Higher Education Access and Choice for Latino Students

Critical Findings and Theoretical Perspectives

Patricia Perez, Miguel Ceja, Patricia Perez, Miguel Ceja

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• eBook ISBN: 9781317512615
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Now the largest and fastest-growing ethnic population in the U.S., Latino students face many challenges and complexities when it comes to college choice and access. This edited volume provides much needed theoretical and empirical data on how the schooling experiences of Latino students shape their educational aspirations and access to higher education. It explores how the individual and collective influence of the home, school and policy shape the college decision-making process.

This unique collection of original scholarly articles offers critical insight on educational pathways that will help families, educators and policy makers intervene in ways that foster and sustain college access and participation for Latino students. It considers destination preferences and enrollment selections, elementary and secondary school experiences, and intervention programs that shed light on how practitioners can promote participation and retention. This multi-conceptual, multi-methodological volume offers directions for future research, programming and policy in Latino education.

1 Introduction

What Do We Know about Latina/o College Access and Choice?

Patricia A.Pérez and Miguel Ceja

In 2012, Latina/o students 18- to 24- years old surpassed their White counterparts as the largest racial/ethnic group enrolled in college. Yet, of the Latina/o students that do pursue higher education in this age cohort, 56% start at a 4-year college compared to 72% for their White peers (Fry & Taylor, 2014). While most Latina/o students start at community college, few transfer out (Núñez & Elizondo, 2013). For example, Radford, Berkner, Wheeless, and Shepard (2010) found only 14% of Latina/o students compared to 36% of White students, had earned a bachelor’s degree or were still attending their 4-year postsecondary institution 6 years later. This finding is disturbing given the majority of Latina/o students declare intentions to transfer (Gándara, Alvarado, Driscoll, & Orfield, 2012). These statistics coupled with the fact that Latina/o students are more likely than White students to pursue higher education part-time and attend less selective institutions help explain why Latina/o students are half as likely as their White peers (11% compared to 22%) to obtain their 4-year degree (Fry & Taylor, 2014).

In this edited volume education scholars address the role of families, schools, and policy in shaping the college access and choice prospects and decisions for Latina/o students. Specifically, across the chapters authors employ varying conceptual and methodological approaches to highlight the complexity of the Latina/o college choice process as well as contribute new theoretical and empirical understandings of how Latina/o students engage in this process. This new insight advances our understanding of Latina/o college access and choice and sheds light on critical factors, implications, future research, and programming that can facilitate Latina/o student postsecondary access, enrollment, and attainment.

It is critical to examine the college choice process for Latina/o students for several reasons. First, Latinas/os are the fastest-growing racial minority group in the U.S., yet the proportion of these students in higher education has not increased at the same rate (Fry & Taylor, 2014). Second, research has long documented that a highly educated workforce is important to remain competitively nationally, and provides economic, civic, and social benefits at large and to the individual (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Third, the scholarship highlights that Latinas/os, as well as other students of color, experience the college choice process differently than their White counterparts and traditional models of college choice do not sufficiently explain their particular processes (Bergerson, 2009). The Latina/o college access and choice processes should be further scrutinized to increase overall achievement and degree attainment rates for this group. Ultimately, within the U.S., the dynamic, growing Latina/o population could have a large economic, social, and civic impact if improved educational resources and opportunities are facilitated.

Latina/o College Access and Choice

Unfortunately, not all students have equitable access to resources to make informed college choice decisions (McDonough, 1997). Factors such as race, socioeconomic status, college generational status, and gender, among other factors, influence access to resources and the students’ college selection decisions (Bergerson, Heiselt, & Aiken-Wisniewski, 2013; Cabrera, Burkum, LaNasa, & Bibo, 2012). Generally, existing college choice research falls within three broad categories: (a) social psychological, (b) economic, and (c) sociological status attainment studies (McDonough, 1997). Broadly, social psychological studies focus on institutional characteristics and students’ perception of fit. Meanwhile, economic examinations employ a cost–benefit analysis in their assessment. Finally, sociological status attainment research examines social status within college choice (McDonough, 1997).

Scholars have synthesized the college choice process through several models (see, e.g., Chapman, 1981, 1984; Hanson & Litten, 1982; Hossler, Braxton, & Coopersmith,1989; Hossler & Gallagher, 1987; Jackson, 1982; Litten, 1982; Perna, 2006). Hossler and Gallagher’s (1987) seminal three-stage model reflects three critical phases in the college choice process: predisposition, when students make the decision to attend a postsecondary institution; search, when students proceed to investigate institutions and their characteristics; and choice, when students complete their college applications and select a particular institution. However, the aforementioned models do not adequately capture the experiences of students of color, low-income students, and first-generation college students (Bergerson, 2009). We extend literature that highlights the nuances of Latina/o college access and choice and capture how other characteristics, such as race/ethnicity (McDonough, Núñez, Ceja, & Solórzano, 2003, 2004; McDonough, Solórzano, Ceja, & Núñez, 2003), class (Kurlaender, 2006), gender (Zarate & Gallimore, 2005), and immigrant status (Pérez, 2010) mediate these processes.

Scholars focused exclusively on Latina and Latino students have utilized various conceptual and theoretical frameworks to examine the spectrum of college choice including social capital/networks (Ceja, 2006; Contreras, 2005; González, Stoner, & Jovel, 2003; Martinez & Cervera, 2012), chain migration (Person & Rosenbaum, 2006), community cultural wealth (Martinez, 2012), critical race theory (Núñez, McDonough, Ceja, & Solorzano, 2008), familismo (Martinez, 2013), funds of knowledge (Kiyama, 2011), resiliency (Ceja, 2004), social-cognitive career theory (Gonzalez, 2012), or a combination of multiple frameworks (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009; Núñez & Kim, 2012; Núñez, Sparks, & Hernandez, 2011; Oseguera & Malagon, 2011; Ovink, 2013; Pérez, 2010; Pérez & McDonough, 2008; Taggart & Crisp, 2011; Talavera-Bustillos, 2007).

Broadly, in the predisposition phase, Latina/o parents play a critical role in encouraging higher education through the development of what Gándara (1995) calls a “culture of possibility” (p. 112). Furthermore, in the search phase, access to a college preparatory curriculum, recruitment programs, key institutional agents, and college and financial aid knowledge is instrumental to pursuing higher education (Gándara & Contreras, 2010). With regard to selecting a postsecondary institution, the college choice literature indicates that Latina/o students are attracted to less-selective institutions that are most likely 2-year institutions, public, less costly, have high dropout rates and are close to home (Kurlaender, 2006; Santiago, 2007). Additionally, financial aid offers seem to encourage attendance at a particular postsecondary institution that is not necessarily the students’ first-choice institution (Kim, 2004). Despite great strides in the Latina/o college choice literature there is still much more to be learned. For example, we know much more about what factors influence college choice but less about why. This edited volume aims to move the Latina/o college access and choice conversation forward by further explicating how and why Latina/o student postsecondary aspirations are shaped and college access, choice, and enrollment decisions are made. Furthermore, we aim to address various points along the Latina/o college choice continuum in one comprehensive volume.

Organization of the Book

In Part I, this volume highlights the home, and elementary and secondary school context, in shaping college aspirations and planning for college. Specifically, Zarate, McCall and Perez use a cognitive frame analysis to examine the role of sixth-grade teachers in preparing Latina/o students for college. Meanwhile, Rodriguez and Núñez explore structural factors that shape college access and choice for students in a Texas Catholic high school and how administrators and faculty shape postsecondary opportunity structures for these students using an organizational habitus lens. Next, Muñoz and Rincón draw on Perna’s (2006) multicontextual model to provide a comprehensive understanding of how Latina/o high school students are impacted by the challenges of learning about and accessing financial aid utilizing the National Center for Educational Statistics’s 2009 High School Longitudinal Survey. In the final chapter, Alvarez explores what factors students and parents negotiate during the college-going process and their associated risks. Together these studies call our attention to the importance of early planning, intervention, and college-going preparation for Latina/o students.

Part II sets up the political context within which college decisions are made and highlights the destination preferences and enrollment selections for Latina/o students. The first chapter by Gildersleeve, Cruz, Madriz, and Melendrez-Flores examines current political discourses targeting Latina/o students and focusing on postsecondary educational opportunity. Next, Pérez, Rodriguez, and Guadarrama contribute a holistic understanding of undocumented Latina/o student college opportunity by examining familial, institutional, and community support processes. Meanwhile, Liu, McNeice-Stallard, Tamashiro, Barkman, and Hao use a cluster analysis model to scrutinize differences among the behavioral typology of first-time students across three Hispanic-serving community colleges. In the subsequent chapter, using Education Longitudinal Study 2002–2006 panel data to inform their study, Loya, Hwang, and Oseguera, contribute to the gender gap discussion by examining the relationship between generational status and postsecondary institutional type as one possible explanation of this gap. Finally, Ramirez and Hurtado use the Cooperative Institutional Research Program’s Freshman Survey to expand on college match research by identifying the Latina/o students who choose selective institutions disaggregated by ethnicity and income. This section is important in outlining not only what Latina/o student college-selection preferences look like but why this is the case.

Part III highlights promising college access intervention programs that move beyond enrollment and shed light on how practitioners can promote participation and, ultimately, retention. To be specific, Martinez-Wenzl and Gándara provide an overview of college access programs in the opening section of their chapter followed by an examination of college preparation for Latina/o immigrants in the community college context. Next, in their qualitative study, Dávila and Macias address the role of the “University Scholars Program” in shaping Latina/o college choice for 8th- through 12th-grade students via Latino critical race theory and a community cultural wealth lens. Furthermore, Williams and Ross illustrate a model practice, “Summer Transition Program,” that exposes Latina/o students to higher education, as well as enhances skills and knowledge needed to effectively transition, negotiate, and thrive in higher education. Finally, we conclude with a summary of select salient themes, interventions, practical, and policy implications outlined across the text. Collectively, the contributions in this volume are central in assisting educators, practitioners, administrators, and policy makers in enhancing postsecondary opportunity and success for Latina/o students.

References

Bensimon, E. M., & Dowd, A. (2009). Dimensions of the transfer choice gap: Experiences of Latina and Latino students who navigated transfer pathways. Harvard Educational Review, 79(4), 632–658.

Bergerson, A. (2009). College choice and access to college: Moving policy, research and practice to the 21st century (ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 35, No. 4). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bergerson, A., Heiselt, A., & Aiken-Wisniewski, S. (2013). Refocusing college choice: Women’s reflections on their postsecondary education choices. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 6(2), 185–211.

Cabrera, A. F. Burkum, K. R., LaNasa, S. M., & Bibo, E. W. (2012). Pathways to a four-year degree: Determinants of degree completion among socioeconomically disadvantaged students. In A. Siegman (Ed.), College student retention: Formula for student success (pp. 167–210). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Ceja, M. (2004). Chicana college aspirations and the role of parents. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3(4), 1–25.

Ceja, M. (2006). Understanding the role of parents and siblings as information sources in the college choice process of Chicana students. Journal of College Student Development, 47(1), 87–104.

Chapman, R. (1981). A model of student college choice. Journal of Higher Education, 52(5), 490–505.

Chapman, R. (1984). Toward a theory of college choice: A model of college search and choice behavior. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: University of Alberta Press.

Contreras, F. E. (2005). Access, achievement, and social capital: Standardized exams and the Latino college-bound population. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 197–214.

Fry, R., & Taylor, P. (2014). High school drop-out rate at record low: Hispanic high school graduates pass Whites in rate of college enrollment. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.

Gándara. P. (1995). Over the ivy walls: The educational mobility of low income Chicanos. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Gándara, P., Alvarado, E., Driscoll, A., & Orfield, G. (2012, February). Building pathways to transfer: Community colleges that break the chain of failure for students of color. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles.

Gándara, P., & Contreras, F. E. (2010). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gonzalez, L. M. (2012). College-level choice of Latino high school students: A social-cognitive approach. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 40, 144–155.

González, K. P., Stoner, C., & Jovel, J. E. (2003). Examining the role of social capital in access to college for Latinas: Toward a colleg...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of Tables and Figures
• Acknowledgments
• 1 Introduction: What Do We Know about Latina/o College Access and Choice?
• Part I: Home, Elementary, and Secondary Context
• Part II: Political Context and Postsecondary Choice
• Part III: Model College Access and Transition Programs
• Contributors
• Index