“Children Crossing Borders is a richly textured study that invites the reader into the perspectives of immigrant parents and early childhood educators through an engaging style and thought-provoking data. The vivid portraits of immigrant parents in very different locales in the United States negotiating the complexity of their children’s early education is a challenging reminder that ‘crossing borders’ is never unproblematic. The authors are able to thoughtfully narrate the contradictions that can sometimes emerge when immigrant parents and early childhood educators have differing concepts of what should happen in preschools. This is an inspiring and stimulating book that breaks new ground in its compelling themes and forward-looking account of the intersection of immigration and early childhood education.”
—NORMA GONZALEZ, University of Arizona

“This landmark volume explores how preschools can be sites of incorporation and integration of America’s immigrant families. By capturing the beliefs and practices of parents and teachers across the country with groundbreaking new methods, the authors greatly expand our understanding of how culture and immigration should be taken into account in early childhood practice and policy.”
—HIROKAZU YOSHIKAWA, New York University

In many school districts in America, the majority of students in preschools are children of recent immigrants. For both immigrant families and educators, the changing composition of preschool classes presents new and sometimes divisive questions about educational instruction, cultural norms and academic priorities. Drawing from an innovative study of preschools across the nation, Children Crossing Borders provides the first systematic comparison of the beliefs and perspectives of immigrant parents and the preschool teachers to whom they entrust their children.

Children Crossing Borders presents valuable evidence from the U.S. portion of a landmark five-country study on the intersection of early education and immigration. The volume shows that immigrant parents and early childhood educators often have differing notions of what should happen in preschool. Most immigrant parents want preschool teachers to teach English, prepare their children academically, and help them adjust to life in the United States. Many said it was unrealistic to expect a preschool to play a major role in helping children retain their cultural and religious values. The authors examine the different ways that language and cultural differences prevent immigrant parents and school administrations from working together to achieve educational goals. For their part, many early education teachers who work with immigrant children find themselves caught between two core beliefs: on one hand, the desire to be culturally sensitive and responsive to parents, and on the other hand adhering to their core professional codes of best practice. While immigrant parents generally prefer traditional methods of academic instruction, many teachers use play-based curricula that give children opportunities to be creative and construct their own knowledge. Worryingly, most preschool teachers say they have received little to no training in working with immigrant children who are still learning English.

For most young children of recent immigrants, preschools are the first and most profound context in which they confront the conflicts between their home culture and the United States. Policymakers and educators, however, are still struggling with how best to serve these children and their parents. Children Crossing Borders provides valuable research on these questions, and on the ways schools can effectively and sensitively incorporate new immigrants into the social fabric.

JOSEPH TOBIN is professor in the educational theory and practice department at the University of Georgia.

ANGELA ARZUBIAGA is associate professor of justice and social inquiry at Arizona State University School of Social Transformation.

JENNIFER KEYS ADAIR is assistant professor of early childhood education at the University of Texas, Austin.

“[Waldfogel’s] carefully researched and balanced account demonstrates that committed governments can indeed implement social policies that improve the well-being of their citizens. Her very readable assessment of the British experiment also has relevance for other countries, especially the United States, and her excellent book deserves to be widely consulted.”
—POLITICAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY 

“A developed country declaring a major war on poverty comes around once in a generation. People will want to know why they did it, how they went about it, but, even more crucially what the impact was on children. This book is the only one to cover all these dimensions and to do it with style. Britain’s War on Poverty isn’t about Britain—it’s about declaring war on poverty.”
—PAUL GREGG, University of Bristol 

“America had a war on poverty and poverty won; the United Kingdom has waged the same war and is winning it by making steady progress against child poverty. Their child poverty rate is down by half from its starting point, and children are demonstrably better off based on polices they adopted and consistently financed and delivered. Why did the Brits do so much better than the Americans? This splendid book convincingly shows why and how a ‘true to its aims,’ well-financed, and persistent war on poverty can work in an Anglo- Saxon democracy. Jane Waldfogel shows how and why policy can make a difference against poverty if it is a high priority for a nation. Britain’s War on Poverty should be widely and carefully read by social policy analysts and advocates who seek a better future for America’s young children.”
—TIMOTHY M. SMEEDING, University of Wisconsin–Madison 

