on the margins: undocumented students’ narrated experiences of (il)legality

Linguistics and Education 23 (2012) 235– 249

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Linguistics and Education

j ourna l ho me pag e: www.elsev ier .com/ locate / l inged

On the margins: Undocumented students’ narrated experiences of(il)legality

Kendall A. King ∗, Gemma PuntiUniversity of Minnesota, College of Education and Human Development, 228 Peik Hall, 159 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455-0208, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 27 June 2012

Keywords:LatinoAdolescentCitizenshipNarrativeLegal statusRace

a b s t r a c t

Undocumented migration is a major demographic trend, yet both under researched andunder-theorized. This is particularly the case for undocumented students in the U.S., asmost studies that target this population have spotlighted extraordinary adolescents (e.g.,Gonzales, 2008). Much less is known about the everyday unextraordinary experiences ofundocumented youth in navigating the U.S. legal and social terrain. To address this gap, thisstudy interviewed and observed undocumented Latino youth in the U.S. over 18 months,and examined what we term, the ‘narrative accounts of legality’ produced by 15 youths.Analysis of these 20 narrative accounts reveals that immigration status is experienced andunderstood largely in racial terms. Findings provide insight into how these experiencesare linked to youths’ sense of self and self-development and the ways in which these highschool students and young adults discursively make sense of the myriad contradictionssurrounding them.

© 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

1.1. Undocumented youth in the U.S.

Undocumented migration is a massive but under-studied social phenomenon. While immigration has long been a majordemographic force in the U.S., contemporary patterns are distinguished by unprecedented high rates of unauthorized entry(Abrego, 2006). As unauthorized immigration status sharply limits one’s social, educational, and occupational opportunities(Gindling & Poggio, 2008; Gonzales, 2009; Rumbaut, 2009), this dynamic deserves close examination. This is particularlytrue for children. Roughly 1.6 million children under the age of 18 in the U.S. are undocumented (Passel, Capps, & Fix,2004), the great majority of whom will remain in the country permanently (Massey, 2009). Although public schools arebarred from excluding undocumented children (Plyler v. Doe, 1982), current U.S. law disallows these children and youngadults from achieving formal legal status. These youth, many of whom have lived in the U.S. for most of their lives, are thuslegally ineligible to work, obtain a social security number, or drive in many states. In a sense, they are caught between twoparadigms—one that they have created for themselves and with their families as permanent residents in the U.S. and oneconstructed by the federal and local governments and by political discourse as ‘illegal’ (Shah, 2008).

To date, the bulk of the research with undocumented students has focused on their civic engagement (e.g., DeJaeghere& McCleary, 2010; Perez, 2009), and in particular, on efforts to increase access to higher education (Abrego, 2006; Gonzales,

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 612 625 3692.E-mail address: [email protected] (K.A. King).

0898-5898/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/08985898

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/linged

mailto:[email protected]

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002

236 K.A. King, G. Punti / Linguistics and Education 23 (2012) 235– 249

2008; Rincón, 2008; Seif, 2004, 2009). Undocumented higher education students—in California and elsewhere—have playeda central role in the in-state tuition movement.1 Because undocumented individuals are ineligible for federal financialaide, access to less expensive, in-state higher education tuition rates has been a central goal. One wide-spread tactic isthe presentation of ‘testimonies’ (e.g., Dreamactivist, 2010). These first-person testimonies describe the challenges of aca-demically successful students, targeting popular audiences through blogs (e.g., Lazarksy, 2010) and magazine articles (e.g.,Jones, 2010). These emotionally compelling ‘coming out’ stories refute stereotypes of undocumented youth as unmoti-vated academically or unwilling to learn English in order to build support for in-state tuition policies at the state level andpassage of the federal DREAM Act2 (Perez, 2009). This work has been partially successful, and data indicate that in-statetuition policies result in increased rates of non-citizen enrollment in higher education, lower high school drop-out ratesfor non-citizen Latinos, and no increased costs to taxpayers (Abrego & Gonzales, 2010; Kaushal, 2008; Mehlman-Orozco,2001).

While student activism has been well described and the personal stories of academically successful undocumentedstudents well covered in the literature (e.g., Chavez, Soriano, & Oliverez, 2008; Gonzales, 2008; Gonzalez, Plata, Garcia, Torres,& Urrieta, 2003; Mangan, 2010; Perez, 2010), much less is known about the experiences and academic outcomes of moreordinary undocumented students. Further, although a large body of research examines the experiences of immigrant youthin the U.S. (e.g., Ogbu, 1987; Portes & Zhou, 1992; Zhou, 1997), very little of this touches on legal status. For instance, Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco, and Todorova’s (2008) landmark, five-year longitudinal study of immigration and achievementamong 400 adolescents did not collect systematic data on the legal status of participants although status did surface asimportant during qualitative case study interviews. Suárez-Orozco et al. (2008) report that “students whom we knew wereundocumented were disproportionably found among the precipitous decliners and our lowest achievers” (p. 390). Theirobservations are supported by estimates of high school graduation and college attendance. For instance, nearly half ofundocumented adults in the U.S. aged 25–64 (47%) have not completed high school (compared with only 8% of U.S.-bornresidents) (Passel & Cohn, 2009). Further, undocumented immigrants who graduate from high school are much less likelythan their U.S.-born counterparts to attend college, with only 49% of these young adult graduates aged 18–24 having enrolledin college (compared with 71% for U.S.-born graduates) (Passel & Cohn, 2009).

1.2. Legal status and race in the U.S.

Public and private discussions of (im)migration in the U.S. take place in a context in which race, ethnicity, and languageare contentious and politically charged (Dick, 2011; Wortham, Allard, Lee, & Mortimer, 2011). U.S. public discourse onimmigrants is often racist and de-humanizing, but also reflective and constitutive of public opinion (Santa Ana, 1999). Themajority (69%) of U.S. adults believe illegal immigrants should “be prosecuted and deported for being in the U.S. illegally”(Rasmussen Reports, 2007), while 52% of U.S. adults believe that most recent immigrants “cause problems” (RasmussenReports, 2007). Such stances do not go unnoticed by U.S. Latinos, and indeed the majority of Latinos now perceive themselvesto be the targets of bias (MacGregor-Mendoza, 1998; Pew Hispanic Center, 2007).

These hostile attitudes can be linked to the expanding size and visibility of the U.S. Latino population, but also to thegrowing association between race and undocumented legal status (De Genova, 2005; Dick, 2011). Latinos in the U.S. numberroughly 50.5 million, and constitute 16% of the total U.S. population (Passel, Cohn & Hugo Lopez, 2011). Of these 50.5 millionindividuals, 30 million (59%) are U.S. born, and 20.5 million (41%) are foreign-born. Undocumented immigrants, in turn,number 11.2 million, and comprise roughly 30% of the total foreign-born population (Passel & Cohn, 2011, 2012; U.S. CensusBureau, 2012). Approximately 82% of all undocumented residents in the U.S. are Latino (Passel & Cohn, 2011). Thus, mostLatinos in the U.S. are U.S.-born, and roughly half of the foreign-born Latinos are documented, legal residents (about 10million) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). Nevertheless, the fact that the majority of undocumented individuals in the U.S. areLatino—and that nearly all media images and public discussions of undocumented individuals focus on border-crossingLatinos3—promotes the racialization of the ‘illegal immigrant’ category (Dick, 2011).

1 In the U.S., fees for students who are out-of-state residents can be triple those of in-state students. Multiple U.S. states, including California, Texas,Utah, Washington, New York, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Illinois, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Maryland, and Connecticut have implemented some form ofin-state higher education tuition policies (NCSL, 2011). These laws are intended to help undocumented students attend (public) state institutes of highereducation by reducing tuition costs. In many cases, in order to be eligible, students must have graduated from high school in that state; reside in that statefor a set number of years; and sign an affidavit that they will apply for U.S. citizenship when eligible.

2 The National Dream Act movement was developed to advocate for a law creating a pathway to U.S. citizenship for undocumented students, therebyallowing them an opportunity to become legal residents and qualify for in-state tuition rates and for state and federal financial aid (Gonzales, 2011). TheDREAM Act (‘Development, Relief, and Education of Alien Minors’) allows individuals to apply for legal permanent resident status if, upon enactment ofthe law, they are under the age of 35, arrived in the United States before the age of 16, have lived in the United States for at least the last five years, andhave obtained a U.S. high school diploma or equivalent. The DREAM Act passed in the House of Representatives in December, 2010, but failed (55–41) inthe Senate. Further action is unlikely until 2012.

3 A 2009 analysis of coverage of Latinos in the news found that immigration was a major topic, and of all stories on immigration, 34% referenced Hispanics,10 times that of any other ethnic group (Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism [PEJ], 2009). Further, in contrast to the popular perceptionthat undocumented individuals have crossed the Mexican–U.S. border, 45% in fact are visa-overstayers, most of whom arrive by sea or via Canada (Passel,2006).

