Category: Uncategorized

Will Sleeper

11/28/13

Color and Money

Interview Analysis Essay

             Trinity College is a diverse, educational institution that contains many different perceptions and viewpoints on social class and race from all types of students. Our first year seminar class conducted a study on this topic, in which we interviewed 18 different sophomores to get a first hand look at what students had to say about the diversity at Trinity. After finishing the interviewing process, using white students and non-white students as well as financial aid students and non financial aid students, it was clear that similar students, in terms of these categories, had comparable opinions about race and social class here at Trinity. A common theme throughout the interviews was the emergence of social and racial barriers in the Trinity College community. The skin color of the interviewed students played a big factor in determining whether or not they perceived these barriers to exist at Trinity. On the other hand, the financial aid status of these students did not seem to influence the perception of racial barriers, yet it did come into effect when looking at social barriers amongst the community. An alarming theme drawn from the interviews was the students’ expression of clothing and appearance emerging as a barrier relating to social class. While Trinity may be seen as a place free from any kind of segregation by the outside world, a deeper look into the student body may suggest something else about the existence of social and racial barriers.

            To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

After reading the transcribed interviews, one pattern that I noticed was the non-white students had a greater tendency to recognize racial separation as opposed to social class barriers at Trinity. Whether it be at a social event on the weekends or at Mather Hall, almost all of these students noted a racial division on campus. While 8 out of the 10 non-white students mentioned these racial barriers at Trinity, only 3 out of the 8 white students brought up this issue. After being asked if she had become more aware of her race since coming to Trinity, Luisa, a non-white female, went on to say, “I don’t know it’s like different here though cause I feel like everything’s really separated by like race,” comparing the college atmosphere to her home town (Luisa 9). The main goal for any institution seeking diversity is to limit segregation of any type and create a place where all feel welcome, with students able to interact with whomever. Following her response, Luisa was then asked if the division among students at Trinity was more racial or social-class based. She answered, “I would say like race definitely because I think that’s like how people first perceive you and it’s first impressions, so like if your like slightly different, they see you as just like it being entirely different from yourself” (Luisa 9). Other non-white students had similar things to say about this, hinting a true yet unfortunate existence of these racial barriers. These students noted that it is much easier for students of the same color or race to associate themselves with each other rather than branching out to students of different races. In one of the films we studied earlier in the year, Skin Deep, Brian Allen, a black student, expressed this same idea at UMASS: “I couldn’t really have as many interracial relationships. I tried if it happened, but I never really initiated them” (Reid et al, 18:54). The atmosphere at Trinity might be very different than what these non-white students are used to and this may suggest the reasoning for the development of racial barriers.

A common theme mentioned throughout the interviews was the racial separation that exists in Mather Hall. With the dining hall being one of the few places on campus where a majority of the student body visits each day, a few of the non-white students stated that it is where they actually feel conscious about their race. While none of the interviewed students mentioned social class division in Mather, 3 of the 10 non-white students presented the indication of racial divide at the dining hall. An Asian female student discussed how she did not see it at first, but after it was pointed out to her, the racial barrier was obvious. She marked, “Mather, I don’t know if you’ve noticed but it’s very segregated in terms of seating area” (Kirsten 18). This idea was presented to us in one of our former readings, Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria, as Beverly Tatum discusses the racial identity development theory. Most students at Trinity would most likely disagree with the notion that many are still developing their own racial identity, but the barriers presented in the community may prove differently. Tatum explains the immersion/emersion phase for both black and white racial development in saying it is, “characterized by a strong desire to surround oneself with symbols of one’s racial identity” (Tatum 76). After reading many of the responses of the interviewees, there is a direct correlation between what they had to say about the racial divide among students and the idea behind this immersion/emersion period. The sense of being comfortable with those who surround you is desired everywhere, which may help explain the racial separation in Mather. While many of the white students may not be aware of this racial divide in the community, it seems to be a lot more prevalent for the non-white students, being a part of the minority at Trinity.

The second pattern that I depicted in reviewing the transcribed interviews was that many students noted that one’s appearance and clothing acts as a barrier in itself relating to social class. While 11 of the 18 interviewees reported socio-economic divides at Trinity, almost half of them brought up clothing and suggested that people dress a certain way depending on their social class. Some of these students offered the notion that lower class individuals at Trinity will dress nicely to try and hide their social background (Juan 5). When asked how social class is apparent at Trinity, one student, Andreas said, “Well I mean…basic apparentness is clothing. You know, clothing that…it’s apparent in clothing because you can tell kids that have more money…higher in social class definitely wear different clothes. It’s one of the things that are out there” (Andres 11). The 5 students who talked about clothing and appearance as a divide at Trinity all receive financial aid, showing that those who are not as well off notice these physical variances between those in different social classes. While many stressed clothing creating social divisions in the community, Juan elaborated on appearance and how your looks can determine the people you are friends with. He stated, “I’ve seen poor people who are of lesser means who are really good looking climb their way up popular ladder at Trinity just because they look good” (Juan 5). All of these 5 students were quick to say that social class assumptions are made based off of the way one dresses.

The social class division suggested by a group of the interviewees is not far from the ideas Hamilton and Armstrong delivered in Paying for the Party. The two authors preach that one’s college experience and the friends one has is all based upon social class and background (Hamilton, Armstrong 3). While this idea gives the advantage to those in the upper class, it is not surprise that the 5 students who mentioned they were more aware of their social class at Trinity all received financial aid. Hamilton and Armstrong explore three separate pathways taken by college students: the party pathway, the mobility pathway, and the professional pathway. In their random sampling, the first category they took into account when studying the given students was class background. The social class and organizational analysis theory talked about in Hamilton and Armstrong’s work includes the issue that people of the same social class tend to associate themselves with one another and this produces the experiences they encounter (Hamilton, Armstrong 4). Kaylie, a financial aid student, noted something similar to this idea and said, “I think that I notice that people attempt to wear same kinds of clothing and same brands and tend to stick together. If I am not wearing that particular jacket or pair of boots, they wouldn’t assume that I am on the same level as them” (Kaylie 36). As seen by our results, appearance was a concern for some of the students in how other individuals would look at them in terms of social class. This common theme goes hand in hand with the theory Hamilton and Armstrong relay in their work.

The responses to questions regarding racial and social barriers at Trinity from the 18 sophomores were very interesting as many patterns emerged. A fascinating theme amongst the interviews was the common perception that people of the same background tend to stick together and are more comfortable in doing so. Whether the similarities in their backgrounds lie in their social status or race, the interviewed students perceived that individuals are hesitant to leave the security of the groups they formed. These ideas expressed in the interviews may be alarming to an outsider of the Trinity College community, but first hand response shows what all different types of students think of the atmosphere.

Works Cited:

Beverly Daniel Tatum, “Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” and Other Conversations about Race, revised edition (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton, Paying for the Party: How College Maintains    Inequality (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2013).

Frances Reid, Skin Deep (Berkeley, CA : Iris Films, 1995)

1) Does the author present a clear and focused argument or thesis statement in the introduction?  Does it respond to the assignment?

2) Is the author’s reasoning persuasive and well developed?  Are the claims supported with appropriate evidence?  Are counter-arguments fully considered?

3) Is the essay well organized with smooth transitions between focused paragraphs? Does it include sufficient background for audiences unfamiliar with the topic?

4) Does the author choose precise and meaningful wording, with fluent syntax and correct grammar and spelling?

5) Does the author cite sources in a standard academic format (or, if applicable, in the format designated by the instructor) so that readers may easily locate them?

6) Does the essay inspire the reader to think about the topic in a new way?

Through different social scientists and authors such as Beverly Tatum, Stacey Lee, Omi & Winant, and Hamilton & Armstrong we are better able to try and understand race and social class in today’s age through their different perspectives and theories.  In our seminar color and money, we further investigated the role race and social class play on a smaller scale, in particular on a college campus, or in this case- Trinity College. We did this through in depth anonymous interviews with randomly selected sophomores, with candid questions about the volunteers perspective on their time at Trinity.  In turn we were provided with not only substantial data to support the theories we have studied throughout the year, but new quantitative and qualitative data that allowed us to also create our own theories and interpretations based on the interviews as a whole.  Ultimately we gathered that most students noticed both social class and race and how they had strong impacts on Trinity campus, but the way in which the students noticed these two characteristics had a lot to do with their differing races and social classes.

Many would think that students on financial aid were more likely to be aware of their social class and the impact it had at Trinity and on them. However, i surprisingly found that mostly all of the students, regardless of financial aid, had at least some awareness of the role that their and others social class played in everyday life. Out of the 18 interviews conducted, 15 of the students noted that they became more aware of their social class since coming to Trinity and an almost equivalent number noted that their social class had an impact on their life at Trinity. Luisa, who described herself as “upper-middle class” noted “Trinity’s a lot more divided um like with social, so social classes divide like the groups of trinity which is interesting. Yea, I feel like I’ve like I guess I’ve seen where I fit socially or like economically amongst like the world or like the people at trinity.” (Luisa, 8).  On the other end of the spectrum, Andres, a student who described himself as “mostly… poor” had similar sentiments in regards to becoming aware of social class as Trinity- “Coming to Trinity obviously [I saw] a big difference between…the social classes…you clearly see people who are in a higher class, clearly see people who are in a lower class, and you sorta just tell the difference of people that there are there.” (Andres, 11).   Overall the trend that appeared from most of the students, regardless of their socio economic status, was that they took note of and saw the distinction between the different classes at Trinity.

Similar to class awareness,  11 out of the 17 interviewees also had a high perception of the role race plays at Trinity college. However, a trend i noticed was that those students who identified as non white had more of a perception of how race played a role personally in their lives, while the white students spoke more about how they understood race in relation to how it played a role in the minority students lives. Said Juan, a hispanic student- “I guess in two aspects, one is an oppressive force and another one is kind of like a really empowering one. Though, I think contrary to what some people may believe, some of that oppression has come from a few of the minorities on campus.” (Juan, 6).  Here Juan is noting how racism and his race has affected his live in multiple ways, giving him both the feeling of oppression and empowerment.   However, Abby, a white student noted, “Uh yeah, like I think my freshman year my seminar was called race and class. Um, so (…) you know the entire class was about like how people would define their race. Um, and how it was very difficult for a lot of people to define their race. So I think I’m definitely more aware of it because of that.” [6:26.03] (Abby, 39). Serafino, a white male talking about his perception of his race at Trinity- “…I think in the same way that coming to Trinity put my social class in perspective, Trinity has also put some of my racial identity in perspective. I wasn’t more aware when I came to Trinity of my ethnicity, but I was aware of [a] different range of ethnicities. Like, where I come from, I live in [a large city], and there are all kinds of people in [that city], but being in a different setting has put my ethnicity in a different perspective, but I’m definitely not more aware of it.” [00:07:29.19]” (Serafino, 34). Both of these students who identify as white noted how they became more aware of their race when coming to Trinity, but less because of how their race affected their lives and instead more being around a wider or different range of racial diversity.  To summarize, the white students tended to see their acknowledgment of race from the perspective of them becoming enlightened in a sense, them seeing how it affected those minorities around them; While the actual minority students tended to see their perception of race from their perspective and how it affected their everyday lives and interactions.

Beverly Tatum’s theory of racial development in “Why are All the Black Kids sitting together” is very evident in these analysis interviews. One of the clearest patterns we can find is that at least three students noticed the racial divide that apparently is clear in Mather dining hall, particularly to non white students. Luisa said, ““…Especially like uhm, it’s interesting cause I feel like even in Mather you just see how the division is really apparent, and so like I’ve seen it there and I’m really conscious about it there too” (Luisa p. 9). The other students who noticed the same divide were also non white. Beverly Tatum would see this as these students being in the encounter stage of racial identity development- The Black kids are sitting together in the cafeteria collectively embodying an oppositional stance (moving away from anything associated with whiteness).   With regards to social class, the novel “Paying for the Party” by Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton’s theories on social class in college do a good job of embodying what some of the interviewies noticed at Trinity College.  Armstrong and Hamilton talk about how college breeds inequality in the classes, giving an inevitable advantage to those of a higher class, and creating an almost seperation and segregation of the different classes, and causing those of the lower classes to become very aware of this.  Said Andre, who i previously mentioned describes himself as lower class and is on financial aid, “It’s just like the way we categorize people. You’re sort of just comparing like, you have all of like the racial people who are most likely lower class just because that’s how it plays out. And then you see all these white people–most likely upper class because that’s how Trinity plays out. Like sixty percent of the school pays full tuition out of pocket, so it’s apparent the school is [long pause] not the normal social class as it is outside in the real world. It would probably be more balanced than the school.” (Andres, 12). Conversely, Michael, a non financial aid student who described himself as upper class showed his privilege when he talks about his unawareness- speaking about his social class- “yeah but it doesn’t really affect me. I just don’t really think about it.” (Michael, 2).

Race and social class both play huge roles in young peoples lives today, and after reading many theories on the matter and also personally exploring these topics ourselves through these interviews, we are able to better understand the impact these have on young adults and on the lives of those around us.

1) Does the author present a clear and focused argument or thesis statement in the introduction?  Does it respond to the assignment?

2) Is the author’s reasoning persuasive and well developed?  Are the claims supported with appropriate evidence?  Are counter-arguments fully considered?

3) Is the essay well organized with smooth transitions between focused paragraphs? Does it include sufficient background for audiences unfamiliar with the topic?

4) Does the author choose precise and meaningful wording, with fluent syntax and correct grammar and spelling?

5) Does the author cite sources in a standard academic format (or, if applicable, in the format designated by the instructor) so that readers may easily locate them?

6) Does the essay inspire the reader to think about the topic in a new way?

Briana Miller

Color and Money

Prof. Jack Dougherty

November 20, 2013

Race and Social Class at Trinity College

Throughout the semester, our seminar read a number of books addressing the significance of racial identity and social class in America. After interviewing a number of sophomores on the issues, we found that most factors of racial and social status on Trinity campus offer patterns that generally disprove the theories proposed by Beverly Tatum and Stacey Lee. There are some cases that do fall in line with their theses; however, the survey taken presents an alternative reality for white and non white students on the Trinity campus.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

Earlier in the semester, we read Beverly Tatum’s Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? and Stacey Lee’s Unraveling the ‘Model Minority’ Stereotype. These two books emphasize the effects of racial identity and the way different racial groups interact with one another. Social class serves as a subtopic in their theories as well.

Though she focuses on the cause and effects of racial and social aspects on Asian American adolescents, Lee’s ideas can easily apply to people of any ethnicity. Her ethnography concludes the following in regard to racial identity development: “students… judge their situations by comparing their social positions to that of whites [and] nonwhite minorities…” (121). In Lee’s study the most of the Asian American youth were highly conscious of the way in which they were compared to Whites—the dominant group in their school; not only in academics but appearance as well. Measuring up to White expectations and behavior in this ethnography was a major goal among Asians regardless of their social status. As mentioned previously, these ideas naturally apply to non-Asians as well. In fact, the Trinity College interviews exhibit an opposing perspective on the connection between race, social status, and the individuals’ consciousness of their self-presentation. Statistics show that seven out of nine non-financial aid students were more concerned with self-presentation than not. Of these seven students, five were white while only two were non-white (Thematic Analysis 2013). This data proposes that, depending on the environment, the dominant group is more conscious of how they carry themselves. I found this data very shocking considering I experienced various situations that supported Lee’s theory within the minority community. Nonetheless, it  is very possible that, through physical appearance, both the dominant and minority groups work to portray a certain social status to both their own racial groups as well as others.

