Advertisement

The Urban Review

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 543–559 | Cite as

Wanting the Unwanted Again: Safeguarding Against Normalizing Dehumanization and Discardability of Marginalized, “Unruly” English-Learning Latinos in Our Schools

  • Reynaldo ReyesIII
  • Emiliano Villarreal
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Our current high-stakes accountability system for too long has allowed officials in positions of power and oversight to discard students viewed as too much of a liability as a practice of policy and pedagogy. This practice especially has altered how English learners are taught and the lens through which they are viewed. The authors present how a scandal in a large, urban borderland district in which “unruly” and English-language learning Latinas/os were systematically eliminated from test-taking and pushed-out illustrates how the consequences of No Child Left Behind have brought us to a tipping point in the education of the marginalized. Our education system has evolved into one in which the dehumanization of vulnerable students, their parents, and their communities has now dangerously become commonplace. In the pursuit of praxis, this essay argues that we must consider actions at the individual and local level, to bring about localized, incremental change that can result in larger cumulative movements of counter-narratives and counter-pedagogies in response to this trend of dehumanization in our schooling of ethnic, racial, and linguistic minorities.

Keywords

Latino English language learners High-stakes testing Scandal Push-out Dehumanization Deficit lens 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Acuña, R. (1995). Anything but Mexican. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  2. Amrein-Beardsley, A., Berliner, D., & Rideau, S. (2010). Cheating in the first, second, and third degree: Educators’ responses to high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(14), 1–33.Google Scholar
  3. Bartolomé, L. (1994). Beyond the methods fetish: Toward a humanizing pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 64(2), 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckett, L. (2013). America’s most outrageous teacher cheating scandals. ProPublica, April 1. http://www.propublica.org/article/americas-most-outrageous-teacher-cheating-scandals. March 22, 2014.
  5. Blanton, C. K. (2003). From intellectual deficiency to cultural deficiency: Mexican Americans, testing, and public school policy in the American southwest, 1920–1940. Pacific Historical Review, 1(72), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Califa, A. J. (1989). Declaring English the official language: Prejudice spoken here. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 24(293), 293–348.Google Scholar
  8. Cameron, C. D. R. (1997). How the Garcia cousins lost their accents: Understanding the language of title VII decisions approving English-only rules as the product of racial dualism, Latino invisibility, and legal indeterminacy. California Law Review, 85(5), 1347–1393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell, D. T. (2011). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 7(15), 3–43.Google Scholar
  10. Cho, S., & Westley, R. (2002). Historicizing critical race theory’s cutting edge: Key movements that performed the theory. In F. Valdes, J. Culp, & A. P. Harris (Eds.), Crossroads, directions, and a new critical race theory (pp. 32–71). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Conchas, G. Q. (2001). Structuring failure and success: Understanding the variability in Latino school engagement. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 475–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cummins, J. (1995). Power and pedagogy in the education of culturally diverse students: A discussion paper. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.Google Scholar
  13. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). From “Separate but Equal” to “No Child Left Behind”: The collisions of new standards and old inequalities. In D. Meier & G. Wood (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 3–32). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  14. Delgado Bernal, D. (2002). Critical race theory, Latino critical theory, and critical race-gendered epistemologies: Recognizing students of color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Every Student Succeeds Act. http://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn. Retrieved July 13, 2016.
  16. Faltis, C., & Abedi, J. (2013). Extraordinary pedagogies for working within school setting serving nondominant students. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), vii–xi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fránquiz, M., & Salazar, M. (2004). The transformative potential of humanizing pedagogy: Addressing the diverse needs of Chicano/Mexicano students. High School Journal, 87(4), 36–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  19. Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  20. Gándara, P., & Contreras, F. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Garcia, E. (2001). Hispanic education in the United States: Raíces y alas. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Giroux, H. A. (2012). Disposable youth: Racialized memories and the culture of cruelty. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Gonzalez, G. G. (1985). Segregation of Mexican children in a Southern California City: The legacy of expansionism and the American Southwest. The Western Historical Quarterly, 16(1), 55–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gonzalez, G. G. (1996). Chicano educational history: A legacy of inequality. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 22(1), 43–56.Google Scholar
