Hustle in Higher Education: How Latinx Students with Conviction Histories Move from Surviving to Thriving in Higher Education

Abstract

The voices and experiences of formerly incarcerated college students are emerging throughout the social science literature. The importance of documenting their narratives is grounded in the reality that more than an estimated 12,000 system-impacted people are enrolled throughout the California postsecondary education system. This paper highlights the knowledge and skills formerly incarcerated students possess and deploy to navigate higher education successfully. Our study adds to the growing body of literature examining the experiences of formerly incarcerated Latinx students from an anti-deficit perspective. We use the theory of funds of knowledge and semi-structured interviews with 16 formerly incarcerated Latinx students at different points of the postsecondary education pipeline to understand their experiences. We find that formerly incarcerated Latinx students tapped into their “hustle” to move from surviving to thriving in higher education. These pre-college skills, acquired through their life experiences, allow students to seek academic and financial resources, create academic networks, and make personal connections with institutional agents to overcome various personal and institutional barriers.

Keywords

formerly incarcerated funds of knowledge higher education Latinx college students qualitative methods

A college degree provides a pathway to social and economic mobility, particularly for people of color from working-class backgrounds (Silva & Snellman, 2018). College-educated people, on average, have higher-paying jobs, better physical health, and are more likely to be civically engaged (Abel & Deitz, 2019; Dee, 2020). However, college access becomes much more difficult for individuals with a conviction history (Halkovic & Greene, 2015). Recent state and national efforts aim to broaden college access for incarcerated persons. In 2021, the United States Congress revoked the ban on Pell grants for incarcerated persons, which reestablished access to federal financial aid to this marginalized population to attend higher education institutions (Vera Institute of Justice, 2020). In 2014, California passed State Bill 1391, which facilitated the establishment of face-to-face community college programs in state prisons to increase educational access for incarcerated persons (Britton et al., 2021).

A body of research is emerging that focuses on college students with a prior conviction history due to the expansion and support of college access programs in prisons (Halkovic & Greene, 2015; Hernandez, 2019). While there are no reliable estimates on the total number of students with conviction histories on campuses, data suggests that there are current estimates that 11,472 incarcerated students in California state prisons enrolled in credit-bearing college courses (B. Choate, personal communication, June 8, 2020). In 2019, the three levels of the California public higher education system—Universities of California (UC), California State Universities (CSU), and California Community Colleges (CCC)—served over 1000 formerly incarcerated students (Silbert & Mukamal, 2020).

Research studies on the experiences of students with a conviction history (SCH) have primarily focused on their educational experience while incarcerated or the impact that education has on recidivism (Mercer, 2009; Tailiferro et al., 2016). In recent years, the literature surrounding this specific student population shifted to focus on their educational experiences and transition to and through a college campus (Abeyta, 2020; Hernandez, 2019). However, there is less research on students with a conviction history and their narratives on their journey to college campuses (Halkovic & Greene, 2015).

This article explores how Latinx students with a conviction history use their experiences and sense of hustle to thrive on a college campus. We define hustle as a strategic way of seeking and accessing resources to achieve one’s goals (Hernandez, 2019). Examples of hustle on college campuses from students with conviction histories include the creative approaches to finding fiscal resources in places with limited financial resources and developing networks and professional relationships with faculty and administrators. To elucidate the experiences of these students, we employ funds of knowledge as our theoretical framework, which is defined as the knowledge, resources, and skills of working-class persons and the community (Vélez-Ibáñez & Greenberg, 1992). We use the expanded view of funds of knowledge proposed by Rios-Aguilar and colleagues (2011), which suggests that funds of knowledge should be studied from the capital perspective. This lens helps us understand how students turn funds of knowledge into forms of capital, such as a higher likelihood of college enrollment to college navigation.

Drawing on data from semi-structured interviews with 16 Latinx college students with conviction histories (SCH), our findings explore how SCH utilize their lived experience while navigating higher education to achieve their academic goals of success in each semester and, ultimately, college graduation. We show how these students overcame academic and fiscal obstacles, how they sought out academic and fiscal resources that allowed them to pass classes and work fewer hours, and how they created support systems to negotiate their unique experiences effectively on their campus. The aforementioned life skills developed for SCH before their arrival on campus. In turn, they deployed these skills as they transitioned from incarceration to a college campus.

This article aims to position students with histories of conviction as possessing information that can help them successfully navigate higher education institutions. Presenting SCHs in an anti-deficit perspective pushes against stigmas surrounding conviction status for current and future college students. In the first section of the article, we lay out prior literature on barriers to student success in college, barriers to success for formerly incarcerated students, and the ways students employ funds of knowledge to persist in higher education despite structural barriers in higher education. We then present our methods, findings, and implications for college administrators and faculty members.

Literature Review

Barriers to Student Success for Formerly Incarcerated Students

As a result of incarceration, an individual may lose access to government-sponsored programs and rights, such as access to public housing, the right to serve on juries, and the right to vote in some states (Alexander, 2012). The loss of access to these state and federal privileges and programs increases the difficulty of reentry into the local community. Another consequence of past imprisonment is being denied employment or encountering biases from employers who are fearful of future actions and behaviors (Pager, 2003). Finding employment can help individuals transition back into society after a period of incarceration; in some instances, employment is a condition of probation or parole (Murillo, 2021). Paradoxically, incarceration can be legally used to prevent individuals from getting hired, even when employment is a condition for their release (Agan & Starr, 2018). Alexander (2012) finds that 10 states prohibit discrimination based on a person’s conviction history. However, formerly incarcerated individuals often lose the ability to attain professional licenses, thus rendering them unable to be self-employed (Ewald, 2019).

This loss of access to both state and federal programs and rights increases the number of barriers in higher education for students with conviction histories (McTier et al., 2017; Stewart & Uggen, 2020). These obstacles occur at both the college application process and throughout their time in college. According to the United States Department of Education (n.d.), approximately 66% of colleges and universities collect information on criminal convictions of applicants. Evans, Blount-Hill and colleagues (2019) find that some private colleges are more likely to use the information as a factor in admission decisions compared to public colleges. Colleges with a larger share of students of color are less likely to use conviction histories in admissions decisions when compared to institutions with predominantly white student populations. These practices may signal that those institutions are constantly measuring the “risk” of applicants and the potential tarnish to their academic brand and legitimacy (Dizon et al., in press).

Beyond barriers to admission, students with conviction histories might struggle with paying for college. Higher education costs have been rising over the past 40 years due to public decreases in budget expenditures that result in individual student increases in tuition and fees and the cost of living (Kelchen et al., 2017). The high costs of college and an inability to find work may contribute to decreases in college enrollment for students with conviction histories. For example, in 2018, approximately 81% of all part-time students and 43% of all full-time students worked while attending college to defray costs (Snyder et al., 2019). However, finding employment is particularly difficult for students with conviction histories (Agan & Starr, 2018).

