Educational “When,” “Where,” and “How” Implications of In-State Resident Tuition Policies for Latino Undocumented Immigrants

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of the effects of in-state resident tuition (IRT) policies, which allow undocumented immigrants to pay in-state rather than out-of state tuition, on when and where undocumented immigrant students enroll, and how they finance their education. We identify effects based on differences in pre- and post-policy outcomes between those covered and not covered by the policy, net of the educational trends of citizens. Using data from two nationally representative data sources and multiple citizen comparison groups, we find that IRT policies affect when students’ enroll in college, and can have implications for other key educational decisions, including where and how to attend.

Undocumented Students in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature, 2001 to 2016

“…ISRT policies for undocumented students seem to increase enrollment; however, more 1.5-generation students are enrolling part time or in community colleges, showing that finances are still a potentially large barrier (Darolia & Potochnick, 2015). Several studies have also pointed out that while ISRT policies may increase enrollment, they do not do enough to help students persist and complete their degrees (Conger & Chellman, 2013; Darolia & Potochnick, 2015; Gonzales, 2009; Greenman & Hall, 2013). Regardless of state policies, the absence of an all-encompassing federal policy will continue to limit undocumented enrollment and persistence in higher education (Greenman & Hall, 2013).…”

Undocumented, to DACAmented, to DACAlimited: Narratives of Latino Students With DACA Status

“…Instead, DACAmented individuals are working toward a goal that can never be achieved, which diminishes their hope and may cripple their ability to reach their full potential. Without serious legislative reform, there will still be significant barriers to employment after graduation for many undocumented immigrants (Daroli & Potochnick, 2015).…”

Educational Effects of Banning Access to In-State Resident Tuition for Unauthorized Immigrant Students

“…Unlike Kaushal (2008) and Flores (2010b), they found adverse policy effects on foreign-born non-Mexican Hispanics and Hispanic foreign-born citizens. Darolia and Potochnick (2015) found that in-state tuition results in positive effects of approximately 2 percentage point on college enrollment of Latino foreign-born noncitizens (FBNCs); however, their results are only marginally significant. Potochnick (2014), examining the effects on a different indicator, but also employing difference-in-differences strategy, found that ISRT policies allowing access to ISRT for UIS caused a statistically significant reduction of 8 percentage points in the proportion of young Mexican (ages 16–19) unauthorized immigrants that drop out of high school.…”

“…Methodologically, a distinguishing characteristic of the studies analyzing the effects of giving access to in-state tuition rates for UIS has been merely to estimate the population targeted by the policy (i.e., UIS). Because no U.S. government agency directly registers undocumented migrants (Passel, 2005), studies that have measured the overall effects of the policy on a group of states or a single state have had to work with samples of Hispanics or Mexicans who are highly likely to be undocumented using the Current Population Survey (CPS; Amuedo-Dorantes & Sparber, 2014; Darolia & Potochnick, 2015; Flores, 2010a, 2010b; Flores & Chapa, 2009; Kaushal, 2008; Potochnick, 2014) or the American Community Survey (ACS; Chin & Juhn, 2011). However, studies that examined the policy effects at the institutional level identified UIS through the use of specific administrative databases that report the students affected by the policy (Conger & Turner, 2015; Dickson & Pender, 2013).…”