or explicitly racist – were used to justify practices such as colonialism, slavery and segregation and they have become part of an often-unquestioned set of assumptions which still permeates Western cultures today. They surface in common-sense thinking, popular and ‘high’ culture and help to structure the everyday practices of institutions ranging from education and policing to social welfare and medicine. (p. 153) Racial categories and stereotypes remain a common and rampant component of popular culture and social institutions, such as in the media and schools, allowing immigrant students to quickly incorporate them as part of their everyday lingo. The interview excerpt with Hanh below illustrates how immigrant youth accumulated and integrated the different stereotypes of groups into their descriptions of students and student relationships. Perpetuating Racial Stereotypes: DN: What do you think of the different groups of students? Hanh: Like…it depends. The Black Americans, when you first see them, they seem very loud towards each other. You can see and hear them from far away. You know their presence. You hear from people and see on TV that Black Americans can be intimidating. I was nervous about talking with them or walking near them. The White Americans, they are like more proper…they don’t seem to openly laugh at you or talk about you. You don’t get a sense that the White Americans are laughing at you for being an immigrant or Asian…But then I started to notice that there are a lot of Asians who are friends with Black Americans. There are also some Asians that hang out with White Americans too. But, I see the Asians that hang out with Black Americans are more…the Asians that hang out with Black Americans seem to be more approachable. They are more opened. They are friendlier. The Black American

88

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship students can be very direct, but you know that they are not going to talk about you after you leave. DN: Can you talk more about being approachable? Hanh: The Asians and Black Americans who hang out with each other are more approachable and less prejudice. But the Asians who hang out with White Americans are prejudice. They seem to discriminate against Asian immigrants, like Vietnamese immigrants. They treat other Asians with so much disdain…maybe…maybe they want to be like the White Americans. I don’t know. This is the majority of the case but not everyone. And the majority of the cases are with girls. The ones that hang out with White Americans are girls more than boys. There are a few boys that hang out with White Americans. They tend to hang out with Black Americans more. Those who hang out with White Americans are distant and unfriendly but those who are with Black Americans are more approachable. They hang out with everyone and they see us [recent immigrants] as friends too. Ummm…When you first look at a group, like the Black Americans, you think about all the things you hear about them – like they are loud and expressive to each other – or like the White Americans who seem more proper. But you can’t just use those ideas, you have to look deeper. You have to see how they treat new immigrants. A lot of Asians look for schools or neighborhoods with White Americans, but they don’t always accept us. Like at this school too – I think it is more difficult to get to know White Americans than any other group of people. I think I want to go to a school with more Black Americans and Asians and Mexicans. I think I would be more…umm…more compatible with them. (Interview, March, 2006)

As the Vietnamese immigrant youth observed and interacted with people across racial lines, their perspectives and ideas about racial identities and relations continued to shift and change over time. Hanh, for instance, noted the stereotypical perceptions of African American as direct, “loud,” and “intimidating,” and Whites as “polite” and “proper” in her initial assessments. However, over time, her perspective became

Becoming Racialized

89

more nuanced as she also observed the subtle interactions among students. Her observations of other Asian Americans and their interactions with students of other racial backgrounds slowly shifted Hanh’s perceptions. She shared that Asians who were friends with African Americans seemed more approachable while those who associated with White Americans seemed less engaging with other Asian students. She observed that the Asian American students who associated with White Americans often “treat other Asians with so much disdain…maybe…maybe they want to be like the White Americans.” Hanh’s re-examination of group dynamics among Asian, Black, and White Americans not only shifted her perspective but also her alliances with these groups. Moving away from the prevailing stereotypes, which worked to situate minority groups as the “Other” and White Americans as the exemplary citizens (Weedon, 1999), Hanh began to align herself with African American and other minority students. Hanh’s move disrupted the conventional mode of racialization, which tended to situate racial and ethnic minority groups in opposition with one another (Kim, 1999; Lee, 1999; Wu, 2002). While Hanh’s close observations of the behaviors in her peers challenged her initial ideas and assumptions about racial groups, these moments of realizations and shifting perspectives do not take place frequently among students. The persistent racial and groupings and separations made disrupting stereotypical ideas and images difficult. Scholars, in fact, warn that racial and ethnic group separations can lead ethnic minorities to adopt and harbor prejudice and racism towards other ethnic minorities (Lee, 2005; Weis & Centrie, 2002). As the Vietnamese immigrant youth became more familiar with the social and cultural contexts in their school, they continued to encounter other ways in which race was perceived and enacted by their peers. Minh, a 21-year-old senior, shared some of his thoughts and observations about race and racial group formation in the following data excerpts. In one of the excerpts, Minh tried to make sense of the discourse of skin color, and how it served to separate students. “White Man, Black Man, and Yellow Man:” Minh came to the United States three years ago not knowing any English. As the oldest child in his family, much responsibility had been

90

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

placed on him. His family – both in the United States and Vietnam – had high expectations for Minh to support and guide them. He was one of the top students in all of his classes. Other students, in particular male peers, looked up to him since he was one of the oldest in the group. I was shadowing Minh one early January morning. After the morning classes, Minh asked if I could talk with his guidance counselor on his behalf. He wanted to know about graduation requirements. After he gathered his things from his locker, we headed to the guidance counselor’s office a couple hallways away. Students were spilling out of their classrooms as we were turning from the ESL hallway onto the main hallway. The noise filled the school as students laughed and talked loudly. Students rushed every which way while security guards and administrators patrolled the hallways and school grounds. I observed an African American female student with tight braids walking arm-in-arm with a White female student. They both had braces and were laughing loudly about something. They were in blue and white cheerleader uniforms. We walked towards the center of the school. Someone called out Minh’s name from down another hallway. We stopped to see who it was. Across from the main trophy display case a couple of male students were chatting about something. As they were talking and laughing, a group of students of color walked passed them. Several of them seemed to be of mixed-race. One of the students with a very tall Afro hairdo stopped and clasp hands with a male student standing near me. They slightly hugged each other. The student of color said: “What’s up, White man?” He smiled again and then slowly started to walk away. The so-labeled “White man” asked the other student standing next to him: White Man? What’s that mean? The White male student yelled to the mixed-race student: Hey my man, he’s Columbian! He ain’t White, man! Columbian student: Why did he call me that? White man?! I don’t think I am White. White and Black and Black and White – you are just colors here. What about your culture? What about your language?

Becoming Racialized

91

White student: Don’t worry about it. We are all equal here. White man, Black man, Asian man, Columbian man, mixed man – we are all equal. As we waited for the student who called Minh to arrive, I asked Minh what he thought of that students’ exchange about “White man, Black man, Asian man…” He smiled, shook his head slightly, and replied: It is true. Here we just become different groups. People just see everyone as a color. I am Yellow or Asian man. The Americans like to have these different groups. Like in this school, we don’t know each other. We just have different groups that are separated by skin color. Sometime, I see some people say ‘what’s up’ to each other across different groups, but mostly I see the same people [people of similar racial backgrounds] together, like the Black Americans and the Americans [Whites]. Or sometimes, sports teams have people of every kind, but most people still stay in their own group. This is America. Trung, the student who had called out Minh’s name, came and stood near us. He saw us talking and decided to leave. DN: And, is everyone equal like that student said? Minh: Yes and no. You have the equal right to go to school and to have your own religions and beliefs. But, you still have discrimination and prejudice. We have the right to be here, to go to school, and be free. But you know, we are so separate from the Americans – we are not free like the Americans and not equal to them. This is their country and they have more freedom than us. (Fieldnotes, January, 2006) While the physical separation of student groups revealed visible signs of racial division on the surface level, learning the different racial discourses – the language, meanings, and social behavior of their classmates – helped Minh and the other immigrant youth to see the various ways in which race is deeply embedded in the social and cultural fabric and consciousness of American society. One set of discourse that Minh and the other immigrant youth, such as the Columbian youth who was labeled “White man,” quickly picked up was the notion that “people see everyone as a color.” This discourse,

92

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

which is part of the everyday social lexicon, serves to reinforce distance and exclusion among students. Minh and the other Vietnamese immigrant youth realized that as newcomers, it is difficult to avoid becoming part of this pervasive system that categorizes and structures people along racial or color lines. Skin color and phenotypes are the most common and important markers of difference in a racialized context (Bhabha, 1994; Omi & Winant, 1994; Rodriguez, 2000; Weedon, 1999). Weedon writes: “In racialized thinking these physical characteristics of individual bodies serve as the guarantee for racial classification” (p. 153). These characteristic differences are fixtures in everyday language serving to emphasize racialized thinking and social behavior. The two data excerpts below further exemplify how the Vietnamese youth both learned about and engaged with racialized discourses in their everyday schooling experiences. Excerpt # 1: I was observing several Vietnamese students in a mainstream math class. This was a math class for students who were behind grade level. I had followed Thai into the classroom. The bell had not yet sounded. The class took place in an enormous industrial technology classroom with high ceilings and bright fluorescent lights. The teacher shared the class with an industrial technology teacher. There were various equipment through the classroom. As Thai and I entered, we encountered two students chasing each other across the room and jumping over desks. It was a White female student chasing an Asian male student. He had taken something of hers, and she wanted it back. They chased each other around and around the classroom without anyone taking note. At one point, the Asian student said to the White student: “If you catch me, I’ll give it back.” The White student replied loudly: “You stupid Chink! Give it back to me!” They stopped in front of Thai. The girl stopped and asked Thai: “Could you please get that for me?” Thai stared up at her but did not say anything. The Asian boy started to laugh and run again. The White female student looked at Thai and said: “Thanks a lot for nothing. You people always stick together, is that it?” She ran off and continued to chase the Asian student while Thai took his seat. The Asian boy finally gave the paper back to the girl. The girl punched him on the shoulder and said: “Stupid Chink!

Becoming Racialized

93

Why do you have to be so stupid?” The boy laughed and said: “Come on, it was a joke. I thought we were cool and everything.” No one seemed to take notice of the two students’ racial exchange. Thai looked at me and shook his head: “I don’t understand why the students are so crazy here. They think it is not a school.” (Field notes, October, 2004) Excerpt #2: I started working with a group of students on their senior projects during middle of the first semester. Many of the seniors did not have afternoon classes and were excused from school. We were not allowed to use the school library if the students did not have classes, so we started to meet at a local library or café near the school. One afternoon in February, Minh mentioned that he needed to buy a book but had never been to a bookstore. I suggested we head to a Barnes and Noble near the high school. Huy, Minh, and Thai got in Huy’s car while Long, Dao, and Trung got into my car. As soon as they got into my car, Dao started to play with the radio. Trung (English): 93.3 FM is the best radio channel. Dao tuned the radio to 93.3 and a rap song came on. The three of them started to bob their heads to the music. I turned the volume down a bit. Dao asked me in Vietnamese: Do you listen to this music too? DN: Sometime. This song is by Enimen, right? Dao: Whoa, you know the singer? I just listen. Trung (Eng): This is Enimem, man. He is white chocolate. Dao (Eng): White chocolate not brown chocolate like real thing. DN (Eng): What do you mean by white and brown chocolate? Dao (Eng): White chocolate like he is like Black American but he is…like White American. Trung (Viet): He sings like a Black man…like he tries to be Black but he is not. So, he is like chocolate but White chocolate. DN: White chocolate? Where did you learn that?

94

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Trung (Viet): People say this in our school. When a White kid is hanging out with Black kids, they call him “White chocolate.” DN (Eng): So what does singing like a Black man mean? Dao (Eng): Like rapping…rapping…it is Black people music. Trung (Eng): Rap is black and country is White. DN: Where do you learn this? Trung: Easy, you just turn on the radio and also watch the music videos. And in school, the Black American students, they like the rap music. But we all listen to rap music. I see some White Americans like Jessica Simpson and her poster is in many of their lockers. But mostly, we all listen to rap. Dao turned the music way down to make another comment: It is interesting about American people. There are many kinds of people and cultures. We are all in one school or country but we have so many different things to keep us apart. Even the music is divided into groups – Black music, White music, Asian music. Trung: This is the American way, man. We have different colors. (Field notes, February, 2006)

These discourses of skin color and racial difference are not only used by the dominant racial group but also internalized and appropriated by racial minorities – groups which racial identification works to subordinate. As the Vietnamese youth learned the characterizations of different groups, they too incorporated them into their descriptions and understandings of the racial and ethnic groups. These characterizations and stereotypes that the immigrant youth utilized in their everyday language connect to what Bhabha (1994) calls “apparatus of power,” which works to produce a racialized subject internally as minorities use the same racialized language and descriptions created by the dominant group to define themselves and other racial and ethnic minorities. The conversation with Minh below further illustrates the ways in which racial differences and depictions work to keep students separate. As Minh and I continued wondering around the hallways, we noticed many kinds of student activity taking place. In the middle of

Becoming Racialized

95

one hallway near the trophy display case, a student was conducting some kind of performance art. He had deep purple hair, done in a spiked Mohawk style. He was locked in a cardboard box with just his head sticking out. Several students asked him questions but he didn’t reply. In another corner, a group of five boys were playing hackey sac. Minh: There are many kinds of people here. In American school, we have the freedom to be what we what to be. DN: Do you feel like you can be what you want to be? Minh: I feel like that most of the time. I just think it is really hard to get to know the Americans well. We don’t have much interaction with them. I think we tend to be with our own group for the most part. We are free to be but we are separate from each other. (Field notes, January, 2006) Aside from race as a social organizing factor, Minh discerned that the notions of freedom and individuality were also two underlying principles which guided personal and social behaviors among students. While the belief in freedom and personal choice were important and allowed students to be selective about their activities and group formation, these ideas operated in conjunction with race and processes of racialization. Students sometime used the ideas of freedom, free speech, individual choice, and equality to justify their actions in response to race and racialization – that there cannot be real discrimination or racism since everyone is free and equal. For instance, when the Columbian student commented that in America everyone is seen as a color, his White American friend responded that everyone is equal. The Columbian student asked: “White and Black and Black and White – you are just colors here. What about your culture?” His friend reassured him: “We are all equal here, man. White man, Black man, Asian man, Columbian man, mixed man – we are all equal.” The way that the White student responded with the notion of equality almost seemed as though he was trying to reassure his friend that while people may be racialized, they are also equal. His injection of equality into the discussion of skin color served to detract from the larger question and concern of racialization that was happening around them. Without further discussion and confrontation of race and

96

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

racialization, the categorization of students based on skin color in many ways became an accepted part of the social and cultural norms. The sense of freedom and equality that the students invoked acted almost like a veil, which shielded them from recognizing the walls and structures of social exclusion, marginalization, and inequality that race constructs. As Minh pointed out, students “are free to be but we are separate from each other” because race continues to perpetuate social distance and separation. The belief in freedom and sense of equality helps the youth to rationalize their choices and actions, further perpetuating racial, ethnic, cultural, and social divisions. Minh further pointed out this social distance and segregation among students in the field notes below. After we left the counselor’s office, Minh and I walked along the main corridor, which was covered with glass on one side. Minh looked through the glass into the cafeteria, also covered with glass. He pointed to the Vietnamese table in the lunchroom. Minh: There are the guys – that is the Vietnamese table. DN: I didn’t know you still had that Vietnamese table in the cafeteria. I thought you don’t like to eat there any longer. Minh: Only the boys hang out in there now. The girls have dispersed after a large group of them graduated last year. The rest of them go into the hallway spot now. The boys go there after lunch. We all congregate there. DN: Why do you think the Vietnamese hang out in one group? Minh: I think after a while, it is easier for us to be together. I see different people, like White Americans and Black Americans together sometime, but not a lot. People are always friendly at first. Like they always ask “how are you?” or “What’s up?” They hug and are close with each other a lot. But after that greeting, there is nothing…I know a few Americans and we just say “What’s up?” to each other when we pass by, but after a year and a half here, I still don’t know them. If you are with your own people and culture, and maybe because you are in the same situation, it is easier to get to know one another. In American culture, people are always so friendly at first, but they are not as opened. We [Vietnamese]

Becoming Racialized

97

are more together like a like a community…Maybe it is cultural and also my language. (Field notes, January, 2006) When the Vietnamese immigrant youth first arrived at Englewood High School, they were excited at the prospect of engaging with the American mainstream culture and having opportunities to interact with U.S.-born peers. They quickly realized that language and cultural barriers were difficult to transcend as classroom organizations and social groups further reinforced these boundaries. Many immigrant students who transferred from the newcomer center remained in ESL classes at their new high school and were often isolated from their U.S.-born peers and the mainstream culture, including school sporting events, dances, celebrations, and other social and academic events. The formation of their social groups also confined the immigrant youth to specific locations within the school, exacerbating the social, cultural, linguistic, and racial divides between them and other peers within the school. These different forms of social and cultural structures helped to maintain racial boundaries and a sense of division between the margins and White mainstream culture within the school. The next section further describes the divisions between the margin and dominant White mainstream social spaces and the ways in which these spaces influence the Vietnamese immigrant students’ sense of belonging and engagement with mainstream culture. Blending in with Mainstream Culture While the Vietnamese immigrant youth were often not engaged with their U.S.-born peers, particularly White Americans, they adopted many aspects of American popular culture, in particular patterns of consumption. Most of the Vietnamese youth were aware and up-to-date on popular music, fashion, fads, and technology. Having a cellular phone, ipod, laptop computer, and other material goods was part of achieving the American standard of living for many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth. While racial structures prevented the youth from fully engaging with the dominant White mainstream, material acquisitions, which is promoted in almost every facet of their lives – media, school, and peers – helped the immigrant youth to become a part of what they

98

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

perceive as mainstream American culture. The following data excerpt provides an example of how the Vietnamese immigrant youth try to blend into the mainstream culture through changing their physical appearances and material possessions. Dressing to Blend: The quiet hallway suddenly burst into life as students rushed out of their classrooms as the bell rang for lunch. I stood in one corner of the “international hallway” and waited until the crowds dispersed before making my way to the cafeteria to meet a couple of students. I walked down the mostly Asian occupied part of the international hallway. One group of Asian American girls, who were English speakers, was talking about their clothes and hair styles for an upcoming party. One female student said to her friend standing next to her locker: “My dress is hot! I have these matching heels that I spent 89 bucks on. I am going to be broke after this!” The friend replied: “It is one chance only in a lifetime. You can’t be skimping on that stuff.” The girls were dressed in urban outfitter style clothes, with low waste cargo pants, flip flops, and tight tank tops. Several of the girls’ midriffs were exposed. Their eye make-up was very dark and thick. Their long black hair with streaks of blond or red hung over their faces. Nearby, a group of Chinese girls was laughing softly. I passed them and almost bumped into a White couple embracing and making out at a locker. I heard a student called my name. I looked down a poorly lit hallway but could not make out who it was. Out of the dark hallway, Tam came running over to me. She gave me a hug and asked if I was joining the Vietnamese students for lunch. Tam, a 17-year-old junior, had been in the U.S. for six years. She was pretty fluent in English and had been enrolled in “regular” mainstream classes for the past three years. Most of her friends were Vietnamese. She spent most of her free time with the Vietnamese group. Tam was dressed in jeans and a tight white tee-shirt with “Tommy” – signifying the popular fashion designer Tommy Hilfiger – written in red and blue across the chest.

Becoming Racialized

99

While she was talking to me, her cell phone rang. Tam pulled out a thin black cell phone with a Hello Kitty trinket tied to it. It was Tuyet, one of her best friends, on the other line. Tuyet wanted to know where Tam was. It turned out that they were about 20 feet from each other. Like most students at Englewood, Tam and Tuyet had cell phones. She waved to Tuyet and started walking towards her. I asked Tam how she pays for her phone. Unlike with other Vietnamese students in the study, Tam preferred to speak with me in English. Tam: I have a job. DN: How long have you had a phone? Tam: For two years. At first, my parents didn’t want me to have one but now they think it is a good idea. They can always get in touch me with me…Everyone has one now. I don’t know too many people without a cell phone. I don’t even know how I survived without it before. I can’t live without a phone. We met up with Tuyet, who was similarly dressed in jeans and a pink sweatshirt with the brand “Hollister” written across the shirt. The way they dressed and wore their hair helped them to blend in with the rest of their peers at Englewood High. Tam had long hair with several blond streaks jutting out noticeably. She, unlike many other girls, did not wear make-up. Tuyet also had long hair but kept it naturally black since her mother did not allow her to dye it. While she left the house with no make-up, Tuyet always stopped by the girls’ bathroom to put on a touch of make-up each morning. Today she had on purple eyeliner, sparkly eye shadow, and blush. Consumerism as a Path to Blending in with Mainstream Culture Corporate and market cultures have become dominant forces shaping both private and public life, including school culture, in the United States (Giroux, 2000). The ways in which these market forces infiltrate different areas of social life has helped to create a context where “growing up corporate has become a way of life for American youth” (Giroux, 2000, p. 99). Immigrant youth also absorb this pervasive consumerist culture, and for many of them, having knowledge and

100

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

possession of these popular products and gadgets signifies their connection and access to the American mainstream culture. Schools serve as an important venue for corporate name-branding and cultivator of future consumers (Giroux, 2000). Giroux writes: “The advocates of corporate culture no longer view public education in terms of its civic function; rather it is primarily a commercial venture in which the only form of citizenship available for young people is consumerism” (p. 85). The encroachment of market culture into public institutions such as schools “threatens to diminish the tension between market values and democratic values, such as justice; freedom; equality; respect for children; the rights of citizens as equal, free human beings” (Giroux, 2000, p. 99). As immigrant youth soaked up the constant barrage of consumerist messages around them – in and outside of school – many began to equate market culture with American culture. They viewed their entrance or opportunity to blend into mainstream American culture through adjusting their physical appearances – hair, make-up, and clothing – and acquiring and displaying material objects. Despite their efforts to become a part of the mainstream culture in the ways they dressed, wore their hair, and displayed their latest gadgets, students at Englewood High continued to remain divided by categories of race, ethnicity, culture, language, and gender. Like many other racial and ethnic minority groups at Englewood High, most immigrant students of color, particularly ESL students, remained outside the mainstream school context due to their racial, ethnic, cultural, and language backgrounds. While they found ways to merge or blend in, such as the way they dressed or used popular everyday lingo, they continued to reside mostly in their race and ethnic specific spaces. School functions such as sporting events, homecoming, campus day, and prom were perceived by the immigrant youth to be for “American students.” When immigrant youth referred to American students, they meant White Americans whereas other racial and ethnic minorities often have the racial and ethnic qualifiers in front such as Black Americans or Chinese Americans. As the Vietnamese students noticed how these activities and events did not reflect their culture, they started to believe that school events were meant for mainstream American students. These school functions further perpetuated perceptions and feelings of cultural isolation, racial division, and a

Becoming Racialized

101

general sense of exclusion. For instance, the Christmas holiday celebration, called “Spirit Week,” described below, provide some examples of how Vietnamese immigrant youth see themselves in relation to their mainstream “American” peer culture. Spirit Week The organization of Spirit Week was mostly student-led. While there were opportunities for all students to participate, the majority of the organizers were White female students. During Spirit Week, hallways and classrooms were decorated with Christmas themed decorations. A Christmas tree was put up in the main entrance. Students who were helping to organize the spirit week went around classrooms to explain the different activities taking place throughout the school. Two female students came into Ms. Mori’s class during second period to explain spirit week. One of the presenters was Asian American and the other White. Ms. Mori, one of the three main teachers in the ESL department, asked her students to give the guests their attention. White student: Ok you guys. This is Spirit Week. We want you all to join in the festivities. It will be a lot of fun and you can support our school. The first thing this week is we are going to have a door decoration contest. You have to decorate your second period class door. Then we will have a judge mark the door. After that, we are going to have pajamas day. You get to wear your pajamas to school. Do you guys understand? And, also, for this week, we are having a film showing. We hope you can come. Do you understand? Do you have questions? No one in the class had any question, so the two guest students thanked the class and left. Ms. Mori continued doing attendance. Most of the students had their heads on their desk, seemingly asleep. I leaned over and asked Kim, a senior student who was serving as a teacher’s assistant during second period, what she thought of Spirit Week. Kim: It is ok. They do it every year. We don’t really do anything with them. They go around school wearing their

102

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship pajamas and slippers and act even crazier. I don’t know. I don’t get it. It is like they want to be at home or something. DN: You don’t like to participate? Kim: I don’t really understand how pajamas are related to Spirit Week or Christmas. Maybe just the American students do stuff but not many ESL students. I don’t feel comfortable wearing my pajamas in public. Tuyet, who sat next to Kim commented: I don’t think I understand this Christmas celebration. How is wearing clothes meant for sleeping related to their religion? And most of the time, they just run around yelling and throwing small paper [confetti] at each other. American students are strange to me. Maybe they just want to have fun…I don’t know. Most of the time, they just make a mess and disrupt school by running around. I don’t know. I don’t understand. (Fieldnotes, December, 2005)

While the two students who were part of the Spirit Week organizational committee made an effort to include other students in the activities, they did not make clear the purpose and intentions of Spirit Week. Their general call to get students involved was not successful with immigrant students as many of them did not understand how the planned activities and events were connected to celebrating the school or the holidays. Immigrant youth, such as Kim and Tuyet, found the students’ actions to be “crazy” and “disruptive.” The cultural and perhaps communication disconnect between the student organizers and the ESL students created another missed opportunity for immigrant youth to learn about and participate in the celebration of both the holidays and school spirit. As more whole campus events were announced and organized throughout the school year, the Vietnamese immigrant students continued to remain on the sidelines with the exception of Multicultural Awareness Week (the events related to Multicultural Awareness Week will be discussed in a later section). The Vietnamese youth contributed their lack of interest and participation in school events to the lack of their cultural representation. Prom was another event that most Vietnamese students did not attend. In the group of over 70 Vietnamese students, only a handful

Becoming Racialized

103

attended. Kim was the only ESL Vietnamese student who attended the event. She and her best friend, Cara, went on a double date. Cara, a senior, had transferred to mainstream classes in her junior year. The two remained friends over the years. They reflected on their prom during a study hall period in the library. Reflecting on Prom I found Cara and Kim sitting at a table in the library. They were sitting towards the back of the library behind the computer section. I sat down next to them. Kim and Cara were looking at the yearbook and chatting about their prom night. Cara exclaimed that she had spent “$400 bucks!” and is now broke. Kim rolled her eyes and said: I know. I can’t believe it was so expensive! Now, I am broke too. I spent almost that much too. (Cara smiled showing her braces.) I had so much fun. And, you looked like a bride. It looked like you and your date were getting married. Kim commented on the yearbook: Why are there no Vietnamese in this yearbook? What happened to VASA [Vietnamese American Student Association] and to Multicultural Awareness Week? Cara: The yearbook is only for White people! We are not in it because we are Asian. Girl, don’t you know that? DN: What do you mean because you are Asian? Cara: You know those things are only for White people, kind of like the prom. There were hardly any Asians. Mostly White people were there. DN: Why did you go? Cara: Why not? It was my last chance to go. I wanted to go and have fun too. DN: Did you have fun? Cara: Hella fun! DN: Tell me about your prom. Cara: We went out to dinner at a restaurant on the water front. It was an American restaurant. We had crab and steak. We had so much fun at dinner. Dinner was so expensive! I couldn’t believe how expensive it was…We went to the dance and it

104

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship was nice. We danced and laughed…Vietnamese don’t do things that White people do, I guess. Kim’s disappointment in the year surfaced again: I don’t see us in here at all. Cara: Stop looking at that! I told you that it is because we are not White. These are for White people. Like campus day too! Only Whites have fun at school events. Us Vietnamese don’t really belong there. DN: Why not? Cara: Because it is made for Whites, not Asians. Like this yearbook, who can afford it? It is $85! And where are we anyway? We are not in it. And prom was also really expensive. I had to save money all year to go. My parents did not want me to spend that kind of money! And campus day, you will see that it is mostly for White kids. DN: Why can’t you have fun at campus day? Cara: We could but it is not Vietnamese style. DN: What is Vietnamese style? Cara: Like we don’t have the right music and stuff like that. It just is not Vietnamese style. DN: You can’t make space for yourselves? It is a big campus. Cara: That is all we do. We hang out with each other. We see the same people. I try to see different people but it is hard. Different groups just don’t get each other. We end up just seeing Vietnamese hang out with Vietnamese, Chinese with their group. The White students are the majority. They [mainstream American] hang out everywhere. (Field notes, May, 2006)

While Kim and Cara made attempts to participate in school functions, they continued to feel like outsiders who took part in activities that were not meant for them. The lack of representation in the yearbook and other school events further reinforced the feelings of exclusion for immigrant youth. Although cultural and racial diversity was a part of the school’s mission and was highly reflected in the student population and school décor, the lack of coordinated efforts to bring the youth together in sustained and meaningful ways created racial and ethnic pockets within the school. These different separations

Becoming Racialized

105

and divisions conveyed a message to newcomers that their racial, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic differences marked them as “Others” or “outsiders.” Many of the immigrant youth began to accept the racial, ethnic, cultural, and other forms of divisions among themselves as well as the exclusion or marginalization that they experienced from the mainstream culture within the school. When Kim, for instance, could not find images in the yearbook that represented the Multicultural Awareness Week or the Vietnamese American Student Association, Cara told Kim to stop looking because “those things are only for White people, kind of like prom. There were hardly any Asians. Mostly White people were there.” The Vietnamese immigrant youth became resigned to the idea and belief that the main events and activities that took place at their school – such as Spirit Week, prom, sporting events, the yearbook, and campus day – were created for White students and not for immigrants or other students of color. Cara stated that while she had fun at the prom, “it is made for Whites, not Asians. Like this yearbook…where are we anyway? We are not in it. And the prom was also really expensive. And campus day, you will see that it is mostly for White kids.” As events and experiences further demonstrated the racial undertones within the school, immigrant youth, such as Cara, began to accept and find their place within the racialized structure – a critical goal of the Americanization project (Olsen, 1997). From Exclusion to Belonging: The Role of Ethnic Marginal Spaces To counter and resist the racializing processes, the Vietnamese students learned to rely on each other and their ethnic social space within the “international hallway” for support. The hallway space became the main focal point of interaction and socializing for many of them. While this Vietnamese ethnic zone offered comfort and a sense of belonging, it also separated the Vietnamese students from students of other races, ethnicities, and cultures, particularly away from mainstream White culture. The following field notes illustrate the ways the different layers of separation that took place among the youth within their school.