“This timely volume tells the remarkable story of the British government’s attempt to end child poverty. Professor Waldfogel, who resides in the United Kingdom for several months every year, tells the story with color and passion, emphasizing the similarities and differences between anti-poverty policy in the United States and Britain. Perhaps most interesting and provocative are the lessons she draws from the British experience for a more sweeping commitment by America to greatly reduce the nation’s child poverty rate, which is now higher than it was in the 1970s. Scholars, advocates, and policymakers committed to reducing child poverty will find Britain’s War on Poverty packed with insights about how we should proceed.”
—RON HASKINS, Brookings Institution

In 1999, one in four British children lived in poverty—the third highest child poverty rate among industrialized countries. Five years later, the child poverty rate in Britain had fallen by more than half in absolute terms. How did the British government accomplish this and what can the United States learn from the British experience? Jane Waldfogel offers a sharp analysis of the New Labour government’s anti-poverty agenda, its dramatic early success and eventual stalled progress. Comparing Britain’s anti-poverty initiative to U.S. welfare reform, the book shows how the policies of both countries have affected child poverty, living standards, and well-being in low-income families and suggests next steps for future reforms.

Britain’s War on Poverty evaluates the three-pronged anti-poverty strategy employed by the British government and what these efforts accomplished. British reforms sought to promote work and make work pay, to increase financial support for families with children, and to invest in the health, early-life development, and education of children. The latter two features set the British reforms apart from the work-oriented U.S. welfare reforms, which did not specifically target income or program supports for children. Plagued by premature initiatives and what some experts called an overly ambitious agenda, the British reforms fell short of their intended goal but nevertheless significantly increased single-parent employment, raised incomes for low-income families, and improved child outcomes. Poverty has fallen, and the pattern of low-income family expenditures on child enrichment and healthy food has begun to converge with higher-income families.

As Waldfogel sees it, further success in reducing child poverty in Britain will rely on understanding who is poor and who is at highest risk. More than half of poor children live in families where at least one parent is working, followed by unemployed single- and two-parent homes, respectively. Poverty rates are also notably higher for children with disabled parents, large families, and for Pakistani and Bangladeshi children. Based on these demographics, Waldfogel argues that future reforms must, among other goals, raise working-family incomes, provide more work for single parents, and better engage high-risk racial and ethnic minority groups.

What can the United States learn from the British example? Britain’s War on Poverty is a primer in the triumphs and pitfalls of protracted policy. Notable differences distinguish the British and U.S. models, but Waldfogel asserts that a future U.S. poverty agenda must specifically address child poverty and the income inequality that helps create it. By any measurement and despite obstacles, Britain has significantly reduced child poverty. The book’s key lesson is that it can be done.

JANE WALDFOGEL is professor of social work and public affairs at the Columbia University School of Social Work and visiting professor at the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

“Old Assumptions, New Realities deserves the attention of welfare analysts and policy-makers on both sides of the Atlantic as one of the first publications to tackle the future of the American welfare state.”
—SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 

“[A]n impressive display of imaginative policy analysis that is practical, fact-based, value-laden, and thoughtful. This book is a must-read for sociologists interested in the evolution of new social policies and interested publics who are concerned that too many Americans are facing economic and social catastrophe.”
—CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY 

“Old Assumptions, New Realities brings together an impressive set of scholars offering new perspectives drawn from a rich diversity of disciplines and methods. By highlighting the key assumptions that underlie the U.S. social welfare system and whether these assumptions are appropriate, this book offers important insights on fundamental questions for social policy and research.”
—MARIA CANCIAN, professor of public affairs and social work and research affiliate, the Institute for Research on Poverty, the University of Wisconsin–Madison 

