Dr. Arnab Mukherjea serves as the inaugural Director of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Middle Leadership Academy (AMLA), a collaborative initiative of the CSU Student Success Network (Network) and the CSU Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Student Achievement Program (CSU ASAP). In this role, he partners with colleagues across the California State University system to support and develop middle leaders, fostering cross campus collaboration and advancing equitable student success. He also serves as a Professor of Public Health at California State University, East Bay, and as Faculty Director for Health Professions in the CSU Office of the Chancellor.
Dr. Mukherjea brings a strong commitment to equity, leadership development, and student achievement. The Network is honored to share his thoughtful reflections in which he discusses the impacts of AMLA across the CSU system, how middle leaders can support AANHPI students, and the health disparities across the diverse AANHPI communities.
Where do you see the AANHPI Middle Leadership Academy (AMLA) having the greatest impact across campuses?
Dr. Arnab Mukherjea: AMLA is a fantastic opportunity for teams of university leaders to substantively address unique barriers to student success that AANHPIs face. CSU ASAP provides tangible resources for each CSU to take a nuanced look at how diverse AANHPI student communities face obstacles to equitable success, particularly in their academic experience. AMLA is a space where campuses can come together to discuss how complex institutional environments and dynamic student contexts shape inequitable outcomes, while sharing promising approaches and practices that have benefited students from AANHPI and other marginalized communities. It is important to note that AANHPIs are often considered a homogenous population and portrayed as a “model minority” – both of these assumptions have been dispelled through rigorous research over time – and therefore, their inclusion in equity initiatives is inconsistent at best, and absent at worst. AMLA provides a platform for campuses to use data, not only from their own institutions but those available systemwide, to make evidence-driven decisions about which AANHPI communities experience considerable inequities, and how interventions might be designed, implemented, and evaluated to address those unique determinants of academic success.
What advice would you give to someone stepping into a leadership role focused on supporting AANHPI students?
Dr. Mukherjea: The most important advice I would give is that it is always important to disaggregate AANHPI data to be precise about which student communities are affected and the manner in which they experience inequity. When depicting AANHPI students, it is important to make sure all ethnic groups are represented when developing outreach materials and highlighting cultural gatherings, celebrations, and artifacts. The other issue I feel strongly about is making sure we do our due diligence when we use various terms to represent our student communities. When I started work in this space, we used the acronyms, API, AAPI, AANHPI, and some use APIDA. I think it’s very important that we check in with all segments of our diverse AANHPI community before we decide what “term” works best for our local context, rather than tell folks what their identity is.
Can you share more about your research on health disparities among AANHPI communities?
Dr. Mukherjea: Not surprisingly, when we disaggregate AANHPI data, we see tremendous heterogeneity with disparities that affect specific subgroups. As a proud South Asian, it is important to me that the community with which I identify is accurately represented and reflected in research. There is a general stereotype that South Asians, Asian Indians in particular, are educated and affluent. In reality, there is a very visible segment of the South Asian population that does very well, but what is hidden is the considerable proportion of my community that only has a high school degree, lives under the poverty line, doesn’t have access to health insurance, are limited English proficient, etc. This “bimodal” distribution is true for almost all AANHPI communities, although some have much more social and economic vulnerability than others.
The other area which I find fascinating is how powerful culture is as a determinant of health. We know diet is a key driver of heart disease and diabetes, and assume that if we educate communities among benefits and harms, they would quickly change their behavior. Notwithstanding the ability of our diverse AANHPI communities to access healthy food, we know that food is a key element of AANHPI identity and the manner in which we maintain traditional practices and express cultural solidarity. Therefore, when we ask people to change certain behaviors, we are essentially asking them to change their cultural fabric. Whether it be the use of tobacco – in my South Asian community, popular forms include smokeless indigenous products tied to social norms – or screening for cancer, there are strong cultural foundations, which have persisted over generations and even during migration, which are often not acknowledged or measured, making many health and medical interventions ineffective or unsustainable. The other areas where I am currently doing work is whether the individual risk-benefit approach (e.g., “do this because it’s good for”, “don’t do this because it’s bad for you”) doesn’t take into account that many, if not most, AANHPI communities are collectivist in nature. This means many in this population do things for the benefit of the group, even if it negatively impacts them personally. I am currently assessing if health messaging framed in how behaviors affect the larger group result in higher levels of modification and persistence. Of course, there are still systemic and institutional barriers that disproportionately affect diverse AANHPI communities. Although this can be daunting, it provides an avenue for students who have experienced these disparities and social factors, such as those found in the CSU, to engage in applied research as well as development of programs and policies that protect and promote health of all AANHPIs and other affected groups.
Are there key insights or approaches from your research that you believe translate well into student success strategies in higher education?
Dr. Mukherjea: Education is a key social determinant of health, and that’s why it’s important to me that AANHPI students, along with other diverse communities, have access to equitable opportunities for success. We know that CSU students often have to juggle many priorities while attending to their academic pursuits. As I noted earlier, culture intersects with so many factors that influence individual and population health. I think the same is true in higher education. Particularly for AANHPI students, cultural norms and expectations play a huge role in navigating the college experience. However, what we don’t quite acknowledge or appreciate is how strong these factors are when students decide classes, choose a major, evaluate career options, or balance individual aspirations with obligations related to supporting their family, deciding where they can or cannot live, choosing a partner or having kids, etc. Therefore, our strategies to increase likelihood of success need to be tailored to these social contexts, whether they be how we teach/advise/mentor or how we address mental health for specific AANHPI communities while they navigate these complex and conflicting pressures. I firmly believe that having faculty, staff, and administrators who reflect these lived realities would enhance the conditions for student success among diverse communities, including those who identify as AANHPI.
What lessons from your community-engaged research could help inform how campuses design more effective and culturally responsive student support services?
Dr. Mukherjea: Representation is key to community-engaged research and practice. One strategy, as noted earlier, is to have accurate and inclusive depictions of diverse AANHPIs in programming, as well as representation of those subgroups in the campus community who serve those students. It also equally important to include students, with careful attention to intentional amplification of voices from those most marginalized, in program design, execution, and assessment. One thing that AMLA emphasizes is to document all process and outcomes to determine if and how various approaches are successful. Therefore, evaluation should be built in every aspect of program planning, not as an afterthought, but in tandem with development and implementation. Campus partners also have to be humble to the dynamic social and political environment we are all experiencing, and recognize that a strategy what may have worked in the past may not operate in the same way in current times. Ultimately, the success of AANPHI equity initiatives has been dependent on partner groups working in solidarity with others, and I am proud that AMLA espouses those same principles, whether it be across ethnic subgroups or campuses collaborating in common purpose.