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

Because the ecology model does not represent specific developmental trajectories as, for example, the racial identity models are purported to do (e.g., Atkinson et al., 1979; Atkinson & Sue, 1993; Cross, 1987, 1995; Helms, 1990, 1995), the ecology model is especially useful for examining both the processes and outcomes of college student development, a field which has become increasingly complex as the student population resembles less and less the homogeneous populations upon whom traditional student development models (e.g., Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Perry, 1968) were based.

Data Sources, Collection, Analyses, and Interpretation

The data used in this article come from my ongoing study of multiracial students. Data for the first phase of the study (Renn, 2000) were collected in the 1997-1998 school year at three private, residential, predominantly white institutions in the Northeast (one liberal arts college and two Carnegie research extensive universities). Eight students at each institution (24 total) participated in open-ended interviews and a written response exercise; 3 or 4 interviewees per institution also participated in a focus group. I conducted observations of campus racial climate and student events, and collected archival materials (student newspaper articles, event flyers, examples of identityrelated academic work from participating students, etc.). In the 2000-2001 school year, I collected data using the same techniques from an additional 14 students in the rural southern Midwest, 6 from a predominantly white community college and 8 from a midsized public university (20,000 students; Carnegie research extensive); 2 of the 8 university students had transferred from the community college. Data presented in this article come from the first two phases of the study (Northeast and southern Midwest).

Students have come to the study by answering public postings, e-mail messages to campus organizations of students of color, announcements in student meetings and classes, and snowball sampling (Atkinson & Flint, 2001). Practicing maximum variation sampling (Miles & Huberman, 1994), I have selected students for participation based on gender identity, racial and ethnic heritage (including variation in combinations of white parents and parents of color and two parents of color), age, ability, sexual orientation, and class background. At each campus, I have sought samples that met the criteria of saturation and sufficiency of sample size (Seidman, 1991).

In the first phase of the study (Renn, 2000), I framed my interpretation through grounded theory methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and developed the fivepattern schema of multiracial identity. In subsequent analyses, I have compared data to the existing schema, refining and elaborating on the patterns when appropriate (for a discussion of using existing theories to guide data analysis, see Boyatzis, 1998; Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Strauss & Corbin, 1994).

APPLYING THE ECOLOGY MODEL TO AN ANALYSIS OF Bl- AND MULTIRACIAL STUDENT IDENTITIES