Exclusion Factors in Latin American Higher Education

Data Collection and Analysis

The study’s fieldwork was conducted in 2013 and two data collection methods were utilized: in-depth interviews and focus groups. Both methods enable an in-depth exploration of perspectives, experiences, and opinions expressed by the university governing boards; access to the context; and an understanding of the specific meaning for the participants of the topic analyzed: exclusion factors in Latin American higher education. Governing boards are those that have the duties and responsibilities associated with “defining a strategic vision for the institution, setting institutional policies, monitoring institutional performance, and ensuring good stewardship of the institution’s assets [and taking] responsibilities for quality assurance and the equivalence of academic awards” (Saint, 2009, p. 8).

The in-depth interviews and focus groups were carried out based on the same semi-structured interview protocol and focused on higher education policies, the characteristics and typology of vulnerable groups, specific programs addressed to these groups, the factors generating disadvantage, forms of exclusion from university, and how exclusion becomes apparent in the progression of certain groups through university.

Nineteen institutional representatives of Latin American universities were interviewed, selected from among the 24 institutions involved in the ACCEDES project. The criteria for selecting the participants were as follows: (a) over 4 years’ experience in university management positions; (b) over 5 years working in their current university; and (c) responsibilities relating to student access and retention policies. Participants belonged to both private and public universities, with sizes ranging from 4,000 to 200,000 students (see Table 1). Each interview lasted approximately 50 min. Being able to access participants from 19 Latin American institutions has made it possible to build arguments that respond to the complexity of different realities, develop a deep and wide-ranging conceptual debate, facilitate linguistic clarity, and bring together different axiological viewpoints.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Participant Profile.

	n	%
Gender
Female	10	52.63
Male	9	47.37
Age
45 or under	3	15.79
Between 46 and 55	7	36.84
Over 55	9	47.37
Years of experience
Between 4 and 5 years	4	21.05
Between 6 and 7 years	5	26.32
8 or more years	10	52.63
Public and private HEIs
Public	12	63.16
Private	7	36.84
HEI size
10,000 students or fewer	4	21.05
Between 10,001 and 50,000 students	12	63.16
More than 50,000 students	3	15.79
Total
No.	19	100.00

Note. HEI = higher education institution.

In addition, the 19 university governing board members interviewed were grouped into three focus groups, comprising between four and seven participants each. Considering that exclusion factors are affected by contextual and geographical characteristics (Gereluk & Race, 2007; Wang, 2011), participants were grouped according to the three geographical regions of Latin America. The first focus group was held in Cuba and included representatives of Central America and the Caribbean islands (i.e., Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Mexico, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba). The second focus group was held in Venezuela and included representatives of the Central and Andean region (i.e., Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, and Venezuela). The last focus group was held in Paraguay and included the Southern countries (i.e., Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, and Paraguay). The focus groups have allowed us to gather a general information framework about the subject of the study, have stimulated a more in-depth reflection, and have allowed us to research complex phenomena and compare divergent views (Krueger & Casey, 2008; Litosseliti, 2003). The fact that all the participants were familiar with the ACCEDES project facilitated their participation and data collection, and increased the likelihood of obtaining more authentic answers (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006).

To meet the objectives of this study, the interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify recurrent patterns and themes. Data analysis was carried out by integrating inductive and deductive approaches, which allowed us to establish a constant dialogue between the data and current theories (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010). Using thematic analysis strategies (Miles & Huberman, 1994), we identified emerging cross-cutting themes from the interviews and focus groups and developed a preliminary category system that was completed by incorporating analysis categories sourced from the literature review.

Although, as we have mentioned, exclusion can manifest itself in different ways depending on the context (Gereluk & Race, 2007; Wang, 2011), the complexity of the phenomenon makes it advisable to conduct a preliminary comprehensive approximation. Therefore, the analysis carried out is cross-sectional and not comparative, focusing on those common aspects identified by the Latin American university governing boards.

