Re-Examining the American Dream
By Connie Cai
In her article, “Parents’ Aspirations and Investments: The Role of Social Class in the Educational Experiences of 1.5 and Second-Generation Chinese Americans,” researcher Vivian Louie details a cultural phenomenon known as ‘immigrant optimism,’ in which voluntary immigrants to America are buoyed by a sense that with hard work, anything is possible. In short, these immigrants subscribe wholeheartedly to the American Dream. Though the “American Dream” might be dismissed as an overly debated and trite phenomenon, Louie takes a fresh approach, analyzing how immigrant optimism and socioeconomic status play out in the educational outcomes of American-born Chinese students. Ultimately what Louie finds is that Chinese American immigrants overwhelmingly view education as a path to overcome racial and economic barriers, but are unable or unwilling to understand that beneath this optimistic belief is the harsh, institutionalized reality of such barriers [1].
In her research, Louie examines the educational trajectories of sixty-eight Chinese American college students and their families in New York City. The students attended either Columbia University or Hunter College, and were selected to represent a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds. While some families lived in ethnic enclaves (ie, NYC’s Chinatown), others resided in more affluent and diverse suburbs [1].
In her interviews, Louie reveals that all Chinese immigrant parents shared high educational aspirations for their children; as one student explains it, “There’s absolutely no question that education is the direct path, the only path”[1]. Louie is careful to point out that while such high educational aspirations of Chinese immigrants and their children have often been used to justify the model minority myth (the belief that Asian immigrants are predisposed to be more successful and intelligent than other immigrant or minority communities), these aspirations actually reveal an intense belief in American institutions as tools for social mobility. The immigrant parents all unanimously revealed stories of racial injustices in America, yet they unequivocally saw education as the sole, or at least the most accessible, method to ensure that their children did not experience similar injustices. This viewpoint is, in part, a result of ‘voluntary’ immigration to America; Asian immigrants’ decision to come to America is usually predicated on seeking a better future for their families [1].
Digging deeper, Louie reveals a dichotomy between highly skilled Chinese immigrants who came to the U.S. for academic and research purposes and those without translatable degrees or skills who worked labor-intensive and low-skilled jobs. While both groups shared similar aspirations, they had vastly different access to educational opportunities due to their differences in socioeconomic status, English speaking abilities, and where they lived . For example, the middle-class Chinese immigrants who had stable, well-paying jobs as engineers and doctors were able to send their children to private schools and pay for extracurricular opportunities; by contrast, Chinese immigrants who operated restaurants in Chinatown had to rely on their informal ‘ethnic networks’ to find opportunities for their children. Unsurprisingly, the educational outcomes of these children were skewed such that children from middle-class backgrounds were much more likely to attend selective, private universities like Columbia and those from a low-income background were more likely to attend public state colleges like Hunter. While both groups had a shared optimism in education as the great equalizer, education actually replicated and legitimized socioeconomic stratification [1].
Louie’s research is pertinent to the current debate surrounding affirmative action and how education, particularly higher education, can be made more equitable. Her research helps us contextualize and understand the stories of many high-achieving Asian students––who are more than just perfect SAT scores and stellar report cards, but also products of optimism and the American Dream, who benefit from vastly different backgrounds and resources. Most importantly, however, Louie’s research provides insight on the discrepancy between what education in America represents (particularly for immigrants) and what it is ultimately able to accomplish. Rather than blindly accepting education as a fail-proof tool for social mobility, Louie argues that we must acknowledge the systemic biases that undergird our education system––namely that inherited socioeconomic status plays a significant role in determining educational outcomes––and strives to correct such biases through policy changes. Maybe then, such optimism will be justified, and the American Dream will be a reality [1].
References
[1] Louie, V. (2001). Parents' Aspirations and Investment: The Role of Social Class in the Educational Experiences of 1.5- and Second-Generation Chinese Americans. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 438-474.
In her article, “Parents’ Aspirations and Investments: The Role of Social Class in the Educational Experiences of 1.5 and Second-Generation Chinese Americans,” researcher Vivian Louie details a cultural phenomenon known as ‘immigrant optimism,’ in which voluntary immigrants to America are buoyed by a sense that with hard work, anything is possible. In short, these immigrants subscribe wholeheartedly to the American Dream. Though the “American Dream” might be dismissed as an overly debated and trite phenomenon, Louie takes a fresh approach, analyzing how immigrant optimism and socioeconomic status play out in the educational outcomes of American-born Chinese students. Ultimately what Louie finds is that Chinese American immigrants overwhelmingly view education as a path to overcome racial and economic barriers, but are unable or unwilling to understand that beneath this optimistic belief is the harsh, institutionalized reality of such barriers [1].
In her research, Louie examines the educational trajectories of sixty-eight Chinese American college students and their families in New York City. The students attended either Columbia University or Hunter College, and were selected to represent a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds. While some families lived in ethnic enclaves (ie, NYC’s Chinatown), others resided in more affluent and diverse suburbs [1].
In her interviews, Louie reveals that all Chinese immigrant parents shared high educational aspirations for their children; as one student explains it, “There’s absolutely no question that education is the direct path, the only path”[1]. Louie is careful to point out that while such high educational aspirations of Chinese immigrants and their children have often been used to justify the model minority myth (the belief that Asian immigrants are predisposed to be more successful and intelligent than other immigrant or minority communities), these aspirations actually reveal an intense belief in American institutions as tools for social mobility. The immigrant parents all unanimously revealed stories of racial injustices in America, yet they unequivocally saw education as the sole, or at least the most accessible, method to ensure that their children did not experience similar injustices. This viewpoint is, in part, a result of ‘voluntary’ immigration to America; Asian immigrants’ decision to come to America is usually predicated on seeking a better future for their families [1].
Digging deeper, Louie reveals a dichotomy between highly skilled Chinese immigrants who came to the U.S. for academic and research purposes and those without translatable degrees or skills who worked labor-intensive and low-skilled jobs. While both groups shared similar aspirations, they had vastly different access to educational opportunities due to their differences in socioeconomic status, English speaking abilities, and where they lived . For example, the middle-class Chinese immigrants who had stable, well-paying jobs as engineers and doctors were able to send their children to private schools and pay for extracurricular opportunities; by contrast, Chinese immigrants who operated restaurants in Chinatown had to rely on their informal ‘ethnic networks’ to find opportunities for their children. Unsurprisingly, the educational outcomes of these children were skewed such that children from middle-class backgrounds were much more likely to attend selective, private universities like Columbia and those from a low-income background were more likely to attend public state colleges like Hunter. While both groups had a shared optimism in education as the great equalizer, education actually replicated and legitimized socioeconomic stratification [1].
Louie’s research is pertinent to the current debate surrounding affirmative action and how education, particularly higher education, can be made more equitable. Her research helps us contextualize and understand the stories of many high-achieving Asian students––who are more than just perfect SAT scores and stellar report cards, but also products of optimism and the American Dream, who benefit from vastly different backgrounds and resources. Most importantly, however, Louie’s research provides insight on the discrepancy between what education in America represents (particularly for immigrants) and what it is ultimately able to accomplish. Rather than blindly accepting education as a fail-proof tool for social mobility, Louie argues that we must acknowledge the systemic biases that undergird our education system––namely that inherited socioeconomic status plays a significant role in determining educational outcomes––and strives to correct such biases through policy changes. Maybe then, such optimism will be justified, and the American Dream will be a reality [1].
References
[1] Louie, V. (2001). Parents' Aspirations and Investment: The Role of Social Class in the Educational Experiences of 1.5- and Second-Generation Chinese Americans. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 438-474.
