A framework for bridging conventional and critical perspectives on immigrant assimilation

Abstract

This review appraises debates between contemporary and more critically engaged perspectives on immigrant assimilation. We argue that these traditions share complementary concerns with whether and how group boundaries are constructed, transformed, and linked to unequal access to resources and life chances. We propose an analytic framework that systematizes these shared concerns around four questions: (1) “what” type of change is being studied; (2) “who” is changing, and relative to whom; (3) “how” this change unfolds; and (4) “when” and “where” these changes occur. By reviewing research on Black and undocumented immigrants, we illustrate points of convergence and divergence across traditions. We show how this framework supports more theoretically generative and empirically integrated research that diagnoses for whom, under what conditions, and why group boundaries enable or constrain access to resources and life chances. We conclude by considering how this framework can connect rigorous social-scientific research on assimilation to public impact.