The children of immigrants’ diminishing perceptions of just and fair punishment

Punishment & Society

14(4) 429–451

! The Author(s) 2012

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1462474512452518

pun.sagepub.com

Article

The children ofimmigrants’ diminishingperceptions of just andfair punishment

Anthony A PegueroVirginia Tech, USA

Abstract

Perceptions of school rules and punishment practices, particularly for racial and ethnic

minority youth, are related to educational progress, psychological well-being, and adult

stability and success. What remains uncertain is how the fastest growing segment of the

population in the USA, the children of immigrants, perceives the rules and punishment

practices within their schools. This study utilizes data from the Education Longitudinal

Study of 2002 and incorporates multilevel analysis to examine the children of immi-

grants’ perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices, which indeed reveal

imperative findings. First generation youth have increased perceptions of just and fair

punishment practices within their schools; however, Black/African American and Latino

American third-plus generation youth have diminished perceptions of just and fair pun-

ishment practices within their schools. The implications of the evident racial and ethnic,

as well as generational, disparities in the perceptions of the school rules and punishment

practices in the USA are discussed more generally.

Keywords

race and ethnicity, schools, segmented assimilation

Introduction

In recent years, perceptions of school rules and punishment practices, particularlythose of racial and ethnic minorities, have received much attention. Racial andethnic minority youth’s perception of rules and punishment practices within their

Corresponding author:

Anthony A Peguero, Department of Sociology, Virginia Tech, 560 McBryde Hall (0137), Blacksburg, VA, 24061,

USA.

Email: [email protected]

lives and at school, impacts their overall well-being, stress and depression, criminalbehavior, attitude and motivation in school, and educational progress and success(Kupchik, 2010; LaFree, 1998; Rios, 2011; Wong et al., 2003). This is particularlyalarming when it is projected that within the next 25 years, for the first time in UShistory, White Americans will represent less than half the total youth population(US Census Bureau, 2010). Research also demonstrates that the growing number ofracial and ethnic minorities within the USA is related to immigration. Althoughracial and ethnic minority youth perceive the school rules and punishment practicesas unfair (Bracy, 2010; Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik and Ellis, 2008), little is knownabout how the children of immigrants perceive school rules and punishmentpractices.

The USA has approximately 43 million foreign-born people, representingapproximately 13 percent of the USA population (US Census Bureau, 2010). Asa result, 25 percent of all students in US schools have at least one immigrantparent. Unlike earlier immigration waves, where most immigrants were fromEurope, approximately 85 percent of immigrants from the current immigrationwave are from Latin America, Asia, or the Caribbean (US Census Bureau,2010). Due to the change in the racial and ethnic composition of this wave ofimmigration, persistent disparities linked to race and ethnicity may be contributingto the educational barriers that the children of immigrants face in US schools.Since children of immigrants are a rapidly growing segment of the populationwithin the US school system, the need to understand the school experiences ofthis population is pressing. School is not only where the children of immigrantslearn about US values, beliefs, and behaviors but also about their social and cul-tural role in US society (Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006). Kupchik (2010: 7)stressed that youth in US schools may be learning the ‘wrong’ lesson when itcomes to school rules and punishment practices by suggesting that ‘this lessonencourages passivity and uncritical acceptance of authority, which bode poorlyfor the future of democratic participation’; therefore, understanding how the chil-dren of immigrants perceive the school rules and punishment and punishmentpractices warrants investigation. Though prior research reveals how race and eth-nicity matter in perceptions of school rules and punishment, these studies oftenassume racial or ethnic minority groups are homogeneous. In actuality, the terrainis more complex, so that not all Black/African American, Latino American, AsianAmerican, and White American youth have similar within-group experiences.

This study extends the literature on race, ethnicity, and the children of immi-grants’ experiences within the US school system by examining the multilevel rela-tionships between generational status, race, ethnicity, and perceptions of schoolrules and punishment practices. This research makes use of multilevel analyses andemploys nationally representative data on students’ school experiences to explorewhether children of immigrants have distinctive patterns in their perceptions of theschool rules and punishment practices. The results revealing the potentially dimin-ishing perceptions of fairness in school rules and punishment practices held bychildren of immigrants are discussed along with their implications.

430 Punishment & Society 14(4)

Youth perceptions of school justice and fair punishment

It is well known that schools are institutions of socialization. Dewey’s (1916) sem-inal work on education cemented the theoretical link between education and dem-ocracy. According to Dewey, schools could serve not only to level the playing field,but also as an apprenticeship for civic life. Since Dewey (1916) argued that schoolssocialize and educate youth into appropriate social positions, roles, and responsi-bilities for a ‘democratic society’, researchers have scrutinized the socializationprocess that occurs within US schools. Unfortunately, schools can reproduceinequality and foster diminished perceptions of the school rules and punishmentpractices within schools for racial and ethnic minority youth.

Perceptions of school rules and punishment practices as just and fair are par-ticularly important because schools are institutions of socialization where youthlearn about social positions, roles, and responsibilities in a democratic society. Thesignificance of students’ perceptions or views about the justice and fairness withintheir schools should not be underestimated. How youth perceive their school envir-onment may be more important than ‘objective reality’, in that youth’s perceptionscan influence their response, behavior, interactions, and education while in thatschool (Kupchik, 2010; Kupchick and Ellis, 2008). Consequently, there has beengrowing concern and research attention paid to the poor perceptions of schoolrules and punishment practices among racial and ethnic minority youth becauseit is arguably linked to educational progress and delinquency (Bracy, 2010;Cammarota, 2004; Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik and Ellis, 2008).

There are racial and ethnic differences to the perception of the clarity andenforcement of the school rules. School rules are often highlighted and emphasizedto Black/African American and Latino American youth because it is a means ofsocializing youth towards accepting increased social control in their lives (Bracy,2010; Cammarota, 2004; Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik and Ellis, 2008). AlthoughBlack/African American and Latino American youth have heightened awareness ofwhat the school rules are, Black/African American and Latino American youthhave diminished perceptions of the school rules as fair and of the enforcement ofthese rules as just (Bracy, 2010; Cammarota, 2004; Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik andEllis, 2008). Although it appears that many racial and ethnic minority youth in theUSA do not view schools as just and fair, what remains unknown is how thegrowing population of children of immigrants perceives the rules and punishmentpractices within their schools.

