Unraveling the "Model Minority" Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth.

Abstract

Unraveling Model Minority Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth, by Stacey J. Lee. York: Teachers College Press, 1996.160 pp. $39.00, cloth; $17.95, paper. Reviewed by Donna Y. Ford, The University of Virginia; and Deneese L. Jones, The University of Kentucky. There seems to be a national obsession with explaining high educational achievement of Asian American students, who are often referred to as minority. Educators and researchers in particular have relied heavily on comparative research and theory to explain why some minority groups fare better than others educationally and economically. The most popular theory has been that advanced by Ogbu (1978, 1990, 1992), through his comparison of what he calls involuntary and voluntary minority groups. Unraveling Model Minority offers a brief but interesting analysis of Ogbu's theory regarding members of this latter group. Countering Ogbu, Lee contends that his analysis (a) fails to explain why Asians do not perform as well in their respective countries of origin as they do in United States; (b) fails to explain poor achievement among Asian Americans; and (c) treats voluntary minorities as a homogeneous group, thereby ignoring within-group differences among various Asians (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc.). Like Ogbu, Lee places heavy emphasis on comparing achievements of Asian Americans with African Americans. This is not a criticism, however, for Lee is to be commended for being one of few researchers who has put pen to paper in an effort to raise readers' awareness as well as their consciousness regarding myths and motives surrounding seemingly positive stereotype of Asian Americans. As Christine Sleeter states in Foreword, the model minority image authorizes flat denial of racism and structures of racial dominance, and silences those who are not economically successful (p. ix). In unraveling model minority stereotype, this work illustrates how it is used both as a hegemonic device to support notions of meritocracy and individualism, and as an obvious but long-ignored tactic to pit people of color against each other. The book is based on a qualitative study conducted in a high school located in a major city on East Coast, north of Mason-Dixon line. Of 2,050 students enrolled at this school, 45% were White, 35% Black, 18% Asian American, and 2% members of other racial/ethnic groups. Lee early explains that several questions guided this study, among them following: What do Asian American student identities explain about formation of ethnic//racial identity? How does variation in Asian American student identity contribute to our understanding of literature on immigrant minorities? How did model minority stereotype influence Asian American student identity? What identities were encouraged and discouraged by school? How did model minority stereotype influence race relations? What influence did school have on race relations? In search of answers to these questions, Lee conducted semistructured interviews with 47 of 356 Asian American students, a number of teachers, and several of school's Black students. The book centers on experiences of students from four Asian American identity groups: Korean-identified students; Asian-identified students; Asian Americanidentified students; and New Wavers, a group Lee describes as personifying a culture of resistance to extant racial/ethnic identities. Accordingly, she notes that these four groups are categorized based on students' levels of racial identity and pride, levels of acculturation, cultural orientations (values, beliefs, behaviors), and attitudes toward school and achievement. After reading this book, readers may begin to sense how model minority stereotype serves to ease guilt and appease conscience of those who wish to ignore nation's most trenchant social ills-namely, racism, prejudice, and discrimination. …