Mark Krikorian Cries "Multiculturalism!"

In an article for the National Review Online today, Mark Krikorian attacks John McCain for his support of "multiculturalism," which he defines (with Francis Fukuyama's help) as, "not just tolerance of cultural diversity in de facto multicultural societies, but as the demand for legal recognition of the rights of ethnic, racial, religious, or cultural groups."

Of course, Krikorian condemns McCain's stance on immigration, but what's more, he derides his support of bilingual education. He also criticizes McCain for insisting that Hispanic Americans be honestly and realistically represented in the media - as the important, intelligent human beings that they are.

Wait a minute! Krikorian is criticizing McCain for these things? For recognizing the civil rights of other people? Wow, I must have missed the big meeting where bigotry and racism became okay again. But no matter. My best suggestion is this: read Krikorian's intolerant, supremacist message. Then, write to him and explain exactly WHY he is so very wrong - and why minorities in this country deserve basic civil rights. Also note that, once upon a time, his ancestors were immigrants and minorities too - and that only because this country afforded THEM basic rights, is he even writing his column today.

This man must be joking.

UK Paves Way for Education; US Latinos Lag Behind

Today's post is written by Nicole Matos, a student of Bryn Mawr College and an intern at Hispanic CREO. She can be contacted by e-mail at nmatos5@gmail.com.

UK school minister Jim Knight announced plans to require that every secondary school student, almost 6 million children, to have Internet access in their homes, according to Friday's article from the Guardian. The government will work with major IT corporations, such as Virgin and Microsoft, to make such services more affordable and schools will receive 100 million pounds to guarantee access for disadvantaged families. The major motivation out of this is to narrow the achievement gap between “pupils from the richest and poorest families”. This gap widened in the UK by 10% last year.

The initiative will help narrow the achievement gap in two ways. Firstly, it will level the playing field amongst students. At this time, more than one million UK children do not have access to a computer. Lacking the ability to do Internet research and other computer work at home, these students are at a great disadvantage when competing with their more technologically privileged peers. For these children, most learning and schoolwork is limited to school or a library, while more privileged students get to do it at home. Secondly, the initiative will narrow the achievement gap by creating a network for parents to receive “real time reporting,” online updates and communication from teachers and students.

A policy like this instated in the US would be a positive step forward to solving our own gap. A recent report done by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund shows that Latinos, especially Latino children, are lagging far behind their White counterpoints when it comes to having computer and Internet access. According to the report, only about 40% of Black and Latino children have Internet access, while 77.4% of White children do. Even at a higher income levels, Latinos still lag behind and Spanish speaking Latinos are not to “have strikingly low rates” of computer ownership and Internet access.

Technologically disadvantaged students suffer a vicious cycle where their lack of computer ownership and Internet access affects their educational success which, in turn, affects their future career success. A policy like this would be an exciting new way to get Latino children a better chance at academic success and would be a first step to getting Latinos on the right path to computer literacy.

Parents and the Education Game

I've been reading a bit on parental involvement lately, but I promise that I will not even mention the phrase "helicopter parent."

Firstly, of particular interest to the Latino community, are the ideas of Edwin C. Darden, Appleseed's director of education policy, who writes on how to teach low-income parents to "work the system" to guarantee their children's best education. Noting that many low-income parents do not understand how the educational system operates and do not believe that they can influence it in any way, Darden cites the need for legislation like NCLB, which, he claims, "has the potential to address these problems [see above] and spark greater parental involvement throughout the United States." He also recognizes that, "The grand battles over testing, adequate yearly progress, and reconstruction of failing schools threaten to swamp efforts to strengthen compliance with NCLB's parental involvement provisions."

Obviously, Darden is right that parents are not effectively engaged in their children's education. But are the mandates of NCLB really all that helpful? Here's what NCLB gives parents: a few letters home, saying, "Your child's school did not make AYP, therefore, you may enroll him/her in free tutoring classes." Is that engaging parents, truly educating them and empowering them to make decisions about their children's education?

