26.3605, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: Lukes (2015)

Wed Aug 12 17:37:27 UTC 2015

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-3605. Wed Aug 12 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.3605, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: Lukes (2015)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
              http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:36:32
From: Laura Dubcovsky [ledubcovsky at ucdavis.edu]
Subject: Latino Immigrant Youth and Interrupted Schooling

Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36048277

Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/26/26-1010.html

AUTHOR: Marguerite  Lukes
TITLE: Latino Immigrant Youth and Interrupted Schooling
SUBTITLE: Dropouts, Dreamers and Alternative Pathways to College
SERIES TITLE: Bilingual Education and Bilingualism
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2015

REVIEWER: Laura Dubcovsky, University of California, Davis

Review's Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

“Latino immigrant youth and interrupted schooling. Dropouts, dreamers and alternative
pathways to college” by is a short and direct book that examines the current status of a specific subset of the immigrant population: those Latino young adults between 16-24 year-old who arrived to the USA without having completed high school. In the Introduction (Chapter 1) Marguerite Lukes explains that her book is driven to fill a gap between the existent research on general immigration and the most specific population of “school leavers.” The author intends to use both quantitative and qualitative methodologies to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the complex issue of “dropping out.” In the following chapters she presents statistical information combined with in-depth individual, social, cultural, and economic factors that add layers of complexity and bring a more accurate picture of the current educational gap. The researcher concludes that a closer examination of these factors will help (re)design programs and revise policies for adult education of a consider
 able number (34%) of young adults foreign- born with interrupted schooling.

In Chapter 2 Lukes aims at “Understanding dropouts: Math and history.” First, the
author traces some changes in the use of the term “dropouts” along the years. For example, she
mentions that during the post-war era young people who left school to enter the workforce were
not perceived as part of a “crisis,” since “neither the concept of a high school dropout nor the
term itself even existed” (qtd in Dorn 21). In contrast, and once high schools were created and
imposed as the social model for mobility and success, students who failed to access them were
perceived negatively, because they did not receive the academic and social benefits provided by
the educational institution. Second, Lukes patiently walks the reader step-by-step through formulas and equations, including  complicated categories of “dropout events,” “dropout rates,” and “completion rates” converted into mathematical procedures. Finally, the author demonstrates that even stricter numerical analyses have limitations, as they alone are insufficient to explain the complexity of the situation of dropping-out. As the researcher claims, numbers can show, but also hide, be vague, or partially inform, for example, about who is being counted as “school leavers,” “discharged,” “pushouts,” “shutouts,” and “holdouts.” Far from ignoring the statistics, the author claims that finer and systematic analysis will bring a deeper understanding of dropouts and graduation rates, tracking factors that determine students to leave schools, 

In Chapter 3, “Pre-migration educational ‘choices’: Interrupted education in context,”
Lukes looks for factors that impact the incomplete education of these young adults before they
arrive in the US. She considers historical and political events within and between the US and
countries of Latin America and the Caribbean that had great influence  on the decisions to emigrate to the north. In her small-scale study the author finds similar  factors that influence literacy and education, namely income level, years of school experience, and parents’ level of education, to those found in larger and empirical studies. Moreover, the scholar shows three main “Reasons given by study participants for interrupting school in country of origin” (Figure 3.4, p. 65), and frames them within socio-cultural context in the following distribution: “family could not afford it” (47.3%), “emigrated to the US” (45.7%), and “pregnancy” (6.9%).

Lukes moves on to factors that influence the incomplete education of the young adults
once they arrive at the US. In Chapter 4, “Immigrant youth entering the US,” the author
compares employment rates and high school diploma attainment. Table 4.2 (p. 75),
“Comparison of US-born and foreign-born 16-to-24- year- old- Latino workers in 2011,” shows
similar employed percentage between US-born (64%) and foreign -born (70%) , but strikingly
different attainment of high school diploma ratios between US-born (37.1% ) and foreign-born
(61.6%). Lukes also shows that the “Employment sector of immigrants in this study” (Table 4.3,
p. 76) relates foreign-born to low- skilled and low-waged jobs, such as food services, health
services, janitorial, retail and construction. Finally, Lukes confirms once more the need for
combined quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis to gain more comprehensive
understanding of post-migrant factors. She uses a typical immigration category - “age at arrival”
– to illustrate that it cannot be informed by statistical analysis only, as it requires further
exploration on the conditions of arrival. For example, the researcher wonders whether young
immigrants entered the country alone or accompanied by relatives of friends, or if they carried
papers or were undocumented.

