Bilingual Research Journal, 38: 23–44, 2015Copyright © the National Association for Bilingual EducationISSN: 1523-5882 print / 1523-5890 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15235882.2015.1017026

Microaggressions and Hmong American Students

Yvonne Y. KwanUniversity of California, Santa Cruz

This research identifies how anti-immigrant sentiment and racism, which have historically beenreflected and transmitted through nativist language policies and school curriculum, affect sec-ond-linguistic-generation Hmong Americans—not via overtly xenophobic and discriminatory actsbut via subtle yet hurtful racial microaggressions. Interviews with 19 Hmong American collegestudents from diverse regions in California show that participants experienced the following racialmicroaggressions: Objectification and Assumed Inadequacy. Such microlevel experiences, as shapedand structured by macrolevel processes, ultimately affected Hmong Americans’ views on Hmongcultural communication practices and heritage language.

INTRODUCTION

Like many Asian Americans, Hmong Americans have struggled to break free from the Black-White dyad of American racial discourse. As belonging to neither of those reified binarycategories, Hmong and other Asians have been viewed as “unmistakably ‘yellow,’” perpetuallyforeign, and inherently not American (Espiritu, 2000, p. 110). While foreignness and othernessare often differentiated by certain phenotypes, such as skin color and eye shape, they are alsoenacted and policed through language and speech. Through “interactions with other students andthrough the formal and hidden curriculum,” Hmong students have come to learn that “Whites areviewed as the only ‘real Americans’” (S. Lee, 2002, p. 233).

Data from this study support S. Lee’s (2002) and DePouw’s (2012) findings that HmongAmericans’ experiences of racial exclusion negatively affect their attitudes about schooling. Thedata also affirm S. Lee’s (2002) analysis on Hmong American identity and Withers’s (2004)study on Hmong language shift—not only identifying how larger macrolevel language and edu-cational processes (DePouw, 2012; Ricento, 2000) and anti-immigrant sentiment fuel racialmicroaggressions but also analyzing how students in this study respond to these subtle insults orput-downs that result from aggressors’ overt or covert establishment of superiority (Sue, Bucceri,Lin, Nadal, & Torino, 2007). Overall, this article addresses how racially microaggressive encoun-ters generate negative schooling and language experiences that subsequently affect participants’perception and use of Hmong.

Yvonne Y. Kwan, a PhD candidate of sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, is an AmericanSociological Association Minority Fellowship Program Fellow and a UC All Campus Consortium On Research forDiversity Fellow. Her research focuses on race and ethnicity, inequality and identity, and Southeast Asian diasporas.

Address correspondence to Yvonne Y. Kwan, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064. E-mail: yykwan@ucsc.edu

24 KWAN

Significance of Study

Language has played a pivotal role in the domination of racial and ethnic groups. Becausethose who control the dominant language also control the resources and power in a system, lan-guage becomes the tool to measure the “level of civilization of the colonized” (Nieto, 2007,p. 232). Even today, English’s “superiority” is supported by educational policies that have con-tinued to attack indigenous and immigrant languages, perpetuating discourses of foreignness andunderachievement (Hornberger, 1998). Because of this, heritage language (HL) maintenance andacquisition have become very challenging. Language maintenance is the continuing use of aminority language that is in competition against a more dominant language, and language losshappens when a person stops using a HL and thus begins to forget its structure and vocabulary(Clyne, 1991). Language loss is often associated with racial or ethnic oppression and culturalloss.

To better understand how language ideologies and microlevel processes affect HmongAmericans, the author conducted a qualitative study with 19 college students from diverse regionsin California to discuss the backlash that youth experienced against the backdrop of the English-only movement. The participants in this study are not a homogenous group. Many factors,including geographic location, parental influences, and personal preferences, impact each per-son uniquely. Understanding the importance of such differences, this article identifies patternsand shared experiences among Hmong students.

This study begins to address the dearth of literature on the social intersection among race,language, and education for Hmong Americans. Among the literature available are Pfeifer’s(2012, 2013) comprehensive bibliographies on “Race Relations and the Hmong” and “HmongPopulation and Primary Education.” Other research highlights the use, function, and rhetoricof language (Burt, 2010; Duffy, 2007), Hmong culture (Fadiman, 1997; S. Lee, 1997), andsecondary schooling (S. Lee, 2001, 2005; Thao, 1984). Few scholars discuss communityresources (Withers, 2004) and postsecondary education (Bosher, 1997; S. Lee, 1997). Thisarticle responds to Withers’s (2004) call for continued analysis of language patterns andexperiences among Hmong youth, investigating how the intersection among school policiesand decisions, anti-immigrant sentiment, and personal experiences shapes Hmong Americans’perceptions of their HL. While attitudes and perceptions of HL “do not necessarily predict lan-guage behavior,” “a positive attitude may be one prerequisite of language maintenance” (Clyne,1991, p. 31).

This article addresses three main questions: (a) How do macrolevel factors, such as educa-tional policy and school curriculum, produce contexts and conditions that create or perpetuateracial microaggressions?, (b) What are the ways in which second linguistic generation HmongAmericans respond to such politics and sentiments around race and language?, and (c) How isHmong language maintenance affected by such macro and microlevel attacks? In order to fullygrasp the relationship between language and power, the article first addresses the macrolevelprocesses (i.e., historical events, language program policies, and curriculum standards) thataffect the racial microaggressions that participants experienced, and then it uses the theory ofsegmented assimilation to contextualize racially microaggressive encounters around race andlanguage.

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 25

Brief Overview of Hmong Americans

A brief review of the history of Hmong in the U.S. will show how immigration policies andanti-immigrant sentiment contributed to the subordinated status of Hmong people. Similar toother Southeast Asian refugees, most Hmong people sought refuge in the U.S. after the warsin Southeast Asia (S. Lee, 2005; Thao, 1984). In Laos, Hmong men were secretly recruited bythe U.S. Central Intelligence Agency to fight in a secret war against the Pathet Lao Communists(Thao, 1984). Soldiers and their families were promised protection, but the American governmentnever upheld this agreement (Duffy, 2007). After the U.S. retreated, many Hmong fled throughthe jungles of Laos to reach Thai refugee camps in order to avoid persecution by communistforces (Thao, 1984). For those who successfully underwent the process of refugee sponsorship,new challenges awaited when they relocated to host countries. Physical and cultural differencescoupled with high rates of poverty made Hmong refugees visible and easily resented in a nationthat was experiencing “compassion fatigue” from an influx of Southeast Asian refugees (E. Park& Park, 2005, p. 41).

Because of disenfranchisement and displacement, many Hmong families reside in low-incomecommunities, rely on social services, and often have unequal access to quality education (S. Lee,2005). See Table 1 for an excerpt of 2013 American Community Survey statistics for foreign-born and American-born Hmong in California. Statistics for other racial groups are also providedfor comparison.

While it is necessary to consider generational differences, the concept of migration gen-eration is limited because “generations” should not solely be distinguished by place of birth(Anderson-Mejías, 2005). Therefore, this article focuses on linguistic generations, which considerboth place of birth and language patterns. Based on Villa and Rivera-Mills’s (2009) analysis onSpanish speakers, this study defines “second-generation maintenance” as Hmong-English bilin-guals who learned both languages before 15 years of age and whose parents are monolingualHmong speakers, and “second-generation loss” as receptive (but not fluent) Hmong-English bilin-guals or English monolinguals whose parents are monolingual Hmong speakers. Such focuson linguistic generations is necessary because although 1.5- and second-generation Hmongbelong to separate migration generations, they share similar linguistic and cultural experiences.

TABLE 12013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates for Hmong,

Asian, White, and Black Populations in California

Hmong Asian White Black

Total population 96,207 5,210,236 23,741,019 2,269,021Median age 21.8 38.8 38.2 35.5Bachelor’s degree or higher (%) 13.1 48.9 31.9 22.0Speak only English in the home (%) 10.5 24.5 66.6 91.0Speak English less than very well (%) 45.4 36.0 13.8 2.3Per capita income ($) 10,418 33,336 33,346 23,008Poverty (all people) (%) 35.5 12.0 15.2 26.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2013).