Access to adequate financial aid also remains a barrier for low-income and first-generation students (Tierney & Venegas, 2009), especially those with conviction histories (Custer, 2019). In many states, the first step to becoming eligible to receive state and federal financial aid is to complete the Free Application Form Student Aid (FAFSA) for federal financial aid. However, there are severe repercussions if college students are incarcerated or convicted of drug-related crimes while receiving federal financial aid. Primarily, they would lose access to federal financial aid and would no longer be eligible to complete the federal application. Some of these laws have been modified in the past decade. In 2021, the US Congress passed legislation to reinstate access to Pell grants for incarcerated persons. Despite these changes, access to sufficient funding remains a challenge for students with conviction histories.

States also implemented policy rules that limit access to financial aid for persons with conviction histories (Custer, 2019). Custer (2019) finds that over half of states have laws that deny access to state financial aid to justice-impacted students as a result of the legislation passed during the 1990s (Custer, 2019). A compounding barrier for students with conviction histories includes that over the last 20 years, financial aid offices have centered their resources on merit over need-based aid (Scott-Clayton & Zafar, 2019). SCH could be less likely to receive merit-based financial aid when compared to students without conviction histories based on their lack of access to college preparatory courses in their secondary education and gaps in time between secondary school and college enrollment (Huerta et al., 2020).

Another barrier to college for students with conviction histories is reduced access to housing. There are often restrictions on where persons with conviction histories can live (Kazemian & Walker, 2018). At the same time, many college students, and particularly low-income students, experience housing insecurity (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2018). The confluence of reduced employment opportunities and restrictions on housing renders SCH particularly vulnerable to housing insecurity as college students. Given the high costs of living in many college towns and cities, financial aid packages that do not fully cover these costs of attendance, and possible restrictions on on-campus housing, finding livable and stable residence remains a challenge for SCH (Kelchen et al., 2017).

Stigma presents another barrier to access and success in higher education for students with conviction histories. Stigmas are attributes that cause someone to be discarded and no longer accepted by others—a judgment on an individual’s character (Goffman, 1963). Stigma can lead to a negative sense of self, which influences interactions with others (Binnall, 2018; Copenhaver, Edwards-Willy, & Byers, 2007). One study finds that answering a question around a conviction history on a college application decreases the likelihood of completion for persons with conviction histories (Custer, 2019). Thus, the stigma of incarceration may contribute to the overall decreases in college access and success for students who enter higher education despite the barriers to entry (Giraldo et al., 2017).

College students often do not disclose when they have experienced incarceration. Those who do disclose their status might be subject to stigma. This stigma has implications for SCH who disclose this information—from the type of interactions with peers to discrimination by faculty based on the type of crime for which the student was convicted (Hernandez, 2019; Ott & McTier, 2019). When professors and peers learn of conviction histories, they might be less likely to treat students in an equitable manner (Giraldo et al., 2017). This unwelcoming college environment can impact students with conviction histories’ perceptions of openness and access to campus-based resources, from how they engage in study groups to interactions with professors outside of class time (Giraldo et al., 2017).

Many students receive academic preparation and support to plan for college in high school (Britton & Spencer, 2020; Fletcher & Tienda, 2010; Huerta, in press). However, persons with conviction histories are less likely to have had access to high-quality high schools (Deming, 2011). Education attainment rates of incarcerated people are lower than that for non-incarcerated persons (Cho & Tyler, 2013). For example, Cho and Tyler found that 68% of those incarcerated do not have a high school diploma, and this may be due to structural inequities that disproportionately impact low-income young men of color—the group most likely to be incarcerated (Rios, 2011). The culmination of inequitable practices in K-12 education can contribute to insufficient academic preparation, creating another barrier to SCH college success.

In his research on disenfranchisement, Binnall (2018) found that people with conviction histories become self-conscious of the “felon” label, leading them to worry about how others will view and interact with them. The mental awareness of being considered and labeled a “felon” can negatively influence people with conviction histories that could thus decrease their sense of community and connection on college campuses (Ott & McTier, 2019), thereby reducing the likelihood of college persistence.

Anti-Deficit Frameworks for Students with Conviction Histories

Some literature on formerly incarcerated and system-impacted students eschews a deficit perspective, such as articles that often only portray the struggles students face and the impact of education on recidivism (McTier et al., 2017).¹ In an examination of the literature, there are three forms of anti-deficit perspectives that should be used with this student population: the anti-deficit lens (Harper, 2010), researching for desire (Schreiner & Anderson, 2005), and strength-based approach (Tuck, 2009). An anti-deficit lens looks to understand and illuminate the way students find the resources needed to succeed in education and not what they lack and why they may leave education (Harper, 2010; Castro, 2014). Researching for desire is looking at communities positively and understanding the complexity, contradiction, and self-determination of a person’s lived experiences (Tuck, 2009). Schreiner and Anderson (2005) define a strength-based lens as a focus on the students’ natural talents and how they can help the student find success in higher education.

Students with conviction histories are particularly adept at navigating dangerous situations and have experience with institutional systems (Halkovic, 2014; Halkovic & Greene, 2015). Giraldo (2016) shows how these students use their knowledge developed from participating in gangs and being imprisoned to combat microaggressions in higher education. One limitation of this perspective is that students are not contributors to campus communities but rather defending themselves against hostile structures (Huerta & Rios-Aguilar, 2021).

Additionally, studies find that students draw inspiration from their lived experiences to persist despite setbacks and difficulties within higher education (Hernandez, 2019; Turner-Odom, 2016). According to Turner-Odom (2016), students use their internal strength to help them find success by drawing on their hopes for a second chance and no longer wanting to return to prison. With similar conclusions, Hernandez (2019) found formerly incarcerated students use support networks drawn on shared lived experiences on college campuses to find success and meet like-minded students with similar histories, which some have called their “homies.”

Funds of Knowledge

Funds of knowledge (FOK) is another important anti-deficit framework (Vélez-Ibáñez & Greenberg, 1992; Moll et al., 1992). Funds of knowledge emerged as a concept in the early 1990s to counter deficit research surrounding low-income, working-class Mexican immigrants and Mexican American families. According to Moll et al. (1992), the knowledge found in Mexican immigrant and Mexican American households can range from information about agriculture, household management, home repair, folk medicine to material and scientific knowledge. By understanding what knowledge is contained in the household, the theory looks to identify precisely how children’s homelives can translate and be used to their educational experiences in local K-12 schools.

