The educational fate of the children of low-wage immigrants is a salient issue in all the economically developed societies that have received major immigration flows since the 1950s. The article considers the way in which educational systems in the two countries structure the educational experiences and shape the opportunities of the children of immigrants.
Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study
This article examines the educational experiences of the children of Mexican immigrants in the United States and of North African immigrants in France. Both groups are low-wage labor migrants with low educational attainment relative to the native born.
Research Design
The article uses data from the U.S. Census and the 2003 Formation Qualification Professionelle Survey in France, as well as analysis of other research on the two countries, to compare educational processes and attainment for the two groups.
Conclusions/Recommendations
The comparison of the two systems shows that although the French and U.S. educational systems differ in many ways, the outcomes are in fact quite similar. In both systems, the children of low-wage labor migrants are tracked into the low streams of the educational hierarchy and have lower attainment than their native-born peers. At the same time, in both countries, a small percentage of children of immigrants do manage to succeed. The authors conclude that despite apparent differences between the two systems, residential segregation and educational tracking produce these similar outcomes, which also reflect the determination of native-born middle-class parents to preserve their privileged status and to thwart efforts to make the educational system more open.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbaR. (2006). Mexican Americans and the American Dream.Perspectives on Politics, 4, 289–96.
2.
AlbouyV., & WanecqT. (2003). Les inégalités sociales d'accès aux grandes écoles [Social inequalities in access to the grandes ecoles].Économie et statistiques, 361.
3.
BeaudS. (2002). 80 % au bac? Et après? Les enfants de la démocratisation scolaire [80% with the bac? And afterwards? The children of the educational democratization]. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
4.
BenabouR., KramarzF., & ProstC. (2004). Zones d'éducation prioritaires: quels moyens pour quels résultats [Zones of educational priority: What means for what results?].Économie et statistique, 380, 3–30.
5.
BerqueJ. (1985). L'immigration à l'école de la république [Immigration and the Republic's school]. Rapport au Ministre de l'Education nationale. Paris: CNDP.
6.
BowenW., & BokD. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BrinbaumY. (2002). Au cœur des parcours migratoires, les investissements éducatifs des familles immigrées: attentes et désilluisions [At the heart of the migratory career, educational investments by immigrant families: Expectations and disillusions]. Doctoral thesis, Paris Universtité René Descartes, Paris, France.
8.
BrinbaumY, &. KiefferA. (2005). D'une génération à l'autre, les aspirations des familles immigrées, ambition et perseverance [From one generation to the other, the aspirations, ambition and perserverance of immigrant families].Éducation et formations, 72, 53–75.
9.
BrintS., & KarabelJ. (1989). The diverted dream: Community colleges and the promise of educational opportunity, 1900–1985. New York: Oxford University Press.
10.
BrizardA. (1995). Comparaisons des performances des élèves scolarisés en ZEP et hors ZEP [Comparisons of student performance inside and outside the ZEP].Éducation et formations, 41, 39–42.
11.
BroncholiniS., & Van ZantenA. (1997). Espaces de concurrence et circuits de scolarisa-tion. L'évitement des collèges publics d'un district de la région parisienne [Spaces of competition and circuits of schooling, the avoidance of public middle schools in a district of the Paris Region].Les annales de la recherche urbaine, 75, 5–17.
12.
CailleJ. P. (2005). L'enquête Jeunes 2002: dispositif et situation scolaire des répondants [The Youth 2002 Study: Mechanism and school situation of respondents].Éducation et Formations, 72.
13.
CondronD. J., & RoscignoV. J. (2003). Disparities within: Unequal spending and achievement in an urban school district.Sociology of Education, 76, 18–36.
14.
CrulM., & HoldawayJ. (2009). Children of immigrants in schools in New York and Amsterdam: The factors shaping attainment.Teachers College Record, 111(6).
15.
CrulM., & VermeulenH. (2003). The second generation in Europe.International Migration Review, 37, 965–986.
16.
