Page 1

FALL 2016




Binational Education Between the U.S. and Mexico PAGE 4

The Students We Share Binational Education Between the U.S. and Mexico PA G E 4

Hailed as an unprecedented— and urgently needed—coming together of elected officials, academics, researchers and policymakers on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, “The Students We Share/Los estudiantes que compartimos” symposium sought to examine fresh research and suggest ways to address the needs of a future workforce vital to the economic health of both countries.

Photo: John Moore

On the Record, All the Time Audiovisual Evidence Management in the 21st Century PA G E 1 6 Photo: George Frey

FALL 2016


2 From the Dean

Pedro Noguera Perspectives on LAUSD PA G E 2 2

4 The Students We Share Binational Education Between the U.S. and Mexico 12 High-Achieving Black Males Countering the Narrative 16 On the Record, All the Time Audiovisual Evidence Management in the 21st Century 22 Q&A with Pedro Noguera Perspectives on LAUSD 26 Chronicling Freshmen for 50 Years Alexander Astin and the Freshman Survey 30

Disrupting Narratives of Social Exclusion for Immigrant Children and Youth


Migrating Memories A Look at Individual and Community Histories in the Aftermath of Human Rights Conflicts


Murals Change the Face of a School

On the cover: Mural: CYRCLE @CYRCLE; Photo: Carlos Gonzalez @the1point8s; @BrandedArts

Photo: Jennifer Young

Ed&IS MAGAZINE OF THE UCLA GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND INFORMATION STUDIES FALL 2016 Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, Ph.D. UCLA Wasserman Dean & Distinguished Professor of Education, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies Laura Lindberg Executive Director External Relations, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies EDITOR


Snowden Becker, Ph.D. Lecturer, UCLA iSchool Jean-François Blanchette, Ph.D. Associate Professor, UCLA iSchool Joanie Harmon Director of Campaign & Development Communications, UCLA Ed&IS Leigh Leveen Associate Director of Development and Marketing, UCLA Ed&IS John McDonald Director, Sudikoff Family Institute Jean Merl Freelance Writer, Former Reporter, Los Angeles Times Carola Suárez-Orozco, Ph.D. Professor of Education, UCLA Ed&IS and Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, Ph.D. UCLA Wasserman Dean & Distinguished Professor of Education, UCLA Ed&IS and Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education Robert Teranishi, Ph.D. Professor of Education, UCLA Ed&IS and Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education DESIGN © 2016, by The Regents of the University of California



he past year has brought bitter debate over immigration, disparaging remarks about Latino immigrants and promises to build a wall between the United States and Mexico. The reality though is that here in California and across the southern United States, we have long shared a vibrant border with Mexico. Our commerce, our cultures, our communities, and our families are deeply interwoven, creating a rich tapestry of humanity along the dividing line between both nations. To a certain extent, our educational systems are also interconnected. This is especially true for the more than 400,000 students our two countries share across the border. In this, the first issue of our new magazine for the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, former Los Angeles Times reporter Jean Merl takes a close look at the work of UCLA Professor Patricia Gándara and her colleagues across the UC system and at universities in Mexico to better understand the needs of these students and how the educational systems of both countries might work together to help them succeed. The work of Gándara and her colleagues aims to lower the heat and shed a little light on education and immigration issues. By conducting and sharing in-depth research they hope to further public understanding and inform the work of educators and policymakers seeking solutions to the challenges facing “the students we share”: young people of enormous potential endeavoring to learn in school systems in Mexico and the United States. Their educational success is critical to their wellness, to the workforce and economy of this dynamic region, and to the engaged, globally conscious citizens these two great bordering countries wish to cultivate moving forward. That effort to “shed light” (fiat lux!) by making important research accessible is imbued here in our work at UCLA Ed&IS and is a guiding principle of our new ­magazine. In these pages, by sharing the research and expertise of our faculty and staff, we aim to promote a new kind of public scholarship. One that engages not just scholars, but also the press, the public and those in the world of public policy. In this first issue, we also learn about the important work the Department of Information Studies is doing to better understand the exploding use of bodycams and audiovisual evidence and the implications for both law enforcement and information professionals. And we take a look at the impact of recordkeeping on individuals and communities in the aftermath of human rights conflicts. Closer to home, noted sociologist and UCLA Professor of Education Pedro Noguera shares his current thinking about the challenges facing the Los Angeles Unified School District, and we get a preview of Professor Tyrone Howard’s research on High-Achieving Black Males. And there is more. We hope that you will spend a few moments in these pages and join our effort to further understand the critical issues in education and information studies and how they impact our communities, nation and the globe. Enjoy – Marcelo

Marcelo Suárez-Orozco

Wasserman Dean & Distinguished Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies

Photo: Jennifer Young

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 3



UCLA PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION Patricia Gándara’s work on the issues and challenges confronting English Language Learners is widely recognized by her academic colleagues and noted by journalists and policymakers. And as co-director of the Civil Rights Project, she has played an important role in the battle against inequality in education. But in recent months, she has taken on another issue. One that has impacted hundreds of thousands of young people: the education of students who go to school in both the United States and Mexico at different times in their lives and the barriers they face in trying to get an education. It is not a small problem. More than 400,000 U.S. school age children born in the United States and their families are trying to find their way in Mexican schools. And that does not count the thousands of students in high school or those students born in the U.S. who move to Mexico with their parents but do not enroll in school. Another 700,000 Mexican children living in the United States as U.S. citizen children of Mexican parents endure similar struggles in American schools. 4 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

These students represent a coming together of two cultures across two countries. They have the potential for bright futures and to make important contributions to the dynamic, economically vibrant border region. But that future is threatened by multiple obstacles to the education of these students, whose schooling is undermined by poor communication, bureaucratic challenges, language barriers and inadequate and unequal learning opportunities on both sides of the border. Gándara and her colleagues at campuses across the UC System and institutions of higher education across Mexico have set out to do something about it. As chair of the UC-Mexico Initiative working group on education, Gándara joined with Maximino “Max” Matus Ruiz, a researcher at El Colegio de la Frontera Norte to organize a research symposium on “The Students We Share/Los estudiantes que compartimos.” A collaboration between University of California campuses participating in the UC Mexico Initiative along with institutions of higher education in Mexico, the symposium took place this September in Mexico City.

Students wait in line to cross the Tijuana, Mexico-U.S. border to attend high school graduation. They are a few of the thousands of students who cross daily from Mexico to the United States to attend school or university. Photo: Don Bartletti

Hailed as an unprecedented—and urgently needed—coming together of elected officials, academics, researchers and policymakers on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, the symposium sought to examine fresh research and suggest ways to address the educational needs of a future workforce vital to the economic health of both countries. “I’m most excited about the fact that we are building for the first time ever these really amazing collaborations,” said Gándara. “We have people on two sides of the border with the same issues that never spoke to each other before.” She noted a groundswell of students in the Southern California/Northern Mexico border region have strong familial, cultural and linguistic ties on both sides of the border. “These students are bilingual and bicultural; they are the natural bridges” to an increasingly global economy, said Gándara. But these students face enormous challenges in trying to navigate education systems in both countries that were never designed to work together. The curricula don’t align; course credits may not transfer; graduation and college admission requirements are different and

These students represent a coming together of two cultures across two countries. They have the potential for bright futures and to make important contributions to the dynamic, economically vibrant border region. But that future is threatened by multiple obstacles.

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 5

unclear. Students who began school in the U.S. but moved with their families to Mexico may speak fluent Spanish but are at a loss to read or write it. Students coming to the U.S. from Mexico must try to master English while adjusting to different teaching methods. Some eventually give up in frustration, short-circuiting their potential and the contributions they could have made. “California and Mexico are sitting on an amazing asset,” Gándara said. “This generation coming up could have a profound impact on both these nations— and we’re wasting it! We’re turning these assets into problems.” She sees the “Students We Share” symposium—and the research and the multi-agency coordination that made it possible—as a key step toward turning things around. The symposium brought researchers from across the United States and Mexico together to consider a range of research and policy options. A study by Dr. Mónica Jacobo, of the Centro de Estudios y Docencias Económicas, makes clear that families returning to Mexico often struggle to place their children in school because they lack official documents from the United States and their children lack official Mexican identity cards. The lack of documents makes enrolling in middle school especially difficult and can be an absolute barrier to high school enrollment, which is now compulsory. Mexico also has bureaucratic enrollment periods, and if a student arrives after school begins, they normally have to wait until the next year to enroll. As a result, students miss significant amounts of time in school. Research conducted in five Mexican states with over 1,500 students by Dr. Víctor Aurelio Zúñiga González and his colleagues at the Institute of Technology at Monterrey, Mexico, concludes that in Mexican schools there are no welcoming policies. Students lose school years because they are not allowed in schools at the date on which they reach Mexico. Students are often invisible to 6 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

