From Risk to Opportunity

Fulfilling the Educational 

Needs of Hispanic Americans 

in the 21st Century

March 2003

The Final Report of the President’s Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans
i

From Risk to Opportunity

Fulfilling the Educational 

Needs of Hispanic Americans 

in the 21st Century

The Final Report of the President’s Advisory Commission 

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

March 31, 2003
ii
iii

President’s Advisory Commission on Educational

Excellence for Hispanic Americans

Co-Chairs

Frank J. Hanna, Esq.

Enedelia Schofield, Esq.

Members

Micaela Alvarez, Esq.

Christopher J. Barbic

Fernando “Frank” Caldeiro

Jose G. Canchola 

Jaime A. Escalante

Charles P. Garcia, Esq.

Norma S. Garza

Alexander Gonzalez, Ph.D.

Miguel A. Hernandez Jr.

Rev. Jose Hoyos

Patricia J. Mazzuca

Francisco J. Paret

Altagracia “Grace” Ramos

Van D. Romero, Ph.D.

Jon Secada

Ofelia S. Vanden Bosch 

Rene Vazquez, M.D.

Octavio J. Visiedo

Ex-Officio Members and Designees

The Honorable Hector Barreto

Administrator for the United States Small

Business Administration

Designee: Fred C. Armendariz

The Honorable Mel Martinez

Secretary for the United States Department for

Housing and Urban Development

Designee: Anna Maria Farias, Esq.

The Honorable John W. Snow

Secretary for the United States Department of

the Treasury

Designee: The Honorable Rosario Marin

The Honorable Rod Paige

Secretary for the United States Department of

Education

Designee: Maria Hernandez Ferrier, Ed.D.

Executive Director

Leslie Sanchez
iv
v

Contents

Commission Members........................................................................................................................................ iii

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ v

Letter of Transmittal............................................................................................................................................ vii

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................viii

I. The Present Crisis .................................................................................................................................... 1

II. Set New and High Expectations Across America ................................................................................ 5

III. Support No Child Left Behind .............................................................................................................. 13

IV. Reinforce and Expand a High-Quality Teaching Profession.............................................................. 21

V. Develop a Federal Research Agenda to Identify the Needs of Hispanic American Students .......... 29

VI. Create Pathways to College Graduation .............................................................................................. 37

VII. Create Increased Federal Accountability and Coordination ............................................................ 47

Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................................. 53

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................................ 54

Commission Meetings and Events .................................................................................................................... 60

Biographies .......................................................................................................................................................... 64

Federal Accountability and Coordination ........................................................................................................ 71

Appendix.............................................................................................................................................................. 74

Executive Order 13230........................................................................................................................................
vi
vii

March 31, 2003

The Honorable George W. Bush

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The members of the President’s Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

are pleased to present to you From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic

Americans in the 21st Century. Approved by unanimous consent of the Commission, From Risk to

Opportunity builds on the Commission’s interim report, The Road to a College Diploma (September 2002).

As specified in your Executive Order 13230, issued October 12, 2001, our report presents a plan to close the

educational achievement gap for Hispanic American children. The report sets forth concrete recommendations

for parents, educators, and leaders from business, local communities, faith-based institutions, and government.

From Risk to Opportunity is the result of an expansive, 18-month review in which we met, spoke with, and listened to more than 1,600 parents, teachers, and experts. We found throughout the country a dedication and

hopefulness among Hispanic Americans. The educational achievement of Hispanic Americans, now the

nation’s largest minority group, consistently lags behind the rest of the country. Nevertheless, there is a growing consensus, encouraged and nurtured by your leadership, that we must indeed “leave no child behind.”

We support your efforts to improve the education of Hispanic Americans, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide advice on this important issue. It has been our privilege to serve you and our nation.

Yours truly,

Frank J. Hanna Enedelia Schofield

Co-Chair Co-Chair
viii

As members of the President’s Advisory Commission

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans,

we too look forward to the day when no child in this

country is ever left behind. Over the last year and a

half, we traveled around our country, listening to the

hopes and fears of parents and their children.

As Americans, we

should all work as a

nation to reach out

to our children at

risk and provide for

them an opportunity. We witnessed an

incredible vitality,

desire, ambition

and determination

in the hearts and

minds of Hispanic

Americans everywhere. The desire to

provide opportunity for one’s children is universal

and is yearned for by the Hispanic American parents

we met. Over the last several hundred years, immigrants have testified to the promise of America by

flocking to her embrace: ours is indeed the land of

opportunity for all who seek it. In January 2003, as

the Commission worked to prepare this final report,

the Census Bureau released new data showing that

Hispanic Americans are now the largest minority

group in the nation. The nation’s Hispanic American

population totals more than 37 million and increased

4.7 percent from April 2000 to July 2001.

Unfortunately, we found that Hispanic students are

far more likely to drop out of high school and much

less likely to earn a college degree. In fact, one of every

three Hispanic American students fails to complete

high school. Too many Hispanic American families

lack the knowledge to fulfill the high expectations

they have for their children. And, tragically, too many

Americans set low expectations for Hispanic

American children. Finally, the federal government

does not adequately monitor, measure and coordinate

programs and research to the benefit of Hispanic

American children and their families, despite the rapidly growing Hispanic American population in the

United States.

On October 12, 2001, with Executive Order 13230,

the President charged our Commission with developing an action plan to close the educational achievement gap for Hispanic Americans. Over the last 18

months, we met with, talked to and listened to more

than 1,600 experts, parents, teachers, students, and

business and community leaders.

The members of our Commission share a deep and

heartfelt urgency regarding the closing of the educational achievement gap for Hispanic Americans. We

present this plan, which represents an expansive

review. Our plan recognizes that the effort must be

pursued by parents; faith-based, community, and

business leaders; educators; and public officials at the

local, state and federal levels.

We offer in our report six recommendations to help

our nation close the achievement gap for Hispanic

American children.

RECOMMENDATION 1: Set new and high

expectations across America for Hispanic

“We look forward to 

the day that no child 

in this country is

ever left behind.” 

– President George W. Bush,

January 8, 2003

Executive Summary
ix

American children by: helping parents navigate the educational system, creating partnerships that can provide expanded options

for children, and implementing a nationwide

public awareness and motivation campaign

aimed at increasing educational attainment

and achieving the goal of a college education.

RECOMMENDATION 2: The Commission

strongly supports full implementation and

full enforcement of the No Child Left Behind

Act. The Commission challenges the states

and school districts to, within five years,

increase the percentage of fourth graders

reading at or above proficient on the

National Assessment of Educational Progress

by 30 percentage points and meet or exceed

the annual measurable objectives defined in

each respective state’s accountability plan.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Reinforce a high-quality teaching profession by more fully preparing all teachers to address the diverse needs

of their students, including Hispanics, those

with disabilities and those with limited

English proficiency by attracting more

Hispanics to the teaching profession, and by

providing incentives and compensation for

successful performance as evidenced by

improved student achievement. Launch a

national study of the curricula, practica, student teaching experiences and the models

used to integrate these preparation formats

employed by colleges of education to prepare educators for reading instruction of

diverse children.

RECOMMENDATION 4: Initiate a new coherent

and comprehensive research agenda on the

educational development of Hispanic

Americans across the educational spectrum

from preschool through postsecondary.

RECOMMENDATION 5: Ensure full access for

Hispanic American students to enter college

and demand greater accountability in higher

education for Hispanic graduation rates.

Challenge the nation’s postsecondary institutions to graduate 10 percent more Hispanic

American students from colleges and universities each year, than are currently graduating, over the next decade. Urge institutions to

explore the increased development of retention programs that would benefit Hispanic

American students.

RECOMMENDATION 6: Increase the

accountability and coordination of programs within the federal government to

better serve Hispanic American children

and their families.

Our urgent call to action requires that all of us dedicate ourselves to ensuring educational excellence for

Hispanic Americans now. We sincerely hope that this

report helps move America closer to that day when

our Hispanic children are not at risk, but are instead

pursuing their dreams and their opportunities.

A

lthough the Hispanic American population of the

United States includes many distinct groups with

different socioeconomic and educational backgrounds, one element remains constant: We are losing Hispanic American students all along the education continuum.

In its work over the past year, the Commission

heard from more than 1,600 experts, parents,

teachers, students, and business and community

leaders about the present crisis in the education of

Hispanic children and youth. Many of these witnesses told the Commission of manifold problems

and issues:

 Low societal expectations for Hispanic

children and youth.

 Weak early childhood cognitive development

and limited early language development due

to factors in a child’s home such as poverty,

high mobility, and limited parental time,

resources and education.

 Lack of quality early childhood education

opportunities.

 Limited parental and community engagement

and choices.

 No accountability for results.

 Poor academic instruction, particularly in

reading.

 Not enough attention to using scientific

research to drive instruction.

 Teachers – and college faculty – who are

poorly prepared to teach Hispanic students.

 Lack of resources in schools that have large

enrollments of Hispanic children and

youth.

 Analyses that do not distinguish among

subgroups within the Hispanic American

community.

 Lack of a federal research agenda that

supports Hispanic students.

I.

The Present Crisis: The Latinization of America

1

The Latinization of America

The 2000 Census reports that the Hispanic population has grown by nearly 60 percent since 1990, and that more than 80 percent of

Hispanics reside in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Arizona, New Jersey, New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada. In nearly every

county for which the new census figures indicate an expanding population, the increase in Hispanic residents outpaces overall

population growth. Aided by strong economic growth in the 1990s, Hispanic workers established themselves in communities ranging

from Zebulon, N.C., to Dalton, Ga., to Lexington, Neb. This demographic shift indicates that it should no longer be assumed that

Hispanics will remain concentrated in a handful of geographic locations within the United States.
Together, these factors contribute to the staggering

dropout problem plaguing

Hispanic students. Today, one

of every three Hispanic

Americans has dropped out of

high school (see figure 1).

The high school completion

rate for Hispanic citizens

born in the United States is

81 percent, compared to 40

percent for foreign-born 

non-citizen Hispanics in the

same age group (see figure

2). Mexican immigrants

experience nearly twice the

dropout rate (61 percent) of other Hispanic subgroups (see figure 3). This phenomenon is of

special concern to the Commission given that

Mexican immigrants constitute 54 percent of

Hispanic immigrants and the largest segment of

all immigrants in the United States.1 Addressing

the educational needs of this large immigrant

group will have enormous implications for their

children and subsequent generations.

Among the Hispanic Americans who do complete

high school, 52.9 percent pursue a postsecondary

education immediately after graduation as compared to 65.7 percent of nonHispanic whites. 2 

Implications for the Future

The present crisis not only

threatens to leave behind yet

another generation of

Hispanic children and youth,

it also will limit their mobility

in the labor force. Moreover, it

may threaten our country’s

ability to compete economically. As the fastest growing and

youngest population group in

the United States, Hispanic

Americans will soon be the

second largest segment of the

labor force. However, the group’s lagging rates of

educational attainment limit their upward mobility.

Recent data tell us this:

 Most Hispanics remain in low-skilled

positions. Only 2 percent earn more than

$75,000 a year, compared to nearly 11

percent of non-Hispanic whites. 3 In 2002,

according to the U.S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, Hispanics

accounted for 61 percent of employees in

U.S. agricultural production. 4 

 Upward mobility of Hispanics into white-collar

positions continues to lag behind the rest of

the nation despite lower unemployment rates.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

2

Income is directly

proportional to educational

attainment.According to

the U.S.Department of

Commerce,a college

graduate is estimated to

earn nearly $1 million more

in income and benefits over

a lifetime than a high

school graduate.The

professional degree

premium is about $3.2

million more over a

lifetime. 5

Figure 2: High School Completion Rates for all 

Hispanic 25-29 year olds by citizenship. October 2000

Citizenship High School 

Status Completion Rate 

Born U.S. – Citizen 81.37% 

Foreign Born – U.S. Citizen by Naturalization 70.00% 

Foreign Born – Not a U.S. Citizen 40.25% 

SOURCE: NCES: March 2001

Figure 1: High School Completion Rates for 

18-24 year-olds by race/ethnicity 1972-2000

Year 1972 1980 1990 2000 

Totals 82.8 83.9 85.6 86.5 

White, non-Hispanic 86.0 87.5 89.6 91.8 

Black, non-Hispanic 72.1 75.2 83.2 83.7 

Hispanic 56.2 57.1 59.1 64.1 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES), Dropout Rates in the United States:

2000, based on U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the

Census, October Current Population Surveys, various years.
Chapter I: The Present Crisis

3

For instance, in 1998, 58.5

percent of all employees in the

private sector held white-collar

jobs, but only 37.5 percent of

Hispanics held white-collar

jobs. 6

 While 41.5 percent of private

sector employees are

considered blue collar, 63.5

percent of Hispanics hold

blue-collar jobs. 7

If the employment picture does

not change, the economic consequences of an uneducated work

force will strain the economy of

the United States. Hispanics are not maximizing

their income potential or developing financial security. This leads to lost tax revenues, lower rates of

consumer spending, reduced per capita savings and

increased social costs. An uneducated work force will also have a

substantial impact on important

domestic programs such as Social

Security. By 2050, Hispanic workers will make up nearly one-quarter of the working-age population,

bearing enormous financial

responsibility for supporting the

Baby Boom generation’s retirement. These factors will put an

additional strain on the Social

Security system. 8

The Commission hopes that money

spent on education is seen as an

investment in our future. School improvement may be

an expensive short-term investment, but the ultimate

profit resulting from an educated Hispanic workforce

is much greater.

“Native born Latinos will

account for 14 million

new workers in the next

25 years.This is not a

Hispanic issue.This

question is about the

future of the economy of

the country as a whole.”

Roberto Suro,

The Pew Hispanic Center

____________________________

1 U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of the Foreign-Born

Population in the United States: 2000. 2 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2002/section3/tables/t20_

1.asp 3 Hispanic Population of the United States, Current

Population Survey. March 2000, Detailed Tables People

Earnings. http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/hispanic/p20-535/tab11-1.txt

4 The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Job

Patterns for Minorities and Women in Private Industry,

2001. www.eeoc.gov/stats/jobpat/2001/index.html 5 U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics

Administration, U.S. Census Bureau, The Big Payoff:

Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of WorkLife Earnings, July 2002. p. 4. 6 The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Job

Patterns. 7 Ibid. 8 President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security,

Interim Report, August 2001, p. 8.

Figure 3: Educational Attainment by Hispanic Subgroup Aged 25 Years and Older (by percent) 

Educational Attainment/ Mexican Mexican Puerto Rican Cuban Central or Other Spanish Non-Hispanic 

Hispanic Subgroup American Immigrant South American White 

High School Dropout 30.96 61.14 35.18 28.79 35.71 27.47 11.30 

Completed High School 33.72 21.30 27.89 36.35 29.27 30.70 33.31 

Some College – No Degree 17.68 8.47 15.82 10.20 12.62 16.08 18.18 

Associate Degree 6.81 3.07 7.25 6.50 5.11 7.29 8.63 

Bachelor or Higher Degree 10.83 6.01 13.87 18.17 17.29 18.45 28.58 

Total Percent 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Total Number 4,188,116 6,863,681 1,625,237 932,482 2,873,837 1,171,389 131,228,564 

SOURCE: NCES: March 2001

5

T

he Commission believes that low expectations can

become self-fulfilling prophecies. Teachers and parents’ expectations have a long-term, pervasive influence on children. If we are to close the achievement

gap for Hispanic American children and youth and

facilitate their path to higher education, parent and

teacher expectations must create an environment

that fosters and promotes academic achievement.

And, we must begin early in the preschool years, and

follow through to the adolescent years and beyond.

To lift our nation’s expectations for the educational

success of Hispanic children and their families, the

Commission offers three strategies.

Learning begins in the family. Family involvement

in a child’s education has been shown to be a better

predictor of educational success than family income

or parents’ education level.9 Parents who encourage

their children to pursue academic interests or who

aspire to further their own education have a powerful, positive influence on their children. Problems

arise, however, when parents believe that they are

incapable of meeting their child’s educational needs

or when parents feel their involvement is not welcome at their child’s school. For Hispanic parents,

these problems can be complicated by language and

cultural differences and by unfamiliarity with the

educational process. But parents can overcome

these barriers if they are willing to try and if schools

make a concerted effort to establish a climate where

parents feel welcome.

It is not sufficient for information to be available to

parents; schools and community organizations have

a responsibility to do more. They must encourage

parents to participate in activities and programs

that will further their understanding of the different

elements of their children’s education. To ensure

increased interaction between schools and parents,

we encourage corporate and community organizations to create “parent academies” to increase

parental knowledge of effective methods for the

educational engagement of their children. These

academies can be facilitated by neighborhood leaders who have been trained by school or non-profit

personnel.

The need for parental involvement increases as students and their families are provided more options,

such as those offered by the No Child Left Behind

Act. Under NCLB, disadvantaged children in

schools needing improvement will be allowed to

transfer to a different public school. They will also

STRATEGY1

Increase parental knowledge in navigating the

educational system through outreach with parentteacher organizations,community groups and

faith-based organizations.

II.

Set New and High Expectations Across America

RECOMMENDATION: Set new and high expectations across America for Hispanic

American children by: helping parents navigate the educational system, creating

partnerships that can provide expanded options for children, and implementing a

nationwide public awareness and motivation campaign aimed at increasing educational

attainment and achieving the goal of a college education.
be eligible for supplemental

tutoring services. Hispanic

American parents with children in poor-performing public schools must have a legitimate opportunity to exercise

these options under NCLB.

Due to a variety of possible

factors, including state and

local administrative delays or

political resistance to the law,

parents may not have the

opportunity to secure these

important learning options.10

In states where supplemental services or better

public school choices are, for any reason, unavailable to Hispanic American parents, the U.S.

Department of Education should, in cooperation

with the appropriate non-governmental organizations, stimulate parent consideration and discussion of recent studies that conclude that providing

parents with the publicly funded option to send

their children to the public or private schools of

their choice actually improves public school education.11 Under NCLB, the states and school districts

have a responsibility to provide supplemental services and choice provisions to parents and children

in low-performing schools.

It is also imperative that parents receive information about their rights regarding options for

English-language instruction under NCLB. Not

only do parents now have the right to elect which

English-language acquisition program their child

is enrolled in when there is more than one option

available, but they are also able to remove their

child from a program designed for limited

English-proficient children if they so choose. For

Hispanic parents, this requires becoming educated

about the rights they are afforded under NCLB

and making a commitment to be advocates for

their children, whether or not they are Spanishspeaking.

Schools must also do their part to provide a detailed

explanation of the curriculum used to teach all students, including the nation’s

almost five million Englishlanguage learners (up dramatically in 2000–2001 from

2.1 million in 1990-1991). 12

Parents should be made

aware of the reasons why a

certain method was chosen

over others, what the benefits

are for their children, how it

will meet the students’ specific needs, and what

research indicates about effective methodology.

Many community and faith-based organizations,

non-profits, foundations and corporations are working diligently with children from a variety of different backgrounds and socioeconomic conditions to

close the achievement gap. Some are having success

and effectively complement schools in many communities. Engaged community stakeholders who foster a supportive and nurturing environment create a

cycle from which everyone benefits.

As the Commission traveled throughout the country, it met and heard from people involved in community organizations at many levels and in various

capacities. America’s Promise, the East Los Angeles

Community Union (TELACU), Engaging Latino

Communities for Education (ENLACE), and small

groups of volunteers like those who run the Star

STRATEGY2

Create partnerships among students,parents,

educators,faith-based organizations and

communities that can provide expanded options for

the education of children.Examine the obstacles to

success that community and faith-based

organizations encounter and how these

partnerships may be fostered and facilitated.Devise

a strategy for highlighting and adopting effective

and successful community partnership models.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

6

“Children speak 

English at schools, some

Spanish at home but the

problem is parents can’t help

their children because they

don’t speak English...

do something for parent[s]

that only speak Spanish.” 

Fr. Celso Marquez, Catholic Priest

Huntington Park, CA

July 15, 2002
House program in Atlanta, Ga., all

find innovative ways to help Hispanic

students and families. Thanks to

foundation and corporate support,

programs like these have the

resources to undertake a more comprehensive approach in reaching out

to students, families and communities. Whether a program’s goal is to

help veterans learn to read and find

employment or to facilitate the transition of Spanish-speaking students

into the American educational system, these groups have had a dramatic effect on those involved.

Often, the greatest impediment to creating meaningful community partnerships for parents is the

unlevel playing field that exists in public funding of

faith-based and community initiatives in the field of

education, housing, job training, health and other

social services.13 In light of the fact that, historically,

religion and community have played such an

important and overwhelmingly positive role in the

lives of Hispanic American families, all federal

agencies should aggressively adhere to the dictates

of President Bush’s Executive Order, Equal

Protection of the Laws for Faith-based and

Community Organizations.14 Compliance with this

Executive Order will ensure that faith-based organizations and community initiatives will have equal

access to federal, state and local funds for the implementation of compassionate and effective solutions

to the educational and other foundational needs of

Hispanic American families.

