amea_2011.indd Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 FEATURED ARTICLES Somos Iguales…Pero No Tanto: Examining the Experience of Belonging among Undocumented Immigrant Latina/o Students Jesús Rodríguez California State University, Long Beach Abstract Using data collected from a larger ethnographic study that explored the educational experiences of three generational cohorts of undocumented immigrant Latino students in a public secondary school setting, this study provides undocumented students’ perspective on barriers (perceived or real) to feeling or not feeling like a member of the school community. Qualitative interviews with twelve undocumented immigrant Latina/o students identifi ed discriminatory factors that contributed to students’ beliefs about their undocumented status among documented Latina/o peers. Findings indicate that feelings of belonging within-group variation (1.25, 1.5. and 1.75) of undocumented Latina/o students were challenged when issues of language, age of migration and the dominant American narrative projected by their Latina/o documented peers placed undocumented students’ outside of the shared cultural group and society. Introduction Immigration has always played a signifi cant role in the development of America’s narrative on social and economic expansion. While economic reasons remain a signifi cant reason for unauthorized migration, the desire for family unifi cation has led to an increase in the number of women and children making the dangerous journey across the border (Biococchi, 2009). Once across the border, the process of creating a new designation of space that seeks to recreate their lost world begins (Ainslie, 1998). Those children and youth entering into the United States as undocumented minors fi nd themselves in a legal tight spot with limited educational opportunities and privileges. Many of these same children will grow up in the only country they will ever know and become a generation of youth that will face unique social, political, and legal complications that will place them as “hostages in the immigration crisis” (Lopez, 2005, p. 1373). Age of Migration and Generational Cohorts The relation of age of immigration and length of residence in the United States has varying effects on identity, mental health, and behavioral outcomes for Latina/o youth (Alegría, Scribney, Woo, Torres, & Guarnaccia, 2007). According to Alegría et al. (2007), those “immigrating at an early age may have greater integration into U.S. culture and potentially weaker identifi cation with Latino cultural values” because of larger societal forces (p. 3). Their socialization process into U.S. culture is far easier than those immigrating at a later age. Despite differences in age of migration and adaptive outcomes, undocumented children and youth confront unique challenges in navigating the legal and educational contradictions which may place them at greater risk for social, academic, and mental health problems. The term 1.5 generation is part of a much larger classifi cation of immigrants who arrive as children and youth. It is the most commonly used term given by scholars who distinguish sub-generational cohorts within that group of undocumented children and youth. These classifi cations or distinct groups are based largely on their age at the time of migration formally 4 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 designating members of any ethnic group whose age of migration to the United States ranges from 6 to 12 years of age (Gonzales, 2007; Rumbaut, 2004; Rumbaut & Ima, 1988). Accordingly, differences in cultural adaptation require a more refi ned designation of those immigrants that came earlier than age 6 and those that came after age 12. Use of the terms 1.75 generational cohort and the 1.25 generational cohort helps explain differences in sub-groups of immigrants who migrated as children or youth. Table 1 summarizes Rumbaut’s (2004) adaptive outcomes for each cohort based on age of migration. Table 1. Generational Cohort, Age of Migration, and Adaptive Outcomes Generational Cohort Age of Migration Adaptive Outcomes 1.75 0-5 years Arrive in early childhood; experience is closer to that of U.S.-born second generation; are pre-school children with almost no memory of their birth country; were too young to attend school to learn to read or write in the parental language; and are almost entirely socialized here. 1.5 6-12 years Arrive in middle childhood; are pre-adolescent, primary school age children who have learned to read and write in the parental language; and whose education is largely completed in the United States. 1.25 13-17 years Arrive in their adolescent years; arrive with or without their families of origin; attend secondary schools after arrival; or enter the workforce directly after arriving; and are much closer to the fi rst generation of immigrant adults in terms of developmental life stages. 