Exploring the Meaning and Paths of Advocacy for Undocumented Students’ Access to Education

Every year, approximately 65,000 undocumented immigrant students graduate from high school (American Immigration Council, 2010). Only about 13,000 of them enroll in U.S. colleges and universities (Passel, 2003). Over a decade, that can account for over half a million undocumented students, many of whom have lived in the United States for over five years, not pursuing a postsecondary education. While access to higher education has increased significantly over time, large disparities among low-income and historically underrepresented minorities still persist (Cahalan, Perna, Yamashita, Ruiz, & Franklin, 2016). Undocumented students, in particular, encounter additional barriers brought on by the fear of deportation and having to deal with anti-immigrant policies throughout their time in education, while also experiencing many of the barriers that other low-income, historically underrepresented minorities face in postsecondary education contexts. Given our nation’s push for a more college-educated populace in order to be globally competitive, not only do states and institutions need to improve their college completion rates (Zumeta, Breneman, Callan, & Finney, 2012), but the federal government should provide guidance in increasing access to postsecondary education to undocumented students. The state of undocumented students’ participation in higher education is the result of contradictory policies within institutional, state, and federal contexts (Gildersleeve & Hernandez, 2012), and is connected to the history of immigration law. Considering that earning a postsecondary education credential is seen as necessary to improve both an individual’s social mobility and the nation’s economy (Baum, Ma, & Payea, 2010), several efforts over the past 30 years have challenged the way our nation offers education to undocumented students. While undocumented students (in most states) are not banned from attending public colleges and universities in the U.S., many states do not offer these students in-state tuition, and oftentimes, staff and faculty in these 178schools are unaware of the resources undocumented students have access to as noncitizens of the United States (Contreras, 2011). With their legacy of increasing access and educational attainment to disadvantaged populations, Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) can serve as models of excellence in serving our undocumented population. Using literature on the history of access to education through public policy for undocumented students, the experiences of undocumented students in postsecondary education contexts, and information gathered from several organizations that provide advocacy and support to undocumented students, this chapter details how the contemporary rhetoric and policies surrounding the legal status of undocumented students demonstrate the nation’s inability to provide equitable pathways to educational attainment and social mobility for undocumented immigrants. By highlighting what some MSIs are doing to support their undocumented population, these institutions are expanding their legacy of inclusion to support this underserved population.

Undocumented students, due to their legal status, face many institutional barriers within higher education that affect their enrollment and retention rates. A recent national study by Cisneros & Rivarola (2020) concluded that of all higher education institutions in the United States, only 59 had centralized support for this specific group of marginalized students in the form of Undocumented Student Resource Centers (USRCs). None of these USRCs was in Massachusetts. Advocates for undocumented students seek institutional support, yet most staff are misinformed or unknowledgeable about how to help undocumented students. These students may turn to international educators in their search for assistance; however, international educators may not be in a position to ally with these students. This is a sequential explanatory mixed-methods research design that studies international educators' awareness of institutional resources and supports specifically tailored to undocumented students. The goal is to analyze how institutions provide resources and supports for undocumented students, and how aware international educators are of aforementioned resources in order to ally with undocumented students. Data collection started with an electronic survey of close-ended questions distributed to a professional association of international educators to gather quantitative data. The researcher then selected a nested and purposeful sample of international educators within the Boston metropolitan area and conducted semi-structured one-on-one interviews to get a richer understanding of their knowledge and professional experience pertaining to appropriately guiding undocumented students. Ultimately, the researcher hoped to gain an understanding of international educators' abilities and limitations in allying with undocumented students. International educators, in their official capacities, are in a delicate position as both student support staff and enforcers of federal immigration compliance. These conflicting obligations affect international educators' ability to overtly assist undocumented students and perpetuate the hidden, circuitous institutional support systems for these students. In light of this tenuous relationship between international educators and undocumented students, institutional decisionmakers may consider strategic separation of these student support services and the creation of Undocumented Student Resource Centers (USRCs) in addition to international student and scholar offices.

Reviewed by: Undocumented Latino College Students: Their Socioemotional and Academic Experiences by William Pérez, Richard Douglas Cortés Cecilia Rios-Aguilar William Pérez and Richard Douglas Cortés. Undocumented Latino College Students: Their Socioemotional and Academic Experiences. El Paso, TX: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2011. 186 pp. Cloth: $65.00. ISBN: 978-1-5933-2393-6. In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (in Plyler v. Doe) that undocumented children could attend public schools regardless of their immigration status (Olivas, 2012). The population of undocumented youth in the United States is substantial—approximately 2.1 million (Batalova & McHugh, 2010). This group is growing up with protected legal access to public education from kindergarten to high school. However, for these undocumented students, the transition to college and to the job market involves leaving the legally protected status of K-12 students and taking on adult roles that require legal status as the basis for participation (Gonzales, 2011). This switching among contexts makes for a tempestuous transition and has important implications for identity formation, friendship patterns, aspirations and expectations, and social and economic mobility (Gonzales, 2011). In spite of the barriers they experience, many undocumented students are now going to college. In particular, community colleges because they are conveniently located, cost much less than four-year colleges, feature open admissions, and accommodate students who work or have family responsibilities, are suited to meet the educational needs of immigrants and undocumented students who want to obtain an affordable postsecondary education, learn English-language skills, and prepare for the labor market (Teranishi, Suárez-Orozco, & Suárez-Orozco, 2011). Unfortunately, very little is known about the college experiences of undocumented students in community colleges. With some limitations, Pérez and Cortés’s (2011) book represents a timely contribution to the topic of immigration and higher education and presents a much-needed perspective on the socioemotional experiences of Latino undocumented students in community colleges. The book is well organized into six chapters. Chapter 1 states the goal of the book and describes the political and educational context that undocumented immigrants face in the United States. Chapter 2 provides a thorough literature review on students’ psychological well-being and introduces the socioemotional framework used to analyze undocumented students’ college experiences. It is worth noting that Pérez and Cortés’s (2011) literature review can be used as a teaching tool for those who are new to this topic. They provide the readers with an excellent overview of the available scholarship on undocumented students and higher education. Furthermore, the comprehensive review provides background information on the contexts (e.g., economic and institutional) that affect undocumented students in higher education and particularly the struggles that these students encounter due to their immigration status both in and out of educational settings. They also describe the study’s two-part methodology: (a) survey data from 37 undocumented students, (b) 24 student interviews, and (c) in-depth interviews with eight community college personnel. Chapter 3 presents the narratives of undocumented students who experience feelings of shame, anger, despair, marginalization, and uncertainty stemming from discrimination, anti-immigrant sentiment, fear of deportation, and systemic barriers (e.g., ineligibility for financial aid and unwelcoming and unsupportive environments). Take, for instance, the stories of Jacinto and Esperanza who often feel “a sense of humiliation and voicelessness due to their undocumented status” (p. 50). They constantly expressed how difficult and shameful it is not to have a driver’s license to prove their identity. Esperanza describes how depressed she gets when she thinks about graduating from college because she will not be able to work in her desired field. All of her hard work has brought her academic success in college, but her narrative ends with her not being able to get a job where she could use her college degree. Chapter 4 highlights the important role that institutional agents play in buffering these students’ negative college experiences. The authors found that, despite moments of despair and an uncertain future, rather than becoming dejected, [End Page 429] undocumented Latino students reframe their circumstances in positive terms. Chapter 5 elaborates on the institutional perspective of undocumented students. Community college personnel interviews reveal that...

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is the first large-scale immigration policy to affect undocumented immigrants in the United States in decades and offers eligible undocumented youth temporary relief from deportation as well as renewable work permits. Although DACA has improved the economic conditions and mental health of undocumented immigrants, we do not know how DACA improves the social mobility of undocumented immigrants through its effect on educational attainment. We use administrative data on students attending a large public university to estimate the effect of DACA on undocumented students' educational outcomes. The data are unique because they accurately identify students' legal status, account for individual heterogeneity, and allow separate analysis of students attending community colleges versus four-year colleges. Results from difference-in-difference estimates demonstrate that as a temporary work permit program, DACA incentivizes work over educational investments but that the effect of DACA on educational investments depends on how easily colleges accommodate working students. At four-year colleges, DACA induces undocumented students to make binary choices between attending school full-time and dropping out of school to work. At community colleges, undocumented students have the flexibility to reduce course work to accommodate increased work hours. Overall, the results suggest that the precarious and temporary nature of DACA creates barriers to educational investments.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is the first large-scale immigration reform to affect undocumented immigrants in the United States in decades and offers eligible undocumented youth temporary relief from deportation and renewable work permits. While DACA has improved the economic conditions and mental health of undocumented immigrants, we do not know how DACA improves the social mobility of undocumented immigrants through its effect on educational attainment. This paper uses administrative data on students attending a large public university to estimate the effect of DACA on undocumented students' educational outcomes. The data are unique because they accurately identify students' legal status, account for individual heterogeneity, and allow separate analysis of students attending community colleges versus baccalaureate-granting, 4-year colleges. Results from difference-in-difference estimates demonstrate that as a temporary work-permit program, DACA incentivizes work over educational investments but that the effect of DACA on educational investments depends on how easily colleges accommodate working students. At 4-year colleges, DACA induces undocumented students to make binary choices between attending school on a full-time basis or dropping out of school to work. At community colleges, undocumented students have the flexibility to simply reduce course work to accommodate increased work hours. Overall, the results suggest that the precarious and temporary nature of DACA creates barriers to educational investments.

There are about 1.8 million young immigrants in the United States who came or were brought to the country without documentation before the age of 16. These youth have been raised and educated in the United States and have aspirations and educational achievements similar to those of their native-born peers. However, their undocumented status has hindered their pursuit of higher education, especially in medical and other graduate health sciences. Under a new discretionary policy, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), many of these young immigrants are eligible to receive permission to reside and work in the United States. DACA defers deportation of eligible, undocumented youth and grants lawful presence in the United States, work permits, Social Security numbers, and, in most states, driver's licenses. These privileges have diminished the barriers undocumented students traditionally have faced in obtaining higher education, specifically in pursuing medicine. With the advent of DACA, students are slowly matriculating into U.S. medical schools and residencies. However, this applicant pool remains largely untapped. In the face of a physician shortage and the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, an increase in matriculation of qualified undocumented students would be greatly beneficial. This Perspective is intended to begin discussion within the academic medicine community of the implications of DACA in reducing barriers for the selection and matriculation of undocumented medical students and residents. Moreover, this Perspective is a call to peers in the medical community to support undocumented students seeking access to medical school, residency, and other health professions.

“Although an abundance of policy research exists on undocumented students and the policy environment surrounding their access to education, little policy analysis exists on the topic. To address this lack of policy analysis, this article poses the question: In a framework based on feasibility, social equity, and potential economic outcomes, what are the benefits, drawbacks, and costs of policies to extend financial support to undocumented students? To answer this question I first review the arguments that supporters and critics have used to expand and restrict college access for undocumented students in the United States. Next, I analyze the policy background that governs undocumented students‟ access to postsecondary education and financial aid in the United States. I use a significant amount of legal scholarship in this analysis because the status of undocumented students in the United States is predicated on the U.S. Supreme Court case Plyer v. Doe and two federal statutes, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104-208) and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104-193).”

Hawaii, as a destination for foreign immigrants and internal migrants, is a place of rather mixed blessings. The physical environment is unsurpassed; it is one of the most beautiful spots on the globe. It has a climate that is especially attractive to those coming from other Pacific Islands such as Samoa and the Philippines. It has a relatively good reputation for its social environment, and for its tolerance for ethnic differences and multiple languages. These positive attractions, however, are somewhat counterbalanced by the nature ofthe economy in Hawaii, and the rather high cost oflivingespecially housing-compared to other locations in the United States. The dominance of the economy by tourism, the U.S. military, and large-scale agriculture severely limits the opportunities for occupational and economic mobility. Stratification along ethnic lines could be taken as another sign of the difficulty of settling in Hawaii. The general motives for migration are well documented. In a recent review by DeJong and Fawcett (1 98 l), five major motives were summarized: economic improvement and social mobility, residential satisfaction, affiliation with family and friends, changes in life-styles, and maintenance of community-based social and economic ties, a negative factor which inhibits migration. To what extent are any of the objectives actually obtained by immigrants in Hawaii? In this paper we examine some of the socioeconomic consequences of the migration of Samoans, Koreans, and Filipinos in Hawaii in contrast to local Japanese and Caucasian residents. Special attention is given to income levels, occupational mobility, and difficulty of adjustment as indicated by the incidence of stressful life events. The research results reported here are part of a larger comparative study of the communication patterns and adjustment of these five ethnic groups in Hawaii conducted by the East-West Center's Communication Institute. Other papers have examined the communication patterns and adjustment of the Korean immigrants (Yum 1979, 1982), interpersonal communication networks (Yum and Kincaid 1979), differential patterns of news interest (Wang and Kincaid 1982), interethnic group stereotyping (Yum and Wang 1983), and the cultural convergence of the Korean immigrants (Kincaid et al. 1983). and from resident Japanese-Americans and CaucasianAmericans who were born in Hawaii or migrated there from Japan or the U.S. mainland. Of the Japanese respondents, 93% were born in Hawaii. All data were collected by faceto-face, home interviews by native-language speakers from the same ethnic group. The Korean sample was randomly selected from an exhaustive list of the 249 Korean surnames found in the 1978 Honolulu telephone directory. The list of Koreans in the telephone directory was somewhat biased in that lower income groups and new amvals were not as likely to be listed. Therefore an effort was made to interview a supplementary sample of new arrivals by approaching them through social workers who were working in the Kalihi-Palama area of Honolulu, where a large number of recent amvals were known to be concentrated. Seven percent of the total sample were selected through this approach. Face-to-face interviews were conducted at residences after a brief telephone interview to screen out disconnected numbers and non-Koreans. The Caucasian and Filipino samples were selected by means of a three-stage cluster technique, beginning with census tracts randomly selected in proportion to the known probability of members of those ethnic groups residing within them. Then households were selected systematically from random starting points following a serpentine path through the tract. Finally, each selected household became the starting point for clusters which were identified by means of the Hawaii Telephone Crossreference Directory for Oahu. Potential respondents were then telephoned for screening according to the following eligibility requirements: resident of Hawaii, at least 18 years of age, member of the required ethnic group (for Filipinos, only Ilocanos born in the Philippines), and willingness to participate in the study. The Japanese sample was selected by the same procedures followed for the Korean sample: randomly selected Japanese surnames from the 1978 Honolulu Telephone Directory, prescreened by telephone for eligibility and willingness to participate. The Samoan sample was selected first with a random selection of known Samoan surnames from the Honolulu Telephone Directory. Each name drawn was visited at home and if he/she met the eligibility requirements and was interviewed, then he/she was asked to identify up to 15 other Samoan households in the same neighborhood for interviewing before moving on to the next neighborhood cluster. When 15 interviews were completed in one neighborhood, interviewing was begun in another neighborhood until 200 interviews were conducted. Although the Samoan sample represents the major subgroups of Samoans on Oahu, it does not qualify as a probability sample. Interviewers were instructed to interview the head of the household (or head's spouse) randomly assigned according to sex, to insure an even representation of male and female respondents. If the household head was not married, that person was interviewed regardless of sex.

The study of undocumented students in the United States is critical and growing. As scholars increasingly employ qualitative methodologies and methods in studying undocumented students, it is important to consider the specific challenges, nuances, and benefits of doing so. Undocumented students have a right to a public elementary and secondary education regardless of immigration status, per the 1982 court case Plyler v. Doe. While the stress that undocumented students face during their K-12 years are real and consequential, this stress becomes particularly acute in their postsecondary lives when education is neither guaranteed nor readily accessible. Qualitative research gives insight into the complex obstacles undocumented students face and advocates for the institutional and social change necessary to best support them. Existing qualitative research on undocumented students employs various methodologies and methods including but not limited to narrative inquiry, testimonio, phenomenology, case studies, ethnography, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Among the salient issues that scholars must take into account when engaging in such research are the ethical, logistical, and relational problems that arise when working with undocumented people; the politicization of researching undocumented students; and the power and privilege that researchers possess in the researcher–participant relationship. Within every stage of the research process, researchers need to take special care when working with undocumented students to ensure their anonymity, respect their lived experiences, and advocate for their human rights. Undocumented research participants are in need of extra protection due to their undocumented status, and this need should not be conflated with weakness. Often, undocumented participants are framed as illegal, powerless, vulnerable, fearful, and in the shadows. While it is true that undocumented people face intense, life-altering, and consequential struggles relative to their undocumented status, it is also true that their intelligence, resilience, and persistence are equally intense. Researchers have an obligation to bring undocumented students’ authentic experiences to the fore in ways that acknowledge their undocumented status and the related struggles while affirming their agency and resistance. How they employ methodological practices is central to this goal.

Thousands of undocumented immigrant youth graduate high school in the United States each year, but very few matriculate into college. These students often face financial and informational obstacles when making the decision to pursue higher education. Recent research suggests undocumented students who live in a state that provides access to in-state college tuition primarily utilize their connections to other undocumented students to gain information about enrolling in college. However, Arizona passed Proposition 300 in 2007 and outlawed in-state tuition for these youth. Through on-line research and interviews with undocumented youth who sought to enter college before and after Prop 300, I find that undocumented students employed different types of social capital to pursue higher education depending upon the political environment. Prior to the implementation of Prop 300, the relevant advice networks included classmates, high school teachers, advisors, and college personnel. Post Prop 300, resources availab...

Reviewed by: Americans by Heart: Undocumented Latino Students and the Promise of Higher Education by William Perez Anne-Marie Núñez and Vanessa Sansone William Perez . Americans by Heart: Undocumented Latino Students and the Promise of Higher Education. New York: Teachers College Press, 2011. 191 pp. Hardcover: $72.00. ISBN 13: 978-0-8077-5284-5. "We have to finish the job," said President Obama, two months after being reelected to a second term, about his plans for reforming immigration. This declaration speaks to the type of change most immigration reform advocates have been fighting for. Not since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 has immigration reform gained such momentum. Although undocumented children and young adults are typically brought here through no fault of their own, they have faced significant penalties in educational and economic mobility. As a counterpoint to the media rhetoric that frames undocumented Latino immigrants as drains on public resources or as criminals, William Perez's Americans by Heart: Undocumented Latino Students and the Promise of Higher Education explores the potential for undocumented students to contribute to the economic and civic life of the United States. The book is based on a two-year study in which Perez collected observational, interview, and survey data about 110 undocumented Latino students enrolled in high schools, community colleges, and universities across the United States. The majority (73%) of the sample resided in California, followed by 17% from Texas, 4% from Virginia, and the remaining 6% from Georgia, Missouri, New York, Washington, and Washington, D.C. (pp. 14-15). He used multiple methods of data collection to provide an in-depth understanding of how, in the face of significant barriers, these students not only engage academically and socially in secondary and higher education, but also participate in civic and community activities. Perez begins by examining the political context influencing immigration reform in the United States. He addresses how economic policies such as the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) caused economic disparities in Mexico that resulted in significant increases in Mexican immigration to the United States. He also discusses undocumented students' limited access to economic and social opportunities and the policies that constrain these opportunities, such as limited access to postsecondary financial aid, lack of access to social services, and minimal chances to find gainful employment. Together, these macro-level factors exacerbate various psychological and social stressors for these youth, including the feeling of being marginalized by the stigma of being undocumented. In Chapter 2, however, Perez points out how these youth have developed the resiliency to cope with these feelings and economic limitations. Such strategies involve the "immigrant optimism" (Kao & Tienda, 1995). They (a) value educational and economic opportunities in the United States, (b) believe that, in accordance with the concept of the American Dream, individual mobility is possible due to hard work, and (c) minimize and resist perceptions of undocumented immigrants as criminals or as drains on public resources. Perez presents themes from qualitative data indicating that, in addition to these personal protective mechanisms, these students also rely on social support from educators, parents, or peers to contend with their stressors and economic hardships. Chapters 3 and 4 focus on the academic and civic engagement of undocumented Latino students. In these chapters, Perez presents quantitative survey data indicating the frequency of participation in various academic and civic activities relevant to his respondents' stage of education. Furthermore, he discusses the results of a qualitative analysis to enhance our understanding of students' experiences in these activities, as well as the personal qualities and social supports that fuel their participation. Findings indicate that many students are engaged in these activities because of their determination to succeed, which is a central part of their identity. Many of these students receive academic awards, hold positions of leadership, participate in extracurricular activities in high school and college, and volunteer. This level of engagement is even more remarkable, considering that many of these students are employed a significant number of hours per week and must deal with transportation difficulties in reaching extracurricular or community sites. In Chapter 5, Perez addresses how community colleges play a role in undocumented Latino students' pursuit of higher education...

In this session, become a part of our movement to create more inclusive environments for undocumented students through education and advocacy. Our undocumented students and supportive faculty will lead an interactive discussion on how to better organize, facilitate, educate, and lead on intersections of diversity, culture, history, and policy related to our undocumented populations within the George Mason University campus and community. Grounded in the understanding of critical pedagogy and Paulo Freire's notion of praxis (1970), the Mason DREAMers student organization leads annual events, UndocuAlly trainings, and community outreach initiatives to raise awareness and build critical understanding about the sociopolitical and educational climate of undocumented students and their families. Praxis that involves theory building through learning, action, and reflection is the basis of social transformation and is at the core of the Mason DREAMers mission. The group promotes this critical consciousness to reflect on the multidimensional identities and realities of undocumented students and then empowers participants to become change agents. This interactive session will discuss the praxis involved in being an advocate for undocumented students at George Mason University and will utilize this time and space to detail the concrete opportunities for advocacy and future action that is necessary to improve the social and educational lives of our students. http://www.masondreamers.org/

In response to a growing awareness of undocumented students’ experiences and the challenges they face, many colleges in the United States are developing supports and resources for undocumented students, and a growing number are establishing Undocumented Student Resource Centers (USRCs)—i.e., supportive offices on campus dedicated to the success of these students (Cisneros & Valdivia, 2020). However, no studies to date have explored the psychosocial impacts of USRCs on the lives of undocumented students. In this paper, we examine the psychosocial impact of USRCs on undocumented students through qualitative interviews with USRC coordinators and students who accessed USRC services and programs in California. Our study utilizes the cycles of deportability framework to theorize undocumented students’ experiences as dynamic psychosocial processes, and to explore what happens to these cycles when students encounter the supportive culture of the USRC and begin to experience its practical and psychological supports. Our results demonstrate how Undocumented Student Resource Centers can transform the lives and trajectories of undocumented students not only by providing resources that help them overcome status-related barriers, but by equipping them with the creative agency, psychological strength, and social support needed to pursue their goals despite their status-related limitation.

