3 Hidden Student Populations – Student-Caregivers as a Hidden Population in Institutions of Higher Education

Kimberly Meints

School of Educational Foundations, Leadership and Aviation, Oklahoma State University

HESA 5333: Hidden Student Populations

Dr. Lisa Will

October 30, 2021

Student-Caregivers as a Hidden Population in Institutions of Higher Education

College student bodies are continuing the trend from the last few decades of becoming more diverse on all fronts (Peterson, 2015). Students today are older, working, and living off-campus (Cox & Sallee, 2017). Many of these students are also providing caregiving to children and other family members while also navigating other roles, such as worker and spouse. These students manage a variety of responsibilities for each of these roles, which sometimes conflict with one another. While most of the research into caregiving students focuses on student-parents, some students provide informal care for parents, grandparents, spouses, and siblings (Joshi et al., 2014). As the population of the United States (US) continues to age, trained medical personnel will become relatively scarcer, increasing the likelihood that college-aged Americans will be required to provide care for their older family members (Joshi et al., 2014). Even the term “parent” can include those with children by birth, adoption, marriage, and fostering. Additionally, nontraditional students now outnumber traditional students, increasing the rate of students with caregiving responsibilities (Beeler, 2016). Therefore, throughout this paper, I will utilize the term “student-caregivers” to indicate as many different types of caregiving relationships as possible.

Student-caregivers can be classified as a hidden student population because their status is not readily apparent and often not reflected in typical university demographics. In fact, a student-caregiver’s dual role may not become apparent to an institution until a time of “crisis,” such as when childcare falls through (Moreau, 2016). These student-caregivers also come from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, with a large portion belonging to marginalized groups (Beeler, 2016; Estes, 2011; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020), and some may come from other countries to study in the US (Myers-Walls et al., 2011), which may subject these students to additive and intersectional discrimination. Additionally, many of these students come from lower socio-economic positions (Beeler, 2016; Cox & Sallee, 2017) or were first-generation students (Beeler, 2016; Moore et al., 2019; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020).

Although less common for the group as a whole, many individual members may have experienced difficult or traumatic events during their time as students or in their life before starting college, including childhood. Through qualitative interviews in various studies, student-caregivers divulged teen pregnancy, homelessness, and domestic violence (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020); foster care, death of a parent, and food insecurity (Sallee & Cox, 2019); military service (Peterson, 2015); and transnational relocations and socio-cultural isolation (Myers-Walls et al., 2011). Childbirth and adoption themselves often indicate the possibility of trauma (medical and removal from family of origin, respectively).

Theory of “Role Strain” in an Academic Advising Office

“Role strain” is the theory that individuals inhabit multiple relational roles that compete for the individual’s resources (Goode, 1960). The theory identifies “role bargains” (p. 483) as the process individuals employ to choose behaviors that will reduce their role strain, or the overuse of limited resources, such as time, energy, and money (Goode, 1960) Higher education practitioners can be instrumental in helping students navigate those choices, in part by introducing them to new choices or resources (Cox & Sallee, 2017; Peterson, 2015; Scharp et al., 2020). However, one aspect of role strain that can impact the support provided by institutional staff is the belief “that the individuals who face common role obligations can generally fulfill them [even as], in general, the individual’s total role obligations are over-demanding” (Goode, 1960, pp. 484-485). If higher education staff believe that meeting academic expectations is normally achievable, then they may approach student support by focusing on a student’s assumed deficits in time management or commitment. Instead, institutional staff can take the posture of mentor and guide, helping students exercise existing skills and gain new ones (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Sallee & Cox, 2019; Scharp et al., 2020).

In my current role, I supervise support staff in an academic advising office at a large, public university in a rural town in the Mid-South. Our staff holds in tension the desire to help students and the understanding that too much help can reduce a student’s ability to develop their own skills. Our student population includes a high percentage of low-income and first-generation students, as well as those who are less academically prepared for college. In conversations with my coworkers, the tension is evident as we navigate as an office, but also in individual interactions, how much help to provide, how best to communicate that help, setting expectations for students, and making exceptions.

Generally, we take a multiprong approach. We try to set expectations early at New Student Orientation for students on making and keeping appointments and attending class. Then, once students are on campus, advisors continue to discuss policies and procedures in their First Year Seminar classes. My support staff walk students through their “next steps” in making appointments, emailing advisors and professors, lifting holds, and other common questions. We also try to communicate timely information as the semester progresses via email and our website.

Some students transition smoothly, but others have more difficulty. In listening to their stories, it is clear that some experience role strain due to the competing roles they occupy. Some of them are also employees, who work full- or part-time, others are parents or providing care for other family members. We have student-athletes, band members, and students participating in Greek Life. All of these roles provide students with important opportunities to develop their identities or meet their individual needs. However, they also cause role strain as their limited resources are taxed and the requirements for these positions compete for their time and attention.

While students may self-identify as members of many of the populations above, members of hidden populations may not feel comfortable divulging their history. That is a particularly salient point in my office. Sharing their status with an advisor can help them receive more direct aid (such a referral to a victim advocate for survivors of sexual assault). However, the advisor is also expected to keep that information private. Therefore, my staff at the front desk may not be aware of the complex history behind a student and why they may have trouble navigating a system on their own. The perspective I share with them is two-fold: 1) that we should assume the best of the other person, since we do not know what they are experiencing, and 2) that we should be a caller’s last transfer. The second principle in particular reflects the limitations of our office, that we cannot solve every issue. However, we try to provide as much helpful information as we can, while also directing students to the most appropriate office. Many of the callers we speak with have already been transferred multiple times. Sallee and Cox (2019) noted the frustration that students feel when they have to jump through “hoops” (p. 636). Other students “gave up” after not finding an answer (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020). I ask my staff to be as knowledgeable as possible, and to make transfers when questions exceed the territory of our office so that we do not run the risk of providing advice to a student that is incorrect, another concern expressed by students (Sallee & Cox, 2019). In this way, we try to be as sensitive as we can be to the wide variety of needs of our students. Additionally, multiple studies indicated the importance of students having specific contacts within the institution that they could rely upon (Beeler, 2016; Peterson, 2015; Sallee & Cox, 2019), so I have purchased business cards for my front desk staff in addition to the professional advisors.

Experiences and Challenges of Student-Caregivers Stressors Related to Role Strain for Student-Caregivers

Student-caregivers are particularly susceptible to the stress of role strain because of the high societal expectations and tangible labor requirements associated with both roles of student and of parent (Cox & Sallee, 2017; Estes, 2011; Moreau, 2016; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Peterson, 2015; Sallee & Cox, 2019; Scharp et al., 2020). The concerns of role strain for them extend beyond merely the labor of study and caregiving. Scharp et al. (2020) found that students experienced uncertainty related to the tension of the student-caregiver’s role conflict and unique concerns at the intersection of this identify, in addition to each role individually. Changes in the student’s situation (i.e., beginning school, becoming pregnant, birth of child, and ongoing life stages of the child) each introduced new uncertainties to the student-caregivers, which caused stress. Financial and time management concerns appeared to be heighted for this population. Challenges specific to student-caregivers were related to the trade-offs that they negotiated and the feeling that they could not be both a good student and a good parent. This extended to other roles, such as the roles of friend or child of their own parents. One management strategy employed by student-caregivers was to seek out tangible support to a greater degree than emotional support. Student-caregivers sought out advice, other caregivers, and financial aid to alleviate their uncertainty. They also experienced relief through goal setting, planning, and scheduling (Scharp et al., 2020).

Institutional staff are well-positioned to offer referrals and advice navigating complex systems and developing academic skills. One hallmark of the student-caregivers experience, though, is a lack of time to research multi-step processes or to physically visit multiple offices, particularly if they also work during business hours (Sallee & Cox, 2019). Creating a central services office for student-caregivers allows them to maximize the use of their time, especially if it has extended hours (Sallee & Cox, 2019). However, various studies reflected that staff were not only not always helpful to students (Cox & Sallee, 2017; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Sallee & Cox, 2019), but were often overworked (Cox & Sallee, 2017), acted as gatekeepers (Sallee & Cox, 2019), or were even threatening to the student (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020). These negative behaviors were attributed by the student-caregivers as emerging from discriminatory perspectives against student-caregivers or members of historically marginalized groups.

This treatment can be discouraging for student-caregivers who rely on support from their networks in order to succeed (Scharp et al., 2020). These students place high expectations on themselves: it is not enough to be an “intensive mother,” but one must also be educated, and it is not enough to be a “good student,” but one must also have ambition (Estes, 2011). Some caregivers on public assistance needed to prove to themselves and others that they were different from other recipients because they were improving their condition and that of their family (Sallee & Cox, 2019). These student perspectives reflected common expectations of society of how other members ought to behave, yet student-caregivers rarely rejected these views, and instead held themselves to higher standards which may increase their own stress (Estes, 2011; Peterson, 2015; Sallee & Cox, 2019). Higher education practitioners may be able to help students set reasonable and achievable goals for themselves and to interrogate the cultural influences under which they navigate their lives, to decide for themselves which expectations to accept or reject (although this should be done in a culturally-sensitive way; see Myers-Walls et al., 2011; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Sallee & Cox, 2019). This requires staff to reflect on and analyze their own beliefs and practices, as well, and to address discriminatory views.

External Needs of Student-Caregivers

Materially, student-caregivers struggle to find affordable childcare during the hours it is needed (Beeler, 2016; Moreau, 2016; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Peterson, 2015; Sallee, 2016; Sallee & Cox, 2019; Springer et al., 2009). When they do find childcare, additional burdens can be placed on student-caregivers when faculty require groupwork or out-of-class activities that were not previously scheduled (Beeler, 2016; Sallee, 2016; Sallee & Cox, 2019). Sometimes, students felt that they could not take part in required or extracurricular opportunities such as internships (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020), conferences, or networking (Moreau, 2016). Single parents, in particular, struggled to manage the labor of their dual responsibilities (Beeler, 2016). Students exhibited a variety of strategies to manage childcare, such as asking family and friends for help (Peterson, 2015); taking turns with their partners to provide primary care (Myers-Walls et al., 2011); using childcare services on- and off-campus (Sallee & Cox, 2019); studying while children slept (Peterson, 2015); taking their children with them to the library (Moore et al., 2019); and sometimes even taking their children to class (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020). However, each of these strategies had drawbacks, and some campuses imposed barriers to them. At a few institutions, children were not even allowed in campus buildings (Moreau, 2016; Sallee & Cox, 2019); one student at a British university reported being escorted out along with her child by security (Moreau, 2016, p. 914). Strict deadlines also hindered students, particularly when issues related to childcare occurred (Scharp et al., 2020).

Student-caregivers experience financial strain as they pay for the expenses associated with raising children (Myers-Walls et al., 2011; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Peterson, 2015). Managing financial concerns becomes a stressful balancing act: 1) working more hours requires more childcare, which costs more money and reduces time to work on school or be with family, but 2) working too many hours can make student-caregivers ineligible for certain aid or increase the Expected Family Contribution when paying for school (Sallee, 2020). Some students choose to attend school part-time in order to reduce costs and allow time for paid work, but this also reduces their eligibility for some forms of funding; others may take time off from school (Beeler, 2016). Both methods can extend time to graduation and decrease the likelihood of graduation (Beeler, 2016). Finally, some students choose to take out loans (Estes, 2011), which may reduce the long-term gains from higher-paying jobs.

When on-campus, pregnant, post-partum, and lactating parents sometimes experienced difficulties navigating campus. They reported difficulty walking the distance from the parking lot to their classes (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020), managing strollers (Springer et al., 2009), carrying pumping supplies, or finding appropriate lactation spaces (Sturtevant et al., 2021). They also needed to miss class occasionally for doctor’s appointments, or to recover from childbirth and bond with their babies (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020). Unfortunately, some students also needed time to recover from miscarriages, which may be discussed even less than parenting (Moreau, 2016).

Students were not aware of federal law that provided protections for them (i.e., Title IX; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020), while staff mistakenly believed that students were covered under other provisions (i.e., Family Medical Leave Act; Springer et al., 2009). Title IX is particularly important as it protects pregnant and parenting students from discrimination in educational settings, even as multiple studies indicated that students did experience prejudicial behavior and policies (Estes, 2011; Moreau, 2016; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020). These behaviors could also intersect with other aspects of the student’s identify, such as their race or gender (Beeler, 2016; Moreau, 2016; Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Sallee & Cox, 2019).

Institutional Responsibilities for Student-Caregivers

Institutions can review their policies, as well, to see if they are causing difficulties for student-caregivers. When student-caregivers are not acknowledged in policies, the institution sends a message that those students do not belong (Moreau, 2016). Lack of clear policy also places student-caregivers at the mercy of faculty and staff to provide support consistently and equitably to student-caregivers, with no guidance from administration; this also others student-caregivers by turning them into exceptions to the rules (Cox & Sallee, 2017). Policy suggestions include where and when children are allowed on campus (Moreau, 2016; Sallee & Cox, 2019), granting automatic incompletes due to pregnancy and childbirth or placement (Sallee, 2016), and adjusting deadlines to complete degrees (Moreau, 2016). Institutions can improve their infrastructure as well, by creating child-friendly campuses, by providing high chairs in dining areas (Springer et al., 2009), appropriately furnished lactation rooms (Sturtevant et al., 2021), and study spaces (Moore et al., 2019). Finally, every effort should be made to educate faculty and staff to the policies and resources for student-caregivers so that they are prepared to give useful referrals (Sturtevant et al., 2021).

Trauma’s Impact on Student-Caregivers

As mentioned earlier, the ubiquity of student-caregivers on college campuses nearly guarantees that some of them will have experienced a traumatic event. In his book, The Body Keeps the Score, van der Kolk (2014) investigates the impact that trauma has on individuals. He identifies that the elevated stress hormones of trauma survivors can lead to “memory and attention problems, irritability, and sleep disorders” (van der Kolk, 2014, p. 46), all of which can interfere with academic endeavors and parenting needs. Socially, trauma “interferes with cooperation, nurturing, and the ability to function as a productive member of the clan” (van der Kolk, 2014, p. 351), which has implications for family life and academic group work. While people develop strategies to manage their trauma, some are maladaptive, including using drugs and alcohol (van der Kolk, 2014, p. 70), which could lead to Adverse Childhood Experiences for the children of student-caregivers.

Davidson (n.d.) provides some guidance to higher education practitioners on the unique challenges faced by student groups at elevated risk of trauma, including veterans, former foster youth, and nontraditional students, all of whom were represented in the various studies already discussed. She identifies core values of trauma informed practice which are relevant to supporting student-caregivers who have experienced trauma. Some examples include trustworthiness (provide clear explanations about tasks and procedures), choice and control (inform about available choices and options), and empowerment (recognize skills and strengths and express optimism toward achieving goals) (Davidson, n.d., p. 15).

Conclusion

Student-caregivers set high expectations for themselves and endeavor to be both good parents (or caregivers) and good students (Estes, 2011). They face unique challenges related to the conflicting needs of each role, but institutions of higher education can help mitigate their role strain on many levels. First, individual staff can approach students from the perspective of a mentor, to help them navigate the university systems, offer advice, and make referrals to resources (Navarro-Cruz et al., 2020; Sallee & Cox, 2019; Scharp et al., 2020). Second, university and college leadership can review infrastructure and policies to identify difficulties caused by systemic issues (Cox & Sallee, 2017; Moreau, 2016; Sallee, 2016; Sallee & Cox, 2019). Third, universities can improve the culture of their campuses to make them more inviting to student-caregivers and their families. This includes incorporating trauma-informed care practices (Davidson, n.d.).

References

Beeler, S. (2016). Undergraduate single mothers’ experiences in postsecondary education. New Directions for Higher Education, 2016(176), 69-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20210

Cox, R. D., & Sallee, M. W. (2017). Neoliberalism across borders: A comparative case study of community colleges’ capacity to serve student-parents. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(1), 54-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1341753

Davidson, S. (n.d.). Trauma-informed practices for postsecondary education: A guide. Education Northwest. https://educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/files/resources/trauma-informed-practices-postsecondary-508.pdf

Estes, D. K. (2011). Managing the student-parent dilemma: Mothers and fathers in higher education. Symbolic Interaction, 34(2), 198-219. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2011.34.2.198

Goode, W. J. (1960). A theory of role strain. American Sociological Review, 25(4), 483-496. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2092933

Joshi, G., Gezan, S., Delisle, T., Stopka, C., Pigg, M., & Tillman, M. (2014). Intentions of college students to serve as informal caregivers for their older relatives: Theory of planned behavior approach. Educational Gerontology, 41(5), 384-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2014.974391

Moore, A. C., Croxton, R., & Sprague, L. (2019). Breaking down barriers for student parents and caregivers with family-friendly library spaces. Journal of Library Administration, 60(3), 215-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2019.1685823

Moreau, M.-P. (2016). Regulating the student body/ies: University policies and student parents. British Educational Research Journal, 42(5), 906-925. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3234

Myers-Walls, J. A., Frias, L. V., Kwon, K.-A., Ko, M.-J. M., & Lu, T. (2011). Living life in two worlds: Acculturative stress among Asian American international graduate student parents and spouses. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 42(4), 455-478. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41604463

Navarro-Cruz, G. E., Dávila, B. A., & Kouyoumdjian, C. (2020). From teen parent to student parent: Latina mothers’ persistence in higher education. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(4), 466-480. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192720980308

Peterson, S. (2015). Community college student-parents: Priorities for persistence. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(5), 370-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2015.1065210

Sallee, M. W. (2016). Ideal for whom? A cultural analysis of ideal worker norms in higher education and student affairs graduate programs. New Directions for Higher Education, 2016(176), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20209

Sallee, M. W. (2020). Engaging student-parents. In S. J. Quaye, S. R. Harper, & S. L. Pendakur (Eds.), Student Engagement in Higher Education (3rd ed., pp. 381-395). Routledge.

Sallee, M. W., & Cox, R. D. (2019). Thinking beyond childcare: Supporting community college student-parents. American Journal of Education, 125(August 2019). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/704094

Scharp, K. M., Cooper, R. A., Worwood, J. V., & Dorrance Hall, E. (2020). “There’s always going to be uncertainty”: Exploring undergraduate student parents’ sources of uncertainty and related management practices. Communication Research, 48(7), 1059-1084. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650220903872

Springer, K. W., Parker, B. K., & Leviten-Reid, C. (2009). Making space for graduate student parents: Practice and politics. Journal of Family Issues, 30(4), 435-457. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X08329293

Sturtevant, C., Huebner, C., & Waite, W. (2021). An evaluation of on-campus lactation spaces for student-parents. Journal of Human Lactation, 37(1), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334419888715

van der Kolk, B. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Penguin Books.