michael fix & jeffrey s. passel immigration studies program the urban institute u.s. immigration...
TRANSCRIPT
Michael Fix & Jeffrey S. Passel
Immigration Studies ProgramThe Urban Institute
U.S. Immigration -- Trends& Implications for
Schools
U.S. Immigration -- Trends& Implications for
Schools
National Association for Bilingual EducationNCLB Implementation Institute
New Orleans, LAJanuary 28-29, 2003
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
• Immigration Trends-- Growth of Immigrant Population-- Geographic Dispersion-- Legal Status
• NCLB Funding-- Formulas & Data
• Students & Language-- Growth of Immigrant
Students-- Language Ability-- Students, Schools, Parents
Overview of Policy IssuesOverview of Policy Issues
Selected Key Points:Immigration Trends & Impacts on Schools
Selected Key Points:Immigration Trends & Impacts on Schools
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Current In-Flows are Very HighCurrent In-Flows are Very High
0.10.6
1.7
2.6 2.32.8
5.2
3.7
10
7
3.8
2.5
1.00.5
4.1
6.0
9.0
14Millions of Immigrants
* Additional immigrants are mostly illegals and legalized aliens
Europe/Canada (Legal)
Additional*
All Other (Legal)
13-14+(est.)
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Immigrant Numbers at Peak --Immigrant Numbers at Peak --
0
10
20
30
40
1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Foreign-Born Population (millions)Percent Foreign-Born of Total
14.8%
31.1 Million(2000 Census)
4.7%11.1%(2000)
Percentage is NotPercentage is Not
40 Million
13%
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Who Comes to the U.S.?Who Comes to the U.S.?
• Legal: 600,000-750,000/year
• Humanitarian:70,000-125,000 down to 27,000
• Undocumented:Early ‘90s — 200-300,000 per yearLate ‘90s — 500-800,000 or moreCurrent — ???
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Children of Immigrants are ...• 1 in 5 Children
• 1 in 4 Low-Income Children
Demographic ContextDemographic Context Immigrants are ...
• 1 in 9 U.S. Residents
• 1 in 4 Low-Wage Workers
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
New Immigration Growth CentersNew Immigration Growth Centers
Immigration CategoriesMajor Destinations (67% of Immigrants) (6)
All Other States (23)
New Growth States (1990-2000 > 91%) (22)Top 10 Growth States (135-274%) (10)
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Legal Status of ImmigrantsLegal Status of Immigrants
Foreign-Born Population in 2000(Based on March 2000 CPS, Census 2000, & Author’s Estimates)
Legal Aliens (LPR)(10.0 million) 31%
Legal Nonimmigrants(1.5 million) 5%Naturalized Citizens
(10.2 million) 31%Refugee Arrivals*
(2.3 million) 7%
“Undocumented” Aliens(8.5 million) 26%
(Preliminary)* Entered 1980 or later
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
2000 Composition CategoriesHighest % Undocumented (40-49% of foreign-born) (11)
Lower % Undocumented (20-29%) (13)High % Undocumented (30-39%) (12)
Lowest % Undocumented (<20%) (15)
Dispersal of Undocumented PopulationDispersal of Undocumented Population
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Growth in Limited English PopulationGrowth in Limited English Population
Percent Growth in LEP, 1990-2000100% Growth or More (15)
<28% -- All Other States (14)31-65% (includes 6 Major Destinations) (16)
77-96% Growth or More (6)
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Limited English Proficient ImmigrantsPoorer on Average
Limited English Proficient ImmigrantsPoorer on Average
13%
33%
14%
20%
36%
19%34%
25%
EnglishProficient
Limited EnglishProficient (LEP)
EnglishProficient
Limited EnglishProficient (LEP)
Income 100-200% poverty level
Income below 100% poverty level
New York City
Los Angel
Los Angeles
Source: Urban Institute, Los Angeles-New York Immigrant Survey (LANYCIS).