I much prefer some of the other ideas that Darden includes, such as Montgomery (MD) County's Parent Academy, which offers more than 35 free workshops for parents. These workshops are not mandated by NCLB - but they seem to be a much more effective way to get parent's involved in their children's education and not just act as spectators.

Secondly, a thank you to the blog Historical/Present for directing me to the report Deciding on Postsecondary Education, from the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Some key points critical to the Latino community:

- Focus groups with first generation students revealed that it is not unlikely for academically under-prepared and/or first generation students to delay the college search process for a few years following their high school graduation.

- Research by Zimbroff (quoted in the study), revealed that youth in cultures that emphasize community values and discourage "standing out" are less likely to leave home and tend to prefer local institutions over prestigious or geographically distant colleges.

- Focus group research indicated that Hispanic first generation college students were encouraged to stay close to home for college, since they would "need the support of their families."

Some other interesting findings in the study - I suggest you check it out.

Data, Data, Data

A few new wonk-y things out and about:

The Cato Institute's Policy Analysis #605: The Public Education Tax Credit, which I was halfway through and is proving to be an exceptional policy brief.

The Pew Hispanic Center's report on Hispanic voters' party affiliation. Surprise! They are leaning back towards Democrats. I wonder if the immigration thing had any influence....?

Wednesday Issue: Hispanic Achievement and Acting White

Inspired by Eduwonkette's recent analysis of the "Acting White" theory, I've decided to do a small spin-off here. Although much attention has been paid to "acting white" within the Black community, there has been little discussion of how this mentality affects Hispanic students' academic achievement.

In his 2006 study, Harvard economist Roland Fryer and his colleague Paul Torelli released a study which showed that minority students' social popularity suffered when it was known that they were academic high-achievers. The researchers found that for Black students, popularity began to decline once students achieved a 3.5 GPA or higher, but for Hispanic students, the bar was even lower. Latino students began to lose standing with their peers once they attained a 2.0 GPA. This data led to the conclusion that minority students deliberately under-perform in school to avoid "acting white" and keep their social standing intact.

Below is Fryer's graph of how a GPA affects students' popularity (thanks to the Hoover Institution):





















Roland and Fryer make no hypotheses about why Hispanic students' popularity decline begins so much earlier than that of Black students. Thankfully, this leaves room for our further inquiry.

The following questions are important ones that need to be raised in our analysis of Hispanic student culture. They do not yet have answers, but are sure to result in important knowledge about attitudes towards academic achievement in Hispanic culture(s).

1.) Do Latino immigrant children and native-born Latinos share the same attitude towards academic achievement?

According to John Ogbu's theory, recently emigrated individuals - called voluntary minorities - often have more optimistic attitudes towards America and its various opportunities. They value education and hard work highly and therefore, are more likely to trust and do well within the school system. Therefore, it should follow that Latino immigrants are more academically successful than native-born Latinos. But is this true?

2.) To what extent does the "acting white" stigma affect low-income, middle class, and wealthy Latinos? Does one group experience more pressure than others to under-perform?

3.) For immigrant Latinos, does the desire to assimilate into American culture have positive or negative effects on academic achievement?

There are a number of ways to assimilate into this culture: on the one hand, Latino students could swing towards the "acting white" mindset. On the other hand, they could swing to the other side (see above: voluntary minorities). Which actually plays out in real life?

The Price of English Language Education

Following up yesterday's news about the price of "adequate" education for Special Education students, today we learn that in Arizona, the Flores v. Arizona case has been resurrected. The legal battle, which first began 15 years ago, has had an immense impact on the way that English Language Learners are educated in the state.

In this appeal, the court will decide how much money is necessary to educate an ELL student and what, if any restrictions, can legally be placed on their English Language Education.

