User:RaginiGhosh/sandbox

This is a user sandbox.

Selecting possible articles

Area

1. Crime in Guatemala or 2014 American immigration crisis: A significant portion of the student population at this high school comes from Central America, and in particular from Guatemala. Working on these two articles will help me to know more about the causes of immigration and refugee movement from these areas to the United States, which will enable me to have a better understanding of the lives of the people I shall interact with in my practice experience. The “Crime in Guatemala” article currently has grammatical errors and a lack of statistical citations for the statements made in some sections. I would like to further develop this article by improving the quality of the written content and adding more citations. Alternatively, the second article focuses more on the broad range factors behind the movement of people from Central America to the United States, which includes not only the causes of immigration but also the responses to immigration. In this article, I would like to focus on the distinction between those who are immigrants and those are refugees from Central America, and write about the U.S. administration’s varied response according to these two statuses, if applicable.

2. Oakland, California: While this article covers a lot of area (both literally and figuratively in scope), it is relevant to my Practice Experience as I will be working in a high school in Oakland wherein I will be mentoring students who mostly live in Oakland and further in the Bay Area. Developing a nuanced background knowledge of the spaces that these students live in, through researching and contributing to this page, will help me to become more informed and sensitized as a mentor. I would like to note that during orientations provided by my practice organization, I was informed or given the idea that these students often have to undertake a long commute from generally low-income or “unsafe” neighborhoods to the high school. This piece of information intrigued me as it was indicated to be a trend for most newcomers who join the educational programs provided by my practice organization. Therefore, I would like to research more on this topic before beginning my practice experience, but keeping in mind that my research shouldn’t intrude on the personal lives of the students through this knowledge. In particular, I would like to contribute to the “Shifting of cultures” section to reflect on the changing demographics of Oakland through immigration and refugee resettlement in more detail.

3. Immigration by country: This article is relevant to my practice experience in terms of understanding how the United States is an (arguably) popular option for immigrants and refugees to resettle here. This article blurs the distinction between those who immigrate to America and America’s response to those who immigrate to this country. The introduction of the article and the section on “Region specific factors for immigration” for the United States lack content and I would like to add more information to these sections.

Sector

1. Humanitarian aid: While this article is not directly tied to my practice experience, it is connected to the lives of the people who find themselves connected to my practice organization, to an extent. This article currently barely has any region specific information on how the emerging humanitarian aid industry is responding to the refugee crisis; the article only describes the various procedures and acts of aid workers in humanitarian aid. If I worked on this article, I would like to contribute by adding how humanitarian aid is distributed globally, including its origins and its destination.

2. Third country resettlement: This article talks about a form of refugee aid/action that pertains to the relocation of refugees globally, which forms the context of my practice experience as my practice organization attempts to supplement refugee resettlement with assisting the transition to a new life in the Bay Area. While there is not enough literature on the work of other similar organizations that help newcomers transition to new environments, this article nonetheless helps me to the understand what I see is the first step in the process of resettlement. This article currently is heavily based on statistics provided by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and contains data that can be updated as the latest records mentioned here are from 2014.

3. Tutor: In my practice experience, I will be working as a tutor and therefore this article is highly relevant for me. Contributing to this article will not only help me to learn more about the roles and history of tutoring but will also allow me to improve the legitimacy of the article. Currently, this article faces low quality and insufficient content issues, needs more citations, and requires a restructuring or reframing of most sections to reflect a coherent progression of the topics that fall under this article.

Evaluating possible articles

Area article: 2014 American immigration crisis

The introduction to the article lacks a brief description of the causes of the immigration crisis, and relies heavily on a statistical overview of the issue at hand. Limited information on Resources section. Knowledge on what happened to immigrants post immigration. Unclear whether these people became immigrants or refugees after they came to the U.S.

Sector article: Tutor

The introduction provides minimal information on the definition of a tutor. The explanation is currently mostly US-centric because it only mentions the perception of tutors in America. The subheadings in the article can be expanded to cover more information on the topic, such as the history or the origins of tutoring. Potential revised outline for article:

1. History: How tutoring came to be, how it's different from the role of a teacher,
2. Geography of Tutoring: If possible, find trends/patterns in types of tutoring across the world to give an overview of how popular tutoring is? Popular tutoring agencies in countries?
3. Types of Tutoring: Explain each type of tutoring and the psychological and social effects of each type? (Other types/forms of tutoring/methods similar to tutoring: mentoring, advising, college students mentoring in context of culture of volunteerism, tutoring newcomers and its connection to affective labor, online/video tutoring) Bring in the emergence of tutoring low-income populations
4. Types of tutors: Are there any trends in the people hired as tutors with respect to their identity in terms of proficiency in language, socioeconomic identity, aptitude in certain subject areas, professional qualifications or experience, adept teaching skills etc.
5. Social effects: What are the particular effects of each type of tutoring on students in terms of advantages, disadvantages, socioeconomic effects, development of cognitive and emotional skills (not restricted to IQ or EQ) etc.