THE RESEARCH TURNED UP WIDE-RANGING FINDINGS. AMONG THEM: Bureaucratic Challenges: Major impediments to accessing schools in Mexico for returning students are bureaucratic procedures and documents that returnees do not have. Language Barriers: ÎÎ U.S. born students returning to Mexico are often held back because they can’t read and write in Spanish and Mexico offers no programs to transition them. ÎÎ It is estimated that no more than 5% of teachers nationwide in Mexico are proficient in English and the capacity to teach ­English is very limited.   ÎÎ Fewer than 5% of U.S. teachers are certified as bilingual and many teachers lack the necessary training and skills to effectively teach children whose native language is Spanish. Unequal Learning Opportunities: There are vast inequalities in educational offerings in both countries with children of Mexican origin being schooled in some of the most segregated and impoverished schools in the U.S. and low income and rural children in Mexico scoring a full standard deviation lower than their higher socio economic status peers in Mexico. University Admissions: Higher education admissions requirements are varied, unsystematic, and opaque and governed by different entities at the federal and state levels. Systems are not responsive to inquiries from returning students.   Looking to the Future: Students educated at least partially in the U.S. tend to have higher aspirations for going to college. Geographic Concentrations: Mexican origin children are concentrated in California, Texas and the Southwest, and large centers in New York, Florida, Illinois and a few other states. Populations are growing rapidly in the southern and Midwestern states of the U.S., where there are comparatively few resources and little knowledge of how to address their needs. Tijuana Border Region: Of the U.S.-born students (U.S. Citizens) who have returned to Mexico, approximately 40,000 are residing in the border area of Northern Baja California. Fear of Repatriation: More than nine-tenths of the U.S. students of Mexican origin were born in the U.S. and are citizens but many have at least one parent who is not. Forced repatriation to Mexico of parents creates a crisis for their U.S. citizen English-speaking children.

their teachers and their skills and knowledge are not recognized. “These students feel that what they have learned in the other country doesn’t count, and it demoralizes them,” says Zúñiga González. “And losing time is a major problem as research has shown students are much more likely to drop out of school if they are over age for their grade.” Language barriers also pose significant problems. U.S. born students returning to Mexico are often held back because they can’t read and write in Spanish and Mexico offers no programs to transition them. And researchers estimate that no more than five percent of teachers nationwide in Mexico are proficient in English and the capacity to teach English is very limited. Researchers noted that on both sides of the border, it is common to hold students back if their command of the language is not strong—regardless if they have ­already successfully passed grade level coursework.

These students feel that what they have learned in the other country doesn’t count, and it demoralizes them.

The U.S.-Mexico border fence on May 1, 2016 in Tijuana, Mexico. Mexicans on the Tijuana side can approach the border fence, often painted with colorful murals, at any time. Photo: John Moore

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 7


tudents in Mexico may also attend schools that are underresourced. Research by Dr. Lucrecia Santibañez, a professor in the School of Educational Studies at Claremont Graduate University, reports that Mexican public schools are largely staffed by less qualified teachers, have poor levels of resources including technology and basic learning materials, and have large class sizes with approxi­ mately 40 students in middle schools. Under such conditions these returning students are often invisible. There is also less time for instruction and extracurricular offerings are limited. “Teachers and schools in Mexico are woefully unprepared to incorporate children of migrants returning to Mexico,” says Santibañez. But the researchers also found that the students have big dreams. A survey conducted by the Center for U.S.-­Mexican Studies at UC San Diego (USMEX) of a representative sample of 9th and 10th grade students in the municipality of Tijuana and one school district in San Diego finds young people rooted in a truly binational community. Roughly one-fourth have experienced living on the other side of the border and identify as being both American and Mexican. Just 10 percent of students in the region say they do not have ties to the opposite side of the border, and more than half say they are very connected to both countries. The vast majority—93 percent— think it is important to go to college and 73 percent believe they will earn a college degree. Seventy-one percent can speak both English and Spanish at least a little and 77 percent have family or close friends living on the other side of the border. But the survey also hints at barriers to their educational success: 45 percent said they might quit school for financial reasons and 54 percent don’t know what college or university they want to attend. They rely heavily on their schools to help them chart their course to the future; 73 percent see teachers and counselors as the best source of career information, while 77 percent believe 8 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

Right: Arlet Burciaga leaves her home in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, every morning and walks down the hill to the bus stop in time to get across the border for school in El Paso, Texas. Seventy percent of the 435 students at her school cross the border daily. Some are U.S. citizens who live in Mexico. Photo: Miguel Gutierrez Jr.

the classes they take prepare them for the future. Melissa Floca, interim director of USMEX, said she welcomes the survey as a way to help determine what cross-border students need to succeed. “Previously, I saw a lot of emphasis being placed on the binational economy,” Floca said, “but not nearly enough attention being paid to the education of the young people that should be the engine of that binational economy.” Floca said it is not unusual for students anywhere to have high aspirations “but we wanted to know what barriers might exist that are particular to these students.” Maggie Loredo knows first-hand the obstacles for students like the ones in the survey, and she shared her experience at the symposium. Brought to the United States illegally as a toddler, Loredo grew up in Texas and Georgia and graduated with honors from high school in 2008. Tired of hiding her immigration status, she decided to return to Mexico to attend university. Her troubles began when she couldn’t get the university to accept her U.S. high school transcripts. It took four years before she could finally begin classes. “It was a big hassle,” said Loredo who got a 10-year visa last year to return to the U.S. “so I’m able to go back and forth now” from her current home in her family’s Mexican village. It’s an option she’d like others to have. “Both countries could make use of our bilingual, bicultural skills,” said Loredo, who is working as an interpreter for a private company and considering enrolling in another university soon to get certified as an English teacher. “Both countries could get something out of this.”

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 9

Intense segregation of Latinos in weak, low-income schools and lack of access to quality instruction for those learning English also hinder student learning. On both sides of the border, too many students fail to achieve the level of education essential for economic success and mobility. 

Photo: Gilles Mingasson

Matus agrees that getting the two countries on the same page in better aligning their education systems is essential. “The problem here is that the school systems in the U.S. and Mexico are not well prepared to receive those children who do not know the local language, the school culture and in general how the system works,” said Matus. “Some of them drop out of school and get involved into the labor market with low skills and capabilities,” Matus said. “They are not well paid and the cycle of poverty starts once again.” Matus hopes the symposium will spur progress in four areas: expanded bilingual education, the recruitment and training of more teachers “from the Mexican origin community who can communicate with the students we share and understand the assets they represent for

10 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

all of us,” binational agreements to help align curricula and instruction and better alignment of requirements for accessing higher education in both countries. “Certainly all these things cannot be legislated,” Matus said, “but the legislatures can play a role in encouraging and supporting such policies where legislation alone cannot address the need.” The research presented at the symposium provided a guide for those on both sides of the border who want to secure their economic and cultural fu­ ture, according to research contributor Gary Orfield, co-­director of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA with Gándara, and Professor of Education at UCLA. “A really big reality on both sides of the border is the future is basically in the hands of these kids,” said Orfield. Research conducted by Orfield and colleagues makes clear that educa-

tional inequality is deeply embedded in the vast region between Tijuana and greater Los Angeles. Intense segregation of Latinos in weak, low-income schools and lack of access to quality instruction for those learning English also hinder student learning. On both sides of the border, too many students fail to achieve the level of education essential for economic success and mobility. Far too few students in Mexico finish high school; less than 20 percent of adults in Baja California have a high school degree. And in the U.S., Latinos trail badly in the completion of college degrees. Just 14 percent of Latinos in the region have achieved a Bachelor’s or graduate de­gree and most have experienced declining real incomes over time. “Our research makes clear that on both sides of the border, Mexican and Mexican-origin students are not attaining the level of education they need for success and mobility in our societies," says Orfield. ”We need to do better.” Researchers also contend that these problems extend to impact the ability of students to attend college. Research presented by Dr. Hiram A. Ángel Lara of the Universidad de Guadalajara finds that Mexican universities have as many different admission criteria and different enrollment periods as the number of State Public Universities (UPEs) and Federal Public Universities, making it very difficult for returnees to navigate admission even if they are academically prepared. Conversely, in the U.S. undocumented students lack access to college preparatory courses and information about higher education access, according to research presented by Dr. William Pérez, Claremont Graduate University. Looming over efforts to find education solutions for the cross-border students is the national debate over immigration, made sharper by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s statements implying many immigrants

were criminals. He has called for sharply curtailing even legal immigration and said he would build a wall along the border and make the Mexican government pay for it. Despite such heated rhetoric, data from the Pew Research Center shows that more Mexican immigrants have returned to Mexico from the United States since the great recession of 2008 than have immigrated to the United States. In this environment, Gándara credits UC President Janet Napolitano with enabling faculty at various UC campuses and in Mexico to share their work with one another concerning issues of mutual importance to California and Mexico. Shortly after she was hired to head the university, Napolitano formed the UCMexico Initiative to create a sustained, strategic and equal partnership between the UC and institutions in Mexico to address common issues and educate the next generation of leaders. Housed at UC Riverside, the initiative is comprised of five working groups, one each for arts and cultures, education, the economy, environment and health. “The Students We Share” came out of the education-working group, which ­Gándara chairs.

The gathering held a special significance—both professionally and personally—for Gándara, who has long seen these students’ enormous potential—and the many obstacles confronting them. “We’re doing it over and over again. I see it happening with these kids going back to Mexico … and I get very passionate about it.” Gándara is determined to change that. “The potential of the students we share is in peril,” says Gándara. “We need to work together to understand the issues confronting students and schools and improve learning opportunities in both countries.” “Students We Share” brought together a unique collaboration between researchers and staff at campuses across the UC system with colleagues in higher education across Mexico. They engaged education leaders and policy makers in both countries and have found much work to be done. But they have also begun an important conversation about what to do about it. John McDonald contributed to this article.