26 KWAN

Transcending the binary categories of maintenance and loss, participants in this study deal withboth simultaneously—practicing the language they grew up with but nonetheless continuing tolose that proficiency.

Intersection Among Language Ideologies, Policies, and Curriculum

Anti-immigrant political ideologies are often perpetuated and enacted in institutions, such aspublic schools and the legal system (e.g., Clyne, 1991; Crawford, 1992). Historically, AsianAmericans have been subjected to legal discrimination in terms of immigration laws, land andproperty ownership laws, and educational policies (Espiritu, 2000; E. Park & Park, 2005; Sue,Bucceri, et al., 2007). For example, in 1885, California passed Assembly Bill 268, allowingschool districts to establish segregated facilities for “Mongolians” where English was requiredto be the only language of instruction (“The Chinese School Problem,” 1885). But after nearly acentury of legally mandated unequal access to quality education, minority education made one ofthe largest headways in terms of bilingual education in the case of Lau v. Nichols in 1974.

In the Lau case, the Supreme Court found that the San Francisco Unified School District was inviolation of not providing equal opportunities for education when it denied Chinese non-Englishspeakers supplemental language courses (Biegel, 2006). Accordingly, states were responsiblefor taking appropriate actions in providing programs for English learners. However, as of 1997,only one-third of all English learners received bilingual education; the rest were either assigned toother programs such as English as a Second Language (ESL) or none at all (Gándara et al., 2000).Despite low rates of participation, bilingual education faced extreme opposition in 1998 with thepassage of California Proposition 227 (Prop 227), which systematically limited the types of lan-guage instruction available to English learners. The law mandated that students be placed instructured English immersion classes (e.g., ESL) not to exceed one year with English as theonly language of instruction (Biegel, 2006; Gándara et al., 2000). More recently, the passageof No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has completely removed federal references to bilingual edu-cation, henceforth institutionalizing an erasure of bilingualism from federal policies (Evans &Hornberger, 2005; Razfar, 2011).

Such educational policies that conveyed that English was superior and non-English languages,including Hmong, were inferior discouraged Hmong students from developing and using theirHL (S. Lee, 2002). Ricento (2000), who explores the development of language policy and plan-ning (LPP) from World War II to the present day, found that LPP is particularly susceptible tosociopolitical forces. For example, the English-only movement that has gained momentum sincethe passage of Prop 227 ultimately hurt the preservation and revitalization of threatened lan-guages and cultures. Because of these trends, this study responds to Ricento’s (2000) calls for anintegration of macrolevel investigations with microlevel research to better understand languagebehavior.

Consider curriculum studies, which provide insight as to how content and instruction promotedominant language and racial ideologies (Razfar, 2011). In the History-Social Science ContentStandards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve, there are only twostandards that vaguely pertain to Hmong people and the Secret War. Standard 10.9 states,

Understand the importance of the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, which established thepattern for America’s postwar policy . . . to prevent the spread of Communism and the resulting

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 27

economic and political competition in arenas such as Southeast Asia (i.e., the Korean War, VietnamWar), Cuba, and Africa. (California Department of Education [CDE], 2000, p. 46)

And Standard 11.2 requires students to “trace the origins and geopolitical consequences (for-eign and domestic) of the Cold War and containment policy,” but only a few topics such as the Bayof Pigs Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam War, and Latin American policy are listed (CDE, 2000,p. 52). Although these two standards allow room for teachers to cover U.S.-Hmong relation-ships, these discussions are often not included. Even the curriculum framework for the AdvancedPlacement U.S. History test only mentions the Vietnam War once in passing when describing thecontainment of “Soviet-dominated” communism in Key Concept 8.1 (CollegeBoard, 2014, p. 72).Both language policies and curriculum standards demonstrate the ways in which Hmong studentscome to understand and value or devalue their culture, history, and language. Their invisibilityin the curriculum is coupled with their hypervisibility in the classroom: While their Asiannessmarks them as perpetual foreigners, the lack of cultural and ethnic sensitivity causes their historyto remain invisible.

Racial Microaggressions

While Robert Park’s classical assimilation theory, which assumes that immigrants experience alinear pathway to incorporation into host societies, was successful in describing assimilation forethnic European immigrants, it could not account for the assimilation processes for individualswhose “race [bore] an external mark by which every individual member of it [could] infallibly beidentified” (R. Park, 1950, p. 228). Segmented assimilation theory, however, acknowledges howAsian American visibility coupled with transnational contexts of migration affect class and racialstratifications, allowing for analysis of not only mobility but also “larger social structures thatintentionally or unintentionally exclude non-whites” (Zhou & Xiong, 2005, p. 1122). Althoughthis article is informed by segmented assimilation’s conceptualizations of mobility, it focusesmore on the latter, the intersection between macrolevel processes (i.e., policy and curriculum)and microlevel encounters with racism. This relationship can inform questions about upward anddownward assimilation of second-linguistic-generation Hmong Americans.

According to Xiong’s (2013) review of Hmong poverty, which employs a segmented assim-ilation framework, the educational system incorporates one of the key contexts of immigrantassimilation because schools are where children undergo the majority of their socialization withpeers and adults outside of their personal and familial networks. Students who speak HLs withlittle linguistic capital often learn through encounters with racism that their HL and culture aresubordinate; such encounters arise in a multitude of different channels, including formal edu-cation and peer interaction. According to Sue, Capodilupo, et al. (2007), contemporary racismincreasingly occurs in the form of racial microaggressions, which are (a) more likely than ever tobe disguised and covert and (b) have evolved from the old fashioned form of overt racial hatredand bigotry to a more ambiguous and nebulous form that is more difficult to identify and acknowl-edge. Such behaviors are likely to occur outside the awareness of progressive and well-meaningWhite individuals (Constantine & Sue, 2007). Adapting the work of Pierce, Carew, Pierce-González, and Wills (1977) and Davis (1989), Yosso (2002) defines racial microaggressionsas “subtle (verbal, nonverbal, visual) insults of People of Color often done automatically or

28 KWAN

unconsciously” (pp. 51–52). These insults may be based on “race, gender, class, sexuality, cul-ture, language, immigration status, phenotype, accent, and surname” (Yosso, 2002, pp. 51–52).Sue, Bucceri, et al. (2007) and Sue, Capodilupo, et al. (2007) identify three categories of racialmicroaggressions: microassaults, microinsults, and microinvalidations. Microassaults are explicitverbal or nonverbal discriminatory attacks that are meant to hurt (Sue, Capodilupo, et al., 2007).Microinsults are characterized by subtle communications that “convey rudeness and insensitiv-ity and demean a person’s racial heritage or identity,” occurring unnoticed to the perpetratorbut clearly conveying a hidden insulting message to the recipient of color (Sue, Capodilupo,et al., 2007, p. 274). And microinvalidations are characterized by communications that “exclude,negate, or nullify the psychological thoughts, feelings, or experiential reality of a person ofcolor” (Sue, Capodilupo, et al., 2007, p. 274). This article focuses on the intersection betweenmicroinsults and microinvalidations—presumably unintended objectifications of Hmong peopleand assumed inadequacies of Hmong culture.

Subtle put-downs or offensive mechanisms are cumulative and often cause people of colorundue psychological and physical stress (Pierce et al., 1977). Solorzano, Ceja, and Yosso (2000)found that racial microaggressions result in negative feelings of self-doubt, frustration, and iso-lation for African American and Chicana/o students. Sue, Bucceri, et al. (2007) also concludedthat racial microaggressions, such as the model minority myth, are very problematic for AsianAmericans. The myth, which assumes that Asians can more easily achieve economic and edu-cational success as compared to other ethnic groups, has been used as a “justifiable reason toignore the problem of discrimination against Asian Americans,” making a “convenient rationaleto neglect [Asian Americans] in research and intervention programs” (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007,p. 78). Racial microaggressions ultimately affect students’ mental health, school performance,socioeconomic and cultural mobility, and identification with HL or culture (Solorzano et al.,2000; Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007).

