University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A quantitative/qualitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students with a general educational development diploma and United States-born Hispanic students with a high scho...

(USC Thesis Other)

A quantitative/qualitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students with a general educational development diploma and United States-born Hispanic students with a high scho...

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A QUANTITATIVE/QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AMONG LATINO IMMIGRANT STUDENTS WITH A GENERAL EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT DIPLOMA AND U.S.-BORN HISPANIC STUDENTS WITH A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA AT COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA by Loretta M. Canett-Bailes A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION August 2004 Copyright 2004 Loretta M. Canett-Bailes Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3145164 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform 3145164 Copyright 2004 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to Matilde Zapien, the founder of the GED program, to all of the Latino students at Compton Community College and to my grandparents, who came to the United States from Mexico seeking a better life: Sebastian Canett, Enriqueta Cruz, Nabor Estrada, and Otilia Vasquez. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank Dr. William Rideout, my advisor, for his outstanding advice and constant support during the dissertation process. His meticulous care will forever be appreciated. Also, thanks to Drs. Nellie Stromquist and Michael Genzuk, my committee members, for their insightful and excellent comments. I give very special thanks to my husband, Dan, for his support and for believing in me. I thank my daughter, Daniela, and the members of my family for their support and prayers. I wish to pay special tribute to my dear friend Father Juan Coro- minas, who has always encouraged me to pursue an academic path. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION .................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES................................. vii ABSTRACT ............. viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION................ ............................................................ 1 Purpose of the Study ................. 1 Comprehensive Review ........ 3 Failures of School Systems ........ 4 Background of the Problem ................ 6 Second Shift in Population .......................................... 8 Significant Increase in Immigrants............................ 8 Sojourner Migration .......................................................... 9 Future Needs in The Marketplace ............................. 11 Economic and Political Impact .................................. 13 Consequences of Amnesty........................................... 13 Profile of Population ........................................... 14 Impact on Compton Community College ...... 15 Transition in Student Population ........... 16 Division of ESL/Foreign Languages ............................ 16 Immigration Reform and Control A c t ..................... 17 Program Services ....... 18 Methods of Outreach/Recruitment......................... 19 Transition: “ Ability to Benefit” ...................................... 19 Approval of General Educational Tests ...................... 20 GED Test and the ESL Department ......................... 21 GED Bridge Program .............. 22 Statement of the Problem.................................... 24 A Need for New Strategies..................................... 25 Academic Achievement.................................................... 26 Purpose of the Study ...................... 27 Summary ................. 27 2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE ..... 29 Analysis of Immigrants and Minority Groups ....................... 29 Types of Minority Status ................. 31 Voluntary Minorities ..... 31 Location of Reference Group ....................................... 32 iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Generational Differences ............. 33 Dual Frame of Reference ..................... 34 Theme of a “Better Tomorrow” .................. 37 Involuntary Minorities ....................................... 38 Cultural Differences.................... 40 Community Force................. 42 Correlation of Involuntary Minority Status and the University of California, Davis ............................. 42 Lack of Success for Involuntary Minorities .................... 44 The Problem of Hispanic School Failure ........................ 46 Psychosocial Framework ........................ 48 Consequences of “ Job Ceiling” on Schooling............... 48 A Matter of Choice................................... 49 Psychosocial Consequences................ 50 Severe Alienation .......... 51 The Immigrant Ethic and its Impact on Schooling ..... 52 Cultural and Academic Differences.................... 53 Cultural Differences Among Latino Students Who Take the GED and Native-English-Speaking (White) Students ........................................................ 53 Cultural Discontinuity Hypothesis................................... 54 Subcomponent Universal Discontinuities ............. 55 Primary Discontinuities and Education ..................... 56 Secondary Cultural Discontinuities and Schooling ....... 56 Cultural Frame of Reference ........................................... 57 Coping With Immigration ............................... 58 Persistence M odel ..... 59 Summary ............................. 59 3. METHODOLOGY .......... 60 Research Design ................................... 60 Setting....................... 61 Criteria..................................... 61 Design of Questionnaire ................... 61 Data Collection and Analysis ............... 64 Delimitations .......... 64 Limitations ....... 64 Summary ..... 65 4. FINDINGS ............. 67 Reliability Analysis - Scale (Alpha) ............... 67 Comparison of the Cohorts by A g e ....................... 67 Education as a Means for Mobility ..... 73 Perceived Support From Peers for Education ....... 75 Perceptions of Community Engagement............... 78 Support From Parents for Education and Perceptions of the Importance of Education by Parents 80 Support in Schools Is Better Than in a Foreign Country ..... 81 Perceived Support From Teachers and Counselors for Education ............................... 81 v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Judgment of One’s Own Ability 82 Institutional and Staff Support............................................. 83 Summary................................................. 83 5. DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUSION .. 85 Overview................................................................................... 85 Statement of the Problem................................................ 85 Review of the Methodology................................ 86 Perceptions of Education as a Means of Mobility ....... 87 Discussion ...... 87 Recommendations ........................................................... 89 Perceived Support From Peers for Education...................... 90 Discussion......................................................................... 90 Recommendations ........................................................... 91 Perceptions of Community Engagement......................... 91 Discussion ....... 92 Recommendations ........................................................... 93 Support From Parents for Education and Parents’ Perceptions of the Importance of Education................... 94 Discussion.......................................................................... 94 Recommendations ........... 95 Support in Schools Is Better Than in a Foreign Country 95 Discussion.......................................................................... 95 Recommendations ........................................................... 96 Perceived Support From Teachers and Counselors for Education ........................................................................... 96 Discussion............................ 96 Recommendations ........................................................... 97 Judgment of One’s Own Ability .................. 97 Discussion ...... 97 Recommendations .............. 98 Institutional and Staff Support................................................ 99 Discussion ...... 99 Recommendations ..... 99 Conclusion ........ 99 REFERENCES............................................................................................... 105 APPENDICES................................................................................................ 113 A. MATRIX ..... 114 B. STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH, SPANISH) ...... 116 vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Component Coefficients and Cronbach’s Alpha Measures of Reliability for Factor Scales ................................................. 68 2. Analysis of Variance for Age ....... 70 3. Multiple Comparisons for Age .......... 71 4. Descriptive Statistics for Age, Gender, and Size of C ity ......... 72 5. Means for Mobility: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 3 ... 73 6. Analysis of Variance for Means of Mobility: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 1 ......................................... 74 7. Multiple Comparisons for Means of Mobility ....................... 74 8. Perceived Support From Peers for Education: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 4 ................................................ 76 9. Analysis of Variance for Perceived Support From Peers for Education: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 4 ............ 76 10. Multiple Comparisons for Perceived Support From Peers for Education .................................................................. 77 11. Perceptions of Community Engagement: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 5 ................ 79 12. Perceptions of Community Engagement: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 5 .......................... 79 13. Multiple Comparisons for Perceptions of Community Engagement............................. 80 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT This research is a qualitative/quantitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students enrolled at Compton Com- munity College who had taken the General Educational Development test (GED) and their U.S.-born counterparts (Chicano or Mexican American) who had a high school diploma or GED. The intent of this investigation was to compare these two cohorts in terms of student motivation, attitudes, family influences, and educational goals. The theoretical framework of John Ogbu’s voluntary minorities (im migrants) and involuntary minorities (U.S.-born counterparts of immigrants) was used as a foundation for the investigation. A 55-item questionnaire was developed and used for interviews with 30 male and 30 female immi grant students with a GED and with 30 male and 30 female U.S.-born Mexi can American students with a high school diploma. It was concluded that Ogbu’s conceptual framework did not serve as a paradigm for the U.S.-born Chicano students at Compton Community College and must be modified. Immigrant Latino students were more similar to U.S. Mexican American students qualitatively in terms of their motivation, aspirations, and mainte nance of culture and language. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Study This research is a qualitative/quantitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students enrolled at Compton Community College (California) who took the General Educational Development Test (GED) and their United States (U.S.)-born counterparts (Chicano or Mexican American) who had a high school diploma or GED. The intent of this investigation was to compare these two cohorts in terms of student motivation, attitudes, family influences, and educational goals among American-born Hispanic students and immigrant Latino students. The terms Mexican American and Chicano are used interchangeably to identify U.S.-born Hispanic students and Latino is used to identify the immigrant student population. In the United States, people of Mexican origin comprise the largest Hispanic subgroup, followed by Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and Central and South Americans. A very small percentage of Hispanics come directly from Spain (Gandara, 1995, p. 1). Currently, there is very little research that investigates the differences, similarities, and motivational factors among American-born Hispanics and the ever-increasing Latino immigrant popula tion on community college campuses nationwide. Although a host of studies have identified a constellation of demographic factors that pre dispose Mexican American students to academic failure, very little attention 1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. has been given to students who overcome socioeconomic and cultural disadvantages to succeed academically. Little is known about academically successful students and what distinguishes them from their classmates who experience academic under achievement and failure. Why do some Mexican American students do well while others fail, despite sharing similar socioeconomic and cultural back grounds (Alva Alatorre & Padilla, 1995, p. 2)? It is a commonplace claim that the education level of the Latino immigrant population is continually falling behind that of the U.S.-born population (Lowell & Suro, 2002, p. i). The Pew Hispanic Center found that the educational profile of the adult population of foreign-born Latinos improved significantly during the past 3 decades. However, these gains have not yet produced a notable converg ence with the level of education in the native-born U.S. population who are not Hispanic. During the period 1970 to 2000 the native-born population experienced improvements in education that outpaced the progress among Latino immigrants. Nonetheless, the trends identified in a report entitled The Improving Educational Profile of Latino Immigrants suggest that the gap between immigrants and natives will narrow in the future (Lowell & Suro, p. i). The Latino student population within California’s Community College system has increased over the past 3 years by 35% and there is very little research that has investigated this population. Moreover, there is not any strong body of evidence regarding similarities and variations among Mexican American students and their immigrant Latino student counterparts 2 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. within the community college system (California Community Colleges, 2003). How are educators able to provide innovative policies, strong aca demic and student support services programs, and multivariate paradigms for guiding educational research without a study of these two populations? Comprehensive Review Any comprehensive review of research findings on these populations can only conclude that little is known about either Hispanic students or immigrant Latinos. As a result, program evaluation researchers measure Hispanic children with instruments and methodologies evolved from studies of majority students. More often than not, such studies predictably find evidence that educational programs are not accomplishing the goal of improving Hispanic student performance at the college level (Olivas, 1986, p. 3). Olivas’s research on Latino college students concluded that Hispanics were concentrated in the less-prestigious and less-well-funded institutions and, indeed, in very few 4-year institutions. In his research the Hispanic student population was based on Mexican Americans or Chicanos. In 1984, only 23% of white (Anglo) full-time students attended 2-year colleges, while 46% of Hispanic students attended such institutions. This uneven distribution of Hispanics within the system indicates that a large cadre of Hispanic students seeking a full-time, traditional tertiary-level learning experience are doing so in institutions established for part-time commuter students. While 2-year community college institutions have increased Hispanic access, they suffer from the inherent problems of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. student transfers, part-time faculty, commuter programs, and funding patterns. Moreover, Hispanic students do not even enjoy full access into the community college system (Darder, Torres, & Gutierrez, 1997, p. 469). A mere 21 colleges in the mainland United States enroll 24% of all mainland Hispanic students; when the 34 Puerto Rican institutions are included, these 55 colleges collectively enroll 43% of all U.S. Hispanic students. Unlike other minority students who benefit from historically Black colleges, Hispanic students do not have access to a network of traditional Hispanic colleges. Therefore, Hispanic students are disproportionately concentrated in fewer than 2% of the more than 3,100 college and uni versities in the country and in institutions that lack historical missions to serve Hispanic students (Darder et al., 1997, p. 469). Failures of School Systems The failures of school systems to meet the needs of Hispanic com munities are mirrored in postsecondary institutions. In the latter, issues of limited access, discriminatory employment practices, and high attrition disproportionately affect Hispanic students (Olivas, 1986, p. 2). High academic achievement among low-income Mexican Americans is unusual in this society. While Mexican American students have been shown to aspire to the same high levels of achievement as their non-Chicano peers (Delgado-Gaitan, 1988; Rumberger, 1983), few actually realize these aspirations (Gandara, 1994, p.1). Although there is a public perception that Hispanic enrollments have increased greatly in the past 2 decades, the reality is very different. 4 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Hispanic students have neither entered a broad range of institutions nor dramatically increased their numbers throughout the system. For example, in 1998 the percentages of all degrees conferred by colleges and universi ties that were received by Latino students were as follows: Associate degree, 7.7%; Bachelor’s degree, 5.5%; Master’s degree, 4.1%; doctorate, 3.2%; and first professional degree, 4.6% (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2001). In all, only about 7% of Mexican Americans (11% of Latinos) over the age of 25 hold college or graduate degrees, compared to 25% of the total population (Nevarez, 2001; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). The increasing Hispanic population in the United States, particularly in the western states, calls for a response from postsecondary institutions to increase participation and graduation outcomes of Mexican American and other Latino students. The Latino population has grown dramatically in recent years, now comprising 12.5% of the total U.S. population, with Mexican Americans making up 58% of all Hispanics (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001). This increase is not evident in the proportional representation of Mexican Americans and other Latinos in postsecondary education. In 1998, while the White (Anglo), non-Hispanic college participation rate was 67.3%, the calculated rate for Latinos was 47.5%, the lowest rate since 1990 (Postsecondary Education Opportunity, 1999). More than half of the Hispanic undergraduates attend 2-year institutions, compared to only one third of White students (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). Research has shown that students who attend 2-year colleges are less likely to attain a baccalaureate degree (Bernstein & Eaton, 1994). In 1998, Hispanics Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. represented 9.6% of undergraduate students and 5.4% of graduate students (Nevarez, 2001; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). Furthermore, while overall test scores for minorities have gone up, the scores of African American, Mexican American, and Puerto Rican students continue to lag behind those of White students. Overall, the pro gress for minorities has also been seen in college participation; however, American Indians, Hispanics, and African Americans are still less likely than Whites to participate in postsecondary study (Rendon & Hope, 1996, pp. xv-xvi). To make matters worse, students most at risk appear to be getting the least of what American education has to offer: schools with the fewest resources, the least-experienced teachers, the least-challenging curriculum, and the lowest expectations. Reversing the educational gap between Whites and students of color (African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans) remains a key imperative in the years ahead—an imperative that challenges educators and policy makers alike (Rendon & Hope). Therefore, this investigation focuses on one of California’s 109 community colleges and the differences and similarities among Mexican American and Latino students at Compton Community College (CCC). Background of the Problem It is important to understand the historical background of CCC in order to comprehend fully the impact of the ethnic shift in the student popu lation. The college, founded in 1927, is one of the oldest public colleges in California. As a department of Compton Union High School, CCC became one of the first few 4-year junior colleges in the nation that combined grades 6 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 11-12 of the high school years with grades 13-14 of the college years and operated as a single institution. A new era was marked in September 1953, when CCC moved to its present location: the 83-acre campus on Artesia Boulevard. Serving the communities of Compton, Enterprise, Lynwood, Paramount, and Willowbrook, the college continues to play an integral role in the lives of the people whom it serves (CCC, 2000-2002). From the time of its founding, the college has historically been wit ness to a shift in its student population. Located in the south central area of Los Angeles County, what began as a predominantly European American educational institution was transformed. It was described in 1987 by President Edison O. Jackson as the “ first Black community college west of the Mississippi.” This statement referred to the shift in demographics from White residents to a predominantly Black community during the 1960s. The Civil Rights movement nationally and the Watts riots emphasized the need for educational equity at local levels. With this transition came a change in the ethnic makeup of the Board of Trustees, administrators, staff, and faculty. What had been European American elected officials and staff now became African American. For the first time, the college was looking toward the creation of role models and programs that would meet the needs of traditionally underrepresented African American students in the community college system. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Second Shift in Population Meanwhile, another phenomenon was taking place that would directly impact the college on a large scale: the arrival of a Latino immi grant population in the surrounding communities. Los Angeles grew rapidly and almost continuously between 1930 and 1990, adding more than 6 million people, for a total of nearly 9 million residents. From a rather small minority in 1930, Latinos expanded to form almost 40% of the county’s population by 1990. Between 1980 and 1990 their numbers grew by an astonishing 70%, led by immigration from Mexico and Central America but also fueled by a high Latino birth rate (Moore & Pinderhughes, 1993, p. 30). The term Latino, used by Moore and Pinderhughes, did not distinguish U.S.-born Hispanics from immigrant Latinos. Significant Increase in Immigrants Immigrants constitute an increasingly significant portion of the United States population. Almost as many immigrants legally entered the United States during the 1980s (7.3 million) as during the preceding 2 decades (7.8 million). This legal flow was substantially augmented by unauthorized immigration. Moreover, the dramatic growth in immigration over the previ ous 2 decades continued into the 1990s, with 4.5 million immigrants arriving between 1990 and 1994. By 1994, with more than 8% of the total U.S. population, the immigrant population was at its highest level since the 1911- 1920 period (Moore & Pinderhughes, 1993, p. 30). During the 1980s until the year 2004, CCC experienced a second major demographic shift that transformed it from a virtually 100% African American student body to one with nearly 50% Hispanic students. This 8 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. new student body configuration brought with it a qualitatively different set of academic needs. The number of incoming Hispanics that includes immi grant Latino students continues to increase. According to the Chancellor’s Office for the California Community Colleges (California Community Colleges, 2004), in the spring semester 1999, Hispanics (U.S.-born and immigrants) represented 10.4% of the total student population, as com pared to the spring semester 2003, when they represented 43.5%—a significant increase of 318% over a 4-year period. How does one begin to understand the sudden shift from an African American student group to one that becomes increasingly a Mexican American and immigrant Latino student population? Perhaps, the analysis of sojourner migrations, as defined by Hondagneu-Sotelo, may help to build a framework for the shift in demographics. The close proximity of the Mexican border (3.5-hour drive) to south central Los Angeles helps to reinforce this explanation. Sojourner Migration According to researcher Hondagneu-Sotelo (1994, p. 17), in circular migrant labor, migrants live in the country of destination only while employed; when not employed, they return to their country of origin, where their families remain. This system of migration is characterized by the physical separation of employment and family home residence for the costs of maintaining and renewing labor. The income earned by immigrant workers in the United States provides the resources for daily subsistence or maintenance when they return to their country of origin. The historical 9 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. movement of Mexican workers to the United States has been characterized by an “ebb and flow” or “revolving door” pattern of labor migration, one often calibrated by seasonal labor demands, economic recessions, and mass deportations (Hondagneu-Sotelo, p. 20). As early as 1911, a report to the U.S. Congress issued by the Dillingham Commission lauded temporary Mexican labor migration and warned of the dangers of permanent Mexican settlement, claiming that, although Mexicans “are not easily assimilated, this is of no very great importance as long as most of them return to their native land. In the case of the Mexican, he is less desirable as a citizen than as a laborer” (Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1994, p. 20). The needs of American employers helped to shape the migration of Mexican workers. Although some employers encouraged the migration of Mexican women and entire families to meet labor needs through such programs as the government-sponsored “bracero programs” (Hondagneu- Sotelo, 1994, p. 20), most did not provide such encouragement. Family migration has had particular consequences for the recon struction of gender relations during the process of settlement in the United States. Men who left their families in Mexico to work in the United States tended to visit Mexico less frequently the longer they remained in the United States. Almost imperceptible to themselves, they became anchored to their jobs and life in the United States. Arturo Barrios, one of the early settlers in Oakview, California, aptly summarized his own experiences and those of many other men like him (Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1994, p. 102): 10 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. When they first come, everyone is thinking, “I’m going to go earn some capital, or buy a ranch,” or whatever, but practically without exception, they don’t accomplish this. Because you come here, and later you like it, and later you are always saying that you’re going [back to Mexico], but you never leave.. . . So in reality, it’s a big illusion that you must come work in order to earn a little capital and better your situation there [in Mexico]. Many times the truth is that this doesn’t occur. They always stay here, with papers or without papers. Not all sojourner migration culminates in settlement, but Arturo Barrio’s assessment captures the discrepancy between what these men initially intend and what they eventually do (Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1994, p. 102). Therefore, is it not plausible that many immigrants coming to south central Los Angeles seeking employment chose to remain, following the Hondagneu-Sotelo analysis, and began to seek a means to learn English? Future Needs in the Marketplace The historical perspective of immigration leads to a look at today’s growing immigrant population. The immigrant population is entering a national economy that is in transition. Most notably, future labor markets will demand more well-educated workers and fewer less-educated ones. If immigrants are to enjoy the benefits of economic assimilation and if the nation is to enjoy the fruits of a well-educated labor force, newcomers must participate fully and successfully, not only in K-12 but also in higher education (Hernandez & del Olmos, 1989). Immigrant children and U.S.