Students Ethnicity

¶ … universities and graduate schools offer courses or whole major programs of study in ethnically or culturally specific areas. Examples include African-American studies and Asian studies. This research explores whether students who identify with the ethnic or racial group will perform better or worse than their counterparts in those courses. The research also explores general perceptions of taking ethnic course content. The study blends information from both psychology and sociology, showing how race/ethnicity, identity, and performance all converge.

As Hansen, Owen & Pan (2013) point out, the ethnic composition of a group or overall class diversity does not necessarily impact individual student performance in general. However, no known research has been conducted specifically on ethnically topical classes and the academic performance of students who identify with that group. This research could lend insight into some of the ways race, ethnicity, identity, performance anxiety, and achievement are interrelated. There are several theoretical underpinnings to this research.

One is that psychological and psychosocial variables including intimidation, cultural and social influences, biases, and the comfort of connection might impact student performance when the ethnicity of the student matches the content of the course. Intervening variables include the ethnicity of the instructor and the ethnic composition of the class. Prior research has shown that ethnic identity impacts behavior and performance in significant ways (Tsai, Chentsova-Dutton & Wong, n.d.).

Therefore, it is hypothesized that persons who self-identify with a particular ethnic group will perform better in classes directly about that ethnic group. Potential reasons why a self-identified member of a specific ethnic group might perform better than their counterparts includes familiarity with the subject matter, intimidation, cultural and social influences, biases, and the comfort of connection. There are several terms that must be operationalized for this research. Those terms include race, ethnicity, and race/ethnic-related coursework. Race is a social construct, and not a biological reality (Sussman, 2014).

Given this, there is no way to measure a person's race based on biological markers. The same is true for ethnicity. This makes it difficult to provide clear operational definitions other than those that are subjective. Based on the illegitimacy of race as a biological variable, it has been determined that the best way to define ethnicity and/or race would be to use a series of survey questions designed to solicit information from each participant.

The information would relate to how the person perceives himself or herself, and also how the person believes he or she is perceived by others. Race and ethnicity therefore form the key independent variables in this research. However, it is both important and necessary to define race and ethnicity in clear ways. Ethnicity can readily be defined as the group to which an individual believes himself or herself to be a part of, based on self-reports.

This type of definition would help eliminate the problems that could otherwise arise with persons from mixed racial or ethnic backgrounds, because generally, if a person identifies strongly enough with a racial or ethnic group to have that identity impact academic performance in a class, then the cultural/ethnic or racial designator would apply.

Given that most anthropologists and biologists agree that race does not exist, an operational definition of race would best depend on how a group has been labeled rather than by any objective measure such as skin color (Sussman, 2014). Ethnicity could likewise be defined as the group to which an individual believes himself or herself to be a part of, based on self-reports.

This type of definition would help eliminate the problems that could otherwise arise with persons from mixed racial or ethnic backgrounds, because generally, if a person identifies strongly enough with a racial or ethnic group to have that identity impact academic performance in a class, then the cultural/ethnic or racial designator would apply. To define academic performance, measures such as rate and extent of class participation, attendance, and grades would all be important factors.

Gender is also going to be taken into account, but not used as an experimental variable as it is not believed that gender would have any bearing on performance in race/ethnic-based classes. To properly control for gender, though, it would be critical to evaluate courses that are gender neutral in their content. Thus, courses on Latina sexuality would introduce the confounding variable of gender in a way that coursework in medieval Arabic literature would not. Based on these operational definitions, there are two research hypotheses, as follows: 1.

The first research hypothesis is that academic performance in culturally or ethnically specific courses is higher among students who identify as being part of that group. This hypothesis would assume that factors like comfort with the material, familiarity with basic concepts related to the course, and self-pressure to perform well in order to "prove" membership in that community might have an impact on academic performance.