“Ambitious and bold, Old Assumptions, New Realities challenges the reader to think about the huge gap between the old assumptions underlying the American welfare state and the new economic and social realities in which American families and children live. The editors and authors also offer a cornucopia of practical good ideas to narrow the gap.”
—IRWIN GARFINKEL, Mitchell I. Ginsberg Professor of Contemporary Urban Problems and codirector of the Population Research Center, Columbia University 

“Over the past few decades, changes in labor markets and public policies have cast American families into a new era of insecurity. For low-skilled workers, the erosion of wages and paths to advancement has been exacerbated by a growing mismatch between social protections and social needs. How should we understand the new challenges we face, and how can we meet them effectively? Old Assumptions, New Realities is essential reading for anyone who seeks thoughtful and creative answers to these questions. The leading scholars assembled here provide a lucid and compelling analysis of the problem and offer innovative ideas for reform. This is publicly engaged social science at its best—an important intervention in public debate that is rooted in the best available research.”
—JOE SOSS, Cowles Chair for the Study of Public Service at the University of Minnesota

The way Americans live and work has changed significantly since the creation of the Social Security Administration in 1935, but U.S. social welfare policy has failed to keep up with these changes. The model of the male breadwinner-led nuclear family has given way to diverse and often complex family structures, more women in the workplace, and nontraditional job arrangements. Old Assumptions, New Realities identifies the tensions between twentieth-century social policy and twenty-first-century realities for working Americans and offers promising new reforms for ensuring social and economic security.

Old Assumptions, New Realities focuses on policy solutions for today’s workers—particularly low-skilled workers and low-income families. Contributor Jacob Hacker makes strong and timely arguments for universal health insurance and universal 401(k) retirement accounts. Michael Stoll argues that job training and workforce development programs can mitigate the effects of declining wages caused by deindustrialization, technological changes, racial discrimination, and other forms of job displacement. Michael Sherraden maintains that wealth-building accounts for children—similar to state college savings plans—and universal and progressive savings accounts for workers can be invaluable strategies for all workers, including the poorest. Jody Heymann and Alison Earle underscore the potential for more extensive work-family policies to help the United States remain competitive in a globalized economy. Finally, Jodi Sandfort suggests that the United States can restructure the existing safety net via state-level reforms but only with a host of coordinated efforts, including better information to service providers, budget analyses, new funding sources, and oversight by intermediary service professionals.

Old Assumptions, New Realities picks up where current policies leave off by examining what’s not working, why, and how the safety net can be redesigned to work better. The book brings much-needed clarity to the process of creating viable policy solutions that benefit all working Americans.

ROBERT D. PLOTNICK is professor of public affairs and adjunct professor of economics at the University of Washington.

MARCIA K. MEYERS is associate professor of social work and public affairs at the University of Washington.

JENNIFER ROMICH is associate professor of social work at the University of Washington.

STEVEN RATHGEB SMITH is Nancy Bell Evans Professor of Public Affairs at the Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs, University of Washington.

A West Coast Poverty Center Volume

A Volume in the American Sociological Association’s Rose Series in Sociology

Winner of the 2012 Academy of Management's George R. Terry Book Award

Winner of the 2013 Inequality, Poverty, and Mobility Outstanding Book Award Presented by the American Sociological Association's Section on Inequality, Poverty, and Mobility

"Arne Kalleberg has written the definitive volume on our precarious, polarized U.S. labor market. This engagingly written tour of the American workplace illuminates its subject matter beautifully."
-CHRIS TILLY, director, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, UCLA

"Good Jobs, Bad Jobs powerfully documents the profound transformation that the U.S. labor market has undergone since the mid-1970s. In a lucid and compelling analysis, Arne L. Kalleberg exposes the complex dynamics driving the sharp polarization between 'good jobs' and 'bad jobs' as well as the accompanying decline in employment security that has affected workers at all levels. This is a thoughtful book that is essential reading for anyone interested in understanding the situation of workers in twenty-first- century America."
-RUTH MILKMAN, professor of sociology, CUNY Graduate Center and the Joseph S. Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies

The economic boom of the 1990s veiled a grim reality: in addition to the growing gap between rich and poor, the gap between good and bad quality jobs was also expanding. The postwar prosperity of the mid-twentieth century had enabled millions of American workers to join the middle class, but as author Arne L. Kalleberg shows, by the 1970s this upward movement had slowed, in part due to the steady disappearance of secure, well-paying industrial jobs. Ever since, precarious employment has been on the rise—paying low wages, offering few benefits, and with virtually no long-term security. Today, the polarization between workers with higher skill levels and those with low skills and low wages is more entrenched than ever. Good Jobs, Bad Jobs traces this trend to large-scale transformations in the American labor market and the changing demographics of low-wage workers. Kalleberg draws on nearly four decades of survey data, as well as his own research, to evaluate trends in U.S. job quality and suggest ways to improve American labor market practices and social policies.

Good Jobs, Bad Jobs provides an insightful analysis of how and why precarious employment is gaining ground in the labor market and the role these developments have played in the decline of the middle class. Kalleberg shows that by the 1970s, government deregulation, global competition, and the rise of the service sector gained traction, while institutional protections for workers—such as unions and minimum-wage legislation—weakened. Together, these forces marked the end of postwar security for American workers. The composition of the labor force also changed significantly; the number of dual-earner families increased, as did the share of the workforce comprised of women, non-white, and immigrant workers. Of these groups, blacks, Latinos, and immigrants remain concentrated in the most precarious and low-quality jobs, with educational attainment being the leading indicator of who will earn the highest wages and experience the most job security and highest levels of autonomy and control over their jobs and schedules. Kalleberg demonstrates, however, that building a better safety net—increasing government responsibility for worker health care and retirement, as well as strengthening unions—can go a long way toward redressing the effects of today’s volatile labor market.

There is every reason to expect that the growth of precarious jobs—which already make up a significant share of the American job market—will continue. Good Jobs, Bad Jobs deftly shows that the decline in U.S. job quality is not the result of fluctuations in the business cycle, but rather the result of economic restructuring and the disappearance of institutional protections for workers. Only government, employers and labor working together on long-term strategies—including an expanded safety net, strengthened legal protections, and better training opportunities—can help reverse this trend.

ARNE L. KALLEBERG is Kenan Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

“This impressive inter-disciplinary study by leading experts is essential reading for anyone who wishes to understand why and how standard employment contracts are declining in advanced industrial societies, and who wants to consider the plausibility of the many new approaches to labour regulation that are emerging.”
—PROFESSOR SIR BOB HEPPLE QC BA, Hon President of the Industrial Law Society

“Few would quarrel with the fact that workplace regulations in the United Sates and other advanced industrialized countries were designed for a workforce and labor market that no longer exist. Yet, it is much less clear what should be put in pace of those outdated regulations. Rethinking Workplace Regulation provides much helpful advice regarding the nature of the problem and innovative solutions. It is a must read.”
—HARRY C. KATZ, Kenneth F. Kahn Dean and Jack Sheinkman Professor, ILR School, Cornell University

During the middle third of the twentieth century, workers in most industrialized countries secured a substantial measure of job security, whether through legislation, contract or social practice. This “standard employment contract,” as it was known, became the foundation of an impressive array of rights and entitlements, including social insurance and pensions, protection against unsociable working conditions, and the right to bargain collectively. Recent changes in technology and the global economy, however, have dramatically eroded this traditional form of employment. Employers now value flexibility over stability, and increasingly hire employees for short-term or temporary work. Many countries have also repealed labor laws, relaxed employee protections, and reduced state-provided benefits. As the old system of worker protection declines, how can labor regulation be improved to protect workers? In Rethinking Workplace Regulation, nineteen leading scholars from ten countries and half a dozen disciplines present a sweeping tour of the latest policy experiments across the world that attempt to balance worker security and the new flexible employment paradigm.

