First-Generation Students-Research Packet

Running head: FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
First-Generation College Students and Higher Education:

Executive Summary
Allison McCarthy, Jennifer Rosseland-Bates, Tyler Bauer & Robin Hall
SUNY at Buffalo
FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary: First-Generation Students and Higher Education
A diverse population makes up a college campus today. Students enter college with
various academic and social expectations of higher education. Certain factors influence these
perspectives, one of which includes the history of degree completion at an institution. Firstgeneration college students include those whose parents received an associates degree or lower
(Irlbeck, Adams, Akers, Burris, & Jones, 2014; Prosper, 2007; Soria & Stebleton, 2012). These
students have several academic, social and cultural disadvantages (Aspelmeier, Love, McGill,
Elliot, & Pierce, 2012; Forbus, Newbold, & Mehta, 2011; Garcia, 2010; Pascarella, Pierson &
Wolniak, 2004). Based upon the existing research and interviews of first-generation students, it
is apparent that those first-generation college students that demonstrate extrinsic motivation,
utilize resources and programs, and form strong campus relationships are likely to persist and
succeed in college.
Literature Review
First-generation college students, or those whose parents did not graduate from college,
are a growing subgroup in the college student population (DeFreitas & Rinn, 2013). Firstgeneration college students continue to be a subjective subgroup of students on campus. Due to
their diverse backgrounds, life stages and motivations they continue to convey stratifying
differences within their subgroup. The vast literature of this group provides commonalities
between these first-generation college students and offers insight to their struggles of applying,
attending and then graduating college (Atherton, 2014; Garcia, 2010; Hertel, 2010; Hodge, 2010;
Jenkins, Belanger, Connally, Boals, & Duron, 2013; Korsmo, 2014; Orbe, 2008; Strayhorn,
2006; Woosley & Shepler, 2011).

A strong correlation exists between first-generation college students applying to college
and their surrounding support of high school teachers, advisors, and parents (Forbus et al., 2011
Irlbeck, Adams, Akers, Burris, & Jones, 2014; Wells & Lynch, 2012). The existence of programs
such as Upward Bound suggests high college application rates by first-generation college
students as well (Forbus et al., 2011). Self-motivation also correlates with increasing levels of
first-generation college students participating in the college application process (Irlbeck et al.,
2014). A study regarding Hispanic first-generation students suggested their surrounding
environmental outlooks on a college education affects whether or not the first-generation student
will apply to an institution of higher education (DiMaria, 2007).
Significant differences between first and second-generation college students include firstgeneration college students more frequently have to work part-time while attending college due
to lower parental incomes and therefore less parental financial support (Garcia, 2010; Hertel,
2010; Moschetti & Hudley, 2008; Olson, 2014; Orbe, 2004). This often results in lower social
adjustment. The second-generation college students are less likely to work off-campus, so they
spend more time engaging in campus activities, giving them an advantage of immersing
themselves in campus culture (Mahan, Wilson, Petrosko, & Luthy, 2014). Those first-generation
college students who do live on-campus are more likely to better transition academically and
socially than those who do not (Inkelas, Daver, Vogt, & Leonard, 2007).
Living-learning communities especially assist first-generation college students
transitioning to college campus culture, encouraging peer support groups and enhanced
relationships (Inkelas et al., 2007). Institutional involvement as a whole also predicts firstgeneration student college success (Woosley & Shepler, 2011). First-generation college students
are also more likely to form stronger relationships with faculty, work harder in their classes and

spend less time engaging in campus activities in comparison to second-generation college
students due to their high dedication to academics (Forbus et al., 2011; Mahan et al., 2014;
McKay & Estrella, 2008; Strayhorn, 2006; Swecker, Fifolt, & Searby, 2013).
Synthesizing Interviews and Literature
Five undergraduate first-generation college students from a public research university
that offers degrees in undergraduate and graduate programs volunteered to share their
experiences through interviews regarding their background, college application process,
transition to campus life and participation on campus. Based on the literature and the interviews,
three main themes emerged: extrinsic motivation, resources and campus relationships/culture.
The interview data both supported and challenged the claims in literature. Most of these students
indicated experiencing difficulties with the college application process, as noted in Forbus et al.
(2011). However, the students discussed varying degrees of support from their surrounding
environment. Parents, teachers and peers would either actively or passively encourage or
discourage a college education based on background and overall knowledge of the process
(Irlbeck et al., 2014). Certain interviewees also mentioned their source of extrinsic motivation
rested with what others thought about college as suggested in DiMarias (2007) study.
Academic achievement programs such as Upward Bound and Educational Opportunity
Programs were part of the interviewees motivation to enroll and then utilize support in college
(Somers, Woodhouse, & Coffer, 2004). One student found it easier to include their parents in on
the college application process by including them in advisor and financial aid meetings
(Coffman, 2011).
The literature also indicates that first-generation college students come from lower
income families, which is true for the majority of the participants interviewed (Aspelmeier et al.,

2012; Bui, 2002). The interviewees discussed their dedication to academics and expressed their
desire to focus on academics and graduating on time, which correlated with the literature as well
(Mahan et al., 2014; Forbus et al., 2011). A few interviewees worked off-campus to cover
expenses, (Moschetti & Hudley, 2008; Orbe, 2004; Garcia, 2010; Hertel, 2010; Olson, 2014) but
then worked on-campus later to increase their campus involvement, which is supported by
Woosley & Shepler (2011) as a clear indicator of success.
Working and engaging with others on campus also allowed the interviewees to gain
social networks that were otherwise unattainable, and also helped them transition into campus
culture (Peabody, 2013; Soria & Stepleton, 2012). According to the literature, first-generation
students are more likely to stay and then succeed in college if they join an organization or live on
campus (Kuh, 2004). The interviewees also found it easier to assimilate to campus culture with
the help of joining on-campus organizations and working on campus (Lowery-Hart & Pacheco,
2011).
Both the literature and the interviews suggest that first-generation college students
require various support entities both on and off a college campus (Franklin & Slate, 2012). For
first-generation college students, the perspective of college is different in the ways that students
view academic, cultural and social contexts (Aspelmeier et al., 2012; Forbus, et al., 2011; Garcia,
2010; Pascarella, et al., 2004). College campuses should focus on the various necessities and
support systems of first-generation college students. Further research on first-generation students
could help student affairs professionals and administrators enhance retention rates on campus.
Research lacks in implementation of activities and programs to enhance first-generation college
students. Although noted in other research articles, the diversity of various first-generation
college student populations has not been addressed. Literature on first-generation college

students is abundant but more research can be done to unleash the full potential of the firstgeneration college student.
Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Interview Protocol
Tyler Bauer, Robin Hall, Allison McCarthy and Jennifer Rosseland-Bates
SUNY at Buffalo
ELP 509
Dr. Holland
Spring 2015
First-Generation College Students and Higher Education: Interview Protocol

