Civic Engagement of Latinx Students: The Role of Higher Education Institutions in Serving the Public Good

Abstract

French

This conceptual article presents a model for understanding and increasing the civic engagement of Latinx students in higher education. The model presents the key student attributes, precollege and college experiences, and institutional characteristics that impact the civic development of Latinx college students. Higher education practitioners and researchers can use the model to inform the understanding and development of programs, services, and practices to increase the civic engagement of Latinx students.

Keywords

civic engagement community engagement Latinx students immigrant students higher education

Historically, many of the social movements that have directly and positively impacted racially minoritized and underserved communities have been organized by racially minoritized college students themselves: the 1960 Greensboro Sit-In, protesting segregationist policies by students from North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College; the 1968 protests that led to the establishment of the first Chicano Studies Department at California State University, Los Angeles (CSULA); and the protests against racial discrimination and injustice at the University of Missouri at Columbia in 2015. These protests that were begun by a small group of racially minoritized college students sparked the civic engagement of peers on campus and spurred national movements that created social change. In line with other scholars, this article broadly defines civic engagement as an individual’s actions that positively impact the public good of our society, including political, social, and community engagement such as participating in protests and organizing (Alcantar, 2014; Dache et al., 2020; Perez et al., 2010). Civic engagement also includes varied forms of activism, participating in formal and informal volunteering, working on election campaigns, voting, working in community-based nonprofits, translating for one’s community, mentoring, and coaching youth, among other things. The social movements listed above are examples of the power of minoritized college students to create social change, the interconnection of civic engagement on college campuses with social and racial justice of our society, and the lasting effect on the public good of our society.

Decades of research have demonstrated higher education’s critical role in promoting our nation’s democratic values and cultivating civically engaged citizenry by training leaders and participants of a diverse democracy (Calderón, 2007; Hurtado, 2007; Jacoby & Associates, 2009; Longo & Gibson, 2011; The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement, 2012; Rhoads, 1998; Saltmarsh & Hartley, 2011). Some higher education institutions have trained future leaders and instilled democratic ideals through structural policies around community engagement graduation requirements, curricular practices (e.g., service-learning courses), cocurricular practices (e.g., internships at the Capitol or clubs focused on providing support to the local community), or organizational cultures and institutional missions focused on serving the public good. Another way some higher education institutions foster democratic ideals, specifically faculty, is through their intentional pedagogical approaches that draws on culturally responsive teaching approaches and curriculum that connects the course content to local social issues (Gay, 2018). Culturally responsive teaching refers to pedagogical approaches that “us[e] the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective for them” (Gay, 2018, p. 36). As a result, culturally responsive teaching approaches are validating, comprehensive, multidimensional, empowering, transformative, and emancipatory (Gay, 2018).

Despite higher education institutions being critical for advancing democratic ideals that can manifest into social change, this level of civic engagement is not always realized to its full potential for racial/ethnically minoritized students. Consequently, this further disenfranchises these populations from democratic engagement. For example, some institutions may require students to take U.S. government and politics courses but will not discuss the role of racial/ethnic minoritized leaders and social movements in politics. Institutions may also promote civic engagement in the form of voting, yet dismiss community engagement and activism as a form of civic engagement. The limitations of higher education institutions in fulfilling an equitable democratic mission for all students are further stratified by the limited literature on the civic development of racial/ethnic minoritized college students. This article contributes to the literature on civic engagement by focusing on the civic development of Latinx students in higher education.

Focusing on the civic development of students is important because all students come to college with some level of civic-related capacities and continue their development through college. Whereas civic engagement focuses on civic-related behaviors and actions, civic development, as described by Ponjuan and colleagues (2016), outlines the cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal domains of civic-related capacities that students develop and which impact their level and type of civic engagement. Civic-related capacities include civic knowledge (e.g., understanding of contemporary and historical local, national, and global social issues), civic skills (e.g., civic literacy, critical thinking), civic values (e.g., students’ commitment toward political or social civic engagement as a “personal goal”; Hurtado, Ruiz et al., 2012, p. 14), and civic responsibility (e.g., sense of responsibility to their community). This article extends this conceptualization of civic development by interrogating how this impacts Latinx college students and the role of higher education institutions.

The literature demonstrates that Latinxs’ civic development and engagement differs from other racial/ethnic groups (Alcantar, 2014, 2017; Cuellar, 2021; DeSipio, 2006; Littenberg-Tobias & Cohen, 2016; Lott, 2013; McNaughtan & Brown, 2020). Latinx college students are more likely to engage in civic activities most connected to their culture, community, and in response and resistance to experiences of marginalization and discrimination (Alcantar, 2014, 2017; Cuellar, 2021; Gildersleeve & Jimenez Sinfuentes, 2017; Katsiaficas et al., 2018; Maginot, 2021; Perez et al., 2010). Thus, the institutional approach to promoting Latinx students’ civic development must be culturally responsive. This article explores the civic engagement of Latinxs and offers a model for the civic development of Latinx students in higher education. By developing the civic-related capacities of Latinx students, higher education institutions would positively impact society’s public good.

This conceptual article draws from the literature on civic engagement in higher education and conceptual models on college student development to propose an organizational model for the practice and study of the civic development of Latinx students in higher education. This article begins by describing the civic participation of the Latinx community and the challenges to civic engagement. Next, the author presents a definition and model of civic engagement at the individual and institutional levels that comprise college students’ civic development. This article then presents an organizational model for higher education research and practice influencing Latinx college students’ civic development. Practitioners can use the model to design and evaluate programs, services, and strategies aimed at increasing the civic engagement of Latinx students and reorganizing or discontinuing practices and policies that limit the civic development of Latinx students. In addition, faculty can use this model to consider ways to incorporate high-impact practices in their teaching, advising, and mentoring to raise and nurture the civic development of Latinx students. Researchers may also employ this model to design and analyze studies on civic engagement in higher education.

