Examining the Academic Achievement of Latino Adolescents

Abstract

The achievement gap between Latino and White youth is well documented. This is of particular concern as children enter middle school because of the decline in school engagement and achievement noted in many students. The impact parent and peer beliefs and behaviors have on academic achievement, engagement, and achievement values of Latino middle school youth have received less attention than in White youth. The current study explored how these parent and peer beliefs and behaviors influenced Latino adolescents’ achievement values, school behavioral engagement, and school achievement. Results indicated that the beliefs and behaviors of parents and peers significantly predicted two sets of achievement values (Subjective Task Values & Economic Benefits to Education). However, student achievement was only related to subjective task values and behavioral engagement. In addition, subjective task values mediated the relation between parent and peer beliefs and behaviors and student achievement. Implications for future research and intervention are discussed.

Keywords

academic achievement Hispanic/Latino/Latina middle school parent-adolescent relationships peer relationships

The racial-ethnic achievement gap between Latino and White students is well documented, with 17% of fourth and eighth grades Latino students performing at or above the proficiency level in reading and math relative to 44% of White students (Aud et al., 2010). The importance of examining the achievement gap in Latino students is underscored by the disproportionate school drop-out rates of Latino students relative to White students (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007). Research in the area of supportive parent and peer relationships have pointed to Latino students’ parents and peers as significant individuals who can serve as positive sources of influence on adolescents’ motivation to learn and subsequent academic achievement (Castillo, Conoley, Cepeda, Ivy, & Archuleta, 2010; Ceja, 2004; Pérez & McDonough, 2008). However, little is known about the means by which the perceptions of parent and peer beliefs and behaviors about school by Latino middle school adolescents affect their achievement. Scholars suggest that achievement values may be associated with Latino student success (Colón & Sánchez, 2010). As parents and peers can influence students’ adoption of achievement values, the purpose of the current study was to examine the effect adolescent perceptions of parent and peer beliefs and behaviors about school had on their achievement values, engagement in school, and academic achievement.

The current study utilized a social capital framework to understand how significant individuals (i.e., parents and peers) positively affected the academic experiences of Latino youth by serving as social networks that provided assets and resources to succeed (Sanchez, Reyes, & Singh, 2006; Zambrana & Zoppi, 2002). This is essential because previous research on Latino student achievement has focused on a cultural deficit perspective, which proposes that Latino cultural values, more specifically the values transmitted by Latino parents can be dysfunctional and potentially contribute to lower educational attainment (Ceja, 2004). According to Valencia and Solorzano (1997), those who use a deficit perspective believe that low-income ethnic-minority parents place less value on education and thus fail to fully participate in their children’s education. However, more recently, scholars have explored the role of Latino cultural norms as a cultural wealth that can be a positive resource for Latino students in their academic pursuits (Zambrana & Zoppi, 2002). Cultural wealth has been defined as a set of values and norms that guide the behavior of Latino youth, which according to Zambrana and Zoppi, can be translated into social capital to improve academic success. In fact, Latino parents often place a high value on education and play a major role in encouraging their children to achieve their educational goals (Sanchez et al., 2006).

Cultural values of Latino families that promote harmony in interpersonal relationships (simpatía), respect for authority figures (respeto), and interdependence and reliance on family (familismo) have been identified as interpersonal strengths that can foster academic success in Latino youth (Rodríguez, 1999; Zambrana & Zoppi, 2002). For instance, a study of Mexican American adolescents found that students’ perception of parental educational expectations was related to their academic performance as measured by grade point average and educational aspirations (Carrranza, You, Chhuon, & Hudley, 2009). Similarly, in a qualitative study of Latina high school students, Ceja (2004) suggested that parents were powerful influences on girls’ academic performance at school. Ceja noted that participants received indirect and direct messages from parents about the importance of doing well in school and this in turn was related to students’ school success. Direct communication consisted of parents telling participants that they must do well in school, complete their homework, and go to college. However, Latino parents also provided indirect communication about the importance of school with messages about their own hardship in finding a “good paying” job or being forced to do manual labor because they did not complete their education.

Peers also have been found to influence the motivation, engagement, and subsequent achievement of their counterparts (Kindermann, 2007; Kindermann, McCollam, & Gibson, 1996). For instance, Nelson and DeBacker (2008) suggested that poor-quality friendship with a student who did not value academics was related to maladaptive achievement motivation. In a qualitative study of Mexican American adolescents, Castillo et al. (2010) reported peer influence could have a powerful positive or negative influence on student’s engagement. Specifically, participants reported that friends were sometimes detractors from doing well in school by tempting them into troublesome predicaments (e.g., skipping class). However, other participants noted that peers were helpful when they discussed the importance of grades and what college life would be like when they attended.