Edited by noted socio-legal scholars Katherine V.W. Stone and Harry Arthurs, Rethinking Workplace Regulation presents case studies on new forms of dispute resolution, job training programs, social insurance and collective representation that could serve as policy models in the contemporary industrialized world. The volume leads with an intriguing set of essays on legal attempts to update the employment contract. For example, Bruno Caruso reports on efforts in the European Union to “constitutionalize” employment and other contracts to better preserve protective principles for workers and to extend their legal impact. The volume then turns to the field of labor relations, where promising regulatory strategies have emerged. Sociologist Jelle Visser offers a fresh assessment of the Dutch version of the ‘flexicurity’ model, which attempts to balance the rise in nonstandard employment with improved social protection by indexing the minimum wage and strengthening rights of access to health insurance, pensions, and training. Sociologist Ida Regalia provides an engaging account of experimental local and regional “pacts” in Italy and France that allow several employers to share temporary workers, thereby providing workers job security within the group rather than with an individual firm. The volume also illustrates the power of governments to influence labor market institutions. Legal scholars John Howe and Michael Rawling discuss Australia's innovative legislation on supply chains that holds companies at the top of the supply chain responsible for employment law violations of their subcontractors. Contributors also analyze ways in which more general social policy is being renegotiated in light of the changing nature of work. Kendra Strauss, a geographer, offers a wide-ranging comparative analysis of pension systems and calls for a new model that offers “flexible pensions for flexible workers.”

With its ambitious scope and broad inquiry, Rethinking Workplace Regulation illustrates the diverse innovations countries have developed to confront the policy challenges created by the changing nature of work. The experiments evaluated in this volume will provide inspiration and instruction for policymakers and advocates seeking to improve worker’s lives in this latest era of global capitalism.

KATHERINE V.W. STONE is Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Professor of Law at University of California, Los Angeles.

HARRY ARTHURS is former Dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and University Professor Emeritus and President Emeritus of York University.

CONTRIBUTORS: Takashi Araki, Thomas Bredgaard, Cesar G. Canton,  Bruno Caruso,  Consuelo Chacartegui, Alexander J.S. Colvin,  Mark Freedland,  Morley Gunderson,  Thomas Haipeter, John Howe,  Robert Kuttner,  Julia Lopez,  Keisuke Nakamura,  Michio Nitta,  Anthony O'Donnell, Michael Rawling,  Ida Regalia, Kendra Strauss,  Julie C. Suk,  Jelle Visser. 

“Whose Rights? is a brilliant foray into the complex relationship between counter-terrorism and public opinion. Using a variety of analytic approaches, the authors demonstrate the compelling place of mass opinion in American foreign policy—dynamics that have still received little sustained attention given their import in a democracy. Anyone interested in the evolution of public policy and political activity related to counterterrorism should study the findings here, which will greatly accelerate our understanding of the war on terror.”
—SUSAN HERBST, president, University of Connecticut

“Anyone interested in American democracy and good and bad sides of public opinion needs to read this book. Whose Rights? will re-shape they we all think about the public and how democracies work.”
—JAMES N. DRUCKMAN, Payson S. Wild Professor of Political Science and faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, the U.S. government adopted a series of counterterrorism policies that radically altered the prevailing balance between civil liberties and security. These changes allowed for warrantless domestic surveillance, military commissions at Guantanamo Bay and even extralegal assassinations. Now, more than a decade after 9/11, these sharply contested measures appear poised to become lasting features of American government. What do Americans think about these policies? Where do they draw the line on what the government is allowed to do in the name of fighting terrorism? Drawing from a wealth of survey and experimental data, Whose Rights? explores the underlying sources of public attitudes toward the war on terror in a more detailed and comprehensive manner than has ever been attempted.