Bibliography

2014 American immigration Crisis:

1. “6 U.S. Code § 279 - Children’s Affairs.” LII / Legal Information Institute. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/6/279.
2. Batalova, Jeanne Batalova Gabriel Lesser and Jeanne. “Central American Immigrants in the United States.” migrationpolicy.org, April 4, 2017. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/central-american-immigrants-united-states.
3. Brown, Anna, and Eileen Patten. “Hispanics of Honduran Origin in the United States, 2011.” Pew Research Center’s Hispanic Trends Project (blog), June 19, 2013. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2013/06/19/hispanics-of-honduran-origin-in-the-united-states-2011/.
4. “Central American Child Migrants.” UNICEF USA. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.unicefusa.org/mission/emergencies/child-refugees/central-american-child-migrants.
5. Chishti, Muzaffar, and Faye Hipsman. “The Child and Family Migration Surge of Summer 2014: A Short-Lived Crisis with a Lasting Impact.” Journal of International Affairs 68, no. 2 (Spring/Summer  ///Spring/Summer2015 2015): 95–114.
6. CNN, Tal Kopan. “DHS Ends Program for Central American Minors.” CNN. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/trump-ending-central-american-minors-program/index.html.
7. “Immigration Terms and Definitions Involving Aliens | Internal Revenue Service.” Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens.
8. “In-Country Refugee/Parole Processing for Minors in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala (Central American Minors – CAM).” USCIS. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.uscis.gov/CAM.
9. Massey, Douglas S.1. “The Mexico-U.S. Border in the American Imagination.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 160, no. 2 (June 2016): 160–77.
10. Musalo, Karen, and Eunice Lee. “Seeking a Rational Approach to a Regional Refugee Crisis: Lessons from the Summer 2014 ‘Surge’ of Central American Women and Children at the US-Mexico Border.” Journal on Migration and Human Security 5, no. 1 (March 9, 2017): 137–79. https://doi.org/10.14240/jmhs.v5i1.78.
11. Rosenberg, Mark B. “Narcos and Politicos: The Politics of Drug Trafficking in Honduras.” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 30, no. 2/3 (1988): 143–65. https://doi.org/10.2307/165984.
12. “Spooked by Trump, Central American Immigrants Turn to Mexico.” Reuters, May 5, 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-central-america/spooked-by-trump-central-american-immigrants-turn-to-mexico-idUSKBN1811BA.
13. “The Hispanic Population: 2010,” n.d., 16.
14. “Undocumented Migration from the Northern Triangle of Central America.” Crisis Group, October 25, 2017. https://www.crisisgroup.org/latin-america-caribbean/central-america/el-salvador/undocumented-migration-northern-triangle-central-america.
15. “U.S. Border Patrol Southwest Border Apprehensions by Sector FY2017 | U.S. Customs and Border Protection.” Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/usbp-sw-border-apprehensions-fy2017.

Tutor:

1. Alzahrani, Turkey, and Melinda Leko. “The Effects of Peer Tutoring on the Reading Comprehension Performance of Secondary Students With Disabilities: A Systematic Review.” Reading & Writing Quarterly 34, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2017.1302372.
2. Barkhuizen, Gary. “Investigating Language Tutor Social Inclusion Identities.” The Modern Language Journal 101, no. S1 (January 1, 2017): 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12369.
3. Bray, Mark. “Shadow Education: Comparative Perspectives on the Expansion and Implications of Private Supplementary Tutoring.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 77 (April 2013): 412–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.03.096.
4. Chi, Michelene T. H.1, [email protected], Marguerite2 Roy, and Robert G. M.2 Hausmann. “Observing Tutorial Dialogues Collaboratively: Insights About Human Tutoring Effectiveness From Vicarious Learning.” Cognitive Science 32, no. 2 (April 2008): 301–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210701863396.
5. Chu, Hsiao-Lei. “Private Tutoring, Wealth Constraint and Higher Education.” Pacific Economic Review 20, no. 4 (October 2015): 608–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0106.12122.
6. Gardner, Ralph III, Michele M. Nobel, Terri Hessler, Christopher D. Yawn, and Timothy E. Heron. “Tutoring System Innovations: Past Practice to Future Prototypes.” Intervention in School & Clinic 43, no. 2 (November 2007): 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512070430020701.
7. Graesser, Arthur C. “Evolution of Advanced Learning Technologies in the 21st Century.” Theory Into Practice 52, no. sup1 (October 20, 2013): 93.
8. Levin, Henry M. “Cost-Effectiveness and Educational Policy.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 10, no. 1 (1988): 51. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163864.
9. Paolitto, Diana Pritchard. “The Effect of Cross-Age Tutoring on Adolescence: An Inquiry into Theoretical Assumptions.” Review of Educational Research 46, no. 2 (1976): 215–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170039.
10. Sligar, Steven R.1, Christopher D.1 Pelletier, Heidi Stone1 Bonner, Elizabeth1 Coghill, Daniel2 Guberman, Xiaoming1 Zeng, Joyce J.1 Newman, Dorothy1 Muller, and Allen1 Dennis. “Student Perceptions of Online Tutoring Videos.” New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development 29, no. 4 (Fall 2017): 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/nha3.20196.
11. Song, Yang, George Loewenstein, and Yaojiang Shi. “Heterogeneous Effects of Peer Tutoring: Evidence from Rural Chinese Middle Schools.” Research in Economics 72 (March 1, 2018): 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rie.2017.05.002.
12. Valerio, Anna. “Private Tutoring in Modern Times. Is It Really Effective?” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 70 (January 2013): 979–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.148.

