Tag Archives: Culturally Responsive Education

22 Maps That Show How Americans Speak English Totally Differently From Each Other

united-states-dialect-map-languageEveryone knows that Americans don’t exactly agree on pronunciations.

Regional accents are a major part of what makes American English so interesting as a dialect.

Joshua Katz, a Ph. D student in statistics at North Carolina State University, just published a group of awesome visualizations of Professor Bert Voux’s linguistic survey that looked at how Americans pronounce words. (via detsl on /r/Linguistics)

His results were first published on Abstractthe N.C. State research blog.

Joshua gave us permission to publish some of the coolest maps from his collection.


FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare

The Model Minority Myth: What 50 Years of Research Does and Does Not Tell Us

Source: http://diverseeducation.com/article/52979/


The Model Minority Myth: What 50 Years of Research Does and Does Not Tell Us

by Dr. Nicholas D. Hartlep

Nicholas Hartlep

Nicholas Hartlep

It is little wonder why Asian-Americans are perceived by the wider higher education community to be paragons of scholarly success, despite their treatment by the U.S. government, historically, as political pariahs (as seen in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the lawful internment of innocent Japanese-Americans during the early 1940s).

The Asian-American student population supposedly scores off-the-charts on high-stakes college admission tests, such as the SAT. Public perception of Asian-American success is evidenced in the phrase “the Asian invasion” — the notion that Asian-Americans are overrepresented on college campuses. Still, Robert Teranishi, associate professor of higher education at New York University and author of the book Asians in the Ivory Tower: Dilemmas of Racial Inequality in American Higher Education, says, “Despite the perception that Asian-American Pacific Islander students are heavily concentrated in selective universities, the largest concentration of AAPI college enrollment is in community colleges.”

While some in the ivory tower (such as Arthur Sakamoto) endorse the claim that Asian-Americans are successful in higher education, Teranishi’s research under the auspices of the National Commission on Asian-American and Pacific Islander Research in Education (CARE) indicates that this “problem-free” façade is empirically inaccurate. Others who have objectively considered the data, such as Frank Wu, agree. Moreover, Asian-Americans are also believed to have superior mental health despite evidence to the contrary.

The model minority characterization of Asians began largely as a result of William Petersen’s 1966 New York Times Magazine article “Success, Japanese-American Style.” Despite the persistence of this myth nearly fifty years later, it is still not understood well by the higher education community, leaving a false narrative of the Asian-American experience intact.

What does research tell us?

Poring over five decades of research on the model minority stereotype (MMS) while myself conducting research for two forthcoming books, The Model Minority Stereotype: Demystifying Success (2013, Information Age Publishing) and The Model Minority Stereotype Reader: Critical and Challenging Readings For the 21st Century (Cognella Publishing, 2013), I have found that research conducted on the MMS is compelling and conclusive.

First, research reveals that Asian-Americans were intentionally selected to be model minorities. African-Americans could have been constructed to be model minorities, but it was not their fate. Petersen’s 1966 story came about, not because the Asian population was superior to other minorities, but because the U.S. government needed a way to shift negative international attention away from itself. Alison Reiko Loader, a Ph.D. candidate in communication studies at Concordia University in Montreal, wrote an illuminating article on this issue, “We’re Asian, More Expected of Us: Representation, The Model Minority & Whiteness on King of the Hill.” She comments that “the model minority stereotype is not as flattering as it may first appear. The expectation of overachievement diminishes individual accomplishment and diversity amongst people of Asian descent by making them all seem the same. By portraying Asians as successful, it also effectively silences them and conceals racism against them.”

According to Loader and others, the MMS shielded the status quo, insulating politicians from accusations that African-Americans were unsuccessful due to racism and discrimination in the United States. Since Asians had “made it,” they were presented as verification that America was a land of opportunity. Northwestern Professor Shalini Shankar posits that schools seem to perpetuate the model minority due to the fact that the stereotype is so functional. “The model minority has gained currency because it allows schools to focus on their more successful Asian-American students as role models for other students. In these contexts, I see the model minority as a functional stereotype, not a myth.” Petersen’s MMS construct helped fortify the meritocratic and American Dream narratives being espoused during the peak of the African-American Civil Rights Movement.

It also certainly helped that Petersen’s story came on the heels of the release of The Negro Family: The Case For National Action (the 1965 Moynihan Report), written by Assistant Secretary of Labor Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Moynihan’s report blamed African-American ghetto culture for the difficulty the population experienced. Petersen’s decision to write an Asian-American success narrative was as purposeful as it was politically intentional.

Furthermore, research on the MMS reveals that Asian-Americans do, in fact, experience racism and mental health challenges. According to Eliza Noh, “Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for Asian-American women age 15-24.” Other mental health experts cite the “model minority” stereotype and its attendant high expectations as a likely cause or contributor to suicide. Paradoxically, since Asian-Americans are perceived as having few, if any, mental health problems — an argument often advanced due to this population’s low utilization rates — Asian-American mental health needs go largely unmet. “In reality, the underutilization may be a reflection of barriers to accessing care, including the absence or awareness of culturally and linguistically appropriate services,” says Dr. Shalini Tendulkar, a researcher at the Institute for Community Health at the Cambridge Health Alliance and an instructor in medicine at the Harvard Medical School. “Additionally, it is imperative that we recognize that even within the Asian-American race, mental health disparities exist. Unfortunately, these disparities are often obscured when we examine aggregated data.”