- born children of immigrants are the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. child population, accounting for 15% of all American children in 1990 and including about 60% of all Hispanic children (Rumbaut, 1996 p. 1). Mexicans constitute the largest immigrant population in the United States; in fact, they form part of the largest, longest, and most sustained 11 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. labor migration in the contemporary world (Rumbaut, 1996 p. 4). Demo graphic data show a dramatic increase in the U.S. Hispanic population over the past decade; early in the next century, Hispanics will become the nation’s largest minority. Gains in educational attainment and economic stability and mobility have not been proportionate to this growth (Darder et al., 1997, p. 45). Another important issue for the Latino population and the potential competitiveness of the U.S. work force is literacy. An illiterate population can neither work effectively nor participate in a democracy. There is some cause for concern; illiteracy rates for Hispanics are much higher than those for non-Hispanics. By the traditional measure of illiteracy—completion of less than 5 years of schooling—as of 1991, 12.5% of Hispanics 25 years old and over were illiterate, compared to only 1.6% of non-Hispanics (Darder et al., 1997, p. 75). As the United States enters the 21st century, reducing educational and economic inequality between Hispanics and the rest of society has become not just a moral preference but an economic imperative. Latinos will constitute about one fifth of labor force growth between now and the end of the century, as well as a growing proportion of taxpayers supporting Social Security, Medicare, and other transfer payment systems needed to support an aging society. An undereducated, undertrained, and underem ployed work force will not only retard the nation’s economic output but will also increase the demand for public assistance and diminish the tax base necessary to support essential government services. Improving the Hispanic community’s human capital characteristics— and its economic 12 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. standing—clearly serves the economic interest of the nation (Darder et al., 1997, p. 75). Economic and Political Impact During the past 2 centuries, this country has absorbed a remarkable assortment of people from all over the world. In particular, the economic and political strife faced by Mexico and Central and South America and the high rates of population growth in those locations during the past decade had a tremendous impact on immigration. According to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 6,000,000 people will be eligible for naturaliza tion in the next 10 years. This currently impacts California at a rate of 56,000 people per year (Hernandez & del Olmos, 1989). Consequences of Amnesty This figure does not yet include the large amnesty population, which was eligible for citizenship at the end of 1983 (Hernandez & del Olmos, 1989). For the past 5 years millions of recent immigrants have been quietly involved in an important process almost without precedent in the United States. This process began when Congress enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) in November 1986 (Hernandez & del Olmos). This included major provisions in the areas of employment and legalization for persons residing in the United States without government permission. The legalization component (commonly referred to as amnesty) allows these persons to become legal residents once they have met specified criteria. The estimated 3 million legalization applicants nationally include 1.8 million who have been in this country since before 13 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1982 (Pre-82s) and 1.2 million special agricultural workers (SAWs) who were legalized to work in California’s farming communities. Historically, about 55% of the nation’s 3 million legalization applicants lived in California. California’s Health and Welfare Agency estimated that more than 900,000 Pre-82s and about 650,000 SAWs were approved as residents. California had received allotments amounting to about $1.1 billion of State Legalization Impact Assistance Grant (SLIAG) funds through federal fiscal year 1990 and was expected to receive nearly 60% of whatever future funds were available subject to Congressional action. These funds are to assist state and local government agencies with costs incurred in providing health, educational, or social services to newly legalized persons. Profile of Population Not enough is known about the population that illegally immigrated to the United States for a variety of reasons. What is known is that 1.6 million Californians who previously lived here in fear of discovery and deportation have since stepped forward to take part in the I RCA legalization program. This historic legalization will have a profound impact not only on the lives of those who become legal residents but also on almost every aspect of California’s economy (Hernandez & del Olmos, 1989). Furthermore, the amnesty population represents a subset of the larger immigrant issue that is of critical importance to California’s economic and social growth. Since 1980, the state has absorbed 26% of all legal immigration into the United States. Many move to California after a short stay in another state. 14 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The Department of Finance’s Population Research Unit and the United States Census Bureau both estimate California is now the place of residency for more than 50% of all undocumented persons in the United States. It is also the destination of choice for nearly half of all refugees legally allowed into the United States. Nationally, 78% of this legal and illegal population is Hispanic; within California, lawful permanent Hispanic residents make up 90% of this significant group. This is of further import ance because the larger percentage of this population lives in southern California (NCES, 2001). This factor directly impacts the communities served by CCC, because what were once predominately Black residential areas (Compton, Lynwood, and the Watts-Willowbrook area) are now becoming Latino areas (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001). Impact on Compton Community College In 1986, 7% of the enrollment at CCC was Hispanic, largely U.S.- born Mexican Americans. This fact is reflected in the registration records of Hispanic students in mainstream courses and immigrant Latino students enrolled in English as a Second Language (ESL) courses. Spanish-speaking students began registering in ESL classes at the end of 1984. Most ESL students then were Middle Easterners, mainly Iranians. After the fall of the Shah of Iran, the Iranian student population disappeared from ESL courses as a result of the Iranian government’s decision to stop all funds sent to students in the United States. 15 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Transition in Student Population By 2003 the Hispanic/Latino student population of CCC was 43.5%. This figure may be even higher if it is taken into consideration that 8% of the student population has not been identified by ethnicity (California Community Colleges, 2004). Once again, the college was faced with the challenge of providing traditionally underrepresented students with aca demic and student services that would address their particular needs. In 1986 CCC organized the first Division of Bilingual/Bicultural Studies. A division chair was appointed by the college president, and the foundations of what later would become the Division of ESL/Foreign Languages were established. It is important to note that this new division was established as a direct result of the increase of immigrant Latino students, not their U.S.- born Mexican American or Chicano counterparts. Division of ESUForeign Languages The Division of ESL/Foreign Languages began with 3 full-time instructors, 4 adjunct faculty, and 64 students. By 1996 the division had grown to 7 full-time instructors, 20 adjunct faculty, and 750 students. The division now generates an average of one million dollars annually for the college’s general fund (K. Higa, computer systems analyst, CCC, personal communication, June 17, 2004). The establishment of the division gave full academic recognition to the ESL program. All full-time faculty were eligible to serve on campus committees and the Academic Senate and to share in the decision-making process. This was the first time in the history of the college that faculty could support the needs of immigrant students through the mainstream academic 16 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. community structure. The curriculum committee established ESL courses for credit; this was highly significant, as courses for credit allowed all ESL students to receive the full benefits of academic and student services such as tutoring, use of the library, and financial aid. (On many community college campuses in California, ESL is placed in the noncredit category, which means that students are not eligible for the full range of college services.) Immigration Reform and Control Act In 1988, the ESL faculty at CCC submitted a proposal to the California State Department of Education to provide educational services for eligible legalized aliens under the I RCA. The proposal was accepted and, as a result, 782 students succeeded in meeting the English language requirements and received Certificates of Citizenship with the approval of the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The curriculum for these students included civics and citizenship, combined with ESL for credit. ESL and civics/citizenship courses were offered at the beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels: Citizenship I, II, and III. The four full-time faculty members were there to meet the needs of non- and limited-English-speaking students, not Mexican Americans who were part of the mainstream student population. As a result of this project, CCC received $392,000 in state funding. Faculty negotiated with the institution to provide new office space, two additional full-time faculty positions, and a program assistant. What was 17 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. once an abandoned boiler room was gutted, painted, and carpeted. The Division of ESL/Foreign Languages now had an official office on campus. The Department of ESL, within the structure of the Division of ESL/Foreign Languages, serves 100% of the non- and limited-English- speaking immigrant Latino students at CCC. Students entering the ESL program are required to show proof of California residency and follow the same application process as first-time students entering CCC. All students are required to take a standardized language assessment test for place ment purposes. Community colleges do not require the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) for ESL students who show proof of California residency. The TOEFL is a requirement for international students who enter with a student visa. Program Services The Citizenship/ESL Program at CCC was unique among community colleges because courses were offered through the academic division of ESL for credit. This meant that ESL students were encouraged not only to take civics/citizenship/ESL courses but also to become full-time students and continue their education. On most community college campuses, the amnesty population (students who would qualify to become U.S. citizens) took noncredit courses through community services, and there was no bridge between this area and the departments of ESL on the college campuses. At CCC, amnesty/ESL students were eligible to receive financial aid and book grants through the Equal Opportunities and Service program (EOP&S) and to take tours to local universities through the 18 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Transfer Center. The EOP&S program is a state-funded program on all community college campuses in California. It provides academic counsel ing, tutoring, study skills workshops, and book grants for low-income and educationally disadvantaged students. Methods of Outreach/Recruitment During the past decade, the faculty and program assistants con ducted a grass roots recruitment effort 4 weeks before the fall/spring semesters in the Catholic churches in the college’s service area. A bilingual outreach team (ESL faculty and students) from CCC visited two churches per Sunday; after each mass they disseminated information about the educational services offered at the college. This information was then placed in the church’s bulletins. It is important to understand that 85% of the church services in Compton, Lynwood, and Paramount are in Spanish. This is another indication of the shift in population. The following churches participated: St. Emydias (Lynwood), San Felipe Nery (Lynwood), St. Alberto the Great (Compton), Our Lady of Victory (Compton), Sacred Heart (Compton), and Our Lady of the Rosary (Paramount). Transition: “Ability to Benefit” The Division of ESL/Foreign Languages at CCC has enabled non- and limited-English-proficient (LEP) Hispanic students to enter the com munity college system. However, in 1991, the status of all ESL students was jeopardized by the passage of Public Law 101-508. This law required that (a) all students entering a community college have a high school diploma or equivalent, (b) all students applying for financial aid have a high 19 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. school diploma or equivalent, and (c) the Secretary of Education be responsible for the approval of any assessment instrument used to determine equivalency. Approved examinations to assess general education for students who did not possess a high school diploma and wanted to apply to a community college were listed in the notice issued by the U.S. Department of Education on December 19,1990, and in Dear Colleague letters dated January, 1991 (GEN091) and January 30, 1991 (Gen 91-8). These letters were sent by California Community College Chancellor David Mertes to all community college presidents (D. Mertes, personal communication, March 5, 1991). Approval of General Educational Tests The first notice included approval for tests used by states for assess ing the basic skills of entering postsecondary students. Until the Depart ment of Education had done an evaluation, locally selected tests were authorized (D. Mertes, personal communication, 1991) and the GED. GED Tests were also approved. The National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) findings released September 8,1993, by the U.S. Department of Education confirmed that literacy skills of GED graduates were virtually identical to those of traditional high school graduates (“GED Graduates,” 1993). Clearly, as the law required that all students entering a community college must have a high school diploma or equivalent, access to immi grants wanting to register for ESL courses at CCC would be denied. This 20 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. change of status in the law was well publicized in the Spanish-speaking media. During 1990,100% of the ESL population at the college were Latinos, and students became very fearful that their right to attend a community college would be jeopardized. Many students asked the ESL program assistant if something could be done. The ESL faculty and the program assistant decided that the following school districts would be asked to administer the GED test in the students’ first language, Spanish. In 1971, Spanish-language GED tests were made available to official test centers (Allen & Jones, 1992, p. 19) at Compton Chester Adult School, Lynwood Adult School, Paramount Adult School, and South Gate Adult School. Passing the GED tests would give Latino immigrants the opportunity to register and study ESL at CCC. Those Latino immigrants who were already studying and receiving financial aid could remain at the college without having their financial aid terminated. It is interesting that the concern regarding eligibility to the campus was raised by the immigrant students, not by their American-born Hispanic counterparts. GED Test and the ESL Department The GED tests would give Latino immigrant students the opportunity to earn their high school equivalency diplomas in the United States. Once they passed the GED, they could register at CCC, and those who qualified could receive financial aid. The GED test includes six tests in the areas of writing skills, social studies, science, literature, the arts, and mathematics. The GED questions require the students to use general knowledge and 21 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. thinking skills usually learned during 4 years of high school (American Council on Education, 2003). Few questions are asked about facts, details, or definitions. Although a student may not have finished high school in the United States, he may have gained knowledge and skills through experi ence, reading, nonformal training, and schooling in his home country. The students who are eligible are those who did not graduate from high school and are 16 years of age or older. It is interesting that, of the various school districts approached, only one responded positively and was ready to form a volunteer GED Bridge Program between CCC and the Compton Unified Chester Adult School. GED Bridge Program With the approval of the president of CCC and the cooperation of the principal of the Chester Adult School in Compton, the GED Bridge Program for New Californians was initiated in 1990. Special study skills classes were offered on Saturdays at CCC to prepare students for the GED test that was given at the Chester Adult School in Compton. Immigrant Latino ESL students from CCC were recruited to take the GED tests. As the program was initiated within the Division of ESL/Foreign Languages, only immigrant Latino ESL students were tested at first, although the test is now open to all students. The Chester Adult School set up specific dates and times for testing in Spanish. The division program assistant organized groups of students for testing. They were told to bring to the Chester Adult School photo identification, a pencil, and $36.50 in cash to cover the cost of the examination. By fall 1990, 45 ESL students 22 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. had taken the GED tests for the first time. Approximately 87% of the first group passed the test. By spring 1991, 473 ESL students had successfully passed the GED examination. During the next 6 years, 3,500 non-English-speaking and LEP students had passed the GED tests in Spanish. As time progressed, CCC’s program assistant visited ESL classrooms at the college and continued recruiting for the GED. Eventually, the Chancellor’s Office resolved the issue of the “ability to benefit” legislation that had mandated that no one could enter a community college without a high school diploma or equiva lency. Thereafter, only students applying for federal or state financial aid would be required to present a high school diploma or equivalency. The number of ESL students wanting to take the GED continued to increase. ESL students at the college began to organize GED preparation workshops in Spanish. The program assistant took the leadership role in helping students to organize their study groups for test preparation. Those students who had passed the examination and had been teachers or engineers in their country of origin volunteered their time to conduct work shops. Initially, these study sessions were held in the program assistant’s garage at her home in Lynwood. A portable chalk board was brought in and chairs and two tables were set up. As the number of students con tinued to increase, the workshops were moved to a classroom on the campus. At the end of each workshop, students voluntarily collected donations for the tutor as a means of expressing thanks. The ESL faculty and the program assistant organized a cap-and-gown graduation at the end of each academic year for those students who had passed the GED. The 23 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. cost of the graduation ceremony was subsidized by community leaders and Padres Interesados En Educacion (Parents Interested in Education), a Lynwood community group. The groups of Latino immigrants taking the GED were no longer restricted to ESL students at CCC. By spring 1996, graduating GED students included a large number from Santa Ana and surrounding com munities in Orange County. The GED continued to be given at the Chester Adult School in Compton. The Division of ESL/Foreign Languages began to see individuals from as far away as Temecula and San Diego coming to Compton to take the GED. In fall 1996, the division received a request from the Crystal Cathedral to help the Spanish-speaking members of his congregation to take the GED. The division had started by recruiting only registered immigrant Latino students, but 6 years later an informal word-of-mouth campaign was reaching students outside of the district, and ESL students who had been teachers in their country of origin began volunteer tutoring workshops in the test subject areas. At the end of each academic year a cap-and-gown ceremony was held for graduating students. Statement of the Problem CCC and the Chester Adult School graduated 3,500 students by 1995, the equivalent of a large high school. This was in spite of the fact that the dropout rate for Latino/Hispanic high school students remains high. According to researchers Fashola and Slavin (1997), who conducted the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Hispanic Dropout Project, for most segments of the U.S. population, high school graduation rates have been steadily increasing over the past 2 decades. Between 1972 and 1994, the White, non-Latino dropout rate (individuals ages 16-24 out of school without a degree) diminished by more than one third, from 12.3% to 7.7%. The African American dropout rate diminished by more than 40%, from 21.3% to 12.6%. However, the dropout rate among Latino students has always been high and has only slightly diminished: 34.3% in 1972 and 30.0% in 1994. Fashola and Slavin’s research, in reviewing the dropout data, did not differentiate between Latino immigrants and U.S.-born Hispanics. How do the Latino students who take the GED and continue their education differ from the Mexican American students with high school diplomas at CCC? What similarities do they share in terms of academic motivation and goals? A Need for New Strategies Because of the large influx of the Latino immigrant population, the college formed the Division of ESL/Foreign Languages to address the needs of this new student group, but what happened to the Mexican American or Chicano students who were registered in mainstream classes? The Tomas Rivera Center at the University of Southern California recently published a report stating that, unfortunately, too few Latinos make the transition to higher education. Latinos, both foreign born and U.S.-born, have the lowest high school completion rate of any major ethnic group and are projected to have the lowest percent of college graduation by the year 25 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2015 (Tornatsky, Cutler, & Lee, 2002, p. 6). Congruent with current research, CCC needs new strategies and a systematic approach to provide programs and services that will mentor, motivate, and assist Latino and Mexican American students to matriculate to college and receive an Associate of Arts degree and/or vocational certificate. In addition, the college must assist these two cohorts of students to transfer to 4-year institutions. Rendon (1981, p. 1) stated that there are two Rs involved in helping Latino/Chicano students’ entry into the academic pipeline: retention and research. Academic Achievement It has been widely documented that the academic achievement of Mexican American students is linked to a number of sociocultural variables. In an interview study of 45 Mexican American professionals who had obtained graduate academic degrees (PhD, MD, JD) despite their families’ low socioeconomic and formal educational standing, Gandara (1982) reported that 51% of the respondents stated that persistence was of critical importance in determining their overall high academic attainment, followed by hard work and ability. Gender differences were also reported. While Mexican American females were more likely to attribute their academic success to environmental factors, such as supportive family members, Mexican American males were more likely to attribute their academic success to hard work and ability (Alva Alatorre & Padilla, 1995, p. 4). In the face of the substantial amount of research that investigates variables of academic success among immigrant Latinos and Mexican Americans, what 26 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. is being done to meet their needs within the community college system and 4-year institutions? Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was (a) to select a theoretical and con ceptual framework to explore the variables of academic achievement and motivational and occupational aspirations among immigrant Latino students and U.S.-born Hispanics, (b) to compare the aspirations and motivations of a cohort of immigrant Latino students who had taken the GED with those of Mexican American or Chicano students who were high school graduates or had taken the GED, and (c) to investigate the sociocultural variables associated with motivation, academic achievement (such as educational and occupational attainment levels of parents), and composition, ethnic and language minority status, and the perception of community engagement and maintenance of culture among Mexican American students with a high school diploma and immigrant Latinos with a GED. Summary There is a need for a conceptual framework to analyze the background and motivation of immigrant Latino students who take the GED and to develop a comparative analysis of Mexican American students with high school diplomas. How does the immigrant population differ from or resemble its U.S.-born counterpart at CCC? How can academic institutions design educational policies and implement programs for Latino/Chicano students without having a profile of these students and an assessment of what motivates them? These are critical questions to be answered as the 27 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Latino/Chicano student population increases in the unified school districts surrounding CCC. 28 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE Only recently has the study of Latino students in higher education become feasible, since there were so few prior to the 1970s (Olivas, 1986, p. ix). The current literature focuses on Chicano (Mexican American) students who have transferred from community colleges to 4-year institu tions or those who move directly from high school to universities. There is very little research concerning immigrant or migrant Latino students within the community college system and their similarities to or differences from their U.S.-born counterparts. How can policy makers and educators meet the needs of this growing population within the community college system? What are the sociocultural variables associated with academic achieve ment? What are the similarities and differences between these two cohorts? This chapter reviews the existing literature on the role of educa tion in social mobility and how this literature addresses Latino students— immigrant, migrant, or U.S.-born Hispanic students— in higher education and investigates academic achievement among Mexican Americans/ Chicanos who are high school graduates and their immigrant counterparts who have taken the GED at CCC. The work of anthropologist John Ogbu provides the conceptual and theoretical framework for this research. Analysis of Immigrants and Minority Groups According to researcher Gandara (1995), as the strong bias in favor of quantitative methods of the 1970s began to give way in the 1980s to qualitative methods drawn from anthropology, more powerful and complex 29 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. explanatory theories of minority school failure were introduced. This newer literature, which has focused on the social construction of disadvantage, has had the added benefit of being able to explain at least partially the variations among immigrant and minority groups and their respective relationships to educational systems. Ogbu (1987) and Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi (1986) articulated a framework for studying minority school achievement that distinguishes between immigrant minorities (people who have come to the United States more or less voluntarily to seek greater opportunity) and involuntary or caste-like minorities (people who came to the United States because of slavery, conquest, or colonization). Within this framework, the immigrant minorities reference their situation in the United States to the homelands from which they fled and, in spite of discrimination and other barriers facing newcomers, find their present situation to be a hopeful one. On the other hand, the caste-like minorities mark as their reference point the members of their group who have already lived in the United States for generations and have failed to secure a place within the mainstream. Ogbu suggested that an attitude of hopelessness and the adoption of behaviors that are defined in opposition to the practices and preferences of White Americans constitute a way of repudiating the negative stereotypes that are projected on them by the majority culture. Hence, if school achievement is a value of White culture, then doing well in school takes on the connotation of “ acting White, anathema to the behavioral standards of the minority group” (Ogbu, as cited in Gandara, 1995, p. 5). Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi applied this framework specifically to Mexican Americans to 30 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. explain the way in which group behaviors may both result from and reinforce majority culture stereotypes that operate to maintain minority group subordination (Gandara, 1995, p. 5). For example, immigrant Blacks from Africa and the Caribbean within the United States are more likely to be doing better than African Americans born in the United States, and Mexican immigrants in the United States are more likely to be doing better than Mexican Americans or Chicanos (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991; Matute-Bianchi, 1986). There are a least two prerequisites for understanding the cultural frame of reference regarding the performance of minorities in contemporary urban industrial societies. The first is to distinguish among types of minority statuses, which have different implications for cognitive and academic behaviors; the second is to distinguish among types of cultural differences (Ogbu, 1993, p. 484). These distinctions are discussed in the following sections. Types of Minority Status Voluntary Minorities Immigrant or voluntary minorities are people who have moved more or less voluntarily to the United States or to any other society because they believe that this would lead to more economic well-being, better overall opportunities, and/or greater political freedom. They may initially occupy the lowest rung of the occupational ladder, lack political power, and possess low prestige. However, this objective structural position does not reflect their entire status in the social hierarchy because immigrants may 31 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. not think subjectively of their position in the same way as their hosts do. In fact, immigrants may not understand that the dominant group may perceive their employment status as being menial; if they do so, they may deliber ately reject this perception of them because they are strangers who are not yet subjectively a part of the local status system. Further, these immigrants may even consider their menial positions better than what they had prior to emigration. As strangers, they can operate psychologically outside of established definitions of social status and relations. They may be subject to pillory and discrimination but have not usually had time to internalize the effects of such treatment or have those effects become an ingrained part of their culture and self perception (Ogbu, 1993, p. 485). Location of Reference Group Another feature of immigrant minorities is the location of their reference groups. Reference groups may be defined as the native-born counterparts of immigrants whom they view as being economically and educationally successful. The involuntary minorities look to affluent members of the dominant group of their present societies in assessing their status or achievement; however, for voluntary immigrants the reference group is their own peers back in their “homeland” or in the immigrant neighborhoods. It is to these that they compare themselves, and here they often find much evidence of their own self-improvement and good prospects for their children because of “better opportunities.” According to Ogbu, their voluntary immigration is usually motivated by a desire to accumulate wealth or other means of achieving self-advancement in their host society or “back 32 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. home” but not by a desire to compete for equal status with elite members of their host society. Following Ogbu’s theory, Latino immigrants compare themselves to individuals from their homeland in terms of how successful they have become; they do not use the elite members of U.S. society as their criteria for achievement. The differential reference group often acts as a strong incentive to exploit anticipated and unanticipated opportunities and to maintain instrumental attitudes toward economic and educational oppor tunities even in the face of prejudice and discrimination. That is, the expectations that motivated emigration continue to influence the way in which they perceive and respond to events, including schooling, in the host society (Ogbu, 1993, p. 485). Generational Differences According to Arturo Madrid and Villma Ortiz, researchers at the Educational Testing Service who analyzed the data gathered in the first year (1979) of the 5-year National Longitudinal Survey of Labor Market Experiences conducted by Ohio State University, Dr. Ortiz used techniques of multivariate analysis to compare first-, second-, and third-generation Hispanic youth with non-Hispanic White youth. Initially, the data indicated that Hispanic youth were more than twice as likely to be delayed in school (20% to 9%) and to have dropped out of high school (30% to 12%) than non-Hispanic white youths (as cited in Olivas, 1986, p. x). As in many prior studies, this one found that second-generation Hispanics stood out in school achievement when compared to first- generation Hispanics and later generations. It was Ortiz’s opinion that 33 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. “immigrant parents provide more encouragement and hold higher expecta tions for their children than do non-immigrant parents” (as cited in Olivas, 1986, p. 35). A recent report by the PEW (Lowell & Suro, 2002) concluded that all Latino immigrants who arrive before age 11 complete American primary education and most go on to complete high school. Those who are primarily educated in the United States are 70% more likely than immi grants who are educated abroad to have completed either a secondary or college education. More than 80% of American-educated immigrants complete high school or college; that figure is approximately 10 percentage points less than the average of the entire United States populace. Nearly 25% of American-educated immigrants complete an Associate degree or better (Lowell & Suro). Dual Frame of Reference The research of Ortiz and the PEW report supports Ogbu’s frame of reference that entails immigrants comparing their present situation with their own former situation or with that of their peers “back home.” When they make this comparison, they find a great deal of evidence that enables them to believe that they have more and better opportunities in their host society for themselves or for their children. Because of this positive dual frame of reference with respect to status mobility, the immigrants think that, even if they are allowed only marginal jobs, they are better off in their host society than they would be in their homeland. This conceptual framework is supported by Gibson and Bhachu, who reported similar behaviors among Punjabi Sikhs in “Valleyside,” California, and researcher Suarez-Orozco in 34 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. his study of Central American Hispanics in San Francisco (as cited in Gibson & Ogbu, 1991). Both groups came to the United States to maintain or improve their families’ economic status. According to Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco (1995), recent Central American immigrants developed a dual frame of reference in which they evaluated their current lot and anticipated the future. The clear majority of his informants believed that they had more and better opportuni ties to get ahead in the United States than they had at home. Many Central American parents whom he interviewed noted that the future welfare of their children was a primary factor in their decision to emigrate. As one mother from Nicaragua put it, “ We came here for them [her five children] so that they may become somebody tomorrow.. . . I am too old. At my age, it is too late for me.... If anything, it is harder for me here than there.” Suarez- Orozco’s findings reinforce Ogbu’s definition of voluntary minorities (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 45). A dual frame of reference comparing present and past realities emerges to help Central American immigrants to face and interpret current conditions. Because they left their countries in search of a better tomorrow and because their parents sacrificed a great deal for the journey, recent immigrant students thought that the advantages in this country were self- evident and required little elaboration. For them, it was very simple: Despite current difficulties, there were more opportunities to study, more help to do so, better training facilities, and more and better job opportunities in this country than at home. More than once, informants seemed puzzled by Suarez-Orozco’s question, “ Are there more opportunities for your future 35 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in your country or in this country?” (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 46). It was perfectly clear to the immigrants interviewed that the United States offered more opportunities for their families than did their homeland, and it was for this reason that the researcher’s question surprised them. Therefore, Suarez-Orozco’s dual frame of reference supports Ogbu’s theory of voluntary immigrants. Furthermore, it was noted by Suarez-Orozco that many parents seemed to overlook difficulties and emphasized the positive. Parents generally perceived the Anglo American world as fairer than the Latin American world. Many parents could point to at least one American teacher who they thought was genuinely interested in their children. These factors added to the development of beliefs in a better tomorrow in the host land. For example, some informants had expected that they would have to pay to send their children to school because “ we are foreigners.” They were happy to find out that there were no additional school fees for foreign children. Others noted that their children were loaned textbooks for the entire semester without having to pay a cent. One father was overjoyed as he and Saurez-Orozco walked through the school’s library, telling him that his children could “use any book they wanted.” Many noted that, both in El Salvador and Nicaragua, they had to pay for their children’s books. One student pointed out that he was given a hot lunch every school day at no cost to his parents. This, he said, would be unbelievable in El Salvador (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 46). 36 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Theme of a “ Better Tomorrow” Researchers Leslie and Leitch (1989) noted that, once this theme of a “better tomorrow” became apparent, Suarez-Orozco concentrated on identifying a specific folk theory of status mobility. Given that there was a collectively held perception among immigrants that more opportunities for advancement existed in the United State than in El Salvador, Nicaragua, or Guatemala, the next issue was to document beliefs on the nature of how one “makes it” in this country. Universally, informants reported that education was the single most significant avenue to status mobility in the new land. It is important to note that the majority of his parent-informants had been pushed out of school in their native lands. Some had not been able to afford the luxury of schooling in remote rural areas. Others had faced hard physical labor at an early age to contribute to the family’s income. The majority had not finished elementary school. Most of the parents were unskilled or semiskilled laborers. Most were illiterate or semi literate in the native Spanish. Their command of the English language was limited. Some parents attended night school to take language courses (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 46). Suarez-Orozco upholds Ogbu’s voluntary immigrant framework by isolating the emergence of an immigrant ethic. The self-evident fact that immigrants leave their land for a better tomorrow is of fundamental import ance in understanding subsequent immigrant functioning. A dual frame of reference, comparing present and prior (often brutal) realities emerges as a matrix in which to evaluate and face experience. In thinking about the meaning of schooling and the future, the immigrants often paused and 37 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. made comparative evaluations between the “here” and the “there.” In sharp contrast, Mexican American informants had no “here and “ there” reference matrix. They did not have a country that they had left in order to better their lives. Therefore, the Mexican American informants did not have a peer group for comparison where they could feel they had a better life style. Rather, when considering educational issues, there was a perception of exploitation and crushed effort; they could produce countless vignettes of systematic exploitation, both expressive and instrumental (Gibson & Ogbu, p.47). As Suarez-Orozco’s dual frame of reference analysis further reinforces Ogbu’s theory of voluntary immigrants, these conceptual ideas can frame a foundation for analyzing similarities and differences among U.S.-born Mexican American (high school graduates) students or “involuntary minorities” with “ voluntary” immigrant Latino students (who have a GED) at CCC. These two cohorts allow for an investigation of the variables of academic achievement, motivation, and occupational aspira tions among immigrant Latino students and their U.S.-born Hispanic counterparts. Involuntary Minorities Ogbu’s examination of involuntary minorities provides a strong understanding of immigrants and their U.S.-born counterparts (Mexican American/Chicano) in the host country. To begin, involuntary minorities did not choose their membership in the United States motivated by hope of economic success or political freedom. They believe less strongly that the United States is a land of opportunity. Instead, they resent the loss of their 38 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. former freedom and they perceive their involuntary incorporation as an unforgettable loss of freedom. In addition, they lack the positive dual frame of reference of the immigrants who compare their progress in the United States to that of their peers “back home.” If the only comparison group for involuntary minorities is European American, they usually conclude that they are worse off than they should be and blame European Americans, the schools, and other societal institutions controlled by European Americans. The children of involuntary minorities are themselves involuntary minorities, unless they “pass.” According to Ogbu, the variation in color permits mem bers of these minorities to “pass” into the dominant group in order to over come the economic and other barriers against them. Official classification as White makes it psychologically easier for those who “pass” to adjust to their new status or cross-cultural boundaries. Rules of affiliation are also more flexible for them than for African Americans because offsprings of “mixed mating,” that is between the dominant European Americans and Mexican Americans or Puerto Ricans who possess White features (e.g., white skin color, light colored hair, speech) may “pass” more or less easily. Researcher Angela Valenzuela invited a modification of Ogbu’s framework that might better characterize a segment of the African American youth population. In her observations of Mexican American youth at Seguin High School in Houston, Texas, the students did not equate achievement with “ acting White.” A strong achievement orientation at Seguin was simply dismissed as “nerdy” or “ geeky,” suggesting that cultural inversion had greater explanatory value in the realm of self-representation than in atti tudes toward achievement (Valenzuela, 1999, p. 19). 39 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Cultural Differences One of the cultural differences is that involuntary minorities thus have a negative dual frame of reference with respect to status mobility. Unlike immigrants, they do not see their situation as temporary; on the contrary, they tend to interpret the discrimination against them as permanent and institutionalized (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 14). Like the immigrants, involuntary minorities encounter economic and social barriers in the society at large, and at school they encounter inter personal and intergroup problems as well as academic learning problems because of cultural/language differences, but they are less able than the immigrants to overcome these problems. Therefore, they tend to experi ence more prolonged social adjustment problems and persistently higher rates of school failure. While they generally verbalize their desire to make good grades, there is less community and family pressure to achieve such a goal. Current research on Mexican Americans supports Ogbu’s analysis of poor academic achievement among involuntary minorities (Fashola & Slavin, 1997; Gandara, 1994; Alva Alatorre & Padilla, 1995). As for peer groups, their collective orientation is actually the opposite of what it is among the immigrants: It is anti-academic success. Conse quently, peer pressures among involuntary minority students are used to discourage utilization of those strategies that enhance school success. There are complex “ community forces” that make it more difficult for involuntary minority students to overcome their initial school problems. Some of the community forces that arise within involuntary minority groups affect their educational process (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 23). Although 40 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ogbu spent decades in studying how the members of various ethnic groups perform academically, other scholars have since come forward to disagree with the professor’s conceptual framework. In particular, racial theorist Shelby Steele is critical of Ogbu’s work involving African Americans. He contended that continued societal deference to the victims of racial discrimination has permitted Blacks “ the license not to meet the same standards that others must meet,” which has been detrimental to every aspect of African American life. “ To talk about Black responsibility is ‘racist’ and ‘blaming the victim’ (Goldsmith, 2003, p. 3).” Asa Hilliard, an education professor at Georgia State University, held that Ogbu was inaccurate about the attitudes of learning by African Americans, stating that education is a very high value in the African American community. He contended that Dr. Ogbu was unfamiliar with the fact that thousands of African American students succeed (Goldsmith, 2003, p. 3). This critique may also extend into his analysis of immigrant Latinos and could require an alteration of his theories. Valenzuela (1999) published a research report entitled Subtractive Schooling: U.S.-Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring. Rather than looking at the youth as lacking the necessary cultural or social capital to succeed, Valenzuela viewed the school process as subtractive. Valenzuela contended that the school process divests these youth of important social and cultural resources, leaving them progressively vulnerable to academic failure. 41 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Community Force Ogbu’s conceptual framework is used as a foundation for this investigation, but it is important to consider also his scholarly critics who have viewed his analysis as not taking into consideration the politics and policies of the American educational system (e.g., Valenzuela, 1999). Ogbu identified as a community force the dual status-mobility frame. As noted earlier, involuntary minorities, unlike immigrant minorities, did not choose to move to their present societies motivated by the hope of economic success or political freedom. Nor do they compare their situation to the conditions of their peers “back home” or to a less favorable former status. Their only comparative frame of reference is that of the members of the dominant group of their respective societies; when they compare themselves with dominant group members, they invariably conclude that they are worse off than they ought to be because of the way in which they are treated by the dominant group. They become resentful, especially because they attribute their poorer conditions to what they perceive as institutionalized discrimination perpetuated against them by dominant group members and by dominant group-controlled institutions such as schools. This assessment leads to disillusionment and lack of optimism about commitment to educational effort (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 23). Correlation of Involuntary Minority Status and the University of California, Davis Following Ogbu’s observations is the correlation of the research of Patricia Gandara at the University of California, Davis. The loss of affirma tive action as a tool in admissions has had a profound effect on the 42 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. University of California (UC) system. In 1997, while affirmative action was still in effect, 13.2% of the entering UC freshmen were Chicano/Latino (of this, 11.9% were Mexican American). This percentage dropped to 11.8% (8.8% for Mexican Americans) in 1998, the first year in which the provisions of Proposition 209 were imposed. The numbers rebounded slightly in 1999, with intensive efforts to recruit students of color who met the university’s new eligibility requirements, and 12.4% Chicano/Latinos (9.13% of whom were Mexican-origin students; the percentage of immigrants students was not delineated) enrolled systemwide. Some within the university applauded themselves for the rapid turnaround in the declining numbers of underrepre sented students enrolling in the university; however, this small increase obscured a more troublesome trend: the increasing segregation on the UC campuses. Gandara noted that the two flagship campuses of the UC system were also the leaders in diversifying their student bodies. Prior to Proposition 209,14.5% of the freshman at UC Berkeley and 15.8% of those at UC Los Angeles (UCLA) were Chicano/Latino, compared to a system- wide 12.4% for the rest of the UC campuses. In 1998, the year after Proposition 209 took effect, just 7.5% of freshmen at UC Berkeley and 11% of those at UCLA were Chicano/Latino. Most of the gains in the UC system in 1999 came from increased enrollments at other campuses, as UC Berkeley added only 55 Chicano/Latino students to its class of 3,218 and UCLA added 54 students to a class of 3,872. The percentage of Latino students who were not of Mexican origin also increased. This phenomenon has become known as “ cascading,” or moving the less competitively eligible students, who in most cases are African 43 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. American and Latino, to the less-sought-after campuses. Thus, independ ent of the UC efforts to increase enrollment of underrepresented students, diversity at UC Berkeley and UCLA has suffered a stunning blow. Research on the cognitive benefits of being educated in diverse settings adds a further dimension to this problem. It is becoming increasingly clear that all students stand to lose from being educated in segregated educa tional settings (Gandara, 1994, p. 2). California’s Cvil Rights Initiative of 1996, commonly referred to as Proposition 209, is an example of a community force that had a strong impact on Chicano/Latino students (Castellanos & Jones, 2003, p. 38). Furthermore, it reinforces how “involuntary minorities” (e.g., Mexican Americans) have been disillusioned and marginalized in higher education. According to an analysis by the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, acceptance rates for Latinos have dropped since 1997 by 38% at UCLA, nearly 43% at UC San Diego, and 38% at UC Berkeley. For African American students, the situation was just as dismal. Systemwide, the minority acceptance rate dropped 24% (Tornatsky et al., 2002, p. 1). These data reinforce how “involuntary minorities” (e.g., Mexican Americans) have been disillusioned and marginalized in higher education. Lack of Success for Involuntary Minorities How do involuntary minorities deal with disillusionment and lack of success? Eventually, they come to believe that discrimination against them is institutionalized, and that it is not eliminated entirely by getting an educa tion (Ogbu, 1982). For example, during Ogbu’s field work in Stockton, 44 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. California, Blacks complained that they had to work twice as hard as the Whites or be twice as good as the Whites if they competed for the same job or social position. One result was that the minorities did not develop “effort optimism” toward academic work (Shack, 1970). That is, they did not develop a strong tradition of cultural know-how, hard work, and persever ance toward academic tasks. In Stockton, minority parents also appeared to be giving their children contradictory messages about getting ahead through education. Ogbu found that the actual texture of the parents’ lives with respect to low-level jobs, underemployment, and unemployment conveyed a contradictory message that was powerful enough to undo their exhortations. Unavoidably, involuntary minority parents discuss their problems with “ the system” as well as the problems of their relatives, friends, and neigh bors in the presence of their children. The result is that involuntary minority group children become increasingly disillusioned about the inability to succeed in adult life through the mainstream strategy of schooling (Hunter, 1980). Of course, this problem is not limited to Black Americans; it can also be seen in the experiences of other involuntary groups in other countries, such as Koreans in Japan. Koreans developed a social identity after their involuntary incorporation into Japanese society. This identity is based on their interpretations of subsequent discriminatory treatment, including denial of equal treatment and true admission into mainstream society. Koreans in Japan, for example, are permanently classified as “aliens” by the Alien Registration Act of 1947 (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 14). Obgu’s insightful 45 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. observations of disillusionment and low academic achievement by involun tary minorities has been corroborated by current research of Mexican Americans and their failure to enter the academic pipeline of higher education. The Problem of Hispanic School Failure According to Matute-Bianchi, persistent school failure among large numbers of Mexican-descent students and other Hispanic groups in the United States is a pervasive, well-documented, and enduring problem (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 205). It has been widely documented that the academic achievement of Mexican American students is linked to a number of sociocultural variables. Among the sociocultural variables associated with academic achievement are the educational and occupational attain ment levels of parents, family income and composition, ethnic and language minority status, and the absence of learning materials in the home (Rumberger, 1983, pp. 199-200). The assumption is generally held that these sociocultural variables influence or cause the disproportionately high level of academic failure and attrition found among Mexican American students. Indeed, several major reports document that Mexican American students are far more likely to leave high school before completion than the general population (Brown, Rosen, Hill, & Olivas, 1980; Hirano-Nakanishi, 1986; National Commission on Secondary Education for Hispanics, 1984; National Council of La Raza, 1992; Rumberger, 1983; Valverde, 1987). A report prepared by the Congressional Research Service (1986) found that Mexican Americans had 46 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the lowest median number of school years completed (9.9) and the lowest proportion of high school graduates (40%) in the United States. The NCES (1989) estimated that national dropout rates were 36% for Hispanics, 15% for Blacks, and 13% for Whites. The low educational and occupational status of many Mexican American families has been viewed as an influen tial determinant of student academic failure (Alva Alatorre & Padilla, 1995, p. 1). A report issued by the Tomas Rivera Center stated that too few Latinos make the transition to higher education. Latinos, both foreign born and U.S. born, have the lowest high school completion rate of any major ethnic group and are projected to have the lowest percentage of college graduation by the year 2015 (as cited in Tornatsky et a!., 2002, p. 4). A high school diploma is the minimum qualification for full participa tion in the U.S. economy. A worker without one can find work in only the most menial of occupations. For example, such a work is 4 times more likely than a high school graduate to be on welfare; 27% of dropouts but only 6% of high school graduates who did not attend college are on welfare (Fashola & Slavin, 1997, p.1). Matute-Bianchi (1986) cited that persistent school failure among large numbers of Mexican-descent students and other Hispanic groups in the United States is a pervasive, well-documented and an enduring problem (Achievement Council, 1984; Arias, 1986; Brown et al., 1980; California Postsecondary Education Commission, 1982; Carter, 1970; Carter & Segura, 1979; Coleman, 1966; Ogbu, 1974, 1978; Ogbu & Matute-Bianchi, 1986; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1971). 