Duru-BellatM., & MingatA. (1997). La constitution de classes de niveau dans les collèges: les effets pervers d'une pratique à visée égalisatrice [The composition of classes in the middle schools: The perverse effects of a practice with an egalitarian goal].Revue française de sociologie, 28, 759–789.
17.
Duru-BellatM., & Van ZantenA. (1999). Sociologie de l'école [Sociology of the school] (2nd ed.). Paris: Colin.
18.
Duru-BellatM., & KiefferA. (2000). Inequalities in educational opportunities in France: Educational openness, democratization or shifting barriers?Journal of Education Policy, 15, 333–352.
19.
DutercqY. (2000). Politiques éducatives et évaluation. Querelles de territories [Educational policies and evaluation: Quarrels over terrain]. Paris: PUF.
20.
EntwisleD., & AlexanderK. (1992). Summer setback: Race, poverty, school composition and mathematics achievement in the first two years of school.American Sociological Review, 57, 72–82.
21.
FarleyR., & AlbaR. (2002). The new second generation in the United States.International Migration Review, 36, 669–701.
22.
FordhamS., & OgbuJ. (1987). Black students’ school success: Coping with the burden of acting White.Urban Review, 18, 176–206.
23.
GalissotR. (1987). Maghreb-Algérie, Classes et Nation [North Africa-Algeria, classes and nation]. Paris: Arcantères Éditions.
24.
GilotteO., & GirardP. (2005). La sectorisation, l'affectation et l'évitement scolaire dans les classes de 6 ème à Paris en 2003 [Sectorization, allocation, and educational avoidance in the first year of middle school in Paris, 2003].Éducation et formation, 71.
25.
GlasmanD. (2001). L'accompagnement scolaire. Sociologie d'une marge de l'Ecole [Educational support: Sociology of a margin of the school]. Paris: PUF.
26.
GuillonM. (1990). Français et étrangers en Ile de France: dynamiques de localisation divergentes [The French and foreigners in the Ile de France: Dynamics of divergent settlement]. In BonvalletC. and FribourgA-M.A-M, Stratégies résidentielles. Paris: Ined.
27.
Henriot-Van ZantenA. (1990). L'école et l'espace local [The school and its surroundings]. Lyon, France: PUL.
28.
HéranF. (1995). “École publique, école privée, qui peut choisir?” [Public school, private school, who can choose?]Économie et statistique.
29.
HernandezD., DentonN., & McCartneyS. (2006). Children in newcomer and native families. Center for Social and Demographic Analysis, The University at Albany, SUNY. Retrieved June 1, 2006, from http://mumford.albany.edu/children/
30.
HeynsB. (1978). Summer learning and the effects of schooling.New York: Academic.
31.
HuntingtonS. (2004). Who are we? The challenges to America's national identity.New York: Simon & Schuster.
32.
L'Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. (2003). Formation et qualification professionnelle. Paris: Author.
33.
KaoG., & TiendaM. (1995). Optimism and achievement: The educational performance of immigrant youth.Social Science Quarterly, 76, 1–19.
34.
KasinitzP., MollenkopfJ., WatersM., & HoldawayJ. (2008). Inheriting the city: The children of immigrants come of age.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press & New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
35.
KozolJ. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools. New York: Crown.
36.
LangouëtG., & LégerA. (1997). Le choix des familles. École publique ou école privée [The choices of families: Public school or private school]. Paris: Fabert.
37.
LegrandA. (2000). Décentralisation et déconcentration [Decentralization and Deconcentration]. In Van ZantenA., L'école, l'état des saviors.Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
38.
LorcerieF. (1994). L'islam dans les cours de langue et culture d'origine: le process [Islam in courses on language and culture of origin: The process].Revue européenne des migrations internationals, 10, 5–43.
39.
LouisF. (1994). Décentralisation et autonomie des établissements: La mutation du système éducatif [Decentralization and autonomy of schools: The transformation of the educational system]. Paris: Hachette.
40.
