Kristen Renn’s Ecological Theory of Mixed-Race Identity Development

1. Kristen Renn’s Ecological Theory of Mixed-Race Identity Development Bianca Boyd

2. Kristen A. Renn • Associate Professor in the Higher, Adult, Lifelong Education unit of the Department of Educational Administration at Michigan State University. • Author of Mixed Race Student in College. • MSU’s Excellence in Teaching Award in 2005 • Associate editor for international research and scholarship for the Journal of College Student Development. • Member of the Governing Board of ACPA-College Student Educators International

3. Aspects of the Theory • Focuses on both ecological factors that influence multiracial identity development and the various labels individual with mixed heritages use to identify themselves. • Theory is based a off Maria Root’s theory that identifies a number of external factors that influence the ethnic and racial development of mixed race individual. • Rennexpanded and applied Root’s theory to higher education.

4. Aspects of the Theory • Renn conducted three studies • Examining both the identity development process and outcomes, experienced by mixed raced college students of various racial/ethnic backgrounds. • Developed her own ecological model of mixed race identity.

5. Aspects of the Theory • She interviewed fifty-six mixed race students at six colleges and universities in the eastern and Midwestern region of the United States and analyzed data obtained from written responses from participants, focus groups, observations, and archival sources.

6. Ecological Influences • Bronfenbreener’s person-process-context-time model (PPCT). • Person – family background, heritage, physical appearance. • Key to development is the increasing complexity of interactive processes in which the individual engaged. • Context- the university

7. The University Context

8. The University Context • Microsystems – face to face interactions with positive or negative racial overtones (monoracial/multiracial). • Mesosystems of campus culture that sends positive or negative messages including the permeability of group boundaries and the desirability of identifying with different groups on campus. • Exosystem – polices for identifying one’s race, ethnicity on forms required by the college and attention paid in the curriculum to racial issues.

9. The University Context • Macrosystem influence how students view race and culture and their own roles in this systems as influenced by their existing beliefs system about individual with mixed race backgrounds. • Time (sociohistorical context) influences the macrosystem. Renn pointed out that Bronfenbrenner’s model did not display individual development over time.

10. You Tube Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msyt04LMy2A

11. Five Identity Patterns • Based off of Maria Root’s model using “border crossings.” • Shows how students may use different ways of identifying racially and many presented different identities depending on the situation and context. • Single identity may not be possible or desirable for mixed race students • All patterns are fluid, non-exclusive and healthy.

12. Five Identity Patterns • Monoracial Identity – students chose one existing monoracial category (black, Asian, white). Easiest for students whose appearance and cultural knowledge were congruent with that identity. • Multiple Monoracial Identity – students used multiple monoracial identities (white and Latino). They have knowledge about each aspect of their heritage or sought out more information in college. They choose to label themselves instead of being labeled by others.

13. Five Identity Patterns • Multiracial Identity – students saw themselves existing outside of the monoracial paradigm (multiracial, biracial, mixed). Shared common experiences with other mixed-race students regardless of heritage. This identity can be public or privately held. Multiracial identity is used more commonly on campuses with formal or informal mixed race groups.

14. Five Identity Patterns • Extraracial Identity – students either opt out of racial categorization completely or do not adhere to the categories used in the United States. • Situational Identity – students identified differently in different context. Racial identification isfluid and contextually driven. This identity pattern depends on the racial boundaries of campus.

15. Trends in Identity Choice • Women identified with more patterns than men. • Men were more likely than women to select one monoracial identity. • Students whose parents were both people of color were less likely to identify monoracially and were more likely to select multiple monoracial identities and situational identities. • Students with one white parent and one black parent were less likely to select an extraracial identity.

16. Additional Research & College Environment • College is a major transition for mixed race students because they leave their families (direct influence) into an environment were peer groups become important. Not being able to declare mixed race on application students were just consider black and recruited for black organizations. • Students with ambiguous features were not accepted by students of color or white students. • Being who other students perceived them to be based off of their appearance and confirming to societal expectations are two major challenges affecting mixed race students. • Benefit of Spaces

17. Application • Assessment • Policy • Programs • Structural Diversity • Curriculum • Encouraging Boundary Crossing

18. Activity • Split into groups of four and you all will be divided in university division or specialty areas: • Education Policy • Student Engagement & Programming • Diversity & Inclusion • Residence Life

19. Critique & Future Directions • Mixed race identity is fluid affected by context and social influences and changeable overtime. To support multiracial students and help monoracial students understand experiences of these students, educators have an obligation to raise awareness of how the concept of race was constructed historically and present alternative constructionist perspectives that better represent reality.

20. Critique & Future Direction • Further research is needed to validate mixed race theories. • Most research has been based on biracial individuals of mixed black and white heritage. • Research has been qualitative and can not be generalized. • Most of the research has been focused on children and adolescents rather than college students or adults. • Consider society’s treatment of and reaction to, individuals of different racial and ethnic combinations are not the same.

21. References Drammeh, J. C. (2008, March 7). Anomaly: A mixed race documentary. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msy04LMy2A Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S, Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schuh, J. H., Jones, S. R., Harper, S. R., & Associates. (2011). Student services: A handbook for the profession (5th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Renn, K. A. (2011, November, 1). Kristen A. Renn. Michigan State University. Retrived from http://www.msu.edu/~renn/ Renn, K. A. (2000). Patterns of situational identity among biracial and multiracial college students. The Review of Higher Education 23.4, 399-420. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/review_of_higher_education/v023/23.4renn.html.

22. Questions