A study with Mexican families looked at familial resources and how families exchanged resources and knowledge as currency within their networks (Vélez-Ibáñez & Greenberg, 1992). This study connected the trading of information and services through the family’s interactions with others to reframing a pupil-teacher interaction as a network interaction. This perspective facilitates the teacher developing a reciprocal relationship with students as opposed to a one-way classroom interaction. Moll et al. (1992) showed how schools could improve educational outcomes by using the knowledge embedded in their families of Mexican and Mexican American students.

Huerta and Rios-Aguilar (2021) explored the educational experiences of Latino youth involved with gangs using a funds of knowledge approach. They found how funds of gang knowledge can help Latino youth find academic success and help educators reframe what knowledge is important and how it is used. They highlight that fund of gang knowledge is useful in navigating streets and schools and connecting course content in alternative schools. By valuing this knowledge, high schools can develop support systems to help gang-associated students succeed in alternative school classroom. Additionally, high schools can develop programming that will assist the student in creating a stronger sense of connection to the K-12 and help them navigate hostile spaces.

Methods

One goal of qualitative research is to foster a nuanced understanding of how people assign and construct meaning to their lived experiences (Maxwell, 2012). We thus employ qualitative methods to understand the experiences of students with conviction histories (SCHs) in higher education. We examined how students moved from surviving to thriving in postsecondary education by utilizing what they labeled as “hustle.” We use interview data drawn from a larger study on the experiences of students with conviction histories in higher education.

Sample

The study consisted of 16 Latinx participants who were either completing or had already completed a 4-year college degree (see Table 1). We employed snowball sampling using the following criteria (Heckathorn, 2011): students who identified as Latinx, persons who have had contact with the carceral system through arrests, convictions, etc., transferred from a community college, and are currently enrolled at a university or have earned a bachelor’s degree. The first author used snowball sampling by contacting formerly incarcerated student groups potential in his personal network. Participants were recruited through an initial email invitation. At each interview, the researcher asked participants for names of additional potential college students with conviction histories, resulting in eight initial participants recruited through snowball sampling. In total, 16 participants participated in individual one-on-one and face-to-face semi-structured interviews in 2019. Participants were provided a $10 gift card incentive; however, not all participants accepted the compensation.

Table 1.

Self-Reported Characteristics of Study Participants at Date of Interview.

Name	Age	Gender	Highest Level of Education	Educational Goal	Identification
Ann	36	Female	Bachelors	Masters	Latina
John Doe	36	Male	Currently working on bachelors	Masters	Chicano
Pichi	28	Female	Bachelors	Masters	Latina
Tony	29	Male	Currently working on bachelors	Masters	Latino
Frank	47	Male	Currently working on bachelors	Masters	Latino
Ed	43	Male	Currently working on bachelors	Bachelors	Mexican-American
Panchito	29	Male	Working on master’s program	Masters	Latino
Peewee	45	Male	In master’s program	Doctorate	Mexican
Delia	35	Female	Currently working on bachelors	Doctorate	Latina
Shade	24	Female	Currently working on bachelors	Masters	Latina
Blank	38	Female	About to start masters	Masters	Latina
Tino	46	Male	Masters	Doctorate	Chicano/Native American
Sergio	50	Male	Doctorate	Doctorate	Chicano
Marie	53	Female	1^st year of masters	Master’s degree	Latina
Beto	40	Male	Beginning doctorate	Doctorate	Chicano
Steven	39	Male	Bachelors in ethnic studies	Doctorate	Chicano

Empirical Strategy

For the study, we conducted 16 one-on-one semi-structured interviews over 1 month. We utilized this format to attain information about the participants’ experiences as college students with conviction histories. The interview protocol allowed for flexibility to either follow the set questions or improvise to get richer data (Lichtman, 2014). We thus gathered information on how students utilized their lived experiences to thrive in higher education through “hustling.” The following questions were part of the interview protocol: (1) Describe any experiences that you had while incarcerated or while growing up that you felt you were able to relate to higher education? (2) Describe how you related [hustling] to higher education? (3) Tell me about any skills that you feel you learned while you were incarcerated or while growing up that you were able to apply to your educational journey; (4) What have been some ways that you overcome obstacles faced while pursuing your education? and (5) Have you used any of the skills you learned from being incarcerated to overcome these obstacles? Each interview was recorded on a digital recorder. The length of interviews ranged from 30 to 90 minutes, and the average length was 1 hour. After each interview, the first author wrote field notes about his experiences and reflections during the interviews. A third-party transcription service transcribed interviews verbatim to begin the data analysis stage.

We used a four-step process for data analysis: preparing, exploring, and coding the data; refining findings; identifying themes; and validating the findings (Clark & Creswell, 2015). After receiving the data from the transcription service, we reviewed field notes from the interviews where preliminary codes began to emerge. To focus the coding, we utilized funds of knowledge to see how students drew from their past experiences to find ways of succeeding (Moll et al., 1992; Saldaña, 2015). We began to see the recurring role that hustling played in a student’s success. Hustling emerged as knowledge, which the students employed to find success in higher education and led them to seek either educational resources or motivation to get better grades.

To ensure validity, the first author used member checking where we consulted with each other over the emerging findings through journaling, peer debriefing, and member checking (Clark & Creswell, 2015; Ortiz, 2003). Member checking helps to elevate the trustworthiness of the findings (Clark & Creswell, 2015). The lead researcher utilized journaling to track the procedures and decisions made during the study while collecting data (Ortiz, 2003). Additionally, we used peer debriefing to discuss our findings, which allowed us to revise the themes from analyzing the data and further develop our findings section.

Positionality

The research team’s personal experiences and histories present a nuanced understanding of the participants’ lived experiences, contributing to our research approach. The first author identifies as a student with a history of conviction who has navigated the higher education path from a community college student to his status as a doctoral student in education. The second author also identifies as a college graduate with a conviction history who has also navigated applying to and completing college and is currently enrolled in a master’s degree program. The third author is an assistant professor who does not have a conviction history. The first and second authors’ identification as people with conviction histories allowed them to an enhanced cultural intuition to develop a heightened level of trust with the study participants and gain deeper insight into their education and life experiences (Delgado Bernal, 1998). The collective experiences as students with conviction histories helped the research team develop a perspective on the data analyzed that other researchers might not possess without relevant lived experiences or personal connections to being directly impacted by the criminal justice system (Milner, 2007).

Results

Using a funds of knowledge (FOK) framework, we interrogate how students with conviction histories use their knowledge and skills to access resources in their postsecondary education. In this study, we identified these skills as hustling, the employment of knowledge and skills necessary to strategically seek and access resources to achieve goals in higher education. Our findings are organized into three sections. First, we look at how students defined and deployed their hustle before coming to higher education. Second, we highlight how students utilize their hustle to access resources, people, and opportunities in higher education. Finally, we show how participants hustle academically to raise their GPA and create academic networks of support. Through this reconceptualization of hustle, students repurpose their survival skills to thrive in academia.