Tutor

A tutor is a person who provides assistance or tutelage to one or more people on certain subject areas or skills. The tutor spends a few hours on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis to transfer his/her expertise on the topic or skill to the student. Tutoring can take place in different settings, such as a classroom, a formal tutoring center, or the home of the tutor/learner. As a teaching-learning method, tutoring is characterized by how it differs from formal teaching methods on the basis of the (in)formality of the setting as well as the flexibility in pedagogical methods in terms of duration, pace of teaching, evaluation and tutor-tutee rapport.

History

Tutoring began as an informal and unstructured method of educational assistance, dating back to periods in Ancient Greece. Tutors operated on an ad-hoc or impromptu basis in varied and unfixed settings wherein the main goal of the tutor was to impart knowledge to the learner in order to help the latter gain proficiency in the subject area. Methods of tutoring only began to become more structured after the 20th century through focus and specialisation in the training of tutors, application of tutoring, and evaluation of tutors. From the 20th century onwards, with the rapid spread of mainstream education, the demand for tutoring has also increased as a way to supplement formal education.

Types of tutoring

There can be an existing overlap between different types of tutoring with respect to the setting or location of tutoring, the size of tutor-learner pairings/groups, and the method of tutoring provided, for example, one-on-one peer tutoring can take place through online tutoring. Tutoring is typically private since it is exists independent of the system of public and private education, that is, one can be enrolled in public/private schooling and attend private tutoring services.

Academic coaching

Academic coaching is a type of mentoring applied to academics. Coaching involves a collaborative approach. Coaches try to help students learn how they best learn and how to operate in an academic environment. Tutors help students learn the material in individual courses while coaches help students learn how to be successful in school. In college, that includes such topics as: study skills, time management, stress management, effective reading, note-taking, test-taking, and understanding how to use a syllabus. Academic coaches meet with the student regularly throughout the semester. Coaches work with students in all kinds of situations, not just those who are struggling academically. Academic coaching is also serves to help students prepare for entrance exams to gain entry to schools or universities, and it is a particularly popular in Asia. For example, in India, a majority of students, be it of any class or stream, visit a coaching center or a "study circle."

Peer tutoring

Peer tutoring refers to the method of tutoring that involves members of the same peer group teaching or tutoring one another. The characteristics of a peer tutoring group/pairing vary across age, socioeconomic class, gender, ethnicity. It has been defined as "a class of practices and strategies that employs peers as one-on-one teachers to provide individualized instruction, practice, repetition, and clarification of concepts"

Online tutoring

Main article: Online tutoring

Online tutoring is another way for a student to receive academic help, either scheduled or on-demand. Sessions are done through an application where a student and tutor can communicate. Common tools include chat, whiteboard, web conferencing, teleconferencing, online videos and other specialized applets which make it easier to convey information back and forth. Online tutoring has relatively recently emerged as a mechanism to provide tutoring services in contrast to more traditional in-person teaching. One of the potential drawbacks of online tutoring stems from the influx or sensory overload of information from different materials. "For example, mate- rial presented in multiple modalities run the risk of interrupting the learner from a coherent learn- ing experience, of imposing a “split attention” effect (the mind cannot concentrate on two things simultaneously), or of overloading the learner’s limited supply of cognitive resources."

Some examples of online tutoring services include Chegg, Wyzant, Khan Academy, Skooli.

Home-based tutoring

Main article: In-home tutoring

In-home tutoring is a form of tutoring that occurs in the home. Most often the tutoring relates to an academic subject or test preparation. This is in contrast to tutoring centers or tutoring provided through after-school programs. The service most often involves one-on-one attention provided to the pupil. Due to the informal and private nature of in-home tutoring, there is limited substantial or conclusive information on in-home tutoring.

