On Engaging Latino Students in their Education: A Resource Guide to Research and Programs

On Engaging Latino Students in their Education: A Resource Guide to Research and Programs

José R. RosarioProfessor of Education

Center for urban and Multicultural EducationSchool of Education

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis902 West New York Street

Indianapolis, Indiana 46402(317) 274-6819

(317) 274-6864 [email protected]

With technical assistance from:

Nancy Lynch, M.S.WIndependent Education Consultant

P.O. Box 532391Indianapolis, Indiana 46253

(317) 590-4493(317) 388-0451 fax

[email protected]

August 2006

1

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the conditions that contribute to educational engagement has become important in recent years to educators interested in reforming education for Latino students. These reformers believe that knowledge of these conditions will prove useful in decreasing the Latino dropout rate, increasing Latino academic achieve-ment, and increasing Latino attendance rate in post-secondary institutions. The literature on the subject is abun-dant, and much has been written on the factors that impact negatively on student achievement (Lynch, 2005; Brown et al., 2004; Carter, 2004; Ryan & Haines, 2001; & DiCerbo, 2001). Much has also been written on the conditions that counteract these infl uences and produce student success (Garcia, 2001; Lockwood & Secada, 1999; Reyes, Scribner, & Scribner, 1999; Siobhan & Ramos; Valenzuela, 1999; White House Initiative on Edu-cational Excellence for Hispanic Americans, 2000).

The purpose of this document is to provide selected samples of research and program-related materials that address the conditions that appear to work best in engaging Latinos in their education. This brief catalogue is limited to resources in the areas of youth leadership and staff development, parent education, pre-college prepa-ration, and school-community collaboration. Our aim in producing this resource guide is to direct readers to what we know about how Latino students can be mobilized to improve their chances of success.

The materials on the list were obtained through a search of existing databases and electronic resources. The search was narrowed to include entries appearing between 1991 and 2005. In the synthesis that precedes these entries, we provide an analysis of what the materials seem to be saying about what works in engaging Latino youth in education. The synthesis draws as well on the experiences and information obtained through our own El Puente Project in Indianapolis, Indiana.

2

WHAT THE RESOURCES TELL US

On the Plight of U.S. Latino Education in Broad Outline

While the fastest growing ethnic minority in America, Latinos are worst off in educational attainment. The reasons for this education gap are connected to the kind of public instruction Latinos typically receive. La-tinos often get less qualifi ed teachers, weaker curricula, and under-resourced schools. As a result, they tend to perform less well than other groups.

The most common statistic for calculating the school dropout rate in the United States is the “status dropout rate.” This rate “represents the fraction of a population in a given age bracket [16- to 19-year-olds] that has not completed high school and is not enrolled in school” (Fry, 2003, p. 2). The rate is perhaps the most accurate reading of how many 16- to 19-year olds in the nation have completed high school. When applied to Latinos educated in the U.S., this measure brings mixed news, some of it good, some of it bad.

In keeping with the trend for all ethnic groups, the Latino dropout rate fell in the 1990s, from 21.6 per-cent in 1990 to 21.0 in 2000. That is the good news. The bad news is that Latinos are still more likely to drop out than other youths. In 2000, 21 percent of 16- to 19-year-old Latinos were dropouts, as compared to 8 percent of white youth and 12 percent of African American youth. Latino dropouts also increased in absolute numbers, from 347,000 to 529,000, an increase of 52 percent. Fry (op. cit.) sums up the problem this way:

Even after removing the immigrants educated abroad from the calculations, Latino youth in U.S. schools are at a disadvantage compared to their peers in other ethnic and racial groups. The dropout rate of 15 percent for U.S.-educated 16- to 19-year-old Latino youth is higher than the comparable rate for African- Americans, 12 percent, and since the estimated dropout rate for white youth is 8 percent, Latino youth educated in the U.S. are about twice as likely to drop out of school as their white peers. (p.7)

Another piece of this mixed puzzle is that immigrant Latinos educated in the U.S. are much less likely to drop out. While the dropout rate for all immigrant Latinos is 34%, the dropout rate for immigrant Latinos educated in the U.S. is 18%. For those educated abroad, the rate is 90%. Overall, foreign-born Latinos fare worse than native-born Latinos. Compared to the 18% rate for foreign-born Latinos, for example, the rate for native-born Latinos is 14%. But among the foreign-born educated in the U.S., Latinos of Mexican descent rank highest. About 40% of immigrant 16- to 19-year-olds of Mexican descent are dropouts. This is much worse than the 13 percent dropout rate among immigrants from South America. Research on Latino dropout behavior suggests that Latinos are more likely to enter school with signifi cant disadvantages: lack of student motivation, limited-English profi ciency and cultural barriers; high poverty rates; low levels of parental education; and low support from parents, teachers, and the community (Woods, 1995; Fry, 2004; Gandara et al., 1998; Nesman et al., 2001; Reyes & Capper, 1991). In addition, as noted by Yzaguirre (2005), Latino students are:

less likely to receive early childhood development through preschool programs;more likely to be retained in grade;less likely to be placed in gifted and talented education programs and advanced placement (AP) cours-es;less likely to complete high school and participate in federal education and related programs intended to

••••

3

increase high school graduation; less likely to pursue post-secondary education at four-year colleges; andless likely to obtain a bachelor’s or advanced degree.

Woods (1995) indicates that Latinos are typically more disadvantaged by the conditions associated with the high dropout rate among students in general. For example, their employment opportunities tend to be more limited; their rates of engagement in high-risk behaviors tend to be higher; they are more likely than other citizens to draw on welfare and other social programs throughout their lives; and their higher rates in unskilled labor tend to result in lower incomes. Rumberger and Rodriguez (2002) explain the dropout problem in terms of individual, school, and institutional factors. Fashola and Slavin (201), on the other hand, point to Latino disillu-sionment with school.