Background/Context The analysis contained in this article was commissioned by the Social Science Research Council's Transitions to College project. Although the historical context and contemporary issues associated with English learners (ELs) and undocumented immigrant students are in many ways distinct, the project team strongly believed that the college transition issues affecting these populations were increasingly salient in light of their rapid and continued growth throughout the United States. Purpose/Objective/Research Questions/Focus of Study The research questions guiding this analysis are: (1) What do we know and what do we need to know about the transition to college of EL and undocumented immigrant students? and (2) What are the resource and policy implications associated with the transition to college of these students? The chief purpose of this analysis is to synthesize the current research and thinking about the transitions to college of EL and undocumented immigrant students and to use the findings to develop a research agenda focused on emergent critical issues. The intent is to educate a research audience that is largely unfamiliar with the experiences of these unique populations and to inform future research directions. Research Design The analysis is situated within the broader context of immigrant educational attainment and integration in the United States. The two student populations are distinguished to delineate the particular college transition experiences of ELs versus undocumented students, while recognizing the overlaps that do exist. Thus, for each student population, the analysis synthesizes current literature and provides discussions of (a) student demographics for states and the United States, (b) student-level issues and factors, (c) K–12 issues and factors, (d) student agency, (e) postsecondary issues and factors, and (f) summary of critical challenges, barriers, and accomplishments relative to the college transition. The final element is a recommended research agenda developed from the issues revealed in this analysis. Findings/Results There is continued growth in the presence of EL and undocumented students, and this growth affects states with longstanding histories of immigrant presence, as well as states that have only recently had notable increases in these populations. Important to understanding the needs and potential of these two groups is that not all EL and undocumented students are new immigrants. Rather, many have only experienced education in the United States, having been born here or having arrived at a very young age with their families. From this analysis, it appears that English proficiency is as much a gatekeeping factor as it is a facilitative factor for EL and undocumented students in their successful college transitions. Unfortunately, because of the impact of poverty on these populations, the financial constraints of transitioning to college further compound the challenges already faced with regard to acquiring English and advanced subject matter proficiency. Two additional findings help to frame the college transition challenges of both EL and undocumented student populations: (1) There is a chasm between research-based best practices and the available human and material resources allocated in schools and colleges to support this objective, and (2) the role of the community college system is salient as a potential facilitative context, but one that is currently overburdened with multiple demands and shrinking resources. Conclusions/Recommendations The article presents an eight-point research agenda that addresses the challenges surfaced in the analysis. The points cover K–12 education, evaluations of the impact of legislation and programs, and postsecondary education, with the aim of improving the overall responsiveness of our educational institutions to the needs and strengths of our EL and undocumented student populations.

Emily Beller and Michael Hout examine trends in U.S. social mobility, especially as it relates to the degree to which a person's income or occupation depends on his or her parents' background and to the independent contribution of economic growth. They also compare U.S. social mobility with that in other countries. They conclude that slower economic growth since 1975 and the concentration of that growth among the wealthy have slowed the pace of U.S. social mobility. In measuring mobility, economists tend to look at income and sociologists, occupation. The consensus among those measuring occupational mobility is that the average correlation between the occupations of fathers and sons today ranges from 0.30 to 0.40, meaning that most variation in the ranking of occupations is independent of social origins. Those measuring income mobility tend to agree that the elasticity between fathers' and sons' earnings in the United States today is about 0.4, meaning that 40 percent of the difference in incomes between families in the parents' generation also shows up in differences in incomes in the sons' generation. Beller and Hout show that occupational mobility increased during the 1970s, compared with the 1940s-1960s, but there is some evidence to suggest that by the 1980s and 1990s it had declined to past levels. Existing data on income mobility show no clear trends over time, but increases in economic inequality during the 1980s made mobility more consequential by making economic differences between families persist for a longer time. In international comparisons, the United States occupies a middle ground in occupational mobility but ranks lower in income mobility. Researchers have used the variation in mobility to study whether aspects of a country's policy regime, such as the educational or social welfare systems, might be driving these results. There is as yet, however, no scholarly consensus about the sources of cross-national differences in mobility.