47 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A study of fieldwork in a California community conducted by Matute- Bianchi (1986), focused on variations in school performance patterns among Mexican-descent high school students, pointed to a relationship between academic performance and student perceptions of ethnic identities. Matute-Bianchi found that more recent Mexican immigrants, as well as the descendants of Mexican immigrants who maintain a separate identity as “Mexicanos” within the context of their experiences in the United States, tended to perform relatively well in school and, in many cases, outperformed nonimmigrant Chicano students (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, pp. 205-206). This investigation corroborates Ogbu’s initial analysis of voluntary and involuntary minorities. In summary, the research cited forms a provocative framework for investigating differences and similarities among Mexican Americans and immigrant Latino students at CCC. Psychosocial Framework Consequences of “ Job Ceiling” on Schooling John Ogbu (1974,1978,1981) demonstrated from a comparative perspective the cultural ecological basis of castelike or involuntary minority school failure. Ogbu (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, pp. 40-41) identified castelike or involuntary minorities as minorities who have been exploited and depreciated systematically over generations through slavery (e.g., Blacks in the United States) and colonization (e.g., Mexicans in the Southwest after the Anglo colonization of the Mexican territories, and Koreans in Japan). 48 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. involuntary minorities, as contrasted with immigrant minorities, were incorporated into a host society not by their own choice, and they must operate in an encompassing social context in which there is a basic con tinuity in a long history of instrumental and expressive exploitation and depreciation by the dominant group. Employment opportunities have been limited historically to certain less-desirable sectors, usually those requiring little formal schooling. Ogbu (1983) cogently argued that this “ job ceiling” has direct consequences on a group’s perceptions of schooling. Such perceptions may be translated into behavioral strategies, which in some cases serve to further remove minority youngsters from the schooling process (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 41). A Matter of Choice Immigrant minorities, on the other hand, “ choose” to leave their original environment to enter a new socioeconomic and cultural milieu. Immigrants are free from a history of depreciation over generations in the new social environment (De Vos & Suarez-Orozco, 1990). Furthermore, in the context of changes brought about by the migratory experience, immi grants develop what Suarez-Orozco termed a dual frame of reference (Suarez-Orozco, 1989). That is to say, immigrants commonly interpret conditions and events in the new country in direct reference to prior experiences in their country of origin (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 41). These facts have been shown to have an effect on the emergence of a folk epistemology regarding schooling and how to “make it” in the new land. This is the case among the Salvadorans, Nicaraguans, and 49 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Guatemalans reported in research by Suarez-Orozco. Free from such experience of job ceiling exploitation and having a comparative perspective (“homeland” versus “new land”) on the nature of their current situation and future opportunities, working class Central American informants have developed beliefs about schooling that are quite different from those reported among nonimmigrant working class Hispanic informants (Gibson & Ogbu, p. 42). Psychosocial Consequences The work of George De Vos (1967, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1984; De Vos & Suarez-Orozco, 1990) illuminates the complex psychosocial consequences of prolonged exploitation and disparagement. As a psychologist, De Vos took a multidisciplinary approach to the study of culture, minority status, and social mobility (De Vos & Suarez-Orozco, p. 310; Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 42; Suarez-Orozco, 1987). Both De Vos and John Ogbu have argued that the specific problems facing the children of immigrants and other minority groups must be seen in the context of the distinct psychosocial experience of each group as it enters a dominant society. Ogbu described the special problems facing minority groups that were initially incorporated into a dominant society against their will, such as African Americans through slavery or Native Americans and the original Mexican Americans through conquest. In addition to their original sub ordination, these groups have been subjected to what Ogbu called a job ceiling: They were assigned the most undesirable menial jobs in the opportunity structure and could not rise above these positions regardless of 50 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. effort, talent, motivation, or achievement (Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 1995, p. 56). De Vos has argued that continuous depreciation has concrete psy chosocial consequences in the classroom. In an atmosphere of discrimina tion, intolerance, and mutual distrust, involuntary minorities come to experi ence formal schooling not only as irrelevant but worse. The traditional educational system, run by Anglos, becomes psychologically a threat to the students’ sense of ethnic belonging. When schools become a stage enact ing the inequality and depreciation in the encompassing social structure (Suarez-Orozco, 1987), success in school may induce what De Vos (1978, p. 22) termed a state of “ affective dissonance.” This means that, in such a context, engaging in the behaviors required for success in school becomes dangerous; it may be read as indicating a wish to “pass,” a wish “ to do the White man’s thing,” an attempt to leave one’s ethnic group (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 42). Severe Alienation Researcher Harriet Romo (1984) found a pattern of severe alienation from school among Chicano families in Texas. She reported that for Texan Chicano families “their own school experiences reinforced negative per ceptions of school interactions and sensitized them to prejudices and discrimination. Of all families interviewed, Chicano parents expressed the most alienation from schools” (p. 646). Fernandez and Marenco (1980) argued that, rather than viewing schooling as a ladder for upward social mobility, certain disparaged minorities experience schooling as one more 51 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. tool of the oppressor to maintain the inequality of the status quo. During the course of Suarez-Orozco’s research, Mexican American parents repeatedly told him that the schools were not teaching their children. For example, one informant noted that his children were given the same textbooks to use year after year. He pointed out this and other facts to show that the schools were interested in maintaining Mexican American children at lower levels (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 42). The narratives of these informants relating to schooling stand in binary opposition to the schooling motif para llegar a ser alguien (to become somebody) that Suarez-Orozco found among recent Central American immigrants (Gibson & Ogbu, p. 42). The Immigrant Ethic and Its Impact on Schooling In his interviews Suarez-Orozco discovered that a number of teacher-informants reported that the Central American students were motivated to learn (particularly English). These teachers noted that immi grant students expended more effort, studied harder, and often received better grades than other minority students. Teachers reported, too, that immigrant students were much more respectful and “nicer to have around” than either Anglo or other minority students. More objective measures seem to confirm these impressions. For example, at one school site, the Central American students were statistically underrepresented in numbers of school suspensions (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 43). In his research Suarez-Orozco isolated the emergence of an immi grant ethic. The self-evident fact that immigrants leave their land for a better tomorrow is of fundamental importance in understanding subsequent 52 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. immigrant functioning. A dual frame of reference, comparing present and prior (often brutal) realities emerges as a matrix in which to evaluate and face experience. In thinking about the meaning of schooling and the future, the immigrants often paused and made comparative evaluations between the “here” and the “ there.” In sharp contrast, Mexican American informants had no “here” and” there reference matrix. Rather, while considering educational issues, the perception prevailed of a basic continuity in the pattern of exploitation and crushed efforts; they related countless vignettes of systematic exploitation, both expressive and instrumental. Central American immigrants, on the other hand, endured hardships, racism, and marginality with reference to two factors: first, a perception that, no matter how bad things seem to be now, they are not as bad as they would be at home; and second, anticipations of a better tomorrow in what they had come to view as a land of opportunity (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, p. 47). In summary, Suarez-Orozco’s findings are reflective and support Ogbu’s theoretical framework of voluntary and involuntary minorities and establish a foundation for the analysis of immigrant Latino students and their Mexican American counterparts at CCC. Cultural and Academic Differences Cultural Differences Among Latino Students Who Take the GED and Native-Speaking English (White) Students According to Suzanne M. Griffin, State Director of Adult Education in Washington, in comparing native-born Latino students and their immigrant counterparts, there are more than cultural differences between LEP and 53 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. native English-speaking students seeking a GED diploma or certificate. LEP students frequently have a higher educational level than their native English-speaking counterparts. They average 10 to 12 years of education in their native countries. Some have graduated from high school, while others have had some college education. Most LEP examinees do not suffer from the “ failure syndrome” that affects many GED candidates who, for various reasons, did not complete high school. LEP examinees with strong educational backgrounds often have high self-esteem, positive atti tudes about their own learning abilities, a good general knowledge base, and strong study skills (Allen & Jones, 1992, p. 14). This analysis might indicate that LEP Latino immigrant students at CCC who pass the GED validate the Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi framework for studying minority school achievement, which distinguishes between immigrant minorities (people who have come to the United States more or less voluntarily to seek greater opportunity) and their U.S.-born counter parts (Gandara, 1995, p. 5). Furthermore, as cited earlier by researchers Ogbu and Suarez-Orozco, immigrants have a “ dual frame” of reference when comparing the greater opportunities that they have in the host country than they had in their native land. Cultural Discontinuity Hypothesis According to Ogbu, it is generally thought by anthropologists that some groups do well in school because their cultures are congruent with school culture. The cultural discontinuity hypothesis attempts to define and explain school performance among some minority groups, immigrants, and 54 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. lower-class children in the United States and other contemporary industrial societies. This hypothesis distinguishes three types of discontinuities: (a) universal discontinuities experienced by all children, (b) primary discon tinuities experienced as a transitional phenomenon by immigrants and non-Western peoples being introduced to Western-type schooling; and (c) secondary discontinuities, which are more or less enduring among castelike or subordinate minorities in Western nations. Subcomponent Universal Discontinuities Ogbu’s analysis concluded that some features of schooling are inherently discontinuous with the home and community experiences of all children. He described how Scrupski and Shimahara (1975) summarized some sociological works in this area. In general, certain features of schools make them a more appropriate place than the family and community to prepare children in the social-emotional skills essential for participation in the adult work force of a modern industrial and cash economy. For example, classroom organization, student-teacher relations, and the grading system tend to promote attributes of impersonality, specificity, universal standardism, achievement norms, and independence similar to those valued and rewarded in the workplace of the corporate economy. In contrast, a child’s socialization in the family promotes intimacy, diffuseness, and particularism in interpersonal relationships. One question that con tinues is why some children and/or adults are more successful than others in coping with the inherent discontinuities and in learning to perform in school (Ogbu, 1982, p. 293). Therefore, in the case of Latino immigrants 55 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. who have passed the GED and Mexican American students with high school diplomas, does CCC provide a nurturing academic environment or do the policies and practices of the institution promote discontinuities for the students’ academic success? Primary Discontinuities and Education Primary cultural differences result from cultural developments before members of a given population come in contact with American or Western White middle-class culture or enter American public schools or Western- type schools. Such cultural differences generate primary cultural discon tinuities. These elements are often associated with immigrants attending schools in their host societies and with non-Western peoples being intro duced to Western-type schools (Ogbu, 1984, p. 294). Secondary Cultural Discontinuities and Schooling John Ogbu (1982) contrasted primary cultural discontinuities with secondary cultural discontinuities that develop after members of two populations have been in contact or after members of a given population group have begun to participate in an institution, such as the school system, that is controlled by another group. Secondary cultural differences usually develop as a response or a contact situation, especially a contact situation involving stratified domination. Colonial stratification, caste stratification, and racial stratification are examples of such a contact situation. This type of contact situation is also associated with the nonimmigrant minorities that Ogbu designated as castelike minorities. Castefike minorities were dis tinguished from immigrant and other types of minorities in that (a) they have 56 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. been incorporated into the society rather involuntarily and permanently, (b) they face job and status ceilings, and (c) they tend to formulate their economic and social problems in terms of collective institutional discrimina tion, which they perceive as more than temporary. Examples of castelike minorities in the United States include Blacks, Indians, Chicanos, and Puerto Ricans. Blacks were brought here as slaves more than 300 years ago and, after emancipation, were relegated to lower-caste status; Indians were the original owners of the land who suffered military defeat and were removed to reservations almost from the beginning of American society; Chicanos were conquered in the Mexico-American War during the first half of the 19th century and were then relegated to a subordinate status that was extended to other Mexicans who since immigrated from Mexico; Puerto Ricans were annexed as a colonized component and treated as such for generations, whether they lived in the American South, North, West, or Southwest or Puerto Rico and whether they lived in rural or urban areas (Ogbu, 1982, p. 299). Cultural Frame of Reference From Ogbu’s cultural frame of reference analysis of castelike minori ties comes the suggestion of a correlation between native-born Latinos (Chicanos) and their immigrant counterparts who have successfully com pleted the GED. Native-born individuals face job discrimination and economic and social problems based on collective institutional racism. The data reflect that LEP immigrant students have a higher educational level than their native English-speaking counterparts. They average 10 to 12 57 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. years of education in their native countries. It is within this context of an “ educational gap” that leads to a study of implications of motivation (Allen & Jones, 1992, p. 14). Coping With Immigration Research by Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco (1995) suggests that, even though immigrant youths must cope with the losses and stresses of immigration, “culture shock,” and a wide array of difficulties and hostilities in conflict-ridden inner-city schools, they nevertheless desperately try, seemingly against all odds, to learn the language and to use the educa tional system, not the welfare system—to “become somebody.” Teachers working with Latino immigrant students reported almost unanimously to the researchers that the new arrivals were simply the best students that they had ever had: appreciative, well behaved, and, above all desperate to learn. As a classroom veteran said, The immigrant students are just great. I would rather teach ESL anytime. They are so eager to learn.. . . These students have a discipline that you just don’t see anymore in American students. They have a respect and a desire to learn that is fantastic. They behave the way our kids [American-born students] used to behave 30 years ago. And they love the teacher. It is a great feeling! (Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco, 1995, p. 5) This response has also been noted by faculty at CCC who have taught ESL students who have taken the GED and entered the mainstream academic program. Furthermore, the researcher noted similar comments made by faculty within CCC’s mathematics department. These comments reflect the findings of Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, although their research was based on younger students. 58 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Persistence Model An interesting study on persistence in seeking a college education by students in proprietary (private) schools emerged in 1995 at the University of New Orleans. There is substantial evidence to conclude that a large percentage of students attending proprietary schools are from underrepre sented minority groups with low incomes. Both African Americans and Hispanics were more likely to persist in all versions of what researchers have termed a persistence model. This was defined as their persistence to graduate with a baccalaureate degree. Income for African Americans and Hispanics was not significantly associated with persistence. Students with a GED and no high school degree were more likely to persist than were students with high school degrees (St. John, Starkey, Paulsen, & Mbaduagha, 1995, pp. 159-161). Summary The theoretical framework of anthropologist John Ogbu is used as a foundation for this research. His analysis of voluntary minorities (immi grants who leave their country in search of better opportunities) and involuntary minorities (immigrant counterparts who are born in the host country) serves as a paradigm for this investigation. The contrasting analysis of Valenzuela and her conceptual frame work of subtractive schooling is also taken into consideration and may serve as a modification of Ogbu’s theories. 59 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Research Design According to Gandara (1995), the strong bias in favor of quantitative methods of the 1970s began to give way in the 1980s to qualitative methods drawn from anthropology, and more powerful and complex explanatory theories of minority school failure were introduced. This newer literature, which has focused on the social construction of disadvantage, has had the added benefit of being able to explain at least partially the variations among immigrant and minority groups and their relationship to the educational system. Ogbu (1987) and Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi (1986) articulated a framework for studying minority school achievement that distinguishes between immigrant minorities (people who have come to the United States more or less voluntarily to seek greater opportunity) and involuntary or caste-like minorities (people who are in the United States because of slavery, conquest or colonization). This research design used Ogbu’s framework of voluntary and involuntary minorities to distinguish between Latino immigrants and their U.S.-born counterparts at CCC. Although Ogbu’s analysis was used as a foundation to distinguish between the two groups in the research design, ultimately, both groups demonstrated an attitude of ambition by the very fact that they had chosen to attend college. Therefore, it is important to reflect on the analyses of other current researchers in forming conclusions from the data collected. 60 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Setting This study was conducted at CCC, in Compton, California. The college serves the communities of the Watts/Willowbrook area, Compton, Lynwood, and Paramount. A questionnaire was developed and students were interviewed during the fall 2002 and spring 2003 semesters. The purpose of the investigation was to determine in what ways immigrant students who passed the GED at CCC {voluntary minorities) were similar to or different from U.S.-born Hispanic students {involuntary minorities) who had a high school diploma from a U.S. high school and were registered at CCC, in terms of their motivation, academic achievement (such as educational and occupational attainment levels of parents), composition, ethnic and language minority status, and their perceptions of community engagement and maintenance of culture. Criteria A stratified random sampling method was used to select (a) 30 female and 30 male students who had taken the GED and continued to study at CCC and (b) 30 female and 30 male U.S.-born Hispanic students who had a high school diploma and were also currently enrolled. Design of Questionnaire The questionnaire developed for this study integrated several of the components of Turner’s (1989) investigation. The findings reported by Turner in A Mandate for the 90’ s: Research on the Success of GED Recipients in Higher Education, which included 160 successful GED recipients at North Shore Community College in Berverly, Maine, targeted 61 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. specific areas. Turner’s research involved students’ motivation, their use of college services, and support of their family/friends. These areas are relevant in developing an instrument to measure similarities and differences between a cohort of immigrant Latino students who passed the GED test at CCC and a cohort of Mexican American/Chicano counterparts with high school diplomas. The themes of Gandara’s questions involving religion and factors from the literature reviewed were modified and utilized; the remain ing items were developed by the researcher. Included in the assessment were categories that investigated commonalties that students who had taken the GED might share. The concept of commonalties was taken from the methodologies of the literature review (see matrix in appendix A). A student questionnaire (appendix B) containing 55 items was developed after a careful review of the literature. It was then translated by a retired tenured professor in the Spanish Department at California State University Dominguez Hills. The immigrant students received the question naire in Spanish and the U.S.-born students received the questionnaire in English. During the spring 2002 semester, two pilot interviews were con ducted. Six female and 6 male immigrant GED students were interviewed along with 6 female and 6 male U.S.-born Mexican Americans at separate times and places. Interviews were conducted in small focus groups in a quiet classroom on the campus. It was important to determine the reliability of the instrument and the clarity of the questions. As a result of the pilot sampling, some questions were deleted or rewritten for clarity. The instru ment was piloted again, this time with 4 students (1 female and 1 male 62 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. representing each cohort). Respondents in the two pilot studies were not included in the main study. The researcher then began the formal interviewing process during the fall 2002 and spring 2003 semesters. These interviews were conducted in small focus groups of 4 to 6 students in quiet classrooms or in the library conference room. It was important to determine in what ways certain questions focused on the immigrant experience while others focused on the U.S.-born students (appendix A). A bilingual (Spanish/English) letter explaining the research was sent to students and appointments were scheduled. The questionnaire was administered in small focus groups not exceeding 5 students per group. The questionnaire process and procedures were explained orally to students and they were then given time to complete the questionnaire. The researcher was present during the process and reviewed each instrument for responses that required a more detailed explanation. The purpose of this research was to analyze attitudes, motivations, and perceptions held by the students regarding their educational processes at CCC. What were the influences of a student’s family in terms of eventual educational choices? Who influenced or supported a student’s educational ambitions? How did students come to attend CCC? Did students feel that support services were available to them on campus? The questions reflect the basic themes incorporated into the research design (appendix A). 63 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Data Collection and Analysis A standard statistical analysis computer software application was used to code responses to the 55 questionnaire items and provide a statistical analysis based on data from the immigrant group and from their American-born counterparts. A principal component analysis (based on questions) was used to develop scale scores (based on research cate gories, as shown in appendix A) that were analyzed using Cronbach’s alpha. Descriptive, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and multiple compari sons were used for analysis where there was a significance at the .05 level. Each questionnaire was assigned a number (01-120) to ensure students’ anonymity. Participants were asked to explain, in writing, their responses to questions 12 through 49. The responses provided a qualitative measure ment that was used to support the analysis, summary, and conclusion. Delimitations This case study involved only one of the 109 community colleges in California. The respondents included 30 female and 30 male immigrant students who had passed the GED test and 30 female and 30 male U.S.- born Hispanic students who had graduated from high school or passed the GED. The study was conducted during the 2002-2003 academic year. Limitations The research is delimited to only those immigrant Latino students who had taken the GED in Spanish and were currently enrolled at CCC. Although immigrants come from as far away as Orange County to take the 64 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. GED, they were not included in this study. Only American-born Hispanic students who had high school diplomas and were registered at the college participated. All data collected were the result of a stratified random sample and, therefore, generalizability is limited and there is a selection bias because of the number of students interviewed and the involvement of only one community college. This does not diminish the need nor importance for such research as it pertains to the CCC district and future analyses. Currently, there is insufficient research in the area of immigrant Latino and U.S.-born Mexican American students in the community college system. Summary The work of noted anthropologist John Ogbu was reviewed to form the conceptual framework for the study. A questionnaire containing 55 items was developed to measure variables of differences and similarities between the two cohorts. Structured interviews were conducted with a stratified random sample of 120 students from CCC. The pool included 30 male and 30 female U.S.-born Mexican American students with high school diplomas and 30 male and 30 female immigrant Mexican students with GED diplomas. Interviews were conducted in small focus groups of 5 or 6 students in quiet areas on the campus. A computer statistical analysis software application was used to analyze the data quantitatively. In addi tion, data collection included qualitative responses that provided insightful information. Students were very cooperative with the process. It was not unusual to hear both immigrant and American-born students share such comments as, “ We need more information on how to go to the university” 65 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and “Do you know who we can talk to?” and “I’m interested in a vocational career but we never get any information.” 66 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS The purpose of the research was to examine variables of academic achievement, motivational and occupational aspirations, and maintenance of culture among immigrant Latino students and U.S.