Personal Characteristics

Personal characteristics are one of the elements that interviewees most emphasize when they are asked about the characteristics of vulnerable groups. A student’s school record and previous academic performance are factors that can generate exclusion among young people: When there is low performance, particularly in the non-mandatory education levels, the possibilities of participating in third-level studies diminish—“The students’ background and performance throughout their academic history is a clear indicator of the likelihood of their success. If they were able to complete primary and secondary school, why would they not succeed at university?” (Institute Director, Uruguay). Regarding this same educational record, orientation toward a career is a key element. Career orientation is characterized by having clear academic interests, demonstrating motivation for certain studies, taking decisions based on this criteria, or receiving professional guidance during times of transition. In this regard, a participant stated,

In my view, there is a very important element in these cases, and that is for the student to have clear goals and objectives. If students really want to become professionals and they have a vocation, they will overcome the difficulties or will seek help from whomever they can to achieve their dream. I have seen extraordinary examples of people’s will to succeed in achieving the objectives they set out for themselves. (Chancellor, Mexico)

If we analyze personal characteristics, it becomes evident that self-perception or self-attribution of personal characteristics becomes a key element. Thus,

one of the factors affecting students in an at-risk situation is their own self-perception—their confidence in their ability to succeed, their self-efficiency, their self-control, and their ability to fulfill academic requirements. If they are predisposed to success they are very likely to be successful. (Vice-Chancellor, Nicaragua)

According to the views of those interviewed, financial difficulties are also an exclusion factor. Thus, young people from disadvantaged environments who must work while they are studying present a higher risk of exclusion. This circumstance is more apparent when employment conditions are tough and involve low-skilled work. A dean states in this regard,

I have seen brilliant students fail because they have to go to work in places with conditions that make it impossible to balance academia and work. And also earning very little money. In the end this discourages students and leads them to drop out. (Dean, Peru)

Family Situation

The family situation refers to how students’ relational and affective environment can become a key factor in exclusion. In fact, the close connection between academic and social integration is influenced, on one hand, by the students’ baggage when entering university and, on the other hand, by their family environment:

When you have to work to support your family or you have to seek resources to feed your children, studying at university becomes your second priority, even if you are highly motivated. Here in Bolivia, it is a very common story, especially amongst young women who get pregnant and have to care for their babies. (Chancellor, Bolivia)

A family’s ability to invest financial resources is another exclusion factor. Poverty and access to education are still closely connected factors in many Latin American countries. Thus, a participant stated, “There is a fact that has become evident in the last few years: poverty and lack of education are variables with a positive correlation, and this is associated with a lack of opportunities” (Vice-Chancellor, Costa Rica). Family support is a determining factor in young people’s academic success. As argued by the chancellor of a university in Panama, this support may be financial:

It is undeniable that coming from a family with scarce resources in which parents have not had the opportunity to get an education makes it harder for their children to access university. Low-income family status can have a negative effect in the absence of external support for education. (Chancellor, Panama)

Family support may also be emotional when young people receive extrinsic motivation and sufficient and constant support at home. One interviewee commented in this regard, “In some cases, when young people arrive home they may not find an environment that is favorable to study. Being the first university student in a family unit is very complicated; you have to break through many barriers” (Institute Director, Chile). Place of residence may also become a factor of exclusion, although this also depends on the availability of public transport. Young people living in the urban periphery or in rural areas with deficient means of transport may not access university studies or may withdraw prematurely:

When I talk about place of residence I am not only referring to the geographical location but also the disadvantages present in this place: distance, the time required for commuting, the costs involved in commuting, and, mainly, the difficulty in accessing means of transport. (Dean, Paraguay)

Institutional Features

The organizational dimension takes into account the characteristics of HEIs in relation to students at risk of exclusion, particularly the role of teaching staff. This is why the involvement and interest of teaching staff is essential in the design and development of strategies to minimize the risk of exclusion:

At the end of the day, there is a very important issue, and that is what the lecturer does within the classroom. Whether the lecturer is sensitive towards minorities—whether the lecturer has the capacity and is interested in designing different teaching strategies to help students. There is the issue of teaching staff training, but it still depends on the attitude of each lecturer. (Institute Director, Chile)

Beyond the lecturer’s individual dimension, it is important to know whether as part of the university’s general policy there are guidelines for dealing with the exclusion of vulnerable students. In this regard, interviewees emphasized the importance of having specific action plans, providing resources for minority groups, promoting programs with financial support, the possibility of getting support and constant guidance from experts, and so on. Each university’s strategic plan should include initiatives and actions to minimize exclusion factors. This view was expressed by participants: “In this university, there is a political commitment from the office of the chancellor to include ethnic and cultural minorities. Programs are developed, we respond to requests, and we invest resources in helping the most vulnerable students” (Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Venezuela). The different strategies implemented by HEIs to prevent the exclusion of vulnerable students must be specific, must be defined contextually, and must have the capacity to respond to the specific characteristics of each group facing the challenges of higher education: “Universities wishing to address the issue of diversity must establish all kinds of programs, ranging from removing architectural barriers for students with reduced mobility to including blended distance learning for students from rural areas far away from the capital” (Chancellor, Colombia). Another exclusion factor that affects university institutions is the management of transition processes: transition from secondary school to university and transition from one academic year to the next within the university:

Certain critical moments can be identified in university life which require special attention, these include exam periods, academic year progression, access to education, etc.; specific actions should be provided for all these academic transitions, especially for students facing greater difficulties. (Vice-Chancellor, Dominican Republic)

Public Policies

The dimension of higher education public policies and the range of actions for their implementation are of key importance for the most vulnerable groups. Public policies, if they are decidedly aimed at eradicating the permanent marginalization and exclusion of the most vulnerable groups, may contribute to providing real opportunities for these groups to succeed in HEIs. Widespread public policies are a current phenomenon in different Latin American countries. In this regard, the interviewee from a Cuban university argues,

In Cuba, we are now analyzing the initiative approved in Brazil—a recent law that promotes the inclusion of African descent minorities in university. Today, nearly all higher education institutions are designing policies to protect the interests of certain traditionally marginalized minorities in Latin America. (Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Cuba)

On the other hand, the government’s legal initiative must protect the university’s independence given the different realities existing within a single country. If national policy is applied uniformly throughout all universities, they will not be able to respond to the specificity of their environment. This is how the legal initiative becomes bureaucracy, given that

universities must have sufficient resources to provide services to vulnerable groups. Not all universities should act in the same way; it depends on the region and on the groups that they encounter. It should be possible to propose different things. I imagine that they have different needs in the country’s capital to those we have here, in more remote areas. (Vice-Chancellor, Dominican Republic)

Supporting this argument, some stated:

Each university is different, so it is fundamental for universities to be able to establish our own policies regarding vulnerable groups. We should have full capacity to take decisions about action plans, budgets, and priorities. On this matter, we cannot follow government dictates. (Vice-Chancellor, Costa Rica)

In conclusion, as suggested by another interviewee, the goal of public policies must be to compensate for young people’s situations of vulnerability or exclusion:

I don’t believe we have to facilitate the access of young people with the greatest problems; what government policies should ensure is that the difficulties faced by the most vulnerable groups are not a barrier for them to reach and succeed at university. (Chancellor, Colombia)

Phases of University Students’ Development

The four factors described above (i.e., personal characteristics, family situation, institutional features, and public policies) have different manifestations throughout the different phases of a university student’s academic life. We can differentiate three different stages or phases in the development of a student’s academic life. The impact of each of the four dimensions identified depends on the point in which the students find themselves in their academic lives. This time-related perspective requires rethinking the exclusion factors described above, as their expression can be different at each stage. The first stage, linked to socialization into university life and connected to the student’s own process of accessing higher education, includes initial contact with teaching staff and creating social networks with classmates:

The students who come to study from the high Andean plateau region, which are the most remote and badly connected areas from the city, are at a loss the first few months and find it hard to adapt to university life. In general, not only must they adapt to university life, but they must also adapt to living away from home, far from their families, with few resources and no friends. I think starting university is very difficult for these young students. (Chancellor, Bolivia)

The second stage of academic development is directly linked with the student’s participation and retention in the university. In most cases, university student retention is dependent on the availability of academic support (i.e., tutorials, study groups, introductory courses), socioeconomic support (i.e., scholarships, student loans, accommodation), and personal support (i.e., peer groups, advisory services, counseling):

We subject our students to demanding tests that are very difficult to pass. That is why students who have some kind of problem end up withdrawing after two or three initial semesters. Considering that each degree program presents its own challenges, imagine if there are also financial or linguistic problems or if one is living disconnected from one’s environment. Academic life is full of complexities that can cause a student to withdraw. (Chancellor, Mexico)

Finally, there is a third stage relating to academic egress and transition to the job market. Very often both institutions, due to lack of planning and resources, and students themselves, due to lack of interest or knowledge, do not pay much attention to this exit stage, thus reducing the social and economic impact of the investment carried out in university education. One of the interviewees expresses it as follows:

Career guidance has not been developed much here. I know that in Europe it is done, but here we do not have that tradition. Once students receive their university degree certificate, they leave and we don’t hear from them again. We do not help them with career guidance nor do we have resources to help them transition to adult life. I think this is one of the main challenges we face as a country and as a university. (Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Venezuela)