Understanding the Identities of Mixed-Race College Students Through a Developmental Ecology Lens

Journal of College Student Development, May/Jun 2003 by Renn, Kristen A

Using an ecology model of human development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1993), I frame the exploration of racial identities of 38 college students with multiple racial heritages. I map the influence of interactions within and between specific environments on students 'decisions to identify in one or more of five patterns of mixed race identity found in a previous study.

The identity development of mixed race college students, those students whose parents are from more than one federally designated racial or ethnic category, does not appear to follow the path outlined in traditional models of racial identity development (e.g., Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1979; Atkinson & Sue, 1993; Cross, 1987, 1995; Helms, 1990, 1995). The models' inclusion of a stage or status of immersion in minority culture and rejection of majority culture does not reflect the experience of many multiracial individuals (Poston, 1990; Root, 1996). Even ethnic identity models (e.g., Phinney, 1990) fail to capture the complexity of multiracial identity. The experience of falling outside the monoracial norm assumed in the United States prompts many individuals of mixed heritage to question the validity of racial categories and the necessity of rigid identification within existing categorization schema (Kilson, 2001 ; Renn, 2000; Root; Wallace, 2001). Indeed, mixed race college students may identify differently depending on campus sociocultural contexts (Renn; Wallace), an outcome seen not as identity exploration, indecision, or diffusion, but as a healthy endpoint in itself (Root). The purpose of this study was to explore the influences of postsecondary environments on the identities of mixed race college students by examining the processes and contexts of racial or ethnic identity development through the lens of a developmental ecology theory.

Throughout this article, I use the words biracial, multiracial, mixed race, and multiple heritage interchangeably. In an effort to create parity between mono- and multiracial descriptors, I do not capitalize the names of racial categories (e.g., black, white, asian) except when a word relates specifically to a nation of origin (e.g., Samoan, Chinese). There is not general agreement in the multiracial literature as to terminology or conventions of capitalizing racial designators; my choices are designed to minimize to the extent possible the textual representation of racial categories as immutable entities. According to the Office of Management and Budget Directive 15 (1997), the federal government defines five racial categories as: American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or African American; Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; White. In addition, the government recognizes one ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino. Participants in my research have parents from more than one federal, racial, or ethnic designation (such as white and black or asian and latino).

In the first section of the article, I discuss theoretical bases for the study of multiracial identity, including two recent studiesWallace (2001) and Renn (2000)-of mixed heritage college students. I next introduce a conceptual framework, Bronfenbrenner's (1979,1993) ecology model of development, to explore the influence of postsecondary environments on multiracial identity. Drawing from my ongoing study of mixed race students, I analyze the influence of individual characteristics (such as race, gender, sexuality), family, peer culture, and larger social movements and mores on individual development. Finally, I suggest implications for higher education practice.

Developmental Models and Research on Identities of Mixed Race Students

In the early 1990s, theorists posited biracial identity development models that roughly mirrored the existing stage models (see Kerwin & Ponterotto, 1995; Kich, 1992; Poston, 1990). Seeking an alternative to the "one schema fits all" approach and a theory that would better match the lived experiences of biracial individuals she encountered, psychologist Maria P. P. Root (1996) introduced a nonlinear model for biracial identity. Drawing on the notions of borderlands and border crossings (see Anzalduà, 1987; Giroux, 1992), Root proposed a theory of identity formation that does not depend on an orderly progression through developmental stages, but rather relies on an individual's ability to be comfortable with self-definition in, across, and/or in between categories. Root's (1996) model of healthy biracial identity development describes how an individual resolves "other" status through one of four "border crossings." She identified these border crossings as (a) having "both feet in both groups" (p. xxi, italics in original) or being able to hold and merge multiple perspectives simultaneously; (b) situational ethnicity and race, or consciously shifting racial foreground and background in different settings; (c) a decision to sit on the border, claiming a multiracial central reference point; and (d) creating a home base in one identity and making forays into others.