Yvonne attests to this claim. She shares how the clothes she wears influences the way people treat her. She made the following remark:

I noticed last year um sometimes how I dress or what I look like for that day it determined who spoke or who didn’t, who held doors open or who didn’t, (…) when I when like when my hair is nice and when I am dress fully um people hold doors open for me, people say hi when I smile at them down the long walk . or people just speak even if they only see me like ifwe see each other often but we’ve never been formally introduced, people speak, they smile or they wave. If I like if my hair is not done or if I’m wearing sweatpants and uggs or something like that um something that does not look name brand and put together people, people are less likely to held doors open for me, people are less likely to speak to me like in a crowd of people, people are less likely to acknowledge me whereas otherwise they would” (Trinity Interviews, 19).

Considering the heightened respect one receives when dressing the part of a well-off individual, it makes sense that individuals from affluent backgrounds are more invested in self appearance. In order to associate with the dominant group—and because they can afford it, students of high social status are more likely to be conscious of their self appearance.  There is no evidence present in the interviews that suggests people of lower social standing allow attire to influence who they interact with.

In her novel, Tatum mentions how “racelessness” is sometimes a coping mechanism for some kids of color who are trying to avoid being singled out racially or socially. She writes “individuals assimilate into the dominant group by de-emphasizing characteristics that might identify them as members of the subordinate group” (Tatum, 63). This particular theory correlates with some of the results produced by the interviews. Though it may not be outwardly suggested, our interviews show that there are, in fact, circumstances where individuals battled with embracing their own racial and ethnic identity, or adopting that of the dominant group. Interviewee Victoria, for example, does not explicitly reveal what her racial identity is when asked during the interview. She, instead, discusses how her peers often mistake her Asian American ethnicity for that of a mixed (White and Asian) or fully Caucasian person. “People have often come to me saying that I’m more identifiable as white. Just on my behavior and my upbringing” (Interview, 25). She also notes how her White, adoptive parents were skeptical of whether or not she should reveal her Asian identity when applying to schools. “…my parents were, I don’t know, I don’t know if they were concerned about it or if they didn’t want me to. But they did express an interest that I leave it, myself, unidentified. I thought that, you know…with a very quote unquote ‘white name’…I wanted to represent who I was better…I identified myself as Asian” (Interview, 25). It was also noted that Victoria’s voice grew quieter when admitting to her interviewer how she identified herself on her college applications despite her parents’ thoughts.  While Victoria obviously struggles with going against her parents’ opinion, it is apparent that she recognizes the advantage of identifying herself as White. More people (specifically of the dominant group) accept her, and even justify why she is more white than Asian—as if that is something she should embrace. Like Yvonne, Victoria is one of a few interviewees who is not completely adverse to their true social or racial identity, for the sake of being accepted by the dominant group on campus.

In addition to recognizing that racelessness does exist at Trinity, the interviews reveal that racial and social barriers do as well. When reporting the level of racial barriers they felt are present at the school, 6 out of 7 non white, financial aid students felt that racial barriers were high. Similarly both of the white, financial aid recipients interviewed felt that racial barriers were present as well. When white, non financial aid students were asked the question, however, only 2 out of 5 students felt they were high. Interestingly, only 1 out of 3 non white, non financial aid students identify racial barriers as being high (Thematic Analysis Spreadsheet). Before receiving the data on the two white, financial aid students, one might conclude that the racial barriers could only be recognized by the minority students. However, these studies suggest that the prevalence of racial barriers might not be explicitly recognizable within certain racial groups, but social classes instead. In Tatum’s ethnography, she suggests that white people in the “contact” stage of the racial identity development “pay little attention to the significance of their racial identity” (95). However, our interviews suggest that their social class might influence the racial barriers individuals feel are present on campus.

The results produced during the interview process were a complete success. They provided unexpected and interesting data that, surprisingly, contrasted from the theories our seminar studied this semester. This just goes to show that there are always exceptions—even for highly respectable and persuasive theories.

Lee, Stacey J.. Unraveling the “model minority” stereotype: listening to Asian American youth. New York: Teachers College Press, 1996. Print.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria? and other conversations about race. New York: BasicBooks, 1997. Print.

Thematic Analysis Spreadsheet. Color and Money Seminar. 2013

Trinity College Interviews. Color and Money Seminar. 2013

Recently our seminar class interviewed a series of sophomore Trinity students on the impacts of race and socio economic status on campus. Our interviewees consisted of students from different financial backgrounds and races, which helped us to identify several important themes in student interactions around campus. To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board. From the responses gathered in these interviews, we were able to identify several common themes that correlated with the findings from Paying for a Party, Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? and Unraveling the Model Minority Stereotype, which we read in class.

One common theme that we found was that Trinity students were made extremely aware of their own family’s wealth and the impact it may have on those around them who are less fortunate. Often times students may not be doing this on purpose it is just how they have always acted. One interviewee stated that she became more aware of her socio economic class because people at Trinity can be  “very pretentious” or “flash off their wealth.” (Kirsten, 16)  In Paying for the Party, Armstrong and Hamilton explain how students often take a different path through college depending on their family’s financial standing because their family’s finances can affect their social interactions. [1] This is further reinforced by one students interview response she stated that when she was dressed well people were more likely to be friendlier to her than if she was dressed like a slob. (Yvonne, 20) On Trinity’s campus, students judge others who aren’t well dressed, making the assumption that those students are from a lower economic class. This impacts how students interact, and as seen above, often students will not even be courteous to those that they perceive are from lower financial standing. Unlike Armstrong and Hamilton, we traced the impact of socio economic status into students’ interactions with athletic coaches. One interview participant stated that coaches “assume” he’s from a lower class and that impacts “how they speak to him.” (Fred, 22) Another student sheds light onto how prevalent financial status can be in social interactions saying that “being able to expend money on dinner with friends… having a car on campus…can sometimes divide who you do or no do not hang out with.” (Victoria, 24) As a Trinity student, I have seen a myriad of these examples myself, as friends who often cannot or choose not to spend as much money in social situations can fall out of a group relatively quickly. After reading Paying for the Party it was clear that socio economic status played a larger role in student’s social interactions on Trinity’s campus than it did at Midwest University, where Armstrong and Hamilton completed their study. This may be because there are “very few people coming from very low social classes” as one interviewee believes. (Jim, 27) One possibility is that kids from the upper class are more social because they feel less pressure from their parents, who have the ability to pay for their schooling. This parallels the findings by Armstrong and Hamilton, who noticed that upper class kids were more likely to choose the party path through college than those from lower social classes.[2] One interviewee, who was a transfer, noticed that both at his previous college and Trinity, kids on scholarship generally worked harder than the kids whose parents paid for it. (Ruby, 29) From our findings we were able to conclude that socioeconomic standing plays a vital role in how one is perceived and interacted with while on Trinity’s campus. Both students and faculty at Trinity pass judgment on students regarding their financial standing, and both have been proven to treat students thought to be from lower classes differently.

Another key theme we found was the impact of race in social interactions on Trinity’s campus. Often times, these may go unnoticed, but 11 out of the 17 interviewees actually had a high perception of the racial barriers present at Trinity College. In the book Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? Tatum outlines the stages of racial identity formation and how that impacts a child as they advance through the stages.[3] In her theory Tatum outlines how a child of color initially has very little understanding of their racial identity. As a child ages, they become more aware of the impact of racism and begin to disassociate themselves with the dominant white culture. Finally the child, now a young adult, emerges through the closing stage committed to the greater African American community, but also accepting of white people and white culture.[4] One of the themes from her book applicable here at Trinity is the actual cafeteria stereotype itself. Nearly every interviewee mentioned something about the racial divide in Mather Hall, and how there is one side typically used by white – athletic students and one side for the minority students. (Kirsten, 18) One possible explanation could be that race can be a dividing factor because “people tend to gravitate towards people of their own background or ethnicity.” (Serafino, 34) This could be amplified by the small percentage of minority students on campus, however. Our findings demonstrate how the immersion/emersion phase of Tatum’s racial identity development theory can impact social interactions amongst students on Trinity’s campus. Students of color begin to realize the racism in their society and tend to hang out with only those of their own race and avoid white culture, which could prove to be the explanation for the segregation found in Mather.[5] However, the segregation on campus will not end until students of both races take the initiative to put aside any and all racial assumptions and make an effort to interact with members of the community who are of different races. Without this, no progress will ever be made and the segregation found around Trinity’s campus will continue to be perpetuated.

Another common theme is that the interviewee’s play down the prevalence or effects of racism on campus; some white students even had very little recognition of racial barriers on campus whatsoever. Our findings in this instance are consistent with those of Lee in Unraveling the Model Minority Stereotype. One reason that many white students may not realize the racial barriers present for minority students at Trinity is that they are unaware that racism is existent at Trinity.  In her study, Lee uncovered that many white students “spoke proudly of the diversity of the student population and boasted that students of all races got along with each other.” [6] In all actuality, however, many of the students that Lee interviewed participated in “busting,” a form of passive racism, which is essentially a form of bullying through racial jokes. The white students viewed this as acceptable because it signified “good interracial relations.”[7] However, the reality was that minority students were actually extremely offended by the jokes. We also uncovered several examples of this. One non-white student illustrated just how prevalent passive racism is on Trinity’s campus stating that “people tend to assume incorrectly that I automatically have certain interests. Which isn’t true.” (Juan, 4) This type of racism generally is not done maliciously or on purpose, but rather it exists due to a general acceptance of racial stereotypes by white students. It is possible that many of the students at Trinity are from primarily upper class areas and have little experience with diversity. The absence of consistent interaction with students of other races could explain why passive racism is so widespread at Trinity. However, as stated above, many minority students also play down the impacts of racism on Trinity’s campus. One non-white student laughed after being asked if she had experienced any racism in her daily interactions at Trinity saying: “Not so much people are like – like, blatantly racist. You know, but they make assumptions that people are Asian they’re gonna be great at, like, the sciences and, yeah.” (Ruby, 30) When minority students play down the impact of passive racism it just perpetuates the racial stereotypes present at Trinity and reaffirms the dominance of white culture on Trinity’s campus.

Socioeconomic status and race are crucial in the social fabric of Trinity’s campus. From our class readings: Paying for a Party, Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? and Unraveling the Model Minority Stereotype; we were able to identify several themes regarding socioeconomic status and race that parallel our findings from interviews conducted with Trinity sophomores. Students have been proven to perpetuate racial stereotypes both through general assumptions and daily interactions, while treating those who are perceived to be from lower socioeconomic statuses differently from those assumed to be upper class.  It is evident that race and social class play a defining role in ones social life on campus at Trinity College. Although this discrimination is often passive, and can come in many different forms, it is prevalent nonetheless, and is negatively affecting Trinity students. One must only look around or listen to a conversation to find this to be true, and unless students of all races take considerable action, the culture on this campus will not change.

Trinity College, a small liberal arts college in Hartford, Connecticut, is home to roughly 2,300 students from all different backgrounds. Regarded as an elite institution, for many local Hartford children “Trinity is like the epitome of…where the kids want to be… everyone always talks about you know wanting to get to Trinity” (Abby page 40). On campus, Trinity proudly boasts a 20% diversity rate, higher than most comparable schools, and 40% of students receive some form of need-based financial aid. Within the school itself, these statistics can seem somewhat distorted; the student body is largely a group of affluent, white young people and the gap in race and social class on campus can have a big influence on the experiences people have here. To study this, our seminar interviewed a group of seventeen Trinity sophomores from all different walks of life. Our results showed that while some students felt Trinity is a liberal and welcoming community for everyone, these students had a tendency to belong to the racial majority (white), the social class majority (non-financial aid), or both. Meanwhile, students of either minority generally felt and more saw segregation on the campus. Trinity College is a small enough school to have a social hierarchy, and this paper argues that students feel the pressure to fit in with the majority but ultimately befriend those they perceive as social and/or racial equals.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

One’s appearance and how he or she dresses is one of the most socially uniting, or dividing, factors at Trinity College. For those with the fiscal means, concern with one’s appearance results in the phenomenon of “everyone looking the same”. According to Andres, a sophomore, “the joke at Trinity College is that… if you see a blonde girl, you’re referring to almost half of the student population” (Andres, page 11). Owning the same coat or pair of boots can foster relationships between students, while potentially excluding those who do not own the same things, whether for personal or financial reasons. This obsession with appearance is evidenced by the fact that, out of seventeen conducted interviews, twelve students alluded to appearance, with seven of these explicitly mentioning it. Of those seven interviews, six students were on financial aid and only one of them was white. On a campus where only 40% of students pay financial aid and there is only 20% diversity, it is unsurprising that the combination of these two minorities would lead to an increased awareness of what it (apparently) takes to fit in at Trinity. Yvonne, a self-proclaimed middle/lower-middle class African American student, states that her appearance directly impacts how people treat her. She says “the way that I dress and the…things that I have…people might assume that I am higher class… if my hair is not done or if I’m wearing…something that does not look name brand…people are less likely to acknowledge me” (Yvonne, page 20). This theme of “dressing to impress” is seen in several students including Abe (white/financial aid), who, like Yvonne, intentionally dresses nicely and as a result feels that people believe he is wealthier than he actually is (Abe, page 45). This practice has helped both students feel more accepted. Juan, meanwhile, feels that looks, whether biological or material, dictate one’s position on the social ladder: “You could be the poorest person but if you look good… you’re immune to that” (Juan, page 5). Based on the experiences of Yvonne, Abe, and Juan, social pressures at Trinity mean that having an “acceptable” and impressive appearance is important for fitting in. It would seem that, whether they have the fiscal means or not, Trinity College students see the social value of acting as though they do.

This concept, that one’s looks correlate directly with one’s social strata and can thus lead to acceptance on a college campus, is discussed at length in Armstrong and Hamilton’s book Paying for the Party. To write Paying for the Party, Armstrong and Hamilton, along with a team of researchers, conducted a longitudinal ethnography that followed a group of women from their freshman year in a party dorm at the unidentified “Midwest University” through a year after graduation. They focused on the effects of social class on the lives of women during and after college. Armstrong and Hamilton suggest that the more willing a woman is to party, and the more money she has to spend, the stronger her college social experience will be. For example, in the sorority rush system at Midwestern University, the sororities claimed to “select girls on the basis of ‘personality’ rather than parental income” (Armstrong & Hamilton 79). Unfortunately for those of lesser income, oftentimes this personality comes across when the girls can relate to each other on a class level- through their clothes, where they vacation, where they like to shop, etc. (Armstrong & Hamilton 81). Girls from wealthier backgrounds were advantaged in the sense that they had the means to make their image acceptable. At Trinity, Luisa, a non-white, non-financial aid student, considered joining a sorority but was ultimately deterred by the fees and expenses that went along with membership, saying that “I don’t know if I’d… socially or economically fit in with them” (Luisa, page 9). In this statement, Luisa subconsciously grouped social success with economic status, suggesting that one must be wealthy in order to fit in with Greek Life, which arguably dominates the social scene at Trinity. Armstrong and Hamilton also discussed at length the concept of “cuteness”: the idea that it is “possible for everyone to be well dressed and well groomed” (Armstrong & Hamilton 82). “Cuteness” also had financial and racial implications. It requires “the sustained investment of money, time, and cultural know-how” and in terms of race, “cuteness” is tied to “blondness”: “blue eyes, white but tanned skin, and straight hair”, which favors white women (Armstrong & Hamilton 82).  Juan, a non-white, financial aid student at Trinity, feels that looks, whether biological or material, dictate one’s position on the social ladder: “You could be the poorest person but if you look good… you’re immune to that” (Juan, page 5). Armstrong and Hamilton’s study focuses mostly on social life and having the funds to participate, and based on our interviews, this focus on partying at MU is comparable to Trinity’s focus on clothes and appearance. How a person looks and what they can afford to wear has a direct impact on their social experience at Trinity.