Tutoring agencies

Some prominent tutoring agencies include:

• Kumon
• National Tutoring Association
• Oxford Learning
• Sylvan Learning
• Princeton Review
• Manhattan Prep
• Modern Education

Effects

Academic performance

Studies have found that peer tutoring provides academic benefits for learners across the subject areas of "reading, mathematics, science, and social studies" Peer tutoring has also been found to be an effective teaching method in enhancing the reading comprehension skills of students, especially that of students with a low academic performance at the secondary level in schools. Additionally, peer tutoring has been proven especially useful for those with learning disabilities at the elementary level, while there is mixed evidence showing the effectiveness of peer tutoring for those at the secondary level.

Economic effects

Although certain types of tutoring arrangements can require a salary for the tutor, typically tutoring is free of cost and thus financially affordable for learners. The cost-effectiveness of tutoring can prove to be especially beneficial for learners from low-income backgrounds or resource-strapped regions. In contrast, paid tutoring arrangements can create or further highlight socioeconomic disparities between low-income, middle-income and high-income populations. A study found that access to private tutoring was less financially affordable for low-income families, who thus benefited less from private tutoring as compared to high-income populations, who had the resources to profit from private tutoring.

Issues

Tutoring as "Shadow Education"

Tutoring has also emerged as a supplement to public and private schooling in many countries. The supplementary nature of tutoring is a feature in the domain of what some scholars have termed "shadow education". Shadow education has been defined as "a set of educational activities that occur out side formal schooling and are designed to enhance the student's formal school career." The term "shadow" has four components to it: firstly, the existence of and need for tutoring is produced by the existence of the formal education system; secondly, the formal education system is the mainstream system and thus tutoring is its shadow; thirdly, the focus remains on mainstream education in schools; fourthly, tutoring is largely informal and unstructured as compared to formal or mainstream education. As a consequence of the popularity of shadow education, private tutoring can sometimes overshadow mainstream education with more priority given to enrolling in private tutoring centers. Mark Bray claims that "Especially near the time of major external examinations, schools in some countries may be perceived by pupils to be less able to cater for their specific needs."

2014 American Immigration Crisis

The 2014 American immigration crisis was a surge in unaccompanied children and women from the Northern Triangle of Central America (NCTA) seeking entrance to the United States in 2014. According to U.S. law, an unaccompanied alien child refers to a person under 18 years of age, who has no lawful immigration status in the U.S., and who does not have a legal guardian to provide physical custody and care. The surge increased rapidly, doubling in volume each year previously, reaching extreme proportions that provoked a response form the U.S. government in 2014 when tens of thousands of women and children from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras migrated to the United States. Many of the children had no parent/legal guardian available to provide care or physical custody and quickly overwhelmed local border patrols.

In 2015, the proportion of migrants from Guatemala had increased, while that of migrants from El Salvador and Honduras had decreased. As of September 2017, the number of unaccompanied alien children apprehended at the U.S. border from the three countries of the Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras) dropped from 2016, marking a change from the increase in apprehensions in 2016 from 2015.

Background

From 1980 onwards, the number of immigrants from Central America arriving to the United States has grown substantially. However, most of the people fleeing Central America are those whose countries are plagued by corruption, poverty, and murder. The three countries from Central America with the highest numbers of migrants are Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador. Other immigrants from different countries in Central America have seen a moderate decrease from 2010 to 2013. For example, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Panama, and Belize have not had as many immigrants as the other three leading countries in the time frame. The three leading countries are the bulk immigrants coming to the United States. Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala make up 85 percent of those who arrive to the United States since the 1980s.

In 2014, the reason this crisis was internationally covered by media outlets, was due to the fact that most of the immigrants were children. Most of these children cross through the Guatemala-Mexico border. Most of these children also ride on a train called “La Bestia” because it can transport many people at once without charge. Immigrants from all over Central America rely on this train to take them north, hopeful to see the Mexican-American border. However, La Bestia has drawn international attention. This train and its routes are the epicenter of mass extortion, mutilation, murder, robberies, rape, kidnapping, and sexual assault of Central American immigrants. Immigrants do not report these crimes in fear of being deported back to their native countries. If these immigrant children managed to survive La Bestia and the cartels in Mexico, they now need to find "coyotes" to smuggle them across the highly guarded Mexican-American border.

Most women and children from Central America simply crossed the Rio Grande and turned themselves in to the United States Border Patrol, relying on the belief, partly well founded, that United States immigration and refugee law made special provision for children. The large number of migrants entitled to hearings, counsel, and placement overwhelmed U.S. immigration courts and other government facilities.