-born Hispanic students. Reliability Analysis: Scale (Alpha) The principle component analysis was used to develop the scale scores. Although certain scales had low reliability, an average of .25 (Cronbach’s alpha) was generated for the qualitative responses to the questionnaire, which provided a powerful academic explanation for the data. (A Cronbach’s alpha of .40 is considered to be a low moderate reliability coefficient.) Table 1 shows the Cronbach’s alpha reliability analysis for each scale (research categories) and its corresponding factor (questions) loading. Comparison of the Cohorts by Age Table 2 reports the results of ANOVA of the age variable, showing that the overall difference in ages between immigrants and nonimmigrants was significant at .000. Table 3 shows that the sources of the significant differences (all .000) were between the following pairs: (a) female immi grant GED and female high school, (b) female immigrant GED and male high school, (c) male immigrant GED and male high school, (d) female high 67 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 1 Component Coefficients and Cronbach’ s Alpha Measures of Reliability for Factor Scales Scale (factor) Component Coefficient Alpha Perceptions of life in the United Q3 .871 States better than in foreign country Q4A .200 (Factor 1_3) Q4B .283 Q5 .256 .4921 Support from parents for education; Q9 .500 parents’ perceptions of importance Q11 -.522 of education (Factor 2_2) Q12A .109 Q12B .062 Q13 .561 -.1756 Perceptions of education as a means Q14 .373 of mobility (Factor 1_1) Q16 .376 Q17 -.029 Q18 .071 Q19 -.037 Q20 .288 Q21 -.124 Q22 .045 Q23A .247 .4381 Support in schools better than in a Q24 .683 foreign country (Factor 1_2) Q25 .369 Q26 .579 .0734 Perceive support from teachers and Q27 .160 counselors (Factor 1_4) Q28A .086 Q28B .277 Q29 .279 Q30 .273 Q31 .450 Q33 .188 Q34 .104 Q35 .035 Q36A .299 Q36B .128 .1730 68 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 1 (continued) Scale (factor) Component Coefficient Alpha Support from peers (Factor 1_5) Q17 .277 Q37 .454 Q38 -.365 Q39 -.305 Q40 .404 .2056 Judgment of one’s own ability Q41 .202 (Factor 1_6) Q42 -.628 Q43 .040 Q44A .634 -.2118 Community perceptions (Factor 1_7) Q46 -.038 Q47 .099 Q49 -.039 Q50 -.008 Q51 -.001 Q52A .017 Q52B .205 Q52C .157 Q52D .198 Q52E -.006 Q52F .226 Q52G -.049 Q52H .220 Q53 -.070 Q53A .205 Q54 -.062 Q55 -.032 Q48 .106 Q52F .156 .5048 Institutional support (Factor 1_8) Q26 .382 Q27 .230 Q28A .221 Q28B .246 Q29 .450 Q30 .198 Q31 .298 .2421 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. schoo! and female immigrant GED, (e) male high school and female immi grant GED, and (f) male high school and male immigrant GED. Table 4 presents descriptive statistics regarding ages of the subcohorts. This one way ANOVA shows the immigrant students were significantly (.05) older than their U.S.-born counterparts. The mean age for female immigrant GED students was 29 years, for male immigrant GED students 27 years, for U.S.-born female high school graduates 21 years, and for male high school graduates 20 years. Table 2 Analysis of Variance for Age Measure Sum of squares df Mean square F p Between groups 92.425 3 30.808 19.814 .000 Within groups 180.367 116 1.555 Total 272.792 119 An explanation for this age difference may be found in the qualitative responses provided by the students. (Each questionnaire was assigned a number to ensure anonymity of the respondents). First, many immigrant females came to the United States with a spouse or children: “I came after my husband with my two sons” (001) or in the case of a male immigrant, “I came with my wife and two sons” (046). This may indicate a more mature student who has family and work responsibilities. Second, immigrant male 70 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 3 Multiple Comparisons for Age Group I Group J Mean difference (l-J) P Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED Female high school Male high school 0.7000 2.0000 2.0667 .190 .000* .000* Male immigrant GED Female immigrant GED Female high school Male high school -0.7000 1.3000 1.3667 .190 .001* .000* Female high school Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED Male high school -0.7000 -1.3664 6.667e'0 2 .000* .001* 1.000 Male high school Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED Male high school -2.0667 -1.3667 -6.667 E '0 2 .000* .000* 1.000 Note. Standard error of measurement = .322. * p < .01. and female students did not attend high school in the United States but took the GED and then focused on learning English. U.S.-born Mexican American students all attended high school, and the idea to continue their education at CCC came after graduation from high school. Therefore, it is likely that the younger Mexican American students were still living with their parents. According to one Chicano student, “I think it’s going to help me transfer to California State University, Long Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4 Descriptive Statistics for Age, Gender, and Size of City Variable Cohort n Mean SD Age Female immigrant GED 30 5.9000 1.2415 Male immigrant GED 30 5.2000 1.2704 Female high school 30 3.9000 1.1847 Male high school 30 3.8333 1.2888 Total 120 4.7083 1.5141 Gender Female immigrant GED 30 2.0000 0.0000 Male immigrant GED 30 1.0000 0.0000 Female high school 30 2.0000 0.0000 Male high school 30 1.0000 0.0000 Total 120 1.5000 0.5021 Size of City Female immigrant GED 30 2.3000 1.1188 Male immigrant GED 30 2.4000 1.1626 Female high school 30 2.0000 0.8710 Male high school 30 2.6000 0.7701 Total 120 2.3250 1.0056 Note. One group difference is that they skipped four ages (19-22). Beach” (106). Immigrant students needed to establish their life style, home and work, in the United States before beginning the educational process, which was not true for the Mexican Americans who were all high school graduates. Therefore, it is possible that the age difference may be explained by the fact that immigrants left their family support group in their home country in search of a better life and, out of a need for economic survival, had to work upon entry into the United States. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Education as a Means for Mobility Table 5 shows the factor (question) mean scores and standard deviations for the means of mobility. Table 6 shows significant (< .05) differences on the ANOVA. Table 7 shows significant (< .05) differences between the female immigrant GED students and the female and male high school graduates and between the male immigrant GED students and the female and male high school graduates. There was no significant differ ence between female and male immigrants. The mean difference between cohorts of immigrant Latinos was 0.4381 (see principle component scale, Table 1) and Mexican American students was significant (< .05). Table 5 Means for Mobility: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 3 Group Mean SD Female immigrant GED 0.2728485 1.3611958 Male immigrant GED -0.2728485 1.4479529 Female high school 0.0000000 0.0000000 Male high school 0.0000000 0.0000000 Total 6.071 532e’1 8 1.0000000 Qualitatively, student responses involving education as a means for mobility assist in explaining the significance. A common commitment among the immigrant Latino students, both male and female, was to gain a college education in order to advance in the United States. This cohort 73 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 6 Analysis of Variance for Means of Mobility: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 1 Measure Sum of squares df Mean square F p Between groups 78.245 3 26.082 74.236 .000 Within groups 40.7555 116 0.351 Total 119.000 119 Table 7 Multiple Comparisons for Means of Mobility Group I Group J Mean difference (l-J) P Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED 0.1454215 1.000 Female high school -1.2654362 .000 Male high school -1.7414686 .000 Male immigrant GED Female immigrant GED -0.1454215 1.000 Female high school -1.4108578 .000 Male high school -1.8868902 .000 Note. Standard error of measurement = 0.1530438. *p=.000. 74 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. thought that they had more opportunities in the United States than in Mexico. As one immigrant male student commented, “Here there is a stronger force to help you and in Mexico there doesn’t exist that kind of relationship” (045). A female commented, “In this country, all one has to do is put forth hard work in everything you do” (013). The possible significance of these response supports Ogbu’s framework of voluntary immigrants, as presented in the literature review. The U.S.-born Chicano students also felt strongly about getting a college education. That a high school education was insufficient to get a good job was a common response from U.S.-born Mexican Americans. One Chicana said, “My mother has always encouraged me to major in law” (066). A Mexican American male student responded, “I want to major in business, transfer and graduate and get a real job” (099). They too felt that they had more opportunities than their parents. A Mexican American female commented, “Here, I get paid to go to school [receive financial aid], whereas over in Mexico, they have to pay to go to school from kindergarten to college” (071). The responses from U.S.-born Hispanics contradict Ogbu’s conceptual framework of involuntary minorities, who feel exploited or marginalized. The responses of Mexican Americans were similar to those of immigrant Latino students. Perceived Support From Peers for Education Table 8 shows the factor (question) mean scores and standard deviations for perceived support from peers for education. Table 9 indicates that ANOVA results were significant at the .05 level. Table 10 75 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 8 Perceived Support From Peers for Education: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 4 Group Mean SD Female immigrant GED -0.1447467 1.0810227 Male immigrant GED -0.1261475 0.8696740 Female high school 0.1321630 1.0454488 Male high school 0.1387312 1.0047024 Total -7.19910E '1 7 1.0000000 Table 9 Analysis of Variance for Perceived Support From Peers for Education: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 4 Measure Sum of squares df Mean square F P Between groups 22.391 3 .7464 8.962 .000 Within groups 96.609 116 .833 Total 119.000 119 shows a significant (.000) difference between the male immigrant GED students and the female high school graduates. In the area of perceived support from peers for education, the significant (< .05) mean difference was -0.1756 (see principle component scale, Table 1). The qualitative responses give insight as to the sources of 76 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 10 Multiple Comparisons for Perceived Support From Peers for Education Group I Group J Mean difference (l-J) P Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED 0.9451893 .001* Female high school -0.1155703 1.000 Male high school 0.5799698 Male immigrant GED Female immigrant GED -0.6151856 .001 Female high school -1.0607597 .000* Male high school -0.3652195 .743 Note. Standard error of measurement = 0.2356319. *p = .000. this significant difference. For example, immigrant male Latino students indicated that they studied with other students: “Usually we studied after class” (046) or “Got together to do homework” (038), and indicated that they had someone pick up assignments when they were absent from class. This was a contrast from the female immigrant students, who indicated that they did not study with someone or have anyone to pick up assignments when they were absent. An immigrant student responded, “I don’t study with someone and I don’t have anyone to pick up homework” (005). Immigrant male and female students repeatedly indicated that they had heard about the GED either through a friend or the GED program coordinator. A female student said, “I was invited by the program coordinator” (012). A male student reported, “ A friend got me interested in the GED to better my future” 77 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (039). A variable among U.S. Mexican Americans, both female and male, was that they studied with someone outside of class and had someone pick up assignments if they were absent. As one female Mexican American student said, “Most of the things I’ve done at CCC are thanks to friends” (063). A male Chicano student stated, “Sometimes I ask a friend if he or she can recommend a teacher or class I should take” (093). These responses from Mexican American students, both female and male, did not fit the social framework of Ogbu’s involuntary minorities. Perceptions of Community Engagement Table 11 shows the factor (question) mean scores and standard deviations for perceptions of community engagement. Table 12 indicates that the ANOVA results were significant at the .05 level. Table 13 shows a significant (< .05) difference between immigrant female GED students and Mexican American high school graduates and between immigrant male GED students and male high school graduates. In the area of perceptions of community engagement, the mean difference was 0.5048 (see the principle component scale, Table 1) on responses to questions regarding the use of language, culture, help received at the college, and the utilization of education to help out others was significant at the .05 level for both cohorts. These significant differences may be reflected in the qualitative responses of immigrant Latinos and U.S. born Mexican Americans, both of whom expressed a strong belief that their education would help others. One immigrant Latino male student stated, “Quality of my life, family, this 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 11 Perceptions of Community Engagement: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 5 Group Mean SD Female immigrant GED 0.3523979 1.2209080 Male immigrant GED -0.5927921 1.2058516 Female high school 0.4679675 0.4162964 Male high school -0.275726 0.4618931 Total -3.33934e'1 7 1.0000000 Table 12 Perceptions of Community Engagement: Regression Factor Score 1 for Analysis 5 Measure Sum of squares df Mean square F p Between groups 23.883 3 7.961 .000 .000 Within groups 95.117 116 0.820 Total 119.000 119 country, and Mexico would be better” (034). Another female immigrant reflected, “Because I have knowledge, I can share it with others” (011). A male Mexican American student said, “It would set an example for others to follow” (096). A Chicana student answered, “I will be teaching high school and hopefully be able to encourage others to go to school” (071). 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 13 Multiple Comparisons for Perceptions of Community Engagement Group I Group J Mean difference (l-J) P Female immigrant GED Male immigrant GED -0.2994668 1.000 Female high school -0.9068874 .001* Male high school -1.1036210 .000* Male immigrant GED Female immigrant GED 0.2994668 1.000 Female high school -0.6074204 .064 Male high school -0.8041543 .005* Note. Standard error of measurement = 0.2338051. * p = . 000. Support From Parents for Education and Perceptions of the Importance of Education by Parents Reliability for the factor of support from parents for education the parents’ perceptions of the importance of education (refer to the principle component scale, Table 1) was low (.1756) for both immigrant Latinos and U.S.-born Mexican Americans. This may be partially explained by the fact that support from parents cannot be quantified. Male and female immi grants and male and female Mexican Americans indicated that their parents had only an elementary education or no schooling at all. A female student responded, “My father and mother had an elementary school education” (010). An immigrant male said, “My father never went to school” (031). Latinos and Chicanos had the support of parents. One immigrant male student stated, ‘To be a prepared person and have more opportunities you 80 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. need to prepare yourself better” and go to the university (037). This was similar to responses from female immigrant students, as one stated, “I think the best gift you can give yourself in life to be happy is get an education” and study at the university (012). This theme continued with the Mexican American students. For example, one male answered, “ They [parents] believe that getting a degree at the university is going to give me a better chances of getting a better job, so I can support myself and family better” (092). A Chicana student responded, “My mother encouraged us to go to college and choose a career that satisfied us, whether it be a small or big career” (077). Support in Schools Is Better Than in a Foreign Country Reliability for the factor of support in schools in the United States compared to that in countries of origin (refer to the principal component scale, Table 1) was low (.0734), low possibly because this factor could not quantified. An immigrant female commented, “ The classes here are taken more seriously than in the adult schools and in Mexico” (017). A male immigrant student indicated, “ There are better opportunities [in the United States] and studying is very important” (044). Perceived Support for Education From Teachers and Counselors Reliability for the factor of perceived support for education from teachers and counselors (refer to the principle component scale, Table 1) was low (.173), possibly because such support cannot be quantified. A theme among immigrant students was the need for more counselors and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. bilingual services.. A female student commented, “ We need more counselors and information in Spanish that could help us” and “ the administration gets bothered because they don’t understand our English” (008). A male immigrant student responded, “ We need more [Spanish speaking] counselors and bilingual services so those of us that speak Spanish can understand better” (047). A Mexican American female student said, ‘W e need more counseling” (061). One Chicano student indicated the need for more counseling: “ A lot of the problems with students is that we are afraid to ask for help or don’t know who to ask” (091). Judgment of One’s Own Ability Reliability for the factor of judgment of one’s own ability to learn (refer to the principle component scale, Table 1) was (.2118), possibly because judgment of one’s own ability cannot be quantified. A theme among male immigrant Latino students was that they would not have the economic means to fulfill their education or career goals. One student said, “I may not have the money” (038). In contrast were female immigrant Latino students who thought that family issues would present obstacles in continuing their education. A Latina commented, “I think about my home and my children and then to be studying— right now my husband wants me to study and not work” (021). Chicanas expressed similar concerns: “Sometimes when you feel stressful in school or work, your family can get in the way, but I’m strong and I go around the obstacles” (083). Male Mexican American students expressed concerns that economic barriers might prevent them from fulfilling their educational or career goals. One Chicano 82 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. stated, “Tuition fees are going up to $24 per unit, according to some classmates” (097). Institutional and Staff Support Reliability for the factor of institutional and staff support (refer to the principle component scale, Table 1) was low (.2421), possibly because such support cannot be quantified. There was a consistent theme among the immigrant students that faculty provided information about the college but did not discuss personal problems with the students. One Latina responded, “ They [professors] give us information about our educational goals so that we don’t waste our time” (023). A male immigrant student stated, “ The professors support us with their advice” (054). A Chicana student commented that her instructors encouraged her “ to go to the top” (086). One Mexican American student responded that his instructor encouraged him “ to go to the university” (111). Summary These results indicated statistical significance for both cohorts in the areas of education as a means of mobility, perceived support from peers for education, and maintenance of the Spanish language, culture, and associa tions (perceptions of community engagement). Reliability was low in the areas of support from parents for education and perceptions of the import ance of education as perceived by parents, comparison of education in Mexico to that of the United States, judgment of one’s own ability, and institutional support, possibly because such factors could not be quantified. The qualitative responses to the questionnaire provided a powerful 83 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. assessment for analyzing and explaining the data. A more detailed summary and a discussion of the findings are presented in the next chapter. 84 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATION, AND CONCLUSION Overview The purpose of this research was: (a) to compare a cohort of immi grant Latino students who had taken the GED with Mexican American or Chicano students who were high school graduates at CCC, in terms of their motivation, aspirations, and educational attitudes; and (b) to investigate the sociocultural variables associated with motivation and academic achieve ment, such as (a) educational and occupational attainment levels of parents, (b) educational support received from parents, (c) perceptions of support services at CCC, (d) educational goals of immigrant Latino and Mexican American students, and (e) maintenance of the Spanish language (perceptions of community engagement), and cultural traditions, including food and holidays. Statement of the Problem CCC and the Chester Adult School graduated 10,000 immigrant Latino students with a GED by the year 2003, the equivalent of two large public high schools in the County of Los Angeles. The dropout rate, on a national level, among Latino students has always been high and has only slightly diminished. It was 34.3% in 1972 and 30.0% in 1994 (NCES, 1993, 1996). The data from the National Center for Education Statistics did not differentiate between Latino immigrants and U.S.-born Hispanics. 85 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. How do Latino (Mexican-born) students who take the GED differ from Mexican American students with high school diplomas at CCC? What similarities do they share in terms of academic motivation and goals? How are they different? This study investigated these variables among the two cohorts. Review of the Methodology A student questionnaire containing 55 items was developed and pilot tested prior to implementation. It was translated into Spanish for the immi grant Latino students. A stratified random sampling was done and inter views were conducted in small focus groups of 5 to 6 students in quiet areas of the campus (library or empty classrooms). The questions were categorized into basic variables that reflect the conceptual and theoretical framework of John Ogbu. Reliability was statistically low and could not be quantified, although qualitatively the responses of both cohorts provided insight and an explanation to support the theories of Ogbu. Prior to the implementation of the questionnaire, two pilots were conducted among 8 immigrant Latinos with the GED and 8 Mexican Americans. Upon the completion of the two pilot interviews, the researcher did not receive any indication that certain areas of the questionnaire would have a low reliability statistically. These low reliability results may indicate a need to reframe the questions or perhaps a larger pool of students was needed for the initial pilot testing of the questionnaire. The questionnaires that were pilot tested were not included in the analysis. 86 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Perceptions of Education as a Means of Mobility The cohorts were significantly different on the variable of perceptions of education as a means of mobility (refer to the principle component scale, Table 1, and Tables 5, 6, and 7). Discussion The work of Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi (1986) developed a frame work for comparing immigrant minorities to their U.S.-born counterparts. People who have come to the United States more or less voluntarily to seek better opportunities are termed voluntary minorities and people who find themselves in the United States through slavery, conquest, or colonization are termed involuntary minorities. Within this theory, the immigrant minori ties assess their situation in the United States in comparison to their home country as a hopeful one. Immigrant Latinos at CCC had successfully completed their GED. Because of their residency status, they had an opportunity to receive financial aid, tutoring, and transfer to a 4-year school. The involuntary minorities marked as their reference point the members of their group who have already lived in the United States for generations and failed to secure a desirable place within the mainstream. For example, Chicano students may view success as being a doctor or lawyer, and the attainment of these professions is very distant from their current circumstances. Ogbu and Matute-Bianchi applied the voluntary/involuntary frame work specifically to Mexican Americans to explain the way in which group behaviors may both result from and reinforce majority culture stereotypes 87 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. that maintain minority group subordination (Gandara, 1995, p. 5). In the present study, one variable that was consistent with both cohorts in the area of education as a means for mobility was that they commented that they had the support of their families, not just to study but also to attend a university. As one immigrant female reported, “My mother is the one that supports me to study and get a career and it doesn’t matter how much I have to study” (024). A male immigrant said, “I think that the university is the best level of education to get a good job” (042). The comments reflect family support and ambition for a better life, although in both instances the mothers and fathers had only an elementary education. The variable of family support to get a good education and attend a 4-year institution was also consistent among Mexican American students. A Chicana stated, ‘The sky is the limit. My mother never let me work so that I can get an education. Whenever she is gone [dies], the only thing she can leave me is an education” (074). A Mexican American male also had the support of his family: “My parents never were specific but they wanted me to go to college and I want to be a psychologist” (117). Key words were, “My parents never were specific.” The researcher asked both cohorts of students, “Did your parents ever tell you how to go about getting an education?” There was no response for this inquiry, because parents never gave their children any specific information about a step-by-step process to follow. The immigrant Latinos supported Ogbu’s analysis of voluntary minorities in that they viewed the United States as being the land of oppor tunities. One immigrant Latina said, “In this country all one has to do is put 88 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. forth hard work in everything you do” (013). The involuntary minorities (U.S.-born Hispanic students) did not totally emulate Ogbu’s theory. These Chicanos did not view the attainment of their educational goals as beyond their aspirations. However, the Mexican American (involuntary minorities) students responded similarly to the immigrant Latino (voluntary minorities) students at CCC regarding their educational goals. The Chicano students not only had the support of their family but also indicated that they wanted to transfer to a university. A Chicano student commented, “I believe an education makes a well-rounded person and I want to obtain a B.A.” (115). This result may be influenced by the facts that all U.S.-born Mexican Americans were first-generation Americans and that their parents came to the United States as voluntary minorities, in their case as Mexican citizens. Therefore, both cohorts (immigrants and Mexican American students) had parents who came to the United States as voluntary minorities, seeking a better life for themselves and their families. This raises the question of why there were no second- or third-generation students among the interviewees. This question is discussed at the conclusion of this chapter. Recommendations Based on the responses to the questionnaire, it is apparent that immigrant Latinos and the parents of Mexican American students did not have knowledge about how and what is required to be a successful student at CCC or what are the steps for attending a university. CCC should develop noncredit college information classes or workshops for both Spanish- and English-speaking Hispanic parents. Classes could be 89 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. implemented at the local elementary, middle, and secondary school sites of the districts that feed into CCC. The objectives of the course curriculum would be to explain how the community college system functions and the opportunities available for transferring to a 4-year institution. Also, a mandatory preregistration orientation (in Spanish) could be implemented for all first-time immigrant Latinos who are non- or limited speakers of English, and for Mexican Americans and African Americans who are fluent English speakers. Students would learn what their options are and where to seek the necessary information. It would be of great benefit for the college’s Research Department to assess parents’ college knowledge prior to and after taking a class on how the college system functions and to arrange for a longitudinal study to assess and evaluate the numbers of Latinos/Mexican Americans enrolling at CCC, their retention levels, and how many receive degrees/certificates and transfer to universities. Perceived Support From Peers for Education In the area of perceived support from peers for education (refer to Tablel), the mean difference between cohorts was significant at the .05 level. See Tables 8, 9, and 10. Discussion There was a difference in mean scores on this variable between the immigrant Latinos and their Mexican American counterparts. While the Chicanos (both male and female) and male immigrant Latinos usually had someone with whom to study or to pick up their assignments, this was not true in the case of immigrant Latinas. As one stated, “I don’t study with 90 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. someone, and I don’t have anyone to pick up homework” (005). This is in sharp contrast to the U.S.