Hustling as Hard Work and Resilience in Youth and Adolescence

Seven of the 16 participants recounted how they viewed hustling as survival in the contexts of their neighborhoods as children and young adults. For Marie, a 53-year-old woman pursuing a Master’s degree, hustling was survival. Marie states, “I have hustled since I was a little girl, since I was 12 years old, hustling, I think maybe before that but [that is] when I really started hustling the streets.” Marie further explained how she hustled in prison to survive. She states, “That’s how I made a living in prison, making cards, selling cards. That’s how I survived in prison, with the cards.” While in prison, Marie drew birthday cards and illustrated envelopes, which she then sold to other incarcerated persons to make money. For Marie, making the cards was a form of survival that provided her with a method to access her resources to have a better life during incarceration. Furthermore, here, Marie hints that hustling is something that she has had to do since a child. Another participant, Shade, a 24-year-old woman working on her BA degree, echoes Marie’s sentiment that she had been agentic in meeting her own needs and finding a way to survive from a young age. Shade states,

It’s resilience. I learned how to survive – big time. I was homeless at 12 years old. Fucking living in TJ, selling fruits and vegetables. I just learned to be resilient. I do not want to say that I know how to ask the right questions, but I’m not afraid to ask questions.

For Shade, not only did she hustle to survive but she also defined it as a form of resilience. Through hustle, she made money by selling fruits and vegetables as a street vendor in Tijuana. Having to hustle also taught her to ask questions to access the fiscal and informational resources needed to survive and thrive in college. Another, participant Panchito, a 29-year-old man in a master’s degree program, recounts,

If I was going to go out and, ‘Hey, we need to go get some food. We ain’t got no money. How are we going to get food?’ We’ll strategize on how to get food. It was just more about being able to really—Me, personally, just being goal-oriented, and being resilient, having an objective in mind and refusing to fail.

In the above quote, Panchito shared having to hustle by developing strategic partnerships to achieve his goal of securing food for his family. Importantly, Panchito uses the term “we,” which implies that the hustle, or strategizing, was a group effort and enterprise to survive as young person. Moreover, the initial use of the plural noun indicates the construction or use of a network to achieve his goals or that he is aware that working with others will allow him to attain his objectives. In talking about working with others, he shows how he employs techniques to accomplish his goals. This quote suggests that even the cooperative nature of the strategy was a form of hustle. While Panchito starts with using the word “we,” he ends with how his individual orientation toward meeting his goals did not allow for failure. By employing his hustle to meet his basic needs, Panchito embodies resilience by not allowing his circumstances in life to dictate his outcomes. He did not see failure as a possibility.

While Marie, Shade, and Panchito recall initially using their hustle to survive as children and young adults with inadequate housing and food, they shared how their hustle helped them survive while incarcerated. All three quotes in this section demonstrated that each participant deployed hustling, which equated survival, and this was exemplified by finding a way to earn money. Finding a way to make money provided these participants with resources to survive both on the streets and in prison.

As young adults and adolescents, hustling was strategically employed to attain specific outcomes—earning money, buying food, and accessing resources in prison. For example, Shade had to think in nontraditional ways to earn money given her age and lack of housing. Marie employed her creativity and skills to get resources in prison. Panchito used planning as a form of hustling that allowed him to envision an outcome, create a plan to achieve this outcome, and develop a network. Like these three participants, Tony, Delia, Frank, Peewee, Tino, and Beto spoke about hustling as a form of survival and a method to access resources. Thus, the participants survived by hustling to access resources, using critical thinking skills, and developing a network.

Hustling as Thriving in Higher Education

Students in this study used their hustle throughout their adolescence to develop and refine skills needed to access and locate basic needs, such as adequate food and housing. They used hustle practices learned as children to survive and then thrive in higher education. For example, participants spoke of working hard to succeed in higher education, seeking money to complete their formal education, and developing networks in colleges that would help them succeed.

Participants hustled in their educational pathways to prove to themselves through evidence of a strong work ethic. Shade states, “I work hard and I show up. I show up and show out.” With this quote, she talks about working hard and performing well academically. Similarly, Delia, a 35-year-old woman pursuing her BA degree, says, “Whatever it is. Proving your name or who you are, whatever. You got to work for it. Higher education, you’ve got to work for it as well, too. It’s not just going to be given to you.” In this statement, Delia emphasizes the need to prove her name by working hard and building a reputation to earn a college degree. Through her life experiences, she understands that successful attainment of goals in college and life comes from hustling or hard work. Shade and Delia both discuss their aim to achieve their goals in accessing and completing postsecondary education.

Acquiring fiscal resources, such as the federal Pell Grant for low-income students and federal work-study programs to meet living expenses, provide another example of how students in this study employed their hustle in higher education. Marie states, “You get money for going to school. That’s the only way I could get money, so I tried it, went to see about it because I heard you get good money and that was the main reason I started [going to college].” Initially, Marie entered higher education as part of her hustle. Entering college was a way to access financial resources that were otherwise unavailable to her due to her conviction history.

Although Marie started college to gain access to federal aid, she has grown to love higher education and persisted to her first year of a master’s degree program in Social Work. Beto, a 40-year-old Latino man pursuing a doctoral degree, echoes Marie’s sentiments about starting school to simply access the financial aid resources. He says, “I started going to community college… and I tell people it was to get financial aid because I needed to make some kind of money.” Another participant, Steven, a 39-year-old man with his BA degree, mentioned how his hustle in pursuing higher education helped him access money to survive. Steven said,

This is the library. If you want to buy your books, yes, you could. What I do [is] I go to fucking cheapbooks.com, get them on the cheap, use that $500 money that EOPS [Extended Opportunity Programs and Services], that’s what it’s for, buy your books. I’m going to do what I can because I’m struggling trying to save as much money as I can. That’s that hustler shit.

Here, Steven discusses how he uses the library because he does not have the money to buy both his books and basic needs. He uses his hustle strategies by finding alternative methods to save some of the $500 received for book grants for personal savings to survive during the academic semester. Steven also talks about working hard to receive scholarships that have provided him access to additional financial resources. He states,

The George Miller [grant] was $7,000, McNair [Scholars Program] was $3,000, and the public service [grant] was $1,000 worth of scholarship, that I earned $11,000 in scholarships. I really started hustling that shit. Yes, you’ve got to do some work on that shit. To get there [to become eligible], you’ve got requirements for you to do that, but it works on so many levels.

Steven, like the other six students in this study, employed hustling to use the limited financial resources provided by his public college to finance his education. He applied for and received numerous scholarships. Here, he shared that obtaining scholarships was a hustle and within that hustle there was work that needed to be done understanding that it was not just going to be given to him.