UCLA Professor Patricia Gándara speaks at the 2013 UCLA Ed&IS Dean’s Distinguished Speaker Series “Making Education Work for Latinas.” Photo: Joanie Harmon

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 11

12 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016



s school began this September, newspaper headlines were once again filled with stories of the poor academic achievement among African American and Latino students. “Good News Can’t Disguise Achievement Gap” read the headline of a story in the San Francisco Chronicle, going on to detail low levels of achievement among Black and Latino students. There were dozens of similar stories in newspapers and news broadcasts across the state, just as there were last year, and in years before that. These stories are not inaccurate, or unimportant. But they do little to provide insight into the lives of students of color, the strengths they have, and what might really encourage and help them to succeed. Worse yet, as with the continual stream of stories about crime and violence, these stories reinforce a negative image of youth of color, and especially young African American and Latino males. “Teachers often see and hear the doom-andgloom statistics. These young men drop out of school at higher rates, are suspended and expelled at higher rates, and end up incarcerated at higher rates,” says UCLA Professor of Education Tyrone Howard. “When you consistently hear these statistics and then one of these young men walks into your classroom, that view is already in your mind and you expect that negative behavior. They almost walk in with two strikes against them and have to prove that they’re not like the stereotypes. That needs to change.” Changing that narrative is keeping Professor Howard quite busy these days. Howard heads the Black Male Institute at the UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies. The Institute is focused on finding ways to propel Black male youth to college and prepare them for success in academia and professional life. As the founding director of the Black Male Institute at UCLA, Howard has established a longterm study of life trajectories for young men of color. The Institute has also created opportunities for UCLA undergraduate and graduate students to engage in the research process as well, through initiatives such as Project Lumina, established in 2010 to examine Black male retention at UCLA. A course, Blacklimated, helps Photos: Rickie “Typo” Crouch

It’s important for the entire nation to develop a healthier and holistic view of who young men of color really are, and to begin to say that we need not be fearful of them. UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 13

first-year freshmen and transfer students become acclimated to UCLA and learn about important resources that are available to them on campus. Its counterpart course for Black female students, ­Sister-to-Sister, was established in 2014. The Black Male Institute Think Tank has brought together students, scholars, practitioners, policy makers, and others to exchange research and ideas to support the success of young men of color since 2011. In the wake of recent acts of violence against young men of color, this work has taken on a new urgency, and Howard’s research has i­ ncreasingly taken on national significance. “It’s important for the entire nation to develop a healthier and holistic view of who young men of color really are, and to begin to say that we need not be fearful of them,” says Howard. “I want to believe that most of the young men of color that we see in schools are more like these young men we work with here at UCLA." In 2015 Howard established the CounterNarratives Project to ­understand the elements of success in the lives of young men of color and build awareness of the unsung stories of their achievement. With funding from the California Endowment, the CounterNarratives Project identified and interviewed more than 200 young men, ages 14–18, who attend urban high schools in Los Angeles, about their lives and the factors that have ­contributed to their success. The data was gathered through in-depth interviews, focus groups, and observations at schools and various ­community-based sites. The Project takes its model from a similar study conducted by Shaun R. Harper, founder of the Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education at the University of Pennsylvania. Howard serves on the advisory committee for Harper’s recent project, Research, Integration, Strategies, and Evaluation (RISE) for Boys and Men of Color. 14 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016


e spoke to the young men about how they described themselves and wanted to know about their success in three areas—home, school, and their neighborhoods,” said Howard. “We wanted to know about the factors contributing to their success. We tried not to rely on the traditional notions of ‘highachieving,’ meaning grades and test scores, but on what the real difference makers were in their schools, homes, and communities.” The research showed a combination of factors contributing to their success. Caring, consistent, and committed adults made a big impact on these young men’s lives. “A lot of it started in the home. There was a lot of support at home despite the narrative that says young men of color

All it takes is one person who raises the bar and has expectations for a student and begins to guide and influence them.

were found to be big influences. In all the research subjects, there was a sense of pride in their communities. They acknowledged the fact that there were some challenges, but they didn’t want their neighborhoods defined solely in pathological terms. They saw the hope and resilience in their communities and they wanted to help make their communities better as well. “There is still a lot of fear, misunderstanding, and ignorance that exists around young men of color,” says Howard. “We have a long and ugly history in this country of making certain segments of our population an ‘other,’ going back to pre-slavery with indigenous populations. “People who have limited experience with young men of color think, ‘this is how all of them behave.’ We have to help practitioners, teachers, and youth workers understand some of the root causes of why we see what we see with these young men. “We know that mentors, structured extracurricular activities, caring teachers

and committed adults make a huge difference, not just in the lives of these young men but for all students,” Howard concludes. “We need to put forth policy agendas that ensure that these kinds of supports are in place in communities across the country, so that we start to see a turnaround.” A renowned scholar of race, culture, and education, Professor Tyrone Howard’s research interests include educational equity, the African American educational experience, and urban schools. He has written extensively on topics including educational access for African American students, educational equity, and culturally responsive pedagogy for numerous journals, book chapters, and publications. Professor Howard serves as Associate Dean for Equity and Inclusion and Faculty Director of Center X, UCLA’s signature urban education institute. He teaches in the Teacher Education Program (TEP) and the Urban Schooling Division of GSE&IS.

don’t have positive role models there. They spoke of mentors: mothers, fathers, and older siblings who played influential roles in how they thought about their own educational trajectories,” explained Howard. School personnel also make a difference, whether they realize it or not. These young men attributed their success to key people at school like a particular teacher who saw something in them, a counselor who took the time to invest in them, or an administrator who saw their potential and pulled them aside. “All it takes is one person who raises the bar and has expectations for a student and begins to guide and influence them.” Additionally, the research indicated an important community component to the young men’s success. Churches UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 15



Frame 371 of the footage captured by Abraham Zapruder of the assassination of JFK.



16 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

A CROWD FORMS IN DALLAS In Dallas, Texas, crowds of people from all over the country gather as spectators and supporters, to be part of something memorable, even historic. At a time when racial tensions are peaking nationwide, it is important for these people to be here together on this day. Thousands of them line the downtown streets. Then, without warning, a sniper fires his weapon from above; chaos, confusion, anger, and grief quickly follow. Federal, state and local law enforcement reach out immediately, along with the media, to those who witness the event in an effort to establish just what happened and why. This description applies not only to the events of July 7, 2016, when a gunman targeted Dallas police during a public demonstration, but also to November 22, 1963, when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Then, as now, people captured the events of the day on camera—the moments before and after shots are fired, the times when citizens encounter the state in violent and lethal ways. People create records that become evidence, evidence that becomes history. Captured footage can take on an iconic meaning far removed from its original context. It is highly likely that video files now regarded as ephemeral or disposable will have a much longer useful life than anticipated, along with dynamic needs for secure management, storage, and ethical use. In short, the challenges in audiovisual evidence management are not new, but venerable. Among those challenges are material and mechanical ones: What are the critical affordances of our recording technologies, their capabilities and limitations? What

falls beyond the frame; what gets redacted or corrupted? Four frames of the original Zapruder film were, famously, damaged by LIFE magazine photo technicians during copying. Two other frames appeared out of sequence in the original printed version of the Warren Commission Report. In every frame of the 8mm original, there is exposed image area between the sprockets which captures important information about the scene as it unfolded, but which is not visible during regular projection. In a climate of suspicion and distrust, any missing, hidden, or altered data quickly becomes fodder for conspiracy theories. It is impossible to restore integrity to a broken chain of custody, or authenticity to an altered original. Other challenges are informational and access-related: What right do the people and the press have to see and circulate images of significant events? What ethical guidelines govern the use of these images in news, in entertainment, in the social sphere? We continue to struggle now with discussions of what images we may see and what images we might not want to see—and with the morality of sharing those images, or profiting from violent death as spectacle. Finally, these records pose custodial and curatorial challenges: Who takes responsibility for the preservation of these recordings? What happens to their material forms and social meaning over time? How do the acts of classification and designation dictate these records’ disposition, and what kinds of value do we ascribe to them? The U.S. government effectively asserted eminent domain over the original Zapruder film, designating it an “assassination record” under the 1992 John F. Kennedy Records Collection Act. In the case of the Zapruder film and its contemporaries, the original materials are stored by archives and museums—but what about the records we are all generating today of the stories that dominate our headlines? How do we secure their survival for the next ­fifty-three years? Records retention policies and the legal “duty to preserve” extend only to what we must keep; they do little to address what we should keep, or how to move beyond basic compliance and toward responsible stewardship. What’s more, the widening gap of trust between our communities—especially communities of color—and those empowered by the social contract to wield force in the cause

Governor of Texas John Connally (1917–1993) examines frames from Abraham Zapruder's film footage of the assassination of President Kennedy. Photo: Donald Uhrbrock

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 17

On March 3, 1991, four police officers were filmed beating taxi driver Rodney King after a pursuit through the streets of Los Angeles. It was one of the first police brutality videos of its kind, and forever changed the conversation about police and race in America.

of keeping the peace has made it difficult to find common ground. What­ ever echoes there may be between the past and the present, 2016 is not 1963. We are now working in a media and technology environment that is incredibly swift-moving, and unprecedentedly powerful. It is a hard time to take on complex problems for which solutions may be a long time coming. It is a hard time to be making and collecting records that are written with invisible electrons in machine languages that will be forgotten by next year. It can be difficult, as well, to confront the succession of news events and the lengthening list of names of the fallen that are connected to these issues, and that continually redefine the boundaries of this topic.