METHOD

The author conducted 15 semistructured interviews and one group interview with HmongAmerican college students—seven men and 12 women. Administration of the group interview didnot differ from the individual interviews; participants merely preferred to be interviewed together.Pseudonyms are used to protect all participant identities. Although this was an IRB exemptedstudy, the author asked participants to provide informed consent and told participants that theywere free to stop the interview or retract any statements at any point in time. See Table 2 for par-ticipant characteristics. In hopes of finding a more representative sample, the author focused onspecific areas with larger Hmong populations: Sacramento and Stockton, Fresno and Merced, andSan Diego and Los Angeles. Participants were selected using reputational case selection, whichinvolves asking individuals in the community who are familiar with the Hmong language experi-ence to recommend individuals for participation in the study (Schensul, Schensul, & LeCompte,1999). In addition to personal contacts, Hmong student organizations at various universities inCalifornia were central to granting the author access. Although these 19 participants may not berepresentative of all Hmong Americans, their stories represent conjunctures that acknowledge theprevalence of racial microaggressions.

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 29

TABLE 2Participant Characteristics

Pseudonym Type of Data Interview Location Participant Hometown Country of Birth

Emily Group Interview Southern California Central Valley USAMaggie Group Interview Southern California Central Valley USATeng Group Interview Southern California Southern California ThailandXang Group Interview Southern California Southern California ThailandDaisy Interview Northern California Central Valley USAHoua Interview Northern California Northern California USAJyliah Interview Northern California Central Valley USAKalia Interview Central Valley Central Valley ThailandKashia Interview Central Valley Central Valley ThailandLong Interview Northern California Northern California USAMai Interview Northern California Northern California USAPachia Interview Northern California Central Valley USAPao Interview Northern California Northern California LaosSamantha Interview Northern California Central Valley USASarah Interview Northern California Northern California USAThai Interview Central Valley Central Valley ThailandToua Interview Central Valley Central Valley ThailandValerie Interview Northern California Central Valley USA

In the interviews, the author first introduced herself to the participants, noting her educationalbackground in race and ethnic studies in education and educational outreach to first-generationcollege students. Then the interview began with general questions about students’ academic pur-suits: major in school, classes of particular interest, and future goals and trajectories. The secondset of questions discussed second language acquisition experiences: participation in bilingualeducation or structured immersion programs and language experiences in the classroom and athome. The last set of questions discussed Hmong language maintenance and loss: proficiencyin Hmong, Hmong language and culture, and family relations. The author also responded tointerviewee inquiries at any point during the interviews.

Affective Approach to Methods

Challenging the notion of the purely objective researcher, the author took an affective approach tothe method of narrative inquiry, allowing her to learn “how to hear what is impossible” (Ahmed,2004, p. 35). Since “affect” is the ability to affect and be affected, it is central to people’s rela-tionships with one another—providing a potential to develop feelings that reference other bodies(Ahmed, 2004). Perceiving the nature of research as a coalitional project between researchers andparticipants, the author used an “enlarged sympathy” approach to not identify with what partici-pants shared but to “imaginatively reproduce the other’s experience as fully as possible in one’sown mind” (Lyshaug, 2006, p. 90). This “genuine fellow-feeling involves imagining how the suf-ferer feels” (Lyshaug, 2006, p. 90) and requires a “directly physiological and affective response”in which the researcher uses bodily recall to be reflexive and try to feel what her participantsfeel—while recognizing that this feeling will never be the same (Kruks, 2001, p. 167).

30 KWAN

Positionality

As a second-generation Chinese American woman, who has also experienced racialmicroaggressions and almost lost her own HL, the author can never claim to know how it feelsto be one of her participants, but her positionality and reflexivity allow her to connect withthem beyond a level of imagined objectivity. Aware of the history of orientalist research, theauthor frequently reflected on her ethics, methods, and theories to ensure that she would con-tinue goals of decolonization and healing (Smith, 1999). While this “feeling-with” frameworkallowed the researcher to be reflexive during the interview and data analysis process, the authordid not use these “feelings” to analyze the data. Instead, the affective approach forces researchersto acknowledge their positionality while “construct[ing] modes of political cultural agency thatare commensurate with historical conjunctures where populations are culturally diverse, raciallyand ethnically divided—the objects of social, racial, and sexual discrimination” (Bhabha, 1992,p. 57). The researcher is not that invisible voice of authority but is instead a social and feelingbody with certain desires and interests.

Narrative Inquiry

Understanding the importance of affective methodological approaches, the author used narrativeinquiry to share participants’ experiences (J. S. Bell, 2002, L. A. Bell, 2003). By using par-ticipants’ stories as data, the author was able to better recognize how “people [made] sense oftheir lives” according to available narratives (J. S. Bell, 2002, p. 208). Procedurally, three “com-monplaces” that were central to the method of narrative inquiry were emphasized: temporality,sociality, and place (Clandinin, Pushor, & Murray Orr, 2007). First, recognizing that participantswere always in transition from some sort of past, present, and future, the author traced how historyand interpersonal relations shaped participants’ present, which in turn affected their views abouttheir future goals and concerns. Second, sociality required reflexivity in that the author under-stood the social and personal conditions (i.e., hopes, feelings, and desires) of all parties (i.e.,researcher and participants) (Clandinin et al., 2007). An affective approach naturally opened upthe possibilities of such interactions. And third, place and the transitions between various placeswere held in high regard in this study. The experiences in the home and in the school, althoughhappening in physically separate facilities, had a dialogic and mutually constitutive effect onparticipants’ interpersonal experiences, particularly those related to racial microaggressions andlanguage use. Temporality, sociality, and place demonstrate articulations, and not generalizations,of Hmong American experiences. These contexts and articulations may change, but their conjunc-ture at specific spaces and times creates analytical entryways to think about bodies, identities, anddiscourse.

Data Analysis

Interviews were digitally recorded and then transcribed with pauses and dramatic emphasesnoted. The author read and reread the narrative transcripts and then identified several patternsthat were consistent for participants and the larger literature. Thematic analysis allowed theauthor to generate initial codes across the entire set of data, search for themes, review the themes

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 31

in relation to the entire set of data, generate a thematic map, and refine thematic relationships(Vaismoradi, Turunen, & Bondas, 2013). In addition to open coding of factors that related toHL maintenance and loss, coding for racism and racial microaggressions were completed. Theanalysis identified immigration and educational policies as providing a major foundation for whyracial microaggressions manifested in the narratives of participants. Ultimately, these experiencesoffered insight into participants’ HL practices.

FINDINGS

Objectification

Objectification is a type of microinsult that occurs when students’ ethnicity, race, or culture isexoticized or objectified; individuals are made to feel dehumanized and treated like an object (e.g.,a Hmong American is constantly asked, “What are you?”). The participants in this study expressfrustration with how their histories and identities have been either made completely invisible ortreated as exoticized objects of inquiry. A lack of cultural or linguistic diversity in educationalinstruction, which often results from English-only educational policies and practices, manifestsas microlevel racist interpersonal exchanges in the classroom. This section describes (a) howparticipants perceive the lack of Hmong curriculum in the classroom, (b) the need for diversecourses and topics, and (c) the impact of such invisibility.

According to Mai, it is problematic that Hmong “history is not even written in the textbook”because she believes that public education should play a central role in reaching out to Hmongcommunities. This includes culturally appropriate curriculum that incorporates Hmong historyand language. Mai says, “If we don’t go out there and reach out to communities, we wouldn’thave communities. Then we don’t know if that community is suffering. That’s just something thegovernment might be overlooking.” Mai’s emphasis on the “government” shows how macroleveldecisions may reflect as microlevel interactions. At the postsecondary level, Teng notes that therewere no specific Hmong studies courses at his college. He took an Asian American Studiescourse, but he found that Hmong people’s histories were truncated to just a lecture or two. Buteven so, Teng describes that from those few lectures, he learned so much about his culture andcommunity:

[Learning about the war] makes me more prideful. I didn’t really understand the magnitude of howthe Hmong people supported the U.S. And if I never learned that, I wouldn’t understand that wehad a big impact. I think our parents were more American than any other Americans out there atthat time. And so we do have a right to be here. We supported the U.S. And at that time, we wereAmericans. And now, I feel like the kids don’t understand that. They’re saying that being Hmong isthe wrong way. But our parents fought. And they were proud. Without curriculum on Hmong historyand language, we lose that pride.