Schooling and immigration

US schools are institutions of socialization with which immigrants and their chil-dren come into contact. As a result of previous waves of immigration, US schoolshave undergone phenomenal transformations, with changes in educational phil-osophy, instruction, and curriculum (Lee, 2005; Olsen, 2008; Rong and Preissle,2008; Valenzuela, 1999). The ideological role of the school in educating and socia-lizing the children of immigrants has been scrutinized, especially in regard to racial

Peguero 431

and ethnic educational inequality (Olsen, 2008; Rong and Preissle, 2008). Becauseracial and ethnic disparities are historic and persistent within US schools, research-ers have explored to what extent race and ethnicity are significant factors to beconsidered in the assimilation process.

The race and ethnicity of the majority of contemporary immigrants sets themapart from the previous waves of immigrants who were primarily from Europe. Forthe current wave of immigrants, many of them have never experienced prejudiceassociated with a particular skin color or racial type in their country of origin(Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006). Immigrants and their children are confrontedwith the reality of racial and ethnic classification and stratification in US schools(Kozol, 1991, 2005; Lareau, 2003; Olsen, 2008; Rong and Priessle, 2008; Waters,1999). In this regard, the role of race and ethnicity may be significant in relation tothe children of immigrants’ school experiences.

There is research examining the adaptation and assimilation processes of thenew immigrants and their children; however, to what extent race and ethnicity arerelated to the assimilation process is often questioned by researchers. Conventionalor ‘straight-line’ assimilation theorists argue that assimilation proceeds in astraight-line which promotes upward intergenerational mobility (Alba and Nee,2003; Kasinitz et al., 2009). In other words, as each subsequent generation becomesmore ‘American’, they are rewarded for their assimilation with increased opportu-nities for upward social, economic, and educational mobility. Segmented assimila-tion theorists, however, argue that race and ethnicity are significant in theassimilation process because social institutions, such as schools, have embeddedracial and ethnic inequalities that present barriers toward upward social, economic,and educational mobility for the children of immigrants (Gans, 1992; Portes andRumbaut, 2001, 2006; Rumbaut, 1997; Zhou, 1997). Consequently, the process ofassimilation becomes segmented because assimilation may facilitate either upwardor downward mobility due in part to the race or ethnicity of the immigrant. It isthis notion of a ‘downward’ trajectory toward educational failure that has raisedmuch social concern for the schooling of the children of immigrants in the USA.

There are a number of findings associated with the children of immigrants’community and school experiences that reflect one of segmented assimilation.First generation Latino American, Asian American, and Black/African Americanyouth report high educational optimism but that educational optimism oftendeclines by third-plus generation status (Kao and Tienda, 1995; Suarez-Orozcoand Suarez-Orozco, 2001). Third-plus generation Black/African American,Latino American, and Asian American youth have higher dropout rates thantheir immigrant parents (Perreira et al., 2006; Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006).Finally, third-plus generation Black/African American and Latino American youthhave more experiences with violence while at school in comparison to their first andsecond generation counterparts (Ewert, 2009; Peguero, 2009, 2011). Thus, examin-ing the school-based experiences, such as perceptions of school rules and punish-ment practices, of the rapidly growing population of children of immigrants iswarranted and needed.

432 Punishment & Society 14(4)

The current study

Perception of clear school rules and fair punishment practices can facilitate theyouth’s successful socialization as a participating member of democratic society.The ideal of justice and fairness within a school is imperative because the educa-tional system is the foundation of a democratic meritocracy. It is also important toacknowledge that there is a historical and ongoing pattern of racial and ethnicdisparities within USA schools. The effects of students’ perceptions of the schoolrules and punishment practices could promote or derail educational progress andsuccess, particularly for racial and ethnic minority youth. Many racial and ethnicminorities also have diminished perceptions of the school rules and punishmentpractices and suffer exponentially as a result. Although immigrants who migrate tothe USA have increased optimistic beliefs that this nation is just and fair, which isoften considered a major factor for immigration to the USA, today’s immigrantsand their children face a reality of racially and ethnically disparate treatment(Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006). Understanding the perception of school rulesand punishment practices within an institution of socialization that prepares thefastest growing segment of youth in the USA, the children of immigrants, to enter ademocratic society is imperative.

In sum, there are three research questions for this study. Is generational status asignificant factor in understanding youth perceptions of just school rules and fairpunishment practices within school? If so, is the relationship between generationalstatus and perceptions of just school rules and fair punishment practices withinschool distinct for different racial and ethnic groups? If the relationship betweengenerational status and youth perceptions of just and fair punishment practiceswithin school indeed varies by race and ethnicity, do they reflect a pattern ofsegmented assimilation?

Data and methods

Data

The data for the research are drawn from the Education Longitudinal Study of2002 (ELS). ELS is a longitudinal survey administered by the Research TriangleInstitute (RTI) for the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2004) ofthe US Department of Education. ELS is ‘designed to monitor the transition ofa national sample of young people as they progress from tenth grade throughhigh school and on to postsecondary education and/or the world ofwork’(NCES, 2004: 7). These data include information about the experiencesand backgrounds of students, parents, and teachers, and descriptions of the schoolsthe respondent students attended.

As with most, if not all samples, the analytical sample is smaller than the ori-ginal sample. This study focused on 12,030 public school students in the base yearsample. As in previous research that investigated the experiences of the children of

Peguero 433

immigrants within US schools (Kao and Tienda, 1995; Peguero, 2009, 2011; Portesand Rumbaut, 2001, 2006; Rumbaut, 1997; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco,2001; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008; Zhou, 1997), because the intersection of race,ethnicity, and generation is central for a segmented assimilation analysis, this studyfocused on Black/African American, Latino American, Asian American, andWhite American public school students. Students who reported being NativeAmerican, multiple races and ethnicities, and/or no race and ethnicity wereexcluded from the analysis. Finally, data from students who only participated inthe abbreviated survey (which did not include parents’ characteristics) wereexcluded from the sample because parents’ birthplace is essential information formeasuring the student’s generational status. Thus, this research uses a subsamplefrom the ELS data consisting of 9870 first, second, and third-plus generation publicschool students.

Perception of just and fair punishment school practices

Similar to previous studies (Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik and Ellis, 2008), percep-tions of the school rules and punishment practices (Cronbach’s a¼ .84) are basedon five Likert scale items (0¼ Strongly Disagree, 1¼Disagree, 2¼Agree, and3¼ Strongly Agree) that the student self-reported: (1) everyone knows what theschool rules are; (2) if a school rule is broken, students know what kind of pun-ishment will follow; (3) the school rules are fair; (4) school rules are strictlyenforced; and (5) the punishment for breaking school rules is the same no matterwho you are. The descriptive statistics for outcome(s), as well as key explanatorymeasures, are reported in Table 1.