Method
Participants
An invitation (See Appendix ) specifically targeting first-generation students willing to
be interviewed was provided to first-generation students at a public, four-year research university
in the northeast. The invitation explained the purpose of the study as follows:
Better understand transitions of first-generation college students into college;
what types of supports and resources first-generation college students may have;
barriers and successes first-generation college students may have while applying;
and any further information the student is willing to share.
Although six first-generation college students at the institution agreed to be interview,
due to time constraints there was only time allowed to interview five first-generation
students. Although the interview sample was limited, it was diverse. None of the five
participants had the same major, and the majors were in the range of liberal arts, sciences, and
business. Two of the respondents participated in the Educational Opportunity Program (EOP),
one was involved with Student Support Services (SSS), one was a part of the Honors Program,
and one was preparing for medical school. The year in college was not considered while
conducting the interviews, although the participants were either juniors or seniors and all were
graduating within the year.
Measures
A number of questions were prepared prior to the interview process. The questions
prepared were as follows:
1. Tell me a bit about your family and growing up such as the area you grew up,
your parents, siblings, and schools.
2. Was your high school located in a suburban or urban area?
3. What made you decide to go to college?
4. Please walk me through the application process for college.
5. Please describe your transition into college from high school. How was it easy
or difficult?
6. What did you major in when you came to college and why?
7. Who was your biggest support for applying to college? How did they support
you?
8. Do you participate in any clubs or activities on campus? If so, what made you
decide to join these organizations?
9. Do you feel being involved in organizations on campus has affected your
college experience? Please explain.
10. Do you work on or off campus?
11. How do you feel working while in school affects your experiences in college
and your academics?
12. Are there any resources or information you wish you would have had when
you first came to college? If so, please explain.
13. What types of supports or programs do you feel would better address barriers
faced by first-generation students?
14. Do you have any advice for incoming first-generation students?
Procedure
The respondents were asked prior to the interview if they were willing to be tape
recorded. All five respondents agreed and the interviews were recorded. In the introduction, the
purpose of the interview was explained to the respondent as follows:
Thank you again for agreeing to be interviewed. This is confidential we do not
use your name or identifying information. This interview is for a project being
conducted by a group of four students for a graduate course entitled American
College Student. We are seeking information concerning first-generation college
students and how they transition into college.
The average time for each interview was approximately thirty minutes. After the
interview the transcripts were typed and reviewed. Similarities and differences were notated on
the transcripts and key areas of interest relating to the thesis and the literature were highlighted.
Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

Interview Summary
SUNY at Buffalo
ELP 509
Dr. Holland
Spring 2015
First-Generation College Students and Higher Education: Interview Summary

Literature suggested that three factors were indicative of first-generation college students
attending college: support from parents, encouragement from teachers or high school guidance
counselors, and self-motivation (Forbus, Newbold, & Mehta, 2011; Irlbeck, Adams, Akers,
Burris, & Jones, 2014; Wells & Lynch, 2012). Responses from the interviews conducted in this
study supported the literature in that first-generation college students will succeed in college if
they are extrinsically motivated, if they utilize resources and programs available on campus, and
if they are able to form strong campus relationships.
Results
Extrinsic Motivation. Extrinsic motivation was a key factor for attending college as
posed in the responses by the first-generation students interviewed in this study. The external
rewards of attending college and the desire to have a degree that would provide potential benefits
in the future were seen as the extrinsic motivator in all participant responses, supporting the
literature findings (Petty, 2014). This supports Prosperos (2007) finding that "most college
students pursue higher education for eventual increased financial rewards" (p. 972). As Becky* 1
discussed, Ive seen my mom and when you dont have a college degree like you dont get hired
at a lot of places and stuff. Although Olsons (2014) findings indicated that first-generation
college student based their career decisions on higher paying jobs, the participants parents in
this study had pushed them into specific majors the parents felt resulted in higher paying jobs.
Beckys parents thought its like you become an engineer, doctor, a lawyer, like thats the main
three that you become or youre not nothing. Josephs parents also believed that the sciences
were the best fields of study due to the financial rewards. Although he wanted to pursue a
degree in visual studies and arts, his parents made him apply for the nuclear medicine program.
1
Names have been changed for anonymity.
Resources. The participants indicated the availability of resources to be an important

part of the transition process to their particular institutions. Participants use of resources and
programs varied, but responses were that programs such as Student Support Services (SSS) and
the Educational Opportunity Program (EOP) were helpful to the first-generation students in their
transition to college.
Both Andrea and Becky specified that EOP was vital to their acclimation into the college
environment. Becky mentioned how her participation in the summer bridge program was a great
preparation for college. She noted, They like show you like what college is really like. So
thats like when I like knew what goes on in college. Becky also stated that she thought the
EOP summer program she attended would be particularly helpful for parents who did not attend
college, as these parents more than likely would not understand or be aware of many of the
aspects of the college experience.
Andrea participated in an EOP program and stated it was also helpful to her success in
college. In the program at her particular institution, she was required to meet with her EOP
counselor once a week. This served as an opportunity for her to talk about issues that she might
have been struggling with and was a standard resource that she knew she could reach out to.
Studies indicated that first-generation college students who received advisement were more
likely to stay enrolled in school (Swecker, Fifolt, & Searby, 2013)
Janes college application process was affected by the fact that her parents did not speak
or understand English well. She did not have her parents as a resource and she also claimed that
her guidance counselor was not particularly helpful through her college application process.
Jane applied to a two- and four-year institution and only heard back from the two-year year
institution, where she initially decided to attend. She indicated in the interview that she believed
her high school guidance counselor did not send her application to the four-year
institution. While completing the application for admission and financial aid, she utilized
google.com to help her through the process and said this was a vital resource to understanding
terms she did not understand. It was Janes self-motivation that got her through her college
application process. Studies such as DiMarias (2007) study indicated that motivation to apply is
an important factor in first-generation college attendance.
Becky also revealed the difficulties she faced during the college application and transition
problem due to her parents not speaking English. Becky began filling out school paperwork as
early as fourth grade as her parents were not able to read and understand the paperwork that
Becky was being given. Becky stated, To be honest like I didnt know like how to apply. Like
cuz my mom didnt know and everybody elses parents were like helping them and stuff and I
am just like Eh.okay so where do I go?. Becky declared her English teacher was a
particularly helpful resource through the college application process.
Campus Relationship and Culture. Lastly, it was noted that participants found campus
relationships to be an important part of the acculturation into the college environment. Campus
relationships were due to connections created with people because of jobs and clubs. In terms of
campus culture, this more so refers to specific perception of institutional norms.
Joseph initially had a 30-hour per week off-campus position. Joseph found it particularly
difficult to make connections while in this position as he spent very little time on campus. A
2010 study by Garcia indicated that students who work off campus have difficulty integrating
into campus social life. After the end of his second year at his institution, Joseph obtained a
position as an orientation leader. This position allowed Joseph to become aware of resources
that were available on campus, as well as build relationships with many staff at his institution.
Three of the five students interviewed had lived on campus at one point during the
academic year and indicated that living on campus allowed them to be more connected to the
campus community. David stated, Yeah I love living on campus. If I were to commute I
probably would not have in any way had the same experiences. And it completely changed
things like Ive been living with my parents my whole life. To be on my own and with a group
of people who have similar interests as me it was really nice. Becky also claimed that living on
campus helped make the transition to college easier for her to get involved, and now she
understands what it is to have the true college experience.
Limitations/Further Research
As the participants for this study volunteered to be interviewed, the sample was limited to
participants that were highly self-motivated and active in programs and organizations on campus.
Further research should study first-generation students that have left college within the first or
second year and seek reasons for why these students left. The literature does state that if students
are not active in campus organizations, or do not feel as if they belong, they will leave the
institution (DiMaria, 2007; Garcia, 2010; Indeklas, Daver, Vogt, & Leonard, 2007).
Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

