Search results

Across the United States, Native Americans ¹ are often underrepresented in gifted and talented programs. The education publications tend to be replete with literature focused on their general failures and challenges in general education, and little attention is placed on those students who are currently in gifted education programs or have the potential for such advanced academic services. This chapter focuses specifically on the underrepresentation of Native American students in gifted programs and how educators could better identify and service this student population in gifted education.

In this chapter, Mousumi De presents the principles and implications of CRT in the context of Asian and Asian American experiences including the perspective, features, strategies, and new directions on how to facilitate the preparation of teacher candidates and work with all teachers to understand the complexity of the Asian and Asian American identity, their racialized experiences, and their sociohistorical, transnational contexts that continue to influence their lived experiences. This chapter highlights the important issues and challenges facing Asians and Asian Americans that have been camouflaged by their stereotypical treatment as model minorities. It also shares the work of many scholars on approaches for promoting diversity and inclusion, such as implementing anti-racist, anti-oppressive, and inclusive history curricula, cultural citizenship education, teaching for social justice, and culturally responsive and culturally sustaining teaching for addressing the marginalization of Asians and Asian Americans.

This chapter quotes how St. John, Daun-Barnett, and Moronski-Chapman (2012) maintained ideological shifts in American culture and politics which are important to the study of higher education policy because of the influence on public finance, government regulation, and curriculum. From the Great Depression through the Cold War to the present, human capital theory has guided higher education (St. John et al., 2012). Veiled concepts of accessibility and equity were substantial during this era to mask more nefarious attempts to shift to the privatization away from the public good of American Higher Education (Astin & Oseguera, 2004). This chapter focuses on the role of accountability as a neoliberal ideology, and the impact of this ideology, as a form of corporatization on higher education. Furthermore, this focus on corporatization intersects specifically with the discourse pertaining to corporate social responsibility (CSR), which can be understood as transparent actions that guide an organization to benefit society, such as in funding and accessibility. In this chapter, the authors engage in a critical analysis of neoliberalism, and academic capitalism, as threats to the institution of higher education as a public good. The authors initially provide a framing of the public to private dichotomy of American higher education in explaining the various products produced and expected outcomes. A historical context for performance-based funding in American higher education is provided as an understanding of the nature and scope of the contemporary model. To understand the influence of public funding policies on American higher education, it is also necessary to comprehend the role of political ideology and how the business model of higher education has evolved. Thus, a general discussion of neoliberalism permeates the entirety of this discussion. This chapter concludes with the tertiary impacts of neoliberalism.

In 1980, there were 1,106.8 million African Americans enrolled in college. Of this number, 463,700 were males and 643,100 were females. In other words, among African Americans enrolled in higher education, 58.1% were female. By the year 2004, of the 2,164.7 million African Americans enrolled in higher education, 65% were female. Thus, between 1980 and 2004, the gender gap in higher education within the African American community increased by nearly 7 percentage points. What happened to African American males? Why are they not enrolling in higher education at higher rates?

The South Texas University this study examined is a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) that has a 73.3% Hispanic (primarily Mexican American) population (Tallant, 2018 ). The logical consequence of education is the provision or guarantee of an equitable opportunity for all students to have equal access to learning and the achievement of academic success (Stewner-Manzanares, 1988 ). The basic definition of bilingual education in the United States is the use of two languages for instruction of the home language and English. Unfortunately, this basic principle is not accepted by postsecondary institutions as predispositions of university preparedness (Blanchard & Muller, 2014; García, Kleifgen, & Falchi, 2008; Kanno & Cromley, 2013; Lee et al., 2011; Menken, Hudson, & Leung, 2014). Mexican American students are potentially being left out of the opportunities afforded by the attainment of a postsecondary education because they are a language minority (Lucas, Henze, & Donato, 1990; Moll, 1990; Trueba, 2002; Trueba & Wright, 1981; Washington & Craig, 1998). Students are already examined for postsecondary credentials or college readiness, in the eighth grade (Paredes, 2013). Through this testing, 11 out of every 100 Hispanic children in the state of Texas are deemed as having attained postsecondary credentials (Paredes, 2013). As part of the fastest growing demographic group in Texas and the United States, the Mexican American population holds the lowest rate of graduation from postsecondary institutions and the highest high school dropout rate of any ethnic minority in the nation. In a 12-year study, Kanno and Cromley (2013) found that one out of eight English as a second language (ESL) or English language learners (ELLs) attain a bachelor’s degree from postsecondary institutions across the United States while the success rate for their English, monolingual counterparts is one out of three. Various researchers (García et al., 2008; García, Pujol-Ferran, & Reddy, 2012) argue that the inequity of education in the United States can be measured by how few minority students educated under the principles of education attend a postsecondary institution because it is the diploma from such institutions that leads to higher paying wages for the individual (García, 1991; García et al., 2008, García et al., 2012).