Generational status, race, and ethnicity

As in prior research (Kao and Tienda, 1995; Peguero, 2009, 2011; Portes andRumbaut, 2001, 2006; Rumbaut, 1997; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, 2001;Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008; Zhou, 1997), generational status is measured as a set ofdummy variables indicating whether the student is a first, second, or third-plusgeneration. Immigration and birthplace information for the students are reportedon the parents’ survey. First generation students are children who are born outsidethe USA; second generation students are born in the USA and have at least oneparent born outside the USA; and third-plus generation students are born in theUSA, as well as both of their parents.

In the ELS survey design, students self-report their race and ethnicity.Black/African American, Latino American, and Asian American students areover-sampled to obtain a sufficient representation for statistical analyses of thesegroups. All of the analyses in this study incorporated sample weights which werecalculated by NCES (2004) to compensate for the survey design and non-responsebias, and to present findings that are nationally representative (see NCES, 2004 forfurther details).

434 Punishment & Society 14(4)

Student, family, and school characteristics

Previous studies have established which student (i.e. gender, achievement, involve-ment, misbehavior, and victimization), family (i.e. socioeconomic status, structure,and parental involvement), and school (i.e. diversity, poverty, size, security,

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for variables

Variable Range M SD N

Student level

Perceptions of school justice and fairness 0–15 8.71 2.37 9870

Everyone knows what the school rules are 0–3 1.98 .65 9870

Students know punishment for broken rules 0–3 1.77 .68 9870

School rules are fair 0–3 1.52 .75 9870

School rules are strictly enforced 0–3 1.75 .68 9870

Punishment same no matter who you are 0–3 1.69 .86 9870

Generational status

First generation 0–1 .12 .32 1170

Second generation 0–1 .16 .36 1540

Third-plus generation 0–1 .73 .45 7160

Race and ethnicity

Black/African American 0–1 .15 .36 1490

Latino American 0–1 .16 .37 1630

Asian American 0–1 .11 .32 1130

White American 0–1 .57 .50 5620

Student characteristics

Female 0–1 .51 .50 5040

Achievement 21.50–79.94 49.96 9.94 9870

Involvement 0–4 1.48 1.15 9870

Misbehavior 0–6 .94 1.51 9870

Victimization 0–8 .80 1.33 9870

Family characteristics

Family SES �2.11–1.98 �.07 .73 9870

Two parent/guardian family structure 0–1 .76 .43 7460

Parental involvement 0–8 5.11 2.75 9870

School characteristics

Diversity 0–100 36.89 31.53 580

Poverty 0–100 24.93 18.63 580

Size 52–4,631 1411 839.90 580

Security 0–11 3.56 2.34 580

Urban 0–1 .28 .45 160

Peguero 435

and locale) characteristics are associated with perceptions of the school rules andpunishment practices as well as the school experiences of the children of immi-grants (Hagan et al., 2005; Kozol, 1991, 2005; Kuphick, 2010; Kupchik and Ellis,2008; Olsen, 2008; Peguero, 2009, 2011; Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Suarez-Orozco et al., 2008); thus, these controlmeasures are included in this study.

Gender is coded male or female based on the student’s self-report of their bio-logical sex. Male students serve as the reference group. Achievement is measured byusing the standardized measure developed by RTI and NCES. ELS included areading and math composite score based on standardized tests developed by theEducational Testing Service (ETS). The composite test score is the average of themath and reading standardized scores, re-standardized to a national mean of 50.0and standard deviation of 10. Involvement (a¼ .63) measures if the student isinvolved in any of the following four categories of school-based extracurricularactivities: (1) academic (e.g. honor society, band, yearbook, etc.); (2) school club;(3) intramural sports; and (4) interscholastic sports. Misbehavior (a¼ .86) is aconstructed scale that counts the number of misbehaving acts the student self-reported while in school (0¼ never, 1¼once or twice, 2¼more than twice): (1)cutting or skipping classes; (2) getting into a physical fight at school; and (3) gettinginto trouble for not following school rules. Victimization (a¼ .75) is a count vari-able (0¼never, 1¼ once or twice, and 2¼more than twice) that is based on fouritems of within school victimization: (1) someone threatened to hurt me at school;(2) someone bullied me or picked on me; (3) someone hit me; and (4) someone usedstrong-arm or forceful methods to get money or things from me.

The NCES preconstructed measure of family socioeconomic status is a standar-dized (z-score) variable based on five equally weighted, standardized components:father’s/guardian’s education; mother’s/guardian’s education; family income;father’s/guardian’s occupational prestige; and mother’s/guardian’s occupationalprestige (see NCES, 2004 for further details about preconstructed variables).Family structure is a dichotomous variable indicating if the student lives in asingle-parent household or a two-parent household; single-parent householdsserve as the reference group. Parental involvement (a¼ .91) is an index based oneight items that measured parents’ involvement in their children’s school experience(each coded 0¼ not involved and 1¼ involved): (1) checking homework; (2) help-ing with homework; (3) discussing school courses; (4) discussing school activities;(5) discussing things studied in class; (6) discussing grades; (7) discussing transfer-ring; and (8) discussing college attendance.

Diversity measures the proportion of racial and ethnic minority students whoare enrolled at the school. Poverty measures the proportion of students receivingfree or reduced lunch within each school. Size is measured as the total studentenrollment of the school. Security (a¼ .85) is a count index where school admin-istrators indicate whether the following security measures were implemented intheir schools: (1) control access to school buildings during school hours; (2) controlaccess to school grounds during school hours; (3) require students to pass through

436 Punishment & Society 14(4)

metal detectors each day; (4) perform one or more random metal detector checkson students; (5) close the campus for most students during lunch; (6) use one ormore random dog sniffs to check for drugs; (7) perform one or more randomsweeps for contraband; (8) require clear book bags or ban book bags on schoolgrounds; (9) require students to wear badges or picture IDs; (10) require facultyand staff to wear badges or picture IDs; and (11) use one or more security camerasto monitor the school. School locale indicates whether the school is located in anurban or nonurban (reference category) locale.