LAW ENFORCEMENT AND DATA-POOR ENVIRONMENTS Law enforcement agencies are increasingly information centered and data driven 18 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

bodies (President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, 2015). They have been among the first institutions to encounter and grapple with the implications of large-scale deployment of new recording technologies—whether ubiquitous surveillance cameras continuously recording public and private spaces, bystanders to incidents uploading smartphone-generated videos to YouTube, or, increasingly, police officers documenting their every interaction with citizens with the help of body-worn cameras. Body worn camera (BWC) initiatives are still, for the most part, in their infancy, but there is increasing pressure for their adoption as a means of increasing transparency and accountability, especially with respect to minority populations adversely and disproportionately affected by interaction with police in the U.S. Yet, as Lum, Koper, et al. (2015) note, police agencies nationwide are deploying BWCs in a data-poor environment. Adoption of new technologies creates new costs, and demands new skills,

systems, and resources—the full extent of which are still unknown for BWCs. In Los Angeles alone, the LAPD has estimated that 122 new staff positions will be needed to manage increased workload associated with deploying 7,000 cameras. This prediction has raised concerns in local government and delayed city approval of BWC program plans (Mather, 2016). NYPD figures put the costs of reviewing and redacting BWC footage prior to public release at $120 per hour (Kravets, 2016). Each instance raises fundamental questions about who will manage the large quantities of video data generated under BWC programs, what their roles and responsibilities will be, what tools they will use, and how they will interact with existing criminal justice systems and infrastructure. Timely intervention, inclusion of diverse voices, and advocacy on the part of information professionals for long-term planning at this critical time will significantly shape the future management

and preservation practices of these ­documents. To date, no degree programs or professional organizations have comprehensively identified, let alone addressed, the emergent core-skills training and continuing education needs of information professionals who will be working with evidentiary recordings over the long term. Indeed, while archivists and audiovisual preservationists are focused on the organization and long-term access to recordings with ­evidentiary value, they have not been strongly connected with legal evidence practitioners. And despite the clearly delineated duty to preserve legal evidence for statutory retention periods that may range from just a few months to perpetuity (in the case of capital crimes), those working in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice have likewise had little engagement to date with the archives and preservation community. When this interaction occurs, it has

A protester points a cell phone at a police officer after an unlawful assembly is declared near the site where an unarmed black man, Alfred Olango, 38, had been shot by police on September 29, 2016 in El Cajon, California. Photo: Donald Uhrbrock

We are now working in a media and technology environment that is incredibly swiftmoving, and unprecedentedly powerful. It is a hard time to be making and collecting records that are written with invisible electrons in machine languages that will be forgotten by next year.

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 19

What will people working with large volumes of video data now, and in the future, need to know and do?

Photo: George Frey

tended to be at the point when decades-old law enforcement records (crime scene photographs, training materials, etc.) are transferred to municipal archives or county historical collections; faced with operational pressures, few police agencies devote resources to maintaining their own archives or institutional histories. In August 2016, UCLA’s iSchool— the university’s highly respected Department of Information Studies—brought together multiple academic and professional stakeholders in a National Forum funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Participants included law enforcement agencies, public policy analysts, civil liberties and human rights organizations, archival scholars and digital preservationists. (For a full list of participants, see http://is.gseis.ucla. edu/bodycams.) They were tasked with

20 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

answering a simple question: “What will people working with large volumes of video data now, and in the future, need to know and do?” In asking such a question, we began to address the strong need to prepare information professionals to manage, on both the material and the ethical level, the enormous volumes of audiovisual evidence that will be generated by widespread dissemination of cameras in society. The forum offered an ideal opportunity to hold cross-community dialogue on and to lay out priorities for education and training programs that will help address the areas of most urgent need. The UCLA iSchool is leading the field in the development of cutting-edge curricula that will prepare our graduates to rise to the challenges posed by new technologies and emergent forms of recordkeeping. The Archival Studies,

Informatics, and Media Archival Studies specializations in the MLIS program include advanced seminars that address recordkeeping policy, archival ethics, electronic records management, and digital media preservation. A new course specifically addresses the implications of ubiquitous surveillance technologies for professional practice in the archival and recordkeeping field. Such a curriculum illustrates the particular synergy between cutting edge research and commitment to the development of professional practice that characterizes the UCLA iSchool. As recording technologies, surveillance practices and cultural norms continue to evolve into new and sometimes surprising configurations, the principles at the heart of the archival mission—integrity, openness, and inclusiveness of the documentary record—remain more relevant than ever to fearlessly yet ethically meet today’s difficult challenges in writing the past.

This publication is a work of shared authorship. UCLA iSchool experts Snowden Becker and Jean-François Blanchette have worked collaboratively on projects related to this topic for an extended period and contributions from both are reflected in this piece. In general, Becker’s research focuses on issues of media preservation and longevity and the archival aspects of evidence management work; Blanchette’s work focuses on the development of computing infrastructure and electronic rec­ ords as documentary proof. On joint publications, the authors have chosen to be listed in alphabetical order regardless of relative contribution to the published work. This work was made possible by a Laura Bush 21st Century Librarian Grant (#RE-4316-0053-16) from the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

Photo: The Washington Post via Getty Images

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 21

Perspectives BY JOHN MCDONALD UCLA Professor Pedro Noguera

Q: For starters, how do you think LAUSD is doing?

is doing a lot of thinking these

pening inside of schools. In this

I think there are real pockets of hope here in LA. I see people doing great work with very vulnerable kids—kids that are very poor, kids that have been incarcerated, kids that are homeless. I also see a lot of very good community organizing going on. And in terms of student achievement, by conventional measures, LAUSD is doing ok. In fact—they are improving. Graduation rates are up, and according to the most recent state achievement scores, the students are making progress—more so than in the past. But that is not good enough. It's not, because if you look more closely at things like college readiness—the rates are low, even for kids who complete the A–G requirements. And there is a persistent and troubling achievement gap among Latino and African American students. That should force us to rethink how we are delivering education to kids.

interview he shares his thoughts

Q: Why is what happens in LAUSD so important?

on LAUSD and the role of the

Any thinking about schools needs to start from an understanding that they (schools) are the essential part of the social infrastructure. They are the institution parents rely on to get their kids an education and where the future workforce comes from. Schools are vital to the life of any city. Unfortunately, many cities have really neglected their schools —even as evidence shows that neglect is having real conse­ quences in terms of poverty, unemployment, crime and other issues. We continue to neglect the schools—we blame schools, but we don’t say what we need to do differently to enable our schools to begin to address the social and economic challenges we face. Los Angeles epitomizes that. With few exceptions, LAUSD serves the poorest kids, the most vulnerable kids. We need to realize that no system can survive if that is the only group it serves. And if this system fails, this city, the whole community is in trouble.

days about the Los Angeles Unified School District and what can be done to improve learning opportunities for kids. A sociologist, he is interested in big issues outside of schools like immigration and inequality, and how they impact what is hap-

larger community in improving education.

Q: What do you see as the most critical challenges? At the forefront is the structural financial deficit facing LAUSD re­ lated to declining enrollment, rising pension costs and other expenses. The Infrastructure of the district is designed to serve 750,000 students, not the half a million they now have. And they have not figured out how to shrink it, and they have not figured out how to make the system responsive to the needs of the city. The financial challenges are really a reflection of the larger issues facing the district. Like many urban systems, LAUSD does not know how to make its schools better. It does not know how to make its schools 22 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

on LAUSD An Interview with Professor Pedro Noguera

Photo: Jennifer Young

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 23

successful in attracting middle class parents. And if you can’t attract middle class parents, you are not going to be able to address the big challenges facing the system.

Q: What’s behind the decline in enrollment? As charter schools have sprung up, parents are opting to leave for what they perceive as better options—and in some cases they are better options. But it’s a mistake to just point at ­charters—the wealthy left public schools a long time ago. That loss of enrollment is driving financial problems, but also generating political problems. And now we are seeing fights over resources and space—and the board is polarized. It has trouble thinking through the issues. We are at a kind of political impasse—combined with major educational and economic challenges. We need civic leadership to address these critical needs.

Q: What can civic leaders do? First, in their desire to see the educational system improve, they can’t just tear it down. Civic leaders need to realize the education system needs to work for everybody, not just for some. You can’t have a public system that only serves the most vulnerable kids—the ones no one else wants to serve—that’s not viable. We need civic leadership to address these problems in a strategic and systemic way. For example, LA is gentrifying rapidly because of the cost of housing. That’s an opportunity to create more integrated schools. Who is seizing that opportunity? The District isn’t—because they don’t know how. No one is really thinking about it. That’s why I say there is a lack of leadership. Instead, what we are seeing now are increasing inequities—because there is no systemic thinking. It makes no sense. I was just in East LA. There are new charter schools springing up all over. They are in inadequate, inferior facilities, and they are already overcrowded. Meanwhile, you have schools like Roosevelt High School that are under-populated, with large playing fields, classrooms and an auditorium. Why don’t we figure out a way to work together and share those resources for the benefit of the community, rather than create new inferior schools—it’s senseless. We have a system that does not work on so many levels— it’s costly, and it’s not effective. And I don’t see a larger strategy emerging—one that tells me we are moving in the right direction.

