Immigrant Students and Achievement
Running head: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
The Academic Achievement of Adolescents from Immigrant Families: The Role of Family
Background, Attitudes, and Behavior
Faye Huie
Article Abstract #2
Immigrant Students and Achievement
The Academic Achievement of Adolescents from Immigrant Families: The Role of Family
Background, Attitudes, and Behavior
The main purpose of this article was to explore the ways in which family background,
parental attitudes, peer support, and student personal attitudes and behaviors towards education
influence students from immigrant families’ academic achievement (Fuligni, 1997). Specifically,
Fuligni (1997) wanted to examine the magnitude of the influence on achievement between all the
aforementioned variables as well as look at the different patterns across multiple generations and
ethnicities. In this article abstract, I will first summarize the major findings of Fuligni (1997) and
my analyses on the approach that Fuligni (1992) used to examine the influences on achievement
in immigrant students. I will then reflect on my own personal insights as a first generation AsianAmerican student and discuss the implications of this research.
Fuligni (1997) attempts to examine how background and psychosocial factors influence
achievement in mathematics and English between students from immigrant (e.g., first and second
generation students) and nonimmigrant (e.g., third generation or greater students) families.
Socioeconomic status (SES) and English language use at home were considered as family
background variables. Study time, value of overall achievement and between academic domains,
and educational aspirations were analyzed as personal psychosocial variables. In addition,
students’ perceived parental and peer attitudes in achievement, parental educational expectations
of their children, and their personal educational aspirations were also examined.
The total number of students who participated in this study was 1,341 tenth, eighth, and
sixth grade adolescents. Fuligni (1997) found that students from first and second generation
immigrant families earned higher grades in both mathematics and English than students from
third generation immigrant families. Though SES was related to achievement, it did not
Immigrant Students and Achievement
contribute a substantive amount of variance in explaining achievement differences between
generational statuses. Overall, Fuligni (1997) found that first generation students were more
likely to achieve higher than their second and third generation peers, with the exception of third
generation Latino students who achieved higher in math than first generation Latino students.
In terms of perceived parental values, peer support, and other psychosocial variables, first
generation students reported more adaptive viewpoints than their second and third generation
peers. Fuligni (1997) also found that East Asian and Filipino students generally reported higher
parental expectations, peer support, academic attitudes, and study time than their Latino and
European counterparts. Finally, Fuligni (1997) found that across all ethnicities and generations,
students’ personal values and study time significantly predicted achievement above and beyond
all other variables. Fuligni (1997) concludes that students of immigrant families who are
proficient in English are adapting well to their academic settings and perform at the same or
higher level than students who come from nonimmigrant and established families.
Fuligni (1997) presents an interesting analysis of how students from immigrant families
are adapting to the academic demands of their new American schools. I expected that personal
student attitudes and behaviors would be the most powerful predictor of achievement above all
other variables. However, I did not expect that first and second generation students whose
English was not the predominate language at home would achieve higher than their peers whose
main language was English. Although the findings were enlightening, a few flaws exist: a) the
survey methods used to collect data, b) generalizing the analyses to overall first/second
generation students, and c) not including students who are not proficient in English.
All the surveys used with the exception of student personal values of English and
mathematics were created by the researcher. There was no explanation of how the scale was
Immigrant Students and Achievement
created, what the items were based upon, or any attempt to validate the instrument. The only
information the Fuligni (1997) provides for his readers are the reliability coefficients, which
were not that reliable for some of the scales (e.g., “range (for alpha) = .63” (p 354)). Although
the findings do make sense theoretically, I wonder if the results would be different if the survey
measures were further analyzed.
I must say that I was not surprised that Asians were found to have more adaptive attitudes
and behaviors towards education than Latinos and Europeans. However, when ethnicity was
disregarded and generational status was analyzed, the results suggested that generally, first and
second generation immigrants had more adaptive psychosocial attitudes and behaviors than the
later generations. I think that Fuligni (1997) must take into account the differences between
ethnicities in order to accurately and effectively draw conclusions. This is especially important to
consider when the psychosocial and academic patterns across generational statuses of Latinos are
found to be less adaptive than Asians. With this said, I think Fuligni (1997) should have placed
more emphasis on ethnicity when analyzing the results. Something more than generational status
is occurring which needs to be taken into major consideration instead of lumping the entire
population together and concluding that early generational status students have been adapting
well to academics in the U.S.
I still do not completely understand why students who could not speak English
proficiently were not included in the study. This study is, in fact, about students from immigrant
families and one cannot expect all immigrant students to be proficient in English. There was no
strong rationale as to why those immigrant students were not included. Ultimately, Fuligni
(1997) concludes that students from immigrant families are adapting well, however, is this
conclusion truly accurate when Fuligni (1997) does not include the students who are not
Immigrant Students and Achievement
proficient in English? I do not think that Fuligni (1997) can draw conclusions about “students
from immigrant families” if he disregards the immigrant students who are not proficient in
English. Additionally, I am surprised that all first generation students were able to speak English
fluent enough to answer survey questions in English. I feel that there is a substantial amount of
information missing about the status of students’ English proficiency skills. It would have been
important to know how long the students were enrolled in an English speaking school or if they
were enrolled in ESOL classes.
This class has introduced me to so many different sociocultural facets of education that it
was difficult focusing on the issues presented in this article. All variables examined in this article
are influenced by issues of parental involvement, peers, SES, and school climate. It was
personally difficult to digest research that found parental involvement as a critical factor in
student achievement. I feel that Fuligni (1997) approached the relationship between parents and
students in a more appropriate manner (i.e., examining the influence of parent values and
expectations instead of the direct relationship between parent and child), especially in the context
of immigrant and diverse students. Also, SES has been found to have little influence on
achievement across the different articles that have been assigned while student values and
behaviors (i.e., motivation and self-regulation) continue to be major players in achievement. This
in itself has strong implications on the approach that we educators need to use to motivate and
self-regulate our students.
This article relates to me personally because I am a child of first generation immigrants. I
have noticed that for Asian-Americans, those who are first generation students tend to value
education more because of the difficulties their parents have endured to provide a “better life.”
Families that have been in the States for generations tend to be more “Americanized” and do not
Immigrant Students and Achievement
share the same values and attitudes on education than those who are children of first generation
immigrants. The Asian culture itself places strong and high values on education which first
generation immigrants may be more likely to pass on to their children. Unfortunately, as
generations progress the cultural values that were once so strong become more accommodated
into the current culture. I feel that this process of accommodating one’s culture into another
weakens the student’s cultural roots. This may be a major reason why educational values and
performance tend go down in further generations, especially with regards to Asian-Americans.
Immigrant Students and Achievement
References
Fuligni, A. J. (1997). The academic achievement of adolescents from immigrant families: The
roles of family background, attitudes, and behavior. Child Development, 68, 351-363.