Table 2. Individual student-level descriptives by generation

First Second Third-plus

Variable M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)

Dependent

Perceptions of school justice and fairness 9.14(2.16)* 8.76(2.31) 8.63(2.42)

Everyone knows what the school rules are 1.95(.63)* 1.89(.67)* 2.01(.64)

Students know punishment for broken rules 1.81(.69) 1.78(.66) 1.77(.69)

School rules are fair 1.61(.72)* 1.51(.74) 1.50(.76)

School rules are strictly enforced 1.81(.67)* 1.78(.66)* 1.73(.69)

Punishment same no matter who you are 1.97(.73)* 1.80(.81)* 1.63(.87)

Race and ethnicity

Black/African American .06(.24)* .06(.24)* .18(.39)

Latino/a American .39(.49)* .42(.49)* .07(.26)

Asian American .44(.50)* .35(.48)* .01(.10)

White American .10(.30)* .16(.37)* .73(.44)

Student characteristics

Female .53(.50) .50(.50) .51(.50)

Achievement 47.17(10.33)* 49.42(10.38)* 50.53(9.69)

Involvement 1.24(1.15)* 1.33(1.18)* 1.54(1.13)

Misbehavior 1.08(1.60)* 1.10(1.61)* .89(1.47)

Victimization .70(1.18)* .65(1.21)* .85(1.37)

Family characteristics

Family SES �.33(.83)* �.17(.80)* .00(.68)

Two parent/guardian family structure .77(.42) .80(.41)* .76(.43)

Parental involvement 4.51(3.01)* 4.89(2.80)* 5.25(2.68)

Note: Significant differences are denoted with asterisks. Significance tests are based on chi-square tests (for

dummy variables) and Welch’s t-tests (for continuous variables), and verified with nonparametric Wilcoxon-

Mann-Whitney tests; statistically significant in Bonferroni tests compared to third-plus generation.

*p� .05.

Peguero 437

Table 3. Hierarchical linear model effects and standard errors for perceptions of overall scale

of the school rules and punishment practices

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

b SE b SE b SE

Generational status and race/ethnicity

First generation .414 *** .114

Black/African

American

.583 * .283

Latino American .402 ** .145

Asian American .299 * .150

White American .570 * .253

Second generation .054 .097

Black/African

American

�.280 .308

Latino American .194 .142

Asian American .074 .139

White American �.109 .139

Race and ethnicity

Black/African

American

�.059 .110 �.052 .110 �.042 .111

Latino American .126 .102 .035 .111 �.051 .133

Asian American .134 .117 �.034 .136 .078 .317

Student characteristics

Female .114 * .055 .111 * .055 .113 * .055

Educational

achievement

�.015 *** .003 �.015 *** .003 �.015 *** .003

School involvement .098 *** .024 .101 *** .024 .101 *** .024

Misbehavior �.280 *** .017 �.276 *** .017 �.276 *** .017

Victimization �.161 *** .024 �.161 *** .024 �.161 *** .024

Family characteristics

Family SES �.199 *** .043 �.189 *** .043 �.185 *** .043

Family structure �.028 .069 �.035 .068 �.037 .069

Parental involvement .024 * .011 .026 ** .011 .025 ** .011

School characteristics

Diversity .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001

Poverty .001 * .002 .001 * .002 .001 * .002

Size .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001

Security .010 .014 .010 .014 .010 .014

Urban �.096 .089 �.093 .089 �.094 .089

Intercept 8.726 *** .036 8.729 *** .036 8.729 *** .036

(continued)

438 Punishment & Society 14(4)

Analytic strategy

Since the ELS is designed as a cluster sample in which schools are sampled withunequal probability and then students are sampled or ‘nested’ within these selectedschools, ELS violates the assumption of independent observations. The nestedstructure of ELS (i.e. students within schools) makes multilevel modeling an appro-priate analytic tool (Raudenbush et al., 2008). Because the outcome variable of theoverall perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices is continuous,Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) is utilized to analyze the multilevel relation-ships between generational status, race and ethnicity, and students’ perceptions ofschool rules and punishment practices while controlling for student, family, andschool characteristics. Because exploring each facet of students’ perceptions of theschool rules and punishment practices is important, Hierarchical GeneralizedLinear Modeling (HGLM) analysis is utilized. Since each measure of students’perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices (i.e. everyone knowswhat the school rules are, students know punishment for broken school rules,school rules are fair, school rules strictly enforced, and school punishment thesame no matter who you are) is an ordinal variable outcome, and ordinalHGLM logistic regression is appropriate. With HLM and HGLM, it is possibleto examine the ability of group-level (or school-level) variables to explain variationat the individual level. Thus, the relationships between student and school-levelfactors and students’ perceptions of school rules and punishment practices can beinvestigated.

The analyses proceed in several steps. Table 1 presents descriptive statistics forthe variables in this study. Because generational status is an important aspect ofthis study, the differences between generational status groups for key student-level

Table 3. Continued

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

b SE b SE b SE

Random effects Variance X2 Variance X2 Variance X2

Between schools .346 *** 1295.692 .346 *** 1298.988 .346 *** 1298.062

Within schools 4.839 4.831 4.830

Notes:

Model 1: The omitted categories are White American, males, single parent family structure; and non-urban

schools.

Model 2: The omitted categories are White American, third-plus generation, males, single parent family

structure; and non-urban schools.

Model 3: The omitted categories are White American third-plus generation, males, single parent family

structure; and non-urban schools.

***p� .001; **p� .01; *p� .05.

Peguero 439

Table 4. Hierarchical generalized linear model effects (standard errors) and odds ratio for

the school rules and punishment practices

Everyone knows what the

school rules are

Students know punishment

for broken school rules

b(SE) OR b(SE) OR

Generational status and

Race/ethnicity

First generation

Black/African American .625(.364) * 1.868 .261(.346) 1.298

Latino American �.166(.165) .846 .123(.146) 1.131

Asian American �.180(.192) .835 .238(.163) * 1.269

White American �.345(.273) .707 .262(.238) 1.300

Second generation

Black/African American �.642(.310) * .525 .545(.288) * 1.724

Latino American �.229(.152) .794 .257(.122) * 1.293

Asian American �.240(.191) .786 .251(.156) * 1.285

White American �.262(.178) .769 �.063(.160) .938

Race and ethnicity

Black/African American �.084(.116) .919 .248(.098) ** 1.282

Latino American �.176(.164) .838 .026(.134) 1.026

Asian American .041(.315) 1.041 .237(.350) 1.268

Student characteristics

Female .217(.065) *** 1.242 .193(.057) *** 1.213

Educational achievement .005(.003) 1.005 �.018(.003) *** .981

School involvement .022(.028) 1.022 �.009(.026) .991

Misbehavior �.058(.018) *** .942 �.086(.016) *** .917

Victimization �.171(.023) *** .842 �.110(.021) *** .895

Family characteristics

Family SES �.148(.059) ** .861 �.152(.046) *** .858

Family structure �.086(.078) .916 �.049(.066) .952

Parental involvement .022(.011) * 1.022 .027(.010) ** 1.027

School characteristics

Diversity �.002(.002) .997 .001(.001) 1.002

Poverty .005(.002) * 1.005 .005(.002) ** 1.005

Size �.001(.001) * .988 �.001(.001) * .993

Security .024(.014) * 1.025 .032(.012) ** 1.033

Urban �.007(.096) .991 �.102(.072) .902

Intercept 1.606(.034) .893(.029)

Random effects Variance X2 Variance X2

.248 *** 929.123 .143 871.71998

Note: The omitted categories are White American third-plus generation, males, single parent/guardian family

structure; and non-urban schools.