In accordance with the social structure imposed on Trinity students as a result of their appearance and social class, the interviews made it apparent that Trinity students tend to be friends with people to whom they are similar. In the interviews, ten of the seventeen sophomores either explicitly or implicitly stated that students tend to self-segregate in terms of race, social class, or both. Luisa says that “that’s how the groups at Trinity form…you kind of become friends with people who you perceive [as] equal” (Luisa, page 8). Juan, Andres, and Serafino express similar thoughts: that it’s a “naturally occurring thing, that people tend to gravitate towards people of their own background or ethnicity” (Serafino 34). One clear example of these group divisions is in Mather Dining Hall, as Michael, Luisa, and Kirsten stated. Kirsten says “there is a sports side and…a minority side” (Kirsten page 18). Each of these three students speak of Mather’s segregation as a given- in Ali’s interview with Michael, Michael refused to say what exactly happened in Mather, instead saying “I mean you know how it works…”, suggesting that Ali should understand the system in its obviousness (Michael page 3). Many students at Trinity seem to simply accept this segregation as the reality. Luisa and Andres, who are both Hispanic, also mentioned the stratifying power of societies like LVL (La Voz Latina, the Latin American cultural society on campus). Luisa wanted to join LVL, but ultimately didn’t because she didn’t speak Spanish and she felt that “the people were kind of secluded in their own…I feel like they were really cliquey” (Luisa, page 10). Andres said something similar; he never felt the need to join LVL, and felt that “they’re harboring kids a little more than they need to… there are also people who are a little bit (pauses to think of wording) negative towards the social division” (Andres, page 13). Essentially, there are well-established systems at Trinity (like Mather or LVL) that facilitate segregation based on race.

On the other side of the spectrum, some students felt that there was no social segregation at Trinity in terms of race or social class. These students tend to be upper class and/or white, like Steve who says  he is “friends with wide range of students, come from all backgrounds… and countries” and claims that no one judges people based on race or social class (Steve, page 44). Overall, there appears to be the general pattern that while social can partially dictate what activities people can participate in, race seems to be more influential in terms of who people spend time with. People will always be more comfortable with those they perceive as equals.

Beverly Tatum’s racial identity development theory may help explain the racial divisions at Trinity. Tatum argues that all people go through stages of racial identity development, with these stages being unique to African Americans or Whites, respectively. For African Americans, she argues that there are five stages of racial development: pre-encounter, encounter, immersion/emersion, internalization, and internalization commitment. She then argues that white students go through six stages: contact, disintegration, reintegration, pseudo-independent, immersion/emersion, and autonomy. Based on Mather and LVL, she would likely suggest that the minority students on campus show evidence of being in either the encounter or immersion/emersion stage. The encounter phase is characterized by “an event or series of events that force the young person to acknowledge the personal impact of racism” (Tatum 55). This causes black students to lead a “more active search” for their identity (Tatum 56). For some students at Trinity, coming to such an affluent and predominantly white school could cause the kind of “event” that brings students into this stage. As a result, this might lead minority students to join organizations like LVL or MOCA (Men of Color Alliance) to help them find a community. The transition to the immersion/emersion stage causes minority kids to self-segregate, and “the developing Black [or minority] person sees White people as simply irrelevant” (Tatum 76). If a large number of minority students at Trinity are in the immersion/emersion stage of racial identity development, this could help explain on-campus segregation, such as in Mather.

By taking a stratified sample of the sophomore class, we interviewed as even a distribution or white, non-white, financial aid, and non-financial aid students as possible. This statistical diversity helped us get a fuller picture of the experiences Trinity students have. In the interviews our seminar conducted, one of the clearest differences between interviews was how included or excluded by the Trinity community students felt. A student’s feeling of inclusion or exclusion is generally tied to how others perceive their race and/or their social class, and how easily they can access certain aspects of campus life. Our data shows that, for the most part, students who reported more insightful observations of the racial and social structure at Trinity had a tendency to be either a minority, on financial aid, or both. The social structure of Trinity makes it easier for students to stay close to those they consider equals, which perpetuates campus-wide segregation.

Works Cited

Armstrong, Elizabeth A., and Laura T. Hamilton. Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2013. Print.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel., PhD. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations About Race. New York: Basic, 1997. Print.

Interview essay

Race and social class are intertwined and affect individuals differently, depending on their demographic categories. By interviewing 18 sophomores from Trinity College, three major patterns emerged, which influenced the lives of students.  First, non-financial aid students are more concerned about how they portray their social class than financial aid students. Second, non-white students are less likely to react to racial incidents than white students. Finally, non-white students were more likely to merge their responses about social class and race, even though interviewers asked about these two topics separately.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

Firstly, through the interview, it was shown that non-financial aid students were more concerned about how they presented their social class than financial aid students. Four out of six non-financial aid students were concerned about self-presentation of social class, while only four out of nine financial aid students were concerned about it. This shows how non-financial aid students were more concerned about the perception that others had of their social class.  For example Alice, a white non-financial aid student, was keen on explaining that while she did not consider herself as wealthy as her friends, she was still pretty wealthy. She expressed that her friends would often say “ ‘well you drive a Mercedes’ that must mean that you’re well off…” (Alice 42). This shows how she, and non-financial aid students in general, are focused on how they self-present their social class, ensuring that people understand that they belong to the upper class.

This finding does not support Tatum’s argument. Tatum, a social psychologist who focuses on race and its implications, explains that in an unequal situation of power, the subordinate group tries to emulate the dominant group’s actions as a mean of survival (Tatum 25). While Tatum’s argument is only based on race, the argument can also be applied to social class. It is assumed that class and race are connected, as the subordinate racial group is also the subordinate socio-economic group (Omi and Winant 55-56). Therefore, it would be expected that financial aid students were more concerned with self-presentation of social class, as that might be a way to increase their self-esteem and not feel less than those who do not receive financial aid.

The social class and organizational analysis theory explained by the sociologists Armstrong and Hamilton can clarify why non-financial aid students are conscious about how they present their social class. The social class and organizational analysis theory is the intersection between the socio-economic status of students and the organizational structure of the college, and how they both affect each other resulting in different social practices(Armstrong and Hamilton).  This theory explains that social class is the guideline that determines social structures around campus. In the interview conducted to Kaylie, she says, “If I’m not wearing that particular jacket or pair of boots, they wouldn’t assume that I am on the same level as them. They wouldn’t speak to me…” (Kaylie 36). Her answers portray how socio-economic class determines social life on campus. Kaylie and most non-financial aid students showed that they are more concerned with self-presentation of social class than financial aid students because they want to keep a certain status in order to keep benefiting from it.

Through the interviews, white students as well as non-white students reported being involved in racial incidents. Six out of ten non-white students surveyed were involved in racial incidents, whereas two out of six white students were not.  For instance, Alice, a white, non-financial aid student, mentioned that while at a dining place on campus, she asked the lady at the register to check how many Bantam bucks she had left, and the lady responded: “yeah um oh you have 15 dollars left, oh your parents came through for you” (Alice 43). Alice considered this to be an assumption based on her race and reacted with “first of all I can get you fired for that and second of all that is very rude and making a ton of assumptions about who I am and what I do and don’t work for…” (Alice 43). Tatum would support this finding, with the racial identity development theory, which is “the process of defining for oneself the personal significance and social meaning of belonging to a particular racial group” (Tatum 16). She explains that racism and racial awakening and development occurs to every individual regardless of their race (Tatum 93). Therefore, racial incidents against both white and non-white students are expected.

While these incidents involve both white and non-white students, non-white students are less likely to react and more likely to minimize the event than white students. Out of the eight people that reported having been involved in racial incidents, six were non-white individuals and three were non-financial aid. From the eight people that were involved in a racial case, only three people reacted to the scenario, and all three people were non-financial aid individuals. This leaves non-white, financial aid students, the most “vulnerable” in the social structure, as those who minimized or did not react towards the racial actions. For example, Fred, a non-white, financial aid student, undermines the fact that Campus Security has stopped him a couple of time based on his race, rather than on his actions. When asked if race has been a factor in his daily interaction he mentions “the incidents with campo and stuff like that will happen but not on daily basis, it’s usually not a factor, it’s rare” (Fred 23). The fact that he says that “it’s rare” and yet, it has happened on various occasions shows how Fred is trying to minimize the impact of the events. They may not react because they don’t feel they have the right to. For instance, Yvonne was also involved in an event of racial profiling where the manager of a dinning facility on campus asked her if she attended Trinity College, when he normally doesn’t do that. Even after the rest of the employers at the facilities supported her and told her to complain, she did not. This shows how she did not feel empowered enough to react and stand against the racist event. Tatum describes, “Survival sometimes means not responding to oppressive behavior directly” (Tatum 25). This theory explains why the non-white, financial aid students tend to avoid any reaction towards a racist act, as a way to protect themselves.

Under and over reacting to racist situations may be a consequence of racial formation.  Racial formation theory explains how one race has hegemony over the other one. This theory states, “racial projects connect what race means in a particular discursive practice and the ways in which both social structures and everyday experiences are racially organized, based upon that meaning” (Omi and Winant 56). The dominant race is the white race and the other ones are the minorities. Racial formation explains how society is built under the principles of this theory, where it is made to benefit one class exclusively. Because society is structured so that it will benefit the dominant race and thus social class, it puts non-white students in a place where they do not feel they deserve or have the right to react towards racist acts. Even if they did, because racial formation has organized society according to race and social class, non-white students would not want to recognize that they were victims of racism.

These interviews also found that non-white students are more likely to intertwine their responses about social class and race, even though interviewers asked about these two topics separately. Twelve out of eighteen students did not associate race with social class, while six out of eighteen students did. Out of the  twelve students who did not relate race with social class, five were non-white students while seven were white. Half of them were financial aid students. When answering the questions in the interview, the majority of the students focus only on social class or race rather than intertwining both.

This finding is interesting because it contradicts both Lee’s and Omi and Winant’s racial formation theory. The racial formation theory suggests that there is a dominant and a subordinate race, and that the power of the race is highly linked to socio-economic benefits (Omi and Winant 55-56). Therefore, according to this theory, white people (dominant race) are also the most privileged economically, while non-white people are not.  This theory shows that students would automatically connect their race with their social class. However, very few students did that association. For instance, Andres, a non-white, financial aid student, was of the few students who associated race with social class when he expressed that “you have all of like the racial people who are most likely lower class just because that’s how it plays out”  (Andres 11). This was not the case of most of the students. Most of them gave straightforward answers and focused exclusively on social class or race, depending on which question was being asked. This was the case of Kaylie who after being asked is she was always aware of her social class after coming to Trinity, responded only focusing on social class by saying: “I was always aware of people being wealthier than I was. It wasn’t as much of a problem. I think that social class influences who your friends are, who you want to be friends be. Also it influences with what able to do with your friends. It depends on how much you are willing to spend money. It does have effect on the social life.” (Kaylie 36) Like Kaylie, most of the students do not take race or social class as the consequence of one or the other.

It is also interesting to notice that only four non-white students out of the ten non-white students who were interviewed, associated race with social class. Overall, the majority of students who did associated race with social class were non-white students. This shows how people who relate these concepts are usually those who are most affected by it.  Even so, the students who relate race with social class and are white students, reported some racial incident. This shows how those who connect race and social class do so because they have been involved in an incident where their social class and race have been associated or a factor of an incident.

These interviews have allowed the seminar to get an insightful view on the campus regarding race and social class. They allow us to corroborate and discover new patterns. They helped prove that non-white students are less likely to react to racial incidents than white students because of the place they have in society. Furthermore they helped identify that non-financial aid students are more concerned about how they portray their social class because of society’s structure, and that non-white students are more likely to intertwine their responses about social class and race.

Bibliography:

–    Tatum, Beverly. “Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?” and other conversations about race. New York: Basic Books, 2003.  Print.

–       Omi , Michael, and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the united States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. Second . New york: Routledge, 1986. Print.

– Armstrong, Elizabeth, and Laura Hamilton. Paying for the part: how college maintains inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013. Print.

Color and Money From the Eyes of the Class of 2016

The perceptions and divides based on social class and race at Trinity College are a very relevant topic. In our seminar, Color and Money, we have done a number of exercises and readings to be able to more properly understand these issues. Most recently, we interviewed a group of sophomores regarding these topics. From these interviews, I was able to identify a few fascinating trends of student perception of race and social class at our college. Additionally, a few readings from our seminar, namely works by Hamilton and Armstrong, and Beverly Tatum, allow us to pinpoint our interviewees’ differences in recognition of relative familial wealth, and blatant understating of the significance of race at Trinity.

Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

The most striking trend that I found was that students on financial aid were significantly more likely to have an understanding of their familial wealth than those not on financial aid. I was able to determine this by reading each interview thoroughly and searching for any statements that each individual made that would contradict their answering of the question “How would you describe your social class?”. For example, one individual, Juan, stated that in terms of socio-economic status, he was “right in the middle”, but that his parents made “a little over $100,000” a year (Juan, p.4). Considering the average household income in the US was around $50,000 in 2011, we would consider this individual to have poor recognition of relative familial wealth. Individuals who stated nothing that could potentially contradict their response to the above question were considered to have recognition of their family’s wealth. Statistically, I found that 9 out of 10 students on financial aid had seemingly good knowledge of their family’s wealth, while only 4 out of 8 students not on financial aid appeared to have this same knowledge. This suggests that wealthy students are more likely to be unaware of their relative wealth than socio-economically less fortunate students. Hamilton and Armstrong offer some evidence as to why this may be. Their book, Paying For the Party, offers an in-depth look as to how socio-economic status can affect collegiate success. The authors state, “…the college experience systematically disadvantages all but the most affluent — and even some of these students.” (Hamilton & Armstrong, p. 3). This quote appears to be significantly more relevant to less affluent students than those of a higher class. Additionally, this systematic disadvantage that college creates could lead those who come from lower income backgrounds to be more aware of their social class than those who don’t, as it could have a potentially dangerous effect on their college and post-graduate success. For example, a wealthy student’s actions may be unchanged given the above knowledge, as whatever college path they decide to take they will be advantaged in greatly. However, for lower income students, knowledge like this may make them act in a different way, and therefore they would find this information valuable. The fact that this information has a greater impact on the lives of lower income students could explain why in our study they had greater knowledge of their individual socio-economic status. Also, it appears that a student’s time at Trinity could skew their own perceptions of social class, which could also be attributed to social and structural inequalities that are also described in Hamilton and Armstrongs’ book. One student even went as far as stating his social class in “terms of trinity” (Jim, p. 27). This, however appeared to have a greater effect on those of the higher classes than on those of the lower classes. This could be accredited to the fact that it would feel better for those not on financial aid to compare their own wealth to the average wealth at Trinity, as they would be around the average level, than those who were on financial aid who would more than likely be comparatively very poor and thus would seek out their actual national socio-economic status. These findings, interestingly enough, seem to be pretty unaffected by race. From the same sample, 7 out of 10 non-white students appeared aware of their socioeconomic status, and 6 out of 8 white students seemed aware. This shows the power that socioeconomic status can have on perceptions and awareness of worldly surroundings. Students appear to be far more likely to understand their relative wealth if they come from a less wealthy background regardless of race. The collegiate system and familial wealth appear to have a major effect on how an individual’s own wealth is perceived.