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
6.0% 5.5%
15.1%
20.1%
9.0%
29.4%
25.7%
5.6%
19.5%
23.5%
Foreign-Born
U.S.-Born AfricanAmerican
White, NH All Other LEP Non-LEP
Children of Immigrants (& LEP)Concentrated in Metro Areas
Children of Immigrants (& LEP)Concentrated in Metro Areas
Percent Non-Metropolitan AmongChildren 5-19 Enrolled in K-12, 2000
Children of Immigrants*
Children of Natives*
All ChildrenSource: Urban Institute tabulations fromC2SS PUMS. *Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
• Immigration & Language Trends-- Growth in Children of Immigrants-- Characteristics (Poverty)-- Geography & Grade Distribution
• Linguistic Isolation-- Schools & Parents
• Students & Language-- Non-English Trends-- Problem Groups
Late EntrantsLong-Term LEPS
Immigrant Students & EnglishImmigrant Students & English
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Immigrant Children Are aRising Share of Students (1 in 5)
Immigrant Children Are aRising Share of Students (1 in 5)
20.1%
6.3%4.8%
15.0%
1.6%
5.2%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
All Children of Immigrants
U.S.-BornChildren of Immigrants
Foreign-Born Children
Share of K-12 Enrollment
Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
55 Million Children Enrolled in Grades K-12(March 2000 CPS & Urban Institute Estimates)
Nonimmigrants (0.1 Million)
0.2%
Undocumented (1.0 Million)
2%
Legal Immigrants (1.5 Million)
3%
2nd Generation (7.8 Million)
14%
Children of Natives (44.2
Million)81%
Immigrants (2.7 Million)
5%
20% of School Kids AreChildren of Immigrants20% of School Kids AreChildren of Immigrants
Source: Urban Institute tabulations. Includes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
11% 10%
5%
31%
20%24%
20%
5%
20%23%
3%
60%
15%
38%
16%
Mexico Other Latin America Asia Europe or Canada Other
19701990
2000
Origins of Immigrant ChildrenShift Markedly by 2000
Origins of Immigrant ChildrenShift Markedly by 2000
Proportion of K-12 Children of Immigrants(Including 1st & 2nd Generations)
Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Immigrant Children Increasingly Poor
Immigrant Children Increasingly Poor
30%
17%
12%
22%
48%
42%
33%
10% 11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
All Children of Immigrants
White, not Hispanic
Percent of K-12 Studentsin Families Below 100% of Poverty
African-American
Foreign-Born Immigrants
But Trend Reverses in Late ’90sBut Trend Reverses in Late ’90s
Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Foreign-Born Children IncreaseFastest in Grades 6-12
Foreign-Born Children IncreaseFastest in Grades 6-12
3.8%
1.4%1.7%
6.4%
0.8%
1.9%2.1%
0.6%0%
2%
4%
6%
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Grades K-5
Grades 6-12
Recently-Arrived*Foreign-Born Children
Foreign-Born Children
Share of K-5 or 6-12 Enrollment
Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Spanish Increasingly Prevalent --Sharp Increases in 1990s
Spanish Increasingly Prevalent --Sharp Increases in 1990s
3.4 Million
7.1 Million
0.4 Million 1.5 Million
1.3 Million
2.0 Million
0
2
4
6
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Millions of Children (5-19) Speaking a Language Other than EnglishAt Home
Spanish
Asian Language
Other Non-EnglishLanguage
Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Includes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
47%
35%
16% 14%
1%
36%
28%
8%
1%
Total Mexican Asian
1st Generation (Foreign-Born)
2nd Generation (Native)
3rd+ Generations (Native)
LEP Share Declines by Generation;Second Generation LEP Stays HighLEP Share Declines by Generation;Second Generation LEP Stays HighProportion of K-12 StudentsNot Speaking English“Very Well” (LEP)
Source: Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
2.6 Million Limited English Proficient Students in Grades K-12
More LEP Children are NativeThan Foreign-Born
More LEP Children are NativeThan Foreign-Born
First Generation900,000