***p� .001; **p� .01; *p� .05.

440 Punishment & Society 14(4)

variables are displayed in Table 2. Table 3 displays the HLM results of the rela-tionships and interactions between the overall scale of perceptions of the schoolrules and punishment practices, generational status, race and ethnicity, and pertin-ent student, family, and school characteristics. In the baseline model of Table 3, theoverall scale of perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices isregressed on race and ethnicity, as well as other student, family, and school char-acteristics. In model 2 of the same table, generational status is introduced into theanalysis in order to assess the role of generation in relationship between percep-tions of the schools rules and punishment practices. In model 3 of Table3, theinteraction between generation, race, and ethnicity are considered. As proposed,to better understand each facet of the perception of the school rules and punish-ment practices, a disaggregated HGLM examination of each measure of the schoolrules and punishment practices is presented in Tables 4 and 5, while controlling forother pertinent factors.

Results

Descriptive statistics

Table 1 provides descriptive information about the variables in this study. Theaverage level of students’ perception of the overall scale of the school rules andpunishment practices generally is 8.71 for students in the sample. As for each aspectof the overall scale, 64.1 percent of students agreed (average of three-point scale is1.98) that everyone knows what the school rules are, 59.3 percent of studentsagreed (average of three-point scale is 1.77) that students know punishment forbreaking the school rules, 48.5 percent of students agreed (average of three-pointscale is 1.52) that the school rules are fair, 58.1 percent of students agreed (averageof three-point scale is 1.75) that the school rules are strictly enforced, and 49.1percent of students agreed (average of three-point scale is 1.69) that the punishmentis the same no matter who you are.

Table 2 provides descriptive information about the student variables in thisstudy by generational status. In this study, the average level of first generationstudents’ perception of the overall scale of the school rules and punishment prac-tices being clear and fair is higher (M¼ 9.14) than third-plus generation students(M¼ 8.63). Similar to the results for the overall sample as reported in Table 1, themodal response to each category of students’ perception of the school rules andpunishment practices is ‘agree’; however, there are some statistically significantgenerational differences. Lower proportions of first (63.5%) and second (62.3%)generation students agreed that everyone knowing what the school rules are thanthird-plus generation students (64.6%), higher proportions of first (51.7%) gener-ation students agreed that that the school rules are fair than third-plus generationstudents (48.1%), higher proportions of first (61.1%) and second (59.8%) gener-ation students agreed that the school rules are strictly enforced than third-plusgeneration students (56.1%), and higher proportions of first (57.8%) and second

Peguero 441

Table 5. Hierarchical generalized linear model effects (standard errors) and odds ratio for

the school rules and punishment practices

School rules are fair

School rules

strictly enforced

School punishment

same

b(SE) OR b(SE) OR b(SE) OR

Generational status and race/ethnicity

First generation

Black/African

American

�.567(.268) * .566 .652(.260) ** 1.920 .666(.319) * 1.947

Latino American .312(.142) * 1.367 �.030(.139) .970 .567(.148) *** 1.764

Asian American .334(.151) * 1.396 .001(.140) 1.001 .374(.141) ** 1.454

White American �.095(.228) .908 .626(.251) ** 1.871 .424(.232) * 1.528

Second generation

Black/African

American

.092(.269) 1.096 �.362(.280) .696 �.489(.250) * .613

Latino American �.043(.118) .957 .176(.120) 1.193 .079(.128) 1.082

Asian American �.106(.139) .898 .227(.144) 1.255 .274(.164) * 1.316

White American �.061(.151) .940 �.020(.161) .979 .081(.145) 1.085

Race and ethnicity

Black/African

American

�.601(.101) *** .547 .020(.098) 1.021 �.239(.099) ** .786

Latino American �.055(.121) * .946 .043(.123) 1.044 �.037(.123) * .963

Asian American �.106(.318) .898 .106(.343) 1.112 .227(.349) 1.255

Student characteristics

Female .148(.052) ** 1.160 �.142(.055) ** .866 �.163(.049) *** .848

Educational

achievement

.014(.003) *** 1.014 �.013(.003) *** .986 �.012(.003) *** .987

School involvement .110(.022) *** 1.116 �.011(.023) .988 �.024(.022) .975

Misbehavior �.240(.016) *** .786 �.059(.016) *** .942 �.259(.016) *** .771

Victimization �.054(.019) ** .946 �.128(.020) *** .879 �.130(.019) *** .877

Family characteristics

Family SES .018(.039) 1.018 �.139(.042) *** .869 �.033(.043) .967

Family structure �.035(.055) .965 �.032(.066) .968 .026(.063) 1.026

Parental

involvement

.009(.009) 1.009 .018(.010) * 1.018 .020(.009) * 1.020

School characteristics

Diversity �.005(.001) ** .994 �.001(.002) .993 .005(.001) *** 1.005

Poverty �.003(.002) .996 .001(.002) 1.001 �.001(.002) .998

Size .001(.001) 1.001 .001(.001) * 1.001 .001(.001) *** 1.001

Security �.035(.013) ** .964 .049(.012) *** 1.050 �.041(.012) *** .959

Urban .034(.078) 1.035 .768(.030) .984 �.088(.074) .915

Intercept .209(.033) *** .768(.030) *** .657(.030) ***

(continued)

442 Punishment & Society 14(4)

(55.4%) generation students agreed that the punishment is the same no matter whoyou are than third-plus generation students (45.7%).

Overall perception of the school rules and punishment practices

Table 3 shows the HLM results that examine the relationships between gener-ational status, race and ethnicity, overall perception of the school rules and pun-ishment practices, and other pertinent factors. Model 1 of Table 3 displays thebaseline findings of students’ overall perception of the school rules and punishmentpractices on student, family, and school characteristics. While controlling for othervariables, at this stage of the analysis, there appears to be no statistical difference inperceptions of the school rules and punishment practices between Black/AfricanAmericans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and White Americans.