An Annotated Bibliography
SUNY at Buffalo
ELP 509
Dr. Holland
Spring 2015
First Generation College Students and Higher Education: An Annotated Bibliography

Aspelmeier, J. E., Love, M. M., McGill, L. A., Elliott, A. N., & Pierce, T. W. (2012). Selfesteem, locus of control, college adjustment, and GPA among first-and continuinggeneration students: A moderator model of generational status. Research in higher
education, 53(7), 755-781.
In this study, Aspelmeier, Love, McGill, Elliott, and Pierce hypothesized that
generational differences could have a sensitizing or risk factor on the relationship
between psychological factors and academic outcomes for first-generation students. The
study used 332 first-generation undergraduates registered in an introductory psychology
class to self-report their academic GPAs as well as psychological factors such as selfesteem. There was a majority of Caucasian and female participants. Aspelmeier et al.
indicated many limitations in their study such as the sample was small compared to other
research studies and the sample was obtained from one specific four-year public
university. Other limitations included that it was during the spring semester and did not
take into account first-generation freshmen that may have withdrawn after the fall
semester. The researchers indicated replication with different types of institutions, such
as community colleges and highly selective public and private universities would provide
more validity to their findings.
The study found that first-generation status of a student had a sensitizing factor in
academic and psychological performance. The informing factor exacerbated positive or
negative outcomes of the first-generation college student. In comparison to continuinggeneration students, first-generation college students were more likely to be motivated to
do well academically. If first-generation college students have low self-esteem, the
student was more likely to perceive that they are failing and therefore was not as
motivated to do well academically. The researchers provided the alternative reason for
the differences found in motivation of first-generation college students to their different
types of social and cultural capital.
For our research, this paper supported our hypothesis that first-generation college
students are more likely to be successful if they are motivated and have proper support
from faculty and staff. The interview responses from our study support the findings that
social and cultural capital did play a role in the first-generation student motivation to
apply and complete college.
Atherton, M. C. (2014). Academic Preparedness of First-Generation College Students: Different
Perspectives. Journal of College Student Development, 55(8), 824-829.
The literature review that Atherton discussed in his article claimed that first-generation
college student status defined academic preparedness. Atherton conducted a study to
build on the objective preparedness of students as well as the subjective preparedness of
the student. The sample in this study consisted of 6,280 first-generation college freshman
between the years of 1999 and 2009. The dependent variables were high school GPA,
SAT scores and the students were asked how they believe they were prepared for college.
The public, research university where this study was conducted, has a higher than
average population of Hispanic first-generation college students. Although Atherton did
not state any limitations in his study, the sample appears to be highly Hispanic firstgeneration and had other ethnicities of first-generation students been studied, the findings
may have differed in results.
The findings in the study were that first-generation college students have a disadvantage
in academic preparedness in comparison to continuing-generation college students. This
supports previous research on first-generation college students (Strayhorn, 2006). The
hypothesis in this study was supported for the objective means of college preparedness.
The study failed to support the hypothesis of the subjective disadvantage of firstgeneration students. For the research, this added another component of academic
preparedness. Subjectively, first-generation college students stated that they are ready for
the academic challenges of college. If that is the case, what is causing these students to
not do well academically?
Bui, K. V. T. (2002). First-generation college students at a four-year university: Background
characteristics, reasons for pursuing higher education, and first-year experiences. College
Student Journal, 36(1), 3-11.
The findings of the literature review in this article were that first-generation college
students were more likely to earn their bachelors degree if they attended a four-year
university as opposed to attending a two-year college and then transferring to a four-year
institution. Bui used Pepperdine University to conduct a study on the differences
between first-generation college students and returning generation college students. The
study consisted of 107 participants that began college at a four-year university and was
mixed as far as whether their parents attended college or not. The participants completed
a survey that asked how they felt about their academic preparedness, reasons for
attending college and first-year experiences. The majority of students who completed this
study were from an Asian background and primarily involved in an introductory
psychology program. This was a limitation because it did not provide for a diverse
population of first-generation college students of other ethnicities as well as students in