The Commission encourages businesses and foundations to target their philanthropic dollars toward

concrete goals related to improving student achievement for Hispanic Americans. These entities can

partner with local and state governments and

research organizations to discover what works for

improving academic performance for Hispanic students, disseminate that information to schools and

communities, and implement appropriate programs

based on these findings. For example, a business or

foundation could partner with a state or local government to print and distribute materials on scientifically based reading instruction to school districts.

Businesses and foundations are also encouraged to

incorporate accountability measures into their philanthropy to ensure that their dollars are used efficiently and to clearly show that the academic performance of Hispanic students is increased directly

as a result of their program or initiative. Business

leaders recognize their obvious stake in a well-educated workforce and can use their influence to be

advocates for Hispanic education efforts. Businesses

also make it a practice to find the most effective

methods for reaching a certain goal and then repeating those best methods. Thus, businesses are in a

position to use their stature in the community to

transfer that attitude and mode of operation into

the public school system.

A promising program that demonstrates proactive

participation in educational issues from corporate

America is W. K. Kellogg Foundation’s Engaging

Latino Communities in Education (ENLACE). This

initiative, which seeks increasing opportunities for

Hispanic children and youths to prepare for, pursue

and succeed in postsecondary education, operates

in six key geographic areas in the United States with

significant Hispanic populations: Arizona/New

Mexico/Colorado, California, Florida,

Chapter II: Set New High Expectations Across America

7
Michigan/Illinois, New York and Texas. The program presents an ambitious model for universitycommunity collaboration.

Through ENLACE, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation

focuses its efforts on Hispanic access to and success

in college by:

 Strengthening selected Hispanic-serving

institutions, public schools and communitybased organizations (CBOs) to serve as

catalysts and models for systemic change in

education.

 Supporting higher education/community

partnerships that increase community

involvement and academic success among

Hispanic students.

 Supporting the creation and/or

implementation of education models based

on research-proven best practices that

increase high school retention and college

enrollment and improve students’ academic

performance and graduation rates.

 Facilitating the expansion and

sustainability of successful

academic enrichment and

community engagement

programs through strategic

planning, networking, leadership

development and policy efforts.

 Disseminating to key

stakeholders within Hispanic

communities information about

effective programs, models and

educational strategies in order to

stimulate changes in policies and

practices related to the education

of Hispanics.

Working collaboratively with, among

others, K-16 educators and administrators, CBOs, and businesses,

ENLACE partners designed strategies

aimed at increasing the academic

achievement of Hispanic students by engaging in a

planning process that included local

audiences/stakeholders with a vested interest in the

work of ENLACE.

Based on research-proven strategies and promising

educational practices, each project funded under

the ENLACE Initiative is free to implement activities, design operating procedures and specify outcome targets specific to the academic, social, educational and cultural expectations and needs of the

communities it serves. This initiative has built standards-based accountability measures into the program with cluster evaluations conducted by the

National Council for Community and Education

Partnerships (NCCEP), an external evaluator that

assesses program effectiveness and outcomes. The

cluster evaluation results of the different grantees

are used to develop policy and the dissemination of

effective practices.

Finally, to equip all educators and partners with

effective strategies, the Commission encourages the

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

8
U.S. Department of

Education, through its What

Works Clearinghouse, to create a bilingual repository of

best practices that would benefit Hispanic students. The

What Works Clearinghouse

will summarize evidence on

the effectiveness of different

programs, products and

strategies intended to enhance

academic achievement and

other important educational

outcomes. It will help provide

education decision makers

with the information they

need to make choices guided

by the best available scientific

research. The use of researchproven strategies based on

sound scientific evidence is

one of the key principles of

No Child Left Behind.

The Commission recommends the development

and implementation of a national public awareness

campaign to set new and high expectations for the

education of Hispanic American children. Most

public service campaigns are launched at a time

when national concern about a crisis is at its peak.

With the unprecedented growth of the Hispanizc

community in both traditional and nontraditional

neighborhoods across the United States, more communities are concerned about the potential social

and economic consequences

of perpetuating an uneducated

Hispanic workforce. Given the

present crisis in educating

Hispanic children and the new

requirements set by No Child

Left Behind, we should not

underestimate the ability of a

national public awareness

campaign to set high expectations and change behaviors

among Hispanic children,

their families and educators

through the use of persuasive

communications techniques.

The campaign should target

culturally and linguistically

appropriate messages, using

trusted and valued strategies

that deliver results in select

markets. This includes monolingual Spanish, bilingual

(Spanish/English) and monolingual English constituencies at various levels of acculturation and

socioeconomic status. The content for the national

campaign should encompass four key components

of educational development: early childhood, elementary and secondary education, and post-secondary education. The implicit common theme for

all messages should be “higher expectations.” The

campaign could center around a sharply focused

theme, as did former First Lady Nancy Reagan’s

anti-drug crusade, Just say no, or offer a multidimensional creative platform with multiple messages

similar to the campaign of the Partnership for a

Drug-Free America.

The Commission has already seen successful components of public awareness campaigns through its

one-year pilot program Yes I Can!/Yo Si Puedo! In

the fall of 2001, the White House Initiative on

Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

developed the framework for Yes I Can!/Yo Si Puedo!

The purpose of the campaign was to 1) measure the

STRATEGY3

Influence expectations by implementing a

nationwide motivation campaign intended to

change attitudes,intentions and behavior toward

increasing Hispanic educational attainment at

every step of the way: pre-K,elementary,

secondary and postsecondary education.

Chapter II: Set New High Expectations Across America

9

“Every day I witness the lack of

motivation of children and

teens who,not having anything

to do,little by little are losing

interest in moving forward.”

Maria Luz,

student and mother of three children

Los Angeles Town Hall,

July 15, 2002

“Diariamente vivo en carne

propia el desaliento de los

niños y jovenes,que no tienen

nada que hacer,y poco a poco

van perdiendo el interés por

segui adelante.” 

Maria Luz, estudiante y 

madre de tres hijos

Reunión comunitaria de Los Angeles,

el 15 de julio de 2002
effectiveness of an educational marketing campaign

aimed at diverse Hispanic test markets and 2) evaluate the relationship between educational attainment

and Hispanic ethnic groups’ acculturation level, language preference and socioeconomic status.

This limited pilot campaign consisted of the development and launching of a new and exciting bilingual Web site, YesICan.gov/YoSiPuedo.gov, that provides parents with a one-stop information center

about education. The Web site represents a nationwide grassroots effort with community technology

centers, and it includes public service announcements with the Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation,

the country’s largest Spanish radio network, to

make these tools available to parents, educators and

community leaders. In the first six months of the

campaign, the Web site received more than 250,000

visitors, with more than 1,000,000 page views.

Interest in the program has been further evidenced

by a 409 percent increase in Hispanic customer

requests to the U.S. Department of Education.

Based on the overall positive responses to

YesICan.gov/YoSiPuedo.gov, the Commission recommends that a full-scale advertising campaign be

undertaken, parallel to the campaign waged some

years ago by the Ad Council and the United Negro

College Fund, “A Mind is a Terrible Thing to

Waste.” Among the options that may be explored

for funding this campaign are public/private partnerships.

Finally, the campaign should incorporate baseline

and consumer research data on the condition of

Hispanics in education and on Hispanic cultural

behaviors, perceptions, and motivations as well as

the barriers faced within the community.

Additionally, a comprehensive understanding of

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

10
those who can influence the awareness and behavior of Hispanic parents is important. This understanding will facilitate the development of messages, strategies and tactics that resonate with

Hispanic constituents and their communities. Just

as significant is the understanding of proven educational methods and/or curricula that contribute

to success in learning. The campaign must also

encompass ways to build public-private partnerships and engage the community at large to develop opportunities for positive learning experiences.

Once the campaign is developed, it should include

an evaluation component to assess its effectiveness.

________

9 U.S. Department of Education. Helping Hispanic Students

Reach High Academic Standards, by Lisa Weiner, Mary

Leighton, and Janie Funkhouser. (Washington, D.C.: 2001) p.

69. 10 Erik W. Robelen, “States Suffer Halting Start on Tutoring.”

Education Week, September 25, 2002. 11 Jay P. Greene and Greg Forster, “Rising to the Challenge: The

Effect of School Choice on Public Schools in Milwaukee and

San Antonio,” The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research,

January 13, 2003, http://www.manhattaninstitute.org/html/cb_27.htm; Jay P. Greene, “Choice Helps

Public Schools,” New York Sun, January 14, 2003,

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_nyschoice_helps.htm 12 Anneka L.Kindler, Office of English Language Acquisition,

Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement for

Limited English Proficient Students. Survey of the States’

Limited English Proficient Students and Available Educational

Programs and Services 2000-2001 Summary Report. The

George Washington University, National Clearinghouse for

English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction

Educational Programs, October 2002, p. 3. 13 “Unlevel Playing Field: Barriers to Participation by FaithBased and Community Organizations in Federal Social

Service Programs,” White 13 House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives,

August, 2001, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/unlevelfield.html 14 George W. Bush, “Executive Order: Equal Protection of the

Laws for Faith-based and Community Organizations,” The

White House, December 12, 2002,

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021212-6.html 

Chapter II: Set New High Expectations Across America

11

T

he Commission used the four

key elements of the No Child Left

Behind Act of 2001 – accountability for results, state and local

flexibility, focusing resources on

proven educational methods and

expanding choices for parents –

as the criteria by which it evaluated the education of Hispanic

children and youth. Three strategies emerged to support the

Commission’s strong recommendation to expedite full implementation and full

enforcement of No Child Left Behind.

The Commission supports the implementation and

strict enforcement of NCLB. If the law is not fully

implemented and enforced, Hispanic children will

be among the first to be left behind.

While Hispanic children have, in many cases, been

historically underserved within the educational system, No Child Left Behind serves

as an unprecedented opportunity for Hispanics to secure those

resources and options that will

prepare them, and thus empower them, to close the academic

achievement gap. The importance of establishing adequate

yearly progress (AYP) cannot be

understated or diminished. It is

only through the institution of a

bar for measurement of progress

that we can ensure that the educational needs of our

Hispanic children are met. By annual testing of students in reading and mathematics in grades 3

through 8, disaggregated data will be available by

socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, disability

and English proficiency. Test results from all subgroups will be invaluable for the development and

implementation of strategies targeted towards the

preparation of teachers and students. It will also help

in the development of appropriate education interventions for Hispanic American children.

Fundamental to academic success is the acquisition

of English for the almost five million English-language learners (of these 3,900,000 are Spanish speakers). For the first time since the establishment of the

Office of Bilingual Education and Minority

Language Affairs (OBEMLA), now Office of English

Language Acquisition (OELA), students whose first

STRATEGY1

The Commission supports federal,state and 

local efforts to fully implement and rigorously

enforce NCLB.

III.

Support No Child Left Behind

RECOMMENDATION: The Commission strongly supports full implementation and 

full enforcement of the No Child Left Behind Act. The Commission challenges the states

and school districts to, within five years, increase the percentage of fourth graders

reading at or above proficient on the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP) by 30 percentage points and meet or exceed the annual measurable

objectives defined in each respective state’s accountability plan.

“What doesn’t vary is the

premise that student

achievement is not

negotiable and excuses are

not accepted.” 

Just for the Kids, Promising Practices

Study of High-Performing Schools.

13
language is not English will be assessed yearly for

English-language acquisition. NCLB does not prescribe a specific method of instruction but demands

results. Parents of English-language learners have the

same options that other parents have when schools

fail to teach their children English.

Scientific research has demonstrated that learning

to read is not a natural process. Rather, reading is a

complex skill that children in schools need systematic instruction to acquire. When provided with

such instruction, most children become successful

readers. Unfortunately, too

many children are not

afforded the opportunity

they need to develop this

essential ability. Numerous

studies show that children

from low-income families are

substantially behind their

more affluent peers in the

basic components of literacy

development before they

enter school. For instance,

the typical child who enters

Head Start as a four-year-old

is able to name no more than

one or two letters and cannot

write a single letter of the

alphabet. Despite efforts to prepare this child for

kindergarten, the same child may leave Head Start a

year later without significant progress in letter

knowledge. Not surprisingly, the weaknesses in the

pre-reading and vocabulary skills evidenced by

preschoolers from low-income backgrounds are

mirrored in their lack of exposure to experiences

that support the development of these skills.

Numerous studies have documented differences

between low-income and other children: the presence of children’s books in the home, the frequency

of book reading with adults, and the quality of language interactions between children and parents.

The Commission shares a concern about children

entering school with pre-reading and language skills

far behind their peers, even in their native language.

NCLB includes a comprehensive reading effort

called Reading First. This $1.05 billion state grant

program promotes the use of scientifically based

research to provide high-quality reading instruction

for grades K-3 to help every student in every state

become a successful reader.

The crucial importance of acquisition of prereading and vocabulary skills as a foundation for

future academic success has been well documented. It is of the utmost importance to focus on

these skills of Hispanic children, for they will allow

children to begin school

prepared to learn and will

affect their future academic

experiences. The

Commission advocates the

Early Reading First program, an NCLB initiative

designed to provide highquality, early education to

young children, especially

those from low-income

families. The critical importance of the overall purpose

of this program, “to prepare

young children to enter

kindergarten with the necessary language, cognitive and early reading skills to prevent reading

difficulties and ensure school success,”15 cannot

be overstated.

The Commission challenges the states and school

districts to, within five years, increase the percentSTRATEGY2

Ensure that Hispanic families receive culturally

appropriate information,guidance and tools that

stress the importance of early childhood

development and early childhood reading skills,

and reinforce the continued expansion of reading

ability during the early grades.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

14
age of fourth graders reading at

or above proficient by 30 percentage points and to meet or

exceed the annual measurable

objectives defined in each

respective state’s accountability

plan. To accomplish this challenging task, information on

promising practices and program models is essential. The

Commission believes that a

coordinated effort is needed to

develop this information across

federal agencies, such as the

Institute of Education Science

(IES) and other offices of the

Department of Education such

as the offices of Special

Education and Rehabilitation

Services (OSERS), English

Language Acquisition (OELA)

and Elementary and Secondary

Education (OESE), as well as

the National Institute of Child

Health and Human Development (NICHD) and

possibly other agencies.

In 1999, average NAEP scores for Hispanics were

consistently below those of non-Hispanic whites.

Hispanic 9-year-olds performed 13 percent below

non-Hispanic whites, and 13- and 17-year-olds

performed 9 and 8 percent respectively below their

non-Hispanic peers.16 The 2000 NAEP test results

indicate that there has been no overall change in

reading scores of all fourth graders from 1992 to

2000. The level of fourth graders reading at or

above proficient has been increasing, but on a very

slow progression from 29 percent in 1992 to 30

percent in 1994, 31 percent in 1998 and 32 percent

in 2000, while the majority of fourth graders (63

percent) are reading at or above the basic reading

level. However, by 2013-2014, states are required to

achieve 100 percent proficiency on reading assessments. For states to meet this goal, they will have to

focus their energy on Hispanic children.

Efforts are also required to

ensure access for Hispanic

children in early childhood

programs. These programs

can be a determinant factor in

increased success in elementary education. Children who

do not attend high-quality,

effective early intervention

programs are at a distinct disadvantage in their ability to

enter into elementary school

with acquired learning skills.

Data show that Hispanic children are enrolled in early

childhood development programs with less frequency

than non-Hispanic white or

African American children.17

Among the reasons found to

influence Hispanic mothers to

not enroll their children in

early childhood programs is

an increased preference for

having the mother provide child care directly at

home, or a reluctance to turn over the care of

their child to someone who is not a relative.18

Nearly three-quarters of entering kindergarteners

from African American or Hispanic families have

one or more risk factors, compared with 20 percent of those from non-Hispanic white families.

The proportion of children with two or more risk

factors is five times larger among Hispanics (33

percent) and four times larger among African

Americans (27 percent) than among nonHispanic whites (6 percent).19 The presence of

these risk factors has a negative impact on a

child’s ability to experience educational success

shortly after entering school.20 Although conclusive disaggregated data are not available, these

facts suggest the need for increased participation

of Hispanics in early childhood programs that can

ameliorate risk factors.

Chapter III: Support No Child Left Behind

15

“I came to the United States

three years ago.I learned

English pretty fast; however,

I did not give my best in

school the last two years.I

have little sister; she is 12

years old and she is now in

middle school.I don’t want

her to have the same

experience I have had while

in high school.So I would

like some information on

how I can help her with her

studies and with her goals

before it is too late.”

Iris Villatoro, 17

Webvisitor: January 11, 2003

San Pedro High School, California
Poverty status also is a determinant factor for participation in these programs. Families below the federal

poverty level are less likely to participate in preprimary education programs than those families at or

above poverty level. (See figure 4 below.)21 This is

particularly relevant for the Hispanic community.

According to the 2001 U.S. Census, 21.4 percent of

Hispanics live below the federal poverty level, compared to 22.7 percent of African Americans and 9.9

percent of non-Hispanic whites. 22

The White House Summit on Early Childhood

Cognitive Development (July 2001), an initiative of

Mrs. Laura Bush, helped to synthesize information

about the need for parental and adult involvement in

the early development of children’s cognitive skills, as

a precursor to subsequent educational attainment

and success. As G. Reid Lyon, chief, Child

Development and Behavior Branch, National

Institutes of Health, noted in his closing comments

at the summit: “The most vulnerable of our children

are those born into poverty. These children are more

likely to enter school with limited vocabularies, meager early literacy and other pre-academic concepts,

and a motivation to learn.” 23

.

The Commission is concerned about the unacceptably high dropout rate in secondary education

for Hispanic students. According to the NCES,24

in 2000 Hispanics comprised the highest percent

of high school status dropouts25 (27.8 percent,

compared to 13.1 percent for African Americans,

6.9 percent for non-Hispanic whites, and 10.9 percent for the national average). Immediate, effective

intervention strategies are needed. When examining the high dropout rate among Hispanics, differences that exist between native born and foreignborn Hispanics should be considered. Only when

these differences are disaggregated, collected, analyzed and understood can appropriate prevention

strategies be developed and resources allocated to

maximize their effectiveness.

Hispanics have the lowest high school completion

rate in the United States. In 2000, only 64.1 percent of

all Hispanic 18- to 24-year-olds had completed secondary education, compared to 91.8 percent of nonHispanic whites, 83.7 percent of African Americans,

and 94.6 percent of Asians.26 Among Hispanic 16- to

24-year-olds who were born outside the United

States, the dropout rate of 44 percent in 2000 was

more than double the rates for first- or later-generation Hispanic young adults born in the United States

(15 percent and 16 percent, respectively).27

The age at which Hispanic immigrants arrive in this

country has an impact on the data that have been

compiled on Hispanic educational attainment.

Many of these immigrants arrive in the United

States as young adults and do not enroll in high

school.28 Of those who do enroll, the high school

dropout rate is much higher than it is for nativeborn U.S. Hispanics.29 Hispanic immigrant youth

are seven times more likely to drop out than their

native-born peers, and 30 percent live in

poverty–more than twice as many as non-Hispanic

STRATEGY3

Decrease school attrition.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

16

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Percent

1991 1993 1995 1996 1999 2001

Year

All or above poverty

Total

Below poverty

Figure 4: Enrollment in Preprimary Education:

Percentage of Children Ages 3-5 Who Were Enrolled 

in Center-Based Early Childhood Care and Education

Programs, by Poverty Status: Selected Years 1991-2001 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, NCES, National

Household Education Surveys Program (NHES),

and “Parent Interview.”
white children. Thus, while the

high dropout rate for Hispanics in

2000 (28 percent) is partly

attributable to the markedly

higher dropout rates among

Hispanic immigrants, even among

U.S.-born Hispanics, the rate is

unacceptably high. 30

Data demonstrate that typically Mexican and Central

American immigrants are less educated upon arrival

in the United States than those from the Caribbean

and South America, as shown in figure 5. On both

secondary and postsecondary completion, the lowest

levels were found among immigrants from Mexico.31

This is significant given the fact that more than one

million school-age children in the United States were

born in Mexico and that these children account for

36 percent of all school-age immigrants to the

United States. According to a 2001

analysis by the Washington-based

Urban Institute, their numbers

increased from about 15 percent in

1970 to the current 36 percent.32

This increase may be masking

progress in educational attainment

of Hispanics and must be given

due consideration.33 The degree to which this is an

influencing factor must be investigated and

addressed to develop and implement strategies that

are appropriate to each group.

The dropout problem, pervasive in the Hispanic

community, is aggravated in the case of migrant students. The majority of migrant students in

1998–1999 were Hispanic (86 percent): 52 percent

were in elementary grades (K-6), 30 percent in secondary grades (7- 12), and 13 percent in preschool

Chapter III: Support No Child Left Behind

17

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Mexico

Costa Rica

El Salvador

Belize

Honduras

Nicaragua

CENTRAL AMERICA

Cuba

Dominican Republic

CARIBBEAN

Colombia

Peru

Argentina

Brazil

Guyana

SOUTH AMERICA

Secondary

College

SOURCE: The Improving Educational Profile of Latino Immigrants, Pew Hispanic Center, 2002.

Figure 5: Level of Education Completed for Selected Latino Immigrant Origins

“[Our children’s]

interests aren’t in school.