5 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 Students’ Sense of Belonging: Factors that Motivate Educational Aspirations The concepts of belonging and school membership comprise a body of literature that addresses the extent to which students feel personally accepted, respected, included, and supported in the school social environment (Goodenow & Grady, 1993; Perry, 1999). A number of studies highlight the problems resulting from adolescents not feeling like they are a part of their school (Battistich & Hom, 1997; Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991; Finn, 1989; Gibson, Gandara, & Koyama, 2004b). If the need to belong is not satisfi ed, the predicted outcomes include diminished motivation, poor performance, impaired development, alienation, and feelings of disconnectedness (Osterman, 2000). The construct of belonging is defi ned by Osterman (2000) as “‘relatedness,’ ‘support,’ ‘acceptance,’ ‘membership,’ or ‘sense of community’” (p. 326). Studies have found a correlation between the role of peers in schooling and the academic performance and aspirations among U.S.-born and immigrant high school aged youth (Gándara, O’Hara, & Gutierrez, 2004; Gibson, Bejinez, Hidalgo, & Rolon, 2004; Gibson, Gándara, & Koyama, 2004b; Raley, 2004; Stanton-Salazar, 2004), especially of Mexican descent (Gibson et al., 2004). For the Latina/o student, a network of social support/ peer infl uence (relations) may serve as critical components in their educational aspirations, academic/ social success, school performance, and overall achievement. Social-capital or peer social capital “connects the student to peers and peer networks that provide resources and other non-tangible forms of support such as pro-academic norms and identities to the Latino student” (Gibson et al., 2004, p. 130). Such capital can lead the student to the knowledge and resources needed to “decode the system” and “participate in power” (Delpit, 1995; Stanton-Salazar, 1997). As a result, peer experiences and social networks can provide avariety of experiences (positive or negative). These experiences are converted into “capital” when they serve to promote academic or post academic success. Those students who lack the peer social capital necessary to decode an institution’s system will fall further behind. Latina/o students, like other ethnic groups, tend to select their peers from within, resulting in a lack of contact with peers from other ethnic groups (Gándara & Contreras, 2009; Gibson et al., 2004). The result of such socialization is limited contact with those who may be more socially advantaged. These students who aspire to high achievement are, at times, accused by their lower-performing peers (in this case the same ethnic group) of “acting white” or like a “schoolboy” (Gándara & Contreras, 2009). A pervasive perception among ethnic-minority adolescents equates school with assimilation into the dominant culture along with a rejection of their own language and culture (Gándara, O’Hara, & Gutiérrez, 2004). The result is low achievement because the thought of assimilation (or any form of engagement with the dominant culture) is met with resistance. While Latina/o students may report an overall sense of belonging in school, Gibson et al. (2004) found that these same students are “highly uncomfortable in those school settings and situations that bring them into direct contact with peers who they feel neither accept nor respect them” (p. 130). This peer social capital from non-Latino peers may serve as a support system that guides, informs, and even models aspects of schooling absent from their own environments. “Academic segregation,” on the other hand, is capable of preventing such relations from evolving (Gándara, 1995). For minority youth, the experience of school membership or bonds with peers and staff serve as the pre-condition to accessing these and other school resources. Latina/o Critical Theory as a Guiding Framework A Latina/o Critical Theory framework was used to guide the study. More specifi cally, key fundamental themes of the theory were used to conceptualize and operationalize the study. The fi rst theme guiding this study is that while race may be critical or even central, it is not experienced in isolation nor is it suffi cient as an explanatory factor. An interjection of information provides the critical race theorist with a perspective to examine the interplay between power and authority within minority movements and communities (Montoya, 1994). 