106

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Gendered Spaces Tam and Tuyet got in the long lunch line in the cafeteria. Several Vietnamese girls, including Hanh, were already in line. Minh, Dao, and several other male students sat crammed around a table near the windows looking at the girls as they progressed in line. The girls used to have a table in the cafeteria. But this year, they decided to eat in the hallway. While the boys eat in the cafeteria, they head to the Vietnamese hallway afterwards. The male and female Vietnamese students have also maintained separate groups even within the Vietnamese hallway. In addition to the racial and ethnic separations, maintaining gender boundaries within the Vietnamese group was a practice that the youth incorporated into their daily social routine. While they were always in close proximity to each other – like choosing two tables next to each other or sitting across from each other in their Vietnamese hallway – gender roles and expectations reflected another level of social and cultural separation with the Vietnamese immigrant youth (Stritikus & Nguyen, 2007). DN: So, how did you all become friends? Hanh shrugged: I don’t really remember. We just got to know each other in our group. Vietnamese all know each other here. Tam switched to Vietnamese when she is with her Vietnamese friends: We live near each other. We take the bus to school together, so I got to know them that way. We’ve just always been together. DN: Do you have friends who are non-Vietnamese, Tam? Tam: I know a lot of Americans. We have classes together. It is just different. In class, I talk to them and do labs together, but after class we go our separate ways. I have my group and they have their groups. DN: Have you ever hung out with them outside of class? Tam shook her head: No, I just find my group. People just head to their own groups. I am used to going to the Vietnamese group. I guess Americans hang out with Americans. I just feel more comfortable with my Vietnamese friends. DN: Why do you think that is?

Becoming Racialized Tuyet: We are Vietnamese. We understand each other you know. There are some Vietnamese who hang out with Americans and they don’t come to our group. I think they were born here so they don’t feel comfortable here. Hanh: The ones that go with the White Americans don’t want to know us or something. [Tam switched to using English.] Tam: I think we just feel comfortable because we know each other. We live in the same neighborhood. Our parents know each other. I don’t have to explain myself. Sometimes with Americans, you do something and they don’t understand and you have to explain. I don’t have to explain with my Vietnamese friends. They understand me. They’re my friends, and I don’t want to go to another group. It would seem weird. Hanh in Vietnamese: American people all have their own groups too. Most of them hang out with each other. This is the way it is in the school. We all follow our cultural group – Vietnamese with Vietnamese, Chinese with Chinese, Black Americans with Black Americans, and White Americans with White Americans. DN: Do you all want to get to know more Americans? Tam: I know some of them. I have classes with them all day. Hanh: Not really. When I first got to this school, I thought it would fun to know more Americans, but now, I just don’t think we are very compatible. They do things differently. DN: How does it feel to be in regular classes, Tam? Tam: It is ok. I wish my friends were in the classes too. I am usually the only Vietnamese in my class. I like the classes but I miss my friends. Tuyet: We are Vietnamese. Americans have different ways of thinking and sometimes Vietnamese who hang out with them follow their styles and behaviors – they lose their Vietnamese ways. It is like you have to no longer be Vietnamese when you are with Americans. I see many Vietnamese girls who try very hard to become like the White Americans or maybe they have not been around Vietnamese and don’t know how to be Vietnamese. I guess, I like hanging out with Vietnamese because this is my group. We understand each other better.

107

108

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship DN: Understand what? Tam: We have similar thinking. Like, like, I don’t feel comfortable hugging a guy in school but most American girls and boys do this all the time. Or, like we can’t go out with guys but Americans do. Like the girls in my class, they always talk openly about their boyfriends and things like that. I don’t feel comfortable with that. DN: Do you have boyfriends? Tuyet: No. Tam and Hanh do. (She smiles). Tam: I have a boyfriend but we don’t go out very much. My parents don’t like for us to go out by ourselves. Hanh: We all go out together. But most of the time, we just go over to each other’s houses. (Field notes, December, 2005)

The friendship and social bonds among Tam, Hanh, Tuyet, and the other Vietnamese immigrant youth are often based on their sense of belonging and connection to being Vietnamese. Tuyet explained this sense of connection: “We are Vietnamese. Americans have different ways of thinking and sometimes Vietnamese who hang out with them follow their styles and behaviors…We like hanging out with Vietnamese because [we are a part of the] group. We understand each other better.” These ethnic networks and groups serve as essential academic and support structures for many of the youth (Gibson, 1988; Lee, 2005; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Qin-Hillard, 2003; Weis & Centrie, 2002; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). Even when the immigrant youth had opportunities to engage with peers in mainstream cultural contexts, such as Tam who had been in regular non-ESL classes and had non-Vietnamese friends, they continued to feel a strong connection to the Vietnamese ethnic group. Tam explained that she was comfortable with her Vietnamese friends because they had “similar thinking.” There was a sense that they “know each other” and “understand each other better” because they were Vietnamese. When she was with Americans, she had to explain herself because they may not do the same things or think the same way. Tam felt accepted and comfortable when she was with the Vietnamese group. Feeling accepted and a part of a group served as an important reason for the construction and maintenance of the Vietnamese ethnic space. Other

Becoming Racialized

109

Vietnamese students shared Tam’s sentiment about the role of the Vietnamese group in fostering their sense of belonging. The following excerpts with Kim and Huy further illustrate the youth’s sense of belonging within the Vietnamese group. Excerpt #1: Kim: The Vietnamese students in our group, they just like to hang out together. They like to talk with each other. They like to play cards. They gossip a lot…I don’t know if I could survive this school without the other Vietnamese students. DN: And Vietnamese with other people – how do they interact with other groups of students? Kim: I heard that there used to be a lot of fights between Vietnamese and Black and White Americans. A lot of those students have transferred or quit school so there are fewer fights. I haven’t seen too many fights anymore…But we are all separated. I don’t really see a lot of Americans talking with Vietnamese. I don’t see a lot of Vietnamese interacting with Americans. DN: Do you have friends who are not Vietnamese? Kim: Not really. Most of my friends are either Vietnamese or Chinese students…Well, I have a couple of Ethiopian and Mexican friends who are from my classes. I like getting to know them and we share different ways of doing things. But my closest friends are Vietnamese. They understand me and I don’t need to think and explain things all the time. (Interview, January, 2006) Excerpt #2: Huy: I don’t know why…it just is. Year after year, we just hang out in these spaces. Like Vietnamese, it is easier to hang out together and talk to one another... I think other groups do the same thing. It is easier to just talk to your own people…It has become normal for us. Sometimes, I don’t even think about it. During break or lunch, I just head to that corner like everyone else…People of different nations hang out at different corners…I like hanging out more with Vietnamese students because they understand me more.

110

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship DN: Would you be able to locate the different group in school? Huy: I have a sense of where different groups of people hang out…I know where the White Americans and Black Americans hang out. I know of course where the Vietnamese and Chinese hang are. The other people, like the Black Americans and White Americans tend to stay away from the ESL or international language hallway. (Interview, January, 2006)

The Vietnamese immigrant youth’s friendships, social bonds, and networks were initially shaped by a common language, ethnicity, and culture. Their participation in these groups made them aware of their racial, “non-American,” and marginal group status within the larger school context. These groups, which served as important social, cultural, and academic resources and support, became permanent forms of social, cultural, and racial separations, further delineating among the different minority communities from the mainstream cultural context. While there were students who crossed the boundaries between the margins and mainstream, they were often involved in after school activities, such as sports, cheerleading, or other specific interest groups. Many Vietnamese immigrant youth believed that these activities and programs were meant for American students and did not participate in them. They instead engaged in their own activities within their designated group. Several of the youth discussed how being a part of the Vietnamese group became a habitual and comfortable process despite knowing that they continued to remain separated from other students and even within their own group. As Hanh, Tuyet, Tam, and I were talking in the Vietnamese hallway, other Vietnamese students started to congregate in the hallway. Several girls plopped down with their trays next to Tam while several boys gathered across from the girls. They pulled out some cards and started playing a popular Vietnamese game called “tieng len.” The boys started cursing loudly while the girls ate and spoke to each other. Tam said to me: “This is what we do. We get together but the boys hang out on one side and the girls on the other side. We [boys and girls] don’t talk to each other very much either. There are many ways in

Becoming Racialized

111

which we are separated from each other – from the boys and from the students of other cultural backgrounds. We are a school of divided groups.” The physical separations among the student groups exemplified the racial, social, cultural, and gender divisions within the school. These separate spaces, which became permanent locations for each racial, ethnic and gender group, impeded meaningful interactions among groups. Immigrant youth saw few opportunities to become more integrated into the mainstream culture except through the way they dress, wear their hair, and display other material accessories. Racial and Ethnic Clustering in Classrooms The ways in which they positioned themselves in the hallways also followed into the classrooms. In their ESL classes, students of different racial, ethnic, or language groups often sat clustered together. I made a comment about these racial and ethnic clusters in Ms. Rose’s ESL class one day. She looked across her room and nodded in agreement. Ms. Rose commented: Oh yes, we started out this way at the beginning of the year because it was easier for them to share dictionaries in their language. We don’t have enough dictionaries for all the students so they have to share. The Vietnamese, Spanish, and Somali groups are the largest and we don’t have enough dictionaries for all of the students. I guess they got used to sitting with each other now. They don’t mind sitting with each other. I think they like it. They can share resources and help each other that way. The students were similarly seated in the different racial and ethnic clusters in other classrooms, including mainstream regular and ESL classes. In Ms. Mori’s class, the racial and ethnic groupings among the youth were highly visible. There was a prominent Vietnamese group, with females in one corner and males nearby. The Latino students were seated near the back of the room on the far side from the door. The Ethiopian students were near the front with the Somali students nearby. The large group of Chinese students sat in the middle of the room, while two Afghani girls sat behind them in the back row. An exchange

112

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

between two students in Ms. Mori’s class illuminated how deep racial separation was among the youth. Assimilating into and Resisting Racial Structures in the Classroom I was walking around the class helping some of the students with their writing assignment as I had done in the past. The students were supposed to write about a topic in which they had expertise. I walked slowly from the Latino student group to the Somali group. I stopped at the Somali student group and asked one of the students about his topic. He looked up with a surprised expression and asked: “You helping me today? I thought you were the Asian teacher and you only help them.” I said that I could help him as well. Hieu saw me talking to the Somali student and came running from across the room. Hieu: Co Diem! He is not Vietnamese. You are our teacher. We don’t get enough help. Why do you always help other students? He is not Vietnamese. Ms. Mori heard Hieu’s comment and said: Hey, we have to work together here. Ms. Nguyen can help everyone. She works with Vietnamese students on a project, but she can also help other students too. Hieu replied: Ms. Mori, that’s not fair! She is Vietnamese and should only work with us. This is the way of the school. Somali student, Labaan: No! She is African today. He and the other students in the class laughed. Ms. Mori: No, she can help everyone. I know you are used to hanging out in your own corner, but we have to learn to work together as well. Hieu: No one wants that, Ms. Mori! Have you seen this school? No one wants to be together. Ms. Mori: OK, Hieu, let’s get back to writing. You can write about that. You seem to have a lot to say about that. Hieu turned to Labaan: She’s our teacher, right? You, cool? Labaan: Cool. We have ours. But maybe your teacher is African today and wants to help us. Hieu: No way, man! She’s Asian – Vietnamese like me, man. When your teacher becomes Asian like us then our teacher can be like you.

Becoming Racialized

113

Labaan slightly lifted his chin towards Hieu as though to indicate his agreement. They laughed and grasped each other’s hands as though to seal some sort of deal. Ms. Mori’s saw my puzzled look and said to me quietly: They are poking fun at each other. It has to do with another exchange they had in class the other day. Labaan went to sit next to the Vietnamese guys – Hieu, Vien, and Luc – and said that he was Asian. Hieu told him that he cannot just be Asian in the group. He had to be Asian everywhere. Labaan said: ‘I just sit here and become Asian like you today. You come and join my group and we can all be African’. They all laughed about it. It is hard to break them apart, especially that group of Vietnamese boys (Ms. Mori nodded her head in the direction of the Vietnamese male group in the back) – they stick together like glue. There is a lot of ethnic grouping in this school. I tried to break them apart sometime, but it is hard. They are used to their group. (Field notes, March, 2006) As the immigrant youth, such as Hieu and Labaan, both consciously and subconsciously acted out these racial ideas and identities among themselves, they participated in the process of “making each other” and themselves racial (Olsen, 1997). The racial discourses that were produced and circulating within the school became mediums of power (Bhabha, 1994; Hall, 1996) as they influenced not only the ways in which youth constructed meaning, knowledge, and ideas of themselves but also their relationships with each other. While the immigrant students were able to find ways to disrupt the racial structures in their classroom, they were also bound to the system that classified them by their skin colors, languages, and ethnicities. The discourse of racial difference, which saturated the school culture, shaped how the youth constructed and positioned their social groups – both in as well as outside of classrooms. Accepting the racialized identities for immigrant students, Olsen (1997) argues, is becoming a part of the American culture and society. In their everyday routines and interactions with each other, the immigrant youth were aware of the arbitrariness of racial identities. When Labaan decided to sit in the Vietnamese group and said that he was Asian, his actions indicated that he was aware of the socially constructedness of the racial groupings.

114

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Hieu too believed that Labaan could identify as Asian and even suggested that Labaan continue to be Asian “everywhere.” They also observed the spatial component to racial construction when Labaan suggested that he can become Asian by just “sitting” with the Asian youth. Their actions suggested that they were aware that racial divisions were socially constructed and crossable. This racial identity construction process for Hieu, Labaan, and the other immigrant youth was also connected to a struggle over resource distribution. In adapting to the social and academic structures of their school, the immigrant youth had been socialized to understand and recognize that resources were also distributed along racial, ethnic, and linguistic lines. In the ESL department, each language group was assigned a bilingual instructional aide. These few staff members were important resources for the immigrant student because they not only served as academic mentors but also cultural mediators and advocates. This cultural and academic support structure was initially created to help alleviate cultural and linguistic barriers. However, over time, this support system also contributed to another form of separation and competition among the students within the school. The immigrant youth began to view resource distribution along racial, ethnic, and linguistic lines. As these scarce resources became threatened, they began to engage in identity politics, which refocused their attention on the subjugation and oppression of each of their specific groups, such as African immigrants, Asian immigrants, and Latinos (Weedon, 1999). Hieu and Labaan were each focused on the needs of their individual group while negotiating over my racial identity and thus role in working with different groups. Adopting a racialized lens, the immigrant students in Ms. Mori’s class viewed and classified me an Asian and therefore someone who could only work with Asians or more specifically Vietnamese students. They positioned me within their existing resource structure at the school. As I attempted to help students from other racial, ethnic, or linguistic backgrounds, Hieu and Labaan interpreted my action as a disruption of how things work in the institution. Hieu attempted to counter my actions. When Ms. Mori tried to encourage cross-racial interactions, Hieu adamantly opposed and reminded her of the racialized culture of the school. He stated: “She is Vietnamese and should only work with us. This is the way of the school…no one

Becoming Racialized

115

[different racial groups] wants to be together.” Hieu interpreted my actions as an unfair redistribution of limited resources. While the immigrant youth recognized the arbitrariness of racial identity construction, they also found it difficult to give up their space and limited resources that were for their group. The potential loss of scarce resources created a somewhat tense disagreement between Hieu and Labaan, which was later diffused when they renegotiated and came to a new agreement about resource sharing. Hieu stated his term to Labaan: “When your teacher becomes Asian like us then our teacher can be like you.” Their agreement seemed to imply that I, as a resource for the Vietnamese students, could not become African and help the Somali students unless the Somali teacher reciprocates and “becomes Asian” and help Vietnamese students. The exchanges between Hieu and Labaan illustrate that while the youth tried to break some of the existing racial divisions and build alliances among different racial and ethnic groups, they were also protective of their racial and ethnic spaces, specifically as those spaces connected to resources. Student racial and ethnic territories, which were initially created from racial, cultural, and linguistic exclusions, now served as important social spaces for many immigrant youth. These racial and ethnic-specific spaces not only provided the youth with a sense of belonging and acceptance that was missing in other areas of their adaptation process, but also provided critical networks, information, and resources – or social capital – necessary to succeed in school (Qin-Hillard, 2003; Weis & Centrie, 2002; Zhou & Bankston III, 1994). Disrupting racial and ethnic boundaries to construct new alliances and friendship among the groups was welcomed. However, any potential threat to scarce resources or the delicate sense of belonging within the racial and ethnic spaces could potentially erupt into tension and conflicts. Racial tensions and conflicts were a part of the youth’s everyday schooling experience at Englewood High School. Racial and Ethnic Tensions: Confined to Designated Spaces Hanh was sitting with two of her friends in the Vietnamese corner. There were a couple of boys wrestling with each other playfully across from the female students. One boy had another boy’s head locked under his arms. Another group of male students were playing cards

116

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

noisily in a corner near the door. Outside on the lawn, a group of Vietnamese male students were hanging out. Two of them were smoking. I sat down next to Hanh and Kim. A younger Vietnamese girl named Que came running towards the group. She sat down next to Hanh and started to catch her breath. She said loudly to no one in particular, “I don’t feel so safe at this school. I just got really scared. There was a fight down the hallway!” Que continued to breathe hard. Hanh and her friends shook their heads. Kim asked Que calmly: “Who was in the fight?” Que: I don’t know! I ran away from them as fast as I could to get here. There was an Asian student there. I saw him arguing with a Black American student. There was a White American student too. They came out of the bathroom and started to push each other. I was nearby and ran. It is not safe here. We never know when there is going to be a fight.” DN: Did security come? Que: I don’t know! Kim: They always come. They always walk about the school. DN: Are there lots of fights here? Kim nodded and said in English: There sure are. DN: Between different groups of students? Kim: Blacks, Whites, Asians, Hispanics. Everyone. DN: What happened? Kim: They just don’t get along. They “kiem trieng” (find problems or mess with each other). Sometimes, if you look at someone wrong, it could cause a fight. They can ask you “What ‘ya looking at?” Or, sometime it could be that you are walking in the wrong part of the building. You just don’t know. You just have to know where to be and know not to look at some people. I just don’t look at people sometime. Hanh: This school is not safe sometime. I just don’t know where to go in the school and feel safe except this little spot in this hallway. It’s like this school is enormous but everyone is territorial about everything. Dao, who was sitting nearby, shared: I almost got into a fight with this White American guy one day. He was sitting next to me in the computer lab. I got up and accidentally brushed him.

Becoming Racialized

117

He yelled at me: ‘Don’t touch me.’ He stood up and clenched his fist. I told him, ‘it was an accident, man.’ He moved like he wanted to hit me, but I didn’t move. He sat down after a few seconds. It seemed like he didn’t like Asians. I don’t like hanging out with them. I just have to avoid many of them. They don’t want to really hang out with us. They always say that you are free here and there are many cultures. It is hard to get to know people and they don’t want to know you. (Field notes, February, 2005) Developing the knowledge and strategies for maneuvering among different racial, ethnic, and social spaces within the school became a critical aspect of the Vietnamese immigrant youth’s adaptation to school life. Knowing when and where to be and avoiding certain areas were important survival skills in their racialized school. Kim, for example, learned to avoid certain areas of the building and not look at people while she was walking around the school. The students realized that even though there were many cultures, languages, and ethnic groups in the school, people continued to exist in their own little corners. While there were many cultures and people had the freedom to interact and learn about each other, the racial structures categorized and often kept the different groups at a distance. Dao summed up the tensions between diversity and social division within his school: “They always say that you are free here and there are many cultures. It is hard to get to know people and they don’t want to know you.” Learning to read the racial map of and codes within school became part of the Vietnamese immigrant youth’s social and cultural adaptation to their new learning environment in the United States. Summary of Chapter The findings in this chapter on “becoming racialized” presented the various ways in which Vietnamese immigrant youth became immersed in the racialized context within their school. The youth accumulated knowledge, narratives, and practices connected to race as they – both consciously and subconsciously – incorporated common myths and stereotypes into their everyday lexicon, participated in constructing social groups along racial and ethnic lines, and adjusted to classroom

118

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

and academic practices that perpetuated racial, ethnic, linguistic, and social divisions. These different racial structures and discourses act as social mechanisms to divide and place students into what Lee (1996, 2005) refers to as a racial hierarchy, which maintains a system of dominance and subordinance between Whites and people of color. Racialization not only works to separate youth into racial categories but also defines them as either American or non-American. As race continues to seep into their thinking and influences the ways in which they see the world, the immigrant youth also begin to associate the idea of “becoming American” as becoming White. The next chapter explores in more depth the different points of tension that arise as the youth engage with the idea of “becoming American” while reconciling with notions of race, ethnicity, and citizenship.

CHAPTER FIVE

“Becoming American:” How the Vietnamese Immigrant Youth Differentiate and Construct Notions of Americanness and Citizenship

The findings in this chapter examine the perceptions that the Vietnamese immigrant youth form regarding who is American, what makes an American, and how their understandings influence their thinking, everyday social behaviors, and life choices. The notion of “becoming American” for the Vietnamese immigrant youth is more than a change in citizenship status; it signifies a shift in racial, ethnic, and cultural identity. This chapter begins with two interview excerpts that illustrate how the youth define what it means to be “real Americans” and how these meanings influence the ways in which they see and position themselves in the context of their school and U.S. society in general. How the Vietnamese Immigrant Youth Define “Real Americans” Excerpt #1: DN: When you have U.S. citizenship, will you consider yourself American? Trung: I don’t think so. My roots will still be Vietnamese. DN: Can you explain “my roots will still be Vietnamese?” Trung: It really doesn’t matter what we call ourselves. Even if we call ourselves Americans, the real Americans will see and call us Vietnamese. The first thing that they will always call us 119

120

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship is Vietnamese. They only see us with yellow skin. It is like our name is “Vietnamese” not “Trung”…We will always be seen as Vietnamese or Asian no matter how long we have been here or if we are a citizen or not. We cannot escape our color. (Interview, January, 2005) Excerpt #2: Hai: I don’t think that I am an American. DN: Do you think that a Vietnamese can be an American? Hai: I know that you can become an American citizen. But, Vietnamese and other immigrants cannot become Americans like the real Americans. We are not from here like the real Americans. Vietnamese should become American citizens, but they must try to maintain their Vietnamese culture… America is your second home, but Vietnam is still your original heritage and home. DN: Who are the real Americans? Hai: Real Americans…the Americans who were born here. DN: If a Vietnamese was born here, would he or she be an American? Hai: Yes and no. He can be an American citizen but will not be recognized as a real American. America has many kinds of people but only a certain kind of people is seen as real Americans. DN: What does a real American look like? Hai: Like they have white skin. White Americans are real Americans. The other people like Black Americans and immigrants are not accepted as American like the White Americans. This is the way of this country. (Interview, February, 2004)

As race and racialization work to define immigrant youth into different social categories, they absorb messages that they are “outsiders,” “non-Americans,” or “others.” While the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study believe that they will become a U.S. citizen in time, they recognize the limitations of becoming “real Americans” because of their racial background and immigrant status. The process of “becoming American” for the Vietnamese immigrant

Becoming American

121

youth raises two main points of tension. First, the racial structures and process of racialization that takes place within and outside of school categorizes the youth as “outsiders” and “others,” making it difficult for them to become what they call “real Americans.” Race is a defining characteristic in becoming or being accepted as American (LadsonBillings, 2004; Lee, 2005; Olsen, 1997; Ong, 2003). Ladson-Billings (2004) argues that in a racialized society, such as the United States, a criterion for recognition and acceptance as an American is Whiteness. A White person’s citizenship and sense of national belonging is rarely questioned, but a person of color’s presence immediately conjures up notions of otherness. Asians produce both this sense of “otherness” as well as images of foreignness (Lee, 2005). Immigrant youth encounter and internalize these messages – whether subtle or overt – to mean that they can never be accepted as “real Americans.” The immigrant youth eventually buy into the racialized discourse and perceive themselves as inauthentic Americans and part of the invisible mass of “other” that the world does not see or recognize as Americans. Repeatedly the youth in this study, such as Trung and Hai in the excerpts above, explain that to be perceived as a “real American, you have to be White skin, blond hair, and blue eyes.” Only those people with white skin can be “real Americans.” The second main point of contention regarding becoming American for the Vietnamese immigrant youth is also tied to the assimilation and racial formation processes. Many of the immigrant youth define real and authentic American as someone with white skin. They then interpret the idea of becoming American to be connected to the process of assimilation in which they are not only expected to give up their cultural practices, beliefs, and language (Castles & Miller, 2003; Gordon, 1964; Lee, 2005), but also to internalize racism. Becoming American for immigrant youth evokes strong emotional responses – including feelings of resistance – as they interpret the process to mean abandoning their race, ethnicity, culture – or as many of them point out – “cutting off your roots” or “wip[ing]” out your culture. Hieu illustrates the complex interconnectedness of race, citizenship, sense of belonging, and social identity in his discussion of becoming American in the following data excerpt.

122

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Becoming American: Resistance and Assimilation Hieu has been living in the United States for five years. He is fluent in English but continues to be in ESL classes. While I asked him questions in Vietnamese, he often replied in English. In this interview, he spoke mostly in English. Hieu: Here…it is like the Americans, they want to, like want to wipe out your culture or something but then it is like you can’t really be accepted like them. You get into a space that does not belong to you or like…how do I say? Like, you are in a place where you have no identity… you are not American or Vietnamese because you cannot speak Vietnamese well or practice your culture. DN: Why do you say you are not American? Hieu: Because Ms. Diem, we are not White! We are not White or Black so we are not American. We cannot consider ourselves Americans and no one considers us Americans. We have no space that is ours except what we make, like our little hallway and our community. That is why we have to hold on to our culture and language. It is so easy to lose everything about yourself – like your language, your memory, your history, your culture. I am already losing so much of myself, like my language. But if I lose those things about myself, I don’t know who I am anymore. I have no space that is for me. (Interview, February, 2006) The Vietnamese immigrant youth, such as Hieu, Trung, and Hai described above, perceive the question of becoming American to be intertwined with the process of assimilation in which they are expected to give up their own cultural practices, beliefs, and language. Hall (2002) explains this process of assimilation that immigrants are experiencing as a new form of cultural racism. She writes: This form of cultural racism is a normalizing discourse, however, cultural racism not only classifies designated groups in seemingly objective terms, it also regulates these

Becoming American

123

differences through the imposition of normalizing judgments. (p. 118) While the Vietnamese immigrant youth find ways to resist the process of cultural racism by trying to maintain their language and bond with their ethnic and cultural community, it is also difficult for them not to absorb – both consciously and subconsciously – the pervasive racial codes and practices around them. The pressure that immigrant youth experience, Olsen (1997) writes, “to align, to be defined racially within the American system of racial categories creates an unsettling persistent force” in their lives (p. 108). As the immigrant youth become assimilated into the racialized structures – both in and outside of school – they also often undergo another process, which can take place simultaneously, where they slowly “lose everything” about themselves – such as their language, memory, history, and culture. The forces of assimilation or cultural racism are strong, and immigrant youth feel the constant pressure to give up their ethnicity, culture, and language. Olsen (1997) describes this pull that newcomers face to assimilate into a racialized identity and category: In the early months and years of immigration, most newcomers simply do not see, and then begin to observe only the racialization of American life, placing themselves outside and continuing to hold on to identities and definitions that are national, linguistic, and religious. They resist internalizing the U.S. racial definitions of themselves, despite being treated by others as if they were already racialized into categories of black, brown, or Asian. In the process, their schoolmates, their teachers, and society’s inability to see and understand the distinctions in identity they themselves would make…pull them into the broad racial category of Latino or brown that lumps together nationalities and ethnicities. (p. 109) However, many of the youth also recognize that their racial status will continue to mark them as non-American and “Other” even if they become assimilated and a part of the racialized structure – or what Lee (1996) calls the racial hierarchy. The youth are aware that they still “can’t be accepted like” the “real Americans.” The notion of becoming

124

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

American for immigrant youth then emerges as more than a process of acquiring citizenship status or a passport; it also consists of a shift in racial, cultural, and ethnic identity. They view the idea of immigrants – particularly immigrants of color – becoming American as not only individuals who have assimilated into the racial structure but also as individuals who have deceived themselves into thinking that they can be accepted as “real” – or White – Americans. Consistently, the immigrant youth in this study point out that even if they choose to simply call themselves American, they will not be accepted as American. Hai, for example, expressed this belief: “White Americans are real Americans. The other people like Black Americans and immigrants are not accepted as American like the White Americans. This is the way of this country.” Thus, the youth believe that immigrants can earn citizenship through the process of naturalization; however, becoming American is unattainable because of their race and skin color. Trung acknowledged this reality when he stated: “We cannot escape our color in America.” While they do not believe the idea that they can become “real Americans,” many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth acknowledge that their lives, future possibilities, and social identities are now linked to the social, cultural, political, and economic contexts of the United States. Becoming accepted as a real American may seem impossible. However, constructing a life and social identity that reflect their connection to their host country is important for immigrants (Castles & Davidson, 2000). They continue to pursue citizenship and other ways of becoming a part of the United States despite the constant feeling of being outsiders. The interview excerpt below is an example of how many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth at Englewood High view themselves as Vietnamese as well as American. Becoming American: The Tensions between “Real” and Ethnic Americans DN: If someone asks you to describe yourself, what would you say? Huy: Like who I am? I guess, I could say Vietnamese. But also American, like Vietnamese American. I am Vietnamese American.