Similarly, Sarah said that she was really grateful and thankful that her college offered a Hmongexperience course: “We had to do a research project on whatever we wanted, and I wanted to knowthe Hmong history.” Hmong history was a topic that was of interest for all participants becausethey said that they had never been exposed to it before. All participants noted that they had learnedabout topics such as Chinese history, Vietnam War, and American history, but never Hmong

32 KWAN

experiences.1 Overall, they felt that their voices were inaudible. Just learning about Hmong his-tory, however, is also not enough. Pachia believes that there must be a more critical discussionabout culture and language. She says, “There are a many things that can’t be translated throughEnglish, so in order to understand our history and our culture, we have to understand the lan-guage.” Invisibility in terms of history and language curriculum may seem innocuous, but theparticipants in this study show how macrolevel educational and curriculum decisions, which canignore the experiences of entire groups of people, can lead to students’ development of negativeattitudes toward their own ethnicity.

It makes matters worse that Hmong Americans are also assumed to be an enigma—these insti-tutionalized ignorances worsen people’s assumptions of Hmong as shadowy refugee figures thatare both odd and unknowable. In the incessant questioning of “Hmong, what is that?,” “that” doesnot refer to a group of people but a detached object of study. The power of racial microaggressionslies in the their ignorance of and insensitivity toward the racial identity of people of color (Sue,Capodilupo, et al., 2007). The participants in this study find that their experiences inside theclassroom made them feel like “second-class citizens”: ignored, objectified, and criticized fortheir appearance and language (Sue, Capodilupo, et al., 2007). Despite the greater concentra-tion of Hmong refugees in the areas in which the participants lived, all participants noted thatthey had trouble conveying or describing their ethnic identity. People simply treated them asjust another type of Asian. For example, Pachia’s non-Hmong peers used to ask her, “Whatis Hh-mong?” (with a drawn out emphasis on the silent “H”). Also, Jyliah, Maggie, Mai, andHoua have all been asked why they are not Laotian or Thai if their families emigrated fromthose countries. Further inquiry shows that because none of the participants knows exact detailsabout Hmong history or their families’ complex postcolonial and refugee pasts, they often donot know how to respond to such questions. In an upset tone, Jyliah says, “I’m just Hmong,and I didn’t know how else to explain it to them.” Furthermore, Maggie expresses frustrationabout having to repeat over and over again, “No, I’m Hmong, not Laos [sic]. I’m not Thai,not Mongolian. It’s just constant. Sometimes, it’s just like I don’t want to explain so much.”There is a ceaseless demand for Hmong youth to justify and define themselves to others becauseit seems like no one knows who Hmong are. This objectification and need to identify “whatthey are” makes it so tiresome and difficult that Houa no longer identifies as Hmong but insteadSoutheast Asian. People automatically assume she should be from a certain country, but sheexplains, “We are a deprived, oppressed nation; we don’t have a country.” This identificationwith an entire area disrupts people’s nation-based conception of nationality and heritage. It alsoallows her to avoid the objectification of her appearance and language. The dehumanization thatis associated with being objectified teaches participants that they should be ashamed of whothey are.

Ironically, however, this invisibility is often associated with a hypervisibility of “the socialconstruction of Asian American ‘otherness’” (Espiritu, 2000, p. 87). In a passionate and reflectivestory about growing up as the only Asian person in her grade, Jyliah shares her experiences aboutdealing with racial microaggressions at school:

1Because Hmong is a predominantly oral culture, premigration history has not been well documented in print; how-ever, there are great efforts from historians such as M. N. M. Lee (1998) and Yang (2009) to revive and write thishistory.

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 33

A lot of students always picked on me because of how odd I looked. Also, in fourth grade, I rememberwe were reading something about Chinese history. My teacher asked me how to pronounce the namesof those Chinese towns. I was not Chinese, but I guess I looked it. My teacher knew I was Hmong,but she still asked me to translate.

Such experiences are very hurtful because they assume that all Asians (or Asian Americans)are the same and know how to read Chinese. It negates the experiential, historical, and culturalrealties of Hmong people. As a young child, Jyliah also wondered if she was Mongolian becausepeople kept asking her if Hmong and Mongolian were the same. Deep down, she knew she wasnot Mongolian, but since everyone always thought she was, she began doubting herself. Jyliah’sexpressions (i.e., fluctuations in volume and tone) convey the pains that she feels as an exoticizedyet equally unrecognized object at her school. She later says that her classmates and teachers musthave seen her as Asian, not even Asian American—“just some exotic kind of oriental thing.”

Because of these encounters, the participants in this study have come to realize that no matterhow assimilated they become (i.e., how well they speak English or whether or not they practiceHmong language and traditions), people will never truly see them as “Americans.” Jyliah states,“Even if you learn only English, people still won’t look at you as if you’re a White person. They’llstill look at you like you’re [an] Asian person from the Asian country.” Similarly, when Sarah wasasked by an older White man what her ethnicity was and she responded that she was Hmong, theman said, “I’ve heard that before. Don’t you live in the mountains?” Again, the “that” in whichthe man was referring to were the Hmong people, and the man’s use of the pronoun “you” impliedthat all Hmong people are from the mountains. Sarah humored his question and responded thatHmong “are known to live in mountains, but they live here too.” As a Hmong American, Sarahwas born and raised in the U.S., but the man only saw her and other Hmong as perpetually foreignobjects. Even if Hmong Americans identified as American, their citizenship status was largelyovershadowed by race. These sentiments were very similar to those of the Hmong participants inHein’s (2006) study on Hmong and Cambodians in the Midwest, two Southeast Asian diasporagroups that share similar but varied strategies for coping with cultural stresses.

This perpetual foreignness and objectification are very prominent and widespread. Longrecalls that people would call him “fresh off the boat” because he was “really into [his] ownculture.” Although this name-calling did not affect Long, others, such as Samantha, struggledwith being called an outsider. Samantha explains, “When I was growing up, I felt ashamed ofbeing Hmong. I was translating for a new refugee, and I knew she was different. She was Hmong,and I didn’t really wanna be seen as that too.” Even though Samantha was helping to translate fora new Hmong refugee, she internalized the racism she had experienced and refused to be associ-ated with her classmate. Samantha did not want to be mistaken as one of those foreigners or newrefugees. Samantha says that these feelings are also prominent among the Hmong Americans sheknows:

When children realize their primary language is something other than English, they feel ashamedbecause they don’t fit in. By the time they realize the importance of Hmong, it is almost too late tolearn and develop the language. Hmong students are kinda feeling like they don’t wanna claim thatthey’re Hmong.

By not claiming Hmong and trying not to speak their HL, participants thought that they wouldbe able to more likely fit in. Kalia expressed that she did not want to speak her HL at schoolbecause that linguistic action revealed to others that she was different. She painfully recounts,

34 KWAN

I guess if you were proud to be Hmong, it was okay [to speak Hmong at school], but I was not proud.I was ashamed. Nobody knows what Hmong is. I don’t know what Hmong is. You know what? Idon’t want to claim it.

People’s ignorance about Hmong people made Kalia feel ashamed to be Hmong and to avoidall markers (like language) that would further set her apart from the regular students. Kalia furtherconfessed her insecurities about English even though it was her main language of communica-tion: “I thought I didn’t really know English, and it was like, I think the teenagers in the largercommunity, like if you speak Hmong too much then you’re a ‘Thailander.’ So I guess we’re try-ing to not speak Hmong.” For Kalia, being called a “Thailander” was synonymous with beingcalled an outsider (read: non-American). The use of Hmong objectified her as different and opento scorn. Like Kalia, Kashia also shared that because she spoke primarily Hmong, she felt “like[she] didn’t fit in, and that’s why [she] was usually alone.” To avoid being a loner, Kashia stoppedspeaking Hmong. Jyliah can commiserate with Samantha, Kalia, and Kashia. Jyliah notes, “A lotof Hmong children are embarrassed about being Hmong because it’s so different. It’s so hardbeing different. And I totally understand how hard it is. So then they don’t want to immersethemselves in it.” Thai also discussed trends in which many of the younger second linguistic gen-eration, including his cousins and siblings, would say that the Hmong language was “ghetto,” sothey did not want to speak the language or associate themselves with the culture. The teasing andother negative associations with the Hmong language reflect how a preference for English (i.e.,English is the language of America, spoken by Americans) creates shame, embarrassment, andinsecurities among the participants.

In terms of the three research questions posed in the introduction, the objectification of Hmongstudents shows how encounters with racial microaggressions have left deep (often negative)impressions on participants’ views about Hmong culture and language. Popular discourses fromthe English-only movement, which are enacted through educational and anti-immigration legisla-tion, create negative language experiences in and out of the classroom. Because of covert racism,participants feel disregarded and ignored when teachers and peers either fail to recognize theirhistorical, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds or objectify who they are. As with the nature ofracial microaggressions, such behaviors may happen unbeknownst to the perpetrators. However,such racial microaggressions have damaging consequences (Solorzano et al., 2000; Sue, Bucceri,et al., 2007). As a response to these encounters, students have felt ashamed to be Hmong andhave expressed tendencies to stop speaking the language and stop practicing the traditions, sincethose are attributes about themselves that they can control.

Assumed Inadequacy

According to Sue, Bucceri, et al. (2007), ethnic minorities’ language, traditions, and worldviewsare often assumed to be inherently different from those of mainstream American society. Thisothering process is a microinvalidation that assumes minority cultures are inadequate, abnor-mal, irrational, deficient, and/or less desirable (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007). Such assumptionsstem from popular deficit-based frameworks like the culture of poverty, which draws causalinference between an ethnic minority’s culture and negative educational, occupational, or crimi-nal outcomes. This section discusses (a) the effect of language pullout sessions on participants’perceptions of their communication styles, (b) the problem with teachers’ assumptions about the

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 35

deficient nature of students’ communication and interaction styles, and (c) participants’ subtrac-tive view of Hmong language use. Overall, negative perceptions of Hmong language use exposeparticipants to racial microaggressions that ultimately teach them that their heritage languagepractices are deficient and less important than English language use.

Since Prop 227, those in this study who initially had had bilingual education were transferredto ESL courses, and the younger participants never had access to bilingual education programs.Although all the participants in this study were automatically tracked into some sort of secondlanguage acquisition program, most were denied individual speech assistance because Hmongstudents were simply homogenized and assumed to not need special services. The educationalsystem assumed Hmong students’ communication styles were naturally deficient because theywere learning two languages at once. While bilingual education programs offered opportunitiesfor Hmong students to develop their HL and English, ESL programs were based upon a founda-tion that assumed Hmong language and culture to be subtractive. Because of these practices thatwere affected by the macrolevel policies, students experienced racial exclusion—not in an overtway but in a way that was mediated by the guise of helping students learn English. These policiesultimately conveyed to the participants that their language and culture were problematic, and theyneeded to “assimilate” by mastering the English language and losing their HL if they wanted tosucceed. For example, Teng says,

Growing up in America, I have learned that Hmong history, culture, religion, language, and everythingis pushed down. It makes us secondary. Schools teach us not to appreciate being Hmong because in asense, we don’t want to be secondary.

The 10 students who had bilingual education said that their classes offered a safe space forHmong students. Xang describes how he appreciated having the bilingual education pullout ses-sions. He and five other Hmong students would be pulled out of their main class for about an houreach day. He says,

For the whole entire day, I’m trying to learn something that’s difficult for me. But when I was pulledout, I would take a step back and say, “Okay, I’m going to try to relax a little bit before I go back.”

From Xang’s perspective, the bilingual education pullout was calming because it was a spacewhere he was not confused or lost. At University High School, S. Lee (2001) also found ESLsessions to be a safe space for Hmong students to interact. However, the practice of languageinstruction pullout was also isolating (S. Lee, 2001). It demonstrated to others that Hmong com-munication processes were deficient, and they needed to be pulled out of the general class torectify their inadequacies. For example, in response to Xang, Eliza noted that she felt singledout when she was pulled out of class. Eliza said, that it was like, “Oh, you’re Hmong.” And ina separate interview, Toua shared similar sentiments. Getting pulled out of class made Eliza andToua feel insecure and ashamed because they needed to be removed from the larger class to workon their inadequate language skills. While pullout sessions provided a space that allowed Xangto take a break from the stares and demands of the larger class, they led to tremendous anxietyand shame for Eliza and Toua, who felt that they were singled out as the abnormal students.Xang’s positive experience could also be related to the bilingual nature of his pullout sessions,while Eliza and Toua’s negative experiences could be associated with the pressures of Englishacquisition in ESL. These othering processes opened up the opportunity for peers and teachers to

36 KWAN

objectify the participants and assume that Hmong communication styles were problematic. Thesefeelings of inadequacy ultimately affected participants’ relationships with the Hmong language.

For those who were placed into ESL programs, eight out of nine lamented that they couldnot take advantage of their prior linguistic skills in Hmong to help them acquire English; theywere prohibited from speaking Hmong in the classroom. For example, Maggie says, “BecauseEnglish with English, how are you supposed to understand what you’re supposed to do that ifyou don’t understand?” On the other hand, participants also understand that the ultimate goalfor ESL is to help students learn English in the quickest and most efficient way possible. Xang,however, questions whether this approach is effective: “I think it forces you to learn English.If it’s effective? I don’t know.” The efficacy of these programs are uncertain, but the reasoningbehind these programs have lasting and prominent effects in conveying to Hmong children thattheir forms of communication are ineffectual—they should forego their HL and adopt the Englishlanguage and American style of communication only.

For example, when Thai first moved to Fresno as a 5-year-old, he had a strong grasp of theHmong language because his father was a Hmong teacher, but Thai was ultimately not allowedto use his HL at school. Even though Thai thought he was progressing, his mom was called infor a parent-teacher conference. Not able to understand what the teacher was saying, his momaccidentally agreed to hold Thai back one school year. Thai was very upset. He says, “I even hadfriends that didn’t even know as much as I did. Why would I be held back?” Thai noted that hewas just shy and did not speak up in class. He shares, “Although I know the answer, I don’t raisemy hand because I guess it’s just how we were taught. Don’t be rude or greedy. So I was like,‘No. I’ll let people take their turn.’” Such actions, however, were not regarded as showing respect.Thai’s teachers just thought that he did not understand. The politeness and modesty of Hmongpeople’s communication styles were not valued in the classroom. From that point onward, Thaisaid he became very insecure about his English language skills. Even to this day, he says, “I can’ttalk that well in English.” Thai continues to practice Hmong, but he makes sure that he only usesthe language at home. He does not risk speaking Hmong elsewhere because he does not want torisk being objectified as a foreigner.

For the most part, participants in this study felt that the Hmong language was viewed as“uncool” as compared to English. While in secondary school, they learned that to be Americanis to speak English well. To speak English well, their teachers often said that they had to stopspeaking Hmong. As children, all of the participants, except for Long, were ashamed to beHmong because it meant they were different. From their interactions with teachers and students,participants recognize that there should be no intermixing of Hmong and English. Samanthasays,

I think what I was really feeling was Hmong wasn’t that appreciated in the classroom, and so that’swhy I preferred to speak English. I preferred to do everything in English and then after a while,everything was just English.

At first, Samantha remembers speaking her HL at school with other students, but the teach-ers overtly stated that English was the only appropriate language at school. Since Samanthagrew up during the height of the English-only movement, teachers may have reflected thosebeliefs.