  25. Harper, C. A., de Jong, E. J., & Platt, E. J. (2008). Marginalizing English as a second language teacher expertise: The exclusionary consequence of No Child Left Behind. Language Policy, 7, 267–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hornberger, N. H., & Johnson, D. C. (2007). Slicing the onion ethnographically: Layers and spaces in multilingual language education policy and practice. Tesol Quarterly, 41(3), 509–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hutcheson, J. N. (1999). Students on the margins: Education, stories, dignity. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  28. Juarez, J. R. (1994). The American tradition of language rights: The forgotten right to government in a known tongue. Law & Ineqality, 13(443), 443–473.Google Scholar
  29. Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  30. Macedo, D. (2006). Literacies of power: What Americans are not allowed to know (Expanded ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  31. Matsuda, M. J. (1991). Voices of America: Accent, antidiscrimination law, and jurisprudence for the last reconstruction. Yale Law Journal, 5(100), 1329–1407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Matute-Bianchi, M. E. (1991). Situational ethnicity and patterns of school performance among immigrant and nonimmigrant Mexican-descent students. In M. A. Gibson & J. U. Ogbu (Eds.), Minority status and schooling: A comparative study of immigrant and involuntary minorities (pp. 205–247). New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. McNeil, L. M., Coppola, E., Radigan, J., & Heilig, J. V. (2008). Avoidable losses: High-stakes accountability and the dropout crisis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(3), 1–48.Google Scholar
  35. Melcher, M. (1999). “This is Not Right”: Rural Arizona women challenge segregation and ethnic division, 1925–1950. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 20, 190–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Menchaca, M., & Valencia, R. R. (1990). Anglo-Saxon ideologies in the 1920s–1930s: Their impact on the segregation of Mexican Students in California. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 21(3), 222–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Menken, K. (2006). Teaching to the test: How standardized testing promoted by No Child Left Behind impacts language policy, curriculum, and instruction for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 521–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Menken, K. (2008). English learners left behind: Standardized testing as language policy. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  39. Menken, K. (2010). No Child Behind and English language learners: Challenges and consequences. Theory Into Practice, 49, 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Michels, P. (2012). Faking the grade: The nasty truth behind Lorenzo Garcia’s miracle school turnaround in El Paso. http://www.texasobserver.org/faking-the-grade-the-nasty-truth-behind-lorenzo-garcias-miracle-school-turnaround-in-el-paso/. November 1, 2013.
  41. Nathan, D. (2013). The children left behind: What happened to the students pushed out by high stakes testing? In These Times. http://inthesetimes.com/article/15738/the_children_left_behind. October 29, 2013.
  42. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing. Tempe: Arizona State University, Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Educational Policy Research Unit.Google Scholar
  43. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  44. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Why has high-stakes testing so easily slipped into contemporary American life? Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 672–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Noguera, P. (2015). Accountability for whom? The Huffington post education blog. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pedro-noguera/atlanta-teachers-convicted_b_7069000.html. Retrieved August 14, 2015.
  46. Pandya, J. Z. (2011). Overtested: How high-stakes accountability fails English language learners. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  47. Perea, J. F. (1997). The Black/White binary paradigm of race: The “normal science” of American racial thought. California Law Review, 85(5), 1213–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Perea, J. F. (2004). Buscando América: Why integration and equal protection fail to protect Latinos. Harvard Law Review, 5(117), 1420–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ramanathan, V., & Morgan, B. (2007). TESOL and policy enactments: Perspectives from practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 447–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ravitch, D. (2002a). Education after the Culture wars. Daedalus, 3(131), 5–21.Google Scholar