They think it’s easy to go

out and get a job. That’s a

big problem nowadays.”

—Lila Hernandez, Mother of three

Las Vegas, NV
(the remainder were “ungraded or received out-ofschool services”).34 These students face daunting

challenges and are often at risk of educational failure

because of language barriers, poverty and educational disruptions that result from repeated moves

and irregular attendance. These frequent moves

often leave schools unaware of their students’ status

and also disrupt the educational process for the student, who faces challenges in meeting academic

standards. This high student mobility also results in

lower participation in state assessments. 35

Intervention strategies do not exist in a vacuum

and are never “one size fits all.” The diversity within the Hispanic community requires equally

diverse solutions that can specifically focus on and

target the problems faced by the different groups

of Hispanic students. Effective and appropriate

educational instruction and intervention are a

major part of decreasing these problems, but further research is needed to investigate optimal

approaches and to develop and test new, creative

strategies. The Commission’s recommendations

for a new federal research agenda to address the

challenges facing Hispanic students recognize

these needs (see section V).

________

15 U.S. Department of Education. Early Reading First.

www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/earlyreading/aboutus.html 16 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, Status and Trends in the Education of

Hispanics, Washington, D.C.: 2002, p. 31. 17 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, The Condition of Education 2002, NCES

2002-025. (Washington, D.C.: U.S Government Printing

Office, 2002) p. 43. 18 Wendy Schwartz, Hispanic Preschool Education: An Important

Opportunity. An ERIC Digest from the ERIC Clearinghouse

on Urban Education. ERIC No: ED405398, pp. 1-7. 19 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Entering Kindergarten: A Portrait of

American Children When They Begin School: Findings from

the Condition of Education 2000, Nicholas Zill and Jerry West,

NCES 2001-035. (Washington, D.C.: 2001), p. 18.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

18
20 “Nearly half of those with multiple risk factors score in the

bottom quartile in early reading and mathematics skills, and

general knowledge.” Ibid., p. 19. 21 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, The Condition of Education 2002, NCES

2002-025., Washington, D.C., 2002, p. 43. 22 Bernadette D. Proctor and Joseph Dalaker, U.S. Census

Bureau, Current Population Reports, pp. 60-219, Poverty in

the United States: 2001. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government

Printing Office, 2002). 23 http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/07-2001/07272001-

lyon.html

24 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, 2001.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/digest2001/tables/dt108.asp. 25 The status dropout rate represents the proportion of young

people, ages 16 through 24, who are out of school and who

have not earned a high school credential. 26 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Dropout Rates in the United States: 2002.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/droppub_2001/ 27 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,

October Population Surveys, 1972–2000; The Condition of

Education 2002, U.S. Department of Education National

Center for Education Statistics. NCES 2002-025. p. 73. 28 Data from 1995 show that 62.5 percent of foreign-born

Hispanic youths who were dropouts had never enrolled in a

U.S. school, and 79.8 percent of these young adults were

reported as speaking English either “not well” or “not at all.”

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Dropout Rates. 29 B. Lindsay Lowell and Roberto Suro, The Improving

Educational Profile of Latino Immigrants, Pew Hispanic

Center, December 4, 2002, p. 15. 30 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, Status and Trends in the Education of

Hispanics. (Washington, D.C.) 2002, p. 26. 31 B. Lindsay Lowell and Roberto Suro, The Improving

Educational Profile of Latino Immigrants, p. 10. 32 Mary Ann Zehr, “Educating Mexico,” Education Week,

March 20, 2002. http://www.edweek.org 33 Reaching The Top, A Report of the National Task Force on

Minority High Achievement, The College Board, 1999, p. 6. 34 U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under

Secretary, Planning and Evaluation Service, Elementary and

Secondary Education Division, The Same Standards for

Migrant Students: Holding Title I Schools Accountable.

Volume II: Measurement of Migrant Student Educational

Achievement: Final Report. (Washington, D.C.: 2002), p. 6.

35 Ibid, p.10.

Chapter III: Support No Child Left Behind

19

Whether a classroom is in a one-room schoolhouse or

in a large urban school, an essential ingredient for

educational success and robust student achievement

is a knowledgeable and dedicated teacher. U.S.

Secretary of Education Rod Paige recently said,

“Our new education reforms ask a lot of America’s

teachersæand we owe them something in return.

We owe them our respect. We owe them our support. And, we owe them the training and the tools

to succeed.”36

Consequently, a requirement of the No Child Left

Behind Act is that every state must ensure that there

is a qualified teacher in every classroom by the

2005–2006 school year. Every child deserves highly

qualified teachers, but too often the least experienced and least qualified teach minority and lowincome students. Both the teacher’s academic

preparation and his or her expectations for each

child play an extremely important role in the

opportunities for success that children find in the

classroom. When teachers have high expectations

for every student, we believe all Hispanic students

can make significant gains.

Solid research underscores the importance of good

teachers and their ability to influence high achievement in students from all walks of life. For example,

value-added studies on the effect of teacher quality

on mathematics achievement have found that children assigned to three effective teachers in a row

scored at the 83rd percentile at the end of the 5th

grade, while children assigned to three ineffective

teachers in a row scored at the 29th percentile.37

There is little disagreement about what needs to be

done, but how to achieve it is the major question.

Teacher preparation and continuing professional

development, based upon what scientific research

tells us about teaching and learning, are important

to answering this question.

The Commission recommends four strategies for

reinforcing and expanding high-quality teaching.

While states and educational organizations have

started to pursue different strategies to recruit and

STRATEGY1

Encourage colleges of education and school

districts to undertake two critical missions:

First,ensure high-quality teacher preparation that

prepares teachers for their role as educators of

Hispanic children. Second,develop measurement

and accountability systems to ensure teacher

quality is linked directly to student achievement.

IV.

Reinforce and Expand a High-Quality Teaching Profession

RECOMMENDATION:Reinforce a high-quality teaching profession by more fully preparing

all teachers to address the diverse needs of their students, including Hispanics, those with

disabilities and those with limited English proficiency, by attracting more Hispanics to the

teaching profession, and by providing incentives and compensation for successful

performance as evidenced by improved student achievement. Launch a national study of the

curricula, practica, student teaching experiences and the models used to integrate these

preparation formats employed by colleges of education to prepare educators for reading

instruction of diverse children.

21
prepare highly qualified individuals to teach in our

nation’s classrooms, more help is needed. Through

NCLB, states and local school districts have access

to funding to support both traditional and new

preparation and professional development strategies to help meet new teacher-quality requirements. Yet, much of the foundation for the preparation of highly qualified teachers rests in the

depth of the knowledge prospective teachers

receive in their undergraduate and graduate training, and this must be improved and linked directly

to student achievement.

A critical requirement for middle and high school

teachers to be considered highly qualified, as noted

earlier, is a demonstrated knowledge of the subjects

they are teaching. Having a thorough command of

the subject matter that they are teaching will

increase teachers’ ability to develop effective programs of instruction that will meet the diverse

needs of their students.38 Elementary-grade teachers

must also be well versed in specific areas of learning. This is especially true for those subject areas

that are critical to all student academic success, such

as reading/language arts, science and mathematics.

Teachers need substantive preparation with techniques and strategies that will maximize their teaching effectiveness. Those who understand the cultures

of the children they teach can be more effective.

Unfortunately, few teachers, including many of those

who work in schools with a high proportion of

Hispanic and/or English-language-learning students,

are adequately prepared to meet the challenge of

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

22
instructing children of a culture different from their

own. It is not simply a question of cultural sensitivity, although this factor has been found to play an

important role in the education of culturally diverse

groups of students.39 “In Title I schools with medium

or high numbers of migrant students, 65 percent of

the teachers reported receiving no professional development in instructional strategies specifically aimed

at teaching migrant students.”40 In 1999–2000, of the

nearly three million public school teachers, 41.2 percent taught limited English-proficient students (now

referred to as English-language learners); of these,

only 12.5 percent had eight or more hours of training in the last three years on how to teach these students.41 In response, we call for an enhanced awareness of the need for the inclusion of language and

cultural information in teacher preparation. In addition, some means of assessing and documenting

teacher preparedness to teach Hispanic children

effectively must be developed and implemented, with

a supportive approach to augment skills in the areas

for which they are unprepared.

The nation is experiencing a teacher shortage that

is expected to reach critical levels in the near

future,42 due in great part to an expected wave of

teacher retirements.43 Over the next decade, school

districts across America will need to hire 2.2 million additional teachers.

States and school districts will face two daunting challenges in hiring teachers: attracting more people to the

profession while ensuring their excellence as teachers

through high- quality preparation and professional

development. For more people to enter the field and

stay in the field, we must ensure they are well prepared

to enable their students to succeed. According to a U.S.

Department of Education survey, fewer than 36 percent of current teachers feel “very well prepared” to

implement curriculum and performance standards,

and fewer than 20 percent feel prepared to meet the

needs of diverse groups of students or English-language learners.44

Almost a quarter of secondary school students (22

percent) take at least one class with a teacher who

did not even minor in the subject he or she teaches,45 and secondary students in high-poverty

schools are twice as likely as those in low-poverty

schools (26 percent versus 13 percent) to have a

teacher who is not certified in the subject taught.46

Likewise, an estimated one-third of teachers are

assigned at least one class a day for which they lack

subject-matter proficiency, a situation most prevalent in high-poverty urban and rural areas,47

where a significant portion of Hispanics live and

go to school.

The ethnic and cultural diversity of our educator

work force does not reflect the growth in diversity

of the student population.48 Minority teachers are

only 13 percent of the total teacher work force.49

Of public school teachers in 1993–94, only 4.1 percent were Hispanic.50 Unfortunately, this dearth of

Hispanic teachers is also present in higher education where, in 1999, “Hispanics comprised only 3

percent of all faculty in degree-granting institutions.”51

In July 2002, the President’s Commission on

Excellence in Special Education delivered to the

President its report, A New Era: Revitalizing Special

Education for Children and Their Families. It recommended states and districts devise new strategies to

recruit, train and retain more highly qualified

teachers. The report also noted that despite the

increasing diversity of students in U.S. schools, the

proportion of minority teachers is decreasing. The

report emphasizes the importance of role models

from a student’s own culture and racial or ethnic

background, as has this Commission. We are also

STRATEGY2

Colleges/schools of education and school districts

should be encouraged to recruit,prepare,reward

and retain more Hispanic American teachers.

Chapter IV: Reinforce and expand a High-Quality Teaching Profession

23
From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

24

particularly concerned that many teachers lack the

training to effectively identify and instruct these

Hispanic children who have disabilities. The federal

research agenda this Commission recommends (see

section V) takes into account the need to better prepare teachers to identify and teach Hispanic children with special education needs.

Education administrators and policy makers must

work together to develop not only policies but also

strategies for implementation of those policies for

teacher recruitment and retention. Some states are

addressing their recruitment needs with a variety of

strategies, including alternative teacher certification

programs,52 scholarships, signing bonuses and student loan forgiveness, and initiatives to increase

interest in the teaching profession by reaching out

to high school students with “future educators”

clubs and programs.53 Of those states using financial incentives, it would appear from the data in figure 6 that such incentives are not being specifically

targeted to the areas of greatest need: high-poverty

or low-performing schools. 54

As figure 7 shows, fully 27 states provide no 

education assistance55 as part of their teacher

recruitment and retention efforts. Of the 23 states

that do offer education assistance, twelve target

subject-shortage areas and only one targets highneed schools.56

“National and state reports estimate that 30 percent

of the teaching force leaves within the first three

years of entering the profession (Darling-Hammond,

2000) and nearly 50 percent leaves in the first five to

seven years (Fetler, 1997).”57 Although salary concerns certainly play a part in attrition, availability and

quality of professional development also play a role.

Another important factor is recognition for a job

well done. The opportunity for growth and promotion, paired with recognition and rewards for excellence based upon skills and performance rather than

solely time in service, should encourage the best

teachers to stay.

0 10 20 30 40 51

Education assistance

Education assistance targeted at

recruiting teachers for high-need schools

Housing incentives

Housing incentives targeted at

recruiting teachers for high-need schools

Retention bonuses

Retention bonuses targeted at attracting or

keeping teachers in high-need schools

Signing bonuses

Signing bonuses targeted at recruiting 

teachers for high-need schools

SOURCE: Quality Counts 2003. Education Week.

Figure 6: State Policies to Attract and Retain Qualified Teachers
Nearly 100 years ago, there was concern about the

training of physicians. The Carnegie Foundation

sponsored a report on this important topic, Medical

Education in the United States and Canada. Written

by American educator Abraham Flexner, that document reported the results of an intense study

designed to evaluate the curricula used in medical

schools across the nation and how well they were

training medical doctors. The report provided the

impetus for overhauling the methods and standards

then in use for physician education. Indeed, the

training of physicians in America changed dramatically and for the better as a consequence of that

report. Flexner was a strong advocate for high standards and for accountability to the general public

for results. He also advocated that medical schools

not only prepare doctors academically, he also

STRATEGY3

The U.S. Department of Education,possibly with

other federal agencies,should conduct or

commission a study of the curricula and methods

used by U.S. colleges of education to prepare

teachers to teach children to read,with a special

emphasis on the importance of preparing teachers

to deal with children of diverse cultural and

linguistic backgrounds.

Chapter IV: Reinforce and expand a High-Quality Teaching Profession

25

General Education Assistance (5)

Targeted BOTH to subject-shortage

and high-need schools (6) 

Targeted to subject-shortage areas (12)

Targeted to high-need schools (1)

No education assistance offered (27) 

SOURCE: Quality Counts 2002. Education Week.

Figure 7: Education Assistance as an Incentive to Attract New Teachers
argued that medical schools had an obligation to

respond to the needs of society by following up

with their graduates to ensure that they were

achieving optimal results.58

Similarly, the Commission recommends a comprehensive study of the colleges of education in the

United States. The study must examine how

prospective teachers are taught to provide reading

instruction to our children. It must also examine the

methods and approaches that colleges of education

use to prepare teachers for their role as educators of

a culturally and linguistically diverse student body.

The award would specifically honor teacher preparation programs that produce high-quality teachers

and give special attention to the needs of Hispanic

and other culturally and linguistically diverse student groups. Criteria for the award could include:

 A clear demonstration that their graduates

are knowledgeable and skilled teachers whose

students show measurable progress toward

the elimination of disparities in performance

between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white

students.

 Descriptive indicators such as numbers of

Hispanics and other minorities recruited and

graduated.

 Number of teachers receiving cultural and

linguistic/diversity training.

 Number of teachers placed in high-need

Hispanic school districts.

 Retention levels of such teachers after three

years and five years.

________

36 Excerpt from the Secretary’s remarks at the National Press

Club on September 9, 2002. http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/09-

2002/09092002.html 37 “Quality Counts 2003,” Education Week (January 2003).

http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc03/ 38 There is a direct correlation between teacher subject matter

mastery and increased student achievement. In Pursuit of

Quality Teaching. Education Commission of the States

(2000), p. 11. 39 Said Yasin and Brinda Albert, “Effective teachers facilitate the

diverse cultural and learning styles of their students.”

Minority Teacher Recruitment and Retention: A National

Imperative, American Association of Colleges for Teacher

Education (September 21, 1999), p. 5. 40 U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary,

Planning and Evaluation Service, Elementary and Secondary

Education Division, The Same Standards for Migrant

Students: Holding Title I Schools Accountable. Volume I: Title I

Schools Serving Migrant Students: Recent Evidence from the

Longitudinal Survey of Schools. Washington, D.C. (2002), p.

30. 41 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, 1999–2000:

Overview of the Data for Public, Private, Public Charter, and

Bureau of Indian Affairs Elementary and Secondary Schools

(NCES 2002-313). By Kerry J. Gruber, Susan D. Wiley,

Stephen P. Broughman, Gregory A. Strizek, and Marisa

Burian-Fitzgerald. Washington, D.C. (2002). Table 1.19, p. 43. 42 “Recent estimates indicate that the nation will need to hire

2.2 million additional teachers in the next decade.” C. Emily

Feistritzer, The Making of a Teacher: A Report on Teacher

Preparation in the U.S. The Center for Education

Information (1999), p. 1. 43 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. “Attrition of New Teachers Among

Recent College Graduates: Comparing Occupational

Stability Among 1992–93 Graduates Who Taught and Those

Who Worked in Other Occupations.” (NCES 2001-189). By

Robin R. Hence and Liza Zahn. Project Officer: C. Dennis

Carroll. Washington, D.C. (2001), p. 1. 44 U.S. Department of Education. National Center for

Education Statistics, Teacher Preparation and Professional

Development: 2000. ( NCES 2001-088). By Basmat Parasad,

Laurie Lewis, and Elizabeth Farris. Project Officer: Bernard

Greene. Washington, D.C. (2001), p. 33. 45 “Quality Counts 2003” 46 Ibid. 47 In Pursuit of Quality Teaching, Education Commission of the

States (2000), p. 6. 48 Said Yasin and Brinda Albert, Minority Teacher Recruitment

and Retention. p. 6.

STRATEGY4

The Commission recommends the creation of an

award that would confer special recognition for

those teacher preparation programs that

contribute in demonstrable ways to reducing the

educational disparities between Hispanic and

non-Hispanic white students.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

26
49 Robin Allen, Teacher Education at the Community College:

Partnership and Collaboration, May 2002.

http://www.gseis.ucla/ERIC/digests/dig0205.htm 50 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, 1993-94.

Table 3.4, p. 48. 51 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, Status and Trends in the Education of

Hispanics, Washington, D.C. (2002), p. 63. 52 As of 2000, there were more than 115 alternative certification

programs operating in 44 states and the District of

Columbia, which have prepared more than 125,000 teachers. 53 Said Yasin and Brinda Albert, Minority Teacher Recruitment

and Retention, p. 12. 54 Quality Counts 2003.

55 State education assistance is defined by Education Week as

loans, scholarships, and the waiving of licensing fees. 56 Quality Counts 2003: “If I Can’t Learn from You . . . Ensuring

a Highly Qualified Teacher for Every Classroom.” Education

Week (2002). http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc00/templates/chart.cfm 57 Kathryn Sloane Weisbaum and Danny Huang, IISME Teacher

Retention and Program Impact 1985–2000, Industry

Initiatives for Science and Mathematics Education, (October

2001) p. 4. 58 Charles Boelen, “A New Paradigm for Medical Schools a

Century After Flexner’s Report,” Bulletin of the World Health

Organization 80, no. 7 (2002) p. 592.

Chapter IV: Reinforce and expand a High-Quality Teaching Profession

27

T

he Commission urges those research entities within

the federal government to develop and implement a

coherent and comprehensive research agenda targeted at eliminating the achievement gap between

Hispanic students and majority students and ensuring the educational success for Hispanic children,

youth and adults.

ResearchFocus: Educational Attainment.

American schools are seeing increasing populations

of Hispanic students in general and of English-language learners (ELL), the largest subgroup of which

are Hispanic students. Despite

their numbers, these students are

often left behind with respect to

educational opportunity and

attainment. Much of the information that has shaped education

policy on this topic is anecdotal,

and important questions lack scientifically rigorous answers. For

years, research studies have found

that Hispanic children are disproportionately represented among

those who have difficulty in school in reading,

mathematics and general educational attainment.

For example, NAEP data for 1998 indicate that 27

percent of non-Hispanic white fourth-graders performed below the basic level in reading achievement, compared to 60 percent of Hispanics.59

And, of course, Hispanics are not a uniform group.

What works in rural Georgia with recent immigrants may not work with either third-generation

Mexican-Americans in California or with

Guatemalans in Orlando. We have too little hard

data concerning how students from different ethnic,

linguistic, socioeconomic and geographic backgrounds learn to read and write English proficiently. Only recently have surveys begun to assess the

influence of causal factors such as expectations,

family attitudes and community norms.

The Commission urges the federal government to

provide leadership in developing a comprehensive

research agenda that will identify effective methods

for supporting educational development of

Hispanic students in our schools

and find ways to reduce the barriers that impede successful educational attainment. This research

agenda must recognize that in

many areas baseline data do not

exist and that there is a need for

disaggregated data given the cultural and linguistic heterogeneity

within the Hispanic population.

Research on the educational

attainment of Hispanic students should: 1) use

existing national assessments and longitudinal

STRATEGY1

Initiate federal research in four key areas

affecting Hispanic children and youth:

educational attainment,student attrition,

special education,and teacher and service

provider preparation.

V.

Develop a Federal Research Agenda to 

Identify the Needs of Hispanic American Students 

RECOMMENDATION:Initiate a new coherent and comprehensive research agenda 

on the educational development of Hispanic Americans across the educational 

spectrum from preschool through postsecondary.

29

“In God we Trust,

all others bring data.” 

Brad Duggan, President & CEO,

National Center for Education

Accountability, from his testimony

before the Commission,

December 16, 2002, New York.
studies to identify potential risk factors and protective factors related to Hispanic student achievement; 2) increase the number of specific research

initiatives that address the educational needs of

Hispanic students; 3) expand existing research programs to include more studies of Hispanic

American students; and 4) develop new research

programs that target specific educational needs of

Hispanic students.