It is clear from the literature that there is a relationship between parent and peer beliefs and behaviors and Latino student achievement. What is unclear is the means or process by which Latino adolescents’ perceive parent and peer beliefs and behaviors as an influence on their ability to perform well in school. One possible path is through how parent and peer beliefs and behaviors influence an individual’s achievement values. Voelkl (1996) defines achievement values as the general importance of school and perceived utility of everyday schooling in shaping one’s future success. In the current study, two sets of attitudes toward school are used to examine achievement values: subjective task values (perceptions of the importance/usefulness of things learned in school) and economic benefits to education (perceptions about the general benefits and limitations of education for your future). Examining multiple achievement values are important because according to Mickelson (1990) students, especially those from ethnic-minority groups often hold two competing sets of attitudes toward schooling. For ethnic-minority youth, attitudes reflecting the “American ideology” (faith that an education is useful in bringing about future opportunity) may not accurately predict school achievement like attitudes rooted in life experiences regarding actual gains from educational credentials because of the disparities in the benefits of schooling they perceive based on the experiences of family and community members.

Achievement values that are discussed in terms of the American ideology, suggests education is the pathway that leads to a successful future and social mobility (Mickelson, 1990). Studies have shown that many U.S. born and immigrant Latino parents adopt this American ideology and transmit these values to their children. For instance, Sánchez, Reyes, and Singh (2006) noted that parents trying to motivate their children to do well in school tell stories about the struggles and hardships they faced and that an education can help them live better lives. Similarly, Ceja (2004) noted that parents told their children that doing well in school could help them get a better paying job. In the current study subjective task values (perceptions of importance/usefulness of things learned in school) were used to measure one type of achievement value. According to Eccles and her colleagues (1983), subjective task values are influential in motivating individuals to make choices and engage in long-lasting behaviors. Thus, they can be seen as the foundation of the “American Ideology” of schooling being important and useful for upward mobility.

The second type of achievement value examined in the current study is economic benefits to education. According to Mickelson (1990), such values reflect an individual’s perceptions of probable returns on education. However, for many ethnic-minority youth, education may or may not be viewed as being linked to social mobility or providing desired returns. This, in part, may be rooted in youth’s awareness of the limitation of education to provide equal access to economic opportunities for individuals from all cultural groups. For example, an adolescents’ perceptions of probable returns on education can be influenced by the observation that Latinos with equal education as Whites receive lower pay (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010) or that individuals’ with limited education (e.g., High School Diploma or less) are as financially successful as educated individuals with an advanced degree. In their study of ethnically diverse adolescents, Steinberg, Dornbusch, and Brown (1992) found that African Americans and Latinos put less effort into their schoolwork because they did not perceive adequate “payoffs” from educational effort. Nonetheless, African American and Latino youth were more optimistic about getting a well-paying job without getting a good education. These findings imply that African American and Latino adolescents may be aware of the inequity in social mobility for some cultural groups and therefore may not view education as a means of achieving success.

Another means by which parents and peers can influence Latino students’ ability to perform well in school is through behavioral engagement. Behavioral engagement encompasses a number of behaviors that revolve around participation in both academic and extracurricular activities at school. One way of defining behavioral engagement has been by examining the level of effort a child puts into participating in a classroom, including classroom involvement (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004). Several studies have suggested that children and adolescents who exhibit greater positive behavioral engagement also demonstrate higher achievement scores on standardized tests and higher classroom grades (Connell, Spencer, & Aber, 1994; Marks, 2000; Sirin & Rogers-Sirin, 2004). Studies have indicated that youth who experienced supportive parental behaviors also reported greater student engagement which in turn predicted better school performance and adjustment (Connell et al., 1994). A more recent study by Murdock and Miller (2003) suggested students were more likely to demonstrate higher school engagement when they received positive parental support because students internalized their parents’ values.

Research has also indicated that peers can influence adolescents’ behavioral engagement in school (Sirin & Rogers-Sirin, 2004), both positive and disruptive forms of behavioral engagement (Berndt & Keefe, 1999). Elementary and middle school students are more likely to interact with peer groups that have similar levels of engagement and those who affiliate with high-engagement peer groups are likely to continue to increase their level of behavioral engagement (Kindermann, 1993). Although peers can have positive effects on adolescents’ school engagement some have focused on the negative effect of peer groups, especially as it relates to minority youth. Ogbu (2004) claims some minority students may disengage in school in part because they fear rejection from their peers. As it relates to Latino youth, there is evidence to suggest that peer groups can contribute to school engagement and academic outcomes (Conchas, 2001). However, how peers and parents within Latino populations, especially at the middle school level, can influence behavioral engagement has not been extensively explored.

Whereas exploration on the influence of peers and parents on adolescent motivation and achievement has been examined in White populations (Cauce, Hannan, & Sargeant, 1992; Kindermann, 2007; Nelson & DeBacker, 2008; Paulson, 1994; Wentzel, 1998), it appears that less is known about the influence of parent and peer beliefs and behaviors on the values, engagement, and achievement of Latino adolescents. Given the importance of parental respect and obedience in Latino culture (Hill & Torres, 2010), we were interested in examining if parents and peers equally influenced middle schools students’ achievement through their achievement values and behavioral engagement in school. We were also interested in exploring the independent contribution of both measures of achievement values to students’ school achievement as it is possible that these differing types of values might be differentially influenced by parents and peers and differentially effect students’ school achievement. Figure 1 depicts the hypothesized model.