6 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 This study examines within-group differences among documented and undocumented Latina/o students. A second guiding theme is to challenge traditional claims of the educational system: meritocracy, equal opportunity, color-blindness, and objectivity (Austin, 2000; Montoya, 1994; Solorzano & Delgado Bernal, 2001). As a result, this study draws on the lived experiences of students using story-telling (“cuentos”) or consejos” (wisdom sayings) as a means of reconciling the culture of home with the dominant American culture. A third theme, drawing on the lived experiences of group members, addresses the need for a centrality of experiential knowledge using stories as a powerful way to name a type of discrimination. Overview of Sample and Procedures Data analyzed come from a larger ethnographic study that explored the educational experiences of three generational cohorts of undocumented immigrant Latina/o students in a public secondary school setting by addressing the following questions: 1. What are the educational, social, and emotional experiences of the undocumented immigrant Latino student in a high school setting? 2. What are students’ beliefs about their undocumented status in school? 3. What do undocumented students perceive as barriers to their schooling experience? In this paper, I use interview data from the larger study to focus on the identifi cation of discriminatory factors that contributed to students’ beliefs about their undocumented status and any barriers (perceived or real) to students’ sense of school belonging. Although Plyler (1982) held that undocumented children are entitled to a free and public education, there are unique challenges to selecting students that belong to a clandestine population. As an insider with a shared language and culture, researcher trust was established with several organizations committed to issues that affect the immigrant Latina/o community in order to solicit possible leads and resources to assist with the study. Eventually, a lead to the Head Counselor in a public high school in Los Angeles emerged. Under the guidance of the researcher, the Head Counselor, alone, became responsible for identifying participants that fulfi lled the sample characteristic assigned by the researcher. Participants were selected from Leonardo Gutierrez High School (pseudonym) in Los Angeles, California. Purposeful sampling was used because the individuals who fi t the study’s criteria were capable of forming an understanding of the research problem by virtue of the shared experience of being undocumented and Latino (Creswell, 2007). Because of the sensitivity in working with this student group, the Head Counselor was required by the university’s Internal Review Board to complete its Online Education Module on the Protection of Human Subjects as a means to ensure confi dentiality. The study was designed to contain a sample of six males and six females (two from each category below) so that there might be a balanced variation of gender, age of migration, and college-ready status. 1. Undocumented Student Less than Twelve Years in U.S./Non-College Ready 2. Undocumented Student Less than Twelve Years in U.S./College Ready 3. Undocumented Student More than Twelve Years in U.S./Non-College Ready 4. Undocumented Student More than Twelve Years in U.S./College Ready Information on the student was not accurate or fully revealed until the interviews began, which provided for an unbalanced sample (Table 2). The 12- year boundary ensured that at least some of the students would fall under one of the three cohorts. 7 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 Table 2. Participant Characteristics (N = 12) Participant Name Gender/Age Age of College Ready Migration/Cohort Status Juana F/17 10/1.5 College Ready Guillermo M/18 8/1.5 College Ready AJ M/18 6/1.5 College Ready Daisy F/17 12/1.5 College Ready FV M/18 12/1.5 Non-College Ready Carolina F/17 16/1.25 Non-College Ready Carla F/18 13/1.25 Non-College Ready Jessica F/18 14/1.25 Non-College Ready Erica F/17 14/1.25 College Ready Alicia F/18 15/1.25 College Ready Carlos F/17 3/1.75 College Ready James F/17 9 months/1.75 College Ready College Ready and Non-College Ready Status The characteristics that determined college-ready status or non-college ready status was determined by a 3.0 grade point average, which determines college eligibility, based on the statewide general A-G course requirement and any advanced placement courses. Those classifi ed as non-college ready had a grade point average below a 3.0, had not completed or were not near completing the A-G requirements, and / or had not fulfi lled the AB-540 requirements of having attended a California high school for three or more years. The status of “college-ready / non-college ready” as a criterion for participant selection is a limitation because the terms were used to designate only those students who met the graduation criteria for eligible entry into the California State University (CSU) or the University of California (UC) system even though statewide requirements vary for entry into California’s community colleges and some private colleges and universities. In addition to the criteria described above, all participants were: 