35%
Second Generation1.2 Million
46%
Third+ Generations500,000
19%
Source: Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Includes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
287 285
119823
194
154
114
84
330265
53
Foreign-Born 2nd Generation 3rd+Generations
Foreign-Born 2nd Generation 3rd+Generations
10+ years5-9 years
<5 years
Most LEP Children In US for Many Years
Most LEP Children In US for Many Years
Thousands of Childrenby Years Lived in U.S., 2000
Grades K-5 Grades 6-12Source: Urban Institute tabulations from
C2SS PUMS. Includes Puerto Ricans.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
4%1%
16%
30%
57%
10%
29%
53%
Less than 1% 1% to 10% 11% to 30% 31% or More
Pct. LEP in Child's School
Non-LEP ChildrenLEP Children
LEP Students AttendLinguistically-Segregated
Schools
LEP Students AttendLinguistically-Segregated
SchoolsPercentage of LEP or Non-LEP Children
Source: Urban Institute tabulations from Schools and Staffing Survey, 1999.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
3%
22%
11%
24%
18%
15%
5%
14%
6%
3%
9%
3%
African American White, Not Hispanic Hispanic Asian
U.S. Average
Big 6 Immigration States
New Growth States
Hispanics & Asians more likely to bein Linguistically-Segregated SchoolsHispanics & Asians more likely to bein Linguistically-Segregated Schools
Proportion LEP in school of the“average” student by race or English ability
Source: Urban Institute tabulations from Schools & Staffing Survey, 1999.
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
53%
7%
66%
6%0%
81%
37%
4%
21%
LEP Children Children Speak English"Very Well"
Children Speak OnlyEnglish
1st Generation (Foreign-Born) -- 63%
2nd Generation (Native) -- 33 %
3rd+ Generations (Native) -- 1%
LEP Children May Not HaveParental English ResourcesLEP Children May Not HaveParental English Resources
Proportion of K-12 Students with No Parent Who Speaks English at Least “Very Well”
Source: Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Includes Puerto Ricans.
Selected Provisions of the NCLB LawSelected Provisions of the NCLB Law
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
• Census-ACS Data-- Uniformly Defined & Collected-- Based on Speaking Only-- Non-Professional (Parental) Assessment-- Sample-Based, possible Undercount
Data for NCLB Grants to States
Data for NCLB Grants to States
• School-Based Data-- Standards & Collections Vary
Within & Across Schools & States
-- Based on “Whole Child” Approach-- Professional Assessment-- Administrative Counts (Complete)-- Interested Party Generates Data
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
• School Data finds More Kids-- 400K above Census 5-17-- 400K higher in California
• Funding Formula-- “Fixed Pie” Reduces Disparity-- California Gains-- New York Loses-- Percentage Changes Large
• Regional Patterns-- Western States
Higher-- Eastern States Lower
School vs. Census DataSchool vs. Census Data
THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.
Ratio of State LEP to CensusRatio of State LEP to Census
Ratio State LEP to Census LEP<67% (State is Low) (13)
90-100% (5)67-90% (11)
>200% (State is Hi) (6)
100-110% (5)110-175% (11)
$20.5
$1.6
-$1.6 -$2.2 -$3.1 -$3.4-$4.5
-$7.7
$1.8$1.8$4.1
CA FL UT OK NM MA OH PA IL NJ NY
West Gains $ with School Data;East Gains from Census-ACS
West Gains $ with School Data;East Gains from Census-ACS
Change in Fund Allocation to States(in millions of dollars) Based on
$300 Million Allocation usingSchool-Defined LEP Population
Versus 2000 Census-DefinedLEP Aged 5-17 Years
Only Changes of $1.5 Millionor more are shown
For more information,contact:
Michael Fix Jeffrey S. Passel
Immigration Studies Program
Population Studies CenterUrban Institute2100 M St., NW
Washington, DC 20037
Michael Fix Jeffrey S. Passel
Immigration Studies Program
Population Studies CenterUrban Institute2100 M St., NW
Washington, DC [email protected]; (202) 261-5517
[email protected] (202) 261-5678