Certain Responses Matter: Analyzing Factors for Making Recipients Feel Supported, the Responses Taken by Institutions of Higher Education and Effects These Had on Students’ Sense of Support Post-DACA Repeal Notice

Abstract

On September 5th, 2017, President Trump announced the repeal of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program (DACA). Since its inception, this program has provided relief from deportation to almost a million young undocumented people. In the aftermath of the announcement, however, recipients of the program must grapple with the uncertainty, the psychological and practical implications of loss—all within a more anti-immigrant political and discretionary removal policy climate. Because policymakers fail to address this policy problem through concrete legislation, recipients have had to cope with the implications of the repeal announcement for an extended period of time, often alone. Periods of uncertainty impose serious mental, emotional, academic and health risks on DACA youth. Unlike undocumented youth in the past, however, DACA recipients have access to or have joined institutions, such as colleges and universities. These can serve as protective layers against the impact of the repeal. While a consensus about the positive effects of sense of support exist, less is known about the factors that matter to students during this time period, responses employed by academic institutions and whether they actually increase students’ sense of support. Situated within an institutional capital conceptual framework, this thesis finds that universities can intentionally or inadvertently serve as venues and agents of capital production and distribution, which can serve to affect students’ wellbeing. While much is known about undocumented students’ needs generally, these studies occurred during drastically different sociopolitical and psychologically periods for DACA youth. The termination DACA constitutes multiple practical losses, a psychological threat, and is manifested during harsher internal enforcement policies. To date, a systematic analysis of how universities responded also does not exist. Consequently, this thesis sets out to find the factors that influence DACA recipients in the aftermath of the repeal, how their institutions responded, and the impact the institutions’ response had on sense of support. This work drew on a mix of national surveys and regional, semi-structured in-depth interviews. More than forty-five survey responses were gathered, and seven interviews were conducted. Through this approach, this thesis sought to find not only whether responses affected the sense of support but also, why they exhibited an effect. Ultimately, this thesis finds that needs and factors for feeling supported were impacted by the repeal. Furthermore, while universities responded in various different ways, quantitative and qualitative data more strongly supported that social forms for response and email fostered a sense of support. Qualitative findings revealed that receiving an email mattered when it was perceived as a legitimate form action and social aid was effective because it addressed a socioemotional need. Evaluated by context and effort, responses found illegitimate left students feeling unsupported and further hindered their psychological state. Based on these findings, I recommend that most, if not all, universities and similar institutions hold the means to make students feel supported. I suggest protocols in responding to situations such as DACA, but I emphasize the need to contextualize the institution’s context to truly evaluate what its capacity is. Failure to respond institutionally to the repeal can inflict further discomfort on an already vulnerable student.