Why do some low-income immigrant and native-born Latino students do well in school while others do not? Why are low-income Latino students less successful in school than their White peers? What are the effects of institutional mechanisms on low-income Latino school engagement? For the past two decades, the most persuasive answers to these questions have been advanced by the cultural-ecologists, who suggest that differences in academic achievement by race result from minority groups' perceptions of the limited opportunity structure. However, variations within the Latino student population remain — some Latino students succeed and some fail. In this article, Gilberto Conchas describes the results of a study that examined how school programs construct school failure and success among low-income immigrants and U.S.-born Latino students. The results of Conchas's study show that, from students' perspectives, institutional mechanisms have an impact on Latino school engagement, and he links cultural-ecological explanations and institutional explanations. The findings from this study extend our understanding of the fluidity and nuance of within-group variations in Latino student success in an urban school context. (pp. 475–504)
Vietnamese students must contend with the burden of the myth of being a model minority. As a result of adults' high expectations of them, Vietnamese youth receive structural and ideological advantages over other nonwhite racial groups. Further, the students themselves reinforce the model minority image as they attempt to attain educational mobility. The authors examine the role of two distinct school contexts within the same school that shape the academic outcomes of Vietnamese students contending with the pressures of being considered members of the model minority.
In this article, we present findings about the implementation of single gender public schooling in California—a movement that signifies a growing interest in school choice and private sector solutions to public education problems. We analyze qualitative data gathered in a study of 12 single gender academies (6 boys; 6 girls). As well-meaning educators responded to California's single gender academies legislation, they designed schools and used resources to address the pressing needs of students in each community, such as low achievement, poverty, or violence, rather than to address gender bias. The impetus for single gender schooling in each context affected the organization, curriculum, and pedagogy in each academy, as did educators’ ideologies about gender. In the end, the politics surrounding the legislation, the resource interests of district and school administrators, and the lack of institutional support for this gender-based reform coalesced to structure the demise of most of the single gender academies. We consider the implications of these findings for the viability of single gender schooling as a public school option.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.