Causes

The unaccompanied minors are leaving their homes for various reasons, but the main reason they’re abandoning their families is due to the untamable violence that has plagued Central America for the last decade. Since the early 2000s, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador have seen an exponential growth in their murder rates across the board. For reoccurring years, Honduras has been the murder capital of the world with a homicide rate reaching a 91.6 murders per 100,000 people in 2011. El Salvador also had a high rate in 2011 with a rate of 90 murders per 100,000 people. Guatemala’s rate is not as staggering and has also shifted to a less violent country. However, El Salvador has seen another surge after 2013, when MS-13 and Barrio 18 broke a truce that propelled people to flee the country. In El Salvador, homicide rates peaked at 104 murders per 100,000 people in 2015. Recently, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees interviewed 404 children from Central America and Mexico, 58 percent say they are looking to evade violence in their native countries. However, in 2006, a similar survey took place where only 13 percent claimed to be fleeing violence. This immense increase in violence was a driving factor for this crisis. There was a 712 percent increase in asylum claims between 2008 and 2013 from immigrants in other places of Latin America as a result of this violence.

For women, as crime increased in the last decade, sexual assault and rape have become a prevalent issue in the Northern Triangle as well. In 2014, 40 percent of the people fleeing were women compared to a low 27 percent in recent times. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women showed that in July 2014, the violent death of women in Honduras shot up at an alarming rate of 263.4 from 2005 to 2013, fueling the migration of women. In 2013, 95 percent of the cases for these women go unsolved and women leaving Honduras also face the same risks on their journey.

Organized crime and drug-related violencd in these countries have also increased danger for the people living in these areas. Since the 1980s, Colombian smugglers have used Central America, specifically, Honduras as a corridor to the United States. Children in schools are forced to smuggle drugs as drug traffickers infiltrate schools. Drug trafficking has taken over these countries as waves of gangsters were deported from the United States in the 90s. Gangs like MS-13 have grown in size and power. Young children are the most vulnerable as gangsters will offer the choice of working for them or leaving. The presence of Mexican cartels has been a feature of Illegal drug trade in Guatemala where law enforcement presence is sparse and there is plenty of open land where planes smuggling cocaine can easily land. In the Northern Triangle(Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador), studies have shown that 19 out of 20 murders will not result in prosecution.

In addition to violence and crime, food shortages and malnutrition continue to plague the region. It is estimated that half of Guatemalan children are chronically malnourished, resulting in stunted growth and eventually death. While these countries have some of the greatest potential for economic growth, inequality and general incompetency by the government has left these issues either under served or unaddressed completely.

Response

From the government

On July 9, 2014, a hearing on the crisis was held by the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Craig Fugate, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, testified, "We are talking about large numbers of children, without their parents, who have arrived at our border—hungry, thirsty, exhausted, scared and vulnerable". Senator Dianne Feinstein compared the crisis to the American refusal to accept Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany aboard the MS St. Louis. The President's request for additional funds was met in both houses of Congress by proposals to modify or eliminate the rights granted by the 2008 reauthorization of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000.

As most unaccompanied children from Central America do not attempt to avoid capture but turn themselves into the Border Patrol after entering the United States, they usually cross the Rio Grande into Texas. The large number of children overwhelmed facilities in Texas in summer 2014 and some of the women and children were transferred to INS facilities in California. In most instances this occurred without incident, but in Murrieta, California, on July 1, 2014, buses carrying immigrants to a Border Patrol facility were blocked by flag-waving protesters. On July 15, 2014, in Oracle, Arizona, pro and con demonstrators faced off regarding possible use of a local facility to house immigrant children. The location of the shelters being used is confidential, but a local law enforcement officer had informed the community of the planned use of the facility.

The U.S. Department of Justice reported in June 2014 that it will provide around 100 lawyers and paralegals for the rising number of children coming to the United States without parents or relatives. Under this program, the federal government will issue $2 million in grants to compensate lawyers and paralegals representing unaccompanied children. Attorney General Eric Holder stated, "We're taking a historic step to strengthen our justice system and protect the rights of the most vulnerable members of society". The Obama administration estimates roughly 60,000 unaccompanied children will come across the border to the United States in 2014.

On July 18, 2014, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick offered one of two locations to the federal government as temporary shelters for up to 1,000 children. One was Camp Edwards, in Bourne on Cape Cod; the other was Westover Air Reserve Base in Chicopee. Governor Patrick explained, "Before a facility opens here, the Commonwealth will sign an MOU with the federal government to ensure that a municipality hosting the facility has input on the circumstances of being a host location."

On July 23, 2014, Senator Barbara Mikulski introduced the bill Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2014 (S. 2648; 113th Congress), a bill that would appropriate supplemental funds for FY2014 to specified federal agencies and programs to respond to the increased apprehensions of unaccompanied children and minors along the southwestern border, fight wildfires, and support Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile defense system. The bill would provide $2.7 billion in supplemental funding. On July 28, 2014, President Barack Obama released a statement of administration policy in support of the bill, urging "Congress to act swiftly to pass the bill to allow a timely and effective response to these pressing needs."