Students with conviction histories also used their hustle in higher education to build institutional relationships that allow them to succeed at their institutions. Panchito discussed how he transfers hustling skills learned as a child to a college setting by building community as an undergraduate student to learn how to access more resources at his institution. Panchito says,

“Sort of like the hustler mentality and survival skills. How you survive in your community. That helped me survive at UCLA when I had a community. If I was by myself, it would have been difficult. Like I said, these institutions are not built for us.”

Panchito speaks about having a community that helped him succeed at UCLA and acknowledges that he did not fit the traditional markers of a UCLA student. Tino, a 46-year-old man with a master’s degree in Social Welfare, also speaks about the help he received from people on his campus that impacted his community college experience. Regarding the role of a community college professor, Tino states, “[I] finally went to [the professor’s] class and ever since then, my entire community college experience, she was there to help me with my [class] papers, help us with the group we were starting and it’s just interesting. She gave me hope.” Like Panchito, Tino spoke about a community college professor who helped him with his class assignment and gave him critical hope for his success in community college. Both Tino and Panchito built a network that allowed them to thrive in higher education. Across different networks, Panchito found other students who provided a sense of community and encouragement to become successful, and Tino aligned himself with faculty who provided guidance and encouragement with class materials and resources to become successful in community college.

Six of the 16 participants hustled to enroll and thrive in college. The ethos of hustle, skills, and knowledge acquired growing up in working-class communities provided the foundation for the students to prove to themselves and others a high work ethic and create networks to locate support systems to become successful. For some students, their initial motivation to enroll in college was to access financial resources to help them survive. In turn, this economic hustle allowed them to succeed in college while covering their basic needs through local, state, and federal financial aid and scholarships. The participants utilized their relationships to locate peers and mentors in college that could help them succeed in higher education. In the next section, we explore how students employ their hustle academically to persist and complete college.

Hustling as Thriving Academically

Participants connected their past experiences with hustling to utilizing the skills they had developed to also succeed academically. They defined hustling as working hard, planning, and being future-oriented. Furthermore, the students utilized their hard work and accessed campus services and created networks to complete college. Marie believes that she hustled to get her degree and achieve other goals. She says, “With hustling, by trying to do what I had to do to get by, I used that [same strategy] in school, I hustle to get my degree and do what I need to do to get it, make a plan of how it’s going to work out and follow that plan.” Here, she highlights that she had to develop an educational plan and follow that goal to get closer to her college degree. Thus, she persisted and eventually transferred from a community college and is now in her first year of her graduate program. The definition of hustle as hard work is reflected in the experiences of other students with conviction histories. Another student, Peewee, a 45-year-old man currently enrolled in a master’s degree program, says,

I’m like a soldier. That’s how I look at it. It’s like a war. I have to fight for my education, I grind, I work hard. I work hard. Hard work pays off. I sit in the front row [in the classroom]. I ask [the professor] questions. I write [my class] papers early. I don’t slack off. I don’t wait until the last minute to write my essays. I always read [ahead in] my books.

Peewee talks about his grind, or hustle, by working hard on his schoolwork, paying attention in class, sitting in the front row, and asking questions, and when combined, signals a deep interest in the course content. He emphasizes, by repeating the phrase twice, that his hard work undergirds his access to learning. Another student, Blank, a 38-year-old woman starting a master’s program, uses language like that of Peewee. She states, “Why waste it like doing a bad job? If I’m going to be here, why not get something out of it and do what you’re supposed to do. Learn and really use it to its full advantage. I’m one of those students who never missed, who always put their hand in the air.” She states that she does not want to waste her education.

Beto reinforces Blank’s beliefs around putting in the work and gaining content knowledge out of her courses. Beto completed extra credit for his courses. He states, “I had a Spanish class that I took, that they offered extra credit for being involved in the Spanish club. That was like extra credit, I’m all over that.” Here, he demonstrated his willingness to do extra work and take advantage of the extra credit to succeed, or hustle, in his Spanish class.

Programs Accessed

Thirteen of the 16 students spoke of the impact of seeking and accessing campus-based programs and services available at their college. Given that many of the students with conviction histories had negative experiences with bureaucracies and administration due to prior convictions and incarceration, their willingness to initiate contact with non-essential services speaks to resilience as a part of their hustle. Regarding academic services, Beto mentions, “It was a variety of different things [programs], some of them were like financial resources. Some help with [college] expenses, some of them will help with tutoring.” For Beto, accessing resources meant seeking out both financial and academic services. In a similar vein, Steven talks about accessing counseling services. He states, “If you’re a student, you’ve got an ID now, you can do drop-in counseling, and just fucking formulate some questions.” Both students describe both knowing and seeking out the suite of services available—from the academic to the financial. Beto reports that he attended tutoring because it was available. Steven talks about asking questions through the academic counseling services to help him develop an educational plan to attain his degree aspiration.

In addition to locating resources such as the tutoring services and counseling center, many participants spoke of connecting with people on campus to succeed academically. Marie states, “Starting from community college, I got to be friends with certain counselors as I started going in, and I became friends with them. When I needed something, I could just go to them and ask them, and I still do that till today.” Marie looked to make connections with staff members. Participants such as Ed., Tony, Pichi, and Tino also spoke about forming relationships with college staff members to access resources in higher education. In turn, these consistent college connections became a network that provided support in different contexts. While Marie started searching for staff who can respond to her requests in the moment, after making a connection, that person became a part of her network of success; connecting with staff led to other opportunities such as speaking engagement on campus and attendance at academic conferences. Ann, a 36-year-old woman with a BA degree, says,

First thing I started off by talking to my professors in my major. She’s the one that, ‘Oh, there’s a professor here that works with former incarcerated students and students still incarcerated.’ She alone introduced me to Reese, Dr. Reese. I looked him up online and saw that he had a reintegration academy. I was like, ‘Oh, this is perfect. Hopefully he’ll let me intern for him.’ Then that’s where I found out about Project Rebound. Since our program was just starting, there was the opportunity to be able to volunteer within the program and help build our program here in addition. I did [Dr. Reese’s] PEP program, integration academy and just was offered almost too many opportunities to gain experience relatable to social work.

Ann found that by talking to professors, she received access to resources that she did not know existed on campus. A professor connected her with another professor who provided support through an organized program for students with conviction histories, but this experience created the conditions for work relevant to her social work major. Similarly, Beto states,

I got to meet a lot of folks along the way that would advocate for me and helped to open up doors for me. I technically couldn’t get paid as [student body] president because of my record. I wasn’t being allowed to work for the district. It was because of the dean of student affairs at the time that advocated for me that the door ended up opening up.

Here, Beto talks about how his record prohibited him from being compensated for his time due to his record. In his local geographic district, persons with conviction histories were not allowed to be hired. However, he credits his network, who advocated on his behalf to ensure that he received compensation for his work as the student body president.

