Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Emily E. Kim
Toni Ireland
6 May 2019
Author Note
This research is supported by mentor Dr. Melanie Killen at the University of Maryland
College Park.
Contact: emilyeunsungkim@gmail.com
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 2
Abstract
The present study examines the role of civic and ethnic factors of identity when an individual is
faced with conflict in different social domains. Civic and ethnic identity have long been regarded
as part of dichotomy, however, recent research suggests that this is not the case. Hybrid
individuals have been shown to exhibit ingroup attachment, but still demonstrate outgroup
tolerance. A pilot study was conducted surveying Asian American adolescents ages 13-18 to
evaluate the extent to which ethnic ingroup attachment affects outgroup tolerance and support of
civic values. The questionnaire asked participants to consider three hypothetical scenarios and
decide between choices that would favor the ingroup versus outgroup. The results polled indicate
the importance of fairness when Asian American students make decisions regarding opportunity
and representation of interests, and raise new questions about the factors governing the allocation
Due to the prominence of globalization and industrialization, the flow of goods, ideas,
and people has reached an unprecedented level of complexity. Transnational migration and
indigeneity are issues at the forefront of current events. Yet, at the root of it all lies identity.
Identity has always dictated the ways in which people interact with one another, and now the
world is exploring how identities are changing and being formed. In particular, the notions of a
civic versus ethnic identity are important in defining public opinion and political stability. There
has always been an understood civic-ethnic dichotomy, however, as states diversify, this is being
challenged with the emergence of a hybrid identity: a merging of ethnic and civic factors. The
response to this varies from tolerance to conflict, and it is the reduction of such conflict and
promotion of intergroup cooperation that this paper attempts to address. To do so, the
socialization processes that facilitate the adoption of a group identity and group norms must be
cross-cultural contexts to determine how ethnic versus civic factors play a role in identity and the
reasoning for decisions, in order to explore how conflict might be minimized and resolution
promoted.
Literature Review
There are a number of studies and articles relevant to the investigation of civic versus
ethnic identity factors. This paper will discuss this literature within the context of its service to
the present study. More specifically, this paper will examine the foundation for group identity
and intergroup conflict, the presence of ethnic and civic factors in identity, and the socialization
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 4
process that may pit one aspect of identity against the other, in which the individual must
determine which aspect of his or her identity takes precedence. This study will incorporate these
concepts into the broader investigation which seeks to examine situations where civic and ethnic
identity may control outcomes of group decision making, and understand when one aspect of
Group identity has important influence on the individual. Group norms and values
translate to the individual’s practice of using certain justifications or reasoning to support certain
actions. However, analysis must not only cover the period of time in which these beliefs are
cemented. It must also analyze when these beliefs are initially formed, and how they may or may
Early childhood and adolescence. It is known that conceptions of group identity and
consequently, who the ingroup and outgroup is, are formed early on in life. These ideas shaped
in childhood and adolescence have the tendency to become entrenched by adult, and thus,
difficult to change. That is why it is necessary to determine inhibiting factors in the identification
initially formed (Rutland & Killen, 2015). These understandings can and have been investigated.
For instance, when children use moral reasoning to interpret situations, the decisions they make
are often inclusive, and they reject the exclusion of peers if it was solely on the basis of group
membership (McGuire, Manstead, & Rutland, 2017). Yet, when prioritizing reasoning about
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 5
cause for conflict. It is known that unique challenges arise more so in intergroup contexts than
they may occur in intragroup contexts (Killen, Hitti, Cooley, and Elenbaas, 2015). Intergroup
relations are examined to understand how identity may or may not be pervasive in dictating and
justifying actions. For example, due to identification with a group, social comparisons are
facilitated which can further exacerbate conflict. When negative outgroup norms are present, this
tends to more ingroup bias. This could mean justifying decisions that provide ingroup advantage
at the expense of the negatively characterized outgroup. However, positive outgroup norms do
not necessarily lead to less ingroup bias (McGuire, Manstead, and Rutland, 2017). Just because
that negative characterization does not exist does not mean that the evaluation of ingroup actions
changes. Additionally, intergroup conflicts are found, via qualitative research and data, to differ
from interpersonal conflicts. One such way is found in how the catalyst for intergroup conflict
tends to be the competition for and the allocation of resources (Liu, 2012). On one level, this
becomes a moral issue. On another level, this competition is a threat to the groups involved.