  51. Ravitch, D. (2002b). Diversity, tragedy, and the schools. The Brookings Review, 1(20), 2–3.Google Scholar
  52. Reyes III, R. (2008). Cheating as good pedagogy: Bilingual teachers defying English-Only to foster student achievement. Multicultural Perspectives, 10(4), 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Reyes, R., & Her, L. (2010). Creating powerful high schools for immigrant and English learning populations: Using past and present ideas in today’s schooling paradigm. In C. Faltis, & G. Valdés (Eds.), Education, immigrant students, refugee students, and English learners. National Society for the Study of Education (Vol. 109(2), pp. 527–547). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  54. Reyes III, R. (2013). Learning the possible: Mexican American students moving from the margins of life to new ways of being. University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  55. Roithmayr, D. (1997). Deconstructing the distinction between bias and merit. California Law Review, 85(5), 1449–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Romo, H., & Falbo, T. (1996). Latino high school graduation: Defying the odds. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  57. Ruíz, R. (1984). Orientations in language planning. NABE: The Journal for the National Association for Bilingual Education, 8(2), 15–34.Google Scholar
  58. Salazar, M. (2008). English or nothing: The impact of rigid language policies on the inclusion of humanizing practices in a high school ESL program. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41(3), 341–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shannon, S., & Escamilla, K. (1999). Mexican immigrants in the United States: Targets of symbolic violence. Educational Policy, 13(3), 347–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Solòrzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. (2000). Toward a critical race theory of Chicana and Chicano education. In C. Tejeda, C. Martinez, & Z. Leonardo (Eds.), Charting new terrains of Chicana(o)/Latina(o) education (pp. 35–65). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
  61. Spring, J. (2012). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education of dominated cultures in the United States. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  62. Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  63. Stefancic, J. (1997). Latino and Latina critical theory: An annotated bibliography. California Law Review, 85(5), 1509–1584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Toppo, G., Amos, D., Gillum, J., & Upton, J. (2011). When test scores seem too good to believe. USA Today. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-06-school-testing_N.htm. Retrieved August 14, 2015.
  65. Torres, Z. (2012). Bowie principal, top EPISD administrator reassigned as district Acknowledges massive failings. http://www.elpasotimes.com/episd/ci_20467994/bowie-principal-top-episd-administrator-reassigned-district-acknowledges?source=pkg. Retrieved July 28, 2015.
  66. Valdes, F. (2002). Outsider scholars, critical race theory, and “OutCrit” perspectivity: Postsubordiantion vision as jurisprudential method. In F. Valdes, J. Culp, & A. P. Harris (Eds.), Crossroads, directions, and a new critical race theory (pp. 399–411). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Valdes, F., Culp, J., & Harris, A. P. (2002). Introduction: Battles waged, won, and lost: Critical race theory at the turn of the millennium. In F. Valdes, J. Culp, & A. P. Harris (Eds.), Crossroads, directions, and a new critical race theory (pp. 1–9). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Valencia, R. R. (2002a). The plight of Chicano students: An overview of schooling conditions and outcomes. In R. R. Valencia (Ed.), Chicano school failure and success: Past, present and future (2nd ed., pp. 3–51). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Valencia, R. R. (Ed.). (2002b). Chicano school failure and success: Past, present and future. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Valencia, R. R. (2008). Chicano students and the courts: The Mexican American legal struggle for educational equality. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Valencia, R. R., Menchaca, M., & Donato, R. (2002). Segregation, desegregation, and integration of Chicano students: Old and new realities. In R. R. Valencia (Ed.), Chicano school failure and success: Past, present and future (pp. 70–113). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  73. Valenzuela, A. (Ed.). (2005). Leaving children behind: How Texas-style accountability fails Latino youth. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  74. Wiley, T., & Wright, W. (2004). Against the undertow: Language minority education policy and politics in the age of accountability. Educational Policy, 18, 142–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wood, G. (2004). NCLB’s effects on classrooms and schools. In D. Meier & G. Wood (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 33–50). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Education, Teacher EducationUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options