Becoming American DN: What does the term Vietnamese American mean to you? Huy: Like American with roots in Vietnam, like me. A person who lives in America but comes from Vietnam…I think that if people can understand the culture and ways of life in America and want to be American, then they can be called American, but they are not the real American. They still have their own culture and roots…You need to be an American but also continue to be a Vietnamese because you cannot be like the real Americans. DN: What does it mean to be both American and Vietnamese? Huy: Like you still have to know Vietnamese and maintain your culture and values. It is like a Vietnamese and American or Vietnamese American... DN: Where did you hear the term Vietnamese American? Huy: Vietnamese American? It is similar to other groups like Chinese Americans or Black or African Americans. Like I am Vietnamese, but a Vietnamese normally lives in Vietnam. I am Vietnamese American because I live in the land of America now. I am American but not American like the real American. So, I am a Vietnamese American. Because if people were to look at me and I say that I am American, who would believe me? How can I be American? I am Vietnamese. But even though I live in America, I am not American. I am Asian and Vietnamese because Asian represents many groups. But I think Americans only see us as Asian. Sometime I forget and follow their way and say Asian too, but I should not forget that I am Vietnamese. DN: Who would not believe you are American? Huy: Anyone who would look at me would say that I am Asian, not American. It is 100% what it is. Everyone who looks at me will say that I am Asian. DN: So, the term “American” is reserved for whom? Huy: It is reserved, reserved for the real people of this land. It is for White American. DN: But didn’t White Americans also come from somewhere? Huy: Right, they did come from somewhere…Europe. DN: What about Native Americans?

125

126

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Huy: This used to be their nation and land. They are the true Americans…Umm…but…umm…maybe because the president is White and the people in the government and high offices are usually White. The country is run by White people. Around the world, when people think of America, they think of the White people in power. They forget about the many other people in America. (Interview, January, 2006)

While maintaining his ethnicity and culture is important, Huy acknowledges that since living in the United States, his perception and interpretation of what it means to be Vietnamese has altered. He believes his sense of being Vietnamese is different from the Vietnamese who are living in Vietnam. To indicate this shift in his perception, Huy now considers himself Vietnamese American, which he interprets to mean someone who lives in the United States but is of Vietnamese descent. In defining himself as Vietnamese American as opposed to simply Vietnamese or American, Huy constructs a hybrid identity that contains and synthesizes ideas, values, and practices from both cultural contexts (Bhabha, 1996; Rizvi, 2000). This complex process of constructing social identities for immigrant youth “represent an ongoing negotiation between self and other identifications which reflects the meanings attached to possible identities and boundaries” (Waters, 1999, p. 46). Each of these identities – Vietnamese, American, Vietnamese American, and Asian American – means something different. Choosing to call themselves one rather than another – such as Vietnamese American rather than Vietnamese or American – indicates that the Vietnamese immigrant youth connect to a specific meaning or idea represented by that category. The social identity that Huy chooses for himself – Vietnamese American – includes an ethnic Vietnamese component. In selecting this particular social identity, Huy rejects the racial category that mainstream society has constructed for him. His emphasis on his ethnic – Vietnamese – as opposed to the racial – as a qualifier for his Americanness is an attempt to reclaim and assert his ethnic and cultural identity, which is often condensed and subsumed under the larger racial construct. The process of ethnic community identification on the part of

Becoming American

127

growing numbers of ethnic minority groups is partly a response “to experiences of exclusion and racialization in western societies” (Castles & Davidson, 2000, p. 138). Because of his racial and ethnic background, Huy believes that he will never be perceived and accepted as a “real American” and thus connects with an ethnic-specific American identity – Vietnamese American. Incorporating his ethnic identity is also an attempt to resist what Huy perceives as assimilating and losing his ethnic and cultural self. Huy’s desire to include the American component in his Vietnamese American social identity is an attempt to position himself as a part of the U.S. social, cultural, political, and economic landscapes. He explains who can be an American: “I think that if people can understand the culture and ways of life in America and want to be American, then they can be called American, but they are not the real American. They still have their own culture and roots…” The suturing of both cultural and national contexts – Vietnamese and American – to form his social identity indicates that while Huy may not be recognized and accepted as an authentic American, he is still a part of U.S. society. Trying to situate themselves within the cultural, political, and economic contexts of the United States is not an easy and smooth process for immigrant youth. The ideas, meanings, and associations that the youth construct relate to their understandings of race, ethnicity, culture, nationality, and citizenship are at times conflicting and competing. The immigrant youth constantly struggle over trying to resist assimilative forces while finding ways to become a part of the social, cultural, political, and economic life in the United States. As they attempt to create a sense of belonging in the U.S., they continue to experience the tensions connected to what it means to become American in a racialized society. Chinese Vietnamese American: Constructing a Hybrid Social Identity Huy is not alone in strategically constructing a hybrid social identity. Other youth in the study also undergo similar processes of examining and sorting out the different ideas and meanings that may be connected to each social category – race, ethnicity, culture, gender, and nationality. Hanh, for example, continuously re-examines these social

128

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

categories in relation to the notion of becoming American in the excerpt below. Hanh is ethnic Chinese but was born in Vietnam. Her family had lived in Vietnam for several generations. She often identify as Vietnamese. Hanh: We are Asians…How can I be an American when I am Vietnamese? DN: Do you consider any Asians to be Americans? Hanh: Um hmmm…um hmmm…well, I sometime see myself as a Vietnamese American because I live in America…Vietnamese Americans – there are many kinds too. Like me, I am a Vietnamese American but I tend to think more like a Vietnamese. Actually, I am Chinese Vietnamese and now I live here. But because I live in America, I am Vietnamese or Chinese Vietnamese American. I am not Chinese American because I don’t really know much about China… Now that I am here, I have learned a different culture and am now a bit different than people in Vietnam. This is like when I was in Vietnam, I was different from Chinese people in China…Now, that I am in America, I think people in Vietnam have a different way of thinking than me... DN: Can you be just American, not Vietnamese or Chinese American? Hanh: Um hmmm…yes…no, no. It is difficult because when people think of American, they mean White Americans…Asians are always Asians not Americans. (Interview, March, 2006) The ways in which the discourses of race circulate and interact with notions of Americanism, citizenship, and nationality within the school, media, and the general society help to perpetuate the idea and belief that to be recognized as a real American, an individual has to be White. Because they do not fit the typical image of an American, Hanh, Huy, and other immigrants of color learn to accept and believe that they are not “real” Americans. These immigrant youth have internalized the idea and belief that Whiteness is a requirement to be American and that their Asian-ness forever marks them foreign; making them lesser

Becoming American

129

citizens than their White counterparts (Bhabha, 1994; Ladson-Billings, 2004; Lee, 2005; Ong, 2003). Race and racialization have constructed and inscribed in people’s minds images of who is and is not American. The notion of who is a real and authentic American conveys the idea that citizenship means more than having a legitimate membership or sense of belonging to the national, social, and cultural contexts. The idea of a real and authentic American also connects to a specific racial identity. In other words, the question of ‘who is a legitimate American’ indicates that citizenship construction takes place along an uneven and unequal path in distributing rights, privileges, power, and recognition connected to this classification. Achieving this social, cultural, and political sense of belonging – a part of what Castles and Davidson (2000) call substantial citizenship – and becoming recognized and accepted as simply Americans may be an impossible goal for many immigrants because of their racial backgrounds. The youth in this study, such as Trung, Hai, Hanh, and Huy, point out that “around the world, when people think of America, they think of the White people in power. They forget about the many other kinds of people in America.” The process of racialization has worked to substantiate the idea that while immigrants can become citizens and a part of the United States through the process of naturalization, their Americanness will always be qualified by their racial or ethnic status – they can only be partially or marginally American. Marginality, Racism, and Citizenship The sense of marginalization and exclusion are often compounded for immigrant youth as they encounter racism – both subtle and overt. The following data excerpt reveals one of the many overt racial incidents that the youth experienced during this study. This particular excerpt illustrates how encounters with racism can affect and transform students, such as Thu, a female student who normally had a calm, even temper and positive future outlook. Thu had often been described as one of the best students with perfect grades and behavior by her teachers and peers. She had

130

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

transferred to three mainstream classes and continued to have one ESL language arts class with Ms. Mori. Minh and I were talking about his senior research project when Thu came rushing up to us in the hallway. She seemed visibly upset about something. She was breathing heavily and clenching her fists. She had always confided in Minh, whom she called “anh” or “big brother.” She didn’t wait for either Minh or I to ask her what was wrong. Thu burst into tears and said in Vietnamese: I don’t like my computer class! [She switched to English.] The teacher is RACIST! He only helps White Americans. [She switched back to Vietnamese.] He ignores all of the Asian and other students in the class. He really looks down on us. He looks at us with some hatred or something. He sighs and sneers when I raise my hand. Minh spoke in English: He does not like immigrants. Thu responded in English: Immigrants, refugees – everyone except White Americans! She got more upset when she said this. Her fists were clenched tight and she was shaking her head. I asked: What happened? Thu: He does not like us! He never looks at us. Today, I handed in my project and he snatched it, and it ripped. He threw it back and said print out another one. I’m so angry! Minh (Eng): That is why you should not care too much. Just get your assignment done and don’t care about it. The more we care about it the angrier we will get. I have to just not care about those teachers but I get so angry and disappointed. Thu sighed: I can’t believe this! They say that America has freedom and equality for everyone. Minh (Vietnamese): We are not Americans so they do not think we have the same rights or something. They have more power than us. Thu: I am a citizen! Even if we are not citizens, we still have rights. (Field notes, February, 2006)

Becoming American

131

The youth in this study are aware that incidents of discrimination and marginalization – both subtle and overt – happen frequently in the school. They report that they often feel that their American classmates and teachers “look down” on them and treat them as though they do not “have the same rights” because of their racial and/or immigrant status. These everyday racial incidents – both in and outside of school – contribute to the youth’s sense of marginalization. As they continue to experience these incidents of racism and marginalization, their image of and belief in the ideas of “freedom and equality for everyone” in America slowly become shattered. These experiences of racism and discrimination help to create more distance between immigrant students and their peers within the mainstream culture as immigrant youth seek acceptance and support from their ethnic and cultural communities. Many of the immigrant youth prefer to remain with their ethnic and cultural communities even at the expense of their academic progress. Teachers reported that the numbers of ESL students transferring out of ESL classes have decreased in recent years. While there are students who have the English language skills to do well in mainstream classes, they continue to fail the school’s English Language Proficiency test. Several Vietnamese immigrant students, including Hieu, admitted to me that they failed the placement test on purpose. Hieu explained that he wants to remain in ESL classes because he did not want to “feel…less than them [American students].” One of the teachers also confirmed that about a third of the ESL students who failed the proficiency test should have easily passed it. Hieu has been in the U.S. for five years. He is a junior at Englewood. Even though he is fluent in English, he remains in ESL courses. Most of his conversations with his friends are in English. His interactions with me are mostly conducted in English even though I often initiate the conversations with him in Vietnamese. I asked Hieu why he is enrolled in ESL classes when he is fluent in English. Hieu: I know it is easy for me but I want to be with our people. I like my regular chemistry and gym classes, but I don’t see our people there. The Americans don’t seem to want to hang out with us. They make me feel like I am less than them or like I shouldn’t be there. I like to be with people who

132

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship see me as someone equal to them, not less. I’ll stay in ESL until they kick me out.

The desire to be with “people who see me as someone equal” is a powerful feeling that contributes to Hieu and many other students’ decision to remain in ESL classes. Learning to accept the social, cultural, and racial divisions among different groups has become a part of the immigrant youth’s social adjustment. This process of social, cultural, and racial separation also shapes the youth’s lives outside of school. The data discussion below illustrates some of the students’ perceptions and experiences related to race and social inequality outside of school. Living in Two Different Americas Most of the immigrant student population at Englewood High, in particular the ESL students, live in the southern part of the city, approximately 20 miles south of the school. They commute the long distance every day even though they live close to several other high schools. The students in this school district have a choice of where they attend school. Many of the ESL and immigrant youth choose Englewood High because of its academic reputation and lower levels of racial and ethnic tensions. While most of the students ride the school bus to and from school, many of the seniors have to the take the city bus to get home. These students only need to take morning classes to fulfill their credits and could leave after lunch. I started to drive a few of them home since I live only a couple of miles from their homes. During these car rides home, the youth often share their experiences and struggles with social and cultural adjustments to life in the United States. One day in January, I drove Trung, Dao, and Thu to the grocery store to get supplies for the Vietnamese New Year celebration that was taking place at the school the following day. As I drove through the different areas of the city to get to their neighborhood in the southern part of the city, Dao pointed out the different kinds of homes and shops in an upscale neighborhood.

Becoming American

133

Dao: It is clean and full of people in this neighborhood. There are so many American shops here. There are people walking around with their dogs. Trung then made a comment that most Vietnamese live down south instead of in the central or northern areas of the city. DN: Why do you think this is? Trung: Well, it is very expensive to be in the central area or in the north. We can’t afford these homes. The homes in our neighborhood are cheaper. There are many immigrants and Black Americans there. Dao: In our neighborhood, we have people with darker skin color than in the north. In the north it is mainly White Americans. The further north we go in this city, the lighter the skin color gets. Like when I take the city bus, when I first get onto the bus, it is full of immigrants and Black Americans. You hear lots of languages. By the time I get to my school, the students are the only ones who are non-White Americans. Sometime, I am the only person who is not American. Trung: Yes, in the south, we have lots of minorities. DN: What do you think of that situation? Trung: It is expensive in the north and mostly White Americans have money…We don’t have a lot of money. Many of the immigrants are new to America. We have to save money to move. DN: Is this the plan, to save money and move north? Trung: Not for everyone but for many people. They want nicer homes, nicer neighborhoods and nicer schools, so they move up north after they get better jobs. Dao: Yes, we do not live in nice neighborhoods. Everyone goes into their homes and close their doors. It is not always safe to walk around. We made it to the Vietnamese-Chinese grocery store where Trung worked on the weekends. He introduced us to some his co-workers. Trung and Dao picked up all the things that they needed for the event and led us to the checkout counter. I drove to Trung’s house first. We all got out of the car and helped him with the grocery. This was the first time I had been to his house.

134

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

He lived in an old pale yellow rambler with a dilapidated front porch. The enormous fenced-in yard was clean but had no planned landscaping. Thu’s house was across the street. It was freshly painted. There were several rose bushes along the front fence. The porch had a swing and piles of children’s toys. Several cars were parked in front. Trung pointed out where other students lived on his block. Most of the homes seemed run-down. Trung pointed out that everyone rented on his block. “We don’t want to fix up too much since it is a rental home,” he explained. Thu helped Trung carry in a couple bags of grocery as I started to drive Dao home. Dao was initially quiet in the car. He lived less than a mile from Trung. His home was located along an alley where many other immigrants also lived. Most of the homes also seemed run-down. Several houses had colorful bed sheets and blankets covering the windows. There was one house that was completely boarded up with overgrown shrubs and bushes. Old cars, several with broken windows, lined the alley. Not a person was in sight. A metro bus passed by noisily. Dao commented: This neighborhood is very different from around my school, right? Sometime, I forget that I am living in America. I never see Americans around here – just immigrants. Our neighbors are immigrants. Our grocery stores are run by immigrants. Our buses are full of immigrants. Only my school has Americans. I guess the America in this neighborhood is different from the America around my school. I drove up to Dao’s drive way. We got out of the car. I had visited his home on several other occasions. His family lived in the nicest house on the block. It had a clean yard and no broken down cars in the yard. His family recently painted the house even though they rented it. Dao seemed contemplative. Dao: I used to believe that there was no poverty or suffering in America. I knew people worked hard, but I thought it was a country full of promises and freedom, you know. DN: How is America different from your initial ideas?

Becoming American

135

Dao in English: Those things, like freedom, they are there…but like, you have to like work hard to get what you want. And like my neighborhood – it is poor and people don’t trust each other. No one comes outside. After work, people go home and stay in their homes. America is a lonely place. You can be by yourself a lot. There are many different kinds of people and cultures but no one like talk to each other or be with each other like in this neighborhood. (Field notes, January, 2006) Trung and Dao were aware of the racial disparity and segregation that existed among the different areas of the city. They noted the issues of race and socio-economic status and how those factors influenced the demographic make-up of different residential areas. Dao described his neighborhood as a different America than the one where his school was located. He stated: “America in this neighborhood is different from the America around my school.” Living in a run-down and povertystricken part of town, Dao often forgot that he was in America as his everyday reality differed from his previous conception of America as a land “full of promises and freedom.” Dao also felt a sense of disconnect between immigrants and Americans because he had internalized the ideas that he was not a “real American.” He was unable to see himself and his other immigrant neighbors as Americans and a part of the United States. Dao viewed racial segregation as a divide between immigrants and Americans: “I never see Americans around here – just immigrants. Our neighbors are immigrants. Our grocery stores are run by immigrants. Our buses are full of immigrants. Only my school has Americans.” Dao seemed disappointed by his experiences in the United States and was resigned to accept his immigrant and racial status as an “outsider.” While they recognize race as a factor in determining an individual’s level of Americanness, the Vietnamese immigrant youth also view the low socio-economic status of their neighborhoods as unAmerican. Trung pointed out that many immigrants aspire to have “nicer homes, nicer neighborhoods and nicer schools, so they move up north after they get better jobs.” All the youth in this study also indicated that having a good job and a nice home was important for their future. Having money and material goods – such as a home, a car,

136

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

electronic devices, and name brand clothing – is symbolic of achieving the American dream and way of life for many immigrants. Money and material possessions are often connected to Whiteness (Lee, 2005), which acquiring those things allows immigrants to enter the mainstream American culture. Dao and Trung were not alone in their observations about the racial and social disparity in their neighborhoods. Other youth were as aware and articulate of the divisions that are connected to issues of race. Kim, Long, Thai, and Truc shared similar observations. Race, Class, Rights, and Privilege When I was driving Kim home after school one winter day, I saw Long, Thai, and Truc in a bus stop near the school. It was chilly out and the youth stood huddled together under the covered bus stop. I stopped the car and asked them if they needed a ride home since they lived close to Kim. They all hopped into the back of my little blue Honda Civic. Often I took the interstate highway. This afternoon, I had left a bit late and the traffic was getting congested on the interstate, so I took the longer back route. This local route took us through several different residential neighborhoods. Throughout the car ride, Long and Thai kept commenting about how different the houses and neighborhoods were compared to their neighborhoods. Thai stated that the nice neighborhoods must be where the White Americans lived. Thai continued: Our neighborhood is for immigrants and people of darker skin tones. I rarely see a White person in my neighborhood. I often forget that there are White people around except at school and on TV. We don’t see them in the grocery stores, restaurants, or around our neighborhood. I had wondered where they lived. I drove passed the university and Kim wandered out loud if she could ever be a student there. DN: Of course you could. It is difficult to enter but if you put your mind to it, you can. Kim: I don’t know. It seems like such a big faraway dream. I know people talk about going to college all the time, and they all have a dream to go to UW. I just don’t know how many

Becoming American Vietnamese students actually get there. I don’t even know how to do the application. As I drove along the winding roads past several more upscale neighborhoods, Long and Truc, who were usually quiet, made some observations about race, class, and privilege. Long: I heard that White Americans have more rights as citizens, right Co Diem? Kim who sat up front nodded in agreement: Umm hmmm… DN: What do you mean more rights? Long: Like they have more rights than Black Americans or other minorities. Truc laughs slightly and adds: Like racism… Long: Where did you hear this? Truc: We see it all the time. Like the way people live here. The White Americans are always richer and live in nicer neighborhoods than other people. Look at this neighborhood. Wow! Look at those houses – so nice. [We were driving through the central part of the city]. Long: We read about it in our government and history classes. Ms. Mori said that there is a lot of discrimination in this country. Like the Black Americans have suffered a lot in history…We see many poor Black people. Mostly when I see a poor person, that person is not White American. I know there are White Americans who are poor too, but like in my neighborhood, they are mostly non-White Americans. DN: What do you think about that? Long: I think it is very terrible. Is this discrimination? Truc in English: It is like there is discrimination like people can’t find good jobs. It is racism also. DN in English: What is racism? Truc in Vietnamese: Like people are not treated well because of their skin color or because they don’t speak English. Like discrimination. DN in English: What is discrimination, do you think? Truc in Vietnamese: Like people are mistreated by other people because they don’t like them. Like sometime people

137

138

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship look down on you and mistreat you because you are Asian or immigrant. Long in Vietnamese: A lot of people often think Black Americans and Spanish people are lazy. But, in my neighborhood, there are Spanish people [Latino], Black people, and Asian people. We all work hard but we can never be like White Americans. White Americans, they are on the top. Asian and other people work hard too but we can never be like them. Kim in English: Uh huh. Like they are prejudice and believe that non-Whites are lazy and cannot be not like them. DN: Like them how? Long in English: Like, like we can never be “tu nhien” [normal] like White Americans. DN: Do you think becoming a citizen can help with that? Long: It doesn’t really help…we can be a citizen but we will never be real Americans. (He laughs) Who will accept us as Americans? Black Americans are citizens but they suffer from a lot of racism. How could it be different for Asian and Spanish [Latino] immigrants? Truc laughs slightly again and said in Vietnamese: We are not White so we can never be Americans. People only see you as Asian even if you are a citizen. DN: What do you see as the benefit of becoming a U.S. citizen? Truc in Vietnamese: It will help us with travels and getting jobs abroad, but we can’t really be like the White Americans. They will always be Americans and we will always be seen as Asians. Long in Vietnamese: I will become a citizen next year. We can say that we are citizens even if we are not Americans. (Field notes, February, 2006)

As they move from one context to the next – from school to home – their racial and immigrant status continue to position the Vietnamese immigrant youth within marginal spaces – racially, culturally, socially, economically, and politically. The youth connect their sense of marginalization to the struggles of racism and discrimination that other

Becoming American

139

racial and ethnic minorities have experienced in the United States. Long stated: “Black Americans are citizens but they suffer from a lot of racism. How could it be different for Asian and Spanish [Latino] immigrants?” Long aligned his experiences and social identity with the historical and contemporary struggles of other racial and ethnic minorities. When asked if obtaining citizenship would resolve their experiences with marginalization and exclusion, Long replied: “Who will accept us as Americans? Black Americans are citizens but they suffer from a lot of racism. How could it be different for Asian and Spanish immigrants?” He believed that having an immigrant and Asian racial background will continue to place him and other Vietnamese immigrant youth outside of the mainstream social and cultural arenas. While they struggle with the process of becoming American, citizenship acquisition remains an important goal for many of the immigrant youth. They think that citizenship status may possibly offset some of experiences of marginalization and disconnect from the dominant mainstream culture. Long explained one of his motivations for considering citizenship: “We can say that we are citizens even if we are not real Americans.” While it may not offer social, cultural, and racial equality, citizenship status provides a legal sense of belonging in the United States for immigrant youth. Citizenship: Perceived Roles and Responsibilities Attaining citizenship is a critical component of immigrant adaptation (Castles, 2000; Castles & Davidson, 2000). The Vietnamese immigrant students in this study believe that one of their main reasons for acquiring citizenship is to obtain legal membership to the U.S. – to establish a sense of belonging in and commitment to the U.S. Trung and Minh discuss some of their reasons for considering U.S. citizenship as well as their ideas about citizenship. Excerpt #1: DN: What do you think your teachers want you to learn? Trung: I think that the teachers want us to be successful students so that we can later help their country. I think that they want to teach us their values and ideas so that we can learn them and help to maintain them. I think this is their good

140

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship strategy. We are immigrants, but we can say that we are not necessarily a burden. We learn how to be good citizens and help to support and contribute to the country. DN: You mention that this is their country…do you consider yourself a part of this country? Trung: Once you have accepted the fact that you have left your country, you have to think about respecting and accepting their land as yours. Think about it, from the things that you eat to the language that you speak is theirs, so you have to respect and think of the country as yours too. But I know that I will not give up my Vietnamese culture. DN: After becoming a citizen, would you consider yourself American? Trung laughed: I will be an American citizen but I will not call myself American. American is reserved for real Americans here, like the White Americans. White Americans are Americans but everyone else is like an Asian American or a Chinese American or an African American... DN: What does having U.S. citizenship mean to you? Trung: Well, I think it will give me more benefits. “Like for example, when I travel to another country, and then if there are terrorists or something really big happen, the first thing they do is get the foreigners out of that country. Basically the Americans will be the first to get to leave.” DN: And besides traveling, what are your other thoughts about becoming a citizen? Trung: I think that having “citizenship” you also get a “voice” in something. You can go vote. DN: And you are thinking that you will vote? Trung nodded. DN: What does this mean for you? Trung: To be able to pick your own leader is amazing. It is very important. It is like…how you live… you have your own needs and ideas about how life should be. You need a “candidate” who will be able to help us to fulfill those ideas about life. DN: How did you learn about voting?

Becoming American

141

Trung: In American government and history classes. Also on TV…Like watching the debates and stuff…and the election. (Interview, February, 2006) Excerpt #2: Minh: The teachers want immigrant students to understand about the American way of life, their economy, their country’s history and their government. It is important for us to learn about this since we live under the control of their country. DN: Do you consider yourself American? Minh: I do not feel like that…I think about being a citizen…I think being a good citizen here means that you have to follow the rules and don’t make the errors. You become a citizen and try to accept their way of life in America. But, I don’t think of myself as American, like real Americans here. DN: What does citizenship mean to you? Minh: If you are a citizen, you can do things like voting. You have more jobs and can go to school. You can travel freely. If you get in trouble, you have more rights. They will not send you back to Vietnam. (Interview, January, 2006) Many of the immigrant youth in this study frequently expressed a sense of obligation and gratitude to their host country, which partly contributed to their motivation for acquiring citizenship. Both Trung and Minh acknowledged that they are now living in the United States and must accept the rules, regulations, and way of life in the new country. Obtaining citizenship represents their commitment to the American way of life – legally, politically, and culturally. Trung stated that once you have left your country, “you have to think about respecting and accepting their land as yours. Think about from the things that you eat to the language that you speak is theirs, so you have to respect and think of the country as yours too.” While citizenship may help the immigrant youth establish a permanent and legal status in the United States, they do not view citizenship as providing them with an equal sense of social, cultural, and political status as those individuals whom they categorize as real Americans. They acknowledge that citizenship affords them more legal

142

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

protection, opportunities, and privileges. Citizenship status also helps to alleviate some of their fears – such as deportation and protection during travel abroad. However, for many immigrants who belong to ethnic or racial minority categories, access to substantial citizenship, which Castles (2000) defines as “equal chances of participation in various areas of society, such as politics, work and social security” (p. 192) remains an issue. The immigrant youth in this study often perceived themselves as subordinates in the social, cultural, and political structures of the United States. They adopted the notion that they did not fit into the image of a real American and remain outsiders or partial Americans. Several of the youth, including Tuyet, went as far as to use the discourse of “master” and “owner” to describe their subjugated relationships with the United States. This language indicates that the immigrant youth not only saw themselves subjugated in terms of their race, class, culture, and language, but many also felt the sense of obligation in giving their physical bodies to their new nation when they considered joining military service. Tuyet shared her meaning about the U.S. as a master in part of an interview excerpt below. Subjugated Bodies DN: Do you think about becoming an American citizen? Tuyet: I will take the test. DN: Is citizenship important to you? Tuyet: Yeah, it is important. I am settling here and living here now. If we don’t have citizenship, if I lose my job then I won’t get unemployment or benefits later. It helps me to get a job too…Now that I am here, I don’t have any more legal papers from Vietnam. If we don’t have citizenship…I don’t want to be a person who is not a citizen here or in Vietnam. I don’t want to be a person without an owner or a master. DN: A person without a master? What does that mean? Tuyet: Yeah. America is like my new master now. DN: Why do you call America the master? Tuyet: It means that I belong to America now even though I am not American like the people who are born here. DN: Do you think that you will be equal with other American citizens after you become a citizen?

