| Both the lack of research on Khmer Americans, as well as the stereotypes that circulate in the media and academic discourse (Reyes, 2006) contribute to the near invisibility of Khmer Americans as their own Asian ethnic minority. In particular, the lives of second generation Khmer American adolescents - their language, literacy and learning experiences - remain underexplored. Conducted over a period of 12 months, this study investigated four second generation Khmer American youths' language and literacy practices, as well as the impact that shifting contexts/cultures and discourses had on their identity constructions. Using an ethnographic case study approach informed by the new literacy studies, these youths were observed both in and out of school and across three primary contexts: their public schools, home/community, and a church/church youth group for adolescents. I highlighted the various practices learned across these various discourse communities and how these communities socialized the youths to have academic (or non-academic), Khmer/Asian and Christian identities, amongst other identities. In contrast to the limiting stereotypes about Khmer Americans, which tend to suggest that an ethnic Khmer identification is detrimental to supporting a positive academic identity, the youths embraced their ethnic heritage while engaging in a wide range of literacy practices, including ones that privileged schooling. My analysis suggests that identities are influenced by how language and literacy resources are situated and claimed in settings; and access to certain resources, relationships and social networks defines the types of identity positions youth could claim or not, and the kinds of literacy practices they could `legitimately' participate in. This study contributes to research conversations that explore Khmer Americans in the United States, in- and out-of-school literacies, adolescent literacies, identities, and adolescent cultures. I strove not only to reveal the complexity of Khmer adolescents' experiences often masked by the model minority image and other racializing discourses, but also to inform our understanding of the relationships among literacies, identities and cultures of other marginalized populations as well. |