In an analysis that deftly deploys the tools of political science and psychology, Whose Rights? addresses a vexing puzzle: Why does the counterterrorism agenda persist even as 9/11 recedes in time and the threat from Al Qaeda wanes? Authors Clem Brooks and Jeff Manza provocatively argue that American opinion, despite traditionally showing strong support for civil liberties, exhibits a “dark side” that tolerates illiberal policies in the face of a threat. Surveillance of American citizens, heightened airport security, the Patriot Act and targeted assassinations enjoy broad support among Americans, and these preferences have remained largely stable over the past decade. There are, however, important variations: Waterboarding and torture receive notably low levels of support, and counterterrorism activities sanctioned by formal legislation, as opposed to covert operations, tend to draw more favor. To better evaluate these trends, Whose Rights? examines the concept of “threat-priming” and finds that getting people to think about the specter of terrorism bolsters anew their willingness to support coercive measures. A series of experimental surveys also yields fascinating insight into the impact of national identity cues. When respondents are primed to think that American citizens would be targeted by harsh counterterrorism policies, support declines significantly. On the other hand, groups such as Muslims, foreigners, and people of Middle Eastern background elicit particularly negative attitudes and increase support for counterterrorism measures. Under the right conditions, Brooks and Manza show, American support for counterterrorism activities can be propelled upward by simple reminders of past terrorism plots and communication about disliked external groups.

Whose Rights? convincingly argues that mass opinion plays a central role in the politics of contemporary counterterrorism policy. With their clarity and compelling evidence, Brooks and Manza offer much-needed insight into the policy responses to the defining conflict of our age and the psychological impact of terrorism.

CLEM BROOKS is professor of sociology at Indiana University, Bloomington.

JEFF MANZA is professor of sociology at New York University.

“Dialogue Across Difference is a beautifully written, academic page-turner that reveals how to confront the racial, ethnic, religious, and gender differences that can divide us. The volume’s title carries the prescription. A more effective diverse world depends not on ignoring our differences but instead on understanding their sources and talking about how they matter. The results of a rigorous, multi-university field experiment are dramatic. With well-facilitated dialogue comes intergroup insight and empathy, positive relations and outreach, and a commitment to social justice. This volume is mandatory reading for researchers, educators, and managers concerned with how to appreciate both our differences and our common humanity.”
—HAZEL ROSE MARKUS, Davis-Brack Professor in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University 

“Dialogue Across Difference is a vitally important book. Diversity is the watchword of the future. But compelling evidence on the pay-offs to diversity have been rare. Eminent scholar Patricia Gurin and her colleagues provide powerful new experimental data on the positive effects of a diverse learning environment. They go even further, specifying exactly how and why diversity matters. This book is a needed robust theoretical and practical blueprint for how to do diverse learning environments the right way. Dialogue Across Difference is a necessary read for anyone concerned with making our colleges and universities, as well as our democratic institutions, responsive to a diverse population.”
—LAWRENCE D. BOBO, W. E. B. Du Bois Professor of the Social Sciences, Harvard University

Due to continuing immigration and increasing racial and ethnic inclusiveness, higher education institutions in the United States are likely to grow ever more diverse in the 21st century. This shift holds both promise and peril: Increased inter-ethnic contact could lead to a more fruitful learning environment that encourages collaboration. On the other hand, social identity and on-campus diversity remain hotly contested issues that often raise intergroup tensions and inhibit discussion. How can we help diverse students learn from each other and gain the competencies they will need in an increasingly multicultural America? Dialogue Across Difference synthesizes three years’ worth of research from an innovative field experiment focused on improving intergroup understanding, relationships and collaboration. The result is a fascinating study of the potential of intergroup dialogue to improve relations across race and gender.

First developed in the late 1980s, intergroup dialogues bring together an equal number of students from two different groups – such as people of color and white people, or women and men – to share their perspectives and learn from each other. To test the possible impact of such courses and to develop a standard of best practice, the authors of Dialogue Across Difference incorporated various theories of social psychology, higher education, communication studies and social work to design and implement a uniform curriculum in nine universities across the country. Unlike most studies on intergroup dialogue, this project employed random assignment to enroll more than 1,450 students in experimental and control groups, including in 26 dialogue courses and control groups on race and gender each. Students admitted to the dialogue courses learned about racial and gender inequalities through readings, role-play activities and personal reflections. The authors tracked students’ progress using a mixed-method approach, including longitudinal surveys, content analyses of student papers, interviews of students, and videotapes of sessions. The results are heartening: Over the course of a term, students who participated in intergroup dialogues developed more insight into how members of other groups perceive the world. They also became more thoughtful about the structural underpinnings of inequality, increased their motivation to bridge differences and intergroup empathy, and placed a greater value on diversity and collaborative action. The authors also note that the effects of such courses were evident on nearly all measures. While students did report an initial increase in negative emotions – a possible indication of the difficulty of openly addressing race and gender – that effect was no longer present a year after the course. Overall, the results are remarkably consistent and point to an optimistic conclusion: intergroup dialogue is more than mere talk. It fosters productive communication about and across differences in the service of greater collaboration for equity and justice.