K.A. King, G. Punti / Linguistics and Education 23 (2012) 235– 249 237

While race is most productively defined as a “cultural category of difference that is contextually constructed as essentialand natural—as residing within the very body of the individual—and is thus generally tied, in scientific theory and popularunderstanding, to a set of somatic, physiognomic, and even genetic character traits”, racialization is the process throughwhich “any diacritic of social personhood—including class, ethnicity, generation, kinship/affinity, and positions within fieldsof power—comes to be essentialized, naturalized, and/or biologized. . .into fixed species of otherness” (Silverstein, 2005, p.364). The ways in which U.S. federal policy (e.g., Coutin, 2005; De Genova, 2005; Ngai, 2004) and state and local governmentmandates (e.g., Dick, 2011; Schiffman & Weiner, 2012) have criminalized and racialized Mexicans and other Latin Americanadult immigrants has been well documented. De Genova (2005), for instance, examined how ‘illegality’ has been discursivelyand ideologically constructed as both a category and a crime, and linked with the Chicago Mexican communities. And morerecent work (Wortham, Allard, et al., 2011) analyzes how ‘payday mugging’ narratives, widely circulating within one EastCoast community, differentially racialize African Americans and Mexicans.

Research focusing on youth and immigrant families, in turn, has examined how citizenship status impacts the everydaylives of undocumented youth in mixed-status families, that is families in which individuals hold varied formal relation-ships to the U.S. state. This work finds that migratory status influences the ways in which parents and children engage ineducational activities with each other and with community resources. For instance, Mangual (2010) highlights the sharedlinguistic resources families use to co-construct national identity. Yoshikawa (2011) demonstrates how undocumented par-ents’ avoidance of programs and authorities, isolated social networks, and difficult working conditions have adverse effectsfor their (citizen) children’s early cognitive skill development.

While De Genova (2005) takes a critical Marxist approach—arguing that threat of deportation is a tool to keep adultMexican workers in line—and Mangual (2010) adopts a language socialization approach—identifying how immigration statusimpacts the ways in which children are socialized to specific identities, Yoshikawa (2011), a developmental psychologist,focuses on identifying the pathways through which legal status impacts children’s learning. All three researchers suggestthat undocumented status has important implications for individual development and life trajectories.

However, none of this work examines how students personally understand and interpret their legal status, and nonefocuses on the experiences of adolescents, a significant segment of the undocumented population. This project addresses thisgap by examining how undocumented Latino students narrate and frame their past experiences with the U.S. immigrationsystem, as well as how they understand those experiences and link them to their evolving sense of self and place in U.S.schools and society.

1.3. Narrative, self, and narrative accounts of legality

Narratives are told within all cultural and social groups (Bohanek, Marin, Fivush, & Duke, 2006; Ochs & Capps, 1996); areubiquitous in daily life (McLean, Pasupathi, & Pals, 2007); and are discursively and argumentatively potent (De Fina, 2000;De Fina & Georgakopoulou, 2012). Across all genders and cultures, the great majority (90%) of emotional experiences aredisclosed to others within a few days (Rimé, Mesquita, Philippot & Boca, 1991). Narratives are also rhetorically powerful inarguments (e.g., Carranza, 1999; Günthner, 1995; van Dijk, 1993), functioning as “exempla” (Martin & Plum, 1997)—that is,as evidence for speakers’ claims or positions (Günthner, 1995, p. 147). These “eyewitness testimonials” (Müller & Di Luzio,1995) are in a sense ‘owned’ by the speaker, and thus difficult to challenge (De Fina & King, 2011).

Our focus on narratives rests on past research pointing to the ways in which narrative and self are closely linked, withnarratives both reflecting past experience and informing understanding of that experience. As Ochs and Capps (1996)summarize, “personal narratives shape how we attend to and feel about events [as] every telling provides narrators andlistener/readers with an opportunity for fragmented self-understanding” (p. 21). Thus, personal narrative is both born outof experience and gives structure to that experience (McLean et al., 2007). More precisely, narrative provides the “primarystructure by means of which we organize our view of self through time allowing us to interpret the past in the light of thecurrent process of narrativizing self” (Georgakopoulou, 2007, p. 18). Of interest is what youths’ narratives of legality andimmigration reveal about their developing sense of self. Self is here understood to be “an unfolding reflective awareness ofbeing in-the-world, including a sense of one’s past and future” (Ochs & Capps, 1996, pp. 20–21), with the understandingthat any narrative telling is situated in a particular conversational and temporal context, and thus can only reveal facets ofa narrator’s selfhood (1996, p. 22).

While narratives are a central tool of qualitative research across the social sciences (De Fina, 2009), little agreement existson what constitutes a narrative, and far less agreement still on best approaches to analysis. As widely noted, the canonicalnarrative—defined by temporal ordering, tellability (i.e., recounting of unusual events), and evaluation (on the part of theteller) (Labov & Waletzky, 1997)—is uncommon in everyday talk (Georgakopoulou, 2007). While the Labovian narrativestructure (i.e., abstract, orientation, complicating action, etc.) remains central to many analyses (including that offeredbelow), most narratives are “co-constructed, co-evaluated. . .and modified through interaction with audiences” (De Fina,2009, p. 238). As Georgakopoulou (2007) notes, narratives “span the continuum from highly monologic to highly collaborativetelling; from past to future and hypothetical events; from long and performed to fragmented and elliptical telling” (p.17). Accordingly, multiple definitions and descriptors have been proposed including ‘habitual narratives’, ‘hypotheticalstories’, ‘cyclical tales’, ‘anecdotes’, ‘situated stories’, ‘accounts’ and ‘small stories’ among many others (e.g., De Fina, 2009;Georgakpoulou, 2004; Ochs & Capps, 2001).


In tandem with this inclusion of a broader range of narrative types has come greater emphasis on the role of context. Whiletraditional (i.e., Labovian) approaches tended to extract the narrative from surrounding talk, current work emphasizes theimportance of context, viewing the constraints, conventions, and conceptions of the interview (or conversation) as importantin shaping the content and structure of the narrative (De Fina, 2011). As De Fina (2009) argues, “we should not erase theinterview context as is often done in narrative research,” nor should it be treated as “unnatural”; rather, the interview contextmust be viewed as any other context of interaction, and therefore, our work should include analysis of how the interviewcontext “shapes and is shaped by the narrative” (p. 234).4

Building on these insights, this study analyzes narrative accounts as they are produced in the contexts of qualitativeinterviews. Narrative accounts (De Fina, 2009, p. 241): (a) are recapitulations of past experience told in response to explicitor implicit interviews’ evaluative inquiries about how or why those experiences took place; (b) involve explanations; (c)are recipient designed; (d) are generally oriented towards factuality; and (e) have a structure that varies considerably as itemerges as the result of the specific questions asked and the relationships between interlocutors. While interview partic-ipants produced narrative accounts on many topics, we focus analysis here on those concerning legal immigration status.Specifically, we limited our analysis to narrative accounts in which immigration status was central to (a) the complicatingevent or action (e.g., perceptions of legal status were basis of an insult), or (b) the coda and evaluation (e.g., events areinterpreted as result of immigration status or the immigration system).

2. Methods

2.1. Interviews and analysis of narrative accounts

Interviews are unique social encounters in that they constitute occasions in which people make sense of their experiencesby building upon common ground and shared understandings (Briggs, 1986; Cicourel, 1964). Interviews can thus be seenas sites for re-elaboration and negotiation of the ideologies and of common-sense understandings (Wortham, Mortimer,Lee, Allard, & White, 2011) that inform the local interaction between participants. As suggested above, within interviews,narratives are especially powerful sites for the construction of identity, the representation of social relationships, and thenegotiation of the moral order (Bucholtz, 1999; De Fina, 2003; Georgakopoulou, 2007). As such, “narratives are one mecha-nism through which relatively stable models of identity can emerge and become robustly associated with particular groups”(Wortham, Allard, et al., 2011, p. E57). Our premise here is that close examination of how interactants negotiate and elab-orate upon these understandings through storytelling can yield deeper understanding of individual’s sense-making aboutsocial issues. As we illustrate here, narratives are not isolated texts (Talmy, 2010), but are sequentially produced within theinterview and often embedded in argumentative sequences and responses to interview questions (De Fina & King, 2011).

As an initial step in our analysis, all narrative accounts of legality were identified within the transcribed interview textsusing the definition provided above. For analysis of structure and content, the basic categories proposed by Labov (1972)were employed:

Abstract: presents the gist of the narrativeOrientation: presents details on time, persons, and placesComplicating action: presents conflicts between characters and subsequent actionsCoda: a closing utterance that relates past events to the present establishing connections between past and present, forexample consequencesEvaluation: presents the point of view of the narrator about the events

We also included the category ‘Complicating event’, which represents the main complication in a story. We then lookedclosely at the talk and argumentation surrounding these accounts.

Many of the narrative accounts of legality were produced in response to specific questions (e.g., have you ever been askedfor your papers?) while others were embedded in broader responses to opening questions (e.g., how did you decide to cometo the U.S.?). In all but three cases, the protagonists in the narratives were the speakers themselves. The three exceptionsrelated experiences of a friend, of relative, or in one case (Excerpt 1), the in-law of a friend. Antagonists varied, but most oftenwere actual or potential employers; immigration or police authorities; inquiring or aggressive ‘white’ or ‘gringo’ individuals;or the narrator’s parent(s).

