More than two months after the Education Department announced plans to lock out undocumented students from postsecondary career and technical education, colleges largely remain confused on how—or whether—to proceed and fearful of the impact this could have on students and their enrollment numbers. 

The change stems from an executive order earlier this year to deny public benefits to undocumented immigrants. The new interpretation of federal benefits includes Perkins funding for career and technical education at the postsecondary level. Adult education programs were also targeted. 

K-12 CTE courses are protected for now under a longstanding Supreme Court ruling that states can’t prevent undocumented students from attending a public school, but it’s unclear how dual enrollment might be impacted. 

A Call for Clarity: Perkins funding doesn’t go to individual students, but rather is used to build CTE programs, buy equipment, and even support professional development. This makes the new mandate difficult to implement and raises more questions than answers. 

“The notice of interpretation is at odds with decades of how this policy has been understood,” says Corinne Kentor, manager of research and policy at the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration.

“It doesn’t come with a whole lot of directives about how the department envisions implementing these new restrictions. It’s a lot of confusion and a lot of concern about the potential administrative burden on the folks who are responsible for running these programs on campuses. … People don’t quite know what to do with the notice and what exactly their obligations might be.”

Kentor has heard from colleges taking a range of approaches, including some that are reviewing programs. Others are holding off on doing anything until there is further guidance from the administration, which is what Kentor’s organization advises. 

Following the announcement, a group of organizations including the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE) compiled a three-page list of questions for Education Secretary Linda McMahon asking for clarity. Questions include how the department distinguishes between direct and indirect public benefits if, for example, Perkins funds are used to purchase equipment that is broadly available to all students. It also includes questions about braided funding, institutions’ roles as sponsors for registered apprenticeships, and enforceability. So far, McMahon has not responded.

These questions came directly from members of the organizations, says Alisha Hyslop, chief policy, research, and content officer at ACTE. Many were also concerned about the logistical hurdle of finding out the immigration status of all students—a question many institutions don’t ask. 

“The biggest impact is an administrative one,” Hyslop says. “It creates a lot of confusion and uncertainty about how these funds can be spent.”

Dual Enrollment Dilemma

One of the biggest questions that has emerged is how the new interpretation of Perkins funding might impact dual enrollment. Most high school students participating in dual enrollment take general education classes, not CTE courses. But in recent years some states, including Texas, have worked to close this gap. 

John Fink, senior research associate and program lead at the Community College Research Center, says the notice from the Education Department could derail some of these efforts. 

“One of the broader challenges with expanding opportunities for CTE dual enrollment is the funding component because generally a CTE course is more expensive to deliver than a gen ed course,” Fink says. “If the federal support was questioned or felt precarious, then that could stymie the growth of dual enrollment as an on-ramp into career technical programs offered by community colleges.”

Some states have required students to prove they are citizens or legally documented immigrants to participate in dual enrollment, while others don’t collect residency information at all. For many undocumented students, dual enrollment has been the key to higher education, offering low-cost or free college classes before they have to pay full tuition after graduation. 

Dianne Lassai Barker, deputy executive director of policy and program for the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships, says she’s heard from many institutions that they are waiting to see if the administration will clarify how the policy is to be enacted. In the meantime, many are leaning on system or state general counsels or their state legislatures to clarify policies on undocumented students. Even certain AP or IB classes funded through Perkins, including some computer science courses, may raise questions about whether undocumented students can participate. 

Texas Bellwether: In Texas, the Perkins change comes on the heels of another blow for undocumented students in higher education. Two decades ago, Texas became the first state to allow undocumented students to pay in-state tuition for higher education, but in June that decision was reversed. Dual enrollment, including in CTE courses, has exploded in the state in recent years. The ruling could undermine the ability of students to fully benefit from dual credit and complete their postsecondary credentials after graduating high school due to the significantly higher cost. What happens in Texas as a result could be telling for what happens in the rest of the country, at least in red states.

Jonathan Feinstein, Texas State Director at the Education Trust, says parsing how the new state and federal restrictions apply is made more difficult by efforts to make high school and college more seamless. Both the Higher Education Coordinating Board and the Texas Education Agency have been pushing institutions to connect K-12 and college pathways through Perkins-funded initiatives. 

“What constitutes a postsecondary program in an era where our education systems, especially here in Texas, have increasingly tried to blur that line?,” Feinstein says.

A ‘Chilling Effect’

For now, it appears most institutions are not making big changes in screening students based on immigration status or barring them from CTE programs. But education and immigration advocates warn about the impact that these statements from the White House will have on their future enrollment and job prospects. 

“With this new guidance, we’re concerned about not only undocumented students, but the chilling effect this could potentially have on all students from immigrant families,” says Alice Dolbow, a senior advisor at the North Carolina-based nonprofit LatinxEd.

Even if students’ access to postsecondary CTE courses ends up not being limited due to unenforceability or if a new administration reverses the interpretation, Dolbow says the message can impact students for years.

In 2009, North Carolina began allowing undocumented students to attend community colleges if they paid out-of-state tuition. South Carolina still doesn’t allow this. As a result, Dolbow says her organization is still fighting misinformation about students’ ability to enroll. Often due to fear, students will not ask about their eligibility and assume they can’t attend. 

Even so, Dolbow is confident most undocumented students will still find a way to get training and work. 

“The local economies still need the work, they still need the skills, they still need the people, whether it’s through entrepreneurship or businesses that start sponsoring training programs,” she says. “That’s what will keep local economies growing if folks are locked out of the traditional postsecondary pathways. Communities are resilient in that way, making a path when one isn’t offered to them.”