Becoming American

143

Tuyet: I will have rights but I will never be like the Americans. This is their country and I will never be seen as an American. This is their country. DN: Who are they? Tuyet: The Americans – the White Americans who run the country and are the leaders of this country. (Interview, February, 2006) Using the discourse of “master and owner” to describe the United States generates a deeper sense of obligation and responsibilities among the Vietnamese youth to “give back” to their host country. Many of them, especially the male students considered military service, in particular after September 11, as a way to demonstrate their loyalty to the United States. Several female students also contemplated joining the military despite their parents’ objections. The youth, in particular the male students, perceived military service as one of the most important obligations to fulfill for their host country. The fieldnotes and interview data below reveal some of the youth’s fears and reasons for contemplating military service. The Discourse of Freedom, Duty, and Military Service A group of Vietnamese immigrant youth was standing in the Vietnamese corner in the ESL hallway. Thai came over to where I was standing near the water fountain talking with Kim and Trung. He showed me a white postcard and asked: Thai: Co Diem, do I have to mail this in? I didn’t know that I have to sign up for the military in America. DN: I don’t think you will have to join the military, but this registration is just in case they do require your service. Thai: I think I have to serve or I don’t qualify for citizenship. DN: It does not mean that you have to join the military. Trung: Are you going to fight in the war? Thai: I don’t know. I think maybe about joining the navy. Trung: You could go fight in Iraq. I want to fight in Iraq. DN: Why do you want to go to war? Trung: To prevent Iraq from bombing the U.S. DN: Did Iraq bomb the U.S.?

144

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Trung: They were involved with 9/11. Saddam is now captured but Osama is still out there. We have to fight or they will bomb us. DN: Is Osama in Iraq? Trung: Osama is probably hiding there. His men are killing American soldiers every day. DN: How do you know about this? Trung: I see it on TV. Every day, American soldiers are killed. DN: And still you want to go to war? Trung: We have to defend freedom in America. Thai: I hope I don’t have to go to war…But maybe I can help. And there are benefits. I can become a citizen… (Field notes, February, 2004)

The war in Iraq continued to dominate the youth’s conversations during the next couple of years. All of the male Vietnamese male students who were 18 or older had received the notice about registering with the United States Selective Services. Many of them were giving serious thoughts to joining the military after high school. Several of the Vietnamese youth who had graduated from Englewood High, including Thai’s older brother, had enlisted in the military. Many immigrant students continued to regard military service as a potential career and life choice. The youth shared some of their reasons: Trung was a sophomore during this interview. He had just transferred from another high school. He was one of the top students in his class. He liked reading and discussing politics. He and his family had been in the United States three years when this interview took place. He arrived in the U.S. the summer of 2001. DN: When you graduate, what do you hope to do? Trung: If I can, I really want to join the navy or army within a year. DN: Why did you decide this? Trung: I really want to be in the army. I think it is important for me to serve this new country. I also think that in the army, they will help me become more disciplined and confident. DN: In what ways?

Becoming American

145

Trung: The army will help me to learn about how to act within a group and in a team… DN: You are not afraid of going to war? Trung: [laughs lightly]: No…I don’t want to think about it, but I want to contribute something to this country. I think it is an important responsibility to defend America. To keep freedom, we have to fight. DN: How did you get the information about joining the army? Trung: I learned about it on T.V. and in the newspapers. Also at school, the officers come here and talk to us about it. I think it is like one of the most important things that a man or a woman – they let women join too – do for a country. DN: What do you think about the war? Trung: I think we have to defend America from the terrorists. When you have freedom like here, you have to fight to keep it because the terrorists do not want freedom. They are against America because America has freedom. DN: Where did you learn that? Trung: I read in the newspaper and watch the news. We are at war and I try to read or watch the news. (Interview, April, 2004) Trung reported that his views about the war and military service were shaped by the media’s representations of the war. He believed that the war in Iraq is a strategy to keep Americans safe. He stated “when you have freedom like here, you have to fight to keep it.” This discourse of war, freedom, and duty became the dominant justification that many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth used to explain why they were for considering military enlistment. Two years later, when Trung was a senior, his position on the war shifted. However, he was still intent on becoming a soldier. Trung felt compelled to contribute something back to the United States. DN: What is the most important thing for you this year? Trung: To get my diploma. And then join the Navy service. DN: What are your thoughts about the war in Iraq? Trung: I don’t agree with it. We fight for nothing except for blood and oil. This is not a good way to trade blood for oil…

146

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship DN: What if they require you to fight in the war? Trung: I will have to. If I enlist, I will have to go at the call. It will be my duty. DN: But you disagree… Trung: I will have to do it. This is the job of the soldier. We do what we are ordered to do. I will have to go and help people… DN: And what is your reason for wanting to be a soldier? Trung: I think it may be my father and grandfather’s influence. I am infected…it is a part of my family’s tradition. My father, uncles, and grandfathers were all in the army. But this is what I should do too. DN: Do you see yourself as an American then? Trung laughs: I think people do not think of me as American because I do not look like American. But I am living here now. It is my duty to serve the country that is like, feeding me and giving me opportunities. DN: You know a couple of years ago, when I asked you about the war, you said something like we need to fight for freedom… Trung laughs: That was because I was young and did not know how to think in a complex way…and because they have now discovered that there is no uranium and WMD. At that time, I really didn’t want another 9/11 and wanted to prevent them from hurting Americans. But now they have found nothing. We should not be there. They have only gone to get the oil wells. They found nothing…It is a big sacrifice for oil. Trading blood for oil is not good. DN: Where did you hear that phrase? ‘Trading blood for oil?’ Trung: We talk about the war in Ms. Mori’s government class. We debate about it. I also read in the paper and on the internet. (Interview, January, 2006)

While he disagreed with the purpose of the war in Iraq, Trung continued to feel compelled to serve in the military – to serve the country that is “feeding and giving [him] opportunities.” Many of the other youth in the study shared Trung’s feeling and perspective about making a contribution to the United States. Hieu’s account below provides another example that illustrates a pattern developing among

Becoming American

147

the Vietnamese immigrant youth regarding the issues of citizenship, military duty, and war. Hieu had been giving serious thoughts to joining the navy after high school. As one of the most vocal and opinionated students in the group, Hieu had repeatedly pointed out experiences of racism, discrimination, and exclusion within the school and society at large. He had expressed strong feelings about maintaining his Vietnamese ethnic and cultural identity. Contemplating military service seemed to contradict his sense of resistance to becoming American and the larger processes of assimilation. Hieu shared the reasons for his decisions: DN: Becoming a solder seems important to you. Why do you want to become a soldier? Hieu: Umm…I want to think about this…It is hard to say…hmmm…I wanted to join about four years ago. DN: What led to your idea? Hieu: Died…I saw on T.V. that a lot of people died from the terrorist attacks. I wanted to join the military. I wanted to help. I was upset. I felt hurt but I also… like didn’t know what to do… People like my family, we are not like Americans but we feel scared and angry too, you know. It is like hard because we are here and not seen as people from here and you don’t know where to be. I was feeling so upset but I had just come here and didn’t know how Americans saw me. I wanted them to know how it hurts me too. I wanted to stop feeling and do something, you know. Maybe doing something will show that I care too and not just Americans care, you know. DN: Um hmm…How old were you then? Hieu: 12. I really believe that without the soldiers doing their work, there won’t be us sitting here talking and having the freedom. I want to protect freedom like the other soldiers. (Interview, February, 2006) Many of the youth in this study arrived in the U.S. around the time of September 11, 2001. The attacks in New York left a powerful impact on them. The image of the United States as a free and safe haven was shattered after the events on September 11 for many of the youth. They began to believe that joining the military would help them to restore

148

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

their sense of “control” over their feelings of vulnerability and anger. Additionally, becoming a soldier to “protect the citizens” would indicate to other Americans and the rest of the world that as immigrants, they were also affected by the events of September 11. One of their motives for wanting to enlist was to legitimize and make visible their anger, fear, and sense of vulnerability. Hieu, for instance, wanted to “show how it hurts [him] too.” There were few opportunities for the immigrant youth to express the different emotions they continued to experience about September 11. Their feelings of anger, fear, frustration, and confusion often remained invisible to the mainstream culture or to other Americans. However, these feelings continued to shape many of their ideas and sense of purpose for the next two years. Those ideas were often reflected in how they approached and interpreted meanings in different social and learning contexts. The fieldnotes below indicate how some of the youth connected a reading assignment to the events of September 11, 2001 and the war in Iraq. War, Peace, and Citizenship Ms. Mori’s ESL language arts classes were reading a book called The Bomb, a story of a group of people on a Pacific Island during World War II. The story depicted the changes in the peaceful lives of the islanders when first the Japanese and later the American soldiers arrive. The students had just read up to the point where the Americans were arriving on the island. Ms. Mori asked the students to discuss with a partner some predictions about the plot. Vien, a junior, was talking with an Ethiopian student. Vien: I think the Americans will kick the Japanese out – get rid of them! Americans are great! Japanese are bad – real bad. They killed, raped, and plundered the village! They are bad. Huy and Danh, who sat across from Vien asked some questions about the Americans’ motives. Danh in English: The Japanese are gone now. Americans take over because they raised their flag at the end of the chapter. The villagers think Americans are good but are they? I think it

Becoming American is not as simple. They may seem nice but I think they have other plans too. Huy in Vietnamese: Japanese take over an island, they are seen as bad. The Americans are now taking over, and people think they are free. Danh: Do you think the Americans will destroy the islanders? Huy: I don’t know, but they used the bomb in Japan. Ms. Mori stopped the small group conversations after ten minutes. She wanted them to have a whole class discussion. Ms. Mori: What did you talk about with your partner? Vien: Japanese lost! Hieu: Americans won and got rid of Japanese! Quoc, a female junior: Americans are good. I think they help the islanders. A Chinese female student raised her hand and Ms. Mori pointed at her: We talked about bad conditions for the islanders because of the Japanese people. We also talked about how the Japanese did the same thing to China too, not just the islanders. Ms. Mori: That is a good point. Japanese soldiers occupied China during World War II also. There were many conflicts during this time. Luc, who sat in the back of the room with his head rested on his desk, added: The Americans gave food and equipment to islanders. Luc’s partner, a Somali male student nodded: They seem like good liberators, I think. Ms. Mori reviewed the different responses that the students gave: Now, the Japanese are gone and the Americans are in control. Remember, they also raised their flag. The island is now under the American control. Vien yelled out: No more JAPS! Ms. Mori: Hey! Be careful there. That is not appropriate. We cannot use that kind of language – that is considered derogatory and mean. Not all Japanese people were involved with the war. When you say that, you include all Japanese people.

149

150

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Hieu: Be careful with that language, man! Ms. Mori is American but her husband is Japanese American. Vien: Oh sorry. I will be careful. But they are bad people. Americans are good. Hieu: But the Americans used the bomb – is that good? Vien: But the Japs, oh, sorry, I mean, the Japanese killed and raped people on the island. The Americans won’t do that. Hieu: But they used one bomb and wiped out a whole city! Ms. Mori: So, what do you predict will happen in the plot? Hieu: I predict that the Americans will take over the island. They are going to occupy the island and then bomb Japan. Vien’s partner, a Somali male student: That will happen in the book? They are not going to leave the island? Hieu: I am talking about history – what really happened. Ethiopian student: I’m talking about what will happen in the book. Minh: The history is that the Americans used a bomb and killed many people. But we don’t know what happens in the book. I think they will talk about that because the title of the book is The Bomb. I think many people on the island will feel like American soldiers are like traitors or something because they bombed Japan. Hieu: Like the Americans betray the island people and the world too. Ethiopian student: I think something will blow up. I thought it was to be a bomb on the island. Hieu: Americans always got many reasons for doing something. They have their own things too not just helping people, like in Iraq. Ethiopian student: They should not be in Iraq. They just want oil there! Hieu: I know! They say it is to free Iraqi people but it is for oil. That is what I mean they have many reasons to be there, like on the island. Minh: Governments are like that everywhere. People want to protect their people but not thinking about killing other people too much. With a war, I think no one wins because even the winners have to lose many things, like Vietnam and American

Becoming American

151

War. Vietnam won but we lost too. So many people died and hurt…a lot of sadness. Vien: Americans are the good guys. I want to join the navy and fight the bad guys, like Saddam! Hieu: I want to go too. I think it is my duty to protect people even if I am not American. Minh: There are many immigrants – Asian and Spanish people [Latino] – fighting in the war even though they are immigrants not American. They believe in America. Vien: Yeah, we fight bad guys to keep freedom. (Field notes, February, 2006) The students in Ms. Mori’s class connected the events that took place in the book “The Bomb” to the current war between the United States and Iraq. Using the class discussion as an opportunity to explore issues of war and peace, the youth raised questions about the existing conflict in Iraq. Minh, for example, viewed war as part of a government’s strategy to protect its people with no winning side “because even the winners lose many things, like Vietnam and American war.” Hieu pointed out the example of the atomic bomb to challenge the image of the United States as the bringer of “liberation” and peace. However, while many of the youth disagreed with the purposes of war, they did not relinquish their idea and belief in joining the military to help “keep freedom” alive in the United States. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth considered enlisting in the military to demonstrate their belief in the idea of freedom in the United States despite the experiences with marginalization and discrimination. Minh pointed out immigrants’ roles in the U.S. military. He stated: “There are many immigrants – Asian and Spanish people [Latino] – fighting in the war even though they are immigrants and not American. They believe in America.” Many of the youth shared that their feelings about the events of September 11 were not validated because they were not considered legitimate or real Americans. As Asian immigrants, they felt that what they were feeling towards the events of September 11 were unknown to Americans and the rest of the world. Their foreignness connected to their Asian racial and immigrant status again positioned them outside of the boundaries of mainstream American culture, making even their

152

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

emotions and fears, which are intricately tied to events taking place in their host country, unacknowledged and to some extent unwelcomed. Hieu, Vien, Trung, Minh, and many of their fellow Vietnamese immigrant youth – partly influenced by the images and narratives of terrorism, war, and freedom in the media and partly driven by their emotional responses – viewed military service as a way to demonstrate not only their commitment to the ideas of freedom in the United States but also their sense of outrage towards the events of September 11. Hieu stated: “Maybe doing something will show that I care, not just Americans care, you know.” Hieu and other immigrant youth’s internal emotional attachments and outward commitment to military service to the United States represented their desire to become an integral part of the larger social, cultural, and political life of their host country; not just to gain legal membership. Their actions and thinking were indications that they wanted to participate more fully within the United States – socially, culturally, and politically. Summary of Chapter The findings in this chapter on “Becoming American” discuss the different struggles that the Vietnamese immigrant youth experienced as they tried to come to grips with what it means to acquire citizenship and find their place within the larger social, cultural, and racial structures in the United States. The youth were keenly aware of the reality of race and racialization as they were confronted with incidents and feelings of marginalization – both in and outside of school. As they encountered the racial discourses and messages that permeated the school culture, the media, and other areas in their lives, the immigrant youth began to internalize the belief that Whiteness is a prerequisite to becoming a real American (Ladson-Billings, 2004). Race and the process of racial formation continue to define and sustain systems of margins and mainstream through the construction and perpetuation of stereotypes and myths of each racial, ethnic, and language group. Bhabha (1994) explains that it is the ambiguous characteristics of stereotypes and myths that allow them to shift and continue to emerge over time and across different social and cultural contexts. The possibility that common stereotypes may be true helps to etch specific ideas, beliefs, and images about different groups more

Becoming American

153

sharply into both the individual and collective imagination. These common stereotypes also serve as powerful social and discursive mechanisms of racial categorization and division along the lines of who is more American. Ong (2003) explains: Ethno-racial stereotypes operate as branding mechanism directed at citizen-subjects considered to be at risk, who are measured according to the economic calculus. The bipolar racializing scheme is a social regulatory scheme that situates such at-risk subjects along the continuum of more or less likely to succeed. They become racialized not simply because of their perceived skin color, and ethnicized not simply because of claims of a particular ancestral culture, but because they have been assessed as belonging to a category and inscribed with a radical indeterminacy in the game of becoming self-motivated, self-propelling, and freedom-loving American citizens. (p. 14) While they recognize that the discourses of racial difference and the process of racial formation can lead to disconnect and disparity between the mainstream White and minority cultures, the immigrant youth do not give up on the idea of becoming a part of the American society through educational achievements, citizenship acquisition, commitment to military service, and through other areas of their lives. They viewed the acquisition of U.S. citizenship as an important strategy to forge a sense of belonging in the host country (Castles & Davidson, 2000). However, the immigrant youth differentiated between U.S. citizenship and becoming American. Making a distinction between these two categories is a strategic move in response to the processes of racialization and assimilation – or Americanization – which are simultaneously at work categorizing the youth into racialized “outsiders.” The findings in this chapter reveal that the entrance and acceptance of newcomers into the mainstream social, cultural, and political life in the United States hinge on their racial backgrounds. Immigrants who are not a part of the dominant White racial group may obtain citizenship status, which entitles them to legal status. However, on many levels – including social, cultural, and political – immigrants of

154

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

color will continue to be perceived as other than American. Whiteness is a requirement to be recognized and accepted as fully American (Ladson-Billings, 2004; Lee, 2005; Ong, 2003). The racial status of immigrants of color and their children will remain marginal or partial and qualified by racial or ethnic identity – such as Asian American or Vietnamese American – as opposed to simply American. In response to the racialization of the notion of Americanness, the Vietnamese immigrant youth create specific distinctions between their definition of U.S. citizenship and the notion of becoming American. Defining U.S. citizenship within the area of legal status and national membership provides the youth with the opportunity to become a part of the United States as they acquire citizenship. Becoming a U.S. citizen does not represent becoming American to many of the immigrant youth as this status implies uprooting and abandoning their race and ethnicity to assimilate into the White dominant culture. However, this process of assimilation does not necessarily lead to immigrant youth becoming accepted and recognized as full Americans. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth pointed out that even as immigrants choose to call themselves American, “no one would recognize [them] as one” because of their immigrant and racial status. Thus, to gain entrance into the racialized social, cultural, political, and national structures of the United States, immigrants have to clearly differentiate between the concept of citizenship and the process of becoming American racially and culturally. While they specifically conceptualize the notion of citizenship within the domains of legal and national membership – which are distinct from social and cultural dimensions – the Vietnamese immigrant youth do not relinquish the need to belong to a cultural and ethnic space and identity. These cultural and ethnic spaces provide a critical niche in the youth’s social and cultural adjustment to school and life in the United States (Gibson, 1988; Lee, 2005; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Qin-Hillard, 2003; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998). These sites, also referred to as transcultural and transnational social spaces, serve as an important form of social capital – social networks and resources through knowledge and information sharing – to facilitate the process of social and cultural adaptation (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Brittain, 2002; Goldring, 1999). Ethnic, cultural, and transnational social spaces also allow the youth the space to share and explore the meanings and

Becoming American

155

contradictions connected to social norms and practices in the different dimensions of their social, cultural, and family life (Stritikus & Nguyen, 2007). The findings in the next chapter will explore in more details the various ways in which the cultural and ethnic community and identity play out in the lives of the Vietnamese immigrant youth.

CHAPTER SIX

In-Between Spaces: Suturing Identities and Sense of Belonging from Multiple Social, Cultural, and National Contexts

While the mainstream culture tends to lump different ethnic minority groups into racial categories, immigrant groups constantly switch between racial and ethnic identities in their everyday life (Lowe, 1997; Waters, 1999). Waters (1999) points out the distinctions between race and ethnicity. Racial differences emphasize the “physical attributes,” while ethnic identity connects with “cultural traits” and practices. Waters (1999) writes: In the folk usage of these terms in present-day America, whites and blacks are racial groups distinct from one another based on skin color, hair texture, and facial features – physical characteristics that define a person as socially white or black. Ethnic groups refer to groups that share practices, language, behaviors, or ancestral origins. (p. 45) While many of the immigrant youth adapt to their racial identity, or what Brodkin (2000) terms as ethnoracial assignments, the youth also play an active role in constructing and negotiating the meanings and boundaries of their ethnic and cultural spaces and identities (Stritikus & Nguyen, 2007). Brodkin (2000) clarifies the distinction between ethnoracial assignment and ethnoracial identity below: 157

158

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Assignment is about popularly held classifications and their deployment by those with national power to make them matter economically, politically, and socially to the individuals classified. We construct ethnoracial identities ourselves, but we do it within the context of ethnoracial assignment. (p. 3) Maneuvering between their ethnoracial assignment and ethnoracial identities and between the different cultural and national contexts becomes part of the immigrant youth’s daily routines (Brittain, 2002; Hall, 2002; Pries, 1999; Waters, 1999; Zhou, 2001). Waters (1999) explains that the formation and incorporation of an ethnoracial identity includes a constant re-examination and re-negotiation between race and ethnicity because the meanings and ideas connected to those identities are situational. An individual is not bound to a racial or ethnic specific identity. Individuals are able to maintain multiple identities at any one time or emphasize one particular identity over others to connect with the social context. Waters (1999) explains: In one situation a person can feel very American, at another time Irish, and at yet another time white – or one could hold all identities simultaneously. But the recognition of the multiplicity and situationality of social identities does not mean that people are free to choose any identity they want or to attach any meaning they want to any particular identity. History and current power relations create and shape the opportunities people face in their day-to-day lives, giving some people ‘ethnic options’ and others ‘racial labels.’ There are also shared or contested meanings attached to different groups that affect individuals’ ways of thinking about themselves. (p. 47) The ways in which the immigrant youth in this study maneuver among the racial, ethnic, cultural, and national dimensions of their social life reveals the situational and relational context of these social identities. Social identities are always in-process (Dominguez, 1997; Hall, 2002; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999; Waters, 1999). The shifting social and cultural contexts in the immigrant youth’s lives influence how they conceive and represent social identities. This chapter discusses the findings related to the various ways in which the

In-Between Spaces

159

Vietnamese immigrant youth navigate among the multiple social and cultural spaces and identities. This chapter begins with an examination of how the Multicultural Awareness Week at Englewood High provides ethnic minority and immigrant youth with opportunities to find and convey their cultural and ethnic voices and identities within a racialized school environment and culture. Multicultural Awareness Week: Finding Cultural and Ethnic Identities and Voices Englewood High had a different energy level during the Multicultural Awareness Week. Although it always buzzed with student activities, today there was an added level of excitement and pride from students of color, particularly among immigrant students, as they celebrated the final day of the Multicultural Awareness Week. Throughout the week at Englewood, there were poetry reading sessions, cultural artifact and history exhibits, and an essay contest. All of these events ended with a two-hour assembly with student performances on the final day. The whole school was congregating in the main auditorium during the second and third periods. The dimly lit auditorium was packed. Many more students dressed in their traditional ethnic costumes and adorned with layers of jewelry, make-up, or flowers were making their way toward the auditorium. There were two large banners on the stage. One read: “Welcome to Englewood Multicultural Awareness Week.” It was draped across the top of the stage. Another banner, which read: “We are the Colors of the World,” was hung along the bottom of the stage. The bottom banner also listed the different ethnicities and nations represented among the students. Among the nations included were: United States, the Philippines, Bosnia, Vietnam, Japan, Israel, Mexico, Tonga, Sweden, Ethiopia, Canada, Cambodia, Pakistan, Scotland, Russia, North Korea, South Korea, Nepal, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Italy, Puerto Rico, Croatia, Somali, Germany, Liberia, Brazil, Spain, Argentina, Cuba, France, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Eritrea, Thailand, Bermuda, India, South Africa, and Kenya. Two White female teachers who stood near me at the back of the auditorium made these comments about the event:

160

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Teacher A: It is going to be really good. I always look forward to the multicultural assembly. Students are so good. And it is always so beautiful – their costumes are gorgeous! Teacher B: I know. They must have worked hard. Look at all the different colors in their costumes. We should have this more often. Teacher A: We try to do different things but it is not always practical. We have so many cultures here. We have this week so students can share their cultures. Teacher B: Look at the number of nationalities on that banner. Students seem to get along well. I don’t notice the diversity until now when all the students are walking around in their different costumes. Teacher A: I know. They blend together really well. Sometime we just see Black and White and forget all the other cultures. But they all stand out with their beautiful costumes now.

The teachers’ conversation indicates how different cultures and ethnic groups often become combined into larger racial context on a daily basis. They “forget how diverse” the student population is at Englewood. One of the teachers explains that she only sees “Black and White and forget about the other cultures” that make up the students’ population at the school. The Multicultural Awareness Week provides an important moment in which students can “stand out” and display their cultural and ethnic differences. However, condensed to a week, many of the students’ diverse histories, cultures, and traditions become part of a public exhibit, which is exoticized through a colorful costume or a dance during the event and then hidden and forgotten for the rest of the school year. A young Thai female student came and stood on the other side of me. She was dressed in her traditional Thai dress and head ornament. I asked if she was going to perform today. Student: Yes. I am so nervous. I hope that I will do ok. DN: You will be wonderful! Student: I don’t know. DN: Are you enjoying the Multicultural Awareness Week?

In-Between Spaces

161

Student: We do this every year. It is a school tradition. Our club tries to participate every year. I feel proud of my culture. DN: You should. Student: Sometime I feel like this is the only way to be included in the school. I guess I get to share with people my culture. I get to kind of share a part of me that is often not known. The other members of her dance group came by and the young student said bye to me. I wished them all good luck. Several female Chinese American students passed me in their cheong sam (traditional Chinese dresses). The lights went out and two students walked up to the stage – an African American male and an Asian American female. They were emcees for the assembly. The African American student started his speech using part of Dr. King’s “I have a dream speech.” The audience let out a tremendous roar when the student started. The student continued: I have a dream. I have a dream that one day all of the cultures and all of the colors of the world will be united. I have a dream that one day all of us will walk together. This dream is here today in our assembly at Englewood High! The audience cheered loudly after he finished. The female Asian American student introduced herself and asked the students to rise for the National Anthem. Afterwards, the principle, Mr. Philips, got up on stage and said: Hello! I am Martin Philips, the principal of the school. I want to welcome and thank everyone – teachers, students, parents, and community members – for coming. What Englewood is about is respect for each other, pride for who we are and our community at Englewood. As always, Englewood has a strong tradition of being a wonderful audience that respects its fellow classmates who will be performing today. Enjoy! And again thank you.

162

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

The assembly started off with a student reading the poem that won the poetry contest. It was a beautiful poem about being multicultural. After the poem, the curtain rose for the fashion show. The crowd stood up and cheered. The Bob Marley song, “One Love,” played in the background. The assembly was a beautiful display of different costumes and colors from many different cultures and ethnic groups. The music stopped after a long display of costumes. A male student of color took the mike. “I want to introduce the Muslim Student Club.” The audience cheered again. Student: We want to share the many countries and cultures that have Muslims. These are just a few of the cultures where Muslims belong. We are not just in the Middle East. There are also African Americans and Whites who are Muslim too. The student began to call out names of different countries. As he said the name, two students, one male and one female, walked out on stage wearing their costumes. The countries represented by the students included: East Africa, Uzbekistan, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and the United States. An hour into the assembly, I saw a group of Vietnamese girls in their “ao dai” (Vietnamese traditional long dress) standing near the stage. I made my way towards them. Tam grabbed my hand, and Hanh hugged me when they saw me. DN: How are you all feeling? Mai Xuan: Nervous! I am so nervous that I am shaking. DN: You were all so beautiful during the fashion show. Mai Xuan: Thank you. DN: How do you feel wearing your “ao dai?” Hanh: I don’t know. I never wear these dresses actually. This is the first time I have worn a “no la” [a conical bamboo hat.] I don’t normally wear these clothes… I feel like a Vietnamese when I wear this dress. DN: What do you mean? Hanh: Like, when I wear this, I feel more Vietnamese. DN: What about you, Trang?

