Decoding Hispanic 1

Decoding Hispanic

Decoding Hispanic Dropout Rates Don A. Gonzalez The University of North Texas

Decoding Hispanic 2 Decoding Hispanic Dropout Rates The Hispanic population in the United States is growing at an exponential rate. Some

demographers have posited that the impact of this population storm will be greater than that of the baby boomers. A recent Pew report reveled that over 50% of the nations population growth has come from Hispanics. Like the baby boomers, these effects will significantly impact education because nearly 37% (Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation, 2004) of the Hispanic population is school-and-college-aged young people (ages 5 to 24). Hispanics already have a higher dropout rate than their Anglo and African-American counterparts. Unfortunately, most dropout rates do not currently distinguish between foreign-born Hispanics and those native born. That is the focus of this review: Is there a difference in the dropout rates of foreign-born Hispanics and those born in the United States.

One of the challenges in evaluating this is issue is the very internal diversity among Hispanics. The group is not necessarily a homogenous entity. Theoretically the group shares a language Spanish. Nevertheless, the group consists of people from different countries, all the races and differing cultures. Often the term is used interchangeably with Latinos. Historically the term was used to describe someone from Spain. In the United States the term began as a cultural moniker and has grown to be used as an ethnic one which essentially includes anyone whose family originated in a Spanish speaking country or they themselves did.

The most current available research on Hispanic dropout rates falls into two categories: 1) grouping all of Hispanics together and then focusing on stop gap programs and 2) attempting to

Decoding Hispanic 3 evaluate the different subgroups within the larger one. methods in light of the aforementioned focus. In September of 1995, then Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley created the Hispanic Dropout Project (HDP) which was funded as part of the Department of Education. The purpose of the project was to bring together a group of experts to analyze the Hispanic dropout problem as well as offer policy solutions. From 1997 through 1999, the group, led by Walter G. Secada of the University of Wisconsin, issued a series of reports. One of the first reports issued was authored by Robert Slavin of Johns Hopkins, the noted psychologist and expert on cooperative learning. Slavin did not conduct any new research, but instead relied on National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) data obtained in 1996. Apparently all the HDP articles relied on this NCES data. Slavin (1997) admitted to being frustrated by the complexity of the Latino dropout rates, yet he did recognize that there was a difference in the dropout rates of the Hispanic subgroups (p. 2). This could have been the catalyst to begin serious research into comparing the dropout rates of native and foreign born Hispanics. Instead, Slavin devoted one brief paragraph to this observation and then moved on to evaluating the individual factors that generally lead to dropouts. prevention programs. The remainder of the article is devoted to reviewing dropout This review will examine these two

Secada led the final report in February 1998, entitled No More Excuses. Reviewing the NCES data Secada (1998) concluded that the results were no different than prior research, that upwards of 30% of Hispanics dropout of school (p. 5). The group then shifted its focus to interviewing administrators of dropout prevention programs across the country. Essentially, the group took the existing research conducted by NCES and concluded that Hispanic dropouts are too high.

Decoding Hispanic 4 The original research conducted by the team consisted of interviewing teachers, students and administrators to find common causalities and solutions. The bulk of the report describes these interactions and includes a litany of names and organizations that assisted the project. The rhetoric in the piece is particularly persuasive in effort to cajole the government into action with a call of no more excuses. Ten years later the problem persists and the HDP website merely exists as a homepage made up of broken resource links. The full report can no longer be retrieved from the Department of Education website link that appears on the HDP website.

Secada (1999) followed up the final report with an article in The Clearing House whose title suggested it would explain some of the lessons learned from the Hispanic Dropout Project. Instead it is simply a condensed rehashing of the final report with some focus on the effects of alternative schools on the dropout rates. This presentation appears to be the last organized connection to the Hispanic Dropout Project.

While the Hispanic Dropout Project may not have lived up to its national hype, interest in the topic Hispanic dropout rates continues to attract research. The past five years has seen its fair share of articles written about this topic. Late in 2000, Robert Hauser conducted a study utilizing data obtained from the October Current Population Surveys, 1972-1998. The survey included over 167,000 youth aged 14-24 years. They defined a dropout as someone who transitioned from school enrollment to not non-enrollment. This definition is consistent with the definition used by the NCES. While Hauser et al admit that this definition is not the most ideal, they contend that it probably more accurately evaluates Hispanic dropout rates. Up to this point this is one of the most comprehensive studies Hispanic dropout rates. According to the study,

Decoding Hispanic 5 Hispanic rates hit 30% in the 1970s, dropped to 20% in the 1980s and spiked again in the 1990s (p. 8). One trend revealed in the process of writing this review is the use of interviews and focus groups to gather data. One such study was conducted in Hillsborough County, Florida by a group who presented to the National Migrant Education conference (Nesman, 2001). The group conducted interviews at middle and high schools in a four school cluster that had a high concentration of Hispanics including two that consisted of migrant farmers. Using the district and county data bases, they found that in this particular community half of the students spoke English as their first language and over two-thirds of the group were native born Hispanics. The group also used focus groups that included one hundred students that were screened for the process. roughly found that 7.5% of the students were dropping out. The

They concluded from the

interviews and focus groups that the indicators for these Hispanics dropping out included lack of self motivation, absenteeism and poverty determined by students being on the free lunch program. This study would seem to support the hypothesis that native born and English

proficient Hispanics have a lower drop out rate, however the authors did not attempt to pursue this further. Instead, like previous studies they focused on the general causes of dropout rates and making recommendations to combat these factors. In particular, they recommended the use of bilingual teachers and tutors to help with homework. It would seem that the data better supported the notion of helping the non-English proficient students become proficient in the use of English.

