Unsettling Measurement Validity: A Critical Mixed Methods Study with Asian International Students

• In Event: Reframing Research, Identity, and Belonging in Global Higher Education for Asian International Students

Abstract

This critical mixed methods study interrogates the validity and cultural responsiveness of the Revised Racial and Ethnic Microaggressions Scale (R28REMS) in capturing the racialized experiences of Asian international students in U.S. higher education, drawing on a synthesized framework that integrates Critical Race Transformative Convergent Mixed Methods (CRTCMM; Garcia & Mayorga, 2018), researcher racial and cultural positionality (Milner, 2007), and a critical race framework centering international students’ racialization (Author, 2023). CRTCMM guides my critical examination of the assumptions in quantitative tools and helps me center equity throughout the research process. Milner’s framework grounds my reflection on positionality, while IntlCrit focuses my attention on the voices, transnational identities, and complex racialization of international students of color (ISoC) in U.S. higher education.

Although existing surveys offer structured insight into experiences of marginalization, they often fail to account for the distinct sociocultural ways international students understand race, racism, and identity. As prior research has shown (Kim, 2025), ISoC often encounter racism on U.S. campuses but may underreport these experiences, not because they are absent, but because the racial terms, categories, and assumptions embedded in survey instruments often reflect U.S.-centric worldviews that misalign with their sociocultural backgrounds and racial literacies (Author, 2020). The research questions are:
(1) What is the factor structure of the R28REMS for Asian international student respondents?
(2) How do Asian international students interpret survey items?
(3) How do Asian international students understand and make sense of the racialized language used in the instrument?

Quantitative data were collected in 2019 at a predominantly white institution (PWI) in the Midwest, with 944 usable responses from domestic and international students of color. One-on-one cognitive interviews were conducted with 25 Asian international students from China (n=10), Korea (n=8), and India (n=7). An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and cognitive interviews were conducted.

The quantitative results identified five factors that closely matched those found in studies of domestic students of color, aligning with prior research on racial microaggressions: Second-Class Citizen and Assumptions of Criminality (36.26% variance), Microinvalidations (10.36%), Assumptions of Similarity (6.62%), Assumptions of Inferiority (5.44%), and Media Microaggressions (3.96%). While psychometric structures are intact, qualitative data revealed substantial conceptual divergences. Participants often interpreted items referencing inferiority or similarity not as racial offenses but as expected outcomes of being non-native English speakers or international students. Many expressed confusion around racial terms (e.g., articulate, colorblind) and were unsure whether to respond based on nationality, immigration status, or racial identification. Additionally, Asian international students in the data are associated with the typical stereotype of Asian, model minority myths, but are not self-attributed to racial microaggressions. This disconnect is shaped by limited engagement with systemic and institutional inequality and a lack of access to educational resources that contextualize racism within broader historical and structural frameworks.

My findings underscore the urgent need to decolonize survey research by rethinking how race is conceptualized, measured, and interpreted, especially for transnational and racially minoritized students, so that instruments reflect, rather than distort, their lived realities.

Author

• HyeJin Tina Yeo, University of California - Los Angeles