In order to explore the first research question about the significance of gener-ational status in the relationship between race, ethnicity, and overall perceptions ofthe school rules and punishment practices, generational status is added to theanalysis in the second model of Table 3. First generation students (b¼ .414,p� .001) have relatively higher overall perceptions of the school rules and punish-ment practices being clear and fair than third-plus generation students. There alsoappears to be no statistical difference between second generation students andthird-plus generation students in relationship to their perceptions of the schoolrules and punishment practices. It is also important to note that the inclusion ofgenerational status into the analysis did not moderate the relationship betweenrace, ethnicity, and overall perceptions of the school rules and punishment prac-tices being clear and fair.

To examine the second and third research questions about the potential racialand ethnic differences in the children of immigrants’ overall perceptions of theschool rules and punishment practices, the interactions between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity are added to the analysis in the third model ofTable 3. In comparison to third-plus generation White Americans, first generationBlack/African Americans (b¼ .583, p� .05), Latino Americans (b¼ .402, p� .01),

Table 5. Continued

School rules are fair

School rules

strictly enforced

School punishment

same

b(SE) OR b(SE) OR b(SE) OR

Random effects Variance X2 Variance X2 Variance X2

.283 *** 1200.098 .196 *** 1002.523 .221 *** 1093.234

Note: The omitted categories are White American third-plus generation, males, single parent/guardian family

structure; and non-urban schools.

***p� .001; **p� .01; *p� .05.

Peguero 443

Asian Americans (b¼ .299, p� .05), and White Americans (b¼ .570, p� .05) haverelatively higher overall perceptions of the school rules and punishment practicesbeing clear and fair. These findings do suggest that generational status mattersdifferently for distinct racial and ethnic groups in relationship to overall percep-tions of the school rules and punishment practices. Also, as suggested by segmentedassimilation theory, first generation youth have higher overall perceptions of theschool rules and punishment practices being clear and fair. More importantly froma segmented assimilation perspective, in comparison to third-plus generation WhiteAmericans, first generation Black/African Americans and Latino Americans haveincreased perceptions of school rules and punishment being clear and fair; however,those increased perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices appear todiminish as the children of immigrants assimilate. Finally, the effect of being a firstgeneration immigrant seems to be the relatively strongest effect, in relation to othervariables included in the study, in regards to their overall perceptions of the schoolrules and punishment practices being clear and fair. As revealed by Kupchik andEllis (2008), the following analyses will present the distinct facets of overall per-ceptions of the school rules and punishment practices because there are conceptualand practical differences between clarity and enforcement of the school rules.

Everyone knows what the school rules are

Table 4 presents the results of the analysis of the relationships between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity, perception that students know what the school rules are,and other pertinent control variables. First and second generation Black/AfricanAmericans have relatively higher perceptions that everyone knows what the schoolrules are than third-plus generation White Americans.

Students know the punishment for broken school rules

Table 4 displays the results of the analysis of the relationships between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity, perception if a school rule is broken, students knowwhat kind of punishment will follow, while controlling for other pertinent factors.First and second generation Latino Americans, as well as second generation AsianAmericans, have relatively higher perceptions that students know the punishmentfor broken school rules than third-plus generation White Americans. Second andthird-plus generation Black/African Americans have relatively higher perceptionsthat students know the punishment for broken school rules than third-plus gener-ation White Americans.

School rules are fair

Table 5 presents the results of the analysis of the relationships between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity, perception that the school rules are fair, and othercontrol variables. First generation Latino Americans and Asian Americans have

444 Punishment & Society 14(4)

relatively higher perceptions that the school rules are fair than third-plus gener-ation White Americans. Conversely, third-plus generation Black/AfricanAmericans and Latino Americans have relatively lower perceptions that theschool rules are fair than third-plus generation White Americans. Moreover, italso appears that first generation Black/African Americans have lower perceptionsthat the school rules are fair.

School rules are strictly enforced

Table 5 presents the results of the analysis of the relationships between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity, perception that school rules are strictly enforced, whilecontrolling for other pertinent factors. First generation Black/African Americansand White Americans have relatively higher perceptions that the school rules arestrictly enforced compared to third-plus generation White Americans.

School punishment is the same no matter who you are

Table 5 displays the results of the analysis of the relationships between generationalstatus, race, and ethnicity, perception that the punishment for breaking schoolrules is the same no matter who you are, and other control variables. First gener-ation Black/African Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and WhiteAmericans have relatively higher perceptions that the school punishments are thesame no matter who you are compared to third-plus generation White Americans.Second generation Black/African Americans have lower, while second generationAsian Americans have higher, perceptions that the school punishments are thesame no matter who you are in comparison to third-plus generation WhiteAmericans. Third-plus generation Black/African Americans and LatinoAmericans have lower perceptions that the school punishments are the same nomatter who you are.

Student, family, and school characteristics

The following student and family characteristics are associated with perceptions ofthe school rules and punishment practices. The relationship between the studentand family characteristics and perceptions of the school rules and punishmentpractices are generally consistent across the five dependent variables. For studentcharacteristics, females and more involved students have relatively more positiveperceptions of the school rules and punishment practices whereas higher achieving,misbehaving, and victimized students have relatively lower perceptions of schoolrules and punishment practices being clear and fair. For family characteristics,students in families with higher socioeconomic status have relatively lower percep-tions, while students who have more involved parents have relatively more positiveperceptions, of the school rules and punishment practices being clear and fair. Therole of school characteristics, however, is not as consistent. For instance, students

Peguero 445

who attend poorer and more securitized schools have relatively higher perceptionsthat everyone knows what the school rules are. On the other hand, students whoattend larger schools have lower perceptions that everyone knows what the schoolrules are. Students who attend more racially and ethnically diverse and moresecuritized schools have relatively lower perceptions that the school rules arefair. Students in larger and more securitized schools have higher perceptions thatthe school rules are strictly enforced. Students in more racially and ethnicallydiverse and larger schools have higher perceptions that the school punishment isthe same no matter who you are within their school. On the other hand, studentsattending poorer and more securitized schools have relatively lower perceptionsthat school punishment is the same no matter who you are.

Discussion and conclusion

This study set out to examine the children of immigrants’ perceptions of the schoolrules and punishment practices. There are important results related to the complexrelationships between generational status, race, ethnicity, and perceptions of theschool rules and punishment practices that need to be highlighted. In sum, there arethree important findings related to the research questions that warrant discussion.First and foremost, generational status matters in understanding youth perceptionsof school rules and punishment practices. Second, there are racial and ethnic dis-tinctions in the patterns of how the children of immigrants perceive the rules andpunishment practices within their school. Finally, this study’s findings could bealigned with a segmented assimilation theoretical framework.