In-Between Spaces

163

Trang: I don’t wear this much either. I am part Chinese, so I don’t wear this dress. But I don’t wear the Chinese dress either because I don’t know much about Chinese culture. I am Vietnamese but Chinese. I wear this dress and feel like, like I am like Vietnamese. But I know that I am not really real Vietnamese. Hanh: Yeah, like I can wear but I don’t really think I should wear it. I feel a bit strange in it, like it is not really me. DN: What dress would make you really you? Hanh: I don’t think there is that dress at all. I just feel different in different dresses. Mostly I just wear regular Western style clothes. I feel comfortable in those clothes but they don’t represent my culture. I don’t think there are clothes made for people like me. DN: What do you mean people like you? Tam laughs: She means people who are confused. Hanh laughs with her: Yes. I mean like people who are not part of the main culture but they share that culture. DN: How did you choose “ao dai” over the “cheong sam” dress? Hanh: I feel more like Vietnamese culturally than Chinese. I don’t feel like Chinese. I am like Chinese by blood but I am more Vietnamese. Tam added in English: Like we are Vietnamese by culture but Chinese by ethnicity. But it does not matter, Americans only see us as Asian only. We have different cultures but we are only Asian here. Having the opportunity to wear the “ao dai” and perform the traditional Vietnamese dance helped the female students to “feel like Vietnamese” even for those who were not ethnic Vietnamese. The Multicultural Awareness Week created an important space and time within the school to help the youth explore issues of race, ethnicity, and culture and how those categories shaped their perceptions and representations of themselves – racially, ethnically, and culturally. Hanh, Tam, and Trang – who were ethnic Chinese but identified with Vietnamese culture – began to explore these social categories and negotiate among the different ethnoracial identities that connected with

164

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

their life circumstances. They were able to move away from the racial and ethnic assignments – Asian or Vietnamese – that concealed their complex social, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds. While race bound them together by their phenotypes and skin color, each youth’s personal experiences and background also shaped how he or she understood ethnic and cultural identities. Social identity development is a situational and contextual process, which changes and shifts depending on the youth’s personal life circumstance. Ms. Le came over and asked me to go sit with the other Vietnamese students who were seated near other ESL students near the front. The Vietnamese students all sat together as were other ethnic and language groups, replicating the group patterns that were in hallways and classrooms every day. A student was performing “Colors of the World.” I sat down next to a Somali student. After the song ended, I asked her what she thought of the celebration. Student: I think it is nice. I wish it is like this all the time. DN: You mean having the assembly? Student: Not have dance and singing. But I wish there are more students showing their cultures. DN: Students don’t show their cultures every day? Student: Sometime they do but most of the time they don’t show their cultures. Only this week. DN: What does showing cultures mean? Student: Like their clothes or what is special in their culture. There are many cultures here, but I don’t know what they are. I think you can tell who is Muslim, but you don’t know who is Chinese or Korean. DN: Can you tell which students are Somali, Ethiopian, and Egyptian? Student: Yes, I can. DN: How do you tell? Student: Their languages are different…I can tell the difference. DN: Do you think that an American can tell the difference? Student laughs: No! I don’t think so. They think we are just Africans. We are all Africans but we come from different

In-Between Spaces

165

countries and have different cultures. But they think we are all the same people! DN: Why do you think it is important to know about different cultures? Student: I don’t want people to confuse me with another culture…If they think I am African immigrant, I lose my culture. I want them to learn about me and my culture. I am different from other cultures. My culture is part of me. DN: What is culture to you? Student: Culture? Culture has different things. Like your religion, or dress, or your language. It has your country’s history...things like that. The next group that came on stage was a free style dance group. They were a mixed group consisting of White, Latino, Filipino, Black and Asian students – the same group of students who often drew crowds in the hallways while they were practicing. They were called: “You’re Contagious.” They brought the audience to its feet. Two female students in the front jumped up and yelled out: “We love you! We love you!” Afterwards, the Vietnamese students came on stage. When the traditional Vietnamese song came on, the Vietnamese group in the audience cheered and clapped loudly. After the assembly, everyone headed back to their third period classes. I went to Ms. Mori’s class. Minh, Huy, and Tho told me that they did not attend the assembly but took a nap instead. I asked them why they did not go to the assembly. Minh: It is always the same thing over and over again. We wear our pretty clothes and walk around and people clap and then nothing. I don’t know the meaning of it. DN: You don’t see it as a celebration of cultures? Minh: No, not really. It is just some people dancing and then nothing. You only see your culture up there for a few minutes and then that is it. And it is the same every year. (Field notes, May, 2006) The Multicultural Awareness Week created a critical juncture within the confines of a racialized structure for many students to move

166

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

from their racial assignments to their ethnic and cultural identities. Students, particularly immigrant and other students of color, felt a sense of pride in sharing and making visible their ethnicities and cultures within their school – aspects of themselves that were often invisible and forgotten by the rest of the school. The Multicultural Awareness Week was an occasion for these youth to claim and express a “part of [them] that is often not known” to the rest of the school. One Somali youth stated this purpose clearly as she described the importance of the Multicultural Awareness Week in allowing other people to see her culture. She stated: “I don’t want people to confuse me with another culture…I have so much history with my culture. If they think I am African immigrant, I lose my culture…My culture is part of who I am too.” However, many of the youth felt that the effects of the Multicultural Awareness Week were fleeing and did not create many meaningful exchanges among the students outside of the colorful displays of “pretty clothes.” The representations of a group’s ethnicity, culture, history, and nation were reduced to a single song, dance, or a costume. While most of the students found the Multicultural Awareness Week to be a routine show and tell experience, they continued to participate because it was one of the few school functions and spaces where their voices could be heard and their cultures be seen. It was also one of the few occasions within the school where the immigrant youth played an active role in representing themselves and their stories as opposed to assuming an assigned racial identity constructed for them by the mainstream culture. One student explained that her reasons for participating in the event had to do with wanting to be seen and included in the school, even if just for a moment: “I feel like this is the only way to be included. I guess I get to share with people my culture.” This explanation resonated with many other immigrants and other students of color. The Multicultural Awareness Week was an opportunity for the youth to escape the pervasive racial identity in which they were classified. The larger school community was able to briefly move beyond the racialized mindset to acknowledge the diversity of ethnicity, culture, religion, and language among the student population during the Multicultural Awareness Week. However, the ways in which race, ethnicity, and culture shape social identities and senses of belonging is

In-Between Spaces

167

a central question that guides many aspects of personal and group interactions among the immigrant youth. The data in the next section of this chapter discuss the ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth define ethnic and cultural identity within their ethnic Vietnamese communal spaces. “Being Vietnamese:” The Question of Ethnicity and Culture Kim is among a group of 20 ESL students who are ethnic Chinese but was born in Vietnam and self-identify as Vietnamese. Her family had lived in Vietnam for several generations. Kim arrived to the United States when she was 14 years old. The conversation between Kim and some of her classmates below reveals the complex ways in which issues of ethnicity and culture inform understanding of inclusion and social identities. Several Vietnamese immigrant female students gathered around Kim as she was looking at “ao dai” [Vietnamese traditional long gowns] for her senior project in the library. Cara: Why are you looking at those dresses? Kim: It is for my senior project. Don’t you think they are beautiful? I think they are so nice. They make the ladies look so nice. Cara: Yeah, yeah but they are so restricting. I don’t think I could wear one and walk. They make women’s clothes so restricting. My ma wants me to wear them but I don’t want to wear them… What does your mother think about “ao dai?” Kim: I don’t know what she thinks about it. She is Chinese. DN: Do you wear Chinese outfits? Kim: No. I am Chinese but I am also Vietnamese. I don’t know much about Chinese culture. I know more Vietnamese culture. I was born Chinese but I am Vietnamese too. Cara: She is not Chinese. The only thing she knows about Chinese is the food and all of us know Chinese food, even Americans. Kim: I am Vietnamese but Chinese too. But mostly I am Chinese…I guess. I just don’t know how to be Chinese but inside I am Chinese… my blood is Chinese.

168

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Cara: You can be Chinese Vietnamese like we are Vietnamese American. We are Vietnamese inside. We are like Vietnamese American, but Kim is like Chinese Vietnamese American. DN: What do you mean Chinese inside or Vietnamese inside? Kim: Like you are born Chinese or have Chinese ancestry. Cara: Like, you are ethnic Chinese but know the language and culture of Vietnam. Kim is more like Vietnamese than Chinese but her ethnicity is Chinese. DN: So it is acceptable to be Vietnamese and have parents who are not Vietnamese? Kim puckered her lips together and said hesitantly: I guess so. Mai Xuan: Vietnamese, Chinese, we are all the same, aren’t we? Huy, who was sitting at a table behind the girls, interjected: No! Vietnamese are Vietnamese and Chinese are Chinese. We have our different history. We cannot be Chinese! We have our long history. Our ancestors are Vietnamese not Chinese. There is a difference. The Chinese may want us to be Chinese but we are not Chinese! Mai Xuan: I think we are the same. We have similar skin, hair, and even the culture is similar. We just speak different languages. Huy: No! We have very different history and culture. The Chinese people are very different! They want to take our land and say our country is part of theirs. Perhaps there are people who know Vietnamese culture and language and they can be a part of our culture but they cannot say that Chinese is the same as Vietnamese. We have to keep our history, culture, and people alive. Kim looked on quietly as Huy shared his perspective. DN: Kim, what made you want to learn about “ao dai?” Kim: I like them. I wanted to learn more about them. They are part of the Vietnamese tradition and culture. I am not really Vietnamese but I know more about Vietnamese culture. I speak Vietnamese more than Chinese. My ethnicity is Chinese, but I feel more Vietnamese. I don’t know what it is like to be Chinese because I have never been there. [She half

In-Between Spaces

169

giggled as she said] I am Chinese, Vietnamese, and American too now that we are in America. (Field notes, March, 2006) The question of how to suture a social identity that encompasses the racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds remains a central part of many immigrant youth’s everyday discussions. This process becomes even more complex for Kim and other students who have multiple ethnic and cultural affiliations. Jenkins (1997) states that ethnicity is “centrally concerned with culture – shared meaning – but it is also rooted in, and to a considerable extent the outcome of, social interaction” (p. 13). Jenkins further explains that ethnicity is not fixed – it is an aspect of identity that is also shaped through social interactions. As a component of ethnicity, culture is defined as patterns of beliefs, values, and practices connected with an ethnic group (Jenkins, 1997). Ethnicity and culture are two interconnected entities that inform each other. Ethnicity is understood as a social and cultural rather than a biological construct (Castles, 2000). Based on these definitions, Vietnamese ethnicity and culture interact to inform identity. While most immigrants perceive the notions of ethnicity and culture as interchangeable (Castles, 2000; Waters, 1999), immigrant youth – such as Kim and others who belong to two or multiple ethnic and cultural backgrounds – view these interactive categories as separate. Instead of positioning herself within two ethnic and cultural contexts, Kim separates ethnicity from culture. She views her Chinese ancestry as her ethnicity – an identity she acquired from birth – and her Vietnamese identity as a cultural affiliation. She associates mostly with her Vietnamese friends and does not feel that she belongs with the Chinese immigrant group. Kim states: “My ethnicity is Chinese, but I feel more Vietnamese. I don’t know what it is like to be Chinese because I have never been there.” The ways in which Kim separates culture from ethnicity in constructing her Vietnamese and Chinese identities seems to position and redefine ethnicity as a biological construct and away from the notions of culture, history, language, and nationality that often accompany it. The way in which Kim constructed and represented her Vietnamese ness also challenges other Vietnamese immigrant youth’s understandings and definitions of ethnicity and culture. Mai Xuan, who

170

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

supported Kim’s dilemma and situation, raised a question: “Vietnamese, Chinese, we are all the same, aren’t we?” This question brought to the forefront her racialized thinking and perspective, which tends to combine different Asian ethnic and cultural groups into one large category based on physical likeness (Omi & Winant, 1994). Mai Xuan’s question elicited an objection from Huy, who insisted on maintaining the difference between Chinese and Vietnamese ethnicity, culture, and history. Huy drew clear boundaries around the Vietnamese cultural identity, which encompassed shared nationality, culture, language, and history – a common definition of ethnicity (Castles, 2000; Jenkins, 1997). While Huy did not object to Kim crossing cultural boundaries and identifying as a Vietnamese culturally, he resisted the move to collapse the different ethnicities and cultures into one group – a move already made by mainstream culture to construct racialized identities. Huy attempted to guard what Benhabib (2002) considers as “imagined boundaries” among cultural differences – differences that are both minor and deep. Kim, however, did not make the claim that Vietnamese and Chinese are the same as Mai Xuan believed above. She did not disclaim her Chinese ethnicity in the process of redefining her Vietnamese cultural identity. She consistently qualified her Vietnameseness with her ethnic Chinese background. “I am not really Vietnamese but I know more about Vietnamese culture. I speak Vietnamese more than Chinese. My ethnicity is Chinese, but I feel more Vietnamese.” Because she wanted to remain as an insider with the Vietnamese group, Kim emphasized her knowledge of and experience with the Vietnamese culture instead of her ethnic Chinese background. Benhabib (2002) explains the insider and outsider to cultural identity below: The demarcations of cultures and of the human groups that are their carriers are extremely contested, fragile as well as delicate. To possess the culture means to be an insider. Not to be acculturated in the appropriate ways is to be an outsider. Hence the boundaries of cultures are always securely guarded, their narratives purified, their rituals carefully monitored. These boundaries circumscribe power in that they legitimize its use within the group. (p. 7)

In-Between Spaces

171

Kim’s insistence on constructing an insider as opposed to an outsider role to the Vietnamese immigrant youth group connected to her struggle for recognition and acceptance. She wanted to move away from the constant category of “other” that was often ascribed to her because of her multiple in-between locations – such as in-between Chinese and Vietnamese or Vietnamese and American cultures. Her attempt to redefine culture and ethnicity to fit her multiple ethnic and cultural affiliations and life circumstance illustrates the discursive and contextual process of social identity construction. Identities – as discursive processes – are not unchangeable but instead constantly shifting and changing as they encounter new discourses and meanings through social encounters (Hall, 1996; MacAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999; Weedon, 1999). Kim is not alone in considering the complex ways in which race, ethnicity, and culture influence ideas and meanings connected to social identities and cultural group formation. Attempting to construct a sense of self as well as a group identity while positioned within the intersecting web of ideas, meanings, and tensions related to nationality, race, ethnicity, class, culture, and gender is a struggle that many immigrant youth face. Each of these social categories represents a different layer of complex and involving meanings, roles, and expectations that inform the immigrant youth’s thinking and behavior. The process of social identity construction creates an insider group connection and belonging as well as boundaries and walls fending off outsider differences and meanings. These insider/outsider positions also continue to shift as the youth move from one social situation to the next. The discussion below describes the various ways that the Vietnamese immigrant youth move among their different racial, ethnic, cultural, and national identities. Strategic Positioning: From Vietnamese to Vietnamese American Hieu, Vien, and Luc were a group of close friends who often struggled over intersecting group identities as well as ethnic and cultural differences. Their conversations often turned into debates about “who is Vietnamese” and “who is American.” Hieu described himself as a Vietnamese. His two friends, Vien and Luc, were Chinese who were born in Vietnam. Like other ethnic Chinese Vietnamese immigrant

172

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

students in the study, Vien and Luc’s families had lived in Vietnam for several generations before immigrating to the United States. These three students always hung out together. Their energy fueled each other, and they were loud and noticeable wherever they went. They were fluent in English and their conversations were mostly in English with occasional Vietnamese phrases and words. When they were in their own group, they often argued over who was more Vietnamese. They often disagreed over their different ideas and definitions of ethnic and cultural identity as indicated below. Hieu responded: You anti-Viet! Vien: Fine, I am not a Vietnamese! Today, I am Japanese! Luc: You are not Japanese! You are Chinese. Dude, you are forgetting who you are. You have too many kinds of blood in you – you are now one confused Asian boy. Hieu: You are both Chinese! We still like you even though you not Vietnamese…We accept you even though you are not Vietnamese. Vien: I want to be what I choose. I am Japanese! Luc: You are Chinese! Just because you want to be something else doesn’t stop you from being who you are. Chinese, dude, accept it. (Field notes, January, 2006) While they disagreed with each another about their ethnic identities, in other social group contexts the youth often shifted from these ethnic specific identities – Chinese and Vietnamese – to ethnicnational or racial-national identities – Vietnamese or Asian American. One example of this shifting identity process took place in a conversation with a Vietnamese exchange student, detailed below. Kiet, a Vietnamese exchange student, was standing off to the side near the Vietnamese student group during the campus day event. I asked him how he was enjoying the event. He responded that there was a lot of “fun activities” for students in U.S. schools. I then asked him what Vietnam is like these days. I told him that I was going to visit Vietnam over the summer. Kiet: You are from Vietnam too.

In-Between Spaces DN: I am but I don’t live there now. Kiet: You are still Vietnamese. Vien overheard us and chimed in: Man, she is not from Vietnam! She lives here now. She does not know your culture and your ways. She is Vietnamese but she is American too. Kiet: She is not American! She is Vietnamese. She cannot be American even if she lives here. She does not look American. She is Vietnamese. Hieu, Minh, and Luc and several other students gathered around and joined in the conversation. Minh: She was born in Vietnam. She speaks Vietnamese. She keeps all the important values of Vietnamese culture but there are many things that she does not know about Vietnam. She is more American than Vietnamese. She can’t live in Vietnam. Maybe if she lives there for a few years then she will adjust like us coming here and adjusting, but she is not Vietnamese like us. Like we are not as American as she is. Vien added in English: Yes, she is Vietnamese American. Me too, man! I am Vietnamese American! Hieu: Yes, we are all Vietnamese Americans today. Kiet replied in Vietnamese: Vietnamese American? You are not part American. How can you be Vietnamese American? That is not right. You are all 100% Vietnamese. Vien: He doesn’t get it! He is not from here. He is Vietnamese. Minh: What we mean is that we are living here now. We will never look like Americans, like the blond hair and blue eyes but we adjust to the way of life here. We get used to life in America and we accept many of the ideas like freedom of expression and freedom of religion and expression here… This is not taught in Vietnam. So if she goes back to Vietnam, she will have a hard time fitting in. Kiet: I know. But she is still Vietnamese. DN: What does it mean to be American and to be Vietnamese? Kiet: You are born Vietnamese if your parents are Vietnamese. You are American if your parents are Americans. DN: What about someone who decides to live in another country permanently and becomes a citizen of that country?

173

174

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Viet: Even then that person is still Vietnamese on the inside. DN: What do you have to do in order to keep your Vietnameseness? Kiet: Speak the language and know the culture. DN: And if that person has been here from one generation to the next and his/her language and culture have been forgotten? Kiet: You have lost your roots then. And then you have become like an American but you are not American. Minh: A person can be a Vietnamese even if that person can’t speak the language. If that person believes in being a Vietnamese and tries then he is Vietnamese. Language and cultural things can be learned. It is what you want to believe in. If you want to become an American, you can. But it is hard to be accepted as an American. Vien: I am Vietnamese and Chinese and American. I just know that I can’t live in Vietnam. I don’t know anything about China even though I am Chinese. I am now American because that is what I know most. But I am Asian American because I have Chinese blood. [Everyone laughs.] Minh responded: Vien, you are a confused person! I guess we are all confused being in America. This is the way it is here. You can be what you want to be – American, Vietnamese, Chinese, Vietnamese-American. I think it is important that you decide. Kiet: You can’t decide this. It is the way of nature. You are born into a culture and nationality. Minh: It is like nature [when you are born into a Vietnamese community and culture] but culture and language can be learned too. You can learn a new culture like we learn American culture. This does not mean we forget Vietnamese culture – that will always be our roots – but we can also belong somewhere else too. (Field notes, May, 2006)

Hieu, Vien, Luc and other Vietnamese immigrant youth’s understandings of and perspectives on social identities, citizenship, and sense of belonging were fused with their readings of race, ethnicity, and

In-Between Spaces

175

culture. As they engaged with other students whose definitions and experiences differed from their own, the youth transitioned from ethnic-specific identity – Vietnamese and Chinese – to an ethnicnational or racial-national identity – such as Vietnamese American or Asian American – to indicate the multiple affiliations and dimensions of their lives. However, social identities, according to Dominguez (1986), are relational and can only be understood within the context of other people who can relate to the meanings and ideas connected to the identity. While Hieu, Vien, and Luc often disagreed about how they interpreted and presented their ethnic and cultural identities among themselves, they were all able to relate to and have a common understanding of the notions of Vietnamese American and Asian American. Vietnamese American or Asian American is a social identity that represents and describes Hieu, Vien, and Luc’s in-between ethnic, social, cultural, and national locations. The constant tensions that Hieu, Vien, and Luc experienced as a social group is not atypical. Their behaviors, in fact, seem to connect what Benhabib (2002) describes as a common pattern of social group dynamics. Benhabib describes this process below: Participants in the culture…experience their traditions, stories, rituals and symbols, tools, and material living conditions through shared, albeit contested and contestable, narrative accounts. From within, a culture need not appear as a whole; rather, it forms a horizon that recedes each time one approaches it. (p. 5) While they often exhibited high levels of disagreements and tensions, Hieu, Vien, and Luc also saw themselves bound as a social, cultural, and racial group when engaging with outsiders of their group. Kiet, the Vietnamese exchange student and an outsider to the Vietnamese immigrant youth group experience, could not relate to the concept of Vietnamese American or Asian American in the ways that Vietnamese immigrant youth used them to describe their ethnic, cultural, and national contexts. Kiet interpreted the category of Vietnamese American as a biological concept – a person who has both Vietnamese and American blood. His understanding of Vietnameseness and Americanness was tied to both cultural and ethnic components and

176

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

ethnicity as a biologically defined construct. He believed that one is born as a Vietnamese or an American. Kiet stated: “You can’t decide this. It is the way of nature. You are born into a culture and nationality.” In contrast to Kiet’s ideas about race and ethnicity, Minh’s construction of Vietnameseness and Americanness illustrated that identity is not fixed and determined by what Kiet phrased as the “natural” or biological conception of ethnicity. Minh pointed out that identities are also culturally derived. He stated: “You can learn a new culture like we learn American culture.” Minh defined his Vietnameseness and Americanness beyond ethnicity – or the biologically constructed notion of ethnicity that Kiet indicated. Separating culture from ethnicity helped to position Minh in both the Vietnamese and American cultural and spatial contexts. He explained: “This does not mean we forget Vietnamese culture – that will always be our roots – but we can also belong somewhere else too.” Maneuvering among these different social dimensions or identities – Vietnamese, Vietnamese American, Asian American, etc. – becomes a part of the immigrant youth’s everyday social life (Hall, 2002; Waters, 1999; Zhou, 2001). Hieu, for example, tried to explain the process of determining when to refer to himself as Vietnamese or Vietnamese American. DN: Do you consider yourself American? Hieu: I am both a Vietnamese and American, or Vietnamese American. DN: How would you call yourself in general? Hieu: It really depends on the person who would ask me that question. Right now, I am a Vietnamese…If I talk to a Vietnamese immigrant like me, I will call myself a Vietnamese…If a White American person asks me, I will say Vietnamese American…it depends on the race of someone asking me. DN: When are you a Vietnamese American? Hieu laughs: When I have my citizenship and when someone who is American asks me. I am American, no Vietnamese American, if they do not know me like my friends who know me. I am not American but Vietnamese American. I belong to

In-Between Spaces

177

both because I am not like Vietnamese from Vietnam or like the White Americans. (Interview, February 2006) While Hieu did not qualify his Vietnameseness or Americanness with Vietnamese immigrant youth who were in his social circle, he believed it is important to convey to others who do not share his racial, ethnic, and cultural background and experiences that he was a part of the multiple social, cultural, and national contexts. His switching from Vietnamese to Vietnamese American was an indication that he “belongs to both” Vietnamese and American cultural contexts. Each identity that Hieu used to describe himself signaled a different set of social connections, experiences, values, and meanings, which was understood by those who were familiar with or had previously been exposed to those classifications. Dominguez (1997) explains the relational context of social identities. Social identities, like material objects, become public ‘knowledge’ when they are named. Without a label to capture our conception of them, they have little social relevance because there is no ‘knowledge’ of their existence in the first place. The emergence of a new social label, therefore, carries with it the elevation of a new social identity to the domain of public ‘knowledge.’ As it emerges as a new ‘thing’ in the public domain, it is shaped and reshaped by other ideas and attitudes that are also part of the public ‘knowledge.’ It cannot stand apart from these other ideas and attitudes because the label that officially announces its birth makes it part of that same public ‘knowledge.’ To speak of social identities, then, is to invoke all those ideas and attitudes that form part of a particular understanding of the world, an understanding that in the public sphere of a given society is that society’s knowledge of the world in which its members live. (pp. 264-5) Identity construction for Hieu and other immigrants is a process of constant reconstruction – a shifting among social categories of race, ethnicity, culture, and nationality – to convey a sense of legitimacy and connection to the context in which it situates. The social identities that

178

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

the youth form connect to what Hall (1996) frames as “strategic and positional” identities. Hall explains that “identity does not signal that stable core of the self, unfolding from beginning to end through all the vicissitudes of history without change” (p. 4). Identities are instead “never unified and, in late modern times, increasingly fragmented and fractured; never singular but multiply constructed across different, often intersecting and antagonistic, discourses, practices and positions” (pp. 4-5). In other words, identities are not essential components of the self that remain stable and constant across different social contexts. They are fragmented and are in a constant mode of reconstitution. The process of identity formation is not smooth and without contradictions. While the Vietnamese immigrant youth referred to themselves as Vietnamese American or Asian American, they were also aware that they will not be perceived and accepted as Americans within the mainstream culture or elsewhere. In a racialized context with a dominant group imprinted in people’s minds as American, Minh was aware that it is difficult for Asians “to be accepted as Americans.” However, these immigrant youth continued to adapt to the notion of Vietnamese American or Asian American as a way to forge a connection to and sense of belonging – legal, cultural, national, and physical sense of belonging – in the United States. The Vietnamese immigrant youth often found themselves at the crossroads of race, ethnicity, and culture as they continued to struggle with and make sense of the various ways these social categories both converged and splintered to inform social identities. This process became even more complex and at times contradictory for Vien, Luc, Kim, and other students who were ethnic Chinese but self-identified as Vietnamese. These youth continuously juggled among the multiple categories – Vietnamese, Chinese, American, Chinese Vietnamese American, and Asian American – and sets of meanings, ideas, and expectations attached to each category. While crossing and re-crossing the boundaries among race, ethnicity, culture, and nationality was confusing and at times frustrating, many of the youth saw this process as having some control and flexibility in determining their social identity and sense of social and cultural connections. Vien stated: “I want to be what I choose.” While issues of race, ethnicity, and culture continued to shape and reshape how the Vietnamese immigrant conceptualized what it meant

In-Between Spaces

179

to be Vietnamese, American, and a U.S. citizen, the youth’s ties to Vietnam – whether through their sense of nostalgia or physical family ties – added another dimension and layer of complexity to how they perceived and enacted ideas of citizenship and responsibilities. The next and final section of this chapter discusses the findings related to how issues of transcultural and transnational contexts inform and add another layer of complexity to the youth’s constructions of social identities and senses of belonging. Negotiating In-Between Transcultural and Transnational Spaces Mai Xuan, a senior female Vietnamese student, was in the library during a study hall period. She had just returned from a trip to Vietnam where she spent two months visiting her grandparents who were ill. Several of her teachers had expressed concerns about her long leave of absence during her senior year. However, Mai Xuan believed that her trip was important. Since her return, Mai Xuan had been trying to catch up with her school work and to start her senior project, which was a graduation requirement. She planned to focus on Vietnamese holiday traditions and practices for her presentation. While she believed that it was important for her to maintain aspects of her Vietnamese cultural practices, Mai Xuan was also learning to become what she perceived as a young modern American woman. The ways in which Mai Xuan tried to make sense of and articulate the ideas, meanings, and practices from both the Vietnamese and American cultural contexts in the excerpt below demonstrate how her social identity and sense of social and national belonging position her in between these social, cultural, and national contexts. DN: What is “Banh Chung?” Mai Xuan: It is the special rice cake for New Year…It is the traditional cake we eat during “Tet” [Vietnamese New Year.] Each of the ingredients in the cake represents good fortune for the New Year. DN: You’re going to make it for the class? Mai Xuan: It will be for part of my senior project. DN: Do you cook often?

180

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Mai Xuan: NO! I don’t really know how to cook. My mom cooks…We girls in America don’t cook…I heard that American girls don’t cook, clean, or do laundry. They go out to eat, send clothes to the cleaners, and have machines for dishes. DN: Who cooks and cleans in your home? Mai Xuan smiles: My mom. She cooks for us. She cleans for us too. She said that my job is to be a good student and then get a nice, rich, and respectable husband. She doesn’t want me to learn to cook or clean. If you cook then you are not as special. DN: Why not? Mai Xuan: In America girls don’t do those things. She [her mom] does it because she is old, but girls in America have to be more modern or something. DN: What about independence? Mai Xuan: But that is why I don’t want to cook or clean and stay in the house. Those things will not make you free from the home. They make you stay in the home. You have to be independent by working or going out. Cooking and cleaning are part of the traditional and old ways. My mom just does it for me. I don’t know how to do those things. DN: And why did you choose this topic? Mai Xuan: I just wanted to do something familiar. I wanted to learn about a Vietnamese tradition. DN: Why is that? Mai Xuan: Because it is part of my culture. I want to learn how to do something that is part of my culture and tradition. DN: What is your culture? Mai Xuan: My culture is Vietnamese. I am Vietnamese so my culture is Vietnamese. [She looked at me with a funny look as though to indicate that was obvious.] DN: What aspects of your culture do you want to keep? Mai Xuan: My language…New Year celebrations…like other holidays too. I like the way people treat each other, like older people and husband and wife. I want like a traditional Vietnamese kind of marriage too. I like those things. I like the simplicity of things.

In-Between Spaces

181

DN: And what aspects of Vietnamese culture do you not want to keep? Mai Xuan: I don’t know. I guess I will keep most things. Hmmm…Well, there are things that would be nice to change. Like girls having more opportunities here in the U.S. I want to work and make my own money. I don’t know. I just don’t want to be at home and have to take care of children or something like that. I want to have a nice modern life where I can work too. I like going out to eat a lot. Mai Xuan’s daily life and future possibilities were intricately intertwined with both the Vietnamese and American social and cultural contexts. While she was trying to define what it meant to be a modern and independent young lady in the United States, she also wanted to maintain aspects of her Vietnamese culture and identity, including ties to her family in Vietnam. In so doing, her thoughts and ideas about Vietnamese traditions and American practices often seemed to contradict each other. On the one hand, she wanted to adapt to the image that “American girls don’t cook, clean, or do laundry. They go out to eat, send clothes to the cleaners, and have dishwashers for dishes.” She wanted to get a good job and earn her own money. These decisions and goals seemed to reflect Mai Xuan’s transition to her perceived ideas of American culture. On the other hand, she continued to value and adhere to many aspects of Vietnamese culture, such as having a “traditional Vietnamese kind of marriage.” She wanted to have a “simple life” similar to what she witnessed in Vietnam. Mai Xuan’s perceptions about her current situation and future goals were informed by both the American and Vietnamese cultural sites. Learning to adapt to and incorporate these two or multiple aspects of their social, cultural, and national contexts became critical for her adaptation. Mai Xuan continued to contemplate and situate her life within both cultural and national contexts in the discussion below. DN: Remember when you told me last year that you wanted to live in the rural countryside near a river? Mai Xuan smiles: That is still my dream. Sometime when I imagine my life, I see that kind of simple and quiet life. DN: What do you like about that life?

