More on the Taiwanese Thingy on the UCLA Application
So, I did more research on my initial complaint about how UCLA Graduate applicants who are Taiwanese are told to mark "Chinese / Chinese American (including Taiwanese)" on the Biographical Data section of the general application, and how this perturbs me.
Why does this matter?
Because Taiwanese Americans are very undercounted and the ability to write in "Other Asian: Taiwanese" is a means in which a person can can assert their ethnic identity. UCLA claims to want this information "to help us understand the diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds of our applicants," but this form (which I am not hoping is an error) does the exact opposite by putting applicants who identify as Taiwanese firmly in a box, Chinese, and rendering us invisible.
Students of Middle Eastern descent at UCLA recently rallied to be counted separately from other white students. As originally designed, students had to either check "Caucasian" or "Other" if they were of Persian, Iranian, Arab descent etc. For pretty obvious reasons, just because a form considers people of Middle Eastern descent to be "white" doesn't mean that this group benefits from white privilege; effectively, this categorization rendered them invisible. Without hard data, it also made any systemic disparities (eg: graduation retention) much harder to track.
In 2007, the Asian Pacific Coalition started a "Count Me In" Campaign to get Asian American data at the UCs disaggregated. As a direct result of their advocacy, starting in 2008, the UC system disaggregated the data for Asian and Pacific Islander applicants. There are major discrepancies in performance between different Asian ethnic groups so this was a beneficial move. We are not a monolithic model minority.
Building on that momentum, the state Legislature’s Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus pushed for the California Legislature to pass Assembly Bill 295 -SUPPORT THE DIVERSITY OF ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER AMERICANS (Lieu, D-Torrance), which would have required the state of California to add 10 ethnicities to the list of 11 subgroups already being tracked for things like Health Care. This even attracted overseas attention since one of the subgroups included Taiwanese. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill.
Ignoring the Governor's veto, the UC system went ahead and started collecting disaggregate data anyway. It's the first university system to collect data for groups like Tongan and Hmong Americans.
Okay, whatever. Why do universities track ethnicity at all?
Rather than go into a spiel about disparities in access to education and how things aren't colorblind and the importance of diversity, here's the straight up answer:
According to this application, and which applies to many other schools: The University of California is required to report to federal and state agencies the ethnic/racial composition of enrolled students. Therefore, we ask that you answer the following set of questions about your ethnic and racial identity. The application form is the primary data source of demographic data for enrolled students.
"The application form is the primary data source of demographic data for enrolled students" being a main point, and UCs get money for the feds if they do it being another.
So...why does the UCLA application say that Chinese includes Taiwanese?
I don't know. Here is where it gets weird. Based on the new policy UC announced in 2007, data tracking for 2008 and beyond the check-boxes are supposed is supposed to look like this: "Chinese (except Taiwanese)" and also "Taiwanese." (At least on the Undergraduate application.)
It gets even weirder when you look at other UC grad school applications. A quick Google search netted these applications:
UC Berkeley's Law School Application doesn't have a Taiwanese check box, but does not provide guidance for what a Taiwanese person can check, leaving the choice to identify as Chinese or Other Asian: Taiwanese up to them.
UC Irvine's Law School Application and UC Davis MBA Application have distinct Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American checkboxes.
An extremely stark contrast to the "Chinese / Chinese American (including Taiwanese)" part of the UCLA grad school application...
That only gets weirder when you look at other UCLA documents! So much inconsistency.
UC LEADS Application says "Chinese/Chinese American" but does not say Taiwanese people have to check it.
The CCCP Scholar's Program distinguishes Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American.
UCLA's School of Dentistry application ALSO has Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American as separate check boxes.
With so much inconsistency on these forms, how do students of Taiwanese descent get counted, if they even are counted, at all? (And I should note that on many of these forms, the hard-fought and won categories of Khmer, Hmong are just totally missing!)
What are you going to do?
I will follow the directions and fill out the damn form, but also feel a little sad inside while I do it.
And maybe I will get in, even if the odds are against me.
And if I get in, I will try and work with the Asian Pacific Coalition to try and make sure these categories they fought for do get counted. Taiwanese American students should be able to self identify, particularly if UCLA is seeking to to understand our unique background.
so...yeah.