What does research not tell us?

Research does not tell us whether MMS critics are themselves elitist, although the charge has been made by Sakamoto, Takei and Woo, who in their article, “The Myth of the Model Minority Myth,” contend that the over-education argument — the notion that Asian-Americans’ returns on education are unequal compared to non-Hispanic Whites — is highly elitist since it argues for increased income inequality: the need for highly educated Asian-American workers to earn even higher salaries in order to put them on par with comparable White workers.

Sakamoto notes, “Much of the existing research on the MMS examines Asian-Americans’ oppression and lack of parity with Whites.” And although much of MMS scholarship showcases how the stereotype divides and conquers people of color, according to Sakamoto, it does not provide actionable solutions. The former is a strength of the scholarship, but the latter is a liability. Actionable solutions are important to the diverse higher education community.

For instance, those who want to understand the MMS more fully might find themselves caught between two kinds of model minority resources: erudite articles with technical discussions of the myth, or books and websites on the myth with concrete data. Texts of the first type focus on the MMS but are often so technical they are inaccessible go the lay reader; they also lack practical applications to the college classroom. Texts of the second type, while generally more accessibly written, often leave readers without a clear sense of higher education implications. Consequently, the future trajectory of model minority research in higher education remains to be seen. Research does not tell us where the sociology of the stereotype will lead.

According to Teranishi, “Higher education should reconsider the model minority myth and develop strategies to demythologize the stereotype.” Wu also reminds us that the MMS “is a means of putting down African-Americans and Hispanics.” Asian-American collegians are not “problem-free.” They should be considered “people of color,” and they should be able to access affirmative action. According to Noh, “They also should be provided the mental health care services that they need.”

Research over the last 50 years informs us that Asian-Americans were intentionally picked to be model minorities and that Asian-Americans experience racism and mental health difficulties. The MMS is not a burden exclusively for Asian-Americans. In the previous installment of this series, we considered how the MMS negatively impacts other minority groups. The final installment will explore policy suggestions to combat the stereotype.

Dr. Hartlep is an assistant professor of educational foundations and author of the forthcoming books, The Model Minority Stereotype: Demystifying Success (2013, Information Age Publishing) and The Model Minority Stereotype Reader: Critical and Challenging Readings For the 21st Century (Cognella Publishing, 2013). He can be followed on Twitter @nhartlep.


FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare

Colorado Experience

On behalf of the entire crew of Colorado Experience and the staff of Rocky Mountain PBS, I want to thank you for being involved and letting us interview you for Colorado Experience. The show has received tremendous support from both long-time and first-time viewers of Rocky Mountain PBS. Your interview, time and passion has contributed a great deal to the episode that you are in and we thank you for helping us make Colorado Experience an excellent show!

We have already aired 4 episodes and have been receiving great feedback! You can tune in every Thursday at 7pm MST to watch new episodes, with the exception of the last Thursday of April. The season ends the first week of June.  Attached please find the complete schedule and program overview.

If you’ve missed any of the episodes, you can watch previously aired episodes for free online on our website: http://video.rmpbs.org/program/colorado-experience/

And on Youtube here:


Please feel free to promote any of the YouTube links, like our Facebook Page (https://www.facebook.com/ColoradoExperience­), follow us on Twitter (@COExperience) and share the show with your friends, family and colleagues.

It has been an amazing journey to produce Colorado Experience, and we’re all so glad that you were a part of it.  

Enjoy the show and thanks again for your participation!


PS – we’re slowly getting DVD and BlueRay copies made for each episode. If you’d like one, just let me know!




   Julie Speer
    Executive Producer & Director

    303-620-5600 (fax)
    1089 Bannock St.
    Denver, CO 80204


http://video.rmpbs.org/program/colorado-experience/  http://video.rmpbs.org/program/great-ingredients/  http://video.rmpbs.org/program/colorado-state-mind/  http://video.rmpbs.org/program/arts-district/  

FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare

Becoming a multicultural educator. Review by James A. Banks

Howe, W. A., & Lisi, P. L. (2014). Becoming a multicultural educator: Developing awareness, gaining skills, and taking action. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.


Dear Bill and Penelope:

Please accept my warm congratulations on the publication of BECOMING A MULTICULTURAL EDUCATOR, which I received from SAGE yesterday. The book is well conceptualized and executed. I think it will be well received by the field. Thank you for including my work and profile in Chapter 1. I am honored to be in your book

Again, warm congratulations!