1. Undocumented; 2. Latina/o from Mexico or Central America because these groups account for roughly 80 percent of the U.S. undocumented population (Passel, 2005); and 3. Students in their third or fourth year of public high school education because it is here that, for many, the issue of legal status is confronted as they begin the process of applying for college or work. Only those students that the counselor knew were comfortable discussing their legal status openly were selected. His knowledge of such students came from his contact with these students and information provided to him by other counselors on his staff. As Head Counselor, he had the authority to access their academic progress and overall achievement patterns prior to compiling a pool of potential participants. To protect the identity of the participants, several steps were taken to ensure confi dentiality. 8 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 Interviews All student interviews were conducted by the researcher in the Head Counselor’s offi ce, which provided a safe, non-threatening environment. Interviews were conducted in Spanish if requested by the student. The interviews were audio-recorded and lasted approximately 40-60 minutes, with handwritten notes taken during the interview and used to supplement any discrepancies or clarifi cations in the audio. Data Analysis The interviews were transcribed verbatim by a paid transcription service and two graduate assistants. Each interview was verifi ed by the researcher. Using Latina/o Critical Theory as a lens, signifi cant statements emerged which formed the themes from which exemplars were used to support and illustrate the fi ndings and interpretations of each section. From these categories, four key themes emerged to communicate the fi ndings with the participants’ quotes from the transcriptions to, in their own words, support the fi ndings. Results The four themes addressed in the larger ethnographic study were: 1) the experiences of displacement, rejection and care for the family; 2) an undocumented immigrant youth subculture; 3) feelings of belonging in the educational setting; and 4) a conceptual model of a shared immigrant narrative. This paper addresses part of the larger narrative on the educational experiences of undocumented immigrant Latina/o students in a public secondary school setting. Undocumented youth in this study were faced with negotiating how and where they fi t in within their own ethnic group. How he or she integrated into the school community was complicated by a set of factors that challenged their place in the educational and social setting. The central fi ndings addressed in this paper that emerge as sub-sections to the theme of feelings of belonging in the educational setting include language as a form of discriminatory treatment and the concept of somos iguales (we are all the same). Language as a Form of Discriminatory Treatment According to Valenzuela (1999), “immigrants experience more overt discrimination; including at the hands of many insensitive Mexican American youth—than any other group” (p.24). While it may be important to create a community where students are free to be “themselves and where their Mexican identity is valued and supported” (Gibson et al., 2004, p. 140), some participants in the study, especially the recent immigrants, could not understand why someone from their own ethnic group would tease them about where they came from and how they spoke. Such feelings of marginalization were heightened when issues related to language were involved. Siento que ellos cuando lo miran Latino como que empiezan a decir cosas de nosotros. Siento que empiezan a decir cosas de mí porque soy Latina o piensan. No sé… porque a veces estoy escuchando música en español y como que se quedan viendo a uno como, “¿Quien es esa que está escuchando m ú s i c a ? ” Sí me siento a veces como que diferente mas ahorita como cambiamos las clases (Carla, 1.25 / Non-College Ready). (I feel that when they see one as Latino, they begin to say things about us. I feel that they are saying things about me because I am Latina or they think so. I don’t know…because sometimes I listen to music in Spanish and it’s like they are watching me thinking, “what is she listening to?” I feel different especially now that we switched classes [semester changes].) Like other 1.25ers and some 1.5ers, language (not speaking English well or at all) served as a trigger to initiate being treated differently. This form of discrimination (linguicism) formed the basis for making some members of the 1.5 cohort and all members of the 1.25 cohort feel separated from their Latina/o peers. 