(Un)conditional hospitality: Examining experiences of welcoming and recognition of ethnic minority students in a private university in Ecuador

• In Event: Belonging and inclusion in higher education: Students' experiences at home and abroad (II)

Proposal

Inspired by the existing literature on issues of coloniality, race and affirmative action in Ecuador (see Johnson, 2021; Martínez, 2018; Martínez & de la Torre, 2010; Nesterova & Jackson, 2021; Walsh, 2015) and ongoing events such as the Paro Nacional de 2022, this study is intent on understanding the complex systems indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian students are required to navigate in the effort to access, persist and eventually succeed in higher education.

Through a longitudinal and iterative approach, this study follows a cohort of students who are recipients of the “ethnic minority scholarship” offered by a prestigious private university located in a large urban center in Ecuador through their four-years of higher education (the average duration of completion for a degree). In this study I utilize the concept of hospitality, which analytically draws attention to questions of normativity and otherness within educational spaces (see Shirazi, 2018), and examines who (and in what conditions) can claim belongingness and be recognized as belonging.

To better understand indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian students’ experiences within a higher education setting, this study employs an ecological systems theory as proposed by Bronfenbreener (1992). An ecological systems theory is centered on the belief that to improve higher education policies and practices we must look beyond the context of the institution, which is generally limited to classroom practices. Rather, we must consider the socio-historical processes that include the continued symbolic and epistemic violence imparted by the legacy of colonialism that often silences and renders minority students as invisible or deficient within institutional spaces (see Stein et al., 2016; Quijano, 2000, Wynter, 2003).

Methodologically, I draw on a qualitative longitudinal design. The choice of a longitudinal approach is based on the common understanding that exploring a phenomenon through multiple points of time allows for a more robust and critical understanding of notions of change than an approach that relies exclusively on recall (see Bamattre et al., 2019; Hermanowicz, 2016). My approach is also iterative, abiding by what Bartlett and Vavrus (2017) refer to as “following the inquiry”. In this sense, the design is consistently adapted and adjusted to best respond to emerging lines of inquiry and serendipitous finding.

In terms of design, this study is comprised of two distinct phases. The first phase occurred throughout the 2022-2023 academic year and consisted of in-depth interviews with 20 key informants: 16 current/former recipients of the ethnic minority scholarship and 4 staff members associated to the university´s Ethnic Diversity Program. The goal of these interviews was to gather additional data points for comparison and triangulation, while gaining added insights that can directly shape the themes and questions addressed during the second phase which will begin in the 2023-2024 academic year and will focus on following a cohort of 12 new ethnic minority scholarship recipients through their four-years of higher education. In this phase I draw on what Murray et al., (2009) and others refer to as “serial interviewing”, a method suited for “research that aims to explore evolving and complex processes or when time is needed to develop relationship between researcher and participant” (p. 958). Participants will be interviewed during each academic year, for a total of 4 interviews per participant.

For this presentation I will focus on findings from the key informant interviews. Tentative themes to de discussed include:

1. While students perceived university initiatives as well-intentioned, they believed that it ultimately promoted culturalist constructions of their identities, which often include expectations of codified and rigid forms of behavior. Students struggled with these expectations, as compliance was viewed as reproducing problematic stereotypes about their backgrounds.
2. Both in the university and in their previous experiences, students often described their statuses as “good students” as a shield to structural and daily encounters with racism. In these descriptions students often discussed how their full-humanity and worth weren’t always assumed or given, but rather predicated on their abilities to “prove” themselves academically.
3. Students often drew on feelings of responsibility towards their communities and devotion to their families as key motivators to persist, despite the multiple obstacles they encountered. Nonetheless, students (especially indigenous students from rural communities) struggled with their statuses within the university believing that while it was an opportunity to “give back”, it also could alienate or distance them from their communities.

Author

• Tiago Bittencourt, Universidad San Francisco de Quito