Suchergebnisse

The promise(s) of education -- Competing visions of public education : who and what should it be for? -- What does education do? paradigms and theories about how education works -- Inequality by socioeconomic background and class -- Inequality by race and ethnicity, immigrant status, and language ability -- Inequality by gender and disability -- Educational inequality in other nations -- Education reforms and inequality / Jessica Brathwaite and Kimberly Goyette -- If we don't like educational inequality, why is it so hard to make it go away?

In this review of two books, Caroline Kieu-Linh Valverede's, Transnationalizing Vietnam: Community, Culture, and Politics in the Diaspora and Cathy J. Schlund-Vials' War, Genocide and Justice: Cambodian American Memory Work, sociologist Kimberly Goyette discusses how memory may be shaped and contested for two Southeast Asian immigrant groups, Vietnamese Americans and Cambodian Americans. She also considers how memory is important for identity, and ultimately, assimilation in the United States.

"A series of policy shifts over the past decade promises to change how Americans decide where to send their children to school. In theory, the expanded use of standardized test scores and the boom in charter schools will allow parents to evaluate their assigned neighborhood school, or move in search of a better option. But what kind of data do parents actually use while choosing schools? Are there differences among suburban and urban families? How do parents' choices influence school and residential segregation? What role ... [do] school concerns play in the preferences of white and minority parents for particular neighborhoods, and how [do] the racial and economic makeup of both neighborhoods and schools mutually reinforce each other? Choosing Homes, Choosing Schools adroitly addresses this gap and provides a firmer understanding of how Americans choose where to live and send their children to school." -- Back cover

Data from the 5% Public Use Microsample of the 1990 Census & the longitudinal 1982-1989 Survey of Natural & Social Scientists & Engineers (SSE) are used to compare the labor force outcomes of women immigrant scientists with those of immigrant men & native-born women scientists. Findings indicate that immigrant women are less likely to be employed & promoted than immigrant men & native-born women. Although women immigrants appear to earn slightly less than native-born women, this gap is explained by such factors as field, employment sector, & family characteristics. It is suggested that immigration paths may underlie some of the labor force disadvantages experienced by immigrant women scientists. Results highlight the importance of considering gender differences, particularly differences in migration path, when studying immigrant scientists. 3 Tables, 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

Much research has focused on the relative success of Asian Americans in U.S. higher education, particularly their high rates of enrollment and graduation compared to White Americans. In this research, we investigate one factor that may influence these outcomes: whether Asian American families invest more financially in their children's college education. Using data from the 2015–2016 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, we find that Asian American families contribute more not only absolutely but also proportionate to their incomes. This is not due to their greater financial resources but is related to Asian American students' attendance at more selective institutions. Asian American families may adopt college investment strategies that place more value on selective institutions, perhaps because of perceived intrinsic value, high esteem in their social networks, limited information about other institutions, and/or because they anticipate that such experiences more easily translate into desired occupations.

White households with children are the least likely of all household types to live in integrated neighborhoods, yet few researchers have questioned whether children themselves influence residential decision–making. Children may affect both residential preferences and constraints and in turn, household mobility decisions that shape patterns of segregation and integration. Following a cohort of household heads in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we find that white households whose oldest child is younger than six are more likely to move when the percentage of black residents and diversity in their neighborhoods is higher. However, when white households with children do move, they are not more likely than white households without children to move to neighborhoods with fewer blacks or less diversity. Young children may matter for segregation because they influence families to leave more diverse neighborhoods, and white movers generally move into neighborhoods with less diversity, whether or not they have children.

According to the majority-minority paradigm, racial and ethnic minorities have lower socioeconomic characteristics than whites owing to discrimination. Asian Americans defy this conventional view, however, at least on average. Asian Americans tend to have higher mean levels of educational achievements, and several recent studies indicate approximate parity with whites in most arenas of the labor market for those Asian Americans who were schooled in the United States. Their favorable socioeconomic outcomes stand in contrast to the widespread discrimination and labor market disadvantages that Asian Americans encountered during the earlier part of the twentieth century. The improved opportunities for Asian Americans suggest increasingly successful interrelations with whites in the post–Civil Rights era, with its more multicultural ethos. Less encouragingly, the favorable average socioeconomic profile of Asian Americans in the post–Civil Rights era in part reflects the rising significance of class resources and associated inequalities. The latter trend is evident in the notable socioeconomic variability within the racial category of Asian Americans.