All the best,
Jim Banks

James A. Banks
Kerry and Linda Killinger Endowed Chair in Diversity Studies and Director
Center for Multicultural Education
University of Washington
Box 353600, 110 Miller Hall
Seattle, WA 98195-3600
Phone: 206-543-3386 Fax 206-543-1237
Website: http://depts.washington.edu/centerme/home.htm


FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare

Becoming a multicultural educator. Review by Jacqueline Jordan Irvine


Howe, W. A., & Lisi, P. L. (2014). Becoming a multicultural educator: Developing awareness, gaining skills, and taking action. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

This is a "must read" book for teacher educators and professional development personnel who are interested in a comprehensive text for multicultural theory and practice.  The classroom examples, case studies, lesson plans, and probing questions for reflection provide a rich background on the complex issues of culture and learning.

Jacqueline Jordan Irvine

Candler Professor Emeritus

Emory University

FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare

Keeping Equity at the Center of Reform



Keeping Equity at the Center of Reform

By Pedro Noguera on November 18, 2012 8:00 PM

Dear Deborah,
I’m glad to hear that your travels across the country have left you feeling inspired and encouraged about possibilities for change. I am too. I just spoke to over 400 school board members (CABE Connection Association of Boards of Education) in Groton, Connecticut on Saturday and I was pleasantly surprised to see how open they were to embracing a broad reform agenda that rejects our narrow fixation on using assessment as a weapon to judge teachers and schools. I’m still not sure about what it will take to get the Obama Administration to adopt a different approach to education reform, but I think this is what we have got work at doing for the next few months as they begin plotting their direction for the next four years.
One thing I know for sure is that we have got to make a commitment to equity in education a central component of whatever we they do. It is remarkable that despite all the rhetoric about education being the civil rights issue of the 21st century, our leaders make no mention of the need for equity in educational opportunities, or conversely, the need to address the profound inequity, that characterizes so much of American education today. I suppose this may be because they are confused about what equity is. As I’ve pointed out before, several civil rights organizations have supported NCLB because they see it as a way to guarantee accountability in academic outcomes. However, what they and others have largely ignored is the profound inequity in learning opportunities caused by concentrating our most disadvantaged students in racially segregated and under-resourced schools.
In a report entitled “E Pluribus…Separation: Deepening Double Segregation for More Students”, the Civil Rights Project at UCLA has documented that a growing number of Black and Latino students attend racially isolated public schools. The report also points out that “The Obama Administration, like the Bush Administration, has taken no significant action to increase school integration or to help stabilize diverse schools as racial change occurs in urban and suburban housing markets and schools.” It is important to note that this retreat from the commitment made by the Brown decision to reduce segregation “with all deliberate speed”, is occurring as our nation is becoming more racially diverse. We should be doing all we can to prepare young people to function in a more heterogeneous society. Instead, not only are our schools becoming more racially homogenous, they are also blatantly unequal.
Many people do not realize that ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) was initially part of the civil rights laws that were enacted in the 1960s to insure that economically disadvantaged children received supplemental support. Though schools serving poor children continue to receive Title I funds, the larger commitment to addressing the challenges faced by poor children came to an end with the adoption of No Child Left Behind. Ironically, NCLB is premised on equity in that it requires all children within the same state to take the same exams. We do this even though it is widely known that children are not being educated under the similar conditions. For example, though we spend far more to educate children in Scarsdale and Beverly Hills than we do to educate children in the South Bronx or Compton. Students in California and New York are required to take the same state exams regardless of where they live or whether or not the schools they attend have libraries, science labs or any of the other inputs associated with quality education. Some states like Virginia and Florida have recently adopted different targets for different sub-groups presumably to address these inequities, but they have done nothing to address the unequal learning conditions or the vast inequities in per pupil spending among schools.
As you know, the US Supreme Court is presently hearing arguments in the case of Fischer vs. the University of Texas, the latest attack on affirmative action. The case is important for a number of reasons. If the court rules the university’s policy to be a violation of the constitution it will be a major setback to efforts to maintain some degree of racial diversity in higher education. What makes the University of Texas’ policy so important is that it was introduced to counter the effects of racial segregation in Texas schools. By guaranteeing admission to students from the top ten percent of each high school’s senior class, the University of Texas was able to insure that students throughout the state had access. One could argue that rather than compensating for the effects of segregation it would be even better to promote integration in K-12 schools and insure the students throughout Texas had access to equal educational opportunities with respect to funding and school conditions. If the policy is ruled unconstitutional not only will public k – 12 schools in Texas remain segregated on the basis of race and class, but higher education will increasingly mirror this pattern.
Deb, nine states, most recently Oklahoma, have adopted bans on affirmative action through voter referendum. The federal government cannot simply allow states to resolve these issues on their own. On matters pertaining to minority rights leadership from the courts and the federal government is essential. I know the Obama administration has a lot to contend with – the so-called fiscal cliff, the brewing conflicts in Israel-Palestine and Syria, the implementation of the healthcare law, etc. but they cannot afford to ignore the challenges the nation faces on issues broadly related to equity, diversity and education. We both know that education is still the foundation of a democratic society. That is even more the case as our nation becomes more diverse and increasingly unequal.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely, Pedro

FacebookGoogle GmailLinkedInEmailShare