As detailed below, our analysis of these narrative accounts pointed to the ways in which race is confounded with immi-gration status, at times in the reported specifics of the actual event, as well as in tellers’ interpretation and analysis of thoseevents. More precisely, our work demonstrated how race is invoked (explicitly, and in other cases implicitly) by storytellersas an explanatory construct in the face of discrimination.

4 De Fina illustrates this point through discussion of her work with undocumented Mexican adult immigrants; many of the narratives told in herinterviews (De Fina, 2003) included negotiations over form and context due to ambiguity about the purpose of the interview, the roles of the participantsas well as the political climate in the U.S. As she describes, “the need to explain/justify their presence in the country and the insecurity about my objectivesare important elements to understand what so many of the narratives I collected were constructed as accounts” (De Fina, 2009, p. 241).


2.2. Study context and participants

The regional context of the study in many ways mirrors that of the wider U.S., both demographically and ideologically.Minnesota is home to a significant and growing number of immigrants, of whom between a quarter and a third lack legalresidential status, that is, roughly 60,000–100,000 individuals (Passel & Cohn, 2011). As in the rest of the U.S., Latinos are themost numerous immigrant group5—although the state is also home to large, established Hmong and Somali communities(Bigelow, 2010). And as elsewhere in the U.S., Minnesotans, particularly in rural parts of the state, often perceive Latinos tobe an economic threat (Fennelly, 2008).

While generally recognized for its strong educational system, Minnesota has one of the country’s largest ethnic disparitiesin educational achievement. For instance, four-year high school graduation rates for Latino students are less than half (37%)of white/non-Latino students (84%) (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2009). In part for these reasons, some youth havemobilized around education issues, focusing on improving high school graduation rates and higher-education access. Theseefforts—with support of organizations such as Minnesota Minority Education Partnership (MMEP) and Minnesota ImmigrantFreedom Network (MIFN)—have secured more than $4.8 million in state funds for ‘flat tuition’ rates at select state colleges(Godinez & Espejel, 2010).

Within the Minneapolis metro area, we conducted 20 interviews with 15 youth and young adults. (See Table 1.) Otherthan Marcelo, who was born in Texas and moved at age one to Mexico, all interviewees were foreign-born (13 in Mexico and1 in Guatemala). Fourteen of 15 participants were undocumented and aware of their legal status. The one exception wasElvira, who made contradictory comments concerning her legal status.6 With all other participants, immigration status cameout quickly even though interviewers made no explicit inquiries. This openness about a sensitive topic might be explained asthe result of the known collaboration between interviewers and an organization that supports undocumented Latino youth(MIFN), or possibly the interviewers’ demonstrated empathy to issues of legal status and use of Spanish. This openness mightalso be a function of selection bias: those individuals who volunteered to share immigration experiences as part of the studywere perhaps more likely than others to speak directly about their legal status.

All participants were recruited through the researchers’ work with MIFN. As part of an evaluation of MIFN youth program-ming in area high schools, participants completed a survey which measured students’ desire to attend college and perceivedobstacles to high school graduation and college enrollment. Although the surveys did not directly ask about legal status, somestudents commented in writing that their legal status dampened college aspirations. We followed up with these students;additional participants were recruited through friendship networks. All interviews took place in private homes, at school,or in public fast food restaurants according to interviewees’ preferences, and lasted 1–2 h. Central topics of conversationincluded their reasons for migrating and their current and past experiences with school and work. While the interviewerswere bilingual, most participants opted to speak in Spanish. In addition, six participants participated in an ethnographic,longitudinal study (Punti, in progress). While the bulk of the data analyzed here comes from the audio-recorded interviews,these observations also informed our work.

3. Findings and analysis

3.1. Narrative accounts of legality

Complicating events or actions in narratives fundamentally convey ‘what happened’ (Labov, 1997). They are typicallya series of temporally ordered events that have beginning and end points. These sequential clauses report the next eventin response to a potential question, ‘And what happened [then]?’. The complicating events or actions within the narrativeaccounts of legality here consisted of two types: (a) actual or potential (e.g., near-miss) encounters with public officials (i.e.,Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] or local police) requesting evidence of immigration status and/or detaining theprotagonist; or (b) threatened or actual denial of employment, service or equal treatment based on (perceived) legal status.

3.1.1. Actual or potential encounters with public officialsThe first type of complicating event is evident in Paula’s narrative account (Except 1). Paula is a 17-year-old who, despite

the difficulties she encounters learning English, states she is determined to graduate from high school within 18 monthsand to study cosmetology. Just prior to Excerpt 1, Paula was discussing differences among Mexicans, making the point thatthose who know English can be discriminatory towards newcomers, but also that immigration status makes a difference.7

5 Latinos in the state number around 200,000 (according to census data released in 2008), with roughly two-thirds coming from Mexico (Chicano LatinoAffairs Council [CLAC], 2010).

6 For instance, she explained that él (padre) agarró papeles de residente y papeles para todos... (‘he (father) got residency papers and papers for all’),suggesting that the family was documented. However, later that same day, Eliva stated that mi mamá se metió en la escuela en un programa. . .que dabanen la tarde para papás que sus hijos no tienen documentos legales (‘my mom got into a school program. . .that was given in the afternoon for parents whosechildren had no legal documents’).

7 It is notable that this account occurs within the context of the broader interview focused on the challenges faced by immigrants, in particular withrespect to English language learning and racism, and in which the interviewer had positioned herself sympathetic. For instance, earlier on, when Paulaexpressed estar con miedo (‘being scared) due to her legal status, the interviewer showed emotional support via back-channeling and by asking more about


When the interviewer asked Paula how status makes a difference, Paula noted that those with papers have more rights andthat nosotros estamos con miedo si te preguntan [por tus documentos] no sabemos ni que contestar (‘we are scared if we areasked for our documents we don’t even know what to answer’). However, Paula also added that she had never been askedfor her papers. The interviewer then asked her if she knew someone who had been stopped by the police or deported (lines1–2), initiating the narrative account.

Excerpt 1 (Paula): Papers not driver’s license8

01 Interv. mmm. conoces algún caso de alguna persona que haya sido deportada o que haya tenido02 problemas con la policía?03 Paula no: ahorita no. así-> bueno una una companera me dijo que su su cunado le habían pe+. . .04 estaba manejando y lo paró la policía, y le preguntó por sus papeles no le preguntó05 por su licencia sino por sus papeles y:: como que se me hace un poco racista que:: los policías06 o las personas que te vean por ser mexicano te pregunten si tienes documentos07 Interv. ya->08 Paula +/. . . y pues da más miedo salir a la calle09 Interv. mm, y tu sabes que dijo el el conductor?10 Paula el+. . .pues el conductor dijo que +. . . no le contestó! porque su hermana tiene papeles +. . .11 ella es mexicana tiene papeles12 Interv. aha13 Paula y le ensenó su licencia y:: sus papeles y ya a él no le dijeron nada14 Interv. (.) supongo que::(.) el hecho de tener un aspecto físico te da una influencia

1 Interv. mmm. do you know the story of anyone who has been deported or who has had2 problems with the police?3 Paula no: right now no. this-> well one one colleague told me that his his brother in-law was asked fo +/. . .4 he was driving and the police stopped him, and the police asked him for his papers he didn’t ask him5 for his driving license but for his papers a::nd like this is kind of racist to me tha::t the police ((plural))6 or people that see you like a Mexican ask you if you have documents7 Interv. ya->8 Paula +/. . .and then it is scary to go out9 Interv. mm, and do you know what the the driver said?

10 Paula the +. . .then the driver said that +. . .he didn’t respond! because his sister has papers +. . .11 she is Mexican she has papers12 Interv. aha13 Paula and he showed his license a::nd his papers and then they didn’t tell him anything14 Interv. (.) I guess th::at (.) the fact of having a physical aspect has some influence

Paula’s account starts on line 3, as a reply to the interviewer’s implicit request for a description of a police encounter.Paula at first responds negatively, and then amends, noting that her friend’s brother-in-law had such an experience: hewas stopped by the police while driving and asked for his (immigration) papers. Paula uses this brief narrative accountas evidence for her next assertion, that this action seemed racist. Note how Paula expands her argument in the followingutterances, first stating that the incident seemed racist (line 5), and then broadening this accusation to police (plural) andthen people (plural) in general (lines 5–6). The coda and evaluation of this account returns to Paula’s earlier argument, thatthese sorts of reported police practices make one fearful to leave the house (line 8). It is only when the interviewer asksabout the outcome of the police stop (line 9) that Paula returns to the specifics of the encounter (lines 10–11, 13). In thiscase, the sister showed her immigration papers and driver’s license, which apparently satisfied the police and they were notfurther detained.

While the interviewer’s question (line 1) was focused on deportation and police encounters, Paula interprets or respondsto this question to advance an argument about racial bias, but also to reflect both on the impact of such practices (i.e.,wide-spread fear, line 8) and their unjustness. Although this narrative account is compact, it supports her argument thatimmigration policy and its enforcement are racially based and racially biased. Here race is explicitly invoked as an explana-tory construct; however, ethnicity (and nationality) are also mentioned. While social scientists generally differentiate ‘race’and ‘ethnicity’, with ethnicity referring to “types of social difference constructed to appear relatively more flexible, lesshierarchical, and anchored in inherited cultural beliefs and practices” (Dick, 2011, p. E40)—in everyday interactions, includ-ing this account, the contrast is very often blurred or non-existent. Note, for instance, how Paula begins with a specificcomment about racial bias (e.g., being stopped by police based on appearance), but in the same turn, expands (or restates)this to include national or ethnic bias (e.g., looking ‘Mexican’), thus reflecting and perpetuating the fusion of race andethnicity.

those feelings: qué te da miedo? (‘what does scare you?’). This question prompted Paula’s explanation of her fear of being laughed for her English languageskills and to continue with the police encounter narrative.

8 See Table 2 for transcript conventions.


3.1.2. Threatened or actual denial of employment, service or treatmentThe second type of complicating event or action within the narrative accounts consisted of the threatened or actual

denial of employment, service or equal treatment based on (perceived) legal status. Excerpt 2, shared by Zumaia, isrepresentative. Zumaia is an 18-year-old high school student and mother to a U.S.-born child. She graduated shortlyafter this interview and planned to develop a child daycare business. In the turns just prior to Excerpt 2, Zumaia andthe interviewer had been discussing Zumaia’s reasons for leaving Mexico. Zumaia’s mother had suffered from domes-tic violence in Mexico, and both she and her mother had fled to the U.S. In concluding this description, Zumaia stressedthat she was focused on giving a better future to her own daughter, despite the challenges of being undocumented in the U.S.

Excerpt 2 (Zumaia): Don’t even bother

01 Zumaia . . .quiero darle un mejor futuro a mi nina pero es difícil porque hay muchas puertas cerradas para los que02 no son de aquí, así como cerradas también hay de abiertas pero no tantas03 como si fueras de aquí.04 Interv. cuál son las puertas abiertas que ves?05 Zumaia pues hay personas que+. . .hay colegios que tratan de ayudarte así pagar por pagos o lo que06 puedas pero es difícil si no eres de aquí y no tienes un trabajo.07 Interv. ya. has intentado encontrar un trabajo?08 Zumaia sí pero este-> así como fui a un restaurante de fast food y estaba una americana! entonces09 este me dio la aplicación pero me vio así como diciéndome don’t even bother así10 como diciendo-> entonces ya cuando le di mi aplicación este se agachó pa bajo y vi que la tiró11 a la basura entonces yo ni no dije nada porque dice “oh papeles falsos!”12 Interv. ah, eso es lo que dijo? pero que papeles falsos. a que se refería con papeles falsos?13 Zumaia no sé, así como dicie::ndo: está usando algo falso::, o no es de aquí (.) no no le+. . .14 doy el trabajo, no sé si era el manager o no sé quien era pero15 me tiró la aplicación a la basura y ok! está bien.16 Interv. y cómo te sentí +. . . qué hiciste, dijiste alguna cosa?17 Zumaia @ no dije nada porque no quise ser grosera. pero no más me fui y no volví a ese lugar

1 Zumaia . . .I want to give a better future to my girl but there are many doors closed to those who2 are not from here, as well as closed there are also open ones but there are not that many3 as for those who are from here.4 Interv. which are the open doors you see?5 Zumaia well there are people +. . . there are colleges that try to help you or like to pay in installments or what6 you can pay but it is difficult if you are not from here and you don’t have work.7 Interv. ya. have you tried to find a job?8 Zumaia yes but then-> like when I went to a fast food restaurant and there was an American woman! then9 she gave me an application but she looked at me like telling me don’t even bother like

10 saying-> when I gave her my application she kneeled down and I saw that she threw it11 in the trash then I no didn’t say anything because she says “oh false papers!”12 Interv. ah, that is what she said? but what false papers. what did she mean with false papers?13 Zumaia I don’t know, like sayi::ng she is using something fa::ke, or she is not from here (.) I won’t+. . .14 give her the job, I don’t know if she was the manager or I don’t know who she was but she15 threw my application in the trash but and ok! it’s fine.16 Interv. and how did you fee +. . . what did you do, did you say something?17 Zumaia @ I didn’t say anything because I didn’t want to be rude. but I just left and I never went back to that place

Zumaia starts by noting (lines 1–3) that there are fewer doors open for those ‘who are not from here’. It is unclear towhom she is referring to: undocumented immigrants, Latinos, Mexicans or all immigrants. The interviewer then solicits aspecific example of an open door that Zumaia sees (line 4), and Zumaia mentions higher education opportunities in generalterms (line 5). However, Zumaia returns again to the point that for those who are not from here, finding a job is difficult(line 6). The interviewer takes up this last comment and inquires if Zumaia has ever looked for a job (line 7). The narrativeaccount provided in response to this question begins on line 8. Zumaia explains that she once went to a fast food restaurant(to apply for a job). Una americana (‘an American female’) employee at the restaurant gave her the application but then alsogave Zumaia a look that Zumaia interpreted as, ‘don’t even bother’ (line 9). When Zumaia completed the application, theworker accepted it, but Zumaia saw she threw it in the trash, commenting in a voice loud enough for Zuamaia to hear about‘false papers’ (line 11). The interviewer questions Zumaia about her interpretations of what the worker meant (line 12), andZumaia explains (lines 13–15) that she was not certain, but believed it had to do with having some kind of fake papers ornot being from here, and for this reason, the worker did not give her the job. Zumaia adds that the status of the worker wasunclear (‘I don’t know if she was the manager’), but that it was fine with her (line 15). The interviewer asks for more specificsabout the encounter—how Zumaia felt and what she did (line 16)—and Zumaia notes that she did not respond because shedid not want to be rude, but that she never returned (line 17).

As in Excerpt 1, the complicating events and actions of Zumaia’s account are not fully elaborated (e.g., what was saidby all of the characters, why the worker suspected Zumaia was undocumented). Nevertheless, we again see how ethnicity(or nationality) is salient, here via the categorization of the antagonist at the outset of the account (line 8) as an americana.Categorization, particularly in orientation sequences, is a powerful mechanism for identity construction since it allows thenarrators to project story-world actions as consequences of (or at least as related to) specific identities (De Fina, 2000,


2006), and is particularly salient here in light of the proceeding comments about those being from here having differentopportunities (lines 2–3, line 6). The worker’s American identity is thus projected as consequential to her aggressive actions.Moreover, this account provides the opportunity for Zumaia to position herself relative to these events and to the (rude andunprofessional) antagonist. Zumaia accomplishes this by undermining the authority of the worker by questioning her statusin the restaurant (line 14) and describing her own response as non-confrontational (‘and ok! it’s fine’, line 15), but also byhighlighting her own sociability.

Here, race is invoked only implicitly as an explanatory construct. Zumaia does not state that her physical appearanceresulted in the worker’s assessment of her as undocumented and subsequent denial of employment; rather, she implies thisthough categorization of the antagonist at the outset of the account. Further, Zumaia arrived in the U.S. at age seven, and herEnglish skills are indistinguishable from a monolingual U.S.-born English speaker, a fact which supports Zumaia’s implicitsuggestion that it was her appearance (e.g., ‘she looked at me’) that resulted in her trashed application.

Zumaia’s account both resists and reflects broader ideologies about race, national origin and immigration status. On theone hand, Zumaia’s implicit critique of the worker’s behavior suggests that it was the worker, not Zumaia, who was in thewrong. Zumaia, in this account, is a polite and respectful job-seeker; ‘the American’ is rude, unprofessional. Her accountdepicts an unpleasant interaction between an undocumented, Latina immigrant (herself) and (what we, and she, presumeto be) a non-immigrant American. As told here, the American was immoral or unethical, not Zumaia. On the other hand, theaccount allows Zumaia to elaborate on the distinction raised at the outset between those who are from here and those whoare from elsewhere (lines 1–3). In this sense, it reflects the on-going racialization of undocumented status, while ignoring thecomplicating, contradictory facts—e.g., that most Latinos are born in the U.S. (Pew Hispanic Center, 2008), that the majorityof those ‘not from here’ have legal rights to work in the country (Pew Hispanic Center, 2008), and that many of those whomight pass as ‘from here’ could also be undocumented (e.g., Brits, Canadians) (Passel, 2006).

3.1.3. ‘Out groups’ and legal statusIn both Excerpts 1 and 2, as in all but three narrative accounts, the interaction with the public official or the reported denial

of service or access were based not on knowledge of the protagonist’s immigration status, but rather were the result of theracialized category of ‘illegal immigrant’. Thus, for narrative accounts with both types of complicating events, race is inter-twined in the specific details of the events reported, as well as in the implicit or explicit interpretation and framing of theseaccounts. The salience of race (at times collapsed with ethnicity or nationality) in experiencing and interpreting immigration-related events was evident across nearly all interviews, even in what might seem innocuous contexts. For instance, in Excerpt3, Pamela shares her interpretation of an interaction with a bus driver. Pamela is a 20-year-old high school student and motherto two children. Like Zumaia, she also graduated shortly after the interview with few prospects for further education; nev-ertheless, she was upbeat in all of her interactions with us despite a recent deportation experience. Just prior to this excerpt,Pamela and the interviewer had been talking about how the situation in the U.S. had deteriorated for undocumented immi-grants. Pamela cited the implementation of the Arizona law SB10709 and offered as an explanation for the law that no nosquieren (‘they don’t want us’) because some Latino youth join gangs and cause problems. Pamela then made a distinctionbetween those who do and do not deserve amnesty (lines 1–2), which leads to the following narrative account (Excerpt 3).

Excerpt 3 (Pamela): Sit down!

01 Pamela . . .por ejemplo yo digo una gente que tiene buen record que no ha hecho ninguna felonía que02 está trabajando que tiene todo en orden. yo digo que a ellos sí los que sí les den su amnistía,03 pero +. . . no sé:: y es cada vez más. hay policías racista::s,04 Interv. has visto alguno has conocido:: ->?05 Pamela no policía pero gente sí. una +. . . una bus driver.06 Interv. qué pasó?07 Pamela era +. . . era una de city bus. y:: dijo +. . . porque yo le digo a Daniel “siéntate!”08 y no se quería sentar en el bus y yo lo senté y dijo “si tú le sigues haciendo así al09 nino te vas a tener que bajar del bus” dijo “porque parece que que” +. . .10 como que me dio a entender que tú +. . . “que ustedes no entienden”11 Interv. que no entienden el qué?12 Pamela o sea como tiene que tratar uno a un beb +. . . a un nino.13 Interv. (.) que dijiste?14 Pamela le digo:: +. . . no le dije nada me quedé callada.15 Interv. por qué te quedaste callada?16 Pamela porque me dio miedo.17 Interv. miedo a qué?18 Pamela a que fuera a llamar a la policía o fuera a hacer algo (.)19 Interv. mmmh. ((understanding))20 Pamela y por eso no dije nada.

9 This legislative act makes it a state misdemeanor crime for an alien to be in the state of Arizona without legal documentation. It obligates police todetermine a person’s immigration status if there is ‘reasonable suspicion that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the U.S.’ (Arizona SenateBill 1070, 2010, p. 10).


01 Pamela . . .for example I think that people who have good record that have not done any felony that02 are working that have everything in order. I think that yes they should get their amnesty,03 but +. . . I don’t kno::w and it is every day more. there are racist police,04 Interv. have you seen any have you met::->?05 Pamela no police but people yes. a +. . . a bus driver ((female))06 Interv. what happened?07 Pamela she was +. . . she was one from the city bus. a::nd she said +. . . because I told Daniel “sit down!”08 and he didn’t want to sit in the bus and I sat him and she said “if you keep doing like that to the09 kid you will have to get out of the bus” she said “because it seems like that that” +. . .10 like she kind of told me that you +. . . “you all don’t understand”11 Interv. that you don’t understand what?12 Pamela so like how one must treat a bab +. . . a kid.13 Interv. (.) what did you say?14 Pamela I told he::r +. . . I didn’t tell her anything I stayed quiet.15 Interv. why did you stay quiet?16 Pamela because I got scared.17 Interv. scared of what?18 Pamela that she would call the police or she would do something (.)19 Interv. mmmh. ((understanding))20 Pamela and that is why I didn’t say anything.

Pamela backtracks on her initial argument that those with felonies do not deserve amnesty, adding that there are alsoracist police (line 3). The interviewer next probes for more details to support her assertion (line 4). Paula does not provide apolice example, but offers one of a racist bus driver (line 5). The interviewer affirms her interest by asking what happened(line 6), and Paula begins the narrative account in line 7. Pamela explains that she was sitting on a city bus and told her youngson to sit down. He did not comply, so Paula pulled her son down to his seat. The (female) bus driver then told Paula that ifshe continued to treat her son in this manner she would have to get off the bus, adding a comment along the lines of ‘you alldon’t understand’ (lines 7–10). The interviewer then requests elaboration on what the driver meant (line 11). Paula explainsthat the driver was asserting that ‘you all’ don’t know how to treat children (line 12). As Paula explains, her response to thisinsult was to stay quiet (line 14) out of fear that the driver might call the police (line 18).

This account differs from that of Excerpt 2 in that the ethnicity of the antagonist (the bus driver) is not characterizedin the orientation (although perhaps suggested by her role and narrator’s use of English ‘bus driver’). However, like theprevious excerpts, this account allows the speaker to assert the existence of racially biased treatment. While Excerpts 1and 2 began with an event in which immigration status was salient—and interpreted and suggested by the storyteller asracially motivated, here the teller begins with a story of what she believes to be a racist incident. Note that the bus driveris characterized by the teller as racist, but the driver herself does not invoke race. Rather the driver’s use of the phase ‘youall’ constructs an out-group social category into which the teller is placed. This out-group categorization might be basedon driver perceptions of race, or on other factors (e.g., language, age). So while Paula frames this as a racist incident, theracial basis of the antagonistic interaction is unclear. Legal status most directly comes into play here in that this incident wasadditionally humiliating because the narrator’s immigrant status heightened her fear of the potential negative outcomesand impeded her ability to confront this perceived insult from the bus driver.

3.1.4. Counter-example: legal status as non-obstacleIn short, across nearly all of these stories in our data, legal status was embedded with race, together both forming and

depicted as obstacles to employment and education, as well as restrictions to agency and mobility. The exception to thisfinding were the narrative accounts provided by Noberto. In all of his accounts—and indeed, across all of our participantobservations with him, Noberto rejects the notion that he faces any obstacles due to his immigration status. Further, asevident in Excerpt 4, he positions himself as one who publicly challenges this idea in interaction with others. Just prior tothe excerpt here, Noberto and the interviewer were talking about the differences between Guatemalan and U.S. schoolswith Noberto asserting that in the U.S. one learns more because there are better materials, more volunteers, and morecollege prep instruction. However, Noberto’s positive statements about schooling contrasted sharply with his uneven highschool attendance record (both observed by the researchers and noted by Noberto himself); given this contradiction, theinterviewer asked if Noberto’s immigration status impacted his schooling experience (lines 1–2).

Excerpt 4 (Noberto): Excuses

01 Interv. el hecho de ser inmigrante y sin documentos ha tenido un impacto +. . . un efecto en02 la escuela? (.) lo ha::s visto con los profesore::s, companero::s?03 Noberto ((moviendo la cabeza diciendo no)) nada.04 Interv. nada.05 Noberto nada nada. la otra vez cuando llegué a la Williams yo estudié allá,06 Interv. +/. . . dónde?07 Noberto a la Williams high school08 Interv. Ok09 Noberto un estudiante en college llegó a darnos información sobre este-> como se dice! sobre el


10 college no, y después tres jóvenes dijeron esto después de la reunión. y entonces dijo el11 joven “van a ir al college después de la graduación, si o no”?12 los tres jóvenes dijeron uno dice “es que no tenemos dinero no podemos ir no,” el otro13 dice “es que no hay dinero, ya ve que el college se paga no,” y el tercero ese que dice14 que no tiene licencia para manejar. “ok” le digo, “ok. ((with a tone of expertise)) que levanto15 la mano no, y tengo una palabra no, y digo mi hermano va al college. y16 no tiene licencia para manejar, el no es millonario, está luchando en un empleo para pagar su17 college y además él es INdocumentado! esos tres jóvenes se quedaron callados, estaban18 poniendo excusas! no hay dinero que no hay papeles, que no hay licencia para manejar, es19 una EXCUSA !((faster speech)). y yo les compartí que mi hermano no es millonario está20 trabajando para pagar su college, pues no tiene licencia para manejar anda en bus a veces21 en carro pero rara vez, no tiene papeles pero está estudiando en el college y otros jóvenes22 lo ponían como excusas! pero no.23 Interv. por qué piensas que muchos estudiantes latinos lo ven como +. . . ponen estas excusas24 como tu dices, por qué no ven la opción de ir al college?25 Noberto yo diría que falta de información, por ejemplo, si yo no tuviera la información que si se26 puede triunfar sin papeles, si yo no tuviera +. . . si yo fuera uno de ellos no, pero como yo27 tengo la información yo +. . .como se dice, no me interesa no +. . .no tienen28 información los jóvenes

01 Interv. the fact of being an immigrant and without documents has that had an impact +. . . an effect in02 the school? (.) ha::ve you seen it with professo::rs, colleague::s?03 Noberto ((moving his head with a no)) nothing.04 Interv. nothing.05 Noberto nothing nothing. the other time when I arrived at Williams I studied there,06 Interv. +/. . . where?07 Noberto at Williams high school08 Interv. Ok09 Noberto a college student came to give us information about mmh-> how to say it! about the10 college huh, and then three youths explained this after the meeting. and then the young11 college student said “are you going to college after graduation, yes or no”?12 the three youths said one say “it’s that we don’t have money we cannot go huh,” the other13 says “it’s that there is no money, you see college must be paid huh,” and the third, that one says14 that he does not have a driving license. “ok.” I tell him, “ok.” ((with a tone of expertise)) I rise15 my hand huh, and I have something to say huh, and I say that my brother goes to college. and16 he does not have a driving license, he is not a millionaire, he is struggling at work to pay his17 college and in addition he is UNdocumented! those three youth got quiet, there were18 making excuses! there is no money that there are no papers, that there is no driving license, it19 is all an EXCUSE! ((fast speech)). and I shared that my brother is not a millionaire he is20 working to pay his college, then that he does not have driving license he goes by bus, sometimes21 by car but rarely, he does not have papers but he is studying in college and the other youth22 were making excuses! but no.23 Interv. why do you think that many Latino students see it as +. . . they make these excuses24 as you say, why don’t they see the option of going to college?25 Noberto I would say that it is a lack of information, for example, if I hadn’t had the information that it is26 possible to succeed without papers, if I hadn’t had +/. . . if I were one of them huh, but since I27 have the information I +. . . how to say it, I am not interested huh +. . . they don’t have28 information the youth

The interviewer’s question on how immigration status impacted his schooling experience is refuted both verbally (‘noth-ing’) and with body language (line 3) by Noberto, and the interviewer echoes this response (line 4). Noberto again asserts thathis legal status has not impacted his education (line 5) and begins a narrative account to support this assertion. After someclarification about the school name (lines 6–8), the account begins with an orientation: a college student had come one dayto his class to give information about higher education opportunities (lines 9–10). Noberto explains that at the close of themeeting, the college student asked if the high school students planned to attend university. Three students responded, eachciting an obstacle: not having money; the cost of tuition, and lack of driver’s license. In Noberto’s account, at this point, heraised his hand, and then called these youths out for simply giving what he felt were excuses. As evidence, Norberto tells theclass about his brother—who despite lacking a driver’s license, legal immigration status, and funding—is attending college.10

Noberto then characterizes his classmates to the interviewer as simply making excuses (lines 19–21). When the interviewerprobes further (lines 23–24), Noberto responds that this is due to his classmates’ lack of information, commenting that if hedid not have the information that he does about how to succeed, he might be one of them (lines 26–28).

Noberto’s narrative account here differs in significant ways from those of all other participants in the study. First, thecomplicating events and actions are quite specific, with the utterances of the protagonists and antagonists produced in detail,with tightly ordered events and some dramatic tension. Second, in contrast to the other narrative accounts, race is totallyabsent from the event descriptions as well as from Noberto’s analysis. Note, for instance, how no details are provided onthe racial, ethnic, or national background of any of the characters of the story. This is consistent with Noberto’s stated belief

10 Although a few months after this interview, Nicodermo’s brother left college to work full time in a fast food restuarnt.


that race and ethnicity are irrelevant. Third, Noberto’s account directly counters the position that undocumented Latinosface educational or professional challenges in the U.S. Noberto positions himself here not only as rejecting the notion thatthese obstacles exist, but as publicly correcting, and even putting down, those with alternative views, a stance which wasconstant across all of our interactions with him. Noberto stated often that he believes that echándole ganas (‘by workinghard’) everyone can pursue ‘the American Dream’, a discourse which reflects not only mainstream U.S. values, but also hisinvolvement with the Latino branch of Amway Global.11

In sum, we find that the complicating events or actions were either real or potential encounters with police or immi-gration officials, or actual, perceived, or threatened denial of employment, service, or equal treatment based on (suspectedor imagined) legal status that were racially loaded. In the great majority of the narrative accounts, the antagonist was anout-group member, either explicitly (characterized as gringa or americano) or implicitly (that is, by role, as a police or ICEofficer). Understandings of these experiences, in turn, largely occur through the lens of race. Youth interpret and assertthat most encounters around legal status occur as the direct result of some type of racial profiling or race-based assump-tions. At the same time, interactions that are perceived as racially based are intensified and made more problematic as theresult of undocumented status. An important question for these students, then, is how these enmeshed experiences andunderstandings of race and legal status are reflected in youths’ developing sense of self, society, and schooling.

3.2. Narrative accounts, self-development, and contradictions

Narrative accounts related both subtle incidences (e.g., not being allowed to travel out of state on a school field trip) oraggressive acts (e.g., being insulted at a bus stop) of marginalization; accounts also provided grounds for students to reflecton the meanings of these events. And through the telling and retelling of these stories, marginalized positions and identitiesare constructed and enacted. Stories “are used to develop and maintain the self” (McLean et al., 2007, p. 262) in at least twoways. First, stories can affect the self-concept “when storytelling serves to express the event as being highly self-relevant, ashaving changed the self in some way, or as reinforcing existing self-views”; second, stories also impact subsequent stories,that is, the way a specific story is told (and received) “influences the degree of elaboration and the nature of the evaluationsone has about that event subsequently” (2007, p. 269). Thus, the telling of stories such as these provides insights into thehow these events—and the interpretations of those events, are linked to students’ developing sense of (marginalized) selfand (fragile) place in society.

For instance, below, Clarita provides an account of what she sees as an important experience in the U.S. (Excerpt 5). Justprior, Clarita and the interviewer had discussed the varied reasons for coming to the U.S. and the difficulty of crossing theborder. The interviewer then asks about what experiences Clarita has had as an immigrant (lines 1–2). Clarita respondswith an account of a recent insult.

Excerpt 5 (Clarita): ‘Go back to Mexico!’

01 Interv. has tenido alguna experiencia en este sentido así como de inmigrante? durante el tiempo que02 has estado aquí?03 Clarita así como unos días, iba manejando, y:: (.) pasé un stop, (.) y:: había unos +. . . en04 otro carro iban unos güeros también de una high school y me gritaron eh you05 Mexican go back to Mexico! y me sentí muy mal y les dije a mis papas o::h, estaban +. . .06 son +. . . no les hagas caso dicen. “son ignorantes” o cualquier cosa así.07 “no les hagas caso” pero yo si me sentí mal @ y esto no hace mucho

1 Interv. have you had any experience in this way like being an immigrant? during this time you2 have been here?3 Clarita like few days ago, I was driving, a::nd (.) I passed a stop, (.) a::nd there were some +. . . in4 another car there were some güeros (whites) also from a high school and they yelled at me eh you5 Mexican go back to Mexico! and I felt very bad and I told my parents o::h, they were +. . .6 are +. . . don’t listen to them they say. “they are ignorant” or something like that.7 “don’t listen to them” but I felt bad @ and that was not long ago

Clarita describes that she was driving and had stopped at a stop sign. At the same intersection, there was a car withseveral güeros (‘whites’) from a high school; they shouted to her to go ‘back to Mexico’ (lines 4–5). Clarita notes that she feltvery badly about this (line 5) although her parents told her not to worry, that the boys were just ignorant people (line 6).She concludes by noting that her parents’ words were of little consolation (line 7). Notable here, as in previous examples,is the salience of race; the antagonists are defined at the outset as ‘whites’. Clarita depicts herself (understandably) as thevictim here (she does not respond or engage with the aggressors), but also as suffering emotionally from this encounter,

11 This branch recruits Latinos to invest their time and income into a multi-level marketing and direct sales scheme that promises economic success andlegal status. One of the messages of this organization, as explained by Noberto, is: cuando yo empiezo a ganar más de 6 mil dolares (al mes) en adelante, elgobierno me va a buscar para darme una visa empresarial (‘when I start gaining more than 6 thousand dollars [per month] on, the government will lookfor me to give me a business visa’) (Punti & King, in press).


noting that the comments made her feel ‘very bad’ and ‘bad’. Finally, we see that parents are framed as ineffective: not onlyare they powerless to prevent this sort of attack, but also unable to sooth Claritas’s sore feelings, a point we return to below.

Clarita’s account brings to light some of the contradictions that characterize the lives of undocumented youth. Youth areaware that they are constructed by the broader discourse as ‘illegal’ and often as ‘criminals’, yet they perceive themselves (andwant to be perceived by others) as good, moral individuals who are respectful, law-abiding, and hard working. This tendencywas salient in Clarita’s account of ignoring the stop sign insults, but also in Zumaia’s account of her employment application(Excerpt 2) in which she contrasts her own behavior with that of the fast food worker. Similarly, Roberto, a 20-year-oldMexican highlighted his own morality in crossing the border with his unwell mother: ‘I didn’t want to come but. . .my momis sick she has a disease called epilepsy and here there are options to treat her. . .I didn’t want to come but I told myself Iam going to sacrifice for my mom so she can be treated’. Many participants further stressed their own character (as honest,hard-working, moral) by contrasting ‘good’ people (like themselves) with those who are ‘bad’ (criminals, gang-members).

Perhaps an even more fundamental tension for youth is between their desire to participate fully in U.S. society, and todo well for their parents and in some cases their own children, and the sharp educational and professional limitations theyface given their legal status. Nevertheless, most participants in this study were reportedly brought to the U.S. because ofthe perceived greater opportunities in the U.S. While youth are aware that their undocumented legal status puts many ofthese opportunities out of reach, still most echoed the refrain that education was important. Yet participants also struggledto make sense of the reality that investing in education will likely not lead to direct benefits on the labor market.

Many of the narrative accounts also reflect the tensions concerning freedom and safety within the U.S. On the one hand,youth frequently noted that they were free from dangers of their home country. On the other, many noted that gang-relatedviolence is a problem here, and further, that they and their families now live with a constant, low-grade fear of deportment.Finally, as suggested above, these youth grapple with the contradiction that their parents have little power in helping themnegotiate the current immigration system and attendant ideologies. As in Clarita’s account, parents tended to advise childrennot to worry, to ignore hurtful comments, and to plan on immigration reform allowing for adjustments in their legal status.As Clarita suggests, these words are of little consolation.

Youth had varied ways of discursively dealing with these contradictions, and took up a range of stances in their sense-making processes. These included: (a) appealing to God (e.g., although they were ‘bad’ in the eyes of the U.S. government,God supported them); (b) participating in business ventures outside of the mainstream (e.g., Amway); (c) planning to returnto Mexico to study; (d) living in the present and not planning for the future; and (e) having aspirations for their (U.S.citizen) children rather than themselves (Punti & King, in press). (See Table 3 in Appendices.) These discursive stances areself-protection strategies as they provided some cover for students’ emotional well-being. Such stance represents students’attempts to develop a positive sense of self in the midst of negative stereotyping, hostile anti-immigrant ideologies andpractices, and the myriad contradictions of investing in education as undocumented student. In this light, such stances arerational responses to an irrational education and immigration system.

4. Conclusion

This analysis provides insight into the ways in which undocumented Latino youth experience, frame and discursivelymanage their immigration status. Youth’s narrative accounts both reflect and promote the deep association between legalstatus and race. In all but three of the narrative accounts, the complicating events or actions—that is, the interaction withthe public official or the reported denial of service, access or equal treatment—were based not on specific knowledge aboutprotagonist’s immigration status, but on racial, and sometimes ethnic or national, stereotypes. For each of the two types ofcomplicating events identified here, race is intertwined with immigration-related accounts, both in the specific details of theevents reported, as well as in the interpretation and framing of these accounts by the participants. Put differently, race andlegal status are collapsed in the reported actions of the antagonists but also in the youth’s interpretations of the events. Thislink potentially leads to even greater disempowerment: youth are racialized as undocumented, and their undocumentedstatus leaves them feeling unable to respond to perceived discrimination.

This pronounced overlap between race and immigration status, here via narrative accounts in interviews, but also rou-tinely in everyday contexts, provides insights into the how these events—and the interpretations of those events, are linkedto youths’ developing sense of self and place in society. These data point to how youth experience their immigration statusnot as an administrative or bureaucratic obstacle, but as essential to their experience and enmeshed with their racial iden-tity. Hispanics have recently overtaken Blacks as the group most believed to be the target of discrimination with one in fourAmericans reporting that Hispanics face ‘a lot’ of discrimination (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010). Further, one-third of Latinos(age 16 or older) report that they, a family member, or a close friend have experienced ethnic or racial discrimination in theprevious five years (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010). The narrative accounts here illustrate one of the processes through whichimmigration experiences are racialized as well as one of the mechanisms through which discourses on race, ethnicity, andlegal status are constructed and circulated. These narrative accounts suggest that racial identity is linked not only to culturalor biological attributes (as has long been the case), but also to legal attributes.

These insights are significant both for researchers and for educators working with this population. For researchers,this work points to the need to take immigration status into account, especially when doing cross-group comparisons.Because legal status is typically an overlooked variable in research on minority populations (e.g., comparisons of educationalachievement by nationality group rarely take into account varied rates of undocumented migration), we have an uneven


portrait of cross-group differences. Data analyzed here suggest that undocumented students confront myriad obstacles toacademic achievement, and in particular, perceive their legal status as a form of racial bias.

For educators, greater awareness, sensitivity and up-to-date information on services for these youth are needed. Whilethere is growing awareness of the existence of thousands of undocumented students in U.S. public schools, there are fewprograms to support them, and a dearth of knowledgeable professionals and accessible programs (Aleixo, Chin, Shurilla,& Fennelly, 2011; Godinez & Espejel, 2010; Gonzales, 2008, 2010; see Table 4 for resources). Our findings suggest thatimmigration status is a profound aspect of students’ developing identity and sense of self, in addition to presenting a majoreducational and professional obstacle. In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level, greaterresponse and responsiveness is needed at a local, school and community levels.

Acknowledgements

We thank the University of Minnesota’s Institute for Equity, Diversity, and Advocacy (IDEA) for a research grant supportingthis project; the Minnesota Immigration Freedom Network (MIFN) for their collaboration at the outset of this project; andAnna De Fina for her timely and thoughtful input on the final write-up. We are deeply appreciative of the student who sharedtheir time, stories and selves with us, and in doing so, made this project possible.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002.

References

Abrego, L. J. (2006). “I can’t go to college because I don’t have papers”: Incorporation patterns of Latino undocumented youth. Latino Studies, 4(3), 212–231.Abrego, L. J., & Gonzales, R. (2010). Blocked paths, uncertain futures: The postsecondary education and labor market prospects of undocumented Latino

youth. Journal of Education of Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 15, 144–157.Aleixo, M., Chin, J., Shurilla, A., & Fennelly, K. (2011). Analysis of policies toward applications from undocumented students. Journal of Law and Inequality,

30(1)Alliance for Excellent Education. (2009). Understanding high school graduation rates in Minnesota. Retrieved from. http://www.all4ed.org/files/

Minnesota wc.pdfArizona Senate Bill 1070 (2010). Retrieved from http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf.Bigelow, M. (2010). Mogadishu on the Mississippi: Language, racialized identity, and education in a new land. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Bohanek, J., Marin, K., Fivush, R., & Duke, M. (2006, March). Family narratives and adolescent identity. In Paper presented at the Society for Research on

Adolescence conference San Francisco,Briggs, C. L. (1986). Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. New York: Cambridge University Press.Bucholtz, M. (1999). You Da Man: Narrating the racial other in the production of white masculinity. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 3(4), 461–479.Carranza, I. (1999). Winning the battle in private discourse: Rhetorical-logical operations in storytelling. Discourse and Society, 10(4), 509–541.Chavez, M. L., Soriano, M., & Oliverez, P. (2008). Undocumented students’ access to college: The American dream denied. Latino Studies, 5(2), 254–263.Chicano Latino Affairs Council [CLAC]. (2010). State of Minnesota. Retrieved from. http://www.clac.state.mn.us/minnesota/index.htmlCicourel, A. (1964). Method and measurement in sociology. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.Coutin, S. B. (2005). Contesting criminality: Illegal immigration and the spatialization of legality. Theoretical Criminology, 9(1), 5–33.De Fina, A. (2000). Orientation in immigrant narratives: The role of orientation in the identification of characters. Discourse Studies, 2(2), 131–157.De Fina, A. (2003). Identity in narrative. An analysis of immigrant discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.De Fina, A. (2006). Group identity, narrative and self representations. In A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 351–375).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.De Fina, A. (2009). Narratives in interview: The case of accounts. For an interactional approach to narrative genres. Narrative Inquiry, 19(2), 233–258.De Fina, A. (2011). Researcher and informant roles in narrative interactions: Constructions of belonging and foreign-ness. Language in Society, 40, 27–38.De Fina, A., & Georgakopoulou, A. (2012). Analyzing narrative: Discourse and sociolinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.De Fina, A., & King, K. A. (2011). Language problem or language conflict? Narratives of immigrant women’s experiences in the U.S. Discourse Studies, 13(2),

163–188.De Genova, N. P. (2005). Working the boundaries: Race, space, and “illegality” in Mexican Chicago. Durham: Duke University Press.DeJaeghere, J. G., & McCleary, K. S. (2010). The making of Mexican migrant youth civic identities: Transnational spaces and imaginaries. Anthropology &

Education Quarterly, 41(3), 228–244.Dick, P. H. (2011). Making immigrants illegal in small-town USA. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 21, E35–E55 (SI).Dreamactivist. (2010). Dream activist undocumented students action & resource network. Retrieved from. http://www.dreamactivist.org/Fennelly, K. (2008). Prejudice toward immigrants in the midwest. In D. Massey (Ed.), New faces in new places: The changing geography of American immigration

(pp. 151–178). New York: Russell Sage.Georgakopoulou, A. (2004). To tell or not to tell?: Email stories between on- and off-line interactions. Language @ Internet. Retrieved from.

http://www.languageatinternet.deGeorgakopoulou, A. (2007). Small stories, interaction and identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Gindling, T. H., & Poggio, S. Z. (2008). Family separation and reunification as a factor in the educational success of immigrant children. Baltimore, MD: Maryland

Institute for Policy Analysis and Research.Godinez, J. M., & Espejel, A. (2010). The Minnesota immigrant college access movement: History, policy and recommendations to admission counselors.

Journal of College Admission, (Winter), 54–57. Retrieved from. http://williamperezphd.com/yahoo site admin/assets/docs/godinez-espejel-2010-jca.24235205.pdf

Gonzales, R. G. (2008). Left out but not shut down: Political activism and the undocumented. Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy, 3(2),1–22.

Gonzales, R. G. (2009). Why integration matters: The case of undocumented immigrant youth. In A. Khashu (Ed.), The role of local police: Striking a balancebetween immigration enforcement and civil liberties (pp. 140–154). Washington, DC: Police Foundation.

Gonzales, R. G. (2011). Learning to be illegal: Undocumented youth and shifting legal context in the transition to adulthood. American Sociological Review,76(4), 602–619.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf


Gonzales, R. G. (2010). On the wrong side of the tracks: The consequences of school stratification systems for unauthorized Mexican students. PeabodyJournal of Education, 85(4), 469–486.

Gonzalez, M. S., Plata, O., Garcia, E., Torres, M., & Urrieta, L. (2003). Testimonios de immigrantes: Students educating future teachers. Journal of Latinos andEducation, 2, 233–243.

Günthner, S. (1995). Exemplary stories: The cooperative construction of indignation. Versus, 70/71, 147–175.Jones, M. (2010, October 24). Coming out illegal. Citizenship for students. United States. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/magazine/24DreamTeam-t.html.Kaushal, N. (2008). In-State tuition for the undocumented: Education effects on Mexican young adults. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4),

771–792.Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov (Ed.), Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English Vernacular

(pp. 354–396). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Labov, W. (1997). Some further steps in narrative analysis. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7, 395–415.Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1997). Narrative analysis: Oral version of personal experience. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 3–38.Lazarksy, A. L. (2010). Nine magic numbers. Stories of undocumented youth in New York City [Blog]. http://ninemagicnumbers.com/MacGregor-Mendoza, P. (1998). The criminalization of Spanish in the United States. In D. Kibbee (Ed.), Language legislation and linguistic rights (pp. 55–67).

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Mangan, K. (2010). Illegal voices: 4 undocumented students describe uncertain futures. Chronicle of Higher Education, 57(5), 17–19.Mangual, A. (2010). Language socialization experiences of mixed-status Mexican families living in the new Latino Diaspora. Unpublished dissertation.

University of California, Berkeley.Martin, J. R., & Plum, G. (1997). Construing experience: Some story genres. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 299–308.Massey, D. (2009). Testimony to the senate judiciary committee. Retrieved from. http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3859&wit id=7939McLean, K. C., Pasupathi, M., & Pals, J. L. (2007). Selves creating stories creating selves: A process model of narrative self development in adolescence and

adulthood. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 262–278.Mehlman-Orozco, K. (2001). The effects of in-state tuition for non-citizens: A systematic review of the evidence. Latino Policy Institute at Roger Williams

University. Retrieved from. http://www.rwu.edu/depository/lpi/lpi-report.pdfMüller, E., & Di Luzio, A. (1995). Stories as Examples in Everyday Argument. Versus, 70(5), 114–145.NCSL. (2011). In-state tuition and unauthorized immigrant students. In National Conference of State Legislators. Retrieved from.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=13100Ngai, M. M. (2004). Impossible subjects: Illegal aliens and the making of modern America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Ochs, E., & Capps, L. (1996). Narrating the self. Annual Review of Anthropology, 25, 19–43.Ochs, E., & Capps, L. (2001). Living narrative: Creating lives in everyday storytelling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Ogbu, J. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of an explanation. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 18(4), 312–334.Passel, J. S. (2006, March). The size and characteristics of the unauthorized migrant population in the U.S. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.Passel, J. S., Capps, R., & Fix, M. (2004). Undocumented immigrants: Facts and figures. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from.

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/1000587 undoc immigrants facts.pdfPassel, J. S., & Cohn, D. (2011). Unauthorized immigrant population: National and state trends, 2010. DC: Pew Research Center.Passel, J. S., & Cohn, V. (2009, April). A portrait of unauthorized immigrants in the United States. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. Retrieved from.

http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/107.pdfPassel, J. S., & Cohn, V. (2012, January). U.S. foreign-born population: How much change from 2009 to 2010? Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved

from. http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2012/01/Foreign-Born-Population.pdfPassel, J. S., Passel, Cohn, V., & Hugo Lopez, M. (2011). Hispanics account for more than half of nation’s growth in past decade. Washington, DC: Pew Research

Center.Perez, W. (2009). We are Americans: Undocumented students pursuing the American dream. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.Perez, W. (2010). Higher education access for undocumented students: Recommendations for counseling professionals. Journal of College Admission, (Winter),

32–36. Retrieved from. http://williamperezphd.com/yahoo site admin/assets/docs/Perez 2010-JCA.24210357.pdfPew Hispanic Center. (2007). 2007 national survey of Latinos: As illegal immigration issue heats up, Hispanics feel a chill. Retrieved from.

http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/84.pdfPew Hispanic Center. (2008). Statistical portrait of the foreign-born population in the United States, 2008. Retrieved from. http://pewhispanic.org/files/

factsheets/foreignborn2008/Table%2026.pdfPew Hispanic Center. (2010). Hispanics and Arizona’s new immigration law. Retrieved from. http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/68.pdfPew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism [PEJ]. (2009, December). Hispanics in the news. Events drive the narrative. Journalism.org. Retrieved

from. http://www.journalism.org/analysis report/hispanics newsPortes, A., & Zhou, M. (1992). The new second-generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social

Sciences, 530(November), 74–96.Punti, G., & King, K. A perfect storm? Undocumented Latino youth, multi-level marketing businesses, and their targeted language policies. In V. Ramanathan

(Ed.), Language Policy and Citizenship. Multilingual Matters, in press.Rasmussen Reports. (2007, May 25). NY Times/CBS poll finds that 69% believe illegal immigrants should be prosecuted. Retrieved from

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public content/politics/current events/immigration/ny times cbs poll finds that 69 believe illegal immigrantsshould be prosecuted.

Rimé, B., Mesquita, B., Philippot, P., & Boca, S. (1991). Beyond the emotional event: Six studies on the social sharing of emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 5,435–465.

Rincón, A. (2008). Undocumented immigrants and higher education: Si se puede. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing.Rumbaut, R. (2009). Undocumented immigration and rates of crime and imprisonment: Popular myths and empirical realities. In A. Khashu (Ed.), The role

of local police: Striking a balance between immigration enforcement and civil liberties (pp. 119–139). Washington, DC: Police Foundation.Santa Ana, O. (1999). ‘Like an animal I was treated’: Anti-immigrant metaphor in US public discourse. Discourse & Society, 10(2), 191–224.Schiffman, H., & Weiner, R. E. (2012). The language policy of state drivers’ license testing: Expediency, symbolism, or creeping incrementalism? Language

Policy, 11(2), 189–196.Seif, H. (2004). Wise up! Undocumented Latino youth, Mexican-American legislators, and the struggle for higher education access. Latino Studies, 2, 210–230.Seif, H. (2009). The civic education and engagement of Latina/o immigrant youth: challenging boundaries and creating safe spaces. Research Paper Series

on Latino Immigrant Civic and Political Participation, No. 5. Retrieved from http://www.wilsoncenter.org/migrantparticipation.Shah, R. (2008). Sharing the American dream: Towards formalizing the status of long-term resident undocumented children in the U.S. Columbia Human

Rights Law Review, 39, 639–689. Retrieved from. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1244922Silverstein, P. (2005). Immigrant racialization and the new savage slot: Race, migration and immigration in the new Europe. Annual Review of Anthropology,

34, 363–384.Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning a new land: Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of

Harvard University Press.Talmy, S. (2010). The interview as collaborative achievement: Ideology, identity and interaction in a speech event. Applied Linguistics, 31, 25–42.U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Foreign born population—Selected characteristic by region of origin: 2010. Retrieved from. http://www.census.gov/

compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0041.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/magazine/24DreamTeam-t.html

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/ny_times_cbs_poll_finds_that_69_believe_illegal_immigrants_should_be_prosecuted

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/migrantparticipation


van Dijk, T. A. (1993). ‘Stories and racism’. In D. K. Mumby (Ed.), Narrative and social control: Critical perspectives (pp. 121–142). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Wortham, S., Allard, E., Lee, K., & Mortimer, K. (2011). Racialization in payday mugging narratives. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 21, E56–E75 (SI).Wortham, S., Mortimer, K., Lee, K., Allard, E., & White, K. (2011). Interviews as interactional data. Language in Society, 40, 39–50.Yoshikawa, H. (2011). Immigrants raising citizens: Undocumented parents and their young children. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Zhou, M. (1997). Growing up American: The challenge confronting immigrant children and children of immigrants. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 63–95.

on the margins: undocumented students’ narrated experiences of (il)legality

Documents