The overall objective of the research was to study the job search of Hispanics. This included an assessment of unemployment duration, postunemployment wages, and reported minimum acceptance wages of Hispanics, distinguished by Spanish surname, compared to non-Hispanic whites, referred to as Anglos, to ascertain whether there may be personal or job market characteristics that explain observed differences. The differences that were examined indicate program changes and additional programs to make job search outcomes of Hispanics more like those of Anglos. Three models of job search under conditions of imperfect information were utilized. These models of expected unemployment duration, expected postunemployment wages, and actual minimum acceptance wages were run separately for Hispanics and Anglos and in pooled regressions with an ethnic dummy variable and ethnic interaction variables. Differences in slope and intercept coefficients were tested for statistical significance. The data were collected for the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Benefit Adequacy Study of the Arizona Department of Economic Security. This survey contains information relating to the job search and financial status of 3347 UI beneficiaries in Arizona. This study first focused on 110 Hispanics and 1031 Anglos who found new employment and subsequently on a randomly selected sample of 449 Anglos and 51 Hispanics that included individuals who did not accept reemployment during the survey period as well as those who did. Differences in job search outcomes between Hispanics and Anglos appeared to be caused by personal characteristics, specifically age, education, career choices, and method of coping with necessary and obligated expenses while unemployed. Supplemental programs that enhance the job search effectiveness of Hispanics are in order, including career counseling, programs that keep Hispanics in school longer, educating Hispanics about alternatives for coping with financial burdens while unemployed or programs to ease those burdens, and the adoption by the state of Arizona of a program whereby UI benefits increase with the number of dependents.

This research provides a descriptive account of the desegregation case Adams-Celaya v. Southwest School District (1978) in a large urban public school district in the southwestern United States. Arias (1990) conceptual framework was utilized along with a chronological account of the events that occurred in the case. Research questions included: (1) Was bilingual education implemented along with desegregation after the Adams-Celaya v. Southwest School District lawsuit?; and (2) Did the district deal primarily with linguistic or descriptive needs of Mexican-American students? This work constituted a detailed case study of the school district. Method included analysis of data gathered through board minutes, newspaper and district publications, historical data, and semi-structured interviews with individuals who played key roles in the district desegregation process. Findings indicate that the court-ordered desegregation remedy occurred in three stages known as Phases I, II, and III. In Phase I mandatory busing occurred (minority students bore the burden). In Phase II, some inner-city elementary schools were designated as magnets with majority (white) students bused in after being offered and taking advantage of incentives such as extended day, small classes, and teacher aides. In Phase III, the focus of this study, four inner-city schools (three elementary and one middle school) were designated as magnets with bilingual curricula offered at each school along with incentives to attract east-side majority students to the inner-city minority populated schools. With regard to impact, findings of this study generally support Arias (1990) that: (1) desegregation remedies must go beyond student reassignment strategies to include appropriate instructional components such as bilingual education, (2) demographic considerations, and (3) "controlled choice system" which is a form of the magnet school approach such as those offered by Southwest School District after the lawsuit. Further findings suggest some of the Phase III schools may be resegregating as racial isolation may be recurring and student enrollment at these schools is declining.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2001. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references. Available also from UMI/Dissertation Abstracts International.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2003. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references. Available also from UMI Company.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas, 1965. / Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 209-219).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2001. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 316-327). Available also in a digital version from Dissertation Abstracts.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oklahoma, 1995. / Includes bibliographical references.

This study supports the development of the Attributions for Scholastic Outcomes Scale--Latino (ASO-L). Previous research has shown that people believe that it is important to close the achievement gaps that exist between racial/ethnic minorities and Whites (Rose & Gallup, 2004). Despite the fact that the general public has taken an interest in this area, there are currently no instruments for measuring how people reason about these issues. Consequently, there is little knowledge as to why people continue to support policies that have been unsuccessful in bringing racial/ethnic minority academic performance up to the level of Whites. This study takes steps in that direction by providing educators and school reform advocates with a useful instrument for understanding how people reason about the causes for the Latino-White achievement gap. The ASO-L measures the extent to which people believe in two different explanations for the Latino-White achievement gap. I have termed the explanation that I believe is most pervasive in US society "culture-blaming." It is consistent with the dominant racial story about Latino underachievement, which focuses primarily on the presumed limitations of Latino families and Latino culture. I refer to what I believe to be the second most common explanation as "structure-blaming." It challenges the dominant racial story because it places blame on schools and the schooling system rather than the limitations of Latinos. Confirmatory factor analyses provide evidence for the factorial validity of the ASO-L. In addition, structural equation modeling performed on sample data indicates that the two primary explanations--culture-blaming and structure-blaming--are meaningfully related to attitudes towards resource redistribution, English-only initiatives, parent education, and standardized testing above and beyond what can be accounted for by measures of attributional complexity (G. Fletcher, Danilovics, Fernandez, Peterson, & Reeder, 1986) and political orientation (Kerlinger, 1984). Finally, a comparison of latent means revealed that Latinos are more likely than Whites to endorse structure-blaming attributions, but no less likely to endorse culture-blaming attributions. Recommendations for further research and academic activism are included. / text

No description available.

No description available.