Identity can be threatened in zero sum terms. From the group’s perspective, the existence of
another group may compromise the legitimacy of their own identity. In situations of conflict,
Thus, the aspects of identity that are threatened must be recognized. When threatened aspects of
group identity are restored, cooperation among groups was found to be facilitated. When these
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 6
dimensions of identity are restored, there is a greater willingness to work towards equitable terms
The social reasoning development model. A recent study documented the necessity for
children’s interpretation and evaluation of exclusion and inclusion in the context of peer groups
or the SRD (Killen, Rutland, Rizzo, McGuire, 2018). The SRD model draws on social and
developmental psychology because it is based on both social domain theory and social identity
morality, and group identity. It asserts that children, in intergroup contexts, do not make their
decisions for uniform reasons. Instead, studies have shown that in childhood and by early
adolescence, children are able to coordinate a number of factors in the decision making process
of intergroup peer contexts. These various factors may include moral concerns such as priority
for fair and equal treatment of others, in addition to group concerns like ingroup bias and
stereotypes.
This paper has, so far, addressed the general developmental psychology theory that
applies to decisions in contexts of intergroup relations. Yet, it seeks to narrow the scope of this
further in considering two particularly interesting variables: civic and ethnic factors. Civic and
ethnic factors have often regarded as part of a dichotomy, especially with regard to nationalism.
This attributes civic nationalism as more akin to fostering democracy, and labels ethnic
nationalism as destabilizing and decentralizing. Recent studies, however, point to this dichotomy
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 7
as incapable of encompassing the full range of identities a citizen may adopt (Brown, 2000;
Defining civic and ethnic. To understand the various arguments for where civic and
ethnic factors fit in, the two terms should first be defined. Civic identity is traditionally defined
as “an inclusive identity that lacks a strong ethnic attachment” (Shulman 2002). Civic nationals
often value group membership and are tolerant toward other ethnic groups that live within the
same state. On the other hand, ethnic nationals “value history, cultural development, and
advocacy of their own group even to the extent of excluding other groups” (Korostelina 2004).
Driven by competition with other social groups, ethnic nationals tend to exhibit more intolerance
factor” that exerts influence on how individuals perceive their experiences (Hanslen & Hesli,
2010).
The hybrid identity. These two aspects of identity are not mutually exclusive. The two
intersect in what has been termed as a hybrid identity. Individuals with a hybrid identity show
strong ingroup attachment. This is the factor the hybrid individual enables when navigating
issues. However, these individuals also show marked outgroup tolerance. This is a unique
merging of civic and ethnic attributes in regard to identity, that significantly impact intergroup
relations, group norms, and justifications. The hybrid identity is one instance of a challenge to
the previously mentioned dichotomy that has been believed to exist. The dichotomy gave
reference to the polarizing effects of ethnic and civic proclivity within the group and the
individual. In that sense, the two factors were pitted against each other. This creates conflict,
each threatening to displace the other as the prioritized circumstance in decision making. The
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 8
conflict is not denied. However, a hybrid identity is found the encompass both civic and ethnic
attributes which changes ingroup and outgroup tendencies. A hybrid identity embraces
nationality and exhibits tolerant outgroup views which are conducive to democratization
(Hanslen & Hesli, 2010). This kind of identity preserves the individual’s association with their
subgroup, or ethnic group, without destabilizing the democratic effects of the civic element.
Thus, the hybrid identity is the mediation of conflict based on threatened identities resulting in a
zero sum conundrum. Likewise, it has been found that long entrenched conflicts can be resolved
only by a change in national identity, “a change that retains the identity at its core, but no longer
supports the notion that the existence of one identity is the negation of the other” (Kelman,
2001). Hybrid identities, thus, allow the individual to retain ethnic ties while also connecting to
psychology, as previously expressed through description of the SRD model, is applicable to the
present issue. The component theories provide a perspective that conceptualizes ethnicity and
ethnocentrism versus civic tendencies. Framing this as a domain of study, it allows ethnicity,
race, and nationalism to be considered. This issue is concerned with understanding how the
world is viewed and experienced in terms defined by ethnic and civic nationalism. Beyond
simply defining ethnicity, race, and nationality, social and developmental psychology enables the
examination of the manner in which an individual or group interprets ethnic or civic terms.