LucassenL. (2005). The immigrant threat: The integration of old and new migrants in Western Europe since 1850.Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
41.
LutzA. (2004). Dual language proficiencies and the educational attainment of Latinos.Migraciones Internacionales, 2, 95–122.
42.
MasseyD., CharlesC., LundyG., & FischerM. (2002). The source of the river: The social origins of freshmen at America's selective colleges and universities.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
43.
MerleP. (2002). La démocratisation de l'enseignement [The democratization of education]. Paris: La Découverte.
44.
MeuretD. (1994). L'efficacité de la politique des zones d'éducation prioritaires dans lescollèges [The effectiveness of the policy of zones of educational priority in the middle schools]. Revue française de pédagogie, 109.
45.
OakesJ. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.) New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
46.
OeuvrardF. (2000). La construction des inégalités de la scolarisation de la maternelle au lycée [The construction of educational inequalities from the maternelle to the high school]. In Van ZantenA., L'école, l'état des saviors.Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
PasselJ. (2006). Size and characteristics of the unauthorized migrant population in the U.S.: Estimates based on the March 2005 Current Population Survey. Retrieved June 1, 2007, from the Pew Hispanic Center Web site: http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=61
49.
PaulJ. J. (1996). Le redoublement pour ou contre [Grade repetition, for and against]. Paris: ESF.
50.
PikettyT. (2004). L'impact de la taille des classes et de la ségrégation sociale sur la réussite scolaire dans les écoles françaises: une estimation à partir du panel du primaire1997 [The impact of class size and social segregation on the educational success of French schools: An estimate on the basis of the Primary School Panel of 1997]. Document de travail, PSE/ENS.
51.
PortesA., & RumbautR. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation.Berkeley: University of California Press.
52.
PortesA., & ZhouM. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants.The Annals, 530, 74–96.
53.
PreteceilleE. (1995). “Division sociale de l'espace et globalisation. Le cas de la métropole parisienne [Social division in space and globalization: The case of the Paris Metropole].Sociétés contemporaines, 22&23.
54.
ProstA. (1968). Histoire de l'enseignement en France 1800-1967 [History of education in France, 1800–1967]. Paris: Colin.
55.
SilbermanR., &. FournierI. (1999). Les enfants d'immigrés sur le marché du travail. Les mécanismes d'une discrimination selective [The children of immigrants on the labor market: The mechanisms of a selective discrimination].Formation Emploi, 65, 31–55.
56.
SilbermanR., & FournierI. (2006a). “Les secondes générations sur le marché du travail en France: une pénalité ethnique ancrée dans le temps. Contribution à la théorie de l'assimilation segmentée [also Revue Française de sociologie, 2008 Supplement 45-94 Second Generations on He Job Market in France: A persistent Ethnic Penalty. A contribution to Segmented Assimilation Theory].Revue française de sociologie, 47, 243–292.
57.
SilbermanR., & FournierI. (2007). Is French society truly assimilative? Immigrant parents and offspring on the French labour market. In HeathA. (Ed.), Unequal chances: Ethnic minorities in Western labour markets (pp. 221–269). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
58.
TanguyL. (1991). L'enseignement professionnel. Des ouvriers aux techniciens [Vocational education: From workers to technicians]. Paris: PUF.
59.
ThomasF. (2005). Des collèges publics divers: disparités entre collèges publics en 2003-2004 [Diverse public middle schools: Disparities among public middle schools in 2003–2004].Éducation et formations, 71.
60.
TrancartD. (1998). L'évolution des disparités entre collèges publics [The evolution of disparities among public middle schools].Revue française de pédagogie, 124.
61.
TribalatM. (1995). Faire France: Une enquête sur les immigrés et leurs enfants [Making France: A study of immigrants and their children]. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
Van ZantenA. (2001). L'école de la périphérie. Scolarité et ségrégation en banlieue [The school on the periphery: Education and segregation in the suburb]. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
64.
ZhouM., & BankstonC. (1998). Growing up American: How Vietnamese children adapt to life in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