9 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 FV defi ned this sort of discriminatory treatment as a form of racism. When asked if the racism came from individuals who were not from Mexico or from others who were also Latino, FV replied: El “racismo” viene de los dos. Yo pienso que hay aquí personas que llegaron de México y llegaron chicos y han crecido aquí y ya porque tú llegas de México más grande y ellos ya hablan el idioma, yo pienso que quieren hacer diferencias entre él y tú. Cuando un idioma o algún color de piel no hace la diferencia en una persona (FV, 1.25 / Non-College Ready). (The racism comes from both. I believe there are people here who arrived from Mexico as small children and grew up here and now just because you come from Mexico older and they already spoke the language [English], I think they want to show the differences between them and us when a language or skin color makes no difference in the person.) AJ and FV remained closest with those whose age of migration was similar to their own. Speaking Spanish openly made them and others in the same generational cohort a target for teasing. Carolina, a 1.25 member, jokingly commented that although she felt very comfortable speaking Spanish on campus with her girlfriends, she admitted to feeling embarrassed when her group of friends became too loud and when even her own friends (some of whom were born here) had trouble following even Carolina’s Spanish. Porque cuando voy con una bola [de amigas] y vamos hablando español, digo, “Esos paisas que no saben inglés.” Yo pienso que así piensan. Yo por eso no hablo tan recio (Carolina, 1.25 / Non-College Ready). (When I go with a group (of friends) and we’re speaking Spanish, I say to myself, “They’re probably thinking, ‘those paisas that do not know how to speak English.’” At least that is what I think they are thinking. That is why I do not speak (Spanish) so loudly.) For FV and Carolina, language appeared as a key indicator of discriminatory treatment between those Latinas/ os born in the United States and members of the 1.25 and 1.5 generational cohorts even though differences in achievement between them and their 1.25 and 1.5 peers were not striking. The only differences, according to the Head Counselor, were where each student fell in completing the statewide A-G requirements for UC/CSU transfer. Framing the achievement patterns for the Latino student within a larger historical and social context (burdens of poverty, economic exploitation, segregation, and discrimination) is one way to understand the disproportionate pattern of educational achievement and attainment among Latino youth. These larger issues not only affect the Latina/o student outside of the school setting, but they are likely to have a signifi cant impact on their experiences in school. The School Setting as Más Igual (“More Equal”) Gándara and Contreras (2009) describe the educational setting as the “fi rst response system for any kind of social, medical, or psychological problem or disability” and the one most lacking in resources (p. 86). Observational data gathered from the campus visits offered a glimpse into the students’ world and its surrounding communities. Participants felt safe in the school despite a history of violence in the surrounding neighborhoods. The climate of the campus, a large multi-story complex with bungalows on the periphery of the grounds, was a hive of controlled energy. The hallways were wide and clean with culturally relevant student artwork displayed on both sides of the hallway walls. The principal and other adult supervisors/teachers were regularly observed engaging the students in conversations. Several teachers wore t-shirts with the phrase: “CAHSSEE: SI PUEDES” (CAHSSEE: YES YOU CAN). It was an encouraging (and constant) reminder that every student could pass the California High School Senior Exit Exam creating for a culture of “high expectations” among the teachers. Carolina expressed feelings of comfort while in school—a sentiment shared by all participants. According to the Head Counselor, the school served as “a safe-haven for these kids” (personal communication, February 10 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 2010). When participants were asked if they believed they had access to all the resources possible to succeed in their education, they all believed they had. For Carolina, the campus was the one place where the school was more equal than other settings despite having experienced some negative feelings towards her treatment. La escuela es como más igual. Es más igual para todos. Pero a veces como afuera, creo que no como no tengo papeles. Agarro mi lonche gratis, me prestan libros, voy aquí a la enfermería. Todo lo tengo. Puedo ir al gym que está aquí. Todo. (Carolina, 1.25 / Non-College Ready). (The school is more equal. It’s equal for everyone, but at times, like outside, I think it is not the same for everyone because I do not have papers. I get my lunch free, they let me borrow books, I can go to the infi rmary (clinic) that is available on campus. I can also go to the gym here. I have everything here.) According to