Above all Chapters 3 and 4 show that the study participants share strong beliefs in
education, in spite of uneven and incomplete educational trajectories. As expressed in surveys
and interviews, they want to stay in this country and study “to become somebody,” “be a better
person,” and “improve their lives. Likewise, Figure 4.2 (p.78) shows, “Stated educational goals
of study participants,” distributed in General Education Development Diploma or GED (24%),
Bachelor’s degree (25%), Associate’s degree (31%), Master’s degree (9%), and Doctorate or
Juris Doctor (24%). Finally, Table 4.6 (p.85) offers four pieces of advice to overcome
obstacles and accomplish self-realization, summarized in the Spanish term of
“superación”: (1) the key to success in this country is education go to school (27%), (2) make
school your priority, not work (32%), (3) learn English (26.3%), (4) take advantage of all
opportunities in this country (14.7%).

In Chapter 5 Lukes explores notions of “Pushouts, shutouts and holdouts” for young
immigrants (age 15-24) “Entering, exiting and evading high school in the US.” First the scholar
defines three finer categories that enable us to move away from monolithic constructs of ‘dropouts.’ According to her, “Pushouts” are “students who enrolled in high school and were
later “counseled out” by teachers and counselors,” while “Shutouts” are “immigrant young adults
who arrived in the US with the intention of entering traditional high school but were
unsuccessful.” Finally “Holdouts” represent “labor migrants who emigrated with no intentions of
pursuing education, but re-entered school via adult education after years in low-wage jobs” (p.
99). Second Lukes pays special attention to the General Education Development Diploma
(GED) exam, as it is considered the natural pathways to college for many newcomers without a
high school diploma. However, the author concludes that under current high stakes and accountability, the GED implementation does not always ensure college readiness, and even less does it account for issues of equity, income or instructional contexts.

In Chapter 6 Lukes addresses three main trends that influence access to education: “Hard
and soft skills: Academic skills, English and social capital among migrant youth.” The scholar
starts by describing linguistic abilities needed to succeed in the educational system, such as
students’ levels of proficiency, role of the first languages for acquiring English as the second
language, and combined content and language components in strong educational programs.
Then Lukes explores different avenues that offer second chances of learning for young
immigrants with interrupted schooling, such as such as nonprofit organizations, libraries, adult
centers and community colleges. Finally the researcher examines students’ social network,
mainly composed by parents and relatives, peers and friends, and teachers and counselors.
Following previous research (Nakkula 2006), she claims that social interaction is a strong
predictor of the decisions young adults make on their second choice education. Consistent with her combined quantitative and qualitative methodology, she proposes to add compounding factors of labor conditions, family pressures, language isolation, etc. to the typically isolated categories of age at arrival and years of schooling, to shed light on the migrants’ cultural capital (Bourdieu 1977).

In the final Chapter, “The road ahead for young adult migrants: Institutional dilemmas,
nagging questions and open doors” Lukes presents challenges and opportunities that would
benefit policy discussions of high school completions. On the one hand, the scholar criticizes
some current educational policies based on accountability only, which are mainly driven by gains
on test scores. From her perspective, this narrow focus brings about undesirable consequences
not only for young immigrants who feel detached and without incentive to attend schools, but
also for staff and teachers who are penalized for accepting older students for enrollment. On the
other hand, the author suggests effective options so that this subset of the population can
continue their education. For example, she proposes educational models that provide a strong
curriculum, where language and content are structurally integrated; address students’ age and
developmental stages to avoid boredom and infantilizing treatment; and prioritize meaningful
connections to students’ lives and needs, such as job training and pathways to legal residency
and citizenship. Additionally, Lukes suggests alternative types of tests, such as performance-
based assessments, which include cultural and linguistic skills of students’ diverse backgrounds.
Above all the scholar advocates for educational programs that recognize the bilingualism brought
by Latino Young adult immigrants as economic, social and cultural capital (Callahan and
Gándara 2014).

