THE NARRATIVE OF UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS IN COLLEGE: EXPLORING
THE AFFECTS OF DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS ON
UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS ATTENDING FOUR-YEAR PUBLIC
UNIVERSITIES
A Thesis
Presented to the faculty of Graduate and Professional Studies in Education
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
Education
(Higher Education Leadership)
by
Donaciano Botello Torres
SPRING 2017
© 2017
Donaciano Botello Torres
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
THE NARRATIVE OF UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS IN COLLEGE: EXPLORING
THE AFFECTS OF DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS ON
UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS ATTENDING FOUR-YEAR PUBLIC
UNIVERSITIES
A Thesis
by
Donaciano Botello Torres
Approved by:
______, Committee Chair Geni Cowan, Ph.D.
______, Second Reader José Chávez, Ed.D.
Date
iii
Student: Donaciano Botello Torres
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the thesis.
, Graduate Coordinator Albert Lozano, Ph.D. Date
Graduate and Professional Studies in Education
iv
Abstract
of
THE NARRATIVE OF UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS IN COLLEGE: EXPLORING
THE AFFECTS OF DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS ON
UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS ATTENDING FOUR-YEAR PUBLIC
UNIVERSITIES
by
Donaciano Botello Torres
Brief Literature Review
California is the home of one of the largest populations of undocumented immigrants in the United States (Drachman, 2006; Nevins, 2010). With an estimated
65,000 undocumented students graduating from high school every year (Passel, 2006), these undocumented students are facing challenges and barriers to enter institutions of higher education. Those barriers are in the form of coming from low socioeconomic status, being underprepared academically, being first-generation students, and lack of federal financial aid (Chávez, 1998; Einsema, 2013; Frum, 2007; Gonzales, Roth, Brant,
Lee, & Valdivia, 2016). A college degree is seen as an opportunity for social and economic mobility (Abrego, 2006; Chávez, 1998; Gandara & Contreras, 2009; Menjivar,
2000, 2006). With undocumented students entering institutions of higher education, the
v
State of California needs to understand how the challenges and barriers are impacting those students. A better understanding of these challenges and barriers California will help improve the graduation and retention rates.
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study was to focus on experiences of challenges and barriers to attaining a college degree and help shape policies that will benefit all undocumented students. This research study looked at the challenges they are facing as well as what resources they are using on campus to stay on track to graduate and pursue post-graduate degrees.
Methodology
This study employed mixed methods that included a questionnaire and one-to-one interview. The study took place at Mariposa University in Northern California. The sample consisted of three students who ranged from being a first-year freshman to a second-year graduate student.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Findings from the study showed that DACA played an important part in the motivation of the students to pursue post-graduate degrees. DACA has allowed more undocumented students to pursue higher education by dismantling some of the barriers they had faced before. Being able to access state financial aid through the CA Dream Act has allowed higher education to be more accessible. Students still face financial difficulties, and the cost of attendance is at the forefront of their decision-making process.
vi
A recommendation is to do more research focused on undocumented students in post- graduate programs and how they are persisting.
, Committee Chair Geni Cowan, Ph.D.
Date
vii
DEDICATION
This is dedicated to my family who has continuously supported me throughout the years, especially my mother, Leticia Botello, whose memory is embedded in this thesis.
Her goal in life was to have her children pursue their dreams and for her that also meant to graduate from college. For my father, Juan Botello, who worked continuously to ensure that his three children would have all of the opportunities in the world. For being supportive of me and having to take on the dual role of father and mother to me. This thesis is for you, for every day that you had to wake up before the sun rose and every time that you worked underneath the blazing sun. This is in honor of my mentor, Martha
Nunez, who always showed me unconditional love. She was a strong believer in the power of education and that there were no excuses for me not to be successful. Your lifetime of work with students has inspired me to do the same. To my mentor, Dr.
Mariana G. Martinez, I want to say thank you for planting the seed of knowledge when I was your student in Upward Bound. Thank you for being a role model and for supporting me through the process of applying to a master’s program. To my brother,
Alberto Botello, you are a constant source of motivation and you helped push me to complete this thesis. Thank you for the showing me how to be successful. To my sister,
Daniela Botello and my niece Isabel, this is for the brighter future that we have inherited and for the work that is still ahead of us. A big thank you to my fraternity brothers of Nu
Alpha Kappa Fraternity, Inc. for all of their support and guidance along the way.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication ...... viii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Background ...... 1
Statement of the Problem ...... 4
Significance of the Study ...... 5
Limitations of the Study...... 6
Definition of Terms...... 6
2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...... 10
Introduction ...... 10
Theoretical Framework ...... 10
Historical Context ...... 12
Federal Policies ...... 16
State Policies ...... 41
Educational Policies ...... 42
3. METHODOLOGY ...... 45
Introduction ...... 45
Setting of the Study ...... 45
Research Design...... 46
ix
Limitations of the Study...... 49
Summary ...... 50
4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ...... 51
Introduction ...... 51
Results ...... 52
Interpretation of the Findings...... 77
Summary ...... 79
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 80
Summary ...... 80
Conclusions ...... 83
Recommendations ...... 84
Appendix A. Questionnaire ...... 87
Appendix B. Invitation to Participate ...... 89
Appendix C. Consent to Participate in Research ...... 92
Appendix D. Interview Questions...... 94
References ...... 96
x 1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Background
California is the home to one of the largest populations of undocumented immigrants in the United States (Drachman, 2006; Nevins, 2010). The large influx of immigration occurred because of labor shortages during wartime in the United States. To fulfill the needs of the economy, the United States had to bring in workers in job sectors like mining, railroads, ranching, and agriculture (De Genova, 2004; Uchitelle, 2007).
This relationship between the United States and Mexico shattered in the face of economic turbulence in the United States. Mexicans became scapegoats for a failing economy.
Federal policies were created and aimed at curtailing undocumented immigration, which in turn stopped the circulatory migration pattern and created a need for permanent settlement (Gonzales, Terriquez, & Ruszczyk, 2014). This large settlement is the start of the American Dream for many immigrant families living in the United States. They believed they would be able to find a better quality of life in the United States as opposed to in their native homeland. Families believed that in the United States their children would be able to attain greater economic success (Chávez, Monforti, & Michelson,
2015).
Undocumented students are guaranteed a free public school education by the landmark case Plyler v. Doe (1982), which in 1975, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that to
2 deny undocumented students access to a free public education would violate the undocumented students’ 14th Amendment and would create a lifetime of hardship
(Chávez et al., 2015; Clark-Ibáñez, 2015; Frum, 2007; Nicholls, 2013; Schmid, 2013).
Undocumented students who decide to pursue higher education were left in a precarious situation because of their legal status within the United States. Although undocumented students are not barred from entering institutions of higher education, excepting in certain states like Georgia and South Carolina, there are significant barriers that deny undocumented students the opportunity to attend a public institution of higher education.
With an estimated 65,000 undocumented students graduating high school nationwide, only 5-10% of them will continue to enroll in a four-year public university (Passel, 2006).
The barriers come in many forms such as coming from low-socioeconomic status families, being underprepared academically, being first-generation college students, and lack of access to federal financial aid (Chávez, 1998; Eisema, 2013; Frum, 2007;
Gonzales, Roth, Brant, Lee, & Valdivia, 2016).
Undocumented students were propelled into action by immigrant rights organizations, which saw there was a niche they could fill to gain a pathway to citizenship during a hostile political period in the United States (Nicholls, 2013). That niche was in the form of the DREAM Act, which failed to gather enough bipartisan support to pass in the Senate and House of Representatives and is discussed in further detail in Chapter 2. Though the DREAM Act failed, it mobilized undocumented students to fight for their rights. It is important to understand the educational experiences of these
3 undocumented students who have received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
(DACA) to further advocate for equal access to higher education and for greater institutional support for undocumented students.
The children of undocumented immigrants are often called DREAMers or the 1.5 generation. The label of being the 1.5 generation differentiates newly arrived immigrants and children who were born here whose parents are first generation. They were brought to the United States as children, through no fault of their own (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010;
Eisema, 2013; Nicholls, 2013), and have internalized the values of meritocracy and equality. They believe that through education, they will be able to become contributing members of society. Undocumented students becoming college-going age face systemic barriers to obtaining a college degree. A college degree is an opportunity for students to enter the labor market, in which, according to Moore, Shulock, and Jensen (2009), “by
2025 there will be one million fewer college graduates than are needed in the workforce”
(p. 2). Undocumented students could fill that void and be an asset to the United States economy. With the implementation of DACA, undocumented students have received more benefits to pursue higher education. Thus, without equal access to a higher education, they are restricted in terms of upward social and economic mobility (Abrego,
2006; Chávez, 1998; Gandara & Contreras, 2009; Menjivar, 2000, 2006). The majority of undocumented students who attend higher education tend to choose the community college option because of the lower cost associated with tuition.
4
Research has been conducted on the experiences of undocumented students within higher education, but few studies have documented how the implementation of DACA affected students’ experiences. Many of the articles written about undocumented students are prior to the passage of DACA and focus on Assembly Bill 540 (AB 540;
Abrego, 2008) and its impact on the experiences of undocumented students in higher education. DACA has allowed undocumented students to gain greater access to a four- year public university because of the benefits their legal status grants them such as access to state financial aid, a social security number, and a work authorization permit. This research aims to examine the educational journeys of undocumented students who have received DACA and are enrolled at four-year public institutions and their experience at their institution.
Statement of the Problem
DACA is an executive order that has provided benefits for undocumented students who are pursuing higher education. To understand the benefits and shortcomings of the implementation of DACA, it is important for researchers to study undocumented students within higher education. A four-year degree signifies a chance for upward social and economic mobility. A high school diploma no longer is adequate in the labor force for entering middle class. While there have been studies that pertain to undocumented students, most have been before the implementation of DACA or have been centralized in Southern California. As they are underrepresented students in higher
5 education, there is a need to understand how undocumented students who have received
DACA are experiencing college at public institutions. The purpose of this study was to focus on those experiences and help create policies that will benefit all undocumented students. This research study looked at the challenges undocumented students are facing as well as what resources they are using on campus to stay on track to graduate and pursue post-graduate degrees. The specific research questions used to guide this study were:
1. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect undocumented
college students’ motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees?
2. What resources are available for undocumented students to be academically
successful?
Significance of the Study
In the past decade, undocumented students have had greater access to higher education by claiming rights. The inequality of access has been challenged, and undocumented students are continuing to fight for equal access and rights in four-year public institutions. This research will further the advocacy for equal access to higher education and for greater institutional support for undocumented students. Professionals within higher education will become better equipped at understanding the barriers and challenges undocumented students face. The research will help create a better understanding of the DACA student population on campus. It will also serve as an
6 indicator of the perceptions that students have of Mariposa University. Institutions of higher education can use the information gathered in this study to respond to students’ needs. The results of this study can be used to create new policies that are more aligned to promoting graduation and retention rates amongst this underserved population.
Limitations of the Study
This study presented many limitations the researcher had to consider while researching this population of students. One of the limitations of this study was the small sample size used to collect research data. The undocumented student population at
Mariposa University is a small subset that is guarded in regard to their information because of their immigration status. Another limitation is the fact that the information gathered in this research limits the generalization of the study to the geographical area where it was conducted. The sample may not be representative of the experiences of all undocumented students who have obtained DACA at four-year public universities. The study was limited to three interviews because only three people accepted the invitation to participate.
Definition of Terms
1.5 Generation
The 1.5-generation refers to undocumented students who migrated at early ages
and reside in the United States (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010).
7
AB 540 Student
AB 540 students are undocumented students who have attended a California high
school for three years and have met the graduation requirements as set by the
state.
Assembly Bill 130 (AB 130)
AB 130 guarantees undocumented students access to privately financed state
scholarships (Schmid, 2013).
Assembly Bill 131 (AB 131)
AB 131 allows qualified California undocumented students the same state-funded
tuition aid as US citizens and legal resident students, such as Cal Grants (Schmid,
2013).
Assembly Bill 540 (AB 540)
Aimed to improve undocumented youth’s prospects for higher education. To
qualify, a student must have attended and graduated from a California high school
(or obtained a GED), she/he must enroll in an accredited institution of higher
education in California, and must declare, through an affidavit, that she/he is in
the process of legalizing their immigration status or will seek to do as soon as
she/he becomes eligible. Students who meet each of the bill’s requirements are
exempt from nonresident tuition. (Abrego, 2008, p. 715)
8
American Dream
Term used to define the life many individuals want when they immigrate to the
United States (Ayala, 2012).
California Dream Act
The California Dream Act is the combination of AB 130 &131 that were passed
in 2011.
DREAM Act
DREAM Act, known as the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minor
Act, was introduced in 2010. Its purpose was to provide undocumented young
individuals permanent residency and a path to citizenship (Schmid, 2013).
DREAMer
A DREAMer is an undocumented student who is working towards a promising
future (Padilla, 2014).
DREAM Team
A group created by University graduates and dissident DREAMers (Nicholls,
2013).
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is a discretionary determination to
defer removal action of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals does not provide an individual with
lawful status. (United States Citizen and Immigrant Services, 2017, para. 4)
9
Undocumented Immigrant
Department of Homeland Security defines undocumented immigrants as
immigrants who have entered the United States without legal documentation (Lad
& Braganza, 2013).
UnDACAmented
A term coined during the DREAMer movement to describe an undocumented
immigrant who has received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
10
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of undocumented students who are recipients of DACA and their educational journey in a four-year public university. This chapter reviews the historical context, federal policies, and state policies that factor into the lives of undocumented students both past and present. This study focuses on the experience of undocumented students who are Mexican and are DACA recipients. The main reason this study focuses on Mexicans is because 78% of DACA recipients that were approved in 2012-2013 were born in Mexico (U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, 2013). With such a high percentage of the approved DACA population, it is more common to find undocumented students who are Mexican. To understand the current political atmosphere, there is a need for a clear background of what has happened previously. This study examines challenges, barriers, and motivations to complete a college degree and pursue a post-graduate degree.
Theoretical Framework
According to Pérez Huber (2010), Latino Critical Theory (LatCrit) is a theory that helps examine the experiences unique to the Latina/o community such as immigration status, language, ethnicity, and culture. LatCrit is focused on bringing a social justice
11 perspective to the research in which the work is grounded on the idea that those being researched have knowledge that is valuable (Villalpando, 2004). LatCrit also challenges the ideas of meritocracy, objectivity, color-blindness, race neutrality, and equal opportunity (Solorzano & Delgado Bernal, 2001). This study uses LatCrit to hear the experiences of undocumented students and how they have interpreted their educational experiences.
LatCrit expands on Critical Race Theory (CRT) by looking at areas that are not found within CRT. LatCrit focuses on four functions: (a) the production of knowledge,
(b) the advancement of transformation, (c) the expansion and connection of struggle(s), and (d) the cultivation of community and coalition (Fernandez, 2002). This study examines the narrative of three undocumented students and allows them to be the producers of knowledge on a subject that affects them on a daily basis. The intersections of all concepts like immigration status create a framework in which students understand their position within society. Using LatCrit helps create a dialogue to further develop the understanding of undocumented students in higher education. Like CRT, LatCrit examines the intersection of race, class, and power structure (Villalpando, 2004), which in this context encompasses Latino undocumented students. LatCrit takes a closer view into other issues that are not examined by CRT, such as language, immigration, ethnicity, culture, identity, phenotype, and sexuality (Pérez Huber, 2010; Villalpando, 2004). This study focuses on undocumented students of Latino descendent because they are the majority, and given the number of DACA applicants in the State of California, they are
12 more prevalent. To work together with institutions of higher education that serve undocumented students, it is important researchers gather data from this population.
Their experiences within their educational journey can shed light on the challenges that are unique to them and address barriers that are encountered in their college-going experience.
Historical Context
The Bracero Program (1942-1964)
During a tumultuous time in the United States, the nation faced a labor shortage in various economic sectors that were vital to the ongoing wartime effort (Astor, 2009;
Robinson, 2010). With the country entering World War II after the Pearl Harbor bombings, it was necessary the United States sustain their agricultural sector during wartime. A draft was implemented in 1942 and agricultural jobs suffered as men went to fight in the war. The agricultural industry lobbied to congress for the recruitment of workers in order to preserve the crops that otherwise would be left unharvested, which meant a financial loss (Bickerton, 2001; Mitchell, 2012). During this time, the United
States and Mexico were in a period of cooperation and were able to agree on terms for a bilateral immigration, with regulation from both governments to ensure Mexican workers a fair deal. The bilateral agreement was signed on August 4, 1942 by President Truman
(Bickerton, 2001) and produced a country-to-country exchange of people, with Mexico sending 5 million workers to the United States to sustain the economy during wartime.
13
The Bracero program, which ended in 1964, transported 5 million Mexican citizens to the states to fulfill the labor shortage (Bickerton, 2001). The Braceros were spread across the United States and used this opportunity to make more money than they could possibly make in their homelands. In 1951, The Bracero Program was renewed but with growers having the ability to contract directly with the Mexican government
(Morgan, 2004). The growers saw the Bracero Program as a source of cheap labor and exploited the workers for their own financial benefit (Robinson, 2010). With the end of the Bracero Program, the growers encouraged workers to migrate back without having work visas. The growers knew they could still use the workers as cheap labor and aided their return to the United States. This created a circulatory pattern of migration that had many Mexicans coming to the United States for months at a time and then returning to
Mexico.
The pattern continued for many years, but sentiments changed after the United
States ended their participation in the Korean war (Bickerton, 2001; Robinson, 2010).
The United States changed its stance on importing Mexican laborers to deter immigration in the 1970s when the realities of how migrant farmworkers were being treated became clear. The changed stance led to a greater pressure on companies to hire and treat domestic farmworkers with better conditions and the ending to the Bracero Program
(Morgan, 2004). Public Law 78 was a law that protected and improved the conditions for domestic workers, which President Kennedy signed into law (Morgan, 2004). In 1963,
14 the House did not vote in favor of extending Public Law 78, but the Bracero Program did not end officially until 1964.
Mendez v. Westminster (1946)
The Mendez v. Westminster case challenged the school segregation policies of the
1920s and 1930s, a time when Mexican Americans were settling in the United States at a higher volume than before. The immigration was caused by the Mexican Revolution that occurred between 1910 and 1920 (Chávez et al., 2015; Wollenberg, 1974) when families migrated to escape the violence and found stability in the United States. Nativism rose once the United States entered the Great Depression starting in 1929. Immigration became a point of contention because there were very few jobs and Mexicans were seen as competition with their Anglo counterparts. While many Mexicans migrated back to their homeland, the United States also used xenophobic rhetoric to allow the repatriation of thousands of Mexican Americans regardless of legal status.
After the Great Depression when the economy was in recession, growers sought out a cheap labor pool, which mainly consisted of Mexican workers coming from across the border. Schools were established by large-scale growers during the 1900s to segregate Mexican students from attending the same schools as their children (Valencia,
2005). The segregation of immigrant students was pushed by social pressure and supported by the belief that Mexican students were inferior (Wollenberg, 1974).
Valencia (2005) stated, “By the beginning of the 1930’s, the educational template for
Mexican American students – one of forced, widespread segregation, and inferior
15 schooling – was formed. The purpose of segregating Mexican students was to
‘Americanize’ them” (p. 395).
In 1946, the Mendez family in Los Angeles challenged the policy of segregation found in the schooling provided to their children. The case was brought to the court's attention by the Mendez family who tried to enroll their children into the Westminster
Elementary School and were denied admittance because they were of Mexican descent.
Mr. Mendez’s sister, who was light skinned and had Vidaurri as her surname, was able to register her children (Valencia, 2005). The Mendez family decided to talk to the administration to see how they could enroll their children into the school, but were denied access to the elementary school. Recognizing the unequal access and the inferior schooling opportunities for their children, the Mendez family decided to pursue legal action, which became a class action lawsuit, to demand fair treatment in the educational system in Orange County (Valencia, 2005). This was one of the first cases that challenged the policy of segregation in California and was important because there was no law that allowed the segregation of Mexican American children, as there was with
African American children. In terms of classification, Mexican Americans are considered White and the legal challenge produced a court ruling that favored integration
(Valencia, 2005). Judge McCormick ruled that the students’ 14th Amendment was being violated by being segregated and there were no valid educational grounds on which to segregate them (Valencia, 2005). The case became a precedent for Brown v. The Board of Education, an instrumental case that created equal access within institutions of
16 education. Brown v. The Board of Education was implemented with the intention to integrate both K-12 and higher education. Schools were no longer able to segregate students based on their race or ethnicity and access to educational opportunities that were once denied to students of color were created.
Federal Policies
Operation Wetback (1954)
To understand the relationship between undocumented immigrants and the United
States, we must take a look at previous restrictions, policies, and enforcement procedures at the border. The Cold War fueled an anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States because of the perceived threat of “others” (Nevins, 2010). These nativist sentiments were directed at those who were viewed as a threat to the security of the American
Dream. In the 1940s, a large influx of documented and undocumented workers had migrated to the United States to work in the fields while the nation played an active role in World War II. Once the war ended and workers returned, the nation turned to enforce stricter immigration policies that reduced the flow of migrant workers to the United
States. The enforcement started in the 1940s but was not implemented as a national policy until Operation Wetback. During Operation Wetback in 1954, over 1 million undocumented and documented workers were apprehended and deported back to Mexico
(Robinson, 2010). Publicized as a victory for the United States, author Calavita (1992) argued that its main outcome was to increase the State and grower control over migrant
17 labor, which was a great way to maintain a pool of cheap labor. So while the Border
Patrol was working to deter the migration of undocumented workers into the country, it was only doing it to protect the profits of companies that used migrant labor to be competitive in the market.
The perception of Mexican immigrants in the United States is that they are a national security threat, one to which the United States has to respond directly and with force to ensure that threats of different political ideologies and criminal activities were stopped at the border (Nevins, 2010; Nicholls, 2013). This view of immigrants being a national threat can be seen in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 when the United
States proceeded to implement an ideology of “securing our borders” in order to prevent the rise of terrorism in the United States (Nicholls, 2013). Although the Canadian border had greater chances of having national threats enter, the United States saw Canadians as being closer in culture and tradition than Mexicans, who were perceived as threats to the
American way of life. In both cases, the rise of xenophobia created a political atmosphere that imposed sanctions on people who did not fit the mold of what an
American should be.
Operation Wetback was a precursor to state and federal policies. The acclaimed success of Operation Wetback led people to believe that strict enforcement of the border was possible. In our current society, this type of discourse has been seen at the national level with the rise of Donald Trump as President of the United States. Mr. Trump has equated immigration with a national threat and has continuously stated that he is going to
18 build a wall on the border and have Mexico pay for it. This type of rhetoric is not a new idea; it has been recycled in our political system since the 1950s when Eisenhower was the President. The Cold War allowed negative stereotypes of “others” to be circulated in mainstream media because people with power or status were able to give it credibility on a national stage. This took the issue out of local and regional focus to a threat against everyone in the nation and gave power to the “experts” in the field; and in this case, the power landed with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).
Plyler v. Doe (1982)
The educational rights of undocumented students were challenged in the court system in the United States. In 1982, Plyler v. Doe was taken to the Supreme Court. The case reviewed the denial of K-12 access for undocumented students in the State of Texas.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, found that the State of Texas did not present compelling evidence for limiting educational access for undocumented students. Texas believed that preventing undocumented students from accessing education would serve as a deterrent to further immigration to the State. The Supreme Court did not agree that such a policy would deter immigration.
The Supreme Court used the 14th Amendment to base its decision regarding the case of undocumented students and their access to public education. Former Justice
Brennan wrote, in his opinion, that undocumented students were not to be held liable for their immigration status (Clark-Ibáñez, 2015; Schmid, 2013). The decision took into consideration that many of the students came to the United Stated through no fault of
19 their own and it was not justifiable to exclude them in public schools because it would then create a permanent underclass and a lifetime of hardship (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010;
Frum, 2007; Neinhusser, 2013; Schmid, 2010). The Plyler v. Doe decision came at a time when a high school education meant a chance for social/upward mobility. Although the decision created an inclusive K-12 education, it did not mention postsecondary access, which is now a highly debated subject since a high school diploma does not allow the same range of economic mobility as it did in the 1980s (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010;
Frum, 2007).
The options for undocumented students are increasing since the passage of policies like AB 540, AB 130, AB 131, and DACA. Prior to DACA, undocumented students were unable to fully integrate themselves into their communities because of their legal status; it also affected their transition from adolescence into adulthood (Gonzales et al., 2014).
Title IV Higher Education Act of 1965
Systematic barriers for undocumented students can be found within Title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965. Title IV grants citizens and permanent residents access to federal and state aid for postsecondary education (Blume, 2011). The inability to access federal aid for undocumented students creates a financial challenge because of the inability to pay for tuition. It was not until Assembly Bill 540 in the state of California that undocumented students were allowed to qualify for in-state tuition. Title IV barred students from federal aid programs such as grants (Pell Grants and Supplemental
20
Educational Opportunity Grants), federal student loans (Stafford and Perkins loans), and work-study (Gildersleeve, Rumann, & Mondrágon, 2010). Having to pay out-of-state tuition, undocumented students found that higher education was three times more expensive than for their documented peers. This is one of the factors that keeps undocumented students out of higher education. The inability to gain legal employment along with higher tuition rates make it difficult for any student to gain access to a four- year university (Gonzales, 2009).
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)
President Reagan introduced the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) to congress in 1986, which legalized 3 million undocumented immigrants (Chávez et al.,
2015). This amnesty created a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment because the IRCA was criticized for being too soft on enforcement, which included the verification system that the United States was using. Conservatives used this anti-immigrant wave to their advantage to push an agenda of nativist policies and support anti-immigration candidates like Pete Wilson to cut any public services for people suspected of being “illegal aliens.”
What most people fail to recognize is the fact that the 3 million undocumented immigrants that were granted amnesty became full members in society and thus contributed to the economy in a larger fashion. The shadow of “illegality” was lifted off their shoulders; thus, they were able to integrate into the economy of the United States.
According to the American Immigration Council (2010), those immigrants who legalized their status had higher wages, experienced upward mobility, and contributed more to
21 local and state taxes. Frum (2007) explained that certain institutions can actually benefit financially from accepting undocumented students. The argument that has been mentioned in various articles is that undocumented students take the space of permanent residents and citizens. This argument, however, does not see the undocumented student population as a new market for tuition revenue. An estimated 65,000 undocumented students are eligible to enter institutions of higher education every year, so there is a large market where universities and colleges could recruit and enroll students.
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) 1994
The United States has been trying to reduce the number of undocumented immigrants migrating to the country for a long time. The North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), enacted in 1994 by congress, was hailed as a way to reduce the flow of immigrants coming across the border (Uchitelle, 2007). Proponents of NAFTA predicted that this agreement would help improve the economy of Mexico, thus eliminating the need to import a cheap labor force from Mexico. NAFTA created a flow of investments to Mexico but the investments created a crisis within the labor market and produced competition that Mexican companies could not compete with. According to
Phillip Martin, an agricultural economist at UC Davis, the United States presumed there would be a shift in which crops would be produced because of direct competition, but did not foresee the laborers deciding to instead migrate to the United States (Chávez et al.,
2015; Uchitelle, 2007). NAFTA took advantage of industries in Mexico and produced a climate in which Mexican companies lost their ability to sell their goods at a profitable
22 margin. The consequence resulted in a wave of migration to the United States, where financial stability was easier to find because of the large agricultural industry. Between
1994 and 2002, Mexico’s agricultural sector lost 1.3 million jobs, and more jobs were lost in the industrial sector as a result of NAFTA (Chávez et al., 2015). This economic downturn pushed workers to cross the border to find job opportunities in the fields.
Operation Gatekeeper (1994)
In the 1990s, nativist sentiment increased greatly, which propelled legislation aimed towards limiting rights for undocumented immigrants while protecting resources for legal residents. With the nativist sentiment growing, President Clinton enacted
Operation Gatekeeper in 1994, with the intent of once again enhancing the security along the US-Mexico border and improving his approval rating. The enhancement efforts included increasing the number of border agents by 1,000 per year until 2001, reinforcing the fence along the border, and increasing the use of other surveillance methods (Nevins,
2010; Nicholls, 2013). Clinton’s was a forceful way to try to limit the migration of
Latinos coming to the United States. The new legislation severely impacted the migration patterns of undocumented immigrants, but not in the way the United States had expected. Undocumented immigrants began to settle in the United States because of the legislation like Operation Gatekeeper. With NAFTA being a push factor for Mexican workers, the United States strengthened the border along San Diego and other traditional crossing areas. The enforcement along those crossing points made people have to cross the border through the desert, which created harsh crossing conditions and increased the
23 price that immigrants had to pay for a coyote to help them cross (Nicholls, 2013).
Families started to settle in the United States because of the economic instability in
Mexico and the growing social links being established by family and friends that had already settled (Clark-Ibáñez, 2015).
In California, legislation like Proposition 187, a statewide initiative aimed at denying social services like a free public education to undocumented students, was supported by Governor Pete Wilson and passed right after Operation Gatekeeper.
Proposition 187 was known as the Save Our State initiative and was aimed at excluding undocumented immigrants from any social services in the State, making it a criminal offense to knowingly help someone who was undocumented. The proposition, passed by
59% of the vote, was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by Federal Courts (Nicholls,
2013). Proposition 187 was meant to help create an environment in which undocumented immigrants would choose the option of self-deportation because they would not have access to any social benefits.
IIRIRA and PRWOCA (1996)
In 1996, two acts were passed that dealt with undocumented students and their access to postsecondary institutions. According to Garcia and Tierney (2011), the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) created a policy such that states were limited in how they could provide access to DREAMers. Section 505 of the IIRIRA states:
24
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien, who is not lawfully present
in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State
(or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a
citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an
amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is
such a resident. (Legal Information Institute, n.d., para. 1)
States, however, found a loophole in the wording of Section 505 and created state laws that allowed undocumented students to gain in-state tuition. As of 2015, 16 states granted in-state tuition to undocumented students (National Conference of State
Legislatures, 2015). Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, and South Carolina have taken legislative action to ban undocumented students from entering higher education (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2015). The word “unless” allowed states to create their own interpretation of the act, and from their perspectives, if they granted undocumented students in-state tuition, they could also provide it to citizens that qualified for in-state tuition (Blume, 2011; Frum, 2007). Some of the common qualifications to be eligible for in-state tuition are the following: undocumented students had graduated from an in-state high school, could show proof that they had been continuously residing in the state from two to three years, and signed affidavit promising to seek legal immigration status in all states (Carne, Harmon, Lizardy-Hajbi, &
Wilkerson, 2010).
25
States that have granted in-state tuition for undocumented students have been challenged in court because of their practice to create equal access to tuition rates. Two cases directly challenged states’ right to create policies that granted in-state tuition for undocumented students, citing that they violated Section 505 of IIRIRA. Day v. Sebelius and Martinez v. Regents of the University of California made the argument that providing in-state tuition to undocumented students clearly violated the IIRIRA because it discriminated against United States citizens (Frum, 2007). The courts in both cases ruled against the plaintiffs because the in-state policies were not exclusive to undocumented students; they provided the same in-state benefit to United States citizens who met the requirements. In the Martinez v. Regents of the University of California case, the
California Supreme court decided to rule against the plaintiffs because the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) does not prohibit undocumented students from in-state tuition eligibility (Frum, 2007). The PRWORA, like IIRIRA, makes undocumented students ineligible for public benefits that entail actual monetary assistance (Frum, 2007). Therefore, the decision to grant in-state tuition is still to be decided by the states since it does not violate IIRIRA or PRWORA (Olivérez,
2007).
The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act)
U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Orrin Hatch first introduced the DREAM Act to the Senate and then-Representative Luis Gutierrez in the House of Representatives in
2001 to help undocumented students who had been brought to the United States as
26 children obtain a pathway to citizenship (Nicholls, 2013). The requirements to be eligible for the DREAM Act in 2001 were:
1) had attained the age of 12 prior to enactment of the Act;
2) files an application before reaching the age of 21;
3) has earned a high school or equivalent diploma;
4) has been physically present in the United States for at least five years
immediately preceding the date of enactment of the Act (with certain exceptions);
5) is a person of good moral character; and
6) is not inadmissible or deportable under specified criminal or security grounds
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Congress.gov, 2002).
The DREAM Act has been introduced into the Senate and the House of
Representative numerous times and has failed to gather enough votes. In the last introduction on December 8, 2010, the DREAM Act was passed in the House of
Representatives but did not pass the Senate. The DREAM Act needed five more votes to be approved in the Senate, but was met by resistance on both sides of the political spectrum. Conservatives felt the DREAM Act was a soft stance on immigration policy and that it would bring more illegal immigration to the United States while some liberals felt the DREAM Act was too limited in the people it included for a pathway to citizenship. According to Nicholls (2013), the failure of the DREAM Act in the Senate in 2010 sparked the DREAMer Movement to put pressure on President Obama to use his
27 power to create an executive action that would provide deportation relief to undocumented students.
The DREAM Act provided a sense of identity to many undocumented students who were in search of the American Dream. Their “illegality” came in stark contrast to the values and beliefs with which they have been indoctrinated since attending public schools in the United States (Gonzales, Suárez-Orozco, Dedios-Sanguineti, 2013). The goals of the movement were to assert its members’ rights to legal, civil, and social citizenship (de la Torre III & Germano, 2014). The movement for legalization or a pathway for citizenship for undocumented immigrants suffered a major setback on
September 11, 2001, when terrorism struck in our homeland. The feelings that overcame citizens created a need to strengthen security, with the first priority being tightening the security of the border between Mexico and the United States. Prior to the terrorist attacks, there had been an announcement of new immigration policy that would allow undocumented immigrants already residing in the US to receive legalization, create a new temporary work program, and also work on improving border security (Mittelstadt,
Speaker, Meissner, & Chishti, 2011). The terrorist attacks shifted the conversation about immigration reform to a national focus on securing the borders (Olivas, 2012). The progress that had been made for large-scale immigration reform was quickly dissolved because of “The War on Terror” and the need to protect the United States from foreign threats. This created the dialogue amongst undocumented students across the nation who felt that the larger immigration reform would not have a chance at passing in Congress.
28
Undocumented students continued to use their identity of DREAMers to become activists in the fight for equal rights. The DREAMer movement started when professional rights associations identified students who were undocumented that could be viewed as “good immigrants.” Undocumented students who were law-abiding, academically successful, and held American values were the poster children for the creation of the DREAMer movement. The DREAMer campaign was created to foster a discourse in which immigrant rights groups could control how people talked about the
DREAMers. They used American values such as merit to draw parallels between citizens and undocumented students to humanize the campaign. This type of campaign lasted until 2010, when DREAMers in the movement felt they had no autonomy in how the campaigns were formed (Nicholls & Fiorito, 2014).
In 2010, the DREAMer movement had internal disagreements about how the campaign was being managed. With advocacy organizations leading the charge and shaping the discourse of the campaign, many DREAMers felt the need to be more inclusive and not create a “good” vs. “bad” immigrant (Nicholls & Fiorito, 2014).
DREAMers that decided to break away from the advocacy organizations did so to focus on passing the DREAM Act in Congress in 2010. The DREAMer movement served as a way for undocumented students to create support networks, a place where they could define their identity and feel a sense of belonging. The movement led to DREAMers across the nation participating in various acts of civil disobedience to create political pressure for the passage of the DREAM Act. With the split from the advocacy groups,
29
DREAMers became empowered to create organizations they were able to control and were aided by other groups like National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON),
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and the Downtown
Labor Center at UCLA (Nicholls, 2013; Nicholls & Fiorito, 2014). Through the support of these organizations, the DREAMer movement was able to develop structure among immigrant rights organizations with a common goal of pushing forward the DREAM Act to be passed. In 2011, after the last introduction of the DREAM Act, the DREAMer movement moved its focus to President Obama’s creation of a program that would protect undocumented students from deportation.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
As of 2014, California was home to an estimated 2 million undocumented immigrants (Padilla, 2014). According to Drachman (2006), California is home to the largest population of undocumented immigrants with 26%, followed by Texas at 12%.
With such a large population of undocumented immigrants, it is important to understand their educational experience within the state. California has been a leader in the advancement of equal access for undocumented immigrants. California followed Texas by instituting a state policy to allow undocumented students to qualify for in-state tuition.
While this was a great step in the right direction for access to higher education for undocumented students, it did not address the larger concerns undocumented immigrants were facing. Some of the concerns were the fear of deportation, lack of legal employment, and the separation of their family because of mixed-status households
30
(Perez, Espinoza, Ramos, Coronado, & Cortes, 2009). With Congress’ inability to pass the DREAM Act, activists saw the need to push President Obama to use his power to use deferred action to those who would have been eligible for the DREAM Act. According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (2014) data, within the first year of implementation of the DACA program, 165,400 applications were submitted from the state of California, which was 29% of the total applications received in that year.
California had the largest number of applications, which means the state has a high number of qualified undocumented immigrants that would be able to contribute to the state economy with the benefits that are conferred by DACA.
Background.
These are young people who study in our schools, they play in our
neighborhoods, they’re friends with our kids, they pledge allegiance to our flag.
They are Americans in their heart, in their minds, in every single way but one: on
paper. They were brought to this country by their parents –sometimes even as
infants—and often have no idea that they’re undocumented until they apply for a
job or a driver’s license, or a college scholarship. (The White House, 2012, para.
2)
President Obama was unable to unify Republicans and Democrats to enact a comprehensive immigration reform bill, as he had promised during his reelection campaign to make a priority in his second term in office. Undocumented immigrants were excluded from many traditional rites of passage such as applying for state and
31 federal financial aid, applying for a driver's license, and obtaining legal employment
(Gonzales, 2011; Gonzales et al., 2013; Gonzales et al., 2014; Weber-Shirk, 2015).
These legal exclusions proved to be a barrier for the assimilation of undocumented youth into society. DACA is an executive order implemented by President Obama in the wake of the absence of legislative action to pass the DREAM Act; the executive order gave eligible undocumented immigrants temporary relief of deportation and work authorization for a two-year period with the opportunity to renew (Arellano, 2014;
Nicholls, 2013). Since the DACA program was created by executive action, it can be terminated at any time.
President Obama modeled DACA after the Meissner memorandum, which emphasizes the ability of immigration officials to use prosecutorial discretion in enforcement activities (Arellano, 2014). Prosecutorial discretion is a standard that immigration agencies can use to decide to prosecute an individual or defer action (U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2017). The Meissner memorandum set guidelines for immigration officials on how to use deferred action. Like the Meissner memorandum, the DACA program used much of the same criteria for eligibility for the program. DACA recipients are granted lawful presence once they are approved. It is critical to recognize the difference between lawful presence and lawful status and the importance of the benefits they carry (Adams & Boyne, 2015; Arellano, 2014; Gonzales et al., 2014). DACA gives recipients lawful presence, which means that recipients have been granted temporary authorization by the department of Homeland Security to be in
32 the United States. This is not the same as lawful status, which is when someone is a naturalized citizen, lawful permanent resident, or someone who has refugee status and has the rights to enter and leave the country (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
2017). Lawful presence creates opportunities for DACA recipients to gain certain rights that before were not accessible, like work authorization permits, social security number, and the right to obtain a driver’s license.
Identity & social capital. Undocumented immigrants are incorporated into society in a safe environment within the K-12 educational system because of the Plyler v.
Doe decision that does not allow schools to discriminate students based on legal status. It is during students’ educational journey that they are exposed to and indoctrinated with
American values and ideals (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010). Student development is driven by what is seen as the social norm within their communities. As a society, we have been taught to value the idea of meritocracy as a driving force since the inception of the United
States. Students are taught that to be successful, they have to “earn their seat at the table” and that everyone has the same opportunity to be successful. In previous research, authors have conducted studies finding that undocumented students believe in the value of meritocracy (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010; Enriquez, 2011).
Students have used found ways to legitimize their identity by using identities like
“AB540” or “DACAmented,” which are seen as identities people have to earn and are thus valued more by society (Gonzales et al., 2014; Wong & Valdivia, 2014). When students begin their transition into adulthood, barriers are encountered, which many times
33 they have no power to control, such as getting a driver’s license, receiving state and federal financial aid, and being underprepared academically (Gonzales et al., 2014;
Martinez, 2014). Undocumented students are faced with three life phases: legal status is irrelevant, transitioning into higher education, and the movement as a vehicle for upward mobility (Einsema, 2013). In the first phase, undocumented students are protected by
Plyler v. Doe because they are guaranteed a free public education regardless of their immigration status. The second phase is the transition to higher education in which students become aware of their immigration status and their lack of being able to fully integrate into society (Martinez, 2014). They face the realities that come with being undocumented and have to choose whether or not to confront their barriers. This is where labels like “unDACAmented,” “DREAMer,” or “AB540” student play a big role in students’ ability to claim rights within higher education. Since these labels are socially accepted, it allows the students more freedom in forming clubs or organizations that demand rights for undocumented students within higher education (Nicholls, 2013). The third phase is using the movement to capitalize on social capital. Using the social capital they acquire, they are able to create a network of support for themselves and others like them (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010).
Social capital is a tool that undocumented students need in order to transition successfully to higher education. Undocumented students who are successful in school tend to have relationships with institutional agents who share their resources or social capital with them (Cervantes, Minero, & Brito, 2015). The relationships create a network
34 through which undocumented students are able to find information and resources that will help them get to college. Undocumented students also rely on other undocumented students for information on how to navigate around institutional barriers. This gathering of information and resources from various social ties to meet specific objectives is called patchworking (Menjívar, 2000). Patchworking is used to explain how undocumented students with limited resources in terms of economic and social capital are able to succeed in entering institutions of higher education. Patchworking also explains that in this transaction of social capital, students do not have to reciprocate it (Enriquez, 2011).
In other words, the institutional agents are giving away their social capital without expecting anything in return because they feel it is for the greater good of the community for these students to go to college.
Challenges. Undocumented students are in a position similar to many other minority groups; they have been systematically denied equal access to institutions of higher education. Policies that dictate educational equality and access for undocumented students vary from state to state and are starting to shift to a consensus of inclusivity rather than exclusion. Undocumented students share many characteristics with other groups that impede their transition to postsecondary education; some of the factors are that undocumented students tend to be low-income, first-generation, academically underprepared, and cannot access federal financial aid (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010; Clark-
Ibáñez, 2015; Frum, 2007; Gonzales et al., 2014).
35
A common theme found in the research was the stigma of being undocumented.
Being undocumented presented new problems, which became part of their daily lives.
Martinez (2014) uses the term “liminal legality” to define the experience of undocumented students who are neither fully undocumented nor documented and there is no time period associated with it. It is in realizing their new identity that undocumented students are able to understand or examine their social location in relation to their documented counterparts. Different students deal with the realization of being in such a space is differently. Undocumented students deal with the fear of deportation, anger, hopelessness, decreased levels of motivation, and stress (Abrego, 2006, 2008; Gonzales,
2010; Gonzales et al., 2014). Being in a state of liminal identity prevents a delay in their development. Generally, the end of high school signifies the entry into adulthood for most students. It is a time when students are able to become financially independent from their parents and go away to college to have their own experiences. For many undocumented students, this is not the case due to the barriers they encounter. According to Gonzales et al. (2013), the transition from adolescence to adulthood is a moment at which undocumented students find real barriers to attending a four-year university because of their “illegality.” Not being able to obtain federal financial aid limits their college choices because they have to plan around their financial realities.
In K-12 education, they were protected by Plyler v. Doe and their “illegality” was not something that was evident because of the Supreme Court ruling. Once they transitioned into adulthood, they were introduced to a new set of laws and regulations
36 that did not protect them and instead excluded them. The laws and regulations specifically target them as “others” and limit their right to claim their place within institutions of higher education. Their social location changed from inclusion in K-12 to exclusion, or very limited resources, in higher education in a short period of time.
Entering higher education then becomes a cumbersome process because of the lack of information, which can come from not having an institutional agent that is working with them or not having information on scholarships that are open to undocumented students.
Coming typically from low-income and first-generation backgrounds, undocumented students have fewer resources to find out how to navigate the application process (Olivérez, 2007). During the application process, there are times a student is asked for a social security number and there are tactics to get around it. If a student does not know the ways around, it could be a barrier to then applying to a four-year university even if they are eligible to apply. With the stigma of being undocumented, students are selective with who they share their status because of the fear of being discovered
(Gonzales et al., 2014). Thus, their social capital building is limited because if institutional agents do not know about their status, there is very little they can do to help a student. Another challenge is the financial cost of applying to colleges. When undocumented students are not connected with an institutional agent, there is a greater chance the student will not find out about the fee waivers available to them. The lack of available resources for undocumented students are barriers that keep them from enrolling in higher education. Although many of the cited studies focus on undocumented students
37 in four-year universities, it is more common for undocumented students to enter higher education at a community college because of the financial costs associated with it
(Conway, 2009). Community colleges are less expensive and do not have the same admissions requirements as four-year universities.
Characteristics of DACA recipients. As of 2015, 664,607 DACA applications had been approved (National Immigration Law Center, 2015). According to U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (2015), California is home to 194,132 of DACA recipients out of the total 664,607, making California the state with the largest population of DACA recipients. It was estimated that as of 2013, 61% of DACA eligible youth had applied within the first year of its implementation (Wong et al., 2013). Although DACA is not a pathway to citizenship as the DREAMer movement was campaigning for, it was a step in the right direction. The largest pool of applicants who applied to DACA were undocumented immigrants born in Mexico. As of 2015, 517,858 of DACA recipients marked their country of origin as Mexico (NILC, 2015). Of those that applied, nearly three quarters had lived in the United States for at least 10 years (Martinez, 2014). It is, however, not to say that the only beneficiaries of DACA are people of Latin@ origin; many people of other ethnicities are also benefitting from DACA but the focus is on
Latin@ because they compose over 76% of beneficiaries (U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, 2014).
Undocumented students who are recipients of DACA come from predominantly low socioeconomic backgrounds. As part of the 1.5 generation, these undocumented
38 students have few chances to gain social capital because of the barriers being undocumented brings. According to Martinez (2014), “immigrant youth are the most disadvantaged positions due to perceived racial discrimination, limited opportunities, and blocked mobility” (p. 1875). A family’s legal status can directly impact their ability to integrate into their community. Without legal status, parents are working in low-wage jobs that provide financial stability, and undocumented students even with a college degree are faced with the same limited mobility without a social security number (Abrego
& Gonzales, 2010). Their socioeconomic status plays a factor in the educational trajectory of undocumented students. Undocumented students live in low-income neighborhoods and attend low-performing schools, which do not prepare them for college-level courses (Olivérez, 2007). The inability to access federal financial aid creates the need for undocumented students to pursue employment in order to cover the cost of tuition. Working is therefore a necessity and can interfere with a student’s progress to graduation. In Student Engagement in Higher Education: Theoretical
Perspectives and Practical Approaches for Diverse Populations, by Quaye and Harper
(2015), Chapter 15 focuses on how to engage low-income students. Quaye and Harper compare the graduation rates of low and high income students within six years, and the results show that only 12% of low-income students graduate versus 73% of high-income students.
In the research study by Wong and Valdivia (2014), in which 1,302 DACA recipients were surveyed, 77% of respondents answered that their personal income was
39 below $25,000. DACA recipients have used their new rights to gain legal employment and are able to gain social/economic mobility by finding new jobs that have higher wages. In the same study by Wong and Valdivia (2014), 46% of the participants reported they were able to become more financially independent. Similar findings were found in studies conducted by Suarez-Orozco, Yoshikawa, Teranishi, and Suarez-Orozco (2015);
Gonzales et al. (2014); and Gonzales et al. (2016). Socioeconomic status has played a large part in creating a barrier for undocumented students in terms of persistence and graduate from college. Being an undocumented student coupled with being a low- income student is a tough challenge to overcome. With the implementation of DACA, undocumented students have been able to find new resources to pay for their college education. While federal aid is still not accessible to undocumented students, they have been granted state aid by the following states: California, Minnesota, New Mexico,
Texas, and Washington (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2015). Connecticut passed Bill No. 147 that granted state financial aid to undocumented students
(Connecticut General Assembly, 2016). These states have used their authority to provide access for undocumented students by reducing the financial barrier most undocumented students face while entering four-year universities.
DACA benefits. In a national survey conducted in 2013 and 2014, 1,302 undocumented immigrants who were recipients of DACA were surveyed about their experience with DACA. This was, at the time of its implementation, the largest national survey conducted. In various studies that surveyed undocumented students, the findings
40 of those studies showed that DACA recipients were able to find a new job or obtain their first job. Wong and Valdivia (2014) found that 70% of respondents had secured a new job or had obtained their first job, 64% felt safer within their current employment, and
84% had applied and received a valid driver’s license or state identification. Gonzales et al. (2016) found that 59% of his participants had gotten a new job and 45% had received an increase in their earnings. This meant that DACA recipients were able to leverage their DACA status to further incorporate themselves into their communities while also improving their socioeconomic status. The fear of deportation and of not having legal employment was a powerful factor in many undocumented immigrants’ decision to stay in low-paying or service-sector jobs where their mobility was limited by their legal status
(Abrego & Gonzales, 2010; Gandara & Contreras, 2009). With DACA, undocumented immigrants have also expressed a greater feeling of belonging in the United States
(Valdivia & Wong, 2014). DACA allows its recipients to receive a work authorization permit, which then allows them to obtain legal employment and a chance for them to step out of the shadows.
The National UnDACAmented Research Project conducted a survey in 2013 and was able to collect responses from 2,700 DACA eligible immigrants. The data collaborated that undocumented immigrants were able to find better economic opportunities after receiving DACA. It also found that DACA recipients who were in college reported increased motivation (Gonzales et al., 2016). This increase in motivation is related to the realization that after graduation they will be able to pursue a
41 career in their field of interest. Before the implementation of DACA, undocumented students were barred from receiving any state and federal aid. DACA has eased some of the barriers associated with the cost of paying for tuition. In the state of California,
AB130 and AB131 have created access for undocumented students to receive state financial aid. DACA students are able to use their work permit to gain internships, access trade schools, or specialize in vocations that help them gain valuable skills to be competitive in the labor market (Gonzales et al., 2016). DACA recipients come from low-income households (Abrego, 2006; Abrego & Gonzales, 2010) and with DACA they are able to change their economic circumstances through education.
State Policies
Senate Bill 1159 (California Legislative Information, 2014)
Senate Bill 1159 was introduced by Senator Ricardo Lara in 2014 as a bill that would allow undocumented workers to use their taxpayer identification number in lieu of a social security number on May 8, 2014 (NASBA). This bill has allowed undocumented workers to take advantage of their educational attainment. Being able to receive a license has enabled undocumented workers to step out of the shadows and have a legitimate source of employment.
Assembly Bill 60 (California Department of Motor Vehicles, 2017)
Assembly Bill 60 was introduced in 2013 to allow immigrants who are residents in California to receive a driver’s license. The bill was named The Safe and Responsible
42
Driver Act and went into effect on January 1, 2015. The bill ensures that undocumented immigrants, regardless of immigration status, are able to legally drive in California. It is estimated that with the passing of AB60 there would be potentially 1.4 million drivers who could benefit from it. Allowing undocumented immigrants the right to obtain a driver’s license also allows them to obtain car insurance, which makes the roads safer.
Educational Policies
Assembly Bill 540
Assembly Bill 540 (AB 540) was one of the first legislative acts passed in the state of California that granted undocumented students rights within higher education.
AB 540 recognized the need to allow undocumented students the ability to qualify for in- state tuition. The requirements to apply for AB540 are as follows:
A student must have attended and graduated from a California high school (or
obtained a GED), s/he must enroll in an accredited institution of higher education
in California, and must declare, through an affidavit, that s/he is in the process of
legalizing her immigration status or will seek to do so as soon as s/he becomes
eligible. (Abrego, 2008, p. 715)
The impact of AB540 has been studied in various ways; articles have ranged from discussing the mental health impacts, to the stigma of illegality, to the academic resilience found among undocumented students in higher education.
43
Abrego (2008) stated, “In their new social identity as AB 540 students, they
[undocumented students] shift legal consciousness from being against the law to being with the law--able to mobilize the law by using it as a resource in their favor” (p. 731).
AB540 created a space in which undocumented students could claim their rights on campus through their new identity. The ability to claim a socially acceptable label provided undocumented students with the confidence to become more involved in their fight to gain access in other spaces on campuses. This can be seen in the DREAMer movement in which undocumented students who were attending institutions of higher education started to claim their rights as students and citizens who believed in the value of meritocracy and the belief that higher education was a step for upward mobility
(Abrego, 2008; de la Torre & Germano, 2014; Weber-Shirk, 2015). Such students were educated in the public school system and developed their sense of self and understanding of their surroundings through the values of the United States. Their experience was validated through the passage of AB540 and some of the barriers were minimized but are still present. Financially, AB540 created greater access to four-year public universities but did not address the whole issue that prevents undocumented students from pursuing their educational journey at a four-year public university.
California Dream Act (AB130/AB131)
The California Dream Act (AB130 and AB131) (Laney College, n.d.) are bills passed in 2011 by the California legislature. These companion bills passed as a direct way to help undocumented students, who met the requirements of AB540, pursue higher
44 education the state of California. The new funding for AB540 students helps address one of the largest barriers undocumented students face, which is the financial aspect of attending a public four-year university. According to Conway (2009), immigrants enroll in higher education at a higher rate than their native-born peers and are 20% more likely to begin at a community college. Even when undocumented students are eligible to qualify for in-state tuition through AB540, tuition remains a burden for families to bear.
Since being undocumented is also characterized by being of low socioeconomic status, it should not be a large surprise that undocumented students are enrolling in community colleges at a higher rate than four-year universities. The return on investment with four- year public universities was an uncertainty before DACA was implemented, which persuaded more students to take the cheaper option. AB130 and AB131 can be accessed online through the Dream Application. AB130 was enacted to allow AB540 students access to scholarships at California public colleges and universities that came from non- state funds. AB 131 opened funding possibilities from state funds, like scholarships and grants.
45
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of undocumented students who had obtained Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and were pursuing higher education in the state of California. The study aimed to look at the lives of undocumented students after the implementation of DACA and the factors that were still affecting their retention and graduation rates. The study looked at the challenges they faced and also identified resources they used on campus to stay on track to graduate.
The study involved a quantitative analysis with survey questions administered through a web-based questionnaire and a one-on-one interview to answer the following research questions:
1. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect undocumented
college students’ motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees?
2. What resources are available for undocumented students to be academically
successful?
Setting of the Study
The researcher completed his study at Mariposa University. To protect the identity of the university, a fictitious name is used for this study. Mariposa University is
46 one of the four-year public universities within California. As of fall 2016, it served over
27,000 students and is located in Northern California. Mariposa University awards 6,500 degrees yearly to students. Latino students comprise close to 30% of the total student population at Mariposa University.
Research Design
This study employs a mixed method design approach that includes a questionnaire and a one-on-one interview. The questionnaire was used to gather demographic data on the participants and had only one section, which contained personal background questions (see Appendix A). The data collected were then used to understand the population of students that participated in the study.
Population and Sample
Research was conducted at Mariposa University in spring 2016. The population for this study was undocumented students who had received DACA. The target population cannot be quantified because of the nature of the population. The university keeps information on AB540 students confidential in order to protect the students. The participants in the study varied in gender and were of Latino origin. Two women and one man participated in the study. The participants all self-reported that they were undocumented and that they were recipients of DACA. This sample is a snapshot of the population that can be found at Mariposa University but is not generalizable to the whole population. To complete the study, the researcher used a snowball sampling method to
47 reach his participants. The researcher recruited students who attended Mariposa
University by sending an invitation to participate e-mail to organizations on campus and to individuals the researcher knew identified as undocumented students (see Appendix
B). He also posted flyers at the Dream Resource Center on campus (see Appendix B).
The researcher also used his networks with student-led groups and organizations to send an invitation to participate in the research. In the process of recruitment, the researcher was able to contact five students to inform them about the research being conducted and invite them to participate if they met the requirements. Once the participants were e- mailed, they were asked to send an e-mail reply with the best time to meet up to conduct the interview portion of the research. Before the interview took place, the researcher asked the participant to complete a questionnaire. Once the interview was concluded, the researcher asked the participant to share the researcher’s contact information with any other students that met the requirements for the research study.
Data Collection Procedures
To capture the narrative of the participants who were undocumented, it was important to capture their experiences in their own words. The interview technique was used to capture the data for this study. The researcher used a semi-structured interview process to engage the participants in an open conversation about DACA and the affect it has played on their experiences at a four-year public university. The questions in the semi-structured interview were designed to elicit understanding of the educational journey of the student, see how DACA has affected their educational journey and their
48 motivation to pursue a postgraduate degree, and to see what resources undocumented students were using on campus. This process let the students be the experts in telling their stories because the subject matter was their lived experience. The researcher conducted the one-on-one interviews with the participants in a meeting space that allowed for confidentiality and privacy.
Instrumentation. Since this study was a mixed method design, there were two forms of instruments used to gather data. The first was a questionnaire administered at the beginning of the interview process. Before starting the questionnaire, they were given a copy of the letter of consent to read before beginning (see Appendix C). In order to proceed, they had to read and respond verbally to acknowledge that they consented to participate in the research. The second instrument was a one-on-one interview with the participants (see Appendix D). In the first portion of data collection, the participants met in-person with the researcher to obtain the questionnaire. The participants were only asked to complete the questionnaire if they were going to be interviewed for the study.
In a narrative research study, the instrument for gathering data is the one-on-one interview with the participant. The one-on-one interview serves as a way to gather information on the experience of an undocumented student within a four-year university and how they interpret their experiences based on their background and lived experience.
To make sure the data were correct, the researcher allowed his participants to read the interpretation of their stories before publishing his work.
49
The participants participated in the interview that lasted between 30 and 60 minutes. To ensure participants remained anonymous within the study, pseudonyms are used to protect the participants’ identities. Research participants had the right to skip any demographic questions if they did not feel comfortable answering. The de-identified data were stored on a password and encrypted protected laptop. The data will be destroyed three years after the completion of the study.
Data Analysis Procedures
Data were collected through a questionnaire and on a portable audio recorder.
Participants’ responses to the questionnaire were summarized in themes and analyzed for patterns. The data from the interviews were collected via portable audio recorder. The audio files were transferred to a password and encrypted protected laptop immediately after the interview and deleted from the portable audio recorder. Participants were given pseudonyms to protect their identity.
Limitations of the Study
The study was limited to undocumented students who received DACA and were attending Mariposa University. Since the population being researched is still hard to access because of their legal status, the study is not generalizable to other universities in the surrounding area. Since the exact number of undocumented students at Mariposa
University is unknown, the researcher cannot guarantee that the sample population can be generalizable to the entire undocumented student population at Mariposa University.
50
Summary
The study included undocumented students who had received DACA and were attending Mariposa University. Mariposa is a four-year university located in Northern
California. The study was a mixed method design, including a questionnaire administered in person and a one-on-one interview with the participants who were self- identified as undocumented students who had received DACA. In the recruitment process, an email was sent with an invitation to participate, and those who chose to participate were then sent further instructions on setting up a meeting time. Before starting the questionnaire, they were given a copy of the letter of consent to read before beginning. In order to proceed, they had to read and respond verbally to acknowledge that they consented to participate in the research. In the interview portion, the participants were read the letter of consent and asked to give oral consent, as to keep their identity protected. The next chapter presents the findings from the online questionnaire and the one-on-one interviews.
51
Chapter 4
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of undocumented students who are recipients of DACA and their educational journey in a four-year public university. The researcher used semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire to gather data. The questionnaire was used to gather demographic information on the participants of the study. The specific research questions used to guide this study were:
1. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect undocumented
college students’ motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees?
2. What resources are available for undocumented students to be academically
successful?
This chapter discusses the data gathered from the interviews and the questionnaire and ends with the summary of the findings. A thorough examination of the interviews and questionnaire provided the researcher with data that could be coded and analyzed for finding common themes relevant to experiences of undocumented students in a four-year university. The participants in the study represent a small population at the university; therefore, their experiences do not represent the experience of all undocumented students.
52
Results
Results from the interviews were coded into common themes about participants’ experiences as undocumented students who received DACA and enrolled at a four-year public institution. The findings present their personal experiences within the educational system and how they were able to manage their academic journey in higher education.
The findings primarily focus on the experience of Latino students who are undocumented and have received DACA at Mariposa University; they are not generalizable to the undocumented student population at a four-year university. This chapter discusses the themes that emerged during the analysis of the data.
Presentation of Data: Demographics
To gain insight into the impact of DACA on undocumented students, the researcher conducted interviews with students who were undocumented and had been granted DACA. Three students who met the criteria participated in the study. Of the three participants, two were female and one was male. To protect the participants’ identity, the researcher referred to them as Tali, Lalo, and Graciela: pseudonyms they chose for themselves. Tali was a second-year graduate student in the College of
Education. She was attending Mariposa University where she received her bachelor’s degree. Tali came to the university after completing four AA at a community college.
Graciela was a fifth-year graduating senior in the College of Social Science and
Interdisplinary Studies. She came directly to Mariposa University as a first-year student.
Lalo was a first-year student at Mariposa University and was trying to enter the College
53 of Business Administration. Lalo also came to the University directly as a first-year student.
Interview Questions
Can you describe your educational experiences since you can to the United
States?
Tali. Tali arrived to the United States when she was only 10 years old. She came by herself, as her father sent her to the United States to live with her older sister. The reason for migration was for a better education. Her father wanted her to be able to have the chance to further her education past the sixth grade because in Mexico, he would have been unable to provide further schooling for her. When she arrived in the United States, she was unable to speak the language and recollected how hard that was for her. She stated, “I failed everything except for math, and so they had me in a special education class for a while.” She remembered the standardized test she took at her new school and how it affected her academics. She was in the special education classes for two to three years before a teacher advocated for her to be retested in Spanish. Tali’s identity as a student was challenged; she felt she was not intelligent because of the classes she was in.
Tali stated:
So that was kind of rough. So for me it was rough because I was always a good
student in Mexico, like I really got good grades, I was a good student so to be
there, and to be told that you were not smart, that you were not this, you were not
that, it really was hurtful for a while to be in special education classes.
54
In high school, she was registered for regular academic classes, and she found them interesting. She saw high school as a challenge and ended up moving to a high school that was more diverse, where academically she performed even better. She ended up graduating from high school with a 3.87 GPA.
Lalo. Lalo came to the United States when he was a year and a half old. He stated that his educational experiences revolved around his language barrier. It was not until he was in the fifth grade that he became fluent in English. He remembered being teased because he was not able to speak English and being pulled out of classes to go to an ESL class. He overcame the language challenge once he got to middle school; there, he took honors English. He saw that challenge as an opportunity to learn and better himself. After middle school, he decided he was going to take more challenging classes so he took AP English, Math, and Science classes. He felt very supported in his school and felt his teachers wanted him to learn the material and not just memorize it, which engaged him more as a student. In high school, his teachers were also a system of support and pushed him to pursue higher education.
Graciela. Graciela came to the United States at a young age. She started her educational journey in Kindergarten and because of her language barrier and family situation, she ended up repeating Kindergarten three times. She remembered that after that struggle she had a good experience in elementary even with the language barrier.
Graciela recalled that some teachers were better than others, but that she always felt she was learning more at home from her father.
55
She stated that, in third through fifth grades, she moved to a new school that was much more inclusive, and she was able to comprehend the language better by that time.
Since the school was new, her family was able to be involved in decisions that impacted the school, which made her feel more connected to her education. Her family moved to
California and she started middle school in Fresno, where she was made to take the placement exams multiple times because the school did not think the scores were correct.
Even after taking the test more than once, she was placed in lower-level classes. During this experience, she found herself advocating for herself within an academic setting. She stated that she was angry because she felt like she was wasting time and not learning any new information. Her family once again moved, this time to Hollister, where she was placed in the correct classes.
In high school, she took honors and AP classes and found herself to be one of the few Latinas in there. She remembered that her identity was constantly called into question because of the friend group she had. Graciela made friends with people from her classes and they happened to be Caucasian, so others would question her about those choices. Towards the end of high school, she felt better equipped to respond to those types of comments and felt secure enough about herself. High school was also where she found many support systems. It is where she came to realize that she was going to go to college even if she was undocumented. She found people who believed in her and pushed her towards higher education. She credits those institutional agents for being a driving force behind her motivation to pursue higher education.
56
When did you realize that you were undocumented?
Tali. Tali realized she was undocumented at the age of 15. She was having problems at home and had disclosed it to people she trusted at school. The information she provided them led to her being put in foster care. During the transition to foster care, her sister informed her that she was undocumented. As Tali stated, “It hit me at 15 being like I’m going to be in foster care. I had no papers. It was a very very difficult time in my life. But I was fortunate to have that vision teacher.” Tali was adopted by another teacher and started to realize the implications of what her new identity meant for her.
I mean, I am not going to say that I was surprised but I kind of was to realize the
implications of being undocumented . . . Like to me, it was like, okay you are
undocumented. You are not a U.S. citizen, or like you are not an American
citizen, but I didn’t realize it was like, oh you can’t go to college, you can’t work,
you can’t do those other things.
She recalled feeling different, but she knew that a high school diploma would be able to help her live a better life. She continued with her schoolwork and started to ask more questions because of her situation.
Lalo. Lalo recalled always feeling different. He came to the realization when he was in the seventh grade. He described seeing arguments between his dad and his brother about college. Lalo’s dad wanted his older brother to go to college in Mexico, and his brother was against that idea. He started to ask questions about why his brother could not
57 just apply for financial aid. His parents told him they were undocumented and could not receive any federal aid.
Graciela. Graciela remembered it was her junior year in high school when she found out about being undocumented because the college talks with her parents became more serious. She was getting information about AP tests and talking about the college application process in her classes, which she took back to her parents to discuss the future. She recalled her parents telling her that if she could find ways around being undocumented to go to college, they would reconsider their support of the idea. Being undocumented made her realize she had to find other ways to get to college. Since she was not able to get a “regular” job like her classmates, she became a tutor and worked for cash in order to help her family save for her college education. She stated:
So I felt useless you know and I though okay well, if I go to college what is it
going to help, what I am going to do after that. So I know that I was counting the
negatives for a while.
After reflecting on her situation, she was able to continue on her path to higher education.
How did your high school experience impact your path to a four-year institution?
Tali. Tali realized that a high school education was not going to be enough to help her gain social mobility. She understood that she needed to further her education.
She stated, “My dad wanted me to come out with a high school diploma so I can have a better life, but maybe better is not best.” Her motivation to pursue higher education also
58 came out of the need to prove people wrong. In high school, she had a counselor that did not help her because she was undocumented and discouraged her from pursuing higher education. Her sister also discouraged her from her dreams and would tell her that she was not going to do anything with her life. The negative messages she received pushed her to succeed and to prove people wrong. She, however, had institutional agents who gave her resources to make sure she pursued higher education. They connected her with a counselor at a community college so she could learn about the admission requirements, which led her to understand that she was not going to be able to attend a four-year university directly. The reason was because at the time she graduated from high school, there was no financial aid available to undocumented students. The California Dream
Act was passed after she graduated from high school, so the cost of a four-year university was not feasible for her. She decided she wanted to continue her educational journey and enrolled at a community college through the support of her institutional agents.
Lalo. Lalo recalled not thinking about college. His parents would encourage him because his older brother had been able to go to college. He felt his brother was lucky because he had received a full scholarship. Lalo did not think he was going to be able to receive a full scholarship. He questioned his academic abilities and his status limited his thinking of future possibilities.
Graciela. Graciela stated that she always saw higher education as her goal even when she found out she was undocumented. She had the support of her counselor and had teachers who supported her to apply to a four-year university. Her environment
59 fostered a college-going identity. Her teachers had post-graduate degrees and encouraged her to do the same. She saw this as an advantage she had compared to some of her peers: the knowledge she was gaining from her AP teachers about the process of getting to a four-year college. In high school, she was also involved in college prep programs such as
AVID, CAL-SOAP, and LULAC. She credited those programs with being a positive reinforcement for her and her goals of pursuing higher education. Programs became a place where she was able to feel safe and supported.
How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals factor into your identity?
Tali. Tali’s identity was greatly shaped by receiving DACA. In her educational journey, she was able to graduate from a community college and from a four-year university. She recalled the struggles she faced when first pursuing higher education and the fear of deportation that plagued her in her everyday life. When she recalled her first semester at the community college, she stated:
I was always terrified of getting deported, people finding out everything so it
made it hard just like, how am I going to pay for college. Now that I look back I
realize that my fears were not realistic, but for me it was so scary.
Her fear manifested in her not utilizing on-campus resources. Her undocumented status held her back from applying directly to a four-year university because it was not a financial possibility. She did not work because she did not want to break the law and risk being deported. The best choice for her was to go to a community college that was near her because of her disability that does not allow her to drive. By that point, she had
60 married a U.S. citizen, but she was still not able to legalize her status, as the process for that takes many years. During her undergraduate career, her family sacrificed to fund her education. Her husband and his family contributed to her education and supported her decision to go to a four-year university. She was able to pay her way through, and her family took on debt to make that happen. She felt lucky that she was in the position to even be attending a four-year university. She graduated as an undocumented student, which was before President Obama announced his executive action.
After her graduation, she was not able to use her degrees because she lacked a social security number. Her husband worked to provide for the family and they decided to start a family. Tali vividly recalled when she learned about DACA, she was very skeptic of the news. She waited to hear other people’s experiences with it because she did not feel comfortable giving that much information to the government. Once she started to hear that DACA was being granted, she decided to apply. The application fee was a challenge because she was already in debt from paying for college. On New
Year’s Day, she finally received her approval letter from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services.
For her and many people like her, this was the start of a new identity, of being officially recognized as a person by the state, and of being safe for two years from deportation. DACA was able to change the way she saw herself in her community. She was now able to do things with more confidence. She reflected on what DACA meant for her and her family and saw the privilege of having a California ID as a way to identify
61 herself in public places like her daughter’s pre-school. DACA created new opportunities for Tali to be involved in her community. She realized she would be able to go back to school for a Master’s degree and that she would be able to work during that time period because of DACA, which made it easier for her to make the decision.
Lalo. Lalo was able to see at a young age that his identity was not going to determine his success. He knew about DACA because of his older brother so he knew there were more opportunities for students like him. He also credited his AVID teacher for making him realize there were other undocumented students at four-year universities who were not on full-ride scholarships like his brother. Lalo was aware that he was different from other students, which mainly stemmed from a financial viewpoint. He recalled seeing other families have government help like EBT cards and food stamps, which made him wonder why his family was not able to take advantage of those resources. He felt he was lesser than others around him because of their socioeconomic status, which made him have a “I need to work hard” mentality in high school. His view on DACA is that it is an opportunity that he should take advantage of because it allowed him to receive financial aid and allowed him to work.
Graciela. Graciela stated, “Throughout the five years that I have been here I haven’t really been out as you can call it.” She was speaking about publicly acknowledging her DACA status. She realized she was not open about the subject, but she did not deny her undocumented status. For her, the status is something that is a part of her identity but not the only part. She has participated in events on campus about
62 topics like Advanced Parole, where she talked about her experience studying abroad for a semester. Her way of thinking about her identity and DACA is that she wants to help others, whether that is fellow DACA students or others. She sees her DACA status as different, such that she can use it to help inform others about the subject.
What motivated you to go to college?
Tali. Tali had originally come to the United States to get a high school education.
Her father wanted her to have a better future and felt that with a high school education from the United States, she would be able to be successful. She came from a background of poor financial resources in Mexico and wanted to be able to get out of poverty. She stated:
I realized that a high school diploma is not going to get me that much better off in
a way I realized what my dad has been telling me that I need to go to college, like
a college degree.
She saw a college degree as a step towards social mobility.
Lalo. Lalo was motivated by his teachers at his high school. He saw his teachers believed in his ability to become a college student and they worked with him to make sure he was eligible. He specifically mentioned his AVID, AP Language, and AP
Literature teachers who were his biggest motivators to pursue higher education.
Graciela. Graciela pointed out her source of motivation was her parents, particularly her father. She recalled that her father always wanted to go to college but was unable to make that dream come true. Her mother also had wanted to go to college.
63
She saw her parents’ dreams as an opportunity she could have. Her father introduced her to new ideas, authors, and topics and sparked a passion in her to learn. She saw college as an opportunity to be around like-minded students who wanted to learn new ideas. She felt she did not have that experience in high school and wanted to be in that type of environment; it is why she chose a four-year university over a community college. She also had her teachers and counselors who encouraged her to go to a four-year university because they felt she did not belong at a community college.
Were there things that made the decision to go to college hard?
Tali. Tali graduated from high school in 2005 prior to the passage of The
California Dream Act. She was informed of AB540 about a year before she graduated and knew she would be able to pay in-state tuition; however, she was still terrified. She described her fears: “Every time I had to go put myself in front of people, I was scared they were going to ask me for social, or my green card… I was always terrified of getting deported.” Financially, she still struggled to attend a community college. Her foster family let her continue to live with them after she had turned 18, but was not in a position to help her finance her education. She was eligible to go directly to a four-year university, but the cost was prohibitive for her. She decided that going to a community college was enough for her at that moment, and she ended up obtaining four AAs at the community college.
Lalo. Lalo felt his path to college was easy. He had a good understanding of the financial aid available to undocumented students. He had access to an institutional grant
64 that helped with the cost of tuition. Since Lalo decided to go to a nearby university, he was able to afford to go straight to a four-year university.
Graciela. Graciela recalled that the cost for college made the process for her hard. Her father, who had pushed her to go to college, was also who tried to talk her out of it. Graciela remembered the conversations around college started to get more serious, which included discussing how much it would cost. She considered the cost of college to be a factor in her father’s attempt to dissuade her from going. He offered her an alternative path, which was to go to college in Mexico. Graciela fought against that idea and enlisted help from her CAL-SOAP counselor. She asked her counselor to talk with her parents to give them more information about how they could afford a four-year university.
What factors played a decision to attend a four-year public institution?
Tali. Tali started to think about a four-year university towards the end of her time at the community college. She was excelling academically and was the President of the
Honor Society at her campus. A UC sent her an outreach letter acknowledging her academic excellence and encouraging her to apply to their campus. She investigated the price of attendance, and when she saw the price, she knew she was not going to be able to attend. She spoke with one of her counselors and let them know about the letter; the counselor then suggested she look at other colleges that were in the area near her. She then found out about the CSU near her and saw that the cost of attendance was something she could afford since she would only have to be there for two years. Since the university
65 was nearby, she could use the bus for transportation because her visual impairment did not allow her to drive. Her husband’s family also factored into her decision to go for her bachelor’s degree because they had saved money for their son who did not go to a four- year university. Her husband also took loans to pay for her education. It was a sacrifice that they were willing to make for a chance at a better future.
Lalo. Lalo knew he did not want to attend a community college. He had seen his brother’s friends go to the community college and get stuck or not transfer to a four-year university. He also knew that, financially, going to a four-year university away from his hometown would be difficult. He chose to stay local because he wanted to be a part of his community and be able to give back.
Graciela. One of the biggest factors for Graciela to attend a four-year university was the scholarships she received. When she had talked to her parents about attending a four-year university, they were not on board with the plan because they knew they were not going to be able to afford it financially. They let her know that if she could find a way around the financial burden, they would reconsider their stance on her going away to a four-year university. Graciela had Lupita, her CAL-SOAP counselor in charge of the scholarship award night for her high school, intervene for her with her parents. Lupita was able to let her parents know that Graciela had received $10,000 in scholarships. Her parents and Graciela felt they had enough money to get her through at least two years of college. Graciela had to consider the cost of attendance of each four-year university to
66 which she was accepted. She chose a school that had a lower cost of attendance and that could also meet her needs as a student, but the bigger factor was the cost of attendance.
What people, organizations, or things about you help you in school?
Tali. Tali loved to learn and school gave her a sense of purpose. She had migrated to the United States in order to get an education that she would not have been able to obtain in Mexico. Tali described herself in a powerful quote, “I’m not just a
Dreamer, I’m a Dreamer, No, I am a fighter. I am like a guerrera, I am a warrior, warrior- woman.” Her will to obtain her master’s degree was stronger than the barriers she faced as a graduate student. She worked a graveyard shift as a residential counselor. Her husband worked during the day, and in the evenings, would take care of the children while Tali went to work. She sacrificed her health in the first year of her master’s degree because she was sleeping an average of four hours per day. As a mother of two, she knew her education was a priority for her because she wanted to be able to provide a better future for her children and her husband. Tali saw her education as a tool to prove she was worthy to be a United States citizen.
Lalo. Lalo stated that a big help he received in school was the fact that his older brother joined a fraternity. Lalo was exposed to a support system of college-going
Latinos who served as role models. He stated, “I’ve been around them for years and I saw how they were supporting each other, no matter their background or the status of their legal status. They try to help build each other up the best they can.” Lalo also stated that he had been supported by the fraternity even though he was not a member. He
67 was a beneficiary of the support system the fraternity provided because his brother included him in the network.
Graciela. Graciela saw her social abilities as helpful in school. She recognized that when she was in high school, she was more introverted and did not ask as many questions. By the time she started at the four-year university, she was more comfortable creating conversations with peers and faculty and saw it as a way to create a supportive network. She is still involved with LULAC and is now a mentor within the organization.
She finds motivation in working with students because they share their dreams and aspirations with her, which helps her push herself more. She also credits her father as being someone who consistently challenges her to learn for the sake of learning and not for the grade.
How has college impacted your life?
Tali. Tali went to college because of the value she saw in obtaining an education.
She has seen direct benefits of her college education in being able to work as a student employee at her four-year university. She was able to see a future in which she could use her degrees to obtain a job in her field of study. She knows that after graduating from college, no one can take away her degrees. Being a college graduate is also a way for her to prove that she deserves to be a United States citizen. She has now lived longer in the
United States than in Mexico and considers her college education a way of proving her worth to be here.
68
Lalo. Lalo recalled that during his first day at his four-year university, he was shocked at the lack of diversity on campus. Coming from a diverse town, he expected to see that reflected in the university he was attending. He found the experience hard to relate to because of the lack of diversity. He understood he would have to adapt to his surroundings and be open-minded. His life was being shaped by his experiences in college and he wanted to be able to grow within those experiences. Being a first-year student, he realized there was much to learn. He was invested in challenging his comfort zone and being open to new ideas.
Graciela. Graciela reflected on her experience as a college-going student and realized she learned more about how people deal with things from having supportive/unsupportive parents, working full-time while going to college, or just understanding conflicts between friends. It was an experience that challenged her perspectives on certain subjects. Being able to join different organizations, she was able to have different experiences within those organizations.
Do you feel welcome on this campus?
Tali. Tali recalled her experience as an undocumented student at her four-year university as being a positive one. Although she did encounter some macroaggressions during her time at the university, she did not hold that as a reflection of the campus. As a graduate student, she had a professor who expressed his support for undocumented students and students with disabilities, which made her feel safe and comfortable.
69
Lalo. Lalo described his campus as being very open-minded. Even though he experienced culture shock when he arrived, he found campus to be a safe place for himself.
Graciela. Graciela felt there was more support for undocumented students on campus with the opening of the resource center for undocumented students on campus.
She still kept her status to herself for the most part but felt the campus was welcoming of undocumented students.
Do you participate in any school programs?
Tali. Tali was heavily involved with the Honor Society when she was at the community college level, but as an undergraduate and graduate student, she had more time restrictions that did not allow her to be involved with programs. The only program she tried to utilize on her campus was the student disabilities office, but perceived she was not eligible since she was undocumented and they required students to provide their social security number. She later found out that she could use their services just as long as they were not federally funded. So she was able gain access to more services that helped her. She did not become aware of them until late in her educational journey and used the opportunity to advocate for better advertisement of services for other undocumented students.
Lalo. Lalo participated in different organizations. He was a member of a salsa dancing club on campus, worked at the campus bookstore, and was in the process of joining a fraternity. He saw the opportunities available on campus and decided he
70 wanted to be a part of the campus through those different programs/organizations. It was also a way for him to interact with other students who shared common interests. He saw his participation as a way of networking with other students.
Graciela. The program about which Graciela spoke was the study abroad program at her school. Since she was a DACA student, she had the opportunity to apply for advanced parole for an educational trip, which she was able to do with the help of the coordinator of the study abroad program. She also found out about more resources because she was working on campus. She mentioned the resource center for undocumented students as a program about which she knew and that she had visited, mentioning that she had not shared that she was undocumented with them.
What role do your professors, mentors, peers and other school people play in your education journey?
Tali. Tali described her journey as an experience of self-discovery. She found herself looking for information on her own because she was not sure who could help her find the answers. Since she had navigated her community college and undergraduate experiences on her own, she felt she could do the same for her master’s program. She did realize that many people along the way helped her. In community college, she was in an equity program that helped her with the expenses of books, and as an undergraduate student, she had professors who encouraged her to pursue a master’s degree. As a graduate student, she had professors who were supportive of her throughout the process.
71
Lalo. Lalo focused on how his peers are an important factor in his educational journey. He saw the fraternities and sororities on campus being more focused on academic excellence so he decided he wanted to spend more time around people who were involved in the clubs. He saw it as a way of being around people who had the same goals as he did, which were to graduate and also enjoy the experience at the same time.
Graciela. Graciela focused on how her professors have been an influence in her journey. With her openness to create relationships with the professors and mentors, she has received insight that has made her question her path. She saw it as an opportunity to reflect and communicate about her goals. It has been a good experience for her having those types of relationships with the professors and mentors.
Do you feel that there are resources on campus to help you graduate?
Tali. Tali’s experience showed her that she could graduate by using very few resources on campus. She admitted it was hard to do and others should not be afraid to take advantage of the resources available to them. She only used the academic advisor when she was ready to apply to graduate school and had not used their services before that. She felt she had to figure out the requirements and that was what undocumented students had to do.
Lalo. Lalo was very acquainted with resources on campus. He felt the 24-hour building was a helpful resource because it made it easier for him to stay on campus and study. He also visited the Multi-Cultural Center on campus because he was able to get more information about other resources. He saw the Multi-Cultural Center as a safe
72 space and also a place where he could network with other students. He was also aware of the online tutoring his university offered. He felt that with the resources he was using, he would be able to graduate.
Graciela. Graciela saw the resources on campus as hidden. She mentioned specific equity programs on her campus that she found out about only after becoming an orientation leader. In her opinion, the equity programs were too hidden. The university needed to do a better job of advertising the services for programs that were there to help students graduate. She mentioned she was aware of many resources because of her social networks, but feared that students who were working full-time did not have the same opportunity to take advantage of them.
How does your identity affect you at school or other places?
Tali. After receiving DACA, Tali was more confident to become a professional.
Before, she did not work because of her legal status and with DACA, she was able to enter the workforce. She still saw the limits she faced in entering the workforce, since she had a very limited employment background and was close to being 30 years old. Her education has given her the confidence to start her career in a field about which she is passionate. She is also able to do more things without the fear of deportation, like go out on a ladies’ night and present a California identification card to buy a drink. Prior, she had to use other means of identification that were not always accepted. In her family life, she felt more secure daily. Her husband was able to apply for a job in the criminal justice field without having fear of her status being discovered. DACA has allowed her to feel
73 included in her community, yet she recognizes that her status can still change because
DACA is an executive action that can be revoked.
Lalo. Lalo saw his identity as a DACA recipient in a positive light. It has encouraged him to strive for a college education and he knows the benefits of being
DACAmented are directly related to his ability to attend a four-year university. In talking about the financial aspect of university, he mentioned the state financial aid was one of the main reasons he went directly to a four-year university. He stated that his identity is shaped by having DACA, but he does not take on that identity. Many people still do not know about his status because of his family. He stated that his family has had a role in him not being fully open about being a DACA recipient. He had family that threatened to have him and his family deported, so he felt that if his own family could do such a thing, he had to be very careful about to whom he disclosed his status. This was to protect himself and his family from deportation.
Graciela. Graciela’s response was about her future since she was about to graduate from her university. She saw DACA as a limitation for her career since there is a renewal process with DACA and, as an executive action, it is not guaranteed to continue after President Obama left office. Thus, she was nervous of what to expect in the years to come. As a student, she went through the renewal process and it took longer than expected; she had to notify her employer that she had not received her new work permit so she could not work. It was through this experience that she realized her status
74 could change at any moment. DACA has also limited her willingness to apply to certain jobs because of the limited time period that DACA guarantees her a relief of deportation.
What does success mean to you in general? Academic success?
Tali. Tali saw success as being able to provide for her family. Her journey taught her that she was very lucky to have been able to pursue higher education because of all the sacrifices she and her family had to make. Being able to graduate with her master’s degree and her husband being able to enter his dream career were part of her definition of success. Academically, success meant graduating from her master’s program and being able to find a job in education.
Lalo. Lalo saw success as being able to provide for his family, doing something that he loved, and providing a positive change in his community. Academically, he saw success as being on track to graduate and staying off academic probation. He also stated that to be successful you have to be able to learn the material you are studying and not just memorize it. Success means actually learning the subject and being able to utilize that information in your career.
Graciela. Graciela described success as being able to find happiness in her life and being with her family. Happiness would be having a career where she felt comfortable with her employer and fellow employees. She saw success also as moving away from being DACAmented and having a legal status that would allow her to feel safer. Success academically for her is to graduate from her university and pursue a
75 master’s and then a PhD. She wanted to be a professor and help other students find their passion.
What are you thinking about doing after graduation in terms of employment, further academic study, etc?
Tali. Tali was in the process of finishing her master’s degree and did not mention any plans of returning to school. As for her career, she planned on continuing her career in higher education.
Lalo. Lalo planned to attend a master’s program in finance at San Diego State
University. He wanted to become a CPA, a certified accountant. His mindset was that he had an opportunity to get a master’s degree and since he was DACA, he wanted to take advantage of that opportunity.
Graciela. Graciela planned on pursuing a PhD. She had already applied to two
PhD programs at the time of the interview. She had been rejected from both but planned on taking a break from school. Her plan was to go back to pursue a master’s degree and then apply for a PhD program. She planned to find a job within education first, as she wanted to work in a school district or at a university.
How does DACA affect your motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees?
Tali. DACA was the push that Tali needed to go back to pursue her master’s degree. After she graduated with her bachelor’s, she knew she could not burden her family with more financial debt by pursuing a master’s degree. When she found out
76 about DACA, she immediately applied for the master’s program because she knew she would be able to have a job that would help her finance her education.
Lalo. Lalo found motivation to go directly to a four-year university because of
DACA. He acknowledged the privilege he was granted through DACA and wanted to ensure that he took advantage of his position. He also stated, “I wanted to go above and beyond, to show that I wasn’t a waste of time, I wasn’t settling for less.” It was such a mindset that had him already planning what master’s degree he wanted to achieve.
Graciela. Graciela saw it as an opportunity to continue to learn. She wanted to break the barrier and do her own research of looking at how other undocumented students were navigating their educational journeys.
How does DACA affect your lifetime career goals?
Tali. Tali saw the beginning of her professional career when she received DACA.
She was able to find her stepping stone in her career because of DACA. She wanted to continue to work in higher education.
Lalo. Lalo saw DACA as one of the main reasons he was able to go directly to a four-year university. He credited his motivation to having been granted DACA. Without
DACA, he thought he would have entered a community college and he knew too many people who never transferred out, so he was glad he was able to go directly to the four- year university where he had more support.
Graciela. DACA opened up new doors for Graciela. Without DACA, she would not have been able to pursue her career goals. So she saw DACA as a privilege she had.
77
She knew other undocumented students who did not have the same privileges and she wanted to be use her status to obtain her career goals.
Interpretation of the Findings
The participants in this study shared common experiences regarding the barriers they had to overcome in order to pursue higher education. They shared how their families where both a source of motivation for and also of challenges to pursuing higher education. A common theme found was that they all had institutional agents who helped them find their path to a four-year university. Their experiences differed because of the political climate that has shifted to be more welcoming of undocumented students in higher education. Tali had no financial assistance through the California Dream Act because she graduated before it came into effect.
The results gave each participant an opportunity to share how their identity was shaped by becoming DACAmented. Their decisions and motivations were impacted by their status. They were able to use their new status as a way to claim their right to higher education. Each participant had different ways of claiming their identity at their campus.
The study found that students felt that resources for undocumented students were not easily accessible but they had found resources through on-campus participation. The greatest challenge for all the students was being able to afford their education. They also advocated for a Federal Dream Act that would allow them a pathway to citizenship.
Most notably, they saw their educational journeys as a way to prove their worthiness of
78 becoming citizens of the United States. All the participants had spent more than three fourths of their lives in the United States and felt they were deserving of a pathway to citizenship.
Each student’s pathway to a four-year university was different because of the political environment they were in. In various forms, institutional agents had a profound impact on the students in this study. The institutional agents provided social capital to the participants and gave them access to the information they needed to attend higher education. In addition to institutional agents, their families also played a large role in their journeys. In sharing their educational journey through the interview, the participants all explained how their family impacted their decision to pursue higher education, from having a supportive atmosphere to having to face challenges about their decision to attend a university. Family plays a large part in the identity of students, and there is a focus on the family being a unit rather than on individual needs (Cortez, 2012).
The cost of higher education is therefore not just a cost the student will have to take on, especially since undocumented students are only able to access state aid, but it becomes a family expense. So the needs of the family are taken into account. In Graciela’s case, her parents took on extra jobs to help her be successful in college, and she recognized that her younger sister was not receiving the same attention she did because of the new jobs her parents acquired to help her financially. All the participants were also first- generation students and had to bridge the information gap for their parents in order to make it to college. This required them to engage with other people to gain social capital.
79
As seen with the student participants, they were able to navigate around potential problems and parents supported their decision to go pursue higher education.
Summary
A central question that this research aimed to understand was how DACA played a role in the motivation of the students with regard to wanting to pursue a post-graduate degree. All the participants saw the benefits of having a “legal” status in the United
States and took the opportunities that were presented in order to create a better quality of life for their families.
Throughout the interviews, questions were asked that made participants think about their status and how it related to their identity. It was interesting to see how the climate influenced the perception of self in these participants. Tali was older than the other two participants and grew up in a time that can be described as “living in the shadows;” the political climate was not friendly towards undocumented students and bills like the DREAM Act were being stalled in Congress. Tali had to search more than Lalo and Graciela to find out information on how to get to a four-year college.
80
Chapter 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
DACA has allowed more undocumented students to pursue higher education by dismantling some of the barriers they had faced prior. Being able to access state financial aid through the California Dream Act has given rise to a more accessible higher education. Students still face financial difficulties, and the cost of attendance is at the forefront of their decision-making process. The purpose of this study was to focus on the experiences and challenges undocumented students face in their educational journey. To understand the experiences of these undocumented students, a qualitative approach was used. This research study looked at the challenges students are facing and what resources they use on campus to stay on track to graduate and pursue post-graduate degrees. The specific research questions used to guide this study were:
1. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect undocumented
college students’ motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees?
2. What resources are available for undocumented students to be academically
successful?
Three participants were interviewed for this study. They responded to questions that dealt with how DACA impacted their motivations to pursue post-graduate degrees.
The participants shared their educational journeys and the challenges they faced along the
81 way. They all faced challenges during their elementary school years, which had an impact on their identities as students. During high school, the participants were involved with a campus resource program that helped guide them to higher education. Their decision to pursue higher education was determined by financial costs. They all reported that they maintained high GPAs and were eligible to attend other four-year universities, but the cost was too high to afford.
The participants all shared that their realization of being undocumented student made them feel different from others. The barriers they encountered due to their status were new to them and they had to find ways to work around them. They all saw the importance of higher education and determined it to be a way out of poverty because of the social mobility it would allow them. Their DACA status increased their accessibility of a four-year degree. They were able to benefit from their new status. Being able to work and the safety of knowing they could not be deported gave them the confidence to pursue higher education.
The participants all had family that encouraged them to pursue higher education.
Even when the parents had doubts or did not have the information, they were open to finding other options. The participants also found that their families were willing to make sacrifices for their education. Such acts of the family encouraged the participants to take advantage of the opportunity they were given.
All the participants had institutional agents who helped them enter institutions of higher education. With the support of caring individuals, they were able to obtain
82 information that helped them navigate the path to a four-year university. The younger the participant, the more knowledgeable they were because of the availability of information.
All the students were aware of financial aid and two of them received financial aid. The third participant was not eligible to receive financial aid because she was already completing her master’s degree.
All three participants were involved on campus, and the activities made them feel more attached to the campus. They were able to meet other people who had similar interests and felt welcomed on campus. They all acknowledged there were incidents when they experienced micro aggressions, but they felt the campus was safe for them.
All three students knew about the on-campus Resource Center for undocumented students.
The participants also reported that their identity was shaped by their status. All the participants still did not freely self-identify as DACA students. Two of them needed to establish rapport with others before sharing that information. One of them mentioned she did not like to share her status because it was something personal for her.
Their motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees came from wanting to take advantage of their status and to prove themselves worthy of being a part of the United
States. The participants knew there were more available resources they could use to improve their socioeconomic status. They saw social mobility as a goal for themselves and their families.
83
Conclusions
The results show that DACA was connected with the participants’ motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees. The participants saw DACA as a tool to further their education because of the benefits they were able to claim. They associated their ability to attend a university with their DACA status. They knew that DACA helped them break some of the barriers to pursue higher education and that it would help them achieve a post-graduate degree. One participant’s decision to pursue her post-graduate degree was specifically because she has received DACA.
DACA impacted how students were able to experience higher education at
Mariposa University. Their ability to think ahead and see themselves in a post-graduate program is telling of their sense of belonging at a four-year university. Their experiences show that even with micro aggressions their campus still created a welcoming environment for them to find success. Their involvement in clubs and organizations was also an important factor in why they were able to feel welcome on campus.
This study showed that the three participants all experienced a tough educational journey. Their school experiences could have easily impeded their progress to higher education but they were resilient. They believed that their hard work and the sacrifices made were in search of a better future. Having a college degree and pursuing a post- graduate degree was seen as working on a better quality of life for them in the future.
The political climate of the United States created a space for these participants to access higher education but the financial challenge is still a strong barrier for students to
84 overcome. Two of the three participants attended the local four-year university in order to save money. The eldest participant had to start her educational journey at a community college because there were no policies besides AB540 that helped undocumented students cover the cost of attendance at any institution of higher education in the state of California. With DACA and state policies like AB540, AB130, and
AB131, the participants were able to navigate some of the financial aid barriers.
Recommendations
With the information from this study, institutions of higher education can implement more culturally competent marketing involving resources available to students. The participants mentioned the lack of visibility of resources that were undocumented-student friendly. If institutions want to increase the graduation and retention rates of undocumented students, they will need to implement better strategies of publicizing information of resources available to such students. The information can come via hosting workshops during orientation, sharing resources that are on and off campus that would be beneficial to undocumented students. The workshop could use
AB540 to identify it as a workshop for undocumented students.
The California Dream Act is a great financial resource for undocumented students who are pursuing higher education; however, the students still have to deal with many financial barriers. If institutions could provide on their websites more information regarding scholarships not requiring proof of citizenship, students may be able to find the
85 information. With more financial aid information/opportunities, undocumented students would be able to graduate and persist at a higher rate.
For future studies, there should be a greater focus on how undocumented students are persisting in post-graduate programs. This would help future undocumented students learn how to successfully enter post-graduate degree programs. It would also give post- graduate degree programs insight into the challenges undocumented students face and how they can better assist them to graduation.
86
APPENDICES
87
APPENDIX A
Questionnaire
The Narrative of Undocumented Students in college: Exploring the affects of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals on undocumented students attending four- year public universities. PERSONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. What is your age: 18-20 21-24 25-30 31-34 2. How do you identify your gender?
Male Female 3. How do you identify your ethnicity:
4. When did you migrate to the United States? (ex: November, 1988)
5. How old were you when you came to the United States? (ex: 2 months old)
0-3 years old 4-6 years old 7-10 years old 11-15 years old 16-20 years old 21-25 years old
88
6. What is your department college?
7. What is your current standing at school? (Ex: undergraduate/graduate student)
8. Are you a full-time or part-time student?
89
APPENDIX B
Invitation to Participate
Dear Sacramento State Student,
My name is Donaciano Botello Torres and I am a graduate student in the Higher Education Leadership Masters Program at California State University, Sacramento. I am an undocumented student who graduated from California State University, Sacramento (Spring 2012).
I am currently conducting research for a master’s thesis and I am in need of your support. The topic being investigated is the experience of undocumented students who have received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and their challenges and barriers within their academic journey in higher education. You have been identified as an individual who meets the qualifications to participate in this study.
A one-on-one interview and a short questionnaire that will last approximately an hour to an hour and a half will be arranged in order to document your experience as an undocumented student who has received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. The interview will take place in an agreed upon location, date, and time that is convenient to you. Would you be willing to be a part of this study? Please contact me at (707) 483-9050 or [email protected].
Thank you!
Cordially,
Donaciano Botello Torres Masters Candidate College of Education, Higher Education Leadership California State University, Sacramento
90
Dear Sacramento State Student,
I am conducting a study on the experience of undocumented students who have received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) at a four-year university as part of my master’s thesis at California State University, Sacramento. The aim of this study is to document the narrative of undocumented students and their academic journey in higher education. The format of the study will be based on one-on-one semi-structured interview and a questionnaire, which could last approximately an hour to an hour and a half. The interview, which includes an audio recording, is an opportunity for you to tell your personal story as an undocumented student living in the United States and how Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals has played a role in your personal life. I would greatly appreciate your participation in this research study. This project could help educators and undocumented students understand the impact that Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals has had for undocumented students. If you are interested in the findings of this research, I would be more than willing to share the information with you at the end of the project. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via phone or email. Thank you for your interest in participating in this research. Cordially, Donaciano Botello Torres [email protected] Master Candidate College of Education, Higher Education Leadership California State University, Sacramento
91
SEEKING STUDY PARTICIPANTS
You are invited to participate in a research study focused on undocumented students who are recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Participation in this study is completely voluntary and anonymous.
If you would like to participate, please contact me via email. Participation in this study will require an hour to an hour and a half to complete an interview and a short questionnaire. Data will be collected though a short questionnaire and an in-person interview. You will be asked to report some demographic information and opinions on your college experience. Even after you agree to participate, you may decide to leave the study at any time.
You will not personally benefit from participating in this study; however, your responses will help build on existing literature and research on undocumented students in a four- year public university. For more information, or if you have any questions, please contact:
Donaciano Botello Torres (Master Candidate) College of Education Phone: (707) 483-9050 E-mail: [email protected]
This study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at California State University, Sacramento. Your participation in the study is greatly appreciated!
92
APPENDIX C
Consent to Participate in Research
The Narrative of Undocumented Students in college: Exploring the effects of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals on undocumented students attending four- year public universities.
You are invited to participate in an IRB approved research study which will involve an approximately an hour and an hour an half in person interview and a questionnaire. My name is Donaciano Botello Torres, and I am a graduate student at California State University, Sacramento, College of Education.
Your participation in this project is voluntary. Even after you agree to participate, you may decide to stop your participation in the study at any time.
The purpose of this research is to look at the life of undocumented students after the implementation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the factors that are still affecting them at a four-year public university. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to complete a questionnaire and be interviewed about your experience as an undocumented student who is a receipent of DACA. Your participation in this study will last for about an hour to an hour and a half. During the course of the interview there may be some questions that might make you feel uncomfortable. There are minimal risks involved with participating in this study. You may skip any question you do not want to answer or stop the interview at any time. However, if you experience any psychological risks, you are encouraged to stop the interview and recommended to contact the Sacramento State Counseling and Psychological Services at (916) 278-6416 for assistance.