Ambitious and timely, Dialogue Across Difference presents a persuasive practical, theoretical and empirical account of the benefits of intergroup dialogue. The data and research presented in this volume offer a useful model for improving relations among different groups not just in the college setting but in the United States as well.

PATRICIA GURIN is Nancy Cantor Distinguished University Professor Emerita of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the University of Michigan.

BIREN (RATNESH) A. NAGDA is associate professor of social work and Director of the Intergroup Dialogue, Education & Action (IDEA) Center at University of Washington.

XIMENA ZUNIGA is associate professor of social justice education at University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

“This book will bring joy to the hearts of high school debaters who study social sciences: these experiences build active citizenship in later adulthood, especially among the children of immigrants who may grow up in neighborhoods that are low on civic engagement. Coming of Political Age is a clear-eyed, carefully justified plan for just how schools can help us address the decline of political engagement.”
—John Mollenkopf, Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Sociology and director, Center for Urban Research, the Graduate Center, CUNY 

“Coming of Political Age offers valuable insight into how schools serve as an important force in the political socialization and education of children of immigrants. Through careful analysis of nationally representative longitudinal survey data and qualitative data, Rebecca M. Callahan and Chandra Muller convincingly argue that civic goals of schools in twenty-first-century America are as relevant as academic goals in shaping America’s future citizenry and that expanding social science curriculum is central to achieving civic goals. This book is an essential reading for scholars, school administrators, policymakers, and citizens concerning school reform and student outcomes.”
—Min Zhou, professor of sociology and Asian American studies, University of California, Los Angeles

As one of the fastest-growing segments of the American population, the children of immigrants are poised to reshape the country’s political future. The massive rallies for immigration rights in 2006 and the recent push for the DREAM Act, both heavily supported by immigrant youth, signal the growing political potential of this crucial group. While many studies have explored the political participation of immigrant adults, we know comparatively little about what influences civic participation among the children of immigrants. Coming of Political Age persuasively argues that schools play a central role in integrating immigrant youth into the political system. The volume shows that the choices we make now in our educational system will have major consequences for the country’s civic health as the children of immigrants grow and mature as citizens.

Coming of Political Age draws from an impressive range of data, including two large surveys of adolescents in high schools and interviews with teachers and students, to provide an insightful analysis of trends in youth participation in politics. Although the children of both immigrant and native-born parents register and vote at similar rates, the factors associated with this likelihood are very different. While parental educational levels largely explain voting behavior among children of native-born parents, this volume demonstrates that immigrant children’s own education, in particular their exposure to social studies, strongly predicts their future political participation. Learning more about civic society and putting effort into these classes may encourage an interest in politics, suggesting that the high school civics curriculum remains highly relevant in an increasingly disconnected society. Interestingly, although their schooling predicts whether children of immigrants will vote, how they identify politically depends more on family and community influences. As budget cuts force school administrators to realign academic priorities, this volume argues that any cutback to social science programs may effectively curtail the political and civic engagement of the next generation of voters.

While much of the literature on immigrant assimilation focuses on family and community, Coming of Political Age argues that schools—and social science courses in particular—may be central to preparing the leaders of tomorrow. The insights and conclusions presented in this volume are essential to understand how we can encourage more participation in civic action and improve the functioning of our political system.

REBECCA M. CALLAHAN is assistant professor of education at the University of Texas at Austin.

CHANDRA MULLER is professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin.