Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?
A study guide of Beverly Daniel Tatum’s 2020 book ‘Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?’
Summary, part 5
Part IV: Beyond Black and White
Chapter 8: Critical Issues in Latinx, Native, Asian and Pacific Islander, an Middle Eastern/North African Identity Development
Tatum uses this part of her book to highlight the experiences of other targeted racial or ethnic groups as their cultural oppression has been part of their lived experiences and has played into in the identity development process. Jean Phinney’s model of adolescent ethnic identity development puts three stages to ethnic identity development:
Unexamined ethnic identity: when race or ethnicity is not particularly salient for the individual
Ethnic identity search: when individuals are actively engaged in defining for themselves what it means to be a member of their own racial or ethnic group
Archived ethnic identity: when individuals are able to assert a clear, positive sense of their racial or ethnic identity
Although it is impossible to put such a wide range of experiences into three stages, Tatum recognizes that this model is a good starting point for understanding how racial and ethnic groups may understand their ethnic identity. Tatum then goes on to provide an overview of these different groups in America and examines how their historic experiences of racism and discrimination may have impacted identity development and thus, experiences in education.
Latinx Experience
The first ethnic minority group Tatum examines is the Latinx communities in America. They are the largest “minority” group in the US, accounting for 54 percent of the total population growth thus far in the 21st century. With a median age of 28, they are also the youngest major racial or ethnic group in the US. 67% of this population is of Mexican ancestry. Because of the conquest and annexation of Mexican territory following the Mexican-American War, Mexican Americans were initially incorporated into U.S. society against their will (much like the experiences of African Americans and Native peoples). In both Texas and California, Mexican-Americans were confined to segregated schools, and Spanish for instruction in public schools was outlawed. Educational attainment and family income remain below the U.S. average.
Because of the Spanish-American War, much of the Puerto Rican community in America had a similar experience of not “choosing” to become American. Further, the Jones Act of 1917 imposed citizenship and obligation to serve in the US military but denied Puerto Ricans the right to vote in national elections. Many Puerto Ricans are dark-skinned (because the multiracial population descended from European colonizers, enslaved Africans, and indigenous Tiano Indians), so they also experienced patterns of residential and school segregation.
Salvadorans and Cubans are the next biggest populations, although Cubans have a long history with the US, immigration into the US increased drastically following the 1959 revolution by Fidel Castro. In 1966, the Cuban Adjustment Act was passed, which provided an accelerated pathway to permanent residence in Cuba. However in 1994, the “wet foot, dry foot policy” was enacted, whereby Cubans who were intercepted on the water (“wet foot”) would be returned to Cuba but those who made it to the U.S. shore (“dry foot”) would be allowed to remain and given permanent residence after one year. The first wave of Salvadorans came to the U.S. between 1980-1990 and now in 2016, approximately two million Salvadorans are living in the US.
Tatum focuses on the common characteristic shared by many Latinx families called familism. Familism is “a set of normative beliefs… that emphasize the centrality of the family unit and stress the obligations and support that family members owe to both nuclear and extended kin” (p. 243). Carlo and Marcelo Suarez-Orozco investigated the nature of familism between Mexicans living in Mexico, immigrant Mexicans in the U.S., U.S.-born Mexican-Americans, and White Americans. Latinx groups were all more family oriented than the White American group, with no significant difference between the three groups. As an example, achieving in school and work was important for Latinx teens because it would allow them to take care of their family members, whereas it was important for White Americans because it allowed them independence from their families. Familism is in stark contrast to the rugged individualism identified with American culture.
Tatum also investigates how language and identity are closely intertwined for Latinx youth. There is a connection between familism and language, where there is a huge emphasis on speaking Spanish. However, this competes with the dominant culture, so young people may avoid speaking Spanish in public. But this doesn’t always guarantee acceptance. The resolution of feelings about speaking Spanish for young people is a crucial dimension of the identity development process. This strong connection between language and education is important for educators to consider. A child’s fluency in Spanish needs not be undermined in order to achieve English fluency. Since learning builds on prior knowledge and experiences, native language can serve as a foundation for all other learning.
Tatum also considers how the reality of undocumented status impacts Latinx families and education. Approximately 5.5 million children who have at least one undocumented parent. Of those, 4.5 million are U.S.-born citizens. A huge portion of kids have their undocumented status kept from them; learning about it can heavily impact the identity development of youth. Feeling scared and alone can lead to students dropping out or avoiding persuing higher education. DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) provided a lifeline for many students with this experience.
Native Experience
Next, Tatum examines the experience of Native people, their identity development, and their experiences within education. As of 2015, 6.6 million people identify as Native American. Only 22 percent of all Native Americans live on reservations and trust lands, with the remaining percentage living in nearby rural communities. More Native American people live in poverty than any other racial group.
Following the establishment of reservations, one of the major strategies used to facilitate cultural conversion was the establishment of off-reservation boarding skills for Indian children. Carlisle Indian School was the first kind of this school established in 1879. Although these schools were reversed in 1930, several generations of native children lost their traditional cultural values and ways and remained alienated from American culture. There were then further disruptions when Native American people were taken from reservations and placed in urban settings, causing intergenerational impacts of trauma and displacement. Despite this legacy of loss, there is also an accompanying legacy of resistance. As of 2017, there are 23 fully accredited Tribal Colleges and Universities in the US.
