Reimagining University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably: A Blueprint for Becoming an Hispanic-Serving Research Institution HSRI System

A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving

Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to

Serve Latinxs Equitably

2 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Introduction

Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), which are broadly

defined as non-profit postsecondary institutions enroll-

ing a minimum of 25% Latinx undergraduates, currently

constitute 19% of all colleges and universities across the

United States and Puerto Rico. Historically, most HSIs

have been institutions with open and inclusive admis-

sions policies. Yet, a growing number of research 1 (R1)

universities, which are better known for their selective

admissions processes and historical underrepresenta-

tion of Latinx students, are now meeting the enrollment

thresholds for HSI designation. Despite increasing

Latinx undergraduate enrollments, Latinx graduate

students, faculty, staff and administrative leadership at

these institutions remain severely underrepresented.

This pattern is concerning given that research 1 universi-

ties play a critical role in producing the next generation

of researchers and professionals. Recognizing this

issue, national efforts involving R1 HSIs are aiming to

boost Latinx graduate and faculty representation at

these institutions. Yet, it remains uncertain to what extent

these R1 HSIs are changing their structures to achieve

these objectives, which points to a critical gap in educa-

tional research and policy that needs to be addressed.

As the public research university system in the state with

the largest Latinx population in the nation, the University

of California (UC) is similarly reflecting these broader

enrollment trends. UC educates an increasingly diverse

student body, including many historically underserved

racial minorities and those who are first-generation and

from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Much of this

diversification at the UC is due to increased enrollment of

Latinx undergraduate students. Five of the nine under-

graduate campuses now meet HSI eligibility criteria, while

the remaining campuses are on paths to meet the 25%

undergraduate enrollment threshold soon. As these

institutions, which were historically predominantly attend-

ed by white students, now educate a significantly more

racially diverse student population, it is essential to

employ culturally responsive and asset-based approaches

in serving this multicultural, multilingual, and first-gener-

ation critical mass of students. Substantial efforts are

required to transform the entire UC system into a reflec-

tion of the state’s population and to establish structures

and environments indicative of servingness. This presents

ample opportunities for UC to actively engage in the

necessary process of institutional transformation,

ensuring optimal support for its students and remaining

the world’s leading research public university system.

Purpose of the Report

This report explores the concept of “servingness” within

the University of California (UC) system, which is on its

way to becoming a collection of fully-fledged Hispan-

ic-Serving Research 1 Institutions (HSRIs). This work

stems from a UCOP Office of the Provost planning grant

under the cross-campus leadership of Drs. Marcela G.

Cuellar (Davis), Frances Contreras (Irvine), and Juan

Poblete (Santa Cruz). The report begins with an intro-

ductory section, outlining the increasing presence of

HSRIs across higher education overall and, more

specifically, within the UC system. Following this, three

papers explore how servingess can be conceptualized

within UC, given existing inequities in outcomes. Finally,

the report concludes by offering a series of recommen-

dations aimed at establishing frameworks, structures,

and environments that truly embody the notion of serv-

ingness throughout the entire UC system.

Paper Summaries

In the first paper, Dr. Juan Poblete proposes that the

arrival of Latinx students into the University of California

marks a progressive development, democratizing

access and potentially paving the way for greater educa-

tional equity within the state. However, this development

takes place against the backdrop of substantial student

enrollment growth and a series of regressive dynamics

that have so far limited the positive social impact of that

access. These dynamics encompass factors such as

reduced per-student spending, decreased state funding

for public education, and the imposition of tuition increas-

es that place a burden on students’ families. Within this

context, two contradictory dynamics become evident: the

expansion of public education’s reach and the concur-

rent privatization of the concept of public education. The

attainment of Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) status

across the University of California system presents a

notable opportunity. By reconsidering the meaning of

“servingness,” this status can potentially initiate a shift

Executive Summary

3 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

back towards perceiving public education as an inher-

ently public good. This perspective views public educa-

tion as a collective investment that we undertake to

foster educational equity, uphold social justice, and forge

a more promising future for all residents in the state.

In the second paper, Dr. Marcela G. Cuellar and Mariana

Carrola (a UC Davis PhD student) present the notion

that within HSRIs there is a need to formulate a theoreti-

cal framework for the concept of servingness, given the

unique institutional characteristics shared by HSRIs and

key constituents that are understudied, such as graduate

students. By conducting a critical literature review of

existing research on HSRIs, the paper synthesizes key

themes, identifies gaps in knowledge, and begins to

contextualize the extent to which institutional transforma-

tion is occurring to intentionally serve Latinx communi-

ties at these institutions. The paper concludes with a

series of recommendations that focus on how research

can play a role in informing and guiding the transforma-

tion of UC institutional cultures and practices. This

approach aims to foster greater responsiveness while

simultaneously advancing scholarship on HSRIs. Addi-

tionally, these recommendations are intended to guide

the overarching process of institutional transformation

across higher education to better address the needs of

underrepresented communities.

In the final paper, Dr. Frances Contreras examines UC

data systems. This paper introduces a novel proposal for

a revamped data infrastructure that can effectively

assess servingness within the UC system. This section

provides an overview of the key data points, surveys, and

annual reporting mechanisms within the UC system as a

whole and across its individual campuses. These tools

have the potential to be harnessed for the purpose of

assessing, analyzing, and developing solutions-oriented

approaches to better serve and respond to the needs of

its Latinx students. Through a critical analysis of key

annual reports and pertinent data, this paper emphasizes

the potential value of such information in facilitating

rigorous self-assessment for campuses. This evaluation

pertains to the outcomes and experiences of students,

faculty, and staff while attending or working within the

UC system. Recognizing that UC’s aspiration to grow its

own pool of future academicians, top managers and

leaders, and to support innovation, it becomes evident

that adopting a systemic approach to assessing Latinx

progress for all concerned parties is imperative to the UC

system’s domestic and global prominence. This endeavor

serves as a cornerstone for bolstering the standing of

the UC system, both on a national and international

level, by ensuring that the advancement and welfare of

all those involved remain central to its mission.

Recommendations

The final section offers several recommendations for

enacting a 21st century vision for creating a HSRI sys-

tem. These recommendations represent a multifaceted

approach to guide UC in these endeavors.

Shared HSRI Vision

• Establish a shared systemwide HSRI definition.

Defining and enacting an HSI identity varies across

institutions and intersects with other organizational

identities, such as R1 status, at UC. UC should estab-

lish a shared HSRI definition for the system and its

individual campuses.

• Create actionable goals in line with HSRI vision.

UC should outline actionable goals that can be pursued

across the system and all UC campuses.

• Develop a UC HSI Dashboard and produce annual

HSRI reports. UC should develop an HSI dashboard

monitoring progress and produce annual HSI reports

for each campus for the purposes of monitoring

progress.

• Convene a systemwide HSRI equity summit. UC

should continue to invest in the UC-HSI Initiative,

which has successfully convened campus leaders in

several annual HSI retreats since 2017.

Latinx Student Supports

• Advance undergraduate student success beyond

enrolling and graduating Latinx students. The 2030

UC Dashboard laudably aims to increase graduation

rates across the system and eliminate equity gaps

among underserved student groups, including Latinx

students. UC must expand its perspective on success

beyond these important measures to achieve greater

equity among Latinx students. Key indicators of

success to consider are fostering graduate school

access, enhancing career opportunities, civic engage-

ment, and more.

4 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

• Increase student support. By implementing changes

in existing opportunities/programs that take into

consideration a growing Latinx student population and

the engagement of this student population in academ-

ic/career development programs, UC can more

intentionally support Latinx undergraduate and gradu-

ate students.

• Reduce student debt. Reducing the prospect of

student debt would encourage enrollments and ensure

that low-income students are working fewer hours and

are able to focus on their academic coursework.

• Direct more support and resources to Latinx

graduate students. UC should direct more support

and resources to support the academic and professional

development of Latinx graduate students.

Latinx Faculty and Staff Supports

• Hire and retain more Latinx faculty. The UC 2030

dashboard boldly aims to invest in faculty hiring and

research. To achieve this goal and align with an HSRI

vision, UC must intentionally hire and retain more

Latinx faculty. This commitment must be championed

at all levels—systemwide, at the campus level, and

within individual departments.

• Establish a faculty diversity task force. A faculty

diversity task force would be charged with critically

analyzing faculty diversity, retention, and progression

through the tenure track ranks.

• Establish a staff diversity task force. A staff diversity

task force would be charged with analyzing staff

composition across campuses, with close attention to

mobility within UC.

Research Capacity

• Provide funding for an HSRI research center. As

more research institutions become HSIs, the need to

understand these unique contexts will require research

and opportunities for cross-campus collaborations. As

UC campuses comprise almost 20% of existing HSRIs

in the nation, the system is further poised to lead in

research efforts on this institutional type. Funding for

the establishment of an HSRI Research Center will

create an infrastructure to support this type of research.

• Incentivize research practice partnerships rooted

in the Latinx community and within Latinx-serving

institutions. It’s imperative to understand how UC’s

land-grant mission is intertwined with the identities of

Indigenous and historically underserved communities.

Specific to the HSRI identity and this report recommen-

dation, providing incentives and opportunities for faculty

and researchers to engage in more community-engaged

efforts will further advance the historic research and

land-grant mission of the system.

Data Infrastructure

• Invest in HSRI data infrastructure for increased

accountability and agency. UC has made great

strides in creating dashboards that provide actionable

data. Building on these resources, UC should also

develop HSRI-focused data resources.

• Establish a systemwide HSRI data task force. An

HSRI data task force would convene to assess the

status of UC across various metrics for its key partners

and collaborators (faculty, staff, students, partnership

program participants).

• Articulate more structured and standardized

measures for evaluating HSRIs. These measures

should consider institutions, their programs, and

interventions meant to support the retention and

success of Latinx undergraduate, graduate students,

and faculty.

• Hire institutional research (IR) staff at UCOP for

HSI analysis.

At this critical juncture, the UC system also has the

potential to emerge as the foremost HSRI system in the

nation, provided it rises to the challenge of serving its

Latinx students equitably. With several HSRIs, the UC

system assumes a crucial role and responsibility in

spearheading the development of new theoretical

frameworks, informing programmatic interventions, and

setting exemplary models and methods that can guide

the broader national postsecondary education landscape

as it endeavors to serve a growing Latinx population. By

undertaking these efforts, the UC system can uphold

and expand upon its legacy of excellence which has

been characteristic of the system since its inception.

5 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Over the past two decades, the University of California

(UC) has progressed in its advancement of greater

inclusion and equity for historically underserved stu-

dents, including Latinx students. In fall 2020, 25% of the

UC system’s undergraduates were Latinx, compared to

12.3% in fall 2000 (UCOP, nd). These enrollments also

include many who are first-generation and from low

socioeconomic backgrounds. This demographic compo-

sition has led to the attainment of federal Hispanic-Serv-

ing Institution (HSI) designation for several UC campuses.

HSIs are broadly defined as non-profit postsecondary

institutions enrolling at least 25% Latinx undergraduates.

Five undergraduate campuses have obtained this

designation, and the remaining four campuses are on

the path to attaining this status in the near future. The

diversification of the UC system means that these

selective institutions that were predominantly white are

now educating much more diverse student populations,

which calls for more culturally responsive and as-

set-based approaches to serving this multicultural,

multilingual, first-generation critical mass of students.

Despite these strides, inequitable representation within

key positions and specific educational outcomes continue

to plague the UC system. For example, the composition

of the undergraduate student body is still not reflective of

California’s growing Latinx population of high school

graduates (Paredes et al., 2021). Remarkably, nearly

53% of the state’s high school graduates are now Latinx,

and 45% have met the A-G requirements, enabling them

to qualify for admission to the California State University

(CSU) or UC (UCLA HSI Task Force, 2022). Similarly,

while diversity among graduate students and ladder-rank

faculty has increased, the representation of Latinxs in

these influential roles continues to substantially lag

behind their undergraduate enrollment (Paredes et al.,

2021). Inequities in graduation rates between Latinx

students and other student groups also persist. The HSI

designation invites campuses to engage in the necessary

institutional transformation to achieve more equitable

access and outcomes for Latinx students (Santiago,

2012). The challenge therefore for the UC system is to

ensure that all campuses are critically reflecting on the

degree to which they are Latinx responsive, relevant,

and serving (Contreras, 2019).

As UC sets out to address these challenges, there is an

opportunity for the system to lead as a national model

for a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI)

system. Given the critical role of research-1 (R1) institu-

tions in producing the next generation of researchers

and professionals, a few national initiatives are now

catalyzing the capacity of HSIs that also hold R1 status.

These initiatives aim to advance the progress of Latinx

graduate students and faculty. The National Alliance of

Hispanic-Serving Research Universities, for instance,

has set bold goals of doubling the number of Latinx

graduate students and increasing Latinx faculty by 2030

among the 21 HSIs that also hold R1 status (Alliance of

Hispanic Serving Research Universities, 2022). With UC

representing 19% of all HSRIs, it has the potential to

emerge as a leader not only among these institutions but

across broader national systems. The system has taken

a proactive stance by initiating UC-HSI Initiative—a

platform designed to connect leaders across campuses

and to strengthen the capacity of UC to serve an in-

creasingly diverse population (Paredes et al., 2021).

Exploring the various avenues through which UC can

augment its servingness capacity will empower the

institution to fully leverage its potential as a trailblazing

Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) system.

Servingness at HSIs

While most HSIs lack a historical mission to serve Latinx

students, scholars have theorized ways through which

these institutions can more effectively serve Latinx

students. This notion is encapsulated in a concept called

servingness (Garcia et al., 2019). Servingness is a

multidimensional construct that considers multiple forces

shaping HSIs and their ability to support Latinx students.

External to an institution, federal and state policy as well

as institutional governing boards influence HSIs and

servingness. Internally, servingness is embodied through

various structures, such as the mission and values of an

institution, HSI grants, the cultural relevance of curricula,

engagement with the Latinx community, and the compo-

sitional diversity of students, staff, faculty, and adminis-

trators. Consequently, these factors contribute to the

formation of environments that Latinx students encoun-

ter within HSIs, which can hold both validating and

racialized characteristics. The measurement of serving-

Introduction

6 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

ness can also encompass an array of academic and

non-academic outcomes.

Each of these elements of servingness are further

shaped by larger systems of oppression, including

settler colonialism and white supremacy (Garcia, 2018;

Garcia et al., 2019). These systems of oppression are

particularly entrenched in research universities across

various structures, including UC. Being California’s

land-grant institution, UC is deeply intertwined with the

history of settler colonialism, as these institutions were

established through the dispossession of Native lands.

(Nash, 2019). White supremacy is further embedded in

the design and culture of most institutions of higher

education. Cabrera et al. (2017) describe how definitions

of meritocracy are always informed by a white racial

frame and consistently evolve when intended outcomes

are no longer produced. Notions of meritocracy, for

example, are shaped by and reinforced by whiteness in

certain higher education cultural practices, such as

admissions processes (Cabrera et al., 2017).

Within UC, admissions and access for racially minori-

tized individuals have been hotly contested issues.

Twenty five years ago, California residents voted to ban

affirmative action in state institutions with the passage of

Proposition 209, which eliminated the consideration of

race in UC admissions processes. The elimination of

affirmative action immediately reduced the representa-

tion of students of color within UC. Lasting impacts are

also visible in hostile campus racial climates and under-

representation of faculty of color on these campuses over

time (Ledesma, 2019). Attempts to repeal the affirmative

action ban through recent ballot measures, such as

Proposition 16 in 2020, also failed. Though strides have

been taken to dismantle certain structural barriers, like

the recent elimination of standardized exam prerequi-

sites for admissions, there is still a significant amount of

work ahead to reshape the UC system in a way that

aligns with California’s demographics and actively

nurtures Latinx faculty, staff, and students. Comparable

obstacles are anticipated in other HSRIs, particularly

following the Supreme Court’s ruling against affirmative

action practices in higher education.

Purpose of This Report and Structure

This report will explore the concept of servingness

(Garcia et al., 2019) specifically within R1 universities

with a focus on the University of California (UC) system.

This work stems from a planning grant provided by the

UCOP Office of the Provost starting on July 1, 2021.

Under the cross-campus leadership of Drs. Marcela G.

Cuellar (Davis), Frances Contreras (Irvine), and Juan

Poblete (Santa Cruz), the planning grant aimed to:

Engage in deep, conceptual, and analytical work to

fully understand the theoretical and empirical landscape

for HSRIs.

Conduct a critical assessment of the UC system’s

ability to measure HSRI outcomes for all partners and

collaborators (students, staff and faculty).

Provide recommendations for greater data transpar-

ency and access by suggesting a framework and

infrastructure for data mapping and analytics.

Develop a blueprint for the UC system as it moves

toward becoming a premier Hispanic-Serving Re-

search system in the nation.

Three papers in this report address these activities and

deliverables as part of the grant:

1. Conceptualizing HSRI at UC

1.1. Develop a historical overview of Latinx arrival to the

system.

1.2. Examine investment and disinvestment of resources

in the past 15 years.

1.3. Develop a literature review of existing HSI scholar-

ship and identify gaps.

1.4.

Generate a blueprint for a 21st Century Vision for

UC to become the premier HSRI system in the nation.

7 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

2. Data Mapping

2.1. Examine the landscape of existing data sources

that can be used for assessing UC’s current state of

“servingness” and its possibilities and challenges for

HSRIs.

2.2. Propose how these sources can be aggregated and

presented as an HSI data module that is more acces-

sible for research, policy and practice.

In the first paper, Dr. Juan Poblete examines the socio-

historical developments leading to the formation of UC as

a HSRI system and calls for a recommitment to the

public good as integral to servingness. Next, Dr. Marcela

G. Cuellar and Mariana Carrola critically analyze litera-

ture on HSRIs and propose areas for future research

that can guide transformation towards servingness

within UC. Lastly, Dr. Frances Contreras proposes HSI

metrics that would enable UC campuses to monitor

progress in becoming more Latinx responsive and to

fulfill the concept of servingness. Collectively, these

three papers advance ideas on how servingess can be

conceptualized and enacted at UC. The report con-

cludes with recommendations that serve as a blueprint

for how UC can set an example in its efforts to become a

leading HSRI system in the nation.

8 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

a. I would like to thank my colleagues Marcela Cuellar and Frances Contreras for their collaboration in this project. Likewise, my thanks to Catherine Coo-

per for invaluable feedback and Mariana Carrola Flores for some of the UC data research.

The Arrival of Latinx Students to the University of California

System and the Future of California

“ Futures are coordination devices. They are central to the creation and sustenance of political projects and

material practices. They act as programs around which people, tools, finances, and organizations are

mobilized. The process of attending to futures forms an arena in which groups can construct a collabora-

tive agency where none existed before.” (Facer and Newfield, 79)

bstract: This paper proposes that the arrival of

Latinx students to the University of California—a

progressive development democratizing access and

potentially making possible higher levels of educational

equity in the state—has occurred in the context of

sizable student enrollment growth and a series of

regressive dynamics that have so far limited the positive

social effect of that access—among them: lower

per-student spending, diminished state funding for public

education, and tuition increases burdening students’

families. More generally, the pipeline guiding Latin@

Californians from P–20 (preschool through graduate and

professional school) has been affected by increasing

levels of demand throughout the pipeline and decreasing

resources to address the needs and aspirations of a

significantly diversified population at the college level.

Two contradictory dynamics are manifest here: an

expansion of the reach of public education and the

privatization of the concept of public education. Hispan-

ic-Serving Institution status (HSI) across the University

of California system is a great opportunity, through

rethinking the meaning of ‘servingness,’ to begin a return

to an understanding of public education as fundamentally

a public good, i.e., one on which we collectively invest

because we strive for educational equity, social justice

and a better future for all in the state. Moreover, the UC

system—including, as of 2021, five of the 17 Hispanic

Serving Research Institutions (HSRI) listed among the

more than 560 HSIs nationally, many of which are

two-year community colleges)—is destined to play a key

role in the evolution of the meaning and possibilities of

servingness in the Hispanic-Serving Institution category,

as the work of educational inclusion meets the mission

of high levels of research production.

During the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries,

three long-term processes changed the University of

California. The first involved the demographic changes

in the state of California in the last 50 years, including

the ascent of Latinx populations to the largest ethnoracial

group in the state and their increased eligibility for and

access to the UC system. The second was a significant

defunding of public education. The third was the result-

ing relative privatization of funding for attendance to

public universities, as more and more of the burden of

covering the costs of attendance was shifted to students’

families through loans to pay for tuition. This paper

examines these three processes, situates them within

historical patterns of inclusion and exclusion, and explores

the implications, difficulties, and opportunities arising

from their convergence in the contemporary landscape.

The aim is to provide context for what the paper terms

Dr. Juan Poblete, Professor, University of California, Santa Cruz

9 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

as the “Arrival of Latinx Students to the University of

California” and the consequent evolution of the UC

system into the leading Hispanic-Serving Research

system in the country.

Six quick facts illustrate this complex and

contradictory situation:

• Between 1970 and 2020, California’s population

doubled from 20 to 39.5 million, tripling its Hispanic

component;

• Between 1992 and 2019, undergraduate student

enrollment at the UC grew from 125,000 to 226,000

(approximately 80%);

• Between 1990 and 2009, per-student state funding for

UC students (adjusted for inflation) decreased by more

than 50%. In the late 1980s, state funding was as high

as $25,000 per student and fell to about $10,000 by

2015 (Johnson et al., 2014);

• Today, Pell Grants are the federal government’s main

tool for helping low-income students pay for college. In

1980, Pell Grants covered more than 75% of the cost

to attend a 4-year public university; the current maxi-

mum award covers just 28%

;

• In the last 40 years, nationally, per capita student debt

has skyrocketed,

• Five of the UC system’s nine undergraduate teaching

campuses are Hispanic-Serving Institutions (at least

25% of their undergraduate students are Latinx) and

1 Source: www.universityofcalifornia.edu/double-the-pell

2 Source: Public Policy Institute of California, www.ppic.org/publication/californias-population

the other four are emerging HSIs, approaching that

status in the next few years.

The growth of California’s Latinx population in the last

fifty years is illustrated in Figure 1.

Since 1970, California’s Latinx population has tripled. This

transformation has sparked substantial inquiries into how

a prominent public education system like the University

of California, a public Land-Grant institution, can uphold

its dedication to the public and its mission of fostering

knowledge, prosperity, and societal welfare. What could

it mean for UC to become a Hispanic-Serving public

education system? How should we interpret the essence

of “servingness” embedded in this designation? This

paper explores a range of implications stemming from

this demographic and societal shift. The convergence of

three enduring processes—demographic shifts (leading

to the Latinx population becoming the largest ethnoracial

group in the state and to increased UC enrollment),

substantial disinvestment in public education, and the

partial privatization of funding for public higher educa-

tion—coinciding with the arrival of Latinx students to the

University of California, needs to be examined within the

backdrop of four broader historical trends that have

historically influenced the status of Hispanics in the state

and shaped their historically formed pattern of inclusion

with elements of exclusion.

1970

Share of population (%)

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

White Latino Asian or Pacific Islander Black

Two or more races

Native American or Alaska Native

Source: Census Bureau decennial counts

Figure 1: California’s Population is Increasingly Diverse

10 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Coloniality, according to Peruvian sociologist Aníbal

Quijano (2008), refers to the productive structure of

power resulting from what we now term as the continen-

tal expansion in the Americas of colonialism with the

accompanying racialization of labor. Coloniality not only

solidified the identity of the colonizing subjects (White

Europeans) but also defined the identity of the colonized

individuals (non-European, non-White others), categoriz-

ing them as subjects of political, economic, and cultural

exploitation at the hands of the former. Across the

Americas, this conquest was realized by instituting a

system that intertwined labor and racial difference at the

economic level, as well as knowledge and subjectivity at

the social level. As a result, the labor of some (Whites)

was deemed worthy of a full salary while the labor of

others (enslaved Africans and Native Americans, and

later Mexican Americans in the USA) could be minimally

remunerated or even exploited without compensation. A

Eurocentric ideology, dichotomizing concepts like

civilization/barbarism and modern/pre- or nonmodern

societies, further shaped the narrative concerning the

value of knowledge and the establishment of hierarchi-

cally ordered and racialized subjectivities and laborers

(Quijano 2008).

Proletarianization is the racialization-based process

through which California-based Mexican citizens who

were entitled to American citizenship due to the Treaty

of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) experienced gradual

dispossession, whether de jure or de facto, of those

entitlements and their ownership and property rights.

Consequently, they were assimilated to the social racial

classification, along with other Hispanic proletarian

immigrants, as citizens or non-citizens of second or third

category (Almaguer 1994). Proletarianization was the

manifestation of the coloniality of power, understood as

the capacity of coloniality to function even after the histor-

ical demise of colonialism, resulting in the constitution of

racialized subjects whose access to labor compensation,

property and social rights was negatively affected.

Studying the racialized restrictions on third world immi-

grants to the U.S. from 1924 to 1965 and the production

of illegality, Mae Ngai (2004) outlined the emergence of

the illegal alien as a racialized and discriminated against

actual presence that cannot turn itself into a full person.

This specific form of limited belonging was an “inclusion

in the nation [that] was simultaneously a social reality

and a legal impossibility,” and it generated what Ngai

calls “impossible subjects” (2004, 4).

Latinx immigrants have historically emerged as these

impossible subjects within the historical context of Califor-

nia. Similarly, a conspicuous contemporary case involves

undocumented students, who inhabit a dual status of

being a tangible social presence and simultaneously

facing legal precarity that renders their existence either

implausible or significantly limited. Thus, “the Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the

National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) core

postsecondary education data collection program,

designed to help NCES meet its mandate to report full

and complete statistics on the condition of postsecond-

ary education in the United States for the Department of

Education” (IPEDS, 1), does not count undocumented

students, despite their relevance for states like Califor-

nia. Their case is a specific manifestation of a much

more generalized dynamic historically modulating the

forms of economic, social, political, and cultural belong-

ing and exclusion of Latinx populations in California.

Coloniality, proletarianization, impossible subjects, and

racialization processes, as well as the ensuing struggles

for equity and social justice, are then the historical roots

of the coexistence of dynamics of relative inclusion and

significant exclusion of Latinx populations in the state of

California today. In other words, the experience of Latinx

populations are characterized by limited participation

and access, as well as notable exclusion, whether in

historical or contemporary contexts, all of which are

shaped by the enduring influence of racial identification

within the framework of coloniality.

The UC has been a crucial space in which these dynam-

ics have unfolded and is now one of the central sites

where these issues can be redressed and the nation’s

ongoing struggle for equity and social justice can be

fought. These dynamics can be retraced from the

historical exclusion of Latinx students to their present-day

inclusion at the undergraduate level, thus showcasing

the gradual demographic arrival and integration of Latinx

students into UC. From 1980 to 2020, enrollment of

11 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Latinx undergraduates at the UC grew by a factor of 10,

and their percentage of all undergraduates almost

quintupled (Table 1

At the graduate level, as expected, growth has been

slower but increasingly significant; the number of Latinx

graduate students enrolled in the UC system quadrupled

since 1980 and close to tripled as a percentage of the

total graduate student population (Table 2

Despite this expansion, both undergraduate and gradu-

ate students, and, even more significantly, faculty and

senior management, are categories in which Latinx

people are still underrepresented in the UC, considering

3 Source: The University of California Statistical Summary of Students and Staff. Fall 1981, 1990, 2000, 2010. Source 2020: Fall enrollment at a glance

| University of California

4 Source for 2020: Fall enrollment at a glance | University of California. Source: The University of California Statistical Summary of Students and Staff.

Fall 1981, 1990, 2000, 2010

5 Source: The University of California Statistical Summary of Students and Staff. Fall 1981, 1990, 2000, 2010. Source: UC workforce diversity | University

of California.

*Latinx is reported as Hispanic.

their demographic size in the state today. According to

the UC system, the two major categories of UC person-

nel are: 1) Academic: including academic administrators,

regular teaching faculty, lecturers, and other teaching

faculty, student assistants, researchers, librarians,

cooperative extension researchers, university extension

faculty, and other academic personnel; and 2) Non-aca-

demic: including senior management (SMG), manage-

ment and senior professionals (MSP), and professional

and support staff (PSS). How underrepresented Latinx

people are in the UC system in those two key personnel

categories in the last four decades can be clearly seen

in Tables 3–5

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total 66,993 88,858 106,351 126,702 123,372

Latinx 5,474 10,876 16,734 22,721 29,856

% Latinx 8.2% 12.2% 15.7% 17.9% 24.2%

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total 38,719 41,089 41,989 54,883 59,267

Latinx 1,633 2,443 2,681 4,084 6,751

% Latinx 4.2% 5.9% 6.4% 7.4% 11.4%

Table 2: All UC Campuses Fall

Enrollment–Graduate Level*

Table 4: University of California

Non-Academic Personnel

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total 27,225 37,908 44,960 58,687 73,012

Latinx 849 1,758 2,582 3,492 5,816

% Latinx 3.1% 4.6% 5.7% 5.6% 8.0%

Table 3: University of California

Academic Personnel

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total 97,102 125,458 141,366 179,581 226,449

Latinx 5,355 14,284 17,402 31,909 56,667

% Latinx 5.5% 11.4% 12.3% 17.8% 25.0%

Table 1: UC Campus Fall Undergraduate

Enrollment: 1980–2020*

*Latinx reported as Chicano and Latin American for 1980 and 1990. Latinx reported as Chicano/Chicana and Latino/Latina for 2000. Latinx reported as

Hispanic/Latino(a) for 2020.

12 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

The arrival of Latinx students into the UC system,

constituting our initial long-term process, has always

been an inevitable demographic occurrence, intricately

interwoven within the broader historical trajectory of

constrained inclusion, often accompanied by marked

exclusion. However, this arrival has also been con-

strained in its potential for transformative impact, due to

its alignment with the concurrent unfolding of two other

processes: a noteworthy reduction in public education

funding and a parallel tendency towards the privatization

of financial support for public higher education. These

two latter dynamics are intricately connected.

Thus, according to UC data, adjusted for inflation, as

6 Source: https://accountability.universityofcalifornia.edu/2021/chapters/chapter-12.html#12.1.5

shown in Figure 2 below: “since 1990–91, total instruc-

tional expenditures per UC student have declined by

21%,” while “students and their families bear a greater

share of that cost.” In other words, California, as a state,

invests less in students (today, on a per capita basis,

less than 50% than in 1990) precisely when more

first-generation and working-class students of color are

entering the system, placing an increased financial

burden on them and their families to finance their educa-

tion (today, twice as much, through tuition increases and

loans, than they did in 1990) (See Figure 2

with infla-

tion-adjusted amounts).

State-provided education has nationally, on the other

hand, come to depend on the payment of tuition through

federal loans by the families of many of these newly

arriving students of color. As Josh Mitchell’s The Debt

Trap. How Student Loans Became a National Catastro-

phe (2021) makes clear, a vicious circle has developed

between underfunding of state schools and the growth of

tuition paid for by loans in both state and private schools:

“The more colleges raise tuition, the more Americans

borrow. The more Americans borrow, the more colleges

raise tuition” (2021,7). In that scenario, today “more than

two-thirds of undergraduates borrow, and those who do

graduate owing an average of $29,000. [...] A generation

2000 2010 2020

Total 5,312 9,285 16,801

Latinx 262 591 1,646

% Latinx 4.9% 6.4% 9.8%

Table 5: SMG & MSP (Managers, Senior

Professionals, and Senior Management Group)*

*In 2010, the UC recategorized some academic administrators (mostly

deans) from SMG staff to academics.

State General Funds Tuition/Fees (Cal Grants) Tuition/Fees UC General Funds

$7,500

$2,510

$7,420

$3,670

$21,100

2018–19

$8,140

$2,290

$6,230

$3,760

$20,420

2019–20

1990–91

$20,850

$430

$2,920

$2,450

$26,650

$16,030

$5,070

$2,340

$24,420

1995–96

$980

$18,530

$4,030

$2,370

$25,740

2000–01

$810

$12,530

$5,560

$2,660

$21,850

2005–06

$1,100

Figure 2: Core Fund Expenditures for Instruction Per Student

13 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

ago it was rare to owe $60,000 in student debt; now

more than seven million Americans owe that much”

(2021,7).

The interlinked dynamics of defunding and privatization,

operating on both a national and interconnected level,

have limited the potential impact of the arrival of people

of color and non-traditional students to higher education

in the U.S. This also pertains to Latinx students’ access

to California’s premier tier of public education. These

dynamics are analyzed in a series of important and

recent books such as Caitlin Zaloom’s Indebted, How

Families Make College Work at Any Cost (2019), Eliza-

beth Tandy Shermer’s Indentured Students. How Gov-

ernment-Guaranteed Loans Left Generations Drowning

in College Debt (2021); Josh Mitchell’s The Debt Trap.

How Student Loans Became a National Catastrophe

(2021), Tressie McMillan Cottom’s Lower Ed. The

Troubling Rise of For-profit Colleges in the New Econo-

my (2017), and Christopher Newfield’s The Great

Mistake. How We Wrecked Public Universities and How

We Can Fix Them (2016).

For Elizabeth Tandy Shermer, the multiple comparisons

sprouting from the end of the 20th century into the 21st

between indentured labor and educational debt have an

underlying commonality: as did workers of color in the

past, many students throughout the nation today—espe-

cially those from low socioeconomic backgrounds

(preyed upon by for-profit colleges more interested in

capturing federal loans than in effectively educating and

graduating students)—find themselves unable to escape

the debts acquired in the pursuit of their degrees, debts

that, instead of decreasing with time, tend to increase

through interests and penalties. As a result, “Student

debt has become one of the largest categories of Ameri-

can consumer debt, second only to home mortgages, in

the new millennium” (2021,3). Differences in families’

capacities to pay tuition mean that a working-class

family will pay more money over time than a wealthy one

for the same degree, increasing “the racial wealth gap,”

accomplishing the opposite of the historical promise of

education. Mitchell (2021) opens with the illustrative

case of an adult student, two years into an educational

loans-generated bankruptcy, who had gone into college

to get a BA and then to graduate school to get a degree

that would allow her to become a psychologist:

Exhibit 1 of her bankruptcy documents listed how

much she had sent over the years to Sallie Mae and

its spinoff, a company called Navient, to repay her

student loans. Month after month, year after year [for

seventeen years], she mailed off those payments,

each check for more than $700. After some 160

checks, she had paid $135,603.34. Most of it,

$100,000, went toward interest, padding the profits

of Sallie Mae. Her balance now sat at $96,820. (7)

Lest this be seen as an aberration exploited only in the

for-profit sector, Shermer clarifies that “By 2017 state-

school graduates [nationally] had an 11 percent default

rate, just a few points less than for-profits’ percentage”

(5). Likewise, it is not only a problem for working-class

families but one with the capacity to redefine the experi-

ence of middle-classness in the U.S., as Caitlin Zaloom

(2019) makes clear: “Today being middle class means

being indebted. It means feeling insecure and uncertain

about the future, and wrestling with the looming cost of

college and the debt it will require” (1).

Tressie McMillan Cottom’s Lower Ed. The Troubling Rise

of For-profit Colleges in the New Economy (2017) points

to the unexpected synergy between traditional higher

education in not-for-profit institutions and for-profit

colleges: “Lower Ed can exist precisely because elite

Higher Ed does. The latter legitimizes the educational

gospel [as a morally and financially sound investment]

while the former absorbs all manner of vulnerable

groups who believe in it: single mothers, downsized

workers, veterans, people of color, and people transition-

ing from welfare to work” (11).

After describing the history of the federal student loans

program, Josh Mitchell concludes:

The student loan program is the quintessential form

of crony capitalism. It privatized profits and socialized

losses. In an echo of the housing bubble, all the risk

fell to students and their families, who have been told

repeatedly that college and grad school are safe and

necessary investments. The narrative of higher

education as a ticket to the American Dream fueled

the exploitation of good intentions by bad actors. (18)

14 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

After showing how, in a tuition and loans system, racial

wealth inequality affects college affordability and post-

secondary educational success, including “students’ abil-

ity to attend college, complete their studies, and depart

with a reduced debt burden,” Fenaba R. Addo and Lorna

Jorgensen Wendt conclude their essay on “The Racial-

ization of the Student Debt Crisis” (2020) by stating: “A

debt-financed higher education system in a society with

extreme wealth inequality means those with fewer

resources are more likely to take on debt to access

postsecondary education” (211). Unfortunately, relative

defunding and privatization of cost have been two of the

contemporary forms of historical inclusion/exclusion or

qualified inclusion determining the social trajectory of

Latinx people in California.

In The Great Mistake. How We Wrecked Public Universi-

ties and How We Can Fix Them (2016), Christopher

Newfield traces the intertwined history of this double

privatization of public education as a social reality and as a

concept. He makes clear that this is not a problem exclu-

sively produced by a bad system of financing but, instead,

one generated by a fundamental change in our concept

of public education as, centrally, a private and individual

good instead of part of the common good. This point is

important for this paper’s argument because delivering on

the progressive and democratizing promise and potential

of the University of California becoming the premier

HSRI public education system in the nation depends, to

a significant extent, on the institution’s honoring of

education’s public good status. This promise depends on

UC’s commitment to shifting from a focus on equitable

access work to widely distributed excellence. After all, by

2019–2020 “The majority of Latinos earned their degrees

at a public institution. Over 70% of Latinos that earned a

certificate or degree did so at a public four-year (42%) or

public two-year (29%)” and “Over half of Latinos who

earned a degree [in 2019–20] did so at a Hispanic-Serv-

ing Institution (HSI). HSIs awarded 55% of the degrees

Latinos earned in 2019–20” (Excelencia, 2022, n.p.).

Defying the dominant ideology about the origins of the

contemporary troubles in public higher education in the

U.S., Newfield sees those problems as not stemming

7 Source: www.equityinhighered.org/indicators/u-s-population-trends-and-educational-attainment/educational-attainment-by-race-and-ethnicity

from a lack of business acumen in the sector or from its

distance from market logic. Instead, for him they are the

direct reflection of the penetration of such logic into the

sector. This affects public higher education in two

connected ways: the relative privatization of funding and

the lack of understanding of what are the meaning and

goals of public education itself.

To Newfield, “the American Funding Model” of public

higher education is “broken”: “It has been broken by too

much private funding and service to private interests”

(2016, 4). His diagnosis: “Private sector ‘reforms’ are not

the cure for the college costs disease—They are the

college cost disease” (4). They lower educational quality

and raise costs. His concise formula for such an analysis

is: “low public funding equals high tuition equals high

student debt equals lower access equals lower college

attainment, period.” (12).

Newfield traces the origins of the ideological transforma-

tion that facilitated a substantial level of higher education

privatization back to the Reagan era and the era of

economic uncertainty. He clarifies that this transforma-

tion didn’t directly entail the transfer of public assets to

private ownership. Neoliberalism, one of the ideological

responses to such a situation, resulted in the white

middle class voting to lower their taxes and weakening

of support for public infrastructure more generally.

Ideologically, such diagnosis: “narrowed the value of

college to the individual’s private investment in their

future earnings while stigmatizing public benefits,

particularly racial equity via race-conscious admissions,

as attacks on private interests” (39).

Newfield argues that in continuous 20th century expan-

sion, by 1980, the U.S. was still a world leader in educa-

tional attainment, but by 2015 had moved into “a middle

of the pack” position (45). As we have seen, those same

four decades were also the years of the arrival of Latinx

students to the UC system. The promise of such an

arrival was to begin correcting the still very unequal

distribution of educational attainment nationally, as seen

in Figure 3 on the following page

15 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

The neoliberal response, as it did in many other areas of

life such as health and social services, misunderstood or

misconstrued the meaning and goals of public education

itself. Faced with budgetary crisis, partly produced by

the neoliberal cutting of taxes, educational leaders felt

compelled to embrace the neoliberal definition of public

education as a private good, something like an invest-

ment the individual made on their own future, and thus

something they should be willing to incur debt to pay for.

This, in turn, became the basis for justifying tuition

raises to address California’s decreased funding. This is

a cycle that has significantly privatized public education.

According to Newfield, tuition increases in the 1980s

and 1990s preceded and were initially independent of

the funding cuts (42). This cycle became part of the

informal agreement between state legislatures and state

higher education leaders; tuition raises could be justified

by state cuts, and the latter could be absorbed by tuition

increases, allegedly without affecting the quality of

education. Nationally, “state appropriations for public

colleges and universities declined by 25 percent in

constant dollars between 1989 and 2014. During the

same period, net student tuition doubled” (18).

The accepted main rationale, on both the state and

college sides, was that an education would eventually

amply compensate the individual beneficiary for the

investment and the temporary debt. For Newfield, this

was only one half of the historical understanding of such

rationale in the previous 20th century expansion of

public higher education. Forgotten was the second half

that insisted on private-nonmarket and public benefits for

all, such as democratization, a generalized intellect

based on skills and cognitive development, better health,

and a more informed electorate. What was forgotten

then was the dual nature of public education: “It has

obvious private good features like increasing a gradu-

ate’s future personal income, and it has an equally public

good status” (65). Newfield understands the notion of

public good as “a good whose benefit continues to

increase as it approaches universal access” (64). In fact,

those socially distributed benefits depend precisely on

public funding to achieve something close to universality

within a society. Absent public funding, higher education

transforms into a privilege distinguishing some from

others, instead of connecting them as a society and

benefiting all of them as a group. Using economist Walter

W. McMahon’s calculations of the benefits of higher

education, Newfield divides the yearly benefits into

thirds: private market benefits (as return on investment)

= $31,174 (in 2007 dollars); direct and indirect nonmar-

ket private benefits = $38,080, including the ability to

work in areas with high compensation, affording high

quality of life and services; and direct and indirect social

benefits = $31,180. More than 50% of the benefit of

higher education, according to McMahon, could be

< High School Associate

Doctoral

Bachelor’s

Master’s Professional

High School Some College/No Degree

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All racial & ethnic groups

American Indian or

Alaska Native

Asian

Black or African American

Hispanic or Latino

Native Hawaiian or other

Pacific Islander

White

More than one race

Figure 3: U.S. Educational Attainment of Adults Ages 25 and Older by Race and Ethnicity, 2017

16 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

deemed externalities, i.e., benefits realized by others in

society as a result of the individual’s education. Newfield

concludes: “In sum, standard calculations of the value of

college are completely wrong. They miss about two

thirds of its overall value” (72).

Elizabeth Popp Berman’s book, “Thinking like an Econo-

mist: How Efficiency Replaced Equality in U.S. Public

Policy” (2022), elucidates the historical evolution of what

she terms “the economic style of reasoning” (13), which

has supplanted other conceptual frameworks, such as

“universalism, rights, and equality” (38), in shaping

public policy design in the United States since the

1970s. Unlike denunciations of right-wing neoliberalism

at the macroeconomic level, Popp Berman’s account

emphasizes, at the microeconomic level, the central role

played by center-left economists and thinkers in the

supposedly neutral privileging of “markets as efficient

allocators of resources’’ and efficiency itself as the

supreme value for all realms of life, including areas

“such as education or healthcare, that are not governed

primarily or solely as markets” (17).

The social and individual benefits of a public education,

its dependence on broad access and high quality mas-

sively distributed among the population, its contribution

to social mobility, and the democratization of the benefits

of economic development are part of what I termed as

the progressive and democratizing promise and potential

of the University of California. In particular, UC’s path to

becoming the premier HSRI public education system in

the nation is an opportunity to think about how a public

understanding of education and servingness (García,

2020) help us honor and enhance the social benefits of

education as a public good. Rather than constituting a

paradox, the notion of combining extensive inclusivity

with substantial research endeavors is exemplified by

the concept of HSRI, an educational classification that,

though still uncommon, is progressively gaining ground.

This term encapsulates a noteworthy endeavor in itself.

8 An R-1 institution is, according to the Carnegie Classication of Institutions of Higher Education, a university that produces “very high research activity”

(Carnegie)

The promise and potential of UC as an HSRI

system as seen in the example of UC Santa

Cruz

As a research-intensive (R-1) institution, UC Santa Cruz

is, as of 2022, one of 20 Hispanic-Serving Research

Institutions (HSRIs) and one of two HSRIs and Asian

American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving

Institutions (AANAPISIs) elected to the American Associ-

ation of Universities (AAU). UC Santa Cruz has earned

international distinction for its high-impact research and

uncommon commitment to teaching, public service, and

social justice.

In 2012, as UC Santa Cruz anticipated reaching 25%

Latinx undergraduate student enrollment, a task force of

faculty, staff, and students was charged with planning how

the campus would implement its HSI mission (Reguerín

et al., 2020). The task force began by reviewing relevant

research models, empirical evidence, and best practices

to address the question “What accelerates or impedes the

academic and socioemotional success of our Latina/o

students?” It was the first time the campus systematically

used data disaggregated by race/ethnicity, socio-eco-

nomic status, and gender to study Latinx students’

academic pathways, complemented by the voices of

Latinx undergraduates, who developed and presented

their study of this question at the American Educational

Research Association (Reguerín et al., 2020). This work

allowed UC Santa Cruz to begin asking questions about

itself such as: What is the meaning of HSI servingness

and more specifically within an HSRI (Hispanic-Serving

Research Institution)? Our now 10-year long HSI trajec-

tory is captured by the further evolution of our initial

guiding question about what accelerates or impedes the

academic and socio-emotional success of our Latina/o

students to our current guiding questions:

• What forces accelerate or impede the holistic success

of Latinx, low-income, and first-generation undergradu-

ate, transfer, and graduate students at UC Santa Cruz?

• What educational interventions, student-centered

practices, and investments can increase UC Santa

Cruz’s capacity as a public R-1 institution

to support

successful academic and career pathways of Latinx,

17 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

low-income, and first-generation undergraduate,

transfer, and graduate students?

• What structures, changes, and institutional

investments can increase the capacity of UC Santa

Cruz, as a public R-1 HSI, to serve as a UC and

national leader in redefining servingness, achieving

equity, and promoting social mobility?

The comprehensive redefinition of the purpose and extent

of our educational endeavors carries a significant

implication—the potential for HSI initiatives to reintro-

duce and emphasize inquiries like: What is the meaning

and mission of public education? What are the connec-

tions among public education, the public who funds it in

California, and both of their futures? What does educa-

tional equity mean in this context and how do we

achieve it? It also means exploring the possibilities of

being a public, HSRI, and R1 educational institution and

system. This centrally involves exploring, expanding and

developing the meanings of “servingness” (García,

2020; Reguerín et al, 2020) by probing the fit between

the needs of our students and our institutional capacity

to satisfy them, in ways that lead to equity of results at

all levels of the educational process:

• How do underrepresented students experience the

institution?

• Are classes designed for the success of students from

underrepresented groups (URGs)?

• Are departments and their faculty—through their

courses, schedules, curricular logics and course

sequences, and major requirements—cognizant of the

differential impact they may have?

• Are we ready to investigate our own practices and

premises to be more effective in our work towards

educational equity?

• Are all campus divisions (academic, student affairs,

advising, etc.) coordinating?

• How can we bridge their practices?

Since “race” can be historically seen as one of the

organizing principles structuring inequality in U.S. history

(Omi & Winant, 2014 )—and, certainly, determining the

status of Latinx people in California—and given that “In

post-secondary education in the United States, the core

educational concepts of college, college students, and

education are racialized by the ideological values of

merit and equal opportunity [...] which block awareness

of structural racism” in education (Dowd and Bensimon,

p.1–2), UC Santa Cruz’s HSI Initiatives developed a set

of Guiding Principles for Becoming a Racially Just HSI

(Reguerín et al., 2020, p. 57):

• Move from successful admission of racially diverse

students (our strengths) to equitable outcomes and

experiences across all racial groups (our challenge).

• Raise awareness and consensus building by disag-

gregating data by race and other identities.

• Reject attempts to mute race and highlight racial (in)

equities at every opportunity.

• Improve inclusion and campus climate by redesigning

gateway classes and providing professional develop-

ment with faculty and staff to meet needs of all students.

• Introduce socially and culturally informed innovations in

teaching and practice, including those centered on

minoritized ways of knowing and being.

• Build on successes and acknowledge challenges and

issues revealed by ongoing inquiry.

As we undertake the revision of these principles to align

with the expansive evolution of our HSI endeavors,

which now encompass all educational levels (ranging

from undergraduate to transfer to postgraduate educa-

tion and faculty roles) and all facets (including admission,

the first-year experience, retention, persistence, profes-

sional preparation and timely and successful graduation,

as well as postbaccalaureate access and achievement)

within the educational pipeline, they vividly underscore

our dedication to confronting the interconnected structure

between “race” and unequal educational outcomes.

Moreover, these revisions serve to emphasize our

commitment, both as researchers and practitioners, to

scrutinize our educational practices to prevent any

participation in perpetuating social inequality and to

propel the cause of educational justice forward.

The choice to prioritize the examination of structural

disparities in access, opportunities, readiness, and

outcomes, and to subsequently scrutinize our institutional

practices through both cognitive and non-cognitive

lenses, with the objective of preventing the perpetuation

of inequality and initiating steps towards rectification,

stands as a pivotal embodiment of servingness at UC

Santa Cruz as an HSRI. Such work has allowed us to

18 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

improve many of our institutional practices—including

our gateway and other required classes in STEM,

introductory literacy and mathematics classes preparing

students from different backgrounds for success in

college—build a transfer-receptive culture (Herrera &

Jain, 2013), provide access to research and internship

opportunities, and address graduate students’ need for

writing support.

These efforts allowed us to see that if we want to be

more effective with all our students, we must change

institutionally. They helped us see that our problems

achieving equity of results were not centrally an issue of

students’ alleged under-preparation but instead of our

institutional relative (in)capacity to meet our students’

needs and hopes. Moreover, HSI work—reorienting our

priorities to serve the needs of the students who need us

the most, often the majority of students in many of the

UC campuses now—also holds the promise of improv-

ing educational attainment for all students. By concen-

trating on the quality and actual results of students’

learning experiences and support services, we improve

our capacity to foster success among all our students.

The Challenges We Must Meet

The array of challenges we must confront to fully harness

the potential of HSI efforts in substantially enhancing

equitable outcomes throughout the University of California

is extensive. In essence, we are tasked with achieving

9 Sources: California demographics: Public Policy Institute of California: www.ppic.org. Personnel: UCSC personnel prole 2019–20. Faculty welfare:

UCSC Committee on Faculty Welfare May 2018.

more with fewer resources to effectively meet the re-

quirements of a markedly diversified student population.

This paper has argued that the increasing levels of

student debt and underfunding per capita by the state

are fundamental challenges to the transformative power

of higher education in California. They are structural

conditions that no amount of HSI work can fully neutral-

ize. We must then recover our view of public education

as a fundamental public good, in which we collectively

invest because we strive for educational equity, social

justice, and a better future for all. The current Latinx

underrepresentation at all levels of university life poses a

significant problem that was notably evident at UC Santa

Cruz in 2019, as shown in Table 6.

Taking into account that UC Santa Cruz boasts a com-

mendable diversity profile in numerous categories within

the UC system, encompassing the percentage of both

undergraduate and graduate students, as well as

faculty members, it becomes apparent just how pro-

found and significant the imbalanced representation of

Latinx individuals within UC system truly is. The fact that

a considerable portion of our senior management

remains predominantly White implies that the input of

people of color is less impactful than what the state’s

demographic makeup necessitates. Furthermore, the

limited presence of Latinx graduate students introduces

complexities in terms of attaining improved representa-

tion among faculty members and senior administrators in

Race/Ethnicity

CA Population

(2019) PPIC

Ladder-Rank

Faculty

Lecturers

(Individuals)

Management

Senior Staff

(Individuals)

Professional

Support Staff

(Individuals)

Graduate

Students

Undergrad

Students

Latinx 39%

10%

(55 individuals)

31 35 759 10% 27%

White 37%

65%

(361 individuals)

221 373 1,369 40% 30%

Asian, P.I. 15%

17%

(100 individuals)

29 34 254 11% 28%

African. Am. 6%

(18 individuals)

7 14 102 3% 4%

Native Am. 1.6%

(11 individuals)

3 5 23 1% 1%

Table 6: Levels of Representation by Race/Ethnicity at UCSC in 2019

19 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

the future. While we have made strides in expanding

undergraduate access to UC, the composition of the

faculty has not experienced a similar democratization.

This imbalance leaves the few professors in place

shouldering an excessive load, sometimes grappling

with an overwhelming volume of student and institutional

demands on their time and attention.

A different challenge is highlighted in Laura Hamilton

and Kelly Nielsen’s Broke: The Racial Consequences of

Underfunding Public Universities (2021). The authors

use the case of the UC system to illustrate two opposing

but connected dynamics affecting public university

systems across the country. First, they discuss the racial

consequences of what they call “postsecondary racial

neoliberalism,” where using individual “merit” to launder

family and class privilege results in significant levels of

per capita defunding for under-represented students

who, lacking cultural, social, and economic capital

relative to most of their White peers, are most in need of

resources and support (20). Second, they highlight the

limitations and possibilities of what they call “new univer-

sities” such as UC Merced and UC Riverside, “schools

that pair high research ambitions with predominantly

disadvantaged student populations” (3). The limitations

are derived from the mismatch between student needs

and available per capita funding. They include “potential-

ly risky public-private partnerships (or P3) as a strategy

for building and maintaining large portions of campus”

(25), “austerity practices”, and “tolerable suboptimization”

of services such as “academic advising, mental health

services, and cultural programming” (25). The possibili-

ties, on the other hand, paradoxically reside in the

transformational potential of the work that is required to

make underfunding compatible with high research,

diversity with excellence, and racial inclusion with full

socialization of knowledge and creativity. Such potential

may entail successfully ‘breaking’ the mold of the tradi-

tional (predominantly White) research university.

Although the UC system is significantly more democratic

in demographic composition and in Pell grant recipients’

participation than other large higher education public

systems in the country and, certainly, is more inclusive

10 URS refers to historically underrepresented racially marginalized students.

than most research universities, it still has a hierarchy of

trajectory, endowments, and prestige that makes some

campuses (UC Berkeley and UCLA at the top) fund most

of their educational per capita expenditures with private

resources and out-of-state enrollments; while other

campuses such as Merced, Riverside and Santa Cruz

must fundamentally rely on decreasing state funding.

This situation risks what the authors call the perils of a

stratified UC system, resulting in an unequal “co-opetition,”

both cooperation and competition, for UC resources (86).

In that context, UC Merced and UC Riverside provide

“political cover” for UC by helping “produce favorable

optics at the system level, allowing the university system

to demonstrate its commitment to serving in-state

students, low-income students and URS.”

(75). Crucially,

however, they do so “with a fraction of the resources”

(75). Consequently, a specific subset of two or three

campuses becomes the nexus for the amalgamation of

both student population diversity and resource scarcity.

These campuses house a larger proportion of low-in-

come students, those who are classified as underrepre-

sented students, and in-state students. These individuals

receive education with considerably lower per capita

funding. Simultaneously, the entirety of the system

capitalizes on the political leverage that such allocation

facilitates, enabling the system to assert its demands at

the levels of state leadership and legislative bodies.

To begin meeting those challenges and actualize the

democratizing educational potential of UC becoming the

premier HSRI system in the country, we must first

understand why our HSRI status matters for all and not

just for URGs. To become an HSI, or more precisely, to

be recognized as HSI-eligible by the US Department of

Education, a post-secondary institution must meet three

criteria: 1) Demographic: a minimum of 25% of its

undergraduates must be Hispanic; 2) Economic: about a

third of the students must be low-income students

(recipients of Pell grants); and 3) Economic: relatively

low overall campus spending per student (core expens-

es). In other words, to become an HSI, such a college

must come close to the definition of the “new university”

Hamilton and Nielsen elaborate upon. It has to success-

fully combine access and excellence, the production of

20 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

high-level research and chronic underfunding, and the

creation of opportunities in the context of structural

limitations. Even with the limiting structural constraints of

the co-occurrence of increasing levels of student debt

and underfunding per capita by the state, with the arrival

of Latinx populations to the UC system, HSRI status for

UC is a recognition of the nature and importance of the

social and educational issues it is tackling, and the

crucial relevance of the new practices, challenges, and

solutions it may be able to identify in that process.

Second, the UC system must pursue six immediate goals:

• Place the vision of equity of representation and the

mission of attaining quantifiable equity outcomes in the

near future at the center for the UC system at all levels:

senior administrators, faculty, staff, and graduate and

undergraduate students.

• Champion that vision and mission throughout the

system, from the UC Office of the President to campus

chancellors and EVCs to deans and chairs.

• Convene a UC system-wide equity summit that includes

HSI-related staff, faculty, and administrators across the

system to define “serving” in “Hispanic-serving” at all

and each of the UC campuses.

• Invest in redistributing per capita student spending

across UC; in the system-wide HSI effort; in student

success at all levels; in the data generating and gather-

ing capabilities that create accountability and agency at

all levels of the UC educational practice.

• Commit to a UC system in which diversity and excel-

lence are representative of the population of the state

in all campuses (not concentrated in 3 or 4 campuses

that are asked to do the work of diversity for the

system), a system in which research opportunities for

undergraduate and graduate students are equally

distributed across all campuses and elds, and one in

which actual social mobility results from equal funding

per student across all campuses.

• Reduce student debt, particularly for low-income and

rst-generation students and students from URGs, and

tie it to access to graduate/professional school to not

only increase graduate enrollments but also assure

career advancement and success.

A UC HSRI system—while structurally limited by the

processes described in this paper—remains poised to

seize a historic opportunity to make the arrival of Latinx

people to the UC system the occasion for a radical

expansion of the democratizing and transformative power

of public higher education in the state and the nation.

21 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

References

Addo, F and L. Jorgensen Wendt, “The Racialization of the Student Debt

Crisis” American Council on Education, 2020.

Almaguer, Tomás. Racial Fault Lines. The Historical Origins of White

Supremacy in California, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.

Berman, Elizabeth Popp. Thinking Like an Economist: How Efficiency

Replaced Equality in U.S. Public Policy, Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 2022.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. For the Carnegie

Classification of Institutions of Higher Education see: https://carnegieclas-

sifications.iu.edu/

Dowd, Alicia. C., & Bensimon, Estela M. Engaging the “Race Question”:

Accountability and Equity in U.S. Higher Education. New York: Teachers

College Press, 2015.

Espinosa, Lorelle L., Jonathan M. Turk, Morgan Taylor, and Hollie M.

Chessman. Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education: A Status Report.

Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 2019.

Excelencia in Education, “Latino College Completion 2019–2020”, n.p.

July, 2022.

Facer, Keri and Christopher Newfield, “Introduction: The University at the

End of the World”, in “Global Higher Education in 2050: Building Universi-

ties for Sustainable Societies”, a special section in Critical Times, 5 (1):

78–86, 2022.

García, Gina Ann (ed.) Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in Practice.

Defining “Servingness” at HSIs, Charlotte NC: Information Age Publishing

Inc, 2020.

Hamilton, Laura and Kelly Nielsen. Broke. The Racial Consequences of

Underfunding Public Universities, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

2021.

Herrera, Alfred and Dimpal Jain, “Building a Transfer-Receptive Culture at

Four-Year Institutions, New Directions for Higher Education, n162, 51–59

Sum 2013.

IPEDS. “Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS)”,

https://nces.ed.gov/statprog/handbook/pdf/ipeds.pdf

Johnson, H., Cook, K., Murphy, P., and Weston, M. “Higher education in

California: Institutional costs”, Sacramento, CA: Public Policy Institute of

California, 2014.

McMillan Cottom, Tressie. Lower Ed. The Troubling Rise of For-profit

Colleges in the New Economy, New York: The New Press, 2017.

Mitchell, Josh. The Debt Trap. How Student Loans Became a National

Catastrophe, New York: Simon and Schuster, 2021.

Newfield, Christopher. The Great Mistake. How We Wrecked Public

Universities and How We Can Fix Them, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 2016.

Ngai, Mae. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern

America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004.

Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. Racial formation in the United States.

New York: Routledge, 2014.

Quijano, Anibal. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America”,

in Mabel Moraña, Enrique Dussel, and Carlos Jáuregui, editors, Coloniali-

ty at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate. Durham: Duke

University Press, 181–224, 2008.

Reguerín, Pablo, Juan Poblete, Catherine R. Cooper, Arnold Sánchez

Ordaz, and René Moreno. “Becoming a Racially Just Hispanic Serving

Institution (HSI): A Case Study of the University of California, Santa Cruz”,

in Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in Practice. Defining “Servingness”

at HSIs, edited by Gina Ann García, Information Age Publishing Inc. pp

41–60, l 2020.

Tandy Shermer, Elizabeth. Indentured Students. How Government-Guar-

anteed Loans Left Generations Drowning in College Debt, Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 2021.

Taylor, Morgan, Jonathan M. Turk, Hollie M. Chessman, and Lorelle L.

Espinosa. Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education: 2020 Supplement.

Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 2020.

Zaloom, Caitlin. Indebted, How Families Make College Work at Any Cost,

Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.

22 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

ommonly identified by their Latinx undergraduate

student enrollment of at least 25%, HSIs vary across

institutional characteristics, including degree offerings,

location, and institutional resources (Núñez et al., 2016).

Historically, most HSIs have functioned as open and

broad access institutions; however in 2022, a notable

development emerged as 21 HSIs were also classified

as research 1 (R1) universities (Alliance of Hispan-

ic-Serving Research Universities, 2022). Although a few

R1 universities have long been HSIs, such as the

University of New Mexico, the growing representation of

R1 universities is changing the landscape of HSIs and

higher education more broadly in key ways. For several

institutions who are members of the Association of

American Universities (AAUs), such as UC Irvine, UC

Santa Barbara and UC Santa Cruz, obtaining HSI status

is historic (Núñez, 2017). More attention is now directed

at these institutions, notably with the establishment of

the UC-HSI Initiative (Paredes et al., 2021) and, in 2022,

the Alliance of Hispanic-Serving Research Universities

(HSRUs), a voluntary association with the goal of

increasing the number of Latinx doctoral students and

professors at these universities by 2030 (Alliance of

Hispanic Serving Research Universities, 2022).

Apart from their robust research missions, R1 HSIs

typically boast greater financial resources and exhibit

selective admissions criteria compared to their non-R1

counterparts, as outlined by the Carnegie classification

description (nd). Whiteness also remains embedded in

the historical and cultural practices of most institutions,

despite changing student demographics (Cabrera et al.,

2017). Within R1 HSIs, this includes the underrepresen-

tation of Latinx graduate students (Garcia & Guzman-Al-

varez, 2019) and faculty (Zambrana et al., 2017). These

patterns are concerning given that research universities

play a critical role in producing the next generation of

researchers and professionals. Nevertheless, there is a

lack of comprehensive empirical research focused on

Hispanic-Serving Research Institutions (HSRIs), a term

introduced by Marin and Pereschica (2017), and their

diverse contributions to enhancing social mobility for

marginalized communities. The underlying concept of

the HSI designation posits that a heightened presence of

Latinx students will drive institutional transformation

aimed at providing improved support for this demographic

and other historically undeserved populations (Santiago,

2012). However, the extent to which HSRIs are actively

reshaping their structures to fulfill this objective remains

uncertain, highlighting a significant void in both educa-

tional research and policy.

The purpose of this paper is to advance conceptions of

servingness at HSRIs, with a focus on UC. We first

present and analyze the existing scholarship about

HSRIs to identify ways that servingness is conveyed and

manifested at institutional and individual levels. Given

that the research on HSRIs is relatively nascent, we also

consider research on the experiences of Latinx individu-

als (students, staff, faculty, and campus leadership) at

Marcela G. Cuellar, Ph.D., Associate Professor, University of California, Davis

Mariana Carrola, Doctoral Student, University of California, Davis

Advancing Servingness at Hispanic-Serving Research

Institutions (HSRIs): A Call for Research and Action across

the University of California

23 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

research universities to begin to contextualize some of

the ways in which HSRIs may be changing. In synthesiz-

ing key findings from existing scholarship, we propose

areas for future research and practice that can advance

transformational changes reflective of servingness at UC

and HSRIs more broadly.

Literature Review Parameters

We began our literature review by searching for

peer-reviewed scholarship that focused specifically on

HSRIs, including organizational and individual levels of

analyses. We incorporated literature that either explicitly

outlined institutions situated at this juncture or provided

information about the institution in a manner that facili-

tated our ability to confirm its status as an HSRI or a

developing HSRI at the time the publication was released.

We also expanded our search criteria to identify a broader

body of scholarship on Latinx individuals at R1s in an

effort to contextualize this growing body of HSRI litera-

ture. We specifically focused on literature published

between 2000–2022 to align with the timeframes in which

the representation of students grew exponentially at UC

(see Poblete chapter). We included search terms that

encompass these types of environments, such as R1,

elite, research, and selective universities. We first

searched for peer-reviewed, empirical articles in educa-

tion databases, such as ERIC, JSTOR, and google

scholar. We then looked at Latinx-specific journals, includ-

ing the Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, Journal of

Latinos in Education, and the Hispanic Journal of Behav-

ioral Sciences. We excluded articles that were not set in

or examined education issues related to research univer-

sities and did not include Latinx individuals at any level.

Including the broader body of scholarship on Latinx

individuals at research universities, our review resulted

in 172 articles that met these criteria. Eighty-two of these

articles were based at HSRIs (see Appendix A

for a list

of articles), while the remaining articles focused on R1

universities more generally (see Appendix B

For this report, our discussion centers on the 82 articles

about HSRIs. However, we also refer to the broader R1

literature to begin contextualizing the ndings within the

HSRI literature. It is important to note the growing interest

in HSRIs as a site of study, given the exponential growth

of studies published since 2000. Between 2000–2009,

merely four studies were conducted within the context of

HSRIs. This number jumped to 40 between 2010–2019.

In just two and a half years, from 2020 to August 2022,

there were already 39 articles published. Less than half

of the HSRI studies focused on the experiences of

Latinx individuals in these institutional settings, while

17.1% focused on the institutions themselves, and

another 13.4% focused on academic and community

programs at these institutions (see Table 1). In terms of

methodological approaches, just over half of the studies

used a qualitative approach, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Methodological Approaches

Utilized in HSRI Literature

Research Design # %

Qualitative 43 52.4%

Quantitative 24 29.3%

Mixed Methods 8 9.8%

Conceptual 5 6.1%

Report 2 2.4%

Total 82

Focus # %

Institutions 14 17.1%

Programs 11 13.4%

Classroom 21 25.6%

Undergraduate Students 20 24.4%

Graduate Students 4 4.9%

Faculty and Staff 9 11.0%

Multiple perspectives 3 3.6%

Total 82

Table 1: Focus of HSRI Literature:

Number of Publications

24 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Emergent Themes

We identified several emergent themes across the HSRI

literature. As the scholarship addresses different levels

of analyses (institutional, programmatic, individual), we

present emerging themes corresponding to these foci.

Institutional Analyses

Almost one fifth of the HSRI literature focuses on

institutional level analyses. Institutional characteristics

of HSRIs are some of the features considered in these

studies, particularly the extent to which these institutions

have included or excluded Latinx students and other

historically underserved groups. Historically, most HSIs

have been community colleges and four-year teaching

universities (Marin & Pereschica, 2017), which are

commonly recognized by their accessibility for students

from these communities. By contrast, R1s have histori-

cally been less accessible for minoritized students,

including Latinx students, until more recently with the

increased enrollment of Latinx students across all

institutional types (Marin & Pereschica, 2017). While not

yet deeply explored in this scholarship, other important

institutional characteristics at HSRIs may include land-

grant status, whether they are public or private, and the

size of the campus population. Some of these charac-

teristics are more static while others may be in flux.

More importantly, organizational identity and institutional

capacity building are critical to understanding the level of

transformation fundamentally occurring at these institu-

tions to more intentionally support Latinx individuals and

communities (Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2015). Some

HSIs are distinguished by enacting institutional cultures

that reflect Latinx cultures and values (Garcia, 2017;

2019). Garcia et al. (2019) additionally elaborate on how

the concept of servingness can be interpreted within an

HSI context, illustrating its manifestation through mecha-

nisms like culturally relevant programs and pedagogical

approaches. Through case studies, several articles

consider some of the broader challenges and opportuni-

ties that HSRIs may face at the intersection of their

organizational identities as HSRIs. The organizational

identity of HSIs may also be perceived distinctly by

individuals given their own roles and positionality within

an institution (Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2015). Institu-

tional analyses thus showcase the multiple and complex

identities of HSRIs and how these can influence the

goals of the university, allocation of resources, and

program development.

Advancing Access and Excellence

A recurring theme within the literature grapples with the

intersectional institutional identities of the R1 university

designation (Carnegie, 2009) and an HSI designation,

which can be seen as contradictory due to the conven-

tional belief that being recognized as an R1 institution

signals prestige, while identifying as an HSI is often

perceived as the opposite (Marin & Pereschica, 2017;

Zerquera et al., 2017). Several studies found a stigmati-

zation around the HSI designation and recognition as an

HSI or having high enrollment of Latinx and other

Students of Color (Doran, 2015; Marin & Pereschica,

2017), which is connected to broader racialized patterns

in U.S. higher education. The most selective and well-re-

sourced colleges in the country are more likely to be

racialized as white, whereas colleges and universities

that serve larger populations of Students of Color tend to

be broad access and less selective (Garcia, 2019).

Furthermore, the assessment of an institution’s worth

frequently aligns with its institutional racial categorization

(HSI, HBCU, PWI), mirroring the hierarchical distribution

of resources and reputation among institutions. As

highlighted by Garcia (2019), this underscores the

argument that just as individuals and groups are subject

to racial categorization, universities also undergo a form

of racialization, leading to tangible consequences for

their organizational frameworks.

As HSRIs negotiate their multiple institutional identities

as both prestigious institutions that are increasingly

enrolling a more diverse student body, Núñez (2017)

describes this as “a watershed moment in higher educa-

tion.” Specifically, HSRIs demonstrate the potential to

simultaneously advance access and excellence as not

mutually exclusive ideals (Martinez & Garcia, 2020;

Núñez, 2017). A report published by the Rutgers School

of Education Center for MSIs (Minority Serving Institu-

tions) highlights how several HSRIs intentionally work to

serve both missions of access and excellence (Martinez

& Garcia, 2020). Outside of Puerto Rico, for example,

Florida International University (FIU), an HSRI, was

recognized for graduating the largest number of Latinx

students with STEM degrees (Martinez & Garcia, 2020).

While programs at certain HSRIs demonstrate intentional

25 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

efforts to support Latinx students, the report does not

address the process of how these institutions became

HSRIs or what particular structures within the R1 environ-

ment have been changed to best support an increasingly

racially/ethnically diverse student population. The integra-

tion of servingness in HSRIs is thus an aspect that

needs more theorization and empirical examination. This

includes expanding servingness to include key members

of HSRIs, such as graduate students and faculty, and

integrating the research mission of these institutions.

Negotiating Multiple Institutional Identities

A few articles investigate some of the tensions that may

emerge as institutions become HSRIs. The pattern for

how institutions arrive at this intersection of organization-

al identities, however, varies. Some HSIs may become

R1 institutions while in other instances, R1s become

HSIs. These patterns towards an HSRI intersectional

identity may yield different challenges and opportunities

in servingness.

HSIs Becoming R1s. A few articles focus on long-exist-

ing broad-access HSIs and their process of attaining R1

status, specifically centering on the challenge of remain-

ing accessible with increased demands for research.

Motivation to achieve R1 classification among several

public institutions largely stems from changing state

higher education policies and budgetary constraints as

R1 universities offer greater opportunities for funding

and research (DeTurk & Briscoe, 2019; Doran, 2015).

One study at the University of Texas at San Antonio

(UTSA), an HSI striving for R1 status, found that some

administrators had deficit perspectives of Latinx students

rooted in deep-seated racism (Doran, 2015). Moreover,

the mission of excellence as pursued by an R1 is often

perceived as being inharmonious with the HSI mission of

accessibility for historically underrepresented students

(Doran, 2015). Another concern that arose was that an

increased focus on research would result in decreased

emphasis on teaching and service at HSIs (Doran, 2015).

Similarly, another study concerned with tensions of the

R1 status with accessibility found that after 10 years of

attaining R1 status, UTSA maintained its high enrollment

of Latinx students; however, there were fewer Latinx

students admitted from the local community, suggesting

that some of the historical mission changed in the

transition (DeTurk & Briscoe, 2019). Further examining

how other HSIs who became R1s grappled with their

historical and emerging missions can provide a richer

understanding of organizational identity and change.

Other aspects of R1s, specifically the infrastructure to

support research, have been less explored. One study,

nonetheless, examined the transition of a broad-access

HSI becoming an R1, shedding light on the opportunities

and challenges with the institution’s greater focus on

research (Bernal & Ortiz-Torres, 2009). In 2006, the

University of Puerto Rico, an HSI and primarily a teach-

ing college at the time, transitioned to a research-inten-

sive university. Faculty faced infrastructural challenges

to meet the new expectations of engaging in research

projects, grant writing, and publishing at a level that had

not been previously expected of them. The university

also lacked structural resources to support faculty

research. The organizational journey of the University of

Puerto Rico demonstrates the critical need for HSIs

seeking R1 classification to build infrastructural capacity

to support Latinx faculty and students engaging in

research. Given that the R1 classification is contingent

on the quantity of graduate programs and enrolled

graduate students, it becomes crucial to delve into how

HSRIs deliberately bolster outreach and admissions

processes at the graduate level, while also providing

essential support for the academic and professional

growth of Latinx graduate students.

R1s Becoming HSIs. The process of R1 universities

attaining HSI designation is less documented in the

literature. UC campuses becoming HSRIs largely reflect

this pattern (Paredes et al., 2021). As more Latinx

students enroll at UC, more campuses are becoming

HSRIs and engaging in activities to increase Latinx

enrollments (Paredes et al., 2021). At least one study,

however, has considered the perspectives from adminis-

trators on what the attainment of HSI status means for

R1 universities (Marin, 2019). According to several

university leaders at one of these HSRIs, the importance

of community involvement beyond the university and of

serving Latinx students requires intentionality and

continuity. Marin and Pereschica (2017) further detail

how other organizational actors, such as graduate

students, influence changes at these types of HSRIs.

Given the growth of HSRIs, it is important for universities

and educational researchers to further examine and

26 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

understand the unique contexts and opportunities these

institutions currently offer and how they can further

develop to better support Latinx success.

Programmatic Explorations

Another strand within HSRI scholarship is the importance

of program evaluations. Some of the programs assessed

included undergraduate mentorship programs, teacher

education programs, community collaborations, depart-

mental outreach efforts, undergraduate research pro-

grams, and undergraduate resource centers. Several of

these studies shed light on the multigenerational mentor-

ing programs Latinx individuals, such as faculty and

staff, create on their own in an effort to build connections

and community in these historically white spaces and

disrupt notions of competitiveness (Ek et al., 2010;

Lopez et al., 2020). In addition, studies utilizing quantita-

tive research primarily examined the association between

program participation and student outcomes, such as

engagement in undergraduate research opportunities

and educational outcomes, such as graduation rates and

graduate school enrollment (Battaglia & Diaz Martinez,

2022). Most of these programs within HSRIs were

perceived as highly valuable and impactful to student

and faculty beneficiaries. While numerous recommenda-

tions exist for enhancing the effectiveness of these

programs, the potential to accommodate a larger num-

ber of students within HSRIs is somewhat constrained

due to the typically substantial student populations.

Although the contexts of these programs are clearly

described in articles, there is limited examination of the

research university context and HSI designation and

how these identities influence programmatic structures

and resources. In fact, only four of the 11 articles fo-

cused on programs connected to HSI efforts or funded

through HSI-based sources. These articles specifically

addressed cross-institutional efforts to expand represen-

tation of students in areas where they have been

historically underserved (Haq et al. 2021; Martinez,

2020), the impact of a Title V student center (Roberts &

Lucas, 2020), and departmental efforts to define and

infuse notions of servingness within a school of educa-

tion (Schall et al., 2021). The limited scholarship in this

domain points to a critical gap in understanding the

impact of different programs that have been established

at HSRIs and whether those funded through HSI-based

sources of support have been institutionalized. Further-

more, while a subset of these studies included graduate

or postdoctoral students, none focused solely on this

population, severely limiting a deeper understanding of

the ways in which HSRIs can enhance the success of

these integral members.

Individual Experiences and Outcomes at HSRIs

Aligned with the notions of servingness as discussed in

the broader context of HSI literature (Garcia et al., 2019),

another cluster of research delves into the experiences

and results encountered by individuals of Latinx heritage

within HSRIs. These investigations offer valuable insights

into the organizational dynamics of HSRIs and their

capacity to nurture Latinx individuals across various

roles, encompassing undergraduates, graduate students,

administrators, and faculty members. We discuss each

of these constituencies in the following sections.

Pockets of Community to Support Latinx

Undergraduates

Given the undergraduate 25% Latinx enrollment-based

definition of HSIs, it is not too surprising that a substan-

tial proportion of the HSRI literature considers the

experiences and outcomes of this group of students.

Latinx students often face unique challenges transition-

ing into, navigating, and thriving at highly selective

universities (Garcia, 2018; Jack, 2015; Kim et al., 2014;

Melguizo, 2007; Ramirez, 2013; Santa-Ramirez, 2021).

Holding individual students’ personal, familial, cultural,

and community backgrounds responsible for misalign-

ment with the norms, expectations, and culture of elite

college environments is another salient feature of these

students’ experiences in R1s (Garcia & Figueroa, 2002;

Jack, 2015; Lopez, 2013). Integration into elite research

universities often forces students to align with university

norms and expectations. However, the norms and

cultures of these institutions are rooted in Euroamerican

ideologies and practices that have historically excluded

or situated Latinx students and other Students of Color

as inferior. Such approaches need to be acknowledged

and challenged at HSRIs.

The larger challenges facing Latinx students at R1s

often persist at HSRIs. In one study at an HSRI, for

example, Latinx undergraduates (freshman and transfer

students) at R1 universities experienced various chal-

27 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

lenges in the college transition and navigation process,

including informational awareness of their institutions’

resources, programs, and development opportunities

(Solis & Duran, 2020). However, Latinx undergraduates

may find pockets of community and support at HSRIs,

including formal and informal spaces, such as mentor-

ship programs, resource centers, Latinx organizations

on campus, and peer/friend groups (Amaro-Jimenez et

al., 2021; Gonzalez et al., 2020; López et al., 2020;

López et al., 2021). Several studies show how Latinx

students are supported through these types of programs

in their academic journeys and highlight some of the

positive impacts, including increased sense of belonging

to the institution and to their fields of study, college

persistence, and development of research and critical

thinking skills (Amaro-Jimenez et al., 2021; Daniels et

al., 2016; Gonzalez, 2020; Maestas et al., 2007). Valu-

able relationships between students, staff, and faculty

have the potential to be developed organically through

these spaces. Yet, some of these spaces may require

external funding to support their creation, and institution-

alization at HSRIs may be limited in their capacity to

serve more students at large institutions. Furthermore,

construing the lack of exposure to elite environments as

the singular problem restricts the scope for tackling the

intricate web of social, systemic, and opportunity-related

frameworks entrenched within research institutions.

These structures often create formidable barriers that

impede the access and success of Latinx students at

these universities.

Limited Attention to Latinx Graduate Students,

Faculty, and Staff

While the HSI designation is based on undergraduate

student enrollment, Latinx graduate students, faculty, staff,

and administrators are crucial members of the community.

These individuals are also instrumental for undergraduate

success at HSRIs. In fact, it seems reasonable to posit

that, without a significant diversification across these

roles, undergraduate student success will not reach its

full potential. Yet, these individuals receive little attention

in the bodies of literature we examined.

In the U.S., Latinxs represent only 7.2% of all doctorates

awarded and 4% of all faculty (Santa-Ramirez, 2021).

At HSRIs, these figures remain low in comparison to

undergraduate enrollment, indicating a dire need to

advance graduate school access for Latinx students.

Latinx graduate students and faculty are also influential

actors within research universities (Marin & Pereschica,

2017). Graduate students, for example, contribute

significantly to universities through their roles as teach-

ing assistants, research assistants, mentors, and future

professors. In a qualitative study examining the implica-

tions of HSI designation for an R1, Marin & Pereschica

(2017) showcased the perspectives of graduate students

at an emerging HSRI. Graduate students emphasized

the need for the university to openly communicate its

emerging identity as an HSI to the larger campus com-

munity, and they also believed that the designation

would increase diversity on campus, which would benefit

the institution’s research mission. This study demon-

strates the importance of graduate students as institu-

tional agents within R1 universities gaining HSI designa-

tion. Beyond supporting HSRIs in teaching, research

and service, graduate students also require support from

the university for their own academic success. Conse-

quently, it is necessary to further understand and ad-

dress the socialization experiences, opportunity struc-

tures, and educational outcomes of Latinx graduate

students at HSRIs and emerging HSRIs.

Some of the HSRI literature also considers Latinx faculty

and administrator perspectives. Studies have explored

faculty perspectives on institutional or programmatic

structures in higher education (Krsmanovic, 2021; López

et al., 2021), the recruitment and retention of Latinx

graduate students (Valle-Riestra, 2011), and faculty’s

own agency during the process of institutional change

(Gonzales, 2012). Another study explored administrators’

perspectives on HSRIs’ organizational identity (Marin,

2019). A focus on staff is glaringly missing, despite the

important educational role these individuals occupy in

higher education (Hurtado et al., 2012). Further research

is thus necessary to understand the experiences of

faculty, staff, and administrators within the unique

context of HSRIs in order to develop intentional support

systems for their success.

28 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Multigenerational, Reciprocal Mentorship among

Latinx Students and Faculty

A consistent theme across many studies focusing on

Latinx individuals at HSRIs underscores the vital need

for mentorship across all levels of the university. This

type of support is crucial not only for surviving but also

thriving and persevering in these historically white

spaces. The imperative spans across undergraduates,

graduate students, and faculty members alike. Mentor-

ship and guidance navigating the “hidden curriculum” at

the graduate and faculty level are critical for success

(López et al., 2020; López et al., 2021). One study that

examined the experiences of Latina faculty and staff in a

mentorship program for Latina undergraduates found

that Latina mentors were also beneficiaries of the

program (López et al., 2021). They cultivated community

on campus, which increased their sense of belonging to

their institution; learned how to be better mentors from

one another, and celebrated each other’s achievements

(López et al., 2021). While the program focuses on

student outcomes and benefits, Latinx faculty and staff

who were involved in these programs were also positively

impacted by these mentorship programs. The literature

unequivocally showcases the significance of mentorship

for Latinx graduate students and faculty. Nevertheless,

what remains absent from the literature is a direct

discussion about the institutional obligation of HSRIs to

actively cultivate and nurture purposeful mentoring

connections for individuals of Latinx background.

In sum, substantial research underscores the need for

Latinx individuals to change their behaviors and values

to align with R1 or elite university environments. However,

there is a dire need for institutional efforts to change and

adapt to better meet the needs of the increasingly

diverse student body at HSRIs. Less is documented on

the ways that cultures at R1s have been or can be

transformed to be more culturally responsive to the

needs of an increasingly diverse community on campus

and across society. Research within HSRIs, and at UC

more specifically, must guide transformational efforts

and illustrate the ways in which these institutions can

support the success of Latinx students, faculty, and staff.

A Ripe Moment for Advancing Institutional

Transformation and HSRI Scholarship

The work to increase the number of Latinx students at

the UC began decades ago (Force, 1997; García &

Figueroa, 2002). The Latino Eligibility Taskforce was

developed in 1992 to research the underrepresentation,

experiences, and challenges that Latinx students faced

in accessing and successfully completing their degrees

at UC (Force, 1997; García & Figueroa, 2002). One of the

recommendations made by the Latino Eligibility Taskforce

was to eliminate the SAT requirement for undergraduates

in order to increase eligibility for Latinx students (García

& Figueroa, 2002). Two decades later, this recommen-

dation was met; other issues, including the lack of

proportionate growth of Latinx UC students with that of

the state demographics, disparities in community college

transfer rates to the UC for Latinx students, and unequal

racial/ethnic distribution of Latinx students and Students

of Color among UC campuses, persist today (Force,

1997; García & Figueroa, 2002). The urgency claimed

two decades ago for institutions and researchers to

address Latinx eligibility and participation at the UC thus

remains. Given the increase of Latinx undergraduates at

the UC, this time is critical for pursuing organizational

efforts and producing research that accounts for the

unique context and opportunities at HSRIs.

With an increasing number of HSRIs becoming integral

to the higher education landscape, a burgeoning interest

in these distinctive environments has emerged within

research and national initiatives. Cross-referencing

Excelencia’s list of HSIs in 2010–11 and the Carnegie

Classification list, we found that there were only two

HSRIs during this time. Prior to 2010, only four research

articles focused on these types of institutions. The surge

in the exploration of this field has unfolded over the past

decade, gaining momentum particularly within the last

2.5 years, with nearly half of all related scholarship being

published since 2020. These trends highlight the oppor-

tune moment for advancing both practice and academic

inquiry regarding HSRIs, particularly within the context of

the UC system. UC has assumed a leadership role

concerning HSRIs through two crucial avenues. Firstly, it

has actively trained and recruited numerous scholars

dedicated to the study of HSIs, essentially solidifying

HSIs as a recognized area of focus within the realm of

higher education. Concurrently, five UC campuses have

29 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

achieved federal recognition as HSIs. As of 2022, UCs

collectively represented 19% of all HSRIs nationwide.

The production of scholarly work centered around

transformative shifts connected to HSRI endeavors is

thus intricately linked with the research mission and

future trajectory of the UC system.

Some of the emerging HSRI literature addresses the

organizational challenges and opportunities at the

intersection of HSI and R1 identities. The majority of

these studies concentrate on HSIs in Texas that are

undergoing the journey towards achieving R1 status.

This focus mirrors the backdrop of diminishing state

support and policies advocating for an increase in the

number of R1 universities within the state. This pattern

of institutional transformation represents a shift from

historically broad-access HSIs, that have largely provided

postsecondary access to Latinx students, expanding

their research capacity and opportunities to garner more

prestige and resources. By contrast, the UC campuses

were established as research universities from their

inception. Despite being lauded for their commitment to

serve the needs of the state as part of their land-grant

mission, most UC campuses have not equitably enrolled

students representing California’s demographics, partic-

ularly the growing Latinx population. While substantial

progress is being made relative to the increasing num-

ber of Latinx enrollments and more UC campuses

obtaining HSI designation (see Poblete chapter), much

work remains to ensure that HSRIs are transforming in

ways that not only enroll more Latinx and low-income

students but intentionally serve them as well. As HSRIs,

the UC campuses can advance access and excellence

(Núñez, 2017) as well as challenge exclusionary practic-

es and policies embedded in existing structures at

prestigious research institutions (Garcia, 2019). Many of

the current and future HSRIs follow this pattern of

transformation; yet, too few studies examine these

institutions. Thus, UC must lead and attempt to make its

campuses and the overall system more culturally re-

sponsive. In doing so, UC can serve as a site of under-

standing these transformational efforts and lead in devel-

oping research to inform how other historically white

institutions can become more culturally responsive and

racially just.

Expanding upon the emerging literature that focuses on

institutional analyses, research conducted within the UC

system has the potential to address significant gaps in

understanding. Some of UC Santa Cruz’s federally

funded HSI initiatives (Bhattacharya et al., 2020; Cooper

et al., 2020; Covarrubias et al., 2020; Reguerín et al.,

2020; Sánchez Ordaz et al., 2020) are featured in

Garcia’s (2020) edited volume. While advancing knowl-

edge on this important context, these single-site case

studies of UC Santa Cruz emphasize practical interven-

tions, therefore providing only a snapshot of UC HSRIs.

Research on several UC campuses, for example, can

produce multi-case examinations that are currently

lacking in this body of scholarship. Comparing and

contrasting how different UC campuses approach

servingness can provide more nuanced understandings

of the opportunities and tensions inherent in engaging in

transformational efforts. Moreover, it’s important to

recognize that research universities are not homogenous

entities, as evidenced by the distinctions between R1

and R2 categorizations. In this context, the UC system

presents an opportunity to investigate potential varia-

tions, given the presence of an R2 HSRI (UC Merced),

alongside several R1s that fall under the HSRI category.

Presently, national initiatives targeting HSRI efforts tend

to exclude R2 institutions, despite their robust re-

search-oriented pursuits. Much of the existing research

tends to be concentrated on either R1 or R2 institutions,

leaving room for exploration within this spectrum.

Additionally, UC can extend current institutional analyses

to include systemic explorations. The system-wide

UC-HSI initiative that brings together faculty and staff

leaders to share best practices across campuses can

offer other public systems of higher education models for

establishing larger scale HSI coordination. The context

of California and the state’s higher education policies

differ from other states and the other public systems in

the state (California State University and California

Community College). Nonetheless, such research on

various UC campuses and UC-HSI efforts can provide

insights for furthering systemic efforts to support individ-

ual campuses, systems of higher education, and the

postsecondary goals within a state. Internally, these

research efforts can inform initiatives to enhance their

efficiency and capacity for change. Lastly, the current

body of HSRI research has yet to delve deeply into the

30 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

multifaceted aspects of research universities. For

example, knowledge generation stands as a vital com-

ponent within numerous R1 universities. However, the

innovative approaches that HSRIs might be employing

to shape this endeavor in alignment with their HSRI

identities remain an underexplored area. Community

engagement, an important indicator of servingness at

HSIs (Garcia, 2016; Garcia, 2019; Garcia et al., 2019), is

also underexamined. Studies on institutional and sys-

temic analyses of the UC can thus contribute immensely

to various disciplines, higher education, organizational

studies, leadership, ethnic studies, as well as interdisci-

plinary studies.

Research centered on UC HSRIs should further expand

on theoretical and methodological approaches. For

instance, studies on HSRIs should adopt asset-oriented

and transformative frameworks (Hurtado, 2015; Núñez,

2017), countering past studies set at R1s that have

historically placed responsibility on individuals. In line

with the HSI designation, HSRIs must consider how they

can advance institutional changes that best support

Latinx individuals (Garcia, 2019; Santiago, 2012).

Additionally, when thinking about servingness at HSRIs,

institutions must also consider the various roles and

contributions of Latinx individuals at the university and

not limit the focus to undergraduate students. This calls

for centering those important groups of individuals that

are essential to the success of these universities, such

as graduate students, faculty, and staff to fully enact

servingness within HSRIs.

Furthermore, the UC system possesses the capacity to

take the lead and drive innovation in the forthcoming era

of HSI scholarship and scholars, much like its historical

track record. Notably, UC has played a role in nurturing

a significant number of foremost experts in the field of

HSIs across the country. Capitalizing on this established

legacy, it is imperative for UC to foster a supportive

environment for scholars throughout its network who

aspire to propel this scholarship into uncharted territo-

ries. Specifically, UC initiatives can provide backing to

scholars who are pioneering novel methodological

approaches to comprehend these contexts, as well as

those who are engaged in collaborative endeavors with

community partners.

In the face of the ongoing challenges posed by racial

unrest and the COVID-19 pandemic, HSIs emerge as

crucial settings to envision the future of higher educa-

tion. Given the inherent institutional diversity found

within HSIs (Núñez et al., 2016), it becomes imperative

to consider the intersections of identities while reshaping

these environments. Within the realm of HSRIs, such as

the UC campuses, achieving this requires a profound

grasp of both historical and contemporary oppressive

practices that can obstruct the ethos of servingness.

Research plays a pivotal role in the identification, com-

prehension, and mitigation of these intricate concerns

tied to systemic social inequalities, thereby enhancing

the preparedness of Latinx individuals at both the

undergraduate and graduate levels. In this pivotal

juncture for HSRIs research, the UC system is strategi-

cally positioned to lead and contribute to this discourse,

serving both as a site for exploration and a generator of

knowledge. By confronting historical and ongoing

challenges confronting higher education, UC can offer

innovative institutional models that foster access and

excellence, critically necessary for the demands of the

21st century.

31 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

References

Alliance of Hispanic Serving Research Universities (2022). Goals. https://

www.hsru.org/goals

Battaglia, S. J., Echegoyen, L. E., & Diaz-Martinez, L. A. (2022). Institu-

tion-wide analysis of academic outcomes associated with participation in

UGR: Comparison of different research modalities at a Hispanic-Serving

Institution. Scholarship and Practice of Undergraduate Research, 8–24.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10121209

Bernal, G., & Ortiz-Torres, B. (2009). Barriers to research and capacity

building at Hispanic-Serving Institutions: The case of HIV/AIDS research

at the University of Puerto Rico. American Journal of Public Health,

99(S1), S60–S65. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2007.121731

Bhattacharya, N., Sánchez Ordaz, A., Mosqueda, E., & Cooper, C.R.

(2020). Redesigning the gateway college Algebra course with inclusive

and asset-based pedagogy: Rethinking “servingness” at a Hispanic Serv-

ing Institution. In G.A. Garcia (Ed.), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs)

in practice: Dening “servingness” at HSIs (pp. 97–116). Information Age

Publishing.

Cabrera, N. L., Franklin, J. D., & Watson, J. S. (2017). Whiteness in higher

education: The invisible missing link in diversity and racial analyses. ASHE

Higher Education Report, Volume 42, Number 6. John Wiley & Sons.

Carnegie Classication. (nd). Basic classication denition. https://carnegi-

eclassications.acenet.edu/classication_descriptions/basic.php

Cooper, C.R., Reguerín, P.G., Herzon, C., Sánchez Ordaz, A., Gonza-

lez, E. & Rocha-Ruiz, M. (2020). Unifying equity practice, research, and

policies at a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution for systemic serving-

ness. In G.A. Garcia (Ed.), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in practice:

Dening “servingness” at HSIs (pp.173–192). Information Age Publishing.

Covarrubias, R., Vazquez, A., Moreno, R., Estrada, J., Valle, I., Zuñiga, K.,

(2020). Engaging families to foster holistic success of low-income, Latinx

rst-generation students at a Hispanic-Serving Institution. In G.A. Garcia

(Ed.), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in practice: Dening “serving-

ness” at HSIs (pp. 313–336). Information Age Publishing.

Daniels, H., Grineski, S. E., Collins, T. W., Morales, D. X., Morera, O., &

Echegoyen, L. (2016). Factors inuencing student gains from undergrad-

uate research experiences at a Hispanic-serving institution. CBE—Life

Sciences Education, 15(3), ar30. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-07-0163

DeTurk, S., & Briscoe, F. M. (2019). Equity versus Excellence: Is

the pursuit of “Tier-1” status compatible with social justice? Jour-

nal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(1), 112–128. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192719836197

Doran, E. E. (2015). Negotiating access and tier one aspirations:

The historical evolution of a striving Hispanic-serving institution.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 14(4), 343–354. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192715570638

Ek, L. D., Cerecer, P. D. Q., Alanís, I., & Rodríguez, M. A. (2010). “I don’t

belong here”: Chicanas/Latinas at a Hispanic Serving Institution creating

community through muxerista mentoring. Equity & Excellence in Educa-

tion, 43(4), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2010.510069

Garcia, G. A. (2017). Dened by outcomes or culture? Constructing an

organizational identity for Hispanic-serving institutions. American Educa-

tional Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 111S-134S.

Garcia, G. A. (2019). Becoming Hispanic-Serving institutions: Opportuni-

ties for colleges and universities. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Garcia, E. E., & Figueroa, J. (2002). Access and participation of latinos in

the University of California: A current macro and micro perspective. Social

Justice, 29(4), 47–59.

Garcia, G. A., & Guzman-Alvarez, A. (2019). Descriptive analysis of

graduate enrollment trends at Hispanic-Serving Institutions: 2005–2015.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(2), 196–212. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192719835681

Gonzales, L. D. (2012). Responding to mission creep: Faculty members

as cosmopolitan agents. Higher Education, 64(3), 337–353.

Haq, A. A., Reitzel, L. R., Chen, T. A., Chang, S., Escoto, K. H., Solari

Williams, K.,D., . . . McNeill, L. H. (2021). “UHAND”—A national cancer in-

stitute funded partnership to advance cancer health equity through scholar

training. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public

Health, 18(10), 5054. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105054

Hurtado, S. (2015). The transformative paradigm: Principles and challeng-

es. In A. Aleman, B.P. Pusser, & E. Bensimon (Eds.), Critical approaches

to the study of higher education. (pp. 285–307). Johns Hopkins University.

Hurtado, S., Alvarez, C.L., Guillermo-Wann, C., Cuellar, M., & Arellano,

L. (2012). A model for diverse learning environments: The scholarship on

creating and assessing conditions for student success. In J. C. Smart & M.

B. Paulsen (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research,

(Vol. 27, pp. 41–122). Springer.

Hurtado, S., & Ruiz Alvarado, A. (2015). Realizing the potential of Hispan-

ic-Serving Institutions: Multiple dimensions of organizational transforma-

tion. In A.M. Núñez, S. Hurtado, & E. Calderón Galdeano (Eds.), Hispan-

ic-Serving Institutions: Advancing research and transformative practice

(pp. 25–46): Routledge.

Jack, A. A. (2015). (No) harm in asking: Class, acquired cultural capital,

and academic engagement at an elite university. Sociology of Education,

89(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040715614913

Kim, Y. K., Rennick, L. A., & Franco, M. A. (2014). Latino college students

at highly selective institutions: A comparison of their college experiences

and outcomes to other racial/ethnic groups. Journal of Hispanic Higher

Education, 13(4), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192714532815

32 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Krsmanovic, M. (2021). Becoming a Hispanic-serving institution: A case

study of faculty perspectives on teaching philosophies and pedagogical

stance. Journal of Latinos and Education, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15

348431.2021.1899923

Lopez, J. D. (2013). Differences among Latino students in precol-

lege multicultural exposure and the transition into an elite institution.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12(3), 269–279. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192713481385

López, R. M., Honey, M. L., Pacheco, H. S., & Valdez, E. C. (2021).

Creando comunidad: Experiences of Latina faculty and staff mentors at a

Hispanic-serving institution. Journal of Women and Gender in Higher Edu-

cation, 14(1), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2020.1735566

López, R. M., Valdez, E. C., Pacheco, H. S., Honey, M. L., & Jones, R.

(2020). Bridging silos in higher education: using Chicana Feminist Partici-

patory Action Research to foster Latina resilience. International Journal of

Qualitative Studies in Education, 33(8), 872–886.

Marin, P. (2019). Is “Business as Usual” Enough to Be Hispanic-

Serving? Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 18(2), 165–181. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192719832250

Marin, P., & Pereschica, P. (2017). Becoming an Hispanic-serving re-

search institution: Involving graduate students in organizational change.

Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 154–177.

https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.365

Martinez, A., Garcia, N.M. (2020). An Overview of R1 Hispanic Serving

Institutions: Potential for Growth and Opportunity. Rutgers Center for

Minority Serving Institutions.

Melguizo, T. (2007). Latino and African-American students’ transfer

pathway to elite education in California. Change: The Magazine of Higher

Learning, 39(6), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.3200/chng.39.6.52–55

Núñez, A. M. (2017). Flipping the HSI narrative: An HSI positionality. As-

sociation of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 276–295. https://

doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.370

Núñez, A. M., Crisp, G., & Elizondo, D. (2016). Mapping Hispanic-Serv-

ing Institutions: A typology of institutional diversity. The Journal of Higher

Education, 87(1), 55–83.

Paredes, A. D., Estrada, C., Venturanza, R. J., & Teranishi, R. (2021).

La lucha sigue: The University of California’s role as a Hispanic-Serving

Research Institution system. Institute for immigration, Globalization, and

Education.

Ramirez, E. (2013). Examining Latinos/as’ graduate school choice pro-

cess: An intersectionality perspective. Journal of Hispanic Higher Educa-

tion, 12(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192712452147

Ramirez, E. (2017). Unequal socialization: Interrogating the Chicano/

Latino (a) doctoral education experience. Journal of Diversity in Higher

Education, 10(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000028

Reguerín, P.G., Poblete, J. Cooper, C.R. Sánchez Ordaz, A., & Moreno, R.

(2020). Becoming a racially just Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI): A case

study of the University of California, Santa Cruz. In G.A. Garcia (Ed.),

Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in practice: Dening “servingness” at

HSIs (pp. 41–60). Information Age Publishing.

Roberts, S. A., & Lucas, K. L. (2020). A Title V Center as a counterspace

for underrepresented minority and rst-generation college Students.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 21(2), 198–211. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192720951307

Ruiz, M., & Valverde, M. (2012). Transformative Hispanic-Serving Institu-

tions: Realizing equity praxis through community connections and local

solutions. Journal of Latinos and Education, 11(3), 189–194. https://doi.org

/10.1080/15348431.2012.686366

Sánchez Ordaz, A., Reguerín, P.G., & Sánchez, S.E. (2020). Using inter-

active theater to strengthen holistic advising at a Hispanic Serving Institu-

tion. In G.A. Garcia (Ed.), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in practice:

Dening “servingness” at HSIs (pp.79–96). Information Age Publishing.

Santa-Ramirez, S. (2021). Sink or swim: The mentoring experiences of

Latinx PhD students with faculty of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher

Education.

Santiago, D. A. (2012). Public policy and Hispanic-serving institutions:

From invention to accountability. Journal of Latinos and Education, 11(3),

163–167.

Schall, J. M., McHatton, P. A., & Sáenz, E. L. (2021). How a college of

education makes the Hispanic-Serving designation meaningful. Journal of

Latinos and Education, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2021.201

3227

Solis, B., & Durán, R. P. (2020). Latinx community college stu-

dents’ transition to a 4-year public research-intensive university.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 21(1), 49–66. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1538192719899628

UC Ofce of the President. (n.d.). Fall enrollment at a glance. Retrieved

from www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-center/fall-enroll-

ment-glance

Valle-Riestra, D. M., Shealey, M. W., & Cramer, E. D. (2011). Recruiting

and retaining culturally diverse special educators. Interdisciplinary Journal

of Teaching and Learning, 1(2), 68–87.

Zambrana, R. E., Dávila, B. A., Espino, M. M., Lapeyrouse, L. M., Valdez,

R. B., & Segura, D. A. (2017). Mexican American faculty in research uni-

versities: Can the next generation beat the odds?.Sociology of Race and

Ethnicity, 3(4), 458–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649217716473

Zerquera, D. D., Arámbula Ballysingh, T., & Templeton, E. (2017). A

Critical look at perspectives of access and mission at high Latinx-enrolling

urban universities. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal,

11(3), 199. https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.367

33 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

he role of data in providing a better understanding

of how institutions and systems are serving its key

stakeholders has become increasingly important in the

higher education landscape. The proliferation of Hispan-

ic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in the United States has

further led to the evolution of Hispanic-Serving Institu-

tional Systems. Yet, few systems have characterized

themselves as HSI systems and continue to witness

challenges to four- and six-year completion, particularly

among its Latinx student population. Therefore, it is

imperative to delve deeper into the data, employing

more deliberate and incisive methodologies. Such an

undertaking is necessary if institutions like the University

of California, along with other public higher education

systems, are to effectively realize the foundational

“serving” element embedded in the HSI identity.

Connecting data and systems to better understand

student outcomes and experiences is not new to the field

of institutional assessment. However, many institutions

and systems of higher education continue to struggle

with data collection, accuracy, reporting, utility, and direct

applicability to informing real time practice. In this new

era marked by the growing significance of data science

and data analytics playing an increasingly important role

in how we, as a society, learn, interact, manage health,

consume both information and products, it is imperative

to also assess how data tools might further optimized to

effectively serve students and key stakeholders across

postsecondary contexts and systems.

A core objective of this concept paper is to identify

elements of a “blueprint” to assist the University of

California in providing a transparent, thorough, and

data-driven approach to serving Latinx students aca-

demically and socially, while also equipping them with

mechanisms for career success. This analysis therefore

proposes to create an HSI Blueprint, a metric overview

for the UC system that would enable all campuses to

better understand its ability to be Latinx-responsive and

fulfill the concept of “servingness,” which Garcia, Nunez

and Sansone (2019) argue is a way to better understand

what it means to be Latinx enrolling to actually serving

these students (Garcia et al., 2019). This blueprint, in

other words, is meant to help the UC system think of

itself as an HSI system, thus unleashing the full potential

of such an identification for the state and the nation’s

higher education effort. Enhanced and easily accessible

data are also crucial for the university to maximize its

efficacy and ensure accountability to both the state and

its diverse stakeholders.

Relevant Literature

Various fields have employed the use of real-time data

to serve clients, patients, and students. In the field of

higher education, state and national systems of public

education have invested in data infrastructures that

enable leaders to better understand the return on

investments in education, the relationship between

educational level and economic outcomes, and the overall

positive externalities that a postsecondary degree(s)

affords the individual, their families, communities, states,

and the nation. In addition, education level has been

found to be highly correlated with democratic practices

such as voting, the existence of sustainable communi-

ties, and thriving economies.

Frances Contreras, Ph.D., Dean and Professor, UC Irvine

Developing a Data-Informed UC HSI System:

Examining Latinx Responsiveness to Enable Latinx

Stakeholders to Thrive at UC

34 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

In an era where the field of data science is also in-

creasingly relevant in higher education settings, tremen-

dous potential exists to use data to connect systems

within higher education, which will enable key leaders

and stakeholders alike to better understand student

navigational processes, transition points or challenges,

as well as institutional levers that may provide real time

intervention, support, and guidance. At the staff and

faculty level, better data systems also enable an institu-

tion to monitor its progress, pay, and composition in a

manner that is disaggregated across various individual

characteristics and identities. Transparent and accessi-

ble data also affords institutions the potential to examine

its progress toward becoming diverse and equitable

across the various stakeholder groups within universi-

ties. As Webber and Zeng (2019) note:

Higher education leaders must consider how data

analytics can be most effectively harnessed, how

strategies for good data governance and organiza-

tional strategies can support informed decision

making, and how and where issues of privacy and

security must be addressed. (p. 3)

The issue that institutional leaders face, particularly

when it applies to students, is the balance between

privacy and seeking solutions to challenges that stu-

dents face as they navigate their college experience. For

example, there are several key intervention points for

students as they navigate higher education pathways,

yet many of these experiences are part of distinct

systems or programs, and not connected to larger P–20

data systems. This makes it challenging for universities

to understand the inputs students have already had to

prepare them for higher education, and how additional

academic supports, advising, access to a set of pro-

grams and critical peer networks would further set them

on a pathway to thrive in higher education.

Data along these key intervention points are therefore an

important aspect for institutions to consider. This includes

the partnership efforts that the UC is engaged in, includ-

ing but not limited to the SAPEP programs, Puente,

Umoja, federal programs such as TRIO, Upward Bound,

GEAR UP, Mesa, as well as programs designed for

transfer students. These data would be useful to include

and quantify along the data continuum. Figure one

shows the range of inputs that students bring with them

to college, offering valuable insights that are pertinent

and beneficial for understanding and informing UC’s

already robust partnership efforts across the state.

Figure 1: Key Intervention Points in UC Student Pathway

Onboarding

• Major of Choice Access

• Academic Supports

• First Year Experience

Institutional

• Gatekeeper Courses

• Deficit Framing from Faculty

and Peers

• Climate: Real & Perceived

Stereotypes URM Students

Experience

• The Role of Space on Campus

• Major Pathways

• Ongoing Academic Supports

• Research

• Faculty Mentors

• Diverse Faculty

• Internships

• Campus Work Experience

• Scholarships

• Access to Peer Networks

• Professional Network Building

K–12 INPUTS & PRACTICES COLLEGE EXPERIENCE PROMISING PRACTICES

• Curricular Access

• Dual Enrollment Programs

w CCs

• Community & Cultural Wealth

(Yosso, 2005)

• Transition to College Programs

• College Information

• Parents as Partners

• Community Partners

Source: Contreras, F., (2022). Cultivating First Generation Students to Excel in the Academy.

35 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

An HSI data platform, for example, housed at one of the

research campuses, could serve to inform all of the HSI

systems in the state of California, including the K–12,

community colleges, CSUs, and UCs. Student pathways

are complex and interconnected; thus, approaches to

data should match this complexity in collection, report-

ing, analyses, and policy formation at the institutional

and public level.

Methods

Secondary data that is collected, reported, and housed

by the UC Information center (www.universityofcalifornia.

edu/about-us/information-center) was examined and

analyzed for the purpose of understanding the many

variables and tools that exist at the UC system level to

assist campuses in assessing their overall effectiveness

of serving students, and its stakeholders (faculty, staff

employees, etc.). Select reports were also examined to

explore the various reporting mechanisms that exist at

the systemwide level and at the campus level. A primary

emphasis is placed on data that specifically focuses on:

1. Students: Undergraduate, Graduate, and Alumni

2. Staff: Managers, Professional, Unionized

3. Faculty: Tenure-track, Non-Senate lecturers

4. Senior Management Group (SMGs)

Together, these categories represent key stakeholders

within UC campuses. The composition, experiences, and

navigational processes of each group is critical to

ensuring that data inform decision making, resource

allocation, and efforts to improve campus climates for all

stakeholders within their respective UC campuses.

The central research questions of this exploratory data

review are:

What data are available to understand UC progress in

serving Latinx students?

2. What data are available to cultivate a Latinx faculty

pipeline for senior leadership?

3. What data should be available on the metrics of

students, staff and faculty?

4. What data would be useful for institutions to consis-

tently measure to understand levels of “servingness?”

This data examination explored the various reports and

mechanisms at the system level that may better empow-

er the UC system and its respective campuses to

directly assess how they are operationalizing key as-

pects of “servingness”—a critical component of the HSI

and EHSI identities noted earlier in this report by Cuellar

& Carrola. Recommendations are included for the UC

system to consider in an effort to build out a data system

that is transparent, useful, in real time, and comprehen-

sive to ultimately serve all stakeholders across the UC

HSRI system.

The Use of Data in Student Success

Institutional data has been used to inform student aca-

demic supports, advising, and undergraduate experiences

as they navigate their respective UC campuses. These

data assist academic units as well as student affairs staff

to better assist students to successfully navigate their

majors to the point of graduation. Based on the annual

UCUES data, URM students of color on average have

more challenging experiences or a different sense of

belonging (Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005) with campus

climates than their non URM peers, as reflected in Table

1. However, a more complex and nuanced analysis

would utilize additional variables to understand context,

major, and individual background characteristics (Nunez,

2009). These more complex analyses would provide rich

data and allow for greater understanding among staff

and faculty on how to serve Latinx students equitably.

36 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

What the UCUEs data suggests is the need for a more

complex analysis of these sense of belonging data by

academic majors, generational status, and gender to

better understand Latinx students’ academic self-concept

within each of their HSI campuses or EHSIs (Cuellar,

2014). Real time analyses may assist universities in

developing more culturally responsive infrastructures

that support student engagement, success, and overall

opportunities (research, social, or personal) to thrive in

the HSI context.

Assessment that is more complex, multi-dimensional,

and culturally responsive is necessary for UC campuses

to fully understand academic and navigational perspec-

tives of its Latinx students. While UCUES is administered

annually and available, it is up to the institutional re-

search units and student affairs to note the distinct

experiences of their students by various background

characteristics such as race/ethnicity, gender, disability

status, age, veteran status, etc. If a campus does not

have an active HSI task force composed of faculty, staff,

and students, for example, the likelihood of these data

being requested, analyzed routinely, and publicly avail-

able is greatly diminished.

An example of the UC Office of the President’s UC

Information Center capacity to be responsive to student

needs and assessment is the data infrastructure that has

evolved around first-generation students. The First-Gen-

eration dashboard was created and as of August 2022, it

enables public users of the site to disaggregate data by

race/ethnicity and select student characteristics. This is

a new feature of the UC Information Center’s suite of

pages that provides a more in-depth data overview of

first-generation students across the UC system. Given

that among Latinx undergraduates, over 60% are

first-generation students, this dashboard is particularly

useful to further assess the relationship between ethnicity

and first-generation status across select variables.

Table 2 presents a compilation of specific undergraduate

student data gathered within the UC system, encom-

passing individual campuses. This data serves the

purpose of pinpointing student outcomes and experiences

as they progress through their respective UC campuses.

Through an HSI perspective or under the guidance of a

dedicated research team, these surveys or data sources

could be examined through the lens of HSI Metrics. This

assessment would particularly focus on how effectively

Latinx students are navigating their UC journeys, evalu-

ating whether the public higher education system is

equipped with the necessary infrastructure for Latino

students to thrive and adequately prepare for various

postgraduate pathways.

Table 1: UCUES Survey Response—

“I feel I belong at this campus,” by race/ethnicity,

Select Years, (2018 & 2020)

Category Year #

At least

somewhat

disagree

African American

2018

2020

2,193

2,593

30%

29%

American Indian

2018

2020

368

325

25%

Asian

2018

2020

20,963

24,677

22%

19%

Hispanic/Latino

2018

2020

14,549

17,865

23%

20%

International

2018

2020

5,016

5,545

19%

15%

White

2018

2020

13,909

14,637

20%

18%

Source: UC Information Center, October 2022.

37 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Tool/Data Sources Administered/Collected Managing Unit

Application

Admissions

Enrollment

Graduation

Annually

UC campuses Enrollment

Management /Admissions (Dashboard),

UC Information Center

Persistence Annually (measures year-to-year persistence) Campuses, System

UCUES

www.ucop.edu/institutional-re-

search-academic-planning/ser-

vices/survey-services/UCUES.html

Annually UC Information Center, UC Campuses

Academic probation data Quarterly or Semester depending on campus system UC Campuses

Exit Surveys Upon departure from a UC Campus UC Campuses

First-generation college students

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/

about-us/information-center/

rst-generation-college-students

Quarterly UC Information Center

Transfer Student Data by Major

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/

about-us/information-center/trans-

fers-major

Annually last was 2021 UC Information Center

Transfer Action team Report

www.ucop.edu/transfer-ac-

tion-team/

Last one was 2013 UCOP

Divisional Major Migration

https://iraps.ucsc.edu/iraps-pub-

lic-dashboards/student-outcomes/

divisional-migration.html

UC Santa Cruz

Table 2: Select Undergraduate Student Data Collected

38 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Graduate Students

The Latinx graduate student population has witnessed

stagnant growth across the UC since 1999, as evident in

Figure 2 (Contreras et al., 2022), raising concerns for

the UC’s potential faculty diversity. While the undergrad-

uate Latinx population has exceeded 25% composition

for the past four years, the graduate student data has

remained flat with little growth. If the UC system is to

diversify its faculty in the next decade, then the composi-

tion of the graduate student population and cultivating

doctoral students across fields should remain a high

priority for UC with a concerted plan for increasing

graduate student enrollments. Therefore, monitoring the

data on graduate student application, admission, enroll-

ment, and time-to-degree is essential for graduate

students, particularly doctoral students that have a

longer time-to-degree than those enrolled in one or

two-year master’s or three-year professional programs.

Metrics

Select data sources are also collected regularly by the UC

campuses and system through the UC Information

Center to assess the overall application admission,

enrollment, and graduation rates of graduate students at

the professional, master’s, and doctoral levels. There

are also surveys administered to graduate students,

such as the annual graduate student experience survey

housed by UCOP and the UC Information Center. Table

3 notes the systemwide tools used to assess the gradu-

ate student population trends and their experience.

Because graduate students also represent a potential

pool of future UC faculty, understanding their experiences

in their respective graduate and doctoral programs,

time-to-degree, and preparation for the academy or

professional fields will also assist UC campuses to better

understand how they serve their graduate and profes-

sional student populations and the degree to which

variation exists across key background characteristics

and variables.

Figure 2: Graduate Student Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity, 1999–2019

Hispanic/Latino(a)

Source: UC Information Center, 2021.

39 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Tool/Data Sources Administered/Collected Managing Unit

Application

Admissions

Enrollment

Graduation

Annually UC Information Center; UC Campuses

Graduate Experience Survey Annually UC Information Center

Ph.D. Career Pathways Survey

www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/

services/survey-services/PCPS.html

Was administered 2017–2019

Council of Graduate Schools and UC

Information Center

Graduate Student Well-Being Survey

www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-plan-

ning/_les/survey-documents-graduate/graduate_well_

being_survey_report.pdf

Last report was 2017 UC Information Center

UC Time-to-Doctorate

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-cen-

ter/time-doctorate

Annually UC Information Center

Survey of Earned Doctorates

https://sedsurvey.org/

Upon graduation External-NCES, NSF

Table 3: UC Systemwide Graduate Student Data Sources

Tool/Data Sources Administered/Collected Managing Unit

HR Data: Staff workforce proles

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-cen-

ter/staff-workforce-prole

Annually UC Information Center

State of the Workplace Survey

https://hr.berkeley.edu/deib/employee-experience/

state-workplace-surveys

Annually UC Berkeley HR

Work Reimagined UC Irvine UC Irvine Human Resources

Employee Engagement Survey UCOP UCOP Employee Relations Unit

Staff@WorkSurvey Annually UC San Diego

Work Environment Survey

https://oed.ucla.edu/surveys-research/work-environ-

ment-survey

Annually

UCLA Organizational Effectiveness &

Development (OED)

Table 4: Select Survey Tools Administered to Staff Across the UC System & Campuses

40 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

The Use of Data for Staff Advancement

Staff are the foundation of the university system, serving

all constituents, especially students and faculty. The aca-

demic enterprise functions because of the expertise of

staff across the UC system who administer key pro-

grams, manage academic units, ensure fiscal account-

ability, and are critical to the experiences of multiple

partners and collaborators within the UC campuses.

