Bradley Levinson examines high-school education in Mexico through a critical ethnographic study that originated with his dissertation research at the University of North Carolina. Levinson conducted his study in a small rural town he calls “San Pablo,” and his focal participants are 20 ninth-graders in a secundaria. Levinson’s main data collection took place in Mexico during 1988–1991, and his follow-up research with the same group of participants spanned a seven-year period up to 1998.

The organizing principle of Levinson’s study is the idea that secondary education in Mexico cultivates a sense of identity that reflects a unique interpretation of equality among the nation’s citizenry--hence the title We Are All Equal. The students’ conflicted attitudes toward this notion of equality provide a rich framework for examining the limitations of assumptions notably fractured by gender and class. The implications for Levinson’s research are intriguing. How does equality come to be defined in a nation conditioned by a traditional norm of machismo that subordinates women? Also, given the disproportionate distribution of wealth in Mexico, as evidenced by a large working-class population, the high status of the concept of equality in public school populations is ironic. Levinson’s focus on the development of Mexican gender identity among ninth-grade students is a definite innovation within the genre of ethnographic research. Drawing on the work of Robert Connell (Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics, Stanford University Press, 1987), Levinson delineates a Mexican “gender regime.” He describes in precise detail the construction of gender through particular family roles, as well as family members’ various inconsistencies in enacting these roles. For example, during one family visit, Levinson encountered a father ironing clothes in the living room. He strategically used this encounter as an opportunity to interview the parent and inquire about notions of machismo and domestic gender roles.

Although Levinson’s designation of schools as institutions for social assimilation does not necessarily represent an innovation in ethnographic investigation, his focus on one Mexican high school through a historical lens, coupled with an interpretation of “culture” that fully takes into account the intersections of class, gender, and ideological variables, is relevant for understanding the complexity of education in contemporary Mexican society. In his follow-up research with original research participants, Levinson considerately updates the most recent progress of the students profiled in his case studies. Some of his observations, particularly in relation to popular culture and identity, seem somewhat anachronistic, such as his reference to rapper Vanilla Ice’s popularity with Mexican students. Another limitation of Levinson’s study is his etic, or outsider, perspective when describing Mexican cultural nuances. His translation of Mexican Spanish, for example, focuses on individual terms, rather than on dialogue. Consequently, there is considerable representation of Mexican Spanish through an English interpretation for a mostly English-dominant readership. For example, Levinson notes the symbolic value of the huarache (sandal) among the young students: “For the schooled San Pabloan, the huarache--a rough, homemade sandal--was the ultimate country signifier, a symbol of rurality, poverty, and little schooling. For these San Pablo girls, the huarache ‘was like, no way’” (p. 175).

By focusing on specific Spanish terms, Levinson is able to provide insights into how students perceive themselves. Levinson conveys an important element for understanding students’ perception of gender, in a manner that is accessible to the non–Spanish-speaker. As a Mexican American fluent in Spanish, I would have preferred to read more Mexican Spanish discourse; however, Levinson has an excellent grasp of essential concepts and terms despite his etic perspective. Levinson’s insight is strengthened by a sincere grappling with cross-cultural issues of subjectivity. Throughout the volume, Levinson remains conscious of his own subjective limitations. At the outset, he acknowledges his English-speaking background--even his limited ability to communicate with his Spanish-speaking housekeeper. Levinson also interrogates himself about details that might have been glossed over by less thorough researchers, such as his researcher–informant relationships with female participants who were romantically attracted to him during the course of his study. Levinson exemplifies what Banks (“The Lives and Values of Researchers: Implications for Educating Citizens in a Multicultural Society,” Educational Researcher 1998:4–17) would call an “external insider” perspective; that is, an informed perspective deriving from the researcher’s adoption by the community under study. We Are All Equal reflects Levinson’s comprehensive entréée into the community of San Pablo. The book should be of value to educators interested in dynamic interpretations of Mexican culture in a school setting, as well as to researchers who wish to explore issues of subjectivity in working with culturally different populations.