Figure 1.

Hypothesized model predicting adolescent achievement.

Method

Participants

The sample consisted of 267 Latino sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade students (46% male) and their teachers (n = 44). Participants in the current study came from a larger, more ethnically diverse sample of students who participated in study examining parent, teacher, and peer influences on adolescent achievement. Although the current study focused solely on Latino youth, no standardized measure of acculturation, generation status, or specific “Hispanic” group membership was examined because this was not the primary focus of the larger study. Student ethnicity was identified based on middle school student’s self-reported identification as Hispanic. Approximately, 90% of the sample indicated that their primary language was English and they did not speak another language besides English in their home. Besides language, no other measure of immigrant status was asked but it could be assumed that the students were well acculturated due to the majority of the sample not speaking another language besides English. The relation between language preference and acculturation has been seen with many different ethnic groups. For example, Lee, Nguyen, and Tsui (2011) suggested that language preferences, more specifically using English, of foreign-born Asians during interviews served as a better measure of acculturation. Also, when examining the acculturation levels of Latino youth, many studies have also suggested that language use was a significant predictor of acculturation (Barona & Miller, 1994; Marin, Sabogal, Van Oss, Otero-Sabogal, & Perez-Stable, 1987; Serrano & Anderson, 2003).

Participants were recruited from six schools across three school districts (two urban and one small city) in the southwestern United States. Schools in which students were drawn from were ethnically and economically diverse. The free and reduced lunch rate for participating schools ranged from 22% to 86.5%, with most schools exceeding 70%. Due to the large number of students participating in free and reduced lunch programs it could be assumed that majority of students come from low-income households (Malecki & Demaray, 2006). Teacher demographic information indicates that teachers surveyed were predominantly White (79%) and female (76%).

Procedures

Active consent was obtained for student and teacher participation in the study in accordance with Institutional Review Board procedures. Student questionnaires were group administered during 20-minute sessions after school hours. Students were entered into a school-wide raffle to win a token gift for their participation in the study. Teachers completed surveys independently and received a gift card for their participation in the study.

Measures

Achievement

Achievement was assessed with a single item, which asked students to report their grades across their academic classes during the last 6-week period from 1 (Mostly D’s) to 4 (Mostly A’s). Self-reported classroom grades have been shown to be an accurate representation of student grades as compared with grade point averages provided by school records, with only a slight inflation noted for students who receive average grades lower than a “C” (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987).

Subjective task values

An adapted version of the Subjective Task Values subscale of the Competence Beliefs and Subjective Task Values questionnaire (Wigfield et al., 1997) was administered to assess student’s perceptions of the importance/usefulness of achievement in math and reading. The Subjective Task Values subscale consists of six items, with three items assessing subjective task values for reading and math, respectively, on a 4-point Likert-type scale with lower scores indicating lower subjective task values. Items included, “How useful is what you learn in math/reading? How important is it for you to be good at math/reading? and How good in math/reading are you?” Given that the internal consistency for the Reading and Math scales were low, .67 and .55, respectively, and the scales were moderately correlated (r = .48), the mean of the reading and math scales was used to create a Total Subjective Task Values scale (α = .70).

Economic benefits to education

The Economic Value of Education Scale (Murdock, 1999) was administered to assess students’ perceptions about the general benefits and limitations of education for their future. Students were asked to complete the 15-item questionnaire on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from really disagree (1) to really agree (4) on their beliefs about the general benefits and limitations of education for their future. Sample items included, “I don’t think an education will guarantee that I get paid well; I can make good money someday without an education; If I work hard in school, I will get a better job than the kids who don’t try hard; and If I try hard in school, it will pay off later with a well-paying job.” A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to determine if the current data fit the previously identified subscales suggested by Murdock. The results suggested that the data fit moderately well with modification (e.g., the addition of 5 correlated measurement error variances): χ²(84) = 163.95, p < .000; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .92; root mean square error approximation (RMSEA) = .05 (Bentler & Dudgeon, 1996; Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Kline, 2005). The scales also evidenced adequate internal consistency for the current sample: Limits to Education subscale was .75 and Benefits to Education subscale was .73. Given the moderate correlation (r = .47) between these two subscales, the current study assessed an overarching latent factor of the Economic Benefit to Education.

Peer influence

To assess students’ perceptions of their peer’s behaviors and beliefs about school, the Peers’ Academic Support and Aspirations scale was administered (Murdock, 1999). Peers’ Academic Support and Aspirations scale consists of 15-items on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from really disagree (1) to really agree (4) and consists of three subscales: The Peer Academic Aspirations, Peers’ Resistance to School Norms, and Peer Academic Support. The Peer Academic Aspirations subscale examines student’s perception of their friends’ long-term goals. Sample items include, “Most of my friends will quit high school when they are old enough; Most of my friends plan to go to college.” The Peers’ Resistance to School Norms subscale assesses the extent to which students’ friends discourage conformity to behaviors related to school success. Sample items include, “My friends make fun of kids who are worried about school; My friends tease kids who do their homework.” Finally, the Peer Academic Support subscale assesses perceptions of peer support for academic-related tasks. Sample items include, “My friends help each other study for tests; My friends work pretty hard in school.”