The second significant trend I noticed was that in most instances, both students of color and white students seemed to voice that race and separation by race are not particularly prominent problems at Trinity College. Trinity is a school with a history of racism and segregation; therefore this lack of recognition for these problems is surprising. Even recently, a Trinity student published an article discussing the extent of these issues at the college: “One of the most prevalent problems on this campus is racism, which has plagued this campus since its inception in 1823” (Real Hartford). However, when students were asked about the impacts that race has had on their daily lives at Trinity College, and their change of awareness of their race since coming to Trinity, their tone often became more passive, and they seemed to approach the questions as if they weren’t significant. For example, one student interviewed, Andres, stated, “race most likely is a dividing factor in some respects” (Andres, p.13). The depth and significance of the way this is phrased is overwhelming. Andres goes on to say that he sees people sticking together that are of the same race, so his choice in wording definitely shows that he is underplaying the significance of the subject. He doesn’t state it in certainty, although he knows it to be true, and he states that it may only be relevant in some respects in an attempt to lessen its implications. Andres and many other students could’ve selected this sort of tone and phrasing for a number of reasons. Beverly Tatum’s Racial Identity Development Theory helps us to better understand why this may be. Tatum’s theory describes a specific set of stages for Racial Identity Development for Whites, and another separate group of stages for Blacks. Since, there is no specific set of stages for other minorities like Hispanics and Asian’s, we must assume that their path would be more similar to Black’s, as they both too would experience the racism and hardships that comes with being a minority. For the Black side of Racial Identity development, there are two stages that could potentially yield the results of understating the significance of race like Andres and many other Non-Whites did. The immersion/emmersion stage where Blacks see “White people as simply irrelevant”(Tatum, p. 76), and the Internalization stage, where Blacks develop a positive sense of self can help to explain this (Tatum, p.76). If an individual were in the immersion/emmersion stage, he or she might feel that white people and their racism simply didn’t matter and therefore may downplay any racism seen or experienced, in their interview. Similarly if an individual were in the internalization stage, they may be so comfortable with themselves they may see the racism as insignificant and not discuss it. On the other side of the spectrum, White’s similarly downplayed the significance of race. Serafino, for example, stated that he “doesn’t think it has that much of an influence”, and people simply “gravitate toward people of their own background or ethnicity” (Serafino, P. 34). Serafino made no attempt to acknowledge the racism and separation that is prominent at the school. For Whites, these kinds of reactions may be explained by two stages: the disintegration stage and the pseudo-independent stage. In the disintegration stage an individual may “reject and ignore racism on a personal level” (Tatum, p. 96). In the Pseudo-independent stage, an individual may feel guilty for his or her own racial identity (Tatum, p.106). If a white person were in the disintegration stage they may simply ignore the racism they see, and if they were in the Pseudo-independent stage they may simply feel to guilty to acknowledge the racism. Tatum’s theory allows us to understand this phenomenon of lack of acknowledgment For all this evidence, however, it must be considered that an individual may just not want to talk about a controversial subject due to the fact that it may be awkward and taboo. However, the patterns in verbiage that are consistent with many interviewees’ make it appear likely that it is more related to their own perceptions of race. In conclusion, if a white person were in the disintegration stage they may simply ignore the racism they see, and if they were in the Pseudo-independent stage they may simply feel to guilty to acknowledge the racism. Tatum’s theory allows us to understand this phenomenon of lack of acknowledgment for racism at Trinity College.

The overwhelming relevance of findings like these is undeniable. We are living in a time where the American Dream is being questioned, and social change is being called for around it. Patterns like the ones presented in this essay allow us to gauge the impact of heated issues like race and social class and provide some insight as to what fuels these problems. It is important to note however that a sample of only 18 interviewees is not nearly enough to infer any of our findings on the entire student body at Trinity. This should simply be a means to raise awareness as to the potential of some of these issues.

The trends and patterns seen in this group of interviews were striking and fascinating. They show us the impact that various factors can have in our own views and actions regarding race and class. It’s important to gauge and understand these patterns, as they can have a great impact on how we live our own lives. They allow us to see the factors that can cause good social understanding and social action and can potentially influence the choices we make and the societal truths that we wish to acknowledge.

Bibliography

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?”: And Other Conversations About Race. New York: BasicBooks, 1999. Print.

Armstrong, Elizabeth A, and Laura T Hamilton. Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality. N. p., 2013. Print.

US Census Bureau, Data Integration Division. “Income.” N. p., n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2013

Provost, Kerri. “Real Hartford » Trinity Student Offers Suggestions for Bridging Town-Gown Chasm.” Real Hartford RSS. Real Hartford, 26 Nov. 2013. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.

Trinity College is a typical American college campus that is coping with societal problems and changes that are common in the country as the twenty-first century continues to progress. The students deal with a plethora of issues for example, coping with everything from academic and social issues to issues regarding the complex socio-economic class hierarchy and how these issues can vastly alter someone’s college experience.  These issues can have reverberations and consequences socially and academically that continue throughout the student’s college career. Our seminar conducted interviews with sophomores at Trinity to learn their perceptions and thoughts of how social class and race impact the daily lives as well as the general college experiences that students have.  By reading the transcripts of the interviews and seeing the general patterns between the demographics of the students it is clear that there is some connection to the ideas of social class and race at Trinity College. Issues of race and social class are not always so evident at first glance of the campus community at Trinity, but upon a more in depth look and examination, there are differing perceptions and attitudes of how both race and social class are perceived at Trinity College.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

By examining the transcripts of the interviews more closely it is not difficult to see a pattern that encompasses many of the students that receive financial aid from the college and their attitudes and their concern with self-presentation. Our interview research found that there are differences in how the students who receive financial aid feel about self-presentation and the students who do not receive financial aid feel about self-presentation. Therefore, how peers may or may not perceive them and their social class based on their self-presentation. Though one might think that in general the students who receive financial aid might be more cognizant of their appearance and self-presentation in comparison to their peers who do not receive financial aid, this is not what our research found. In fact, the interview data and transcripts actually show that more students who do not receive financial aid care or self-report that they care about their self-presentation.  Self-presentation is a key idea in college because as adolescents and students it is not unusual for people to find a significant other during their time in college.  In analyzing the interviews, we found that three out of the seven financial aid students are concerned with their self-presentation and four out of six non-financial aid students are concerned with their self-presentation. There also were patterns of how the Trinity sophomores perceived their own race and how it can be a barrier that is created for them and their social lives at Trinity College.

There is a distinct correlation in many of the interviews, about the possibilities of racial barriers that inhibit different races from interacting at Trinity. For example, a large number of the sophomore interviewees who are non-white, who said that they do believe that there some sort of racial barrier that inhibits certain students from being included in social events and activities. In one interview in particular, Juan observes that there are misconceptions about certain races and generalizations and stereotypes about what certain races and ethnicities should enjoy and activities people from those races should participate in (Juan p. 4). Juan observes that although he is non-white, he does not necessarily enjoy hip-hop or R&B as much as people of other races—white—would assume that he likes because of what his family’s heritage and culture might suggest in the larger scheme of things. Throughout many of the interviews, the interviewees indicated that there are definitely racial stereotypes that are expressed and beliefs that are held about certain races. The stereotypes of different races are definitely prevalent throughout the interviews. When asked if he thinks that there have been any assumptions made of him based on his race, Fred, an African-American student noted that he has been stopped by campus security on several occasions and asked if he is a student at Trinity. Though Fred seemed to brush off these somewhat negative interactions with campus security, it is still significant to consider how and why they happened in the first place (Fred p. 23). Nonwhite students in general did not suggest or really notice that their race had any influence on how they interacted with their fellow students at Trinity. This pattern gives good insight into how students at Trinity see the effect that their own race can alter their perceptions and experiences at Trinity.

Several of the interviewed students noted that a person’s social class won’t cause that person to be excluded or included in an event or activity, but it might change the possibility of a person participating in an event or activity for financial reasons or restrictions. One student, Serafino, feels that inclusive or exclusive situations are  “Not at a social level. I don’t think people necessarily include or exclude people based on social class, but some things people do just cost a certain amount of money to be able to do. When it comes to that I think there is a divide, there’s an exclusion factor, but just solely based on someone’s availability to participate in something. Not on a social level necessarily” (Serafino p. 34). Dr. Beverly Daniel Tatum, author of Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together In the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations About Race, would argue that many of the students who were interviewed are in various stages of her theory of Racial Identity Development. Depending on who they associate themselves with socially or how they see themselves in terms of their race. Tatum would argue that students such as Juan, would be in the middle of the stages encounter, in which individuals experience “a certain level of racism, which leads to self- segregation and an active desire to find those who have shared experiences” (Tatum p. 55-56) and the immersion/emersion stage of racial identity development. For individuals in this stage of racial identity development, “…the person at the immersion/emersion phase is unlearning the internalized stereotypes about his or her own group and is redefining a positive sense of self” (Tatum p.76). Juan is in between these stages because although he acknowledges that he has been on the target of racism, he does associate with people outside of his race and does not intentionally segregate himself from students of different races (Juan p. 4). Tatum would say that Fred is somewhat in the pre-encounter stage of racial identity development. This would be the case because in the encounter stage, individuals,  “…absorb beliefs and values of the dominant white culture, including white superiority and black inferiority” (Tatum p. 55).

Several students noted that they tend to naturally gravitate socially to other students who come from similar backgrounds racially and ethnically to their own background, Kaylie, a nonwhite student, noted that she sees herself as the exception to this because she does not hang out with a group of students from her background, or a similar background.  As a result of this, Kaylie thinks that she has in fact become more aware of her race since coming to Trinity. “Yes, because I have noticed that black people making in general…they tend to hang out together and I actually do not hang out with many black people in daily basis… so whenever I go out with friends and library and anywhere I tend to be the only black person in my group” (Kaylie p. 37). Three nonwhite students, Michael, Luisa, and Kirsten all felt that the Mather Dining Hall has some of the most clear and evident examples of how segregated racially Trinity College can be in certain situations and places. All three of these students notice the literal and figurative division of where people sit in Mather and how that directly corresponds to their race or ethnicity. “…Especially like uhm, it’s interesting cause I feel like even in Mather you just see how the division is really apparent, and so like I’ve seen it there and I’m really conscious about it there too” (Luisa p. 9). Kirsten also observed the stark contrast of where students sit when they are eating in Mather. She said that on a daily basis this is the clearest example of how students are divided racially at Trinity College. “Daily interactions? Um, I mean, for example Mather I don’t know if you’ve noticed but it’s very segregated in terms of seating area. I mean at first I didn’t notice it until someone pointed it out and I was like oh yeah you know like there’s a sport side and then there’s like a minority side. So sometime like this year, like last year I was always like contemplating which side I should like sit in and it just ruined my meal. So after thinking about it I’m like I’m not even hungry anymore I’ll just go to the Cave” (Kirsten p. 18). These three students’ observations of the culture of one of the biggest communal spots on campus highlight the subtle presence, yet, presence, nonetheless of a divide in how students of minority races and ethnicities do not interact or coexist with one another at Trinity. It is interesting that though eight white students were interviewed, none of them identified Mather as a clear example of the racial segregation and separation that some of their non-white peers pointed out.

Stereotypes based on race and social class as identified by several of the students who were interviewed also relate to Stacey Lee’s theory of racial identity. In her book, Unraveling The Model Minority, Lee explains that people will act according to the stereotype that is consistent with how the society thinks and portrays them. Specifically, Lee states that, The process of identity formation among all of the Asian American students was influenced by their perceptions regarding their positions and locations within society and their understanding of their interests. Asian American students in all four groups judges their situations by comparing their social positions to that of whites, non-white minorities, and other Asian Americans,”( Lee p. 121).  Lee’s book chronicles her time and research at a high school in Philadelphia where racial identification  and racial categorization is common (Lee p. 4). The students who were interviewed, more specifically the non white-students, felt that because of their race, others perceived them to have certain characteristics and personality traits. Ruby, for example, explains how she does not fit one of the stereotypes associated with Asians, “…I mean, I guess it’s just like– how I said before, like, people assume that just ’cause you’re Asian you’re gonna be great at math and chem, and stuff like that. And, I’ve taken chem twice, and I basically failed both times already [laughs]. So, I guess just like that but… yea. Not so much people are like– like, blatantly racist. You know, but like they make assumptions that because people are Asian they’re gonna be great at, like, the sciences…” (Ruby p.30). This is just one example of how stereotypes and assumptions often increase the negative associations that go along with minority races.         This pattern of racial stereotypes, whether that be a negative or positive, is a something that the majority of the interviewees expressed during their interviews.

In conclusion, the patterns and commonalities in the interviews with students of similar backgrounds and racial demographics, it is clear that students at Trinity are in the process of understanding the basis for why these divisions are present on the campus of Trinity College. From a simple glance at the school and the student population, it is not necessarily clear that there are issues regarding race and social class at Trinity. Yet, when these issues are investigated in greater detail, there is evidence that race and social class backgrounds of students can have an influence on the everyday lives of students at Trinity. Both Tatum and Lee’s theories of racial identity development and racial identity have relevance in terms of how they accurately depict many of the problems such as race and social class that students deal with whether they are conscious of it or not, on a daily basis.

Works Cited:

Stacey Lee, Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth, second edition (New York: Teachers College Press, 2009).

Beverly Daniel Tatum, “Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” and Other Conversations about Race, revised edition (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

College Equals Identification Time

     One of the most entertaining parts of being a college student is figuring out who you are. College is the first time, for many students, that there is no such thing as a “boss”. Every decision is made solely by the individual and he or she will have to face the consequences. Sometimes, an unseen “boss” is present and consequences are handed out. This “boss” is also known as society. Society is driven by the social norms instilled within it’s boundaries and therefore, if any individual strays from the norm, pressure is felt to blend into the rules of society. The hardest part about finding yourself, is figuring out how big of an influence society has in your life.  Finding yourself is seemingly impossible to do as the “new kid on campus,” however, many sophomores here at Trinity College have begun to figure out their standing in the hierarchies present on campus. Trinity College, though populated by a majority of white, non-financial aid students, is more beneficial, in the social learning aspect, to non-white students. This remains true because non-white students are more aware of their social class as well as their race. On top of that, they’ve learned to recognize assumptions being made about their social class and race.

     To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

     One aspect about individual life that is blatantly exposed here at Trinity College is one’s social class and the ability to become aware of where one falls in the social hierarchy. This is a difficult task, especially for college students. On this campus, one would think that students in the upper class level of society would have their eyes opened to the fact that their affluence is prominent in many aspects of their lives since they’re now surrounded by students who are in the same social class and thus participate in the same activities. However, they seem ignorant of that fact. Only half of the white non-financial aid students claimed to have become more aware of their social class upon arriving at Trinity College whereas ¾ of the white financial aid recipients claimed to have become aware. For example, Frank, a white financial aid recipient responded in this way when asked whether or not he has become more aware of his social class: “Certainly.Before I came to Trinity,I had no idea I was poor. I thought I was living pretty darn good life–still am-­- but when I came here and I saw how rich people really are, I was like ‘wow’ and it really hit me… I don’t have money…” (Frank 47) It is obvious here that within one’s own race, there is a huge divide based on how much money your parents have. Some students disagree with the amount of emphasis that is placed on social class, like Andres, when he states: ” Um, I don’t think it’s really come up. Social class I believe is a more subtle thing at Trinity…” (Andres 12). This proves that everything is based on perception. If one chooses to see the college in a particular light, that’s what will happen. However, initial responses don’t necessarily remain the same once thought comes into play. Andres was asked some follow up questions  after the initial interview and he mentioned the following:

     Yeah I knew Trinity was known for being a little bit more full of richer people, and even      in my own town we had our high school but literally less than a block away was a private      school [private school name] which a lot of Trinity school kids come from, and it cost            about thirty grand to go there so it’s like…sort of like…a typical thing. You go to [private      school here] and then you come to Trinity. So I was aware of like, there is a social class,        [but] I never really had to interact with those kids until now (Andres 12).

     Even Andres can see a glimpse of social class playing a larger role here than he initially thought. As a non-white, financial aid, student this opens his eyes to a part of the world he is yet to have really been immersed in: the upper class. Unfortunately, it appears the more upper class interviewees are oblivious to the privileges laid out in front of them.

     A second aspect of individual life that students are more exposed to here, is people to people interaction. Not only do students have the opportunity to have a light shed on their social class, there is also an open door for the thoughts and judgements of others to infiltrate. According to our data, half of the white students had had assumptions made about their social class.  Even still, one story stands out and it is Abe’s story. He states: “Well, I usually dress up really nicely so people think that I am from upper level. You can tell…that they think that I am wealthy, which I’m not,…so I feel like at Trinity people judge you by the way you dress more than anything and the way you act you know, [and they] don’t actually want to get to know you…” (Abe 45) Abe is in between ignorance and realization because he knows that something is amiss, however he has yet to find the drive to fix it. He is content with assimilating himself in order to fit in with the wealthier students. On the other hand, 6 out of 10 of the non-white students had a story to tell about an assumption made about their social class.But one student’s lack of storytelling made him stand out in the crowd. Andres stated above that he did not feel social class was that prominent, however, he continues the statement with a contradiction: “…Sorta like…it defines who people hang out with; it defines who people talk to more often.Directly, I’ve never had any problems with people about social class, but…indirectly it probably is the reason why I don’t know some specific people or some people probably just don’t even care about me because of my social class, but I wouldn’t know that directly.” (Andres 12) He starts out by saying that these assumptions define who you hang out with, yet he has never had any problems “face to face” with someone. However, he tries to disguise the fact that he knows assumptions have been made and could be completely false, yet he continues on to blame these assumptions on why he does not have certain friends. Andres, a non-white financial aid recipient would be in the Pre-encounter stage according to Beverly Tatum. Tatum is a psychologist who explains the theory of racial identity in her piece “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria” In the pre-encounter stage, minority children absorb beliefs and values of the dominant white culture, including white superiority and black inferiority. In this stage, racial identity has “not been realized…and not yet under examination” (Tatum 55). Though Andres is no longer a child, he has yet to understand the links between activities in his life and the preconceptions other people have. He has room to grow and seems to do so throughout the interview.

     The second major topic of discussion is race, and initially, if any certain students have come to a realization about their race that has, therefore, made them more aware of it. There is a correlation between race and financial status, as to whether your race has been put into perspective. This is made evident through the responses of the interviewees. For example, this is Kirsten’s response when asked if she had become more aware of her race: “I think so; yeah for sure cause I don’t meet a lot of Asian students… Um and then when you do meet Asian students, they’re either…really…white Asians or the really like nerdy Asians, so you get two different spectrums of Asian students on campus. So it’s hard to find out which group of Asians you belong in I would say.” (Kirsten 17). Kirsten is a non-white financial aid recipient and is having a hard time identifying because she feels she has to choose an identity. Stacy Lee is a professor in Educational Policy Studies  and noted for her work “Unraveling the Model Minority” . Lee has a theory on identity formation that explains why Kirsten feels the way she does when finding a group of Asians to identify to. “The process of identity formation among all of the Asian American students was influenced by their perceptions regarding their positions and locations within society and their understanding of their interests. Asian American students in all four groups judges their situations by comparing their social positions to that of whites, non-white minorities, and other Asian Americans”(Lee 121). In other words, the stereotypes and preconceived notions of peers and administration lay the foundation that leads Asian American students making a choice of who they are and who they want the world to see them as. 6 out of 10 non-white students felt they had become more aware of their race and Kirsten was one of them, whereas 2 out of 8 white students felt more aware. Interestingly enough, 5 out of 9 financial aid recipients had become more aware of their race whereas only 3 out of 9 non-financial aid students felt that way. Of those three, one, Victoria,  began her response as a borderline “yes” and finished as a solid yes though seeing the effects on other people of her race. Victoria declares:

     I think yes and no. I think…it’s [a] very different environment from [home city] where        everyone is kind of mixed together more, so to speak…here I think what has definitely        bridged the gap for me is the fact that, you know, I’ve had the fortune of…playing [a            specific sport] or going to a prep school and so, you know, people don’t necessarily just          look at me and say ‘Oh, she’s, you know, from [country she was adopted from]’, …                they’re able to see more in common. That has definitely been interesting to watch, just        because I have friends who are…more…identifiable [stumbles on “identifiable”] by their      race than I am, per say. And they have been, I don’t know, sidelined by it, a bit more            (Victoria 25).

     Finally, when asked about assumptions being made about one’s race 8 out of 10 non-white students shared examples about assumptions being made while only ⅜ white students felt assumptions had been made. Of the non-white students, two experiences shed a harsh light on the reality of Trinity College. Yvonne shares the first story.

     …people have assumed well after they get passed the whole thing that I’m not rich then      they assume that I’m from an urban area, which I am, I’m from [a particular city],                which is a predominantly black….. city but it’s not like the only race there…people also,        well on this campus, more recently have questioned whether I go here like specially if I        am in sweatpants or like if I look like not put together they would question whether I go      here or if I’m from the Hartford area (Yvonne 20).

     In order to be “put together” this non-white student would have to be dressed in high class fashion and carry herself in a way that would blend in with Trinity culture. In order to stay the individual she is, she bears the burden of racial profiling. The fact that she recognizes this happening would allow Beverly Tatum to declare that she is in the Encounter phase. At this point, the individual experiences a certain level of racism, which leads to self- segregation and an active desire to find those who have shared experiences (Tatum 55-56). Yvonne knows there is a problem, especially since being “put together” would mean being something she is not and she has thus begun her ascent on the racial identity ladder. The second experience that deserves attention is Fred’s. “I think people correctly assume that I’m African American. A couple times Campo [Campus Security] has stopped me because of it…they’ll stop and ask me…well I assume it’s because of it [my race]…they’ll stop and ask me if I go to school here, questions like that, but that happens rarely, once in a while.” (Fred 23). This proves that it is not just students judging each other because judgement is being cast by employees as well.  Both of these students have experienced a profiling of sorts and have now become more aware of the assumptions being made about them. The white students seem to have a little bit harder of a time with the realization that their race plays a role in more than they imagined, but a few have experienced encounters with profiling.

     One of the three white students who felt assumptions had been made about her race had an experience that rubbed her the wrong way.

     “ I think, like, people because I am white and upper middle class they think I am spoiled      and I have never worked to earn anything kind of so that has been definitely something      where I am like you don’t know anything about me, like, just because of these simple            facts doesn’t mean anything, like, even if they were right even if I hadn’t worked for            anything in my life, like, you don’t know that. I was at [a place to eat on campus] and…        or not that place… I was at [another place to eat on campus]… [I went up to] the lady          and I was like ‘hey can you check how many bantam bucks I have left?’ and she was like      ‘yeah um oh you have 15 dollars left, oh your parents came through for you’ and I was          like first of all I can get you fired for that and second of all that is very rude and making        a ton of assumptions about, like, who I am and what I do and don’t work for because I          have a white friend and she literally works for every single bantam buck she puts on            there and she was with me and was like, what the?” (Alice 43).

     At first glance, one would think Alice is dignified in her anger since someone made an assumption about her social status, profiled her,  without knowing her. However, her anger about being profiled comes across as out of place when presented to a minority student who would not see this as a profiling incident. What Alice didn’t understand is that having one’s parents “come through” for them is actually a good thing. Alice took the statement to mean that she must be rich since she is white and therefore her parents put money on her card. But the truth of the matter is that the phrase means that you’re in good hands and someone is watching out for you. There is an obvious cultural barrier here considering Alice didn’t understand the true meaning of the phrase and then proceeded to feel dignified in threatening the job of the woman just because what the lady said did not sit well with Alice. She, as a student, felt she had the power to remove an adult from her position at the college solely because she was offended by what the woman said to her. Alice neglected to say anything directly to the woman about this threat, so she doesn’t really have as much “power” as she thought. Had alice been made aware of the meaning of the phrase as it is used in the woman’s culture, her reaction would have been a “thank you” instead of a threat.

     Students at any multi-racial and socioeconomically diverse college will experience issues and learning experiences. What each student does with this new knowledge is up to that individual. Even though the majority of students here at Trinity are white, the real learning outside of the classroom benefits the non-white students because they are put in a position where learning from experience is inevitable. Students on financial aid experience the same types of inevitable learning when it comes to realizations about their social class. When all is said and done, it is the minorities who get the most social learning out of their attendance at Trinity college because they get to see the world in a different light.

Hieu “Hugh” Nguyen

FYSM

Prof. Dougherty

12/04/2013

“C+” for Diversity in Trinity College

            Race and social class are always intriguing and complex concepts of society. The First- Year Seminar class (FYSM) has been learning different racial and social class theories to try to understand more about these concepts and their applications in college life. There are three theories, two of which are about race, that were taught to the class: Tatum’s racial identity development, Omi’s racial formation , and Armstrong and Hamilton’s social class and organizational analysis. Tatum’s theory develops different phases that every student has and will eventually go through. Omi’s theory states that race is unstable and cannot be determined by physical traits but by social and historical aspects. Armstrong and Hamilton’s theory is about how students in different social classes experience different college pathways. The class’s study demonstrates that, at Trinity, both financial aid and non-financial aid students are equally aware that non-financial aid students have greater options in extracurricular and social activities. The study also conveys that Trinity students commonly use appearance as a main factor to judge one’s racial and social status. Thirdly, the study proves that social class greatly affects one’s perception of racial barriers, which is opposite to what many people think. Fourthly, the study reveals many signs of racial and social isolation on Trinity’s campus. In addition, these findings closely link to two theories, the racial formation theory and the social class and organizational analysis.

           To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 9 students who received financial aid (3 white and 6 non-white), and 9 students who did not receive financial aid (5 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

          Many people would believe that compared to non-financial aid students, financial aid students are more aware that affluent students have more range of extracurricular activities and social options than students on financial aid. Social options here refer to activities like eating out at a restaurant, traveling, going to a frat party, becoming a member of a fraternity or sorority, etc…However, our study of Trinity sophomores revealed that both financial aid and non-financial aid students are equally aware that non-financial aid students have greater options in extracurricular and social activities. Out of 18 interviews that the class conducted, four out of nine financial-aid students and five out of nine non-financial aid students mentioned that wealthy students at Trinity are involved in more extracurricular activities and/or social options than students in lower classes. For instance, participant Luisa when asked about how social class has been a daily factor to her life, pointed out that there were friends who could go out for dinner or go to a big city on every weekend while she could not do that. But she also stated that she did not know whether or not she should pay the money to join in a sorority, and she acknowledged that students from lower classes had to work on campus and thus they rarely had the options of doing what her and her friends did (Luisa 6-7). What Luisa said closely ties to Armstrong and Hamilton’s theory about social class. That theory of social class and organizational analysis explains due to social class, students from different socioeconomic backgrounds, as Luisa observed, experienced different things in college and followed different college pathways. Thus, what Luisa’s friends do imply that they are from upper middle class and so they follow the party pathway, while Luisa and other students like her seem to fit in the “wannabe” category who tries to fit in to the party pathway. Also that the students who have to work come from the middle or working class and thus they follow the class mobility pathway.

          One common belief is that one’s appearance does not have anything to do with they are treated by others. However, our study revealed that appearance, like physical traits and clothes, is the main factor that makes up the impression regarding one’s social status and race, and thus, appearance decides how others judge an individual. 12 out of 18 students reported a problem that involved the use of appearance to misjudge one’s racial or social status. Seven of them elaborated that their appearances caused other Trinity students to misjudge their social statuses. Appearance includes physical traits and clothes. Let’s consider clothes first. Four students (Andres, Yvonne, Abe, and Kaylie) conveyed how clothes and accessories on one’s body could create an illusion of one’s social class. For instance, Yvonne pointed out how people treated her differently based on what she wore. She said ”…when my hair is nice and when I am dressed fully…people hold doors open for me, people say hi when I smile at them…, or people just speak even if they only see me like if we see each other often but we’ve never been formally introduced, people speak, they smile or they wave. If …my hair is not done or if I’m wearing sweatpants…or something…that does not look name brand…people…are less likely to hold doors open for me…less likely to speak to me…” (Yvonne 20). This undoubtedly demonstrates how clothing is like an automatic electrical switch that turns on and off indicators of social class. When it turns on, which means a person wears brand clothes, the individual’s social class is assumed as upper-middle class or higher, which makes other people treat the individual very nicely; when the switch turns off, which happens when the clothes don’t look fashionable or not so well put together, the individual’s social class is assumed as middle class or lower, which leads to the very indifferent, if not impolite, manner that other people have toward the individual.

            While these four students were focused on the clothing aspect of appearance, three other students (Kirsten, Fred, and Alice) highlighted the other aspect of appearance, which is physical traits. These students expressed their frustrations of how other people used their physical traits to assume their social class to treat them accordingly. Kirsten mentioned a situation when someone automatically assumed she had a lot of money just by looking at her, but actually Kirsten came from the working class (Kirsten 16). Fred’s story elaborated a similar idea: his coaches on his sports team, based only his appearance, interacted with him in the way that he felt “like I’m from more of a lower class family” (Fred 22). Alice’s case was even more extreme. She expressed her very hostile attitude toward a Trinity staff member who, according to Alice, assumed that Alice came from a very wealthy family by using Alice’s appearance (white, blonde hair) as an indicator.

          Our study also demonstrated how appearance, not only heavily misinterprets one’s social class, but also confuses one’s race. 5 of the 12 students who have not been mentioned in the previous  paragraphs (Luisa, Juan, Victoria, Ruby, and Abby), all shared the same concern about how race cannot be defined based solely on appearance. Luisa was confused because many people got her race wrong: they thought she was Indian or African-American, while her race was actually Hispanic (Luisa 10). Those people did not get her race correct because they only used her skin as an indicator. This problem does not only happen to Luisa whose looks are different from the stereotype of a race, but also occurs to students who are like, as Juan said, “oreo”-who looks black but is actually white internally (Juan 6). One paradigm is Victoria, who was originally Asian but had been raised in a white family. This kind of problem that happens to the five students can be solved by Omi’s theory about racial formation. The main reason that causes confusion in race is that a lot of people have used physical traits to determine one’s race. If the racial formation theory is applied, these people would know that race is not a matter of biological traits but is measured by social aspects. Thus, if people had known about this concept of race in Omi’s theory, they would have looked more into one’s life before trying to determine his or her race. Therefore, these five students’ problem conveys how important and necessary the racial formation theory is, and it urges everyone to learn about this theory. More broadly, the 12 students in general convey the idea of Omi’s racial formation and the parallel theory about social class formation. One should never judge another’s racial or social status based on that person’s appearance.

            While many may argue that one’s social class does not have anything to do with one’s perception of racial barriers, our interviews confirmed the opposite of this notion. When asked how race has been a factor in the life of the participants, out of 10 non-white students, five out of six  financial aid students were highly aware of racial barriers, while only two out of four non-financial students realized how deeply race influenced their lives on campus. Thus, the connection between race and social class is much closer than people often think. Both of these groups were students of color, however most of the financial aid students were ranked “High” in terms of perception of racial barriers, while only half of the non-financial aid were ranked “High”. This demonstrates that even though students of color may all encounter racial issues on campus, those in middle class or lower recognize the racial barriers more quickly and react to them more dramatically. Thus it can be concluded the higher the socioeconomic status of an individual is, the less likely he or she will be able to recognize and react strongly to racial barriers. This also applies to white students. After a close reading of the transcripts of all the interviews, the writer found that there were two special white students who differed from the rest of the interview participants. The other seven white students, and the nine non-white students, though they had different levels in perception of racial barriers, were all aware that racial barriers exist on Trinity’s campus to some extent. However, these two guys (namely, Jim and Steve) had absolutely no awareness of racial barriers on campus, or in other words, these two never noticed any racial issues on campus. For instance, Steve answered very shortly: “no” to all questions about race and its affect on his life at Trinity (Steve 44). Both Jim and Steve have high socioeconomic status, as Jim described his family as “well-off” (Jim 27) and Steve stated that his father was in finance and his family was in “good shape” (Steve 44). From these examples and numbers, one can see how much race and social class relate. Social class acts as a deciding factor that determines one’s ability to recognize and react to racial matters. The higher one’s social class, the less likely he or she will recognize and react to issues that involve race on campus. In addition, this pattern also suggests that future studies about race should take socioeconomic status into account, instead of trying to isolate race and social class.

             The interviews conducted by the class also confirmed the existence of isolation in daily life at Trinity. For instance, three students mentioned the exact same thing though they were interviewed at different times and they did not know each other. Michael, Luisa, and Kirsten stated that Mather Hall was divided into two sides, one of which was the minority side. This separation  makes some students feel really uncomfortable, particularly when it comes to the question of where to eat. Kirsten, as a minority and an athlete, expressed her confusion and pointed out that the division at Mather ruined her meals (Kirsten 18). Outside Mather, there were a lot of signs of isolation on campus. One sign is that people only associate with people from the same social class or race. For instance, Victoria noted how having a car on campus defines who to hang out with (Victoria 24); Abe stressed on how before coming to Trinity he never cared about social class and that people hang out with others from the same social class (Abe 45); and Kaylie noticed that black people tend to hang out together on a daily basis (Kaylie 36). But the more worrisome problems are under the surface. After a close reading of all the interview transcripts, the writer found two quite intriguing patterns. The first thing is that even though many students noticed signs of isolation and separation due to race and social class, students were afraid to talk about them or discuss them with their friends. One epitome is Michael. He whispered to his interviewer “Mather. Where people sit” and he tried to not speak out the name of the side that he sat whenever he goes to Mather (which would be “minority”) (Michael 3). His action proved that he was afraid. What Michael did during his interview also gave the impression that talking about racial issue is something bad. If students like Michael do not dare to publicly discuss these isolation problems, these problems at Trinity will never be tackled and never ended. The second alarming thing is that many solutions that Trinity has tried to promote such as inter-racial interaction have not working properly. One paradigm is minority clubs. During her interview, Andres pointed out that there are people in minority clubs like LVL and MOCA who “are negative towards the social division and…have negative ideals” toward people from other races (Andres 14). This links to what one of the writer’s friends (who is African-American) said about P.R.I.D.E. (short for Promoting Respect for Inclusive Diversity in Education), that the program had mostly black people. Thus, clubs that are meant to promote interactions and to build understanding among students from different racial backgrounds have been doing the opposite. If these club members only associate with people from their own race and are taught by older members to view people in other races negatively, how on earth will the members ever dare to reach out to talk to other students from different races. This issue of minority clubs also conveys that Trinity is not as diverse as it is advertised on its viewbook and website. It is just like the concept that Juan brought up, “oreo”- Trinity appears to be diverse on the outside, but actually is not that diverse inside, as people from one race or social class tend to isolate themselves from those from other races or social classes.

                Overall, many interesting patterns were found in the interviews conducted by the FYSM “color and money”. These patterns help students have a deeper view about race and social class as well as racial and socioeconomic issues in college life. Furthermore, these patterns point out that Trinity’s student body is not as diverse and open-minded as it is advertised to be. Many students judge others’ racial and social status based on appearance. Many treat others based on race or social class. Wealthy students are less likely to recognize and react to racial tension on campus than less affluent students; those who are well aware of racial and social issues are afraid to openly talk about them. Many associate with only people from the same race or social class. Student clubs that are meant to promote diversity have not been working properly. These signs of racial and socioeconomic tension at Trinity are very likely to last for a very long time. Thus, it is necessary for college administrations and students to tackle these issues immediately, instead of advertising how great the student body is on paper to attract more applicants.

Works Cited

Armstrong, Elizabeth, and Laura Hamilton. Paying for the party: how college maintains inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013. Print.

Lee, Stacey. Unraveling the “Model minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth. New York: Teachers College Press, 1996. Print.

Omi , Michael, and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the united States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. Second . New york: Routledge, 1986. Print.

Varieties and Trinity College

Trinity College is where all different kinds of people meet up and spend 4 years together. As the importance of varieties is getting bigger and bigger, students get to meet different people easily. People may meet some people they have never met before and share precious time. However, even though Trinity College suggests friendly relationships with people no matter what racial, social, and financial background they have, there are still many difficulties and differences between the students.

There are many different ways to categorize the students of Trinity College. Some may suggest the subjects the students are majoring in can be a good factor of grouping while some may recommend the clubs the students are in can be a better one. While analyzing the differences of the students in social sense, the race and the social class of the students would be good factors. With the factors and several other interesting patterns from the groups of students, which will be referred later, one can realize that non-white students in Trinity College are relatively ashamed of their backgrounds, unlike other white students.

In Trinity College, one fifth of the students are non-white. The President Jones says, “Trinity had also tried to improve diversity by increasing its financial aid at a time when other parts of the budget are being cut” (Hu, 1). Also, Trinity College has been “committed to doing everything humanly possible for the diversity of the students’ body” (Hu, 2). Yet Trinity does have one of the highest acceptance rates among liberal arts colleges for black students, who make up 5 % of the student body, according to a survey by the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. In 2006, according to New York Times, Trinity accepted 52.8 % of black applicants, compared to 42.8 % of all applicants. In comparison, Amherst accepted 48.3 % of black applicants, Swarthmore accepted 37.4 %, and Wesleyan accepted 34.7 %. However, despite Trinity’s effort, it has significantly a lower minority population ratio than at other similar sized liberal art college, such as Williams (28%), Amherst (31%), and Wesleyan (26%). Why? Why is the percentage of racial minorities in Trinity significantly low? The school committee try its best for non-whites, as the President Jones say. It’s easier for non-white (especially African American) students to get in. All these data show that non-white students “avoid” Trinity College.

Why do non-white students avoid Trinity College? Again, the school committee is doing its best to recruit students from non-white racial bases; perhaps, the institution itself does not have a significant problem. Possibly the students and the atmosphere of the campus have some reasons why Trinity College is avoided by non-white. To find out what is there, the students of Jack Dougherty’s Freshman Seminar had interviews with 18 students in Trinity College and analyzed the transcripts of the interviews.

The reason why non-white students tend to avoid Trinity College, a great higher education institute that tries to provide a lot of opportunities for minority’s students is that they are ashamed of their races. There are total eight white students on the list of interviewers. Seven out of the eight white students are concerned with self-presentation. However, only a half of the ten non-white students are concerned with self-presentation. While white students are enthusiastically doing many stuffs and have influence on the campus, non-white students would not do anything. Out of the 18 interviewers, 15 of them agree that there are high racial barriers in the campus, which prevents the mix of students. As Luisa from the interview says, “everything is separated by race here.” (Dougherty, 9).

There is a theory how people group themselves by race: Racial Identity Development theory. In her book “Why Are All Black Kids in the Cafeteria”, Beverly Daniel Tatum explains the Racial Identity Development theory. According to the theory, there are five different steps how one developed his racial identity: pre-encounter, encounter, immersion/emersion, internalization, and internalization-commitment.

Pre-encounter is the stage where “a child absorbs many of the beliefs and values of the dominant culture, including the idea that it is better to be White. The stereotypes, omissions, and distortions…” (Tatum, 55). In this stage, racial identity has “not been realized…and not yet under examination” (Tatum, 55). Encounter is the stage where the individual experience a certain level of racism, which leads to self-segregation and an active desire to find those who have shared experiences. On these first two steps, students start believing socially dominant opinions, such as being white is superior.

Immersion/Emersion is the phase in which races other than one’s own becomes irrelevant. He or she begins to act on desires of self-segregation and this phase is usually “characterized by a strong desire to surround oneself with symbols of one’s racial identity” (Tatum, 76). “In many ways, the person at the immersion/emersion phase is unlearning the internalized stereotypes about his or her own group and is redefining a positive sense of self (Tatum, 76).

Internalization is the point that one begins to develop racial pride and a sense of security, which establishes “meaningful relationships across group boundaries” (Tatum, 76). In Internalization-Commitment stage, one begins to advocate for beliefs pertaining to his/her race/ethnicity and “perceive and transcend race” (Tatum, 77). What stage they are in these Racial Identity Development theory, will determine child-rearing tactics, where they live, who they associate with. According to the theory, racial identities get formed, by step by step. People get emotionally attached to their racial groups. This theory can explain why people feel comfortable and tend to get along around the group with the same racial identity as theirs.

As an example, Kaylie’s interview would show that there are high race barriers in the campus. Kaylie is a half Hispanic and Black student from a big city. She used to go to a public school, but then later transferred to a private boarding school. She explains herself as a lower middle class child. The reason why Kaylie’s interview is interesting, is that she explains herself as “adopted to the white culture” (Dougherty, 37). She says she is very “white”, according to herself and her friends; more interestingly, both her non-white friends and white friends claim so. The way she talks, her music taste, the clothes she wears, and group of friends she hangs out with, are very “white”. Her life is a life of minority in Trinity in a nutshell. Even though she hangs out a lot and does several extracurricular activities, she claims that “I am different… At the end of the day, there are something that doesn’t change between her (Kaylie’s white friend) and me (Dougherty, 37).

It’s not hard to find the same case out of Trinity College. There is this video, “Skin Deep”, in which several students from several different college gather around and talk about their races. There are white students, black students, Hispanic students, and Asian students; however, the conversation somehow flows as white vs. non-white. In the video, Khanh, whose ethnicity is Taiwanese, says “while you guys (white students) are grown up to love yourself, I was grown up to hate myself and be ashamed of myself” (Skin Deep, 15:12). Khanh says this in a very extreme way, but perhaps he has a point. The non-white students seem to agree with what Khanh says and later share their experiences about how unfair their life has been. As another example, Freda, an African American, yells, “people are going to hate you because you (general term) are white!” (Skin Deep, 17:20). Perhaps, minorities’ students feel much more lonely and unfair than people can imagine.

Social class differences can cause separation between the students in Trinity College. How does social class difference in the campus directly affect the students? Race may be a different factor because people can clearly see the differences of individual in their physical appearances right away, but how does the social class work difference work? It’s not like there is a law that separate lower class from the society; welcome to the Democratic society and the 21^st century! Surprisingly, according to the students, money can decide what kind of friends you have.

If one cannot afford the trend, she may be behind everything. Yvonne, a white student from Trinity, from the interview says, “If I like if my hair not done or if I’m wearing sweatpants and uggs or something like that um something that does not look name brand and put together people, people are less likely to held doors open for me, people are likely to speak to me like in a cord of people, people are less likely to acknowledge me whereas…” (Dougherty, 20). Perhaps, social class can be seen through one’s physical appearance. According to Yvonne, people don’t even open their mind for you unless you look fancy enough in all those trendy brands. Not just clothes, but doing anything also requires some fortune. Kaylie from the interview also says that “anything needs money. Going out, going to the party…everything needs money” (Dougherty, 36). Lack of money (lower social class) can limit one’s social life in Trinity.

Average Caucasian Americans are richer than average non-white Americans; however, it’s even worse in Trinity. The problem is that, since Trinity College gives more financial aid for minority students, it’s more likely that non-white students are less fortune than white students. For example, while six of the ten non-white students (60%) get financial aid, only three out of the eight white students (37.5%) get financial aid. The equation white is richer than non-white does not work all the time, but in general sense, the white students in Trinity College are relatively richer than non-white students, which causes social class differences between white students and non-white students.

Trinity College is a higher education institute that has a tradition of almost 200 years. It has many famous alumni members and is well known for its great academy. However, as society changes fast, Trinity needs to transform itself. In Trinity College, many non-white students feel afraid of joining the major groups; perhaps, they can’t. The racial and social differences between students must be solved in positive results, as soon as possible. No students should be ashamed and afraid of joining major groups in the campus only because of his backgrounds.

Works Cited

Hu, Winnie. “An Inward Look At Racial Tension At Trinity College.” – NYTimes.com. N.p., 18 Dec. 2006. Web. 02 Dec. 2013.

Reid, Frances. Skin Deep. Berkeley, CA: Iris Films, 1995.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? and Other Conversations about Race. New York: Basic, 1997. Print.

Trinity College. “Protesting Hate at Trinity College, April 2011,”. Hartfrod: Archival Documents and Manuscript Collections, 1 Apr. 2011.

Interview Essay

              It is no surprise that many see Trinity College as a private institution full of wealthy, white students. However, by taking a closer look at the students populating the campus, one finds a range of socioeconomic statuses and a variety of races and ethnicities. To get a sense of how students of all different races and economic backgrounds perceive the campus, our “Color and Money” seminar interviewed eighteen students from the sophomore class. Among many of the interviews, racial and socioeconomic barriers were themes that arose frequently. First, non-White students were accustomed to people making assumptions about their race and did not react dramatically to different stereotypes, whereas the remaining white students overreacted in situations. A comparable divide was also seen between those in the minority and majority socioeconomic populations at Trinity because of the different assumptions made about one’s social class. Each of these reactions stem from the countless differences in identity development, which theorists such as Beverly Tatum are able to explain.

In “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” Beverly Tatum explains white racial development and black racial development, and explains each phase the respective individual experiences as part of the development. Tatum pieces together ideas from personal experience to paint a clear picture of how white people and black people develop. By analyzing the interviews, it is clear that many of the students at Trinity College are at different phases of identity development.

Similarly, many interviewees noted that groups of different races tend to congregate, which is a concept examined by Stacey Lee in her work, “Unraveling the ‘Model Minority.’” Through careful observations in a prestigious high school, Lee noticed that students segregate by race. By asking students provocative questions, we were also able to notice a divide between different races and social classes. When asked if people have become more aware of social class and race, a majority of the students in the minority, or the non-white students and students receiving financial aid responded yes, and the White students and financial students typically responded no.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics, such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

By closely examining the interviews, it is clear that non-White people have a greater perception of racial barriers than those students who are white at Trinity College. When analyzed to see if the students recognize racial barriers, seven out of ten of non-white students had an awareness of them, whereas only three out of six white students noticed a divide. One of the students by the pseudonym Luisa admitted that she has definitely become more aware of her race while at Trinity. She tells the interviewer, “I’ve been a lot more conscious of my race and it’s weird I guess because I’ve never felt like a true minority before I came to Trinity” (Luisa 10). She also tells the interviewer that as a freshman, she considered joining the La Voz Latina house on campus, but ultimately decided against it because she believed the group was cliquey. By being on campus for just two years, Luisa already feels a wedge between the different races on campus. Andres, another non-white student, also saw a similar trend in racial barriers, specifically pertaining to La Voz Latina and other on-campus organizations. When asked if he has become more aware of his race, Andres tells the interviewer, “Like with some of the…clubs– like LVL [and] MOCA, they make it their job to have a community for kids when they come to Trinity… I go to the events and stuff but, in a sense I feel like they’re harboring the kids a little more than they need to” (Andres 13). Andres, along with other ethnic students, has noticed that Trinity feels obligated to have groups for minority students because Trinity is aware that they may feel excluded. By forming these groups, however, a divide is created between the different ethnicities on campus. Similarly to Lee’s discovery, a majority of the students interviewed noticed that different races segregate themselves from other races. Ten out of fifteen of interviewed students answered yes when asked, “Since coming to Trinity, have you become more aware of your race?” It is clear that many of the non-White students have become more conscious of their race since coming to Trinity, something that the White students have not seemed to notice as much.