Illusion of Lackluster Latinx Civic Engagement

Contrary to how Latinxs’ civic engagement is portrayed in the context of the history of social movements, the limited literature on the civic engagement of Latinx students in higher education, and the public discourse on the civic engagement of Latinxs, fuels an illusion of Latinx students not being, or wanting to be, civically engaged. This illusion of low civic engagement is compounded by the systemic disenfranchisement of the Latinx community from full incorporation into American democracy through policy, education, and public discourse. It is important to recognize the incongruity between Latinxs’ perceived and actual civic engagement as it can potentially affect higher education professionals’ approach to civic engagement. For some postsecondary stakeholders, this can mean they perpetuate these same disenfranchisement practices. Recognizing practices and policies that disenfranchise the Latinx community also highlights the vital role of higher education institutions in promoting the civic development of Latinx students. The following section presents examples of how the Latinx community has been disenfranchised through the public discourse on civic engagement, voting policies and practices, and education.

The public discourse on Latinxs’ civic engagement is often focused on voting. While voting is important, if it is the sole measure of Latinxs’ civic engagement, we will overlook much of their contributions and miss the opportunity to engage students. Research has found that Latinx adults voted at lower rates in the past four decades than most other racial/ethnic groups (USAFacts, 2020). In 2016, 48% of U.S. citizen Latinx adults voted, compared with 65% White and 59% Black adults (USAFacts, 2020; the only exception was Asian U.S. citizens who voted at similar rates at 49%). The proportion of Latinx adults who voted is even lower when examined across the entire Latinx voting-eligible and noneligible adult population at 33% (USAFacts, 2020). While these statistics may imply that Latinxs’ are less civically engaged, numerous factors negatively impact their ability to vote. For example, voter suppression laws, limited access to voting due to English proficiency, voter ID laws, felony conviction restrictions, and residency in U.S. territories (e.g., Puerto Rico) and Washington, D.C., continue to greatly affect the Latinx community (Solomon et al., 2019).

Similar to higher education institutions, primary and secondary schools are often described as the pillars of democratizing institutions in the United States. Research has found that engaging in civic opportunities in K–12 schools increases the likelihood of civic engagement as adults (Flanagan & Levine, 2010; Hart et al., 2007; Littenberg-Tobias & Cohen, 2016). Yet Latinx predominantly attend underserved and underresourced K–12 schools that are less likely to offer a quality civic education program where students can gain civic capacities, be it through civic curricula or democratic pedagogies (Flanagan & Levine, 2010; García Bedolla, 2012; Littenberg-Tobias & Cohen, 2016; Rogers et al., 2012). Furthermore, many Latinx students attend high schools where college is not encouraged, especially 4-year colleges, which often have more civic learning opportunities.

Another issue that limits access to civic engagement and gives the illusion of a lack of civic engagement among the Latinx community is the United States’ conceptualization and response to civic engagement among minoritized communities. For example, protests and other forms of activism by racial/ethnic minoritized communities are often inaccurately portrayed, and sometimes penalized, by school authorities, government, the media, and police as being antidemocratic, and thus are not considered forms of civic engagement (Dache et al., 2020; Ferguson, 2017). For example, Hill et al. (2019) demonstrate how higher education institutional and governmental discourse and response to campus protests in the 1950s and 1960s aimed to curb and control student activism. However, activism is a staple of democracy and a form of civic engagement. Racial/ethnic minoritized communities utilize activism to fight for social justice, as demonstrated in the mass immigration protests of the 1990s and massive global Black Lives Matter protests of the 2020s. In 2018, Pew Research Center found that 16% of the Latinx population reported participating in a protest or demonstration to support immigrant rights during the tumultuous time that former President Trump was in office (Lopez et al., 2018). This number was higher when Latinxs were separated by college-age groups and education level: 23% of 18- to 29-year-olds and 23% of those with some college or higher participated in a protest or demonstration to support immigration since Trump took office (Lopez et al., 2018). Although the nearly a quarter of young adult and college-educated Latinxs participating in a protest or demonstration is a sizable number, the rate of Latinxs engaging in activism may be even higher. The statistics presented focus on protests and demonstrations related to immigration and may not account for varied forms of activism, such as through art and information sharing, and do not include other social injustices such as police brutality, climate change, and so on.

The aforementioned context of civic engagement of the Latinx community is not an exhaustive list but rather provides greater context to understand Latinx college students’ civic engagement. It also demonstrates the critical importance and need for higher education practitioners to promote Latinx college students’ civic development.

Conceptualizing Civic Development and Engagement in Higher Education

The author utilizes two conceptual models in higher education to inform the design of an organizational model for the civic development of Latinx students. Together these models illuminate in- and out-of-college experiences, student attributes, and institutional characteristics that impact student development in higher education. The author draws from Astin’s (1993) input–environment–outcome model (I-E-O model) and the multicontextual diverse learning environments (DLE) model (Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012). Each model is described below.

Astin’s (1993) I-E-O model considers students’ characteristics and experiences that influence their college involvement and educational outcomes:

In the I-E-O model, student outcomes (O) are presumed to be a function of inputs (I) and environments (E). Students enter college with characteristics, proclivities, and prior experiences (inputs) that influence the experiences and environments toward which they gravitate in college. Together, inputs and experiences/environments are predictive of college outcomes. (Bryant et al., 2012, pp. 80–81)

Latinx students are not devoid of their cultural, racialized, familial, community, and economic backgrounds once they enter college. On the contrary, these backgrounds and experiences influence how Latinx students experience college; thus, higher education practitioners must recognize and integrate their backgrounds in college.

