Hmong Youth: What do we know about them?
Zha Blong Xiong, Ph.D.Associate Professor
Family Social Science
College of Education and Human Development
University of Minnesota
Hmong Resettlement in the United States, 1975-1994
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
1975-1976
1977-1978
1979-1980
1981-1982
1983-1984
1985-1986
1987-1988
1989-1990
1991-1992
1993-1994
Hmong families in Minnesota
During the past three decades, Hmong have made significant progresses: Public assistance dependency changed from 71% in 1990 to 34%
in 2000; Poverty rate was down from 60% in 1990 to 38% in 2000; High school completion rates increased from 37% to 47% at the
same period; Rates of homeownership changed from 0% in 1980 to 39%
nationally and 54% in Minnesota in 2000; And educational attainment with a bachelor’s degree or higher
rates jumped from 4% to 8%.
Source: Grover & Todd, 2004; Thao & Pfeifer, 2004.
Hmong families in Minnesota
Hmong are among the poorest citizens in the Twin Cities (median household income of $35,917 vs. Caucasian ($56,642) and other Asians ($51,948). Their median home value of $93,200 is the lowest compared to other racial and ethnic groups’ home value (Mind the Gap, 2005).Approximately 47 percent of the Hmong adults were not in the labor force compared to 29 percent Minnesota adults (2000 Census).Only 4 percent of the Hmong in the Twin Cities have jobs in high-paying occupations, with annual salaries ranging from $60,000 to $97,000 vs. Asian (24%) and Caucasian (20%).
The largest Hmong population is under the age of 19 years old
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
2000
Hmong
AmericanIndianAfricanAmericanVietnamese
Source: Star Tribune (2002, April 10).
48%
32% 31%
22%
Note: Youthful refers to the percentage of children between ages 5-19.
School Enrollment in 2000
0.00%1.00%2.00%3.00%4.00%5.00%6.00%7.00%8.00%9.00%
Nurs
ery
school,
pre
school:
Kin
derg
art
en:
Gra
de 1
to
gra
de 4
Gra
de 5
to
gra
de 8
:
Gra
de 9
to
gra
de 1
2:
In c
olle
ge,
underg
raduate
years
In g
raduate
or
pro
fess
ional
school
U.S. Male U.S. Female Hmong Male Hmong Femlae
Total sample size for the study
gender
173 56.9 56.9 56.9
131 43.1 43.1 100.0
304 100.0 100.0
male
female
Total
ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent
CumulativePercent
Total sample size for the study
Statistics
304 304 300 304 302
0 0 4 0 2
1.43 16.28 2.49 4.75 3.45
.496 2.575 .646 1.974 .698
1 11 1 1 1
2 40 4 6 4
Valid
Missing
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
gender age
where wereyou born(coutry)? group
If born outsidethe US, how
long have youlived in the
US?
Segmented Assimilation Theory
Diverse Paths of Adaptation
Assimilateto the
middle-class,mainstream
culture
Adapt and integrate
biculturally
Segmentedassimilate to the
underclassculture
Sources: Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Zhou & Banston, 1998.
Language usage
When you talk to your friends, what language do you most often use?
51 16.8 27.7 27.7
20 6.6 10.9 38.6
113 37.2 61.4 100.0
184 60.5 100.0
120 39.5
304 100.0
English
hmong
mixed
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative
Percent
English usage
How often do you use English when talking with your friends?
4 1.3 2.2 2.2
56 18.4 30.6 32.8
107 35.2 58.5 91.3
16 5.3 8.7 100.0
183 60.2 100.0
1 .3
120 39.5
121 39.8
304 100.0
seldom
from time to time
often
always
Total
Valid
9999
System
Total
Missing
Total
Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative
Percent
Language usage
When you talk to your parents (or guardians), what language do you most oftenuse?
7 2.3 3.8 3.8
128 42.1 69.6 73.4
47 15.5 25.5 98.9
2 .7 1.1 100.0
184 60.5 100.0
120 39.5
304 100.0
English
hmong
mixed
other (specify)
Total
Valid
SystemMissing
Total
Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative
Percent
Youth’s perception of parents’ acculturation:
To what extent have you adopted the American ways of doing things?
Scale Frequency Percentage
Note at all 13 11.5
A little 70 61.9
Much 21 18.6
Very much 9 8.0
Total 113 100
Note. Change the percentages in your handout.
Acculturation GapsAcculturation Item
Parents
(n = 94)
Youth
(n = 177)
Sig.
Speak English 2.63 (1.23) 3.39 (.58) <.05
Speak Hmong 4.76 (.67) 3.24 (.73) <.05
Adopted American Ways*
1.63 (.67) 2.58 (.61) <.00
Language fluency was assessed on a 5 Likert-like scale where 1 = not at all, 3 = enough to get by, and 5 = very well.Acculturation item was assessed on a 4 Likert-like scale where 1 = not at all, 2 = a little, 3 = much, and 4 = very much.* n = 30 for parents and 78 for youths for this item.