different majors.
The results of this study indicated that first-generation college students come from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds and are more likely to attend two-year colleges due to
finances. Bui found that first-generation college students who attended a competitive
four-year institution had different demographics than the continuing-generation students
attending the same type of institution. Some of the demographic differences reflected
were that first-generation college students pursue higher education in an effort to support
their families because they would obtain higher paying jobs. Bui also found that firstgeneration college students placed more emphasis on their studies in an effort to succeed
in college due to higher fears of failing and losing financial aid.
These results suggested that resources on college campus should be more accessible for
first-generation college students. This study supported our hypothesis that first-generation
college students will succeed in college with extrinsic motivation. Interview responses
from our study also support these findings as many of the first-generation college
participants in our study indicated they believed obtaining their college degree would
provide them with external benefits, such as higher paying jobs. One participant
indicated she would like to help her mother financially, which further supports Buis
findings that first-generation college students pursue a college degree to assist their
families.
Coffman, S. (2011). A social constructionist view of issues confronting firstgeneration college
students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011(127), 81-90.
This paper advocated the social constructivist view that social and culture capital have an
influence on the success of first-generation college students. This study looked to support
and build on previous literature (Moschetti & Hudley, 2008). The details of the study are
general and vague. Coffman (2011) interviewed an undisclosed amount of undergraduate
and graduate students at a university in the Northwest. Because of the generalized
rationale of the interviewees, this study has limitations on the different demographics of
each individual student. The study tried to combat this by stating the social constructions
are different between every individual and therefore race and class are not important in
the study.
The results of this study support previous research on social capital (Moshetti & Hudley,
2008). The interviews conducted as noticed differences in social class, academic
preparedness, social networks, and motives for attending college. The study continued
stating that it is difficult to predict a first-generation college students behavior due to the
social constructions that each individual has. Coffman (2011) did see that programs
geared towards the first-generation college student would aid in the success of the
student. In particular, programs should focus on students with different socioeconomic
standings and experiential learning. For our paper, Coffman (2011) supports our thesis
that resources and campus relationships are beneficial for the first-generation college
student.
DeFreitas, S. C., & Rinn, A. (2013). Academic achievement in first generation college students:
The role of academic self-concept. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
13(1), 57-67.
DeFreitas and Rinn utilized a sample of 167 diverse undergraduate first*generation