In the case of Martinez (2000), the reasons for the high dropout rate among Latinos can be found in the inadequate educational conditions and discriminatory practices towards Latinos since the 1970s. She suggests that education has systematically disenfranchised and marginalized groups of students, particularly Latinos. She fi nds these undemocratic practices (i.e., segregation and tracking into ability grouping) as barriers to social mo-bility. She criticizes current basic skills curricula and the reform movement that underlies them as void of any critical analysis. As a result, schools have only helped to sustain and reproduce socio economic inequalities.

Another way schools have contributed to the reproduction of inequities in Latino education is through the subjection of Latinos to low expectations that lead to mediocrity in academic performance (Martinez, 2003). Martinez (2003) suggests that among the detrimental effects of public schooling for Latinos is the perception that Latinos are not destined for college. As a result, far too many of them do not get the appropriate advising they need to explore their options after high school. In the cases she studied, she found that none of the students she interviewed ever found a person they could consider a role model or mentor throughout their K-12. Javier, one of those students, could not recall any positive encouragement from school teachers and guidance counsel-ors. He reports that “My guidance counselor…felt very strongly that I should not attend any 4 year institution” (Martinez, 2003, p. 17). Noemi, another of the students, reported that she decided to apply to college on her own “late in [her] senior year sort of like a shot in the dark” (p. 17). A common problem in explaining Latino drop-out behavior is the tendency to view Latinos as a homog-enous ethnic group. But Lucas (2002) and Emslie (2002) observe that Latino immigrants come from diverse backgrounds. This is especially true about education. Latino immigrant students enter American schools at “dif-ferent ages with a wide variety of fl uency in English and with all varieties of educational backgrounds” (Emslie, 2002. p. 291). Emslie emphasizes that “some Latino immigrants may have a large gap in their schooling or no schooling at all. Others may lack important native language literacy skills for student of their age” (p. 291). On Engagement and Disengagement in School

An important concept to emerge from the reform literature on what works best for students who are “at-risk” of dropping out is “educational engagement.” In Reducing the Risk: Schools as Communities of Support (1989), Gary Wehlage and his colleagues argue that for students to succeed in school, they must be “socially bonded” to the institution. “A student is socially bonded,” they argue, “to the extent that he or she is attached to adults and peers, committed to the norms of the school, involved in school activities and has belief in the legiti-macy and effi cacy of the institutions” (p. 117). They also point to “educational engagement” as the sort of so-cial bonding that leads to positive academic outcomes. For Wehlage and his associates, educational engagement

••

4

is “the psychological investment required to comprehend and master knowledge and skills explicitly taught in school.” Educational engagement is a co-construction: it is the kind of involvement that “requires intention, concentration, even commitment by students, but it is not generated by students alone” (p. 177). It requires the participation and support of school personnel as well.

As a direct result of their ethnicity and culture, Latinos face a number of social factors that complicate their educational engagement as Wehlage and his associates defi ne it. These factors include social prejudice; lack of communication between students and schools; mobility; lack of educational continuity; living condi-tions that make studying diffi cult; and high levels of responsibilities for family members at home (Blue & Cook, 2004). However, Latinos’ ethnicity and culture are not the only variables that impact on their levels of engage-ment. Other factors, which apply to Latinos and non-Latinos alike, include lack of student motivation, lack of parent involvement, lack of teacher enthusiasm, negative peer interaction, unsupportive environments, personal experiences, lack of student interests, and lack of student self-image/self-esteem (Lynch, 2005; Brown et al., 2004; Carter, 2004; Ryan & Haines, 2001; Vallerand et al., 1997; DiCerbo, 2001).

Thus, the lack of engagement in education is not a problem limited to Latino students. Student disen-gagement has been increasing in general, not only for the reasons cited earlier but also because for many Latino and non-Latino students the school experience is impersonal and irrelevant to their real-world struggles. Once students disengage from learning, their chances of leaving school increase accordingly.

On Key Factors Connected to School Engagement and Disengagement

Student motivation

When talking about motivation in the classroom, it is important to recognize there are two types, and that each plays a particular role in student engagement. Intrinsic motivation emanates from within the individu-al and describes the tendency of the individual to be naturally curious, or the desire he/she feels about complet-ing a task in the absence of external incentives or rewards. It has been shown that students who are intrinsically motivated tend to make use of strategies that require a larger amount of effort and that allow them to develop more intensely. Internal motivation is longer lasting than external motivation. Teachers can support this type of motivation through praise, arousing interest, and recognizing and rewarding students’ sense of mastery, task completion, and acquisition of knowledge and skills.

External to the individual, extrinsic motivation is strictly dependent on an outside source for its activa-tion. It is a type of motivation that is said to be short-lived and not effective in the long-term because it fails to tap one’s personal inner drive to learn. Thus, educators are advised to be cautious when using extrinsic rewards to engage learning because of their tendency to decrease students’ appreciation of the knowledge gained. How-ever, the use of extrinsic motivation does have its benefi ts: it gives students real, tangible, and concrete reasons for working towards a particular goal. So external incentives, expressing clear expectations, and providing clear feedback will all promote this kind of motivation.

Parent involvement

Parent involvement in school and home is important to student engagement. Parent involvement pro-duces good role models, gives the student another source to learn, and encourages students. Parents can rein-force student engagement by taking an active interest in school; becoming involved in homework, and asking

5

questions that facilitate interest in the subject; knowing what classes the student is taking; keeping up with their student’s grades; and interacting with the teacher. Latino family involvement in their children’s education may be different from those of traditional American families; but they are nonetheless valuable and should be re-spected and considered when planning parent/family involvement programs. Although they do not participate in their children’s schooling in traditional ways, Latino parents are very involved in their children’s educational lives (Carter, 2004; Lopez, ). Educators must identify new ways to involve Latino families in their children’s education while respecting and validating their culture and values. Caring and nurturing spaces

For Ryan and Haines (2001), peers play a large role in student engagement and achievement. Their infl uence can be positive or negative, especially at the secondary level, where students are struggling with questions of identity. Students who are more confused about who they are tend to depend more on their peers’ opinion, and as peers develop closer relationships, they become more like each other. With low peer acceptance comes low academic achievement in many cases.