Investigating contexts in which ethnic and civic identity may clash is salient, specifically
with regard to hybrid individuals and the emergence of data supporting the hybrid individual’s
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 9
unique ingroup and outgroup attachments. These contexts are present during the socialization
process. There are several important factors that lead to socialization, which are important in
order to comprehend how identity is shaped and assumed. Among these factors are primarily
religion, education, family composition, age, however other factors do exist as well (Rutland &
Killen 2015). There are different domains of identity, and thus there are a number of contributors
to the constitution of an identity overall. Among these domains, it is possible for one to challenge
another (Shnabel, Ullrich, 2013). In these unique contexts, conflict may emerge.
Ethnic ties as destabilizing. One contention holds that ethnic identity tends to be
destabilizing. In the sense of favoring democratization, data has shown that this is not always the
case. In Ukraine, the percent of individuals who primarily identified with an ethnic identity did
not correspond directly to voting preferences against democratic reform (Hanslen & Hesli,
2010). Thus, it does not necessarily hold that ethnic identity is in opposition to democratic
tendencies. However, it is worth noting that ethnic identity does have the potential to conflict
with civic identity. Though perhaps not as destabilizing to democracy as once thought, it still
stands that ethnic identity and attachment to the ethnic ingroup may, in certain contexts,
overcome civic identity. Ethnic identity is still prevalent and may supersede national identity. It
weakens polarized opinions based on ethnic ties, ethnocentrism, and economic deprivation,
which most strongly affects ethnocentrism and ethnic identity. This is a situation in which
national identity is important as a moderator, and civic identity can function as a moderator of
Evaluating contextualized conflict. There are unique situations in which the ethnic and
civic ties may clash. Certain aspects of identity make the individual more prone to certain actions
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 10
than other. For example, “‘ethnic’ and ‘hybrid’ citizens are actually more likely than ‘civic’
sense of belonging to a relevant identity group” (Hanslen & Hesli, 2010). These contexts take
into account intergroup relations and, likewise, the occurrence of conflict and conflict resolution.
Individuals may gravitate towards one aspect of identity more than the other. They may be a
hybrid individual who bridges the two domains of identity, not only for the purposes of security,
but also to aid in navigating through relations with the outgroup. Research has been conducted
about these terms in Eastern European countries and case studies have been conducted regarding
Southeast Asian countries. However, there is yet to be thorough investigation regarding civic,
ethnic, and hybrid nationals with specific regard to examining the individual within a volatile
stage of identity formation. Since it is noted that identity begins to form early on, the prevalence
of these identities in young children and adolescents should be evaluated, and and understanding
of how they play a role in the individual’s interpretation of ethnicity, race, and nationalism
should be developed.
Conclusion
address this by revealing the root of conflict and the contexts in which conflict grows or is
inhibited. Factors of the identification and socialization processes are key in the development of
intergroup perceptions and biases. These perceptions, in turn, are the very notions that govern
intergroup relations and may breed conflict. In order to have potential success at mitigating bias,
the socialization process must be addressed early on. Groups will justify perceptions and actions
with moral reasoning, balancing self-interest and the greater good, and these justifications will
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 11
become stagnant with time. They do, however, stand to be influenced by factors of identity,
notably, ethnicity and nationalism. This introduces a complex context in which ethnic and
national ties come into question, as they are associations that pull an individual towards different
groups. Particularly interesting is the emergence of a hybrid identity, which involved these ethnic
and civic ties, yet varies the individual’s ingroup and outgroup tendencies. This should be further
explored in order to understand situations in which civic identity may overcome ethnic identity,
or vice versa. These contexts are crucial to understanding the current political landscape that has
been attempting to cope with issues of migration and indigeneity both domestically, and abroad,
because it comes down to understanding what determines individual and/or group actions. This
research will help examine the unique conflicts that occur within a diverse body of citizens, and
Research Method
A questionnaire in a web-based format was used to poll participants, asking for a number
of different responses. This type of measure was chosen because it was the common method used
in almost all studies cited in the present paper. The questionnaire was seventeen questions long,
and was filled out individually by each participant (Appendix A). The researcher did not directly
administer the survey. Asian American students from Centennial High School ranging from age
14-18 were polled. Questions asked for a variety of responses, asking the participant to select
from a number of options, rate a choice on a 5-point Likert scale, and provide written responses
and justifications. These questions were broken down into the following two sections.
