 |
 |
 |
 |
|
The Education of Migrant Children In Michigan A Policy Analysis Report Maria Teresa Tatto o Virginia Lundstrom-Ndibongo
o Brenda E. Newman
About the Authors: Maria Teresa Tatto1 is an associate professor of education at Michigan State University. She has coordinated and participated in local and national research studies in Latin America, the United States, and Asia. She has published several articles and book chapters dealing with analysis of educational policy, the effects of education reform on teachers' practice, the influence of teacher education, and, more recently, values education policies in Mexico. Her areas of specialty are the comparative study of teacher education and student learning, the relationship between educational policy and practice, and the comparative study of the contexts of policy formation in education. Virginia Lundstrom-Ndibongo works on computers and learning technologies in South Africa. Brenda Neuman-Sheldon works at Policy Studies Associates in Washington, D.C. Sally E. Nogle is Associate Athletic Trainer, Adjunct Faculty, in the Department of Kinesiology at Michigan State University in East Lansing, Mich. Loukia Sarroub is an Assistant Professor at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, Wisc. James Weiler is pursuing his doctorate in curriculum, teaching and educational policy at Michigan State University, in East Lansing, Mich.
Abstract: The present report originated in a MSU policy analysis class taught during 1996. The professor and students agreed to construct a class that represented a grounded experience in policy analysis touching upon a current and relevant issue. We began exploring the policies surrounding the education of migrant children in Michigan. Our goal was to learn about the policies related to the of education of migrant workers' children and to develop an understanding of the issue's complexities. We knew our work would be limited by time, financial, and political constraints. These constraints limited our work to an exploratory inquiry supported by literature reviews and informational interviews with key individuals in selected Michigan sites. We chose this "invisible" policy issue for several reasons. Migrant education offered us the opportunity to examine current reform tendencies to provide access to quality education for all children, the preparation of teachers to support select populations, the organization of schools to accommodate these children in response to vague policy mandates, and power issues affecting the different constituencies and stakeholders. Thanks to the support of the Julian Samora Research Institute, the Michigan Department of Education, and various individuals, we held face-to-face interviews with policymakers, teachers, and migrant children and their families. Our purpose was to begin a critical and constructive dialogue among the parties involved in the development and implementation of this policy. The authors, Maria Teresa Tatto, Virginia Lundstrom-Ndibongo, Brenda E. Neuman, Sally E. Nogle, Loukia K. Sarroub, and James M. Weiler, extend their appreciation to the following individuals who shared their expertise and time to make this project possible: Refugio Rochín and Juan Marinez, JSRI-MSU; John Dominguez, VBISD-Migrant Education Director; James D. Mapes, VBISD Superintendent; Guillermo Dominguez; Ramiro Gonzalez; Janie Garcia Haywood; Gloria Villalon; Cirilo Martinez; Mike Helms; Tonda Boothby; Vicenta Hernandez - parent; Olga Zamora - parent; Kathy Furrow, teacher-Lawrence Public Schools; John Overly, Principal, Lawrence High School; the migrant students of Lawrence Public Schools; Laurencio Peña, Migrant Education Program-WMU; Mary Lou Borden, Director of Migrant Education-Stockbridge Middle School and personnel; and Edgar R. Leon and Mazin A. Heiderson, Consultants-MDE. We were both moved and inspired by their deep commitment to migrant children and to Latinos in this country
Our informal inquiry uncovered four areas in the Migrant Education Policy in need of careful examination. Based on the experience of nearly 30 years of educating migrant children in Michigan, we believe that the series of proposals below may help improve migrant education policy. (1) We propose that the Department of Education, Schools Districts, Migrant Education Directors, and teachers take a careful look at those issues specifically affecting teachers and the teaching of migrant students to improve the quality of education these students receive. Four areas in need of study and improvement are: the recruitment of individuals who have the potential to understand and address the learning needs of migrant students; the selection of teachers who have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach Latino children and students who are not a part of the dominant culture; the availability and quality of educational development opportunities for experienced and prospective teachers and teacher aides who will be in charge of the instruction of these children. The education needs of teachers and aides include not only knowledge of Spanish and English, but of the subject matter and of pedagogies that allow self-regulated learning and critical thinking without devaluing diverse cultures and backgrounds; and, the relevance and availability of organizational supports for students and their teachers including the development, guidance, and use of innovative curriculum and instructional technology. (2) We propose to strengthen the links between migrant families and schools. We suggest this can be done through a "students as ambassador program." This means that the migrant students will be responsible for facilitating communication between their families and teachers, but with the help of their teachers, local migrant education recruiters, and their churches. They will be the intellectual and social conduits needed by parents and schools in order to learn from and about each other. We think that the student ambassador program is likely to generate an "organic" mechanism for establishing rapport among the migrant students, their parents, and the school teachers and administrators. We believe that the connections made between school and home are crucial for the academic success and socialization of migrant students into the American school culture. (3) We recommend a more focused study of available technologies, both electronically and paper based, and a needs analysis among the population of potential users. We warn against making decisions without the basis of empirical evidence. Technology - especially electronic technology - is expensive and may be underutilized if it is allocated without a clear idea of how it would be used, and by whom, within an specific context. Furthermore, hidden costs such as equipment maintenance, technical support, and personnel training may hinder use or effectiveness if not fully considered as part of the implementation strategy. It is possible that simpler - paper and pencil - technologies may prove more beneficial and equitable for migrant students in the long run. We recommend a cost-effectiveness study of technology acquisition, distribution, and use before moving to implementation. The criteria for technology acquisition and distribution should be how much it will actually contribute to providing equitable access to quality education by migrant students, higher achievement rates, and lower school drop out. (4) We recommend a more detailed and informed study of how resources have been distributed thus far and the outcomes of such distribution. Specific areas of study are: exploring ways in which migrant students can gain real access to school personnel and facilities; how to allocate funds to hire qualified teacher and teacher aides; how to allocate enough funds to provide in-depth teacher development activities2; how to reallocate substantial funding to the development/acquisition of curricula and textbooks to provide students with technology they can use and "take with them" as they move from school to school; the development of a more equitable formula to distribute funds to schools (migrant students in small rural programs should have as much access to education/funds as students in larger rural/urban programs); allocating the majority of funds to help students at the elementary school level - intervention in middle and high school though important and necessary may arrive too late and takes on a remedial rather than a preventive character; developing evaluation and accountability systems to keep the program focused and true to their goal. In closing we need to say that it was difficult for us to find a well defined program with a clear and cohesive theoretical basis and purpose. We concluded that a cohesive migrant program does not exist. We found different interpretations of what the migrant program is as we talked to different individuals in different locations. Migrant education directors and implementors will need to invest time in developing a mission and shared understandings as to what the migrant program is all about to help all those involved. The education of migrant children in the state of Michigan is a complex issue. There are a great number of social, economic, and political forces that are intertwined in identifying and meeting the needs of this special population of students. A primary concern that we address in approaching this issue is how to "define" the problem. John Kingdon (1984) identifies problem definition as highly important in the policy making process.3 In policy terms, a problem is a pre-existing condition about which we believe something should be done. It is important to remember that before any policy can be created and enacted, the problem must be perceived as real and important. Difficulties facing migrant students are real (low achievement in school, high drop-out rates) and important (individuals systematically being mistreated by the school system). Migrant students have special needs because of poverty, racial bias, language barriers, and their constant mobility. One of the largest difficulties facing migrant students is their being grouped with other "special needs" students that receive services in response to conditions that are considered to be similar to their own. However, as important as it may be for students to receive educational services to combat poverty, racial bias, or language barriers, we must not forget that migrant students are a "special case" of a larger group (Latinos) due to their constant mobility. Within the context of a limited number of resources (fiscal and personnel) we may find difficulties arguing to those in power that migrant students may need more services than their peers who face many of the same difficulties as they, but the needs of migrant students demand this endeavor. Andrew Trotter, in Harvest of Dreams, wrote that "language difficulties aside, even the simple act of going to school adds complications for migrant students. The barriers can include different textbooks from district to district, time lost in enrolling and transferring records, and prejudice and ridicule from other students, (many) leave little mark in school, moving away before teachers glimpse the needs behind their shy faces."4 Thus, we can begin to see that migrant students face a sort of filtering mechanism in addressing their unique problems. The ability of migrant students to receive an appropriate and equitable education is an issue deeply embedded, first, in those issues affecting the entire Latino population and, second, in those affecting the nation at large. If schools are not meeting the needs of many different groups of students, including migrants, the question we have to ask ourselves is "why?" In order to answer this question, we address the various "levels" of policy efforts in generalized terms so that we can see just how migrant students are not served. Nationally, our schools are perceived to be failing all students, not just those from underrepresented populations. As a result, the "Goals 2000" initiative was developed as a benchmark system to chart school progress to the end of the millennium. The project was, in part, an understood solution to meet the needs of those not currently being well-served in American schools. A broad based reform effort, mostly founded in political rhetoric rather than coherent prescription, "Goals 2000" provides us with an encapsulated explanation of the direction in which educational reform in the United States is heading.5 These goals seem to fall into three main categories:
economic and socialization efforts - student achievement and citizenship,
adult literacy, beginning school ready to learn, parental participation;
school restructuring - professional teachers, safe schools; and competitive
- raising graduation rates, first in math and science. It is assumed
that accomplishing these goals, no matter how general, would by extension
require improvement in migrant student achievement. In other words,
a comprehensive generic reform framework is presumed to succeed in
addressing individual needs. However, it is important to note that
the primary aims of these goals appear to be of a social and economic
nature. This focus on aims related to socialization, responsible citizenship
and productive employment, highlights just how narrow the "Goals
2000" focus is. Goal number eight - parental involvement to advance
social, emotional and academic growth - speaks volumes about this
issue. If the goal is to increase students' social, emotional, and
academic growth, we must ask by whose standards this is being judged. John Goodlad, in Teachers for Our Nation's Schools, wrote: "the American people have tranquilized themselves into believing that most of the shortcomings of the schools can be accounted for by the shortcomings in the families of minority students… this belief blinds us to the fact that schools created to serve expectations and student populations quite different from those now prevailing… are not up to today's demands… education cannot be a substitute for economic and social reform."6 Can we truly address the issues of migrant students by attempting to transform them into the ideal picture of the successful American family? The 1995 National Goals Report, "Building a Nation of Learners," devoted a chapter to "How Can Family-School-Community Partnerships Accelerate Progress Toward the Goals?" The report states that "a number of educators and researchers argue that if the National Education Goals are to be achieved, families, schools, and communities must work collaboratively to form strong family-school-community partnerships."7 The National Goals panel defines this partnership as recognizing "the equal status of families and schools in their shared responsibilities" for student learning and achievement.8 The Goals report cites three main rationale for promoting these partnerships. First, research suggests that increased family involvement is associated with positive achievement and behavior outcomes. Second, there is widespread public support for increased parental involvement in schools. Third, the goals are interrelated and parent, as well as school, effort is required to attain them.9
Is it fair to ask families and communities to change to meet the needs of current school structures? Meier and Stewart, in The Politics of Hispanic Education, argue that political minorities such as Latinos are limited in their access to educational equity as demonstrated by attempts to "Americanize" them in public schools.11 This serves to promote inequity by discounting the value of other cultural and community ideals. This specific type of socialization, to the White middle class ideal, presents quite a negative view of minority populations in the United States. Through attempts to make migrant students more like those who succeed in schools, policies have identified these individual students as being the problematic variable. Instead, the focus should be on creating a curriculum that responds to diverse student needs, developing and supporting teachers who are capable of educating and caring for a wide variety of students, or responding to alternative community needs. Many of the difficulties facing migrant students are the same as those facing all Latinos in American schools. Latinos are more likely to live in poverty, be denied educational access, and need more education (population statistics indicate that a larger percentage of Latinos are of school age) than their White peers.12 Claude Goldenberg writes that Latino students perform at lower levels of achievement, and drop out more frequently than White students in American schools. He states that, over the past 15 to 20 years, 85% of Hispanic fourth and eighth graders still read at a 'basic' level or below. Over half score below 'basic,' meaning that they cannot demonstrate understanding of a text written at their grade level.13 He concludes that there are a great number of difficulties for students from Spanish speaking backgrounds, and that programs need to be created to improve their academic achievement.
The "bleak" future for Latinos, especially in the context of schools, is usually cast as a language problem. Many school programs designed to serve Latino needs are solely based on bilingual or English as a second language (ESL) model. Goldenberg argues that bilingual education programs are not enough to solve achievement difficulties for these children since "greater poverty and lower levels of parental education place these children at risk for educational underachievement, regardless of instructional language."15 Only "effective instruction, curriculum, school-wide organization, and home-school collaboration" combined with "long-term, systematic research and evaluation in multiple sites [with] state and national level policymakers develop[ing] initiatives to deal constructively with the issues educators face as they work to provide effective and equitable educational opportunities for immigrant and language minority students," will help Latino students to succeed in schools.16 While Goldenberg is writing about issues related to immigrant and Latino students, he promotes a "change" model for schools that addresses the larger problems facing "at-risk students" and school restructuring. Through common goals, success indicators, effective leadership, and capable participation, he proposes that teacher attitudes and behaviors can be influenced to affect change in student outcomes.17
Within the State of Michigan, federal funds earmarked for migrant education are administered to districts. These Title I funds (within Title I, Part C is designated for the education of migratory children as part of the 1994 Improving America's Schools Act) are used as supplementary income for districts serving migrant populations. Michigan's Migrant Education Program theoretically addresses the unique "transitory" needs of migrant students. The stated goals of the Michigan Migrant Educational programs are to: o support high quality comprehensive educational programs for migratory children to help reduce the educational disruptions and other problems that result from repeated moves; o insure that migratory children are provided with appropriate educational services (including supportive services) that address their special needs in a coordinated and efficient manner; o ensure that migratory children have the opportunity to meet the same challenging State content standards and challenging State performance standards that all children are expected to meet; o design programs to help migratory children overcome
educational disruption, cultural and language barriers, social isolation,
various health-related problems, and other factors that inhibit their
ability to do well in school, and to prepare such children to make
a successful transition to post-secondary education or employment;
and These goals vaguely address the unique needs of the migrant population within a larger disadvantaged group. But, they are merely statements of intent unless they are used to form policies that are coherent and uniformly implemented to best serve the needs of all migrant students. Trotter argues that school district boundaries provide barriers to migrant student achievement. Districts' commitments to current personnel structures and programs exacerbate the difficulties of mobile students. The emphasis on one appropriate structure for schools as well as the ideal of a stable non-migratory family and community structure do not allow for "differential" participation in schools. Another important consideration is the special nature of Michigan's migrant education programs. Because of seasonal crops, the majority of migrant students are in Michigan during the summer months and early fall. The vast majority of these students are only in schools for the first few weeks of a traditional academic school year. As a result, many districts use of migrant student funds are concentrated in the development and implementation of summer programs rather than school year supplemental services. Thus, we must consider a number of factors when looking at the Michigan program. There are a number of circumstances that are unique to Michigan that are not applicable to other areas. Trotter advocates collaborating with local growers, district flexibility with rules (i.e. maximum excusable absences), involving migrant parents (bringing to meetings, language services), and administrators working cooperatively with regional programs to determine credit equivalences in order to truly meet the needs of migrant student populations.19 While Trotter's argument is important to note, and his conclusions valid, they assume a common conception of the needs of migrant children. His solutions are more structural than ideological. We need to focus on both structural and ideological factors in order to create effective policy.
At the state level, research is scarce and disconnected, the goals are broad, there are minimal regulations dictating how funds should be used, constituent support is practically non-existent, and there are few planning, coordinating, and monitoring mechanisms in place. Thus, it is left up to the individuals at the district and school levels to conceptualize, design, and implement programs and to determine whether the needs of migrant children are being met. Given these broad, rather loosely defined State and Federal policies, it seems pertinent to ask what kinds of programs are local districts creating to meet the needs of migrant students. Furthermore, how do the districts identify these students' needs and evaluate whether or not they have been met? Weiss' information, ideology, and interest framework seems to be especially relevant in this context. The policy talk surrounding educational reform and the education of migrant children is high on ideology and interests, but quite low on information. Weiss noted that "the public policy positions taken by policy actors are the resultant of three sets of forces: their ideologies, their interests, and the information they have."21 Weiss further stated that how policy actors define their interests depends, in part, on how they perceive the situation.22 Thus, diverse ideologies and interests of the players in this complex policy game impact the development of programs at the local level.
There are numerous theories that address the importance of local participation in the development of policies and programs for disadvantaged populations. Meier and Stewart conclude that "the source of change will be of necessity local," because they do not see federal intervention as likely in the current political climate.25 Some theorists propose restructuring the school system to adapt to local circumstances. Tyack and Cuban envision policymaking as a kind of "hybridization," those at the local level are not only encouraged, but expected to transform policy at the local level as part of the process.26 Emphasis on differentiation based upon local circumstance highlights the importance of "local policymaking" views. This results in little cohesion or similarity in the "actual" programs serving migrant students. Without centralization or standardization of any kind, there is no national inter-school connection available for migrant students. Given their relatively short stays in each geographical community, local differentiation may make it impossible for students to connect to any school.
We must take into consideration how policies will be, or are currently being, implemented on the local level and how the institution of schooling will adapt to the programs in place. The differing interpretations surrounding the use of Title I funds speaks to Rein's controversy over universalist-formalist/selectivist-discretionary positions of service.28 Differential understandings of universal entitlement versus selective administration frames and different district philosophies of what would be best for both migrant students and the district at large. In some cases addressing solely the needs of the migrant students (selectivist) is predominant while in other cases improving the educational opportunities of all district students thereby improving the situation for migrants (universalist) is cast as most valuable. We can begin to understand that policy solutions closely follow the underlying assumptions upon which they were conceived. Given the decentralized administration of funds for migrant education programs, as well as the highly localized nature of program development, there can be large discrepancies in the types of services offered and the values that they represent.
The lack of a unified vision for the migrant population exacerbates these difficulties because there is little or nothing to prevent these "others" from defining the problem however they see fit. There needs to be more uniformity in programs and services that are offered to migrant students. This could be most effectively accomplished through a coherent and "universal" conceptualization of the problems facing migrant students. The differential understandings of what it means to provide for special populations allow for a great diversity in understanding what students need. Relevant questions are: What are the specific needs of migratory children? How can schools best adapt to meet those needs? It is important to note that the central question is: how can schools or programs, not how should children, adapt? Behn, in identifying the importance of political considerations in policy, translates that need into paying attention to constituencies - those who stand to win or lose from policy alternatives.29 Thus, we must remember that we are dealing with groups of people and not just institutions.
Teaching, Teacher Education and Development The policy problem and its location in the larger context of the ongoing educational reform In practically all documents dealing with the direction of the current educational reform to improve the quality of education, the effectiveness of teachers and teaching, and the provision of adequate teacher education, are underlined.30 A strong assumption permeating these documents seems to be that higher and uniform standards, and better prepared and supported teachers, will have an impact on learning, graduation, and achievement rates. Although, in principle, we believe that higher standards and better preparation will improve teaching and learning for a good number of students, our concern here is with the standards, preparation, and supports that teachers will need to teach children who are unlike traditional students, the very children the document argues is trying to serve. The reform documents seem to make scarce references to the intersection of two important concerns: how to support teachers to be effective teachers for all students; and, the efficacy of teacher preparation to help address the needs of these specially non-traditional students. In these reports no mention is made of the particular challenges that migrant students and their teachers confront in spite that in eight years (1989-96) national funding for migrant education has been close to $300 million and that a percentage (in this there are specific guidelines) of these funds is expected to be directed at teacher selection, and development. Similarly, little is said about the development of curricular materials that can effectively improve these students' learning. Although teachers of Latino students - specially migrant students - may need more guidance, paradoxically such guidance is absent or it is assumed to be supplied through the presence of bilingual teachers who may be poorly qualified to provide the required support in other important areas (e.g. in subject matter teaching such as Mathematics or Science) or in low supply across the nation. In Michigan the consolidated education plan suffers from problems similar to the ones permeating the reform documents.31 Specific plans regarding appropriate teachers (in numbers and qualifications) or curriculum are noticeably absent; more attention is placed on nominal descriptions of resource distribution. Thus we learn that migrant education receives about $11 million from the Federal government for an average of 21,000 students spread out among 59 projects (39 regular and summer programs; 14 regular school year only; and six are summer program only) as of 1995. Looking at these figures we also learn that only 4% of the budget allocated to migrant education goes to curriculum projects while 6% is distributed among interstate and intrastate coordination, technical assistance, statewide needs assessment, data collection analysis and reporting, and to professional development. As it is likely to be in other migrant education programs across the country, in several reports dealing with this issue published recently by the Julian Samora Research Institute (JSRI), the focus is prominently economic (distribution of resources, number of children served, etc.). Except for low test scores and high dropout rates in the higher grades, we know little about how children are actually being served by schools, what goes on in classrooms, what are the qualifications of those hired to teach and to help them, and what kinds of curricular materials are used and with what results. Similarly unknown are answers to other more important questions such as what and how much are students learning, how does learning occur for these students vis-à-vis their classmates, how many days do they attend school, whether or not they can justify attending to a Summer program in addition to attending a regular school program during the rest of the year, whether or not the same curriculum used for non-migrant students benefits migrant students, what are the effects on students' learning of the lack of continuity and coordination in the curriculum across schools. In sum, we are missing convincing evidence of what works and under what circumstances, and how does it work and for whom. Possible sources of the problem After a review of funds distribution in the recent Michigan Department of Education (MDOE) consolidated plan, we concluded that very little is allocated to important resources that can make a difference in the quality and effectiveness of instruction for these students such as curricular materials and teaching personnel. In addition, in a number of our interviews and field trips we came away with the impression that the use of the funds allocated to migrant children is largely unspecified (e.g. could be used to buy books - the decision of what books to buy could be left to the staff who might be teachers and choose books that, though attractive, are empty of academic content - or to hire aides with few or no qualifications to fill adequately the job) and dependent in large part upon the administrator (principal/superintendent/ director) in charge. The actual effect of these funds seem to be masked by funds coming from other sources (such as Title 1, Chapter 1, Bilingual Education, etc.) migrant students are eligible for as a consequence of belonging to many other populations' sub-groups. Because of these layers of programs it is difficult to "see" the "net" effect of the migrant education funds or of a migrant education program. It was difficult to find specific "program" goals and/or specific "program domains" by which the program/funds can be held accountable. In large part the teachers and aides are the ones who are closest to the problem and the ones who constantly make decisions and take actions that "shape" migrant education around the state. Given the responsibility these teachers and other school personnel have vis-à-vis migrant education it becomes even more urgent to develop adequate supports and professional development efforts for those involved. Because migrant education seems to operate in a very decentralized fashion, it is likely programs "that work" could be found throughout Michigan. Describing how these work, and learning from them, can help develop effective strategies to educate migrant students.
Poor knowledge availability from evaluations or policy studies A review of the available literature in the ERIC System and HOLLIS from Harvard University revealed few studies that included empirical evidence of what works when educating migrant students (but also Latino students) vis-à-vis teacher education or development, teaching and learning conditions, and curricular material. Though few in number, some of these studies indicate promising avenues to educating Latino-migrant populations successfully. For instance, distance education is a technology of instruction that has been successfully used for elementary school students in Australia using a combination of correspondence papers from students, telephone contact with students, home tutors and short-term face-to-face lessons with itinerant students. These teachers worked with 15-20 students, usually in family groups across grade levels. The program's experience points to the importance of positive teacher attitudes when implementing an educational program for a marginalized group.32 In Texas a pilot program was created to teach Algebra to migrant students via audioconferencing. This program proved to be a feasible alternative to on-site instruction noting high class grade averages and students' increased mathematical ability.33 In a longitudinal study carried out by Ruiz (1995), holistic-constructivist pedagogy was introduced into bilingual special education classrooms with teachers changing from a medical model to a contextual performance model for viewing abilities and disabilities with a consequent change in students' attitudes toward reading and writing, and student meta-cognition regarding effective literacy-related strategies.34
Velma Menchaca and Jose Ruiz-Escalante (1995) identify seven research-based suggestions that would assist teachers in creating effective strategies for migrant education students: (1) building a positive environment that helps students to adjust to a new learning environment through modeling respect, eliminating the threat of ridicule, and sharing common experiences; (2) building on migrant students' strengths and experiences (the students have a richness of diverse experiences, cultures, and languages. Not only are learning activities enhanced by student's prior knowledge, their lives are validated by an academic institution); (3) promoting self-concept and self-esteem (to overcome the many obstacles, migrant students must have faith in themselves; when necessary, teachers should modify assignments to allow for real success in meaningful activities that are valued by the student and by others, such as family and friends); (4) personalize lessons with students' experiences (drawing from students' life experiences should be used to help students understand ideas and transfer them to the content area); (5) integrate culturally relevant content (through novels, discussions, and writing students should learn of others sharing a familiar cultural base; teachers should encourage positive ethnic affiliation; values, attitudes, lifestyle choices, and approaches to learning are often influenced by how one learns to respect other cultural groups' heritage and histories while retaining their own); (6) using cooperative learning (studies show that cooperative learning helps migrant students achieve in a supportive setting, reduces anxiety levels, improves motivation and self-esteem, and helps students gain access to learning opportunities); and (7) developing students' metacognitive learning strategies. The idea is to help students become independent learners
so they can recognize approaching obstacles and make appropriate changes.36 In general, however, the problems of these populations have been dealt with programs such as intensive English for speakers of other languages classes, bilingual programs that teach courses in the native language as students learn English, and newcomer programs that provide transition courses to facilitate students cultural and academic adjustment. In all these interventions "quality of instruction [is seen] as hampered by students varying English proficiency and academic skills and by a curriculum that does not parallel the one provided to other students."38 Without knowing more about the attributes and character of teachers' and migrant students' interaction in Michigan, it is difficult to suggest specific policies that could help alleviate the problem. Nevertheless, based on preliminary information gathered rather informally in daily visits to two migrant programs (one large, one small), from interviews with Department of Education officials, and from taped interviews with teachers from two of the Projects (provided by Dr. Edgar Leon), we can delineate a number of possible directions for improvement subject to future research. A needed focus on teachers There seems to be a mismatch of these students realities, desires, and needs with traditional structures of schooling.39 But students in the larger district view teachers as being well situated to make important changes. They described characteristics of teachers who had important influence in their lives, these teachers treated them as individuals, they asked questions more than just provided information, they modeled learning, encouraged them in their learning, paid attention to them while in the classroom, took the time to get to know them, made clear they had high expectations from them, gave each student individual attention, had or developed knowledge of Latino culture, understood their limitations and still pushed them to work hard and excel, and were culturally sensitive. These students made a strong plea "to be a part of the regular classroom and be treated fairly," and they saw the teacher as responsible for establishing this climate. A parent and grandparent stressed the importance of teachers who were strict and who cared about the children and their learning. A mother saw teachers who wanted her to participate in a dialogue regarding the curriculum as a sign of their incompetence in the subject matter knowledge and knowledge of teaching practice. She wanted them to take the role of authority. According to scholar Lisa Delpit, parents' desire to see teachers act as an authority is actually a call to be more explicit of their expectations from their students. Because implementation tends to be evolutionary (Majone and Wildavsky, 1979) teachers are continuously in the center of a process of deciding or redefining objectives. If policymakers are to "rely on learning and invention rather than on instruction and command" to implement policies, they need to begin by recognizing the teachers' vital role for the success of any policy. Reconceptualizing the problem as it affects teachers and students The issues pertaining to teachers and teaching of migrant students can be conceptualized as belonging to four large areas: recruitment and selection of teachers who will have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach Latino children,40 education and development, and organizational support including the development, guidance and use of innovate curriculum and instructional technology. A. The recruitment of individuals who have the potential to understand and address the learning needs of migrant students In this report we argue the need to recruit teachers, regardless of ethnicity, who have the skills, knowledge, and dispositions required to teach Latino and other children. This implies the development and enforcement of higher and uniform standards in the recruitment of teachers and teacher aides for migrant programs. Some of the characteristics sought in these teachers might include teachers or prospective teachers of Latino origin but they do not need to exclude teachers of other origin. In theory, we believe it is possible to find individuals with a learned ability to appropriately address the needs of these students. The Michigan Department of Education and universities need to work collaboratively to actively recruit and train more teachers from various communities that the schools serve, with a concerted effort to have more people who understand children from migrant working backgrounds. There are a number of advantages to having teachers who know and understand migrant children. First, these teachers would serve as visible, positive role-models. When asked, a student stated, "it would make me feel good if I see more [Latino] teachers." Second, teachers need to learn that Latino children and parents may need to make tacit expectations clear and explicit. Subtle clues White and "school savvy" students and parents understand might go unnoticed by the Latino population making communication about academic matters frustrating and difficult. Third, teachers need to learn how to feel comfortable and incorporate more people from the community to support children's academic learning. Having teachers who are able to build connections across schools' diverse constituencies would be able to help bridge the traditional gap between school and home. A number of empirical studies have found that many parents are intimidated to speak to teachers, not being able to speak standard English well only exacerbates this situation. As the students informed us, most often they are the link between school and home, and they felt as though the responsibility of communicating the need for schooling fell on their shoulders. Decreasing the barriers for parents to speak directly to their child's "regular" teachers (or even one teacher) would encourage parents to be more involved in the school. Thus our position is that although we advocate the recruitment of Latino teachers (since nearly 12% of the U.S. school children are Latino and only 4% of their teachers are Latino) we believe that more important are teachers' qualifications. More of these qualifications and dispositions are listed under the sections that follow. B. The selection of teachers who have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach Latino children and students who are not a part of the dominant culture. To improve the quality of migrant education it is necessary to tighten the criteria and standards currently used to select teachers. These teachers need to know how to teach migrant children (need to be able to construct a program of learning for these students starting from where they are, allow students to participate, and construct their own learning, etc.), need to be certified in the teaching of subject matter (such as Mathematics) and need to have excellent use of school-appropriate English and Spanish. Similarly, teacher aides should go through a rigorous selection process with clear standards (e.g. they should be fluent in English and Spanish and certified to teach; parents and well-intentioned personnel will not do as teacher-aides). Teachers need to have learned how to teach in a context with Latino students under close supervision from a qualified and competent teacher. Characteristics that make someone an excellent teacher of Latino students are unknown and more research needs to be done in this area (Tatto, 1996). C. The availability and quality of educational development opportunities for experienced and prospective teachers and teacher aides who will be in charge of the instruction of these children. Because the education of teachers of migrant children is an area that has received relatively little attention in the current policy dialogue we include here a more extensive review of policy alternatives.
Although knowledge in the area of teaching migrant populations in this country is poor, there are some valuable lessons that educators have learned from studying efforts developed both nationally and internationally. New visions for teachers of minority populations seek to influence teachers' views of learners as makers of meaning, learning as discipline-oriented and situated in context, and the curriculum as open, flexible, and constructed by students and teachers.41 Under this vision teachers and students need to make sense of their learning within a sociohistorical context in order to be able to teach and learn for understanding and develop a disposition to look at teaching and learning as vehicles towards a more equal and just society.42 A number of studies point to two conditions as the focus of teaching and teacher education and development efforts sensitive to diverse students; one, the development of a view of learning to guide teacher development efforts and, two, the formation of learning communities and the development of norms to facilitate movement towards a common purpose and facilitate communication among students and teachers, teachers and teachers, parents and teachers, and parents and students. Developing a view of learning to guide teacher The development of a view of learning to guide teacher development efforts which requires that: o the content and construction of the curriculum, and learning environment be developed by those who teach and by those who are taught; o the curriculum and the instruction be discipline based (e.g. learn to master English/ Spanish through the learning of Mathematics and Science); o the focus of instruction be on teachers' and children's sense-making rather than one imposed from outside by a program of instruction developed by and for others; o both the teachers and students understand that they can and do learn from each other with teacher acting as facilitator and students learning from and with peers teaching each other preferably in a multi-age classroom; o the development of high quality self-paced, self-guided materials for individual study (e.g. programmed lessons in Spanish if necessary). Teacher development responsive to the needs of migrant students should enable teachers to develop a collaborative teaching and learning environment. Learning to teach migrant or Latino students needs to occur among migrant or Latino children and with teachers who are experienced and sensitive to the abilities and needs of these students. Teachers need to be able to learn skills (Spanish, develop appropriate curriculum based on knowledge that children bring with them, etc.) and knowledge (Mathematics, Science, culture relevant, etc.) and acquire dispositions (high expectations for these students, e.g., these children can be very successful in Mathematics and Science since Mathematics itself is a language and learning Science under a conceptual perspective allows children to learn concepts and use manipulatives) in context this is, with migrant students and their teachers while teaching, learning and making meaning. This means that student-teachers need to intern in schools with large populations of migrant students, which may be supported or sponsored by the MDOE or other funds. Learning to teach in this context will enable student-teachers to understand and construct strategies to address the needs of these students. This new kind of teacher education and development should favor practices in which student teachers and teachers would work together to decide practical issues that are important to them such as the curriculum, selection of books and academic materials, and the kinds of activities that may best allow significant engagement. The aim is to shift emphasis away from mere regurgitation of accumulated facts (favored by the "mind as slate" orientation) and to develop ways of understanding how students utilize and combine multiple skills in a newly challenging context.43 A transformation in teaching and teacher education to address the needs of migrant students would need to be developed by those who actually teach these students and by the students themselves through ongoing dialogue, consultation, application, and reflection. The development of new types of teaching and learning experiences demand guidance for successful implementation where texts, teacher guides, and a structured curriculum are essential elements. Only rarely have teachers and students been allowed to participate in the dialogue that results in the construction of new curriculum. Curricula has been typically handed down accompanied by implementation mandates. Programs that have successfully experimented with teacher-developed curriculum for peripheral populations have produced strong teaching and study materials designed to allow for social construction of knowledge by students, allowing teachers to help pupils develop new understandings based on previous learning. This has occurred in Colombia, with use of self-guided texts in multi-age groups where students teach each other and teachers serve as facilitators. A new kind of teaching and teacher education that addresses the migrant students' needs begins with the premise that helping teachers make sense of old and new knowledge helps them facilitate sense-making in their students. Teachers will not know "naturally" how to address the learning needs of students they don't know much about or cannot communicate with; teacher preparation and guidance are needed to be successful with these students. Teachers should not be seen as the sole center of the action in the classroom. Peers are expected to also learn by helping each other comprehend what they learn. Migrant students can contribute to others' learning of a different culture, language, and lifestyle. Other students can contribute by helping explain concepts or correcting improper English usage. Teachers and students should be encouraged to share strategies in which they (can) become (more) knowledgeable with the goal that all participants in the teaching-learning process are seen as equally contributing in the construction of knowledge. The directions for change delineated above cannot be
accomplished without the construction of a conducive learning environment
in which all voices in a community of learners can be accorded important
contributions towards that learning. The formation of learning communities and the development of norms (such as adopting the Writing Process as an approach to teach writing or a conceptual method for teaching Mathematics and Science) to facilitate movement towards a common purpose and facilitate communication among students and teachers, teachers and teachers, parents and teachers, and parents and students. The development of learning communities starts with: o developing communities of teachers and individuals - within a school or district - that share common concerns and goals for student learning; o norms as regards to purpose and to learning activities and actions that are appropriate for a program for migrant students that allow for cohesiveness of purpose and facilitate learning dialogue (e.g. while lecturing may be useful, conceptual learning or understanding action oriented manipulatives are encouraged); o the development of ongoing learning opportunities for teachers and students designed to encourage reflection, dialogue, critical thinking, and understanding in context (teachers learn to teach among migrant children in apprenticeship programs; teachers constantly learn to improve their Spanish); and o the aim of and the vehicle for a new kind of teacher education and professional development sensitive to diverse students is teachers learning together to improve their knowledge as well as to support each other in a continuous attempt to implement a different kind of teaching and facilitate a new kind of learning. The implementation of a new kind of teacher education and professional development and the creation of communities of teachers and learners calls for the development of rules, or norms, as defined by a community formed by teacher educators, teachers, pupils, and their parents.44 Just as Catholic and other private schools have created a culture around what it means to teach and learn, migrant education programs teaching and development efforts need to develop a culture that serves to guide and support teachers, students, and parents as they attempt to educate children. Although more research is needed as to what this specific culture should look like, its development needs the full participation of the community involved in this endeavor. In a recent study of an optimal learning environment (OLE Project) for Latino students, Ruiz and Figueroa (1995) offer the following set of principles for educators to guide instruction and learning based on a "holistic-constructivist paradigm": o offer students choices in writing, reading, and learning; o activate and use students' interests and background knowledge; o center learning on whole texts or projects; o provide active participation and interaction; o recognize that literacy is first, a meaning-driven process within which issues of form (e.g. phonics, spelling) can be addressed; o provide opportunities for classroom work to have an authentic, real life purpose (write a book or a real letter); o accept and acknowledge students' developmental approximations toward learning; o immerse students in a language-and print-rich environment; o give demonstrations, not just directions, of the literacy and learning that needs to be done; o respond immediately and in a personalized manner to pupil work products or journal entries (rather than a give a letter grade); o create a sense that the classroom is a community
of learners, readers, writers, and speakers; A beginning point in formulating this culture is the development of a clear theoretical and philosophical position to guide the development and implementation, and to insure the continuity of teacher education for migrant children. Research on teacher change argues that positive dispositions and knowledge development towards diverse students are likely to occur when teachers instruct in a context that requires them to be in contact with this population. Learning opportunities for teachers congruent with a context specific approach asks student teachers and teacher educators to reflect and challenge traditional conceptions of the teacher role, the learners' role, subject matter, and pedagogy.45 Teacher education experiences and opportunities to learn would be expected to allow teachers to learn to teach in context with support and mentoring from program staff and from other fellow teachers.46 Increase the length and depth of professional development efforts Substantial professional development efforts should include both high frequency (e.g. once per year) and be of enough duration (e.g. close to or longer than a month during Summer) to guarantee appropriate use of curricular materials, in-depth knowledge of the culture, and so on. The typical in-service sessions currently given to teachers are short and lack depth. We do not have enough data to talk about in-services provided to teachers by the migrant education program, but an evaluation of these in-services might provide important guidelines for improvement. Move towards an independent learner model Develop and apply strategies that help students become independent learners, able to read and learn on their own regardless of the language in which this occurs. Technological advances in computers and software, but also self-guided textbooks, can help these children learn on their own and provide an important support for teachers in the classroom.
Development of effective and continuous mentoring and monitoring systems for teachers and students would help improve and maintain quality teaching and learning. These systems may help program implementors improve their practice and provide feedback they can use to improve themselves rather than as means to punish or withdraw support and funds. It is important to remember that learning to teach is itself a process. Monitoring becomes a means of continuous support and challenge by and for teachers. The need for fundamental school restructuring The improvement of the education of migrant children may need the invention of a new institution (e.g. distance education approach or an exclusive school for migrant children) or a fundamental restructuring of the school environment as we know it to support teacher efforts to develop innovative strategies to teach diverse students and to effectively provide access to migrant students in regular schools. Although we suspect that migrant students are kept at the margins of classroom activities and tend to underutilize school resources (such as computers, texts, teachers, peers, etc.) we do not know how and why this happens. Not knowing or understanding the dynamics of migrant students' participation in the process of schooling makes it difficult to make any intelligent recommendations to address these students' actual problematic. We do not know at this point what would need to be different (e.g. hire more school savvy teacher aides, provide in depth workshops to a critical number of teachers to help them manage migrant students, develop explicit guidance mechanisms for teachers and students to engage in conceptually meaningful learning tasks). We recommend an exploratory study guided by a sound methodology before mandating policy. Segregation strategies such as ability grouping, tracking, placement in special education classes, or placement with learning disabled or other students with learning difficulties are over-used and have proven ineffective. Migrant students are different mostly because their language is Spanish and because they move around according to the seasons, but they are able to learn given a fertile environment. Not being able to speak English fluently does not imply a learning disability. Develop accountability systems to monitor resource development, allocation and use There seems to be a need for the adoption or development of materials of high academic quality curriculum developed both in English and Spanish that cold serve both as a connection among the students and the teacher, the student and the parents, and among students themselves. Self-guided textbooks should be seriously considered here as should materials developed in Mexico, such as those included in the government-produced free textbooks and the telesecundaria programs. Sesame Street, or in Spanish Plaza Sesamo, is an excellent instructional program broadcast in Spanish in Mexico. To do this, more funds need to be allocated to curriculum projects and accountability systems to monitor that funds are dispersed as intended. Only 4% of the budget currently allocated for migrant education in Michigan goes to curriculum projects. From interviews with migrant education specialists in Michigan it is clear that many intelligent ideas of alternative forms of schooling directed toward migrant working families have been attempted. Concepts from distance education and traveling schools have been reported to have had success in Michigan. Outside Michigan a number of potentially useful resources
have been developed: Teacher Resource Guide for the Development of
Positive self-concept in Migrant Children, MACRO Education Associates;
Building Self-Concept in the Classroom, P. Higgins, The Northwest
Clearinghouse for Gifted Children; Preparing Teachers for Working
with Children of Migrant Families: Building a Home-School Connection,
Mary Bradford, Nova Southeastern University; and Help! They Don't
Speak English Starter Kit for Teachers of Young Adults, Virginia State
Department of Education, Migrant Education Program. These are but
a few that are available. Unfortunately these resource, and others,
are not always easily accessible to teachers. These guides attempt
to give teachers background information and insight on migrant education
students, and the goal is to provide practical suggestions to be used
in class. Policy Implications From our preliminary investigation we conclude that teacher policy vis-à-vis migrant students, at least at the local level, has been poorly conceived. It has been dominated by special interests and ideology whereas information that could help explain this issue better has been largely ignored. This was evident during our field trip when an administrator pointed out that the kind of conversations we were having with the students rarely happen. Something similar occurs with the teachers of these children. When asked, teachers said that self-instructional guides and texts for migrant children would be a tremendous help to them and would avoid children's learning delays at school. How often have these children and their families been asked what would best help them in their learning? In sum, this population has not been seen by policymakers and schools as learners, but as uncritical, powerless recipients of services designed by - but without - them. Even moving to a more formal level we could probably ascertain that few serious evaluation studies of these programs have been made (see the 1993 evaluation of the program available through the MDOE, Migrant Program Office). The lack of timely, reliable, and pertinent information not only about processes, but also about inputs and outcomes, are serious indicators and barriers to running (or improving) an effective program. We recommend the development of a series of pilot studies that determine what exists and recommends where to go. More information about what is currently being done, and about the policy instruments more appropriately supporting teachers and students, needs to be studied. It would help balance the interest and ideology-charged agenda regarding this policy. Principal policy instruments have been directed towards compliance, mandates, and incentives, but little else in the direction of human resource development. This situation points again to the importance of investing in the education, professional development, and guided support of those individuals who work with this population. 
Rethinking Family Involvement in Migrant Education Research Questions We have observed that there is little communication occurring among the schools, their migrant student populations, and these students' families. In fact, it seems that families have little access to their children's learning, teachers, and schools. We are therefore prompted to ask; how involved are migrant parents in their children's education in comparison to mainstream parents? What is and isn't contributing to this? Are mechanisms in place in the schools which encourage parental involvement? If so, what are they? What is happening at the local level? How do parents find out about things? Are schools accountable to parents? How can parents be accountable to the schools for their children's learning? A distinguishing element of the migrant worker population is its mobility. Like most nomadic peoples, migrant workers have more than one home, move several times a year, and keep their children with them. Given these additional characteristics, can we realistically expect these highly mobile parents to be engaged in their children's education, when their main purpose is to make a living in agriculture? Hence, we have also asked ourselves how education can be more "organic" for the migrant students and their parents. Are there ways to make education a part of the migrant family's daily life? In other words, are there ways to develop close connections between families, communities, and schools? Contextualizing the problem Parents and children should expect schools to be places where people have the opportunity to learn, and where knowledge is transmitted between students and teachers. In the case of the migrant child, opportunity to learn is mitigated by funding, language deficiencies, lack of available resources - including well-prepared teachers and good textbooks - and low parental involvement in children's education (Carger, 1996; Fieldnotes, 1996). Like any child, the migrant student comes to school already knowing something about the world and about academic culture. We suggest that the migrant student understands mathematics, language, art, science, history, and other subjects constituting the normative curriculum of any school day. Yet, migrant children are often viewed as tabula rasa, a person who knows nothing until schooled in the American system or according to different states' expectations, or most importantly, not until they have mastered Standard English and mainstream school culture. This calls into serious consideration the notion of socialization of the migrant families into the American mainstream. Our migrant students are being socialized as if they come to Michigan from Texas, Florida, or Mexico without any previous knowledge. This is problematic and deserves immediate attention. There are regions in Michigan where 25% of the school population consists of "settled-out" and migrant workers' children (Fieldnotes, Sept. 30, 1996). These children often come from poor, traditional Latino families whose prerogatives are to provide enough food, clothing, and shelter for their children and their relatives back home. It is true that the parents do not migrate across the country in order to provide their children with the best education, yet it is clear that they desire, and have a right to receive, an education for their children (Interview, Sept. 30, 1996). They also want their children to have access to resources, a quality education, teachers who can mediate between American and Hispanic or Latino cultures, and that their children not be considered "special needs" students because of English deficiencies (Interview, Oct. 21, 1996). In turn, the children see the hardships and struggles their parents undergo while living at or below the ($9,000 per year) poverty level. Older children often skip school to provide childcare for younger siblings; they work in the fields when adult relatives cannot work because of illness or injury (Fieldnotes, Oct. 14, 1996). These migrant children have often been in school in Mexico or somewhere else in the U.S. The system is such that the privilege of education is politically driven and ideology prevails over information when developing policy. According to school administrators and teachers at our two field sites, among migrant workers there is a healthy respect for the school and institutions like it. Teachers report that parents generally do not question what schools do or what teachers teach. They often assume that the teacher knows what is best for the children. One teacher, who was also the director of a summer migrant program reported, "I'm very interested in engaging the kids in hands-on activities because they can simply disappear in the classroom. The kids are very quiet and disciplined and it's easy for the teachers to ignore them" (Fieldnotes, Oct. 14, 1996). The migrant students have been taught to respect their elders. This could actually set them back when respect is understood as complacency and lack of assertiveness is misunderstood as lack of motivation. If teachers lack the skills and resources to engage the migrant students in their school work, they run the danger of becoming invisible in the classroom. When parents finally discover their children are not achieving by school standards, it is usually too late to intervene. The costs are high; the drop-out rate in Michigan is close to 50% at the middle and high school levels (Fieldnotes, Sept. 30, 1996). Conceptualizing migrant education as a problem of integration
and socialization can serve as a frame for discussing questions integral
to public education in general, and specifically family involvement
in schools. Parental involvement is important. In accordance with
the statements made above about the integration of migrant students'
prior knowledge and family and community involvement in the schools,
the "Goals 2000" report states almost one-third of public
secondary school teachers rated strengthening parental involvement
in their children's education as the most important educational policy
in the coming years. Also, the report indicates, 40% of parents do
not think they are spending as much time as they want on their children's
education. Developing close connections between migrant families and
schools will not only parallel our national goals, but also serve
to maximize learning opportunities for everyone, including teachers,
students, parents, and administrators. To better understand the kinds of values that most Hispanics and Latinos hold with regard to education, we decided to consider two reputable sources other than our field research from the vast array of available materials. One is an ethnography about a family's experience with public schooling, and the other examines American conceptions of Hispanics and Latinos. These two sources, plus our field notes, give us a more comprehensive portrait of migrant education and the problems that migrant workers and their children are likely to face every day. Finally, at the end of this section, we shall discuss the gender dynamics that we encountered as we encountered various people involved in migrant education. Gender relations are an important dimension to consider in Hispanic and Latino culture as they can impact strongly on the mother's role toward her children's education (Interview, Sept. 30, 1996). In her book Of Borders and Dreams: A Mexican-American Experience of Urban Education, Carger examines the experiences of one family who moves illegally into the United States from Mexico and ends up in Chicago. Carger is especially interested in explaining why this family's oldest child, Alejandro Juarez, does not succeed in school. Many aspects of Alejandro's educational experience mirror those that we heard about in our fieldwork. Although Alejandro's family did not migrate to work in the fields, his parents were factory workers and could not easily connect or understand American school demands. In fact, Carger points out, Alejandro's parents respected the schools too much to intervene, believing that they were doing their best for their child, even as they witnessed his increased confusion and frustration. A strong family that usually worked together through everything, Alejandro's family could not cope with his schooling. One main characteristic of migrant families is that they often work together in the fields. Carger argues that the Juarez valued working together, while Alejandro's schools valued individual responsiveness. In an anthropological and ethnographic sense, Alejandro experienced incongruities between his home and school cultures. As other cross-cultural researchers discovered (Au, 1980; Au and Mason, 1983; Emerson 1983; Gibson, 1987; Heath, 1982, 1983, 1986; Phillips, 1983), Alejandro's way of learning and familial values differed from those esteemed by traditional educators. Learning through observation, supportive gradual mastery of skills, cooperation in tasks, and collaboration in negotiating life's everyday trials were emphasized by a large family accustomed to working together. Yet in school, tasks were assigned with little emphasis on modeling, individual achievement was prized, and collaboration for support was viewed negatively, as cheating. Carger later pointed out that Alejandro's parents could not relate to the schools' expectations and the school understood their lack of involvement. This was in large measure due to the fact that the Juarez were not literate in English. Although intensely supportive of his education, Alejandro's parents are unaware of how to facilitate his school success. They are vague in their career expectations for their son, although they are clear and emphatic in their desire for him to pursue better jobs than they have experienced. They repeatedly encouraged him to develop his English abilities by conversing with native English speakers in their new neighborhood. They lectured him on behaving in school and listening to teachers, even when they expressed doubts about teacher behavior. They also recognized the importance of having access to books and encouraged him to go to the library. However, both their own and Alejandro's reading problems and unfamiliarity with library practices greatly hindered what he could accomplish there on his own. These short vignettes from Carger's book, we think, illustrate the disconnectedness between school and home for many Hispanics and Latinos and especially migrant workers. Many schools and families do not have the necessary "cultural capital" to work together and connect in a productive way to address their students' needs, yet Hispanic and Latino parents "express considerable satisfaction when a teacher makes an effort to involve them in their child's academic development" (Goldenburg, 1996). Equally important is Linda Jackson's Research Report #10, published by JSRI at Michigan State University, on stereotypes Anglos hold about Hispanics and Latinos. Her study shows Anglos perceive Hispanics and Latinos as having fewer positive characteristics and more negative characteristics than Anglos. To corroborate Jackson's data, we learned in our field research that some migrant program aides do think of migrant students as "slow" and "lazy." On the other hand, the aides also reported that parents are very involved. "They want to know what their kids are doing and they want their kids to be respectful. The migrant students are more respectful than the other kids" (Oct. 14, 1996). However, we also found that the teachers are usually the ones to contact the parents and since most teachers do not speak Spanish, they often ask the ESL or Spanish language teachers to act as intermediaries. In effect, we find that perceptions of the Hispanic and Latino students are somewhat mixed. In one school district, the Migrant Education Director commented that "the migrant population is not well received nor welcomed in western Michigan" and that this was a daily struggle for families (Sept. 30, 1996). However, all of our field sources told us that they are optimistic and positive of migrant students' potential for academic success. We think there needs to be a more definitive study of the effects of Anglos perception of migrant children's education so parents and teachers can be more attuned to ways of helping their children cope, as Jackson concludes. This last section addresses gender and how it might impact on migrant parents' involvement in their children's education. Mothers, across many cultures around the world, are responsible for rearing and teaching their children how to survive and succeed in the world. Hispanic and Latino families are no exception. Mothers in the often extended families tend to the children; they are generally the ones to participate most often in their children's school activities, including parent and teacher conferences, Open House, volunteerism, and other school and parent activities (Tatto, Edwards and Garcia, 1991). At one school district we found that migrant mothers, if they have time off work, also volunteer or work in the schools to be near their children. This may pose a problem for fathers, who expect their wives to remain at home instead of working independently outside of the home. Although we need to do more research to understand family dynamics among migrant workers, we think the role of women and, increasingly, men are potentially significant in the connections parents make in their communities and schools. Parental involvement means integrating both parents' values and expectations with those of the school. More research needs to be done to determine whether fathers' views can have negative effects on family involvement and, especially, mothers' involvement in school activities. Policy Alternatives We discussed several strategies for getting parents
more involved in their children's schooling. In one school district
we were told that with more Hispanic and Latino teachers being hired,
parents would be more likely to participate in and gain more information
regarding their children's education because the teachers would be
able to relate to the parents both culturally and linguistically.