Q: So, what would you say to those civic leaders working to “reform” education in Los Angeles? I’d say we still need public schools—be careful that your efforts to “reform” the school system don’t destroy it, because if this city loses its public schools, we will be much worse off. I’m concerned because reform has been rebranded to mean “choice” or “charters.” It does not mean building up the public system—and that is what we need to be focused on.

24 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

We need to come back to the question, how do we create good choices in all schools in all neighborhoods? It can't just be that only some are served well.

That does not mean we shouldn’t have options for students and families. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t think about how we can give schools more autonomy and free them up from bureaucratic regulations. But we need to come back to the question, how do we create good choices in all schools in all neighborhoods? It can’t just be that only some are served well.

Q: What should LAUSD do? The whole way we have thought about reform and improvement is deeply flawed, because we focus on gimmicks. But we don’t address the need to build capacity, and that’s what we should be focused on. We need capacity building efforts in schools where we are working very deliberately to provide the resources that match the needs of the kids. And simultaneously to increase the professional capacity of the staff—the teachers, counselors and administrators—so they too have the skills to meet the needs of the kids. That mismatch between what the kids need and what schools provide is what results in so many kids not being served well. Michelle King, the new superintendent, needs to surround herself with strong people who can help her to solve problems. She has to lead and she can’t be afraid to make some tough, bold decisions. LAUSD also needs to draw on the resources of this community for help. They cannot do it without it. The funding is not adequate or efficient—we have under-resourced schools. But it’s not just about the money. The school district needs to be strategic about making investments that can attract people back to the system and build some confidence in our public schools.

Q: How can UCLA and other universities help?

That mismatch between what the kids need and what schools provide is what results in so many kids not being served well.

I think there is great irony in that there are great universities in Los Angeles—UCLA, USC and others—and we need to ask what role are they playing in support of public schools? I would say that historically they have not done enough. But I sense a willingness now to take that on in a much more serious and robust way than they have in the past. And I think they have a lot they can provide. It goes much beyond teacher education. We need to work with the school system to think about how we can bring services into the schools, because we have lots of kids who are poor. And we need to think about how we can design schools that will attract middle class families back into the public school system. There are huge challenges that the universities could play a role in—not solving—but in collaborating with teachers, parents, unions and others to help figure this out. I think UCLA and other universities have a responsibility to be involved. As for me, I am trying to play a role in helping to bridge some of the divisions. I think maybe we can get people to move beyond the more entrenched ideological positions—and maybe to think more pragmatically about how to solve problems. That’s a good sign.

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 25




or a half-century, the “American Freshman” survey has chronicled the experiences and aspirations of college freshmen at campuses

across the nation. Starting with a sampling of students from 300 colleges in 1966, the annual survey by UCLA education professor Alexander Astin has now questioned 15 million students, as well as 400,000 faculty and staff, at 1,800 colleges and universities. It has established itself as a barometer of social change and a valuable resource for education researchers, policymakers and the media.

26 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

What are some of the biggest changes seen through the freshman survey? The most significant changes that the survey reflects have been the effects of the women’s movement. It’s hard to realize that when the survey started in the 1960s, few women opted to go into engineering, law or pre-med. The number of women [studying] business was also quite small, and very few aspired to doctorate degrees. Nursing and education were the “female” fields, as well as home economics. And there were all these sexist jokes about women going to college to find a husband. All of this, of course, has changed. Most of the big effects of the women’s movement took place between 1970 and the mid-1980s. The survey was able to track profound changes. So many people who were born after that time take these changes for granted. [Women] are going to be the majority in medicine before too long. When we open up the last remaining fields and get more women in politics and in policymaking positions, we’re going to see even more profound societal change. The survey’s original intent was to track how student responses changed during and after college, but when Astin and his team—which included his wife and fellow education professor, the late Helen Astin—switched to an annual freshman survey, “it took on a life of its own … showing how the new students were changing from one year to the next,” Astin recalled. “It became obvious that we had something really significant that [enabled us] to put our finger on the pulse of society.” The survey has changed with the times over the last five decades. While students in 1966 were asked whether they said grace before meals, the 2016 survey, which is administered by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA, queries students about their sexual orientation. UCLA Ed&IS had the opportunity to speak with Professor Astin about the Freshman Survey and the profound changes to American society as seen through the lens of higher education, and the value of spirituality in a traditionally secular academic environment.

How have students’ values changed? Around the same time that the women’s movement was happening, the mate­ rialistic values of freshmen became stronger. In fact, we saw the whole society become more materialistic. There’s some evidence suggesting that this was caused, at least in part, by the advent of television. As materialism got stronger, students showed a sharp decline of interest in [forming] a philosophy of life. This was very troubling to us, because in the 1960s, it was the top value in the survey. It has continued to decline—fewer than half [of freshmen] today think [a philosophy of life] is important. But our follow-up studies of each entering class show that [materialism] tends to get weaker during college. Making money becomes less important. Students’ interest in the environment, in the arts and in having some kind of positive impact on race relations gets stronger. So higher education has that kind of shaping effect on values. UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 27

Photo: Laura Uzes

Alexander "Sandy" Astin is founding director of the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA and professor emeritus of education at UCLA's Graduate School of Education & Information Studies. In 2007, he received the Henry Paley Memorial Award from the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU). One of the nation's most prolific researchers in the field of higher education, Astin has authored 20 books and more than 300 other publications. Through much of his career, he has been most identified with the longitudinal study of college freshmen. For more than 40 years, Astin's research, which he began at UCLA, has informed the nation's understanding of the college experience and its outcomes.

28 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

Has students’ spirituality— or lack thereof—evolved?

How have race relations been impacted?

Students are becoming more polarized in their religious choices. Today you have a record high number of kids who say, “I have no religion” and a record high number who say that they are affiliated with some kind of a fundamentalist or evangelical group. The in-between folks—mainstream Protestant groups and Catholics—[are] losing members to these two extremes. In recently published research, I focused on students who say they’re not religious but are spiritual. They are unlikely to become involved in “interfaith” efforts on campus, because this is a group for whom organized religion has little appeal. The growth in this group reflects a more general societal trend toward what you might call “secular spirituality.”

We have a question in the survey about whether racism is still a problem in our society. As you might guess, differences in attitudes on this issue are quite [significant] when students start college. … These racial differences become even greater during college. [This may be] because young people frequently hang out with others of their own race during college, so the particular attitudes of each race are reinforced.

Do you think this shift is a result of organized religion’s attitude toward issues of gender identity and homosexuality? In the history of humankind, there has [not] been a faster, more profound change in people’s attitudes about an important social issue than there has been with homosexuality. The issue of sexual orientation has really splintered the various religious groups, [although] there are significant numbers of young people, even in evangelical groups, who are supportive of full rights for homosexuals. Data and graphics from the 2016 Freshman Survey

What is your greatest hope for the next generation of college students? There’s a growing awareness among people of that age about the importance of having a society where people are accepted for who they are, rather than what group they belong to. Our research shows that colleges tend to cultivate and reinforce that kind of acceptance [with] study abroad or interdisciplinary courses. People have become more empathic and more accepting, more sort of [citizens] of the world. The data from our spirituality project support that. Merely going to college seems to strengthen that world view.

There’s a growing awareness among people of that age about the importance of having a society where people are accepted for who they are, rather than what group they belong to. UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 29




FRAMING IMMIGRATION IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE Since the dawn of the millennium, the world has been witnessing a rapid rise in the numbers of a plurality of migrants—involuntary, internal or international, authorized or unauthorized, environmental refugees, and victims of human trafficking. These flows have intensified under the ascendancy of globalization, growing inequality, rachitic and collapsing states, war and terror, and climate change. Catastrophic migrations pose new international risks to millions of migrants and challenge the institutions of sending, transiting, and receiving nations. Although immigration is normative, it has taken a dystopic turn. Worldwide, civil and ethnic wars, structural violence, environmental cataclysms, and growing inequality are behind the largest displacement of people since World War II. Of the over 60 million forcefully displaced, half are children.

Excerpts from a paper written by Carola Suárez-Orozco, Marcelo Suárez-Orozco and Robert Teranishi. The Institute for Immigration, Globalization and Education developed this paper with funding from The Ford Foundation.

30 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

The United States, much of Western Europe, as well as newly ­industrialized countries such as Russia, India, China, South Africa, Turkey, and others are being changed and challenged by mass migration. The U.S. leads the world in the number of immigrants. Currently, 45 million people (or approximately 14%) residing in the U.S. are foreign born. In the year 2065, the U.S. is projected to have an estimated 78 million immigrants. Immigrants in the U.S. today arrive from every continent on earth. The latest data tell a dynamic story: Asians now surpass Latinos among those who have been in the U.S. for five years or less. After peaking in the early 2000s, Latino immigration is now at its lowest level in 50 years. New immigration from the Caribbean now exceeds all new immigration from Europe. The number of new immigrants from Africa grew 41% from 2000 to 2013, a sharper rise than for other major groups. Demographic projections suggest that by 2065, the U.S. will be the first major advanced post-­ industrial society in history to become minority-majority—already a demographic reality in many states including California.