Special Ed Vouchers in Texas

A Latino family in Texas is battling their local school district to cover the cost of sending their special needs son to a private school. They allege that the school district, Coppell ISD, has not fulfilled the requirements of their son's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and has allowed for him to suffer bullying and attacks by other students. The Dallas Morning News has the whole story, along with a brief history of this type of legal case.

The deciding word of this case will be "adequate," as in, is this child receiving an "adequate" education from his public school? If the court decides that he is not, the legal requirements of the IDEA Act will require the district to pay for his private school education.

Other states have formal programs to serve the needs of special education children. One example is Washington, DC, which follows the IDEA Act's requirements.

DC's current program pays the private school tuition of special education students who cannot be "adequately" educated within the existing public school system. This program has come under fire in the past because of its cost. Earlier this year, Mayor Adrian Fenty pledged to reform the city's special education programs that are offered in public school, so as to reduce the amount spent on sending students to private school.

In contrast, Florida offers a private school scholarship program to ALL special education students, regardless of whether or not their public schools are serving them adequately. Any student who attends a public school and has an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is eligible. This program is called the McKay Scholarship Program.

Last year, the more than 18,000 students who participated in the McKay Scholarship Program received an average of $7,206 to attend private schools. The program has been ranked as exemplary amongst school choice supporters, especialy because of its broad reach and few participation restrictions.

Wednesday Issue: Career and Technical Education (Part I)

When we talk about educational options, oftentimes, traditional models come to mind: charter schools, homeschooling, private schools, etc. One educational option frequently ignored, however, is career and technical education (CTE), formerly referred to as vocational/technical education. Considering the needs and values of the Latino community, CTE proves to be a very important educational option for Hispanics. Today’s analysis will take a very quick look at the positive opportunities that CTE offers to the Latino community. Tomorrow, we’ll take a more critical look at these programs and consider their flaws.

Before any real analysis can begin, however, one must understand the full breadth of the term “Career and Technical Education.” CTE is no longer just the auto mechanics class that meets in the back of the school; numerous pedagogical and institutional models fall under the category of CTE. One example is dual enrollment programs, where high school students attend college classes (and receive credit for them) while pursuing their high school diplomas. Another example is Tech Prep programs, which generally begin in the ninth grade and provide students with technical training to pursue a career in engineering, mechanics, agriculture, or a number of other fields. Students often graduate these programs with an Associate’s degree or a professional certificate in their field. Many other models exist for CTE, but all share one main purpose: prepare students to pursue higher education and a specific career field.

Although each CTE model is unique (and thus, has its own positive and negative quirks), CTE programs benefit Latino students in similar ways. Firstly, most of these programs allow students to receive college credit for the classes that they are taking. While this is an obvious “plus” for any child, it is especially helpful for Latinos whose families may struggle financially and are unable to pay college tuition. Research from the organization Excelencia in Education reveals that Latino students are much more likely than other undergraduates to be from a low-income family. Earning college credits in a CTE program can allow Latino students to “speed up” their university careers, reducing their financial obligations and making it more likely that they will graduate from college.

In addition to helping Latinos get an educational and financial “head start” on college, many of these programs equip students with marketable skills that can help them during their undergraduate careers and beyond. For example, many programs train students to work as auto mechanics. Being able to work as an auto mechanic during an undergraduate career is surely a much lucrative option than say, working at McDonald's (or the school's dining hall, like I did).

Thirdly, while I would love to see every Latino child in America (in fact, every child in America) graduate from college with a 4-year degree, that is not the wish or destiny of every student. Some students cannot or do not want to attain a bachelor’s; for these, CTE provides major opportunities. According to the Census Bureau’s most recent analysis, the average full-time worker with an Associate’s degree will earn $1.6 million over the course of his/her working life. In contrast, the average full-time worker with only a high school diploma earns a mere $1.2 million. That’s some difference. By providing students with an easy opportunity to attain an Associate’s degree or professional certificate (which also has extra earning power), CTE programs ensure a better future for that student – a future which holds not only increased earning power, but also increased employment options.

