“It’s Weird”: Latinx College Students’ Perceptions of Campus Life and Navigating Whiteness at an Emerging Hispanic-Serving Institution

Abstract

Spanish

This study examines Latinx students’ perceptions at Aspen University (AU), an emerging Hispanic Serving Institution (eHSI), highlighting how white normative standards and institutional practices impact their experiences. Utilizing Critical Whiteness, the research reveals themes of white normative spaces, segregated cultural affirmations, dominant Latinx cultural notions, and institutional white liberalism. Findings suggest that HSI servingness requires intentional organizational shifts and dismantling white supremacy to support Latinx students.

Keywords

higher education Latinx students Emerging HSI qualitative whiteness

As higher education institutions seek to diversify their student bodies, it is imperative to move beyond the mere enrollment of racially diverse students and to examine how colleges and universities serve their populations, particularly Latinx¹ students, at emerging Hispanic Serving Institutions (eHSIs) (Cuellar et al., 2020; Franco & Hernández, 2018; Garcia, 2017). Currently, Aspen University (AU; pseudonym) is poised to reach Hispanic Serving Institution(s) (HSI) status by 2036, and as members of this university community, we are questioning and grappling with the institution’s “readiness” to serve Latinx students in ways that disrupt whiteness and reject the colonial project. The pursuit of disrupting whiteness and rejecting the colonial project aligns with the evolving role of HSIs in higher education. Scholars such as Garcia (2021) and Vega et al. (2022) emphasize that servingness must transcend numerical representation to address systemic inequities that continue to marginalize Latinx students. HSIs are uniquely positioned to dismantle white normative structures that dominate historically white institutions (HWIs) and challenge the racialized hierarchies embedded in higher education (Garcia & Cuellar, 2023). In this article, we define whiteness as a socially constructed system of power and privilege that normalizes and centers on white cultural values, experiences, and perspectives while marginalizing others (Cabrera, 2018). The designation of an institution as an eHSI, such as AU, warrants a critical examination of how HWIs with emerging HSI status disrupt or sustain whiteness and shift practices that serve Latinx students (Garcia, 2019; Greene & Oesterreich, 2012). The concept of servingness extends beyond traditional student success metrics, encompassing a holistic approach that centers Latinx student experiences and needs (Garcia, 2017, 2019). Traditional notions of student success, often defined by graduation rates and academic achievement, do not adequately capture the nuanced experiences of Latinx students at HWIs (Franco & Hernández, 2018; Garcia, 2017, 2019, 2021; Scott et al., 2024).

This study aims to understand how Latinx students perceive servingness at AU as it transitions toward achieving HSI status (Garcia, 2017, 2019, 2021). By centering student experiences, we aim to explore whether AU is enacting practices that challenge or reproduce whiteness. Students’ voices provide critical insight into the intersection of institutional readiness and the lived experiences of those navigating HWIs. We seek to answer the research question: How do Latinx students perceive and navigate their academic and social experiences at an emerging Hispanic-Serving Institution (eHSI) shaped by white normative structures and institutional practices? By examining the influence of white normative standards in higher education, this study highlights the importance of centering Latinx student voices (Matias & Mackey, 2015). Whiteness in higher education often manifests through institutional practices and cultural norms that prioritize White experiences and marginalize those of students of color (Greene & Oesterreich, 2012). Greene and Oesterreich (2012) state that, “in their current iteration, HSIs are actually PWIs [predominantly White institutions] that incorporate brown bodies into their possessive investment in Whiteness” (p. 173). We are answering their call for disrupting whiteness by (re)envisioning servingness at HSIs through an equity and justice lens.

Hispanic Serving Institutions

In 2022 to 2023, there were 600 HSIs across over 20 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, enrolling 63% of Latino undergraduates (Excelencia in Education, 2024). This represented a 5% increase from the previous year. Additionally, 412 institutions with Latinx student enrollment between 15% and 24.9% are classified as Emerging HSIs (eHSIs), a term developed by Excelencia in Education. In Colorado alone, there were 16 HSIs and 10 eHSIs in 2022 to 2023 (Excelencia in Education, 2024).

The work of Garcia (2017, 2019) provides a critical framework for understanding what it means for institutions to serve Latinx students beyond simplistic measures of graduation or degree completion, which often rely on “white normative standards” (Garcia, 2019, p. 3). Garcia proposes six metrics for student success that go beyond traditional outcomes: (1) graduation, (2) graduate school enrollment, (3) employment, (4) community engagement, (5) a positive campus climate and culture, and (6) support programs. Her typology of HSIs—Latinx-enrolling, Latinx-producing, Latinx-enhancing, and Latinx-serving—illustrates the range of institutional identities and commitments to supporting Latinx students. While Latinx-enrolling institutions may meet the 25% enrollment threshold, they often lack the cultural and organizational shifts necessary for student success. Latinx-serving institutions, alternatively, actively transform their organizational culture and climate to ensure equitable outcomes for Latinx students. This typology is particularly useful for eHSIs and HSIs as it highlights how “servingness” requires intentional efforts, not just numerical thresholds.

As predominately white institutions (PWIs) transition to becoming HSIs, many scholars argue that deliberate and proactive organizational shifts are essential (Aguilar-Smith, 2021; Cabrera et al., 2016; Cuellar & Johnson-Ahorlu, 2023; Garcia, 2017; 2021; Garcia et al., 2019; Lujan et al., 2024). However, research indicates that many institutions fail to intentionally address the cultural, climate, and structural changes necessary to support Latinx students (Aguilar-Smith, 2021; Garcia, 2017). For instance, Sanchez (2019) found that Latinx students at eHSIs and HSIs with less than 40% Latinx enrollment experienced higher rates of racial microaggressions compared to those at institutions with greater Latinx representation. These experiences, occurring both inside and outside the classroom, underscore the challenges faced by eHSIs in addressing the tensions and inequities within predominantly white or race-neutral institutional spaces.

Carter and Patterson (2019) highlight how race-neutral approaches to student success fail to adequately address the unique needs of Latinx students. Similarly, Serrano (2020) and Lujan and McNaughtan (2024) emphasize the importance of disrupting white-dominant institutional spaces and creating home spaces where Latinx students can feel a sense of belonging. Torres and Zerquera (2012) further argue that institutions must understand the nuanced experiences of their Latinx populations and actively work to meet their needs. Failure to do so often results in continued racist experiences and unsatisfactory outcomes for Latinx students, faculty, and staff.

To serve Latinx students, organizations must reflect on their motivations, institutional messaging, and capacity for change. As Garcia (2017) and others (e.g., Cuellar & Johnson-Ahorlu, 2023; Lujan et al., 2024) suggest, the transition to an HSI designation must be accompanied by meaningful organizational transformation that prioritizes the needs of Latinx and other marginalized communities. This includes addressing campus climate, revising policies and practices, and fostering environments that support equitable outcomes. Ultimately, the future success of Latinx students at eHSIs and HSIs depends on institutions’ willingness to engage in deep, intentional conversations about their identity, purpose, and commitment to servingness.

Unpacking White Liberalism, White Normativity, and Epistemic Justice

As HSIs work to serve their Latinx student populations, it is essential to critically examine how whiteness—through white liberalism and white normativity—shapes institutional practices and hinders equity. White liberalism manifests in superficial inclusivity efforts that prioritize symbolic diversity over systemic change, often leaving foundational structures of white supremacy unchallenged (Garcia & Cuellar, 2018; Ortega & Reyes, 2022). Similarly, white normativity perpetuates predominantly white institutional values, marginalizing Latinx voices and embedding whiteness as the unacknowledged standard within HSIs (Garcia, 2019; Greene & Oesterreich, 2012). These dynamics undermine the potential of HSIs to move beyond enrollment-driven recognition and toward authentic servingness, which requires reimagining institutional practices to support Latinx students holistically. We call for centering epistemic justice, which values and legitimizes diverse ways of knowing while challenging the power dynamics that exclude non-dominant knowledge systems (Fricker, 2007; Medina, 2013). This section delves into the importance of addressing whiteness within HSIs, by focusing on the concepts of whiteness as normative, white liberalism, and epistemic justice.

Whiteness as Normative

Gusa (2010) examines the concept of “white institutional presence,” (p. 465) highlighting how whiteness is normalized within educational institutions, influencing policies, practices, and cultural expectations that privilege white cultural values while marginalizing others. This normalization is prevalent in curriculum design, hiring practices, and interpersonal dynamics, where whiteness operates as the unspoken standard. Similarly, Bonilla-Silva (2003) critiques this white normativity as perpetuating “colorblind racism,” (p. 2) where systemic inequities are ignored, and whiteness remains the invisible metric against which all other identities are measured. Together, these frameworks reveal how the normalization of whiteness not only marginalizes diverse perspectives but also undermines efforts toward equity by obscuring systemic white privilege.

White Liberalism

White liberalism refers to inclusivity efforts that avoid addressing deeper systemic issues of racism and inequality (Cabrera, 2018; DiAngelo, 2011). While institutions may adopt diversity initiatives and celebrate multiculturalism, these efforts often fail to challenge the foundational structures of white supremacy and privilege (Gillborn, 2005; Matias, 2016). In HSIs, white liberalism frequently manifests in tokenistic approaches to diversity, where institutions achieve HSI designation based on enrollment metrics without making substantial changes to their practices or meaningfully engaging with the Latinx community (Garcia, 2017, 2019; Garcia & Cuellar, 2018). Such performative allyship prioritizes optics over substantive change, preserving the status quo (Picower, 2009; Sleeter, 1993). For instance, institutions may use their HSI status in marketing campaigns while neglecting to address the systemic inequities Latinx students face, including microaggressions, underrepresentation, and inadequate support services (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Matias, 2016). Scholars like Pérez and Ceja (2015) critique the intersections of race, whiteness, and servingness in HSIs, highlighting how these institutions often fall short of dismantling inequitable systems. Similarly, González (2021) examines how whiteness shapes leadership and access in higher education, emphasizing the marginalization of Latinx voices. Ortega and Reyes (2022) further critique how white liberalism reduces equity work to numerical representation, failing to address the systemic barriers that impede racial justice.

Epistemic Justice and Classroom Micro-Climates in HSIs

To address the shortcomings of white liberalism and performative diversity in HSIs, it is essential to embrace epistemic justice, which prioritizes valuing and legitimizing diverse ways of knowing and understanding (Fricker, 2007; Medina, 2013). Gonzales et al. (2023) emphasize the need to address epistemic injustice in higher education by critically examining how power dynamics determine whose knowledge is recognized and valued. Within HSIs, this involves centering the voices, experiences, and knowledge systems of Latinx communities in institutional practices such as policy-making, curriculum design, and campus climate. This commitment includes increasing the representation of Latinx faculty and administrators, incorporating Latinx scholarship into curricula, and fostering participatory decision-making processes with students and communities to challenge white normativity and performative diversity (Leonardo, 2004; Wekker, 2016).

The classroom plays a critical role in this transformation, as it serves as a micro-climate that significantly influences students’ sense of belonging. The National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climate (NACCC) developed by the USC Race and Equity Center (n.d.) examines students’ perceptions of mattering, the inclusion of racial diversity in curricula, and encounters with racial stress. At one HSI, Serrano (2020) found that Black and Latino males reported negative classroom experiences due to microaggressions and a lack of diverse faculty, contributing to an overall hostile campus racial climate. However, positive micro-climates can emerge in ethnic studies courses or in classrooms where students connect with faculty who share their racial or ethnic identities. These affirming environments allow students to see their identities reflected in academic content, linking their personal experiences to professional goals and fostering a sense of belonging (Cisneros et al., 2025; Nuñez et al., 2010; Serrano, 2020). By committing to epistemic justice, HSIs can move beyond symbolic gestures and create equitable, inclusive educational spaces that genuinely support and uplift Latinx students.

Theoretical Framing: Critical Whiteness

Critical Whiteness (CW) provides a lens for examining how institutional practices and cultural norms in higher education perpetuate white supremacy and marginalize students of color, including Latinx students. Even though there are no explicit tenets, this framework interrogates how whiteness operates as an invisible norm, maintaining systemic inequities and exclusionary practices within educational institutions (Gillborn, 2005; Leonardo, 2004). Although CW lacks explicit tenets, it interrogates how whiteness is embedded in policies, cultural norms, and institutional practices, often under the guise of neutrality (Matias, 2016; Picower, 2009). For example, Leonardo (2004) critiques the focus on white privilege for its potential to obscure the systemic and institutional nature of racism, advocating instead for a more structural analysis. While CW effectively critiques whiteness, its lack of concrete principles presents challenges for operationalizing its ideas in research and practice.

To address this limitation, we operationalize CWS in our study by framing whiteness as a conceptual tool for analyzing race and racism, exposing how white supremacy manifests in institutional structures and policies. For instance, our analysis examines how emerging HSIs like AU can move beyond superficial diversity efforts, such as celebrating enrollment thresholds, to actively dismantle systemic whiteness and better serve Latinx students (Cabrera, 2018; Sleeter, 1993).

Context of Study

Colorado has the eighth largest Hispanic population in the U.S., comprising 22.5% of the state’s residents, with significant growth (72%) since 2000 and a median age of 29 compared to 41 for White non-Hispanics. Hispanic/Latinx students make up 31% of the K-12 population in Colorado, with one in two K-12 students in the Denver metro area identifying as Hispanic/Latinx. Aspen University is at 15.7% FTE Latinx enrollment and is actively working toward achieving HSI designation through intentional efforts spearheaded by an HSI Advisory Group (Aspen University, 2024). These efforts emphasize “servingness,” defined as creating an anti-racist, inclusive campus culture that affirms and supports Latinx students and other minoritized groups (p. 3). AU has engaged in evidence-based practices such as reviewing HSI frameworks, expanding cultural resources within the Latinx Cultural Center, and addressing equity gaps in persistence and graduation rates for Latinx students. The university is developing a strategic plan to institutionalize these efforts, focusing on increasing representation among faculty and staff, improving student support systems, and fostering community engagement. By centering on inclusivity and equity, AU aims to transition from an emerging HSI to a truly Hispanic-serving institution that meets the diverse needs of its students and community.

Methods

To shape the development of AU to become an effective model for HSIs prioritizing high-quality “servingness” in achieving student success, the proposed project centers student-led inquiries and leadership through a Student Participatory Action Research (SPAR) inquiry model. Participatory action research (PAR) is a methodological approach that fills an “. . . intellectual void that occurs when people’s voices are left out of the research and thus policy decisions that affect their lives and opportunities” (Cannella, 2008, p. 205). Applied to higher education, SPAR seeks to empower students, who are often being acted upon and spoken about, by the state and systems of higher education. It allows communities to appropriate the tools of research and be both the producers of knowledge and engage in leadership to change and improve systems of higher education. PAR is characterized by the following three principles: the collective investigation of a problem, the reliance on Indigenous knowledge to better understand that problem, and the desire to take individual and/or collective action to deal with the stated problem (Morrell, 2008). Through SPAR, college students who are impacted by policies or institutional practices are given the tools to collectively define the scope of inquiry, research institutions and contexts, and become civically engaged as social agents. Those with power tend to legitimize their own forms of knowledge and knowledge-making practices, thereby generating more power individually and systematically. SPAR intervenes in this process by investing in the tools necessary for those at the bottom of social hierarchies to produce their own knowledge about their world and to lead for transformative change.

In this SPAR project, the research team recruited and selected two undergraduate Latina students and four graduate Latina students (all first-generation students) from AU to be co-researchers and participate in multigenerational research mentorship. Both undergraduate students were psychology majors and were curious to learn more about the HSI literature. The undergraduate students were actively involved in shaping the research design by contributing to developing research questions, refining the methodology, and identifying key focus areas. The graduate students are all full-time student affairs professionals while working toward their Ph.D. degree in Higher Education. One of the graduate students has years of experience working at HSI RI four-year institutions. They mentored the undergraduates with the research process and guided them through all the phases of the research design. The PI is a Chicana professor in the Higher Education program at AU and has over 20 years of experience working toward equity and justice for minoritized students in her research and as a former student affairs practitioner. One of the undergraduate researchers attended a professional research conference with the PI and several graduate students to further assist with presentation skills, professional networking, and discussing their future academic goals.

Data Sources

We conducted four focus groups in 2021 and 2022 with 12 Latinx current undergraduate students with at least 1 year completed at AU. Undergraduate and graduate students created the recruitment materials (flyers) and distributed them on AU’s campus with the assistance of the Latinx Cultural Center. We also constructed an email for administrators to send to Latinx students, specifically asking for their input about AU’s emerging HSI designation. The focus groups were offered in both in-person and Zoom formats, with the majority of students opting for the Zoom option. As a result, only one focus group was conducted in person. Each focus group lasted approximately 1 to 1.5 hr and included at least three participants. Upon joining, participants selected their own pseudonyms to ensure confidentiality. Of the twelve participants, nine identified as female and three as male. Two participants identified as Dominican or Cuban, while the remaining participants identified as Mexican or Mexican American. Given the findings and the demographic of participants, we acknowledge several limitations in the findings while also calling for a more expansive need to nuance the experiences of Latinxs at eHSIs and HSIs. While we did not specifically target Latinas, these individuals participated, and we discussed them later in our recommendations.

Data Analysis

We reviewed transcripts from focus groups using Charmaz’s (2011) and Saldaña’s (2009) approaches to qualitative coding for social justice research. Social justice research seeks to code for inequities, privilege, and power about individual and collective rights. To further align the research study with SPAR, the undergraduate and graduate students attended focus groups as members of the research team who took notes and helped clarify research questions. Some questions included how students would describe AU’s campus climate, experiences that made students feel validated/invalidated, and what AU would look like if they served Latinx students. We held regular meetings to discuss focus group protocol and initial coding. A part of the focus group protocol was the purpose of the study to center the participants’ voices in the next iteration of action for AU. We compared data and codes to establish consistent and focused codes. Next, we re-reviewed codes and looked for critical incidents to identify significant moments or events highlighting racialized instances. We also tried to stay grounded in participant voices, particularly when those voices reveal nuanced experiences of racism and inequity. After detailing a racialized incident, the researchers used critical whiteness as an analytical tool for theme development.

Findings

Using whiteness as a theoretical framing for how Latinx students perceive their college experiences in an eHSI, we found four themes: (1) Teaching and learning in White normative spaces; (2) Segregated cultural affirmations; (3) Dominant notions of the Latinx culture as Mexican culture; and (4) White liberalism approach to HSI Status to describe their campus climate.

Teaching and Learning in a White Normative Space

Most of the students in this study expressed difficulty adjusting to their classroom spaces, sites of white normativity, mainly because they were among the few students of color. Students expressed they found it especially hard to connect with their classmates and professors, as Teal describes:

I know I’m majoring in psychology, which has a couple of Latino kids, but it’s not like a whole lot, just it’s mainly white people tend to major in that. Even my professor is white, so it’s really hard when I go to class. I don’t know how to connect with my classmates or to my professor because I’m the only person of color in my class. So that can be hard, but just like having more people of color in the classes or, I don’t know, having like some sort of class that teaches more about like how to be more diverse . . . I don’t know.

Teal conveys the difficulty of navigating white normative spaces as a Latinx student who desires more students of color and for her professors to teach courses or for her program to have courses that infuse diversity into their teaching praxis. White normative spaces extend to majors and “curricula that largely enters white histories, peoples, and knowledge” (Irwin, 2022, p. 98). Many students stated that some professors expressed some rhetoric about classroom space being inclusive, but while the rhetoric of inclusivity was expressed, very few unpacked its meaning or how inclusivity gets enacted by everyone. Bad Bunny mentioned that professors should discuss inclusivity more at the beginning of the class and suggests:

A little speech where they could say to the students and tell them this is an inclusive environment. Like, you shouldn’t look at others differently just because of the color of their skin or just because they’re different cultural backgrounds. You should be open-minded to them because they’re like you, they’re humans, and they have feelings . . . Like, I don’t know, just something like that. So that the classroom is a little more open minded. And so that Hispanics or any minority student feels more included into the actual classroom because it’s really big. And it doesn’t have that many minority students. So, we really stand out.

Bad Bunny feels hypervisible inside the classroom because of the lack of representation inside the class. It is also evident that the classroom space is not conducive for Students of Color to thrive if he is urging his professor to keep the dignity and humanity of students from different cultures at the forefront of creating an inclusive class environment. Stephanie, a business major, describes her discipline as difficult because whiteness is centered in many of the structures of support; for instance, “women in business club, I feel a lot of topics aren’t useful for me because it’s very white woman-centered and not a lot of how to enter in the workplace as a Latina or all those things that come with it.” Similarly, Alex described some of her professors in the STEM field as unaccommodating, she states:

Especially in STEM, they’re so brutal, all of this is happening, check the syllabus, there’s not even any ounce of empathy. It’s like, I don’t know, get out my face. And then, also I have accommodations from the [Disability Student Center] and even with that, it’s been difficult and just so discouraging when you know that they might not understand the emotional impacts of certain things, like your academic performance.

Some professors’ ridged behaviors are rooted in white normativity, which they use to maintain white supremacy. Professors were not the only individuals who worked to sustain white normativity inside the classroom. Students in this study expressed epistemic injustice, in which the production of knowledge is silenced, surveilled, or even refused to reciprocate linguistic communication by their peers inside the classroom.

Upholding Epistemic Injustice

While epistemic injustice is most commonly used to frame how academic publishing is used to sustain whiteness, we use it to frame the classroom experiences of Latinx students when they are required to work in group settings with their peers. Some Latinx students in this study experienced explicit non-verbal microaggressions from white students who lacked interpersonal skills and self-awareness about their own whiteness and blatantly acted as if Students of Color were invisible and minimized their epistemic contributions to the group conversation, JBalvin described his experience:

. . . in my composition class that I have . . . I was forced to be in a group that I didn’t want to be in. And the majority of people in that class are white, and when I was like forced to kind of be with them, . . . they kind of . . . gave me like a certain face . . . I was an outsider . . . I didn’t feel comfortable like being in that group, but . . . the professor had told me to . . . I kind of had no option but to be with them . . . when they would like to talk to each other, and they would respond to each other, but when I would say something . . . they just wouldn’t really acknowledge what I was saying. They just would kind of like stare at me and just look at me differently.

Katie also experienced a similar experience, as she explains:

I’ve been in two groups where it’s just white people and I’m the only Hispanic and . . . I felt in both groups that they both just talk to each other and they would not make eye contact with me. Then, when I was like talking, it was like weird. They just wouldn’t pay the same attention to me as they did with each other . . . they just agreed to whatever I said . . . Or, they wouldn’t like to add to my conversation, or they wouldn’t like to respond back to my conversation the way they did to each other . . . it was just a really weird experience for me because I tried including myself, but it still didn’t work out.

While Katie describes her experience as “weird,” what she is illuminating is that the protection of white normativity was considered strange and something she might have not experienced in her prior schooling. Additionally, the structure of the assigned groups and classroom environment placed Katie in a situation to try to mold to white normative standards of acceptance, which was not reciprocated. Minimizing the voices and contributions of students of color is a form of epistemic injustice.

Segregated Cultural Affirmations

There was an overwhelming consensus about the spaces these Latinx students felt at home: the cultural center dedicated to serving Latinx Students and a program dedicated to serving first-generation students, mostly Students of Color. The students who participate in the first-generation program also reside in the same residence hall. Often, students described AU as a “white campus,” but they found community in specific areas of campus. As Katie states:

So, I actually feel very comfortable and included at AU. I’m actually very happy that I came here, and it’s a really good fit for me; even though it’s a really big camp campus and I spend the majority of the time in class with a lot of majority white people, I still feel okay being in that climate just because I could go back to [name of residence hall] and there will be a community there for me where I will a feel at home and included. So it’s a balance for me.

Katie feels like she belongs or has a sense of community that is in designated areas. When she mentions the classroom, she pauses and hesitates by stating yes, it’s ok, there’s a majority of white people but acknowledges that she can go back to her community for refuge. She also qualifies her statement of being “ok” as if it’s tolerable because she has a community to balance her experience. Maluma responds to Katie with a similar experience:

I kinda agree as well because I also got accepted into [mentoring program], which is run by [Cultural Center]. We had our first family group meeting yesterday, and I thought it was really cool to know that other people of the same ethnicity are going through the same struggles that you are going through. And I really appreciated finding community. I’m also in [program for first-generation students]. I also feel really welcome when I enter [Residence Hall] building because even though my classes might have a white majority of students, coming back here, I feel at home, and that is the important thing I feel like of a residence hall to feel at home because it is your way. It is your home away from home.

Maluma also felt and named the importance of feeling comfortable and at home where he lives. He also added a qualifier that white students were often the majority in his classroom, but where he chooses to live makes his classroom experience bearable. However, many of the students participating in the first-generation program were also enrolled in a first-year seminar, which was a stark contrast to how students describe their experiences as Molly indicated, “Like my [first-generation program] professors . . . [name of professor] he’s African American, and he’s cool as hell. His teaching ways are completely different from all my other teachers. He’s so comfortable with us and so connecting, and it’s just really nice.” Katie also related to Molly’s sentiment:

My [first-generation program] teacher is a white female. She is not of color, but yet she still manages to understand us and our background and how we need help and the resources we need. She always knows how to help us and when to help us. So this very nice that she’s taking the time to get to know us as individuals and as minorities so that she could understand more fluently how we need help or how she could help us or how she could be a better teacher for us.

Katie illustrates that white instructors can resist white normative structures, given that most students are from diverse backgrounds. These sentiments also evidently state that culturally responsive instructors only occur with specific programs and are not considered the normative practice in every class.

Dominant Notions of Latinx Culture as Mexican Culture

For intersecting identities, two Latinx students who participated in the focus group did not identify as Mexican. Both had strong opinions about the university being Mexican-centric, as Lily, who is Dominican, explains how she chose AU to attend. Lily shares:

So, when I looked online before I came to AU, it seemed like there was like a pretty good percentage of kids that were Latino on those websites that give the statistics for college. So, I mean, that kind of drew me into this college because I wanna be surrounded by people who have had like a shared experience or we have like shared traditions and cultures, but then I came here from the Dominican Republic and like, pretty much like 90% of the Latinos here are from Mexico. And we have some things in common, but it’s like completely different. So, I feel like, I don’t know, there aren’t that many people that I can like really relate to, even in the Latino community, because the Latino community isn’t very diverse within it, in like what kind of Latinos there are, where they’re from.

Molly also concurred with Lily by sharing her own experiences as a Cuban American at AU. Molly shares:

I totally agree with, I definitely agree with Lily because there are hella Mexicans, and I’m not saying that’s a bad thing in any way. I’m just saying I wish there were more people from other places . . . I wish I could talk to more people from different cultures because when I met Lily and she told me about stuff from the Dominican Republic, it was stuff I like hadn’t known before. And I was like, wow, that’s so cool. I wish I knew more about the other Hispanic countries than just Mexico. I guess I didn’t really think about it applying to the school that most of the Latinos would be from Mexico. I just didn’t think about it because it just said Latinos, so I didn’t have any, you know, I, I don’t know much about Colorado. So that was all I, all I saw was just, oh, a lot of Latinos are great.

Lily and Molly did not feel a sense of community in the Cultural Center designated for Latinx students because they didn’t see their culture represented within the student body, programming, or staff. Teal, who identifies as Mexican, also agreed with needing to diversify the programming and considered it a lost opportunity for herself to learn about other Latinx cultures, as she describes:

I think having more people from different places from like Central America and other areas is where I feel like they [staff at Latinx Cultural Center] can definitely improve on that just so that everybody feels welcome. And it’s not just like one certain group we’re focusing on; everybody’s being covered. Everybody’s culture and traditions are being celebrated, not just in Mexico.

Within the institution and the region, the conflation of “Latinx” with “Mexican” reflects and reinforces white-dominant notions of Latinx culture, which prioritize a narrow and monolithic understanding of Latinx identity. This oversimplification aligns with critical whiteness theory, which interrogates how white supremacy shapes cultural norms and institutional practices, often erasing the diversity and complexity within marginalized communities (Cataño & Gonzalez, 2021; Garcia & Dwyer, 2018). By privileging one dominant Latinx narrative—often tied to Mexican identity—institutions perpetuate a white-centric framing of diversity that tokenizes Latinx students while failing to engage with the intersectional realities of ethnicity, race, and indigeneity.

Institutional White Liberalism Approach to HSI Status

Often, institutions achieve their HSI designation through the changing demographics of the institutional context without much intentionality or interrogation of its meaning or how to dismantle white normative structures and policies to support Latinx students better by increasing the representation of Latinx students, faculty, and staff (Vega et al., 2022). Becoming an emerging HSI happened to AU, but students are also privy to the changes that are needed for it to feel like a Latinx-serving institution. As Maria pointed out:

How would AU combat microaggressions and even the overt racism that goes on campus? Because I know the past years we’ve had some huge protests, and the actions behind it [changes] weren’t transparent, we didn’t really see if there were changes, we weren’t aware of those changes. So, transparency and what would AU do for the microaggressions and racism happening? What are some actual changes?

The lack of intentional efforts and transparency about how racism and equity issues are being addressed was an important observation by these students. In the same vein, students also named the lack of Latinx representation among students, staff and faculty, and these students are thirsty for more Latinx representation in all facets of university life. JBalvin stated:

I would see a lot more diversity in classes. I think that’s for sure because, honestly, the only class that I really have diversity . . . I’m talking about 10 to 15 students. And, but my big classes are just like, I don’t see enough diversity in them . . . if AU wants to serve the Latinx community, like really make an impact . . . there would be a lot more diversity on campus for sure.

While AU has the emerging HSI designation, it still operates as a white-serving institution as students discuss their lack of visibility in the community and at large campus activities. Elisa, a community college transfer student, transferred in the middle of the pandemic, but her experience on campus did not improve once classes were in person:

Honestly, just walking on campus . . . I still felt a disconnect. I still felt like a spec of mud on the white cloth. Um, and it just didn’t get any better. And now that we’re back in full swing with the full classroom in person, it still feels like I don’t see many Latinx students. At least not that I have noticed.

Her description of feeling like a “spec of mud on the white cloth” is telling and adequately depicts how Latinx students feel navigating an eHSI. This metaphor highlights the profound sense of otherness and marginalization experienced by Latinx students in a predominantly white institution.

Ignoring Institutional Racism

The bodies of Latinx students are used for institutional purposes without thought given to what shifts and changes need to occur to become a Latinx-serving institution. Students already have some understanding of what an HSI is supposed to feel and be like, including the grant funding that can be awarded based on this designation. Alex contributed: “Mostly, I hope there’s more support for Latinx students on campus and more encouragement for future students to come here. Our population is growing, and hopefully, with that growth comes more support.”

However, Rivera elaborates on how institutional white liberalism is operationalized when the university has not increased its support or acted against institutional racism. She stated:

So now that I’m seeing AU stating we are a Hispanic serving institution like you barely started, you haven’t done the things necessary actually to benefit the Hispanic community to be considered that. I think it’s more of a ploy. I don’t know if I can say that, but I feel like it’s STEM just trying to bring in more diversity without having the programs to support that diversity. I remember when this was mentioned in [Cultural Center] and when I was talking to some of the people, we were talking about how it was kind of unfair that AU thinks that it is an HSI when a lot of their faculty, when a lot of like their white students are racist to Hispanic people and they don’t take racism to be something serious. So like, it kind of makes me upset that they think that they’re a Hispanic-serving institution without having been providing those things to begin with.

Institutional white liberalism as avoidance of addressing racism as a systemic issue cannot be understated here. The university’s designation as an eHSI is seen by students as a superficial label that does not reflect genuine support or structural change. Student’s reflections align with the critical whiteness perspective, highlighting how white normative standards and institutional practices perpetuate the marginalization of Latinx students, even within institutions that claim to serve them.

Discussion

The findings from this study illuminate the complexities of servingness at an emerging HSI and underscore the necessity for intentional efforts to disrupt whiteness within institutional policies, practices, and campus climates. While many students expressed excitement about AU’s journey toward HSI designation, they simultaneously highlighted the persistence of white normative structures that marginalize Latinx students. As Maria explained, “How would AU combat microaggressions and even the overt racism that goes on campus?” These findings resonate with existing literature emphasizing that achieving HSI status requires more than numerical representation; it necessitates a fundamental shift in institutional culture and practices (Garcia, 2017, 2019, 2021; Franco & Hernández, 2018).

Classrooms at Aspen University, like many at PWI transitioning to HSI status, remain entrenched in white normative standards that silence and marginalize Latinx students. Students’ descriptions of racialized epistemic injustices, such as their contributions being ignored or dismissed by peers, align with the concept of “white institutional presence” (Gusa, 2010, p. 465) and whiteness as a pervasive and unexamined standard in higher education (Matias & Mackey, 2015). For instance, JBalvin shared, “When I would say something [in group discussions] . . . they just wouldn’t really acknowledge what I was saying. They just kind of stared at me and looked at me differently.” These experiences suggest that the institution has not yet addressed how white normativity shapes classroom interactions, curriculum design, and faculty-student dynamics (Irwin, 2022; Leonardo, 2004).

To counteract these dynamics, institutions must embrace epistemic justice by validating and centering the diverse knowledge systems and lived experiences of Latinx students (Fricker, 2007; Medina, 2013). Positive micro-climates, such as those created by culturally responsive faculty in first-generation programs, demonstrate the potential for classrooms to serve as affirming spaces. Molly highlighted this contrast, saying, “My [first-generation program] professor is African American, and he’s cool as hell. His teaching ways are completely different from all my other teachers. He’s so comfortable with us and connecting—it’s just really nice.” However, these pockets of support need to be scaled institution-wide to ensure equitable experiences across all disciplines and programs (Krsmanovic, 2023; Nuñez et al., 2010).

The cultural and identity spaces at Aspen University provided critical support for Latinx students, yet these spaces also reinforced the perception of segregation. Katie shared how these spaces allowed her to navigate a predominantly white campus, saying, “Even though I spend the majority of my time in classes with mostly white people, I feel okay being in that climate because I can go back to [the residence hall] and there will be a community there for me . . . It’s a balance.” This bifurcation reflects what Serrano (2020) describes as “racial microclimates” within HSIs, where students find solace in designated spaces but continue to experience marginalization in mainstream campus environments.

Additionally, the institution’s emphasis on Mexican culture within its Latinx-serving efforts perpetuates a monolithic understanding of Latinx identity, neglecting the diversity within the community. Lily, a Dominican student, explained, “Pretty much like 90% of the Latinos here are from Mexico . . . I don’t know, there aren’t that many people I can relate to, even in the Latino community.” Molly, a Cuban student, echoed this sentiment, saying, “I wish I could talk to more people from different cultures because when I met Lily, I learned so much about the Dominican Republic. I just wish there were more people from other places.” These observations align with the critique that HSIs often fail to engage with the full complexity of Latinx identities (Garcia & Dwyer, 2018) and the need for greater recognition of Latinx Indigenous and Afro-Latinx perspectives (Kovats Sánchez, 2021). To create a truly inclusive environment, institutions must adopt an intersectional approach to servingness that recognizes and celebrates the full spectrum of Latinx identities (Garcia & Cuellar, 2023; Vega et al., 2022).

AU’s approach to HSI designation reflects patterns of institutional white liberalism, where superficial diversity efforts mask deeper systemic inequities (Cabrera, 2018; Matias, 2016). Students expressed frustration with this lack of transparency and meaningful action. Rivera critiqued the institution, saying, “It feels like [AU is] just trying to bring in more diversity without having the programs to support that diversity . . . They think they’re a Hispanic-Serving Institution, but they’re not providing those things to begin with.” Elisa described her experience of marginalization as feeling like a “spec of mud on the white cloth.” Institutional white liberalism exemplifies how the systems of oppression and lack of awareness of how race and racism permeate within the institutional context. Institutional white liberalism also speaks to the university receiving all the celebratory accolades of becoming an HSI without much regard for how this designation is built off the backs of Latinx students. Still, they may not reap but of the rewards.

To move beyond this tokenistic approach, HSIs must embrace critical whiteness as a tool for interrogating and dismantling the white supremacist structures that underpin their policies and practices (Gillborn, 2005; Leonardo, 2004). This includes addressing how racial capitalism operates within HSIs, where the bodies of Latinx students are used to secure funding and recognition without corresponding investments in their success and well-being (Vega et al., 2022).

The findings highlight the need for a reimagined framework of servingness that centers intersectionality and actively involves students in institutional transformation. Garcia’s (2021) multidimensional framework for servingness provides a useful starting point, emphasizing the importance of aligning institutional practices with the diverse needs and experiences of Latinx students. Students’ voices must be at the forefront of these efforts, as they offer critical insights into the gaps and opportunities within current servingness initiatives. For instance, Alex shared her hope for increased support, saying, “Our population is growing, and hopefully, with that growth comes more support.”

For AU to transition from an eHSI to a truly HSI, it must prioritize dismantling white normativity, diversifying faculty and staff, and creating inclusive policies and practices. By leveraging the strengths of its cultural centers and programs while addressing their limitations, the institution can create a more cohesive and equitable campus climate. Fostering connections between students’ cultural and familial knowledge and their academic experiences can enhance their sense of belonging and academic success (Nuñez et al., 2010).

Implications for eHSIs

Our findings highlight the importance of intentional, systemic efforts to transform institutions beyond the superficial markers of eHSI or HSI status. While the excitement about reaching HSI designation highlights its potential as a milestone for institutional transformation, persistent issues of white normativity, performative diversity, and racialized epistemic injustice remind us that achieving this status requires a deeper commitment to change. Institutions must center equity in their efforts, utilizing qualitative and quantitative data analyzed through an equity lens to inform policies and practices. Developing metrics that reflect the lived experiences of Latinx students can help institutions move beyond normative standards of success and create inclusive environments that authentically support all students.

Additionally, institutions must adopt an intersectional approach to servingness, resisting monolithic representations of the Latinx community. Efforts should reflect the full diversity of Latinx identities, including Afro-Latinx, Indigenous Latinx, and other underrepresented groups while addressing classroom inequities through culturally responsive teaching and inclusive practices. To move beyond performative diversity, institutions must critically examine and dismantle the white normative structures embedded in their policies and campus climates. By embracing intentional, student-centered strategies and reimagining servingness through equity and justice, HSIs can fulfill their potential to create humane educational environments.

Recommendations

As institutions seek or hold the HSI designation, it is imperative that students, both undergraduate and graduate levels, are a part of the decision-making process. Students from a diverse representation of the Latinx diaspora, white students, and other racially minoritized students should be engaged in these conversations and decisions. Institutions may form committees to seek the designation or to enhance their servingness efforts; it is important that there is a clear vision and a commitment toward equity and justice. Echo chambers of senior leadership making decisions will not serve Latinx students and other minoritized and marginalized students, faculty, and staff. A clear message and purpose for organizational transformation must be at the center and continue throughout the process. The motivation must be to disrupt normative policies and practices which do not serve Latinx students. If the institution is unwilling to engage in this type of transformation, while it will only occur after a while, administrators must ask themselves, to what end is our motivation?

Practitioners from Latinx Cultural Centers and race and ethnic studies faculty can be better resourced and a resource on how to embed servingness throughout departments and in ways that resonate with students. Campuses and the Department of Education rely on students to self-report their ethnicity (Hispanic and non-Hispanic) and race as defined by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), which erases Latinx students who are Afro-Latinx, Indigenous Latinx, and Asian Latinx (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, n.d.). Under the Bident Administration, alternative reporting models existed, such as those used by the Office of Minority Health within the Department of the Health Resources and Services Administration (see https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/explanation-data-standards-race-ethnicity-sex-primary-language-and-disability) providing more nuanced ethnic and racial categorization. These models allow for reporting Hispanic only, Hispanic and another race, and other races (non-Hispanic), offering a more comprehensive representation of Latinx student diversity.

To counteract white liberalism, HSIs must commit to equity and justice by critically examining and transforming their policies and practices (Gillborn, 2005). This includes increasing transparency, actively addressing instances of racism and discrimination, and fostering a campus climate that genuinely values and supports Latinx students (Leonardo, 2004; Wekker, 2016). Approaches for incorporating culturally responsive teaching pedagogy for Latinx and students of color will be critical in addressing “weird” classroom settings (Krsmanovic, 2023). Emerging HSIs and HSIs should invest in faculty hiring and development policies and processes that promote those faculty meeting the needs of Latinx and minoritized students in their classrooms. Addressing these systemic issues will help eHSIs and HSIs move beyond enrollment and toward servingness. By implementing these recommendations, HSIs can better serve their Latinx student populations and create a more inclusive and equitable educational environment. Recognizing and leveraging students’ cultural and familial knowledge while actively challenging white normative standards and white liberalism will foster genuine servingness and support the academic, cultural, and social success of Latinx students (Cisneros et al., 2025; Nuñez et al., 2010). The time for transformative change is now—HSIs must move beyond mere representation to become true empowerment agents for Latinx student success.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Susana M. Muñoz

Notes

Author Biographies

Susana M. Muñoz (she/her/ella)is an Associate Professor of Higher Education and Leader for Equity Initiatives and Faculty Development in the School of Education at Colorado State University Her scholarly interests center on the experiences of minoritized populations in higher education. Specifically, she focuses her research on issues of equity, identity, and campus climate for undocumented Latinx students, while employing perspectives such as legal violence, racist nativism, Chicana feminist epistemology to identify and deconstruct issues of power and inequities as experienced by these populations.

Fabiola Mora (she/her/ella) is a scholar-practitioner committed to creating equitable and just environments. As a first-generation, queer Latina, she brings lived experience to her advocacy for historically minoritized communities. She has worked across education and other public institutions to advance systemic change efforts. She currently serves as EDI Director for the Denver Public Library system, as an affiliate faculty member at MSU Denver, and is a doctoral candidate in Higher Education Leadership at Colorado State University.

Jade Silva Tovar (she/her/ella) leads as a Latina administrator at e/HSIs for over a decade. She navigates her experiences as a Mexican American woman, Chingona scholar, and a first-generation graduate from Iowa. Jade is completing her PhD from Colorado State University’s Higher Education Leadership program. She holds a M.Ed. from Arizona State University and a B.A. from the University of Iowa.

Daisy Torres-Baez (she/ella/pay) is an educator focusing on centering invisible communities and identities. She is pursuing a doctorate through Colorado State University’s Higher Education Leadership program. As a Peruvian American daughter of immigrants whose family speaks Quechua and Spanish, she strives to advance racial justice at work, in her community, through research, and as a mother.

References

Aguilar-Smith

(2021). Seeking to serve or $erve? Hispanic-serving institutions’ race-evasive pursuit of racialized funding. AERA Open, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211057097

Aspen University. (2024). Embracing our future: Aspen University’s mission as a Hispanic Serving Institution. Office for Inclusive Excellence.

Bonilla-Silva

(2003). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield.

Cabrera

N. L.

(2018). Where is the Racial Theory in Critical Race Theory?: A constructive criticism of the Crits. Review of Higher Education, 42(1), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2018.0030

Cabrera

N. L.

Watson

J. S.

Franklin

J. D.

(2016). Racial arrested development: A critical whiteness analysis of the campus ecology. Journal of College Student Development, 57(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2016.0014

Cannella

C. M.

(2008). Faith in process, faith in people: Confronting policies of social disinvestment with PAR as pedagogy for expansion. In Cammarota

Fine

(Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion (pp. 189–212). Routledge.

Carter

T. L.

Patterson

J. A.

(2019). A community college HSI: The effect of an HIS designation on organizational identity. Community College Review, 47(4), 360–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552119864412

Cataño

Gonzalez

. (2021). Examining servingness at California community college Hispanic-serving institutions (HSI) for LGBTQ+ Latinx students. Journal of the Alliance for Hispanic Serving Institution Educators, 1(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.5070/H511153437

Charmaz

(2011). Grounded theory methods in social justice research. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 359–380). Sage.

10.

Cisneros

Dura

Convertino

Frausto Hernandez

(2025). Compromiso, pertenencia, and empoderamiento: How faculty at a fronterizx HSI perceive and enact servingness to become empowerment agents for Latinx student success. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 24(1), 40–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/15381927241263301

11.

Cuellar

M. G.

Johnson-Ahorlu

R. N.

(2023). Racialized Experiences Off and On Campus: Contextualizing Latina/o Students’ Perceptions of Climate at an Emerging Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). Urban Education, 58(9), 1973–2002. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920927772

12.

Cuellar

M. G.

Garcia-Louis

Gonzalez

L. S.

(2020). Advancing an asset-based framework for Latinx student success: Moving beyond the deficit approach in Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). In Doran

Crisp

(Eds.), Crisis and opportunity in the age of COVID-19: The role of HSIs in recovery, reform, and prosperity (pp. 125–146). Rutgers University Press.

13.

DiAngelo

(2011). White fragility. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3(3), 54–70.

14.

Excelencia in Education. (2024, May). Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) factbook: 2022-23. Author. https://www.edexcelencia.org/research/publications/hispanic-serving-institutions-hsis-factbook

15.

Franco

M. A.

Hernández

(2018). Assessing the capacity of Hispanic serving institutions to serve LatinX students: Moving beyond compositional diversity. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2018(177), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.20268

16.

Fricker

(2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001

17.

Garcia

G. A.

(2017). What does it mean to be Latinx-serving? Testing the utility of the typology of HSI organizational identities. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 109–138. https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.363

18.

Garcia

G. A.

(2019). Becoming Hispanic-serving institutions: Opportunities for colleges and universities. Johns Hopkins University Press.

19.

Garcia

G. A.

(2021). A love letter to HSI grant seekers/implementers and the federal agencies that fund them: Defining servingness in research, practice, & policy. Journal of the Alliance for Hispanic Serving Institution Educators, 1(1), 1–14.

20.

Garcia

G. A.

Cuellar

M. G.

(2018). Exploring curricular and cocurricular effects on civic engagement at emerging Hispanic-serving institutions. Teachers College Record, 120(4), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000407

21.

Garcia

G. A.

Cuellar

M. G.

(2023). Advancing “intersectional servingness” in research, practice, and policy with Hispanic-serving institutions. AERA Open, 9, 23328584221148421. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221148421

22.

Garcia

G. A.

Dwyer

(2018). Exploring college students’ identification with an organizational identity for serving Latinx students at a Hispanic serving institution (HSI) and an emerging HSI. American Journal of Education, 124(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1086/695609

23.

Garcia

G. A.

Núñez

A. M.

Sansone

V. A.

(2019). Toward a multidimensional conceptual framework for understanding “servingness” in Hispanic-Serving Institutions: A synthesis of the research. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 745–784. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319864591

24.

Gillborn

(2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness, critical race theory, and education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500132346

25.

Gonzales

L. D.

Núñez

A. M.

Clemmons

Acosta

(2023). Epistemic justice in the academy: Cultivating institutional spaces and practices that honor marginalized ways of doing and being. In Crisp

Gonzales

L. D.

López

(Eds.), Studying Hispanic-serving institutions: A research framework and empirical foundations (pp. 158–175). Rutgers University Press.

26.

González

(2021). Latinx faculty in Hispanic-serving institutions: Challenges in academic leadership and the persistence of white institutional presence. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 20(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192719893947

27.

Greene

Oesterreich

H. A.

(2012). White profs at Hispanic-Serving Institutions: Radical revolutionaries or complicit colonists? Journal of Latinos and Education, 11(3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2012.686351

28.

Gusa

D. L.

(2010). White institutional presence: The impact of Whiteness on campus climate. Harvard Educational Review, 80(4), 464–489. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.80.4.p5j483825u110002

29.

Hurtado

Carter

D. F.

(1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 324–345. https://doi.org/10.2307/2673270

30.

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. (n.d.). Race/ethnicity: Collecting data for reporting purposes. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/report-your-data/race-ethnicity-collecting-data-for-reporting-purposes

31.

Irwin

L. N.

(2022). White normativity: Tracing historical and contemporary (re)productions of whiteness in higher education. In Foste

Tevis

T. L.

Davis

(Eds.), Critical whiteness praxis in higher education considerations for the pursuit of racial justice on campus (pp. 85–115). Routledge.

32.

Kovats Sánchez

. (2021). “If we don’t do it, nobody is going to talk about it”: Indigenous students disrupting Latinidad at Hispanic-serving institutions. AERA Open, 7, 23328584211059194. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211059194

33.

Krsmanovic

(2023). Becoming a Hispanic-serving institution: A case study of faculty perspectives on teaching philosophies and pedagogical stance. Journal of Latinos and Education, 22(3), 1005–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2021.1899923

34.

Leonardo

(2004). The color of supremacy: Beyond the discourse of ‘white privilege’. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(2), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2004.00057.x

35.

Lujan

McNaughtan

(2024, May). Moscas en la leche: A critical evaluation of Hispanic-Serving Institution campus spaces through photovoice methodology. The Journal of Higher Education, 95(3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2024.2355077

36.

Lujan

McNaughtan

Williams

(2024). “Not simply the act of enrolling”: Defining servingness at Hispanic-serving community colleges. In Doran

(Ed.), Minority serving community colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2024(205), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20617

37.

Matias

C. E.

(2016). Feeling white: Whiteness, emotionality, and education. Sense Publishers.

38.

Matias

C. E.

Mackey

(2015). Breakin’ down whiteness in antiracist teaching: Introducing critical whiteness pedagogy. Urban Review, 48(1), 32–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-015-0344-7

39.

Medina

(2013). The epistemology of resistance: Gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and resistant imaginations. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199929023.001.0001

40.

Morrell

(2008). Six summers of YPAR: Learning, action, and change in urban education. In Cammarota

Fine

(Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion (pp. 155–184). Routledge.

41.

Nuñez

A. M.

Ramalho

E. M.

Cuero

K. K.

(2010). Pedagogy for equity: Teaching in a Hispanic-serving institution. Innovation in Higher Education, 35(3), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-010-9139-7

42.

Ortega

K. E.

Reyes

N. A. S.

(2022). Mapping racial geographies of violence on campus: A critical race spatial analysis of Latinx student perspectives at a predominantly white institution. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 15(2), 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000199

43.

Pérez

P. A.

Ceja

(2015). Higher education access and choice for Latino students: Critical findings and theoretical perspectives. Routledge.

44.

Picower

(2009). The unexamined whiteness of teaching: How white teachers maintain and enact dominant racial ideologies. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320902995475

45.

Saldaña

(2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

46.

Salinas

(2020). The Complexity of the “x” in Latinx: How Latinx/a/o Students Relate to, Identify With, and Understand the Term Latinx. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(2), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192719900382

47.

Sanchez

M. E.

(2019). Perceptions of campus climate and experiences of racial microaggressions for Latinos at Hispanic-serving institutions. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 18(3), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192717739351

48.

Scott

B. L.

Muñoz

S. M.

Scott

S. B.

(2024). How whiteness operates at a Hispanic serving institution: A qualitative case study of faculty, staff, and administrators. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 17(4), 563–574. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000438

49.

Serrano

(2020). ‘Finding home’: Campus racial microclimates and academic homeplaces at a Hispanic-Serving Institution. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 23(5), 739–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2020.1718086

50.

Scharrón-del Río

M. R.

Aja

A. A.

(2020). Latinx: Inclusive language as liberation praxis. Journal of Latinx Psychology, 8(1), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/lat0000140

51.

Sleeter

C. E.

(1993). Advancing a white discourse: A critical review of whiteness literature. Urban Education, 33(1), 69–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085993033001004

52.

Torres

Zerquera

(2012). Hispanic-serving institutions: Patterns, predictions, and implications for informing policy discussions. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 11(3), 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192712441371

53.

USC Race and Equity Center. (n.d.). National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climate (NAC). University of Southern California. https://race.usc.edu/naccc

54.

Vega

B. E.

Liera

Boveda

(2022). Hispanic-serving institutions as racialized organizations: Elevating intersectional consciousness to reframe the “H” in HSIs. AERA Open, 8, 23328584221095074. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221095074

55.

Wekker

(2016). White Innocence: Paradoxes of Colonialism and Race. Duke University Press.