Skip to main content

Spotlight on Heterogeneity The Federal Standards for Racial and Ethnic Classification (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Conclusions
Pages 49-55

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 49...
... It is almost certainly the case that there is no standard that will satisfy all the people involved: respondents; federal data collectors and users, including statistical agencies, program agencies, and enforcement agencies; state and local data collectors and users; private companies; and researchers. Thus, the task of those who must decide on revision is to determine the most important objectives and the most feasible way of meeting them.
Read the entire page →
From page 50...
... Because of the constantly changing nature of both the U.S. population and people's perceptions of their identity, consideration should be given to procedures for regular review and updating of federal standards for racial and ethnic data.
Read the entire page →
From page 51...
... Third, it must be recognized that the directive cannot serve as a substitute for the collection of other relevant demographic information such as nativity, parental nativity, and language spoken in the home-that is increasingly important for a range of policy issues related to immigration and demographic changes in the United States. TESTING AND EVALUATION An unintended side effect of the federal standard is that it has not fostered research on alternative categorization schemes.
Read the entire page →
From page 52...
... Field testing of question wording and order is needed to assess their effects on response rates and reliability. The Census Bureau has done some research in this area, but there is a need for research on survey instruments other than the census questionnaires that are used for agency data collection (e.g., school reporting, bank reporting, employer reporting)
Read the entire page →
From page 53...
... In addition to federal agencies, local and state governments as well as data users will bear the costs of changes. As noted above, specific costs cannot be identified, but potential costs include those for printing and distribution of new forms and explanations, for training clerical and administrative staff, and for harmonizing data gathered under old and new categorizations.
Read the entire page →
From page 54...
... The arguments for this position involve the unscientific and fluid meanings of race and ethnicity and the tendency for categories to contribute to racial and ethnic distinctions in the nation's economic, social, and cultural life. But it must be recognized that the United States does have a unique history in which race and immigration from diverse sources have
Read the entire page →
From page 55...
... Those who must decide whether and how to revise Directive 15 will have to carefully consider what such a standard can and cannot do and weigh the important and often conflicting values and objectives inherent in any federal standard for racial and ethnic classification.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • ethnic classification
  • ethnic data
  • major categories
  • data collectors
  • census bureau

  • american indians
  • field testing
  • naturalization service
  • regular review
  • data gathered

  • response rates
  • multiple responses
  • logical consistency
  • dramatic difference
  • separate statistical

  • enforcement agencies
  • comparing data
  • legal action
  • policy choices
  • bureau data

  • statistical agencies
  • criticisms described
  • analysis conflicts
  • agency data
  • minimum set

  • federal reporting
  • allow multiple
  • diverse sources
  • demographic changes
  • expressed opposition


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.