To counteract peer and other potentially negative infl uences, schools and classrooms must be caring and nurturing spaces that are inspiring to Latino students (Valenzuela, 1999). There is a correlation between student engagement and teacher-student relationships that are based on nurturing, caring, mutual respect, and admiration. Students need to feel safe, respected, and valued if they are to develop a sense of belonging. Social approval and acceptance is important at all ages, especially the preteen and teen years. Teachers need to make more use of social reinforcers during these years: that is, anything that contributes to the satisfaction of students’ need for approval, affection, acceptance, affi liation, esteem, and other social needs (Ryan and Haines, 2001).When a student respects and looks up to his/her teacher, that student gains motivation to work hard for the teacher (Ryan & Haines, 2001). Teachers can help improve student engagement by caring, enthusiasm for teach-ing, being fl exible, stimulating curiosity, and allowing students to express themselves creatively and freely..

According to DiCerbo (2001), offering effective education to Latino students means valuing and using what these students already know and can do—their culture, language, and experiences—in ways that provide them with tools for their own academic and social learning. Linking learning to life experiences allow stu-dents to see relevance in education, as well as provide incentive for academic engagement. Also crucial to such engagement is knowing what interests and concerns students and devising instructional plans that fold those interests and concerns into the curriculum.

Creating caring and nurturing spaces reinforces what we know about self-image and self-esteem. Self-image is how we imagine ourselves to be, and self-esteem is how we feel about that image. Many professionals working in the fi eld of human behavior and development believe that self-esteem can be taught. With high self-esteem, students have the courage to take risks in learning about the world, to develop their skills and abilities, and to make friends with peers and adults. The components or building blocks of self-esteem are:

Safety: Students need to feel that they are in a save environment, physically and psychologically. They should feel free to be themselves and have a voice within the school community. Feeling safe allows them to develop an emotional environment for exchanging information and feelings.Identity and Belonging: It is important for Latino students to know “who they are” and “who are they a part of.” They need to know other students and adults who look like themselves and experience the strengths and richness of their heritage. They need positive and specifi c information about themselves.

•

•

6

Competence and Purpose: It is important that Latino students gain skills in tasks and have goals for us-ing skills that contribute to individual and group environments.

Educators can play an important role in engaging Latinos in their education by treating them respect-fully, taking their views and opinions seriously, and appreciating their contributions. As the National Research Council (2003) proposes, educators can improve Latino education by adapting supports into their schools that include:

a challenging but individualized curriculum focused on understanding;knowledgeable, skilled, and caring teachers;a school culture centered on learning; a school community that engenders a sense of support and belonging, with opportunities to interact with academically engaged peers;strong ties linking the school with students’ families and communities;an organizational structure and services that address students’ non-academic needs; andopportunities to learn the value of schoolwork for future educational and career prospects.

On strategies that work

In this section, we consider what we know about “best practice,” well-designed programs that have been found to engage effectively Latino students in their education. Our focus is on efforts aiming to develop leader-ship capacity among students, reform schooling practices, mobilize parents, prepare students for post-secondary education, and forge school-community partnerships. Student leadership development

Student leadership programs targeting Latino youth aim to promote excellence and equity in education by mobilizing students and fomenting among them a greater sense of mastery and ownership of their own lives. Much like all youth-serving programs that seek to develop the leadership capacities of young people, Latino student leadership programs typically entail development processes that engage them in meaningful and power-ful learning (Rosario and Vargas, 2004). Such programs advocate for a construction of Latino students as pow-erful resources, especially in school settings where there are a few, if any, Latino personnel representing their voices in the culture and decision-making apparatus of the institution. For students who are making a cultural and linguistic transition to American education and way of life, development of leadership capacity amounts to the transmission of knowledge and the cultivation of sensibilities and values that can serve students as “survival skills” with which to navigate and negotiate a new cultural and political landscape. A primary focus of Latino youth leadership programs is on building community, on engaging and em-powering students to refl ect, self-discover, and build relationships with others on the basis of a shared sense of purpose and vision. To promote this goal, the programs support Latinos as they are engaged in designing and implementing community-oriented activities inside and outside the school. Students are provided with aca-demic enrichment and opportunities intended to develop their self-confi dence as they demonstrate their talents, skills, and interests. Students who are empowered to see themselves as leaders help create a healthy peer cul-ture and provide positive role models for other Latino students. They can support programs in ways that school personnel cannot do alone. Latino student leaders bring energy and ideas to a school, and their participation deepens their engagement and commitment to the setting as an institution.

•

•••••••

7

Professional development

Among the challenges facing many schools today is meeting the educational needs of the increasing population of Latino English language learners. In the words of Zetlin, MacLeod, and Michener (2005), the inability of schools “to provide appropriate education for Latino language minority students have had adverse outcomes. A 40% dropout rate and failure to achieve basic literacy skills,” they add, “have much of this popula-tion entrapped in a cycle of failure and poverty” (p. 1). To alleviate the problem, schools have turned to profes-sional development as a solution and are providing ongoing educational opportunities to teachers, counselors, and administrators.