A CFA was conducted to determine if the current data fit the previously identified subscales suggested by Murdock. The results suggested poor model fit and that an adaption to the original factor structure of the scale was necessary for the current sample. Based on model modification indices, a cross loading for the item “I don’t think many of my friends will graduate from high school” was added to the Peer Academic Support subscale in addition to the Academic Aspirations subscale. The final model fit was improved: χ²(85) = 229.53, p < .000; CFI = .91; RMSEA = .07. The internal consistency analyses with the present sample suggested that the scaled evidenced good psychometric properties: Peer Academic Aspirations (α = .76), Peers’ Resistance to School Norms (α = .77), and Peer Academic Support (α = .81). Because the subscales were highly correlated (r ranged from .64 to .79), a latent construct was used to measure peer influence.

Parent influence

Parent influence was measured using a researcher-developed questionnaire that assessed students’ beliefs about the importance of parental approval of various decisions within their life (i.e., school, athletics, and clothing). The parent influence measure consisted of six items on a 4-point Likert-type scale from really disagree (1) to really agree (4). Sample items include, “What my parents think about what I wear is important to me; My parents never have enough time to hear about what happens to me at school.” Research suggests there are differences in parent influence on school-related decisions and other life decisions, such as athletics, clothing, and extracurricular activities (Wang, Peterson, & Morphey, 2007). Given these differences, a CFA was conducted to evaluate the hypothesized factor structure of the measure. Two factors were identified consistent with the literature, parent influence on student’s academic and behavioral performance at school and parent influence on other life decisions; the model fit was adequate χ²(13) = 47.19, p < .000; CFI = .95; RMSEA = .09. Internal consistency of the parent influence related to academics with the present sample was high (α = .86), whereas the consistency of the parent influence related to other activities was low (α = .49). Only the parent influence related to academics subscale was used.

Teacher-reported engagement

Engagement was assessed with an adapted version of the Wellborn Engagement scale (Skinner, Zimmer-Gembeck, & Connell, 1998). Teachers who instructed students in at least one academic subject were asked to describe the student’s behavioral engagement in their classroom within the past 6-week period using a 12-item scale on a 4-point Likert-type scale from really disagree (1) to really agree (4). Sample items include, “This student tries very hard to do well in school; When this student is in class, he or she concentrates on doing his or her work.” Results of the CFA for the current data suggested good model fit for a single factor of teacher-rated engagement: χ²(5) = 7.27, p = .209; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .04. Internal consistency of this measure for the current sample was .95.

Results

Structural Equation Modeling was used to test the hypothesized structural model (see Figure 1) using Maximum Likelihood (Mplusv 5.2, Muthén & Muthén, 2008). Model fit evaluation was based on model fit criteria proposed by Hu and Bentler (1999): a CFI ≥ .95, RMSEA ≤ .06, and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) ≤ .08. Full information maximum likelihood (FIML) was used to account for missing data at random (average percent missing was 2.32%). The correlation between the variables used in the current study is as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Correlation Coefficients of Examined Variables.

Variables	Achievement	Subjective task values	Economic benefits to education	Engagement	Parent influence	Peer influence
1. Achievement	—	.15*	.04	.14*	.00	−.09
2. Subjective task values		—	.30***	.09	.31***	.24***
3. Economic benefits to education			—	.05	.47***	.44***
4. Engagement				—	.09	.01
5. Parent influence					—	.40***
6. Peer influence						—

p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

Results suggest partial support for the hypothesized model (see Figure 2), χ²(16) = 26.07, p = .045; CFI = .97; RMSEA = .050; SRMR = .036. We found that both parent and peer influences were related to Latino adolescents’ subjective task values and economic benefits to education. However, unexpectedly, both sets of achievement values were not predictive of student school achievement in the current study. Specifically, economic benefits to education were not predictive of achievement while adolescents’ subjective task values were. We also did not find support for parent and peer influences on adolescents’ behavioral engagement in class. However, behavioral engagement was noted as a significant predictor of student school achievement, which is consistent with findings of prior research.

Figure 2.

Mediation effect of subjective task values.

The mediation effect for subjective task values was tested with the PRODCLIN program (MacKinnon, Fritz, Williams, & Lockwood, 2007), in which asymmetrical confidence intervals are used to provide more powerful test of indirect effects than the traditional Sobel test. Asymmetric confidence intervals are more advantageous because they provide a more powerful test of mediation, thus increasing the likelihood of assessing if a mediation effect exists in your model (MacKinnon et al., 2007). PRODCLIN is only able to test mediation analyses singularly (e.g., one mediation effect at a time), thus two separate tests were conducted to examine the mediated effect of peer influence on student achievement by way of students’ subjective task values and parent influence on student achievement via subjective task values. The confidence interval for peer influence was .085 to .610 and for parent influence, .043 to .158. The absence of zero within these intervals suggests that mediation effects for parent and peer influences were both significant. These results indicate that students’ subjective task values mediated the relation between peer and parent influences on students’ self-reported achievement.

Discussion

The purpose of the current study was to examine the influence parents and peers have on the achievement values, school behavioral engagement, and subsequent school achievement in a sample of Latino middle school adolescents. Overall, our findings suggest that Latino youth in the current study perceive their parents and peers to significantly influence their subjective task values (perceptions of the importance/usefulness of things learned in school) and economic benefits to education (perceptions about the general benefits and limitations of education for your future) but not their behavioral engagement in school. However, when examining subsequent school achievement, subjective task values and behavioral engagement were found to be significant predictors and subjective task values were also found to mediate the relation between parent and peer influences and students’ self-reported achievement.

Consistent with previous studies, parent and peer influences were significant predictors of both measures of achievement values in the current sample of Latino youth. However, unlike other studies (Castillo et al., 2010; Ceja, 2004; Sirin & Rogers-Sirin, 2004), we did not find a significant relation between parent and peer influences and school behavioral engagement. One possible explanation as to why parent and peer influences did not predict students’ school behavioral engagement was because this construct was the only variable that was not self-reported by adolescents but rather by teachers. Previous studies have suggested that when examining indicators of engagement from both student and teacher reports, student reports were more highly correlated than were teacher reports (Skinner, Furrer, Marchand, & Kindermann, 2008). According to Skinner and her colleagues, student reports may have a more powerful causal influence because students’ perceptions are the proximal cues of their motivational reactions. The notion of the importance of how adolescents’ interpret and make meaning of their environments has been suggested in previous research with minority youth. According to Spencer (1995, 1999), the phenomenological variant of ecological systems theory model expands on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological perspective because it emphasizes how individuals interpret their life experiences, which is useful when examining behaviors within high-risk environments. Although teacher reports of student engagement may be accurate, it may be that students’ perceptions of their level of behavioral engagement will be more directly linked to their perceptions of school achievement. Future studies need to consider examining student and teacher perceptions of engagement to determine which is a more accurate measure of self-reported student achievement.

When examining student achievement, results partially supported our hypothesis. Specifically, both subjective task values and school behavioral engagement were significant predictors of school achievement. However, unlike previous studies (Colón n & Sánchez, 2010), we did not find a significant relation between economic benefits to education and student achievement in the current sample of Latino students. According to Mickelson (1990), beliefs regarding returns on education are derived from personal and observed experiences. Also, we defined this type of achievement values as being based on adolescents’ perceptions of how likely an education will provide them with economic benefits. It is possible that the Latino middle school youth in the current study did not have or had limited opportunities to observe how education was linked to future gains. According to Colon and Sanchez, Latino students performed better in school when they viewed education as a means for making future gains. If students do not have access to experiences that support the benefits of education as a means to becoming successful, then it is likely that such a measure will not be important in predicting student achievement. Future studies need to examine Latino adolescents’ perceptions of how education is related to their social mobility and future gains.

It is important to note that unlike previous studies, which has examined participants attending both high school and college, the current study focused on a middle school sample of Latino adolescents when examining the influence parents and peers had on the achievement values, behavioral engagement, and achievement of these young adolescents. This is significant because of the potential for developmental differences between early and late adolescents. Research has suggested that declines in academic achievement, achievement motivation, and school engagement begin in the middle school years (Anderman, Maehr, & Midgley, 1999; McDermott, Mordell, & Stolzfus, 2001). Therefore, examining variables that contribute to achievement of Latino youth in early adolescence can help reduce the disproportionately high drop-out rates among Latinos (Carpenter & Ramirez, 2007).

Finally, the importance of subjective task values on the school achievement of Latino middle school youth was highlighted in the current study. The relationships between parent and peer influences and school achievement of Latino youth was mediated by these subjective task values. Results from the current study suggest that the school achievement of Latino middle school youth was better explained by the indirect or mediated effects adolescents’ subjective task values had on parent and peer beliefs and behaviors and not the direct effects of parent and peer influences on student achievement. Latino parents were able to ensure academic success in their adolescents through their efforts to transmit the importance of education and how an education will improve their life (i.e., social mobility). The importance of subjective task values in predicting student achievement is similar to Hill and Tyson’s (2009) concept of academic socialization. According to Hill and Tyson, academic socialization includes a parent’s ability to communicate their educational expectations while also conveying the value and utility of education for their youth’s future. Among various parenting behaviors, academic socialization emerged as a critical component of parental involvement in middle school that had the strongest and positive relation with student achievement. Hill and Tyson suggested that academic socialization fostered the development of internalized motivation for achievement (i.e., subjective task values). Overall, the current study adds to the literature on how parents and peers can positively influence the school achievement of middle school Latino adolescents.

Limitations

The results of the current study provide preliminary support that parent and peer influences on subjective task values or seeing the importance/usefulness of the things learned in school may be most important in predicting student achievement in Latino middle school youth. However, as with any study, there are potential limitations that must be considered. First, future studies need to consider the level of acculturation for Latino youth. Acculturation or immigration status was not directly measured in the current study, which may be useful in explaining potential differences in Latino adolescents based on their level of acculturation. However, approximately 90% of the students in the current study reported their primary language at home was English, which suggest a greater level of acculturation than what would be expected for first-generation Latino youth. This is important because later generations of Latinos have been found to perform less well than first-generation Latinos (Rodriguez, 2002). Consequently, parent and peer influences can affect achievement values, student engagement, and subsequent achievement differently depending on a student’s level of acculturation.

Another limitation is the use of student self-report grades as the sole measure of student achievement. Although self-report grades have been shown to be accurate measures of student achievement (Dornbusch et al., 1987), future studies should use more concrete measures of achievement in order to have more precise measures of school success and failure in Latino youth. Third, the current study relied on multiple teachers to rate students’ behavioral engagement in the classroom. It is possible for variability between scores to be related to differences between teachers. In order to address these issue future studies may want to provide a training session for teachers in order to clearly define what is meant by behavioral engagement in the classroom. Also, classroom observations may be helpful in order for researchers to observe how teachers are quantifying behavioral engagement in the classroom. Finally, the current study relied on cross-sectional data at only one time point, which limits the ability to determine the predictive ability of the examined variables in the current study. Future studies that incorporate a longitudinal design can better examine parent and peer influences on the achievement values, school behavioral engagement, and subsequent student achievement in Latino youth.

Implications for Intervention

These findings have important implications for parent and teacher interventions when working with Latino youth because both play a significant role in the educational outcomes of youth. For parents, results indicate that parent and peer influences predict both types of achievement values, however, subjective task values are particularly important in predicting student achievement. Therefore, we must encourage parents to engage in activities and behaviors that communicate the importance of how an education leads to social mobility and future success for Latino youth, especially given the important role that parents play in the development of educational aspirations for Latino youth. Due to the low levels of educational attainment of Latinos, many Latino youth may not have examples of the significant returns of an education (economic benefits to education) in their immediate environment. Nevertheless, parents are able to stress the importance of doing well in school in order to prevent their children from experiencing similar hardships as a result of poverty and a lack of education (Ceja, 2004; Mickelson, 1990; Sanchez et al., 2006). Frequent communication that explains the life struggles of Latino parents due to not having an education will serve as a motivating factor that affects Latino adolescents’ desires to obtain an education (Azmitia, Cooper, Garcia, & Dunbar, 1996). In addition, to the direct influence of parents they can also influence their adolescents’ choice in peer networks. According to Simons-Morton and Chen (2009), certain parenting practices (authoritative parenting) may encourage school engagement by discouraging the development of problem-behaving friends. It is possible that when parents create an atmosphere of educational importance, adolescents are more likely to gravitate to peers with a similar outlook on education, thus providing another source of support for enhancing achievement values and academic outcomes.

As for teachers, when examining their influence on student engagement and subsequent achievement, it is important that they actively work to create an atmosphere that encourages and not devalues Latino students. Teachers represent a critical potential source of support for early adolescents living in low-income neighborhoods. However, this support, important for academic success, is often considered difficult to obtain for racial and ethnic-minority students (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). This is of great significance because Arellano and Padilla (1996) found college entrance among Mexican youth was predicated on the access of mentors or role models (i.e., teachers or counselors) who took a particular interest in their academic success. As previously stated, Latino youth with parents who have not obtained high levels of education may have limited opportunities to observe the link between concrete achievement values and future success. Therefore, these students may need to rely more on their teachers to provide examples of how education is directly related to future success. Teachers must begin by creating an atmosphere in which all students but especially Latino students have a sense of belonging. According to Booker (2006), student achievement is directly and significantly related to their perceptions of teacher support, encouragement, and warmth all of which creates a feeling of school belonging. Teachers who can help Latino students connect with other important adults and feel welcomed at school are more likely to help those students stay engaged in school which will lead to higher academic success in the future. Overall, the ability to create an atmosphere of educational importance for Latino youth will take the commitment from families, schools, and the community at large. It is important that Latino youth not only hear messages about the importance of an education from parents and teachers but that they also need to see positive images of how an education can lead to success. Community partnerships with schools will provide opportunities to have adults of color, especially those from Latino backgrounds, become mentors in schools in order to provide these visible signs of how an education leads to social mobility.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

DeMarquis Hayes is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology, Counseling, and Special Education at Texas A&M University-Commerce. His research examines issues of resilience and vulnerability in children and adolescents, especially those from racial minority and low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Jamilia J. Blake is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Psychology in the College of Education and Human Development at Texas A&M University. Her research interests surround peer-directed aggression in socially marginalized populations and the relation between peer-directed aggression and children’s psychological/social adjustment and academic achievement.