students at a four-year, public university in the southwestern United States and
hypothesized and found that when these students had higher verbal and math scores, they
experienced higher academic achievement. The study found that ethnicity did not affect
the scores, or the academic achievement. The article surmised that if first-generation
students experienced higher academic achievement, the chance that they would graduate
would increase. Intervention in high schools continued through college for firstgeneration students was offered as a solution.
This article was a nice addition to further research on the correlation between higher
academic achievement in first-generation students and graduation rates. It did provide
insight as to how secondary schools and higher education may work to help firstgeneration students succeed in college by focusing on increasing their verbal and math
skills. However, as the limitations indicated, the study conducted was at a diverse
university and many of the students in the population spoke English as a second
language, which may produce findings that will differ from first-generation college
students that speak English as a first language.
DiMaria, F. (2007). First-generation students offer practical advice. The Hispanic Outlook in
Higher Education, 17, 10-11.
This study used sixteen stories of first-generation college student struggles and
accomplishments of transitioning and attending a four-year college. The study was
created as encouragement for fellow first-generation college students so they may witness
other first-generation college students that had accomplished their goal of a four-year
degree. Most of the stories in this study were from first-generation college students that
were Hispanic. This aided in our research of understanding the diverse first-generation
college student population.
Two findings in this article were important for our research. The study mentioned the
local community saw college as nontraditional and unnecessary. In order to attend
college, the first-generation college student needed to have motivation to apply and once
in college to keep their grades high. The response of one of our interview participants
who indicated attending college was not approved of in her community supports this
finding. Another finding was that first-generation college students needed resources in
order to feel included on campus. For Hispanic first-generation college students, the
students mentioned feeling a sense of not belonging on campus until they utilized the
multicultural center on campus. This extended our research to focus not only on financial
resources on campus but also cultural resources on campus.
The results of this study supported our hypothesis that first-generation college students
that are extrinsically motivated, who use resources, and have campus relationships will
succeed in college.
Forbus, P. R., Newbold, J. J., & Mehta, S. S. (2011). First-generation university students:
Motivation, academic success, and satisfaction with the university experience.
International Journal of Education Research, 6(2), 34-55.
The literature review in this study found that first-generation college students differed
from non-first generation college students because they came from low socioeconomic
backgrounds, lower academic preparation and not as much family support. This study
focused on differences between first-generation college students and non-first-generation
college students in relation to motivation, academic success and satisfaction with the
university. Forbus, Newbold, and Mehta provided their participants a questionnaire but
did not specify the sample size of the population that was used.
The study found that first-generation college students had a higher desire to graduate in a
short time from the institution. This could be due to family and financial reasons as other
research had found that many first-generation college students are from low
socioeconomic backgrounds (Bui, 2002). First-generation college students were less
likely to have a good time in college because they felt that college was about academic
success and not social success as some non-first-generation college students felt. Firstgeneration college students also reported that in relation to non-first-generation college
students they worked harder in every course, they thrived to get high grades and they
stayed organized to complete their academic work. First-generation students also reported
a greater sense of satisfaction to their institution, had a strong sense of pride and enjoyed
their university experience if there was a strong institutional reputation.
An interesting finding in this study was that first-generation college students reported
having higher grade point averages than the non-first-generation students. This finding
contradicted the literature review in this study because the literature had stated firstgeneration college students had lower grade point averages than continuing-education
students. As one of our participants in our study was in the Honors Program and about to
graduate within three years, the results of our interviews indicated that first-generation
students do not always have lower grade point averages.
Franklin, S. S., & Slate, J. P. (2012). First-generation student enrollment and attainment beyond
the baccalaureate. Journal of Education Research, 6(2), 175-186.
10
Franklin and Slate (2012) conducted a study to examine first-generation college students
and non-first-generation post-baccalaureate graduation rates, as well as the highest level
of education obtained across different racial and ethnic groups. Data was taken directly
from the U.S. Department of Educations National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) The Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study. Study results found that
non-first-generation college students earned a significantly higher percentage of graduate
degrees than their first-generation college counterparts. It was determined that blacknon-Hispanic and Hispanic students had larger disparities between their first generationcollege student counterparts.
As the study found that ethnicity did cause further obstacles in addition to first-generation
status for students, it was determined in the study that advancement of support programs
was necessary in higher education institutions. This determination supported our
hypothesis that first-generation students will succeed in college if they have resources to
utilize. Our interview responses from first-generation college students that participated in
support programs such as Student Support Services (SSS) and the Educational
Opportunity Program (EOP) and succeeded in college also reinforce the need for support
programs for our first-generation college students.
Garcia, V. (2010). First-generation college students: How co-curricular involvement can assist
with success. Vermont Connection, 31, 46-52.
Garcia presented a literature review on the benefits of co-curricular involvement for firstgeneration college students. Garcia called for more research on this topic due to firstgeneration college students being less prepared for college than continuing education
students. She suggested that students would usually attend college based on whether their
11
parents went to college. However, first-generation college students will be less likely to
attend college full-time as a result of working and families. Due to working off campus
and spending most of their time away from the school, first-generation college students
had a difficult time integrating into campus social life. As these students increased their
involvement, their learning and personal development would also increase.
This study supports Wells and Lynch (2012) in their claims about first-generation
students likelihood of dropping out of college before their second year in comparison to
continuing-education students. The first-generation college students we interviewed and
how their involvement on campus helped them in their overall development support
Garcias findings. The first-generation college students we interviewed did take
advantage of these programs and activities on campus and are succeeding in college.
Hertel, J. B. (2010). College student generational status: Similarities, differences, and factors in
college adjustment. The Psychological Record, 52(1), 1.
From various sources of literature, the first-generation college student suffered from
multiple disadvantages in comparison to continuing-generation college students. In this
study, Hertel compared the differences in overall adjustment for the first-generation
college student and the second-generation college student. Using 130 participants from a
large Midwestern university, the researchers had the participants fill out a questionnaire
during their second semester of college. The questionnaire was sent via mail. A larger
number of females completed the survey. This was a limitation as it would be hard to
determine a difference in findings for males from females.
The findings of this study indicated that first-generation college students had lower
parental incomes and social adjustment. For second generation college students, on-
12
campus friends were seen as a factor in predicting campus adjustment. However, firstgeneration college students viewed intellectualism as an overall predictor of campus and
college adjustment. Self-esteem, in contradictory to other research, was seen as low in
both groups (Aspelmeier, Love, McGill, Elliott & Pierce, 2012).
For our paper, this research aided our thesis and is supported by our interview responses
that resources and relationships are important for college adjustment.
Hodge, A. E. (2010). First-generation college students: The influence of family on college
experience. The Penn State McNair Journal, 17, p. 120-134.
This article is a study about the qualitative influence of family for first-generation college
students. It reviews literature and past studies of family involvement and the success of
first-generation college students in college. This study utilized three semi-structured
focus groups with first-generation college students at a Middle-Atlantic university. The
participants completed a survey and consent form and the group interviews were
approximately 90 minutes. The participants were chosen by their memberships in
university programs offered to first-generation college students.
The findings indicated that support, understanding, motivation, goal achievement, and
expectations were all influenced by family. Types of family support included indirect,
direct, and conditional supports. There was also indication of no support by families
either prior to the first-generation student applying for college or after the first-generation
student began college. The lack of familial support after the first-generation student
began college was found in interview responses of our study as many of the participants
in our study indicated they could not talk to their parents about what was happening in
college because their parents just did not understand. The invisible motivators found in
13
this study were that first-generation college students wanted to support their family,
which was also found in our interview responses.
The personal and family motivation in Hodges study was found to be the main
motivators for first-generation college students. Although the limitations of the sample
were that the participants were primarily African American students and there were a
small number of students available during the summer months, our interview responses
support these findings and this article will be very useful in our connections with our
literature and interviews.
Inkelas, K. K., Daver, Z. E., Vogt, K. E., & Leonard, J. B. (2007). Livinglearning programs and
first-generation college students academic and social transition to college. Research in
Higher Education, 48(4), 403-434.
This study included literature review that indicated living and learning communities
showed success in the academic and holistic development of the college student. This
study aimed to support the hypothesis that first-generation college students benefited
from living and learning communities as well. It covered a wide range of participants
with 3,335 email submissions from 33 institutions. All participants were both firstgeneration and continuing-generation sophomores or freshmen of traditional age and who
either lived in residence halls that included a living and learning community or in
residence halls that did not include a living and learning community. Therefore this
study did not include first-generation college students that did not live in the resident
halls, such as commuters and nontraditional students.
First-generation college students transitioned better academically and socially when
housed in living and learning communities as opposed to traditional residence halls. The
14
activities that were created in the living and learning communities aided first-generation
college students the most. The students noted that the interaction with faculty helped
with academic transitions. The living and learning residence halls created a peer support
and enhanced relationships. This study supported the literature review that firstgeneration college students tend to focus more on academics over social interactions. By
housing students in living and learning communities, first-generation college students
have better access to resources and ability to form on campus relationships. The
interview responses of the participants of our study indicated they lived on campus and
had more access to campus resources as well as social relationships and support Inkelas,
Daver, Vogt and Leonards findings.
Irlbeck, E., Adams, S., Akers, C., Burris, S., & Jones, S. (2014). First generation college
students: motivations and support systems. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(2),
154-166.
Colleges and universities are recruiting more diverse students in response to the growing
rate of enrollment and retention. First-generation college students are part of the
subpopulations being recruited. In this study, a first-generation college student was
defined as a student whose parent or guardian received a high school diploma or less.
Ten self-identified first-generation college students from Texas Tech University
volunteered to be interviewed by the researcher. These interviews were semi-structured
with a more flexible discussion style.
The results of this study coincided with themes in our hypothesis. Irlbeck, Adams,
Akers, Burris and Jones determined that three factors led to the enrollment of the firstgeneration college student. The three factors were parental support, teacher
15
encouragement and self-motivation. These dynamics are related to the three themes of
our hypothesis. One major implication of this research was in the method of choosing the
students. The first-generation college students asked to participate were students that had
been highly involved on campus. The study would have more validity if there had been
responses from first-generation college students that were not as involved on campus and
the barriers that prevented them from being involved on campus. As was revealed in our
interview responses, when first-generation college students are unable to live or work on
campus, there is no time for them to become involved and they felt they were not
included in the college experience.
Jenkins, S. R., Belanger, A., Connally, M. L., Boals, A., & Duron, K. M. (2013). First-generation
undergraduate students' social support, depression, and life satisfaction. Journal of
College Counseling, 16(2), 129-142.
Jenkins, Belanger, Connally, Boals and Duron (2013) conducted a study comparing firstgeneration college student experiences to non-first-generation college student experiences
with social support, posttraumatic stress, depression symptoms and overall life
satisfaction. Results found that the greatest differences were seen across genders. Female
first-generation college students, although they indicated they had far more social support
than their male first-generation college peers, reported higher experiences of depression
and related illnesses than their male first-generation counterparts. In this study, firstgeneration male college students also reported a higher well-being than non-firstgeneration male students. Researchers were not able to conclude why this was, however
they suggest that it might be that even just attending college was a strong self-esteem
booster for first-generation male students.
16
The study clearly set out its limitations at the end. However, the researchers did not find
that all of their research was conducted at one institution to be a limitation. It would be
interesting to find out if results played out differently at other types of institution.
Jenkins et al. indicated there was very little consideration in the study as to how a
students socioeconomic background may have contributed their findings. This is
another limitation as there may have been a significance found in experiences for
students, both first-generation and non-first-generation college students with different
socioeconomic backgrounds (Korsmo, 2014).
Korsmo, J. (2014). When schooling doesnt matter at home. Educational Leadership, 71(9), 4650.
In this article first-generation students were found to not have much parental nor high
school encouragement or support in their ambitions to attend college. Providing surveys
to 200 first-generation college students from middle- and low-income backgrounds,
responses were similar for both types of socioeconomic backgrounds. However, the
motivation found in many of the first-generation students was that it was their own
personal drive and goals that pushed them to attend and complete college.
The author in this article indicated that connections with students by faculty were very
important and that by validating and acknowledging the first-generation student
experiences and lack of parental support these connections may be made. It is made clear
that these connections are not relationships because relationships take time to build
whereas connections are made with just eye contact. As many first-generation students
do not feel they belong, Forbus, Newbold and Mehta, 2011 also found the way faculty
17
and staff communicate with the first-generation students may help the students build selfconfidence and overcome the feeling of not belonging on a college campus.
LoweryHart, R., & Pacheco, G. (2011). Understanding the firstgeneration student experience in
higher education through a relational dialectic perspective. New Directions for Teaching
and Learning, 2011(127), 55-68.
Relational dialectics theory stated that relationships were the result of a give-and-take
process that was constantly in motion. According to Lowery-Hart and Pacheco, this
theory related to the first-generation college students in the ways with which the students
try to maintain their cultural identity while on a college campus. This study was created
to understand the internal and external tensions that first-generation students come across
on a college campus. Four focus groups and individual interviews were administered to
twelve first-generation college students that were divided equally by gender. The study
was conducted at a southwestern regional university. Demographics other than gender
were not recorded which may have an impact on the results of the study as ethnicity also
has an effect on first-generation college students (DiMaria, 2007).
The results of the study found that external and internal tensions were present to the firstgeneration college student in relation to maintaining their cultural identity as a firstgeneration college student. The fear of losing their personal identity made the firstgeneration student unlikely to engage with campus resources and continue campus
relationships with continuing-generation college students. An interesting finding was
that first-generation college students engaged with campus resources and relationships
when they did not identify as a first-generation college student. Thus, college campuses
should create programs that foster living and learning programs that allow first-
18
generation and continuing-generation college students to create relationships together,

such as Inkelas, Daver, Vogt and Leonard (2007) suggested. This study does not support
our hypothesis that campus resources help first-generation college students.
Mahan, D., Wilson, K. B., Petrosko Jr, J. M., & Luthy, M. R. (2014). Is retention enough?
Learning and satisfaction of first-generation college seniors. Kentucky Journal of Higher
Education Policy and Practice, 3(1), 1.
Most research on first-generation college students focused on the direct outcome on the
institution such as retention and grade point average as indicated in the literature review.
In this study, the focus shifted to the development of long-term learning experiences and
satisfaction throughout the first-generation students time at the institution. The study was
conducted at a large private college in the Midwest. In total 938 seniors from this
institution completed the surveys and tests that assessed academic ability and satisfaction
with the institution. The results of this study suggested that there was no significant
difference between the ways that first-generation college students and non-firstgeneration college students were satisfied with their college experience and degrees of
learning.
This study found one important difference in first-generation college students and nonfirst-generation college students. The two different groups of students differed in the
ways that the students engaged on campus. The first-generation college student was more
inclined to engage with professors and faculty at the institution as opposed to becoming
more involved on campus. This is because first-generation college students were more
likely to work more than 16 hours per week outside of school and have limited time so
they spend their spare time interacting with faculty and professors during office hours
19
and class times. The non-first-generation college student was more engaged with extracurricular activities such as clubs and service learning. College faculty could help firstgeneration college students by creating a classroom environment that fosters the
development of interpersonal relationships between themselves and students.
Our findings in responses from our interviews indicated that peer relationships and
campus involvement had a positive effect on satisfaction with college more than
relationships with faculty. Although one of our participants did respond that he enjoyed
the smaller classrooms, it was not clear in his statement whether it was because of the
one-on-one with faculty or with peers.
McKay, V. C., & Estrella, J. (2008). First-generation student success: The role of faculty
interaction in service learning courses. Communication Education, 57(3), 356-372.
This study hypothesized that service learning courses offered first-generation students the
interaction with faculty, community, and peers necessary to improve their academic
success. The sample population consisted of first-generation students enrolled in a
service learning course who agreed to participate in the study. Results indicated that
faculty interaction and guidance was positively associated with academic success for
first-generation students. The authors further found that first-generation students who
participated in these courses reported they had higher motivation to achieve their
academic goals.
The findings in this study are important for higher educational professionals because they
gave us a better understanding of what first-generation students need to be successful in
college. As it appeared that the interaction with faculty was one of the key components
of these communities, it is likely that faculty mentorship may be an option during the first
20
years of college for first-generation students, supporting Mahan, Wilson, Petrosko and
Luthys (2014) findings that faculty interaction is pertinent to first-generation college
student success. This study also supported Swecker and Searbys (2013) findings in
which they found the more interaction first-generation students had with professional
academic advisors, the higher retention rates were in colleges. This is an important factor
for many higher education institutions today as they seek to remain in compliance with
federal regulations and retaining students.
Moschetti, R., & Hudley, C. (2008). Measuring social capital among first-generation and nonfirst-generation, working-class, white males. Journal of College Admission, (198), 25-30.
Moschetti and Hudley conducted a study on the effects of social capital on firstgeneration and non-first-generation working class white males. The study sought to
find how much communication each group had with institutional agents, and the
comparison of the availability of agents between first-generation and non-firstgeneration college students. From a sample made up of white, male freshman students
attending a university in the southeastern U.S, the students were asked to fill out a
questionnaire. The students communication with institutional agents, frequency of
institutional assistance, grade point average and expectations of the future were
measured. An important result of this study suggested that first-generation college
students accessed institutional agents more frequently if they had higher aspirations for
the future or if meeting with the agents raised students aspirations.
This article related to our study in that it reinforced first-generation student success
through contact with institutional agents. The students in our study found campus
resources very helpful, and thus most of the participants grades of our study and
21
aspirations were relatively high. This article also reinforces Orbes (2004) and Garcias
(2010) findings that most first-generation college students are likely to work significantly
more than non-first-generation college students. However, this study may be limited to
the experiences of white, working-class, men and excludes other first-generation
populations such as females, other ethnicities and socioeconomic statuses (DiMaria,
2007; Hertel, 2010; Jenkins, Belanger, Connally, Boals and Duran, 2013). This article
also supported our hypothesis that with more availability of resources first-generation
college students are more apt to succeed.
Olson, J. S. (2014). Opportunities, obstacles, and options: First-generation college graduates and
social cognitive career theory. Journal of Career Development (Sage Publications Inc.),
41(3), 199-217. doi:10.1177/0894845313486352
Olson highlighted career choices of first-generation college students transitioning
between college and the workforce. Olsons description of social cognitive career theory
(SCCT) depicted career decisions as functions of self-efficacy, outcome expectations and
personal goals. The first-generation college student may express high levels of selfefficacy in one area and not another, resulting in lower confidence. Outcomes were
related to first-generation college students who based their career decisions on the
possibility of higher paying jobs. Personal goals included becoming a role model for
others in their community as well as becoming a successful adult after college. However,
these roles may be conflicting and create tensions for the student as well.
This article related to our studys hypothesis that extrinsic motivation is a factor in the
success of first-generation college students in college. First-generation students need an
end goal or purpose in order to stay in college and succeed. Career goals become part of
22
this extrinsic motivation and are reflected through our interview data and supported by
other articles related to motivation (Mahan et al., 2014; Forbus et al., 2011).
Orbe, M. P. (2004). Negotiating multiple identities within multiple frames: an analysis of first
generation college students. Communication Education, 53(2), 131-149.
The research in this study focused on first-generation college students and the retention
rates that ensured a student graduated. Developmentally, first-generation college students
have multiple identities which can be salient at different times of the students life. The
research article used the communication theory of identity (CTI) model to aid in the
process of understanding first-generation college student identity. The study was
conducted using multiple focus groups and individual interviews at several different
campuses that varied in institutional type. The findings were assessed by 79 firstgeneration college students. The findings indicated that the complexity of multiple
identities to a first-generation college student varied among individuals on many different
levels.
The conclusions from this study were split into three components. First, saliency among
first-generation college students was different between each individual and depended on
the environment of the student. First-generation students in a private college were less
likely to identify as a first-generation college student than first-generation students in a
public institution. Second, the first-generation college status was more important for
individuals with co-cultural backgrounds. The students that were more salient about their
first-generation status were students that were people of color or women. The least salient
students were white males. Third, the first-generation college student lacked a sense of
23
group belonging. In the findings, no person identified a group that individuals could be
part of that served as a group for first-generation college students.
Orbe, M. P. (2008). Theorizing multidimensional identity negotiation: Reflections on the lived
experiences of first-generation college students. New Directions for Child &
Adolescent Development, (120), 81-95.
Orbe explored the first-generation college student negotiations of college culture and how
that integrated into their college experience. Using the foundations of dialectical theory
and cross-cultural adaptation theory, Orbe introduced six primary dialectical tensions that
face first-generation college students during their time in college. These experiences of
tension and stress guide the student into new identity formation. The tensions are not
linear and lie on a continuum, which suggest they can be interconnected. It was found
that individual to social identity and stability to change were most relevant to identity
negotiation in relation to first-generation college students.
This study will be helpful in forming meaningful questions about the identity formation
of first-generation college students. Asking about their internal as well as external factors
that affect their development, we will be able to explore the various tensions they face in
college as individuals. This study will also help in the development of interview
questions such as, How have you had to adapt to the college environment? In relation
to first-generation college students, these answers will most likely differ from continuingeducation students.
Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., & Wolniak, G. C. (2004). First-generation college students:
Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. Journal of Higher
Education, 75(3), 249-284. doi:10.1353/jhe.2004.0016
24
Pascarella, Pierson and Wolniak suggested the need for more cognitive and psychosocial
development for first-generation college students. The study wished to follow these
students into their second and third years of college. The authors sought to find the
differences between first-generation and other college students in their academic and
nonacademic experiences. Pascarella et al. further estimated the differences between
students cognitive, psychosocial and status attainment outcomes and determined if
specific academic and nonacademic experiences influencing their development were
different in magnitude.
The study provided valuable insight on the experiences of first-generation college
students. It found that students who were first-generation did not involve themselves in
extracurricular activities due to their tendency to work more than their peers. Garcias
(2010) literature review supports these findings when it highlighted jobs as an important
factor to first-generation college students in particular. Based upon our findings from
interview responses of first-generation college students, it was more the issue of working
off campus that severely impacts their involvement in on-campus activities. We further
found that first-generation college students do need to work to pay for their college and to
help their families, but if they work on campus they are able to increase their social
capital.
Peabody, M. (2013). A critical analysis of the identification and treatment of first-generation
college students: A social capital approach. Kentucky Journal of Higher Education Policy
& Practice, 2(1), 1-13.
This literature review recognized the unique needs of first-generation college students on
campus. Peabody drew on the characteristics of first-generation college students and
25
connected issues of retention and social capital to encourage institutions of higher

education to better serve this community. The author described social capital as a key
indicator of successful social networking on a college campus, the benefits of belonging
to one group, membership in a different group from their familial networks, and social
movement from a current position to another position. Potential negative effects would be
that first-generation college students would rely on certain groups and be afraid to break
away and form their own identity. Certain prescribed actions suggested by Peabody were
that in order for institutions to foster a social capitalistic environment they should include
living-learning communities and transition programs.
This studys findings that living-learning communities assisted in first-generation college
student retention and success support findings in Mahan et al. (2007) and Inkelas et al.
(2007). Peabody also supplied more evidence that campus relationships and campus
resources assisted in first-generation student success. First- generation student responses
in Peabodys study provided evidence that supported the claim that they enjoyed college
more when they found social group membership, especially those who are commuters.
Our studys participant interview responses support this finding also.
Pelco, L. E., Ball, C. T., & Lockeman, K. (2014). Student growth from service-learning: A
comparison of first-generation and non-first-generation college students. Journal of
Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 18(2), 49-66.
Service learning is a college credited experience that allowed students to engage with
their studies by aiding in the needs of the community. Service learning also provided the
opportunity for reflection towards the task and academics. Service learning was
beneficial for college students and had been tested empirically. This study was meant to
26
show the effects of service learning between first-generation college students and
continuing-generation college students in terms of academic and professional
development. The participants of the study were sorted into 321 first-generation and 782
continuing-generation students with a majority of the respondents as female. The study
was in a large urban university in the southeast United States.
The results of this study reflected that both first- and continuing-generation students
showed a high level of development in professional and academic factors. A
disparity was present in the effects of service learning with male first-generation college
students and male continuing-generation college students from low-income backgrounds.
The male first-generation college students from low socioeconomic backgrounds showed
the fastest and strongest development. On the other hand, continuing-generation males
from low socioeconomic backgrounds showed the least development within service
learning. This supports the findings in Forbus, Newbold & Mehta (2011) that firstgeneration college students have higher academic GPAs than continuing generation
students.
Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). First-and second-generation college students: A comparison of
their engagement and intellectual development. Journal of Higher Education, 276-300.
This study was the first to look at the experiences of first-generation college
students using data from the national survey database. The study focused on the
differences between first-generation college student sand second-generation college
students in relationships, learning and intellectual development, and characteristics. The
sample was 3,000 first-generation undergraduates spread across the United States. The
data was taken from the surveys that included demographic factors, educational
27
aspirations and academic engagement. The article mentioned a limitation in this sample
due to the reliance on self-reported data and sampling methods.
The results of this study indicated that first-generation college students, in comparison to
second-year college students were less engaged overall to the institution. A relationship
was found between the motivation to pursue an advanced degree and academic
achievement which supports Somers, Woodhouse and Cofer (2004) study. The
students that felt most engaged to the institution lived on campus validating the notion of
living and learning programs for first-generation college students (Inkelas, Daver, Vogt,
and Leonard, 2007). The results also indicate that first-generation college students might
not have the social capital to know how to do well academic and utilize the resources on
campus which supports Coffman (2011). For our paper, this article gives an overview on
the disadvantages that first-generation college students face and how student affairs
professionals can solve the inequality.
Prospero, M., & Vohra-Gupta, S. (2007). First generation college students: Motivation,
integration, and academic achievement. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 31(12), 963-975.
Prospero and Vohra-Gupta focused on academic achievement of the firstgeneration college student in comparison to non-first-generation college students. Firstgeneration college students were defined as a student with parents with no college degree.
For this study, Prospero & Vohra-Gupta researched the motivation and integration
dimensions of the first-generation college student. Two dimensions of motivation were
apparent: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation was when the individual
participated in an activity for their own personal enjoyment or growth. Extrinsic
28
motivation was when the individual participated in an activity to receive external