According to Clair (1999), professional development efforts intended to address the needs of a linguisti-cally and culturally diverse population must address several important concerns. For example, teachers need to understand basic constructs of bilingualism and second language development, the nature of language profi -ciency, the role of the fi rst language and culture in learning, and the demands that mainstream education places on culturally diverse students. Clair goes on to suggest that certain conditions must exist in schools if they are to improve learning for all students:

district and school policies must support coherent and integrated professional development;district and school leadership must make student, teacher, and organizational learning priority; andthere must be suffi cient time and resources for promising professional development to take hold.

Parent education

As noted earlier, parent involvement in school and home is important to student engagement. Latino parents are very involved in their children’s educational lives, but not in ways educators typically expect. To in-volve parents in these more traditional ways, “parent education” programs are essential. An excellent example is the parent education component of the California El Puente Program (Grubb, Lara, and Valdez, 2002). This effort emphasizes two kinds of activities: (1) teach parents how to support their children’s education through processes unfamiliar to them; and (2) help parents overcome fears about having their children leave home for college and university. To help with these activities, El Puente relies on the use of peer parent groups.

Velez and Jones (1997) work on the effects of parent involvement on academic achievement shows that Latino parents do have a powerful effect on student outcomes. Based on their fi ndings, they recommend that school programs should help parents establish and enforce rules for “appropriate” conduct inside and outside home; maintain regular verbal interaction with their children around school issues, personal behaviors, and plans for the future; participate in recreational activities with their children, conveying warmth or emotional nurturing; and establish and maintain contacts with schools. Schools can also assist Latino parents by educating them on what their rights are regarding their child’s education (Improving Your Child’s Education: A guide for Latino Parents, 2004):

Pre-college preparation

Post-secondary education has become increasingly important to economic self-effi ciency in today’s economy. Many jobs now require some form of post-secondary education and training, which has a signifi cant impact on earnings. A four-year degree makes a 53% difference for high school graduates and a 272% differ-

•••

8

ence for individuals with no high school diploma. A two-year degree adds 34% for a high school graduate and 79% for high school dropouts (Alssid, Gruber, and Mazzeo, 2000).

Yet, students of low-income and fi rst-generation-college backgrounds face multiple outcomes in pre-paring for college: lack of knowledge of the campus environment, its academic expectations, and bureaucratic operations; lack of adequate academic preparation; and lack of family support. First generation-college students often encounter as well a cultural confl ict between home and college community (Tym et al., 2004). According to Alssid, Gruber, and Mazzeo (2000), 53% of Latino graduates in 1992 were academically qualifi ed for college compared to 68% of whites; and 53% of students from families with incomes of less that $25, 000 were quali-fi ed for college compared to 86% of students from families making more than $75, 000 (p. 1).

Thus, programs aiming to increase the college-going rate of Latinos and other disadvantaged programs must include college preparation as part of their services. To be effective, such programs must include:

college admissions counseling;career counseling;fi nancial aid assistance;college application forms assistance;selection of college preparation courses assistance;college/University campus visits;college entrance exam assistance;parent workshops; and career exploration workshops

Schools tend to see college preparation as important for high-achieving students. But research suggests that at-risk students can benefi t as well from such efforts. As Alssid, Gruber, and Mazzeo point out, “programs in Washington State, Oregon, Massachusetts, and Kansas City appear to show that post-secondary bridge pro-grams targeted to at-risk students and dropouts can encourage re-enrollment, improve educational outcomes, and continuing college attendance” (p. 3).

School-community partnerships

Although not typically associated with student engagement and academic achievement, there is some evidence to suggest that school-community partnerships are potentially useful in this regard. These types of partnerships typically take the form of after-school, youth-serving initiatives designed to provide academic and non-academic support services. Two exemplary programs highlighted by the National Research Council (2003) as having made a difference on student outcomes are:

El Puente Academy for Peace and Justice. Established in 1993 by the El Puente community organiza-tion with support from New York City’s New Vision’s initiative, this community-based partnership is an after-school program that teaches students basic skills through projects. The program gives students opportunities to express their own values and concerns and to build leadership skills by assessing com-munity needs.Project GRAD-USA (Graduation Really Achieves Dreams). This program was developed at Jeff Davis High School in Houston to retain students in school and prepare them for college.

•••••••••

•

•

9

The Council mentions as well partnerships organized around service learning options. These programs place students in community-serving organizations in ways that are directly connected to the school’s curriculum. What makes them and other forms of partnerships effective is the features they share: they are youth-centered; strengths-based, pro-social, and developmental; responsive to specifi c youth and neighborhoods; and replete with opportunities to learn from adults in and out of school.

10

SUMMARY

Latino engagement in education cannot proceed independent of family and home. As Velez and Jones (1997) suggest:

Schools need to establish closer links to Latino parents, acknowledging the strong commitment Latino parents have to their children’s academic achievement. These parent/school ties have to be developed with a sensitivity to the parenting styles prevalent in Latino homes. Schools and parents need to work together to over-come the language and cultural barriers that stand in the way of their partnership for promoting students’ academic and social achievement. (p. 12)

In addition, it is important to recognize, as Woods (1995) points out, that there is no one magical, quick fi x solution to the problem of student engagement. The issue is complex and requires a complex array of re-sponses. The approach to student engagement and disengagement requires different kinds of programs that re-spond to different circumstances and needs. To adjust to and thrive in mainstream America successfully, Latino students typically must cross multiple cultural boundaries simultaneously: the loyalties their own Latino culture demands of them; the mainstream, middle-class culture looking to assimilate them; the adult culture that aims to govern them; the peer culture that struggles to shape them; and the school culture they are required to master.