Finally, I must examine CTE from a former teacher’s perspective. Another reason why I support CTE is that students actually like it. The practical approach of these programs provides concrete goals for students to work towards and keeps them invested in their education. When I was teaching in DC, our high school had an extremely popular culinary program. This program funneled students into post-secondary culinary schools, but aside from giving them that opportunity, it kept them interested in their high school work. Needless to say, that is no small feat. Being able to engage students who have been historically alienated by our school system is one major benefit of CTE programs and, in my opinion, all the more reason to support them.

Of course, CTE programs are not perfect. Although they offer many excellent opportunities to Latino students, there are also aspects of CTE which must be criticized. Tune in tomorrow to hear more about the challenges of CTE programs.

Vouchers versus CTC Scholarships, Part II

Today's goal is two-fold:

1.) Point out some of the philosophical differences between vouchers and CTC scholarships.

2.) Discuss how these philosophical differences could affect the CTC push in Utah.

Numero uno:

School choice opponents are often quick to label tax credit scholarships as "vouchers," however, in reality, the two models operate quite differently - and have different philosophical underpinnings.

Vouchers come from public tax dollars - essentially, as money "returned" to the citizen for his/her own use. Voucher systems function on the belief that individuals have the right to control how their tax dollars are used for their children's education. Generally, voucher programs are proposed as "universal" and available to all residents of a particular state. This fits with their underlying philosophy - after all, if one family has the right to decide how its tax dollars are used, all other families should have the same.

On the contrary, corporate tax credit scholarships are created by the donations of various corporations. The donating corporation is the one who receives the tax credit; the student is the individual who receives a scholarship for private school. Rather than emphasize taxpayers' rights, CTC programs emphasize a philosophy of responsible business. They are also generally targeted to a specific audience - low-income families, for example. This results in a feel-good situation for both businesses and the general public. By participating in a CTC program, businesses enjoy a tax break and the squishy "I made a difference" feeling while families receive the money they need and the comforting thought that Big Business cares.

Numero dos:

The difference between "taxpayers' rights" and a focus on philanthropy cannot be understated for the Utah case. Utah's legislators would be seriously remiss to assume that their constituents who favored vouchers will also support a CTC scholarship program. My guess, based on what happened earlier this month, is that Utah's citizens will not be particularly enthusiastic about CTC scholarships.

To back this up, I must again refer to the Salt Lake Tribune poll, which found that only 6% of Utah voucher supporters favored the program because it would "help the poor." For most voucher supporters, "parental choice" was the driving factor in their approval. However, if a CTC program is initiated, it is likely to be restricted to low-income families. Thus, it will focus exclusively on helping the poor.

It's a recipe for resistance. While voters may not decide the future of this program, they'll have plenty to say to their legislators, who will be listening.

Additional Notes:

One of the most common misconceptions and fears about the Utah voucher program was that it would "take money away from public schools." Since the CTC program clearly has nothing to do with public funds, Utahns may be much more supportive of it despite the fact that it conflicts with some of their original reasons for supporting vouchers.

I will also be watching to see how the idea of competition figures into this debate - will the proposed CTC program actually provide enough scholarships and influence to change the public system itself? We shall see...

Tomorrow Wednesday Issue is Career and Technical Education, so stay tuned for some good information and hopefully, lively discussion!

Amigos Por Vida In the News

Amigos Por Vida Charter School, an affiliate organization of Hispanic CREO, made this morning's Houston Chronicle. Congratulations to them!

If you missed last week's exclusive interview with Carlos Villagrana, the school's director, you can find it right here.

FYI: Amigos Por Vida is a charter school in the Gulfton area of Houston, Texas, which is one of the poorest neighborhoods of the city. The school has triumphed over its initial mismanagement and the challenges of serving a largely low-income and minority student population to achieve great results with its children. The school serves mostly Latino students and has seen enormous success with its dual immersion language program.

IQ/Insanity Tests for Utah's Voters - So which is it?

Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com and a tireless school choice supporter, published a strongly worded op-ed in Saturday's Salt Lake Tribune, sounding his own "grito" against Utah's declining education system. The rhetoric is strong and maybe off-putting to some, but his righteous anger is something to be admired.

Here's the problem, though: Byrne's argument is that Utah's schools are not working for low-income and minority students and thus, Utah needs school choice. While this is true, we already know that not even the voters who supported the vouchers did so because of a concern for poor/Latino/African-American children. Thus, we have a marketing problem on our hands. Byrne is missing an opportunity to connect with voters and tap into their value system as a way to motivate them to vote for vouchers.

There are better arguments. The Tribune's polls show that voucher opponents in Utah were largely frightened that the voucher program would take money away from public schools. I can affirm this; while I was in Utah, every Referendum One opponent that I spoke with cited the argument "Vouchers take money away from public schools." Every. single. one.

So while I understand that Byrne was speaking on his own behalf - and probably not thinking about how to best "market" the school choice cause - his words still raise some imoortant questions for those of us involved in school choice. It may seem ironic and counter-intuitive, but perhaps the best way to GET school choice for low-income and minority students is actually to focus less on those students themselves and more on the worries of the voters.

T Minus 1 Day: Utah Voucher Melee

Tomorrow, Utah's citizens will vote on one of the most controversial and innovative programs to be recently proposed in their state. Their collective "yay" or "nay" will determine whether or not a new universal voucher program will be created and opened to all the children in Utah.

With only one day to convince undecided voters, both sides are working in full-gear, frantically trying to win over the public. I should know this, because I've spent the past three days in Utah and I'm just not sure I can stand to watch another NEA-sponsored commercial while trying to enjoy my late-night "Meerkat Manor."

All joking aside, the media efforts of both sides are impressive. Salt Lake is literally covered in pro- and anti-voucher propaganda, from highway signs to flyers to radio and TV ads. The voucher yard signs are even competing for space with the mayoral candidates' signs. It almost seems as if there is no other issue on the ballot this year.

And while these PR campaigns seem to be well crafted for their main audience - the White, middle-class population of Utah - they are missing a critical segment of the state's population - Latinos. Hispanics comprise 13% of Utah's population and arguably, are the group that stands to benefit the most from the voucher legislation. All this adds up to a powerful vote. So why isn't anyone reaching out to Latinos?

Here are two possible obstacles (and some ideas on how school choice groups can work around them):

1.) A perceived language barrier.

School choice groups may reluctant to reach out to Latinos because of the time and resources involved in producing bilingual materials and advertisements. However, according to the US Census, only 3.5% of Utah's population speaks only Spanish (no English) at home. Therefore, choice groups could continue to produce materials in English and reach a large segment of the Latino population. However, their materials will have to be tailored to the Latino population - could I please get a single Latino face in a voucher commercial? It would be nice.

As a former teacher, I also have to add this: give your audience materials that they can actually read. Materials written at a college level may look sophisticated and thus, “credible,” but if the community can’t read them, they’re essentially worthless. You CAN write about school choice at a 5th grade level (I have!), but you’ll need to be creative with your style.

2.) Irrelevant outreach tactics.

Blogs, You Tube videos, and newspaper Op-eds are great, but they are not necessarily the best ways to reach a Latino audience. In this community, face time is still the best way to get your message across. The voucher debate is big in new and traditional media, but few groups are attempting any grassroots work. This is a critical strategy for the Hispanic community. Utah's Latinos need information about the issue, but they also need to know about the voting process, how to register to vote, and the impact of their vote. To truly convince Latino voters of their political power and get them to exercise that vote, you have to work in the community, get to know the voters, and be available (and able) to walk them through the process.

Any other ideas? I would love to hear them.

Note: Another interesting article to consider is yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune poll on why Utahans support or oppose vouchers. It's good data to consider when we're developing our marketing and outreach strategies.