One unique way that schools have upheld oppression of Native people is through stereotypes, racist mascots, and erasure of history. In 2001, the American Indian College Fund campaigned to portray contemporary and accurate Native American people. The challenge of invisibility is still prevalent today, especially in schools and areas of small Indigenous populations. Historical omissions and distortions don’t just affect Native American students, they contribute to the miseducation of everyone. Using Indigenous stereotypes as mascots in schools and sports teaches students that stereotyping minority groups is acceptable. Social psychologist Stephanie Freyberg explains that “whether the stereotypical image is “negative” or “positive” in its content, the impact on Native American youth is harmful in terms of lowering self-esteem, feelings of community worth and achievement-related possible selves” (p. 266).
Asian Experience
People from many different ethnic, cultural, religious, and geographic backgrounds make up Asian and Asian-Americans. Collectively, Asian-Americans have the highest median family incomes, highest levels of education, highest rates of intermarriage, and lowest rates of residential segregation in the country. The Chinese were the first to immigrate to the U.S. in large numbers during the California gold rush in 1850. Chinese men found employment working as laborers on the transcontinental railroad and were eventually blamed for the downturn of the economy, facing bigotry and violence as a result. This eventually led to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which prohibited all immigration of Chinese laborers for 10 years.
Similarly, Japanese workers were originally welcomed in Hawaii, but there was the considerable anti-Japanese sentiment on West Coast and this was only intensified by Pearl Harbor. Filipino-Americans also had a similar experience with male immigration to Hawaii and eventually immigration to mainland states. Most Korean-Americans living in the U.S. now were part of the post-1965 immigration from immigration act and now, more than half of Korean adults over the age of 25 have a college degree. NHPI (Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders) have lower levels of educational attainments and higher poverty rates than the Asain-American population. Ultimately, for many within the Asian-American communities, the polarization of civil rights protests required a new consideration of their identity, their self-definition, and their place in racialized America.
Tatum also unpacks the myth of the model minority and how it impacts young Asian-Americans in and outside of school settings. The idea is generally credited to a 1966 article by William Petersen entitled “Success Story, Japanese-American Style” which reviewed the success of Japanese-Americans despite their history of discrimination. The article used statistics to show the low rates of reported crime, mental illness, and more to show how groups succeeded against the odds. The shift from “undesirables” to the model of success can be explained by a dramatic shift in the immigrant population. Immigrants that arrived in 1965 were a hyper-selected group that had higher rates of education, economic status, and “success” compared to other people in their home countries. For example, Vietnamese immigrants are not hyper-selected because their educational attainment does not exceed the general U.S. population, but they are highly selected, because 23% have a bachelor’s degree, compared to the 5% in Vietnam that have bachelor's degrees.
In general, Asian Americans are likely to become more economically successful in the U.S. compared to Mexican immigrants because they are coming with more social capital in the form of their advanced education. Hyperselectivity sets the foundation for Asian immigrant parents and their second generation to adopt a cultural frame around achievement and success which is supported by higher levels of education in the community, which means more resources to re-create institutions such as language schools, after-school tutoring, and cultural and academic enrichment programs. This support can lead to experiences of stereotype promise in schools. The stereotype promise (the performance-enhancing benefit of being expected to succeed, which can sometimes become a self-fulfilling prophecy) is not often extended to other groups of color.
However, Tatum also points out that if you are not “successful” by academic standards, it can mean distancing yourself from your ethnic group. These cultural expectations are internalized, but many do not meet these standards of success and they deviate to other career paths, interests, and goals. Additionally, the learning needs of Asian students can be overlooked because they are assumed to not need help. Thus, the model minority stereotype can limit their educational options (e.g. if they are encouraged to pursue math and science, which require less verbal fluency than English) and it has served to pit Asian-Americans against other groups, targeted by racism. The stereotype that Asian-Americans are quiet and content with the status quo is also supported by the myth of the model minority, as it obscures the reality of racism in the lives of Asian-Pacific Americans and encourages silence about it.
Although social categories like Asian Pacific Americans, Latinx, and Native Americans are legacies of racial formations and discrimination of America’s past, “cultural identities are not solely determined in response to racial ideologies, but racism increases the need for a positive seld-defined identity in order to survive psychologically” (p. 287). Positive psychological outcomes will happen for children in schools if we hear their voices, affirm their identities, and interrupt racism.
Middle Eastern and North Africans (MENAs)
In the 2016 census, a new racial category in emerged in the census: MENA, which stands for Middle Eastern and North Africans. In the same way that “Asian” or “Native” lumps together many unique ethnic and cultural experience, MENA does the same. There is a tendency to lump those from MENA region under one category: Arab or Muslim, although obviously not every MENA person identifies with these categories.
The MENA population is only about one hundred million, but the Muslim population in the U.S. is 3.3 million, of which a majority of that population is U.S.-born. For MENA youth, 9/11 marked a turning point in how others looked at them and how they looked at themselves. Suddenly, the Muslim part of young people’s identities came to the forefront of identity development, which was hard for many youths to carry. This led to a temptation to “pass” by altering appearance (i.e., not wearing a hijab or shaving a beard) or moving around the country to blend in with others around them (i.e., moving to South Florida where there is a greater Hispanic population to pass as Hispanic).
Repeated representation of Muslims as a dangerous presence in American society has served to legitimize anti-Muslim feelings and fueled anti-Muslim crimes. Muslim women are particularly vulnerable because of their identifiable religious attire. Tatum reminds readers that empowerment often comes from connection with others who have shared experiences and concerns, so allies need to lift MENA youth in schools up so they feel comfortable connecting with others who share their experiences.
Concerned educators can support MENA students by:
Acknowledging their presence institutionally: for instance, celebrating Muslim holidays campus-wide, participating in baccalaureate service on commencement weekend. Small acts that make students feel seen and included
Educate yourself: learn about Islam and the MENA region from reliable sources like American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and Teaching Tolerance
Speak up against Islamophobia: anyone can interrupt an offensive joke or challenge stereotypes. If you don’t know how best to be helpful, ask and then listen. Be public in your support of those that are targeted
Chapter 9: Identity Development in Multiracial Families
Tatum uses this chapter to focus specifically on multiracial families and identity development in young people, taking a look into the history of racial categorization in the U.S. to understand the contemporary meaning of claiming a multiracial identity.
In the 20th century, in both U.S. legal and social practice, anyone with any known African heritage (no matter how far back in the family lineage) was considered Black. This was known as the “one-drop rule.” During this period the choice of biracial or multiracial identity was not a viable option. Essentially, multiracial identities were categorized as Black ones. No other ethnic population in the U.S. was defined by the one-drop rule. In 1967, the Loving v. Virginia case overturned the last laws prohibiting interracial marriage. This historical backdrop provides the context of the contemporary question of multiracial identity.
American attitudes towards interracial marriage have grown dramatically more favorable in the last half century and any ambivalence or disapproval can be excused by concerns about the hardship the children of these relationships are assumed to suffer. Although studies have found that biracial children are just as happy as other children, it is important to look at what unique challenges biracial young people may face when it comes to identity development.
In Beyond Black: Biracial Identity in America, Kerry Ann Rockquemore and David L. Brunsma categorized diverse understandings into four types of racial identification:
The singular identity (either exclusively Black or exclusively White)
The border identity (defining oneself as biracial)
The protean identity (shifting between, Black, White, and biracial)
The transcendent identity (rejecting all racial categories)
Although exclusively Black singular identity was the norm historically (especially considering the one-drop rule), people often choose the identity that society gives them. For instance, if they have lots of Black features and society sees them as Black, they are more likely to self-identify that way. In a study completed with a mix of biracial people, it was found that the border “biracial” identity was most common (58%), only 6.5% of people identified as “protean” and 15% identified as “nonracial,” refusing to participate in racial categorization process in any way other than human. The study found that there is no unified racial identity known as “multiracial” or singular understanding of what it means in one’s daily life and although physical appearance does play a role, it is not the only identifying factor.
Tatum also recognizes that the choices parents make about where their children live and where they go to school have implications for their identity development. Parents in a biracial relationship need to take a race-conscious approach to socialization. If the Black parent is disparaged in front of the child, or there are no positive ties to the Black community, it will be difficult for the child to value their Black heritage.
Epilogue: Signs of Hope, Sites of Progress
Tatum concludes this work with the analogy of winter giving way to a spring thaw. That thaw can only come about through collective action for social change. In order to facilitate change, Tatum references the Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation Enterprise’s (TRHT) goals of eradicating racial hierarchies of human value and replacing them with belief in “a shared common humanity” (p. 349). When developing a model to resolve these systemic conflicts specifically in the U.S., the TRHT focuses on transformation rather than reconciliation, given that racism is built into the U.S.’ very structures.
Seven principles for facilitating this transformation are offered, and it is believed that, through these actions, true transformation can occur in our society:
History must be recounted accurately on the local and national level
This transformational vision must be communicated in a clear, concise manner that sets up ambitious but achievable goals. These goals must be short and long-term and must be constantly revisited to assess progress
This transformative process needs to be inclusive, understanding of coexisting cultural, experiential, and perspective differences, acknowledge the fact that different approaches to racial equity are interdependent, including non-traditional allies, and provide a supportive setting for all participants to tell their stories
The healing process must focus on trust-building
Commitment to reparations and restorative justice is vital, as is the commitment to policies that foster true systemic change
There must be a communications strategy in place to keep communities well-informed, even those who are unsupportive of or uninvolved in the process
There must be a well-understood manner of dealing with the inevitable arising of conflict
Tatum leaves readers with a statement that truly encompasses where the fight for antiracism is currently at and how its vision can be fully realized in the future:
“I started this book with the question, Is it better? My answer is: Not yet, but it could be. It’s up to us to make sure it is. I remain hopeful.” (p. 358)