Although one may expect that non-White students would react more to seemingly racist acts on campus, our study revealed the opposite.  When asked about assumptions people at Trinity College have made about one’s race, Juan, a non-White student, shared that a certain white student on campus greets him, “hey what’s up brotha” (Juan 4). Juan admitted that he would go along with it, but firmly told the interviewer, “I don’t think that makes him racist though. Cuz for me racism is such a malicious thing… I just feel like he just wanted to fulfill something” (Juan 5). Although one may expect Juan to react aggressively towards this clear act of stereotyping, Juan responded very passively to the situation.

Similarly, when asked about assumptions people have made about his race, Fred, an African American student, told his interviewer that “Campo” has stopped him before. He tells her, “I think people correctly assume that I’m African American. A couple times “Campo” has stopped me because of it … they’ll stop and ask me if I go to school here, questions like that, but it happens rarely” (Fred 23). What many would see as offensive, Fred downplays. Could this be because non-White people have grown accustomed to these offensive stereotypes? Fred is an excellent example of an individual in the internalization stage of racial development described by Tatum. At this point, Tatum asserts that the individual begins to develop a sense of racial pride and security, allowing the individual to establish “meaningful relationships across group boundaries” (Tatum 76). Fred acknowledges that stereotypes have been made and used against him, but is confident in who he is and is able to successfully integrate himself with many different races. Not only did Fred make this occurrence seem insignificant, but Kirsten, an Asian student also downplayed a stereotypical comment made by a comedian.

When Kirsten told the comedian she was from a certain neighborhood, the comedian responded, “oh, you must have money right?” (Kirsten 16). Kirsten continues to tell the interviewer, “he was joking around obviously, but because I was Asian and from [this part of the city] he thought like oh yeah she must have money…but I don’t take offense, I don’t really care about the whole issue, kinda” (Kirsten 16-17).  Again, it is clear that many times students of a minority on campus downplay the stereotypes outwardly stated against them. Ironically, the students of the racial majority tend to act more defensively when he or she feels under attack because of his or her race.

Alice, a white- student who did not receive financial aid upon coming to Trinity, recounts an incident in a certain dining hall. She asked the woman working at the cash register if she could check how many bantam bucks were on her card. The woman checked and responded, “yeah um oh you have 15 dollars left, oh your parents came through for you” (Alice 43). Alice continues on to display her reaction. She states to the interviewer, “I was like first of all I can get you fired for that and second of all that is very rude and making a ton of assumptions about like who I am and what I do and don’t work for…” (Kirsten 43). From a comment some may not even think twice about, Alice grew very angry and defensive that the woman working at the cash register supposedly made such assumptions. Although surprising, it is clear that the students of the majority, in both race and social class react more aggressively towards assumptions made by others.

Similarly to the divide between races, it is clear that there is a barrier between the socioeconomic minority, or those students who receive Financial Aid, and the majority, or those who do not receive Financial Aid at Trinity College. It is clear that the minority has become more mindful of their social class ever since coming to Trinity. This differs from the somewhat split responses of becoming more conscious of race at Trinity for both non-white and white students. When asked if he/she has become more aware of one’s respective social class upon coming to Trinity, eight out of eight students on Financial Aid answered that they have become more conscious. Contrary to this statistic, only about half of the students who do not receive Financial Aid have become more aware of their respective social class. Looking at these statistics, it is clear that social class tends to be an area of judgment by students at Trinity College. Many of the students on Financial Aid responded to the question, “has social class been a factor in your daily interactions?” and “what assumptions, if any, have people at Trinity made—correctly or incorrectly—about your social class” by describing the clothes one wears and how this plays a large role in determining a person’s social class. Abe, a student on Financial Aid, describes to the interviewer that, “I usually dress up really nice so people think that I am from the upper level. You can tell like that they think that I am wealthy, which I’m not because of the way I dress…I feel like at Trinity people judge you by the way you dress more than anything” (Abe 45). Abe is not the only student who feels as though the clothes one wears has a big effect on how one’s social class is perceived. Juan, another student who receives Financial Aid from the college describes to his interviewer how “I’ve seen poor people who are of lesser means who are really good looking climb way up the popular ladder at Trinity just because they look good” (Juan 5). On the other hand, the students who do not receive Financial Aid tend to avoid admitting any assumptions made about social class.

When asked the assumptions people at Trinity have made pertaining to social class, Jim, a student who does not receive financial aid responded, “…I mean not much…I mean I never really talked about it…I really I truly can’t know…I…I’m not worried about any [assumptions] that people have made about my social class….” (Jim 27). Jim is not the only student who avoided talking about any assumptions made. Luisa, another student who does not receive financial aid, responded, “uhm, I don’t know, I don’t think people make like outwardly assumptions…I don’t know I feel like people just make like assumptions but like don’t they don’t like outwardly say them…” (Luisa 8). Both Jim and Luisa, and other students who are in the socioeconomic majority avoided delving into detail of assumptions made about social class at Trinity, whereas the students who are on Financial Aid shared many observations that he or she has seen at the College. Those who are on Financial Aid are clearly more open about perceptions made at Trinity pertaining to social class, contrasting those who are not Financial Aid who do not openly admit to perceptions made. Because of the difference of observations between the various social classes at Trinity, a divide is drawn between those on Financial Aid and those who are not.

By carefully analyzing the interviews conducted it is clear that there are certain stereotypes that students have about other students at Trinity, whether pertaining to social class or race. Through the interviews, one can clearly see that students of the majority and minority of socioeconomic status and race pick up on these stereotypes, however, the reaction of the two groups is different. The white students and those not receiving financial aid tended to overreact when exposed to stereotypes against them but tended to avoid admitting that they have any stereotypes themselves. The non-White students and those receiving financial aid, on the other hand, tended to react less aggressively towards the stereotypes and openly talked about perceptions that he or she had witnessed. The interviews highlighted many existing discrepancies in the student body that bring to light certain stereotypes and an evident divide on the campus.

Works Cited

Lee, Stacey J. Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth. New York: Teachers College, 1996. Print.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” New York: Basic, 2003. Print.

Sarah Fogel

Interview analysis essay

12/4/13

The way students at Trinity College view race and social class varies from person to person. These variations often depend on if the student is white or non-white or on financial aid or not. Students who were non-white and white had about an equally high perception of racial barriers. Non-white students not only felt racial barriers from white students but also from other minority groups on campus. Racial barriers less often directly affected white students, but many admitted to seeing situations that opened their eyes to the racial barriers on campus. Another discrepancy was between financial aid and non-financial aid students. Students who were receiving financial aid equally cared and did not care about self-presentation, while a higher amount of non- financial aid students did care. Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton describe these ideas about social class in Paying for the Party. The book analyzes how certain girls living in a known party dorm fare in school and in the party scene based on their social class. Beverly Tatum’s book Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? focuses more on race and talks about different stages people go through in understanding and accepting their race. Both these books support the patterns revealed in the interviews. The patterns seen in the interviews illustrate how significant race and social class are to people’s interpretations of life and their interactions with others.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (4 white and 6 non-white) and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (4 white and 4 non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

It would be easy to assume that students of color would perceive racial barriers differently, but in fact it seemed as if both white and non-white students had a similar perception of racial barriers on campus. For non-white students only 3 out of 5 had little perception of racial barriers and for white students only 3 out of 7 had little perceptions of racial barriers. The students who saw a separation of race mentioned how they found it sad to see. One non-white student Juan talked about how he experienced a Caucasian student changing his way of speech and mannerisms around him.  “He would always greet me using the phrase ‘hey what’s up brotha’” (Juan 4) even though this was not consistent with how he spoke. Another non-white student talked about the racial separation he saw within minority groups on campus not just between whites and non-whites. Luisa talked about wanting to join a minority group on campus, but she felt even it posed a racial barrier as she said, “I guess like it’s hard to explain but I feel like they were really like cliquey in a way because I didn’t exactly come from like wherever they come from and I didn’t speak fluent Spanish” (Luisa 10). Interestingly other students felt similar racial barriers from other students of color. Andres talked about minority groups on campus that he felt did help him, but also as he said, “I go to the events and stuff, but in a sense I feel like they’re harboring the kids a little more than they need to” (Andres 13). This creates more of a social barrier because students in a sense get “stuck” in these groups and don’t branch out and meet other students. It is interesting to think about what stage of racial formation they would be in according to Tatum. It would seem as if Andres, Juan and other non-white students are in the immersion stage “characterized by a strong desire to surround oneself with symbols of one’s racial identity” (76). Even so, when trying to join minority groups, they feel a lack of connection with them and that separates them even more from other students on campus.

Comparatively many white students experienced a high degree of racial barriers on campus. They talked about seeing these barriers rather than feeling them directly. Abby said her perception of racial barriers was heightened because of a class she took freshman year and also because of her interactions with Hartford residents. Even though she does not feel barriers personally she said, “I just see less people making assumptions about my race than I do see people make assumptions about other people’s race” (Abby 40). Another student Abe reported a different experience; he went to a discussion put on by a group and was one of two white kids in the room. “ I felt really uncomfortable because I felt like the conversation was about like you know uh basically what minority students receive on campus” (Abe 46). With white students there were two types that saw racial barriers, one group that did not believe they were directly affected by it but saw judgment being passed and another group that did feel barriers between themselves and non-white students on campus.

An interesting pattern that could be seen was that students who experienced some kind of racial judgment were very nonchalant about the situations. One would expect more anger towards the situations they encountered, but mostly students said it was not a big deal and it only happened once in a while. One student did seem upset by a situation involving racial judgment, but it was directed at his friend not himself. More than once a non-white student mentioned being stopped by campus police and asked if they were a student at Trinity College. Fred was a student who had been stopped by campus police but in one of the questions before he revealed that he had been a non-white student stopped by campus police, he said, “I think it’s an encompassing campus so there aren’t many people who are defining you because of your race.” (Fred 22). Then he went on to reveal that “ A couple times Campo [Campus Security] has stopped me because of it…they’ll stop and ask me…I well I assume it’s because of it [his race]…they’ll stop and ask me if I go to school here.” (Fred 23). Yvonne also talked about racial profiling.  She said on days that she wears sweatpants and dresses down, people have asked her if she goes to the school or if she lives in Hartford (20). Many white students have “dress down” days where they might wear sweatpants and none of them talked about this happening. Other situations where someone would expect a stronger reaction were when other students either teased people because of their race or assumptions were made. Ruby, an Asian student, said,  “People assume that just ’cause you’re Asian you’re gonna be great at math and chem, and stuff like that.” (Ruby 30). Ruby just laughed these assumptions off and said she even failed chemistry twice. This pattern of not fully acknowledging the reality of racial assumptions on campus was prevalent throughout the interviews.

Another aspect of the interview involved social class and its effect on the Trinity College campus. How concerned students were with self-presentation differed on whether or not they were on financial aid. Out of students on financial aid 4 out of 5 did care about self-presentation but for students not on financial aid 6 cared while only 3 did not. The 4 students on financial aid who were more concerned with appearance often talked about how others’ reaction towards them changed according to what they were wearing. When they dressed up, people were more likely to be polite to them. For example Kaylie talked about the repercussions she feels for not dressing the same as other students. She said, “If I am not wearing that particular jacket or pair of boots, they would assume that I am not on the same level as them. They wouldn’t speak to me.” (36). She understands the importance of keeping up appearances. Ethan had another reaction to appearances. He made an effort to dress in a certain way so that people could not make assumption about his class. He was happy with the fact that people cannot “pigeon-hole him,” which is a good thing he believes and he strives to keep that up (Ethan 50). The students who did not care as much about presentation and were on financial aid often discussed how so much revolves around materialistic things on Trinity’s campus and that did not interest them. Andres explained how he can see that people try to conform to a certain look, but he does not feel the need to join in. He said I see  “groups of people walking together that are…they all look alike.” (Andres 11).

Paying for the Party by Hamilton and Armstrong elaborates more on the idea of social class. They discuss sorority rush and explain the importance of appearance regardless of social class “…the way that recruits signaled commonalities in social class [was] via the expensive accessories” (page 81). For students not on financial aid there was a much bigger difference between students who did care about self-presentation and students who did not care.  Abe, a non-financial aid student, observed at Trinity a large spectrum of social class and said, “I never really cared about social class and then when I came here I felt like it’s like, you basically hangout with your own social class” (Abe 45). Abby, a student who is not on financial aid because of a merit scholarship says she does not openly discuss this fact, “but when she does [and] when people do hear [that she is on a merit scholarship] they’re usually very surprised” (Abby 38). It is what people wear that can indicate their social status. On the other hand there are students not on financial aid who found the whole materialistic aspect immature and pointless. Luisa talked about the fact that people associate with those in the same social class and said, “ It’s just really narrow-minded and child-like and like when we graduate like obviously you’re not gonna be like it’s just like kinda stupid to do that.” (Luisa 51). She doesn’t see the point in only associating with others who appear to be similar in class and dress. This mind set resembles a few girls in Paying for the Party who were not interested in the whole partying and Greek scene and chose to leave their floor or not interact with the girls that only cared about social status. Brooke explained that she “viewed [other girls] behavior as immature and from a position of superiority extricated herself” (116). Not everyone, even if they can fit in socially, chooses to act a certain way because it is expected of their social class. Although some people do conform and care about their presentation, to others it is seen as frivolous and unimportant in the long run.

All of the interviews illustrate that people perceive race and social class very differently based on their background and other factors. At the Trinity College campus it was interesting to see how a small sample of sophomores reacted so differently to questions about race and social class. The books Paying for the Party and Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together? help explain the various reactions of the sophomores. These issues can often be uncomfortable to discuss but thankfully the students were willing to open up for research purposes. It would be easy to assume that all white students felt one way and all non-white students felt another, but in actuality there were some shared feelings and patterns as well as some differences among the students of different races and social backgrounds.

Citations

Armstrong, Elizabeth A., and Laura T. Hamilton. Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2013. Print.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? and Other Conversations about Race. New York: Basic, 1997. Print.

FYSM Color and Money: Race and Social Class

Interview Analysis Essay Final

College is ideally a time when young people broaden their horizons, gain new experiences and, for perhaps the first time, interact with individuals of backgrounds very different from their own.  But, meeting new people of different backgrounds can be intimidating or uncomfortable, especially when one feels subject to preconceived notions and stereotypes.  Paradoxically, college campuses like Trinity’s may be places of greater segregation and social divisions than of integration of diverse and harmonious living and learning.  Thus, the idealized image of college as a time of broadened horizons and greater understanding of differing viewpoints may be more true in theory than in practice.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (four white and six non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (four white and four non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

The data and perspectives presented in this study show significant social divisions Trinity’s campus– divisions on the bases of both race and socioeconomic class.  When confronted with different cultures, backgrounds, and perspectives, students tend to surround themselves with others who share similar backgrounds, cultures, and viewpoints.  Thus, rather than acting as an incubator for the mixing of customs, cultures, and ideas, college campuses like Trinity’s instead can become rot with division, cliques and, paradoxically, homogeneity.

A common theme that emerged from the interviews was the observations of self-segregation and racial divisions in Mather dining hall.  Five out of 18 interviewees noted racial divisions inside and outside the main dining hall.  Interestingly enough, all five of these students happened to be non-white—making up half of all the non-white students interviewed.  Kristen, an Asian student receiving financial aid, described the Mather dining hall as “very segregated in terms of seating area,” noting what she and others perceived as the “sports side” and the “minority side” (Kristen, 18).  Other interviewees reported being most conscious of their race in Mather dining hall, feeling unsure of where they should sit.  Kristen even admitted to avoiding Mather altogether and choosing other campus dining options to escape the segregation in the main dining hall (Kristen, 18).  Even outside of the dining halls, interviewees reported signs of racial segregation.  Kaylie, a Black and Hispanic student receiving financial aid, noticed “that Black people making in general… they tend to hang out together…” (Kaylie, 37).

Beverly Daniel Tatum offers a possible explanation for such divisions as she explains the racial identity development processes for both Black and White individuals in her book, Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?.  Tatum posits that for many Black individuals, encounters with racism lead them into the second stage of racial identity development, appropriately called the “encounter” stage.  This stage of racial identity development is characterized by the active desire to surround oneself with those who have shared similar experiences (Tatum, 56).  Furthermore, desires for self-segregation are heightened during the next stage of racial identity development, the “immersion/emersion” phase.  During this stage of racial identity development, one views races other than one’s own as simply irrelevant (Tatum, 76).  Moreover, the “immersion/emersion” phase is very typical of college students—Tatum herself notes being so deeply in the “immersion/emersion” phase while in college that, to this day, she “can’t remember the name of one White classmate” (Tatum, 75).  The prevalence of the “immersion/emersion” phase on college campuses in general could further explain the self-segregation observed in Mather dining hall.

As previously noted, an encounter(s) with racism is a necessary catalyst for Black individuals to enter into the “encounter” stage.  And while we might not want to admit it, potential catalysts are certainly present on Trinity’s campus.  When asked whether or not people at Trinity had made assumptions—whether correctly or incorrectly—about his race, Fred, an African American student receiving financial aid, mentioned being stopped by campus safety and, on more than one occasion, being asked to present his Trinity ID.  Fred states, “Well, I assume it’s because [I’m African-American]… they’ll (Campus Safety) stop and ask me if I go to school here, questions like that…” (Fred, 23).

Such interactions were not limited to African American men.  Yvonne, an African American female student receiving financial aid, noted being asked to present ID while ordering at the Cave– a practice that is very atypical.  Moreover, Yvonne recounted an incident in which she misplaced her Trinity ID card, and had to ask a fellow student to let her into her dorm– a very common request between students.  However, presumably because of Yvonne’s race, the student refused to let her into her dorm, fearing Yvonne might be trying to rob the dormitory (Yvonne, 21).

While no other interviewees of color reported such blatant encounters with racism, several reported feeling in some way isolated from or judged by White students.  Victoria, an Asian, non-financial aid student adopted by a White family, claims, “at times, people may have made jokes or assumptions about me” (Victoria, 26).  Juan, a Hispanic student receiving financial aid, told the following story about when his freshman year roommate moved out at the end of the school year:

… [T]oward the end of the year when everybody is leaving, they’ll put a sign on the door saying that anything that hasn’t been taken out, anything that is still in the dorm that wasn’t originally a part of the school when you moved there is gonna be taken out (05:58).  Toward the end of the year, this person, they left, in our room, they left their stuff, and I didn’t have his phone number because I had a new phone.  So I like had to call his father and tell him that his stuff was going to be taken away if they didn’t come and pick it up.  I had to call his father’s office.  And I feel like a lot of that had to do with their perception of me.  And I feel like had I been a Caucasian maybe I wouldn’t have had to do that because they would’ve automatically assumed that the school took it (06:40).  Whereas, certain aspects of my interactions with his parents made me feel like they would’ve assumed that I took the stuff after the sign had been removed (Juan, 5).

        Moreover, Kaylie, a Black and Hispanic student receiving financial aid, claimed culture clashes and feelings of disjointedness even between her and her roommate, a White southerner.  Kaylie described her roommate as having, “her own sense of culture” (Kaylie, 37) that she didn’t always understand.  Kaylie claimed these differences in culture occasionally resulted in disagreements, and that these cultural divisions were not anything she believed would change or be alleviated in the future (Kaylie, 37).

        Based on these feelings of isolation and unnecessary anxieties (as demonstrated in Juan’s case), it is understandable why students of color would seek solace among individuals who share their experiences and culture.   These sentiments were most clearly summarized by Andres, a Hispanic student receiving financial aid, as he claimed:

…[Y]ou could say that like, ‘oh all those minorities aren’t trying to meet white people, or they’re not trying to meet other people different from them.’ Or, you can say that they’re just trying to be friends with people who are similar to them, which is another way to view it because there are so few of them you might as well be friends with the people that are most similar to you (Andres, 14).

        In addition to divisions on the basis of race, our interview study produced substantial evidence of social divisions on the basis of socioeconomic class.  11 of 18 students interviewed noted social divisions on the basis of socioeconomic class, claiming “it defines who people hang out with; it defines who people talk to more often” (Andres, 12).  Moreover, seven of the 11 interviewees to note socio-economic social divisions were students receiving financial aid.

Abe, a White (Middle Eastern) student receiving financial aid, noticed “[n]ot a lot of people from the lower social class hangout with the higher/upper social class, and not a lot of people from upper class hang with socially lower…” (Abe, 45).  Luisa, a Hispanic student paying full tuition, felt, “Trinity’s really cliquey in the aspect that, like, they [wealthy students] won’t approach someone who they perceive as, um like, in a less economic standing…” (Luisa, 8).

Five of the 11 interviewees who spoke of socio-economic divisions on campus cited clothing as the primary factor used in determining one’s perceived socio-economic class.   All five of these students receive financial aid.  Kaylie (who, as discussed above, mentioned race related cultural tensions with her roommate) observed students on Trinity’s campus, “attempt to wear same kinds of clothing and same brands and tend to stick together” (Kaylie, 36).  Kaylie stated that if she, or anyone else, does not wear the “right” clothes, wealthier students will assume her to be of a lower social status, and will refuse even to talk to her (Kaylie, 36).

Yvonne, an African American student receiving financial aid, agreed that how she dressed or what she looked like on a day-to-day basis determined who did or did not speak to her, who did or did not open doors for her, etc (Yvonne, 20).  Yvonne admitted to trying to work this pattern of behavior in her favor, occasionally splurging on expensive brand-name items and attempting to dress and carry herself in such a way that people might assume her to be of a higher socioeconomic class (Yvonne, 19-20).  And, Yvonne is far from alone.  Abe also admitted to dressing up so that people might think he is from a higher socioeconomic class (Abe, 45).  Thus, social hierarchy on campus resulting from socio economic divisions among students is a significant source of anxiety for students who feel they cannot compete.

While clothing may be the first indicator of one’s socioeconomic status on campus, seven of the 11 interviewees who identified socioeconomic divisions on campus agreed that divisions were most evident during nightlife, when social class influences what one is able to do with his or her friends (Kaylie, 36).   Luisa identified situations in which some of her friends were left behind on weekend trips to New York City or dinners off campus because they either had to work, or could not spare the necessary expenses (Luisa, 8).  Victoria (previously mentioned as a victim of race-related jokes) mentioned wealthier students had greater access to sports clubs, and several even had cars on campus, allowing for greater social opportunities than those available to students with lesser means (Victoria, 24).

Such social divisions brought about by socioeconomic class and its implicit social opportunities are consistent with Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton’s theory of social class and organizational analysis.  Under their theory, college experiences are shaped by individual characteristics and resources associated with class background, and organizational characteristics of the college itself (Armstrong and Hamilton, 7-8)  Therefore, certain students of higher socioeconomic classes are generally afforded greater social opportunities than students of lower socioeconomic classes.

Thus, even though college is ideally a time of broadening horizons and exposures to new people, perspectives, and cultures, our data suggests that this is not always the case.  According to quantitative and qualitative data presented in our seminar’s interview study, the prejudices that many students bring on to the Trinity campus lead many minority students to engage in self-segregation.  Moreover, socio economic differences and lack of understanding from the higher socioeconomic classes with regard to the lower result in further social divisions.  Based on these accounts from Trinity students, it appears that with regard to race and socioeconomic class, Trinity students “tend to stick to people who are similar to them” (Andres, 14).

Works Cited

Beverly Daniel Tatum, “Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” and Other Conversations about Race, revised edition (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton, Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2013)

Vincent Ye

Trinity College Interview Social Views

College education is particularly significant to all students in the United States since they get to learn and acquire new experiences. Unfortunately, it is also during college education that most students begin to realise the disparities in race and social class that are evident in society. Hence, as they pass through the entire college experience, students find that they learn and undergo some of the most painful and unfair ordeals as a result of segregation and stereotyping. In this paper, I highlight the disparities and similarities that are evident among students of a variety of races who receive financial aid and those who do not obtain the aid.  This study will then be compared with the views of two major authors, Stacey J. Lee and Beverly D. Tatum.

Interview Essay: Detecting Patterns Across Transcripts

While some may believe that higher-income students are more brand-conscious, our study of Trinity sophomores found that both financial aid and non-financial aid students were equally likely to mention brand-name clothing and machinery when discussing social class dynamics on campus. Across all 15 interviews we conducted, financial aid students mentioned either specific brand name clothing or the higher status of brand styles in 3 out of 8 interviews with financial aid students, and 4 out of 7 interviews with non-financial students. For instance, Alice, who described herself as a female, white student from an upper middle class family, explained that the fact that she drives a Mercedes makes people think that he is well off. She states “well you drive a Mercedes that must mean that you are well off” (Alice 42). Although most students did not mention the exact brand names of the clothes they wear, most of them recognised that the type and quality of clothes one wears determines their social class and friends. Kaylie, a financial aid student who said that she is a Hispanic from two Caribbean nations noted that people who wear the same brand of cloths tend to walk together (Kaylie 36). She says “If I am not wearing that particular jacket or pair of boots, they wouldn’t assume that I am on the same level as them. They wouldn’t speak to me” (Kaylie 36). Kirsten, another financial aid student views that dressing and brand name is of great significance in regard to how other students judge her (Kirsten 20). She states that when she dresses well and makes her hair, people are likely to talk to her, smile to her and open the door for her. However, when she wears “sweatpants” people are less likely to do the same and they may not acknowledge her (Kirsten 19). In her book, Stacey Lee states that clothing style among students is vital in determining one’s social class. This is because clothes are won in public and they are used to judge where one shops, their financial ability and who they socialise with (Lee 77).

A few interviewees felt that their social status curtailed them from participating in certain activities. This is because most of them were unable to raise funds so as to join certain clubs within the institution. Others were frank enough to state that the manner in which one dressed could be used to determine if they were from a rich or poor background. This does not entirely mean that they are poor but it does insinuate that some college students judge the financial status of their peers according to their outer appearance. Yvonne, a female African-American stated that others say that she is from upper class from her appearance. She notes that most of them say that “oh is she rich,” which according to her is a misjudgement since she comes from a middle class family (Yvonne 20).

There are many stereotypes directed towards many minority groups in the United States. These stereotypes range from the fact that most of them are criminals, they are uneducated while others say that they engage in the sale and buying of illegal drugs. Many white citizens are not victims of prejudice and unfair assumptions. This is the same case in the interviews. Many non-white interviewees stated that there are various kinds of stereotypes that have been said in reference to their personality and their outward look. Nine non-white students responded that many assumptions have been directed towards them. Although these assumptions are not expressed on a day to day basis, most of them have experienced prejudice and unfair judgement. Fred, a male student who describes himself as black or African American said that once in a while, campus security has stopped him in order to enquire if he is a student in the institution (Fred 23). This must have been extremely embarrassing for Fred. Juan, a male Hispanic student stated that other students thought that he was a rapper because of his minority status (Juan 4). The evidence that has been retracted from these interviewees confirms that minority groups are more likely to receive unfair assumptions as compared to majority societies.

The interview also documents various stereotypes that were directed towards Asian communities. Most Asian students were thought to be rich or talented in science and mathematics subjects. Ruby, who is an Asian, female student notes that people in the institution assumed that because of her Asian roots, she was proficient in Mathematics and Chemistry (Ruby 29). She adds that despite this assumption, she has taken a Chemistry class two times and failed both times (Ruby 29).  Kirsten, a non-white student also notes that many students say that she is rich because she is Asian. She confirms this fact by saying that her parents work hard (Kirten 15). Kirsten further comments that she works hard herself and that is why she is able to afford everything she has. From these comments, one can conclude that Kirsten’s view of attaining wealth is that one has to work diligently so as to attain prosperity. Therefore, being rich is not a birth right; it is a result of hard work and dedication.

The distribution of different genders in higher education institutions is another factor that one should consider. Traditionally, it has been thought that more male students attain education at any level while female students may not reach higher education institutions. However, the interviewees contradict this statement since there was an equal number of male and female students. This might mean that female students have started to appreciate attaining education because of their own reasons. Another factor is student dependence on their parents or guardians for financial provisions. Among the 15 students who took part in the interview, only one of them confessed to attaining their pocket money from a job they conducted apart from schooling. Abby, a white female respondent said that she has a tutoring job which she does for three hours a week.  This job provides many opportunities and privileges to her. For example, she is able to pay for her own meals (Abby 39). Another factor that was observed across all the interviewees was the enthusiasm and great regard the students had towards their experience with the whole educational context at Trinity. These students had positive comments, some stating that they were happy to meet and socialise with diverse groups in the institution.

The description of the view of the interviewees confirms and conflicts with some ideas of some authors. For instance, in her book, Stacey Lee examines 82 Asian-American students in a high performance high school. Her findings prove that Asian Americans perform extremely well in school (Lee 23). Her depiction of these students is that they work hard, have perseverance and value their education. According to Lee, this attitude ensures that the students have the same chances of attaining the American dream as compared to their white majorities (Lee 23). Lee further states that in the school context, teachers treated all Asian American students as equals. However, these Asian students divided themselves into groups according to where they came from. Therefore, there were groups of Korean students, New Wavers and other factions (Lee 25). This is a similar case as seen in the interview. Luisa, a Hispanic student confirmed that when she was a freshman, she wanted to join La Voz Latina house, which is a Hispanic club in the institution. However, he could not join the club because she felt that she was not like the rest of the Hispanic students since she was not as fluent in Spanish as they were (Luisa 10). This only proves Lee’s views that despite the normal stereotyping that minority students have to face, they also encounter seclusion within their own minority groups.

In her book, Beverly D. Tatum discusses the entire aspect of racism and how it affects children in high school and college. Tatum’s general view is that racism is a vice that has penetrated deep into the American society such that it affects the manner in which minority groups in these institutions interact with each other and with majority students. One aspect that Tatum highlights in her book is the fact that the school context has allowed isolation of students according to their backgrounds. Therefore, Asian, Indian and African American students among other factions isolate themselves in regard to sitting positions in the classroom, in the cafeteria and even in their accommodation premises (Tatum 17). This is a depiction of what one of the interviewees stated in the interview. The fact that minorities are secluded means that they have to sit alone even in places where food is taken. Kirsten, a non-white Asian student revealed that race determines daily interactions in the institution (Kirsten 18). For instance, she noticed that in the cafeteria, there was the minority side and a sport’s side. This factor often infuriates her and most of the time; she prefers to have her meals in the cave (Kirsten 18).

Conclusion

The topic of social and racial stratification in the United States is inevitable because it is rooted deep in every sector of the American nation. The education sector is one of the main places where seclusion and stratification is prominent. Despite the fact that most of the respondents in the interview responded positively in regard to racial segregation, the fact that some of them had negative views shows that this issue is widespread. Other factors discussed in the paper concern minority groups versus majority groups, education among boys and girls and social interactions among different social classes. Although the interview shows that racism and minority seclusion is not very widespread, Lee and Tatum have different views. This discovery shows that education policy makers and regulators have the task of conducting vital investigations that will provide more insight on this topic.