Existing national assessments

and longitudinal studies,

such as the National

Assessment of Educational

Progress and the Early

Childhood Longitudinal

Study-Kindergarten Cohort,

provide important information on the achievement of

ELLs and on the settings in

which their education is

occurring. These data can be

used to develop hypotheses

about potential risk and protective factors related to the

achievement of English-language learners.

The federal government

should continue to develop research initiatives that

specifically target the educational needs of Hispanic

students such as those for ELLs. NICHD and the

IES are funding a major research program, the

Biliteracy Research Network. This systemic, multidisciplinary research program will increase understanding of the specific cognitive, linguistic, sociocultural and instructional factors, and the complex

interactions among these factors, that govern the

acquisition of English reading and writing abilities

for Spanish-speaking children and youth. From

2000–2004, the federal government will spend nearly $32 million on this program and will study more

than 5,400 children at many locations in eight states

(California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan,

Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Utah) as well as

Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. The

overarching questions guiding this research are the

following: 1) How do children whose first language

is Spanish learn to read and write in English? 2)

Why do some Spanish-speaking children have difficulty acquiring English-language reading and writing skills? 3) For children whose first language is

Spanish, which instructional approaches and

strategies are most beneficial, at which stages of

reading and writing

development, and under

what conditions?

The Commission supports

the development of a

comprehensive and coherent research agenda on the

educational development

of Hispanic American students that builds on existing research efforts.

Research is needed to

identify effective instructional approaches for ELL

children, youth, adults

and families and in particular, the diverse Hispanic

subgroups in this nation.

As a nation, we cannot afford to wait for the important results from the research networks. A comprehensive study must be initiated that will evaluate

the myriad of programs currently in use to rigorously determine promising practices that can be

used meanwhile. Information about these practices

must be disseminated to assist those educators

throughout the nation in need of options that will

enable their Hispanic students to participate in the

academic success that is expected for all our children. This research-agenda effort should make use

of the early findings of the NICHD-IES research

network and of the National Literacy Panel for

Language Minority Children and Youth (NLP). The

NLP, which is funded by the U.S. Department of

Education, is working to produce a research syntheFrom Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

30
sis on reading in children and adults whose first

language is not English to identify both promising

practices and research gaps.

There are other initiatives under development that

call for attention to language-minority groups,

including interagency efforts addressing the effectiveness of early childhood programs, curricula and

interventions in promoting school readiness; adolescent literacy; mathematics cognition and specific

learning disabilities;60 and reading comprehension.61

The Office of English Language Acquisition recently

held a national summit focused on the implementation of No Child Left Behind with language-minority

children, where research was a focus. Speakers there

called for additional research in areas of assessment,

effective teaching methods and identification of special needs children.

ResearchFocus: Student Attrition.

Accountability is one of the four pillars of No Child

Left Behind, and accurately reporting high school

retention and graduation rates is highly relevant to

determining the performance level of every school.

We must both more accurately measure school

dropout and increase the rate of high school completion among Hispanic students. The best available

data indicate that almost 30 percent of Hispanic

students fail to complete high school.62 Because the

academic achievement gap is so glaring, and the

statistic is so dramatic in and of itself, its validity is

rarely questioned. However, questions have recently

arisen about what is being done at the local level to

effectively and accurately report the high school

completion rates for students in general, and

minority students in particular. “Indeed, the statistics overall on high school completion are somewhat suspect, said by local and state public school

officials to be difficult to grasp and often implausibly positive.”63

Why has it been so difficult to accurately account for

Hispanic students? There are many reasons, but the

most troubling is that school officials may attribute

the attrition of Hispanic students to other factors

that do not qualify them as dropouts. School administrators know that having a high dropout rate

reflects poorly on them. Schools do not benefit from

accurately reporting how many or why students do

not continue their education.64 Additionally, schools

may not have staff or resources directed for this purpose. Not only do we need careful tracking of students as they progress through the educational system, but new and better methods of tracking must

also be developed. These must include methods to

track highly mobile students who may move multiChapter V: Develop a Federal Research Agenda To Identify the Needs of Hispanic American Students

31
ple times during the school

year. There is also a need for

careful study of the risk factors for school dropout, in

order for preventive measures to be put in place.

There is work currently

being done in Texas to track

students from middle

school through high school.

During the 1997–98 school

year, the Texas Education

Agency (TEA) began to

implement its new leaver

data processing system.

Designed to effectively track

students as they move

throughout the Texas school

system, the system allows

TEA to calculate the state’s

event dropout rate, as well

as a longitudinal dropout

rate. While schools often

prefer to report the event

dropout rate because it

reflects the number of students who leave during one

school year, a longitudinal

dropout rate is a more accurate reflection of schools’ success. This method of

reporting tracks a cohort of students as they

progress to each level, showing how many in that

group have dropped out by the time they are supposed to graduate.

Another benefit of the leaver data processing system

is that students are tracked from seventh through

twelfth grades, accounting for those who may never

even make it to high school. TEA has developed very

specific guidelines for how students are classified

when they leave school, based on the reason they

leave. This avoids confusion in reporting dropout

rates and allows for consistent reporting among the

various state schools.

Preventive interventions

must be developed to

improve high school completion rates among

Hispanic students. Without

each of these components,

accurate statistics, knowledge of risk factors and

proven prevention, we cannot hope to eliminate the

educational disparities that

exist between Hispanic and

non-Hispanic white students

in our schools.

ResearchFocus: Special

Education.

There is a need for the

development of assessment

methods and identification

instruments that can clearly

distinguish between

whether a student’s performance is limited by ELL

status, disability status or

learning difficulties at the

preschool, elementary

school and/or secondary

school levels. Furthermore,

there is a need to develop predictors of and interventions for learning difficulties in Hispanic students. This will be important for both ELL and

native-English-speaking Hispanic children and

must take into account cultural and linguistic differences.

Often, teachers who are not well prepared to deal

with culturally and linguistically different students

make inaccurate assumptions about those students.

At best, a teacher may not relate well to a student. At

worst, the teacher may assume the student has limited intellectual capabilities and refer him or her for

special education. This situation continues to occur

across the country with many language-minority

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

32

“Para mi ha sido una jornada

muy dura y sumamente dificil el

encontrar ayuda profesional para

la educación especial de mis dos

niños quienes sufren de ADHD

[Deficit de Atención e

Hiperactividad]).Mi hijo mayor

de 17 años de edad,con la gracia

de nuestro Dios obtuvo apoyo

muy positivo y éxito en la

Annapolis Area Christian School,

pero desafortunadamente mi

niño menor de 10 años de edad,

quien atiende to grado en la

misma escuela,además de sufrir

de ADHD,también sufre de

Dyslexia,y es aun mucho más

dificil encontrar siquiatras

expertos y/o maestros

especializados...”

- Marlene Montes

Webvisitor Feb. 11, 2003
children. However, there are

now so many Hispanic students in all areas of the

country that the reverse

problem has also arisen:

Teachers often assume that

any apparent learning difficulties a Hispanic student is

having are attributable to

linguistic differences and/or

ELL status. Thus, Hispanic

students are at risk not only

for over-referral for special

education but also for

under-referral. More

research is clearly needed

regarding all aspects of

Hispanic American children

with disabilities: referral,

identification, instruction

and evaluation.

It is not a simple matter to

determine whether a child

whose native language is

not English may have a

language disorder or other

learning difficulties. For an

English- language learner’s

special needs to be accurately identified, new assessment measures are

needed. While there are some assessment instruments available in Spanish, more are needed. The

linguistic diversity of the Hispanic population in

the United States must be taken into account, and

most Spanish-language tests do not have guidelines for differentiating between, for example,

Puerto Rican and Mexican Spanish. Instruments

used to directly test students or to gather information about the student from parents are needed. Merely translating a test or survey instrument,

even with back translation as a verification

process, is not an adequate or appropriate

approach to the development of assessments.

Rather, it is important that surveys that are translated be tested for cognitive

equivalence; an NIH report

issued in 2001 gives advice

for the translation or development of survey instruments.65 Native-language

tests of student abilities

should be developed to

parallel the currently used

English measures. If their

results are to be compared

with results of English-language tests, it is important

that they test the same constructs but in ways that are

culturally appropriate. It is

also important that psychometric data be collected for

new measures.

In addition, simply assessing

a student in his or her native

language as well as or

instead of English often

results in an inadequate or

incomplete assessment. If a

student, even one with limited English, is taught a subject in English, he or she is

highly unlikely to have sufficiently specific vocabulary to demonstrate one’s real

knowledge about that topic in the native (nonEnglish) language. Thus, there is a need not only for

additional measures, both in Spanish and in

English, but also for new approaches to assessment

for and identification of learning difficulties and

special educational needs. The area of special needs

identification and intervention for Hispanic students at all levels of education should be a major

research focus.

Research Focus: Teacher and 

Service Provider Preparation.

There is a need for research to identify the characteristics of highly effective teachers in contributing to

Chapter V: Develop a Federal Research Agenda To Identify the Needs of Hispanic American Students

33

“For me it has been a hard

struggle to find professional

help for the special education

of my children who suffer

from ADHD (Attention

Deficit Hyperactivity

Disorder). My oldest, 17 year

old son has, thanks to God,

received positive and

successful support at the

Annapolis Area Christian

School...but unfortunately

my younger 10 year old son,

in 4th grade at the same

school, not only suffers from

ADHD, but also suffers from

Dyslexia, and it is so much

more difficult to find expert

psychiatrists and/or

specialized teachers...”

Marlene Montes

Webvisitor Feb. 11, 2003
the educational success of Hispanic students at preschool, elementary and secondary school levels for

the delivery of classroom instruction and for special

education interventions. There is also a need to

develop and evaluate the effectiveness of teacher

preparation and in-service education curricula

addressing cultural and linguistic differences that

would enable teachers to provide optimal educational experiences for Hispanic students. National surveys, such as the Schools and Staffing Survey, could

provide valuable data to inform such an effort.

The teacher shortage in the nation extends to teachers of English-language learners as well as to specialists who are trained in the diversity of languages

and cultures present in today’s classrooms. While

highly qualified teachers who are prepared

to teach linguistically and culturally

diverse groups of students are needed in

classrooms throughout the United States,

there is also a need for special education

service providersæbilingual speech-language pathologists, psychologists, reading

specialists and special education teachers.

Research is needed on effective methods

for teacher and service provider recruitment, preparation, professional development and retention. The Teacher Quality

Research Program, which is evaluating the

effectiveness of different professional

development models in math and reading, could be expanded to evaluate the

effectiveness of teacher preparation or

professional development models for

working with ELL students.

In addition, as noted in section IV, this

Commission recommends that the U.S.

Department of Education, possibly with

other federal agencies, conduct or commission a study of the curricula and

methods used by colleges of education to

prepare teachers to teach children to read,

with a special emphasis on the importance of preparing teachers to deal with

children of diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

Coordination

In addition to these efforts, the Commission urges

the federal agencies to work together to develop a

coordinated research effort that addresses the educational needs of Hispanic children and youth. The

coordinated effort should:

 Develop a comprehensive report that

summarizes all research efforts under way

and those that are needed.

 Develop a plan for federal coordination

across the U.S. Department of Education and

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

34
the NICHD as well as the U.S. departments

of Labor and Justice. The overview report

would include current research efforts as well

as those that are under development or being

planned. The report would also identify gaps

and needs in research that would affect the

education of Hispanic children and youth.

 Develop a plan with procedures to maintain

coordination across agencies and to address

significant gap areas.

________

59 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Research and Improvement, National Center for Education

Statistics. “The NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card for the

Nation and the States.” (NCES 1999-500). By P.L. Donohue,

K. E. Voelki, J. R. Campbell, and J. Mazzeo (Washington,

D.C.: 1999). Table 3.2, p. 70.

60 See the NICHD Web-site at http://www.nichd.nih.gov/funding/funding-opps_rfa.htm for information on these interagency funding initiatives. 61 See the U.S. Department of Education Web-site at

http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/04-2002/04122002a. html

for information on this funding initiative. 62 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, Status and Trends in the Education of Hispanics

(Washington, D.C.: 2002). Supplemental Table 3.3a, p. 87. 63 Jay P. Greene, High School Graduation Rates in the United

States. The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (2002) 

p. 1. 64 Ibid., p. 8. 65 R. M. Li, P. McCardle, R. L. Clark, and D. Berch, Diverse

Voices – The Inclusion of Language-Minority Individuals in

National Studies: Challenges and Opportunities. National

Institute on Aging, National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development, National Center on Minority Health

and Health Disparities (2001).

Chapter V: Develop a Federal Research Agenda To Identify the Needs of Hispanic American Students

35

T

oday, about 10 percent of Hispanic Americans

graduate from four-year colleges and universities,

with fewer than 100,000 graduating each year. 66

This graduation rate has persisted for almost three

decades despite the fact that, over a comparable

period, up to 60 percent of Hispanic students graduate from high school and more than 40 percent

enroll in college immediately after graduation.67

Clearly, a significant number of Hispanic students

who walk through the doors of our nation’s institutions of higher education are not walking out with

a college degree.

The Commission fully understands and embraces the

promise that No Child Left Behind holds for closing

the educational achievement gap and for producing

more academically qualified Hispanic high school

graduates, as only 42.6 percent of Hispanic high

school students are qualified to enroll in four-year

institutions (see figure 8). NCLB will hold states,

schools and educators accountable for producing these

results. The Commission believes that this accountability should be extended to institutions of higher education and that colleges and universities must bear a

greater responsibility for increasing the number of

Hispanic students who enroll in their institutions and

ultimately graduate with a four-year degree.

VI.

Create Pathways to College Graduation

RECOMMENDATION: Ensure full access for Hispanic American students to enter college and

demand greater accountability in higher education for Hispanic graduation rates. Challenge

the nation’s postsecondary institutions to graduate 10 percent more Hispanic American

students from colleges and universities each year, than are currently graduating, over the

next decade. Urge institutions to explore the increased development of retention programs

that would benefit Hispanic American students.

37

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Asian or 

Pacific Islander

69.6

Hispanic 

regardless of race

42.6

Black not of 

Hispanic origin

44.3

White not of 

Hispanic origin

61.8

American Indian 

or Alaskan native

34.2

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of

1988 (NELS: 88/94), Data Analysis System. (JBL Associates, Inc.)

Figure 8: Percent of High School Students that are Qualified for College.
In challenging higher-education institutions to

graduate more Hispanic Americans, the

Commission examined research to determine that

this goal was realistic and achievable. By focusing

on the key activities that colleges and universities

already perform, institutions can attain a 10 percent annual increase in the number of Hispanic

college graduates. By graduating 10 percent more

Hispanics each year than are currently graduating,

the current graduation rate would double by 2014.

This translates into 7,500 additional Hispanic baccalaureate degrees each year. Each of the 2,300

four-year colleges in the nation would have to

graduate about three additional Hispanic students

with a baccalaureate degree each year, an increase

of 33 new Hispanic baccalaureate degrees over the

decade for each baccalaureate-granting institution

in the nation. This is a small effort for each college

to make.

They must make a deliberate effort, however, to

realize the results that these activities can produce.

The notion that there is not a substantial pool of

academically qualified Hispanic students from

which colleges and universities can recruit is simply

not true. According to the National Education

Longitudinal Study, of those Hispanic students

who were academically qualified to go to college,

only 49.5 percent were enrolled in a four-year institution, compared to 60.3 percent of African

Americans and 61.9 percent of non-Hispanic

whites.68

In the wake of the end of affirmative action programs in many states, many in the education community may argue that Hispanic enrollment in institutions of higher learning is bound to decline. This

is not necessarily true. The Commission has

encountered higher-education institutions that have

been successful in attaining diversity on their campuses despite the end of affirmative action programs. The 1996 Hopwood v. State of Texas decision

banned race-conscious admissions at all state public

universities. As a result, many private institutions

also changed their admissions process. One example

is Rice University, in which the elimination of racebased admissions resulted in a 22 percent drop in

Hispanic enrollment.69 Nearly seven years later,

however, Hispanic enrollment has rebounded to levels equal to those prior to the 1996 Hopwood decision, due in large part to the institution’s effective

recruitment efforts. Rice University has also received

accolades for its efforts to aggressively recruit

Hispanic American students. Hispanic magazine

ranked Rice University as the second best university

in the nation for Hispanics in 2002. The opportunity for Hispanic Americans to obtain access to government services and public institutions is paramount in the context of higher education. Indeed

we believe the quality of higher education for all students is enhanced by a diverse student body.

Ensuring that public educational institutions are

legally accessible to individuals of all races and ethnicities is an important and entirely legitimate government objective.

The Commission offers the following four strategies

that would increase the numbers of Hispanic students who enter, persist and graduate from college.

Many factors have been identified as elements that

are critical to the success of Hispanic students as

they make the transition from high school to college. Hispanic students at the postsecondary level

face many barriers, but one factor is key to whether

they are ultimately able to earn a bachelor’s degree.

A solid foundation throughout elementary and secondary education, particularly at the secondary

STRATEGY1

Promote a college-track curriculum through

innovative initiatives such as the State Scholars

program to prepare more Hispanic American

students to attend the nation’s colleges and

universities. Increase Hispanic participation in

Advanced Placement courses,and develop and

implement a secondary school guidance

counseling system that can meet the needs of a

diverse student body.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

38
level, has been found to be one of the

best predictors of whether a student

eventually obtains a four-year degree.

“No matter how one divides the universe of students, the curriculum

measure produces a higher percent

earning bachelor’s degrees than either

[test scores or class rank].” 70

Students who graduate from high

school without the foundation to succeed at the postsecondary level may

find themselves in an extremely frustrating position. While they often gain

acceptance at a college or university, nearly one-half

of postsecondary students require some remedial

coursework, indicating they are at risk for never

obtaining a degree.71

A high school program that includes three credits

each in math (algebra I, algebra II and geometry),

science (biology, chemistry and physics) and social

studies, as well as two credits in a foreign language, may well serve to prepare students for the

challenges they will face at a college or university,

but the level of math that a student reaches is of

particular interest, as it has been shown to be one

of the most accurate predictors of future success,

especially in completing a four-year degree.

According to the National Education Longitudinal

Study, 60 percent of those Hispanic students who

took an advanced math course in high school went

on to enroll in a four-year institution, while only

16 percent of those whose highest course was at

the intermediate level went on to a four-year college or university. 72

Building on the success of the Recommended High

School Program, President Bush launched the State

Scholars Initiative on August 29, 2002. Designed to

support those states whose mission it is to make a

challenging high school curriculum the norm, the

goals of the State Scholars Initiative include developing business-education partnerships to create

incentives for students to complete the program

requirements, establishing state and local policies

supporting enrollment in rigorous courses, and

documenting the results of the program through

regular evaluations. This year, seven states will be

selected to participate in a pilot program in which

chief state school officers’ and governors’ offices will

work with business and education organizations to

provide leadership and guidance for state and local

initiatives. Prior to beginning high school, students

will be informed about the benefits of completing

rigorous course work requirements and be encouraged to make a commitment to enrolling in the

program. Teachers, school counselors, mentors,

community volunteers and others will serve to support the students in their efforts.

The Commission also recommends that the nation’s

high school educators should encourage Hispanic

students to take Advanced Placement (AP) courses

and the corresponding tests. Participation in AP

course work is an indicator of a challenging and

high-quality educational experience. As evidence

suggests that students who participate in the AP

program are extremely successful in college,73

ensuring that Hispanic students have access to these

courses is an important part of the strategy for

increasing the rate at which Hispanic students

matriculate to institutions of higher education. In

her testimony before the President’s Advisory

Commission (December 16, 2002), Carolyn Bacon

noted, “the data show that students who pass an AP

exam actually double their odds of staying in college

Chapter VI: Create Pathways to College Graduation

39
and getting a degree.” Not only do these courses and

tests contribute to the goal of a rigorous high school

curriculum, but they also serve to ease the transition

to the more challenging curriculum at the postsecondary level, allowing students to experience something similar to a college course while still in high

school. These students are able to take the next step

without the added stress of a new and unfamiliar

environment.

While the preliminary data suggest that Hispanic

students who have some level of AP are as successful as non-Hispanic whites at the postsecondary

level,74 in 2000, Hispanics comprised only 9 percent of the students who took AP exams.75 This

under-representation seems to indicate that

Hispanics would benefit from increased knowledge

about the benefits of AP and other challenging

coursework, and that this type of opportunity

might not already be an option for them because of

the schools they are more likely to attend. This lack

of participation may also indicate that Hispanic

students are not obtaining the skills necessary at

earlier levels of education to participate in AP classes, reaffirming the need for

Hispanic students to receive a

high-quality education in

early grades.

Another problem that negatively impacts the educational

experience of Hispanic students is a lack of personal support during high school. The

average American school has

one counselor for every 561

students,76 and these counselors are often responsible for

assisting more students than

their schedules can accommodate. Rather than focusing on

the important steps that must

be taken to gain college

admissions and secure financial aid, these dedicated individuals must often handle disciplinary problems.