Carolina, she had access to the same resources others had regardless of status. An essential sameness prevailed and was a dominant theme for the 1.25 members. For the 1.25 members, life on the campus was igual (the same) because of access to resources, pero no tanto (but not that much) because of treatment by members of their own ethnic group, language, and the full rights and privileges afforded only to documented students (e.g. fi nancial aid, job permits, and possible internships). Students like Carolina and Jessica (1.25 generation) appropriated a discourse on equality constructing the space of the school as a “microcosm of the nation” or at least an idealized nation (Levinson, Douglas, & Holland ,1996). In his study of a secondary school in Mexico, Levinson et al. (1996) established that class and ethnic differences within school were often ignored or downplayed while the educational differences beyond the school became more salient (p. 212). He found that a “discourse of essential sameness (“todos somos iguales,” “we are all equal”) was used to distinguish the schooled from the unschooled. Carolina and Jessica believed that access to the same resources for the same students created a sense of equality among the school community. Yet, they also believed that this same equality should be extended to every person beyond the school, making a subtle case for access to higher education, jobs, and possible citizenship. Conclusions Issues of language, age of migration, and its intersection with citizen Latina/o English speakers served to identify discriminatory treatment experienced among members of the 1.25 and 1.5 generational cohorts and their documented Latina/o peers. Language, however, remained the form of “linguistically related racism” for undocumented youth in both the 1.25 and 1.5 generations of this study (Phillipson & Skutnabb-Kangas, 1992). Linguicism is “prejudice multiplied by power used by members of dominant language groups against nondominant language groups” (Chen-Hayes, Chen, & Athar, 1999, p. 20). For the 1.25ers and 1.5ers, language was the only difference separating them from their documented peers. Because of their age of migration, 1.25ers remained especially vulnerable to this discriminatory practice. As one indicator of discrimination, the emotional and social experiences of undocumented Latino youth posed the question of how subtractive schooling (Valenzuela, 1999) was taking place not at the institutional level, but at the hands of other Latina/o youth as 1.25 and 1.5 members begin the integration process into the dominant culture. The method of the framework shifted from a critical perspective of the Latina/o looking outside of his or her ethnic group as a means to pull back the layers of oppression and racist attitudes to the Latina/o looking inward at his or her own ethnic group as participants in the dominant narrative. Yet, the Latina/o students remained bound by a common culture, language and story. They maintained a strong cultural identity even when faced by the dominant American narrative projected by their Latina/o documented peers. Challenging the dominant ideology was Carolina’s statement: todos 11 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 somos iguales pero no tanto (we are all the same, but not that much). While the school provided the necessary means to succeed academically, the real life resources (affordable access to higher education, jobs, a feeling of safety and security because of undocumented status) were not provided no matter how hard they worked. Her storytelling, like that of the others, opened a door into an ignored or alternative reality by providing a snapshot of the recovered memory and story of the undocumented experience. References Ainslie, R. (1998). Cultural mourning, immigration and engagement: Vignettes from the Mexican experience. In M. Suárez-Orozco (Ed.), Crossings: Mexican immigration in interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 285-300). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Alegría, M., Scribney, W., Woo, M., Torres, M., & Guarnaccia, P. (2007). Looking beyond nativity: The relation of age of immigration, length of residence, and birth cohorts to the risk of onset psychiatric disorders for Latinos. Journal of Research on Human Development, 4(1), 19-47. Austin, R. (2000). The black community, its lawbreakers, and a politics of identifi cation. In R. Delgado & J. Stefancic (Eds.), (2000). Critical race theory: The cutting edge (2nd ed., pp. 290-301). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Battistich, V., & Hom, A. (1997). The relationship between students’ sense of their school as a community and their involvement in problem behaviors. American Journal of Public Health, 87(12), 1997-2001. Bicocchi, L. (2009). Undocumented children: Invisible victims of immigration control. Report delivered to the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented \ Migrants, EU. Chen-Hayes, S., Chen, M., & Athar, N. (1999). Challenging linguicism: Action strategies for counselors and client-colleagues. In Advocacy in Counseling: Counselors, Clients, and Community (pp. 21-31). ERIC Counseling and Student Services Clearinghouse, North Carolina: University of North Carolina. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fi ve approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Delpi, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural confl ict in the classroom.New York: The New Press Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., & Ryan, R.M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/ 4), 325-346. Finn, J. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59,117-142. Gándara, P. (1995). Over the ivy walls: The educational mobility of low income Chicanos. New York: State University of New York Press. Gándara, P., & Contreras, F. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Gándara, P., O’Hara, S., & Gutierrez, D. (2004). The changing shape of aspirations: Peer infl uence on achievement behavior. In M. Gibson, P. Gándara, J. Koyama (Eds.), School connections: US Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement (pp. 39-62). New York: Teachers College Press. Gibson, M., Bejínez, L., Hidalgo, N., & Rolon, C. (2004). Belonging and school participation: Lessons from a migrant student club. In M. Gibson, P. Gándara, J. Koyama (Eds.), School connections: US Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement (pp.129- 149). New York: Teachers College Press. Gibson, M., Gándara, P, & Koyama, J. (2004a). The role of peers in the schooling of US Mexican youth. In M. Gibson, P. Gándara, & J. Koyama (Eds.), School connections: US Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement (pp.1-17). New York: Teachers College Press. Gibson, M., Gándara, P, & Koyama, J. (2004b). School connections: US Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement. New York: Teachers College Press. 12 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto Association of Mexican American American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2011 • Volume 5, Issue 1 Goodenow, C., & Grady, K.E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’ values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students. Journal of Experimental Education, 62(1), 60-71. Gonzales, R. (2007). Wasted talent and broken dreams: The lost potential of undocumented students. Immigration Policy in Focus, 5(13), 1-11. Levinson, B.A., Douglas, E.F., & Holland, D.C. (1996). The cultural production of the educated person: Critical ethnographies of school and local practice. New York: State University of New York Press. López, M.P. (2005). Refl ections on educating latino and latina undocumented children: Beyond Plyler v.Doe. Seton Hall Review, Vol. 35:1373, 1374-1406. Montoya, M. (1994). Máscaras, trenzas, y greñas: Un/masking the self while un/braiding Latina stories and legal discourse. Chicano-Latino Law Review, 15, 1-37. Osterman, K.F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 323-367. Perry, C. (1999). Proactive thoughts on creating safe schools. The School Community Journal, 9(1), 9-16. Phillipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1992). Linguizismus: Kontrolle durch Sprache. In Rassismus und Migration in Europa, ed. A. Kalpaka & N.Rathzel, Das Argument – Sonderband AS 201, 204-215. Plyler v. Doe. 457 U.S., 202 (1982). Rumbaut, R.G., & Ima, K. (1988). The adaptation of southeast Asian refugee youth: A comparative study. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Offi ce of Refugee Resettlement. Rumbaut, R. G. (2004). Ages, life stages, and generational cohorts: Decomposing the immigrant and second generations in the United States. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1160-1205. Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2002). Marvelous human rights rhetoric and grim realities: Language rights in education. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 1(3), 179-205. Solórzano, D.G. & Delgado Bernal, D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308-342. Stanton-Salazar, R.D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding socialization of racial minority children and youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1-40. Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students. In M. A. Gibson, P. Gándara, & J. P. Koyama (Eds.), School Connections: U.S. Mexican Youth, Peers, and School Achievement. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 18-38. Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: US-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. SUNY Press, Albany. 13 Somos Iguales...Pero No Tanto amea_2011 6 amea_2011 7 amea_2011 8 amea_2011 9 amea_2011 10 amea_2011 11 amea_2011 12 amea_2011 13 amea_2011 14 amea_2011 15