CHILDREN & YOUTH IMMIGRANT CHILDREN AND YOUTH In the U.S., immigration is both history and destiny: it is how the country came to be in the present form and it is the future. The children of immigrants are the fruit borne of immigration. ­Twenty-five percent of children under the age of 18, a total of 18.7 million children, have an immigrant parent. Their growth has been rapid—in 1970 the population of immigrant origin children stood at 6% of the total population of children. It reached 20% by 2000, and is projected to increase to 33% by 2050. The transition of these children to citizenship, to the labor market, and to the narrative of the nation will deeply shape the future of our nation. The majority of the children of immigrants are born in the U.S. of foreign-born parents. They are U.S. citizens; though approximately a quarter are growing up in the shadows of sanctioned immigration status. The most recent estimates suggest that 4.5 million U.S.-born children younger than 18 years old are living in the U.S. with at least one parent who is an unauthorized migrant. Altogether, about 7% of all school-aged children in the U.S. have at least one parent who is in the U.S. without authorization. Though many of these children demonstrate extraordinary resilience in the face of exceptional odds, they also face particular challenges and risks.

IMMIGRANT NARRATIVES ACROSS TIME AND SPACE In contemporary society, particularly in the aftermath of Brussels, Paris, San Bernardino, Boston, and 9/11, immigration has for some become associated with dysfunction, balkanization, and terror. In a culture of fear, facts are high-jacked and stereotypes can take center stage. The anti-immigrant meme lives in full daylight and is found in quotidian full-throated pronouncements by the political class, in the press, and in social media. The ambivalence and worries about immigration are notably less acute in public opinion data than in the headlines, radio programming, and political debates. A 2015 survey suggests that half of Americans believe that immigrants strengthen our society. Nonetheless, 34% worry that immigrants are a threat to our customs and values, whereas the remaining 16% are undecided on this issue. There are deep divisions beneath the surface by age, race, and ethnicity. More than two-thirds of young adults (18–29) think that new immigrants strengthen the country, whereas close to half of seniors (65 and older) believe

There are 18.7 million children born to immigrant parents, representing 25 percent of the U.S. population under the age of 18.

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 31

that immigrants represent a threat to our society. Further deep divisions occur by race and ethnicity, with 70% of Asian-Pacific Islanders, 67% of Latinos and 56% of Black Americans believing that new immigrants have a positive influence on American society. On the other hand, 40% of White Americans believe that newcomers are a threat. Putting things into perspective, when it comes to immigration, Americans have always been of two minds: while we tend to romanticize it looking backwards, we are ambivalent about it in the here and now. Contemporary concerns resonate diachronically with sentiments in earlier anti-immigration eras such as with growth of the Know-­Nothing Party in the late 1840s and 1850s, at the turn of the 19th century during the great migration wave, and in the 1990s. During the late 19th century and the early 20th century, Eastern European and Italian immigrants were feared for bringing their anarchist and communist struggles to the American homeland. In other eras, there were deep concerns about immigrant acculturation and loyalty to the homeland. In WWI, German immigrants were forced to “bury” their language, and WWII led to the internment of Japanese Americans. Similarly, characterizations of immigrants align synchronically with sentiments now found throughout Europe, including the U.K., France, Germany, Sweden, as well as South Africa and elsewhere. Further, while some immigrant groups are favored, others are disparaged or feared. That is true today and was true in the metaphorical yesterday. In the past, we feared Irish and Italian immigrants and favored English. Today, Americans tend to hold more positive views of Asians than of Latin Americans or immigrants from the Middle East:

32 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

whereas 47% and 44% report that Asian and European immigrants have a mostly positive impact on American society, respectively, 37% and 39% report that immigrants from Latin America and the Middle East have mostly a negative impact. Americans are particularly concerned with unauthorized immigration and the perceived nexus between “illegal immigration” and terrorism, for example. In February 2016, a Rasmussen poll found that 59% of likely voters believed that stricter border controls ­ should be the priority when it comes to immigration.

The propagation of the anti-immigrant meme, and the concurring increase in hate speech and violence towards immigrants are a part and parcel of a new culture of intolerance and prejudice, now living in full daylight on both sides of the Atlantic.



s foreshadowed above, the most serious concern about immigration today is the fear that immigrants are bringing crime and terror to the new country. Recent anti-immigrant rhetoric by politicians has added fervor to this meme. Immigrants in general, and undocumented immigrants, particularly those from Latin America, are depicted as “rapists” and “violent criminals and murderers,” whereas immigrants from the Middle East have been demonized as “terrorists.” Donald Trump, for example, has called for a forced registry of Muslims in the U.S. and for an immediate ban of further immigration of Muslims to the U.S. Similar anti-immigrant sentiments are found throughout Europe and Africa. The recent explosive growth in the numbers of new refugees flowing into Europe coupled with the Paris– Brussels terrorist attacks have stoked anti-immigrant sentiments on both sides of the Atlantic. In the U.S., immigration is routinely re-casted as “illegal immigration.” When adults were asked what word came to mind when thinking about immigrants, about 12% used the word, “illegal.” A recent Gallup poll revealed that unauthorized immigration ranks in the top dozen major national concerns. Indeed, the idea of “illegal” immigration seems incommensurable with our national secular religion revering the Constitution,

the Bill of Rights, and the rule of law. Framing immigration along the legal-­ illegal axis recasts many immigrants as inherent criminals whose very presence affronts basic American values of individual responsibility and the rule of law. The propagation of the anti-immigrant meme, and the concurring increase in hate speech and violence towards immigrants are a part and parcel of a new culture of intolerance and prejudice, now living in full daylight on both sides of the Atlantic. Dehumanizing immigrants and stigmatizing the children of immigrants threatens and further tears the fabric of the nation. Anti-immigrant narratives depicting new arrivals as criminals, drug dealers, human traffickers, and terrorists are also on the rise in Europe, South Africa, and elsewhere. While the power of this meme is extraordinary, it is largely data free: the preponderance of evidence suggests that immigrants are significantly less likely to commit crimes than comparable samples of non-immigrants.

ECONOMIC MALAISE Opinion polls demonstrate that immigrants are now viewed as an economic burden. They are said to take jobs away from their native-born counterparts, depress wages, and exhaust social services. In the U.S., 50% of adults recently reported that immigrants are making the economy worse. Immigration is blamed for either causing or aggravating the ­unemployment problem. In the U.S., a common charge is that immigrants do not pay taxes and do not contribute to Social Security; yet they benefit from public services such as public education, welfare, food stamps, and Medicaid. The charge that immigrants hurt the economy, depress wages and abuse basic social services is, again, contrary to the empirical evidence. Indeed, the UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 33

preponderance of evidence suggests that immigrants represent a real yet moderate net surplus in a variety of economic indicators. What is historically true is the tight correlation between economic downturns and anti-immigrant sentiments; when there is a difficult economic situation, immigrants serve as ready scapegoats in times of crisis. Similar economic concerns are echoed in France and much of the rest of Western Europe, in Australia, South Africa and elsewhere. The high rates of unemployment among the second generation across the globe, especially in Europe, add concerns about the long-term prospects of new immigrants.

CONCERNS ABOUT INTEGRATION On both sides of the Atlantic, immigrants are feared for weakening social cohesion, diluting cultural mores, self-segregation, worsening economic woes, and for disloyalty and terror. In the U.S. a recent survey found that 34% of American adults reported that immigrants are making social and moral values worse. In Europe, there are growing concerns scandalized in the media over so-called “no-go zones,” such as the infamous banlieues in Paris, and the ghettoes in Brussels, where youth alienation, unemployment, crime, and self-radicalization are creating new pipelines to global and domestic terror. In the U.S., there are ­isomorphic concerns that immigrants, from Latin America in particular, “refuse to learn English” and self-segregate in co-ethnic ghettoes where the second generation gravitate towards the underground economy, drug trafficking, and gang culture. Similar anti-immigrant narratives centering on self-segregation, lack of English language acquisition, and the flourishing of countercultural criminal gangs are echoed in the U.K. Yet, other concerns center on questions of transnational ties and the unwillingness to fully invest and integrate into the new society. Many immigrants are said to fail to become fully engaged citizens. When they become citizens, they are accused of taking on citizenship for mere instrumental purposes (e.g. for economic benefits or welfare). Accusations of divided loyalties also center on the practice of sending remittances to family members remaining in the home

34 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

Photo: Bob Chamberlin

country. These fears over divided loyalties are reminiscent of the fretting of the Know-Nothing Party in the 1850s over the untrustworthiness of Irish, German, and Italian immigrants said to follow slavishly the commands of their Roman Pope. In the U.S., there has been a deep and reoccurring concern with every wave of non-English speaking immigrants about linguistic integration. Benjamin Franklin famously ruminated that Germans would “never adopt our Language or Customs” and similar concerns were voiced during the last great wave of migration about Eastern Europeans and Italians. Yet, at every turn, while immigrants initially maintained their home language, their children inevitably gravitated to English, and over time, gave up the language of their parents, turning the U.S. into a “cemetery for languages.” Over the last quarter century, there is a palpable concern about the flourishing of the Spanish language in the U.S.; leading to a number of English-Only ballot initiatives in several states. Yet again, these concerns are empirically misplaced. Furthermore, they ignore the considerable linguistic, cognitive, and cultural advantages of bilingualism.

The charge that immigrants hurt the economy, depress wages and abuse basic social services is contrary to the empirical evidence.

