Sending Messages

I had originally prepared a blog about the importance of including Latinos in meeting our national college completion goal. However, I was struck by the contrasting messages sent with the legislative decisions in Arizona this past week on immigration, ethnic studies, and teaching English with an accent. What implicit and explicit messages are being sent and what are the potential implications? I see a sharp and disturbing contrast between our message of inclusion of Latinos and the messages being sent from Arizona of exclusion.

At Excelencia in Education, we have made concerted efforts to send the message across the nation that Latino college completion benefits all and is critical for our national well-being.  We've also worked hard to correct the inaccurate profiles of Latinos in this country. We've emphasized that the vast majority of Latinos, and the overwhelming majority of Latino youth, are U.S. citizens and made the point that educating the Latino population provides a rich and critical opportunity for our country. We've approached the framing of our message from multiple asset-based perspectives: from human capital, social justice, and enlightened self-interest.

We've tried to send a message of inclusion, not one of exclusion or fear. We've continually emphasized that serving Latino students in higher education does not mean excluding students of other backgrounds; it means making sure that Latinos are included in the programs and services offered and assessed for performance. We have focused on the opportunities of improving Latino student success rather than the dire consequences of not educating our population. We've highlighted what is working to improve Latino student success in higher education as a way of informing the field of what is possible. In fact, just last week Excelencia in Education hosted a policy forum entitled "Ensuring America's Future by Increasing Latino College Completion."

However, I can't help but think that the message being sent from Arizona is not one of inclusion or focused on Latinos as an asset to the state or to our country.  From English only instruction to the latest requirement to prove citizenship, from the banning of ethnic studies to the removal of English teachers who have accents, the impression growing nationally about Arizona is generally not inclusive, especially of Latinos. Rather than building on assets and the potential strengths of those who live in the state, the message that appears to be coming across is one of exclusion.

Has the articulation of the demographic growth of Latinos and the continual portrayal of us predominantly as immigrants provided the justification behind the legislative decisions made in Arizona? While some might argue that protectionism and a lack of federal guidance cemented the decision to move forward on their own immigration policy, can the same rationale be used for the proposed limit to academic freedom by banning ethnic studies and the exclusion of English teachers who have accents?

I'll be frank. I am a U.S.-born fully bilingual well-educated military brat and former federal civil servant working in the field of education. The message I received from Arizona, intended or not, is that I am not welcome.