Rethinking Assimilation Theory for a New Era of Immigration

TLDR

Assimilation theory has faced intense critique for decades, yet it remains the most comprehensive framework for studying immigrant incorporation. The authors contend that assimilation theory remains useful for studying contemporary U.S. immigration. They critically review Gordon’s canonical assimilation model, incorporate Shibutani and Kwan’s ethnic stratification theory, assess debates over historical versus contemporary immigration, and analyze socioeconomic and residential assimilation evidence for recent immigrant groups.

Abstract

Assimilation theory has been subject to intensive critique for decades. Yet no other framework has provided the social science community with as deep a corpus of cumulative findings concerning the incorporation of immigrants and their descendants. We argue that assimilation theory has not lost its utility for the study of contemporary immigration to the United States. In making our case, we review critically the canonical account of assimilation provided by Milton Gordon and others; we refer to Shibutani and Kwan's theory of ethnic stratification to suggest some directions to take in reformulating assimilation theory. We also examine some of the arguments frequently made to distinguish between the earlier mass immigration of Europeans and the immigration of the contemporary era and find them to be inconclusive. Finally, we sift through some of the evidence about the socioeconomic and residential assimilation of recent immigrant groups. Though the record is clearly mixed, we find evidence consistent with the view that assimilation is taking place, albeit unevenly.