In 2002, a group of researcher at the Hispanic Border Leadership Institute presented a study in which they found that Hispanic dropout rates in five western states Arizona, California,

Decoding Hispanic 6 Colorado, New Mexico and Texas - was 44% (Acevedo, 2002, p. 5). The group relied on

census data and NAEP reports. The study is forthcoming in asserting that its purpose is to put influence policymakers, in other words state legislators. This may explain why the group made no effort to distinguish between native born and foreign born Hispanics. Interestingly, one of the groups recommendations is for Texas Education Agency to develop a measurable method of determining attrition rather than allowing the local districts to define the terms.

In 2003, Maria O. Egemba and James Crawford presented a paper at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association analyzing Hispanic drop out rates. The two sited the Hispanic Dropout Project and its findings as motivation for writing the piece. The data used came from the High School and Beyond (H & B) study of 1980 senior and sophomore student cohorts. The H & B survey included 3,251 Hispanic students who were surveyed every two years through 1992. The authors concluded from this information that 28% of the Hispanic students dropped out. The study did use citizenship and English proficiency as an independent variable in analyzing the data. It concluded that citizenship and English proficiency was a factor in 19% of the drop out cases. While this was the highest percentage factor in predicting drop outs, no expanded effort was made to distinguish between native born and foreign born Hispanics.

The data obtained from studies of the early 2000s began to demonstrate that there might be a correlation between national origin and drop out rates. While the data was beginning to surface, the researchers were not pursuing further investigation. This has recently changed. The Pew Hispanic Center has sponsored a significant amount of research in understanding U.S. Hispanic

Decoding Hispanic 7 populations. To date the foundations research is the most comprehensive look at Hispanics and education available. Richard Fry conducted a report for the foundation in 2003 that clearly rejects the notion that Hispanic dropout rates can be properly analyzed while grouping all the subgroups together. In fact, Fry asserts that by targeting the statistics in a more detailed fashion policy makers can be better armed to decipher problems and find solutions (p. iv). This enabled Fry to discover that a large portion of Hispanic youth in the United States are foreign born, many of whom have had little or no contact with the school system in this country (p. 1). According to his research, a

foreign born student whose education is foreign based has 90% chance of dropping out (p. 5). Fry observes that there are primarily three subgroups to evaluate: 1) native born Hispanics, 2) foreign born Hispanics educated in the United States and 3) foreign born Hispanics educated abroad. The last group generally emigrate to work in this country, not go to school. English proficiency seems to be a primary factor as Fry points out that of the half million Latino dropouts, only 9,000 are native-born youth who do not speak English at least well (p. 9). Armed with this data, Fry recommends targeting resources at the Hispanic youth who have had long exposure to U.S. schools. This he contends will have the greatest impact.

The recent immigration debates in Washington and last years student walk outs have drawn the attention of the American public and media. The Pew Hispanic Center conducted the largest household survey in the United States, sampling over three million addresses (Hazimzadeh, 2006, p. 1). The statistical profile obtained from this survey resulted in 32 tables. The primary advantage of this study is that it breaks down data within the internal diversity of the Latino population. According to the data the native born Hispanic population is actually growing

Decoding Hispanic 8 slightly faster than foreign born (22.4% to 20.2%). The greater impact of the data, according to Hazimzadeh, is the rapid growth of Hispanic youth. According to the survey 80% of Hispanics under the age of 18 speak English well. One may be able to extrapolate from this that increased English proficiency may result in higher graduation rates

Richard Fry (2005) did a follow up article analyzing foreign born youth drop out rates. His research found that foreign-born (not just Hispanics) are significant contributors to the dropout rate in this country. While they only make up 8% of our nations teens, they make up nearly 25% of those dropping out. The analysis utilized a large sampling of foreign-born students from over forty different countries and regions.

It has taken nearly fifteen years since the failed Hispanic Dropout Project, to begin to see some significant and relevant research being conducted in this field. The work of the Hispanic Pew Center is a great foundation for this continued effort. This work could be supplemented by case studies of urban school districts with large Hispanic populations. When the research breaks through the internal diversities of the Hispanic population, the results show that native-born Hispanics are dropping out at a lower rate than thought.

Decoding Hispanic 9 References Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation. National Survey of Latinos: Education, January 2004 (conducted August October 2003). Slavin, R. Hispanic Dropout Project (HDP), 1997. Effective dropout prevention and college attendance program for Latino students. Washington, DC: Office of the Under Secretary of Education. Secada, W. Hispanic Dropout Project (HDP), 1998. No more excuses: The final report of the Hispanic dropout project. Washington, DC: Office of the Under Secretary of Education. Secada, W. (1999). Lessons learned by the Hispanic dropout project. The Clearing House, 73(2), 93-95. Hauser, R., Simmons, S, & Pager, D. (2000). High school dropout, race-ethnicity, and social background from the 1970s to the 1990s: Russell Sage Foundation. New York, NY: Spencer. Nesman, T., Barobs-Gahr, B., & Medrano, L. (2001). They are our kids: Significant findings from a 1998 Latino Dropout Study: The National Migrant Education Conference. Orlando, FL. Acevedo, B., Ortiz, L., Baca, L., et al. (2002). A compromised commitment: Societys obligation and failure to serve the nations largest growing population: Hispanic Border Leadership Institute. Tempe, AZ. Egemba, M. & Crawford, J. (2003). An analysis of Hispanic students drop out rates: American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL. Fry, R. (2003). Hispanic youth dropping out of U.S. schools: Measuring the challenge: The Pew Hispanic Center. Washington, DC.

Decoding Hispanic 10 Hakimzadeh, S. (2006). 41.9 Million and counting: A statistical view of Hispanics at middecade: The Pew Hispanic Center. Washington, DC. Fry, R. (2005). The higher dropout rate of foreign-born teens: The role of schooling abroad: The Pew Hispanic Center. Washington, DC.