Staff data are primarily housed by HR systems on each

of the respective campuses. There are a number of

annual surveys administered to staff, such as the Staff

Engagement survey, which is systemwide, or various

institutional climate surveys administered by the cam-

puses. Recently, there have been several campus-level

surveys developed and administered to assess hybrid

work schedules and to develop a hybrid management

approach to academic and non-academic units within

the respective campuses. This is an area that would

provide valuable insights for UCOP to understand,

ensuring that, across the system, campuses strike a

balance between flexibility and the optimal support of

both undergraduate and graduate students.

The Employee Engagement Survey is a systemwide

annual survey developed by the Council of University of

California Staff Assemblies (CUCSA) and the system-

wide Employee Relations unit. The survey is designed to

assist employers within UC to understand the views of

staff on topics related to their employment such as

performance, career development, engagement and

communication. Table 4 provides an overview of select

survey tools and data sources on staff across the UC.

Faculty

Faculty are also a key component to understanding

“servingness” within the UC system. Not only are faculty

engaged in knowledge production and innovation, but

through the processes of research, teaching, and

service they are cultivating the next generation of

scholars. As the data on Latina/o faculty has consistently

hovered well below 7% throughout the history of UC,

despite the transformation of the UC and all public

systems of education in California into HSI systems

(Contreras, 2019), the limited presence of Chicanx/

Latina/o faculty leaves students with limited access to

role models, mentors, and instructors that may share a

similar lived experience, relate as first-generation

college goers, or fervently advocate for underrepresent-

ed student communities. Faculty of color are more likely

to mentor undergraduates, provide undergraduate

research opportunities, and engage in culturally relevant

pedagogy and practices in their research, teaching, and

service (Turner, 2018; Castellanos et. al., 2022). This

imbalance also generates an extra service and mentor-

ing load on those few faculty, which, in turn, may affect

their chances of promotion and success.

The data on faculty diversity encompasses a spectrum

of sources within the UC systemwide surveys, individual

faculty-related data from AP records delineating their

progression through merit reviews and promotions,

academic senate surveys, and climate surveys adminis-

tered by individual UC campuses. There is also opt-in

race/ethnicity data collected at the time of hire that

enables UC to monitor its faculty diversity over time.

Table 5 provides an overview of select data sources that

exist (or existed) for UC faculty.

41 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

An HSI Blueprint for Data Analytics at UC

The UC System has the potential to serve as a model for

the nation as it continues to evolve into an Hispanic-Serv-

ing Research Institution (HSRI) System. Building an

expansive data platform that builds upon the key variables

reported in the First-Generation Page launched in August

2022 is an important step to creating an HSI landing

page for data analytics. An HSI data reporting page and

system would be very useful to understanding HSI

indicators for the individual campuses and the system.

A UC HSI data system could also serve as a valuable

partner to an HSI Research Center where a team of

faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates examine

key indicators of student, staff, and faculty experiences,

outcomes, and challenges. The data system would serve

as a catalyst for real time analysis, trend reporting, and

a solutions-oriented approach to serving all those

involved in the efforts within the UC campuses and

across the system.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are intended to provide

the UC System with guidance on utilizing data to inform

various practices and efforts within the UC campuses

and across the system to better serve Chicanx/Latinx

students, staff, and faculty as well as cultivate a pool of

thought, practitioner, and industry leaders for California.

0. Develop a high-level task force capable of thinking

together the data, budget, academic and non-academic

possibilities and needs of a successful UC HSRI

thriving system.

1. Develop a System-wide HSI Data Task Force. An

HSI Data Task force would enable UC to have a stand-

ing committee composed of institutional leaders and

faculty on the data analysis that needs to be done at the

system level to explore how UC is serving all key

constituents, including students, staff, faculty, alumni,

prospective students, and community stakeholders.

Tool/Data Sources Administered/Collected Managing Unit

HR Data (Hiring, Race/Ethnicity) Annually HR; UC Campuses

Academic Personnel Data (Merit data, annual review and

tenure data)

Routinely

UC Campuses, also shared with UC

Information Center and UCOP

Faculty Climate Surveys Campus Specic Campus Specic

UC Accountability Report

https://accountability.universityofcalifornia.edu/2022

Annually also reports on other

stakeholders (students, etc.)

UCOP

Faculty and Instructor Remote Education Survey

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-cen-

ter/faculty-and-instructor-remote-instruction-survey

Was a response to the

COVID-19 change in instruction

modality

UCOP

Faculty Compensation Reporting

www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/

content-analysis/employees/compensation-reporting.html

Annually UCOP

Reports of the UC President’s Task Force on Faculty

Diversity

www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_les/fac-

ulty-diversity-task-force/report.pdf

Existed in 2005–2006 System-wide Senate Task Force

Table 5: Select Data Sources on UC Faculty

42 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

2. Annual HSI and EHSI Dashboard. Investing in the

development of an annual HSI and EHSI dashboard and

annual report with key data indicators for establishing a

“Latinx Thriving UC System” is a first step to exploring

how the UC’s partners and collaborators are navigating

HSIs as well as their experiences within the UC cam-

puses.

3. Provide Funding for an HSI Research Center. A

research center housed at UC Davis due to the proximity

to the state capital and the expertise of Dr. Marcela

Cuellar would be the ideal location for a robust HSI

Research Center. This research center would allow for

cross campus collaboration, multigenerational research

teams, and innovative approaches to data analytics that

support and introduce real time solutions for the UC

campuses to better serve Latinx students equitably.

4. Institutional Research Staff Designated for HSI

analysis. An HSI Director of Data Analytics at the UC

Office of the President could support the campuses in

designing campus level analyses and assessment practic-

es, creating a more robust assessment infrastructure.

5. Develop a Task Force for Faculty Diversity. From

2005-2006, a Task Force to the UC President examined

the status of faculty diversity across the UC. This report

provided a comprehensive assessment of faculty diversity

across UC. Because the UC system has made little

progress in increasing the proportion of Latinx faculty

across a 30-year period, a standing task force is warrant-

ed to provide recommendations for investment, improv-

ing department cultures, and ensuring transparent merit

and review practices within and across the UC system.

The above recommendations are designed to expedite

the evolution of the UC into a thriving HSRI system,

ensuring that Latinx students attend campuses equipped

with structures that foster success for them and other

first-generation students. Additionally, these recommen-

dations prioritize faculty diversity and offer staff the

opportunity to advance within all employment categories.

The establishment of a research center and key task

forces would facilitate the UC in effectively putting the

“S” in HSI into practice, serving not only students, but all

of its partners and collaborators genuinely, and serving

as an exemplar for public higher education systems.

References

Cuellar, M. (2014). The Impact of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs),

Emerging HSIs, and Non-HSIs on Latina/o Academic Self-Concept. The

Review of Higher Education 37(4), 499-530. doi:10.1353/rhe.2014.0032.

Garcia, G. A., and Vanessa A. Sansone, V. (2019). “Toward a Multidimen-

sional Conceptual Framework for Understanding ‘Servingness’ in Hispan-

ic-Serving Institutions: A Synthesis of the Research.” Review of Education-

al Research. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654319864591.

Dowd, Alicia C., Keith Witham, Debbie Hanson, Cheryl D. Ching, Román

Liera, and Marlon Fernandez Castro. 2018. Bringing Accountability to Life:

How Savvy Data Users Find the “Actionable N” to Improve Equity and

Sustainability in Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Council

on Education, The Pennsylvania State University Center for the Study of

Higher Education, and the University of Southern California Center for

Urban Education.

Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the

campus climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 235–251.

Jaegler, A. How to Measure Inclusion in Higher Education: An Inclusive

Rating. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8278. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148278

Martinez, A., Canizares-Esguerra, J., Zamora, E., Gonzalez-Lopez, G.,

Gonzalez-Lima, F., Menchaca, M., Valdez, F., and Moran Gonzalez, J.

(2019). Independent Equity Committee at the University of Texas at Austin.

Hispanic Equity Report.

Webber, K.L. and Zheng, H. Z., (Eds.). (2020) Big Data on Campus: Data

Analytics and Decision Making in Higher Education. Baltimore: MD: John

Hopkins University Press, p. 3.

Zheng HY, Mayberry E, Stanley L. Building an agile data analytics envi-

ronment to support university decision-making: A case study of Ohio State

University’s rapid development of a COVID-19 dashboard system. New Di-

rections for Institutional Research. 2020 Fall-Winter;2020(187-188):31–42.

doi: 10.1002/ir.20345. Epub 2021 Nov 1. PMCID: PMC8652853.

43 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

Blueprint for a 21st Century

Vision for UC to Become the

Premier HSRI System in the

Nation

While increasing the enrollment of Latinx students at UC

is a critical step for educational equity and diversity,

there is more work to be done to have a sustained

impact and advancement of Latinx students, staff, and

faculty at UC. Keeping in mind the dual missions of

access and excellence as well as the classifications of

HSI and R1 is central to developing and supporting

sustainable efforts that will ensure the success of Latinxs

at the University of California.

The three papers in this report conceptualize serving-

ness at UC in different domains and offer several recom-

mendations for enacting a 21st century vision for creat-

ing a HSRI system. Based on these papers, the

following recommendations represent a multifaceted

approach to guide UC in these endeavors.

Shared HSRI Vision

• Establish a shared systemwide HSRI definition.

HSI designation is based on undergraduate enrollment

per federal policy. Defining and enacting an HSI

identity varies across institutions and intersects with

other organizational identities, such as R1 status, at

UC. As such, it would be beneficial for UC to establish

a shared HSRI definition for the system and its individ-

ual campuses.

• Create actionable goals in line with HSRI vision.

Along with defining what it means to be a HSRI, UC

should outline actionable goals that can be pursued

across the system and all UC campuses.

• Develop an UC HSI dashboard and produce annual

HSRI/eHSRI reports. To assess progress towards

achieving the shared HSRI vision, UC should develop

a dashboard monitoring progress and produce annual

reports for each campus.

• Convene systemwide HSRI equity summit. The

UC-HSI Initiative has successfully convened campus

leaders in several annual HSI retreats since 2017.

The UC should continue to invest in and support

these convenings.

Latinx Student Supports

• Advance undergraduate student success beyond

enrolling and graduating Latinx students. The 2030

UC dashboard laudably aims to increase graduation

rates across the system and eliminate equity gaps

among underserved student groups, including Latinx.

UC must think about success beyond these important

measures to achieve greater equity among Latinx

students. Key indicators of success to consider are

fostering graduate school access, enhancing career

opportunities, civic engagement, etc.

• Increase student support. By implementing changes

in existing opportunities/programs that take into consid-

eration growing Latinx student population and engage-

ment of this student population in academic/career

development programs, UC can more intentionally

support Latinx undergraduate and graduate students.

• Reduce student debt. Student debt remains at an all

time high and compromises the ability of Latinx students

and families to successfully navigate UC. Reducing the

prospect of student debt would not only encourage

enrollments but would ensure low-income students are

working fewer hours and are able to focus on their

academic majors.

• Direct more support and resources to Latinx

graduate students. The HSI designation is based on

undergraduate enrollment. At HSRIs, Latinx graduate

students are an important part of the campus commu-

nity and integral to the success of the knowledge

generation and teaching that occurs in these contexts.

UC should thus direct more support and resources to

support the academic and professional development of

Latinx graduate students.

Latinx Faculty and Staff Supports

• Hire and retain more Latinx faculty. The UC 2030

dashboard boldly aims to invest in faculty hiring and

research. To achieve this goal and in line with a HSRI

vision, UC must intentionally hire and retain more

Latinx faculty. This commitment must be championed

at all levels—systemwide, campus, and departments.

• Establish a faculty diversity task force. A faculty

diversity task force would be charged with critically

analyzing faculty diversity, retention, and progression

through the tenure-track ranks.

44 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

• Establish a staff diversity task force. A staff diversity

task force would be charged with analyzing staff

composition across campuses, with close attention to

mobility within UC.

Research Capacity

• Provide funding for a HSRI research center. As

more research institutions become HSIs, the need to

understand these unique contexts will require research

and opportunities for cross-campus collaboration. As

UC campuses comprise 19% of existing HSRIs in the

nation, the system is further poised to lead in research

efforts on this institutional type. Funding for the estab-

lishment of a HSRI research center will create an

infrastructure to support this type of research.

• Incentivize research practice partnerships rooted

in the Latinx community and Latinx-serving insti-

tutions. It’s imperative to understand how UC’s land-

grant mission is intertwined with the identities of

Indigenous and historically underserved communities.

Specific to the HSRI identity and this report recommen-

dation, providing incentives and opportunities for faculty

and researchers to engage in more community-engaged

efforts will further advance the historic research and

land-grant mission of the system.

Data Infrastructure

• Invest in HSRI data infrastructure for increased

accountability and agency. The UC has made great

strides in creating dashboards that provide actionable

data. Building on these resources, UC should also

develop HSRI-focused data resources.

• Establish a systemwide HSRI data task force. An

HSRI data task force would convene to assess the

status of UC across various metrics for its key partici-

pants (faculty, staff, students, partnership program

participants).

• Articulate more structured and standardized mea-

sures for evaluating HSRIs. These measures should

consider institutions, their programs, and interventions

meant to support the retention and success of Latinx

undergraduate, graduate students, and faculty.

• Hire institutional research staff at UCOP for HSI

analysis.

Conclusion

The UC system is one of the main stages of a

decades-long radical democratization of access to and

diversification of higher education in the nation. UC now

educates a diverse student body, one that better

reflects the state and nation, including those who are

first-generation and from low-API schools, and/or lower

socioeconomic backgrounds—but does so with half the

funding per capita in real dollars their peers received 30

or 40 years ago (Reguerín et al., 2020). The ongoing

pandemic is only going to further complicate this situa-

tion. This is the basis of our real challenge: how to be

successful with many students who, while being some of

the best in their cohort, are still often underserved and

structurally underfunded, by acknowledging first that we

are, in important ways, equally underprepared to serve

them effectively on their way to success. There is then

considerable work to be done to make the entire UC

system more reflective of the state’s population. As a

system, we need research and supports that allow us to

understand persistent problems to create or redesign the

educational and support practices that can lead to

success for all.

In this historic moment, the UC system also has the

potential to become the leading HSRI system in the

nation, if it rises to the challenge of serving its Latinx

students equitably. With the largest number of HSRIs,

the UC system will play a crucial role in helping to

develop new theoretical frameworks, inform program-

matic interventions, and establish model approaches

that inform the national postsecondary education land-

scape attempting to serve a Latinx population that will

comprise over 21% of the total U.S. population by 2030

(United States Census Bureau, 2020). In doing so, UC

can continue to build on its legacy of excellence charac-

teristic of the system since its inception.

45 | A Blueprint for Becoming a Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System

Reimagining the University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably

References

Introduction

Alliance of Hispanic Serving Research Universities. (nd.). Who we are.

www.hsru.org.

Cabrera, N. L., Franklin, J. D., & Watson, J. S. (2017). Whiteness in higher

education: The invisible missing link in diversity and racial analyses: ASHE

Higher Education Report, Volume 42, Number 6. John Wiley & Sons.

Contreras, F. (2019). Becoming “Latinx responsive”: Raising institutional

and systemic consciousness in California’s HSIs. American Council on

Education and The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

Garcia, G. A. (2018). Decolonizing Hispanic-serving institutions: A frame-

work for organizing. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 17(2), 132-147.

Garcia, G. A., Núñez, A. M., & Sansone, V. A. (2019). Toward a multi-

dimensional conceptual framework for understanding “servingness” in

Hispanic-Serving Institutions: A synthesis of the research. Review of

Educational Research, 89(5), 745-784.

Ledesma, M. C. (2019). California sunset: O’Connor’s post-Afrmative

Action ideal comes of age in California. The Review of Higher Education,

42(5), 227-254.

Santiago, D. A. (2012). Public policy and Hispanic-serving institutions:

From invention to accountability. Journal of Latinos and Education, 11(3),

163-167.

Paredes, A.D., Estrada, C., Venturanza, R.J., and Teranishi, R.T. 2021.

La lucha sigue: The University of California’s role as a Hispanic-Serving

Research Institution system. The Institute for Immigration, Globalization,

and Education. Los Angeles, CA.

University of California Ofce of the President. (nd). Information center.

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/about-us/information-center

UCLA HSI Task Force. (2022). Cultivating the seeds of change: Becoming

a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI).

Recommendation and Conclusion

Reguerín, P.G., Poblete, J. Cooper, C.R. Sánchez Ordaz, A., & Moreno, R.

(2020). Becoming a racially just Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI): A case

study of the University of California, Santa Cruz. In G.A. Garcia (Ed.),

Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) in practice: Dening “servingness” at

HSIs (pp. 41-60). Information Age Publishing.

United States Census Bureau. (2018, February). Hispanic population to

reach 111 million by 2060. www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2018/

comm/hispanic-projected-pop.html

Suggested Citation: Cuellar, M.G., Poblete, J., and Contreras, F. (2023).

Reimagining The University of California to Serve Latinxs Equitably: A Blueprint for Becoming a

Hispanic-Serving Research Institution (HSRI) System. Davis, CA: Report Prepared for The

University of California Office of the President.