Search News


Browse Archives

News

A Message to Prospective Undocumented Students

October 16, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

High school counselors keep lists – short lists based on unofficial, one-on-one conversations about which colleges, mostly private ones, admit and grant institutional aid to illegal immigrants, says David Hawkins, director of public policy and research for the National Association for College Admission Counseling.

“What I consistently hear from counselors is they’re constantly trying to figure out what colleges they might have any chance to send an undocumented student to, realistically, with financial aid,” Hawkins explains. "It seems that there's this underground information that is flowing. It's not well-known, and it's not coordinated in any way."

“There are a lot of private colleges that actually do give undocumented students financial aid. It’s just that they don’t advertise it.”

With some states barring these students from public colleges, private colleges may soon be forced to consider advertising their own policies. In the meantime, if a pending recommendation becomes policy, high school counselors could confidently add Vassar College to their respective lists. In a recent recommendation to the president, Vassar’s Committee on Inclusion and Excellence proposed that the private institution adopt and publicize a new policy clearly signaling that it “will give admission applications submitted by undocumented students the same consideration given to any other applications it might receive. Undocumented students who are admitted to Vassar will be offered financial assistance based on demonstrated need following the same procedures Vassar uses to grant aid to accepted international students.” (Undocumented students aren't eligible for federal aid.)

Vassar now has no formal policy on undocumented student admissions and aid, says David Borus, dean of admission and financial aid at Vassar and a member of the 20-person committee of administrators, faculty and students that put forward the proposal.

“We wouldn’t get many applications in a given year from undocumented students, and when we did, we would handle them on a case-by-case basis,” Borus explains. “There are a number of schools that have quietly but consistently admitted and funded undocumented students over the years…. Vassar isn’t looking necessarily to be a trend-setter here or make a statement. We’re trying to clarify what our own procedures and policies should be.”

“It is in everyone’s best interest for colleges to be clear, or clearer, about what their policies are with regard to the admission and financial aid process,” Borus says. “Currently there is no stated policy and we don’t want to leave students and families and counselors and others wondering where they stand and what the possibilities are. We’d like to make it a bit clearer and more explicit.”

In 2007, Vassar returned to a "need blind" admissions policy for domestic students, meaning that applicants’ financial circumstances aren’t considered in admissions decisions. In March, Vassar announced it would replace loans with grants for students with family incomes of up to $60,000. Vassar’s president, Catharine Bond Hill, is an economist who has specialized in issues of higher education affordability and access.

Katherine Hite, an associate professor of political science and director of Vassar’s Latin American and Latino Studies program, is co-chair of the committee that offered the policy recommendation on undocumented students. “It’s much in keeping with the kind of broad-minded understanding and inclusive spirit of the college,” she says. “I am proud that Vassar is willing to consider that they should publicly step up."

The committee submitted the recommendation to the president September 19; its fate is still pending. The Vassar Student Association Council subsequently endorsed it unanimously, and the student newspaper, The Miscellany News, this week published an editorial in support. "A lot of federal policy, it revolves around exclusion," says James Kelly, a senior and the Vassar Student Association president. “We’re just making those students aware that Vassar is an option. Because without saying it [explicitly], given everything else that’s going on, it just might be perceived as an exclusive place."

About "everything else that's going on," while Vassar’s home state, New York, is one of 10 states that extends lower in-state tuition rates to undocumented students, a number of states have restricted illegal immigrants’ access to public colleges in recent months. (While a 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler v. Doe, affirms the right of illegal immigrants to a K-12 education, it doesn’t extend to higher education.)

Earlier this year, South Carolina barred illegal immigrants from attending public colleges as part of a sweeping new immigration law, and Alabama and North Carolina both prohibited them from entering community colleges. Meanwhile, in reinstating a dismissed lawsuit last month, a California appeals court found that in offering in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants, the state was “thwarting” the intent of federal immigration law.

“Vassar College is very quick to forget that more than 40 percent of the country is on my side,” says Jeremy Bright, a sophomore and president of the institution's Moderate, Independent and Conservative Alliance. Bright, who wrote an op-ed opposing the proposed admissions policy for undocumented students, says he opposes the recommendation “for both ideological and practical reasons.”

“I can understand the logic of taking one or two, or selectively taking specific candidates, saying, ‘Oh, this person’s very qualified, and we need to bring him or her here,'” says Bright. “I may not agree with it personally, but at least I can understand the logic.”

“But to publicly adopt a policy…basically endorsing illegal immigration, and saying that borders don’t matter, citizenship doesn’t matter, I’m completely against that.”

“To me, it sends a message to other applicants about, ‘This is the stated ideology of the school,’” Bright says.

Given the clashing ideologies characterizing the present political climate, a college is arguably brave these days for even attempting to enter into the immigration fray. Colleges typically have avoided formalizing their policies both because of the deep divisiveness of immigration issues, politically speaking, and, more practically speaking, the relatively low numbers of potential applicants any policies would impact, explains Hawkins, of the college admission counseling group.

But demographics are changing. Susan Klopman, vice president of admissions and financial planning at Elon University, in North Carolina -- which, on the flip side of things, as a matter of practice but not formal policy does not admit undocumented students -- says the issue of whether to admit or not to admit will likely attract greater attention at private colleges in the coming years. (Explaining Elon’s own practice, Klopman cites a desire not to run afoul of the federal government, and its financial aid stream, and a desire to treat all non-U.S. applicants equally, in terms of visa requirements and such.)

"None of us quite understand how the changing demographics of this country are going to affect our institutions, and I think that will bring this question to the fore in a more pressing manner than we have had to deal with up to this point,” Klopman says.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on A Message to Prospective Undocumented Students

  • Double standard
  • Posted by Jack Olson on October 16, 2008 at 8:50am EDT
  • You can't just walk into Vassar or most other colleges and register for classes. You must apply to be admitted because the college feels entitled to set standards for admission. Yet, the same college which claims the right to require students to apply for admission to the college doesn't see why a country isn't equally entitled to require immigrants to apply for admission to the country. "We're entitled to be selective, but you're not."

  • Breeding law-breaking?
  • Posted by Frank on October 16, 2008 at 8:55am EDT
  • I don't like supporting government-run social programs. They're typically poorly-run, wasting limited public resources. Privatization is a better idea, and allowable under the Constitution.

    Does that mean, I should not obey IRS rules, and not pay taxes? Because "elites" decide not to obey laws that try to discourage illegal immigration that is financially destroying the USA?

    Both would be wrong. But I'm not an "elite," so I won't claim moral superiority on April 15th.

    At least Vassar isn't indebting students. As opposed to naive edu-crats who load on $50,000.00 in student loans for degrees that many times have no marketability in the working world.

  • RE: Double Standard
  • Posted by Acacia O'Connor on October 16, 2008 at 10:10am EDT
  • The argument that Mr. Olsen makes about colleges reviewing admissions policies for undocumented students Vassar is a leap. Vassar is a private liberal arts institution of higher education, not a country- to equate the standards for "admission" of the two seems silly. And while, as Professor Hite says, the policy reflects the "inclusive spirit" of the college and could be construed by some to be some sort of institutional endorsement of illegal immigration it seems to me that its purpose is principally aimed at transparency, a favorite word in higher ed.

    Though really, should otherwise talented young adults be disqualified from admission at a *private* college based on where they live, who their parents are or how much money their families make? These students perspectives and voices are every bit as vital as any other, and are perhaps more valuable because they represent a present yet often voiceless part of our communities.

  • Resisting Juan Crow
  • Posted by Charles Bittner , Academic Liaison at The Nation on October 16, 2008 at 10:15am EDT
  • I applaud Vassar’s willingness to consider this admissions policy and hope that other colleges and universities, both private and public, will advance a similar strategy.

    Many of the undocumented students this policy will affect have spent their entire childhoods as students in our public school system. Against great odds, some have excelled, graduating with honors each year from high schools throughout the country. What advantage could be gained by denying these highly motivated students the possibility of continuing their education in the only home some of them have ever known? Moreover, while an undocumented student may one day change their immigration status, either through marriage or as a result of future modifications to immigration law, they will suffer the deleterious effects of exclusion from the country’s colleges and universities throughout their lives.

    These young people had little input in their parents’ decision to overstay work visas or enter the country without proper documentation, and consequently bear no personal responsibility for their current immigration status. Justice Brennan, in a Supreme Court decision concerning public education and undocumented students, wrote, "Imposing disabilities on the child is contrary to the basic concept of our system that legal burdens should bear some relationship to individual responsibility or wrongdoing. Obviously, no child is responsible for his birth and penalizing the child is an ineffectual as well as unjust way of deterring the parent."