Alicia Darensbourg is a licensed psychologist at Cypress Fairbanks Independent School District. She earned her doctoral degree in school psychology from Texas A&M University. Her research interests surround academic achievement discrepancies in ethnic-minority populations.

Linda G. Castillo is a full professor of counseling psychology in the Department of Educational Psychology in the College of Education and Human Development at Texas A&M University. She is a fellow of the American Psychology Association. Her expertise and research focuses on educational, mental health, and health disparities of Mexican American adolescents and adults.

References

Anderman

E. M.

Maehr

M. L.

Midgley

(1999). Declining motivation after the transition to middle school: Schools can make a difference. Journal of Research & Development in Education, 32, 131-147.

Arellano

A. R.

Padilla

A. M.

(1996). Academia invulnerability among a select group of Latino university students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18, 485-507. doi:10.1177/07399863960184004

Aud

Hussar

Planty

Snyder

Bianco

Fox

. . .Drake

(2010). The Condition of Education 2010 (NCES 2010-028). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Azmitia

Cooper

C. R.

Garcia

E. E.

Dunbar

N. D.

(1996). The ecology of family guidance in low-income, Mexican-American, and European-American families. Social Development, 5, 1-23. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.1996.tb00069.x

Barona

Miller

(1994). Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanic Youth (SASH-Y): A preliminary report. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 16, 155-162.

Bentler

P. M.

Dudgeon

(1996). Covariance structure analysis: Statistical practice, theory, and directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 563-592.

Berndt

T. J.

(1999). Friends’ influence on students’ adjustment to school. Educational Psychologist, 34, 15-28. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3401_2

Booker

K. C.

(2006). School belonging and the African American adolescent: What do we know and where should we go? High School Journal, 89(4), 1-7.

Browne

M. W.

Cudeck

(1993). Alternate ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen

K. A.

Long

J. S.

(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

10.

Carpenter

D. M.

Ramirez

(2007). More than one gap: Dropout rate gaps between and among Black, Hispanic, and White students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, 32-64.

11.

Carrranza

F. D.

You

Chhuon

Hudley

(2009). Mexican American adolescents’ academic achievement and aspirations: The role of perceived parental educational involvement, acculturation, and self-esteem. Adolescence, 44, 313-333.

12.

Castillo

L. G.

Conoley

C. W.

Cepeda

L. M.

Ivy

K. K.

Archuleta

D. J.

(2010). Mexican American adolescents’ perceptions of a pro-college culture. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9, 61-72. doi:10.1177/1538192709350454

13.

Cauce

A. M.

Hannan

Sargeant

(1992). Life stress, social support, and locus of control during early adolescence: Interactive effects. American Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 787-798.

14.

Ceja

(2004). Chicana college aspirations and the role of parents: Developing educational resiliency. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3, 338-362. doi:10.1177/1538192704268428

15.

Colón

Sánchez

(2010). Explaining the gender disparity in Latino youth’s education: Acculturation and economic value of education. Urban Education, 45, 252-273. doi:10.1177/0042085908322688

16.

Conchas

G. Q.

(2001). Structuring failure and success: Understanding the variability in Latino school engagement. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 475-504.

17.

Connell

J. P.

Spencer

M. B.

Aber

J. L.

(1994). Educational risk and resilience in African American youth: Context, self, action, and outcomes in school. Child Development, 65, 493-506. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.ep9405315136

18.

Dornbusch

S. M.

Ritter

P. L.

Leiderman

P. H.

Roberts

D. F.

Fraleigh

M. J.

(1987). The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child Development, 57, 1244-1257. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.ep8591146

19.

Eccles

J. S.

Adler

T. F.

Futterman

Goff

S. B.

Kaczala

C. M.

Meece

J. L.

Midgley

(1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In Spence

J. T.

(Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.

20.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059

21.

Hill

N. E.

Torres

(2010). Negotiating the American dream: The paradox of aspirations and achievement among Latino students and engagement between their families and schools. Social Issues, 66, 95-112.

22.

Hill

N. E.

Tyson

D. F.

(2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Developmental Psychology, 45, 740-763. doi:10.1037/a0015362

23.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

24.

Kindermann

T. A.

(1993). Natural peer groups as contexts for individuals development: The case of children’s motivation in school. Developmental Psychology, 29, 970-977. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.6.970

25.

Kindermann

T. A.

(2007). Effects of naturally existing peer groups on changes in academic engagement in a cohort of sixth graders. Child Development, 78, 1186-1203. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01060.x

26.

Kindermann

T. A.

McCollam

Gibson

(1996). Peer networks and student’s classroom engagement during childhood and adolescence. In Juvonen

Wentzel

(Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp. 279-312). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

27.

Kline

R. B.

(2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

28.

Lee

Nguyen

H. A.

Tsui

(2011). Interview language: A proxy measure for acculturation among Asian Americans in a population-based survey. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 13, 244-252. doi:10.1007/s10903-009-9278-z

29.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Fritz

M. S.

Williams

Lockwood

C. M.

(2007). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program PRODCLIN. Behavioral Research Methods, 39, 384-389.