Parent-Adolescent Conflict
Cambodia 24.7 55.1 33.7
Hmong 30.0 66.0 46.0
Lao 32.6 42.4 50.0
Vietnamese 27.7 49.4 43.9
Chinese 34.2 37.4 21.9
Philippines 28.6 46.7 24.3
Mexico 38.6 32.2 31.2
Cuba 35.8 38.3 24.3
Variables Family Cohesion Parent-Child Conflict Familism(% High) (% High) (% High)
Source: Portes & Rumbaut (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Key Findings: Most Frequently Mentioned Issues of Parent-Adolescent Conflict by Youth
Topic of Conflict Boys (%) Girls (%) (n=102) (n=79)Conflict with Father Getting low grades 30.23 25.70 Watching television 29.20 18.63 Helping around the house 27.14 35.70 Not doing homework 26.00 14.31 Play stereo/radio loudly 25.03 17.12Conflict with Mother Helping around the house 35.33 54.43 Not coming home on time 28.40 39.24 How neat clothing looks 27.50 24.10 Not doing homework 26.73 23.14 Getting low grades 26.71 24.10
Note. (1) Fewer F-D conflicts vs. M-S conflicts. (2) Fathers’ conflicts were gender specific vs. mothers’
Key Findings: Issues of Most Intense Parent-Adolescent Conflict by Youth
Topic of Conflict Boys (%) Girls (%) (n=102) (n=79)Conflict with Father Acting like gangsters 3.73 3.11* Doing drugs 3.29 4.00* Dyeing hair 3.31 3.05 Not wanting to get a job 3.18 3.00 Not going to school 3.09 3.54Conflict with Mother Dyeing hair 3.21 2.56 Not going to school 3.16 3.71* Talking back to parents 3.15 3.39 Doing drugs 3.06 4.09* Drinking beer/liquor 2.94 3.89*
•Significance at p < .05•Scale: 1 = very calm to 5 = very angry
Note. Gender biased when looking at the intensity of conflicts.
Daily stressItem Yes No
Frequency % Frequency %
1. You had to translate for one of your parents who does notspeak English
121 28.3 168 39.3
2. Your parents talked about having serious money problems 104 24.3 186 43.5
3. You did poorly on an exam or school assignment 89 20.8 205 47.9
4. You heard people say bad things or make jokes about yourculture or race
82 19.2 206 48.1
5. Your close friends got drunk or high 78 18.2 213 49.8
6. A close family member or someone you live with got drunk orhigh
73 17.1 218 50.9
7. You had to do almost all the cooking, cleaning, or childcare inyour home because your parents had to work
72 16.8 214 50.0
8. You liked someone who didn't like you 69 16.1 219 51.2
N = 286-296
Ethnic Identity (%)
Item Stronglyagree
Somewhatagree
Stronglydisagree
Somewhatdisagree
I am happy that I am a member of thegroup I belong to.
56.4 35.9 5.5 2.3
I have a lot of pride in my ethnic groupand its accomplishments.
52.3 40.5 6.4 0.9
I feel good about my cultural or ethnicbackground.
58.6 34.5 5.9 0.9
I feel a strong attachment toward myethnic group.
47.3 43.2 8.6 0.9
N = 220.Note. Most youth still have a strong ethnic identity despite the rate of acculturation and language shift.
Self-esteem (%)
Item Agree alot
Agree alittle
Disagreea lot
Disagree alittle
I am able to do things as well as most otherpeople.
47.5 43.0 1.8 6.3
I feel that I am a person of worth, at least onan equal basis with others.
44.4 49.3 4.5 0.4
I feel I do not have much to be proud of. 35.6 24.2 10.5 29.7
At times I think I am no good at all. 28.4 20.6 13.3 37.6
N = 218
Depression (%)
Item Rarely (less than once a week)
Some of the time (1 to 2 days a week)
Occasionally (3 to 4 days a week)
Most of the time (5 to 7 days a week)
In the past week I felt sad.
58.3 29.4 7.8 4.6
I felt depressed. 60.6 20.0 11.0 6.4
N = 219
Delinquent actsProblem/Delinquent Behavior No Yes
run away from home 159 29
cut classes 107 81
taken a car 159 29
beat up somebody 121 68
gone to court 140 49
placed in jail 145 44
broke into building 165 24
attacked with weapon 174 15
used weapon or force 187 2
picked up by police 152 37
School attachmentItem Strongly
disagree/disagreeMixed Strongly
agree/agree
In general, I like school a lot. 41.8% 45.1% 11.8%
I feel very close to at least one of my teachers. 43.1% 33.9% 21.8%
I get along well with my teachers. 70.1% 22.7% 5.9%
Other students think I am a good student. 61.9% 28.9% 7.9%
My teachers think I am a good student. 64.5% 30.9% 3.3%
I often get in trouble at school for arguing, fighting or not following the rules.
11.2% 18.8% 68.8%
How often have you been in trouble for skipping or not attending school?
Never/seldom Fairly often
often
17.2% 26.3% 54.9%
Note. The percentage may not add up to 100% due to missing data. N = 304.