Thus, if we are to be effective in engaging Latinos in their education, there must be at a minimum con-tinuous monitoring of practice to ensure equity and access in education. This means requiring that all school programs conform to what we know about effective practice for Latino students:

teaching methods that are appropriately challenging and draw on students’ interests, culture, and experi-ences;adapting instructional strategies to individual needs and providing ongoing professional development;deploying community resources to enrich the school curriculum with real-world experiences and en-hance the support that schools provide with additional services;mobilize organizations and community leaders in retaining students in school and developing basic competencies of targeted students;involve and educate parents;creating a school climate where Latino students are respected, nurtured, and are made to feel comfort-able and attached to the institution;address non-academic needs and out-of-school problems as feasible and appropriate as possible through after-school programs and community-based partnerships;have at least one adult in the school setting assume responsibility for mentoring each student in need of program services;design intervention components that locate students in supportive peer groups to reinforce achieve-ment-oriented behavior;provide access to college preparatory curricula to increase Latino post-secondary attendance rates; and be sensitive to the particular circumstances of Latino students and families and create “safe” places for them to interact with the school.

•••••••••••

11

SELECTED SAMPLE OF BOOKS, ARTICLES, AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS

Alssid, J. L., Gruber, D., & Mazzeo, C. (2000). Opportunities for Expanding College Bridge Programs for Out of School Youth. Brooklyn, NY & San Francisco, CA: Workforce Strategy Center.

Describes opportunities for expanding post-secondary bridge programs for at-risk and out-of school youth and offers information on potential funding.

Blue, D., & Cook, J. E. (2004). High School Dropouts: Can We Reverse the Stagnation in School Graduation? Study of High School Restructuring. Issue Brief, Vol. 1, No. 2. Austin, TX: University of Texas-Austin.

Describes factors affecting high school dropouts. These include family income; social and emotional factors; socioeconomic status; race and ethnicity; grade retention; and institutional infl uences.

Brown, M. A., Blanca Orellana, M. A., & Morrison, G. M. (2004). Motivation and Academic Performance: Implications and Strategies to Increase Students Resilience Among Latino Youth. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California Santa Barbara. [California Association of School Pyschologists (CASP) Presentation]

Reports on a presentation by CASP demonstrating how student motivation affects academic perfor-mance and what schools can do to help increase student motivation.

Cahnmann, M. (2003). To Correct Or Not To Correct Bilingual Students’ Errors Is a Question of Continua-Ing Reimagination In Continua of Biliteracy: An Ecological Framework for Educational Policy, Research and Practice in Multilingual Settings. Cleveland, OH: Multilingual Matters Ltd, 187-204.

Examines the correction and assessment in biliteracy classrooms. Correction and assessment sheds light on larger issues of language, literacy and power in the classroom and local community. Argues that teachers need to fi nd a middle ground between accepting marketplace/standard and vernacular language norms in achieving standard literacy.

Calderon, Margarita (2001). Curricula and Methodologies Used to Teach Spanish-Speaking Limited English Profi cient Students to Read English. In Effective Programs for Latino Students. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum As-sociates, 251-305.

Provides descriptions of curricula and methodologies used to teach Spanish LEP students to read Eng-lish. Recommends the need for both teacher and staff development considering that the process to learn to read English is as complex for the student as it is for the teacher and the school system.

Carter, S. (2004). The Impact of Parent/Family Involvement on Student Outcomes. An Annotated Bibliography of Research from the Past Decade. Eugene, OR: Consortium for Appropriate Resolution in Special Education (CADRE).

As title suggests, an annotated bibliography of existing literature on the impact of parent and family involvement on student outcomes.

Ceja, A. O., & Ocasio, M. (1999). Indianapolis Latino Community: Action, Presence and Leadership. India-napolis, IN: National Urban/Rural Fellows.

12

Provides information to the Indianapolis community about the Latino population and its community leaders.

Clair, N. & Adger, C. T. (1999). Professional Development for Teachers in Culturally Diverse Schools. ERIC Digest.

Reports on the importance of professional development among teachers who work in linguistically and culturally diverse schools.

Cooper, C. R. (2002). Bridging Multiple Worlds: How African American and Latino Youth in Academic Out-reach Programs Navigate Math Pathways to College. Applied Developmental Science, 6(2), 73-87.

Explores the predictability of pathways to college based on the experiences of Latino youth and their participation in outreach programs. Validates the signifi cant role of outreach programs.

DiCerbo, P. A. (2001). Why Migrant Education Matters. Issue & Brief No. 8. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Focuses on the importance of providing effective education for migrant students by valuing and drawing on what the students already know and can do: that is, their culture, language, and experiences.

Emslie, Julia R. (2002). Transforming High Schools to Meet the Needs of Latinos. In Educating Latino Stu-dents: A Guide to Successful Practice. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 291-302.

Discusses practices and methods for high schools in order to meet the needs of Latino students, includ-ing those learning English. Describes going beyond the curriculum, gaining school and personal com-mitment, and involving community and parents.

Fashola, O. S. & Slavin, R. E. (2001). Effective Drop Out Prevention and College Attendance Programs for Latino Students. In Effective Programs for Latino Students. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates, 67-100.

Identifi es programs designed to retain students, increase college attendance, and improve school per-formance. Identifi es four common traits found in these programs: personalization of service, exposing students to an attainable future, targeting academic assistance, and recognizing status and success.

Fry, R. (2004). School Enrollment of Recently Arrived Immigrant Youth: A Refl ection of Educational Progress Before Migration. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center.

A presentation providing a detailed analysis of foreign born youths’ enrollment in high schools and how they are more likely to be high school dropouts or non-enrolled than earlier arrivals.

Gandara, P., Larson, K., Rumberger, R, & Mehan, H. (1998). Capturing Latino Students in the Academic Pipe-line. California Policy Seminar Briefs Series, Volume 10, No. 3. Berkeley, CA: Chicago/Latino Policy Project.

Documents three school-based programs aimed at improving the rate of high school completion and col-lege attendance among Latino students.

13

Gaitan, C. D. (2004). Involving Latino Families in Schools: Raising Student Achievement through Home-School Partnerships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Advocates for the involvement of parents in schools. Provides recommendations on how schools can involve parents and create home-school partnerships. Emphasizes the signifi cance of confi dence and communication as essential elements in home-school partnerships.