-born Mexican American females. A Chicana said, “ Most of the things I’ve done in CCC are thanks to friends” (063), or two male immigrants who said, “ We usually studied after class” (046) or “ got together to do homework” (038). Immigrant Latinas were isolated in seeking friends who could pick up assignments for them or study with them. This might be the result of working after classes and/or picking up children at school, along with other family responsibilities. Recommendations Faculty of immigrant students can include as part of the course requirements that students exchange names and telephone numbers so that, if they are unable to attend class, they can call a classmate for the course assignments and notes. Faculty can also form study groups within the classroom setting and give outside classroom assignments that would require students to do homework assignments in groups. This would assist immigrant students with learning the process and procedures for studying in groups. According to researchers Avalos and Pavel (1993, p. 2), this would help to “engage students into the academic and social fabric of the institu tion.” A comparative analysis might be done with two cohorts, one in which study groups were formed within the classroom and a control group, to evaluate the effectiveness of this methodology. Perceptions of Community Engagement The variable perceptions of community engagement was defined as students’ participation in school, political groups, church activities, and their Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. maintenance of Spanish language, culture, and traditions. Students were asked whether they thought their education would help others. As one Mexican American female said, “ Yes, my education will help my family, especially my mother and child. My goal is to be a nurse, and being a nurse will help people in general when they are sick in the hospital” (073). The mean difference in scores between immigrant Latinos and Mexican Americans was 0.5048 (Tables 1, 11, 12, and 13). Both cohorts were asked about their use of Spanish and English in the areas of reading, listening to the radio, watching television, and speaking. Students reported the traditions that their family members brought to the United States and have maintained, such as the Spanish language, food, holidays, and religion. Discussion Immigrant Latinos and U.S.-born Mexican Americans shared the point of view that their education would help others. A male Mexican American student said, “It would set an example for others to follow” (096). This is very similar to the response of a female immigrant, “Because I have knowledge I can share it with others” (011). This indicates a very strong ethic to help others, a responsibility towards others. Another concurrent theme among immigrant Latino and Mexican American students was the maintenance of the Spanish language outside of the home, as well as cultural traditions, food, holidays, and religion. While immigrant Latino students initially came to CCC to master the English language and then pursue their educational goals, Mexican Americans indicated that they 92 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. continued to use the Spanish language outside of the college and main tained close family ties with Mexico’s cultural traditions. According to one male Chicano, “ We went to family reunions in Guadalajara and Culican, Mexico” (117). Recommendations The college currently provides no Spanish speaking counselor in vocational education or in the Transfer Center; therefore, many Spanish speaking students do not have access to vocational career opportunities or in-depth information on how to transfer to a university. It is also critical that the college bilingualize all materials that deal with the processes and pro cedures for the vocational certificate programs, Associate of Arts degree, and transfer to4-year institutions, as the research indicated that both cohorts have maintained the Spanish language. The college should have an aggressive recruitment program with the high schools that feed into the college district. The use of peer counselors (former immigrants and Mexican American students who have been successful in their college programs) could add a new dimension to the recruitment program. College personnel should be trained in reaching out to the Hispanic community. It is important that an evaluation and assess ment process be set up to investigate outcomes of this new paradigm. 93 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Support From Parents for Education and Parents’ Perceptions of the Importance of Education Discussion The responses to the questionnaire regarding this variable were consistent between immigrant Latinos and Mexican American students. Mexican American parents and immigrant parents (Mexican citizens) of Latino GED students were very supportive of their children’s educational endeavors, although they could not provide their children with the specific steps to follow to achieve their goals. A female immigrant said, “My parents gave me the right to choose an education, but they didn’t know how to explain [what I needed to do to get an education] because they didn’t have an education” (017). A male immigrant student commented, “Everyone in the family motivates one another to study a career at the university” (045). Similar responses were noted among Mexican American students. A Chicana student said, “My mother has always encouraged me to get an education” (067), and a male Chicano student stated, “My whole family supports me, and my sister is a teacher” (116). These comments strongly support Ogbu’s theory of voluntary minorities. Parents often find much evidence of their own self-improvement and good prospects for their children because of “better opportunities” (Ogbu, 1993, p. 485) in the United States. The counterpoint of Ogbu’s analysis for involuntary minorities was not substantiated by the cohort of Mexican Americans. The support from parents and family reported by these students is more similar to that for the voluntary minorities. The cohort of U.S.-born Hispanics consisted of first- generation students, and all their parents had come to the United States 94 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. from Mexico as Mexican citizens. Immigrant parents of GED students at CCC were similar to the first-generation Mexican American students’ parents because they also came from Mexico looking for a better life and more opportunities for themselves and their children. This leads the researcher to theorize that the parents of Mexican American students were similar in their attitudes about education as the parents of immigrant Latino students at CCC. This supports the theories of Ogbu’s voluntary minorities. Recommendations As reported in the recommendations regarding education as a means of mobility, the College should implement a core noncredit curricu lum that could be offered through Community Services to inform parents about the opportunities, processes, and procedures in higher education. These courses should be made available to working parents within the community. Support in Schools Is Better Than in a Foreign Country Discussion The qualitative responses regarding support in schools in the United States and the countries of origin provide an explanation that supports Ogbu’s theoretical framework for voluntary minorities. An immigrant female commented, “ The classes here are taken more seriously than the adult schools and those in Mexico” (017). A male immigrant student indicated, “ There are better opportunities here and studying is very important” (044). For voluntary immigrants, the reference group was their own peers in the 95 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. “homeland” or the immigrant neighborhoods. It is to these that they compared themselves; here they often found much evidence of their own self-improvement and good opportunities in terms of their life styles in the host country with more opportunities (Ogbu, 1993, p. 485). Recommendations The immigrant male and female Latino students were significantly older than the Mexican American students. Further research is needed to investigate the significance of this in order to design student support and academic programs at CCC so that the needs of immigrant students with the GED might be better met. Also, additional research might be done to investigate the impact of these programs on retention and transfer. Perceived Support From Teachers and Counselors for Education Discussion A remark common to both male and female immigrants was the need for more Spanish-speaking counselors for immigrants. “ We need the counselor to explain more to the students what classes to take for what we are studying” (031). The same was true for Mexican American students: “ We need more counseling” (106). “I would say more counseling because my nursing counselor is always busy or she’s in her office most of the time” (073). Both cohorts thought that they had the support of their classroom instructors. ‘They inform us about going to the university and how to get there” (050). An immigrant female responded, ‘They always talk to us about the opportunities we have” (007). “ Actually one teacher does 96 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. encourage us to continue our education” (077). “The teacher says what the classes are that will help you in what you’re searching for” (107). Recommendations The college should publish in English and Spanish a student information handbook outlining the steps leading to vocational certificates and/or the Associate of Arts degree, how to transfer to the California State University or the University of California, the University of Southern California, or other private institutions. The college should have a Transfer Center that offers services in Spanish and should recruit and hire more tenure-track Spanish-speaking counselors. The counseling area should be reviewed and a new paradigm developed to promote the academic success of immigrant Latinos and Mexican Americans students. This would require research regarding successful community college programs that serve immigrant Latino and Chicano students. The college could then develop and implement student support services and academic programs that would help to retain and transfer this growing student population (immigrant Latinos/Mexican Americans). Judgment of One’s Own Ability Discussion A concern expressed by male students in both cohorts was having the economic means to continue their education. One immigrant male reported that that, although he felt that he was academically prepared to continue his education, he was unsure of how he would pay for it: “I may 97 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. not have the money” (038). Similarly, a Mexican American student said, “Money!” (114) would keep him from continuing. Latina and Chicana students tended be concerned that their families might present obstacles to continuing their education. An immigrant Latina said, “During the time I spend at school, in my heart I want to be with my son and husband” (012). A Mexican American female commented, “ Two barriers would be family and finances: family because I am going to be a mom and I worry about who is going to take care of my newborn, and financially, because babies need lots of things like clothes” (073). Recommendations A computerized scholarship and financial aid system (also in Spanish) should be in place to educate students about the resources that are available to them. A series of ongoing workshops should be developed to teach immigrant GED students and U.S.-born Hispanics study skills and time management. Time management might assist female Latinas/ Chicanas to balance studying and family time. CCC could form a partnership program with local universities, such as the California State Universities in Long Beach, Dominguez Hills, and Los Angeles, as well as with the University of California, Irvine, and the University of Southern California. The college could request that immigrant Latino and Mexican American students who have successfully transferred from a California community college provide workshops on how to be a successful student at a 4-year school. Immigrant Latinos with a GED and Mexican American high school graduates at CCC are in need of role 98 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. models and mentors. University students who are representative of both of these cohorts (immigrant Latinos/Mexican Americans) might fulfill this need. Institutional and Staff Support Discussion There is a dichotomy between counselors and faculty regarding support for these students. Immigrant male and female GED students reported the need for more bilingual services (038, 029). Both cohorts of students were not aware of the financial resources available to them. Recommendations Further research is needed into the policies and procedures of CCC to investigate why immigrant Latino GED students and U.S.-born Mexican Americans are not being served adequately by CCC. Conclusion Throughout the study, Obgu’s theoretical and conceptual framework of voluntary and involuntary minorities was used as the foundation for the analysis to explore the variables of academic achievement, motivational, and occupational aspirations among immigrant Latino (Mexican) students who had a GED and their U.S.-born Hispanic (Mexican American) counter parts. The results of the research indicate that the immigrant Latino students supported Ogbu’s theory. There was evidence that immigrant students thought that they had more opportunities in their host country (United States) and more support from their families to pursue their studies than did their peers in the country of origin. The members of this group 99 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. came to the United States to maintain or improve their family’s economic status (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991, pp. 45-66). In contrast were the involuntary minorities, who did not choose to move to their present society motivated by the hope of economic success or more opportunities. The only comparative frame of reference that they have is to the members of the dominant group in the United States; when they compare themselves with the dominant group, they become angry because they attribute their poor conditions to what they perceive as discrimination by the dominant group members who control institutions such as schools (p. 23). Two sets of pilot interviews were conducted. In the scale (cate gories) of perceived support from teachers/counselors, there were no indications in the qualitative responses (refer to matrix and questions in the appendices) that the Mexican American students (involuntary minorities) felt angry or attributed lack of support services to the college or felt discrimin ated against by the dominant group that controls the institution. It is for this reason that Ogbu’s theoretical framework was used only as a foundation for this investigation and should be modified in its definition of involuntary minorities. The results of the questionnaire indicate that Mexican American students at CCC did not follow Ogbu’s conceptual framework of involuntary minorities. Chicano students believed that they had opportunities to better themselves. As one female Mexican American student stated, “My parents had to be bread winners and couldn’t go to school” (078). She felt that she was able not only to go to school but to eventually transfer to the university, and her aspiration was to become a school principal. This is very unlike 100 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ogbu’s involuntary minorities who suffer from discrimination and oppression by the dominant society (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991). A male Chicano student commented, “My parents sent me to a better high school, in Santa Monica, because I want to be a history teacher” (118). The young man’s father worked in the city and drove him to and from school daily, and upon graduation from high school the student registered at CCC, from where he planned to transfer to a university. This is another example of how the Mexican American behavior reflected more Ogbu’s voluntary minorities. The researcher theorizes that, although a stratified random sample was used, all Chicano students were first-generation students in the United States; therefore, their parents all came from Mexico as Mexican citizens, maintaining their language and customs. The Mexican American students were close to the immigrant experience because their parents had come to the United States as Mexican citizens. Therefore, the Chicanos at CCC expressed the same aspirations as the immigrant Latino students to pursue their educational goals strongly and to transfer to a 4-year institution. One Mexican American male said, “My mother and father encouraged me the most to get an education and prepare myself for a career” (114). Another Chicana commented that her father encouraged her to get an education: “He always dreamed of becoming a medical professional. However, due to his extreme poverty in Mexico, he was unable to pursue his goal” (072). These responses are very similar in tone to those of the immigrant Latino GED students. A male immigrant student stated that both his mother and father encouraged him to get an education: ‘They both advised me to study so I could get a better job” (033). One immigrant Latina commented that 101 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. her mother wanted her to get an education: “Women need to prepare themselves outside of the home and study so they don’t have to depend on a man” (020). There was a very strong educational ethic among both cohorts. Their common frame of reference was that the parents of Mexican Americans and immigrant Latino students are/were Mexican citizens. Furthermore, Ogbu’s conceptual framework does not take into consideration the variable of generation. He has not closely analyzed the proximity of involuntary minorities to their immigrant experience nor with their relationship to maintenance of language (e.g., Chicano students speaking Spanish at home) or cultural customs (e.g., Mexican Americans visiting family in Mexico). An unanticipated outcome was that all 60 Mexican Americans who were interviewed were first-generation residents. Where are the second- and third-generation Chicanos? This raises several questions. Are the second- or third-generation Mexican Americans studying at other com munity colleges within the Los Angeles area? This might serve as one explanation, but another is that, due to the failure rate of Latinos to finish high school, second- and third-generation Hispanics may very rarely (if at all) be attending a 2-year college. The high school attrition rates for Latinos was reported in the literature review. It is recommended that further research be conducted in this area. A similar research design might be conducted at two of CCC’s sister colleges: Cerritos College in Norwalk and/or Rio Hondo College in Whittier. As a result of the data and analyses of the student responses to the questionnaire, the immigrant Latinos and Mexican American students were 102 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. more similar in their motivation and aspirations than they were dissimilar. This may be due to the Mexican Americans being first-generation residents and closer to the immigrant experience. The Mexican Americans shared with their immigrant Latino cohorts that their parents had been born in Mexico and, therefore, immigrant Latinos as well as the parents of Chicanos had come to the United States as voluntary minorities. The researcher recommends a further investigation of both cohorts in a longi tudinal study to quantify student outcomes in terms of student retention rates, certificate/degree termination, and/or transfer to a 4-year university. The research suggests that CCC should evaluate its academic and student support services programs for immigrant Latinos and Mexican American students. As these two populations continue to increase, it is critical to the academic success of these groups that the college design and implement programs to meet the needs of these students. The question of the second- and third-generation Mexican American students should be answered. An assessment of sister community colleges such as Cerritos, Rio Hondo, Long Beach, and El Camino should be conducted to determine the percentages of students attending these community colleges while living in the Paramount, Lynwood, Compton, and Watts/Willowbrook areas. There might be a perception by second- and third-generation Mexican Americans that the surrounding community colleges can meet their needs better. It would be interesting to investigate the dropout and educational attainment rates of students in Mexico. What attitudes and beliefs might they be transferring regarding their view of the educational system in the 103 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. United States? A new student service model might provide educational policy makers and other institutions of higher education with improved academic (including vocational) programs and student support services for an increasing Latino/Hispanic student population on a national level. Continued research is needed investigating immigrant Latinos and Mexican American students within the community college system. Ogbu’s theoretical framework may have served as a foundation for this research, but it is important to look for new paradigms that investigate this growing and emerging population within the community college system. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REFERENCES 105 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REFERENCES Achievement Council. (1984). Excellence for whom? A report from the Planning Committee. Oakland, CA: Author. Acuna, R. (1996). Anything but Mexican: Chicanos in contemporary Los Angeles. New York: Verso Press. Allen, C., & Jones, E. (1992). GED testing program: The first fifty years. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Alva Alatorre, S. (1991). Academic invulnerability among Mexican Ameri can students: The importance of protective resources and apprais als. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13(1), 18-34. Alva Alatorre, S., & Padilla, A. (1995). Academic invulnerability among Mexican Americans: A conceptual framework. Journal of Educa tional Issue of Language Minority Students, 15. Retrieved June 4, 2003, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/miscpubs/jeilms/vol 15/ academic.htm 15/academichttp://www.ncela.gwu.edu/miscpubs/ jeilms/voh 5/academic.htm American Council on Education. (2003). GED: The key to your future (15th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Anderson, A. C., Bowman, M. J., & Tinto, V. (1972). Where colleges are and who attends. New York: Carnegie Commission on Higher Edu cation. Arias, B. (1986). The context of education for Hispanic Students: An over view. American Journal of Education, 95(1), 26-57. Avalos, J., & Pavel, M. (1993). Improving the performance of Hispanic community students. Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED358907) Retrieved April 4, 2003 from http://www.ericfacility.net/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed358907.html Bernstein, A. R., & Eaton, J. S. (1994). The transfer function: Building curricular roadways across and among higher education institutions. In M. J. Justiz, R. Wilson, & L. G. Bjork (Eds.), Minorities in higher education (pp. 215-260). Phoenix, AZ: ACE/Oryx. Brown, G., Rosen, N., Hill, S., & Olivas, M. (1980). The condition of educa tion for Hispanic Americans. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. California Community Colleges. Office of the Chancellor. (2003). Student demographics, 2003. Sacramento: Author. Retrieved November 5, 2003, from http://www.ccco.edu/divisions/tris/mis/reports.htm California Community Colleges. Office of the Chancellor. (2004). Reports: Data Marti. Retrieved June 15, 2004, from http://www.ccco.edu/ reports/reports, htm California Postsecondary Education Commission. (1982). Equal education opportunity in California education: Part IV. Sacramento, CA: Au thor. Carter, T. (1970). Mexican Americans in school: A decade of change. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Carter, T., & Segura, R. (1979). Mexican Americans in school: A decade of change. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Castellanos, J., & Jones, L. (2003). The majority in the minority: Expand ing the representation of Latina/o faculty, administrators and stu dents in higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Coleman, J. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (1989). How long? A synthesis of re search on academic achievement in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 23(3), 509-531. Compton Community College. (2000-2002). Compton College catalogue. Compton, CA: Author. Congressional Research Service. (1986). Selected demographic charac teristics of the U.S. Hispanic population and of Hispanic subgroups. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Castellanos, J., & Jones, L. (Eds.). (2003). The majority in the minority: Expanding the representation of Latina/o faculty, administrators and students in higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Darder, A., Torres, R., & Gutierrez, H. (Eds.). (1997). Latinos and educa tion: A critical reader. New York: Routledge. Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1988). The value of conformity: Literacy for empowerment, learning to stay in school. Anthropology and Educa tion Quarterly, 19, 354-381. De Vos, G. A. (1967). Minority status and attitude toward authority. In G. A. De Vos & H. Wagatsuma (Eds.), Japan’ s invisible race (pp. 258- 272). Berkeley: University of California Press. 107 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. De Vos, G. A. (1978). Selective permeability and reference group sanc tioning: Psychocultural continuities in role degradation. In J. M. Yinger (Ed.), Major social issues (pp. 7-24). New York: Free Press. De Vos, G. A. (1980). Ethnic adaptation and minority status. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 11,101-124. De Vos, G. A. (1982). Adaptive strategies in United States minorities. In E. E. Jones & S. J. Korching (Eds.), Minority mental health (pp. 74- 112). New York: Praeger. De Vos, G. A. (1983). Ethnic identity and minority status: Some psycho- cultural considerations. In A. Jacobson-Widding (Ed.), Identity: per sonal and sociocultural (pp. 90-113). Upsala, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiskell Tryckeri AB. De Vos, G. A. (1984, April). Ethnic persistence and role degradation: An illustration from Japan. Paper read at the American-Soviet Sym posium on Contemporary Ethnic Processes in the USA and the USSR, New Orleans, LA. De Vos, G. A., & Suarez-0rozco, M. (1990). Status inequality: The self in culture. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fashola, O. S., & Slavin, R. E. (1997). Effective dropout prevention and college attendance programs for Latino students. Washington, DC: Hispanic Dropout Project. Retrieved December 15, 2003, from http://www.ncbe.gwu.edU/miscpubs/hdp/4/indexhtm Fernandez, C., & Marenco, E. (1980). Group conflict, education and Mexi can Americans: A discussion paper. San Antonio, TX: Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Gandara, P. (1982). Passing through the eye of the needle: High-achiev ing Chicanas. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 4(2), 167- 179. Gandara, P. (1994). Choosing higher education: Educationally ambitious Chicanos and the path to social mobility. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2(8), 1-32. Retrieved July 7, 2003, from http://epaa.asu. edu/epaa/v2n8.html Gandara, P. (1995). Over the ivy walls: The educational mobility of low- income Chicanos. New York: State University of New York Press. GED graduates equivalent to high school graduates on literacy measures. (1993). Journal of the American Council on Education, 10(4/5), 1-13. 108 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Gibson, M., & Ogbu, J. (Eds.). (1991). Minority status and schooling: A comparative study of immigrant and involuntary minorities. New York: Garland Press. Goldsmith, S. (2003, May 3). Rich, Black, flunking. East Bay Express. Retrieved May 13, 2004, from http//www.eastbayexpress.com/issue/2003-05- 21/feature.html/1/index.html Hernandez, M., & del Olmos, F. (1989, March 13). A guide to Phase 2 of the Immigrations Amnesty Law. Los Angeles Times, pp. 1-16. Hirano-Nakanishi, M. (1986). the extent and relevance of pre-high school attrition and delayed education for Hispanics. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 8(1), 61-76. Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. (1994). Gendered transitions: Mexican experi ences of immigration. Berkley: University of California Press. Hunter, D. (1980, August 18). Ducks vs. hard rocks. Newsweek, 35. Leslie, L., & Leitch, L. (1989). A demographic profile of recent Central American immigrants: Clinical services and implications. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 11, 315-329. Lowell, L., & Suro, R. (2002). The improving educational profile of Latino immigrants (Pew Hispanic Center Report). Los Angeles: PEW Charitable Trust and USC Annenberg School for Communication. Matute-Bianchi, M. (1986). Ethnic identities and patterns of school suc cess and failure among Mexican-Descent and Japanese American students in a California high school: An ethnographic analysis. American Journal of Education, 95, 233-55. Moore, J., & Pinderhughes, R. (Eds.). (1993). The barrios: Latinos and the underclass debate. New York: Sage Foundation. National Center for Education Statistics. (1989). Dropout rates in the United States: 1988. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. National Center for Education Statistics. (1993). Digest of education sta tistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, NCES. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Digest of education sta tistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, NCES. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). The condition of educa tion 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Re trieved October 23, 2001, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/ 109 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. National Commission on Secondary Education for Hispanics. (1984). Making something happen. Washington, DC: Hispanic Policy De velopment Project. National Council of La Raza. (1992). State of Hispanic Americans 1991: An overview. Washington, DC: National Council of La Raza. Nevarez, C. (2001). Mexican Americans and other Latinos in postsec ondary education: Institutional influences. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. Retrieved January 6, 2003, from http://www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed459038.html Ogbu, J. (1974). The next generation: An ethnography of an urban neighborhood. New York: Academic Press. Ogbu, J. (1978). Minority education and caste: The American system in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press. Ogbu, J. (1981). Origins of human competence: A cultural-ecological per spective. Child Development, 52, 413-429. Ogbu, J. (1982). Cultural discontinuities and schooling. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 13, 290-307. Ogbu, J. (1983, November). Indigenous and immigrant minority education: A comparative perspective. Paper read at the 82th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Chicago. Ogbu, J. (1984). Understanding community forces affecting minority stu dents’ academic effort. Oakland, CA: Achievement Council. Ogbu, J. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of an explanation. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 312-334. Ogbu, J. (1993). Differences in cultural frames of reference. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 16, 483-506. Ogbu, J., & Matute-Bianchi. (1986). Understanding sociocultural factors: Knowledge, identity, and school adjustment. In California State De partment of Education (Eds.), Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp. 73-142). Sac ramento: California State Department of Education, Bilingual Edu cation Office. Olivas, M. (Ed.). (1986). Latino college students. New York: Teachers College Press of Columbia University. 110 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Postsecondary Education Opportunity. (1999, June). College continuation rates for 1998 high school graduates, Oskaloosa, IA: Mortenson Research Seminar on Public Policy Analysis of Opportunity for Post secondary Education. Rendon, L. (1981, June). The three R’ s for Hispanics in higher education: Retention, recruitment, and research. Paper presented to the Col lege Recruitment Association for Hispanics, Lansing, Ml. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 210075) Rendon, L. I., & Hope, R. 0. (1996). Educating a new majority. San Fran cisco: Jossey-Bass. Romo, H. (1984). The Mexican origin population’s differing perceptions of their children’s schooling. Social Science Quarterly, 65, 635-649. Rumbaut, R. (1996). Becoming American: Acculturation, achievement, and aspirations among children of immigrants. Baltimore, MD: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Rumberger, R. (1983). Dropping out of high school: The influence of race, sex, and family background. American Educational Research Jour nal, 20, 199-220. Scrupski, A., & Shimahara, N. (1975). The social system of the school. In N. Shimahara & A. Scrupski (Eds.), Social forces and schooling: An anthropological and sociological perspective (pp. 141-186). New York: David McKay. Shack, W. A. (1970). On Black American values in White America: Some perspectives on the cultural aspects of learning behavior and com pensatory education. New York: Social Science Research Council Subcommittee on the Values and Compensatory Education. St. John, E. P., Starkey, J. B., Paulsen, M. B., & Mbaduagha, L. A. (1995). The influence of prices and price subsidies on within-year persis tence by students in proprietary schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(2), 149-165. Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (1987). Towards a psycho-social understanding of Hispanic adaptation to United States schooling. In H. T. Trueba (Ed.), Success or failure? Learning and the language minority stu dent (pp. 156-168). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (1989). Central American refugees and U.S. high schools: A psychosocial study of motivation and achievement. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. (1995). Transitions. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 111 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Tornatsky, L , Cutler, R., & Lee, J. (2002). College knowledge: What Latino parents need to know and why they don’t know it. Claremont, CA: Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Turner, A. P. (1989). A mandate for the 90’ s: Research on success of General Educational Development (GED) recipients in higher educa tion. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Repro duction Service No. ED 316303) U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. Retrieved October 23, 2001, from http:// www.census.gov/prod/2001 jpubs/statab/sec01 .pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Profiles of general demographic character istics: 2000 census of population and housing, United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. Retrieved October 23, 2001, from http:// www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp/1/2khus.pdf U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. (1971). Mexican American Education Study: Reports 1-4. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. New York: State University of New York Press. Valverde, S. (1987). A comparative study of Hispanic high school dropouts and graduates: Why do some leave school early and why do some finish? Education and Urban Society, 19, 320-329. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDICES 113 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX A MATRIX Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Matrix Generational Demographic Data Perceptions of Life in U.S. Better Than in Foreign Country 2 3 4 5 6 7 Support From Parents for Education, Perceptions of Importance of Education by Parents 9 10 11 12 13 Perceptions of Education as a Means of Mobility 14 23 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Support in Schools is Better Than in a Foreign Country 24 25 26 Perceived Support From Teachers/ Counselors for Education Preferred 27 33 28 29 34 35 30 36 31 32 Perceived Support From Peers for Education Preferred 17 37 38 39 40 Judgment of One’s Own Ability 41 42 43 44 Self-Identity 45 Perceptions of Community Engagement 46 52 47 48 53 54 49 55 50 51 Institutional Support Staff Support 26 32 27 28 33 35 29 30 31 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX B STUDENT INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH, SPANISH) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Name Student Interview - Questionnaire Date Address_______ Phone _______ □OB [}[]/[][]/□[] AGE Gender Date of GED [][] [ ] Male [] Female [][]/[][]/[] Student ID# [][]-□-[][][][] immigrant Student American Bom Years in U.S. What age did you come to the U.S.? Generation 1 2 3 4 5 6 (Please Check) | || l f ~ l l II II I 1. Where were you bom? □ U.S.A | | Mexico [ | Mexican | | Non-Mexican | | Other 1a. What size was the town/city? I | Big City (example like L.A.) I | Medium City (like Long Beach) | | Small City (like Compton) [ | Rural less than 5,000 2. Did you come with or without your family? □ Mother I | Father □ Both [ | Other 3. How did the move come about? Who came first? | | Father [ | Mother I | Siblings 4. How did you support yourself and/or family when you first came to the U.S.? a. (If family came first, how did they support themselves?) | | Day Laborer □ Food Service I | Other b. (If you came first, how did you support yourselves?) | | Day Laborer □ Food Service | | Other 5. Do you think your life is better in the U.S. than your country? □ Yes □ Same | | No Q Other 117 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6. For American born Latinos - Do you think your life style is better than your parents or grandparents? [ | Yes □ No | | Other______________ 7. if better, in what way? | | Yes □ No | | Other______________ 8. What did your father do? I | Laborer I" ! Office □ Professional | | Other___________ 9. What did your mother do Gob)? | | Laborer | | Food Service □ Professional | [ Other______________ 10. What is your father's level of education? | | Elemantary | | Junior High □ High School □ No School 11. What is your mother's level of education? | I Elemantary □ Junior High □ High School [ | No School 12. Did your mother or father encourage you to get an education or prepare yourself for a particular career? □ Yes □ N o Level of education required: □ High School | | College □ University Explain_________________________________________________________________________________ 118 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 13. Who encouraged you the most to get an education and prepare yourself for'a career? | | Mother | | Father | | Grandparent M/F | | Other Explain_________________________________________________________ _______ 14. What made you decide to come to Compton College? □ Leam English | [ Prepare for Job | | Go to University Explain______________________________________ 15. How do you think coming to cellege will help you in the future? □ Leam English □ Prepare for Job □ Go to University Explain_____________________________________________ 16. What do you want to study? | | Leam English □ Certificate I | A.A. Degree □ Transfer University Explain_________________ 17. How did you hear about the GED? (To be asked of those who have taken GED-) | | Friend | | College Personnel | | Other Explain_____________________________________________________________ 119 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 18. Why do you think the GED will help you? How? □ Prepare educationally I | Job | | Other Explain_______________________ 19. Would you be able to go to a post-secondary college in your country? Q Yes □ No Explain___________________________________________________________________________ 19a. Do you think the educational system is better here than in Mexico? I | Yes □ No □ OK □ Other Explain__________________________________ 20. In what way is it better? or What are the differences? I | Accessible | | Financial Aide Provided | | Career Preparation | | Transfer to University 21. For American bom - Do you think you are receiving a better education than your parents? □ Yes □ No I | Other Explain________________________________________________________ 22. In what way is it better or if the opposite is true what are the differences? I | More Opportunities □ Less Opportunities | | Other Explain_______________________________________________________ 120 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 23a. What do you thik of the help you have received at Compton College? □ Excellent □ Very helpful | | Helpful □ OK | | Very little help □ Not helpful Explain___________________________________________________ 23b. What help did you receive? | | Excellent I | Good □ Satisfactory | | Unsatisfactory | | Other Explain_________________ 24. For American born students - How do you compare the help you have received at Compton College with that of the support you received in other schools you have attended in the U.S.? □ Excellent | | Good □ Satisfactory □ Unsatisfactory [ | Other Explain____________________________________________________________________________ 25. Who or what has been the most helpful to you at Compton College? | | Friend | | Teacher | | Student □ Counselor I | Other Explain_________________________________________________ 121 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 26. Do your current teachers encourage you to continue your education? In what ways? I | Yes □ N o | | Other Explain________________________________________________________________ 27. How do your teachers help you to do well in school? | | Provide College Info □ Class room instruction □ Other Explain_____________________________________ 28a. Have you had personal problems? □ Yes □ No Explain__________________________________________________________________________ 28b. Have your teachers helped you to solve personal problems? □ Yes □ No Explain__________________________________________________________________________ 29. Have your teachers helped you with your academic or career goals? Q Yes □ No Explain__________________________________________________________________________ 30. Do you have an academic counselor that you see regularly? □ Yes □ No Explain__________________________________________________________________________ 31. Has the academic counselor helped you solve any personal problems or advised you with your academic or career goals? □ Yes Q No Explain__________________________________________________________________________ 122 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32. Who has helped you out the most at Compton College? [ [ Friend | | Counselor | | College Personnel | | Teacher | | Other Explain 33. What types of programs or services at the college have helped you? | | Counseling | | Financial Aide □ g e d | | Instruction | | Other Explain 34. Did you ever feel discriminated against because of being Latino at the college? I I Yes □ No Explain 35. Do you have any recommendations for the teachers or counselors at the college? How could they better serve the students? | | More Counseling | | Bilingual Service [ | Bilingual Materials | | Other Explain 36a. Have you formed friendships with other students? □ Yes □ No Please explain 36b. What is their ethnic background? | | Latino - immigrant Q Anglo Q Other [ | Latino - American born Q African American 123 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37. Do you study w ith other students outside of class? Explain_______________ _______ _________ □ Yes □ No 38. Have friends or other students given you advice that has helped you at the college? □ Yes Q No Example: What teacher to take. How to apply for financial aid. Explain __________ ________ ___________________________________ ________ 39. Do you have friends or fellow students in your classes that you can call when you m iss class? Example: They tell you what the assignment was or pick up papers for you. □ Yes □ No Explain_______________________________________________________________________ _ 40. How many years of schooling did you complete? (~ ~ 1 Elementary Q High School □ Junior High Q Other 40a. If you did not finish school please explain why? □ Got pregnant Q Flunked out Q Other □ Got married Q Moved Explain 41. What is your educational goal? □ Graduate High School □ Got to University □ Go to College Q Other Explain 42. What is your career goal? FI Laborer Q Professional n Paraprofessional Q Other Explain___________________________ 12 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43. Do you think there are any barriers that can keep you from reaching your eductional or career goals? If yes - What are they? Q Yes Q No □ Family Q Educational skills I | Financial Q Other Explain_____________________________________________________ 44. Do you have anyone who is supportive of your educational and career goals? □ Yes Q No If yes, who? | | Mother Q Spouse □ Father Q Other If no, why?____________________________________________________________________________ 45. How do you identify yourself ethnically? □ Latin - American Q ] Mexican - American Q Other I"! Latino Q Hispanic I | Chicano Q Hispano 46. Are you currently involved with any community groups? □ Yes Q ] No If so, what kind? □ Political Group | | Church I | Community [ | Other An example might be a church group - If yes, please explain ________________________________ 47. What type of activities do you participate in that help out others? I | School I | Community | | Church Give examples: _______________________________________ 48. Do you think your education will help out others? Q Yes Q No Explain why or why not ___________________________ _____________________________________ 125 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49. Have you helped anyone attend Compton College? If yes, in what way?_________________________ □ Yes Q No 50. Do you speak Spanish at home? Q Yes Q ] No 51. Do you speak Spanish ouside of class? □ Yes Q No 52. In the following area do you use Spanish or English more? Reading []3 Spanish Q English Listening to the radio Q Spanish Q English Watching TV Q Spanish Q English Speaking Q Spanish Q English 53. Do you have friends that are not Latino? Q Yes Q ] No If yes, what is their ethnicity? f~ ~ ] Anglo | | Asian I | African American □ Native American | | Other___________ 54. Do you participate in celebrations that are primarily identified with the Latino community? Q Yes Q No If yes, please explain _________________________________________________________________________ 55. What traditions have you or family members brought to the U.S. that you have maintained? I I Language I | Food | | Holidays □ Religions | | Other_________ If you were born in the U.S. perhaps they are traditions your parents or grandparents brought with them. Explain____________________________________________________________________ By Loretta M. Canett-Bailes 126 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Entrevista al estudiante - Cuestionario Nombre _________________________________________ Fecha Direccion ______________________________________ Telefono__________________________ DOB EDAD Gender Fecha de GED Student ID# t ][]/[][ M ][ 3 [][] [] Male [] Female [][]/[][]/[] [][]-[]-[][][][] Estudiante emigrado Nacido en U.S. Afios en U.S. Generacion 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^.Cuantos afios en U.S.? (Por favor Marque) F i n ■ ■ ■ « ■ I p vm l L h m L h m h v m L a u a u l 1. iDonde nacio Ud.? □ □ □ □ □ U.S.A Mexico Mexicano No-Mexicano Otro 1a. i,Que grande era la ciudad/pueblo? I | Grande como L A I | Mediana como Long Beach I I Pequefia como Compton □ Pueblo rural de menos de 5.000 2. iVino solo o con su familia? | | Madre | | Padre □ Los dos □ Comentario 3. i,Como llegaron aqul? ^Quien Ilego primero? [ I Padre | | Madre □ Algun otro familiar 4. iComo se ganaba usted la vida o su familia / cuando llegaron por primera vez a U.S.? a. (Si fue su familia la que vino primero, ^como se ganaba la vida?) | [ Jornalero □ Trabajo en un restaurante | | Comentario b. (Si fue usted el primero ^que es lo que hizo?) | | Jornalero □ Trabajo en un restaurante | | Comentario 5. ^,Cree usted. que su vida en U.S. es mejor que en su pais? f~1 Si FD Igual □ No FH Comentario 127 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6. Para los latinos (hispanos) nacidos en U.S. ^Cree usted que el modo de vida que usted tiene ahora es mejor que la de sus padres o abuelos? □ Si □ No | | Otro ______________ 7. Suponiendo que sea mejor, i,en que es mejor? □ □ n Si No Otro i ^ C O que trabaja su padre? □ Obrero □ Oficinista □ Profesionista □ Otro 9. Ysu madre ^que es lo que I □ Obrera □ Oficinista □ Profesionista □ Otro 10. ^Cual es el nivel escolar de su padre? □ Elemental | | Secundaria j | Superior □ No tuvo escuela 11. £,Cual es el nivel de education de su madre? | | Elemental [ | Secundaria | | Superior □ No tuvo escuela 12. Ya sea su padre o su madre i,le han animado para que usted se eduque o se prepare para una camera? □ S i □ No iNivel de education que se necesita? □ Secundaria □ Colegio | | Universidad Expliquese ____________________________________________________________________________ 128 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 13. Quien ha sido el que le ha animado mas para que usted prosiga en su education y se prepare para una camera? I j Madre | | Padre □ Abuelos H/M I | Otro Expltquese____________________________________ 14. iQu6 es lo que le decidio a venir a Compton College? [ | Aprerider ingles | | Prepararme para un trabajo □ Ir a la Universidad Expllquese ________________________________ 15. iCdmo cree que el venir al Colegio le va a ayudar para su futuro? □ Aprender ingles | | Prepararme para un trabajo j | Ir a la Universidad Expllquese ___________________________________________ 16. iQue es lo que usted piensa estudiar? j | Aprender ingles | | Adquirir un certificado □ A.A. Degree □ Transferira la Universidad Expllquese _____________________ 17. <j,C6m o se entero usted del GED? <,Fue alguno de los que ya lo habian tornado? I | Amigo | | Personal del Colegio | | Otro Expllquese _______________________________________________________ 129 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 18. <,Por que cree usted que el GED le va a ayudar? iD e que manera? □ Prepararme para mi formacion personal [ | Prepararme para un empleo □ Otro Expllquese __________ ___________________ 19. i,Hubiera tenido posibilidades de cursar estudios superiores (colegio o universidad) en su pais? □ Si □ No Expllquese ____________________________________________________________________ 19a. i,Cree usted que el sistema educativo de aqui es mejor que el del Mexico? □ S i □ No □ OK I | Otro Expllquese ____________________________________________________ 20. i,En que sentido es mejor? iCuales son las diferencias? □ Accesible | | Ayuda economica | | Preparation para una carrera [~~| Transferee da a la Universidad 21. Al nacido aqui, en America. ^Cree usted que recibe mejor educacion que la de sus padres? □ Si □ No □ Otro Expllquese _______________________________ __________________________________ 22. iD e que modo es mejor su educacion, a la de ellos? iQue diferencias ve usted? □ Mas oportunidades □ Menos oportunidades | | Otro Expllquese _________________________________________________________ 130 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 23a. iQue opina usted de la ayuda que ha recibido en el Colegio de Compton? I | Excelente I | Muy provechosa I | Provechosa I [ Pase I | Muy poco provechosa I | Nula Expllquese ___________________________________________________ 23b. iQue ayuda ha recibido usted del Colegio? I | Excelente f~| Buena | | Satisfactoria □ Inaceptable I | Otro Expllquese __________________________ 24. Para el nacido en America. ^Que diferencias ve usted entre la ayuda que ha recibido en el Colegio de Compton con la que pudo haber recibido en otras escuelas a las que ha asistido anteriormente? [ | Excelente | | Buena | | Satisfactoria j | Inaceptable [ | Otro Expllquese ________________________________________________________________________ 25. i,Quien o que ha sido el que o lo que le ha ayudado mas en el Colegio de Compton? □ Amigo □ Maestro □ Estudiante □ Consejero □ Otro Expliquese 131 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 26. En la actualidad i\e estimulan los profesores a proseguir en sus estudios? iD e que manera? □ S i □ N o | | Otro Expllquese 27. ^De que manera sus profesores le ayudan a mejorarse y progresar en la escuela? | | Dar informacion sobre el colegio | | Instruccion en clase □ Otro Expliquese 28a. iTiene o ha tenido problemas personates? □ si □ No Expllquese 28b. iLe han ayudado los profesores a solucionar sus problemas personates? □ Si □ No Expliquese 29. iLos profesores le han ayudado en sus objetivos academicos o de carrera? Cl] Si [ | No Expllquese _________________________________________________________________________ 30. ^Tiene usted un consejero academico con el que se entrevista periodicamente? Q Si | j No Expliquese _________________________________________________________________________ 31. iSu consejero academico le ha ayudado en sus problemas personates o le ha orientado en sus objetivos academicos o de carrera? Q Si j | No Expllquese __________________________________________________________________________ 132 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32. iQuien le ha ayudado mas en el Colegio de Compton? I I Amigo I | Consejero [ | Personal del Colegio [ | Maestro | | Otro Expliquese _________________________________ 33. iQue clase de programas o servicios de Colegio le han sido mas provechosos? | | Los Consejeros [ | Ayuda Economica □ GED | | InstrucckJn [ | Otros Expliquese _____________________________________________________ 34. En el Colegio £Se ha sentido usted alguna vez discriminado por ser latino (hispano)? □ Si □ No Expliquese 35. iQue recomendarla usted a los profesores o consejeros del Colegio? iD e qu6 manera podrian ayudar mejor a los estudiantes? | | Mas Consejeros | | Servicios Bilingues | | Materiales Bilingues | | Otro Expllquese ________________________________________________________________________ 36a. En el Colegio £ha establecido vinculos de annistad con otros estudiantes? Q Si Q No Por favor, expllquese _____________________________________________________________________ 36b. iCual es su ralz etnica? □ Latino (hispano)-emigrado [Hj Anglo Q O que otra □ Latino-nacido en USA □ Afro-americano 133 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37. ^Estudia usted con otros estudiantes fuera de clase? Expliquese □ Si □ No 38. i,Tiene amigos u otros estudiantes que le han orientado para provecho de usted? □ Si □ No Por ejemplo: iCdmo tratara los profesores? iCdmo aplicarpara la ayuda financiera? Expliquese 39. iTiene usted amigos o companeros de clase a los que usted puede recurrir o llamar cuando no puede asistir a clase? Por ejemplo: que le digan la materia asignada o le recojan las notas o papeles □ Si □ No del profesor. Expllquese 40. ^Cuantos afios de escuela ha tenido? | | Primaria | | Secundaria P I Junior High [_ | Otro 40a. En caso de que usted no los haya terminado, ;por favor! diga por qu6 razon. | | Se embarazo Fracaso Q Otro [ | Se caso Q Cambio de lugar Expllquese 41. i Que meta u objetivo se ha propuesto en sus estudios? J | Graduar de la Secundaria | | Ira la Universidad 1 1 ir al Colegio £_] Otro Expliquese 42. iQue carrera profesional piensa seguir? f~ | Obrero [^] Profesionista 1 1 Auxiliar de Profesion Q Otro Expliquese 134 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43. <j,Cree usted que se va a encontrar con dificuttades que le impediran alcanzar el objetivo de su educacion o carrera? Suponiendo que si, i,cuales van a ser? □ Si □ No I | Familia J 3 Destrezas educacion ales o Financieras □ Otro Expllquese __________________ . ___________ _________________________ 44. iHay alguien que le ayuda econdmicamente en su educacidn o carrera? [ 3 Si □ No En caso afirmativo, <j,quien es? □ Madre □ Esposo(a) | | Padre [3] Otro En caso negativo, ipor que? ~ ________________________________________ _______________ 45. ^.Etnoldgicamente usted como se identifica: | | Latino-americano [ 3 Mexico-americano [ 3 U otro □ Latino [ 3 Hispanic I | Chicano [ 3 Hispano 46. i,Esta usted comprometido en alguna organization comunitaria? [ 3 Si □ No Si es afirmativo, ^que grupo? □ Grupo politico □ Grupo religioso | | Comunidad □ Otro Un ejemplo de ello podria ser un grupo parroquial. _______________________________________________ 47. i,En que clase de actividades participa usted para a ayudar a otros? [ | Escuela | | Comunidad 1 | Grupo religioso De algiin ejemplo ________________________________________ 48. Piensa usted que su educacion va a beneficiar a otros? □ Si □ No jPor favor! Diga la razon del porque Si o la del porque No. ________________________________________ 135 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49. < j,H a sido usted el instrumento para que alguien fuera al Colegio de Compton? En caso afirmativo ide que manera se valid? _______________________ □ Si □ No 50. iHabla espafiol en su casa? Q Si j | No 51. iHabla usted espafiol fuera de la clase? Q Si | | No 52. iEn las siguientes areas usa usted el inglds o el espafiol? Al leer □ Espafiol □ Ingles Al escuchar el radio □ Espafiol □ Ingles Al mirar la TV. □ Espafiol □ Ingles Al hablar □ Espafiol □ Inglds 53. iTiene usted amigos que no sean latinos (hispanos)? Q Si | | No En caso afirmativo iCual es su ascendencia racial? I I Anglo □ Asiatico □ Afro-americano | | Nativo-americano □ Otra ___________ 54. iParticipa usted en celebraciones que son caracterlsticamente latinas (hispanas)? Q Si | | No En caso afirmativo tenga ia bondad de explicarse _________________________________________________ 55. ^Que costumbres o tradiciones, usted o su familia, trajeron a US y que continuan manteniendo? □ Lenguage □ Comida □ Dias Festivos □ Religion I | Otra _________ En caso de haber nacido en America, es posible que continue con tradiciones que sus antepasados trajeron consigo. Expliquese __________________________________________________________________________ By Loretta M. Canett-Bailes. Translated into Spanish by Juan Corominas, Ph.D. 136 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Internationalization of higher education: A case study of a private United States research university