Whether through participation in a college-track

curriculum, accessibility to AP classes, or personal

attention and guidance from a college counselor,

Hispanic students should be able to expect that a

college education can be a reality for them.

Elementary schools must lay a foundation for

future learning that can be built upon in high

school from the very beginning, challenging

Hispanic students and encouraging them through

programs that reward their hard work.

Ensuring that Hispanic students are prepared to

undertake the rigors of a college education is one

of the most pressing issues facing education policy

makers. However, actually opening the door to

higher education through financial assistance is

imperative once Hispanic

students have reached this

goal. Nearly one-half (47 percent) of Hispanic students

come from families with

annual incomes of less than

$20,000, and 60 percent of

Hispanic students come from

families in the lowest socioeconomic status bracket.77

Clearly, many Hispanic families do not have the economic

resources to easily accommodate the cost of a college education, but this factor alone

should not deter them from

pursuing their higher-education goals.

Unfortunately, a recent survey

found that more Americans

STRATEGY2

Assist Hispanic students and their families to

understand the college financial aid options.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

40

I’m 18 years old. I have been

going to school here in the

United States since I was 10

years of age. I graduated high

school and now I want to

continue my studies and

attend college. But the fact

that my mother brought me to

this country illegaly has

shattered my plans and

dreams of continuing my

education.

-Marco 

Webvisitor Feb. 8, 2003
believe it would be easier to shoulder the burden of

buying a home than finance a college education.78

Additionally, two-thirds of Hispanic and African

American parents report that they do not have sufficient information about how to finance their children’s college education.79 Meanwhile, average

tuition for public four-year universities is up 9.6

percent from the 2001–2002 academic year.80 The

lack of knowledge about financial aid, combined

with the rising cost of tuition and the daunting perception about the difficulties of paying for college,

is a strong deterrent for students and their families

who hope to realize their dream of obtaining a

bachelor’s degree. The first step in overcoming this

obstacle is to educate parents about the options

available for financing a college education and the

process every individual must complete in order to

be awarded a financial aid package.

For most students, the bulk of their financial assistance is still awarded in federal loans, which comprise 46.1 percent of the total aid awarded to college

students throughout the nation.81 The prospect of

incurring such large amounts of debt is intimidating, but the financial benefits of a college education

are economically substantial in the long run. The

average Hispanic holding a bachelor’s degree earns

$15,000 more each year than a Hispanic high

school graduate.82 Compounded over a lifetime of

work, the payoff is substantial, certainly enough to

cover the cost of student loans. According to the

U.S. Department of Commerce, a college graduate

is estimated to earn $1 million more in income and

benefits over a lifetime than a high school graduate.

Federal and state governments lack the capacity to

cover the cost of tuition for every student through

grant aid. The most promising solution for

Hispanic students is to raise awareness about financial aid options. Corporations and non-profit foundations like the Hispanic Scholarship Fund and

Hispanic College Fund have made a concerted and

effective effort to alleviate the burden of financial

aid by providing grants for Hispanic students who

are pursuing postsecondary degrees. A conscious

effort should also be made by high school counselors to raise awareness about scholarships provided through private corporations and non-profit

organizations.

Likewise, students have options available through

existing federal programs such as TRIO and GEAR

UP.83 Unfortunately, Hispanics are still underrepresented in these programs. While it is essential for

each stakeholder to contribute in helping Hispanic

students pay for their college education, the most

Chapter VI: Create Pathways to College Graduation

41
important factor is building a strong academic

foundation so that Hispanic students are prepared

to excel at the postsecondary level.

At nearly every town hall meeting, the Commission

heard about the need for the states to consider providing in-state tuition to undocumented students.

In many cases, these particular students were

brought to the United States by their parents at a

very young age. They consider themselves to be

American and are graduates of U.S. high schools.

Lack of documentation regarding their legal status

currently inhibits their ability to secure in-state

tuition. The Commission encourages the states to

review this issue.

The Commission encourages strategies that would

increase the retention and graduation rates of

Hispanic students on college campuses, and we

urge that these strategies include the creation of

programs with the following features:

 Academic component that could include

small classes, supplemental instruction, a

skills-building course, regular faculty

meetings and a team of college advisors.

 Individualized support component that

includes peer mentoring and advising,

academic and personal advising, free

tutoring, and building alumni relationships.

 A social and cultural support

componentædiversity celebrations and

community service projects.

 Assessment that measures results.

The University of Texas administers several retention programs that have produced impressive

results. One of these programs attained a six-year

graduation rate of 70 percent at the end of academic year 2000–2001.84 This compared favorably to

70.3 percent for the university’s overall graduation

rate. Furthermore, entering freshmen undergo a

yearlong transition and support program that

begins in the summer prior to their enrollment.

Community colleges have provided many Hispanics

an accessible transitional bridge to a four-year

degree because they offer low-cost courses, a varied

class schedule with plentiful evening and weekend

courses, and multiple locations around the community, all of which provide the flexibility needed by

the demanding personal schedules of diverse

groups of learners.85 Likewise, the rising prices at

private and public four-year institutions have made

community colleges a more economically attractive

option for students with limited financial means.

The evolution of community colleges demonstrates

a deliberate and proactive positioning to meet the

needs of an increasingly diverse student population.

Community colleges are the fastest-growing sector

of postsecondary education. In 1965, there were 1.2

million students enrolled in two-year institutions,

1.8 million in private four-year institutions and 2.9

million in public four-year institutions. In 1998,

those enrollment numbers had grown to 5.7 million, 3.1 million and 5.9 million, respectively.86

According to the 1998 report, Minorities in Higher

Education: Sixteenth Annual Status Report by D. J.

Wilds and R. Wilson,87 55 percent of Hispanics

were enrolled in two-year institutions.

“It has been estimated that on an average, students

who enter a four-year institution in order to obtain

their bachelor’s degree have a 15 percent greater

chance of attaining one than did similar two-year

STRATEGY4

Encourage strategic alliances between

community colleges and four-year institutions,

which would better serve Hispanic students.

STRATEGY3

Encourage postsecondary institutions to 

develop new retention strategies that help

Hispanic students.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

42
college entrants.”88 Many students who enroll in community

colleges do not go on to complete a four-year degree. This

situation has been most prevalent among Hispanics, who

have the lowest persistence

rates.89 Nonetheless, according

to a Postsecondary

Longitudinal study by the

NCES,90 among those reasons

given by students for enrolling

in a two-year institution are:

preparation for transfer to a

four-year institution (38 percent), to obtain a degree or certificate (22 percent), to acquire

or improve job skills (22 percent), and personal enrichment

(16 percent).

As we have seen, many Hispanic students do not fit

the profile of the traditional student. The characteristics that make them nontraditional are defined by

an NCES study91 as any of the following: delays

enrollment in a postsecondary institution, attends a

postsecondary institution part-time for at least part

of the academic year, works full time,92 is considered financially independent for purposes of determining eligibility for financial aid, has dependents

other than a spouse, is a single parent, or does not

have a traditional high school diploma.93 These are

the same characteristics that in many cases are complemented by the flexibility available at community

colleges.

Critical to further increasing the transfer rate

between the two-year and four-year institutions are

the strategic alliances that are being created and

implemented in the form of articulation agreements. Many community colleges have entered into

partnerships with four-year institutions, to offer

“2+2” or “2/4” transfer articulation agreements. In

many of these programs, “students are simultaneously admitted, registered and enrolled in both

institutions,”94 while in others,

the institutions work together

to formulate a curriculum at the

two-year institution that will be

accepted for automatic transfer

to the four-year institution

upon completion of an associate’s degree. Many of these

agreements are focused on

high-needs areas within the

community such as nursing,

teaching and technology. With

respect to teacher education,

this arrangement may allow for

flexibility that will permit a student to complete the first two

years of a teacher preparation

program at the two-year institution and then complete the

bachelor’s degree at the four-year institution. Other

manifestations of these agreements include a fouryear institution offering upper division courses on

the community college campus and the establishment

of a satellite campus of the four-year institution on

the campus of the two-year institution.95

The Commission encourages two- and four-year

institutions to work together in perfecting articulation agreements that motivate and adequately prepare Hispanic students to transfer seamlessly from

two-year institutions to four-year institutions,

which would result in an increase in the college

graduation rate of Hispanics. These articulation

agreements should be innovative and tailored to

meet the needs of both institutions and the students that are facing the greatest barriers to access,

as well as a state’s area of highest need. An example

of how a state’s high-need areas may be addressed

can be found in Florida. In response to a critical

shortage of quality teachers, Florida undertook a

visionary and creative solution. In 2002,

MiamiæDade Community College received

approval by the Florida Board of Education to offer

baccalaureate degrees in teaching at their

InterAmerican campus.

Chapter VI: Create Pathways to College Graduation

43
With the anticipated growth of the academically

prepared Hispanic population, attention must be

devoted to ensuring sufficient capacity to meet this

need. The Commission firmly believes that No

Child Left Behind has ushered in a new era of educational opportunities for Hispanic American students. The focused attention on accountability and

results will have a direct impact upon the future

numbers of Hispanic American students who will

be academically qualified to go to college.

This anticipated growth will require that postsecondary institutions conduct an assessment of their

institutional capabilities and develop an integrated

vision and action plan on how to meet the future

accommodation needs of this burgeoning and better-educated cohort. The Commission recognizes

that this anticipated growth comes at a time of

shrinking state budgets, but the future needs of

these students must be addressed. Creative alternatives will be required to maximize the use of state

postsecondary funding. Capacity building does not

refer exclusively to physical facilities such as classrooms, laboratories, libraries and dormitories, but it

encompasses all that would be required to meet the

educational needs of a student body, including faculty and support services.

Institutions of higher education have become

increasingly aware that in many cases a significant

barrier to access for many students is geography.

For many Hispanic students, close familial ties and

responsibilities and lack of financial wherewithal

make traveling long distances to attend college simply not an option. Many of these institutions have

looked for alternatives to traditional access such as

distance learning. Just as information technology

has proliferated over the past quarter century, so

too have distance learning options. Course content

is greatly expanded, and faculty student interaction

is significant. During the 1997–98 school year, a

third of the postsecondary education institutions at

the two-year and four-year level offered an estimated 49,690 credit-granting distance education courses, the majority of which were at the undergraduate

level, with an enrollment in these of more than one

million students.96 “During the 1999–2000 school

year, about 1.5 million out of 19 million postsecondary students took at least one distance education course.”97

Although research is still underway, it would not be

surprising to find that few Hispanics are able to

make use of distance learning, partly because

Hispanics have to contend with not only an achievement gap but also a digital divide. The digital divide

is a critical factor in the overall educational achievement of Hispanic Americans, and the divide is

becoming more acutely important given the educational benefits that can be obtained through

advances in technology. The Commission encourages the creation of corporate and community partnerships that would increase the accessibility of

Hispanics to this alternative method of instruction.

________

66 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education

Data Surveys (2001–02). 67 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2002/section3/tables/t20_1.

asp 68 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study

of 1988 (NELS: 88/94), Data Analysis System. 69 Jeffrey Selingo, “The Broad Reach of the Michigan Cases.”

Chronicle of Higher Education (January 27, 2003). Clifford

Adelman. Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity,

Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor’s Degree Attainment.

(Washington, DC: 70 Department of Education, Office of Educational Research

and Improvement, 1999) p. 15. 71 Ibid., p. 74. 72 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study

of 1988 (NELS:88/94), Data Analysis System. 73 Carolyn Bacon’s testimony before the President’s Advisory

STRATEGY5

Build capacity among postsecondary institutions

for increased numbers of Hispanic American

students.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

44
Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans (December 16, 2002). 74 Ibid. 75 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, Status and Trends in the Education of Hispanics

(Washington, D.C.: 2002) p. 39. 76 Dana Markow and Marc Scheer, The MetLife Survey of the

American Teacher 2002. (New York: MetLife, 2002) p. 67. 77 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study

of 1988 (NELS:88/94), Data Analysis System. 78 National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.

Losing Ground: A National Status Report on the Affordability

of American Higher Education (2000) p. 11. 79 Mark Helm, “Tracking Down College Aid Often Hard for

the Neediest.” Houston Chronicle (January 27, 2003). 80 The College Board, “Trends in College Pricing,”

(Washington, D.C.: 2002) p. 4. 81 The College Board, “Trends in Student Aid,” (Washington,

D.C.: 2002) p. 4. 82 Teresa Sullivan. Testimony before the President’s Advisory

Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans (December 16, 2002). 83 Access Denied: Restoring the Nation’s Commitment to Equal

Educational Opportunity. A Report of the Advisory

Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (Washington,

D.C.: February 2001). 84 Statistical Handbook, Office of the Institutional Research,

and the Preview Annual Report of 2001. University of Texas

at Austin. 85 The Knowledge Net: Connecting Communities, Learners and

Colleges, American Association of Community Colleges

(2000) pp. 1-51. 86 Jane V. Wellman, State Policy and Community CollegeBaccalaureate Transfer, The National Center for Public Policy

and Higher Education and the Institute for Higher

Education Policy (August 2002) Figure 1, p. 4. 87 Victor B. Saenz, Hispanic Students and Community Colleges:

A Critical Point for Intervention. ERIC Clearinghouse for

Community Colleges (September 2002).

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/ERIC/digests/dig0102.htm

88 College for All? Is there too Much Emphasis on Getting a 4-

year College Degree? U.S. Department of Education, Office of

Educational Research and Improvement (1999).

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/CollegeForAll/completion.html 89 Victor B. Saenz, Hispanic Students and Community Colleges. 90 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. Short-term Enrollment in Postsecondary

Education: Student Background and Institutional Differences

in Reasons for Early Departure, 1996–98. (NCES 2003-153).

By Ellen M. Bradburn. Project Officer: C. Dennis Carroll.

(Washington D.C.: 2002). 91 The Condition of Education 2002, U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (NCES

2002-025) p. 26. 92 Defined as 35 hours or more per week. 93 Completed high school with a GED, other high school completion certificate, or did not finish high school.

94 Robin Allen, Teacher Education at the Community College:

Partnership and Collaboration (May 2002).

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/ERIC/digests/dig0205.htm 95 James E. Prather and Christina E. Carlson, “When Four-Year

and Community Colleges Collide: Studies in Planning for

Enrollment Maximization.” Paper presented at the Annual

Forum of the Association for Institutional Research (33rd,

Chicago, IL: May 16-19, 1993). 96 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. Distance Education at Postsecondary

Education Institutions: 1997–98. (NCES 2000-013). By Laurie

Lewis, Kyle Snow, Elizabeth Farris, Douglas Levin. Project

Officer: Bernard Greene. (Washington, D.C.: 1999). Table 6,

p. 20. 97 U.S. General Accounting Office. Distance Education: Growth

in Distance Education Programs and Implications for Federal

Education Policy. Testimony of Cornelia M. Ashby, Director,

Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, before the

Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, U.S.

Senate (September 26, 2002).

Chapter VI: Create Pathways to College Graduation

45

A

s established by Executive Order 13230, one role of

the Commission is to determine how federal departments and agencies are addressing the educational

needs of Hispanic Americans. A necessary part of

that role is to develop a monitoring system that

measures and holds departments and agencies

accountable for coordinating federal efforts to ensure

the participation of Hispanic Americans in federal

education programs. While the majority of federal

education programs are housed at the U.S.

Department of Education, most federal agencies

administer programs that deal directly or indirectly

with education. These efforts include scholarship and

fellows programs, mathematics and sciences programs funded by the National Science Foundation,

Department of Defense Schools, job training,

research studies on learning and behavior, and many

other initiatives. The Commission sought to ascertain whether these education programs or initiatives

were inclusive of Hispanic Americans.

The executive order directed federal departments

and agencies to report to the Commission data in

four areas:

 Efforts to increase participation of Hispanic

Americans in federal education programs

and services.

 Efforts to include Hispanic-serving school

districts, Hispanic-serving institutions, and

other educational institutions for Hispanic

Americans in federal education programs

and services.

 Levels of participation attained by Hispanic

Americans in federal education programs

and services.

 The measurable impact resulting from these

efforts and levels of participation. The

Department of Education’s report also shall

describe the overall condition of Hispanic

American education and such other aspects of

the educational status of Hispanic Americans,

as the secretary considers appropriate.

In the event the data are not available, the executive

order directed the Commission to suggest the

means for collecting the data.

After receiving guidance from the Office of Personal

Management (OPM) and the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) to ensure that the

proposed reporting forms, and the information

they would generate, would enable the Commission

to assess results, the office of the White House

Initiative transmitted, on August 29, 2002, a twopage reporting form to the heads of 29 federal

departments and agencies, requesting specific information that would help the Commission assess

their performance.

Of the 29 federal departments and agencies that

received the Commission’s reporting form, 26 submitted reports. Unfortunately, some of these reports

did not include complete information. For example,

only 15 responded with information about the

number of Hispanic Americans participating in

federal educational programs and services. In addition, when the Commission looked for information

that would permit it to measure results, data submitted by federal agencies, with some exceptions,

were largely void of any indicators that it could

examine with any degree of confidence.

VII.

Create Increased Federal Accountability and Coordination

RECOMMENDATION: Increase the accountability and coordination of programs within the

federal government to better serve Hispanic American children and their families.

47
The Commission is frustrated with these findings.

Federal departments and agencies have many

resources at their disposal, and they should have

been able to report complete data to the

Commission in a timely and consistent manner.

Given the lack of complete data, the federal government must develop new strategies to monitor and

coordinate the way federal agencies and departments respond to the educational needs of Hispanic

Americans. The Commission recommends the following two strategies:

No real assessment can be made and no level of

monitoring can occur without first establishing

appropriate standards. Even after federal departments and agencies have become accustomed to

accounting for Hispanics, their efforts must still be

measured against some standard. The Commission

believes that three essential elements should comprise this standard:

 Level of effort exerted to meeting the

educational needs of Hispanic Americans.

 Number of served or participating entities

(defined in the reporting form as Hispanic

Americans, Hispanic-serving school districts,

Hispanic-serving institutions and other

educational institutions for Hispanic

Americans).

 Measurable impact of federal efforts.

The Commission designed a federal monitoring

system that it believes will be functional and useful

to the President, to the heads of departments and

agencies, and to the public at large. The system

includes performance standards and a scorecard

modeled after the President’s Management Reform

Agenda, which was launched in August 2001. This

reform agenda was designed to “address the most

apparent deficiencies where the opportunity to

improve performance is the greatest.” The

President’s Management Council, OMB, and OPM

developed standards for success in each of the five

government-wide initiatives:

1. Strategic management of human capital.

2. Competitive sourcing.

3. Improved financial performance.

4. Expanded electronic government.

5. Budget and performance integration.

The standards that the Commission recommends

are represented in the attached Sample Standards of

Performance chart. The scorecard employs a simple

grading system: green for success, yellow for mixed

results, and red for unsatisfactory. The Commission

recommends that a similar system be employed to

determine the progress and performance of federal

departments and agencies in meeting the educational needs of Hispanic Americans.

The Commission understands that federal departments and agencies must adjust and rethink the

way they report efforts to meet the educational

needs of Hispanic Americans. The place to start is

to disaggregate data on participants served to

account specifically for Hispanic Americans and

other ethnic groups. The current reporting emphasis only on minorities does not produce the information needed to determine whether Hispanic

Americans are adequately served. The federal government’s interpretation of “minority” generally

STRATEGY2

As part of the federal monitoring system,

disaggregate data on participants served to

account specifically for Hispanic Americans.

STRATEGY1

Implement a monitoring system to measure and

hold federal departments and agencies

accountable for coordinating efforts to ensure the

participation of Hispanic Americans in all federal

education programs.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

48
focuses upon African Americans and

is not inclusive of other ethnic groups.

The federal government must be more

inclusive of Hispanic Americans.

Disaggregating data is an essential

part of measuring results, particularly

when accounting for federal expenditures in education. Typically, federal

educational expenditures take the

form of formula-based or discretionary grants. Formula-based grants

are directed by Congress and for an

amount established by a formula that is based on

certain criteria that have been incorporated into

the legislation and program regulations. These formula grants are administered by agencies and

awarded directly to states or localities.

Discretionary grants are awarded to eligible

grantees on the basis of a competitive process. All

grantees are required to submit reports to the

granting agency that demonstrate performance.

After awarding a grant, federal agencies will conduct monitoring in order to review and evaluate

specific aspects of a grantee’s activities. These

aspects typically include: 1) measuring a grantee’s

performance; 2) assessing a grantee’s adherence to

applicable laws, regulations and the terms and conditions of the award; 3) providing technical assistance to grantees; and 4) assessing whether a

grantee has made substantial progress. If the grant

was intended to meet the educational needs of participants, then any one of these activities could

assess the participation of Hispanic Americans,

provided the agency incorporated the disaggregated participant data as part of the grant award.

The Commission sought other practical guides with

which to help federal agencies do a better job of

measuring the participation of Hispanic Americans

in their educational programs and services. Many of

these were drawn or adapted from the monitoring

plans developed or in the process of being developed

by the Department of Education.

 Consistent with existing data reporting

requirements under the Department of

Education Title I program, federal agencies

may want to consider adopting similar

language or amending existing regulations

and instructions pertaining to the

development of state plans that would

require that data gathered be disaggregated.