The DLE model (Hurtado, Alvarez et al., 2012) increases the environmental and experiential influences further by considering the multicontextual effects on student’s development and college outcomes, including institutional, sociohistorical, curricular, cocurricular, and policy contexts. At the microsystem and mesosystem levels, the DLE model describes the importance of academic and social in- and out-of-class interactions between diverse students, instructors, and staff. The community context and external commitments also influence institutions and students. This model also highlights the impact of macrosystems on institutions and students, such as sociohistorical and policy contexts that impact institutional contexts. The DLE model helps illuminate the effects of institutions, including the in- and out-of-college context and experiences on the civic development of Latinx students at various college campuses. For instance, immigration issues impacting Latinx communities influence the institutional context and Latinx experiences in college.

In summary, the I-E-O model (Astin, 1993) informs the model’s student-level focus, particularly students’ characteristics and experiences before and during college, and their influence on student outcomes. The DLE model (Hurtado, Alvarez et al., 2012) adds to the model’s institutional-level factors influencing students’ experiences and outcomes. The next section brings together components of these models and related literature to inform this article’s proposed model to the civic development of Latinx students in higher education.

Model for the Civic Development of Latinx College Students

Figure 1 presents the model for the civic development of Latinx college students that I propose to guide an institutional approach to the civic development of Latinx students.¹ The model for the civic development of Latinx college students can guide the higher education practitioner’s and scholar’s understanding of and approach to Latinx students’ civic development. As presented in the final section of the model, the outcomes of interest for this model include increasing Latinx students’ civic values, civic engagement, and pursuing service-related careers. Service-related careers include professional degree- or certificate-earning careers that directly impact the public good. These may include teachers, nurses, physicians, and social workers, as well as local, county, state, or federally elected and appointed officials. This is not to say that service-related careers are the ultimate goal of developing students’ civic capacities, nor is the full enactment of civic values and engagement limited to service-oriented careers. However, many Latinx, low-income, and immigrant communities are in dire need of teachers, physicians, nurses, and elected officials who reflect and understand their experiences and who can speak their language. The need for Latinx representation in professional service–related careers has never been more evident than in this current health pandemic.

Figure 1.

Conceptual model for understanding the relationship between student attributes, college experiences, and institutional characteristics on student civic values and aspirations for service-related careers.

The following breaks down each section of the model presented in Figure 1 and the corresponding literature. First, I present the student-level factors, followed by the environmental factors in the model. For each of the aforementioned sections in the model, I offer real examples of institutional approaches to the civic development of Latinx students that align with the different areas of the model to demonstrate how it can be used in practice.

Student Attributes and Precollege Factors

The student-level factors are presented in the first box inside the model for the civic development of Latinx college students in Figure 1. The student-level factors include student attributes and precollege factors such as various individual characteristics and experiences that Latinx students come to college with, which influence their civic development. This includes their background characteristics (sex, socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and immigrant generation and status), high school academics (grade point average [GPA], SAT scores), and civic experiences in high school (e.g., service-learning, community service). Research has found that engaging in civic opportunities in high school positively influenced students’ civic participation in college and adulthood (Hart et al., 2007; Hillygus, 2005).

In addition, research has found differences by sex in civic participation and values, and service-related occupation aspirations (Cemalcilar, 2008; Hurtado et al., 2002; Lott, 2013). Research indicates that women are more civically engaged than men (Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS], 2015; Einolf, 2011; Wilson, 2000). In addition, women are more represented than men in service-related careers, such as teaching, nursing, and social work (BLS, 2015). Over a quarter (30%) of Latina women work in education (e.g., teachers, librarians) and health service (e.g., nursing) fields (BLS, 2019). Sex differences in service sector occupational fields are important to consider when designing service-learning opportunities that aim to expose Latinx students to various careers.

Research has also found that family income and parents’ level of education impact students’ level of civic engagement due to access to social, cultural, and human capital (Flanagan & Levine, 2010; Lott, 2013; Pacheco & Plutzer, 2008; Wilson, 2000). Students whose parents have higher incomes and education levels may afford access to civic and internship opportunities that may not be accessible to others. Relatedly, parents’ civic engagement is also indicative of their children’s civic engagement (Wilson, 2000). In one study, Latinx high school students identified their parents’ “community involvement, political action, or compassion for others” as influencing their participation in student protests (Solorzano & Bernal, 2001, p. 321).

Together, these precollege experiences and student attributes influence their civic development and engagement in college. Higher education practitioners equipped with this information can help inform culturally responsive and student-centered approaches to civic development for Latinx students. For example, suppose higher education professionals know that the majority of Latinx students are coming from local high schools that provided civic learning opportunities. In that case, this information can be used to determine how to continue their civic development.

In addition, the precollege experiences and characteristics presented in the model can be used as a starting point for higher education practitioners in understanding Latinx students’ civic development. For instance, knowing the language, cultural, immigrant, and socioeconomic diversity of Latinx students could help higher education practitioners develop outreach strategies to engage Latinx students in civic-promoting experiences that are presented in the model, such as study abroad, service-learning, and interning with local, state, and federal nonprofit and government agencies. For example, California State University Channel Islands (CSUCI), located in Ventura County in Southern California, an area with a sizable Mixtec immigrant community, has integrated culturally responsive course offerings and opportunities to engage the many Mixtec students that enroll in their institution and those of other backgrounds within the community. Mixtecs are an indigenous Mexican immigrant population from the southern regions of México, many whom speak Mixteco (Perez et al., 2016). At CSUCI, the university has developed a Mixtec language course that fulfills their language graduation requirement. In addition, they have partnered with local nonprofit and news organizations to increase access to college and community resources by the Mixtec immigrant community. These curricular and cocurricular opportunities can increase the civic engagement of Mixtec students in Ventura County and also engage other non-Mixtec students with the Mixtec community and culture.

The next section discusses the environmental factors that support or hinder Latinx students’ civic development.

