conrespeto (1)

7/30/2019 ConRespeto (1)

1/3

Con Respeto, Bridging the Distance Between Culturally Diverse Families and Schools

Guadalupe Valdes

1996

This book reports on a piece of a larger ethnographic teaThe author observed and

interviewed 10 families in which the adults were Mexican-born, mostly first generation,living in a semi-rural area near the U.S.-Mexican border. She learned about their work

experiences, struggles to find housing, encounters with schools and educators,

involvement in their children's education, their cultural values, and more.

Most of the families had come to this country from rural, traditional Mexico. On average,

the highest education level attained by the adults was 4th grade. Their jobs in the U.S.

included construction, small restaurant ownership, janitorial work, farm labor, housepainting, waitressing and factory work Owning a small business was everyone's dream.

Living conditions for the families were poor, i.e., apartments and houses were located in

poor and often dangerous neighborhoods and were deteriorating. "Parents were living

lives that required large amounts of energy to survive."

In these families there were clearly defined roles for husbands, wives and children.Husbands were providers and wives were responsible for the welfare and education of the

children. Children were responsible for contributing to the well-being of the family by

performing chores, taking care of younger children and teaching them their familyresponsibilities, and bringing in money as soon as it was reasonable and possible.

"Success was defined as having hardworking sons and virtuous daughters. Families never

imagined that young people might need to make choices between family responsibilities

and their own ambitions."

Parents understood that being a high school dropout in the U.S. did not put a child in aposition to provide much economic support to his family, which means they werestrongly in favor of their children graduating from high school. They believed in

education to a point. Education was important, but it didn't come first. Coming from a

closed society, parents did not see education as a solution to changing a rigideconomic/social hierarchy. They knew the diploma was essential for a better job than

parents had, but beyond that expressed mistrust for people who had "too much

education." Too much education was seen as a cause of not being able to manage the

simple, practical tasks required in life and of not knowing how to cope with the toughdemands of life. Kids who went to work after high school and brought money home

were seen as offering proof that they understood their responsibilities to the family, their

gratitude to their parents, and that they weren't abandoning the family by going off tocollege.

While parents supported their children's K-12 education, most defined this supportdifferently than would a middle class parent. "The mother's most important responsibility

was to shape their children's character, which meant such things as raising children who

understood their roles in the family,


2/3

were responsible to the family,

did not raise their voices to their elders,

stayed close to home and the extended family all their lives,

appreciated the sacrifices their parents had made in order to make their lives

better, and

showed their gratitude to their parents for these sacrifices.

Parents recognized individual differences early This child is serous, that child is slow,that one is energetic and knew that there was a role for each child in the family. The

following were "general beliefs underlying most of their views:

o Individuals who do well in school are not necessarily very clever or

intelligent. They may be only book smart.

o Some people are more 'closed-headed' than others. They do not learn as

easily in school.

o Some people who do well in school are not necessarily gifted. They may

simply rely on their memories to get by.

o All people have particular talents. They should do what they are naturally

good at in their lives rather than try to be what they are not."

"The majority of the teaching in the 10 families was carried out by means of consejos

(spontaneous homilies designed to influence behaviors and attitudes). Consejos were

important because mothers considered the moral education of their children to be theirprimary responsibility."

Trust of teachers did not come easily to the parents in this study.

"Commitment and interest in education were not enough to make up for parents' lack of

familiarity with U.S. institutions. Often parents did not feel competent enough to deal

with school personnel. Many misunderstandings led them to believe that schoolpersonnel did not care about their children." Parents did not understand teachers who

expected them to send their children to school already knowing their ABC's, because in

Spanish learning combinations of letter sounds made more sense than single letters andbecause teaching ABC's was the job of the teacher. The job of the parent was shaping

behavior and the school's job was academics.

Parents did not take kindly to verbal messages sent home by the teacher via a child. Theywould ignore them, because they did not view them as a legitimate form of

communication. They might ask advice from the teacher, always on the topic of

discipline and behavior out of school, and were disappointed that the teacher wasn'thelpful. "All interactions initiated by the parent were regarding behavior, not

academics. There were issues around spanking, which was seen as a legitimate way by


3/3

parents to change inappropriate behavior in children, but which sometimes led the school

to call Child Protective Services.

Report cards, even when translated into Spanish, made no sense.

Kids, by virtue of knowing more English or by withholding information, were able tomanipulate their parents successfully.

Students of these parents might not raise their hands in class, speak out in front of others,or answer first, since this kind of independent action was not rewarded at home.

Individual achievements were not the focus of child rearing. In the family, big kids teach

little kids. All work together for the good of the whole, not for the sake of

accolades/praise.

An implication of the extended family was that if one part of the family got a job away

from where the extended family was living, the whole family would move together to be

closer to their relatives, thus more mobility was seen.

Since extended family came first, if there was a death or illness of a family member inMexico, the whole family might pack up and leave for a month or more. Families saw

school personnel as clueless if they insisted that kids not be absent from school so long.

Family was the priority. What could kids be missing in school that would be moreimportant than seeing their grandmother for the last time? If schools really believed that

missing class was so significant, the teacher would have sent along sufficient homework

for the kids to do while they were away.

Elders were considered the wisest members of the family. Those who had been in the

U.S. the longest served as "trusted advisors." Despite the fact that trusted advisors had a

certain amount of misinformation, the family would yield to their recommendations. Asan example, a mother did not understand something that was happening to her child in

school. She believed the teacher was doing something wrong. At the urging of the

extended family's trusted advisors, she pulled her child out of school to teach a lesson tothe teacher.

Memorization was viewed negatively by the families in the study, with the exception of

multiplication tables. One mother advised her daughter not to memorize the keyboard ina keyboarding class, because this was the work ofmacheteros, i.e., those who hack away

or pound away at their studies.

The author ends by expressing regrets that family intervention programs as carried out by

schools have as a goal to change families and, ultimately, to marginalize Mexican

American culture.

conrespeto (1)

Documents