Likewise, pressure or perceived intimidation by friends and family members might also cause a person to perform better than peers in courses related to his or her ethnic background. 2. Second, the reverse hypothesis could also hold true, in that students who identify with the cultural or ethnic group might perform worse in those classes because of factors like antagonism or disagreement with the instructor or boredom.

In this case, a student might be put off by the fact that their African-American Studies professor was Russian, or that course readings were all written by persons outside the cultural or ethnic group. Both hypotheses highlight the importance of group identity and individual identity, as research has repeatedly shown that identity impacts behavior (Tsai, Chentsova-Dutton & Wong, n.d.). Research Methods Data was collected in several stages. First, the researchers compiled a list of ethnically specific courses available at a target university.

Second, the researchers collected a sample population of students enrolled in these courses. Third, an anonymous survey was sent to the students that have taken any of the ethnically specific courses. Finally, the researchers collected the student-participants' grades from the courses in question. Stage one entailed compiling the list of courses. The courses of study and classes selected for evaluation in this research was defined by their course titles.

This simple method relies on the instructor to define whether or not the course contains ethnically or racially specific content, in order to eliminate any ambiguity or bias on the part of the researchers. Therefore, courses that mention a specific racial or ethnic group and which are comprised entirely of reading material and assignments that focus on issues pertinent to that group will be included in this research such as English literature and Asian History.

A total of ten different courses were located, and surveys were sent to all students in these courses. Participants taking any course that does not meet the criteria for being ethnically specific need not be included in the research. The survey method is appropriate for this research because it allows for the collection of data from all willing participants in each of the ethnic/race-based classes in the target university.

Moreover, this method of data collection promotes both validity and ethical correctness because all students surveyed would have voluntarily agreed to the survey, and no student is being singled out or self-selecting for the research. A disclaimer was offered prior to administering the survey to ensure anonymity, both with regards to the survey results and also to the collection of grades for the course.

The survey method will also allow for a focus on capturing complete data question responses, attitudinal behavior, and the ability to extensively investigate volunteer subjects concerning their responses. The survey questions (Appendix A) were left open-ended to encourage nuanced responses. Even some of the questions that suggested a "yes" or "no" answer received explained responses. These were included in the survey without further interpretation. The open-ended nature of the survey does mean, however, that some answers may need to be interpreted.

One method of interpreting open-ended qualitative questions is concept mapping. In concept mapping, answers are placed into the realm of the conceptual, responses categorized into schema (Jackson & Trochim, 2002). For example, responses to a question about race could be grouped into a handful of different groupings, rather than left to stand individually. This can help make the results more comprehensive. The survey questions (see Appendix A) help to answer the research question, which is whether or not student performance in ethnic courses is related to the student's ethnic self-identification.

While it has been hypothesized that students who belong to a particular racial or ethnic group will perform better in classes with certain ethnic content, the alternate hypothesis is that students belonging to that ethnic group will underperform related to their classmate counterparts. Reasons for the differences in performance would, however, theoretically be identical. Sociological and psychological variables such as identity, pressure, intimidation, perception of professor bias, and many other factors could create a complex interplay impacting academic performance.

A total of 560 surveys were sent out to the students enrolled in the ten different courses. Of those, only thirty were returned with all of the questions answered, yielding a small but substantial enough sample population. Results The results of this research should lend insight into the validity of ethnic courses of study.

The research question sought to determine if academic performance in culturally or ethnically specific courses is higher among students who identify as being part of that group considering factors such as comfort with the material, familiarity with basic concepts related to the course, and self-pressure. The secondary question is the reverse hypothesis looking to determine if students who identify with the cultural or ethnic group might perform worse in those classes because of factors like antagonism or disagreement with the instructor or boredom.

Survey respondents were provided with twenty questions (see Appendix A) to determine these different research questions. The 30 survey respondents noted that they took a number of different courses. Some participants offered a list of several ethnic courses they were taking; others only mentioned one. There are a number of different reasons for taking the courses, including fulfilling requirements. Half (fifteen) of the respondents indicated that they needed the credit or that it was to fulfill a requirement.