Environmental Factors

The environmental factors are experiences in college (both at the student- and institutional-level) that will influence civic values, engagement, and aspirations for service-related careers. The environmental factors are presented in the middle box and outer layers of the model in Figure 1. The environmental factors include student’s college enrollment and academic factors, academic and social experiences in college, and the underlying institutional characteristics. The global, national, and local community is represented in the outer layer of the model in Figure 1 because these contextual factors influence students’ background, college experiences, and institutional factors. The environmental factors and the related literature are described in the following.

College Enrollment and Academic Factors

Full-time enrollment and college GPA are positive predictors of civic engagement, whereas enrolling part-time, taking remedial coursework, and transferring negatively affect students’ level of academic and social engagement (Astin, 2000; Kuh, 2009). However, limited research has examined the influence of these variables on civic engagement. These college enrollment and academic factors are important because many Latinx college students enroll part-time, take remedial coursework, and start their postsecondary education in community college (Espinosa et al., 2019; Excelencia in Education, 2019). Thus, these factors must be considered when designing civic learning opportunities. For instance, civic programming for part-time Latinx college students can be focused in the classroom or after business hours. This is especially true for civic learning opportunities at community colleges as many community college students work full-time, enroll part-time, are commuters or are also grappling with other responsibilities outside of college (American Association of Community Colleges, 2021; McNaughtan & Brown, 2020).

Relatedly, the model also includes what Nora (2003) calls “environmental pull factors,” which are responsibilities outside of college that will affect a student’s academic and social engagement level with college. This includes working more than 20 hours per week, family’s financial responsibilities, and commuting to school. Pull factors may limit the time students can devote to on- or off-campus civic learning opportunities. However, some studies have found that working students are more civically engaged (Jarvis et al., 2005). While many Latinx students work while going to college (Dowd & Malcom, 2012), they may be working in service-related jobs, such as tutoring or coaching kids.

Furthermore, research implies that the relationship with students’ level of civic values is more negative for those majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM; for example, in biology, computer science, or mathematics) in comparison with the social sciences (Garibay, 2015; Lott, 2013). The act of majoring in STEM does not lead to lowered civic values, but students may be less exposed to civic learning opportunities related to STEM. Given the positive impact civic engagement has on college success, higher education practitioners should implement more culturally responsive civic learning opportunities in STEM majors. Doing so may increase Latinx students’ civic capacities and their success in STEM.

Academic and Social Experiences in College

The model includes formal and informal civic curricular and cocurricular experiences in college. Formal curricular experiences—taking service-learning, ethnic studies, and women’s studies courses—have been found to foster civic engagement, democratic ideals, and pluralistic orientations through civic participation and critical civic learning (Hurtado, Ruiz et al., 2012). For example, the Latinx Empowerment at De Anza (LEAD), a learning community at De Anza College—a minority serving institution (MSI) community college in Northern California—offers culturally responsive courses in Chicano studies, political science, and economics, among others. Students learn about social issues impacting the Latinx community and engage in service projects to benefit the community in this learning community.

Institutions may also foster civic engagement through cocurricular activities that engage students with civic opportunities outside of class, such as clubs, programs, and organizations, with leadership development and community engagement components. In addition, participating in undergraduate research opportunities impacts students’ civic development and service career choices (Garibay, 2014; Hunter et al., 2006). An example of civic-promoting cocurricular opportunities is the University of Nevada, Reno’s (UNR) Noticiero Móvil, a faculty-led and student-run Spanish and English news outlet housed in the Reynolds School of Journalism. Noticiero Móvil has been instrumental in providing Spanish language news and information to the monolingual and multilingual Spanish-speaking Latinx community of Northern Nevada. In fact, they are the only Spanish news outlet in Northern Nevada. In 2020 alone, students actively released news about the presidential election, voting, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), public health services, and issues and resources related to COVID in Spanish and English. Getting information about Nevada’s elections and ballot measures to the Spanish-speaking community can increase the Latinx vote.

In addition, as Latinx students are more likely to engage in less formal civic opportunities, such as protests and mobilizing, higher education practitioners must consider the policies and practices related to students participating in on- and off-campus protests. Some higher education institutions shun protests as a type of civic engagement rather than supporting students (Aguilar-Hernández, 2016; Hill et al., 2019). In the model, informal civic opportunities include engaging in protests and demonstrations; working on a local, state, or federal campaign; and hours devoted to volunteering. These are civic opportunities that are not offered through a formal program, course, or requirement. Students who participate in informal civic activities in college may be more motivated to be civically engaged, demonstrating initiative in seeking out these opportunities. Past studies have found that these three civic activities positively predict political engagement, civic values, and awareness (Hurtado, Ruiz et al., 2012).

Furthermore, Latinx student involvement in racial/ethnic organizations, including Latinx Greek organizations, influences student leadership development and civic engagement (Garcia et al., 2017; Moreno & Sanchez Banuelos, 2013). Other cocurricular and civic experiences that impact students’ civic development include participation in student government, study abroad, and leadership training (Engberg, 2013; Lott, 2013).

Finally, interactions with diverse peers and having meaningful relationships with faculty have been found to influence the development of students’ pluralistic orientation and also influence their career aspirations (Berman et al., 2008; Campos-Outcalt et al., 1995; Engberg, 2007; Hunter et al., 2006; Sax et al., 2005). To support Latinx students’ civic growth, higher education practitioners and faculty must intentionally support the development of meaningful relationships with peers and faculty on campus.

Institutional Characteristics

The third component of the model accounts for institutional characteristics (e.g., control, selectivity, type, religious affiliation, MSI, and community engagement commitment/classification), which may influence students’ academic and social experiences within colleges and, ultimately, the civic outcomes. For example, highly selective 4-year colleges are more likely to enroll students with high academic achievement and socioeconomic backgrounds, which puts students at an advantage for civic participation. In comparison, Latinxs attending community colleges may not have the same civic learning opportunities as 4-year colleges as these are predominantly commuter campuses (McNaughtan & Brown, 2020). Included in the model are also religious-affiliated institutions as participation in religious activities or networks has been found to positively influence civic values and engagement (Lewis et al., 2013).

MSIs are another institutional context included in the model because of their long history of preparing leaders and service sector professionals, such as doctors and teachers (Gasman et al., 2015; Scott, 2000). Some MSIs apply their federal Title III and V funding to provide community outreach and service (U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary and Office of Postsecondary Education, 2012). For example, Nevada State College, a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), used its Title V funds to prepare future teachers serving in high-need areas. Although MSIs are considered sites for promoting civic engagement among underserved populations, limited research has examined their relationship to the civic development of Latinx students (Alcantar, 2017; Cuellar, 2021; García & Cuellar, 2018). One study found that Latinx students attending more racially/ethnically diverse college campuses were more likely to vote (Fernandez et al., 2020). Another study found no differences in civic values of Latinx students attending HSIs and emerging HSIs (Cuellar, 2021). Still, other studies have demonstrated the impact of curricular and cocurricular practices and racialized experiences at HSIs and emerging HSIs on students’ civic development (Alcantar, 2017; Comeaux et al., 2020; García & Cuellar, 2018).

Another institutional characteristic that influences students’ civic development is an institutional commitment to civic engagement. Institutions demonstrate their commitments through their mission statements, strategic plans, or by seeking institutional classification such as the Carnegie Foundation’s Community Engagement Classification (Barnhardt et al., 2015; Scott, 2000). One study found that students’ perceptions of their campus’ civic mission greatly influenced their civic commitments, even after controlling for student backgrounds, participation in curricular and cocurricular opportunities, and institutional characteristics (Barnhardt et al., 2015). As an example, CSULA, an HSI, instituted a civic engagement graduation requirement for undergraduates.

This model primarily focuses on college students and campus environmental factors that impact the civic development of college students. However, researchers and practitioners using this model should consider external environmental components, such as the sociohistorical, political, racial, social, and global contexts that impact students and institutions and the civic development of individuals, as depicted in the outer layers of Figure 1. For example, the civic engagement of Latinx students is also influenced by the sociohistorical and political structures of their family’s country of origin. This is exemplified in the differences in Latinxs’ 2020 presidential voting patterns in Florida, a predominantly Cuban immigrant state, compared with California, a predominantly Mexican immigrant state (Latino Decisions, 2020). In addition, the local and state context of higher education institutions and the locations that Latinx students are coming from also influence their civic development and participation and should be considered in the approach to Latinx students’ civic development. An example of ways that institutions can draw from and engage with the local and state community is Poder Quince, a voter registration drive organized by Jolt Initiative—a nonprofit organization comprising chapters of college students from universities in Texas—that partners with young Latinas celebrating their quinceañeras to increase Latinx voter registration (Poder Quince, 2020). Their initiative is to register party guests and encourage them to vote.

Promoting the Civic Development of Latinx College Students

The model for the civic development of Latinx college students presents the multifaceted nature of developing the civic capacities of Latinx college students. This article aims to provide a model to guide research and practice to (a) gain a better understanding of the civic development of Latinx college students, and (b) inform the development and design of institutional policies and practices to develop the civic capacities of Latinx college students. For higher education institutions to develop the civic capacities of Latinx students, practitioners must consider the students’ diverse and heterogeneous backgrounds and experiences before enrolling in college and their experiences in and outside of college while enrolled. This section presents final recommendations for higher education practitioners and researchers, based on the model for the civic development of Latinx college students and the examples presented above, to support the civic development of Latinx students. First, institutions must intentionally and systematically get to know Latinx students and their communities. To do this, institutions should first recognize that not all Latinx students are alike, as evidenced in the example from CSUCI. The first section of the model provides a guidepost for attributes, identities, and experiences to consider. In addition, more research is needed to further explore how these attributes, identities, and experiences influence the civic capacities and engagement of Latinx students differently. For example, further research could highlight the civic development and engagement of Latinx male, lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual, and queer (LGTBQ) students. One study found that participating in a fraternity, ethnic student organization, and internship program positively impacted the leadership development of Latinx males (Garcia et al., 2017). The study also found nuances by institutional contexts, geographic area, and other mediating factors and experiences that influence Latinx males’ leadership development (Garcia et al., 2017). Increasing Latinx males’ civic development and engagement is important, especially to increase the rate of Latinx men in service-related professions in teaching and health. More research is also needed on the civic development and engagement of Latinx students in and beyond service-related majors and occupations. For example, how can civic values and engagement be instilled in majors and careers, such as business, that do not have a direct path to serving the public good?

Second, it is necessary to identify the civic capacities of Latinx students, including the social and political issues that are important for them, and connect civic practices to local, national, and global Latinx communities, as seen in the examples presented of De Anza College and UNR. Third, institutions must develop a civic mission and institutionalize civic goals. Higher education administrators and faculty must identify the common language and goals for civic engagement for their institution that accounts for diverse students. Civic missions guide institutional civic goals, practices, and metrics of success. The author also suggests identifying a definition of civic engagement that includes political, social, and community engagement. In addition, the goal of developing students’ civic capacities should be engrained in all facets of the institution, including the curriculum of all the academic programs, the requirements for student success and learning objectives, initiatives on campus, and the organizational culture of the institution, supported by the examples of NSC and CSULA.

Fourth, higher education institutions must develop partnerships with the community, including nonprofit and government organizations at the local, national, and global levels, equivalent to the example of Poder Quince. Developing partnerships is especially critical for institutions that serve many students from the local community or communities reflective of the student population, particularly community colleges and MSIs. Higher education institutions should find creative, culturally responsive approaches, such as the example of Poder Quince, to increase the civic engagement of their Latinx students and surrounding communities in partnership with the community.

It is important to note that the examples mentioned in the recommendations are from institutions with an organizational culture of civic engagement. They also have a large and growing Latinx student population and are in California, Texas, and Nevada, which are all minority-majority states with large Latinx populations. However, these civic practices are not limited to these types of contexts. Nor is this article implying that having a large enrollment of Latinxs, such as at HSIs and community colleges, or being located in areas with large Latinx populations automatically translates into institutions committing to the civic development of Latinx students. HSIs, community colleges, and higher education institutions in minority-majority states, such as those presented in this article, are not all alike and do not always use culturally responsive approaches to “serve” Latinx students (Garcia et al., 2019; Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015). Scholars have found significant variation in HSIs in the campus cultures, practices, and commitments to Latinx students and communities (Alcantar et al., 2020; Garcia et al., 2019; Núñez et al., 2016).

There are also variations among similar types of institutions in the same state. The variation in approaches and commitments can even be present within one institution. A case in point is the two institutions in Nevada presented as examples in this article. Both NSC and UNR are public 4-year colleges in the state of Nevada. But both have very different student demographics and institutional and community contexts. They also vary in the approach and commitment to serving Latinx students across the campus within each institution. Because of these variations, institutions must make intentional and concerted efforts to increase the civic-related capacities of Latinx students, which are responsive and tailored for the specific institution. Deliberate efforts to raise the civic capacities of Latinxs are also crucial at higher education institutions serving a smaller Latinx student population, such as predominantly White institutions (PWIs) and historically White institutions (HWIs). Latinx students at PWIs, HWIs, and even MSIs that are simultaneously HWIs and PWIs, often feel and experience more marginalization and discrimination, partially due to these institutions having limited or no Latinx institutional culture. Even at institutions and states with a large concentration of Latinx students, there may not be an organizational culture and investment in civic engagement or incorporation reflective of Latinx culture, further perpetuating Latinx people’s disenfranchisement. The lack or limited investment in civic engagement is common in community colleges. At institutions located in communities with a smaller Latinx population, there may also be fewer opportunities in K–12 schools and the community to engage civically and develop their civic-related capacities. Future research must explore Latinx culturally responsive approaches to civic development at different types of institutions and in various geographic regions.

Conclusion

Higher education institutions can play a critical role in the civic development of racially/ethnically minoritized populations and underserved communities, and through this, serve the public good. Intentional efforts to increase the civic capacities of Latinx students are especially important now, in the wake of major social unrest and calls to action, to combat social and racial injustices. Given the Latinx community’s heterogeneity, Latinxs are interconnected in the Black Lives Matter movement’s fight for racial justice for the Black community. The Latinx community is also impacted by the ongoing attacks and injustices aimed at immigrant communities, including deportation and the deplorable conditions at immigrant detention centers, and the devastating effects of the health pandemic on their livelihoods. Finally, the recent attacks on democracy by White supremacy groups at the federal and state levels impact the Latinx community. Higher education practitioners, faculty, and administrators must learn and discuss these issues as an institution and identify ways to support Latinx students and communities.

An important factor to address the social issues impacting the Latinx community is voting. An estimated 52% to 55% of eligible youth aged 18 to 29 years voted in the 2020 presidential general election; this rate is higher than any other recent presidential election (Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement [CIRCLE], 2020). Racial/ethnic minoritized youth were especially critical in swing states (CIRCLE, 2020). We must use this momentum to continue increasing the civic capacities and civic participation of Latinx students, not just during the presidential election cycle. The model for the civic development of Latinx college students presented in this article serves as a guiding framework for higher education institutions to consider in the design of policies and practices to develop the civic capacities of Latinx students. One of the ultimate measures of social integration and mobility for underserved Latinx populations is their active civic engagement in the United States. Prioritizing the civic development of Latinx college students is critical for the civic development and participation of a historically disenfranchised community as well as the social integration and mobility of a large and growing segment of the U.S. population that will impact the public good of our society.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge the support from Dr. Vanessa Monterosa, Dr. Rachel Freeman, Dr. Edwin Hernandez, Shannon Nguyen, and the reviewers in the revisions of this article. Also, special thanks to the American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education (AAHHE), including the past and current leadership, and its members, for the opportunity to present a version of this article at the annual conference in 2020.

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Cynthia Maribel Alcantar

Notes

Author Biography

Cynthia Maribel Alcantar is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education Leadership at the University of Nevada, Reno. Her research focuses on the social structures that impact the social mobility and integration of racial/ethnic minoritized and immigrant populations in the United States. Particularly the influence of schools on the educational pathways and civic participation of racial/ethnic minoritized and immigrant students.

References

Alcantar

C. M.

(2014). Civic engagement measures for Latina/o college students. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2013(158), 23–35.

Alcantar

C. M.

(2017). Cultivating our nation’s engaged citizenry: Institutional factors that promote the civic engagement of college students [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global database (UMI No. 10619730).

Alcantar

C. M.

Rincón

B. E.

Espinoza

K. J.

(2020). In a state of becoming: How institutions communicate Asian American and Pacific Islander- and Latinx-servingness through campus artifacts. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 14(3), 104–119.

Aguilar-Hernández

J. M.

(2016). ¡Si se pudo!: Student activism in the Chicana/o Studies movement at UCLA, 1990-1993. In Sandoval

D. M.

Ratcliff

A. J.

Buenavista

T. L.

Marín

J. R.

(Eds.), “White” washing American education: The new culture wars in ethnic studies (pp. 249–275). Praeger.

American Association of Community Colleges. (2021). Fast facts 2021.

Astin

A. W.

(1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass.

Astin

A. W.

(2000). The civic challenge of educating the underprepared student. In Ehlrich

(Ed.), Civic responsibility and higher education (pp. 124–146). The American Council on Education and Oryx Press.

Barnhardt

C. L.

Sheets

J. E.

Pasquesi

(2015). You expect what? Students’ perceptions as resources in acquiring commitments and capacities for civic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 56, 622–644.

Berman

Rosenthal

M. S.

Curry

L. A.

Evans

L. V.

Gusberg

R. J.

(2008). Attracting surgical clerks to surgical careers: Role models, mentoring, and engagement in the operating room. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 207(6), 793–800.

10.

Bryant

A. N.

Gayles

J. G.

Davis

H. A.

(2012). The relationship between civic behavior and civic values: A conceptual model. Research in Higher Education, 53, 76–93.

11.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Volunteering in the United States-2014. U.S. Department of Labor.

12.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2018.

13.

Calderón

J. Z.

(Ed.). (2007). Race, poverty, and social justice: Multidisciplinary perspectives through service learning. Stylus.

14.

Campos-Outcalt

Senf

Watkins

A. J.

Bastacky

(1995). The effects of medical school curricula, faculty role models, and biomedical research support on choice of generalist physician careers: A review and quality assessment of the literature. Academic Medicine, 70(7), 611–619.

15.

Cemalcilar

(2008). Understanding individual characteristics on adolescents who volunteer. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(2009), 432–436.

16.

Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. (2020, November 25). Election week 2020: Young people increase turnout, lead Biden to victory. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/election-week-2020

17.

Comeaux

Grummert

S. E.

Cruz

N. A.

(2020). Strategies of resistance among racially minoritized students at a Hispanic-serving institution: A critical race theory perspective. The Journal of Higher Education, 92, 1–34.

18.

Cuellar

M. G.

(2021). Latina/students as agents of change: The influence of cultural assets and college experiences. Race Ethnicity and Education, 24(6), 789–809.

19.

Dache

Quaye

S. J.

Linder

McGuire

K. M.

(Eds.). (2020) Rise up! Activism as education. Michigan State University Press.

20.

DeSipio

(2006). Latino civic and political participation. In Tienda

Mitchell

(Eds.), Hispanics and the future of America (pp. 447–479). National Academies Press.

21.

Dowd

A. C.

Malcom

L. E.

(2012). Reducing undergraduate debt to increase Latina and Latino participation in STEM professions. University of Southern California.

22.

Einolf

C. J.

(2011). Gender differences in the correlates of volunteering and charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(6), 1092–1112.

23.

Engberg

M. E.

(2007). Education the workforce for the 21st century: A cross-disciplinary analysis of the impact of the undergraduate experience on students’ development of pluralistic orientation. Research in Higher Education, 48(3), 283–317.

24.

Engberg

M. E.

(2013). The influence of study away experiences on global perspective-taking. Journal of College Student Development, 54(5), 466–480.

25.

Espinosa

L. L.

Turk

J. M.

Taylor

Chessman

H. M.

(2019). Race and ethnicity in higher education: A status report. American Council on Education.

26.

Excelencia in Education. (2019). Latinos in higher education: Compilation of fast facts. Excelencia in Education.

27.

Ferguson

R. A.

(2017). We demand: The university and student protests. University of California Press.

28.

Fernandez

H. K.

Bergom

Niemczyk

(2020). Is campus diversity related to Latinx student voter turnout in presidential elections? Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 13(3), 195–204.

29.

Flanagan

Levine

(2010). Civic engagement and the transition to adulthood. The Future of Children, 20(1), 159–179.

30.

García

G. A.

Cuellar

(2018). Exploring curricular and co-curricular effects on civic engagement at emerging Hispanic Serving Institutions. Teachers College Record, 120(4), 1–36.

31.

Garcia

G. A.

Huerta

A. H.

Ramirez

J. J.

Patrón

O. E.

(2017). Contexts that matter to the leadership development of Latino male college students: A mixed methods perspective. Journal College Student Development, 58(1), 1–18.

32.

Garcia

G. A.

Núñez

A.-M.

Sasone

V. A.

(2019). Toward a multidimensional conceptual framework for understanding “servingness” in Hispanic-serving institutions: A synthesis of the research. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 745–784.

33.

Garcia

G. A.

Okhidoi

(2015). Culturally relevant practices that “serve” students at a Hispanic serving institution. Innovative Higher Education, 40, 345–357.

34.

Garibay

J. C.

(2014). Beyond traditional measures of success in STEM: Predictors of STEM bachelor’s degree recipients’ values toward using research and sociopolitical involvement to promote more equitable society [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (3627476).

35.

Garibay

J. C.

(2015). STEM students’ social agency and views on working for social change: Are STEM disciplines developing socially and civically responsible students? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(5), 610–632.

36.

Gasman

Spenser

Orphan

(2015). “Building bridges, not fences”: A history of civic engagement at private Black colleges and universities, 1944-1965. History of Education Quarterly, 55(3), 346–379.

37.

García Bedolla

. (2012). Latino education, civic engagement, and the public good. Review of Research in Education, 36, 23–42.

38.

Gay

(2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

39.

Gildersleeve

R. E.

Jimenez Sinfuentes

(2017). Latino/a youth activism in higher education: A new materialist analysis of the Latino graduation ceremony. Critical Questions in Education, 8(4), 343–357.

40.

Hart

Donnelly

T. M.

Youniss

Atkins

(2007). High school community service as a predictor of adult voting and volunteering. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 197–219.

41.

Hill

D. C.

Shaw Bonds

M. D.

Quaye

S. J.

(2019). We are tired of talking: The catalyst for the mobilizing anger collective. In Dache

Quaye

S. J.

Linder

McGuire

K. M.

(Eds.), Rise up! Activism as education (pp. 81–95). Michigan State University Press.

42.

Hillygus

D. S.

(2005). The missing link: Exploring the relationship between higher education and political engagement. Political Behavior, 27, 25–47.

43.

Hunter

A. -B.

Laursen

S. L.

Seymour

(2006). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education, 91, 36–74.

44.

Hurtado

(2007). ASHE presidential address: Linking diversity with the educational and civic missions of higher education. The Review of Higher Education, 30, 185–196.

45.