182

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship Mai Xuan: Because life would be simple and quiet. I want a quiet simple life. I want a simple life with a nice husband. I want a traditional Vietnamese family. DN: Do you think that is different from living a modern life? Mai Xuan: It’s different, but sometimes the modern life can be too busy and stressful…People here get too busy and have too many responsibilities. [She smiled.] It’s like I want to live two different lives. I don’t want to be a traditional girl because I want to work. I don’t know…it seems hard – the expectation of being successful. DN: What do you plan on doing after high school? Mai Xuan said quietly: I guess go to college. My mom said that I have to go to college. She works hard so I can have a better life…umm…But, I am not a good student…I guess everyone wants me to go to college. DN: Why are you doing this project on Vietnamese culture? Mai Xuan: I do this project so that I can learn about Vietnamese culture too. Already, I am forgetting so many things. When I was in Vietnam, it felt so different to me. I have only been away for five years and already I do not feel like I belong there. When I am here, it is easy to forget Vietnamese culture and history. I have to remind myself to think in Vietnamese and be Vietnamese. It is so easy to forget. But if my Vietnamese culture is gone, I don’t know who I am. I don’t know where I should be anymore. Maybe I don’t belong here or there. (Interview, March, 2006)

Situating in-between cultural and national sites – hybrid social spaces (Bhabha, 1996; Rizvi, 2000) or transcultural and transnational spaces (Brittain, 2002; Castles, 2000; Pries, 1999) – requires a constant examination and re-negotiation of one’s social identity and the possible meanings and expectations that each identity produces. Immigrant youth, such as Mai Xuan, are not just juggling between the cultural differences of home and school; citizenship and national membership is also a critical question. Their lives are straddled between not just two cultures but two nation-states. Balancing these two cultural and national contexts can be difficult as the immigrant youth, slowly begin

In-Between Spaces

183

to lose their ties and connections to Vietnam. Mai Xuan, for instance, found it difficult to remain as a “traditional Vietnamese” in the U.S. cultural site because every day her sense and knowledge of her culture was slipping away. “When I am here, it is easy to forget Vietnamese culture and history. Here, it is like I have to remind myself to think in Vietnamese and be Vietnamese.” When she was in Vietnam, she also did not feel entirely like she belonged there. She was afraid of losing her Vietnamese culture because if that was gone, she feared that she will lose her sense of self. She saw both cultural sites playing a critical aspect of her life yet she felt that she belonged to neither here nor there. “I don’t know where I should be anymore. Maybe I don’t belong here or there.” Mai Xuan continued to explore the tensions of existing in-between cultural and national sites in a conversation with a couple of her female friends, Kim and Cara. The ideas and decisions that Mai Xuan and her two friends shared about future plans and life choices often conflicted, particularly around gender roles and expectations. The differences in their ideas and meanings reflected the dilemma that many immigrants face as they tried to fulfill the expectations of both cultural and national sites – Vietnam and the United States. Understanding and Negotiating Gender Roles and Expectations Mai Xuan has been spending time in the library to catch up on her school work. Huy, Kim, and Cara were all sitting with her during their study hall hour. Huy got up to look for some books. DN: When are you going to Vietnam, Cara? Cara: Over the summer. My family has to visit our relatives there. I can’t wait! It will be good to be around other Vietnamese. I have to learn to blend in with other Vietnamese there. I look like Vietnamese but then they can tell that I am Viet Kieu (Vietnamese living abroad) right away. Kim: I want to go also but I have to work. I want to start making money. I have to save up money for college later. Mai Xuan: I want to go back to Vietnam. I miss it. I had so much fun there that I didn’t want to return here. I have always dreamed of living in the country side (nha que). I want a small

184

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship thatch-roof house (nha la) near the water and travel around by a small row boat (thuyen cheo). It is a simple life. I want to learn to do that. Kim: How are you going to row a boat?! You are so delicate and weak. Mai Xuan said in her quiet voice: I know but I want to live that way. Cara: I don’t want to live in Vietnam. I love visiting and being there, but it would be hard to live there…There are not a lot of opportunities for girls. Mai Xuan sighs deeply: Living in Vietnam is simpler…I don’t have to always worry about my future. There are so many demands of you here like becoming successful… I like the freedom and opportunities, but I get so stressed thinking about all the people’s ambitions. DN: This is normal. You are about to graduate and there are a lot of things to think about. It is important to have plans – whether you plan to go to college or not. What are some of your plans? Mai Xuan looked down and started to play with her hair: I will find a job somewhere…It’s just that everyone thinks that I should go to college…I guess I will go to college. Cara stared at Mai Xuan and said in English: No, you are not! You are going to stay at home and let your mom take care of you. Then you will get married and then your husband will take care of you! Kim: Yes, she wants to get married and have a nice husband. Cara in English: You can’t depend on a man! You have to learn to stay on your own two feet and take care of yourself. We are in America! I get so upset at you (she was talking to Mai Xuan) when you are like this! We have opportunities to be independent. We have to be strong. You are smart but you act like you are so weak. Urghh, I get so angry with you! Mai Xuan looked down: I don’t know… Kim: I am not going to depend on a guy to support me, but I want a nice family one day. DN: Can you have a career and a nice family too?

In-Between Spaces

185

Kim: Yes, but I think that is hard sometimes too. It is hard to have everything all at once. My ma works hard and I don’t see her often. We are never together. She gets so tired when she comes home that we don’t do anything. I don’t know if we can do it all. Mai Xuan: No. You have to make sacrifices. In Vietnam, the women work to help the family too but her main concern is to care for the family. Here it is expected that you work outside and care for the family too, like my ma. I want to work and make money, but I want a nice family too. What is wrong with wanting a nice family and living a simple life? (Field notes, March, 2006) The discussion of future possibilities among Mai Xuan, Cara, and Kim exemplifies the tensions that many immigrant students encountered as they tried to reconcile the ideas, values, and practices that were connected with each cultural site. The tension between the “simple life” of Vietnam and “freedom and opportunities” in the United States continued to arise as they considered and shared their future plans. Mai Xuan encountered resistance and even elicited anger and frustration from her friend, Cara, as she tried to construct a “simple future” following the path of what she believed to be traditional Vietnamese culture. While Mai Xuan’s sense of nostalgia and longing for the simple life of Vietnam seemed to indicate that she was not taking advantage of the “opportunities to be independent” as her friend Cara suggested, her ideas were, in fact, based on her observations and reflection of her mother’s hard work and sacrifices in the United States. She pointed out the double duties and expectations of women’s roles in the United States: “In Vietnam, the women work to help the family too but her main concern is to care for the family. Here it is expected that you work outside and care for the family too, like my ma.” Mai Xuan’s observation of her mother’s work and family life connects with what scholars who examine the intersection of gender and immigration have found among immigrant women and social status mobility in the United States. While there is the expectation that immigrant women gain higher social status and gender equality after they arrive to the United States, scholars find an uneven pattern of social mobility across the different social domains in their lives

186

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

(Espiritu, 2001; Kibria, 1993; Pessar, 1999). Immigrant women may have more freedom to work outside of the home, but the roles and expectations within the home often remain intact. Observing her mother’s dual sets of roles and responsibilities, Mai Xuan interpreted the idea of freedom and opportunities for women in the United States as requiring “sacrifices.” She believed that the sacrifice of family for career may be too much – a point that generated resistance and disagreement from Cara. Pushing against Mai Xuan’s notion of the “simple life,” Cara argued that that the idea of the simple and traditional life acted to bind and restrict women’s life, making them dependent on men. Cara believed in being independent and strong. She stated: “You can’t depend on a man! You have to learn to stay on your own two feet and take care of yourself. We are in America now.” As immigrants who reside in-between social, cultural, and national sites, the thinking, goals, and everyday behaviors of the youth in this study reflected the values and expectations of both contexts. The ideas, meanings, and identities they produced often intersected with these multiple social, cultural, and national locations. As technology, ease of transportation, and other global forces help immigrants to maintain stronger and more tangible ties to their countries of origin, the traditional idea of immigrants adapting to their host country and becoming assimilated into the culture is being reinterpreted and reconstructed (Rizvi, 2000; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2000). Increasingly immigrant’s lives are structured across two or multiple nation-states as family and social ties to their countries of origin situate individuals within a global context (Nayak, 2003; Ong, 1999; Rizvi, 2000; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2000). Hanh and Minh’s immediate families, for example, are in both the United States and Vietnam. Their situations put them in a transcultural and transnational context, requiring them to constantly shift their ideas, thinking, priorities, and connection to their current social location. Splintered Families: Living Transcultural and Transnational Lives Hanh, an 18-year-old Chinese Vietnamese female student, immigrated to the United States with her mother and brother three years ago. Her father was in poor health, which prevented him from leaving Vietnam. Her mother and brother had been taking turn going back to Vietnam to

In-Between Spaces

187

care for the father. Since Hanh was the youngest, her mother had been trying to encourage her to remain in school. Last year, Hanh’s brother dropped out of school and started full-time work to help support the family – in Vietnam and the United States. When Hanh first enrolled in school in the United States, her motivation and excitement for learning and academic engagement was very high. She signed up for Saturday English school at a community center7 and had high hopes of going to college. Hanh had many ideas about what she wanted to study. There was a period when Hanh had a new idea about what she wanted to do with her life almost daily. Hanh’s academic performance and motivation began to drop during her junior year and her attendance became sporadic. She was absent from school for long periods of time. At one point, the school asked her to sign a contract to remain in school for a certain number of days. She was supposed to ask for permission before leaving school for more than two days at a time. Tension developed between Hanh and her teachers. One of her teachers, Ms. Mori, shared some of her concerns and frustrations about Hanh’s situation below. Ms. Mori approached me before the 4th period and said: Hanh is absent again today. She was absent last week. She has been absent so much, I don’t know if she can pass. I am not sure what is going on with her. She has not brought in any excuses. I don’t know what is going on with her contract either. We had Mrs. Tran [Vietnamese Instructional Aide] call home yesterday and Hanh got very angry. She did not want Ms. Tran to call her home. She was very upset. Hanh said that she was 18 years and she is free to do what she wants. She can make her own decisions. This may be but she is still a dependent. She has not been emancipated. So, now one of us has to call home. Hanh got very angry and told Mrs. Tran not to call her home again. Her brother went through something like this

7

I created and directed an after school and Saturday program for recent Vietnamese immigrant youth. Several of the youth in this study were participants of that program. I did not conduct field observations or interviews of students during the program.

188

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship until he dropped out. She is smart. When she comes to school, she does her work. (Field notes, January, 2006)

Hanh was aware of the consequences of being absent, but she felt obligated to her family. When Hanh turned 18 at the beginning of her junior year, she began to take more time off from school. She assumed that she could make her own decisions because she was 18. Hanh explained her absences to me one afternoon when she returned to school after being absent for five days without a written excuse from her mother. Hanh: I am 18 now and I can do what I want. This is what they say about America. When you are 18, you are free to make decisions. I don’t need to tell the school that I need take time off. My family needs me, you know. My mother is in Vietnam now. She’s not here to sign a note. The teachers do not understand and always say things to me like I am a bad girl skipping school. I want to stay in school but in our Vietnamese culture, family is important...I don’t know what to do either. I want to help my family. It would be simpler if my whole family is together, but everyone is scattered. DN: When was the last time you saw your mom? Hanh: I saw her about two months ago. She’s with my father now. I wish that he is here and can see an American doctor. We haven’t been together as a whole family for three years. DN: Your teachers are very concerned about you. Hanh: I know, but they asked questions like I am a bad student or a bad person. I know there are rules but if my ma needs me. They don’t understand. They think school is the most important thing. I think school is very important, but there are times when I cannot think about school. DN: Have you gone back to Vietnam yet? Hanh: I was there over the summer. It was so confusing being there. [She sighs briefly.] I had forgotten so much about Vietnam – the loud busy streets, the hot and humid weather, the hectic life… [Hanh sighs again.] It was a stressful and tiring trip. It was hard to see my father. When I left Vietnam I

In-Between Spaces

189

was his little girl. He used to pick me up from school on his motorbike. But when I was there this summer, I was like the adult. It was hard. DN: I’m sorry about your situation. It sounds very difficult. Hanh continued: I just didn’t belong there anymore. And when I am here, it is like I don’t really have permission or time to really be here and enjoy life here. I am pulled between family and school and between Vietnam and America. Hanh paused and laughed: I think of myself almost like that Vietnamese comedian, who dresses as half man and half woman, but for me, I am half Vietnamese and half like America…it is like I have a foot here and a foot there. It is hard, co Diem. I didn’t think my life would be this difficult. I am confused a lot. (Field notes, Jan. 2006) As I got to know the immigrant youth over the course of this study, I realized that Hanh’s family situation was not unique. Other students in this study also experienced high levels of tensions and conflicts about their roles, responsibilities, and sense of belonging as they tried to balance their various positions within the transcultural and transnational contexts. Minh’s situation was another example of how transnational family structures can disrupt the learning and social and cultural adaptation of immigrant youth. Minh, a 21-year old male senior, was one of the top students in his class. His calm, logical, and caring mannerism had earned him the respect of his classmates and other Vietnamese immigrant youth. Initially, Minh seemed to be adjusting to his new life. It was only three years after knowing Minh that he shared some of the struggles he had been facing in his personal and family life. In the middle of November, Minh came looking for me while I was with a group of students in the Vietnamese corner in the ESL hallway. Minh asked if I could talk with his guidance counselor about a leave of absence. He explained to me that he needed to take some time off to go to Vietnam and take care of some business in his family. We met his counselor and I gave her Minh’s request. The counselor did not think it was a good idea. She added: “I don’t understand what is going on with some of these students. They keep taking time off during the middle of

190

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

the school year. We can’t help them if they don’t show up.” I explained to Minh what the counselor said. When we left the counselor’s office, Minh seemed unusually quiet. I was on my way home and asked if he needed a ride home. Minh didn’t have afternoon classes and had been working after school at a pet shop. Minh seemed very contemplative. I asked him if he wanted to get a sandwich and a cup of coffee. We went to a Vietnamese sandwich shop near his house – the usual hang out place for many of the youth. After we got our Vietnamese coffee and sandwich, I asked Minh if he had to work. He did not answer my question but instead began talking about a different topic as though he had had been waiting for the right moment to say what was on his mind. Minh: I have to let you know something. I am married and have a son. They are in Vietnam. My son is not well. DN: Oh, I did not know that. What is wrong with your son? He continued: My wife said he is not well. I know I should have let you and the teachers know. But I thought it would make things too difficult in school. They would not see me as a student. I have not even told most of my friends. DN: When did you get married? Minh: Before I came to America. I did not know that we were going to leave Vietnam that year. We had been waiting for the papers to go to America for so long that we forgot about it. We got married and then the notice that we could go to America arrived. My wife was pregnant at the time. I did not know what to do, but she had not yet submitted her application to go to America. It was very confusing. We had to leave her behind. I have been back twice, and it was hard to leave her and my son every time. DN: You got married at a very young age. Minh: I know. But many people get married at a young age in my town. All of my friends now have two or three kids. My mother told me to wait but I didn’t know how long it would take for the paperwork to go to America to take. We could have waited for five or ten more years. DN: Who do they live with?

In-Between Spaces Minh: She and my son are with my uncle’s family. I send them money every month for their expenses. It has been very hard. I have worked since the first month I came to America. DN: Your life is very complicated. Minh laughs slightly: It is hard for me to be in high school again. I get so frustrated that I feel like a kid in school with people telling me what to do and the rules I have to follow. And when I leave the school, I feel like I am on my own with so many important decisions to make. I get lots of headaches thinking about this. DN: Do you talk to your friends? Minh: I have some good friends, but I also got into trouble over the summer because I was hanging out with them. This summer, I was supposed to go to Vietnam, but I didn’t have enough money. One day, my friends and I drank some beer at a party. I got a D.U.I. and now I am in big trouble. I lost my license. I have to do community service for six months. DN: I had no idea you were going through so much. You seem so calm at school. Minh smiled but shook his head: I feel very disappointed with myself. Now I have a record, and I am not even a citizen yet. DN: People make mistakes. I’m glad that at least no one got hurt. You have to be careful about those things. Now, you just do whatever you have to do and move forward. Minh: I will. DN: You are dealing with some serious things in your life. Minh: I feel stuck between being a kid and an adult. I go to school and hang out with my friends like a kid. It makes me forget the real situation in my life, but I feel bad about that you know. When I go home, all I do is think about my family. Now my son is sick. [He shook his head.] I don’t think I can go to Vietnam because I have the D.U.I. class. DN: You will be OK. I think it is important that you try to let someone in school understand your situation. Minh: I feel so ashamed of myself right now. I can’t even look at my teachers in the eye. I don’t want them to be ashamed of me. Like Ms. Mori, she has helped me so much. I don’t want her to be disappointed.

191

192

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship DN: She is concerned about you. You should talk with her. Minh: My life has become very complicated. I thought it would get easier when I got here, but it has only gotten more difficult. My life is like in two countries. I have learned so much. I have made mistakes too. I know about the reality of having freedom – it does not mean you can do what you want to do. DN: Can your mom go to Vietnam to see your son? Minh: She can. But, he is my son. I need to be there and care for him. DN: I know but you need to take care of things here first. Otherwise, you will not be in a good position to help. You need to finish school first. You don’t want to get into more legal problems with your D.U.I. Minh: I know. I will see what happens. DN: Minh, it is like you live two different lives. Minh laughs: It has been like that for three years now. I sometime don’t know who I am but I made the choice to get married. My mind is like split between Vietnam and America. DN: What is the hardest thing that you face every day? Minh: You know it is not the hard work. I don’t mind working hard. I can handle it. The hard part is the expectation and the rules around me. Like at school, there are rules for students. At school, I am seen as a young child. If the teachers say that I cannot do something, then I cannot argue with them. When I am out of the school, the expectation of me is like an adult. My family – in America and in Vietnam – relies on me to care for them…I have to make many difficult decisions. But my family in Vietnam does not understand that I am like a child here. They do not understand why I cannot go to see them. DN: Do you think these expectations are difficult because of cultural differences? Minh: Umm hmmm. It is like in Vietnam, if a young man has a family, he cannot be a student and a child. The man has to take care of the family. It is not common for married people to be students. For me, being a student is like I have returned to my childhood. In Vietnam, a student is like a child with few

In-Between Spaces

193

responsibilities except studying. If you leave the school, you become an adult. DN: What about going to college? Minh laughs: Few people can go to college in Vietnam. In my home town, I didn’t know anyone who went to college. People with college degrees were not from my town, they were assigned there by the government. Graduating high school is very important. I never even thought about college. DN: I see, so if you leave high school, you are an adult. Minh: Yes. When I came here and realized that I have a chance to finish high school and possibly go to college, I couldn’t believe it. I am an adult becoming a child again…I want to go to college. But my family lives in Vietnam, and they do not understand my choices. They see too many restrictions and rules in my life. Now with the D.U.I. they think that I will never see them again... (Interview, November, 2005) Many of the immigrant youth’s lives, such as Hanh, Minh, and Mai Xuan, are structured beyond the traditional boundaries of a single nation-state and their notions of nationality, social and cultural connections, and belonging often extend beyond those physical territorial limits. These immigrant youth exist in between social, cultural, and national contexts – or transcultural and transnational social spaces (Brittain, 2002; Castles, 2000; Pries, 1999; Rizvi, 2000). Brittain (2002) suggests that the transnational feelings and perspective form out of the existing ties between global migrants and their sending nations. She writes: A nation can exist across different ‘nation-states,’ not in the physical sense, but in a social and cultural sense. This concept of nation as transcending territorial boundaries is a key element in the formation of transnational social spaces because under this view a nation might exist across different nation-states if the individuals who feel they belong to this nation adopt this transnational perspective. (p. 12)

194

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

“A foot here and a foot there” As their lives are structured between two nations, Hanh and Minh often experienced a sense of disconnect from both cultural and national sites. Hanh described herself as a person with “a foot here [in the United States] and a foot there [Vietnam]” and had not given herself “permission or time to be here [United States] and enjoy life.” Minh’s family context also created many disruptions in his social and cultural adjustments to life in the United States. He described his life and mind as “split between Vietnam and here.” Minh wanted to pursue a new life in the United States but his responsibilities and ties to his family continued to link and pull him to Vietnam, fracturing his process of adapting to life in the United States. Living with “one foot here and one foot there” involves a constant negotiating and repositioning of priorities, commitments, and sense of belonging – their social and cultural centers and identities continue to shift to meet the expected roles and responsibilities of each setting. “Becoming a Child Again:” Shifting Social Roles and Responsibilities While both Hanh and Minh valued education and wanted to take advantage of the opportunities in the United States, the youth were also pulled towards upholding family obligations and responsibilities. Minh, for example, was struggling to meet the needs of his family in Vietnam while trying to stay in school in the United States. His decision to enroll in high school after arriving in the United States was not entirely understood by his family, particularly those who in Vietnam, since he had a family to support. Minh explained that “in Vietnam, if a man has a family, he cannot be a student and a child…For me, being a student is like I have returned to my childhood.” Minh seemed to feel a great deal of guilt about returning to school and “becoming a child again.” Every day as Minh left school, his sense of duty and responsibilities surfaced – he moved from child to adult status. Trying to meet the expectations of both cultural and national contexts, Minh constantly negotiated his roles and shifted his priorities as he moved from home to school on a day-to-day basis. Hanh experienced a similar sense of duality as her family was also structured across two nation-states. Positioned within a transnational context had generated stress, fear, and confusion for Hanh as she tried

In-Between Spaces

195

to fulfill the rules and expectations of both cultural locations. As her father’s health remained an issue, Hanh and her other family members were constantly traveling between Vietnam and the United States to care for him. Hanh had also taken on more responsibilities at home, which had caused her to neglect her studies. Hanh’s erratic attendance had created a tense situation between her and her teachers. Hanh believed that her absence from school was justified since she was trying to meet her responsibilities as a daughter. However, because her teachers did not know about Hanh’s family, they were frustrated and concerned about her attendance. The lack of communication between Hanh and her teachers created a tense situation. Hanh felt that their inquiries made her feel as though she was a “bad student or a bad person” instead of a good daughter and sister. Hanh explained: “I know there are rules [in school] but if my ma needs me, I don’t know what to do. They [the teachers] don’t understand. They think school is the most important thing in my life. I think school is very important, but there are times when I cannot think about school.” Hanh attributed the tensions between school and home life to issues of cultural differences. Similar to Minh’s situation, she struggled to fulfill two sets of expectations between home and school and between Vietnamese and American cultures – a process that constantly disrupted her life and pulled Hanh in different directions and towards different roles and priorities. As the youth learned to strategically move among these various social, cultural, and national locations, they produced and portrayed new and different representations of self to connect with the cultural site. Challenges to Traditional Citizenship Hanh, Minh, and other immigrant youth’s family structures and social and cultural ties to their sending nation not only challenge the commonly understood process of immigrant social adjustment, they also add complexity to the question of citizenship formation. As the concept of transcultural and transnational social space becomes a part of a growing numbers of immigrants because of increasing globalization (Brittain, 2002; Castles, 2000; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Pries, 1999; Rizvi, 2000; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001), the role of traditional citizenship within a single-nation state will continue

196

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

to be contested (Benhabib, 2002; Nayak, 2003). Many of the immigrant youth describe their lives as “split” between two cultures and nations or living with “one foot here and one foot there.” These feelings of being splintered and spread across multiple social, cultural, and national sites form a transnational context for immigrants. The international migration process creates a connection between the migrants and their nations of origin. Migration is more than a person simply relocating from one location to the next. It creates linkages between the host country and the sending country. Migrants do not necessarily sever existing family and/or other social, cultural, political, and economic ties to their homelands (Pries, 1999). Growing numbers of immigrants are maintaining attachments to their transcultural and transnational social spaces because their experiences with racialization, prejudice, and discrimination convey that they are not fully welcomed to join mainstream society (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 2001). Transcultural and transnational social spaces provide an important sense of social and cultural inclusion that is often missing in their experiences in the United States. These spaces offer a sense of community for newcomers as they learn about and engage with new social ideas and practices. The social, cultural, and national sense of belonging for immigrant youth whose family, ethnic, and cultural ties continue to place them in a transnational phase pushes the boundaries of traditional understandings of citizenship within a single nation-state with clear borders. Citizenship, which traditionally encompasses the legal, national, and cultural sense of belonging (Benhabib, 2002; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Hall, 2002; Lowe, 1997; Maira, 2004), has become splintered into separate components for many immigrant youth. The process of acquiring U.S. citizenship through naturalization is viewed by immigrant youth as gaining legal and national membership, not necessarily as acquiring social and cultural benefits. Immigrant youth look to ethnic and cultural communities – or transcultural and transnational social spaces – for social and cultural belonging (Castles & Davidson, 2000). Their sense of cultural belonging – a component of cultural citizenship (Kymlicka, 2000; Rosaldo, 1997) – positions them within a transnational context, pushing the boundaries of the traditional idea of single nation-state citizenship. The ways in which immigrant youth constantly negotiate between the different sets of ideas,

In-Between Spaces

197

meanings, and expectations associated with each social, cultural, and national setting reveal the fragmented and situational process of social identity and citizenship construction in the context of global interconnectedness. Summary of Chapter The findings in this chapter discuss the different ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth make sense of and maneuver among the multiple social, cultural, and transnational spaces in their lives. As they move from one social space to the next – racial, ethnic, cultural, and transnational spaces – and engage with the ideas, meanings, and expectations connected to each different site, the youth’s notion and representation of self often shift. Repositioning their social identities becomes an important strategy for the youth to balance among the different sets of priorities and expectations connected with the various social spaces in their lives. The ways in which the immigrant youth renegotiate identities as they move among multiple social sites indicate the dynamic and fluid process of identity construction (Hall, 1996; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999; Weedon, 1999). Social identities are relational and are often understood by those who have been exposed to those categories (Dominguez, 1997). Therefore, the different meanings and representations that the youth produce and convey in relation to their social identities may either create a sense of inclusion or generate tensions and disagreements among others around them. The notions of Vietnamese American and Asian American, for instance, are two categories that are often more understood by immigrants or other people who are familiar with them or other similar labels – such as Chinese American, Korean American, and African American. Outsiders, such as Kiet – an exchange student from Vietnam and stranger to the Vietnamese immigrant experience – did not understand the youth’s notion of Vietnamese American as a label used to describe Vietnamese immigrants. He viewed the category of Vietnamese American to mean a person having a Vietnamese and American parent – a biological construct. His interpretation conflicted with those made by the Vietnamese immigrant youth, who viewed Vietnamese American as individuals with Vietnamese heritage residing in the United States.

198

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Issues of race, ethnicity, and culture play an important role in influencing how Vietnamese immigrant youth perceive and construct citizenship and senses of social, cultural, and national belongings. This process becomes even more complex for immigrant youth whose lives – family, ethnic, and cultural ties – position them within a transnational social space. Situated in-between social, cultural, and national spaces, the immigrant youth are guided and influenced by different sets of priorities, rules, and expectations, which tend to pull them in many directions. Both their process of adaptation to life in the United States and efforts to maintain ties to their homeland and ethnic community are constantly disrupted as the immigrant youth are constantly redefining and repositioning social, cultural, and national identities to emphasize the ideas, values, and priorities of each social site.