PDF

Educational opportunism as the traditional policy of the South Caucasian international schools

PDF

Dealing with the United States' educational crisis: Studying baccalaureate programs

PDF

An examination of the factors that affect education vs non-education career choices of Asian Pacific Americans in higher education

PDF

Improving the transfer rates of minority students: A case study

PDF

Factors influencing academic success of Chinese international students in Los Angeles community colleges

PDF

An examination of the contract education program in a multi-college community college district in Southern California: A descriptive and qualitative case study investigation

PDF

Chinese immigrants united for self -empowerment: Case study of a weekend Chinese school

PDF

Educational reform at the general secondary schools in Armenia

PDF

Academic achievement of English -learning Latino students in relation to higher order thinking skills instruction

PDF

Academic, environmental and social integration variables that maximize transfer preparedness for Latino community college students: An application of academic success models to the study of Tran...

PDF

AIDS knowledge and education for South Korean-born college students attending Korean colleges and United States-born Korean American and South Korean-born students attending United States college...

PDF

English learners' standardized test performance: A longitudinal perspective

PDF

An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement

PDF

China's critical educational access demand and United States higher education distance learning curriculum: An answer?

PDF

Assessing equitable postsecondary educational outcomes for Hispanics in California and Texas

PDF

Community learning in environmental NGO projects in Vietnam: A comparative study

PDF

Assessing students' and professors' attitudes toward the use of computer -based technology in the classroom: A case study at the University of Jordan

PDF

In their own words: Polynesian students' perspectives on persistence in an American university

PDF

Catholic schools and civic engagement: A case study of community service -learning and its impact on critical consciousness and social capital

Asset Metadata

Creator Canett-Bailes, Loretta M. (author)

Core Title A quantitative/qualitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students with a general educational development diploma and United States-born Hispanic students with a high scho...

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, bilingual and multicultural,education, community college,Education, higher,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Rideout, William M. (committee chair), Genzuk, Michael (committee member), Stromquist, Nelly (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-536591

Unique identifier UC11336037

Identifier 3145164.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-536591 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3145164.pdf

Dmrecord 536591

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Canett-Bailes, Loretta M.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA