At this forum, which was this evening (Feb. 17) at 7 p.m. in Harris Hall, I expected to learn more about the issue of undocumented students than I did. What the forum ended up being was about 15 minutes worth of actual dialogue about the issue, interspersed with 25 minutes of the moderators making filler comments and glancing around the small lecture room in hopes someone would say something to spark further conversation, plus 10 minutes at the end where one of the forum organizers outlined the designated plans of action. While I didn't 100-percent enjoy the structure of the forum, I did find some of the discussion helpful.
The gist of the problem is that undocumented students—defined on a fact sheet handed out at the event as "individuals without citizenship who were born abroad and are not legal residents of the United States"—face monumental roadblocks in accessing higher education, largely dealing with inability to pay tuition or even apply for federal financial aid that would ease the monetary burden high tuition costs place on students. The fact sheet further states that around 65,000 undocumented students graduate from high school in the United States each year and only about 5-10% of those students pursue a college degree (compared to 75% of their documented classmates).
The article in The Daily Northwestern, "Undocumented at Northwestern," stated that there are at least three undocumented students currently attending NU, only one of whom would agree to speaking anonymously for the story. One moderator this evening responded to an attendee's question as to whether any undocumented students were leading this push for action at NU, admitting movements tend to be stronger and more effective when led by people advocating for themselves, but that NU doesn't currently have the right climate to support undocumented students themselves being the face of this advocacy. The same attendee who asked the question (who was actually a company member of the Albany Park Theater Project) said he thought "allies" (documented students working on behalf of their undocumented peers for change) can change the lexicon in discussing the issue, so that the rhetoric shifts from being about "illegal immigrants" to focusing on "undocumented students."
That particular comment, on allies changing the lexicon, struck me. If it is true that the climate at NU is not, at present, ideal for candidness on the part of undocumented students, I wonder if the campus would even be receptive to a changed lexicon. On The Daily's story, I saw a handful of user comments utilizing the argument that NU's actions in supporting undocumented students attending the University would be "reprehensible" in that the administration would effectively be complicit in breaking the law, in aiding and abetting in illegal activity. A couple stated in more plain language that the undocumented students should "go back to Mexico" and "make that country better" (although nowhere in the story is it stated that any of the undocumented students at NU are from Mexico). I know this isn't necessarily the view the majority (or even a large minority) of students at NU have. But it's pretty telling that issues like the DERU membership list publishing garner more attention on the web than immigrant issues. Students at NU just don't have a common vocabulary on this. I think, rather than a changed lexicon, a movement on this campus will have to build a lexicon from scratch. And it won't be easy. Any effort like this runs the risk of ultimately just preaching to the choir, of reaching out to the groups within a certain comfort level the organizers share, thereby "spreading" the dialogue to the people who already know about it. This was a problem the organizers briefly discussed once they moved on to the "action" part of the forum (that particular issue is #2). The following were the action points discussed:
1. Faculty Outreach — The event organizers emphasized getting faculty members on board, keeping them informed on the issues regarding undocumented students and perhaps having them sign a petition for change.
2. Student Groups Outreach — The organizers emphasized that this outreach must be campus-wide, not just among allied organizations. Their reasoning is that this issue "affects us all."
3. Web Awareness — This includes social media and other online publicity. I'm not sure whether this will include such organized structure as a movement website or just a few Facebook events, but at the forum I remember thinking back to our discussions of online "involvement" in causes. I hope the movement doesn't at any point begin to rely on connecting to people just on the Internet, or complacency could set in and spread pretty quickly. You know, the "Oh, I just clicked a button...that means I'm a supporter" type of deal.
4. Event Planning/Programming — This would include further outreach on campus in the form of topic-targeted awareness forums on amnesty, the DREAM Act, etc. In my opinion, this type of programming needs to get more specific, and FAST, because future events can't just be planned the way tonight's was and expect to incite passion and fire for change among the student body.
5. Research and Policy Change — This will include participants putting together information on policies other universities put in place that could work at NU, possibly including some form of private financial aid pool for undocumented student applicants, and then making a policy proposal to NU administration, which the organizers said are "generally friendly" toward this issue.
6. Evanston Outreach — This would include talking to high schoolers about the type of programs they would like to see in place for undocumented students at an ideal college for them. This endeavor, I could see running into some issues, as local high schoolers may have the same surface-level understanding of this issue that many NU students have. I do think it is important to reach into the community, but again, I feel the specificity is lacking.
I think action point #5 should be the culmination of the first leg of this movement. A proposal to the University should not be made hastily, without having a substantial proportion of the student body behind the issue in a meaningful, sincere way.
All in all, I enjoyed the forum but thought the organizers could have been more, well, organized in providing the blueprint for a helpful dialogue. The forum felt like a very premature first step, whereas I think with more preparation, it could have been a solid, progressive first step already moving forward into the second.
Also, a final note, I didn't feel an atmosphere of excitement or potential for sweeping change emanating from that room. I couldn't help but wonder how different a meeting like this might have been if NU were located in a border state, for instance, when this issue would be one, to use a current course term, of almost "forced intersubjectivity." Does this movement have a chance at succeeding in a university with students facing, instead, "optional intersubjectivity"? Will the goal of this movement have to become changing that "optional" into a "forced"? How can that be done? I hope the people involved are ready and willing to face that issue and make something of it.
(I may or may not be taking part in the early stages of the movement, depending on whether they use the "exit card" I filled out before leaving to fervently recruit me. I suppose that can be their first test.)
No comments:
Post a Comment