Research Multiple & Overlapping Identities The Case of Guam Thomas Misco & Lena Lee Introduction is a lack of consciousness about race, with but rather unceasingly changes through a acceptance of the dominant culture as variety of experiences, intentions, desires, Over the last several decades, the superior. The other common stage involves and powers (Foucault, 1966). In other words, discourse of multicultural education has awareness and establishment of non-racist subjectivity is constantly in the process of emphasized the study of ethnic identity identity in order to take responsibility for reproduction and transformation. development in order to better understand social injustice. As a result, each individual’s identity diversity and gain more specific knowledge However, in most of these studies the may not be formed only through their de- about different ethnic groups and ethnic- identity development models have too often pendence on others’ perspectives. Rather, ity. Examining identity acknowledges that ignored several ethnic minority groups a group of people can shape and renew socio-cultural issues are interwoven with within the United States. As Grant (1997) itself, and their individual selves, through individual feelings, thoughts, and fears asserted, ethnic identity involves many dif- a continual process of struggle. that lead people to have certain behavior ferent characteristics such as nationality, Instead of considering ethnic iden- toward themselves as well as others. citizenship, and language. As a result, these tity as an unchangeable and permanent In particular, ethnic identity develop- significant “markers of identity” (p. 9) can be ontological foundation, in this study we ment theory (e.g., Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, related to how each individual juxtaposes view it as multilayered and continually 1979; Cross, 1991; Hardiman, 2001; Har- any given determinant of identity as well as evolving (Bauman, 2003; Foucault, 1966). diman & Jackson, 1997; Helms & Cooks, what determinants they view as significant We emphasize the dynamics of identity 1999; Ortiz & Rhoads, 2000) has identified or insignificant in a socio-cultural, histori- by examining how each educator we in- certain stages of identity development cal, geographic, and political realm, result- terviewed in Guam’s post-colonial context for both minority groups and dominant ing in mirroring identity as a strategic and understood and interpreted one’s own eth- groups. Several studies have described a positional choice (Hall, 1996). nicity, which serves as a core of traditional variety of identity models (e.g., Atkinson, In addition to the importance of self- ethnic identity study (Phinney, 1996). Morten, & Sue, 1979; Carney & Kahn, perspective on identity development in 1984; Carter, 1995; Cross, 1991; Gay, 1984; multicultural education, another critical Problems of Context: Guam Hardiman & Jackson, 1997; Helms, 1994; question about self has to do with how an Jackson, 2001; Phinney, 1990; Tatum, 1992; individual perceives and views the other. Guam is the western-most territory Terry, 1977; Vandiver, 2001) and these The identity of minority groups is not of the United States, situated in the Pa- various models consist of stages that have always a reality that can be completely cific Ocean 3,700 miles west-southwest of features in common. determined by the will of a person in a mi- Hawaii. The largest island of Micronesia, For instance, identity development for nority group. Rather, it is often determined Guam is 30 miles in length and ranges minority groups typically includes such by others. from 12 to 4 miles in width. Indigenous to stages as conformity and acceptance (the These “others” become a mirror which Guam are the Chamorro people and their stage of internalizing and valuing the ma- reflects both self and others in a way that language. jority culture as desirable and superior), can prevent understanding their true The 2000 census, which has limited resistance (the stage of rejecting and chal- identities since they often see themselves parameters for disentangling Guam’s di- lenging the majority culture), and reflection as others see them. In this manner, the verse population of 154,805, lists 75,851 and integration (the stage of redefining an question of identity in a particular context Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Island- independent sense of self and incorporat- moves from the subjective domain of the ers, 51,106 Asian, and 10,660 White per- ing both one’s culture and dominant social “self” to the objective domain of “others,” sons within Guam. Approximately 37% of values into one’s own identity). illuminating what Sartre has called, “be- Guam residents categorize themselves as Dominant group identity typically fol- ing-for-other” (1943), which refers to an Chamorro and 47% were born off the island lows a different model in which two stages individual’s tendency to be dependent on (Census, 2000). Guam residents claiming are commonly found. The beginning stage others for one’s sense of self. two or more ethnic origins or races in the Thus, subjectivity is not only based census included 13,687 or 9% of the popula- Thomas Misco and Lena Lee on others’ gazes, but is also established by tion. Those speaking only English at home are associate professors the continual process of struggle between number 52,831 (34%), while roughly 30,000 in the Department of Teacher Education ongoing power and resistance to that power speak Chamorro (19%), 30,000 speak of the School of Education, Health, & Society (Foucault, 1966). The subject is not fixed, Philippine (19%), and 24,000 (15%) speak at Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. another language. FALL 2012 23 Research Guam is an “important crossroads to other residents of Guam (Rapadas, basal programs with few books highlighting for an assortment of multinational and Balajadia, & Rubinstein, 2005, p. 169). In anything about Guam. Some educational multiethnic interests” and is a complex, addition, Chamorro are over-represented institutions made attempts towards a more creolized culture brought on by centuries in the penal system and experience higher culturally responsive education through of “intercultural mixing as the principal rates of suicide and family violence than Chamorro language classes in the 1970s, form of indigenous social and cultural ar- that of other ethnicities, as many are “un- but according to Hattori U.S. cultural he- ticulation” (Diaz, 2010, p. 17). The island able to adjust and fully benefit from the gemony is firmly entrenched and is a force is experiencing rapid social and economic modernization, globalization, and technical contrary to maintaining the indigenous changes, but over 20% of Guamanians advancements that a selected few, includ- history and culture (Hattori, 2011). live in poverty (Census, 2000; Rapadas, ing some indigenous people, are able to To address needs of a multicultural Balajadia, & Rubinstein, 2005). enjoy” (Rapadas, Balajadia, & Rubinstein, student population, teachers have posi- A history of colonial dynamics has very 2005, p. 166). All of this is similar to other tioned students as writers and illustrators much informed multiculturalism in Guam. instances of indigenous people suffering and have taken on an active role in modify- For roughly 500 hundred years without within the confluence of present and his- ing and adapting available curriculum for pause, Guam has experienced colonialism toric colonization and globalization: local needs (Foley & Petty, 1996). Moreover, of some variety. In 1521, Magellan sighted Hattori (2011) has noted the Chamorro The failure to thrive is generalized and Guam, which not only marked the begin- perpetuated even outside their native cultural values of interdependence, re- ning of long-term Spanish colonization but lands, because in U.S. communities all spect for nature, filial piety, respect for also the murder of many residents. In 1898, over the mainland, native peoples like elders, and respect for social position as the Treaty of Paris transferred Guam to Hawaiians, Chamorus, and Maoris are inafa‘maolek, or “making it good for each the United States as a territorial posses- struggling for economic and cultural other” (p. 221). sion. Guam was held by the U.S. until 1941 survival. Clearly, it is a struggle that they The “absence of this indigenous episte- when the Japanese invaded and occupied are losing. We are rapidly witnessing the mology in favor of the standard American deaths of cultures all over the world and the island. curriculum” is also found outside of educa- in this part of the world, there seems to be The United States liberated Guam little that is being done. (Rapadas, Balajadia, tion in the social, economic, and political from Japan in 1944 and by 1950 had es- & Rubinstein, 2005, p. 166) institutions and the “massive land takings tablished the Organic Act, which brought that concurred with the ‘gift’ of U.S. citizen- about home rule in Guam as an unincorpo- In short, forces of globalization, ship” (Hattori, 2011, p. 221). Most clearly rated territory of the United States, thus urbanization, popular culture, and the Americanization is evident in language providing a special form of U.S. citizenship. presence of the U.S. military have influ- use as only 22% of Guam’s residents still Within the larger teleological political enced Chamorro cultural transformation, speak the Chamorro language. trajectory of democratization, home rule especially over the past 50 years (Hattori, was a significant milestone (Diaz, 2010).