Fourteen more respondents were interested in the specific culture that they were studying, while one had the course suggested to them. This shows that while there are many students who find such subjects interesting, just as many take these types of courses to fulfill requirements. Interestingly, one respondent reported hearing that "African-American studies classes were easy." Twenty-two respondents indicated that the course was not a requirement for their studies, while it was for eight.

Combined with question two, this indicates that many have opted for these courses as an elective, either to fulfill a general requirement or because of personal interest in the subject. Nine students indicated that they were swayed to sign up for the course with the influence of friend or family member. The other twenty-one respondents made the decision without significant external influence. Courses with ethnic or racial content therefore appeals to most students. Questions five and six concern the ethnicity and racial identity of the respondents.

These questions were measuring one of the main independent variables of the research. Twelve respondents self identified currently as black/African-American, and identified with the same group as a child. One respondent identified currently as "mixed," but black as a child. Four identified currently as white/Caucasian, with one identifying as biracial as a child. Four were of Asian descent, each identifying with a different subculture. Five identified as biracial, with four identifying with a different group as a child.

One respondent identified solely as Croatian both as a child and currently. Two respondents identified as Hispanic, and one was Arab-American. A large number of the respondents had a "mixed" identity, and several had one that was fluid as well. For instance, one had identified as white as a child but later as Korean-American due to a mixed background. Similarly, a person who was part Native American fluctuated between identifying as white. Persons who look ethnically ambiguous indicated their being perceived differently by different people throughout their lives.

Question seven was a related question about how they feel that others perceive them. While most noted that they were perceived the same way that they perceived themselves, or that others did not seem to know enough about their culture to identify it, three students provided more nuanced responses. Three of the seven black/African-American respondents saw the question about how others perceive them not as a racial/ethnic question, but one of status, their responses carrying a specific socioeconomic status element.

None of the other students had comments of this nature. One of the respondents that currently self-identifies as biracial (Native American and white) identified only with Native American as a child, and indicates that others perceive them currently as white. Two of the respondents that identified consistently with one group indicated that others have connected them with several other groups. Question eight asked if they perceived that their racial/ethnic background had a bearing on how they performed in the course.

Eighteen respondents felt that they did perform better on account of their background, while twelve did not. The responses to this section were detailed, with many providing reasons why they thought that their background helped them. In some cases, there was an affinity for the group -- the Indian-American taking the class about India, and an African-American an African-American studies course.

A couple of respondents noted the converse of this -- that being an outsider to the material helped them because it challenged them, and they responded positively to this challenge. Fourteen students responded that their race/ethnicity had a bearing on their other courses as well, while the other sixteen respondents felt that it was irrelevant.

There were also mixed responses to the question of whether one's race/ethnicity made the course harder -- seven felt it made the course more difficult, ten felt the course was easier, three felt a bit of both, and ten others felt that it had no effect. Only in four instances did the academic advisor guide the student towards the course. In the majority of the courses the professor was a member of the group in associated with the class.

In thirteen, he or she was not, and there was one null response to this question. The next three questions concerned the ethnic/racial composition of the class, and the respondent's familiarity with the subject. Half the courses were not very well mixed in terms of their ethnicity -- the majority being white/Caucasian. There was discrepancy with two different African-American studies courses, one of which was predominantly white students and the other predominantly black. In many other cases, ethnic composition was skewed in line with the subject matter.

For example, there were more Asian students in a course on Chinese and Japanese literature than persons of non-Asian descent. This is likely due to language familiarity, which confirms the research hypothesis. Only five people noted that the racial composition of the class made them uncomfortable, but that number is higher than would have been expected at a multicultural school. Most respondents stated comfortable or indifferent towards the class composition, with seven responding as uncomfortable.