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 12
scenarios. The first referenced a situation where the respondent was part of the Asian American
club, and had been given control over allotting votes to ethnic minority clubs in order to give
them a say in the Student Government Association. He or she could distribute the votes equally,
give the Asian American club an extra vote, or give the Asian American club a majority of the
votes. This would call for the respondent to weigh their attachment to their own ethnic group
versus a civic attachment to voting rights and equal representation. The next scenario dealt with a
current controversy many adolescents are aware of, and this proposed switch has been said to
hurt Asian Americans, actually leading to less Asian American students being admitted despite
high scores and grades. This scenario asked students to consider a process that attempts to give
all ethnic groups equal opportunity, versus a process that traditionally facilitates Asian American
success. The last scenario concerned an Asian American boy bringing ethnic food for lunch, and
deciding which group to sit with: an all Asian group, all white group, or half Asian half white.
This weighed the respondents’ attachment to their ethnic group and their comfort level with
Hypothesized results. There were two hypotheses addressing the research question,
which was: In contexts where ethnic and civic aspects of identity conflict, what determines
H1) Ethnic ingroup attachment will control in Scenarios 1 and 2, because outgroup
H2) Ethnic ingroup preference will control in Scenario 3, because individual’s partaking
in cultural actions will feel more comfortable with those who share that culture.
Identity measure. The last component of the survey addressed the respondent’s
identification with their ethnic group. This was the last component so as not to prime the
respondent’s mind with considering their ethnicity and how important it is to them before
answering the scenarios. Seven questions made a statement about ingroup attachment and asked
the respondent to rate how much they agreed with that statement on a five-point Likert scale (1
being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree). Additionally, the respondent’s ethnicity,
parents’ ethnicity, and languages spoken most frequently at home, school, and with friends were
recorded. This was the extent to which ethnic ingroup attachment was measured.
Participants
Twenty individuals were surveyed. Gender was a fairly even distribution, 55% female
and 45% male, and age was also fairly even. Participants numerous Asian ethnicities were
surveyed: Chinese, Korean, Indian, and Southeast Asian/Pacific Islander. The majority of
Figure 1
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 14
Figure 2
Results
While there was a diverse group of respondents, there was a surprisingly uniform array of
responses. In regard to the first question, 60% of students answered that the votes should be
distributed equally, 30% said the Asian American Club should get an extra vote, and 10% said
the Asian American Club should get the majority of the votes. Only 40% favored their ethnic
ingroup, which was less than expected. Additionally, almost all justifications referenced fairness
as the deciding factor. Students chose to distribute votes based on what would give each group
equal voting power. Students who chose to allot more votes to the Asian American Club did so
because they believed that since Asians are a large population at Centennial, they should get an
The second scenario also resulted in consensus; 90% said that standardized testing should
be used over recommendations and quotas. Very few referenced the negative impact of a
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 15
different admissions process on Asians, and most, again, justified their response by saying it was
most fair. Even the 10% who chose to change the admissions process did so because they
Table 1
2: 10% 100%
Quotas
The last scenario also was answered similarly across the board. Every response selected
the third table. Reasons provided discussed sharing culture with friends of another ethnicity
while feeling supported by the presence of their own ingroup ethnicity. A few responses
emphasized that race should not play a role in Ryan’s decision of who to sit with. Nevertheless,
respondents were asked to consider this and all listed the third table, an even blend of white and
Asian friends, to be the best option for a student bringing ethnic food to lunch.
Last, the average index of ethnic ingroup identification was 3.94, with a range of 2.4.