If you have any questions about the research at any time, please call me at (707) 483- 9050, or Dr. José Chávez at [email protected]. If you have any questions about your rights as a participant in a research project please call the Office of Research Affairs, California State University, Sacramento, (916) 278-5674, or email [email protected].
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission. Measures to insure your confidentiality are keeping the data on a password-protected laptop and the use of pseudonyms to protect your identity. The data obtained will be maintained in a safe, locked location and will be destroyed after a period of three years after the study is completed.
93
Would you like to participate in this study? May I audio record this interview?
Your oral argeement indicates that you have read and understand the information provided in the inform consent form and agree to participate. If you choose to not participate the interview will be terminated.
94
APPENDIX D
Interview Questions
The Narrative of Undocumented Students in college: Exploring the affects of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals on undocumented students attending four- year public universities.
BACKGROUND:
1. What country of origin are you and your family from? 1. 2. What was the primary reason for you and your family to immigrate to the United States?
3. Can you describe your educational experiences since you came to the United States?
4. When did you first realize that you were undocumented?
a. Probing Questions: How did you feel? How did it affect you? 2. 5. How did your High School experience impact your path to a four-year institution?
6. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals factor into your identity?
COLLEGE GOING QUESTIONS:
1. What motivated you to go to college? 3. 2. Were there things that made the decision to go to college hard? 3. What factors played in your decision to attend a four-year public institution? 4. What people, organizations, or things about you help you in school?
5. Are there people or situations that make school hard?
6. How has college impacted your life? 7. Do you feel welcome on this campus? 4. 8. Within your campus have you felt discriminated in an academic/social setting?
95
9. Do you participate in any school programs?
a. If so which ones and why? 5. 10. Do you participate in any clubs or organizations on campus? 6. a. If so which ones and why? 7. 11. What role do your professors, mentors, peers and other school people play in your educational journey? 8. 12. Do you feel that there are resources on campus to help you graduate?
a. Probing question: What resources do you currently use on campus? 9. 13. How does your identity affect you at school or other places?
14. Success can mean different things. What does success mean to you in general? Academic success?
POST-SECONDARY ASPIRATIONS:
1. What are you thinking about doing after graduation in terms of employment, further academic study, etc.? 10. 2. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect your motivation to pursue post-graduate degrees? 11. 3. How does Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals affect your lifetime career goals?
96
REFERENCES
Abrego, L. (2006). “I can’t go to college because I don’t have papers:” Incorporation
patterns of Latino undocumented youth. Latino Studies, 4, 212-231.
Abrego, L. (2008). Legitimacy, social identity, and the mobilization of law: The effects
of Assembly Bill 540 on undocumented students in California. Law & Social
Inquiry, 33, 709-734.
Abrego, L. & Gonzales, R. G. (2010). Blocked paths, uncertain futures: The
postsecondary education and labor market prospects of undocumented youth.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 15(1), 144-157.
Adams, A., & Boyne, K. S. (2015). Access to higher education for undocumented and
"Dacamented" students: The current state of affairs. Indiana International &
Comparative Law Review, 25(1), 47.
American Immigration Council. (2010). The DREAM Act: Creating opportunities for
immigrant students and supporting the U.S. economy. Retrieved from
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/the_drea
m_act_creating_opportunities_for_immigrant_students_and_supporting_the_us_e
conomy.pdf
Arellano, D. A. (2014). Keep dreaming: Deferred action and the limits of executive
power. Arizona Law Review, 54, 1139-1156.
Astor, A. (2009). Unauthorized immigration, securitization and the making of Operation
Wetback. Latino Studies, 7(1), 5-29.
97
Ayala, E. (2012). The struggles of undocumented college students (Unpublished masters
project). California State University, Sacramento.
Bickerton, M. (2001). Prospects for a bilateral immigration agreement with Mexico:
Lessons from the Bracero Program. Texas Law Review, 79. 895-919.
Blume, G. (2011). Funding postsecondary education for undocumented students in the
United States. The Evans School Review, 1(1), 36-55.
Calavita, K. (1992). Inside the state: The Bracero Program, illegal immigrants and the
INS. New York: Routledge.
California Department of Motor Vehicles. (2017). AB 60 Drivers License. Retrieved
from https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/ab60
California Legislative Information. (2014). Senate Bill No. 1159. Retrieved from
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB
1159
Carne, G., Harmon, C., Lizardy-Hajbi, K., & Wilkerson, E. (2010). Access to higher
education for undocumented students: “Outlaws” of social justice, equity, and
equality. Journal of Praxis in Multicultural Education, 5(1), 67-82.
Cervantes, J. M., Minero, L. P., & Brito, E. (2015). Tales of survival for undocumented
Latina/o immigrant students: Commentary and recommendations from qualitative
interviews. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 3, 224-238.
Chávez, L. (1998). Shadowed lives: Undocumented Immigrants in American Society. Ft.
Worth TX: Harcourt, Brace, and Jovanovich.
98
Chávez, M., Monforti, J. L., & Michelson, M. R. (2015). Living the dream: New
immigration policies and the lives of undocumented Latino youth. Boulder, CO:
Paradigm.
Clark-Ibáñez, M. (2015). Undocumented Latino youth: Navigating their worlds. Boulder,
CO: Lynn Rienner Publishers.
Congress.gov. (2002). S. 1291–Dream Act. Retrieved from
https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/senate-bill/1291
Connecticut General Assembly. (2016). An act assisting students without legal
immigration status with the cost of college, S. 147. Retrieved from
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2016/TOB/s/2016SB-00147-R00-SB.htm
Conway, K. M. (2009). Exploring persistence of immigrant and native students in an
urban community college. The Review of Higher Education, 32, 321-352.
Cortez, C. (2012). Con familia y carino: A culturally responsive after-school tutoring
program for Latino dtudents (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest.
De Genova, N. (2004). The legal production of Mexican/migrant “illegality”. Latino
Studies, 2, 160-185. de la Torre, P., III, & Germano, R. (2014). Out of the shadows: DREAMer identity in the
immigrant youth movement. Latino Studies, 12, 449-467.
Drachman, E. (2006). Access to higher education for undocumented students. Peace
Review: A Journal of Social Justice, 18, 91-100.
99
Eisema, D. (2013). Against all odds: The undocumented student movement as a vehicle
for upward social mobility (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of
Amsterdam.
Enriquez, L. (2011). “Because we feel the pressure and we also feel the support”:
Examining the educational success of undocumented immigrant Latina/o
Students. Harvard Educational Review, 81, 476-499.
Fernandez, L. (2002). Telling stories about school: Using critical race and Latino critical
theories to document Latina/Latino education and resistance. Qualitative Inquiry,
8(1), 45-65.
Frum, J. (2007). Postsecondary educational access for undocumented students:
Opportunities and constraints. American Federation of Teachers, 3, 81-108.
Gandara, P., & Contreras, F. (2009). Rescatando sueños: Rescuing dreams in the Latino
education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Policy Perspectives,
304-334.
Garcia, L. D., & Tierney, W. G. (2011). Undocumented immigrants in higher education:
A preliminary analysis. Teachers College Record, 113, 2739-2776.
Gildersleeve, R., Rumann, C., & Mondragón, R. (2010). Serving undocumented students:
Current law and policy. New Directions for Student Services, Fall, 5-18.
doi:10.1002/ss.364
Gonzales, R. G. (2009). Young lives on hold: The college dreams of undocumented
students. College Board Advocacy, 1-27.
100
Gonzales, R. G. (2010). On the wrong side of the tracks: Understanding the effects of
school structure and social capital in the educational pursuits of undocumented
immigrant students. Peabody Journal of Education, 85, 469-485.
Gonzales, R. G. (2011). Learning to be illegal: Undocumented youth and shifting legal
contexts in the transition to adulthood. American Sociological Review, 76, 602-
619.
Gonzales, R. G., Roth, B, Brant, K., Lee, J., & Valdivia, C. (2016). DACA at year three:
Challenges and opportunities in assessing education and employment, new
evidence from the UnDACAmented research project. Washington, DC: American
Immigration Council.
Gonzales, R. G., Suárez-Orozco, C., & Dedios-Sanguineti, M. C. (2013). No place to
belong: Contextualizing concepts of mental health among undocumented
immigrant youth in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1174-
1199.
Gonzales, R. G., Terriquez, V., & Ruszczyk, S. P. (2014). Becoming DACAmented:
Accessing the short-term benefits of deferred action for childhood arrivals
(DACA). American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1852-1872.
Lad, K., & Braganza, D. (2013). Increasing knowledge related to the experiences of
undocumented immigrants in public schools. Educational Leadership and
Administration: Teaching Program Development, 24, 1-15.
101
Laney College. (n.d.). California Dream Act (AB 130 & 131). Retrieved from
http://www.laney.edu/wp/ab540/california-dream-act-ab-130-131/
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 8 U.S. code § 1623. Retrieved from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1623
Martinez, L. M. (2014). Dreams deferred: The impact of legal reforms on undocumented
Latino youth. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1873-1890.
Menjívar, C. (2000). Fragmented ties: Salvadoran immigrant networks in America.
Oakland, CA: California University Press.
Menjívar, C. (2006). Liminal legality: Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants' lives in
the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 111, 999-1037.
doi:10.1086/499509
Mitchell, D. (2012). They saved the crops: Labor, landscape, and the struggle over
industrial farming in Bracero-Era California. University of Georgia Press.
Retrieved from JSTOR.
Mittelstadt, M., Speaker, B., Meissner, D., & Chishti, M. (2011). Through the prism of
national security: Major immigration policy and program changes in the decade
since 9/11. Retrieved from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/post-9-11-
immigration-policy-program-changes
Morgan, K. L. (2004). Evaluating guest worker programs in the U.S.: A comparison of
the Bracero Program and President Bush’s proposed immigration reform plan.
Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, 15, 125-144.
102
Moore, C., Shulock, N., & Jensen, C. (2009). Crafting a student-centered transfer
process in California: Lessons from other states. Sacramento, CA: Institute for
Higher Education Leadership & Policy.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2015, July 15). Tuition benefits for
immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/tuition-
benefits-for-immigrants.aspx
National Immigration Law Center. (2015). DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals) is three years old! Retrieved from
https://www.nilc.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/02/DACA-3-year-status-report-
2015-08-14.pdf
Nevins, J. (2010). Operation gatekeeper and beyond: The war on “illegals” and the
remaking of the U.S.-Mexico boundary. New York: Routledge.
Nicholls, W. J. (2013). The DREAMers: How the undocumented youth movement
transformed the immigrant rights debate. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Nicholls W. J., & Fiorito, T. (2014). Dreamers unbound: Immigrant youth mobilizing.
New Labor Forum, 1-7.
Nienhusser, K. (2013). Role of high schools in undocumented students’ college choice.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(85). Retrieved from
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1398
103
Olivas, M. A. (2012). Dreams deferred: Deferred action, prosecutorial discretion, and the
vexing case(s) of DREAM Act students. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal.
21(1), 463-547.
Olivérez, P. M. (2007). A perilous path: Undocumented immigrant students and the
college pipeline. Metropolitan Universities, 18(4), 87-101.
Padilla, D. R. (2014). An understanding of the Latino Dreamers experience of human
capital through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). California State University, Sacramento. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/10211.3/122142
Passel, J. S. (2006). The size and characteristics of the unauthorized migration
population in the U.S.: Estimates based on the March 2005 current population
survey. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.
Pérez Huber, L. (2010). Using Latina/o Critical Race Theory (LatCrit) and Racist
Nativism to explore intersectionality in the educational experiences of
undocumented Chicana college students. Educational Foundations, 77-96.
Perez, W., Espinoza, R., Ramos, K., Coronado, H. M., & Cortes, R. (2009). Academic
resilience among undocumented Latino students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 31(2), 149-181.
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).
104
Quaye, S. J., & Harper, S. R. (Eds.). (2015). Student engagement in higher education:
Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. New
York: Routledge.
Robinson, R. S. (2010). Taking the fair deal to the fields: Truman’s commission on
migratory labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952.
Agricultural History, 84, 381-402.
Schmid, C. L. (2013). Undocumented childhood immigrants, the Dream act and deferred
action for childhood arrivals in the USA. International Journal of Sociology and
Social Policy, 33(11/12), 693-707.
Solorzano, D., & Delgado Bernal, D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance
through a critical race and Latcrit theory framework. Urban Education, 36, 308-
342.
Suárez-Orozco, C., Yoshikawa, H., Teranishi, R., & Suárez-Orozco, M. (2011). Growing
up in the shadows: The developmental implications of unauthorized status.
Harvard Educational Review, 81, 438-473.
Uchitelle, L. (2007, February 18). NAFTA should have stopped illegal immigration,
right? New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/18/weekinreview/18uchitelle.html
105
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2015). Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals Process (Through fiscal year 2015, 4th quarter). Retrieved from
https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms-data/data-set-
form-i-821d-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2014). Characteristics of individuals
requesting and approved for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
Retrieved from
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Humanitarian/Deferred%20Actio
n%20for%20Childhood%20Arrivals/USCIS-DACA-Characteristics-Data-2014-7-
10.pdf
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2017). Frequently asked questions.
Retrieved from https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-
action-childhood-arrivals-process/frequently-asked-questions
Valencia, R. R. (2005). The Mexican American struggle for equal educational
opportunity in Mendez v. Westminster: Helping to pave the way for Brown v.
Board of Education. Teachers College Record, 107, 389-423.
Villalpando, O. (2004). Practical considerations of critical race theory and Latino critical
race theory for Latino college students. New Directions for Student Services, 105,
41-50.
106
Weber-Shirk, J. (2015). Deviant citizenship: DREAMer activism in the United States and
the transnational belonging. Retrieved from http://www.mdpi.com/2076-
0760/4/3/582
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2012). Remarks by the President on
Immigration [Press release]. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-
press-office/2012/06/15/remarks-president-immigration
Wollenberg, C. (1974). Mendez v. Westminster: Race, Nationality and segregation in
California schools. California Historical Quarterly, 53, 317-332.
Wong, T. K., & Valdivia, C. (2014). In their own words: A nationwide survey of
undocumented millenials. San Diego, CA: UC San Diego, Center for Comparative
Immigration Studies.
Wong, T. K., García, A. S., Abrajano, M., FitzGerald, D., Ramakrishnan, K., & Le, S.
(2013). Undocumented no more. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
Retrieved from
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2013/09/20/74599/un
documentedno-more/