Sometimes, teachers did not have to verbally voice their disapproval of Hmong languageuse. Kashia remembers that her teachers never directly disparaged her, but whenever she spoke

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 37

Hmong, they looked at her in a suspicious way that pressured her to stop speaking the languageat school. It was difficult for Kashia to stop speaking Hmong because she said, “I wasn’t reallyconfident with myself, so I didn’t feel confident with the [English] language.” Furthermore, Touagives details about a seemingly natural process of deciding whether or not to use Hmong: “Inthe classroom, you can’t really speak Hmong, so it’s built in to your mentality. You should speakEnglish. It’s built in; it’s natural.” The use of English at school and Hmong only at home isindoctrinated in these youth at a very young age—through verbal instructions by teachers andthrough looks and feelings they receive when speaking their HL in the public sphere. This isvery similar to Razfar’s (2011) discussion about how teachers may both implicitly and explicitlyassert the “assimilation objectives of schooling” (p. 9). Early educational experiences have hada tremendous impact on the development of language ideologies among the students who wereinterviewed. By not allowing students to use their HL in the classroom, students began to inter-nalize the belief that their communication styles were deficient and subordinate. If they were toretain their Hmong language, their English development would be harmed and their educationaloutlooks stagnated.

This deficit-based perspective was supported by one participant who parroted the pro-English-only ideologies and denounced the maintenance of the Hmong language at home and at school.Daisy said that the Hmong language could prohibit a child from acquiring English. Daisy’s par-ents even encouraged her to make more White friends than Hmong friends because her parentsthought that Hmong kids tended to be perpetual foreigners who refused to learn English or do wellin school. Daisy says, “It’s not that we don’t like Hmong people, but if we just speak Hmong, thenwe won’t assimilate or adapt to the American culture, and we’ll do really bad [sic] at school.” Shebelieves that many Hmong people are too dedicated to their language and culture, especially thosewho speak Hmong at school. This perspective demonstrates how Daisy has internalized popu-lar ideologies of subtractive bilingualism. Under this line of reasoning, bilingualism contributesto students’ academic failures by not only causing confusion in students, but also supporting a“ghetto” immigrant lifestyle (Gingrich in Hunt, 2007). Hurtado and Rodríguez (1989) define thisunderstanding of subtractive bilingualism as “the idea that skills acquired from one languageinterfere with learning a second language” (p. 411). Daisy fosters views that are more closelyaligned with the English-only language movement than those of any of the other participants inthis study. She even shared that her young nieces and nephews spoke too much Hmong, whichhindered their acquisition of English.

In regards to the three research questions that address the effect of language policies on lan-guage use, this study finds that experiences of racial and linguistic exclusion, which stem fromthe English-only policies that compel teachers, students, and schools to perceive non-Englishlanguages as subtractive, create conditions in which Hmong students internalize beliefs that theirhome language is inherently inadequate. To respond to such microaggressive assumptions, all par-ticipants emphasize the need to develop English proficiency. While the maintenance of Hmongis tremendously important for participants’ cultural identity, all agree that English is the moreimportant and economic choice. Because of negative linguistic assumptions that are supportedby the English-only movement and reinforced through curriculum and educational policy, suchmacrolevel factors have created environments that foster microinvalidations, which ultimatelyhurt Hmong maintenance.

38 KWAN

DISCUSSION

Race and racism have been reinscribed under new guises of postracial discourse—ones that donot necessarily overtly address race, but instead use language and belonging as a proxy for race.López (2010) writes, “In comparison to the clearly stenciled Whites Only signs of the Jim Crowera, today’s racism seems more diffuse, less obvious, harder to distinguish from the unfairnessof everyday life” (p. 1072). Rather than address overt or intentional racism, this article exploreshow presumably unintentional racial microaggressions have affected the Hmong Americans inthis study. Focusing on the impact of macrolevel educational policies on microlevel experienceswith racial microaggressions, this study shares how participants are affected by racial exclu-sions that revolve around HL use and phenotypical differences. While there are many factors thatcontribute to heritage maintenance and loss, this study addresses two racial microaggressions(objectification and assumed inadequacy) that collectively shape the challenges participantsfaced.

Similar to Tuan’s (1998) study on the discrimination experienced by East Asians, the Hmongstudents in this study were also objectified as perpetual foreigners. Because accents often signal toothers the “foreignness of an immigrant,” participants in this study were more likely to experiencediscrimination if they spoke Hmong or accented English (Kim, Wang, Deng, Álvarez, & Li, 2011,p. 3). These findings corroborate with studies on how accent and the perpetual foreigner stereo-type increase depressive and negative symptoms in Chinese American students (Kim et al., 2011)and Southeast Asian mothers of mixed heritage children in Taiwan (Fan & Ni, 2013). Althoughthe overt forms of racism experienced by the Hmong students in S. Lee’s (2001) study were lessprevalent than in this study, subtle forms of racial microaggressions forced students in this studyto internalize feelings of inadequacy and shame, especially in regards to the subordinated statusof their language.

Participants knew that they would always be seen and categorized as “Asian,” but they alsohoped that if they could perfect their English, then there was a possibility that they would notbe assumed to be perpetual foreigners. This is why it was very important for the participants toacquire English quickly, even if it meant that they could not speak Hmong. Out of the 19 par-ticipants, only six belonged to the “second-generation maintenance” group. They were able toable to read, write, and speak fluently in Hmong. The majority were categorized as “second-generation loss” because they only understood the language in a very limited capacity. Thosewho understood the language fluently either took formal classes or dedicated themselves to self-study when they became adults. The passion for maintaining the language often arose after thestudents took Hmong history classes or participated in Hmong culture clubs in college. For most,however, the greatest challenge was to combat the lingering dominant language ideologies thathave been instilled in them from the microaggressive experiences they have had growing upas Hmong Americans in California. The subtle insults and put-downs related to anti-immigrantsentiment and English-only policies have had lasting negative effects: feelings of displacement,nonbelonging, shame, and embarrassment.

Language policies and ideologies are based upon a value system that contributes to the racialclimate of schools and communities (Solorzano et al., 2000). Just as the Spanish and AfricanAmerican Vernacular English speakers in Razfar’s (2011) study were typified, simplified, andgeneralized as part and parcel of the subordinated languages they spoke, so too were Hmongspeakers in this study. In a non-American context, Fan and Ni (2013) found that assumptions

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 39

of deficient language were “rooted in the microaggression[s] perpetrated by the mainstreamsociety” (p. 745). The mainstream (Taiwanese) linguistic and cultural expectations that wereembedded within the infrastructure of schools and of mixed heritage homes resulted in dam-aging latent effects for the marginalized Southeast Asian mothers of mixed heritage children.Such transnational perspectives show how racial and linguistic microaggressions harm not justthe children whose language and self-worth are policed by language ideologies but also parentswho have a subordinated cultural and linguistic status.

While Hein (2006) had suggested that Hmong ethnic boundary, which clearly demarcated thedifferences between Hmong and non-Hmong, would aid in language retention, this study findsthat the second linguistic generation’s language shift patterns mirror those of the Cambodiansin Hein’s study, meaning that there was increased cultural adaptation. Participants still identi-fied as Hmong Americans, but their cultural practices and language use shifted toward Americanvalues and English (Vang, 2014). From this study, it can be predicted that high levels of lan-guage loss will lead to the decreased validations of second language programs such as bilingualeducation. Because of the complexities associated with English mastery and Hmong languageloss, such data, if misinterpreted, can justify the continued lack of support for HL resources. Thestudents in this study, however, have been found to associate their insecurities around Englishwith the perceptions that have been instilled in them through ESL and not bilingual educationclasses. Because ESL programs often fostered negative rhetoric around bilingualism, participantsassumed that their English language skills were inherently poor or inadequate and related to theirHmong language use. Data from this study, however, indicate otherwise. The students’ academicsuccesses in college show that their English skills are at least adequate for them to have passedtheir general writing courses. However, their perceptions of such skills could have been morepositive had they been exposed to additive skills and positive approaches to bilingualism.

In Minnesota and Wisconsin, Bosher (1997) found that recently immigrated Hmong studentswere able to successfully navigate postsecondary education through bicultural adaptation. Thisstudy finds that this continues to be true. However, American dimensions of culture seem todominate even when the Hmong students in this study try to revitalize their language, values,and culture. Similar to Withers’s (2004) findings, there continues to be language loss among theyounger generations of Hmong. While there is evidence that students are now trying to activelymaintain their language and culture through student organizations and community outreach atthe college level, there is a lack of institutional support. When there are other demands, such asschool or work, language maintenance suffers. By the time the participants are in college, thecrucial years for developing a HL have lapsed. Language loss, as intertwined with processes ofassimilation and acculturation, often act as a survival mechanism for students to avoid invisibility,hypervisibility, and ridicule. Rather than assume such compromises and shifts to be “deficiencieson the part of one generation of speakers or the other,” there must be a recognition of the complexprocesses that arise from different social and schooling conditions (Burt, 2013, p. 121).

CONCLUSION

Although it has been almost 20 years since the passage of Prop 227 and the height of theEnglish-only movement, larger language-based educational policies and curriculum standardsstill actively and inadvertently silence the history and culture of Hmong Americans. This study

40 KWAN

cannot draw conclusive causal inference between educational policies and the likelihood of HLmaintenance or loss for Hmong Americans, but interview data and analysis show how macrolevelprocesses have damaging effects on individuals, particularly through racial microaggressionsthat objectify Hmong identity and criticize Hmong culture and communication styles. Theseracial microaggressions convey to the participants that they should primarily adopt mainstreamAmerican values and not practice Hmong traditions (especially not in the public sphere). The neg-ative encounters between participants and non-Hmong teachers and students ultimately compelparticipants to prefer English development to HL maintenance or acquisition.

Adding to Zhou and Xiong’s (2005) conceptualization of segmented assimilation, this articleshows that even though Hmong American students are increasingly adopting American val-ues and traditions (through language), they may still be perceived by others as unassimilated.This study’s ability to draw intersections between macrolevel processes and microlevel experi-ences provides insight to the challenges of assimilation for second-linguistic-generation Hmong.Although recognizing the nexus between social mobility and discrimination, this article cannotoffer any conclusive insights into linguistic assimilation and social mobility. However, the find-ings from this study begin to identify some factors that affect Hmong American participants’cultural and ethnic identity development.

SUGGESTIONS

Many second-linguistic-generation speakers are socialized in situations that are either not con-ducive to or are overtly restrictive of HL learning. For example, Tse (2000) notes, “Many[linguistic minorities] have little or no access to HL reading materials, lack opportunities to inter-act with other HL speakers, live outside of communities with HL language services, or speak a[HL] not valued by their school” (p. 702). This was also the case for the participants in this study.As suggested by Tse (2000), HL maintenance is best supported when the home, community, andschool environments collectively help “reverse the stigma of non-English languages and providestudents with the necessary social, cultural, language, and literacy experiences” (p. 702). Shinand Lee (1996) found that although Hmong parents wanted their children to develop Englishproficiency, they also wanted their children to maintain the Hmong language. Hornberger (1991)suggests that rather than use maintenance models whereby HL is understood to be a right, whichmay further alienate English-only-speaking groups and reify segregation between the languages,schools and teachers should foster “cultural pluralism” and an integration of both languagesas resources (p. 222). This increased awareness should help decrease the prevalence of racialmicroaggressions that arise among peers, teachers, and Hmong students.

In terms of secondary education, this study recommends that Hmong bilingual education ordual immersion programs be developed to support home and community efforts that help stu-dents maintain the language. The teachers should not only teach English but also Hmong history,language, and culture (K. Lee & Clarke, 2013). Support from community organizations, suchas Hmong Innovating Politics (HIP) and Hmong Empowerment Resource Outreach (HERO),can help parents navigate the educational and legal bureaucracies, which make such programspossible. Also, graduate programs, such as the Preliminary Multiple Subject Credential witha Bilingual Authorization in Hmong, offered by the Kremen School of Education & HumanDevelopment at California State University (CSU) Fresno, demonstrate how educators who are

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 41

trained in Hmong literacy and culture can foster culturally appropriate and empowering class-rooms. Hence, instead of struggling to learn Hmong in college, Hmong youth can develop suchlinguistic skills much earlier in their educational pipelines. Furthermore, secondary schools needto continue working with Hmong-serving institutions, such as CSU Fresno and Sacramento andUniversity of California Davis and Merced, on multiage conferences and programs, such as theHmong Youth Empowerment Conference, to help promote cultural awareness, teach strategiesfor coping with racial discrimination, and increase access to higher education among Hmong stu-dents. Such events, which welcome students of all ages, parents, and community organizations,foster mentorship and community empowerment.

During the economic recession, Hmong language and history classes were not offered at CSUFresno or Sacramento. At CSU Fresno, the instructor held free courses for students, but these cutsultimately demonstrated the lack of institutional support for minority histories and languages.There is a great burden placed on Hmong educators and leaders who must do double labor toeducate Hmong students. Also, many postsecondary institutions offer general Asian AmericanStudies or Southeast Asian American Studies courses, but curriculum on Hmong people is lim-ited. A postsecondary intervention can aid in a more holistic maintenance of Hmong language andculture. In order to reverse some of the stigma associated with the racial microaggressions experi-enced by participants, the findings indicate there should be increased access to Hmong Americanstudies and language courses. While such courses are listed in course catalogs, they have not beenoffered in years. When these courses are offered, departments and faculty should contact Hmongcultural clubs on campus. Last year, a lecturer at CSU Sacramento successfully recruited Hmongstudents for his Hmong American Experience course via Facebook. In addition to coursework,the universities should support events, such as the Hmong Heritage Week, by providing space andmonetary support. Such larger, institutional approaches are necessary to address the widespreadignorance about Hmong people and language and the racial microaggressions that stem from it.

Overall, the additive nature of HL maintenance may help Hmong students with their insecu-rities around English, thereby allowing more Hmong youth to pursue higher education or otheroccupational outlets that can ultimately allow them to use their language skills to not only findbetter jobs but also practice what Duffy (2007) calls the “rhetoric of testimony.” If providedinstitutional resources, second-linguistic-generation Hmong can begin to use their literary skills(Hmong and English) to write about themselves and their communities, combatting negativestereotypes and invisibility of Hmong experiences. While these testimonies may not always bepublished, many spoken word artists, performers, and playwrights such as Kevin Yang and MayLee Yang have shared their writings and work (often about Hmong Americans’ struggles withidentity formation and racism) with larger audiences through performances and online media.As Sue, Bucceri, et al. (2007) and Sue, Capodilupo, et al. (2007) suggested, even if institutionalsupport is lacking, an alternative way to combat racial microaggressions is to share people’sexperiences rather than to conceal them or pretend they do not exist.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author thanks Julie Bettie and Dana Takagi for their support when this study was firstconducted and the reviewers and editors for their thoughtful and constructive feedback.

42 KWAN

REFERENCES

Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion. New York, NY: Routledge.Anderson-Mejias, P. (2005). Generation and Spanish language use in the Lower Río Grande Valley of Texas . Southwest

Journal of Linguistics, 24, 1–12.Bell, J. S. (2002). Narrative inquiry: More than just telling stories. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 207–213. doi:10.2307/3588331Bell, L. A. (2003). Telling tales: What stories can teach us about racism. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 6, 3–28.

doi:10.1080/1361332032000044567Bhabha, H. (1992). Postcolonial authority and postmodern guilt. In L. Grossberg, C. Nelson, & P. Treichler (Eds.),

Cultural studies (pp. 56–68). New York, NY: Routledge.Biegel, S. (2006). Education and the law. St. Paul, MN: Thompson West.Bosher, S. (1997). Language and cultural identity: A study of Hmong students at the postsecondary level. TESOL

Quarterly, 31, 593–603. doi:10.2307/3587843Burt, S. (2010). The Hmong language in Wisconsin: Language shift and pragmatic change. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen

Press.Burt, S. (2013). Hmong in Wisconsin. In T. Purnell, E. Raimy, & J. Salmons (Eds.), Wisconsin talk: Linguistic diversity

in the Badger State (pp. 111–122). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.California Department of Education (CDE). (2000). History-social science content standards for California public

schools, kindergarten through grade twelve. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/histsocscistnd.pdf

Clandinin, D. J., Pushor, D., & Murray Orr, A. (2007). Navigating sites for narrative inquiry. Journal of TeacherEducation, 58(1), 21–35. doi:10.1177/0022487106296218

Clyne, M. (1991). Community languages: The Australian experience. Cambridge, UK: Press Syndicate of the Universityof Cambridge.

