This paper provides evidence on the factors that influence the non-resident enrollment percentage for public and private institutes of higher education (IHEs). We find a significant positive correlation between the enrollment percentage and tuition for private IHEs and no significance for public IHEs. Further investigation reveals that the highest-priced public and private IHEs generally attract the highest percentage of non-resident students. This suggests that the more costly IHEs, especially private, may enjoy a special cache that allows them more latitude in setting non-resident tuition. The non-resident enrollment percentage is not appreciably different across a wide range of tuition levels for both IHE types, indicating that these IHEs might be able to maintain their non-resident enrollment percentage levels with marginal tuition increases.

This item contains the agenda, minutes, and attachments for the Faculty Senate meeting on this date. There may be additional materials from the meeting available at the Faculty Center.

In the United States, some states and higher education institutions allow undocumented students to pay in-state resident tuition at public colleges and universities. Yet, when undocumented youth apply and seek to qualify for in-state tuition, they find bureaucratic procedures and rules that may discourage them from applying at all, delay, or hamper their access to higher education. The study explores how such bureaucratic requirements impose learning, compliance, and psychological burdens on undocumented youth. Building upon administrative burdens scholarship and using qualitative and quantitative analyses of admissions applications at the institutional level, undocumented students reports' of their experiences, and surveys of college admissions officers, this study examines the admissions requirements and other factors that may shape the applications of undocumented students to colleges in the states providing ISRT benefits for undocumented youth. The findings suggest that undocumented youth navigate multifaceted institutional contexts across and within states, including requirements and rules at different organizational levels and interactions with admissions officers whose discretion may facilitate or obstruct access. Variations in ISRT requirements reflect states' patterns of immigration, demographics, political (sub) cultures, narratives about the deservingness, organizational factors as well as the discretion that college personnel has in applying the requirements. Findings suggest that factors associated with residency, notarized affidavits, tax forms, and lack of clear information and guidance from college personnel substantially increase burdens when undocumented youth seek to benefit from ISRT. Certainly, when states, institutions, and admissions officers establish and shape ISRT requirements, they implicitly influence the sense of belonging and membership of undocumented applicants and mediate intergovernmental tension surrounding legalization and inclusion of this population in society. / Doctor of Philosophy / Bureaucratic requirements and rules at some public colleges and universities in the United States may hamper the ability of undocumented immigrants to apply for admission and qualify for in-state resident tuition in the states and colleges that allow it. This study explores how such bureaucratic requirements impose learning, compliance, and psychological burdens on undocumented youth and the factors associated with such burdens. The study examines admissions applications in community colleges in the states where the benefit is available, interviews and surveys with undocumented youth as well as surveys of colleges admissions officers. The findings show that the administrative burdens that undocumented youth faces result from requirements and rules that overlap at different organizational levels, several policy interpretations, the intertwine between immigration and higher education policies, perceptions of such population's deservingness, and the discretion of admissions officers. Through these requirements, states and colleges shape the sense of belonging of immigrant youth and chart their legal and social inclusion.