What is it about academia anyway? We profess to hate it, spend endless amounts of time complaining about it, and yet we in academia will do practically anything to stay. The pay may be low, job security elusive, and in the end, it's not the glamorous work we envisioned it would be. Yet, it still holds fascination and interest for us. This is an article about American academic fiction. By academic fiction, I mean novels whosemain characters are professors, college students, and those individuals associated with academia. These works reveal many truths about the higher education experience not readily available elsewhere. We learn about ourselves and the university community in which we work.

Education has been shown to have myriad effects on people, from increasing their incomes to changing their views of the world. In the area of entrepreneurship, education creates opportunities and increases the rate of entrepreneurial activity. This study explores educationʼs effects on the immigrant entrepreneurship development processes and outcomes in the context of Korean-Americans by comparing a national sample of Korean-Americans with differing amounts of education. The sample is part of the National Minority Business Owners Surveys (NMBOS) carried out by the Lawrence N. Field Center for Entrepreneurship at Baruch College between 2003 and 2005. The authors hypothesize that high-education Korean-Americans will have larger and more successful businesses, have more varying types of businesses, and follow differing paths to business formation. In addition, the authors hypothesize that motivations, goals, and attitudes toward their businesses, families, and their lives generally will be different. Among other things, confidence and level of satisfaction with their business will be higher for the high-education group. The study finds that while the low- and high-education groups vary in their types of businesses, the paths followed into those businesses, and the size of their businesses, they are very similar as to their attitudes, motivations, and family interactions. Implications for future research are discussed.

The Kathryn M. Buder Center for American Indian Studies is a premier graduate degree scholarship program in social work committed to the education of American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) MSW students. The Buder Center has made many contributions over the years and continues to grow in exciting and innovative directions. This chapter considers the factors influencing AI/AN students in higher education; discusses the challenges and barriers faced by AI/AN students; and describes the founding of the Buder Center, its programs, and services. The chapter concludes by presenting recommended approaches for recruiting and retaining AI/AN students in higher education.

This paper examines the growth of private corporate influence in American higher education. A key question is corporate philanthropy and privatization at what cost? The terms often used in these discussions are commodification of the academy, privatization of a public good, or the increasing corporatization of higher education. Today, American universities are responding to the demands of the marketplace, as knowledge is being used as a form of venture capital and where professors have become academic entrepreneurs and students have become consumers. The foregoing is made more complex as an increasingly diverse student pool seeks access to postsecondary education, in the face of federal policies that serve to restrict access and financial support. A discussion of the collateral costs of our corporate culture as we face challenges to access, equity, and opportunity in America in the twenty-first century concludes this paper.

Educational leaders in schools serving Native American students must understand, communicate, and apply state and federal education policies along with specific federal Indian policies relating to tribal self-determination and the education of these students. Tribal peoples residing in native communities typically view revitalization of indigenous language as a crucial first step in achieving the cross-cultural goal of school success for all tribal children. Inclusion of indigenous languages serves multiple purposes such as transmitting traditional cultural values, supporting overall academic achievement, and fostering self-determination and independence for native communities. Title III and Title VII of the No Child Left Behind Act are the designated policy “homes” for indigenous language inclusion and the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act addresses indigenous language as an obstacle to overcome, giving the unintended impression that native languages are somehow situated within a deficit framework of poverty and special education. This chapter explores the foundations of the inclusion of native languages into current federal policy and argues that the placement might be better suited as stand-alone legislation in order to more effectively promote community development and self-determination for Native American peoples.