Hurtado

Alvarez

C. L.

Guillermo-Wann

Cuellar

Arellano

(2012). A model for diverse learning environments: The scholarship on creating and assessing conditions for student success. In Smart

J. C.

Paulsen

M. B.

(Eds.). Higher education handbook of theory and research (pp. 41–122). Springer.

46.

Hurtado

Engberg

M. E.

Ponjuan

Landrewman

(2002). Students’ pre-college preparation for participation in a diverse democracy. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 163–186.

47.

Hurtado

Ruiz

Whang

(2012, June 2–6). Assessing students’ social responsibility and civic learning [Paper presentation]. Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, New Orleans, LA, Unites States.

48.

Jacoby

, & Associates (Eds.). (2009). Civic engagement in higher education: Concepts and practices. Jossey-Bass.

49.

Jarvis

Montoya

Mulvoy

(2005). The political participation of college students, working-students, and working youth (Circle working paper 37). www.civicyouth.org

50.

Katsiaficas

Hernandez

Alcantar

C. M.

Samayoa

Gutierrez

M. N.

Williams

(2018). “We’ll get through this together”: Collective contribution of family and community in the lives of Latino undocumented undergraduates. Teachers College Record, 120(120306), 1–48.

51.

Kuh

G. D.

(2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683–706.

52.

Latino Decisions. (2020, November 5). Latino voters in the 2020 election national survey results. https://latinodecisions.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Latino-EE2020-Deck.pdf

53.

Lewis

V. A.

MacGregor

C. A.

Putnam

R. D.

(2013). Religion, networks, and neighborliness: The impact of religious social networks on civic engagement. Social Science Research, 42(2), 331–346.

54.

Littenberg-Tobias

Cohen

A. K.

(2016). Diverging paths: Understanding racial differences in civic engagement among White, African American, and Latina/o adolescents using structural equation modeling. American Journal of Community Psychology, 57(1–2), 102–117.

55.

Longo

N. V.

Gibson

C. M.

(Eds.). (2011). From command to community: A new approach to leadership education in colleges and universities. Tufts University Press.

56.

Lopez

M. H.

Gonzalez-Barrera

Krogstad

J. M.

(2018). More Latinos have serious concerns about their place in America under Trump. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/10/Pew-Research-Center_Latinos-have-Serious-Concerns-About-Their-Place-in-America_2018-10-25.pdf

57.

Lott J. L., II. (2013). Predictors of civic values: Understanding student-level and institutional-level effects. Journal of College Student Development, 54(1), 1–16.

58.

Maginot

K. B.

(2021). Effects of deportation fear on Latinxs’ civic and political participation. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(2), 314–333.

59.

McNaughtan

Brown

(2020). Fostering democratic participation at community colleges: Understanding the relationship between voting and student, institutional, and environmental factors. Community College Review, 48(4), 355–375.

60.

Moreno

D. R.

Sanchez Banuelos

S. M.

(2013). The influence of Latina/o Greek sorority and fraternity involvement on Latina/o college student transition and success. Journal of Latin/Latin American Studies, 5(2), 113–125.

61.

The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. (2012). A crucible moment: College learning and democracy’s future. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

62.

Nora

(2003). Access to higher education for Hispanic students: Real or illusory? In Castellanos

Jones

(Eds.), The majority in the minority: Expanding representation of Latino/a faculty, administration and students in higher education (pp. 47–67). Stylus Publishing.

63.

Núñez

A.-M.

Crisp

Elizondo

(2016). Mapping Hispanic-serving institutions: A typology of institutional diversity. The Journal of Higher Education, 87(1), 55–83.

64.

Pacheco

J. S.

Plutzer

(2008). Political participation and cumulative disadvantage: The impact of economic and social hardship on young citizens. Journal of Social Issues, 64(3), 571–593.

65.

Perez

Espinoza

Ramos

Coronado

Cortes

(2010). Civic engagement patterns of undocumented Mexican students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9(3), 245–265.

66.

Perez

Vasquez

Buriel

(2016). Immigrant Zapotec, Mixtec, and Purepecha youth: Translating in three languages in the context of societal marginality. In Alim

Ball

Rickford

(Eds.), Racializing language, languaging race (pp. 255–271). Oxford University Press.

67.

Poder Quince. (2020). Quince power. Jolt Initiative. https://www.poderquince.com/

68.

Ponjuan

Alcantar

C. M.

Soria

(2016). Redefining civic engagement: A developmental model of students’ civic-related capabilities. In Soria

Mitchell

(Eds.), Civic engagement and community service at research universities: Engaging undergraduates for social justice, social change and responsible citizenship (pp. 99–122). Palgrave Macmillan.

69.

Rhoads

R. A.

(1998). Freedom’s web: Student activism in an age of cultural diversity. The John Hopkins University Press.

70.

Rogers

Medirattta

Shah

(2012). Building power, learning democracy: Youth organizing as a site of civic development. Review of Research in Education, 36, 43–66.

71.

Saltmarsh

Hartley

(Eds.). (2011). “To serve a larger purpose”: Engagement for democracy and the transformation of higher education. Temple University Press.

72.

Sax

L. J.

Bryant

A. N.

Harper

C. E.

(2005). The differential effects of student-faculty interactions on college outcomes for women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 642–657.

73.

Scott

G. D. R.

(2000). A Historically Black College perspective. In Ehrlich

(Ed.), Civic responsibility and higher education (pp. 263–278). The American Council on Education and The Oryx Press.

74.

Solomon

Maxwell

Castro

(2019). Systematic inequality and American democracy. Center for American Progress.

75.

Solorzano

D. G.

Bernal

D. D.

(2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and latcrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342.

76.

USAFacts. (2020, February 1). How many Americans vote and how do voting rates vary by state? https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-americans-vote-and-how-do-voting-rates-vary-state/

77.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary and Office of Postsecondary Education. (2012). Advancing civic learning and engagement in democracy: A road map and call to action. U.S. Department of Education. http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/road-map-call-to-action.pdf

78.

Wilson

(2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240.