An Egocentric Network Analysis of Asian American and Pacific Islander Educators' Social Support During Anti-Asian Violence

• In Event: Understanding and Supporting the Well-Being of Underrepresented Educators: Perspectives Across Identity Locations

Abstract

Objectives
The recent uptick in anti-Asian violence and discrimination (Tessler et al., 2020) raises alarming concerns regarding Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) educators’ wellbeing and turnover (Carver-Thomas et al., 2021). Therefore this mixed methods study aims to address the intersected issues of anti-Asian discrimination and violence and the shortage of a diversified teacher workforce by exploring AAPI educators’ social network structures and how they mitigate the impact of anti-Asian violence and discrimination
.
Theoretical Framework
The study is guided by the buffering effect model (Cohen, 2004; Cohen & Wills, 1985), which asserts that social connections can be a resilience factor, providing psychological and material resources needed to cope with stress. Nevertheless, a dearth of studies has examined the social support they received during the pandemic.

Methods and Data Analysis
Egocentric network data were collected using a name generator online survey among 228 AAPI educators across the U.S. in the Winter and Spring of 2022. Participants (egos) listed pseudonym initials of people (alters) with whom they receive social support after experiencing anti-Asian violence and discrimination. Python 3.7.0 was used for the network analyses. In addition, online semi-structured interviews were conducted via the Zoom platform with 21 AAPI educators. Finally, a descriptive thematic analysis was conducted to summarize the themes related to their social and professional support and how their networks impacted how they experienced anti-Asian violence.

Results
Results indicated that 53.51% of AAPI educators reported receiving social support to cope with anti-Asian violence. However, the degree of centrality refers to the number of alters tied to an ego, and results suggest that participants received limited support (Freeman, 1979, mean = 2.13, SD = 2.36). In addition, the mean density among those who received social support was 0.14 (SD = 0.25), suggesting that our participants’ networks were sparsely knit. Finally, the EI index (Newman, 2002) for racial/ethnic homophily was 0.16, meaning there was no tendency for participants to receive support from individuals of similar racial/ethnic backgrounds.
Thematic analysis of qualitative data revealed that AAPI educators reported being amongst a few staff of color, at times the only AAPI educator, and having minimal exposure to other AAPI educators in their schools. Additionally, AAPI educators reported not feeling seen in the professional learning opportunities within their districts and wanting professional development focused on the history of the AAPI diaspora. The lack of disaggregated data also represented a professional need. Data aggregating Asians as a monolith hide the struggles that some in the diasporic group experience and present a risk to the social, emotional, and academic needs of AAPI educators.
Implications
Research findings highlight the importance for school administrators to provide social support for AAPI educators when experiencing anti-Asian violence and discrimination. Moreover, the lack of tendencies of homophily illustrates the need for a diversified educator workforce and the need to strengthen the networks of AAPI educators and educators from other underrepresented and marginalized backgrounds who experience racism to promote their resilience during these challenging times.

Author

• Quennie Dong, University of California - Berkeley
  Presenting Author