Search results

Federal immigration policy embodies national ideas about membership. Nevertheless, attitudes toward immigration within a nation are not invariable. Regional policies vary dramatically in their support or antagonism toward immigrants. In addition, immigration policy profoundly affects other areas of governmental authority. This chapter explores the relationship between state-level immigration policy and family reunification for Hispanic/Latino children in the United States. The quantitative analysis utilizes data from the National Council of State Legislatures (NCSL) (2008–2014) as well as data gathered from the Child Welfare Outcomes Report published by the Department of Health and Human Services. The results show that while Hispanic/Latino children are not overrepresented in the child welfare systems of the states with the most antagonistic legislation, they are returned to the custody of their parent(s) in smaller percentages compared to whites in the states with the most antagonistic bills compared with the states with the most supportive bills.

This study aims to understand the extent to which scholarly networks are connected both in person and through information and communication technologies, and in particular, how distance, disciplines, and motivations for participating in these networks interplay with the clusters they form. The focal point for our analysis is the Graphics, Animation and New Media Network of Centres of Excellence (GRAND NCE), a Canadian scholarly network in which scholars collaborate across disciplinary, institutional, and geographical boundaries in one or multiple projects with the aid of information and communication technologies. To understand the complexity in such networks, we first identified scholars’ clusters within the work, want-to-meet, and help networks of GRAND and examined the correlation between these clusters as well as with disciplines and geographic locations. We then identified three types of motivation that drove scholars to join GRAND: practical issues, novelty-exploration, and networking. Our findings indicate that (1) scholars’ interests in the networking opportunities provided by GRAND may not easily translate into actual interactions. Although scholars express interests in boundary-spanning collaborations, these mostly occur within the same discipline and geographic area. (2) Some motivations are reflected in the structural characteristics of the clusters we identify, while others are irrelevant to the establishment of collaborative ties. We argue that institutional intervention may be used to enhance geographically dispersed, multidisciplinary collaboration.