Results: Fathers’ Model
Affiliation Deviant Peers
School Commitment
Participation Organized Activities
Problem Behavior
Monitoring
Attachment
Conflict
School Performance
2 (95) = 111.78 (p = .12)RMSEA = .03; 90% CI = [.00 – .06] CFI = .99N = 142
- .34 ***
Mothers’ Model
Affiliation Deviant Peers
School Commitment
Participation Organized Activities
Problem Behavior
Monitoring
Attachment
Conflict
School Performance
2 (95) = 124.85 (p = .02)RMSEA = .04; 90% CI = [.01 – .06] CFI = .98N = 146
- .33 ***
Males: Summary of Stepwise Regression Analysis for Self-Reported Delinquency
VariableB SE B
Model 1 .204
School commitment -.099 .018 -.451***p<.05, **p<.01N= 206
2R
Females: Summary of Stepwise Regression Analysis for Self-Reported Delinquency
2R2R
VariableB SE B Beta change
Monitoring of mother -.087 .029 -.281** .189
Antisocial attitudes .197 .055 .327** .083
GPA -1.028 .246 -.376** .059
School commitment .077 .026 .285** .060
Peer delinquency .770 .283 .232** .049
*p<.05, **p<.01. N = 206
Sibling differences in delinquencyMeasure Delinquent
siblings:Mean (SD)
Non-delinquent siblings:Mean (SD)
Eta Squared (η2)
School Performance“How well do you think you keep up with your schoolwork?”
2.66(1.26) 3.75(0.91) .20**
Trouble for Skipping School“How often have you been in trouble for skipping or not attending school?”
2.14(1.09) 1.43(0.56) .15**
Antisocial Attitudes“When I get mad, I say nasty things.”“If someone hits me first, I let him/her have it.”
15.13(3.86) 12.39 (2.58) .15**
Organized Activities“How much time you spend with organized sports like swimming, baseball, football, soccer, etc.?”
7.59(1.90) 8.80(1.47) .12**
Parent’s Labeling“How often have your parents labeled you as a “bad” child?”
2.38(0.78) 1.90(0.82) .09*
* p<.05; ** p<.01; n = 58. Forthcoming publication in the Jounal of Psychology.
ConclusionIndividual level:
Young people are facing tremendous pressure from parents (i.e., family responsibilities, such as translation and household chores, and doing well in school).
Although they still identify themselves with the Hmong culture, a third of them feel they don’t have much to be proud of.
About one in four youth doesn’t feel very close to at least one of their teachers, and close to three in four youth reported of getting in trouble at school for arguing, fighting or not following the rules.
Family level: Significant parent-child relationships seem to be shifting from reciprocal respect and
cohesion to ambiguity and conflict. Girls tend to receive more scolding vs. boys, esp. from mothers. Paradoxically, this
seems to protect girls from many of the delinquent activities. Family dynamics, particularly lack of monitoring, serve as the most robust determining
factor in adolescent problem behaviors.Peer and Community levels:
Delinquent peers and lack of organized activities serve as the most robust mediating factors in changing the course of adolescent problem behaviors.
Implications for Practice
Adolescence is a period of life that is considered more difficult due to multiple changes (Arnett, 1999):
Biological change (e.g., puberty) and sex driveEarly maturation vs. late maturationBiological change associated with cultural expectation of courtship and marriageBiological change (i.e., acne), physical appearance, and self-esteem
Cognitive change (e.g., reasoning skills) and thinking abilityCalm, obedience to moodiness and disobedienceDemand a more matured relationship, yet with lots of guidance
Changing school setting (e.g., elementary to middle or junior high) (Eccles , Buchanan, et. al., 1991; Eccles, Midgley, et. al., 1993).
Tips For Parents
Parents want obedience, quiet, modest, self-control vs. individuality, self-expression, loud, and assertiveness from youths. Lead to daily power struggles – nagging and
rebellionParents expect diligence by getting up early in the morning, cooking for and helping parents and relatives during family events vs. weekend is supposed to be a space for relaxation, recuperation, and socialization with friends for youths. Lead to heartfelt argument and name calling (tub
nkeeg, tsis paub tab)
Tips for Professionals
Teach youths to deal with difficult parents and resist the temptation of belonging to a “cool” group (and/or acting “cool”) and be accepted by others. More than half of the youth do not feel they have much to be proud of. Youths need to get access to quality out of school time
programs and activities. The earlier the better!
Youths need to be connected to other positive youths and caring adults. Fulfill their desire to belong and be accepted. Boost their self-esteem and enhance their resistant skills.
Tips for Professionals
Cultural diversity training on Hmong culture and family life is needed for teachers, administrators, and professionals who work with Hmong youth.Teachers and professionals working with Hmong need to make efforts to connect with these young people and/or connect these young people to other caring adults.Teachers and professionals need to re-evaluate how they work with these youth (i.e., pressure at home; loneliness at school; feeling defeated).Support groups for Hmong youth and/or with other non-Hmong youth may be necessary.
Questions and Answers
Top Related