30.

Malecki

C. K.

Demaray

M. K.

(2006). Social support as a buffer in the relationship between socioeconomic status and academic performance. School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 375-395. doi:10.1037/h0084129

31.

Marin

Sabogal

Van Oss

M. B.

Otero-Sabogal

Perez-Stable

(1987). Development of a Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9, 183-205.

32.

Marks

H. M.

(2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153-184. doi:10.3102/00028312037001153

33.

McDermott

P. A.

Mordell

Stolzfus

J. C.

(2001). The organization of student performance in American schools: Discipline, motivation, verbal learning, and nonverbal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 65-76. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.65

34.

Mickelson

R. A.

(1990). The attitude-achievement paradox among Black adolescents. Sociology of Education, 63, 44-61.

35.

Murdock

T. B.

(1999). The social context of risk: Status and motivational predictors of alienation in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 62-75. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.1.62

36.

Murdock

T. B.

Miller

(2003). Teachers as sources of middle school students’ motivational identity: Variable-centered and person-centered analytic approaches. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 383-399.

37.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2008). Mplus user’s guide. Fifth edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

38.

Nelson

R. M.

DeBacker

T. K.

(2008). Achievement motivation in adolescents: The role of peer climate and best friends. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 170-189.

39.

Ogbu

J. U.

(2004). Collective identity and the burden of “Acting White” in Black history, community, and education. The Urban Review, 36, 1-35. doi: 10.1023/B:URRE.0000042734.83194.f6

40.

Paulson

S. E.

(1994). Relations of parenting style and parental involvement with ninth-grade students’ achievement. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 250-267. doi:10.1177/027243169401400208

41.

Pérez

P. A.

McDonough

P. M.

(2008). Understanding Latina and Latino college choice: A social capital and chain migration analysis. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 7, 249-265. doi:10.1177/1538192708317620

42.

Rodríguez

C. G.

(1999). Bringing up Latino children in a bicultural world. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

43.

Rodriguez

J. L.

(2002). Family environment and achievement among three generations of Mexican American high school students. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 88-94.

44.

Sánchez

Reyes

Singh

(2006). Makin’ it in college: The value of significant individuals in the lives of Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 5, 48-67. doi:10.1177/1538192705282570

45.

Serrano

Anderson

(2003). Assessment of a refined Short Acculturation Scale for Latino preteens in rural Colorado. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25, 240-253. doi:10.1177/0739986303025002006

46.

Simons-Morton

Chen

(2009). Peer and parent influences on school engagement among early adolescents. Youth & Society, 41, 3-25. doi:10.1177/0044118X09334861

47.

Sirin

S. R.

Rogers-Sirin

(2004). Exploring school engagement of middle-class African American adolescents. Youth & Society, 35, 323-340. doi:10.1177/0044118X03255006

48.

Skinner

E. A.

Furrer

Marchand

Kindermann

(2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 765-781. doi:10.1037/a0012840

49.

Skinner

E. A.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

Connell

J. P.

(1998). Individual differences and the development of perceived control. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 63, 2-3.

50.

Spencer

M. B.

(1995). Old issues and new theorizing about African American youth: A phenomenological variant of ecological systems theory. In Taylor

R. L.

(Ed.), Black youth: Perspectives on their status in the United States (pp. 37-79). Westport, CT: Praeger.

51.

Spencer

M. B.

(1999). Social and cultural influences on school adjustment: The application of an identity-focused cultural ecological perspective. Educational Psychologist, 34, 43-57.

52.

Stanton-Salazar

R. D.

(1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67, 1-39.

53.

Steinberg

Dornbusch

Brown

B. B.

(1992). Ethnic differences in adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.6.723

54.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Statistical abstract of the United States: 2011. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/

55.

Valencia

R. R.

Solorzano

D. G.

(1997). Contemporary deficit thinking. In Valencia

R. R.

(Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice (pp. 160-210). New York, NY: Falmer Press/Taylor & Francis.

56.

Voelkl

K. E.

(1996). Measuring students’ identification with school. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 760-770. doi:10.1177/0013164496056005003

57.

Wang

Peterson

G. W.

Morphey

L. K.

(2007). Who is more important for early adolescents’ developmental choices? Peers or parents? Marriage and Family Review, 42, 95-122. doi:10.1300/J002v42n02_06

58.

Wentzel

K. R.

(1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202-209. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202

59.

Wigfield

Eccles

J. S.

Yoon

K. S.

Harold

R. D.

Arbreton

A. J.

Freedman-Doan

Blumenfeld

P. C.

(1997). Changes in children’s competence beliefs and subjective task values across the elementary school years: A three-year study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 451-469. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.451

60.

Zambrana

R. E.

Zoppi

I. M.

(2002). Latina students: Translating cultural wealth into social capital to improve academic success. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 11, 33-53. doi:10.1300/J051v11n01_02