Students in this study utilized their lived experiences to succeed academically. They employed their work ethic and persistence, skills formerly used to acquire basic needs through hustling in their neighborhoods and prisons to find resources and people who could support their academic success. They utilized their hustle to receive scholarships and develop networks. Students went from being convicted of crimes and using their hustle to survive in their local contexts to accessing and financing higher education.

Discussion and Implications

This study employs the funds of knowledge framework to show how students with conviction histories employ their hustle in higher education. In turn, students with conviction histories then employ this same hustle skill set to thrive as students in higher education. Throughout this paper, the students each demonstrated a purposeful search for fiscal and human resources that allowed them to not only survive but to thrive in college by using a variety of resources, skills, and knowledge to navigate a complex and bureaucratic system to become successful.

Latinx students with conviction histories strategically navigated their college environments to access resources, even when resources are limited. This approach required them to activate their hustle and acquire the resources they needed. We argue that the students’ hustle enables them to access resources in often resource-constrained college settings and overcome multiple hurdles compared to peers. Velez-Ibanez and Greenberg’s (1992) initial conceptualization of funds of knowledge highlights the resources, skills, and knowledge embedded in Mexican families used to survive and forge relationships with community members. Among students with conviction histories, hustling is the knowledge acquired through their lived experiences that is used to first survive and then thrive. In turn, these students employ and deploy this knowledge to find resources in higher education settings. For these students engaging their hustle is creating the plan needed to acquire the resources, and deploying it is the work they initiative in pursuing their goal, which is their grind. Like the work of Hernandez (2019), who demonstrates how funds of knowledge is found in the lived experience of Latinx formerly incarcerated college students, hustle is the knowledge these students possess to acquire their goals learned from within their communities and homies. Interestingly, this study pushes back against how narratives of stigma lead to decreased access to resources for formerly incarcerated students or how students only face obstacles (Ott & McTier, 2019). Rather than feeling marginalized, the students in the study were resourceful and made personal connections with college faculty and staff to increase the likelihood of success in college. Students built relationships with financial aid counselors, academic counselors, and staff in on-campus programs as part of their hustle to thrive in higher education.

Overcoming Barriers to Services for Persons with Conviction Histories

Numerous barriers to higher education exist for persons with conviction histories. Jobs are more challenging to acquire, access to college financial aid can be limited, and stigma exists against persons with conviction histories (Alexander, 2012; Custer, 2019). Approximately Forty states have policies restricting individuals with conviction histories to stable work opportunities (Agan & Starr, 2018). In response to the discrimination that rendered employment more difficult for those impacted by the justice system, a number of the study participants commented how they initially went to college to access financial aid to survive, get a job, and improve their lives. This reality demonstrates how the students’ hustle functions because jobs are hard to locate. Students with conviction histories reported that they returned to pursue higher education because funding was available at schools. The entry point for all participants in this study was California community colleges. This sector of higher education is one of the most accessible for many reasons, such as relatively low cost, varied academic programs, and thus serves as the most common entry point for Latinx students in the state (Chapa & Schink, 2006). Most SCH commence their postsecondary career in community colleges. It is not surprising, given that private colleges are more likely to ask about conviction histories compared with public institutions (Evans, Szkola, et al., 2019). Private colleges also tend to be less affordable than public universities.

Students had to overcome the stigma that exists toward persons with criminal convictions on college campuses (Abeyta, 2020; Custer, 2019; Giraldo et al., 2017). Students described using their hustle to demonstrate their commitment to succeeding in college. They equated this work with proving their names in other contexts, such as the neighborhoods where they grew up. The decision to enroll in college, students with conviction histories recognized the importance of demonstrating their work ethic and academic capabilities to persons on college campuses. As part of their hustle, they found and attended tutoring and counseling to demonstrate their work ethic and ensure academic success.

Students with conviction histories created support networks composed of other students and college staff and faculty who could advocate for them. Through these networks, they learned of opportunities that would increase the likelihood of success in college. These networks opened up access to other resources on campus and job opportunities. These findings align with prior work on the role of networks for college students. Karp and Hughes (2008) show the importance of information networks and social ties in college persistence (Tierney & Venegas, 2006).

Students’ intentional built relationships with key staff and faculty in higher education, as this demonstrated a strategic hustle to become successful in college. Some participants mentioned seeking out faculty who had experience working with currently and formerly incarcerated students. In doing so, they found persons who had demonstrated that they were more interested, sensitive, and aware of the unique needs in providing help to students with conviction histories rather than stigmatizing them. Students employed knowledge they entered the institution with learned from lived wisdom to find “Homies” who will support them as they embark on their journeys (Hernandez, 2019). Through the development of these networks or communities of support students were able to find acceptance on campus, leading to an increased sense of belonging (Abeyta, 2020; Strayhorn et al., 2013). This sense of belonging, in turn, is associated with increased college success.

Halkovic (2014) outlines how students’ interactions with institutions and institutional actors promote success amongst students and advocacy for these students on campus. The strategic network formation of students in this study demonstrates how this student population learned to navigate systems that are not historically friendly toward them due to admissions policies or other forms of stigma. Many colleges have more stringent screening policies and impose restrictions on students with conviction histories that may limit the types of degrees to which they can apply (Custer, 2019). For example, SCH might not be allowed to or discouraged from enrollment in courses that require licensure by the state. Understanding these barriers, students with conviction histories in this study described building relationships with financial aid officers and faculty who were interested in working with students with this life experience.

Implications for Research

Future research should focus on broadening the conversation around students with conviction histories. Much of the current work explores how education impacts SCH. Additional research is needed on how SCH experience higher education, particularly SCH, who are historically underrepresented in higher education such as Latinx, Native, and Black students. The research should highlight the skills and knowledge these students possess—an anti-deficit perspective. Future work could also look at the reentry experience of SCHs and the importance of community colleges within the conviction-to-convocation journey. Studies should focus on best practices and outcomes to help SCH achieve their academic goals. In addition, future research should analyze policies and provide recommendations around how to expand programs to all public colleges and universities. Finally, additional scholarship is needed on the role of programs and student organizations serving SCH in increasing a sense of belonging and aiding in positive academic outcomes.

Implications for Practice

This article elucidates the numerous ways in which SCH utilize their hustle to navigate higher education. Colleges and universities cannot continue to put the burden of responsibility on the shoulders of SCH, as has been done with other Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC). Whether the entry point is in correctional or academic institutions, colleges and universities need to provide SCH resources and opportunities: student services, leadership, and professional development, and career opportunities.