CHAPTER SEVEN

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

Summary and Discussion As the demographic composition of the United States continues to shift and become increasingly diverse with the effects of mass global migration (Castles, 2004; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Castles & Miller, 2003), the question of citizenship and citizenship education generates different and even opposing views. Many of the emerging perspectives and conceptions of citizenship challenge traditional understanding of citizenship. Traditional approaches to citizenship often signify not only national and legal status but also cultural membership to a specific nation-state with clearly defined national borders. A citizen is an individual who pledges his or her allegiance and patriotism to a specific nation-state (Benhabib, 2002; Cairns, 1999; Delanty, 2000; Kymlicka, 2003; Nussbaum, 2002). In the past two decades, theorists and scholars across different disciplines have redefined some of the central tenets of citizenship and citizenship education. The notion of global citizenship, for example, has become an important concept in citizenship discourse. Those arguing for global citizenship suggest that nation-states should move towards adopting principles of cosmopolitanism rather than maintaining membership to specific nation-states (Nussbaum, 2002; Soysal 1994, cited in Ichilov, 1998). Meanwhile, Kymlicka (2000, 2003, 2004), Rosaldo (1997), and other multiculturalists continue to push for the recognition of cultural citizenship within multicultural nation-states. They suggest that citizenship education should focus on issues of social justice and equality and to actualize cultural democracy 199

200

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

where cultural groups are able to maintain and exercise group rights (Kymlicka, 2000, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2004; Rosaldo, 1997). Growing numbers of scholars are also indicating the various ways in which citizenship formation intersects with social and cultural structures and categories that exist in society and institutions, such as race, class, and gender, (Hall, 2002; Holland et al., 1998; LadsonBillings, 2004; Raissiguier, 1999). Traditionally, it was assumed that citizens who belonged to a particular nation-state also shared a common ethnicity, culture, history, and language (Castles & Davidson, 2000). However, in multiracial and multicultural societies, such as the United States, these commonalities are not shared by all racial, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic groups. These differences are important factors in the construction and recognition of a legitimate citizen. Membership, rights, and protection provided by citizenship is differentiated by racial, ethnic, and cultural differences. Within the United States, for example, to be recognized and accepted as a legitimate citizen and an American, Whiteness is a criterion (Ladson-Billings, 2004). A White American is often recognized simply as an American whereas for most people of color, their Americanness is qualified by their race or ethnicity – such as African American, Asian American, or Chinese American. They are often simply not viewed as American but instead as hyphenatedAmericans or eternal foreigners. The citizenship status, Americanness, and patriotism of people of color are often questioned by fellow citizens. As the different discourses on citizenship, nationality, race, ethnicity, culture, and gender interact; they produce new meanings and ideas about what is American for immigrant youth. Acquiring U.S. citizenship is an essential component of adaptation to life in the United States for most immigrants. As they form idea about citizenship, immigrant youth contemplate and reconcile the meaning and significance of becoming American – socially, culturally, and legally. In addition, they become aware of how notions of race, ethnicity, culture, class, and gender help to define and position them within the larger social, cultural, economic, and political order. Focusing on citizenship formation becomes an important way to examine how issues of race, ethnicity, and culture interact to influence the lives of immigrants. In examining the intersection of immigration, citizenship, and education, focusing on how immigrant youth understand these

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

201

ideas will provide insights into the question of how citizenship is mediated among the multiple cultures, social practices, and discourses that exist in the lives of immigrant youth. This ethnographic study explored how race, ethnicity, and culture influenced the ways in which Vietnamese immigrant youth constructed citizenship and social and cultural identities. It examined how the immigrant students engaged with ideas and social practices – both from their school and home contexts – to construct and enact citizenship in their everyday lives. The study focused on the following questions: • •

How do Vietnamese immigrant youth make sense of the complex interactions among race, ethnicity, culture, and citizenship? How do the ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth understand their social, cultural, and national identities influence how they talk about their future opportunities and sense of belonging – socially, culturally, and politically?

The main findings of this study describe how Vietnamese immigrant youth perceive, engage with, and define citizenship in ways that reflect and connect with other social and cultural adaptation processes that are taking place in their lives. Citizenship is generally defined as providing a multiple sense of belonging – national, legal, and cultural. However, for people with racial and ethnic backgrounds which are positioned outside of the White dominant mainstream culture, these unifying components of citizenship become fractured and fragmented. Citizenship for immigrant youth is a complex process of social identity formation that reflects their reading of and responses to issues of race, ethnicity, and culture. The findings of this study were categorized into three areas: 1) Becoming racialized; 2) Citizenship and becoming American; and 3) Constructing meanings and identities within social, cultural, and national spaces. The next sections will summarize some of the findings of this study. Becoming Racialized As the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study adjusted to their new school, issues of language and cultural barriers initially allowed them limited interactions with their U.S.-born peers as they were often

202

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

placed in ESL classes. Outside of classrooms, issues of language and culture also forced most of the immigrant youth to congregate in language specific spaces, which further limited the opportunities for them to engage with their non-ESL peers. Over time, as they acquired English language skills and became oriented to their new school, they realized that the patterns of separation among students were also reinforced by racial and ethnic differences. The immigrant youth discovered that their race and ethnicity positioned them within specific physical and social locations within the school. These divisions, which were most visible in the ways that the students organized their peer groups – both in and outside of classrooms – prevented students from having meaningful interactions across racial, ethnic, and language boundaries. These separations deepened structures and practices of racial and ethnic divisions within the school. As the immigrant youth became immersed in the racialized context of their school, they quickly learned to read both the overt and subtle signs of race and how they were manifested within and across different groups. The immigrant youth began to absorb – both consciously and subconsciously – the knowledge, narratives, and practices connected to race that surrounded them. Not only did they learn to navigate the racialized system of their school, they also adopted many of the racialized practices and narratives. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth incorporated common stereotypes of different groups into their conversations. They also participated in constructing social groups along racial and ethnic lines, and adopted classroom and academic practices that further delineated racial, ethnic, and cultural differences. Each of the specific racial and ethnic group tended to remain confined in their defined spaces and avoided other territories within the school that belonged to other racial or ethnic groups. Infringing upon other groups’ spaces often resulted in conflicts and fights. As the immigrant youth learned to navigate the racial structures and replicate the patterns of racial and ethnic divisions, their actions further isolated them from other peer groups and many of the school events. They learned to exist within the marginal spaces within their school. While the immigrant youth adapted to the racialized school structures, they also underwent the assimilation process, where they slowly, as several immigrant youth described, started to lose much of themselves – their language, memory, history, and culture. The forces

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

203

of assimilation or Americanization were strong, and immigrant youth felt the constant pressure to give up their culture, ethnicity, and language to become a part of the racialized American cultural landscape. Many of the youth integrated aspects of the American cultural practices into their everyday lives while also recognizing that their racial status continued to mark them as non-American and part of the large mass of “Other” even if they became assimilated and a part of the racialized structure – or what Lee (1996) calls the racial hierarchy. The Vietnamese immigrant youth interpreted the various signs of race around them to mean that they did not “fit in with the larger group.” As the students continued to experience schooling and cultural adaptation, they gained an acute sense of otherness. Race and racialization not only served to categorize and ascribe stereotypes and myths for each specific group, they also inscribed in students’ minds and imagination the images and representations of who is and is not American. As race continued to seep into their consciousness and influence the ways in which they interpreted their world, the immigrant youth also absorbed messages that they were “outsiders”, “non-Americans”, or generalized “others.” Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth associated the idea of “becoming American” as becoming White. The notion of becoming American for the Vietnamese immigrant youth emerged as more than a process of acquiring citizenship status or a passport; it also consisted of a rejection of their racial, cultural, and ethnic identity. They viewed the idea of an immigrant – particularly an immigrant of color – becoming American as not only an individual who had assimilated into the racial structure but also as someone who had convinced herself into thinking that she could be accepted as a “real” – or White – American. The ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth interpreted the notion of “becoming American” also influenced how they framed their perspectives on citizenship and citizenship acquisition. Citizenship and “Becoming American” Acquiring U.S. citizenship was considered an important part of transitioning to life in the United States for the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study. While the actual process of obtaining formal U.S. citizenship status was a matter of time for most of the immigrant youth, the question of becoming American was complex, ambiguous, and

204

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

contentious. As they began to adopt many aspects of U.S. popular culture and language, the youth also sensed the limitations on becoming real Americans due to their immigrant status and racial background. Their experiences further give evidence to the notion that to be seen and accepted as an American, Whiteness is essential (Ladson-Billings, 2004). A White person’s citizenship and sense of national belonging is rarely questioned, but a person of color’s presence immediately conjures up notions of “otherness” and outsiders. Immigrant youth encountered and absorbed these messages – both subtle and overt – to mean that they can never be fully accepted as real Americans. Repeatedly the immigrant youth articulated the idea that to be a “real American, you have to have White skin, have blond hair and blue eyes.” The youth interpreted the discourses of race and Americanism to mean that U.S. society had structured different boundaries or barriers for gaining entrance into the larger society – an immigrant of color can only become American to a certain extent. To address the racialization that is embedded in the notion of Americanization or becoming American, the Vietnamese immigrant youth strategically separated citizenship from the general notion of American identity. The meanings that the youth attributed to the notion of becoming American differed from their understanding and representation of citizenship. As the Vietnamese immigrant youth experienced the ways in which race structured them outside of the mainstream cultural context and positioned them as others and not real Americans, they began to reconceptualize the multiple and interconnecting dimension of citizenship – legal, national, and cultural membership – as discrete and separate entities. The Vietnamese immigrant youth defined citizenship as a general national status and membership. In the process of gaining legal and national status, immigrant youth can imagine themselves becoming a part of their new host country. However, they did not equate citizenship acquisition with becoming American. In this racialized American cultural landscape, immigrants often interpreted the notion of becoming American to mean that they have to give up their race, ethnicity, culture, and language. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth viewed becoming American as part of the assimilation process in which they were expected to give up their own cultural practices, beliefs, and language (Castles & Miller, 2003;

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

205

Gordon, 1964). While they will “lose everything” related to their race, ethnicity, culture, and language, they also recognized that assimilation does not necessarily mean that they will become accepted and recognized as Americans. Many of the Vietnamese immigrant youth pointed out that even as immigrants choose to call themselves American, “no one would recognize [them] as one” because of their immigrant and racial status. As race acts as a social mechanism that sorts and categorizes individuals according to their status, it also prescribes their level of rights, privileges, and social, cultural, political, and economic membership within the U.S. mainstream culture. Race has for long been a factor in assigning membership to social, cultural, and political life (Ladson-Billings, 2004; Lee, 2005; Morrison, 1992; Omi & Winant, 1994). Traditionally, citizenship within a single nation-state includes not only the legal and national sense of belonging but also a collective sense of history and cultural life (Benhabib, 2002; Castles & Davidson, 2000; Lowe, 1998). Benhabib defines citizenship as having three distinctive elements: “collective identity, political membership, and the right to social entitlements and benefits” (pp. 178). However, within a diverse and racialized nation-state, such as the United States, race and the process of racial formation have severed the interconnected dimensions of citizenship. Race has splintered citizenship into separate dimensions for immigrant youth who are not a part of the dominant race and culture. While they framed citizenship within the domains of legal and national membership – which were distinct from social and cultural dimensions – the Vietnamese immigrant youth also formed a cultural and ethnic space and identity. Building their own social groups became a mechanism for coping with the racial divisions and the sense of otherness. These spaces centered on their ethnic, cultural, and language groups. While immigrant scholars have long indicated that these spaces have been essential in helping immigrant youth to achieve academically (Gibson, 1988; Lee, 2005; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Qin-Hillard, 2003; Zhou & Bankston III, 1998), they also provide immigrant students with a sense of belonging – both in school and society at large where they are constantly viewed as outsiders. These cultural and ethnic spaces serve as an important form of social capital – social networks and resources through knowledge and information sharing – to facilitate social and cultural adaptation (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Brittain,

206

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

2002; Goldring, 1999). These ethnic, cultural, and social spaces – also referred to as transnational and transcultural spaces – provide the youth a space in which they can share and explore the meanings and contradictions connected to social norms and practices in the different dimensions of their social, cultural, and family life (Stritikus & Nguyen, 2007). In-Between Social, Cultural, and National Contexts Race, ethnicity, and culture play important roles in influencing how Vietnamese immigrant youth define and construct citizenship and a sense of social, cultural, and national belonging. This process of citizenship formation becomes even more complex for immigrant youth whose lives – family, ethnic, and cultural ties – position them within a transnational social space. Immigrant youth whose families, ethnic, and cultural ties continue to structure them within a transnational context often push the boundaries of a traditional sense of citizenship, which positions citizens within one nation-state. Immigrants with transnational ties and family structures often feel an affiliation and sense of social, cultural, and national belonging that stretch beyond the boundaries of one nation-state. Situated within multiple social, cultural, and national spaces, the immigrant youth are guided and influenced by different sets of priorities, rules, and expectations, which often pull them in various directions. The immigrant youth’s process of adapting to life in the United States and efforts to maintain ties to their ethnic community and homelands are constantly disrupted as they continue to reposition their social, cultural, and national identities to emphasize the ideas, values, and priorities of each cultural site. Citizenship becomes a complex process of social identity construction for immigrant youth as their lives are often situated across multiple social, cultural, linguistic, and national contexts. As they move from one social space to the next – racial, ethnic, cultural, and transnational spaces – and engage with the ideas, meanings, and expectations connected to each site, the youth’s representation of self often shifts. Recasting and emphasizing different aspects of their social identity – racial, ethnic, cultural, and national – becomes an important way for the youth to balance the different sets of priorities and expectations connected with the various social spaces in their lives. The

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

207

constant renegotiation of identities that take place as the youth move among multiple social sites indicate the dynamic and fluid process of identity construction (Hall, 1996; McAfee, 2000; Raissiguier, 1999; Weedon, 1999). The process of social identity and citizenship construction for immigrant youth – particularly for those whose lives are structured within a transnational context – is not seamless and without contradictions (Hall, 1996). Instead, at every social, cultural, racial, and national juncture, the Vietnamese immigrant youth continue to negotiate and reposition themselves to connect with or create opposition to the discourses within those sites. Social identity – including citizenship formation – not only signals a set of social values, beliefs, and practices but also becomes a representation of social, cultural, political, and national affiliations and alignments for many immigrant youth. The immigrant youth’s social and material conditions and attachments to different cultural sites continue to influence how they form social, cultural, and national identities. Implications The findings from this study have important implications in some specific and interconnected areas related to immigrant student adaptation and their citizenship construction process. First, the findings suggest important implications for future research on the adaptation of immigrant students. Research in the area of immigrant students’ adaptation has been extensive and continues to grow. However, much of the research focuses on issues of language and culture. While language and cultural barriers are critical factors that influence immigrant student social and academic adaptation (Olneck, 2004; Olsen, 1997; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Suarez-Orozco & SuarezOrozco, 2001), including an analysis of citizenship adds an important perspective for understanding the social, cultural, and civic adaptation of immigrant students. Citizenship is an important adjustment issue for immigrant students as they contemplate and reconcile the function and significance of becoming a citizen in their host country while maintaining connections to their cultures, languages, histories, and countries of origin. However, studies that focus on immigrant youth

208

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

citizenship development remain limited (Hall, 2002; Lee, 2005; Maira, 2004; Rizvi, 2000). Examining how immigrant students think about, discuss, and construct citizenship is important in helping us to better comprehend the ways in which race, ethnicity, and culture intersect and play out in their lives. Including an analysis of citizenship development in future research on immigrant student adaptation helps to more accurately represent the totality and multi-dimensionality of immigrant student experience. Racial, Cultural, and Linguistic Marginalization The second implication that stems from this study addresses the concerns of how issues of isolation and marginalization that immigrant students face within the school influence their social and academic adaptation process. Issues of isolation between immigrant students and their U.S.-born peers initially arise from language and cultural barriers. However, as the immigrant youth acquire English language skills and adapt to some of the social and cultural aspects of their new school, they also begin to understand and experience racial and ethnic divisions among different student groups. Similar to other immigrant groups in the United States, the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study were highly influenced by the racial narratives and practices that were present in their school and other institutions, such as the media, within the larger U.S. society. As the findings illustrate in this study, the Vietnamese immigrant youth accumulated and absorbed many of the racial stereotypes, images, and thinking that not only characterized other racial groups but also of themselves. The everyday routines and practices that took place in school have deep and lasting impacts in the ways youth think about themselves and connect to the larger society. Many of the immigrant youth internalized and learned to define themselves in relation to how they are characterized in racial terms. They also learned to accept that they could not be viewed and accepted as Americans because of their racial and ethnic backgrounds. The linguistic, cultural, and racial isolation that many immigrant youth experience affects not only their social and cultural adaptation process; it also influences their academic engagement. Many immigrant students report that they remain in ESL classes as a way to alleviate their sense of social and cultural isolation; they want to remain in

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

209

classes with, as one student states, their “own people.” In so doing, they compromise their academic progress and future opportunities. Issues of racial, cultural, linguistic, and academic marginalization raise an important point that we need to consider creating more opportunities for students of different background to learn about each other and have more meaningful interactions. It is critical that as educators, we become more aware of and create strategies to address the racial and ethnic tensions and mistrust that continue to divide students and perpetuate systems of racial hierarchies within and outside of schools. Reframing Citizenship The findings from this study that connect to the ways in which immigrant youth perceive and enact citizenship have important implications for future research studies examining the intersections of immigration, diversity, and citizenship. The ways in which the Vietnamese immigrant youth in this study construct citizenship reveals that it is a complex social process that connects with other social processes and categories, such as race, ethnicity, and culture. The meanings that the immigrant youth attribute to citizenship differ from commonly understood notions of citizenship. Traditional ideas of citizenship tend to suggest that a citizen is an individual who pledges her allegiance and patriotism to a particular nation-state that has clearly defined borders. In addition, citizens of a particular nation-state share not only a common national identity but also the same cultural, linguistic, and historical heritage (Castles and Davidson, 2000). Citizenship also generally represents three specific forms of memberships – national, legal, and cultural (Ong, 1999). However, in a racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse nation-state such as the U.S., the common characteristics that bind people to a national and cultural identity no longer applies. The meanings of traditional conceptions of citizenship become greatly challenged. The findings in this study reveal some specific ways in citizenship is challenged. First, race and racialization play a significant role in defining and positioning newcomers – often outside of the mainstream White culture. Aside from structuring people into what Lee (1996) refers to as the racial hierarchy, race and the process of racialization have long played a key part in the construction of citizenship in the U.S. – they serve to partition rights, privileges, and protection based on

210

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

one’s racial background. Race is a critical component for the recognition and acceptance of being American. Many immigrant youth, such as the Vietnamese youth in this study, adopt the idea that they cannot become real Americans due their racial backgrounds. Citizenship for the youth becomes a separate process from becoming American. The youth learn to narrowly define citizenship within the legal parameters while looking to other areas for social and cultural acceptance and belonging. Their conception of citizenship therefore challenges traditional understanding of citizenship as having membership to the nation-state in three specific areas – national, legal, and cultural. Another important area in which immigrant youth challenge traditional notions of citizenship connects to issues of transnationalism. Many immigrant youth, such as the ones in this study, have lives structured across two or multiple national contexts. They learn to construct transnational or hybrid national and cultural identities. Their conception and enactment of citizenship often position them within two or more nation-states, which also push against one of the most essential tenets of citizenship – membership to a specific nation-state with clearly defined national borders. As the demographics of the U.S. continue to become more ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse, it is critical that theorists, educators, and policymakers engage in a deep re-examination and re-thinking of citizenship, citizenship education, and notions of democratic practices. Without a clear sense of the function and purpose of citizenship, immigrant students, such as the Vietnamese youth in this study, will continue to generate their own concepts and definitions of citizenship to fit their specific life circumstances. Many of the concepts and interpretations of citizenship that the immigrant youth construct may deviate from the larger collective goals and objectives of fostering unity and understanding among the different groups. Conclusion As a nation we continue to remain divided along racial, ethnic, class, gender, religious, linguistic, and citizenship status lines. We have not yet been effective in addressing issues of diversity even though our history is intertwined with and deeply connected to notions of

Summary, Implications, and Conclusion

211

difference. With the forces of globalization strengthening and expanding into more remote parts of the world, the United States and other industrialized multicultural nation-states will become more diverse as extensive global migration continues and alters their demographics. In the context of increasing global social, cultural, economic, and political transformation, the issues of education and social integration of culturally diverse groups become increasingly complex and controversial as the debate evokes contrasting views, values, and the extent to which we can address the tensions between unity and diversity. As a nation-state that is greatly influenced by increasing levels of immigration and diversity, the United States is at the cusp of an incredible and historical change, and as educators, we need to engage in this public debate about reshaping education to include voices and experiences of diverse and heterogeneous populations. It is critical that we help our youth to become engaged citizens who can analyze and question the dominant structures and practices that continue to subjugate them. As educators, we need to engage in the conversation of renewing and reinventing education for democracy to become responsible and open to pluralism and diversity (Banks, 2004; Greene, 1995; Gutmann, 2004). Maxine Greene (1995) points out the importance of connecting pluralism to community building as a way to continue maintaining our “Great Community.” She writes: There have always been newcomers in the United States; there have always been strangers. There have always been young persons in our classrooms that most teachers did not, could not, see or hear. In recent years, however, invisibility has been refused on many sides. Old silences have been shattered; longrepressed voices are making themselves heard. Yes, we are in search of what John Dewey called “the Great Community” ([1927] 1954, p. 143), but at the same time, we are challenged as never before to confront plurality and multiplicity. Unable to deny or obscure the facts of pluralism, we are asked to choose ourselves with respect to unimaginable diversities. (p. 155)

212

Vietnamese Immigrant Youth and Citizenship

Greene encourages educators to begin to use creativity to imagine new ways to conceptualize relationships and connections between the role of public education and citizenship. She challenges educators to imagine a language and vision that would include the different voices that exist within the pluralistic society, to confront dominance, and reconfigure a culture of respect for and acceptance of diversity. She pushes educators and public intellectuals to imagine a different community that include the voices of “the strangers” within our society. In moving forward into the 21st century, issues of racial, ethnic, social, and cultural diversity must be addressed if the U.S. is to sustain the ideas and ideals of social democracy. Issues of racialization and other social processes that limit rights, protection, and civic participation serve to divide groups and fracture common understanding of citizenship and by extension the larger sense of national and cultural belonging. It is critical that as educators, we engage in a deep re-examination of the notion of citizenship in the context of increasing global migration. It is also important that we rethink the idea of what it means to be an American in connection with the high levels of diversity. Without a clearer sense of how immigrants can connect to what it means to be an American and a citizen, we may continue to witness multiple levels of social and cultural fragmentations and disconnect as different racial and ethnic groups continue to generate their own concepts and definitions of citizenship to fit their specific life circumstances. Many of the concepts and interpretations of citizenship that the immigrants construct may deviate from the larger collective goals and objectives of fostering understanding and unity among the different groups.

Definition of Terms

Acculturation is a result of having sustained contact among two or more groups. Rong and Preissle (1998) write: “It is the exchange and adaptation of practices, beliefs, knowledge, and skills among different groups – the result of the borrowing is a recombining of the old into something new” (pp. 81). U.S. cultural context is, for example, a result of sustained periods of cultural exchanges and borrowing between numerous groups – it is an “amalgamation” of the many different cultures that exist within the U.S. (Rong & Preissle, 1998). Many immigrants view acculturation as a positive process. They consider acquiring new skills such as learning English as important and additive rather than subtractive to cultural identity. Assimilation is a one-sided process in which newcomers “are expected to give up their distinctive linguistic, cultural or social characteristics and become indistinguishable from the majority population” (Castles & Miller, 2003, p.250). The goal of assimilation is to lead to an eventual decline in ethnic, cultural, and social differences as ethnic minority groups conform to the dominant culture. Gordon (1964) describes assimilation as a “melting pot,” which works to ‘melt’ away the various cultures of the new immigrants into the host country’s culture, “without leaving any cultural traces at all” (p. 125). vi Citizenship – A citizen is an individual who pledges his or her allegiance and patriotism to a specific nation-state (Benhabib, 2002; Cairns, 1999; Delanty, 2000; Kymlicka, 2003; Nussbaum, 2002). Traditional approaches to citizenship often signify not only national and legal status but also cultural membership to a specific nation-state with clearly defined national borders. In the past two decades, theorists and scholars across different disciplines have redefined some of the 213

214

Definition of Terms

central tenets of citizenship and citizenship education. Some of the emerging perspectives and ideas about citizenship include: Cosmopolitanism suggests that citizenship be organized around principles of global citizenship rather than national membership. Cosmopolitanism relates to having or being informed by a worldwide perspective as opposed to thinking within a local or provincial scope. A cosmopolitan is someone who transcends national borders and pledges allegiance to the worldwide community of human beings as opposed to a single-nation state or a specific ethnic community (Nussbaum, 2002). Cultural citizenship recognizes recognize the rights and cultures of indigenous and ethnic minority groups within diverse multicultural nation-states (Flores & Benmayor, 1997; Isin & Wood, 1999; Kymlicka, 2000, 2004; Rosaldo, 1997). Flexible Citizenship is created with the increase of temporary migration. Historically, the process of immigration has been a more permanent move for people. Migrants would leave one location and settle in another, and were often, as Rizvi (2000) states, “forced to assimilate into their new cultural milieu” (p. 209). However, in this new global era, people’s movements across national borders have become increasingly temporary, and the maintenance of one’s culture, language, and former citizenship status is critical (Rizvi, 2000). Many migrants acquire multiple citizenship status as they move from one nation-state to the next. Diasporic Community - Immigrants whose citizenship and cultural ties transcend a single nation-state also belong to the growing diasporic communities or groups – “displaced peoples who share cultural, ethnic or religious ties [who are] are increasingly able to maintain linkages as social relations become ‘stretched’ over time and space” (Nayak, 2003, p. 35). Diasporic communities are usually communities of people who exist in transnational or transcultural contexts. People who are a part of diasporic communities tend to belong to or connect with transnational or transcultural contexts. Hybridity takes place through the fusion of diverse cultures and identities and reflects their heterogeneous or pluralistic origins. It

Definition of Terms

215

is a cultural mélange as opposed to cultural assimilation (Rizvi, 2000). Hybridity is most often used to describe populations or groups who have formed transnational identity and maintain a strong connection to transnational spaces or communities. Transnational Space and Citizenship – Brittain (2002) defines transnational spaces to mean: “a human collectivity of immigrant students from a particular country where students engage in activities that cross the boundaries of two nation-states…and create a sense of belonging that overlaps these two nation-states” (p. 49). The physical and symbolic boundaries that immigrants cross on a daily basis reveals a complex practice of re-assessing the meanings of cultural and ethnic identity as they engage with the different cultural spaces. These transnational spaces can be both physical as well as those recalled from memory. Culture - Traditional notions of culture frame it as a system or pattern of beliefs, values, laws, and customs that are shared by a group of people and used to guide as well as explain social practices (Jenkins, 1997; Smith, 2001). This frame of culture often suggests that it is a cohesive system that endures across social contexts. People are then defined by and bound to the culture in which they were initially a part. Contemporary and emerging perspectives of culture, which are influenced by feminist theory, cultural studies, post-structuralist theories, and diasporic scholarship, include analysis of power and social context. The contemporary notions of culture suggest that it is an incomplete process that continues to be redefined by competing social discourses (Smith, 2001). In this study, various aspects of both the traditional and contemporary perspectives of culture surface as the youth discuss and define culture for themselves. The immigrant youth’s ideas of culture often connect to the beliefs, values, and customs that they already have as well to the new ideas and practices that they encounter in their new environment. In other words, culture is not a static and fixed system. It is a fluid and contextual process that continues to be redefined by new ideas, discourses, and social practices (Nasir & Hand, 2006).

216

Definition of Terms Mainstream culture in this study refers to the dominant racial and ethnic majority culture, namely White Anglo Americans (Banks & Banks, 2005; Okihiro, 1994; Olsen, 1997). Many of the immigrant youth often use the phrase “American culture” to describe activities and projects in which mostly White American students participate. These activities such as sporting events, school dances, holiday celebrations, and other after school functions often include non-White students. However, immigrant youth refer to them as part of the American culture as the majority of participants are White students.

Discourse is broadly defined as a social and cultural lens for understanding and guiding social relations and behaviors. It is a “way of seeing the world” (Sunderland, 2004, p. 7). Discourse can be manifested through spoken or written language or social interactions among people. Ethnicity is “centrally concerned with culture – shared meaning – but it is also rooted in, and to a considerable extent the outcome of, social interaction” (Jenkins, 1997, p. 13). Similar to the notion of culture, ethnicity is not fixed – it is an aspect of identity that is also shaped by social interactions. Ethnicity and culture are two interconnected entities that inform each other. Ethnicity is understood as a social and cultural rather than a biological construct (Castles, 2000). Globalization is a phenomenon in which worldwide cultural, political, and economic relations are becoming increasingly interconnected and interdependent through the convergences of economic and political structures and aided by advanced technology and systems of transportation, (Burbules & Torres, 2000; Torres, 1998). One major consequence of globalization is the unprecedented levels of increases in mass global migration, resulting in greater rise in racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity in many nation-states (Banks, 2004; Castles, 2004; Ong, 2004). Identity in this study is defined as the ways in which immigrant youth represent and situate themselves in relation to both the interweaving and at times competing discourses of race, culture, ethnicity, gender,

Definition of Terms

217

class, and nation. Drawing on Foucault (1994), Hall (1996), Hall (2002), McAfee (2000), and Raissiguier (1999), identity formation is defined as relational and in-process as opposed to fixed or complete. It is a fluid process that is constantly negotiated and redefined as the youth engage with new ideas and discourses. Racialization is the process of becoming a part of the racial structures that exist within a social institution or society at large. Many scholars connect this racialization process to the larger project of Americanization, whose goal is to structure immigrants into a racial system as well as position them outside of the American mainstream culture (Gibson, 1988; Gordon, 1964; Lee, 2005; Olsen, 1997; Rumbaut & Portes, 2001). It is a project in which processes of assimilation and exclusion are taking place (Castles & Davidson, 2000). Racialization continues to define and sustain systems of margins and mainstream through the construction and perpetuation of stereotypes and myths of each racial, ethnic, and language group. It is a form of social division, which often leads immigrant students towards the path of downward or segmented assimilation (Olsen, 1997; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996; Valenzuela, 1999).

Appendices

Appendix A: Participant Observation Guide Classroom observation will be guided by the following questions: a) How do the teachers explain their lessons or assignments? b) Do the teachers make the connections between the assignment and the students’ lives or to the larger social context? c) How do the teachers engage students in the classroom? d) How do the teachers respond to the diversity in the classroom? How do they make connections to the cultural and linguistic diversity in the classroom? e) What meanings do the teachers want students to make of their lessons or assignments? f) How do student engage with the teachers’ teaching techniques? g) Do the students participate in discussions? h) What actions do students take when they do not understand the assignment or teachers’ instructions? i) Do students ask questions? What kinds of questions do students ask? j) How do students show initiative? (Do they raise their hands? Do they participate verbally?) k) How do students perceive and interpret the assignments? l) What meanings do students make of their assignments or the teachers’ lessons? m) Do students’ actions and behavior fit with their peers’ actions and behavior? During moments of observing students in non-formal classroom settings, I will focus my observation on the following questions: 219

220

Appendices

a) How do the students engage with the larger school community and culture? b) How do students make use of in-between class time? c) How do students make use of their lunch period (social function or extra time for homework?) d) How do students engage with their peers during lunch? e) With whom do students interact and in what ways? f) With whom do the students have lunch? g) What do students talk with their peers about in-between classes?

Appendices

221 Appendix B Student Interview Protocol

ƒ

General questions about their transition experience. How long have you been in the U.S.? How do you like living in the U.S.? o Follow-up questions a) In what ways is living in the U.S. different than living in Vietnam? b) How are you adjusting to the U.S.? – What do you find difficult about living in the U.S? What do you find to be easier living here? c) What kinds of things do you do for fun here? d) What did you do for fun in Vietnam? e) What are some things that are different? f) What kinds of things do you like about the U.S.? g) What do you miss about Vietnam? Question regarding age: How do you think your age relates to your learning experience in the U.S.? o Follow-up questions: a) What is school in the U.S. like for you? b) What was school in Vietnam like for you? c) How do you like the teacher’s teaching methods? d) How do you feel about participating in the classroom, like speaking in class? e) What do you think about participating in the classroom? f) What do you want to do after you finish high school? g) How did you come to this goal? h) Follow-up with older students: how do you think that being younger would influence your current learning process? Gender question: How do you think your gender influences your learning process? Follow-up questions: a) Do you think that girls have different learning goals than boys here in the U.S? b) Do you think that they had different learning goals in Vietnam?

222

Appendices c)

ƒ ƒ

ƒ

ƒ

(Relating to the previous question about future aspiration) Ask student if he/she would choose the same choices if he/she was a girl or boy? How do you think your English language ability influences your schooling? Aspects of culture: What do you think is the importance of education? How did you come to this perspective? Follow-up questions: a) How do your parents see education? b) How did the teachers teach in Vietnam? c) What were some ways that you studied in Vietnam? d) What were some ways that you learned in Vietnam? e) Do you still maintain some of your learning styles or studying habits? What are some examples? Student Interview Protocol – Second interview What aspects of American culture influence your perception of schooling? Follow-up questions: a) What kinds of things do you like about school in the U.S.? b) How do you think you study differently here than when you were in Vietnam? c) How do you think you learn differently here than when you were in Vietnam? d) What kinds of new things do you incorporate into your learning process? How do you think you have changed since you have been in the U.S.? o Seek examples: a) How do you learn differently in school? b) How do you interact differently with friends who are boys? c) How do you interact differently with friends who are girls? d) How do you interact with non-Vietnamese classmates in school?

Appendices

223 e)

ƒ

ƒ

ƒ

ƒ

ƒ

How do you interact or relate with your family – parents and siblings? What do you think your teachers hope for you to learn? a) How do teachers’ teaching styles influence your learning? b) What do you think of the teachers’ teaching techniques in the U.S.? c) What are your learning goals? d) How do you think the school is meeting those goals? What do you think of students in the U.S.? a) Can you describe the student population in this school? b) How is this different from your previous school in Vietnam? c) Who do you usually hang out with? d) What determines how you pick friends? When you think about ‘who is an American,’ what image comes to mind? - Follow-up questions: a) Can you describe this person? b) What makes an American? c) Would you consider yourself as American? Why or why not? d) If you don’t consider yourself American, how would you describe yourself? ƒ Would this change in the future? What does citizenship mean to you? a) How would you describe your citizenship? b) What makes someone a citizen of a nation? c) What does being a citizen of a nation mean to you? d) Would this citizenship change? Why would it change? e) Do you see your citizenship changing in the future? f) What or who has helped to inform your ideas about citizenship? When you think of the idea of ‘freedom’ what comes to mind? a) How did you learn about this idea of ‘freedom’? b) Describe how this idea of ‘freedom’ influences your everyday life.

References

Alba, R., & Nee, V. (2003). Remaking the American mainstream: Assimilation and contemporary immigration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Apple, M. W. (2000). Between neoliberalism and neoconservatism: Education and conservatism in a global context. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (p 57-78). New York: Routledge. Apple, M. W. (2001). Educating the "right" way: Markets, standards, god, and inequality. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Asian Nation (2007). Population, statistics, and demographics. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.asiannation.org/population.html. Banks, J. A. (1992). Multicultural education: Approaches, developments and dimensions. In J. Lynch & C. Modgil (Eds.), Cultural diversity and the schools (Vol. 1, pp. 83-94). London: Falmer. Banks, J. A. (1993). Multicultural education: Development, dimensions, and challenges. Phi Delta Kappan (September 1993), 22-28. Banks, J. A. (1996a). The historical reconstruction of knowledge about race: Implications for transformative teaching. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Multicultural education, transformative knowledge and action: Historical and contemporary perspectives (p. 64-87). New York: Teachers College Press. Banks, J. A. (1996b). The historical reconstruction of knowledge about race: Implications for transformative teaching. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Multicultural education, transformative knowledge and 225

226

References

action: Historical and contemporary perspectives (p. 64-87). New York: Teachers College Press. Banks, J. A. (1998). The lives and values of researchers: Implications for educating citizens in a multicultural society. Educational Researcher, 27(7), 4-17. Banks, J. A. (2001). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Banks, J. A. (2001a). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Education, 52(1), 5-16. Banks, J. A. (2001b). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education: (p. 3-24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A. (2004a). Introduction: Democratic citizenship education in multicultural societies. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p. 3-16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A. (2004b). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 3-29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A. (In press). Education students for cosmopolitan citizenship in a diverse and changing world. In Press. Banks, J. A. et al. (2005). Democracy and diversity: Principles and concepts for educating citizens in a global age. Seattle: University of Washington. Banks, J. A. (In Press). Educating students for cosmopolitan citizenship in a diverse and changing world. Seattle: In press. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Introduction. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. xi-xiv). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (Eds.). (2005). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A., & Nguyen, D. (2008). Citizenship education and diversity: History, conceptual approaches, and issues. In C. Tyson (Ed.), Handbook of research in social sciences: Pending.

References

227

Baubock, R. (1994). Transnational citizenship: Membership and rights in international migration. Brookfield: Edwards Elgar Publishing. Baubock, R. (1998). The crossing and blurring of boundaries in international migration: Challenges for social and political theory. In R. Baubock & J. Rundell (Eds.), Blurred Boundaries: Migration, ethnicity, citizenship (p 17-52). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. Benhabib, S. (1992). Situating the self: Gender, community and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press. Benhabib, S. (2002). The claims of culture: Equality and diversity in the global era. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Berrol, S. C. (1995). Growing up American: Immigrant children in America then and now. New York: Twayne Publishers. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge. Bhabha, H. K. (1996). Culture's in-between. In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (p 53-60). London: Sage Publications. Blackmore, J. (2000). Globalization: A useful concept for feminists rethinking theory and strategies in education? In N. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: critical perspectives (p 133-156). New York: Routledge. Brittain, C. (2002). Transnational messages: Experiences of Chinese and Mexican immigrants in American schools. In C. SuarezOrozco & M. M. Suarez-Orozco (Eds.), The new Americans: Recent immigration and American society. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing. Brodkin, K. (1998). How Jews became White folks and what that says about race in America. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Burbules, N. C., & Torres, C. A. (2000). Globalization and education: An introduction. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (p 1-26). New York: Routledge. Cairns, A. C. (1999). Empire, globalization, and the fall and rise of diversity. In A. C. Cairns & J. C. Courtney & P. MacKinnon & H. J. Michelmann & D. E. Smith (Eds.), Citizenship, diversity, and pluralism: Canadian and comparative perspectives (p 23-57). Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

228

References

Callahan, J. F. (Ed.). (1995). The collected essays of Ralph Ellison. New York: The Modern Library. Canning, K. (1999). Feminist history after the linguistic turn: Historicizing discourse and experience. In S. Hesse-Biber & C. Gilmartin & R. Lydenberg (Eds.), Feminist approaches to theory and methodology: An interdisciplinary reader (p 45-78). New York: Oxford University Press. Capella, J.-R. (2000). Globalization, a fading citizenship. In N. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives. New York: Routledge. Cargill, M. T., & Huynh, J. Q. (2000). Voices of Vietnamese boat people: Nineteen narratives of escape and survival. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Company, Inc. Castles, S. (2004). Migration, citizenship, and education. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p 17-48). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Castles, S., & Davidson, A. (2000). Citizenship and migration: Globalization and the politics of belonging. New York: Routledge. Castles, S., & Miller, M. J. (2003). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Chan, S. (Ed.). (2006). The Vietnamese American 1.5 generation: Stories of war, revolution, flight, and new beginnings. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Code, L. (1991). What can she know: Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Coll, K. M. (2010). Remaking citizenship: Latina immigrants and American politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Cortes, C. E. (2001). Knowledge construction and popular culture: The media as multicultural educator. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 169-183). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cubberley, E. P. (1908). Changing concepts of education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Delanty, G. (2000). Citizenship in a global age: Society, culture, politics. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

References

229

Do, H. D. (1999). The Vietnamese Americans. Westport: Greenwood Press. Dominguez, V. R. (1986). White by definition: Social classification in Creole Louisiana. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Flores, F.V., & Benmayor, R. (1997). Latino cultural citizenship: Claiming identity, space, and rights. Boston: Beacon Press. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Inc. Foner, N. (2008). Afterward: Some concluding reflections. In D. ReedDanahay & C. B. Brettell (Eds.) Citizenship, political engagement, and belonging: Immigrants in Europe and the United States (pp. 244-252). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Foucault, M. (1976). Power as knowledge. In C. Lemert (Ed.), Social theory: The multicultural & classic readings (p 517-523). San Francisco: Westview Press. Foucault, M. (1984). What is enlightenment? In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Foucault Reader, (pp. 32-50). New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans. Vol. 1). New York: Vintage Books. Foucault, M. (1994). The subject and power. In P. Rabinow and N. Rose (Eds.), The essential Foucault: Selections from the essential works of Foucault, 1954-1984 (pp. 126-144). New York: The New Press. Garcia, E. E. (2004). Educating Mexican American students: Past treatment and recent developments in theory, research policy, and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 491-514). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Gibson, M. A. (1988). Accommodation without assimilation: Sikh immigrants in an American high school. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

230

References

Giroux, H. (1996). Doing cultural studies: Youth and the challenge of pedagogy. In P. Leistyna, A. Woodrum, & S. A. Sherblom (Eds.), Breaking free: The transformative power of critical pedagogy (p 83-108). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Giroux, H. (1997). Channel surfing: Race talk and the destruction of today's youth. New York: St. Martin's Press. Giroux, H. (2000). Stealing innocence: Youth, corporate power, and the politics of culture. New York: Palgrave. Goldring, L. (1999). Power and transnational social spaces. In L. Pries (Ed.), Migration and transnational social spaces (pp. 162-186). Brookfield: Ashgate. Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The role of race, religion, and national origin. New York: Oxford University Press. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gutmann, A. (2004). Unity and diversity in democratic multicultural education: Creative and destructive tension. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p. 7196). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hall, K. D. (2002). Lives in transition: Sikh youth as British citizens. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs 'identity'? In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (p 1-17). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Hatcher, R., & Troyna, B. (1993). Racialization and children. In C. McCarthy & W. Crichlow (Eds.), Race, identity, and representation in education (p 109-125). New York: Routledge. Hernandez, D. J. (2004). Children and youth in immigrant families: Demographic, social, and educational issues. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 404-419). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hesford, W. (1999). Framing identities: Autobiography and the politics of pedagogy. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Higgins, J., & Ross, J. (1986). Southeast Asians: A new beginning in Lowell. Lowell, MA: Mill Town Graphics.

References

231

Holland, D., Lachiotte Jr., W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ichilov, O. (1998a). Conclusion: The challenge of citizenship education in a changing world. In O. Ichilov (Ed.), Citizenship and citizenship education in a changing world (p 267-273). Portland: The Woburn Press. Ichilov, O. (1998b). Introduction. In O. Ichilov (Ed.), Citizenship and citizenship education in a changing world (p 1-10). Portland: The Woburn Press. Isin, E. F., & Wood, P. K. (1999). Citizenship & identity. London: Sage Publications. Jacobson, M. F. (1998). Whiteness of a different color: European immigrants and the alchemy of race. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Jenkins, H. (2004). Pop cosmopolitanism: Mapping cultural flows in an age of media convergence. In C. Suarez-Orozco (Ed.), Globalization: Culture and education in the new millennium. Berkeley: University of California Press. Jenkins, R. (1997). Rethinking ethnicity: Arguments and explorations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Kellner, D. (2000). Globalization and new social movements: Lessons for critical theory and pedagogy. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (p 299322). New York: Routledge. Kibria, N. (1993). Family tightrope: The changing lives of Vietnamese Americans. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kim, C. J. (1999). The racial triangulation of Asian Americans. Politics and Society. 27(1). 105-138. Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. (2002). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In Y. Zou & E. T. Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and schools: Qualitative approaches to the study of education (pp.87-138). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Kymlicka, W. (2000). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kymlicka, W. (2003). Two dilemmas of citizenship education in pluralist societies. In A. Lockyer & B. Crick & J. Annet (Eds.),

232

References

Education for democratic citizenship: Issues of theory and practice (p 47-63). Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing. Kymlicka, W. (2004). Foreword. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p xiii-xviii). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ladson-Billings, G. (2004a). Culture versus citizenship: The challenges of racialized citizenship in the United States. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p 99126). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ladson-Billings, G. (2004b). New directions in multicultural education: complexities, boundaries, and critical race theory. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 50-68). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lee, C. D. & Slaughter-Defoe, D. T. (2004). Historical and sociocultural influences on African American education. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 462-490). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lee, R. G. (1999). Orientals: Asian Americans in popular culture. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Lee, S. J. (1996). Unraveling the 'model minority' stereotype: Listening to Asian American youth. New York: Teachers College Press. Lee, S. J. (2005). Up against Whiteness: Race, school, and immigrant youth. New York: Teachers College Press. Lomawaima, K. T. (2004). Educating Native Americans. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 441-461). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lopez, D. E., & Stanton-Salazar, R., D. (2001). Mexican Americans: A second generation at risk. In R. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children of immigrants in America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lowe, L. (1997). Immigrant acts: On Asian American cultural politics. Durham, Duke University Press. Maira, S. (2004). Imperial feelings: Youth culture, citizenship and globalization. In M. M. Suarez-Orozco & D. B. Qin-Hillard (Eds.), Globalization: Culture and education in the new millennium (p 203-234). Berkeley: University of California Press.

References

233

McAfee, N. (2000). Habermas, Kristeva, and citizenship. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (Second ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Miriam-Webster dictionary (2007). On-line dictionary. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on May 20, 2007: http://mw1.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/experience. Morrison, T. (1992). Playing in the dark: Whiteness and the literary imagination. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Naples, N. A. (2003). Feminism and method: Ethnography, discourse analysis, and activist research. New York: Routledge. Nasir, N. & Hand, V. (2006). Exploring sociocultural perspectives on race, culture, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 76, (4), 449-475. Nayak, A. (2003). Race, place and globalization: Youth cultures in a changing world. New York: Oberg. Nussbaum, M. C. (2002). Patriotism and cosmopolitanism. In J. Cohen (Ed.), For love of country? (p 3-20). Boston: Beacon Press. Nussbaum, M. C. (2002). Introduction: Cosmopolitan emotions? In J. Cohen (Ed.), For love of country? (p ix-xiv). Boston: Beacon Press. Ogbu, J. U. (1991). Immigrant and involuntary minorities in comparative perspective. In M. A. Gibson & J. U. Ogbu (Eds.), Minority status and schooling: A comparative study of immigrant and involuntary minorities (p 3-36). New York: Garland Publishing. Ogbu, J. U. (2001). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (p 582-596). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Oboler, S. (2006). Introduction: Redefining citizenship as a lived experience. In S. Oboler (Ed.), Latinos and citizenship: The dilemma of belonging (3-30). New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Okihiro, G. (1994). Margins and mainstreams: Asians in American history and culture. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Olneck, M. R. (2004). Immigrant children and education in the United States. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 381-403). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

234

References

Olsen, L. (1997). Made in America: Immigrant students in our public schools. New York: The New Press. Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1993). On the theoretical concept of race. In C. McCarthy & W. Crichlow (Eds.), Race, identity, and representation in education (p 3-10). New York: Routledge. Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Ong, A. (1999). Flexible citizenship: The cultural logics of transnationality. Durham: Duke University Press. Ong, A. (2003). Buddha is hiding: Refugee, citizenship, the new America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ong, A. (2004). Higher learning: Educational availability and flexible citizenship in global space. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (p 49-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pang, V. O., Kiang, P. N., & Pak, Y. K. (2004). Asian Pacific American Students: Challenging a biased educational system. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., p 542-566). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (1996). Immigrant America: A portrait (Second ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pries, L. (1999). New migration in transnational spaces. In L. Pries (Ed.), Migration and transnational social spaces (p 1-35). Brookfield: Ashgate. Raissiguier, C. (1999). The construction of marginal identities: Working-class girls of Algerian descent in a French school. In S. Hesse-Biber & C. Gilmartin & R. Lydenberg (Eds.), Feminist approaches to theory and methodology: An interdisciplinary reader (p 138-151). New York: Oxford University Press. Ravitch, D. (1990). Multiculturalism: E pluribus plures. The American Scholar, 59(3), 337-354.

References

235

Ravitch, D. (1995). Debating the future of American education: Do we need national standards and assessments? Paper presented at the Conference on Educational Policy at the Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. Reed-Danahay, D. (2008). From the “imagined community” to “communities of practice”: Immigrant belongin among Vietnamese Americans. In D. Reed-Danahay & C. B. Brettell (Eds.) Citizenship, political engagement, and belonging: Immigrants in Europe and the United States (78-98). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Reed-Danahay, D. & Brettell, C. B. (2008). Introduction. In D. ReedDanahay & C. B. Brettell (Eds.) Citizenship, political engagement, and belonging: Immigrants in Europe and the United States (pp.118). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Rizvi, F. (2000). International education and the production of global imagination. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (p 205-226). New York: Routledge. Rodriguez, C. (2000). Changing race: Latinos, the census, and the history of ethnicity in the United States. New York: New York University Press. Rong, X. L., & Preissle, J. (1998). Educating immigrant students: What we need to know to meet the challenges. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Rosaldo, R. (1997). Cultural citizenship, inequality, and multiculturalism. In W. V. Flores & R. Benmayor (Eds.), Latino cultural citizenship: Claiming identity, space, and rights (p 27-38). Boston: Beacon Press. Rothenberg, P. S. (Ed.). (2001). Race, class, and gender in the United States: An integrated study (Fifth ed.). New York: Worth Publishers. Rothstein, S. W. (1991). Identity and ideology. New York: Greenwood Press. Rumbaut, R. & Portes, A. (2001). Introduction – Ethnogenesis: Coming of age in immigrant America. In R. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.). Ethnicities: children of immigrants in America (pp. 1-20). Berkeley: University of California Press.

236

References

Sarroub, L. K. (2001). The sojourner experience of Yemeni American high school students: An ethnographic portrait. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 390-415. Sassler, S. L. (2006). School participation among immigrant youths: The case of segmented assimilation in the early 20th century. Sociology of Education, 79, 1-24. Schlesinger, A. M. (1998). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York: W.W. Norton. Scott, J. W. (1999). The evidence of experience. In S. Hesse-Biber & C. Gilmartin & R. Lydenberg (Eds.), Feminist approaches to theory and methodology (p 79-99). New York: Oxford University Press. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. New York: Zed Books Ltd. Soysal, Y. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and Postnational membership in Europe. Chicago: The University of Chicago. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stringer, E. (2004). Action research in education. New Jersey: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Stritikus, T. T., & Nguyen, D. T. (2007). Strategic transformation: How Vietnamese immigrant youth negotiate gender identity. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 853-895. Suarez-Orozco, C. (2004). Formulating identity in a globalized world. In M. M. Suarez-Orozco & D. B. Quin-Hillard (Eds.), Globalization: Culture and education in the new millennium (p 173-202). Berkeley: University of California Press. Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (2001). Children of immigration. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 599-602. Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (2001). Globalization, immigration, and education: The research agenda. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 345-366. Suarez-Orozco, M. M., & Qin-Hillard, D. B. (2004). Introduction. In M. M. Suarez-Orozco & D. B. Qin-Hillard (Eds.), Globalization: Culture and education in the new millennium (p 1-37). Berkeley: University of California Press.

References

237

Suarez-Orozco, C., Suarez-Orozco, M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning a new land: Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Takaki, R. (1989). Strangers from a different shore: A history of Asian Americans. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Thomas, J. (1993). Doing critical ethnography (Vol. 26). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Torres, C. A. (1998). Democracy, education, and multiculturalism: Dilemmas of citizenship in a global world. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Tyack, D. B. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Tyack, D. B. (1976). Ways of seeing: An essay on the history of compulsory schooling. In R. M. Jaeger (Ed.), Contemporary methods for research in education (p 35-69). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association. U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Profile of the foreign born population in the United States: 2000. U.S. Department of Commerce. Retrieved May 23, 2005, from the World Wide Web: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23-206.pdf U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2003). Immigrants. Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved October 25, 2004, from the World Wide Web: http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/immigs.htm Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. - Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany: State University of New York Press. Vietnamese Studies Internet Resource Center. (2005). Vietnamese population in the United States. U.S. Census Bureau 2000. Retrieved May 3, 2005, from the World Wide Web: http://site.yahoo.com/vstudies/vietpopulations.html Villenas, S. (1996). The colonizer/colonized Chicana ethnographer: Identity, marginalization, and co-optation in the field. Harvard Educational Review 66(4), 711-731. Waller, W. (1989). The school as a social organism. In J. H. Ballantine (Ed.), Schools and society (Second ed., p 146-153). Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company.

238

References

Waters, M. C. (1996). The intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity in identity development of Caribbean American teens. In B. J. R. Leadbeater & N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (p 65-84). New York: New York University Press. Waters, M.C. (1999). Black identities: West Indian dreams and American realities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Weedon, C. (1999). Feminism, theory and the politics of difference. Malden: Blackwell Publishers Inc. Weis, L. & Centrie, C. (2002). On the power of separate spaces: Teachers and students writing and (righting) selves and future. American Educational Research Journal, 39 (1), 7-36. West, C. (1993). Race matters. New York: Vintage Books, a Division of Random House, Inc. Wolcott, H. F. (1997). Ethnographic research in education. In R. M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complimentary methods for research in education (2nd ed., p 327-353). Washington D.C.: American Educational Research Association. Wong, B. (2008). Globalization and citizenship: The Chinese in Silicon Valley. In D. Reed-Danahay & C. B. Brettell (Eds.) Citizenship, political engagement, and belonging: Immigrants in Europe and the United States (183-202). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Wong Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning the second language means losing the first. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346. Wu, F. H. (2002). Yellow: Race in America beyond Black and White. New York: Basic Books. Yang, P. Q. (1995). Post-1965 immigration to the United States. Westport: Praeger. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Zhou, M. (1997). Segmented Assimilation: Issues, Controversies, and Recent Research on the New Second Generation. The International Migration Review 31 (4), 975 Zhou, M. (2001). Straddling different worlds: The acculturation of Vietnamese refugee children. In R. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children of immigrants in America (p 187-228). Berkeley: University of California Press.

References

239

Zhou, M., & Bankston III, C. L. (1998). Growing up American: How Vietnamese children adapt to life in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Index

Acculturation 50-54, 60-61, 69, 211 American Dream 59 Americanization 29, 52-55, 58, 77, 105, 153, 200, 202, 214 Americanness (also see real American) 119, 136, 129, 135, 154, 174, 198 Asian American 13, 24, 88, 97, 100, 126, 140, 153, 158, 159, 170, 172-176, 195, 198 Assimilation 29, 50-65, 69, 77, 121-123, 147, 153, 200, 202, 211, 214 Bhabha, Homi 4, 69, 91, 113, 126, 128, 180 Castles, Stephen 3-4, 27, 4344, 51, 63-66, 74, 77, 121, 124, 126, 128, 139-140, 153-154, 167, 180, 191, 193-194, 197, 202-204, 207, 211, 214 Chinese Vietnamese American 127-128, 165, 176 Civil Rights Movement 51, 63 Consonant Acculturation 53

Consumerism 99 Cosmopolitanism 6, 66-67, 197, 211 Cultural citizenship (also see multicultural citizenship) 7, 194, 197, 211 Cultural norms 55-56, 61, 65, 95 Cultural racism 122-123 Diaspora 31 Diasporic Community 27, 32, 41, 212 Discourse 1, 3, 7-9, 13-16, 29, 57, 62, 72, 74, 77-78, 83, 89, 91, 94, 113, 118, 121122, 128, 142, 144-145, 152, 168, 175, 197-198, 202, 205, 213-214 Ethnicity 3, 7-8, 13, 16, 29, 45, 55, 72, 77-78, 85, 100, 109, 118, 121, 1243, 125, 127, 154, 155, 161, 163169, 172-173, 175-176, 195, 197-200, 202-203, 205, 207, 214 Ethnic American124

241

242 Ethnic identity 16, 27, 52-53, 57, 60, 68, 123, 126, 153, 155, 201, 212 Ethnic pluralism 51 Ethnic space (Ethnic boundary) 108, 114, 154, 203 Ethnic tension 115, 132, 206 Ethnography 8, 9, 19 Ethnographic study 7, 8, 10, 198 Ethnoracial assignment 155 Ethnoracial identity155 Flexible citizenship (Flexible citizen) 4, 67-68, 70, 212 Foucault, Michel 14, 115, 214 Gendered spaces 105 Globalization 4-7, 11, 23, 27, 43-44, 65, 70-73, 193, 208, 214 Global citizen 5-6, 66-67, 197, 211 Hall, Katherine 3-4, 8-9, 13, 16, 70-71, 73-74, 155-156, 174, 194, 197, 206 Hall, Stuart 14, 16, 113, 168, 195, 204 Hybridity (Also see hybrid social identity and hybrid social space) 69, 212 Hybrid social identity 127 Hybrid social space 180 Identity politics 114 Imagined boundaries 168 Immigrant adaptation 3, 11, 26-27, 30, 50, 53, 60, 74, 139 In-between spaces 60, 155

Index Insider 21, 23-26, 69, 168-169 Khmer Rouge 35 Language barrier 20, 35, 39 Lee, Stacey 27, 51, 56-57, 74, 77, 86, 89, 108, 120-121, 128, 135, 153-154, 203, 205, 214 Linguistic spaces 60, 78 Lowe, Lisa 3, 12-13, 27, 61, 155, 194, 203 Mainstream culture 4, 8-9, 2425, 53, 60-61, 77, 96-97, 99-100, 104, 110, 130, 139, 148, 155, 164, 167, 175, 199, 213-214 Marginalization (marginality) 24, 64, 77, 95, 104, 129130, 138-139, 151-152, 206 Marginal spaces 105, 138, 200 Market culture 99 Military Service 142-146, 151153 Olsen, Laurie 8-9, 27, 51, 5458, 62, 74, 77, 105, 113, 120, 205, 213-215 Omi, Michael 57, 62, 82-83, 86, 91, 167, 203 Ong, Aihwa 3-5, 8, 16, 27, 54, 61, 65-67, 69-70, 74, 120, 128, 153, 184, 207, 214 Other 21, 89, 121, 123, 168, 200 Otherness 24, 69, 120-121, 201, 203 Outsider 2, 21-26, 28, 32, 62, 69, 104, 121, 124, 135,

Index 142, 153, 168-169, 173, 196, 201, 203 Participant Observation 16-17, 217 Phenotype 91, 161 Portes, Alejandro 8, 20, 53, 77, 214 Positionality 21 Racial code 28, 122 Racial discourse 77, 92, 121, 167 Racial hierarchy 65, 118, 123, 200, 207 Racial map 117 Racial tension 115 Racialization 27, 29, 57-58, 61, 63, 65, 75, 77, 89, 95, 118, 120, 123, 126, 128129, 152-154, 193, 200, 202, 207, 210, 214 Racism 37-38, 51, 62, 74, 86, 89, 95, 121-123, 129-130, 137-138, 146 Real American 28, 119, 120121, 123-128, 135, 138142, 151-152, 201-202, 207 Rumbaut, Ruben8, 20, 53, 77, 214 Selective Acculturation 53 Semi-structured interview 1718 September 11 143, 147-148, 151 Social integration of immigrants 55

243 Stereotypes 86-87, 89, 94, 118, 152-153, 200-201, 206, 215 Strategic positioning 169 System of dominance 118 Transcultural and transnational contexts 68, 176, 184, 187, 212 Undocumented immigrants 67 Vietnamese American 13, 17, 22, 26-27, 29, 32-33, 37, 40-41, 103, 105, 124-128, 153, 165, 171-176, 196 Vietnamese refugees 32-33, 36-39, 41, 60 The Vietnam War 33, 37 War in Iraq (Iraq War) 144146, 148 Weedon, Chris 86, 89, 91, 114, 168, 193, 204 Winant, Howard 57, 62, 82-83, 86, 91, 203