The book offers an Appendix that describes the study sites and the study participants’
selection and recruitment. It also presents the survey (in English and Spanish), the focus group
protocol and the interview protocol. Lukes refers to the validity of her small-scale study, given
by the triangulation of quantitative and qualitative sources. Finally she mentions the limitations given by the low number of participants, their self-selection, and the self-reported answers about
their literacy abilities. Finally the author recognizes that the literacy criterion used in the survey
leaves out potential participants who do not read and write. Lukes also makes comments on her
firm commitment to the Latino youth immigrants, illustrated not only in the current study but also by years of intense work as practitioner and researcher.

EVALUATION

“Latino Immigrant Youth and Interrupted Schooling” accomplishes the purpose of
interrogating about current educational status of Latino young immigrants with interrupted
schooling. Moreover it fills a gap in the literature of completions, dropouts, and discontinued
education within migrant population. Lukes offers an enjoyable reading that describes
individuals’ educational trajectories from their countries of origin to the US. In a simple and
direct style, she achieves the goal of thickening the problematic issue of Latino young students
who do not complete secondary school. Professional and lay readers will appreciate the up-
dated information of a less explored subset of immigrants, adding voices and faces to the sheer
numbers. The author offers seven well- organized chapters that include narrative explanations,
illustrative Tables and Figures, and vignettes of students’ personal stories. From the introduction
the scholar sets the general tone of the book, taking up a committed position of advocacy for
Latino young immigrants (Ruiz- de-Velasco, Fix & Clewell 2001).

Within the chapters Lukes revisits content-loaded concepts, such as “dropouts” and
“accountability,” describes factors that impact pre-and post-immigration, explores second
chances in education, and compares and contrasts educational expectations between immigrant
generations. The scholar particularly emphasizes the benefits of her methodological principle
that combines quantitative and qualitative data, which offers more accuracy and enables deeper
interpretations. She also offers useful clarifications, such as the length difference between the
American school system and Latin American and Caribbean schools. While the former offers 12
mandatory school years, divided into “elementary” (Grades K-6), “middle” (Grades 7-8) and
“high” (Grades 9-12) schools, the latter request 8- 9 mandatory school years, up to the
“secundaria”(Grades 8-9), which corresponds to American Middle schools only (Tables 3.3 and
3.4, pp.58-9). The book has some weakness, such as the limitations mentioned in the Appendix
Section, and some editing mistakes. For example the title “Reasons given for choice of program
by study participants” (Figure 6.7, p. 135) does not correspond to the author’s written
commentary, “Why they chose the educational program in which they were enrolled at the time
of the study” (p. 135). Likewise the Spanish version of the survey has some differences from the
English version (See questions 23, 34 and 36 in pages 178 and 180, respectively).

REFERENCES

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.1977. Reproduction in education, society and culture. London:
Sage.

Callahan, R. and P. Gándara (eds.). 2014. The bilingual advantage. Language, literacy and the
US labor market. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual
Matters.

Dorn, S. 1996. Creating the Dropout: An institutional and social history of failure. Westport, CT:
Praeger.

Nakkula, M. 2006. Identity and possibility: Adolescent development and the potential of schools.
In M. Sadowski (ed.) Adolescents at school. Perspectives on youth, identity and
education. (3rd ed.) (pp 7-18) Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Ruiz- de-Velasco, J, Fix, M. and Clewell, B. 2001. Overlooked and underserved: Immigrant
students in US secondary schools. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Laura Dubcovsky is a lecturer and supervisor in the Teacher Education Program from The School of Education at the University of California, Davis. She has a Master’s in Education and a PhD in Spanish linguistics with special emphasis on second language acquisition. Her areas of interest combine the fields of language and bilingual education. She is dedicated to the preparation of prospective bilingual Spanish/English teachers, especially on the use of Spanish for educational purposes. She collaborates as a reviewer with the Linguistic list serve and bilingual associations, as well as with teachers, principals, and specialists at the school district. She has taught a course that addresses Communicative and Academic Spanish needed in a bilingual classroom for more than ten years. She also published the article, Functions of the verb decir (''to say'') in the incipient academic Spanish writing of bilingual children. Functions of Language, 15(2), 257-280 (2008). Laura continues working
  on uses of Spanish by bilingual teachers , bilingual home/school connections , and academic language across school disciplines.

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-3605	
----------------------------------------------------------