 It may be prudent for agencies to consider

the inclusion of several specific action steps

under proposed fiscal year 2004 annual plans

that would “investigate the feasibility of

modifying or revising current

guidance/instructions to disaggregate data.”

 Under the Government Performance Results

Act (GPRA), all programs are required,

regardless of line item, to establish program

indicators and performance measures that

attest to the effectiveness of their programs. It

may be appropriate for agencies to require

assistant secretaries and their senior officials

and managers to revisit their current

program indicators and performance

measures. They might consider revising or

modifying those to reflect the diversity of our

nation and disaggregate data to ascertain

whether there is sufficient evidence that

describes the effectiveness of their programs

for specific populations.

 Under discretionary grant programs, grantees

are required to submit performance reports

Chapter VII: Create Increased Federal Accountability and Coordination

49
describing activities undertaken throughout

the year to satisfy the goals and objectives

contained in their approved application. It

may be appropriate, during quarterly

monitoring calls conducted by

program/project officers, to require, as part

of their protocol, a series of questions that

reflect the diversity of individuals served by

agency programs.

 It may be appropriate to allow programs to

include, as a selection criterion, a

requirement that applicants describe how the

grantees’ proposed goals align with the

agency’s strategic plans, program indicators

or performance measures. In essence,

agencies might require applicants to describe

how their proposal will impact special

populations and agree to disaggregate data to

support their hypothesis.

 It may be appropriate for program staff to

include, as part of future grant competitions,

an assurance that grantees provide data to

accurately document those individuals who

have participated in the program and the

impact the program may have had on

participants.

Currently, some departments and agencies are able to

meet the educational needs of Hispanic Americans

through the outreach they conduct to

reach Hispanic children, students and

their parents. For example the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA) funded a program entitled,

Proyecto Access, an eight-week summer

mathematics-based academic enrichment program for middle school students with an interest in engineering or

science. During a recent summer, the

program was able to serve 1,259 students on 10 college campuses in eight

states and Puerto Rico. Of those 1,259

students, 800 or 63.5 percent, were

Hispanic Americans. This program has

been serving the nation’s youth for six

years. Thus, the first students to graduate from the

program will be entering college this year. The college

graduation outcome data are essential to highlight the

potential of Proyecto Access.

Likewise, parental and community participation is

encouraged in all NASA education programs. Some

specific strategies to encourage parental and community participation are NASA Days in the

Hispanic community, programs including a

parental component, and a center at a community

college that reaches out to parents and community

members. An example of a program that helps prepare parents to support their children in mathematics and science education is the Ciencia@NASA program. Ciencia@NASA is a NASA Website

(http://ciencia.nasa.gov). The target audience

includes Spanish-speaking adults and children and

students who are learning English or Spanish as a

second language. Ciencia@NASA exposes the

Hispanic and Latino communities to NASA science

in a way that interests and excites them. This

Website is the only NASA Web site that reaches the

Hispanic/Latino communities with educational

information from all NASA Centers and

Enterprises.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services’ National Institutes of Health (NIH) exemFrom Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

50
plifies another agency that has long been at the

forefront of both practicing outreach and encouraging the participation of minority subjects in its

clinical studies. Since 1985, when the Public Health

Service Task Force on Women’s Health publicized

the need to include minorities in clinical studies,

NIH has encouraged minority participation. The

policy was revised in 1994 to require the participation of minorities in all clinical research studies to

the extent that organizations receiving grants to

conduct clinical research are now required to submit reports to NIH on the number of minorities

participating in their studies. More recently, NIH

adopted the 1997 OMB revised minimum standards for maintaining, collecting and presenting

data on race and ethnicity for all grant applications,

contract and intramural proposals, and for all active

research grants, cooperative agreements, and contract and intramural projects. These standards

include two ethnic categories (Hispanic or Latino,

and Not Hispanic or Latino) and five racial categories (American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian,

black or African American, Native Hawaiian or

Other Pacific Islander, and white). NIH has applied

this policy to all new applications and proposals,

annual progress reports, competing continuation

applications, and competing supplemental applications for research grants, contracts and intramural

projects as of January 10, 2002. NIH has detailed its

legacy of inclusion policies in an extensive outreach

Chapter VII: Create Increased Federal Accountability and Coordination

51

Sample Standards of Performance

G

 Significant efforts – in the form of

effective outreach strategies that

engage Hispanic Americans throughout the educational continuum – have

been undertaken to increase the participation of Hispanic Americans in

federal education programs and services.

 The department disaggregates data

and is able to account for a substantial

increase in the number of entities

(Hispanics, Hispanic-serving institutions, Hispanic-serving school districts and other educational Hispanicserving organizations) that

participated in its educational programs and services.

 The department is able to show measurable results from the resources it

devoted to increasing the participation

of Hispanic Americans in its education

programs and services. Results are

quantified and comprise specific

increases or improvements in such

areas as: enrollment rates in college;

graduation rates (high school or college); reading, math, or science scores

of children; number of parents participating in parent academies; K-16 partnerships; etc.

Y

 New or moderate efforts – in the form

of effective outreach strategies that

engage Hispanic Americans throughout

the educational continuum – have been

undertaken to increase the participation

of Hispanic Americans in federal education programs and services.

 The department has begun to disaggregate data and is able to account for

moderate increases in the number of

entities (Hispanics, Hispanic-serving

institutions, Hispanic-serving school

districts, and other educational

Hispanic-serving organizations) that

participated in its educational programs and services.

 The department has demonstrated

efforts to measure results from the

resources it devotes to increasing the

participation of Hispanic Americans

in its education programs and services. Department is instituting measurements that will track and quantify

specific increases or improvements in

such areas as: enrollment rates in college; graduation rates (high school or

college); reading, math, or science

scores of children; number of parents

participating in parent academies; K16 partnerships; etc.

R

 Little or no efforts have been undertaken to increase the participation of

Hispanic Americans in federal education programs and services.

 The department does not disaggregate

data and is not able to account for the

number of entities (Hispanics,

Hispanic-serving institutions,

Hispanic-serving school districts and

other educational Hispanic-serving

organizations) that participated in its

educational programs and services.

 The department is not able to show

any results from the resources it

devoted to increasing the participation

of Hispanic Americans in its education programs and services.

 Department or agency submitted an

incomplete or no report.
manual, Outreach Notebook for the Inclusion,

Recruitment and Retention of Women and Minority

Subjects in Clinical Research.

Another example is the work of the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD) in the colonias, impoverished rural areas

along the Texas/Mexico border. HUD has conducted

extensive outreach across local, state, federal and

international agencies to draw on their collective

resources to improve the health, education and

housing needs of this community. Among the federal agencies that have been engaged in this effort are

the departments of Education, Health and Human

Services, and Agriculture, and the Small Business

Administration. This collaboration has already produced important educational opportunities. HUD

recently donated 500 excess computers to the children of the colonias. The children use the computers

to do their homework, and parents learn and practice keyboard techniques.

Finally, in order for the two recommended strategies to

be effective, it is important that the responsibility for

gathering and reporting the data must then be placed at

the highest levels of the department or agency. The

Commission was able to observe the correlation between

the quality and quantity of the information submitted

and the personnel that were delegated the task of compiling and reporting of the same.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

52
Acknowledgments

53

O

n behalf of our colleagues on the Commission, we would

like to express our deep appreciation to State Farm

Insurance Companies for being the national sponsor of the

Commission. We are also deeply appreciative of The CocaCola Company and Texas Instruments for supporting our

initiatives and providing for the town hall meetings.

We extend special thanks to Speaker of the House J.

Dennis Hastert for hosting the Commission on Capitol

Hill along with a bipartisan delegation of more than 40

Members of Congress.

We want to convey our gratitude to the White House

Initiative staff, which under the leadership of Executive

Director Leslie Sanchez, assisted us in our work and

helped prepare this report. The staff includes: David

Almacy, Webber Barton, Adam Chavarria, Monica Kibler,

Syddia Lee-Chee, Denise Rodriguez-Lopez, Sophia

Stampley, and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute

fellows Heidy Servin-Baez and Edgar Zazueta.

We are indebted to the many individuals who assisted us

at various times throughout the course of our work,

including: Clifford Adelman, Ruben Barrales, David

Berthiaume, Charles P. Blahous, Ph.D., Beth Ann Bryan,

Anna Cabral, Charley Diaz, Tom Finch, Brian Fitzgerald,

Ed.D., Francisco Garcia, Abel Guerra, Cathleen M. Healy,

M. Rene Islas, Jeffrey M. Lubell, David Lizarraga, Peggy

McCardle, Ph.D., Sara Martinez Tucker, Gloria Mounts,

Harry P. Pachon, Ph.D., Sarah Pfeifer, Valerie F. Reyna,

Ph.D., Raul Romero, Frank Ros, Tom Snyder, Kathy Stack,

Barry Stevens, Kimberly Strycharz, Susan Winchell as well

as numerous employees of the United States departments

of Housing and Urban Development, Education and

Treasury and the Small Business Administration.

We want to acknowledge Peter Gallagher of America’s

Promise, Yurima Jimenez of Tormont Publications, Keith

Mitchell with Apple Computer, Inc., William C. Pelzar of

CollegeBoard.com and Jorge Plascencia of Hispanic

Broadcasting Corporation for their help and assistance in

launching www.YesICan.gov/YoSiPuedo.gov.

We are grateful for the expertise provided by G. Reid

Lyon, Ph.D., chief of the Child Development and

Behavior Branch within the National Institute of Child

Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the

National Institutes of Health, and Russ Whitehurst,

Ph.D., director, Institute of Education Sciences.

We also wish to acknowledge the special contributions of

Treasurer of the United States Rosario Marin and

Department of Education General Counsel Brian Jones

for making the town hall meetings such a success.

We are indebted to the numerous individuals in schools,

universities, community and faith-based organizations,

businesses and government throughout the country who

provided the facilities and staff that contributed to the

success of our community events.

We wish to thank all those individuals who provided

expert testimony to the Commission, and to the countless students, parents, educators and community leaders

who participated in our events.

Finally, we extend special thanks to those individuals

who contributed technical expertise, research and editorial support, including: Jay Diskey, president, Diskey and

Associates; Janice Dodge, president, Antrim Editorial

Services; John Lee, president, JBL Associates, Inc.;

William C. Pelzar of the College Board; and Chad

Wooten, Fire Esc, Inc.
Bibliography

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

54

Access Denied: Restoring the Nation’s Commitment to Equal

Educational Opportunity. A Report of the Advisory

Committee on Student Financial Assistance. Washington,

D.C., February 2001.

Adelman, Clifford. Answers in the Toolbox: Academic Intensity,

Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor’s Degree Attainment, U.S.

Department of Education, Washington, D.C.: Office of

Educational Research and Improvement, 1999.

Agron, Joe. “Building for the Boom.” American School &

University, 73, no. 9 (May 2001): 22.

Allen, Robin. Teacher Education at the Community College:

Partnership and Collaboration, May 2002. ERIC Clearinghouse

for Community Colleges.

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu?ERIC/digests/dig0205.htm

Bacon, Carolyn. From her testimony before the President’s

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans. (New York: December 16, 2002).

Boelen, Charles. A New Paradigm for Medical Schools a Century

After Flexner’s Report. Bulletin for the World Health

Organization 80, no. 7 (2002): 592.

Bush, George W. “Executive Order: Equal Protection of the

Laws for Faith-based and Community Organizations,” The

White House, December 12, 2002.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021212-

6.html

Carter, Samuel Casey. No Excuses: Lessons from 21 HighPerforming, High-Poverty Schools. The Heritage Foundation

(2000).

Chen, Xianglei. Efforts by Public K-8 Schools to Involve Parents

in Children’s Education: Do School and Parent Reports Agree?

(NCES 2001-076), 2001.

Cibulka, James and Michelle Nakayama. The Creation of HighPerformance Schools Through Organizational and Individual

Learning: Practitioner’s Guide to Learning Communities.

National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in

Teaching, February 22, 2000.

Coles, Ann. The Education Resources Institute, Key Findings

from the College to Pathways Network, as expressed in her testimony before the President’s Advisory Commission on

Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans. (New York:

December 16, 2002).

The Cost of Teacher Turnover. Prepared for the Texas State

Board for Educator Certification as part of the Texas Beginning

Educator Support System Initiative by Texas Center for

Educational Research, November 2000.

Creating Partnerships for Learning: Family Literacy in

Elementary Schools. National Center for Family Literacy

(Louisville, KY: 2001).

Curran, Bridget, Camille Abrahams, and Theresa Clarke.

Solving Teacher Shortages Through License Reciprocity. A Report

of the SHEEO Project, February 2001.

Dean, Sandra. Director, Together We Light The Way. From her

testimony before the President’s Advisory Commission on

Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans (New York:

December 16, 2002).

Dickson Rice, Lois and Arthur Hauptman. Moving Beyond

Student Aid. Conference Report no. 3. (The Brookings Institute:

July 2000).

Empty Promises, The Myth of College Access in America, A

Report of the Advisory Committee on Student Financial

Assistance, June 2002.

Family Literacy: Directions in Research and Implications for

Practice. Summary and papers for a national symposium.

Edited by L. Ann Benjamin and Jerome Lord. Sponsored by the

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research

and Improvement in collaboration with the Office of

Vocational and Adult Education and the Office of Elementary

and Secondary Education’s Even Start Program, January 1996.

Feistritzer, C. Emily. The Making of a Teacher: A Report on

Teacher Preparation in the U.S., The Center for Education

Information, 1999.

From Promise to Progress: How Colleges and Universities are

Using Student Engagement Results to Improve Collegiate Quality,

2002 Annual Report. National Survey of Student Engagement.

The College Student Report.

The Funding Gap: Low-Income and Minority Students Receive

Fewer Dollars. The Education Trust, August 2002.

Garcia, P. Understanding Obstacles and Barriers to Hispanic

Baccalaureates, Inter-University Program for Latino Research

and the RAND Corporation. Notre Dame, IN: University of

Notre Dame, 2001.
Bibliography

55

Greene, Jay P., “Choice Helps Public Schools,” New York Sun,

January 14, 2003, http://www.manhattaninstitute.org/html/_nys-choice_helps.htm

———, High School Graduation Rates in the United States. The

Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, November 2001.

———. High School Completion Rates in the United States. The

Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, November 2001.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/cr_baeo.pdf

Greene, Jay P. and Greg Forster. “Rising to the Challenge: The

Effect of School Choice on Public Schools in Milwaukee and

San Antonio,” The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research,

January 13, 2003. http://www.manhattaninstitute.org/html/cb_27.htm

Grogger, J. and S. J. Trejo. Falling Behind or Moving Up? The

Intergenerational Progress of Mexican Americans. San Francisco,

CA: Public Policy Institute of California, 2002.

Hauptman, Arthur M. and Lois D. Rice. Coordinating Financial

Aid With Tuition Tax Benefits. Policy Briefing no. 28. The

Brookings Institute, December 1997.

Helm, Mark. “Tracking Down College Aid Often Hard for the

Neediest.” Houston Chronicle, January 27, 2003.

Hirsch, Eric. A Report of the SHEEO Project, Enhancing the

Teaching Profession: The Importance of Mobility to Recruitment

and Retention, Strategy Brief, State Higher Education Executive

Officers, February 2001.

Hoefferth, Sandra L. Findings About Early Childhood

Development, Poverty, and Child Care Environments. Summary

of Presentation on June 30, 1997, Science Writers Workshop.

NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research and

American Sociological Association.

http://obssr.od.nih.gov/Publications/ASASCHOF.HTM

Howey, Kenneth R. A Review of Challenges and Innovations in

the Preparation of Teachers for Urban Contexts, Implications for

State Policy. National Partnership for Excellence and

Accountability in Teaching, March 2000.

Immerwahr, John with Tony Foleno. Great Expectations: How

the Public and Parents—White, African American and Hispanic—

View Higher Education, National Center for Public Policy and

Higher Education, Public Agenda, Consortium for Policy

Research in Education, National Center for Postsecondary

Improvement, May 2000.

In Pursuit of Quality Teaching: Five Key Strategies for

Policymaker. Education Commission of the States, 2000.

Kennedy, Mike. “The Growth Equation.” American School &

University 74, no. 8 (April 2002: p.18, 6p, 5c).

Kermani, Hengameh and Helena A. James. Problematizing

Family Literacy: Lessons Learned from a Community-Based

Tutorial Program for Low-Income Latino Families. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association. Chicago, March 1997.

Kindler, Anneka L. Office of English Language Acquisition,

Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement for

Limited English Proficient Students. Survey of the States’

Limited English Proficient Students and Available Educational

Programs and Services 2000-2001 Summary Report. The George

Washington University, National Clearinghouse for English

Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational

Programs, October 2002.

King, Tracey and Ellynne Bannon. The Burden of Borrowing: A

Report on the Rising Rates of Student Loan Debt. The States

PIRG’s Higher Education Project, March 2002.

The Knowledge Net: Connecting Communities, Learners and

Colleges, American Association of Community Colleges, 2000.

League for Innovation in the Community College.

http://www.league.org

Li, R. M.; P. McCardle; R. L. Clark; and D. Berch. Diverse

Voices—The Inclusion of Language-Minority Individuals in

National Studies: Challenges and Opportunities. National

Institute on Aging, National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development, National Center on Minority Health and

Health Disparities, 2001.

Lowell, B. Lindsay and Roberto Suro. The Improving

Educational Profile of Latino Immigrants. Pew Hispanic Center,

December 4, 2002.

Lyon, G. Reid. Summary of Comments Before the White House

Summit on Early Childhood Cognitive Development. July 27,

2001. http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/07-2001-

07272001_lyon.html

“Make It Happen: Teach (The Career That Makes a Difference;

We Need Teachers).” National Education Association.

http://www.nea.org/futureteachers/weneed.html
From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

56

Markow, Dana and Marc Scheer. The MetLife Survey of the

American Teacher 2002. (New York: MetLife, 2002).

Measuring Up 2002: The State-By-State Report Card for Higher

Education. The National Center for Policy and Higher

Education. http://measuringup.highereducation.org/

Murdock, S. H. Expert Testimony before the President’s

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans. Las Vegas: April 17, 2002.

NAEYC Position Statement: Responding to Linguistic and

Cultural Diversity Recommendations for Effective Early

Childhood Education, adopted November 1995.

http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/naeyc/position.htm

National Advisory Committee on Affordability. Losing Ground:

A National Status Report on the Affordability of American Higher

Education, 2000.

National Center for Family Literacy, Connecting Families and

Work: Family Literacy Bridges the Gap, 2000.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Losing

Ground: A National Status Report on the Affordability of

American Higher Education, 2000.

Ianotta, Joah G., ed. Emerging Issues in Hispanic Health:

Summary of a Workshop. National Research Council,

Committee on Population. Division of Behavioral and Social

Sciences and Education. Washington, D.C: The National

Academies Press, 2002.

National Study of Community College Career Corridors for K-12

Teacher Recruitment. Recruiting New Teachers, Inc. and the

National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in

Teaching, May 31, 2000.

NEA: Recruitment—Initiatives by Selected Teacher Education

Institutions. http;//www.nea.org/recruit/minority/teached.html

“Nearly one-half of current teachers will become eligible for

retirement during the next decade.” Hirsch, Eric. A Report 

of the SHEEO Project, Enhancing the Teaching Profession: The

Importance of Mobility to Recruitment and Retention. Strategy

Brief, State Higher Education Executive Officers, February 2001.

Neering, Kari. “Satellite Campuses Help Many Launch

Education.” The Journal News (Westchester County, New York),

December 2001.

Nelson, F. Howard, Rachel Drown, and Jewell C. Gould. Survey

and Analysis of Teacher Salary Trends 2000. The Research and

Information Services Department, American Federation of

Teachers, AFL-CIO.

Perez, Antonio, president, Borough of Manhattan Community

College. From his testimony before the President’s Advisory

Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans. New York, December 16, 2002.

Prather, James E. and Christina E. Carlson. When Four-Year and

Community Colleges Collide: Studies in Planning for Enrollment

Maximization. Paper presented at the Thirty-third Annual

Forum of the Association for Institutional Research. Chicago,

May 16-19, 1993.

Proctor, Bernadette D. and Joseph Dalaker. U.S. Census Bureau,

Current Population Reports, pp. 60-219, Poverty in the United

States: 2001, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington,

D.C., 2002.

“Quality Counts 2000: Who Should Teach?” Education Week

2002. http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc00/

Quality Counts 2003: “If I Can’t Learn from You ... Ensuring 

a Highly Qualified Teacher for Every Classroom.” Education

Week 2003.

http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc00/templates/chart.cfm 

Reaching The Top, A Report of the National Task Force on

Minority High Achievement, The College Board, 1999.

Robelen, Erik W. “States Suffer Halting Start on Tutoring.”

Education Week, September 25, 2002.

Saenz, Victor B. Hispanic Students and Community Colleges: A

Critical Point for Intervention. ERIC Clearinghouse for

Community Colleges, September 2002.

