« Spotlight on ELLs, Brought to You by EdWeek | Main | Resource: More Free Webinars on ELLs »

Should We Say Latino or Hispanic?

| 5 Comments

In The New York Times column After Deadline, Philip B. Corbett reports that news coverage of Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court has raised some questions about the usage of words such as "Latino," "Hispanic," and "immigrant."

It's a topic that is relevant to this blog since 68 percent of English-language learners are Spanish-speaking, and teachers and administrators may often be in the position of describing them to others.

Corbett notes that Sotomayor refers to herself as "Latina." He adds that while "Latino" or "Hispanic" are acceptable, some people have a strong preference. He says that reporters and editors should routinely ask how an individual or group wants to be described and honor that. He notes that it may be best to be specific, such as to say someone is Mexican-American or a Guatemalan immigrant. He also properly notes that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens and are thus not "immigrants."

Someone who prefers the term "Latino" asked me recently at an education conference why Education Week uses "Hispanic" in its pages. I answered that we use both.

Federal studies, for instance, use the word "Hispanic," so I use that same word when writing about such studies. In addition, if I'm writing about demographics in a school, I usually use the word "Hispanic" because that's how the data are reported to the federal government.

Many advocacy groups use "Latino," so if they host an event or release a report that I write about, I pick up on their language and use "Latino" in my story.

When writing about individuals, I try to be as specific about someone's heritage as possible. I say that someone is a "native of Mexico" or "Mexican-American," depending on what information the person gives me.

What I find challenging to determine sometimes, though, is when it makes sense to include someone's heritage in a story. My editors, of course, help me think through these decisions. For example, I debated recently whether I should say that J. Michael Clara, an activist who filed a complaint with the office for civil rights of the U.S. Department of Education alleging that the Salt Lake City school district wasn't providing adequate services for English-language learners, was a "Mexican-American city transit planner" or simply a "city transit planner."

I had asked Clara, who was born in the United States and grew up in Austin, Texas, if he calls himself a Mexican-American. He does. I thought that the fact that he was Mexican-American could have made him more sensitive to what kind of education ELLs, many of whom were from Mexico, were getting in the schools. I decided Clara's heritage was relevant to the story.

What do you think? Did we at Education Week make the right call?

5 Comments

When is a white person's heritage relevant to the story?

I believe a white person's heritage will be most relevant if the time comes when the white experience isn't the one that is normailized

Mary Ann, I think that Education Week has made the right call. Since there are multiple terms, then context will determine which (if any) is appropriate.

Why use these tags at all? They carry a lot of baggage. Instead, educators can more easily use a term such as "Spanish-speaker", or "Hmong-speaker", etc., since the person could be from any country (including the US), hopefully without the connotations that the other more politically-charged terms carry with them. People (such as Sonia Sotomayer) can choose their own preferred term to describe themselves, rather than being labelled.

My ten cents.

This is what can be read about both terms in the "DICCIONARIO DE LA LENGUA ESPAÑOLA - Vigésima segunda edición, de la Real Academia Española"

"latino, na."
(Del lat. Latīnus).

3. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a la lengua latina.

7. adj. Natural de los pueblos de Europa y América en que se hablan lenguas derivadas del latín.

8. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a esos mismos pueblos. Los emperadores latinos de Constantinopla Los países latinos de América
_______________________________

"hispano, na".
(Del lat. Hispānus).

1. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a Hispania.
2. adj. español. Apl. a pers., u. t. c. s.
3. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a las naciones de Hispanoamérica.
4. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a la población de origen hispanoamericano que vive en los Estados Unidos de América.
5. m. y f. Persona de ese origen que vive en los Estados Unidos de América.
___________________

Therefore, both terms are acceptable "etimológicamente". Of course, sometimes the story requires that you be more specific about one's ancestors being from one country or from another,...in general I find that it is in admiration that news normally speak about a "Hispano" or "Latino" who has managed to overcome difficulties and stand over the average American of whatever nationality, because reporters know how difficult that is.

Comments are now closed for this post.

Follow This Blog

Advertisement

Most Viewed on Education Week

Categories

Archives

Recent Comments