15
OF WALLS & BRIDGES: EDUCATIONAL COSTS OF ANTI-IMMIGRANT RHETORIC IN US PUBLIC EDUCATION
Authors: Paul L. LANDRY
Number of views: 265
There has been heated public and political discourse in the United States concerning immigrants, with generalized fear of terrorist attacks, xenophobia and calls for restriction
on immigration. A major proposal by one candidate in the Presidential election has been to “build a wall” to keep out Mexican immigrants. Yet in a “nation of immigrants,” with millions of immigrant families and descendants already within, people from other countries will continue to enter. Major concerns for educators, and for teacher educators, are the effects and implications of such anti-immigrant discourse upon schooling and educational opportunities for immigrant language minority children in public schools. Structurally, the US Constitution guarantees education to children within the United States, and prohibits
discriminatory denial of education services based upon race, ethnicity, language or immigration status. The focus of discussion will be on implications of such public rhetoric and related policies upon relationships between immigrant language minority families and schools, and the academic progress of immigrant children. A wealth of research demonstrates the beneficial effects of positive and receptive school environments for immigrant language minority children, and strong collaboration between schools and immigrant families. Research regarding such relationships also suggests adverse effects of symbolic interactionism in anti-immigrant discursive environments which impede salutary and productive collaboration between immigrant language minority families and schools.
As rhetorical sparring continues, the children fall further behind academically due to marginalization, ineffective instruction and dropping out of the education system. This
dysfunctional interaction exacts a far deeper and more persistent cost burden, in terms of human capital and lost opportunity, than generally recognized in superficial political debate over who would pay for a putative anti-immigrant wall.