On July 29, 2014, Rep. Hal Rogers introduced the bill "Making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014 (H.R. 5230; 113th Congress)" (also known as the "Secure the Southwest Border Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2014" and the "Secure the Southwest Border Act of 2014") into the United States House of Representatives. H.R. 5230 would provide supplemental FY2014 appropriations to several federal agencies for expenses related to the rise in unaccompanied alien children and alien adults accompanied by an alien minor at the southwest border. The bill would also change the procedures for screening and processing unaccompanied alien children who arrive at the border from certain countries. H.R. 5230 would provide $659 million in supplemental funding. On July 30, 2014, President Barack Obama released a statement of administration policy stating that "his senior advisors would recommend he veto the bill" if it were presented to him for his signature. The House was scheduled to vote on the bill on July 31, 2014, but the Republican leadership canceled the vote because it did not have enough votes to pass H.R. 5230 at that time.

The Department of Health and Human Services had opened three temporary shelters for children at military bases in Texas, Oklahoma, and California, but the sites were closed in August 2014 as the flow of migrant children declined and the capacity of permanent centers to house children was expanded. However, the new centers, such as the one in Artesia, New Mexico, may not offer facilities compatible with due process. After a lawsuit was filed by the ACLU about conditions at Artesia conditions there showed marked improvement.

In January 2014 the Department of Homeland Security sought a contractor to manage and transport approximately 65,000 Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) "ages infant to 17 years of age". The Department of Health and Human Services stated in its “Budget in Brief” that the expected annual number of arriving UAC had increased from 6,560 to an estimated 60,000 for fiscal year 2014, and the Government anticipated awarding a five-year contract to deal with them.

In October 2014, immigrant rights groups filed Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) litigation to compel the release of documents regarding the use of the expedited removal process against families with children, including those detained at the family detention center in Artesia, New Mexico. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The provisions of H.R. 7311, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, signed into law by George W. Bush give substantial rights and protection to unaccompanied children from countries which do not have a common border with the United States. This made expeditious deportation of the large number of children from Central America difficult and expensive, prompting a call by President Barack Obama for an emergency appropriation of nearly $4 billion and resulted in discussions on how to interpret or revise the 2008 law in order to expedite handling large numbers of unaccompanied children.

In November 2017, the Trump administration ended the Central American Minors Program which allowed eligible minors from the Northern Triangle to apply for the refugee resettlement or parole in the United States, thereby limiting the flow of Central Americans to the United States.

U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America

While the U.S. had numerous domestic policies for dealing with the massive rise in immigration, on July 8, 2014 President Obama also requested funding for "the repatriation and reintegration of migrants to countries in Central America and to address the root causes of migration from these countries." This announcement was the start of a long term U.S. plan to address three "areas of action": security, governance, and prosperity. Congress has so far granted $1.4 billion contingent on these Central American countries meeting security, corruption, and human rights requirements to receive assistance. When funding was first appropriated for these countries, funding was split fairly evenly between addressing economic and civil concerns and "rule of law" concerns regarding police and judicial institutions. So far none of these countries have met all of the legislative requirements to receive all of the funding allotted to them.

In a statement made on the inauguration of Jimmy Morales as the President of Guatemala, the Obama administration addressed certain criteria that the Northern Triangle countries (Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala) would be expected to uphold in order to receive assistance from the United States. These criteria were: Combat corruption and strengthen public institutions, improve civilian jurisdiction and counter activities of criminal organizations, protect human rights, support programs to promote equitable growth, implement effective civil society consultations, and increase government revenues. These criteria have reflected long-standing obstacles for prosperity in these countries, particularly those relating to equality, human rights, and collecting government revenues needed to fund police.

While funding for these efforts has been fairly consistent the past two years, the FY2018 budget proposed by President Trump would cut aid to these countries by roughly 30%. It is hard to know what the full implications of this cut to funding would be, but experts have claimed that it would most likely result in backsliding of any progress made in the governance of these countries.

Detention centers

One cause of the influx of immigrants with children was word of mouth in Central America that families with children were not detained due to lack of facilities. Detention centers with facilities for families with children were built in Artesia, New Mexico, a temporary site that closed in December 2014; one in Dilley, Texas, that is managed by Corrections Corporation of America and located across 50 acres with a capacity of 2,400 migrants; Karnes City, Texas, with a capacity of 530 people; and a small facility in Berks County, Pennsylvania. The facility in Dilley includes barrack-style housing, a school, a medical clinic, and other facilities. However, migrants in the detention centers were refused bond in order to deter other migrants. In February 2015, a federal court, in a case under appeal, forbade use of deterrence of others as a consideration in refusing bond. Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security issued new regulations easing requirements for bonding out reducing the average stay in the facility to 22 days, and some detainees who have been detained 6 months or longer have been released. Johnson believes maintaining some capacity to detain families is necessary to maintain deterrence.

From the public

Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus called for humane measures with respect to families and children fleeing violence in Central America and continued efforts to refine administrative policy with respect to the millions of undocumented immigrants living and working in the United States.

A 2014 Mother Jones article suggested that many of the unaccompanied children were attempting to escape abusive situations. Analysis of Border Patrol statistics by the Director of the Regional Security Policy Program at the Washington Office on Latin America shows a correlation between gang-related killing of children in Central America, particularly San Pedro Sula in Honduras, and the surge in migration.

According to the Immigrant Rights' Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR),(usually called the immigration courts), within the United States Department of Justice each have statutory responsibilities with respect to unaccompanied children from Central America.

The ACLU believes the stipulated settlement in Flores v. Meese, which is a United States District Court for the Central District of California decision which sets out a nationwide policy concerning federal detention of any minor, also applies.

From migrants' home countries

While acknowledging suggestions that immigration reform may have helped prompt the influx of child migrants, the Obama administration has also focused attention on measures to be taken by the migrants' home countries to try to stop the flow. In July 2014, President Obama met with the presidents of Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras to seek their cooperation in reducing migration of children and expediting returns. In the summer of 2014, Mexico took actions to keep migrants from using freight trains ("La Bestia") to travel through Mexico. As of February, 2015, the number of unaccompanied minors apprehended at the U.S. border, 12,509, during the previous 5 months had dropped while the number deported by Mexico to their home countries, 3,819, had risen by 56% year on year from the same period in fiscal year 2014. Conditions in Honduras had improved with a drop of about 20% in the homicide rate from 2012 to 2014.

From migrants

Since the placement of restrictions on illegal immigration through policies pursued by the Trump administration, the movement of people from Central America to the United States has shifted to Mexico. The role of Mexico as a transit country between the Northern Triangle and the United States has transformed since the 2016 Presidential election with more people applying for asylum in Mexico than in the U.S. According to a Reuters report, "Mexican asylum data and testimony from migrants in Tenosique suggest that although fewer Central Americans are trying to enter the United States, plenty are still fleeing their poor, violent home countries, with many deciding to stay longer in Mexico, which has traditionally been a transit country."

Resources

Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) provides free legal aid to unaccompanied minors in immigration proceedings across the U.S. KIND was founded in October 2008 by Angelina Jolie in a collaboration with the Microsoft Corporation and 25 leading U.S. law firms.

In addition to smaller organizations focused on assisting Central Americans in the United States, broader international organizations such as UNICEF, International Rescue Committee, Amnesty International also provide advocacy and support for Central Americans migrating to the U.S.

Aftermath

After the 2014 immigration crisis in America, the influx of immigrants from Central America to the United States continued but in lower proportions. Over the early 2010s America and Mexico presented consistent pushback to all immigrants from Central America. America and Mexico both also showed no immediate immigration policy changes even with the crisis. The United States and Mexico have militarized borders and dissuaded immigrants from making the journey as of 2014.

However Central American families and children keep on coming to borders seeking asylum. In the aftermath, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) detainment of Central American people in the Mexican-American borders increased over 100 percent from late 2015 to early 2016 compared the year before. Also, United States government ordered for the deportation in 7,700 in 2014 to 2015 without court-hearings. However, there are 62,000 children still awaiting legal proceedings after 2014. In most cases, 94 percent of these children do not have attorneys to represent them in court. However, people from the Northern Triangle continue to immigrate despite the militarization of the CBP, increase in deportations, and the dangerous journey because their homes remain unsafe.

Settlement in the United States

During the 2011-2015 period, most migrants from Central America settled in California, followed by Texas and Florida. According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, "In the 2011-15 period, the top four counties with Central American immigrants were Los Angeles County in California, Harris County in Texas, Miami-Dade County in Florida, and Prince George’s County in Maryland", which comprise approximately 30% percent of the total Central American immigrant population in the United States for this period. According to U.S. Census data from 2010, out of the top 10 cities where Guatemalan Americans reside in the United States, three cities fall in California: Los Angeles, San Francisco/Oakland/Fremont, and Riverside/San Bernardino/Ontario. Salvadoran Americans in the United States were in the highest concentrations in Los Angeles, Houston and New York in 2010, with 7 out of the top 25 cities with Salvadoran Americans falling in California. In 2011, Honduran Americans in the United States were populated in the highest proportions in Florida, Texas, and New York.

After arriving in the United States, these migrants fall into the legal category of undocumented aliens, which puts them at the risk of deportation. Deportation to their home country poses further problems for Central Americans, as the NCTA countries are not prepared to deal with their return due to inadequacies in the physical and political infrastructure.