    In fact, it is difficult to identify any compelling national interest or legitimate public purpose that exclusion from higher education advances, or to understand what the country hopes to accomplish by denying a college education to some of its residents, especially those for whom a lifetime of poverty is clearly possible without greater educational opportunity.

  • Posted by Greg on October 16, 2008 at 10:20am EDT
  • I wonder if Vassar, or any other college, state or private, that actively recruits or supports undocumented students would hire undocumented workers? I guess it is different based on which way the money is flowing.
    There are civil and criminal penalties for hiring illegal aliens. Sec. 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and 8 U.S.C. 1324a, makes it unlawful for any person knowingly to hire, recruit or refer for a fee any alien not authorized to work. An employer that violates these laws can face penalties of:
    · $250 to $2,000 fine for each unauthorized individual;
    · $2,000 to $5,000 for each employee if the employer has previously been in violation; or
    · $3,000 to $10,000 for each individual if the employer was subject to more than one cease and desist order.
    The employer could also be fined $100 to $1,000 for each individual “paperwork” violation.
    The criminal penalties for a pattern and practice violation can be up to $3,000 for each unauthorized alien, imprisonment up to six months, or both.

  • Point of order
  • Posted by Frank on October 16, 2008 at 5:30pm EDT
  • " .. it is difficult to identify any compelling national interest .."

    Care to explain why out-of-state LEGAL students have to pay up to 300% than ILLEGAL students?

    Where's the fairness?

  • "Undocumented Students"
  • Posted by DFS on October 17, 2008 at 3:55pm EDT
  • As soon as I saw those words I knew -- without surprise -- which way this was going.

    Does English mean anything anymore? I realize that some of the "undocumented" are here because they aged up from the illegal actions of their parents, but the law is still the law, and they remain illegal.

    Is this unreasonable? Or should we just throw away all immigration law? I am open to hearing opinions about what to do with the former minors.

  • Posted by JDR , Librarian on March 17, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • I must say that Mr. Bittner makes a most compelling argument. Is it truly in keeping with the spirit of this country to punish the children of those who choose to break the law? According to Justice Brennan it clearly is not. Current immigration laws require that children in the United States on an undocumented basis return to their native country within six months of their 18th birthday or else face a 3/10 year bar from returning to the US (depending on how long they stay past their 18.5 birthday). At first glance, this appears to be a reasonable policy, but the unfortuante reality of the situation is that many of these young adults are completely assimilated to US culture, no longer have any ties to their "native" countries, are still very closely connected to parents in the US, and are illiterate in their "native" language. Whether you like it or not, a young adult in these circumstances is going to remain in their comfortable settings right here in the United States nine times out of ten.

    I am not a person who believes in amnesty for all, open borders, or any of the other radical ideas being thrown around. But, in my mind, if you think denying illegal immigrants access to things like a higher education is going to make them go away or somehow benefit this nation, you are as out of touch with reality as those who would wipe away all immigration law. Law abiding illegal immigrants in the US face a minute threat of deportation and will often choose remain here as long as they can. If that is the case, why should we expect their children, completely culturally assimilated and with no connection to their country of citizenship, to do any different? The problem here is not the children who were brought here illegally, it is with the unenforceable policies of US immigration laws. We need the government to come up with and enforce immigration laws that realistically account for the labor needs of this country while also keeping in mind the rights and advantages of US citizens. Until we do this, we are going to continue to perpetuate the problems of illegal immigrants within our borders.

    That said, if either side of this argument can not recognize that there is a fundamental difference between an undocumented child brought/kept here illegally by their parents and the parent themself, I don't believe there is any chance of coming up with an effective legal strategy to deal with the problems of immigration throughout the US. True these students are illegal, but we must also acknowledge that they are not illegal because of a choice that they made, rather one that their parents made for them. And while I do acknowledge that legally the US grants them an opportunity to return to their country of citizenship, I conceed that it is unreasonable to expect them to do so. That leaves us in a quandry, but one that pales in comparison to the quandry that the students themselves face. When a private institution such as Vassar chooses to independently finance the education of these students, it is in the best interest of us all. A more educated work force, be it documented or undocumented, benefits everyone and has been statistically proven to place less of a burden on the taxpayer.

    I think Mr. Bittner poses an excellent question: how does denying these children access to higher education benefits us as a nation? I have heard the argument that it is tax payers financing their education, but it doesn't seem to hold water when the numbers are broken down (long term costs to the taxpayer for having uneducated undocumented workers vs. educating them). Does anyone else have any other arguments?