Why does this matter?
Because Taiwanese Americans are very undercounted and the ability to write in "Other Asian: Taiwanese" is a means in which a person can can assert their ethnic identity. UCLA claims to want this information "to help us understand the diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds of our applicants," but this form (which I am not hoping is an error) does the exact opposite by putting applicants who identify as Taiwanese firmly in a box, Chinese, and rendering us invisible.
Students of Middle Eastern descent at UCLA recently rallied to be counted separately from other white students. As originally designed, students had to either check "Caucasian" or "Other" if they were of Persian, Iranian, Arab descent etc. For pretty obvious reasons, just because a form considers people of Middle Eastern descent to be "white" doesn't mean that this group benefits from white privilege; effectively, this categorization rendered them invisible. Without hard data, it also made any systemic disparities (eg: graduation retention) much harder to track.
In 2007, the Asian Pacific Coalition started a "Count Me In" Campaign to get Asian American data at the UCs disaggregated. As a direct result of their advocacy, starting in 2008, the UC system disaggregated the data for Asian and Pacific Islander applicants. There are major discrepancies in performance between different Asian ethnic groups so this was a beneficial move. We are not a monolithic model minority.
Building on that momentum, the state Legislature’s Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus pushed for the California Legislature to pass Assembly Bill 295 -SUPPORT THE DIVERSITY OF ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER AMERICANS (Lieu, D-Torrance), which would have required the state of California to add 10 ethnicities to the list of 11 subgroups already being tracked for things like Health Care. This even attracted overseas attention since one of the subgroups included Taiwanese. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill.
Ignoring the Governor's veto, the UC system went ahead and started collecting disaggregate data anyway. It's the first university system to collect data for groups like Tongan and Hmong Americans.
Okay, whatever. Why do universities track ethnicity at all?
Rather than go into a spiel about disparities in access to education and how things aren't colorblind and the importance of diversity, here's the straight up answer:
According to this application, and which applies to many other schools: The University of California is required to report to federal and state agencies the ethnic/racial composition of enrolled students. Therefore, we ask that you answer the following set of questions about your ethnic and racial identity. The application form is the primary data source of demographic data for enrolled students.
"The application form is the primary data source of demographic data for enrolled students" being a main point, and UCs get money for the feds if they do it being another.
So...why does the UCLA application say that Chinese includes Taiwanese?
I don't know. Here is where it gets weird. Based on the new policy UC announced in 2007, data tracking for 2008 and beyond the check-boxes are supposed is supposed to look like this: "Chinese (except Taiwanese)" and also "Taiwanese." (At least on the Undergraduate application.)
It gets even weirder when you look at other UC grad school applications. A quick Google search netted these applications:
UC Berkeley's Law School Application doesn't have a Taiwanese check box, but does not provide guidance for what a Taiwanese person can check, leaving the choice to identify as Chinese or Other Asian: Taiwanese up to them.
UC Irvine's Law School Application and UC Davis MBA Application have distinct Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American checkboxes.
An extremely stark contrast to the "Chinese / Chinese American (including Taiwanese)" part of the UCLA grad school application...
That only gets weirder when you look at other UCLA documents! So much inconsistency.
UC LEADS Application says "Chinese/Chinese American" but does not say Taiwanese people have to check it.
The CCCP Scholar's Program distinguishes Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American.
UCLA's School of Dentistry application ALSO has Chinese/Chinese American (except Taiwanese) and Taiwanese/Taiwanese American as separate check boxes.
With so much inconsistency on these forms, how do students of Taiwanese descent get counted, if they even are counted, at all? (And I should note that on many of these forms, the hard-fought and won categories of Khmer, Hmong are just totally missing!)
What are you going to do?
I will follow the directions and fill out the damn form, but also feel a little sad inside while I do it.
And maybe I will get in, even if the odds are against me.
And if I get in, I will try and work with the Asian Pacific Coalition to try and make sure these categories they fought for do get counted. Taiwanese American students should be able to self identify, particularly if UCLA is seeking to to understand our unique background.
so...yeah.