At another school district, we learned that the parents and their
children were well integrated in the community even if the parents
are not able to communicate with the teachers. We also learned that
when efforts are made to offer ESL classes by the community in this
district, most parents do not have time for them. We think the differences in the two districts are ideological in nature. They are driven by the fact that, in one place, the administrative leadership positions are almost entirely held by Hispanics and Latinos, while in the more rural district there were no Hispanics and Latinos leaders. The researchers we met at MSU and at the State Department of Education advocate strong bilingual language skills for the migrant students, even if the parents wish their children to speak only English.
Policy Implications First, we note a set of characteristics given to us by the MDOE researchers to describe migrant students and their families. These characteristics illustrate the importance of positively connecting the school to the families as a way to promote student achievement and strong community ties. Second, our frame of reference has been informed through an integrated view of published policy research and fieldwork during the fall of 1996.47 Third, although we are better informed about the problems that migrant education programs face, it should be noted that our recommendations are not fully based on comprehensive factual information such as costs, politically driven agendas, or other factors not mentioned. Although we agree with the MDOE researchers that a centralized curriculum and year-round schooling is the best alternative for promoting migrant academic achievement, we are rather skeptical that this will occur soon and we are not certain how it may affect family and school relations. We fully support the idea of opening summer school programs as ways to transmit the basics and for enrichment purposes while families work out in the fields. The recommendations we make point to general strategies of action rather than specific guidelines for policy implementation. Table 1 outlines our Ambassador Student Council Program.
Second, our student ambassador proposal is more likely to work if the migrant students, other Hispanic and Latino students (such as the "settled-out" students), and any other interested students are able to meet on a weekly basis to discuss how to be school ambassadors. They will function much like a student council and should have a school advisor - a teacher or parent who is supportive of the program, is familiar with Hispanic and Latino cultures and languages, and who will have access to some school funds - to guide them as they deal with administrative issues. These student ambassadors are then enabled to work together to address the issues affecting them. They can establish communication between schools and parents, and form an integrated community with common concerns. Third, we realize that the biggest factor affecting migrant families and their schools is the high mobility. We suggest that ambassador programs be implemented everywhere there are populations of migrant workers in Michigan. We also suggest that these same mobile students help schools form similar programs either in Michigan or other states. We think that the consistent presence of the "settled-out" students will promote greater stability in the ambassador program. With electronic mail becoming more available, students will be able to access each other and link to schools. Once this program is instituted, there will always be available ambassadors to welcome any newcomer into the community. Fourth, we think this active interaction radiating from the students as focal points of action will make for easier transmission of school knowledge and skills. The council of ambassadors may function as a study group and a political voice mediating among the migrant students' academic concerns, the school's expectations, and the parents' needs to be better informed about school culture and knowledge. Fifth, migrant mothers and fathers will need to feel welcome and wanted by the school. Again, this can be facilitated by the student ambassadors. One student shared why she is compelled to succeed in school; "I want to be somebody so that I can help my parents out. My paycheck always goes to my parents and I want to help them so that they won't have to work in the fields. I like to be in the same school where it's small and I can get to know other Hispanics" (Sept. 30, 1996). There is no question that the migrant students would like the opportunity to help themselves and their parents. As the primary facilitators of communication between school and home, they will not be the passive recipients of policy enactment, but proactive members of an integrated system of learning and positive growth. Finally, because there are many stereotypes that people hold about Hispanics and Latinos, we encourage student ambassadors and their teachers to look to the published research concerning diverse populations as a way to begin to renegotiating and rethinking existing learning and teaching practices. Michigan, for example, could make many of the JSRI informational documents more available and accessible, in English and Spanish, to all the schools with concentrations of migrant or Hispanic and Latino students and families. Student ambassadors could then discuss and share this information with parents and develop ways to negotiate the system. We base our recommendations on the fact that we have not been able to find or to recognize school mechanisms which function to promote migrant family involvement in their children's education. We think that our general aims in the student ambassador program are likely to generate an "organic" mechanism for establishing a rapport among the migrant students, parents, teachers, and administrators. We believe that the connections made between school and home are crucial for the academic success and socialization of migrant students into American school culture. We are also careful to note that deep prejudices exist in the American and Hispanic and Latino communities which may hinder these students' academic progress, and we are therefore interested in developing more useful ways of "training" qualified teachers, administrators, and parents to teach the nation's fastest growing population, Hispanics and Latinos (Interview, Oct. 21, 1996). We are concerned that migrant students are often considered "blank slates" because they may have language deficiencies in both Spanish and English, so we are eager to dispel such notions and suggest that our intuitions or ideologies be based on a wider variety of information and data. We recognize the importance of providing a good education for all students. By encouraging migrant family involvement in schools, we believe we are echoing our national goals of promoting a more enriching educational environment. Uses of technology The education of migrant children in Michigan presents a challenge for the nation, state, and local communities. At the federal level, migrant education receives special funding to the states as a supplemental education program for students identified according to specific criteria. In Michigan, federal funds and special state grants are distributed to the intermediate or school districts which, in turn, use the money in various ways (i.e., special offices, summer programs, special classrooms, and teachers' aides). Technology is one avenue whereby the education of migrant children can be served better. Technology can be useful administratively and educationally.
The latter, technology for learning, is the primary focus of this
report although it includes comments on the administrative uses of
technology for migrant education. As teachers integrate the use of computers to access the Internet in the classroom, migrant children can act as classroom resources for developing internet projects with the teacher and classmates, and construct links with other schools and sites which utilize language, culture, and traditions. Classroom internet projects demonstrate how children are constructing their own learning through collaboration with classmates, teachers, and others on the Internet - activities which can break down ethnic barriers and foster inclusion for minority children. Other types of technology, like software, teleconferencing, programmed texts, CD-ROMs, and multimedia programs are all resources that could be effectively used to help migrant children attain educational needs. How well these goals could be achieved will depend upon certain conditions being addressed by migrant families, teachers, and the community, state, district, and federal programs. Although not the main thrust of this report, the use of technology for record-keeping purposes can also support the migrant child in getting an education if the U.S. databases are used concurrently to store and generate information on students so that institutions, administrators, teachers, and students can better use that information to facilitate decision-making. For the migrant child whose family may move several times a year, a more secure, efficient, accurate, up-to-date tracking system for educational and health records could be of great service, even necessity. For example, repetition or lack of vaccinations could be harmful for both the migrant child and the community. In transit, original paper records and documents can easily be lost or destroyed, so that entry and transition into the new school sometimes occurs without verification or evidence of prior records. Keeping an electronic record, which new schools could easily access, would help in assessing the needs of the migrant child vis-à-vis the new school community. Technology for Learning Overview Personal computers and connections to the Internet have the potential to dramatically change the character of traditional education. "As increasing numbers of schools become equipped wi |