Search results

First-generation college students in the United States are a unique demographic that is often characterized by the institutions that serve them with a risk-laden and deficit-based model. However, our analysis of the transcripts of open-ended, semi-structured interviews with 22 “first-gen” respondents suggests they are actively deft, agentic, self-determining parties to processes of identity construction that are both externally imposed and potentially stigmatizing, as well as exemplars of survivance and determination. We deploy a grounded theory approach to an open-coding process, modeled after the extended case method, while viewing our data through a novel synthesis of the dual theoretical lenses of structural and radical/structural symbolic interactionism and intersectional/standpoint feminist traditions, in order to reveal the complex, unfolding, active strategies students used to make sense of their obstacles, successes, co-created identities, and distinctive institutional encounters. We find that contrary to the dictates of prevailing paradigms, identity-building among first-gens is an incremental and bidirectional process through which students actively perceive and engage existing power structures to persist and even thrive amid incredibly trying, challenging, distressing, and even traumatic circumstances. Our findings suggest that successful institutional interventional strategies designed to serve this functionally unique student population (and particularly those tailored to the COVID-moment) would do well to listen deeply to their voices, consider the secondary consequences of “protectionary” policies as potentially more harmful than helpful, and fundamentally, to reexamine the presumption that such students present just institutional risk and vulnerability, but also present a valuable addition to university environments, due to the unique perspective and broader scale of vision their experiences afford them.

This chapter explores the concept of identity-conscious advising and coaching to support the development of First-Generation Black Male College Students during their undergraduate experience. Advising and coaching represent foundational practices colleges and universities use to support student success. Much like other aspects of education, institutions implement advising and coaching practices without consideration for how the identity of the student or the professional delivering the service influences student outcomes. First-Generation Black Male College Students' interactions within the college context are often framed by their visible, racial, and gender identities as opposed to their first-generation experience. First-Generation Black Male College Students experience microaggressions, discrimination, deficit perspectives, or negative stereotypes. By exploring an identity-conscious approach to relevant advising theories and coaching approaches, the chapter highlights the importance of building trusting, affirming relationships that lean into the lived experiences of First-Generation Black Male College Students without subjecting them to false, harmful stereotypes. This approach requires self-awareness on the part of educators and an understanding of the racialized dynamics that are inherent in the experience. Without addressing anti-Blackness, the impact of advising and coaching on First-Generation Black Male College Students is likely to have diminished or limited effects for this vital student population.

The transition to college presents significant challenges for many students as they navigate new academic and social experiences. In the USA, 30% of first-year students drop out before their second year. Research indicates that mentoring programs help students achieve social integration and likely have a positive effect on their transition to college. This research study was conducted with education students to better understand the potential impacts of peer mentorship.

Student mentors and mentees were matched by attributes such as their concentration within the education major, gender, sports they played and whether they were first-generation matriculants. Data collection utilized two surveys one before the peer mentoring process and one after the process.

The findings suggest that peer mentoring improved first-generation students' sense of belonging to both their major and the college. Peer mentors also experienced increased belongingness. The transfer rate among participants of 2% was a significant drop from previous years.

The success of the peer mentoring experience was possibly due to the intentional matching process based on certain attributes. Additionally, taking a leadership role increased a sense of belonging in the peer mentors.

The USA’s higher education leaders and professional organizations have called for increased professional development programming at graduate colleges to better prepare US graduate students for their future careers. This study aims to investigate the demographic characteristics of graduate students participating in co-curricular professional development (PD) and sociocultural development (SD) programming at a graduate college at a large, selective and research-intensive public university in the Midwestern USA.

Using institutional data from six semesters, the authors examined the characteristics of students that attended the graduate college’s programs at one university. The authors analyzed which students were most likely to attend PD and SD programs using multinomial logistic regression models.

Female students, students from US historically marginalized racial groups, and US Pell Grant recipients (low-income students) were found to have a higher likelihood of attending both PD and SD programs at the centralized graduate college.

The findings will be of interest to graduate deans and educators who support graduate students. Further evaluative research on the usefulness of such programs at other institutions would help graduate colleges better understand the role they play in meeting graduate students’ needs.

The findings contribute to the understanding of the important role of the US graduate college in the development of graduate students. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first study to evaluate the backgrounds of graduate students who pursue co-curricular PD and SD opportunities.

This paper aims to examine critical, college-going identities and literacies of first-generation immigrant youth within a dual enrollment, youth participatory action research seminar.

This study is a qualitative case study drawn from a larger, critical ethnographic study.

Findings illustrate that youth’s multiple literacies, forged in a deliberately intergenerational and relational space, served as a powerful site of analysis as well as a means to disrupt restrictive definitions of success, supporting youth’s worldmaking amidst the construction and negotiation of new and critical “academic” identities grounded in the familial, cultural and historical knowledges that their inquiries surfaced.

This research attends to the transformative power afforded by humanizing collectives that center youth voices and perspectives, specifically those of first-generation immigrant students.

The purpose of this paper is to understand demographic group (race, first-generation college graduate, gender, age) differences among perceived family and faculty social and family financial support within the US graduate school admissions pipeline in the social sciences.