College Board. (2014). AP United States history: Course and exam description. Retrieved from https://advancesinap.collegeboard.org/english-history-and-social-science/us-history

Constantine, M. G., & Sue, D. (2007). Perceptions of racial microaggressions among Black supervisees in cross-racialdyads. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 142–153. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.54.2.142

Crawford, J. (1992). Hold your tongue: Bilingualism and the politics of “English only.” Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Davis, P. C. (1989). Law as microaggression. Yale Law Journal, 98, 1559–1578. doi:10.2307/796605DePouw, C. (2012). When culture implies deficit: Placing race at the center of Hmong American education. Race,

Ethnicity, and Education, 15(2), 223–239. doi:10.1080/13613324.2011.624505Duffy, J. (2007). Writing from these roots: Literacy in a Hmong-American community. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii

Press.Espiritu, Y. (2000). Asian American women and men: Labor, laws, and love. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.Evans, B., & Hornberger, N. (2005). No child left behind: Repealing and unpeeling federal language education policy in

the U.S. Language Policy, 4, 87–106. doi:10.1007/s10993-004-6566-2Fadiman, A. (1997). The spirit catches you and you fall down: A Hmong child, her American doctors, and the collision

of two cultures. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Fan, S., & Ni, H. (2013). The dormant outcome of racial microaggressions in Taiwan: Language-delayed mixed children

and their immigrant mothers. U.S.-China Education Review, 3(10), 735–748.Gándara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., García, E., Asato, J., Gutiérrez, K., Stritikus, T., & Curry, J. (2000). The initial impact

of Proposition 227 on the instruction of English learners. Davis, CA: UC Linguistic Minority Research Institute andEducation Policy Center.

Hein, J. (2006). Ethnic origins: The adaptation of Cambodian and Hmong refugees in four American cities. New York,NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Hornberger, N. (1991). Extending enrichment bilingual education: Revisiting typologies and redirecting policy. In O.García (Ed.), Bilingual education: Focusschrift in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman on the occasion of his 65th birthday(pp. 215–234). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Hornberger, N. (1998). Language policy, language, education, language rights: Indigenous, immigrant, and internationalperspectives. Language in Society, 27, 439–458. doi:10.1017/S0047404500020182

Hunt, K. (2007, April 1). Gingrich: Bilingual classes teach “ghetto” language. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/31/AR2007033100992.html

MICROAGGRESSIONS AND HMONG AMERICAN STUDENTS 43

Hurtado, A., & Rodriguez, R. (1989). Language as a social problem: The repression of Spanish in South Texas. Journalof Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 10, 401–419. doi:10.1080/01434632.1989.9994386

Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Deng, S., Álvarez, R., & Li, J. (2011). Accent, perpetual foreigner stereotype, and perceived dis-crimination as indirect links between English proficiency and depressive symptoms in Chinese American adolescents.Developmental Psychology, 47(1), 289–301. doi:10.1037/a0020712

Kruks, S. (2001). Retrieving experience: Subjectivity and recognition in feminist politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityPress.

Lee, K., & Clarke, K. (2013). The significance of social memory in 1.5-generation Hmong-Americans: Implicationsfor culturally competent social work practice. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 22, 162–177.doi:10.1080/15313204.2013.785376

Lee, M. N. M. (1998). The thousand-year myth: Construction and characterization of Hmong. Hmong Studies Journal,2(2), 1–15.

Lee, S. (1997). The road to college: Hmong American women’s pursuit of higher education. Harvard Education Review,67, 803–828.

Lee, S. (2001). More than “model minorities” or “delinquents”: A look at Hmong American high school students. HarvardEducational Review, 71(3), 505–528.

Lee, S. (2002). Learning “America”: Hmong American high school students. Education and Urban Society, 34, 233–246.doi:10.1177/0013124502342007

Lee, S. (2005). Up against whiteness: Race, school and immigrant youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.López, I. H. (2010). Post-racial racism: Racial stratification and mass incarceration in the age of Obama. California Law

Review, 98(3), 1023–1073.Lyshaug, B. (2006). Solidarity without “sisterhood”? Feminism and the ethics of coalition building. Politics & Gender,

2, 77–100. doi:10.1017/S1743923X06060041Nieto, D. G. (2007). The emperor’s new words: Language and colonization. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology

of Self-Knowledge, 5, 231–238.Park, E., & Park, J. (2005). Probationary Americans: Contemporary immigration policies and the shaping of Asian

American communities. New York, NY: Routledge.Park, R. (1950). Race and culture. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Pfeifer, M. (2012, December). Race relations and the Hmong. Retrieved from http://www.hmongstudiesjournal.org/race-

relations-and-the-hmong.htmlPfeifer, M. (2013, December). Hmong populations and primary education. Retrieved from http://www.hmongstudies

journal.org/hmong-populations-and-primary-education.htmlPierce, C., Carew, J., Pierce-González, D., & Wills, D. (1977). An experiment in racism: TV commercials. Education and

Urban Society, 10(1), 61–87. doi:10.1177/001312457701000105Razfar, A. (2011). The linguistic re-turn: The moral and practical imperative of “language” in curriculum studies. Journal

of the American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies, 7(2), 1–37.Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics,

4(2), 196–213. doi:10.1111/1467-9481.00111Schensul, S., Schensul, J., & LeCompte, M. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: Observations, interviews, and

questionnaires. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Shin, F., & Lee, B. (1996). Hmong parents: What do they think about bilingual education. Pacific Educational Research

Journal, 8(1), 65–71.Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies. New York, NY: Palgrave.Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The

experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60–73.Sue, D., Bucceri, J., Lin, A., Nadal, K., & Torino, G. (2007). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience.

Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13(1), 72–81. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.13.1.72Sue, D., Capodilupo, C., Torino, G., Bucceri, J., Holder, A., Nadal, K., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions

in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271

Thao, P. (1984). Mong education at the crossroads. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.The Chinese school problem. (1885, March 5). Daily Alta California, 38. Retrieved from http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/

cdnc?a=d&d=DAC18850305.2.21

44 KWAN

Tse, L. (2000). The effects of ethnic identity formation on bilingual maintenance and development: An analysisof Asian American narratives. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 3(3), 185–200.doi:10.1080/13670050008667706

Tuan, M. (1998). Forever foreigners or honorary whites?: The Asian ethnic experience today. Piscataway, NJ: RutgersUniversity Press.

U. S. Census Bureau. (2013). California, selected population profile in the United States [Data]. 2013 Americancommunity survey 1-year estimates. Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov

Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conductinga qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Sciences, 15, 398–405. doi:10.1111/nhs.12048

Vang, P. D. (2014). Hmong and acculturation. In J. Merton (Ed.), Acculturation: Psychology, processes and globalperspectives (pp. 115–136). New York, NY: Nova Publishers.

Villa, D., & Rivera-Mills, S. (2009). An integrated multi-generational model for language maintenance and shift: Thecase of Spanish in the Southwest. Spanish in Context, 6, 26–42.

Withers, A. (2004). Hmong language and cultural maintenance in Merced, California. Bilingual Research Journal, 28,425–461. doi:10.1080/15235882.2004.10162624

Xiong, Y. S. (2013). An analysis of poverty in Hmong American communities. In M. Pfeifer, M. Chiu, & K. Yang (Eds.),Diversity in diaspora: Hmong Americans in the twenty-first century (pp. 66–105 ). Honolulu, HI: University of HawaiiPress.

Yang, K. (2009). Challenges and complexity in the re-construction of Hmong history. Hmong Studies Journal, 10, 1–17.Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race media literacy: Challenging deficit discourse about Chicanas/os. Journal of Popular Film

& Television, 30(1), 52–62. doi:10.1080/01956050209605559Zhou, M., & Xiong, Y. S. (2005). The multifaceted American experiences of the children of Asian immigrants: Lessons

for segmented assimilation. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(6), 1119–1152. doi:10.1080/01419870500224455