Garcia, E. E. (2001). Hispanic Education in the United States: Raices y Alas. New York: Rowman & Littlefi eld.

Describes what works in creating better educational opportunities for latino students. Book also shows how and why educational reforms need to build on the native language and cultural strengths of minority youth. Evidence is enriched by narrative accounts of author’s life.

Grubb, W. N., Lara, C. M., & Valdez, S. (2002). Counselor, Coordinator, Monitor, Mom: The Roles of Counsel-ors in the Puente Program. Educational Policy, Vol. 16, No. 4, 547-571.

Examines the roles of counselors in the California Puente program. It reports fi ndings on how the Puente counselors have enhanced the progress of Latino students and recommends how necessary improve-ments can continue student success.

Huerta-Macias, A. (2002). Learning for Latinos: The Sociocultural Perspective. In Educating Latino Students: A Guide to Successful Practice. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Describes applications of sociocultural realities of Latinos to the classroom, including family and com-munity; advocates for the teaching and learning process to move beyond the frameworks established by mainstream society to assure academic achievement.

Kelly, T. A.; Slavin, R. E., & Calderon, M. (2001). Effective Programs for Latino Students. Bilingual Re-search Journal. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reviews instructional factors and programs that contribute to Latino student achievement.

Kenny, M. E.; Blustein, D. L.; Chaves, A.; Grossman, J. M. & Gallagher, L. A. (2003). The Role of Perceived Barriers and Relational Support in the Educational and Vocational Lives of Urban High School Students. Jour-nal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2, 142-155.

Reports of a study analyzing how the barriers students perceive and the support they receive function to affect educational achievement of students in city high schools.

Lockwood, A., and Secada, W. (1999). Transforming Education for Hispanic Youth. Washington, D.C.: The Center for the Study of Language and Education, The George Washington University.

Traces the factors that account for the high dropout rate among Latinos, reviews programs that work to reduce the high dropout rate, and provides policy and programmatic recommendations for trans-forming education for Latino youth.

14

Lucas, N. J. (2002). Aspects of Successful Programs for Latino Immigrants/Recent Arrivals at the Secondary Level. In Educating Latino Students: A Guide to Successful Practice. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Provides new insights to develop better and infl uence the quality of programs designed to meet the edu-cational needs of Latino youth without formal schooling backgrounds; advocates for schools to identify and build upon Latino students strengths and skills, provide possibilities for multiple forms of success, and extend opportunities to the family and the total school community for involvement in the learning process.

Lynch, N. (2005). Student Motivation. Indianapolis, IN: The El Puente Project.

Report on student motivation describes the types of motivation, the factors that affect student motiva-tion, and how student leadership can make a difference on student motivation.

Martinez, C. (2000). Rethinking Literacy and Curriculum Reform for Chicana/Chicano students, In Chartering New Terrains of Chicana/Chicano Latina/Latina Education. New Jersey: Hampton Press, 193-212.

Discusses value of incorporating a holistic approach to literacy learning as articulated by critical educa-tional theorists and researchers and the practical philosophy of whole language. Advocates for the devel-opment of a critical approach to literacy along with corresponding classroom practices as an important starting point for the empowerment of Latino students.

Martinez, M. D. (2003). Missing In Action: Reconstructing Hope and Possibility Among Latino Students Placed At Risk. Journal of Latinos and Education, 2(1), 13-21.

Reports on interviews of four Latino students about their high school experience and the vital role that a pre-college program played in their overcoming obstacles, graduating from high school, and preparing for college. Interviews point to the need for institutions to provide adequate access and support services.

Moreno, R. P. & Valencia, R. R. (2002). Chicano Families and Schools: Myths, Knowledge and Future Direc-tions for Understanding. In Chicano School Failure and Success: Past, Present and Future. New York: Rout-ledge Falmer, 227-249.

Deconstructs the myth that Latino parents do no care about their children’s education and argues that they do. Provides insight on ways teachers and schools can get Latino parents involved by discussing the factors that might prevent Latino parents from getting involved with schools.

National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students’ Motivation to Learn. Committee on Increasing High School Students’ Engagement and Motivation to Learn. Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

A committee of fi fteen education scholars and researchers from the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine lays out the key to successful student engagement in high school, whether urban, suburban, or rural.

15

Nesman, T. M., Barobs-Gahr, B., & Medrano, L. (2001). They Are Our Kids: Signifi cant Findings from a 1998 Latino Dropout Study. Paper presented at the National Migrant Education Conference, Orlando, FL.

Presents data on dropout causes among Latino middle and high school students. Factors contributing to dropout rates included lack of student motivation; negative peer infl uence; low parent, teacher, and com-munity support; responsibilities outside the school; language and cultural barriers; and infl exible school policies.

Pearl, A. (2002). The Big Picture: Systemic and Institutional Factors in Chicano School Failure and Success. In Chicano School Failure and Success: Past, Present and Future. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Identifi es systemic and institutional factors that contribute to Latino failure in school and provides a model to facilitate Latino student success.

Reyes, P., & Capper, C. A. (1991). Urban Principals: A Critical Perspective on the Context of Minority Student Dropouts. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 4, 530-557.

Examines views of urban school principals on student dropouts. Three issues are addressed: how princi-pals defi ne the problem of student dropout; their current practices and proposed solutions to address the problem; and how the perceived context of the problem informs these practices and solutions.

Rosario, J. R., & Vargas, F. (2005). Making Something of Themselves: Latino Soul Making in an Urban Setting. Indianapolis, IN: Center for Urban and Multicultural Education.

Provides brief history of the El Puente Project in Indianapolis, Indiana, and describes the struggles of immigrant Latino high school youth with what to make of themselves in the world they live.

