August 1, 2005
Flores-González, Nilda. School Kids/Street Kids: Identity Development in Latino Students. New York: Teachers College Press, 2002.
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (2000), 28% of all 16-24 year old Hispanics are high school drop-outs, as compared to 7.3% of whites, 12.6% of blacks and 4.3% of Asians (Flores-González 2). In School Kids/Street Kids Flores-González addresses the high drop-out rate of Latino high school students by conducting a study of thirty three Puerto Rican students at Hernández High School in Chicago, a school whose student body is comprised mostly of low income Hispanic students. Flores-González divides the students in her study up into what she calls “school kids,” or students who adopt an identity based on participation and achievement and “street kids,” or students who form an identity in opposition to school and authority. According to Flores-González, there are several specific steps schools can take to reinforce “school kid” identity formation among Latino students, thus lowering drop-out rates.
In the first chapter of her book, Flores-González lays out a useful summary of current educational theory on the subject of Latino drop-out rates. Flores-González aligns herself with proponents of Resistance or Oppositional Theory—the theory that minorities tend to be low-achieving because they are rebelling against some perceived injustice in the educational system—adding that the form that this resistance takes is often for students to assume a “street kid” identity.
Flores-González’s proceeds to follow thirty three students through several years of high school. Some of the students she interviews drop out, some graduate and some only intermittently attend school. Most of her study takes the form of interviews and personal accounts. She identifies each student as either a “school kid” or a “street kid,” providing the following definitions:
School Kid Identity: “More than an identity bounded to school, this school-kid identity represents an image of how these youths view themselves and how they want to be viewed by others—as good kids…As a cumulative identity it is composed of family, school, and community identities, such as the obedient and dutiful daughter, the all-American school athlete, and the church-boys and –girls.” (11)
Street Kid Identity: “Students who do not become school kids and who behave contrary to school norms are usually labeled ‘bad kids.’ Because images of the bad kid inevitably evoke images of the street and street culture—gangs, rowdy boys, teenage mothers—I chose to use the term ‘street kids’…to identify youths who take on non-school-oriented identities and who engage in behaviors contrary to accepted norms.” (11-12)
After analyzing several personal accounts of each student’s high school experience, Flores-González notes several traits that the “school kids” share:
1. School kids have opportunities to take on the socially appropriate role of students.
2. They can count on the support of their teachers and peers.
3. They get recognition and rewards.
4. They develop close and warm relationships with teachers and other school kids.
5. They receive constant positive feedback for their adequate performance as students.
6. They are given opportunities to explore and incorporate into their school-kid identity various other school-related identities
7. They are encouraged to explore possibilities for their future and to aspire—and expect—to become socially mobile. (154-5)
Flores-González concludes that schools can encourage “school kid” identity formation by imposing high academic standards and implementing a curriculum which incorporates multicultural perspectives. Schools should also decrease both school and class size to discourage anonymity among the student body; teachers should work to form close, personal relationships with students; competition (for grades or spots on athletic teams) should be kept at a minimum, and schools should encourage participation in extra-curricular activities. Finally, Flores-González suggests, schools should paint a truthful picture of discrimination in the workforce while still helping Latino students to construct “ambitious yet realistic conceptualizations of themselves in the future” (156).
1ad4