First generation youth, in general, have more positive perceptions that theschool rules and punishment practices are clear and fair. As noted, immigrantsoften bring with them a culture of optimism because the motivation for migratingto the USA is one of hope and opportunity. In many cases, immigrants’ country oforigin or homeland is often used as a ‘dual frame of reference’, an alignment oftheir previous life before migration to their current life in terms of how to evaluatetheir experiences in the USA (Kao and Tienda, 1995; Portes and Rumbaut, 2001,2006; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999; Waters, 1999).Such a frame of reference enables first generation immigrants to feel that their lifein the USA is significantly better than the life they left in their native country oforigin. The children of immigrants, who do not have access to a dual frame ofreference, do not see their current status as one of being ‘better off’; rather, they seethemselves as the marginalized group compared to the dominant US culture (Kaoand Tienda, 1995; Portes and Rumbaut, 2001, 2006; Suarez-Orozco and Suarez-Orozco, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999; Waters, 1999). To that point, there are also dis-tinctive generational patterns among different racial and ethnic groups.

There is historic and persistent evidence of racial and ethnic inequality, espe-cially for Black/African Americans and Latino Americans, within US schools (Kaoand Thompson, 2003; Kozol, 1991, 2005). Racial and ethnic minorities, particu-larly Black/African Americans and Latino Americans, have diminished perceptions

446 Punishment & Society 14(4)

of justice and fairness from authority figures, law enforcement, and institutions ofsocial control (Bracy, 2010; Hagan et al., 2005; Kupchik and Ellis, 2008). Forexample, even though first generation Black/African Americans, LatinoAmericans, Asian Americans, and White Americans have increased perceptionsof school punishment being the same no matter who you are, this study’s findingsbuild upon the aforementioned research by suggesting it is specifically third-plusBlack/African Americans and Latino Americans who have diminished perceptionsof school punishment practices. There is also abundant evidence indicating thatBlack/African Americans are being disproportionately disciplined within USschools (Kupchik, 2010; Morris, 2006; Rios, 2011). Recent research also revealsa similar pattern of the overrepresentation of school sanctions for LatinoAmericans (Kupchik, 2010; Morris, 2006; Peguero and Shekarkhar, 2011; Rios,2011). As discussed, the current wave of immigrants may have not experiencedprejudice associated with a particular skin color or racial type in their country oforigin; however, upon arrival many immigrants and their children have confronteda reality of racial and ethnic discrimination in the USA. In this regard, it is plaus-ible that as the children of Black/African American and Latino American immi-grants assimilate, they are learning about the harsh realities of racial and ethniceducational disparate treatment and inequality, particular with school punishmentpractices, within the US school system.

This study’s research findings could be supportive of a segmented assimilationperspective. First generation Black/African Americans and Latino Americans havesignificantly increased perceptions in the fairness of who receives schoolpunishments while third-plus generation Black/African Americans and LatinoAmericans have diminished perceptions in the fairness of who receives schoolpunishments. Thus, a pattern of downward assimilation appears to be occurringin association with perceptions of the punishment practices particularly forBlack/African American and Latino American youth. This study demonstratesthat the intersection of race, ethnicity, and generational status has a significantrole in youth perceptions of school rules and punishment practices, which can beimportant information for school administrators, educational researchers, andpolicymakers.

These findings have important implications for schools. Although there is ahistory of racial and ethnic disparate treatment by school faculty, counselors,and administrators, this study’s findings indicate that first generation youthindeed have enhanced perceptions of the school rules and punishment practices.Although within the USA, there is currently a heated debate over immigrationpolicy and rhetoric that vilifies immigrants and their children is on the rise(Chavez, 2008), it is imperative for school administrators and faculty to providea safe learning environment for all students but also to treat their students, includ-ing the children of immigrants, fairly and impartially.

As with most studies, there are limitations that often translate into furtherresearch questions. To better understand the role of generational status in students’school experiences, the social, political, and economic environment of immigration

Peguero 447

should be considered. For example, the threat of a growing immigrant populationmay have resulted in an increase of social control and punitive justice polices(Chavez, 2008; Desmond and Kubrin, 2009; Martınez and Valenzuela, 2006);future research should consider the impact of increased social control and punitivejustice policies on students’ perception of school rules and punishment practices.Although there are many studies that reveal the detrimental effects of biased treat-ment for youth, the outcome of perceiving school as a place of differential treat-ment for the children of immigrants remains unknown. Although schoolcharacteristics were not central to this study’s analysis, the inconsistent relation-ships between school characteristics and students’ perceptions of school rules andpunishment practices suggest that school context matters. For example, theschool’s level of diversity is argued to be an important factor in determininghow racial and ethnic minority youth are treated (Goldsmith, 2004). Watkinsand Melde (2009) reveal that generational status is linked to perceptions ofschool disorder. Previous studies indicate that, in general, first generation youthare more likely to attend schools with higher rates of social and physical disorder(Kozol, 1991, 2005; Olsen, 2008; Valenzuela, 1999). Thus, it is plausible thatincreased perceptions of physical and social disorder are linked to perceptions ofjustice and fairness for the children of immigrants. Additionally, student–teacherrelations can also play a role in determining how the children of immigrants per-ceive their schools rules and punishment practices, especially if they are beingtreated in a negative or discriminatory manner. Recent research suggests that ini-tially student–teacher relations are perceived to be strong for first generation youthbut as the children of immigrants assimilate, those strong relationships betweenstudents and teachers reported by first generation youth appear to diminish(Peguero and Bondy, 2011; Watkins and Melde, 2010).

This study reflects Kupchik’s (2010: 6) sentiment of the ‘wrong lessons’ in rela-tion to:

current discipline regime discourages students from thinking critically about power

relations and governance. They learn in school that their voice does not matter – that

they are powerless to change their environment or even to contest how they are treated

when suspected of violating a school rule.

It is reasonable to assume that many racial and ethnic minority youth, includingthe children of immigrants, who have diminished perceptions of the society theylive in as democratic, fair, and just is a serious social and educational problem thatneeds to be addressed. It is also plausible the children of immigrants are assimilat-ing or being taught the ‘wrong lessons’ within US schools. The children of immi-grants are the fastest growing segment of the US population, which has clearimplications for the US school system, economy, and society. As the USA becomesincreasingly immersed in a globally competitive market, addressing an educationalsystem fraught with inequalities becomes imperative. The families with childrenwho come to the USA are also of particular pertinence to the USA’s economic and

448 Punishment & Society 14(4)

social sustainability because these children are part of the future of the USA: itsparents, its labor force, its voters, and its social, educational, and political leaders.

Acknowledgements

I thank the reviewers and the editors their constructive suggestions. Gratitude is extended toVincent J Roscigno for his encouraging comments throughout this research. Appreciation is

also conveyed for the research support offered by the Racial Democracy, Crime and Justice-Network (RDCJ-N). I also thank Jennifer M Bondy for her continuing support associatedwith this research.

References

Alba R and Nee V (2003) Remaking the American Mainstream: Assimilation and

Contemporary Immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bracy N (2010) Student perceptions of high security school environments. Youth &

Society. Epub ahead of print 20 April 2010. DOI: 10.1177/0044118X10365082.

Cammarota J (2004) The gendered and racialized pathways of Latina and Latino

youth: Different struggles, different resistances in the urban context. Anthropology

and Education Quarterly 35: 53–74.

Chavez LR (2008) The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens, and the

Nation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Desmond S and Kubrin CE (2009) The power of place: Immigrant communities and

adolescent violence. Sociological Quarterly 50: 581–607.

Dewey J (1916) Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of

Education. New York: The Macmillan Co.

Ewert S (2009) Student misbehavior during senior year: A comparison of immigrants

and the native-born. Social Science Research 38: 826–839.

Gans HJ (1992) Second-generation decline: Scenarios, for the economic and ethnic

future of the post-1965 American immigrants. Ethnic and Racial Studies 15: 173–192.

Goldsmith PR (2004) Schools’ role in shaping race relations: Evidence on friendliness

and conflict. Social Problems 51: 587–612.

Hagan J, Shedd C and Payne MR (2005) Race, ethnicity, and youth perceptions of

criminal injustice. American Sociological Review 70: 381–407.

Kao G and Thompson J (2003) Racial and ethnic stratification in educational achieve-

ment and attainment. Annual Review of Sociology 29: 417–442.

Kao G and Tienda M (1995) Optimism and achievement: The educational performance

of immigrant youth. Social Science Quarterly 76: 1–19.

Kasinitz P, Mollenkopf JH, Waters MC and Holdaway J (2009) Inheriting the City: The

Children of Immigrants Come of Age. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Kozol J (1991) Savage Inequalities: Children in America’s Schools. New York: Crown.

Kozol J (2005) The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in

America. New York: Three Rivers Press.

Kupchik A (2010) Homeroom Security: School Discipline in an Age of Fear. New York:

New York University Press.

Peguero 449

Kupchik A and Ellis N (2008) School discipline and security: Fair for all students?

Youth & Society 39: 549–574.

LaFree G (1998) Losing Legitimacy: Street Crime and the Decline of Social Institutions

in America. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Lareau A (2003) Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Lee SJ (2005) Up against Whiteness: Race, School and Immigrant Youth. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Martınez Jr R and Valenzuela A (2006) Immigration, Ethnicity, and Crime. New York:

New York University Press.

Morris EW (2006) An Unexpected Minority: White Kids in an Urban School. New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2004) Educational Longitudinal

Study: 2002 Base Year Data File User’s Manual. Washington, DC: National

Center for Education Statistics.

Olsen L (2008) Made in America: Immigrant Students in Our Public Schools. New York:

The New Press.

Peguero AA (2009) Victimizing the children of immigrants: Latino and Asian American

student victimization. Youth & Society 41: 186–208.

Peguero AA (2011) Immigration, schools, and violence: Assimilation and student mis-

behavior. Sociological Spectrum 31: 695–717.

Peguero AA and Bondy JM (2011) Immigration and students’ relationship with tea-

chers. Education and Urban Society 43: 165–183.

Peguero AA and Shekarkhar Z (2011) Latino/a student misbehavior and school pun-

ishment. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 33: 54–70.

Perreira KM, Harris KM and Lee D (2006) Making it in America: High school com-

pletion by immigrant and native youth. Demography 43: 511–536.

Portes A and Rumbaut R (2001) Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second

Generation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Portes A and Rumbaut R (2006) Immigrant America: A Portrait. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Raudenbush S, Bryk A and Congdon RT (2008) Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear

Modeling, Version 6. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

Rios V (2011) Punished: Policing the Lives of Black and Latino Boys. New York: New

York University Press.

Rong XL and Preissle J (2008) Educating Immigrant Students in the 21st Century: What

Educators Need to Know. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Rumbaut RG (1997) Assimilation and its discontents: Between rhetoric and reality.

International Migration Review 31: 923–960.

Suarez-Orozco C and Suarez-Orozco M (2001) Children of Immigration. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Suarez-Orozco C, Suarez-Orozco M and Todorova I (2008) Learning a New Land:

Immigrant Students in American Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

450 Punishment & Society 14(4)

Valenzuela A (1999) Subtractive Schooling: US-Mexican Youth and the Politics of

Caring. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

US Census Bureau (2010) Current Population Survey. Washington, DC: US Census

Bureau, Population Division.

Waters MC (1999) Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American

Realities. USA: The Russell Sage Foundation and Harvard University Press.

Watkins A and Melde C (2009) Immigrants, assimilation, and perceived school dis-

order: An examination of the ‘other’ ethnicities. Journal of Criminal Justice 37:

627–635.

Watkins A and Melde C (2010) Latino and Asian students’ perceptions of the quality of

their educators: The role of generational status and language proficiency. Youth &

Society 42: 3–32.

Wong CA, Eccles JS and Sameroff A (2003) The influence of ethnic discrimination and

ethnic identification on African American adolescents’ school and socioemotional

adjustment. Journal of Personality 71: 1197–1232.

Zhou M (1997) Growing up American: The challenge confronting immigrant children

and children of immigrants. Annual Review of Sociology 23: 63–95.

Anthony A Peguero is an assistant professor of Sociology and research affiliate ofthe Center for Peace Studies and Violence Prevention at Virginia Tech. Hisresearch interests involve adolescent violence, socialization and marginalization,school bullying, race and ethnicity, and the adaptation of the children of immi-grants. He serves on the editorial board for the journal of Youth Violence andJuvenile Justice and the Crime and Deviance Section of Sociology Compass. DrPeguero is also a member of the Racial Democracy, Crime, and Justice Networkwhich holds the dual goals of advancing research on the intersection of race, crimeand justice and of promoting racial democracy within the study of these issues bysupporting junior scholars from under-represented groups.

Peguero 451