Asian-Americans and Student Organizations:Attitudes and Participation
Yuh-Yin Wang, William E. Sedlacek, and Franklin D. Westbrook Research Report #7-91 This study was sponsored and conducted by the Counseling Center and the Office of Minority Student Education at the University of Maryland, College Park. Computer time for this project was provided by the Computer Science Center of the University of Maryland, College Park. COUNSELING CENTER UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND Asian-Americans and Student Organizations: Attitudes and Participation Yuh-Yin Wang, William E. Sedlacek, and Franklin D. Westbrook Research Report #7-91 Summary152 Asian-American undergraduates (80% return rate) completed a questionnaire on their attitudes toward participation in student organizations. Asian-American students, in general, liked the idea of joining groups, and they believed there were important reasons for participating in minority student groups. However, contradictorily, they were highly ambivalent about joining an ethnic pre-professional society regardless of whether they were born in the U.S. or not. Several explanations were plausible. First, they may not have considered an 'ethnic' pre-professional society to be helpful academically; but they may appreciate an ethnic group which provides opportunities for cultural awareness and group support. It is also possible that they did not trust an ethnic pre-professional society to teach them how to succeed in a career, and they might prefer to join a general one in order to be better informed about the profession. Another possible explanation is that students believed separate Asian groups isolated them from the larger community. Emotionally they valued their culture; however, in order to better adjust to the U.S. society, they preferred to mix socially with the majority. The ambivalence of Asian-American students toward ethnic preprofessional societies may explain their feelings of marginality. Vietnamese-Americans were more likely to prefer to be in their own groups than were the other Asian groups. Offices dealing with minority students may want to consider Vietnamese- Americans separately from other Asian groups in order to meet their needs. Over the past 20 years, the racial make up of students in higher education has changed significantly (Fleming, 1984). However, according to Olivas (1982), it is still difficult for minority students in traditionally White colleges to adjust academically and socially to campus life. Many students from minority groups have reported that they have not felt welcome, and have been treated like uninvited guests in a strange land (Parker and Scott, 1985). The opportunities for them to participate in student organizations and campus life in general have not often appeared available. Loo and Rolison (1986) found that the lack of participation in campus activities usually causes minority students to feel social/cultural alienation which they think may adversely affect their social/emotional well-being and retention. Carr and Chittum (1979) also pointed out that students of all racial or ethnic i backgrounds feel isolated when they have no organization of their own, and when there is little done to encourage their participation in campus life. Therefore, minority student organizations need to exist as an alternative to involvement in non-minority groups. Some research has focused on the needs of minority students, primarily Black students, on majority campuses (Sedlacek, 1987). However, Minatoya and Sedlacek (1983) found that the aspirations and expectations with which students enter a university may differ significantly by racial/ethnic group; therefore problems related to Black students may not be consistent with those experienced by Asian-American students. Bannai and Cohen (1985) found a rather simple Asian-American stereotype, the 'passive-methodical image,' which has emerged in higher education. Asian students are perceived as quiet and unassertive, yet highly methodical and attentive to detail. This stereotype can have a significant influence on how they are treated in the classroom and among peers. Sue (1980) indicated that another stereotype, the 'clumsy', inarticulate Asian who is good with numbers but poor with words, is held by many educators. These stereotypes seem to result in setting up rigid expectations for Asian-American students, and usually tend to direct them into activities which demand math/science skills and minimize verbal skills. Moreover, many students of Asian descent begin to believe these stereotypes and behave accordingly. As for mental health problems, Tracey, Leong, & Glidden (1986) found that unlike Caucasian students who were more likely to endorse emotional/social issues than academic and career issues as their presenting problems, Asian-American students rarely endorsed these concerns. They appeared to be more concerned with academic and career issues, since these problem areas are more role salient for Asian-American students. Their tendency to emphasize academic issues in contrast to social issues was further demonstrated in Mordkowitz and Ginsburg's (1986) case study. They concluded that Asian families tended to motivate achievement in their youth by various methods of strictly controlling home- work, excusing the child from daily household chores, indicating high expectations and encouraging perseverance; whereas, the parents tended to de-emphasize verbal expression and socialization. Their subjects reported believing they would have had a less positive image of academic achievement, but more developed social skills if they had grown up in a White family. Westbrook, Miyares, and Roberts (1978) found that ethnic identity was a more serious problem for Black students than for White students. Phinney and Alipuria (1987) showed that Blacks scored highest in the search for ethnic identity, followed by Mexican-Americans, Asian- Americans, and Whites. The result is consistent with Minatoya and Sedlacek's conclusion (1981) that although Asian-American students are less concerned with race than Blacks, they are concerned, in a less overt and direct manner. Leona (1986) concluded that Asian- American students have experienced social discomfort, for they are struggling between the informal and spontaneous nature of relationships in the U, S. culture and their own formal and traditional culture values. Atkinson, Maruyama, and Matsui (1978) indicated that among Asian-American university students, Japanese-American students seem more acculturated than other Asian groups. Although some Asian-American students find themselves in paradoxical situation of trying to be more active and acculturated within the predominant White society, they remain highly visible as a racial minority. Sue and Sue (1987) noted that within-group differences ( such as Korea- born KoreanAmericans vs. U.S.-born Korean-Americans ) on the acculturation variables and characteristics may be as great or greater than between-group differences (such as Asian-Americans vs. Caucasians). The variations within and between ethnic groups of Asian-Americans suggest that each group may have different issues and needs. Making generalizations about Asian-Americans without considering subcultural differences can lead to faulty conclusions. Sue (1982) found that published studies tended to focus mainly on Japanese- and Chinese- Americans with minimal attention paid to the Indo-Chinese-, Korean-, Pacific Island-, and Philippine-Americans. The purpose of the study was to assess the interest and involvement of Asian-American students in student organizations, particularly pre-professional groups. An additional purpose was to find out what differences there are among Asian groups on attitudes toward, and involvement in student groups. METHOD Subjects A random sample of 200 undergraduate Asian-American students from a large eastern university was mailed a questionnaire. Follow-up letters and phone calls resulted in an 80% return rate (N=152) after 11 were excluded as inappropriate for the sample. The students were 55% male and 45% female with a mean age of 20.5. Sixty-nine percent lived off campus with their family, 18% lived on campus, 13% lived off campus with others and 10 % lived alone off campus. Percentages throughout this article may not add to 100 % due to rounding or not reporting all percentages. Twenty percent of the respondents were freshmen, 26% were sophomores, 25% were juniors, and 29% were seniors. Sixty percent majored in engineering, physical sciences, life science, or mathematics, 20% majored in arts, social sciences, or humanities, and 17% in business. Twenty-six percent were born in the U. S. 18% first generation, 7% second generation). The foreign-born students had been in the U. S. a mean of 11.2 years (range 2 to 22 years). Ethnic identities chosen were: 23% Korean-American, 20% Chinese-American, 20% Asian- American, 14% VietnameseAmerican, 7% Philippine-American and 5% American with the rest choosing other designations. Data were analyzed using chi-square and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) at the .05 significance level. Differences on student group participation, birth status, and among ethnic groups were examined. RESULTS Means and standard deviations of the 29 Likert items and percent responses to one additional item are shown in Table 1. In general, students tended to like to mix socially with White students with a low mean of 1.6 on item 20, and seldom felt isolated or out of things (items 11 and 21). They liked the idea of joining groups; yet, they usually didn't perceive themselves as having time for groups (items 15 and 22). They tended to agree with participating in minority student groups (item 12)B however, they disagreed with a pre-professional society made up of Asian-Americans alone, and more strongly disagreed with one made up exclusively of their ethnic subgroup such as KoreanAmericans or Vietnamese-Americans (items 9 and 10). Asian-American students reported seldom using the minority student office or career development office (items 24 and 25). Twenty-nine percent of them indicated that the main function of a minority student group was the promoting of cultural awareness; while 25% indicated ethnic identity, and 22% indicated group support as the main function of such a group (item 30). Subgroup Differences Men were more likely to agree that the University is supportive of minority students than women, and seniors were less likely than underclass students to feel this way. Birth status tended to differentiate items about socializing (see Table 2). The U.S.-born students were less inclined to like the idea of joining organizations made up exclusively of Asian- Americans or exclusively of an ethnic subgroup, such a Chinese-Americans, or Vietnamese-Americans. Also they were more likely to have close friends of other races and felt themselves more a part of campus life than did foreign-born students. However, there were no significant differences between U.S. and foreign-born students in their participation in Asian or general groups. Table 3 shows the differences in attitudes by group participation. Students who joined in one or more Asian ethnic groups felt it more important to be member of an ethnic organization, and felt more comfortable making contributions to these groups. They tended to agree that associating with those of a familiar background was the good thing about joining an ethnic group. They felt more secure when they were with students of the same racial group, and consequently felt a part of campus life. However, those who did not participate in any ethnic groups were more inclined to report that they didn't have time, didn't like the idea, and could not find any reason to join an ethnic group. Significant differences emerged when the multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to compare different ethnic subgroups. The biggest differences existed between those who called themselves Vietnamese-Americans versus Americans (Table 4). Vietnamese-Americans felt isolated among majority students, and felt left out while attending the University. Most of their close friends were from their racial group. However, those who identified themselves as Americans tended to feel the opposite of the Vietnamese-Americans. DISCUSSION As noted by Carr and Chittum (1979), Asian-American students' feelings of marginality are manifested through their participation in groups. Logically, birth status might be expected to be related to group participation and perceptions of social ability and university life. However, the U.S.-born students were not significantly more enthusiastic about joining groups. Regardless of the fact that they were significantly more confident of their social ability, they did not seem to seek social achievement through participation in either ethnic or general groups. Asian-American students, in general, liked the idea of joining groups, and they believed there were important reasons for participating in minority student groups. However, contradictorily, they were highly ambivalent about joining an ethnic pre-professional society regardless of whether they were born in the U.S. or not. Several explanations were plausible. First, they may not have considerd an 'ethnic' pre-professional society to be helpful academically; but they may have appreciated an ethnic group which provides opportunities for cultural awareness and group support. It is also possible that they did not trust an ethnic pre-professional society to teach them how to succeed in a career, and they might prefer to join a general one in order to be better informed about the profession. Another possible explanation is that students believed separate Asian groups isolated them from the larger community. Emotionally they valued their culture; however, in order to better adjust to the U. S. society, they preferred to mix socially with the majority. The ambivalence of Asian- American students toward ethnic preprofessional societies may explain their feelings of marginality. Differences existed among ethnic subgroups as to how they perceived issues. This is particularly true for 'Americans' and 'Vietnamese-Americans'. offices dealing with minority students may need to consider Vietnamese-Americans separately from other Asian groups. Vietnamese-Americans have been in the U.S. for a shorter period of time and have had to survive without help from those who have been in the U.S. longer; also the loss of their country was entangled with policies of the U.S. These situations can make integrating with the general society difficult. Generally, they were more likely to seek help from minority student services than other Asian groups. However, Vietnamese Americans liked to maintain their independence as much as possible. Research indicates that Asian students prefer a more directive approach in counseling. Vietnamese-Americans might prefer counseling focused on their group needs. Since U.S.-and foreign-born Asian-Americans differed on socializing but not on group participation rate, it might be good to promote activities that mix Asian-American students of different birth status to provide them with a chance to learn from each other, while sharing common socializing values. More Asian-American students were interested in business than was reported by Minatoya and Sedlacek (1981). This indicates that Asian-American students seem to be pursuing social science and related fields in greater numbers, and are moving away from occupational stereotypes. Overall, Asian-American students are a diverse group, sharing some common attitudes and perceptions but differing on others. Continuing research on their needs and interests can help us plan and execute optimal student service programs for them. REFERENCES Atkinson, D. R., Maruyama, M., & Matsui, S. (1978). Effects of counselor race and counseling approach on AsianAmericans'perceptions of counselor credibility and utility. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25 (1), 76-82. Bannai, H., & Cohen, D. A. (1985). The passive-methodical image of Asian-American students in the school system. Sociology and Social Research, 70 (1), 79-81. Carr, D. J., & Chittum, C. (1979). A study to identify nonacademic factors which may positively influence the recruitment and retention of 'other race' students at Virginia's State-Supported Institutions of Higher Education. Final report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 187 166) Fleming, J. (1984). Blacks in college. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass. Leong, F. T. L. (1986). Counseling and psychotherapy with Asian -Americans: Review of the literature. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33 (2), 196-206. Loo, C. M., & Rolison, G. (1986). Alienation of ethnic minority students at a predominantly White university. Journal of Higher Education, 57 (1), 58-77. Minatoya, L. Y., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1981). Another look at the melting pot: Perceptions of Asian-American undergraduates. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 328-336. Minatoya, L. Y., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1983). Assessing differential needs among university freshmen: A comparison among racial/ethnic subgroups. Journal of Non-White Concerns in Personnel and Guidance, 11 (4), 126-132. Mordkowitz, E. R., & Ginsburg, H. P. (1986 April). The academic socialization of successful Asian-American college students Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Olivas, M. A. (1982). Federal higher education policy: The case of Hispanics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 301-310. Parker, W. M., & Scott, J. (1985). Creating an inviting atmosphere for college students from ethnic minority groups. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, (1) 82-84. Phinney, J. S., & Alipuria, L. L. (1987, April). Ethnic identity in older adolescents from four ethnic groups. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore, MD. Sedlacek, W. E. (1987). Black students on White campuses: 20 years of research. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 484-495. Sue, D. W. (1980). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice.New York: Wiley. Sue, S. (1982). Mental health of Asian-Americans. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sue, D., & Sue, S. (1987). Cultural factors in the clinical assessment of Asian-Americans. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55 (4), 479-487. Tracey, T. J., Leong, F. T. L., & Glidden, C. (1986). Help seeking and problem perception among Asian-Americans. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33 (3), 331-336. Westbrook, F. D., Miyares, J., & Roberts, J. H. (1978). Perceived problem areas by Black and White students and hints about comparative counseling needs. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25 (2), 119-123. Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations of 29 Likert Items* and Percentage Distribution of 1 Item.
Items Mean SD1.It is important to be a member of an ethnic 3.14 .95 organization such as an Asian-American student group. 2.The University fosters respect for differences in 3.40 .90 cultural heritage. 3.I feel that I have more problems in socializing than 2.45 1.12 majority students do. 4.I feel comfortable making contributions to my ethnic 3.46 .79 student organization. 5.It does not matter if there are any Asian-American 3.08 1.19 faculty in my major at the University. 6.Most of my close friends are members of my racial group.3.04 1.34 7.I would prefer that people think of me as a Chinese- 3.27 1.25 American, Japanese-American, Korean-American, and so forth, rather than as an Asian-American. 8.I am interested in belonging to an organization which 3.76 .89 is made up of students in my major. 9.For such a group mentioned in statement 8, I prefer 2.16 .98 that it be made up exclusively of Asian-American students. 10.For such a group mentioned in statement 8, I prefer 2.04 1.01 thatit be made up exclusively of members of my racial group, such as Chinese-American students or Korean-American students. 11.I feel isolated among majority students. 2.20 1.02 12.I can not find any reason to participate in a minority 2.62 1.06 student group. 13. The good thing about being involved in a student 3.79 .92 organization of my ethnic group is associating with those of a familiar background and culture. 14. I am more confident of my academic ability than of my 3.07 .97 social ability. 15. I usually don't have time for student organizations. 3.30 1.08 16. Ethnic/racial groups tend to segregate and isolate 3.30 1.09 minority students. 17. I don't think I am a minority. 2.74 1.18 18. To join a student organization can enhance my problem 3.14 .85
solving ability. 19. The University is supportive of minority students. 3.35 .86 20. I prefer not to mix socially with White students. 1.59 .74 21.I feel left out of things while attending the 1.95 .97 University because of race. 22.I don't like the idea of joining groups. 2.20 .94 23.It is more important to join a majority student 2.39 .84 organization than a minority student organization. 24.I often take advantage of the services provided by 2.12 .97 the Office of Minority Student Education. 25.I don't know whether there is a Career Development 2.22 1.33 Center on campus. 26.I feel more secure when I am with students of 2.65 1.15
my racial group than with majority students. 27. The interracial climate on campus is hostile. 2.42 1.00 28.I enjoy participating in ethnic/racial programs 3.33 .88 and activities on campus. 29.I feel I am a part of campus life. 3.37 1.00 30.Please indicate, in your opinion, what is the main function of a minority student group? (Please check one only) Promote political awareness.---------- 1% Promote cultural awareness. ---------- 29% Maintain ethnic identity. ---------- 25% Provide group support. ---------- 22% Provide social activities. ---------- 16% Provide academic support. ---------- 7% * Based on a 5-point scale, 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree. Table 2 Significant Differences in Attitudes by Birth Status U. S.-born Foreign-Born N=41 N=111 Item M SD M SD 6.Most of my close friends are members 2.37 1.26 3.30 1.28 of my racial group. 7.For such a group mentioned in 1.83 .89 2.28 .99 statement 8 I prefer that it be made up exclusively of Asian-Americans. 10.For such a group mentioned in 1.71 .90 2.16 1.02 statement 8 I prefer that it be made up exclusively of members of my racial group, such as Chinese-American students or Korean American students. 11.I feel isolated among majority 1.90 .95 2.32 1.03 students. 14.I am more confident of my academic 2.68 1.05 3.21 .91 than of my social ability. 21. I feel left out of things while 1.61 .83 2.07 .99 attending the University because of race. 29.I feel I am a part of campus life. 3.76 .92 3.23 .99 * Based on a 5-point scale, 1= strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree. All items shown here are significant at .05 level using multivariate analysis of variance. Table 3 Significant Differences By Participation in Asian Groups* No groups 1 or more groups N=110 N=42 Items M SD M SD 1.It is important to be a member of an 2.91 .86 3.74 .91 ethnic organization such as an Asian-American student group. 4.I feel comfortable making 3.22 .64 4.07 .84 contributions to my ethnic student organization. 6.Most of my friends are members of my 2.80 1.27 3.67 1.32 racial group. 8.I am interested in belonging to an 3.67 .90 4.00 .83 organization which is made up of students in my major. 12.I can not find any reason to 2.86 .91 1.95 1.14 participate in a minority student group. 13.The good thing about being involved 3.57 .88 4.36 .79 in a student organization of my ethnic group is associating with those of a familiar background and culture. 15.I usually don't have time for student3.63 .98 2.67 1.03 organizations. 22.I don't like the idea of joining 2.44 .90 1.57 .70 groups. 26.I feel more secure when I am with 2.48 1.07 3.10 1.25 students of my racial group than with majority students. 28.I enjoy participating in ethnic/ 3.07 .69 4.02 .95 racial programs and activities on campus. 29.I feel I am a part of campus life. 3.16 .97 3.93 .85 * Based on a 5-point scale, 1=strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree. All items shown here are significant at .05 level using multivariate analysis of variance. Table 4 Significant Differences in Attitudes by Asian GROUPS* Items Americans Asian-Am Chinese-Am Korean-Am Philippine-Am Vietnamese-Am N=8 N=31 N=31 N=35 N=11 N=22 M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD 6. 1.50 .53 2.48 1.18 3.04 1.26 3.60 1.29 3.00 1.48 3.77 .97 7. 2.88 1.72 2.48 1.21 3.44 .89 3.94 1.16 3.40 1.35 3.36 1.22 11. 1.62 .92 2.00 .82 2.48 .98 2.06 1.03 1.64 .81 2.71 1.15 19. 3.00 .54 3.74 .68 3.19 .88 3.14 .85 3.73 .91 3.59 .67 20. 1.12 .35 1.32 .54 1.67 .68 1.60 .60 1.81 1.30 1.82 .79 21. 1.25 .46 1.71 .82 1.93 1.36 1.94 .84 1.70 .67 2.54 .80 * Based on a five point scale, 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree. All items are significant at .05 level using multivariate analysis of variance.