Immigrants and their children are here—on both sides of the Atlantic—to stay. Their future is our future. Thus, changing minds about immigration is an urgent exigency of our times.


hile language in the U.S. has been a primary symbolic integration preoccupation, in Europe, the overarching concern involves religion (specifically Islam) and social practices (such as arranged marriages, female genital cutting, and headscarves)—all said to be incommensurable with European ideals of gender equality, autonomy, and individual choice. In the aftermath of the London, Paris, and Brussels attacks, the aforementioned concerns pale in comparison to the worries of the descendants of immigrants wreaking jihadist havoc throughout Europe. In short order, on both sides of the Atlantic, immigration has gone from a state of “benign neglect” to mild annoyance, to intense concern and apprehension, and, more recently, to panic. Growing inequality and economic stagnation along with the crisis of unauthorized ­immigration and home-grown terrorism have aligned into a perfect storm. The long-term demographic changes add to these deepening concerns. In an experimental study comprised of 98 White Americans from all regions of the country, researchers found that when participants were told that White Americans would no longer be the majority in the U.S., they became more reluctant to embrace diversity. At a time when nearly all demographic growth moving forward will be via the children of immigrants, both in the U.S. and throughout Europe, the current immigration malaise threatens the fabric of the nation, subverts the remaking of the social contract, undermines economic vitality, puts millions of ­immigrant-origin children at risk, and is antithetical to fundamental democratic ideals and elemental notions of social justice. Immigrants and their children are here—on both sides of the Atlantic—to stay. Their future is our future. Thus, changing minds about immigration is an urgent exigency of our times.

We next turn to considering the role of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination in shaping opinions, its implications on ­immigrant-origin children and youth, as well as its consequences for civic society.

STEREOTYPING, PREJUDICE, & DISCRIMINATION Social science has established that stereotyping and categorization are normative, inborn automatic processes. These ­automatic processes are further driven by socialization and cultural memes. Stereotyping and categorization serve as short-hand strategies to simplify complex and frequent social encounters. These cognitive strategies can “apportion both opportunity and privilege [to in-groups] and cruelty and misery [to out-groups].” Prejudice is an unfavorable, biased attitude based on “prejudgment and minimal information.” Stereotypes are often made up of quick appraisals based on minimal knowledge that exaggerate group differences. How out-groups are perceived is in large part driven by two dimensions—the warmth one feels towards a particular group and the perceived competence of its members. These stereotypes in turn lead to forms of emotional appraisals (prejudice). Every society, across history, stigmatizes designated groups, separating “us” from “them.” As the anthropologist Boas has observed, “A stratification of society in social groups that are racial in character will always lead to racial discrimination.” As in all other “sharp social groupings the individual is not judged as an individual but as a member of his class.” Racialized hierarchies cluster people of “purer” origin to avoid the danger of contamination by outsiders. As applied to immigrants, “racialization” is an appropriate construct foregrounding the socio-historical processes of segregation, marginalization, micro- and macro-aggressions, and collective disenfranchisement. In countries such as the U.S., large and growing numbers of poor immigrants of color and the undocumented, are de facto and de jure relegated to spaces where socially constructed phenotypes align with entrenched patterns of segregation and marginalization of native minorities. Portes and Zhou (1993) have termed this dynamic as “segmented assimilation” wherein certain immigrants join the marginalized space of native minorities creating what they term a new “rainbow underclass.” Other countries also experience the complex interweaving of factors racializing immigrants and other minorities. These can include religion (Europe and its North African minorities), country of origin (Japan and its Korean and other minorities), and social class (Spain and its Roma minority). The consequences of exclusion for those who are targeted include the obvious loss of opportunity that has lifelong consequences not only to the individual but also to their children. There are also well-documented implications for compromised health. The ongoing stress of discrimination and UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 35

social exclusion is also linked to anxiety, depression, trauma, and anger. There are also worrisome implications of the “burgeoning inequality gap for the cultural fabric.”

IMPLICATIONS FOR IMMIGRANT ORIGIN CHILDREN & YOUTH When large swaths of our society begin to loudly and proudly proclaim exclusionary messages, this creates a climate of national hatred and xenophobia. While our national creation myth is one of immigrant travails and triumphs, we are currently facing a social climate where many quickly forget their grandparents’ experience, feel no compunction about pulling up the ladder behind them, and demonize those who are newly arrived. Exclusionary messages towards immigrant-origin children and youth matter for several reasons. First, it matters because it is linked to poor psychological and physical outcomes. Being a member of a disparaged group is simply bad for mental and physical well-being. Second, it creates a context of development where parents and families can be expelled, and when even the most basic of services can be self-righteously denied, which contributes to a growing opportunity gap. Third, it sends clear ­signals of who belongs and who does not, undermining our youngest new-­ Americans’ sense of social belonging and identity. Given that currently a quarter of all children growing up in the U.S. are the children of immigrants (and that is projected to be a third by 2050) this is not an inconsequential number of young children and youth to consider. Lastly, this kind of public climate has serious ramifications for our own sense of national unity. At a time of extraordinary demographic shift, our society needs to foster cohesive social relations, strengthening the bonds of solidarity between new and more established Americans. We need to disrupt the narratives of exclusion and division, and nurture practices of inclusion and shared membership in the family of the nation.

36 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016

STRIVING TO INFLUENCE THE “PERSUADABLES” The public mind can be quite fickle—particularly for those who have not given much thought to an issue. There are always, of course, individuals who are strongly decided one way or another on an issue and are unlikely to shift opinion through the introduction of rhetoric or popular discourse. Many “persuadables,” however, will change opinion according to exposure to public discourse or convincing rhetoric. The topic of immigration “sits at the edge of [most Americans’] peripheral vision”; it comes in and out of focus. When in focus, it is obscure at best, and is often contentious, with 51% of Americans reporting that immigration strengthens the nation, and 41% saying that it hurts it. The question is how to reach the “moveable middle” or unentrenched persuadables, who may not have reflected much on the topic of immigration because of lack of exposure, information, or deep reflection about the issue. How do we reach these persuadables with counter-narratives that present a compelling account?

HOW ARE MINDS CHANGED? To change minds (and in turn behaviors), research by Stanford and Duke Professors Chip and Dan Heath suggests several important strategies. Messages are more likely to “stick” in the minds of audiences when they are understandable and memorable. Providing too much information and complexity in the delivery of the message impedes its delivery. Messages should be kept clear; relatedly, they should be tangible and concrete. Secondly, they should be delivered in an unexpected manner that takes the audience somewhat by surprise; this will create interest and hold attention. Providing credible information by a convincing expert is also important; the audience must believe the raconteur delivering the information. Using narrative storytelling devices is especially effective. Additionally, drawing upon emotional appeals that make people care, drawing upon self-interest, and appealing to identity are particularly effective. In turn, if the messages stick in people’s minds, they will be more likely to change their behaviors.

A potential way to break the pattern of stereotyping and prejudice is by bridging the so called ‘empathy gap.’



In order to change minds, especially when an issue is a difficult one, it is important to engage both the emotional and rational sides of our brains. In Thinking Fast & Slow, Nobel Prize Laureate Daniel Kahneman speaks of two brains that are often in conflict with one another. “System 1” is the automatic, intuitive, emotional brain, while “System 2” is the deliberative, reasoning brain. Kahneman suggests that most people think quickly, allowing their emotional brain to guide them. The intuitive emotional brain tends to be gullible, suppresses ambiguity, and is over-confident in its assessments. He proposes that it is important to slow down and use the more deliberative reasoning brain to fully assess issues in making important decisions. Relatedly, Chip and Dan Heath suggest that in order to “switch” opinions and behaviors under difficult circumstances, it is important to engage both the heart and the mind. The “heart” serves to motivate change. It is essential to provide a narrative that emotionally resonates and points to why change is essential and worthwhile. It is vital for individuals to feel motivated and it is helpful for them to feel part of a collective identity. To engage the mind several strategies are effective. “Bright spots” that have been effective and can be replicated provide hope and strategies for change. Breaking down the steps to change into small concrete steps makes the process logical and attainable. Explaining the whys behind the specific strategies also engages the mind in the process. It is important to note that all humans have both intuitive and rational minds. Some tend to be swayed more consistently by one approach over another, while others are engaged by different strategies at different times. An effective strategy to change attitudes on a widespread basis therefore should engage both “facts” and appeal to “emotions” in order to have the broadest possible reach.

A potential way to break the pattern of stereotyping and prejudice is to minimize the distance across perceived difference. A way to do this is by bridging the so called “empathy gap” between “others” perceived to be substantively more different than they really are. J.D. Trout, who has written extensively about bridging the empathy gap, defines empathy as the capacity to accurately understand the position of others and to “feel this could happen to me.” Psychologically, it is critical that individuals are able to identify with the pain of the suffering of the other. Typically, people underestimate social pain like ostracism and shame experienced by others. In order to have people accurately assess interpersonal and intra­ personal social pain, they need to have experienced some sort of social discomfort themselves. The actual event of recalling having undergone a previous experience of social pain can act as an empathetic bridge to understanding others’ experiences.