California’s public higher education system has over 100 academic and student support programs for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated students. However, there are sometimes barriers to learning about existing programs for students. Colleges and universities should provide incarcerated students with student services and academic preparation that will help them understand their options and continue their education as they transition from incarceration to their place of residence. In addition, colleges and universities can support the development and implementation of on-campus peer mentor programs for SCH to provide opportunities to develop their communication, navigational, and leadership skills. At the same time, peer mentors can empower and guide their mentees through their shared experience of incarceration and pursuit of higher education. Lastly, academic and career counselors must be trained on the unique needs and barriers for SCH in college. In California, there are nearly 50 agencies and bureaus that license across different occupations and professions. Each agency and bureau have their own legal barriers for people with arrest and conviction histories. Colleges and universities should train faculty and staff to understand how these legal barriers impact formerly incarcerated students’ academic and career decisions.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Joe Louis Hernandez is a current doctoral student in the Higher education and student affairs program at Claremont Graduate University. He currently serves as the inaugural coordinator for Rising Scholars at Mt. San Antonio College, which serves formerly incarcerated students. His research centers on developing an anti-deficit framework that can present formerly incarcerated students and Streetwise Scholars instead of only focusing on reducing recidivism and the barriers they face.

Danny Murillo is a current graduate student in the Social and Cultural Analysis of Education program at California State University, Long Beach. He co-founded the Underground Scholars Initiative, a student support organization and program dedicated to serving formerly incarcerated students. He was the primary author of The Possibility Report: From Prison to College Degrees in California.

Tolani Britton is a professor of Education at UC Berkely School of Education. She uses quasi-experimental methods to explore the impact of policies on students’ transition from secondary school to higher education and access and retention in higher education. Recent work investigates whether the disproportionate increase in incarceration of Black males for drug possessions and manufacture increased gaps in college enrollment rates by race and gender.

References

Abel

J. R.

Deitz

(2019). Despite rising costs, college is still a good investment (No. 20190605). Federal Reserve Bank of.

Abeyta

M. E.

(2020). Formerly incarcerated Latino men in California community colleges. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 27(2), 51–62.

Agan

Starr

(2018). Ban the box, criminal records, and racial discrimination: A field experiment*. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(1), 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjx028.

Alexander

(2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.

Binnall

J. M.

(2018). Summonsing criminal desistance: Convicted felons’ perspectives on jury service. Law & Social Inquiry, 43(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12317.

Britton

Friedmann

Adan

(2021). Higher learning inside: The demographic makeup of incarcerated persons taking postsecondary courses in California. Report prepared for UC Davis Wheelhouse Center for Community College Leadership and Research.

Britton

Spencer

(2020). Do students who fail to plan, plan to fail? Effects of individualized learning plans on postsecondary transitioning. Teachers College Record, 122(5), n5. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200509.

Broton

K. M.

Goldrick-Rab

(2018). Going without: An exploration of food and housing insecurity among undergraduates. Educational Researcher, 47(2), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0013189X17741303.

Castro

E. L.

(2014). “Underprepared” and “at-risk”: Disrupting deficit discourses in undergraduate STEM recruitment and retention programming. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 51(4), 407–419. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1515/jsarp-2014-0041.

10.

Chacón

J. A.

(2013). The experiences of low-income Latino/a students in the California community college system at a time of education budget cuts. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12(3), 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1538192712468158.

11.

Chapa

Schink

(2006). California community colleges: Help or hindrance to Latinos in the higher education pipeline? New Directions for Community Colleges, 2006(133), 41–50. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1002/cc.226.

12.

Cho

R. M.

Tyler

J. H.

(2013). Does prison-based adult basic education improve post release outcomes for male prisoners in Florida? Crime & Delinquency, 59(7), 975–1005. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0011128710389588.

13.

Clark

V. L. P.

Creswell

J. W.

(2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide. Pearson Higher.

14.

Copenhaver

Edwards-Willey

T. L.

Byers

B. D.

(2007). Journeys in social stigma: The lives of formerly incarcerated felons in higher education. Journal of Correctional Education, 58(3), 268–283.

15.

Crocker

Major

(1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96(4), 608–630. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.608.

16.

Custer

B. D.

(2019). The disenfranchisement of justice-involved college students from state financial aid. Michigan State University.

17.

Dee

T. S.

(2020). Education and civic engagement. In Bradley

Green

(Eds.), The economics of education (pp. 103–108). Academic Press.

18.

Bernal

D. D.

(1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), 555–583. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.68.4.5wv1034973g22q48.

19.

Deming

D. J.

(2011). Better schools, less crime? * The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 2063–2115. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1093/qje/qjr036.

20.

Dizon

J. P.M.

Enoch-Stevens

Huerta

A. H.

(n.d.). Carcerality and education: Toward a relational theory of risk in educational institutions. American Behavioral Scientist. (in press).

21.

Evans

D. N.

Blount-Hill

K.-L.

Cubellis

M. A.

(2019a). Examining housing discrimination across race, gender and felony history. Housing Studies, 34(5), 761–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2018.1478069.

22.

Evans

D. N.

Szkola

St John

(2019b). Going back to college? Criminal stigma in higher education admissions in Northeastern U.S. Critical Criminology, 27(2), 291–304.

23.

Ewald

A. C.

(2019). Barbers, caregivers, and the disciplinary subject: Occupational licensure for people with criminal justice backgrounds in the United States. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 46(4), 719.

24.

Fletcher

Tienda

(2010). Race and ethnic differences in college achievement: Does high school attended matter? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 627(1), 144–166. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0002716209348749.

25.

Giraldo

L. G.

(2016). From incarceration to community college to work: Racial microaggressions and reintegration in the prison-to-school pipeline. Doctoral dissertation. The Claremont Graduate University. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

26.

Giraldo

L. G.

Huerta

A. H.

Solórzano

(2017). From incarceration to community college. In Rios-Aguilar

Marquez Kiyama

(Eds.), Funds of knowledge in higher education: Honoring students’ cultural experiences and resources as strengths (pp. 48–65). Routledge.

27.

Goffman

(1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice-Hall.

28.

Goldrick-Rab

(2010). Challenges and opportunities for improving community college student success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 437–469. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654310370163.

29.

Halkovic

(2014). Redefining possible: Re-visioning the prison-to-college pipeline. Equity & Excellence in Education, 47(4), 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.959284.

30.

Halkovic

Greene

A. C.

(2015). Bearing stigma, carrying gifts: What colleges can learn from students with incarceration experience. The Urban Review, 47(4), 759–782. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11256-015-0333-x.

31.

Harper

S. R.

(2010). An anti-deficit achievement framework for research on students of color in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 63–74. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1002/ir.362.

32.

Heckathorn

D. D.

(2011). Comment: Snowball versus respondent-driven sampling. Sociological Methodology, 41(1), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9531.2011.01244.x.

33.

Hernandez

J. L.

(2019). You are about to witness the strength of street knowledge: How formerly incarcerated Latinx/a/o students transfer their knowledge acquired through their lived experiences to find success in higher education and build resiliency. [Master’s thesis]. California State UniversityProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

34.