Rumberger, R. W. & Rodriguez, G. M. (2002). Chicano Dropouts: An Update of Research and Policy Issues. In Chicano School Failure and Success: Past, Present and Future. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Examines the current state of knowledge and research about Chicano dropouts by bringing together several concepts and theoretical lenses that explores the issue in critical ways. Reviews programs and policies enacted to address the issue of Chicano dropouts in secondary schools. Argues for the need to explore and uncover the process that makes leaving school a logical alternative to graduating from high school and attending college. Addresses the problem of Chicano drop outs through a programmatic, systemic, and policy approach.

Santiago, D. A., & Brown, S. E. (2004). What Works for Latino Students. A Presentation at Higher Expectation: Increasing Opportunity and Achievement for Hispanic Students Conference, Washington D.C.

A comprehensive directory of several programs that work with Latino students in increasing their aca-demic achievement and opportunities. Each profi le includes the program’s mission, services, and indica-tors of effectiveness.

The Education Trust. (2004). Improving Your Child’s Education: A Guide for Latino Parents. (2004). Washing-

16

ton, D.C.: The Education Trust. www.edtrust.org

As the title suggests, a guide intended for Latino parents on how to help improve their children’s educa-tion.

Tym, C., McMillion, R., Barone, S., & Webster, J. (2004). First-Generation College Students: A Literature Re-view. Austin, TX: Research and Analytical Services.

Reviews literature on fi rst-generation college students and provides information on access issues, char-acteristics of fi rst-generation students, retention problems, and pre-college and college intervention efforts.

U.S. Department of Education. (1999). State of the Hispanic Community. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Provides a statistical portrait of national dropout rates for Latino and non-Latino youth.

U.S. Department of Education. (2000). White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Ameri-cans. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Offi ce.

Reports on White House initiative designed to promote excellence in education for Latinos and describes what can be done do to close the achievement gap among Latinos.

Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive Schooling: U.S.-Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring. New York: SUNY Press.

Vallerand, R. L., & Fortiez, M. S. (1997). Self-Determination and Persistence in a Real-Life Setting: Toward a Motivational Model of High School Dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72, No. 5, 1161-1176.

Examines the effects that an intrinsic and extrinsic motivational model has on high school dropout and provides a better understanding drop out behavior in high school.

Velez, W., & Jones, T. G. (1997). Effects of Parental Involvement on the Academic Achievement of Latino Children. Research & Opinion, Vol. 11, No. 1.

Addresses the relationship between educational attainment and parental involvement among Latino families.

Wehlage, G. (1989). Reducing the Risk: Schools as Communities of Support. London: The Falmer Press.

Drawing on bonding theory, this work reports on case studies of exemplary programs in the nation designed to address the needs of at-risk students. It argues for designing programs that build community building and nurture and support academic engagement.

Woods, E. G. (1995). Reducing the Dropout Rate. School Improvement Research Series (SIRS). Washington,

17

D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Offi ce of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI).

Examines the need to reduce student dropout rates and provides information on successful existing pro-grams and its elements as a way to improve high dropout rates.

Yzaguire, R. (2005). Educational Status of Latino Children. National Council of La Raza: Viewpoints. www.nclr.org/content/viewpoints/detail/1310

Reports on an analysis of the U.S. system of education and its impact on Latino children.

Zetlin, A. G., Macleod, E., & Michener, D. (2005). Professional Development of Teachers of Language Minor-ity Students through University-School Partnerships. LSS Spotlight on Student Success Series, No. 300. www.temple.edu/LSS/htmlpublications/spotlights/300/spot300.htm

This document reports on how professional development of teachers of language minority students can be realized through university-school partnerships.

18

SELECTED SAMPLE OF ADDITIONAL ONLINE RESOURCES

Collegiate Leadership Development Program (CLDP). United States Hispanic Leadership Institute. Chicago, IL. www.ushli.org

College Preparatory Kit for High School Students. Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute, Inc. Washington, DC. www.chciyouth.org

Destination University: A Guide to College for Students and Their Families. Hispanic Scholarship Fund. San Francisco, CA. www.hsf.net

Gambone, M. A., & Connell, J.P. (2004). The Community Action Framework for Youth Development. The Prevention Researcher, V. 11(2). www.TPRonline.org http://www.tpronline.org/articles.cfm?articleID=236

Hispanic Education in California. (2003). National Council of La Raza: Census Information Center. www.nclr.org

Kornhaber, M. L. (2004). Appropriate and Inappropriate Forms of Testing, Assessment, and Accountability. Educational Policy, Vol. 18, No. 1, 45-70.

Latino Achievement in America. (2003). The Education Trust. Washington, DC. www.edtrust.org

Rivera, L. (2002). Latinos in Massachusetts: Education – A Review of the Literature on Bilingual Education. The Mauricio Gaston Institute for Latino Community Development and Public Policy. www.gaston.umb.edu/factsheethtml/biling.html

Vallejo, A. (2005). Community Outreach with ENLACE at East Bay High School. www.wkkf.org/ENLACE

Walker, J., & Dunham, T. (2005). Understanding Youth Development Work. University of Minnesota: Exten-sion Services.www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/youthdevelopment/DA6699.html

Waxman, H. C.; Huang, S. L., & Padron, Y. (1998). Motivation and Learning Environment Differences Between Resilient and Nonresilient Latino Middle School Students. Laboratory for Student Success (LSS): Spotlight on Student Success, No. 311.http://www.temple.edu/LSS/lss_spotlight300series.htm

19

SELECTED SAMPLE OF EXEMPLARY PROGRAMS

The programs mentioned below support the needs of students by creating partnerships with public schools to implement its programs. They have been found to be successful by reducing dropout rates, increas-ing school completion, which in turn, is a result of increased student engagement (Woods, 1995).