Using data from a cross-sectional convenience sample survey (N = 99), this paper looks at ordinal social support variables (faculty member support, family social support and family financial support) by demographic groups. This paper uses a Mann–Whitney U test to compare first-generation status, race and gender and a Kruskal–Wallis H test to compare age groups.

This paper finds that applicants over 27 years old had significantly less faculty support in the graduate admissions pipeline compared to other age groups; differences in faculty support across race were marginally significant (p = 0.057). Regarding family social support, this paper finds first-generation applicants, male applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of support. Finally, this paper finds first-generation applicants and applicants over 27 years old report lower levels of familial financial support.

Previous literature on graduate admissions – published in this journal (Pieper and Krsmanovic, 2022) and others – does not consider experiences up to and before applicants hit the “submit” button on graduate applicants, which the authors term the graduate admissions pipeline. Instead, most previous literatures focus on faculty committees and validity of required application materials. Thus, this study begins to answer Posselt and Grodsky’s (2017) call to develop an understanding of applicant experiences and support within the graduate admissions pipeline.

The purpose of this study is to understand the differences in motivations, advantages, disadvantages and time of multiple-major awareness among students who pursue multiple majors based on a set of defined characteristics. The student characteristics of interest included race, gender, financial aid status, class standing, transfer status, first-generation status and the number of majors.

The authors administered a survey instrument to a random sample of multiple-major undergraduate students to gauge the prevalence of motivations, advantages, disadvantages and time of multiple-major awareness themes developed during individual interviews.

Statistical analysis revealed significant differences among multiple-major students based on characteristics of interest. Results discussed at length include transfer students deriving higher levels of motivation from degree practicality than nontransfer students and students who receive financial aid indicating multiple passions as a primary motivation more frequently than students not receiving financial aid. Similar differences between male and female students are uncovered relating to perceived advantages of diverse interactions and experiences and increased balance, as well as perceived disadvantages of time commitment and ability to grow professionally. Finally, first-generation students learned about multiple majoring later than non-first-generation students.

This study builds on previous research regarding multiple-major students, an understudied yet important population in higher education. Additionally, it delves deeper by exploring differences in this population by student characteristics.

This chapter explores the parallels between the recruitment and retention of students from marginalized backgrounds, and efforts with similarly identifying faculty and student affairs administrators. Higher education institutions target specific student populations to increase access, thus leading to an increase of students of color, low-income students, and first-generation students on college campuses (Chen & Nunnery, 2019). This welcome development proves inadequate on its own, as the critical support structures necessary for student success are not in place. Students' lived experiences are not attended to in a manner that fosters thriving (Jack, 2019; Nunn, 2021).

Research underscores the significant positive impact on marginalized students of having faculty and student-facing administrators from similar backgrounds on their campus (Braxton et al., 2014; Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, & Hayek, 2007). The intentional recruiting of these college personnel provides a vital means of attending to the needs of underrepresented students. Yet, the student experience is not instructive for the work with underrepresented college employees. The lived experiences of the faculty and administrators from marginalized identities are not being addressed either, similar to that of underrepresented students (Orelus, 2020). When these college personnel leave institutions unexpectedly or stay but are not thriving, this impacts students, colleagues and the college as a whole. In many respects, institutions are replicating inequities they commit to substantively dismantle, limiting the racial justice work they promised, and effectively thwarting their own Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts.

Using an autoethnographic approach, this chapter will explore these parallel issues, and propose recommendations for future research and institutional policy and practice for retention of underrepresented faculty and student-facing administrators.

Many low-income students are unable to participate in internship programs because they lack financial resources to pay for the cost of housing and relocating to the internship site. This paper examines the types of benefits or supports related to housing and relocation that employers are providing to paid interns.

This paper uses content analysis to examine the types of supports included in job advertisements posted on Handshake, the largest early career networking platform in the US.

During the period studied, less than 11% of internships advertised indicated that the employer was willing to provide housing or relocation support, only 107 employers across the US. Only 53 employers were willing to provide free company-sponsored housing. Internships offering support are clustered in the fields of business, engineering and research, providing almost no internships for students in other fields.

Given the high cost of housing, if a student does not have access to considerable financial resources, they are unlikely to participate in an internship or will be limited to a position in their commutable area. To level the playing field among all students, employers need to offer free or subsidized company-sponsored housing to student interns. While some employers do offer support, the number of students needing support far exceeds the number of internships available.

While there is information on what students identify as barriers, there is no accurate picture of employer supports available to mitigate these barriers. This exploratory analysis is the first to examine the benefits and supports employers are providing to paid interns.

A Legacy Community is a living and learning community supported by broader institutional departments (e.g., student affairs, academic affairs, foundation, and alumni affairs) that dedicate resources, opportunities, and supports intended to: (a) undo legacies of educational disparities that Black/African American males have historically witnessed and (b) build capacity for students engaged in these communities (i.e., Black/African American males) to create and leave positive legacies on their terms. In this qualitative study of Black and African American undergraduate male living and learning community (LLC) participants at a primarily white institution (Legacy House), we investigate the LLC program elements that impact participants' educational and social experiences, and foster pathways for student legacy building. Legacy house participants describe brotherhood, sense of belonging, and leaving a legacy as elements that enable positive student academic and social outcomes, campus involvement, and career readiness.