Most students speak English at home, with friends, and at school, with only about 10%
indicating that he or she speaks a different language among any of those three groups. This
indicates that the majority of respondents were more inclined to value their ingroup identity,
though they are adapted to social norms in each respective environment. Despite this, and despite
varying age, gender, and ethnic background, all answered very similarly to each scenario.
Discussion
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 16
Implications. Being a pilot study, the general direction of research is broad with the goal
of discovering nuances that can be elaborated on in future study. There are conclusions that can
be drawn from this research to inform future directions. First, fairness has an important role in
governing the decisions of Asian American students as it pertains to the context of social and
academic opportunity. Respondents justified their decisions in the first two scenarios explaining
that equal distribution of votes or standardized test admissions are the most fair, logical option.
These decisions were made despite a high average index of ingroup attachment, 3.94 on a
five-point scale. Thus, fairness, a civic quality, is important to the individual when evaluating the
distribution of opportunities to both the ingroup and outgroup. This disproves H1 since ethnic
ingroup favoritism did not control over protecting the civic ideal of fairness.
In regards to the third scenario, there was consensus that the boy bringing ethnic food to
lunch should sit at the table with half Asians and half whites. This finding has a different
indication: there was a direct or implicit acknowledgement that he should not sit at the all white
table, since no respondent selected this option. This may be precipitated by stereotypical or
to one’s own ethnic groups. This supports H2 because when participating in an activity that was
more ethnic based, bringing cultural food to lunch, the individual tended to favor their ingroup.
However, there was still a tendency for civic reasoning to pervade, as several respondents noted
the potential to share one’s own culture with other ethnic groups as a reason for the boy to sit at a
factors pervade in the individual’s allocation decision. However, in the social domain, outgroup
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 17
stereotypes or perceived hostility (not necessarily actual hostility) contribute to the individual’s
decision to favor the ingroup. He or she will not be entirely opposed to the outgroup, but do
exhibit more ingroup attachment and are more comfortable with members of their own ethnic
group.
Limitations. There are several limitations on the present study that should be noted.
First, the sample size was very small, and only from Centennial High School. Centennial’s
student body is 34% Asian and 33% white, thus, Asian students are not an ethnic minority as
they may be at other schools. The size of the Asian population was definitely accounted for in
respondents’ answers. Additionally, with such a small sample size, what may appear to be a
majority of opinion might not actually be, especially given the fact that the sample came from a
single high school with a specific set of social norms. This is not a sample that is representative
of the general population of Asian American students. Being a pilot study, much refinement is
necessary. The variables measured are too general to generate specific data trends; this is
accounted for in part by a broad research question and vague methodology. Information gathered
from this pilot study should be used to narrow the research question. The questionnaire can then
be likewise modified to control for certain factors and isolate the desired variables.
Future Directions
One direction that should be considered is polling younger students. With age comes
collect data on students in late elementary school or middle school. Identity formation and
socialization are at a more turbulent state in those years, so different trends in answers may
emerge. Another direction being considered for future research is focusing the research question
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 18
to address what adolescents consider when evaluating the fairness of a situation. More
specifically, this would focus on individuals with different ethnic and civic affiliations (i.e. Asian
American), and how they evaluate situations which bring civic values into conflict and could be
resolved to benefit the outgroup at the expense of their own ingroup. This would be more akin to
Conclusion
the United States whose ethnic background and citizenship contribute to their identity and
perspective taking during times of conflict. With a political atmosphere that increasingly follows
neorealist theory of putting the national interest first, an individual’s ethnic background can often
come into conflict with their identity as a citizen. Particularly with the influx of immigrants and
refugees, and the prevalence of immigration as an issue, people’s ethnic and civic ties are
important in dictating public opinion about tolerance towards the outgroup. Thus, it is salient to
investigate which aspect of identity takes precedent, and whether someone exhibiting attachment
to their ethnic group is necessarily antithetical to their support of civic nationality. The present
study indicates that individuals with strong ingroup attachment can still exhibit outgroup
tolerance. In situations weighing equal opportunity, respondents chose to make the fair decision
over prioritizing their own ethnic group’s advantage. This data can be the basis for more
framework. There is immense potential to better understand how citizens with ethnic attachment
view conflict, and how tolerance and resolution can promoted in instances where civic values are
at stake.