Other issues

Scamming of relatives

On July 23, 2013, The New York Times reported that con artists had fraudulently obtained confidential information about child immigrants held at military bases in Oklahoma and Texas and had been contacting the children's parents asking for money to facilitate release of the children and reunification with their family. No money is actually required. The matter was reported to be under investigation by the FBI.

Trafficking and abuse of migrant children resettled by federal officials

In July 2015, a federal indictment revealed a forced-labor ring operating on an egg farm near Marion, Ohio, in which teenagers from Guatemala were being lured with promises of education and then forced to work 12-hour days, six or seven days a week. The teens lived in squalid trailers, were denied their paychecks and threatened with death if they sought help. At least half a dozen of the teenagers found working on the farm had been in the custody of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is charged with the processing, treatment, and placement of unaccompanied migrant children pending the resolution of immigration proceedings. Government officials placed the teens with human traffickers who posed as relatives and friends. Concerns that the Ohio case was indicative of larger, systemic problems led to a Senate inquiry into how human traffickers successfully exploited the federal resettlement processes.

The results of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations' probe were released on January 26, 2016. Led by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), the committee found that preventable mistakes were made in the Ohio case. HHS officials failed to run background checks on the sponsors and any secondary caregivers in the households, site visits to the sponsors’ homes were not conducted, and in one instance a sponsor was permitted to prevent a child-welfare case worker from visiting with one of the victims. System-wide, the Senate inquiry found similar, serious gaps including weak processes for verifying relationships between children and sponsors, failure to perform background checks, lack of home visits and home studies, and the placement of children without meeting sponsors in person. Other key deficiencies in HHS policies and procedures were an inability to detect when a sponsor is seeking custody of multiple unrelated children and allowing sponsors to deny HHS from providing post-release services to children and barring contact between HHS care providers and the children.

Ultimately, the inquiry concluded that the policies for placing unaccompanied minors exposed them to a risk of trafficking and other abuse at the hands of government-approved sponsors. The Subcommittee identified more than 10 other cases of post-placement trafficking beyond the Ohio case and 15 additional cases with "serious trafficking indicators." It is unclear how many other unaccompanied minors, placed by HHS, have been victims of trafficking or other abuses. HHS maintains no standardized mechanism of tracking trafficking or abuse cases. However, the findings of the Senate investigation echoed results of an independent investigation by the Associated Press (AP) in which the AP found more than two dozen children who had been placed with sponsors and subjected to sexual abuse, starvation, labor trafficking, or severe abuse and neglect.

On January 25, 2016, the AP reported that in response to surges in the number of unaccompanied minors arriving in the U.S. in the past three years, government officials weakened safety standards related to the transfer of children from government shelters into sponsors' homes and the vetting of sponsors. Specifically, the government stopped fingerprinting most adults seeking to claim the children. In April 2014, the Office of Refugee Resettlement also stopped requiring original copies of birth certificates to prove the identity of most sponsors and later it decided not to complete forms that request sponsors’ personal and identifying information before sending many of the children to sponsors’ homes.

Although the number of unaccompanied youth arriving from Central America declined significantly in 2015, with a 49% drop in the first 8 months of the year when compared to that same period in 2014, the number of young migrants is again on the rise. HHS officials stated that they are strengthening their policies and procedures for placing children and have signed a contract to open more shelters; however, they remain under pressure from the Senate Subcommittee and advocates to both account for documented failings and address their causes.

Refugees vs. Immigrants terminology

In the discussion on the influx of Central Americans into the United States the terms "refugee" and "immigrant" have been used interchangeably or synonymously to represent Central Americans entering the country, despite the different legal ramifications of the two terms. The difference in the usage of these terms comes from the different perspectives on the factors motivating movement to the United States, with "push" factors being associated with the terminology of "refugee" and "pull" factors being associated with the terminology of "immigrant". According to Karen Musalo and Eunice Lee,

For those adopting the "push" factor outlook, the crisis is humanitarian one, reflecting human rights violations and deprivations in the region, and the protection needs of refugees (UNHCR 2015b; UNHCR 2014; Musalo et al. 2015) While acknowledging that reasons for migration may be mixed, this view recognizes the seriousness of regional refugee protection needs. For those focusing on "pull" factors, the crisis has its roots in border enforcement policies that were perceived as lax by potential migrants, and that thereby acted as an inducement to migration (Harding 2014; Navarette, Jr. 2014)

Contributions

Tutor: Updated lead section and types of tutoring section. Added sections on history, tutoring agencies, effects, issues. Added sub sections on Effects (economic and academic performance), on Issues (tutoring as shadow education). Removed sections on private tutoring, costs, effectiveness, policy, writing tutor, solution assistance.

2014 American immigration crisis: Updated lead section, background, causes, responses, resources, aftermath. Added section on Other Issues. Added sub sections on Aftermath (Settlement in the United States), on Response (from migrants). Moved and updated section on Federal responsibilities into Response.