Third Generation Disadvantage among Mexican Americans

Among Mexican Americans, generational differences in education do not fit with assimilation theory’s predictions of significant improvement from the second to third generation; instead, education for third generation remains similar to the second generation and falls behind that of non-Hispanic whites. Scholars have not examined this educational gap for recent cohorts, nor have they considered a wide range of economic outcomes by generation. Using a nationally representative sample of young adults from the National Educational Longitudinal Survey, we examine various educational and economic outcomes among second- and third-generation Mexican Americans and compare it to whites and blacks. We find that third-generation Mexican Americans have similar outcomes to the second generation and lower education and economic levels than whites and blacks, even when controlling for key factors. Our findings reveal limitations to assimilation theory and suggest that the persistent low status of third-generation Mexican Americans may be largely due to their racialization. These findings coupled with prior research on Mexican Americans point to a consistent pattern of third generation disadvantage, which stands in contrast to second generation advantage.

Will Moving to a Better Neighborhood Help? Teenage Residential Mobility, Change of Context, and Young-Adult Educational Attainment

Research suggests that growing up in more affluent neighborhoods improves educational attainment. But would it help adolescents to move to relatively more affluent neighborhoods, as theories of neighborhood effects anticipate? Does it depend on the magnitude of the change of context? To answer these questions, we use data from the National Educational Longitudinal Survey and the 1990 Census to estimate models using propensity score methods. We found that both upward mobility and change of context during adolescence had small effects on long-term educational attainment that varied by race, socioeconomic status, transfer status, and the social class of starting neighborhoods. Importantly, upward moves and positive changes in context reduced African-Americans’ chances of completing high school.

Book Reviews

Helen F. Ladd of Duke University reviews “The Money Myth: School Resources, Outcomes, and Equity” by W. Norton Grubb,. The EconLit Abstract of the reviewed work begins “Examines how inequalities in resources other than money, such as leadership, instruction, and tracking policies, contribute to the deepening divide in the quality and success of American education. Discusses moving beyond money--the variety of educational resources; multiple resources, multiple outcomes--testing the improved school finance with the National Educational Longitudinal Survey of the Class of 1988; when money does matter--explaining the weak effects of school funding; families as resources--the effects of family background and demographic effects; students as resources--the effects of connectedness to schooling; equity and inequality--from static to dynamic conceptions; dynamic inequality--schooling outcomes over time; correcting dynamic inequality in practice--exploring what schools do for low-performing students; making resources matter--implications for school-level practice; supporting the improved school finance--district, state, and federal roles; the implications for litigation of the improved school finance; and the implications for reform--conceptions of schooling and the role of the welfare state. Grubb is Professor and David Gardner Chair in Higher Education at the School of Education, University of California, Berkeley, and Faculty Coordinator of the Principal Leadership Institute. Index.”

Multiple Resources, Multiple Outcomes: Testing the “Improved”School Finance With NELS88

This article first presents the conceptual framework of the “improved” school finance. This approach clarifies that effective school resources include compound resources, complex resources, and abstract resources in addition to the simple resources usually included in production functions. The implications of this approach are then explored with the National Educational Longitudinal Survey of the Class of 1988 (NELS88), data rich enough to measure many school resources and many outcomes. The results indicate that simple resources are much less powerful than compound, complex, and abstract resources. Many effective resources are unaffected by spending levels and must be constructed within schools, explaining why money often does not make a difference to outcomes. The results also indicate that, while a few powerful resources affect all outcomes, some affect test scores but not progress through high school, while others affect progress but not learning.

Student Achievement in Public Magnet, Public Comprehensive, and Private City High Schools

Problems with our public urban high schools are widely discussed, and many see magnet schools and private schools as the answer. But are those schools really better at increasing the academic skills of students? Using the National Educational Longitudinal Survey, I estimated the effect of attending a magnet school, Catholic school, or secular private school on the achievement of urban students in math, reading, science, and social studies. I then compared these estimates to the achievement of students who attend comprehensive public high schools. I found that magnet schools are more effective than regular schools at raising the proficiency of students in science, reading, and social studies; Catholic schools have a positive impact on math skills, while secular private schools do not offer any advantage, net of preexisting differences among students. Further analyses tested the sensitivity of the results to assumptions about independence and selectivity; these showed support for the magnet school advantages in reading and social studies, but raised doubts about the Catholic school effects in math and the magnet school effects in science.

Differences among Urban, Suburban, and Rural Schools on Technology Access and Use in Eighth-Grade Mathematics Classrooms

One of the potential dangers related to technology occurs when technology access and use are not equitably distributed. This study examined the access and use of technology in urban, suburban, and rural schools by using teacher survey data from the eighth-grade cohort of the National Educational Longitudinal Survey of 1988 (NELS:88). The subjects were 3,825 eighth-grade mathematics teachers who answered questions on the extent to which students had access to technology and how they were using it in their mathematics class. The results indicated that there were several significant differences on technology use by type of school setting. Teachers from suburban schools were more likely to report using calculators than teachers from urban and rural schools. Teachers from rural schools reported that they were less likely to use calculators and computers than teachers from suburban and urban schools. Finally, teachers from rural and suburban schools were more likely to report that their students used computers for enrichment purposes, while urban teachers were more likely to report that computers in their schools were used for remediation.