1. The Community Action Framework for Youth Development (Woods, 1995) Purpose(s):

Target “at risk” youth and address fi ve questions:

What are our basic long-term goals for youth?

What are the critical developmental milestones or markers that tell us young people are on their

way to getting there?

What do young people need to achieve their developmental milestones?

What must change in key community settings to provide enough of these supports and opportuni-

ties to all youth that need them?

How do we create the conditions and capacity in communities to make these changes possible

and probable?

Component(s):Integrate basic knowledge about youth development and the community conditions that affect it.

Contact: www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c017.html

2. Achievement for Latinos through Academic Success (ALAS) (Gandara, Larson, Rumberger, & Me-han, 1998) Purpose(s):

Address needs of Latino students who manifest the least motivation, the poorest academic skills, and the greatest need for teacher supervision.Emphasize psychological interventions as much as academic and cultural interventions.Address not only students’ individual characteristics but also characteristics of the environments in which students live and function.Target middle-school level students, a critical junction for school reform and dropout prevention efforts.

Component(s):Adolescent: focuses on social problem-solving training and counseling. School: includes frequent teacher feedback to students and parents as well as attendance monitoring. Family: includes use of community resources to train parents in school participation as well as in guid-ing and monitoring the adolescents. Community: focuses on fostering collaboration among community agencies providing youth and family services, as well as on enhancing their skills and methods for serving youths and families.

Contact: www.ucop.edu/cprc/pipeline.html

•

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

•

••••••••

20

3. Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) (Gandara, Larson, Rumberger, & Mehan, 1998) Purpose(s):

Designed to help high school students with high academic potential prepare for entrance in colleges and universities.

Component(s):Provides an “untracking” program that gives low-achieving students (mainly low-income and minority students) an opportunity to be placed in the same college prep academic programs as high-achieving students.

Contact: www.avidonline.org/

4. The High School Puente Project (California) (Gandara, Larson, Rumberger, & Mehan, 1998) Purpose(s):

Combine innovative teaching and counseling methods with community involvement to provide a fo-cused, supportive and culturally sensitive learning environment for student success.

Component(s):Writing and Literature instruction in a 2 year English class (9th & 10th grades).Intensive college preparatory counseling.An assigned mentor who introduces the students to opportunities and roles not experienced before.

Contact: www.puente.net

5. The Adopt-A-Student Program (Woods, 1995)Purpose(s):

Provide a career-oriented support system to low-achieving high school juniors and seniors by paring the students with business volunteers that serve as mentors.

Component(s): Identify future employment.Identify occupational interests.Steps toward potential jobs

Contact: www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c017.html; http://www.atlanta.k12.ga.us/parents_students/curriculum_ar-eas/international_programs/index.html

6. Project Coffee (Woods, 1995) Purpose(s):

Target students considered “high-risk” for potentially dropping out of school and provide retention services.

Component(s):Comprehensive vocational instruction.Integration of academics and occupational training, counseling, job training and work experience.A school-business and industry partnership.


7. The Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program (Woods, 1995)Purpose(s):

Target middle school children who are limited- English-profi cient and at risk of leaving school.Component(s):

Tutoring.

•

•

•

•••

•

•••

•

•••

••

21

Parent/teacher involvement in goal setting, decision-making, monitoring student progress, and evaluat-ing outcomes.


8. Upward Bound Program (Woods, 1995) Purpose(s):

Provide academic assistance to low income, disadvantaged, and underachieving students who show potential for completing college.

Component(s):Remedial instruction.Immersion in new curricula.Tutoring.Cultural enrichment activities. Counseling.


9. Engaging Latino Communities for Education (ENLACE) Purpose(s):

Strengthen educational pipeline and increase opportunities for Hispanic students to graduate from high school and enroll at a higher institution.Enable Hispanic students to become role models, mentors, and community leaders for the younger Hispanic generation.

Component(s):Engages schools with college prep programs.Encourages parent involvement by linking them with community resources.

Contact: www.wkkf.org/ENLACE

10. IN REACH, Inc. (community-based, educational non-profi t organization) Purpose(s):

Engage young people, their families, educators, and communities in the pursuit of academic excellence. Component(s):

After School Enrichment Program: offered to elementary students to improve literacy and math skills.Girls Are Great: offered to middle school adolescent girls to improve academic skills and increase edu-cational and career opportunities.Include Me Community Services Youth Leadership Program: engages high school students in commu-nity service learning, civic engagement, and leadership development activities.

Contact: www.inreach.org

11. The Blue Ribbon Youth Leadership Institute (YLI) Purpose(s):

Serve low-income and minority high school students.Expand students’ notion of community.Create opportunities for recognition.Develop feelings of empowerment.

Component(s):Service learning for students at-risk for academic failure in leadership roles and service-learning activi-

•

•

•••••

••

••

••••

•••••

22

ties.Peer and adult support;Venues for affi liation with new groups of service-minded individuals.

Contact: www.chccs.k12.nc.us/brma/ylihighschool.asp

12. El Puente Project (Indianapolis, IN)Purpose(s):

Encourage immigrant and non-immigrant Latino high school youth to fi nish high school and prepare for a post-secondary education through youth mobilization and empowerment

Component(s):Academic support;Parent involvement.Student mobilization and leadership development.Cross-cultural awareness.

Contact:www.elpuenteproject.com

••

•

•••••

23

We enrich, support, and advocate for the education of Latino youth.

El Puente PublicationsCopyright © 2006 by El Puente Project. All rights reserved.

Permission to download and make copies of this publication is granted for personal and educational uses only.

A Partnership Project of theCenter for Urban and Multicultural Education (CUME)School of EducationIndiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)902 W. New York StreetIndianapolis, IN 46202

José R. Rosario, Ph.D.Professor of Education andEl Puente Project Director