Huerta

A. H.

(n.d.). Possible selves with limited college support: Case studies of Latino boys in two urban continuation schools. American Behavioral Scientist. (in press).

35.

Huerta

A. H.

McDonough

P. M.

Venegas

K. M.

Allen

W. R.

(2020). College is… focusing on the college knowledge of gang-associated Latino young men: Focusing on the college knowledge of gang-associated Latino boys and young men. Urban Education, 0(0), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920934854.

36.

Huerta

A. H.

Rios-Aguilar

(2021). Treat a cop like they are God: Exploring the relevance and utility of funds of gang knowledge among Latino male students. Urban Education, 56(8), 1239–1268. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0042085918794766.

37.

Karp

M. M.

Hughes

K. L.

(2008). Information networks and integration: Institutional influences on experiences and persistence of beginning students. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2008(144), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.347.

38.

Kazemian

Walker

(2018). Effects of incarceration. In Farrington

D. P.

Kazemian

Piquero

A. R.

(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of developmental and life-course criminology (pp. 576–599). Oxford University Press.

39.

Kelchen

Goldrick-Rab

Hosch

(2017). The costs of college attendance: Examining variation and consistency in institutional living cost allowances. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(6), 947–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.1272092.

40.

Krefting

(1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214–222. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.45.3.214.

41.

Latino

C. A.

Stegmann

Radunzel

Way

J. D.

Sanchez

Casillas

(2018). Reducing gaps in first-year outcomes between Hispanic first-generation college students and their peers: The role of accelerated learning and financial aid. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 22(3), 441–463. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/1521025118768055.

42.

Lichtman

(2014). Qualitative research for the social sciences. Sage Publications.

43.

Maxwell

J. A.

(2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage.

44.

McTier

T. S.

Jr. McGuire

K. M.

McGuire

K. M.

(2017). A prison to school pipeline. Journal of Underrepresented & Minority Progress, 1(1), 8–22. https://ojed.org/index.php/jump/article/download/33/40.

45.

Mercer

K. R.

(2009). The importance of funding postsecondary correctional educational programs. Community College Review, 37(2), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0091552109348044.

46.

Milner

H. R.

(2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0013189X07309471.

47.

Moll

L. C.

Amanti

Neff

Gonzalez

(1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534.

48.

Murillo

(2021). The possibility report: From prison to college degrees in California. Campaign for College Opportunity.

49.

Ortiz

A. M.

(2003). Ethnographic interviews. Diverse research approaches and methods applied to the college environment. Brunner-Routledge.

50.

Ott

McTier

T. S.

Jr (2019). Faculty attitudes toward college students with criminal records. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 13(4), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000138.

51.

Pager

(2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5), 937–975. https://doi.org/10.1086/374403.

52.

Rios-Aguilar

Kiyama

J. M.

Gravitt

Moll

L. C.

(2011). Funds of knowledge for the poor and forms of capital for the rich? A capital approach to examining funds of knowledge. Theory and Research in Education, 9(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1477878511409776.

53.

Rios

V. M

(2011). Punished: Policing the lives of Black and Latino boys. NYU Press.

54.

Rouse

C. E.

(2004). Low-Income students and college attendance: An exploration of income expectations*. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1299–1317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00277.x.

55.

Saldaña

(2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

56.

Schafer

M. H.

Wilkinson

L. R.

Ferraro

K. F.

(2013). Childhood (mis)fortune, educational attainment, and adult health: Contingent benefits of a college degree? Social Forces, 91(3), 1007–1034. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos192.

57.

Schanzenbach

Nunn

Bauer

Breitwieser

Mumford

Nantz

(2016). Twelve facts about incarceration and prisoner reentry. The Hamilton project: Economic facts series. Brookings Institution.

58.

Schreiner

L. A.

Anderson

(2005). Strengths-based advising: A new lens for higher education. NACADA Journal, 25(2), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.12930/0271-9517-25.2.20.

59.

Scott-Clayton

(2011). The shapeless river: Does a lack of structure inhibit students’ progress at community colleges? Assessment of evidence series. (CCRC working paper No. 25). Community College Research Center, Columbia University.

60.

Scott-Clayton

Zafar

(2019). Financial aid, debt management, and socioeconomic outcomes: Post-college effects of merit-based aid. Journal of Public Economics, 170(3), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.01.006.

61.

Silbert

Mukamal

(2020). Striving for success: The academic achievements of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated students in California community colleges. Stanford Criminal Justice Center.

62.

Silva

J. M.

Snellman

(2018). Salvation or safety net? Meanings of “College” among working- and middle-class young adults in narratives of the future. Social Forces, 97(2), 559–582. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy050.

63.

Snyder

T. D.

De Brey

Dillow

S. A.

(2019). Digest of education statistics 2017 (NCES 2018-070). National Center for Education Statistics.

64.

Stewart

Uggen

(2020). Criminal records and college admissions: A modified experimental audit. Criminology, 58(1), 156–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12229.

65.

Strayhorn

T. L.

(2018). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. Routledge.

66.

Strayhorn

T. L.

Johnson

R. M.

Barrett

B. A.

(2013). Investigating the college adjustment and transition experiences of formerly incarcerated Black male collegians at predominantly White institutions. Spectrum: A Journal on Black Men, 2(1), 73–98. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2979/spectrum.2.1.73.

67.

Taliaferro

Pham

Cielinski

(2016). From incarceration to reentry: A look at trends, gaps, and opportunities in correctional education and training. Center for Law and Social Policy.

68.

Tierney

W. G.

Venegas

K. M.

(2006). Fictive kin and social capital. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(12), 1687–1702. https://doi.org/10.2307%2F1389793.

69.

Tierney

W. G.

Venegas

K. M.

(2009). Finding money on the table: Information, financial aid, and access to college. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(4), 363–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2009.11779021.

70.

Tuck

(2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79(3), 409–428. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.17763/haer.79.3.n0016675661t3n15.

71.

Turner-Odom

(2016). Beyond the cell: Former incarceration and first year college success (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). California State University.

72.

Underground Scholars Initiative (2019). Language guide for communicating about those involved in the carceral system. Berkeley Underground Scholars.

73.

United States Department of Education (n.d.). Beyond the box: A U.S. Department of education resource guide for increasing access to higher education for justice-involved individuals [Fact sheet]. United States Department of Education.

74.

Vélez-Ibáñez

Greenberg

(1992). Formation and transformation of funds of knowledge among US-Mexican households. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 23(4), 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1992.23.4.05x1582v.

75.

Vera Institute of Justice (2020). US House of Representatives votes to lift ban on Pell Grants for people in prison. Vera Institute of Justice.