Martinez, Yolanda G., and Ann Cranston-Gingras. "Migrant farmworker students and the educational process: Barriers to high school completion." High School Journal 80.1 (1996): 28. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 30 Jan. 2011.

The focus of this article was to bring to light the socioeconomic differences and inadequacies on the part of the educational system that has a profound effect on the dropout rates of migrant workers. To quote its authors, "The issues associated with the reasons why migrant young adults drop out of school, when examined closely, reflect more about the society in which we live and our schools, than what too many would be considered a lack of ambition on the part of these young adults."
This article cites several research studies done to examine the reasons why, "Migrant students face a likelihood of dropping out that is approximately twice that of any "high school group"." Of all the school faculty that was interviewed the reasons they felt this was so is:
social prejudice or lack of acceptance from both parts
lack of communication between students and school personnel (teachers)
mobility
lack of educational continuity
lack of emphasis placed on education
lack of knowledge of how the educational system in the U.S. works
inappropriate home environment (not conducive to education)
It seems to me that many of the reasons are interconnected. Migrant workers come from a lower standard of living forced upon them by the system that hires them. Therefore, they have less than the "Jones'" and face prejudice and lack of acceptance by mainstream society. There is a lack of communication between students and teachers because there is a preconceived notion that these students are less interested, lack motivation and/or the understanding of the English language. There are a few of these ideas that many of the migrant students also felt were the culprit when interviewed. When the migrant students who were attending a HEP program were interviewed there were 6 reasons stated. The top reason was their need to work, because the living conditions allowed to most migrant workers there is a greater need for every able bodied family member to have a job to help pay for the bare necessities. The reasons that followed were lack of interest, moved, because migrant work is seasonal and they must go where the work is, and another reason that coincides with the moving is too many absences. It is difficult to keep up on homework when moving from place to place and attending new schools. Some felt they were too old; there is a gap between age and grade. The last reason was marriage/pregnancy & family problems.
The goal of the HEP programs is to give migrant workers the chance to gain higher education by giving them room and board while taking classes. This eliminates one of the largest obstacles. They are encouraged to interact with their peers on campus to create relationships that may be encouraging and spark more interest in higher education. I think the larger idea here is that changes need to happen to the larger system to allow migrant workers a more fair chance at obtaining a high school diploma. I think the question becomes, how do we change the system? How can a HEP program optimize what it is offering working inside a system that offers so many obstacles?

High School

Dolan, Thomas G (2002). "Sending "C" Students to College - The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education - A long tradition of opportunities galore.". The Education digest (0013-127X), 68 (4), p. 60.

This article makes me wonder what really are students tested on? How well is High School teaching students if those same “C” students are getting good grades in College? The main argument Thomas Dolan is arising is that just because students didn't perform well in High School, that doesn't mean they won't do well in College. Inspiration, dedication, and creativity have to be key to a lot of students, and apparently not very many students are being inspired in the current system. One of the quotes in the article states that a C student from High School brings a lot of untapped potential. This happens because those C students weren't dedicated to getting good grades for some certain reason, and if that reason is erased, then they may very well become actually “good” students. “Many schools of higher education, large and small, are offering the "C" high school student the opportunity to turn into an "A" and "B" student, and many students act on that opportunity” (Dolan). If students stop being just another kid in a system, then they might actually start applying themselves. This is what many Colleges are striving towards, and this article states that it seems to be working.

Dolan backs up his argument that “C” students have potential with quotes, and philosophies of a few people in charge of admissions at different Colleges. Every person is willing to admit that there is a ton potential in the average High School student. The key is to get them to realize that potential, and apply themselves to what they happen to be good at. This is all good in theory, but what I would like to know is how effective is this?

I believe that High School is a system that basically spews out information towards teenagers, so it is easy to understand how a C student can end up performing well when given the opportunity. What I want to know is how do we change that? How do we base grades off of overall potential? It seems to me like this article is saying that High School is not even remotely doing its job. Perhaps College is necessary for the majority in our current educational system, but in an ideal system High School should be enough. 12 years of education should be more than enough to prepare students with enough base knowledge to do almost anything a job would require of them, but perhaps throwing information out at kids for them to grasp by themselves isn't the best procedure for teaching. The so called “C” students might be more effected by being simply part of a majority rather than an individual. These Colleges that were addressed in the article seem to focus on eliminating that. Perhaps a dedication to each individual is a better system than a dedication to a specific curriculum taught to the majority.

Extended Bibliography: “ESOL AND THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN.”

REGAN, TIMOTHY F., and PETER SCARTH. “ESOL AND THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN.” 1968. ERIC. EBSCO. Web. 30 Jan. 2011.

Regan and Scarth in their article “ESOL AND THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN.” comment on their concerns and observations on programs for English for Speakers of Other Languages, and how these programs are or are not working for Mexican-Americans. They directly address different methodologies and approaches that were being used in 1968. Regan and Scarth also discuss the short comings and and lack of regard for the Mexican-American’s “psychological set and his cultural heritage.”(Regan, Scarth 1) This article addresses how the psychological set and heritage is immensely important for the Mexican-American's retention of the curriculum.

The process that the educational community has used in teaching Mexican-American's English in the class room, according to Regan and Scarth, has me lacking guidance and direction for many generations. They address multiple aspects of the ESOL program that have had short comings in the past. Regan and Scarth point out teachers continue to disregarded research that supports using Spanish in the classroom and insist on having students only speak English. Regan and Scarth go on to discuss the importance of empathy for the Spanish speaking students cultural backgrounds that the students call upon for understanding and using their new learn skills.

The evidence that Regan and Scarth present in they article from 1968 is still evident in the education system today. Many teachers who interact and work with Spanish speaking students encounter the same issues address in this article. As more and more Mexican-American students are learning in English based classrooms the philosophy of Educators must be open and willing to adapt their methods to help these students learn. The unique backgrounds and heritages that many Mexican-American and migrant workers families' come from present teachers with learning abilities they have not encountered with native english speaking students or urban students. These new learning environments require new techniques and programs that have not previously used in the public education system.

The complex ideas and methodologies addressed by Regan and Scarth are ones that all educators must ask and address for themselves when they are working with more and more spanish speaking students. With the help and use of ESOL specialists teachers and schools have had more success helping Spanish speaking students in their classrooms. Many concerns can arise out of the current state of these programs. One specifically not addressed by Regan and Scarth is the need for Mexican-American students to be full assimilated into American culture. One of the main focuses in primary school is to help children become and act “American.” This step I believe is being left out of the education process for Mexican-American students for respect to their home life and cultural background. However with the lack of becoming “American” will these students have a harder time continuing their American education, one that is so reliant on standardized tests geared toward American students?