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 19
Works Cited
Brubaker, R., Loveman, M., Stamatov, P. (2004). Ethnicity as cognition. Theory and Society, 33,
31-64.
Hansen, H. E., Hesli, V. L. (2010). National identity: civic, ethnic, hybrid, and atomised
https://doi.org/10.1080/09668130802532894
D. Wilder (Eds.), Social identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict reduction ( pp.
Killen, M., Hitti, A., Cooley, C., & Elenbaas, L. (2015). Morality, development,
culture and psychology (pp. 161-220). New York: Oxford University Press.
Killen, M., Rutland, A., Rizzo, M. T., McGuire, L. (2018). Intergroup exclusion, moral
(Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (470-484). New York,
Liu, J. H. (2012). A Cultural Perspective on Intergroup Relations and Social Identity. Online
McGuire, L., Manstead, A. S. R., & Rutland, A. (2017). Group norms, intergroup resource
Shnabel, N., Ullrich, J. (2013). Increasing intergroup cooperation toward social change by
restoring advantaged and disadvantaged groups' positive identities. Journal of Social and
Shulman, S. (2002). Challenging the Civic/Ethnic and West/East Dichotomies in the Study of
Appendix A
Survey Administered
Please answer each question completely, and to the best of your ability. There are no right or
wrong answers, and this is not a test.
1. Age
Example Scenarios
2. The SGA has decided to give votes to each ethnic minority club, so that each club can
have a voice in helping to make decisions about school policies and social functions. You
are a member of the Asian American Club. You can either decide to: 1) distribute all the
votes equally among all the ethnic minority clubs, 2) give your club an extra vote, or 3)
give your club a majority of the votes.
a. Which would you choose: 1, 2, or 3?
b. Why?
c. How do you think the other clubs would feel about this?
3. The school system is considering a new way to decide how students are admitted to GT
classes. Standardized test scores would no longer be used. Instead, GT class participation
would be based on teacher recommendations and a quota representing equal number of
students from each ethnic group (African-American, Asian, Hispanic and White). The
school system is interested in your perspective. Representing Asians, you can either vote
to: 1) reject this plan, 2) support this plan or 3) request that the quota for Asians are
increased.
a. Which would you choose: 1, 2, or 3?
b. Why?
c. How do you think the other minority groups would feel about this?
4. Ryan is an Asian-American boy in high school. Today, he brought his favorite
homemade Asian food for lunch. He can decide to sit with his group of friends that is all
Asian, his group of friends that is all white, or his group of friends where half are Asian,
and half are white. Ryan is equally close with all his friends.
a. Which group should he sit with and why?
b. How will the other groups feel when they see him sitting there?
Identity Measure
5. The fact that I am Asian American is an important part of my identity.
6. I have a lot in common with the average Asian American student.
7. Asian American people are very similar to each other.
8. I have spent time trying to find out more about my ethnic group, such as its history,
traditions, and customs.
9. I have a strong sense of belonging to my own ethnic group.
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VERSUS CIVIC IDENTITY 22
10. I understand pretty well what my ethnic group membership means to me.
11. I feel a strong attachment towards my own ethnic group.
a. Response scale: (1) Strong disagree (2) Disagree (3) Neutral (4) Agree (5)
Strongly Agree
12. My ethnicity is:
a. Chinese/Chinese American
b. Korean/Korean American
c. Japanese/Japanese American
d. Indian/Indian American
e. Southeast Asian or Asian Pacific American
f. Other: ___________________
13. My father’s ethnicity is:
a. Chinese/Chinese American
b. Korean/Korean American
c. Japanese/Japanese American
d. Indian/Indian American
e. Southeast Asian or Asian Pacific American
f. Other: ___________________
14. My mother’s ethnicity is:
a. Chinese/Chinese American
b. Korean/Korean American
c. Japanese/Japanese American
d. Indian/Indian American
e. Southeast Asian or Asian Pacific American
f. Other: ___________________
15. What language do you most frequently use at home?
16. What language do you most frequently use at school?
17. What language do you most frequently use with friends?