EFFECTIVE COUNTER-NARRATIVE STRATEGIES AIMED AT ANTIIMMIGRANT SENTIMENT The FrameWorks Institute has made a conscious effort to articulate the classic faulty patterns of public thinking about immigrants in the U.S. The FrameWorks Institute boils its message down to three basic messages. It focuses on humanizing immigrants by reminding us that we are a nation of immigrants. It provides counter-­factuals around the “economic costs” of immigration highlighting the significant shared benefits immigrants generate for our country. Lastly, the message makes a moral argument around a broken immigration system that needs to be fixed in order to treat people fairly. Thus, the FrameWorks Institute template for changing the narrative about immigrants incorporates many of the strategies for changing minds discussed above. Its message is sticky in that it is clear, tangible and solutions oriented, and draws upon messages of self-interest. As such, it has potential for a broad reach by engaging facts, and appealing to our moral intuition and basic sense of f­airness.

Authors Carola Suárez-Orozco and Marcelo Suárez-Orozco with Hilary Pennington from the Ford Foundation, who co-hosted a workshop held in October 2016, “Bridging the Empathy Gap: Networked Communities to Address Social Inclusion for Immigrant Children and Youth.” Photo: Rosalinda Larios

For a copy of the full article with footnotes, go to About the authors: Carola Suárez-Orozco, Ph.D. Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, Ph.D. UCLA Wasserman Dean & Distinguished Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education Robert Teranishi, Ph.D. Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Co-Director, Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education The Institute for Immigration, Globalization, and Education (IGE) conducts multidisciplinary and comparative research engaging policymakers, practitioners, and institutional leaders. Our research serves to inform efforts to expand opportunities, reduce barriers, and improve the well­ being of diverse, vulnerable, and marginalized students. This work is timely in the context of globalization, which is profoundly changing the developmental contexts, educational trajectories, and life courses of our children, adolescents, and young adults.

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 37

Migrating Information Studies Professor Anne Gilliland examines individual and community histories in the aftermath of human rights conflicts


38 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016


esearch on human rights archives is one of the key issues of 21st Century archival studies. The need for and impact of recordkeeping on communities that have undergone displacement, ethnic conflict, and bureaucratic violence has gained the attention of the global information community. UCLA Information Studies Professor Anne Gilliland’s research looks at the ensuing generations and how recordkeeping helps them to reconcile the turbulent past. “The development of the truth and reconciliation commissions and the tribunals for the various wars that have taken place since the Second World War and especially since the 1990s have all invoked archives and records,” she says. “They’ve also led to new documentation being created at the tribunals and in the affected countries through personal testimonies and oral history projects. However there is less work being done with those in diaspora as a result of these terrible human rights violations. “The archival and recordkeeping community collectively does not protect all citizens’ rights, at least certainly not to an equal or even equitable extent,” Gilliland argues. “We still concentrate on the interests of our own institutions and nations and have not addressed those in crisis who move across or fall between them. We fail so-called ‘non-citizens’ who fall off the archival radar: migrants, refugees, other displaced people, and the undocumented.” Gilliland is critical of the failure of record keepers to meet the principles laid out in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Archives of 2011 “for protecting citizens’ rights, for establishing individual and collective memory, for understanding the past, and for documenting the present to guide future actions.”


She says that people’s identities and rights are diminished when the records they need are lost or not even created. Documentation of lives led before migration is often destroyed, altered, missing or inaccessible in the migrants’ place of origin. Fleeing a country in turmoil or living for years in a refugee camp in another country are not circumstances that lend themselves to carrying much documentation or non-essential objects. In some instances, needed identity documents containing one’s name and ethnic affiliation may also be used as the basis for persecution. In such situations, people may opt to destroy their personal documents as a way to avoid being identified as members of the “unwanted” group. In other instances, perpetrators destroy personal records and documents of those whom they want to eliminate or whose identities they wish to erase. Moreover, traveling on false documents is sometimes the only way for these persecuted in­dividuals to escape from persecution, but such actions have not only national and international implications, but sub­ sequent personal consequences for those individuals. (Gilliland & Halilovich, 2016.)

“The urgency of addressing such concerns globally is underscored by the terrible human plight involved in the forced displacement and migrations that seem to be a global constant … in recent times,” wrote Gilliland in “Permeable Binaries, Societal Grand Challenges, and the Roles of the 21st Century Archival and Recordkeeping Profession,” an article published in Archifacts, the journal of the Archives and Records Association of New Zealand. “It is a systemic societal grand challenge that has very specific recordkeeping dimensions that should call to action those who are closest to records creation, capture, organization and policy formation and who understand the complex recordkeeping dimensions possibly better than any other party.” Gilliland’s aims are far-reaching. Her work looks to acknowledge and identify the structural and emotional confrontations and violence perpetrated and perpetuated by recordkeeping; to elucidate the different official, bureaucratic and personal realities that are in play; to identify and understand the dimensions of “workarounds” that are being or might be used when records are difficult to obtain, missing, destroyed, or were


UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 39

simply never created; and ultimately to promote recovery for individuals and communities through the provision of services, systems and education in support of immediate and evolving needs for records. “We should not just be contemplating the general liberation of the archives through digital affordances, but we should be doing so also with a specific aim to enfranchise and recognize the rights and needs of those whom archives and their principles have historically systematically failed or have been disempowered,” says Gilliland. In December 2015, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees predicted that 2015 would likely exceed all previous records with over 60 million displaced people around the world. What are the memory and recordkeeping needs, practices and exigencies associated with such massive human trauma, movement and dispersion? What are the implications for human rights and for the (re)construction of identity? How do we raise awareness of these issues in, and what supportive interventions might be appropriate on the 40 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016


Photo: Bulent Kilic

part of the archival field and others engaged in memory- and recordkeeping? These questions are at the heart of Gilliland’s research and also lay the foundation for how to address the gap in archival education on human rights issues. In their article, “Migrating memories: transdisciplinary pedagogical approaches to teaching about diasporic memory, identity and human rights in archival studies,” Professor Gilliland and Associate Professor Hariz Halilovich from RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, argue that “education designed to prepare students to be practicing archivists, scholars and educators has rarely considered how best to address these considerations as they relate to the tens of millions of individuals and communities who have experienced or who are descendants of forced diaspora.”   The two professors designed an interdisciplinary graduate course to bridge this gap: “Migrating Memories.” The course seeks to combine experiential and reflective learning with peer learning and letting students share what they know and seeing how they can complement one another.

“In this class we are thinking about how people have become distributed across the globe and how they communicate; what the issues are with memory and remembering across generations, and between home countries and adopted countries; and the role of social media in the bringing together and collective memory formation of dispersed communities,” says Gilliland. “We are also attempting to broaden our approaches by drawing upon the humanities and the arts as well as the social sciences where the archival field is largely based today.” “Migration is related to mobility [and] movement; but it’s not only across space, it’s also across time, across cultures, across memories. We want to light a spark in the creative imagination of our students, to [help them] think of archives and memories as phenomena that are not fixed in institutions and material objects, but are also in what people carry with them and that is often non-material,” says Halilovich.

Anne Gilliland is a professor at UCLA’s Department of Information Studies (UCLA ­iSchool), the director of the Center for Information as Evidence, and a faculty affiliate of the Center for Digital Humanities at UCLA. Hariz Halilovich is an Associate Professor at RMIT University where he is also a Vice-Chancellor’s Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Global Research, the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies (GUSS).

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 41



ast May, the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools campus, which is home to six schools including the UCLA Community School, became an al fresco art gallery. During a one-week period, 28 murals, some as tall as 40 feet, were painted all across on the campus. The mural festival was a joint project between Branded Arts and LAUSD, in an effort to promote arts learning and to inspire students daily. Many of the students on the sprawling campus participated in the festival. Some suggested themes, others like alumnus Jose ­Maradiaga-Andrade, who was interning at Branded Arts, became artists themselves; Jose painted a mural of a young man staring over the border fence between the U.S. and Mexico with the word “hope.” Jessica Miramontes was the subject of one of the murals, a 55-foot-tall portrait of herself towering over the campus, which is part of a diptych by the street-art duo Cyrcle; its companion image depicts another student, Yakal Anderson. Their images grace the cover of this ­magazine. “I’ve always wanted to do a mural festival like this,” said Branded Arts’ Warren Brand. “But where are you gonna find 30 walls within a two-block radius where all the building owners are on board? It’s a good partnership.” Artists from all over participated in the festival, including Shepard Fairey, who painted a 40-foot-tall portrait of Robert Kennedy which faces the students each day as they enter the campus. The school now sits on the previous home of the historic Ambassador Hotel, where RFK was assassinated in 1968. “Those with the courage to enter the moral conflict will find themselves with companions in every corner of the globe” graces the bottom of the mural.

42 UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016


Shepard Fairey’s mural of Robert F. Kennedy is being completed on the grounds of the UCLA Community School campus in May 2015.

Opposite top: Mural: Beau Stanton Photo: Static Medium Print and Photo. @staticmedium

Opposite bottom: Mural: Jose Maradiaga-Andrade Photo: Jay Cantor. @KungFuBreakfast

Above: Mural: CYRCLE. @CYRCLE Photo: Jay Cantor. @KungFuBreakfast

Back cover: Mural: Hueman. @huemanartist Photo: Jay Cantor. @KungFuBreakfast

UCLA Ed&IS FALL 2016 45


UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies 405 Hilgard Avenue, Box 951521 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521

UCLA Ed&IS Magazine Fall 2016  

The UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies’ new magazine highlights the public scholarship of its faculty. A few of the...