Last week, I got some interesting news. Apparently Asians are not an underrepresented minority at my university. Hmmm. Also, we outnumber other minority populations such as Blacks/African-Americans and Hispanics/Latinos at the university because they are considered underrepresented. This brings into the question of what actually qualifies as an Asian that is underrepresented versus an Asian that is not underrepresented. As a Filipina, I was sure that I would be somewhat in the minority in research. But maybe that is based on more observation that statistics.
Now, what if someone that is Nepalese, Tibetan, Cambodian, or Burmese tries to apply for funding under a Diversity category. Certainly the categorization of "Asian" would still exclude them if the same representation statistics were applied. But, just how many of each of these ethnicities are actually represented among the U.S. university population. I would think that the number of other Asian populations, such as those from India, Japan, South Korea, and China (those countries that are likely greater represented), would probably skew the actual amount of ethnically diverse Asians that are in universities. So what about the rest of the minority within the minority? Should there be a breakdown of ethnic populations to ensure better representation and better chances at opportunities for diversity funding? Or would this just be another complicated addition as a result of political correctness? Does it really matter? Could one make a case for just how underrepresented their particular ethnicity is within the university? Should one?