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.

Indian higher education system is supposed to be the source of equal opportunities to all students irrespective of their life circumstances. Does it succeed in realizing this ideal? In fact, the system of higher education inadvertently plays a critical role in constructing and recreating the inequalities between groups. The prime victims of inequality are first-generation students, whose disadvantages are unseen, their voices ignored. In India, first-generation students are typically confronted with the dynamics of caste-based inequality in addition to their deficiency in cultural and social capital. In this context, the purpose of this study was to examine the difference between who goes and who stops for higher education across generational status. Field survey data of 930 senior secondary students was employed as the basis for analysis. Findings of this study highlight that the gap between realization and planning is more in first-generation students as compared to their counterparts. Results of logistic regression indicate location, category, family income, academic achievement, stream of education, and social and cultural capital are pertinent factors that influence educational attainment of first-generation students.

In this study, the authors investigated the academic and social experiences of first-generation undergraduate Latinx students who participated in a Latinx student-focused organization at a large, research-intensive, Predominately White Institution (PWI) in the Midwest. Our results revealed three major themes. First, participants considered the Latinx student organization to be a significant resource for their social integration into the university; however, it was less significant as an academic resource. Second, the participants recognized that while the university “tries” to promote diversity, they felt that the university could do more in promoting ethnic student groups and their interests across campus. Third, participants perceived that the university treats all Latinx students as one homogenous group, ignoring the diversity that exists between different Latinx groups. These themes suggest that efforts to make PWIs more diverse and inclusive may benefit from the formation and maintenance of minoritized ethnic student organizations. PWIs would also benefit by incorporating the diverse Latinx student perspectives into institutional diversity policy, and prioritizing higher-quality initiatives for greater visibility of Latinx student issues across campus. Moreover, programming that does not aggregate or homogenize Latinx identity, but embraces and values the multifaceted Latinx identities, would also benefit PWIs.

Given their history of preparing African Americans, ethnic minorities, and first-generation college students for careers in education, the culture and traditions of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) can provide insight into the preparation of diverse physical educators for the cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity in today’s American K-12 schools. As such, this chapter will present practical findings from an ethnographic study of a historically Black urban Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) program with a large native Spanish-speaking population. Specifically, we focus on the concepts of cultural sustainment and code-switching as strategies used by teacher educators to promote bilingualism and biculturalism. To achieve this, we highlight the relationship among institutional, programmatic, and classroom cultures for the cultural ­sustainment and development of preservice physical educators. According to Paris (2012), culturally sustaining pedagogy seeks to perpetuate and foster linguistic, literate, and cultural pluralism as part of the democratic project of schooling. We conclude with strategies on how to successfully work with culturally diverse college students, promoting bilingual and biculturalism through cultural sustainment and code-switching.

Bridge programs constitute institutionalized interventions to provide equitable educational opportunities for low-income, first-generation, and disadvantaged traditional undergraduate students (Gullatt & Jan, 2003). These are typically pre-college transition programs that serve to facilitate college access and readiness. This chapter discusses the role of bridge programs at American colleges and universities and the recommends integration of the Dynamic Student Development Metatheodel (DSDM) student success model (Frederick, Sasso, & Barratt, 2015). This chapter outlines the typology of bridge programs at the federal, state, and campus levels and highlights the target populations of these programs. Evaluation and outcomes regarding the efficacy of these programs are also highlighted. Implications and considerations for practice are provided integrating specific constructs from the DSDM to inform the further development of bridge programs to increase student development.

Considering the rising number of first generation college students (FGCSs), an increased number of first generation college graduates should be expected. Historically Black Colleges and Universities have long served as a landing place for these students. While research has focused on the barriers to access and persistence for this population, there has been little discussion about the FGCSs that attend college, obtain degrees, and go on to serve in their disciplines and contribute to their communities. Having been a FGCS, now serving as a tenure-track faculty member at a Historically Black institution, I have been compelled to explore and initiate a dialog regarding the experience of being, First, still. “It” does not end with degree completion.

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.

When examining the need to increase student retention and persistence at universities, one must consider how leveraging community partnerships can assist institutions of higher education realize success that they may have not thought otherwise possible.

Additionally, individuals must look at the number of high school students who have not seen college as a viable option for them given the absence of tangible models in their homes. Creating a strong mentoring program that incorporates the expertise of community stakeholders with personal experiences of current successful college students offers a viable solution. This chapter will cover the success of the “Placing Opportunities Within Everyone’s Reach” (POWER) mentoring program developed at a Historically Black College and University (HBCU) in the South and its long-term impact on students.