Schwartz, Wendy. Hispanic Preschool Education: An Important

Opportunity. An ERIC Digest from the ERIC Clearinghouse on

Urban Education.

Selingo, Jeffrey. “The Broad Reach of the Michigan Cases.”

Chronicle of Higher Education, January 27, 2003.

Senechal, Monique, Jo-Anne LeFevre, Brenda L. Smith-Chant,

and Karen V. Colton. “On Refining Theoretical Models of

Emergent Literacy: The Role of Empirical Evidence.” Journal of

School Psychology 39, no. 5, pp. 439-460, 2001.

Sullivan, Teresa. From her testimony before the President’s
Bibliography

57

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans. New York: December 16, 2002.

Suro, Roberto, Executive director, The Pew Hispanic Center.

From his testimony before the President’s Advisory

Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans. New York: December 16, 2002.

Teaching Children to Read. A Report of the National Reading

Panel, 2000.

Texas Teacher Recruitment and Retention Study. A Project of Texas

Education Agency, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

and State Board for Educator Certification, February 1999.

Transforming Education Policy: Assessing 10 Years of Progress in the

States. The Business Roundtable Education Initiative, June 1999.

Trends in College Pricing. Washington, D.C.: The College

Board, 2002.

Trends in Student Aid. Washington, D.C.: The College 

Board, 2002.

“Unlevel Playing Field: Barriers to Participation by Faith-Based

and Community Organizations in Federal Social Service

Programs,” White House Office of Faith-Based and

Community Initiatives, August, 2001.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/unlevelfield.

html

U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics

Administration, U.S. Census Bureau. The Big Payoff:

Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life

Earnings, July 2002.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, 2001.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/digest2001/tables/dt108.asp

———. Early Reading First. www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/earlyreading/aboutus.html

National Assessment of Educational Progress.

———. Helping Hispanic Students Reach High Academic

Standards, by Lisa Weiner, Mary Leighton, and Janie

Funkhouser. Washington, D.C.: 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics, 1996

Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study. (JBL

Associates).

———. National Center for Education Statistics, 1999–00

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:2000),

Undergraduate Data Analysis System. (JBL Associates).

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Attrition of

New Teachers Among Recent College Graduates: Comparing

Occupations Stability Among 1992–93 Graduates Who Taught

and Those Who Worked in Other Occupations (NCES 2001-

189), by Robin R. Henke and Lisa Zahn. Project Officer: C.

Dennis Carroll. Washington, D.C.: 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics, The Condition

of Education 2002 (NCES 2002-025).

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Descriptive

Summary of 1995–96 Beginning Postsecondary Students: Six

Years Later (NCES 2003-151), by Lutz Berkner, Shirley He, and

Emily Forrest Cataldi. Project Officer: Paula Knepper,

Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of

Education Statistics, 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Distance

Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997–98.

(NCES 2000-013), by Laurie Lewis, Kyle Snow, Elizabeth Farris,

Douglas Levin. Project Officer: Bernard Greene. Washington,

D.C.: 1999.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Distance

Education Instruction by Postsecondary Faculty and Staff: Fall

1998, by Ellen M. Bradburn, MPR Associates, Inc.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Dropout Rates

in the United States: 2000. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/2000/droppub_2001/

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Entering

Kindergarten: A Portrait of American Children When They Begin

School: Findings from The Condition of Education 2000,

Nicholas Zill and Jerry West. (NCES 2001-035) Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. High School

Academic Curriculum and the Persistence Path Through College.

(NCES 2001-163). By Laura Horn and Lawrence K. Kojaku.

Project Officer: C. Dennis Carroll, Washington, D.C.: 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data Surveys, Completions, 2001-02.

(JBL Associates).
From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

58

———. National Center for Education Statistics, Office of

Educational Research and Improvement. Status and Trends in

the Education of Hispanics, Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics, Overview of

Public Elementary and Secondary Schools and Districts: School

Year 2000–01. NCES Statistical Analysis Report.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/overview/table10.asp

———. National Center for Education Statistics, National

Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/94) Data

Analysis System.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Parent

Involvement in Children’s Education: Efforts by Public

Elementary Schools (NCES 98-032). By Nancy Carey, Laurie

Lewis and Elizabeth Farris. Project Officer, Shelly Burns.

Washington, D.C.: 1998.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Projections of

Education Statistics to 2012 (NCES 2002-030). By Debra E.

Gerald and William J. Hussar. Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Postsecondary

Institutions in the United States: Fall 2000 and Degrees and

Other Awards Conferred: 1999–2000 (NCES 2002-156). By

Laura G. Knapp, etal. Project Officer: Susan G. Boyles.

Washington, D.C.: 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Public High

School Dropouts and Completors from the Common Core of

Data: School Years 1998–99 and 1999–2000 (NCES 2002-382).

By Beth Aronstamm Young. Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Schools and

Staffing in the United States: A Statistical Profile, 1993–94

(NCES 96-124). By Robin R. Henke, Susan P. Choy, Sonya Geis,

and Stephen P. Broughman. Washington, D.C.: 1996.

———. National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and

Staffing Survey, 1999–2000: Overview of the Data for Public,

Private, Public Charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs Elementary

and Secondary Schools (NCES 2002-313). By Kerry J. Gruber,

Susan D. Wiley, Stephen P. Broughman, Gregory A. Strizek, and

Marisa Burian-Fitzgerald. Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Short-term

Enrollment in Postsecondary Education: Student Background and

Institutional Differences in Reasons for Early Departure, 1996–98

(NCES 2003-153). By Ellen M. Bradburn. Project Officer: C.

Dennis Carroll. Washington D.C.: 2002.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Teacher

Preparation and Professional Development: 2000 (NCES 2001-

088). By Basmat Parsad, Laurie Lewis, and Elizabeth Farris.

Project Officer: Bernard Greene. Washington, D.C.: 2001.

———. National Center for Education Statistics. Beginning

Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study “First Follow-up”

(BPS:1996/1198), The Condition of Education 2002. 2002.

———. Office of Educational Research and Improvement,

National Center for Education Statistics. The NAEP 1998

Reading Report Card for the Nation and the States (NCES 1999-

500). By P.L. Donohue, K.E. Voelki, J.R. Campbell, and J.

Mazzeo, Washington, D.C.: 1999.

———. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. No

Child Left Behind: A Desktop Reference, Washington, D.C.:

2002.

———. Office of Postsecondary Education. Meeting the Highly

Qualified Teachers Challenge, The Secretary’s Annual Report on

Teacher Quality, 2002.

———. Office of the Under Secretary, Planning and Evaluation

Service, Elementary and Secondary Education Division. The

Same Standards for Migrant Students: Holding Title I Schools

Accountable. Volume I: Title I Schools Serving Migrant Students:

Recent Evidence from the Longitudinal Survey of Schools,

Washington, D.C.: 2002.

———. Office of the Under Secretary, Planning and Evaluation

Service, Elementary and Secondary Education Division, The

Same Standards for Migrant Students: Holding Title I Schools

Accountable. Volume II: Measurement of Migrant Student

Educational Achievement: Final Report. Washington, D.C.:

2002.

———. Office of the Undersecretary, Planning and Evaluation

Service, Postsecondary, Adult, and Vocational Education

Division. The National Study of the Operation of the Federal

Work-Study Program: Summary Findings from the Student and

Institutional Surveys. Washington, D.C.: 2000.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for

Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics, National

Health Interview Survey, 1997; The Condition of Education 2002,

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES 2002).
Bibliography

59

U.S. General Accounting Office. Distance Education: Growth in

Distance Education Programs and Implications for Federal

Education Policy. Testimony of Cornelia M. Ashby, director,

Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues, before the

Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, U.S.

Senate, September 2002.

Vernez, Georges and Lee Mizell. Goal: To Double the Rate of

Hispanics Earning a Bachelor’s Degree. Center for Research on

Immigration Policy. Rand Education, 2001.

Voices From La Frontera, Study of School Districts Along the

United States/Mexico Border. WestEd in collaboration with

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, August 2002.

Weisbaum, Kathryn Sloane and Huang, Danny. IISME Teacher

Retention and Program Impact Evaluation 1985–2000. Industry

Initiatives for Science and Math Education. (Cupertino, Calif.:

2001). http://iisme.org

Wellman, Jane V. State Policy and Community CollegeBaccalaureate Transfer. The National Center for Public Policy

and Higher Education and the Institute for Higher Education

Policy, August 2002.

Wenglinsky, Harold. How Schools Matter: The Link Between

Teacher Classroom Practices and Student Academic Performance.

Education Policy Analysis Archives 10, no. 12, February 13, 2002.

Windham, Patricia; George R. Perkins; and Jon Rogers.

Concurrent-use Campuses: Part of the New Definition of Access.

North Carolina State University, Department of Adult &

Community College Education. Community College Review.

December 2001.

Yasin, Said and Brinda Albert. “Effective teachers facilitate the

diverse cultural and learning styles of their students.” Minority

Teacher Recruitment and Retention: A National Imperative.

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education,

September 21, 1999.

Zehr, Mary Ann. “Educating Mexico,” Education Week, March

20, 2002.
Commission Meetings and Events

60

Full Commission Meeting,

Swearing-In Ceremony and Orientation

February 27-28, 2002

The Mayflower Hotel

Washington, D.C.

Presentations:

Christopher J. Barbic, founding director, Yes College

Preparatory School

Ruben Barrales, deputy assistant to the President 

and director of Intergovernmental Affairs

Antonio R. Flores, Ph.D., president and chief executive

officer, Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales, White House counsel

to the President

Abel Guerra, associate director, Office of Public Liaison

The Honorable William D. Hansen, deputy secretary,

United States Department of Education

The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the 

House of Representatives

Sergio Quijano Kapfer, Office of the General Counsel,

United States Department of Education

The Honorable Mel Martinez, Secretary of the United

States Department of Housing and Urban Development

Gloria Mounts, committee management officer, United

States Department of Education

Leonard B. Rodriguez, White House

Second Full Commission Meeting 

April 17-18, 2002

The Venetian Hotel

Las Vegas, Nev.

Presentations:

Costanza Eggers-Pierola, project director, Center for

Children and Families Education Development Center

Teri Flack, deputy commissioner, Texas Higher

Education Coordinating Board

Steve Murdock, Ph.D., head, Department of Rural

Sociology, Texas A&M University

David Valladolid, president and chief executive officer,

Parent Institute for Quality Education

Town Hall Meeting

April 17, 2002

Rancho High School

Las Vegas, Nev.

Presentations:

Jaime A. Escalante, teacher and commissioner, President’s

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for

Hispanic Americans

Peter Gallagher, chief executive officer, America’s Promise

Carlos Garcia, superintendent, Clark County School

District, Las Vegas, Nev.

Polly Gonzalez, anchorwoman, KLAS-Channel 8

Ernie Jauregui, principal, Rancho High School

The Honorable Rosario Marin, Treasurer of the United

States

The Honorable Rod Paige, Secretary of the United States

Department of Education
School Visit

April 18, 2002

C. P. Squires Elementary School

Las Vegas, Nev.

Town Hall Meeting

June 19, 2002

Vieau K-8 School

Milwaukee, Wis.

Presentations:

Lourdes Castillo Uribe, principal, Vieau 

Elementary School

The Honorable Margaret Farrow, lieutenant governor,

State of Wisconsin

Patricia Gomez, producer and host, ¡Adelante!

The Honorable Rosario Marin, Treasurer of the 

United States

The Honorable Brian Jones, general counsel,

United States Department of Education

Spence Korte, superintendent, Milwaukee Public Schools

Enedelia Schofield, Esq., co-chair, President’s 

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence 

for Hispanic Americans

Educator Working Group Meeting

June 20, 2002

The Radisson Hotel

Milwaukee, Wis.

Chair: – Christopher J. Barbic

Presentations:

Alvaro Garcia-Velez, president, Notre Dame Middle

School for Girls (Milwaukee)

Sherry Street, project director, American Education

Reform Council

Town Hall Meeting

June 24, 2002

Solidarity Mission Village

Atlanta, Ga.

Presentations:

Anna Cablik, president, Anatek, Inc.

Anna Maria Farias, Esq., deputy assistant secretary, United

States Department of Housing and Urban Development

Gareth Genner, director, Solidarity School

Frank J. Hanna, Esq., co-chair, President’s Advisory

Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans

The Honorable Brian Jones, general counsel, United

States Department of Education

The Honorable Rosario Marin, Treasurer of the 

United States

Enedelia Schofield, Esq., co-chair, President’s 

Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence 

for Hispanic Americans

Family Working Group Meeting

June 25, 2002

The Sheraton Midtown Atlanta at Colony Square

Atlanta, Ga.

Chair: – Ofelia S. Vanden Bosch

Presentations:

Joan G. Carson, Ph.D., professor, Department of Applied

Linguistics, Georgia State University

Commission Meetings and Events

61
Government Resources and Accountability

Working Group Meeting

July 12, 2002

The Mayflower Hotel

Washington, D.C.

Chair: – Altagracia “Grace” Ramos (Designee)

Presentations:

The Honorable William D. Hansen, deputy secretary,

United States Department of Education

Jeffrey M. Lubell, director of research and policy, United

States Department of Housing and Urban Development

Community Partnerships Working 

Group Meeting

July 15, 2002

The East Los Angeles Community Union Headquarters

Los Angeles, Calif.

Chair: – Francisco J. Paret

Presentations:

Frank Alderete, executive director, Federal Educational

Programs, The East Los Angeles Community Union

Michael Alvarado, scholarship program director,

The East Los Angeles Community

Union Education Foundation

Pete Placencia, coordinator, The East Los Angeles

Community Union Health Careers Program 

School Visit

July 15, 2002

Puente Technology Center

Los Angeles, Calif.

Presentations:

Sister Jennie Lechtenberg, executive director, Puente

Technology Center

Leslie Sanchez, executive director, White House Initiative

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

Jon Secada, member, President’s Advisory Commission

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

Town Hall Meeting

July 15, 2002

Huntington Park High School

Huntington Park, Calif.

Presentations:

Maria Hernandez Ferrier, Ed.D., director, Office of

English Language Acquisition, United States Department

of Education

The Honorable Brian Jones, general counsel, United

States Department of Education

The Honorable Rosario Marin, Treasurer of the 

United States

Francisco J. Paret, member, President’s Advisory

Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic

Americans

Leslie Sanchez, executive director, White House Initiative

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

Jon Secada, member, President’s Advisory Commission

on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

62
Commission Meetings and Events

63

Public Awareness and 

Motivation Working Group

July 22, 2002

MiamiæDade Community College, Wolfson Campus

Miami, Fla.

Chair: – Charles P. Garcia, Esq.

Presentations:

Eduardo Padron, president, MiamiæDade Community

College

Third Full Commission Meeting 

August 5-6, 2002

The Westgate Hotel

San Diego, Calif.

Presentations:

Robert Bernal Aguirre, chairman, Hispanic Council for

Reform and Educational Options 

Ginger Hovenic, president, Business Roundtable for

Education

G. Reid Lyon, Ph.D., chief, Child Development and

Behavior Branch, National Institute of Child Health and

Human Development

The Honorable Gaddi H. Vasquez, director, Peace Corps

Working Group Meetings

October 10-11, 2002

Orlando, Fla.

Chairs: – Christopher J. Barbic, Charles P. Garcia, Esq.,

Francisco J. Paret, Rene Vazquez, M.D., (Designee),

Enedelia Schofield, Esq. (Designee)

Fourth Full Commission Meeting

December 16-17, 2002

The Marriott Marquis

New York, N.Y.

Presentations:

Carolyn Bacon, executive director, O’Donnell

Foundation

Wilbert Bryant, deputy assistant secretary for Higher

Education Programs, United States Department of

Education

Anne Coles, Ed.D., senior vice president, College Access

Services, The Education Resources Institutes

Sandra Dean, director of special programs, Durham

District School Board, Canada

Brad Duggan, president, National Community

Education Association

Ricardo R. Fernandez, Ph.D., president, Lehman College 

Arthur Hauptman, public policy consultant

Antonio Perez, Ed.D., president, Borough of Manhattan

Community College

Margarita Pinkos, Ed.D., director of ESOL, Palm Beach

County

Jean Rutherford, Ed.D., director of education initiatives,

National Community Education Association

Teresa Sullivan, Ph.D., executive vice chancellor for academic affairs, University of Texas at Austin 

Roberto Suro, director, Pew Hispanic Center

John L. Winn, deputy secretary for accountability,

research and measurement, Florida Board of Education

Fifth Full Commission Meeting 

(Conference Call)

March 14, 2003

Loews L’Enfant Plaza

Washington, D.C.
Biographies

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

64

Commissioners

Frank J. Hanna, Esq., Atlanta, Ga. (co-chair)

Hanna is chief executive officer of HBR Capital, Ltd., a

merchant banking firm, and has started and backed a

number of successful financial-service and informationprocessing businesses. He has a strong interest in education, has helped found three schools in Atlanta and has

served on the Archdiocese of Atlanta education task force.

A frequent speaker on issues of faith as they pertain to

business practices, he is active in efforts that serve children

and the poor. A graduate of the University of Georgia’s

business college in 1983 and law school in 1986, Hanna

was a Truman Scholar and a National Merit Scholar.

Endelia Schofield, Esq., Hillsboro, Ore. (co-chair)

Schofield is principal of W. L. Henry Elementary School

in Hillsboro, Ore. Her extensive experience in public

education includes seven years as an elementary school

principal and nine years as an elementary school teacher.

She had significant involvement in staff and curriculum

development and success in increasing student achievement. Schofield earned a master of arts degree from

Portland State University, a doctor of jurisprudence from

Northwestern School of Law, and a bachelor of arts from

Pacific University. She is a member of the Oregon Bar.

Micaela Alvarez, Esq., McAllen, Tex.

Alvarez has been a partner with Hole & Alvarez, L.L.P., in

McAllen, Texas, since 1997. She has established an impressive legal career that includes a term as presiding judge of

the 139th Judicial District Court in Hidalgo County, Texas.

Alvarez serves on the boards of the McAllen Medical

Center and the state Office of Risk Management. She also

chairs the McAllen Advisory Board. Alvarez earned a doctor of jurisprudence degree from the University of Texas

School of Law in 1989 and a bachelor of social work

degree from the University of Texas in 1980.

Christopher J. Barbic, Houston, Tex.

Barbic is the founding director of YES College

Preparatory School. As the only state-chartered public

high school in Houston providing inner-city students

with a rigorous college preparatory curriculum, YES

College Prep is aggressively addressing the inequities in

urban education through a focused mission of preparing

students for college and graduation. Ranked the highestperforming high school on the Texas Assessment of

Academic Skills testing, YES serves predominantly lowincome students from the Hispanic community. Barbic

holds a bachelor of arts degree in English and

Organizational Development from Vanderbilt University.

Fernando "Frank" Caldeiro, League City, Tex.

Caldeiro is a National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA) astronaut qualified for flight

assignment as a mission specialist. Caldeiro is assigned

technical duties in the Astronaut Office Station Operations

Branch, where he serves as lead astronaut for Europeanbuilt station models. Caldeiro received an associate degree

in applied science in Aerospace Technology from the State

University of New York at Farmingdale in 1978, a bachelor of science degree in mechanical engineering from the

University of Arizona in 1984, and a master of science

degree in engineering management from the University

of Central Florida in 1995.

Jose G. Canchola, Tucson, Ariz.

Canchola is chairman of the Canchola Group, a holding

company of several restaurant franchises in Tucson 

and Nogales, Ariz. Canchola was a member of the

McDonalds Corporation Operators Advisory Board 

from 1981 to 1993 as well as National Franchise Director.

Canchola serves on the board of directors of the Tucson

Electric Power Company and of the Northern Trust Bank

in Tucson. Previously, he held a range of prominent 

local and national positions, including chairman of the

U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and Mayor of

the City of Nogales, Ariz. Canchola is also an investor in 

the Arizona Diamondbacks. He was educated at various

institutions, including the New York Institute of Finance,

New York University, the University of Chicago, and the

University of Oklahoma.

Jaime A. Escalante, Roseville, Calif.

In 1974, Escalante was hired as a mathematics teacher at

Garfield High School in East Los Angeles, Calif., a troubled inner-city school. His success in teaching advanced

mathematics to inner-city students was portrayed in the

1988 Academy Award-nominated film Stand and Deliver.

His many teaching awards include the Presidential Medal

for Excellence in Education and the Andres Bello Prize

from the Organization of American States. He is a recipient of the Freedom Forum’s Free Spirit award and an

inductee in the National Teachers Hall of Fame. He also

hosted the PBS classroom television series “FUTURES

with Jaime Escalante,” a popular instructional program.

He holds a bachelor of arts degree from California State

University, Los Angeles.

Charles P. Garcia, Esq., Boca Raton, Fla.