Nine respondents noted some familiarity with the course materials, while eleven responded as somewhat familiar, and ten unfamiliar. Twenty-one respondents felt they would do well going into the course, and they did. These responses were mostly in the form of generalized confidence, but a few felt that they would specifically perform well in the course they chose. Three of respondents noted they felt confident going in but found the course more difficult than they had anticipated.

One respondent anticipated difficulty from the outset and found that the course was indeed challenging. Three respondents felt that the course would be challenging, but discovered that it was not as difficult as they had anticipated. Two people did not respond to this question. The final questions concerned the performance of the student within the class. There were no major issues with comfort about speaking in class, that were class-specific. Twenty responded as comfortable, nine responded as uncomfortable, and one did not respond.

Seven respondents said that they were unable to link the course to their own personal experiences. Twenty-two felt that they could either relate to the course material based on their lives, or that they would be able to link the material to their lives going forward. One person did not respond to this question. Most respondents reported receiving good grades. Sixteen reported A-, A, or A+. Ten reported B. Or B+.

Of the four with grades lower than a B, three had anticipated success but struggled with either the class composition or the material; one initially anticipated a struggle in the course. These four also noted that the grade received negatively affected their GPA. The rest noted positive or no impact on their GPA. Conclusion Results offer some support for the first and primary research hypothesis.

Persons who identify with a specific ethnic group, or who have been identified by others as belonging to that group, perform well in classes related to their ethnicity -- but not necessarily better than their counterparts in the classroom from other backgrounds. Some students perceived their performance to be related to their race or ethnicity, but their actual grades did not necessarily reflect this perception. Thus, the implications are that ethnicity does not actually impact student performance, but it does influence subjective perceptions of the class.

Many students indicated that the courses caused them to think differently about their own and others' identities, and the ways race and ethnicity are linked to social status and power. Performance was affected the most when the course had overt language implications, including the literature classes. For example, there were more Asian students in a course on Chinese and Japanese literature than persons of non-Asian descent. Students struggled with languages other than their own more than they did with concepts like sociology of race.

This is likely due to language familiarity, which confirms the research hypothesis that in some cases, the students' backgrounds will impact their performance in class. The relationship between academic performance in ethnically topical courses and individual variables like intimidation, cultural influences, biases, and the comfort of connection presents unique and important implications for academia. Research in this area could potentially call into question the validity or relevance of ethnic or cultural programs of study, and reveal potential biases in the way these courses are being taught.

Moreover, research could help illuminate factors for improving course curricula and content development. From a sociological point-of-view, research in this area would lend insight into identity development and in-group status. There are also differences between how outsiders perceive a specific racial or ethnic group, how that group perceives itself, and how that group believes itself to be perceived by outsiders as well. There are several limitations to this research that need to be addressed. The first is the small sample size, and the limitations of the methodology.

Future research should be more robust, and should include a much larger sample size. Second, future research should not focus on as broad a course load. Instead, targeting only Asian studies, Muslim studies or African-American studies might be helpful. It was also difficult to measure variables like perceived intimidation and coercion, and ultimately these variables were poorly accounted for through the survey instrument. Future research should use an interview method to extract more detailed information from the participants. Another drawback is related to the use of concept mapping.

The drawback to concept mapping is that sometimes it takes away from the uniqueness of the responses. As noted, if concept mapping is used for a question concerning race, the response of "Taiwanese" might be put it into a category of "Asian." In doing so, however, the individuality of the response would be removed, contrary to the intent of the original question and contrary to the intent of the open-ended survey technique.

The question was asked in an open-ended manner in order to receive an open-ended response that reflected how the respondent genuinely felt about the question -- which is important if the question is about race -- so the concept mapping technique could possibly undermine the respondent's answer. Nevertheless, there is merit to concept mapping with respect to collecting some generalizations about the responses. Thirty individual experiences have value as subjective evidence, but they have greater weight when they are understood as answer types. It is for this reason.