The quest for collective identity: The plight of disadvantaged ethnic minorities.

Abstract

Education and Training Award (1997) / Prix de l'education et de la formation (1997)AbstractThere are groups in society that experience profound social problems including widespread academic underachievement. This discouraging profile applies to Native people, African Americans, and certain Latino groups, notably Mexican Americans and Puerto Ricans.I argue that cultural difference theories, in the form of genetics, cultural deficit, and cultural discontinuity, are incomplete and misguided. A theory of is proposed that focuses on collective identity as the primary psychological process, even taking precedence over self-esteem.Intergroup processes are applied to explain the problems confronting society's most disadvantaged groups. Specifically, the intergroup power differential between societal groups is explored, leading to a theory of valueless colonialism. It is the effects of valueless colonialism that leads to the destruction of collective identity for certain groups. The consequences of a poorly defined collective identity are difficulties with personal identity and self-esteem. Social problems and academic underachievement are the visible manifestations.North America is the envy of the world: a land of opportunity and plenty that prides itself on confronting openly any aberrations of justice that might disadvantage members of a particular social group. But even as mainstream society applauds itself for initiating steps toward social equality, front-line educators and social service providers are quietly whispering. Their voices are loud, but appear as whispers to mainstream social scientists and policy makers who are not engaged in, to quote the jargon, active listening. The front-line voices are disquieting because they tell us that despite the politics of inclusion, there remain certain societal groups that are profoundly disadvantaged: Native people, African Americans, and certain Latino groups. Exceptional cases of achievement notwithstanding, these groups suffer from widespread academic underachievement and pervasive social dysfunction, and their plight cries out for immediate attention.Such devastating inequalities fall squarely in the domain of social psychology, and yet to date, no explicit theory has been offered to address this pressing inequality. This is not to suggest that all social psychological theory is irrelevant, but only that basic processes have not been directed at understanding the predicament of society's most disadvantaged.The present paper outlines a theory designed to explain the social reality of society's most disadvantaged. It is offered in the firm belief that theory is necessary to serve as a guide to both empirical research and social policy. The pivotal explanatory concept for the present theory is collective identity. My concept of collective identity builds on two diverse traditions on the social psychology of the self. First, it incorporates traditional notions of self-esteem, but concludes that the importance of this evaluative component of the self has been exaggerated. Second, it builds on an important distinction between personal and social identity, but argues for the primacy of social, or collective, identity. The concept of collective identity is then applied to a reformulation of current theories of colonialism that I label valueless colonialism. I will argue that challenges to collective identity in the form of valueless colonialism are key to understanding the academic and social problems confronting society's most disadvantaged groups.In order to set the stage for a social psychological analysis involving collective identity and valueless colonialism, it is necessary to, first, briefly document group differences in academic underachievement, and second, review current theories.Group Differences in AchievementIn order to address the question of group-based academic achievement, it is important to review not only which groups tend to underachieve, but also those which tend to excel. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 117 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.