Garcia has served as chairman and chief executive officer

of Sterling Financial Investment Group since the founding of the company in September 1997. Today, the company is organized as a global organization and was hon-
Biographies

65

ored by the University of Florida as Fastest Growing

Privately Held Firm. In June 2001, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush

appointed Garcia to a newly formed Florida Board of

Education. Garcia is the only Hispanic on the sevenmember board, which is frequently referred to as the

education “super board.” For his contributions to the

Hispanic community, Hispanic Business magazine identified Garcia as one of the “100 most influential Hispanics

in the United States.” Garcia is a graduate of the U.S. Air

Force Academy and holds a master's degree from the

University of Oklahoma and a juris doctorate from

Columbia Law School.

Norma S. Garza, Brownsville, Tex.

Garza is founder and chair of the Brownsville, Texas,

Reads Task Force. She served on former Gov. George

Bush’s Focus on Reading Task Force and the Governor’s

Special Education Advisory Committee. She also served 

as a Texas panel member of Academics Goals 2000 and

received the Texas State Board of Education “Heroes for

Children” award. Garza is a member of the International

Dyslexia Association and serves as a strong advocate for

business community involvement in education. A graduate of Southern Methodist University, she works as a certified public accountant and is a member of the National

Reading Panel.

Alexander Gonzalez, Ph.D., San Marcos, Calif.

Gonzalez is president of California State University,

San Marcos. Previously, he was the provost and vice president for academic affairs at California State University

in Fresno. Gonzalez has served on the California State

University System Commission on Financial Aid, the

Institute for Teaching and Learning, and the Commission

on Educational Equity. He is a member of the San Diego

Economic Development Corporation and the Greater

San Diego Chamber of Commerce. Gonzalez has also

served as commissioner of the Western Association of

Schools and Colleges and as a member of the Advisory

Board of the Hispanic Scholarship Fund, the Council 

of Representatives of the National Association of State

Universities and Land Grant Colleges, and the Council 

of Representatives of the American College Board. A

graduate of Pomona College, he attended Harvard Law

School and earned a doctorate in psychology from the

University of California in Santa Cruz.

Miguel A. Hernandez Jr., Sea Brook, Tex.

Founder and chief executive officer of Hernandez

Engineering Inc., the eleventh largest minority-owned

business in the United States, Hernandez helped initiate

NASA’s Apollo Space program. Hernandez was named

the first Hispanic Business Entrepreneur of the Year. His

company, which specializes in manned space flight operations, was chosen for creating innovative marketing

strategies, overcoming the challenge of competing with

larger companies, growing at an annual rate of 123 percent between 1986 and 1990, and contributing to the

community. Hernandez volunteers his time and resources

with several organizations, including the Hispanic College

Fund, the National Hispanic Institute, and Hispanic

Outreach Pathways to Education. He earned a bachelor’s

degree in engineering and a master’s degree in systems

management from the University of Florida.

Rev.Jose Hoyos, Dale City, Va.

Hoyos is the pastor of the Holy Family Church in Dale

City, Virginia. In 1995, the Governor of Virginia appointed him as a member of the state Volunteers and

Community Work Commission. He was a founder 

of the Arlington Hispanic Council and of Marcelino 

Pan y Vino, a nonprofit organization. He has been a

columnist for Diario de Hoy in San Salvador, El Salvador,

since 1997, and has contributed to La Nación, a newspaper distributed in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan

area. He has created television and radio programs serving Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia

since 1996. Previously, Hoyos was the associate pastor of

St. Anthony of Padua Catholic Parish in Falls Church,

Virginia, and Judge of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal for the

Diocese of Arlington, Virginia. Hoyos obtained a master

of divinity degree from Catholic Theological Union in

Chicago, Illinois.

Patricia J. Mazzuca, Philadelphia, Pa.

Mazzuca is principal of Roberto Clemente Middle

School, Philadelphia’s largest middle school. The school

serves as an international model for multicultural education and technology programs in inner-city schools.

Mazzuca has received numerous awards for her leadership in education and has been a frequent lecturer, guest

speaker and panelist—locally, regionally and nationally.

Mazzuca has extensive experience in bilingual education,

technology/curriculum integration, and assessment and

analysis. Mazzuca earned a degree in elementary and secondary school principalship from Trenton State College,

a master of education degree in special education from

Temple University and a master’s of psychology degree

from the University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras.

Francisco J. Paret, Palo Alto, Calif.

Francisco Paret is presently managing partner of

Aldamar Partners, an investment banking boutique providing independent financial advisory services.
From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

66

Previously, Paret was a senior investment banker in the

Technology Investment Banking Group with Credit

Suisse First Boston Corporation. He has also held positions with ING Barings Securities; with Bear, Stearns &

Co., Inc.; and with Prudential Securities Inc. Paret is a

founding partner and member of Social Venture Partners

of the San Francisco Bay Area, focused on issues of youth

and education. He also serves on the board of directors

of Opportunities Industrialization Center West, and on

the board of advisors of Hispanic-Net, a non-profit

organization that seeks to advance Hispanic entrepreneurship. He received a master’s degree in business

administration from The Wharton School at the

University of Pennsylvania, and a bachelor of science

degree in business administration from Georgetown

University in Washington, D.C.

Altagracia “Grace” Ramos, Beavercreek, Ohio

Grace Ramos is a commissioner with the Ohio Civil

Rights Commission in Columbus, Ohio. Previously,

Ramos held positions with the U.S. Department of

Housing and Urban Development and the Office of

Public Liaison at the White House. She has been active 

in a variety of community groups, including the Ohio

Baptist Convention Hispanic Task Force, the Dayton

Area Baptist Association, the Greater Dayton Area

United Way, the Ohio Welfare Conference, the U.S.

Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the Hispanic

Youth Foundation. Ramos has received numerous

awards, including selection by the Dayton Daily News as

one of the “Ten Top Women.” She also received the Ohio

Distinguished Hispanic Award and the Ohio Woman of

Courage Award in Government. She attended San

Bernardino College.

Van D. Romero, Ph.D., Albuquerque, N. Mex.

Romero is the vice president for research and economic

development at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and

Technology. Romero is also a professor of physics at New

Mexico Tech. He received his bachelor of science and master of science in physics from the New Mexico Institute of

Mining and Technology and his Ph.D. in Physics from the

State University of New York.

Jon Secada, Miami, Fla.

Jon Secada, a Grammy Award-winning artist, is a pioneer

musician of the Latin fusion sound. His music, influenced

by his upbringing in Miami’s melting pot, seamlessly

mixes pop, rock and jazz into the instantly recognizable

Secada sound. He is both a critical success among music’s

cognoscenti and a popular success, selling nearly 20 million albums worldwide. In addition to his phenomenal

solo career, he has co-written songs with pop luminaries

Gloria Estefan, Ricky Martin and Jennifer Lopez. Secada’s

artistry is informed by his education from the University

of Miami, where he received both a Bachelor of Arts and

a Masters Degree in jazz vocal performance.

Ofelia S. Vanden Bosch, Wimberly, Tex.

Vanden Bosch recently retired after a career in public

service working for Victoria County, Harris County, the

Houston Chamber of Commerce, the City of Houston

and the State of Texas. Her last position, from 1995 to

2000, was as administrative assistant to the Governor of

Texas. Previously, she worked for the City of Houston

from 1964 to 1974 and again from 1983 to 1994, where

she served two mayors and two city department directors. From 1975 to 1982, Vanden Bosch worked for the

president of the Houston Chamber of Commerce and

the Texas Secretary of State.

Rene Vazquez, M.D., San Juan, P. R.

Vazquez’s distinguished career in medicine and public

service has led him to operate one of the largest ophthalmology clinics in Puerto Rico. He currently has a private

practice in pediatric ophthalmology in Hato Rey, Puerto

Rico. Vazquez has served in various positions at

Municipal Hospital, in the Ophthalmology Department

of the University of Puerto Rico School of Medicine, and

as chief of pediatric ophthalmology with San Jorge

Children’s Hospital. He has published articles on various

aspects of pediatric ophthalmology. Vazquez received his

bachelor’s and medical degrees from the University of

Puerto Rico.

Octavio J. Visiedo, Coral Gables, Fla.

Octavio Visiedo was formerly the superintendent of

schools in Dade County, Fla., the country’s fourth largest

school district. After serving six years in that position,

Visiedo resigned and, in 1999, became one of the four

founders of Chancellor Academies, Inc., a leading developer and manager of high-quality, public charter schools

and independent private schools serving students from

pre-kindergarten through grade 12. Visiedo received

both his bachelor of arts in history and master of education degrees from the University of Miami. He is a visiting professor at Florida International University.

Ex-Officio Members

The Honorable Rod Paige, Secretary of the 

United States Department of Education

Secretary Paige was confirmed by the United States Senate

as the seventh secretary of education on January 20, 2001,
following the inauguration of President George W. Bush.

Born in Monticello, Miss., Secretary Paige is the son of

public school educators. He earned a bachelor’s degree

from Jackson State University in Mississippi and a Master’s

degree and a doctorate from Indiana University. Although

Secretary Paige first distinguished himself coaching college-level athletics, he always has been committed to public education and the preparation of teachers to excel in

their profession. He served for a decade as dean of the

College of Education at Texas Southern University.

The Honorable Mel Martinez, Secretary of the 

United States Department of Housing and 

Urban Development

Secretary Martinez is the nation's 12th secretary of

Housing and Urban Development. He was unanimously

confirmed by the United States Senate and took his oath

of office on January 24, 2001. In nominating Martinez,

President George W. Bush said: “Since leaving his Cuban

homeland as a boy, Mel Martinez has been the embodiment of the American dream and has had great success

in helping the people of his community obtain affordable housing and urban services.” His work in the public

and private sectors, active involvement in community

activities and understanding of the work of faith-based

social service agencies make him particularly well suited

to serve as leader of the United States Department of

Housing and Urban Development.

The Honorable John W. Snow, Secretary of the 

United States Department of the Treasury

President George W. Bush nominated John William

Snow to be the 73rd secretary of the Treasury on January

13, 2003. The United States Senate unanimously confirmed Snow to the position on January 30, 2003, and he

was sworn into office on February 3, 2003. As secretary

of the Treasury, Snow works closely with President Bush

to strengthen economic growth and create jobs. Snow

was chairman and chief executive officer of CSX

Corporation, where he successfully guided the transportation company though a period of tremendous

change. During Snow’s 20 years at CSX, he led the corporation to refocus on its core railroad business, dramatically reduce injuries and train accidents, and improve its

financial performance.

The Honorable Hector V. Barreto, Administrator of the

United States Small Business Administration

By unanimous vote, the United States Senate confirmed

Hector V. Barreto as the 21st administrator of the Small

Business Administration on July 25, 2001. President

George W. Bush nominated him to the post. As SBA

Administrator, Barreto directs the delivery of financial

and business development programs to America’s entrepreneurs. With a portfolio of direct and guaranteed business loans and disaster loans worth more than $45 billion, SBA is the nation’s largest single financial backer of

small business.

Ex-Officio Designees

Fred C. Armendariz, associate deputy administrator,

United States Small Business Administration

Armendariz is the associate deputy administrator for

Government Contracting and Business Development 

for the Small Business Administration. In this position,

he serves as the principal advisor to the Administrator 

on all government contracting and business development

issues. He establishes and implements all policies and

procedures for the operation, improvement, and oversight of the Offices of Government Contracting, Business

Development, HUBZone Empowerment Contracting,

and Policy, Planning, and Liaison, including the Offices

of Technology, Size Standards, and Policy and Research.

Anna Maria Farias, deputy assistant secretary,

United States Department of Housing and 

Urban Development

Farias is the deputy assistant secretary for Special

Initiatives under the auspices of Community Planning

and Development in the Department of Housing and

Urban Development. She recently served as senior counsel for HUD Secretary Mel Martinez. From November

1992–2000, Farias served as the executive director of the

Crystal City Housing Authority in Texas. She received 13

National Awards of Merit and the Presidential National

Award for being the only executive director in the country to reside in public housing.

Maria Hernandez Ferrier, director, Office of

English Language Acquisition, United States

Department of Education

Hernandez Ferrier was appointed to the position of

director of the Office of English Language Acquisition,

Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement for

Limited English Proficient Students (OELA) on March 8,

2002. In her position, Ferrier serves as principal adviser

to the secretary of education on all matters related to

limited English-proficient students. In Ferrier’s 17 years

of experience as an educator, she created numerous

award-winning models for assisting underserved children and youth.

Biographies

67
The Honorable Rosario Marin, Treasurer of the 

United States

Marin, of Huntington Park, California, was sworn in as

the 41st Treasurer of the United States on August 16,

2001. Marin is the first Mexican-born United States

Treasurer to hold this office. She is also the highest 

Latina to serve in President George W. Bush’s administration. Before taking this office, Marin served as mayor

and councilwoman of Huntington Park, a city of 85,000

residents, with a population that is 99 percent Hispanic.

White House Initiative Staff

Leslie Sanchez, executive director

As executive director of the White House Initiative,

Sanchez is privileged to work with a Presidential

Advisory Commission to advise on the needs of

Hispanic students. A native of Texas, Sanchez has held a

number of positions throughout the Washington, D.C.,

area. She directed the Republican National Committee’s

Hispanic marketing effort for the 2000 elections and

served as a legislative aide to U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla 

(R-TX). She was named one of Hispanic Business magazine’s “100 Most Influential Hispanics.” Sanchez is a

graduate of The George Washington University, and she

earned a master of business administration in Marketing

from Johns Hopkins University.

Adam Chavarria, associate director

Chavarria serves as the associate director of the White

House Initiative. Previously, he served as the executive

director of the Hispanic College Fund (HCF), a national

non-profit organization founded by Hispanic business

leaders in 1993. He has also served as an active member

of the United States Senate Republican Conference Task

Force on Hispanic Affairs Advisory Committee since

1991. A native of Harlingen, Texas, Chavarria earned his

undergraduate degree in Political Science and masters in

Public Administration from the University of Minnesota.

Syddia Lee-Chee, director of marketing and public affairs

Before joining the White House Initiative, Lee-Chee was

the national marketing and media liaison for Hispanic

Affairs at the United States Department of Treasury, where

she developed new marketing strategies and partnerships

for marketing Treasury Securities. Lee-Chee also held a

number of key marketing positions in multinational corporations such as Gillette, Inc., and served as executive

director of the Panamanian Advertising Council. She is an

active community volunteer, founder of several chapters in

Latin America of AIESEC, the largest student global business network. Lee-Chee holds a bachelor’s degree in

Business Administration with a major in Accounting from

Santa Maria La Antigua University in Panama, and graduated from Georgetown University, School of Continuing

and Professional Studies.

Denise Rodriguez-Lopez, director of policy 

development

Prior to joining the White House Initiative, RodriguezLopez served as the director of government affairs and

legislative policy for the Cuban American National

Council. A native of New York, she has also held the

positions of director of the regional offices division for

the Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration and

administrative counsel for the Puerto Rico Electric and

Power Authority. She earned a bachelor’s degree in business administration and a juris doctorate from the

University of Puerto Rico Law School. She is working

towards her master of law in Government Contracts at

The George Washington University Law School.

J. David Almacy, strategic partnerships and 

communications 

Almacy joined the White House Initiative staff in

November 2002 after two years with GovTech Solutions,

a political Internet communications firm specializing in

the design and development of campaign, Congressional

and federal government Web sites. A native of

Washington, D.C., Almacy brings an extensive public

affairs and marketing background that includes a White

House internship and prior work for the Republican

National Committee, Phi Delta Theta Fraternity,

Washington Business Journal and C-SPAN. He is a graduate of Widener University, where he earned his undergraduate degree in marketing and political science.

Webber Barton, special assistant, policy development

Barton developed an interest in helping the Hispanic

community during her time as an intern in the White

House Office of Political Affairs, where she assisted with

Hispanic outreach efforts. After graduating from the

University of the South in May 2002 with a bachelor’s

degree in Spanish, she joined the White House Initiative

to focus on education issues specifically addressing the

needs of Hispanic students.

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

68
Biographies

69

Heidy Servin-Baez, congressional fellow

Born in Mexico and raised in Corvallis, Ore., ServinBaez is a fellow with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus

Institute for the year. She is a graduate of the University

of San Francisco, where she earned her undergraduate

degree in International Business and a minor in economics and French.

Edgar Zazueta, congressional fellow

Zazueta has been a part of the White House Initiative

staff since August of 2002; he is a public policy fellow

with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. He is

a graduate of the California State University, Fullerton,

where he earned a bachelor’s degree in Political Science.

The Commission wishes to specifically acknowledge the

support of Monica Kibler and Stophia Stampley during

the development of this report.
From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

70
Federal Accountability and Coordination Reporting Guidelines and Federal Report Forms

71

[Hold for insertion of federal reporting form]

Fulfilling Federal reporting requirements of Executive Order 13230

II. The measurable impact resulting from these efforts and levels of participation.

a) To what extent have (or will) the programs, projects, or initiatives undertaken by your Department help

students to close the educational achievement gap for Hispanic Americans and ensure attainment of the

goals established by the President’s No Child Left Behind Act?

b) To what extent have (or will) the programs, projects, or initiatives undertaken by your Department help

Hispanic parents, educators, and communities successfully prepare children to graduate from high school

and attend postsecondary institutions?

c) Highlight models of success that helped improve achievement among Hispanic students through coordinated efforts among parents, community leaders, business leaders, educators and public officials.

d) Finally, please describe any public/private partnerships that you Department has or will undertake as

part of your efforts to meet the educational needs of Hispanic Americans.

Federal Accountability and Coordination 

Reporting Guidelines and Federal Report Forms
Hispanic Educational Expenditures as Percent of Agency Education Budgets

Agency Education Budget Hispanic Education Expenditures % of Education 

(FY2002, in thousands) as Reported by NCES as Reported to the Commission Budget

U.S. Department of Education 47,769,284 6,927,000 14.50%

U.S. Department of Agriculture 11,896,064 34,171 0.29%

U.S. Department of Commerce 133,360 6,799 5.10%

U.S. Department of Defense 4,749,222 260 0.01%

U.S. Department of Energy 3,625,124 28,610 0.79%

U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services 22,858,490 2,159,380 9.45%

U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development 1,300 9,500 730.77%*

U.S. Department of Interior 1,185,653 1,733 0.15%

U.S. Department of Labor 6,364,200 489,562 7.69%

U.S. Department of 

Transportation 144,379 2,514 1.74%

U.S. Department of Treasury 139,000 1,356 0.98%

U.S. Department of 

Veterans Affairs 2,301,273 99,027 4.30%

U.S. Agency for International 

Development 462,500 4,800 1.04%

National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration 2,066,869 47,365 2.29%

National Endowment for the Arts 10,854 50 0.46%

National Endowment for 

the Humanities 103,000 2,600 2.52%

National Science Foundation 3,230,812 71,100 2.20%

Totals $107,040,084 $9,884,740 9.24%

From Risk to Opportunity: Fulfilling the Educational Needs of Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century

72
Summary of Federal Responses

This chart shows the range of responses from 29 Federal departments and agencies to a series of questions designed

to assess efforts to increase the participation of Hispanic Americans in Federal education programs and services.

Entities are defined as Hispanic-serving school districts, Hispanic-serving institutions, and other educational institutions for Hispanic Americans.

Federal Departments # Educational % of Budget to $ Allocated # Participating # Participating

and Agencies Programs to Hispanics Programs Reported (in millions) Entities Hispanics

Central Intelligence Agency 3 N/A 0.24 9 4,009

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R

National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration 172 0.32% 47.364 24,586 17,985

National Endowment for the Arts 5 0.06% 0.05 18 680

National Endowment for the Humanities4 2.50% 2.60 77 N/A

National Science Foundation N/R N/R 71.70 N/R N/R

Office of Personnel Management 2 0.42% 0.273 5 24

Smithsonian Institution

Social Security Administration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

U.S. Agency for International 

Development 5 0.00 4.80 9 97

U.S. Air Force N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R

U.S. Army 6 N/R N/A N/R N/R

U.S. Department of Agriculture 34 0.20% 34.17 10,114 8,160

U.S. Department of Commerce 16 N/A 6.80 217 10,840

U.S. Department of Defense 1 N/R 0.026 8,835 534

U.S. Department of Education 13 14% 6,927.00 29,957 12,065,914

U.S. Department of Energy* N/R N/R 28.61 71 N/R

U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services* N/R N/R 2,159.38 N/R N/R

U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development 1 0.03% 9.50 19 N/R

U.S. Department of Interior N/R N/A 1.732 286 4,127

U.S. Department of Justice N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R

U.S. Department of Labor N/R 0.05% 489.5 903 2,310,178

U.S. Department of State

U.S. Department of Transportation 10 0.04% 2.51 14 183

U.S. Department of Treasury 8 N/R 1.35 36 28

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 5 0.19% 99.03 246 30,555

U.S. Navy NR NR NR NR NR

U.S. Small Business Administration 1 1.00% 7.90 N/R 102,614

Totals 286 1.57% $9,894.54 75,402 14,555,928

[Hold for insertion of NCES table]

Federal Accountability and Coordination Reporting Guidelines and Federal Report Forms

73
White House Initiative on Educational 

Excellence for Hispanic Americans

400 Maryland Avenue, SW

Suite 5E110

Washington, DC 20202

(202)401-1411

(202)401-8377 fax

(877)4ED-PUBS

www.YesICan.gov