rewards. The individual engaged with an activity because of the belief it would better
himself due to external encouragement.
The study used a diverse sample of 197 first-generation college students attending
a southern community college using self-report measures. The results of the study
indicated that the motivation and integration factors are more salient in the firstgeneration college student as compared to continuing-generation college students.
Extrinsic motivation was seen as a factor that leads to lower GPA which does not support
our thesis. Perhaps, the results were because of the lack of resources and campus
relationships with the students. Resources and campus relationships increased a students
academic achievement (Peabody, 2013).
Somers, P., Woodhouse, S., & Cofer, J. (2004). Pushing the boulder uphill: the persistence of
first-generation college students. NASPA Journal, 41(3), 418-435.
Somers, Woodhouse and Cofer (2004) examined the impact of several demographics of
college students such as background, achievement, college experiences and cost and how
this affected first-generation college students and non-first generation college students
differently. The data was taken directly from the National Postsecondary Student Aid
Study in 1995-1996 and defined first-generation students as students whose parents had
received a high school diploma or less.
Results found that first-generation college students from racially diverse backgrounds
were less likely to persist in their education. However, contradictory to other students, it
was found that first-generation students who completed a bachelors degree were more
likely to complete an advance degree level. It was also interesting that first-generation
29
college students accumulated far less debt than other students. This is believed to be due
to the fear of accumulating debt and one of the participants interviewed in our study
support this finding.
Soria, K. M., & Stebleton, M. J. (2012). First-generation students' academic engagement and
retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 673-685.
In this study, the experiment focused on the retention and academic achievement of firstgeneration college students in relation to non-first generation college students. Firstgeneration college students were defined as students that were part of a family where no
parent or guardian received a baccalaureate degree. The study used a sample of students
from a large Midwest public institution with over 28,000 students. The results of the
study found that first-generation college students had a significant disadvantage in the
likelihood of leaving the institution or performing well in class.
Academic engagement was formulated on three separate levels. The first was the
interactions between faculty and students. The second was the ability to link
multiple courses in formulating an idea in class. The third was the first-generation
students ability to formulate insightful questions in class. On all of these levels, firstgeneration college students performed lower than non-first generation students and this
conclusion was supported by Strayhorns (2006) findings. This had an important
inclination in the institutions ability to make the student belong on campus. A positive
correlation was found between sense of belonging at the institution and academic
engagement. For our research, student affairs professionals should look to engage firstgeneration college students to the institution and help them achieve higher grades in
academics.
30
Strayhorn, T. L. (2006). Factors influencing the academic achievement of first-generation

college students. NASPA Journal, 43(4), 82-111.
This study reviewed the effects of variables on first-generation students and their
academic achievement in relation to non-first-generation students. Compiling data from
the Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B), the sample consisted of
individuals that participated in the B&B, mostly female. Gender and race were shown to
be related to cumulative GPAs. Precollege factors such as ACT and SAT scores were
related. Time between high school, college and time to degree all reflected significance
and satisfaction with academics in college. Findings also indicated educational
aspirations were positively related to higher GPAs. Future recommendations offered in
the article were to understand the needs and aspirations of first-generation students as
well as unique challenges of ethnic minority first-generation students. However, due to
the sample being mostly female, the results may have been different in a more diverse
sample.
The findings of a relationship between ACT and SAT scores, which cover verbal and
math, and GPA support DeFreitas and Rinns (2013) findings concerning higher math
and verbal skills in relation to higher academic success for first-generation college
students. The further significance of academic integration increasing academic
achievement also supports the service learning courses discussed in McKay and Estrella
(2008). However, it was interesting to see that although higher ACT and SAT scores
resulted in a higher GPA, remedial courses taken in relation to math and writing resulted
in lower GPAs in this study. Validating Pernas (2008) description of habitus, Strayhorn
suggested that higher educational professionals should focus on the factors that assist in
31
aspirations of first-generation students in relation to habitus and self-concept. Strayhorn

also found that race, gender, and first-generation status matter in education (p.
104). Therefore, the suggestion of further research into effects on minority firstgeneration students is plausible.
Swecker, H. K., Fifolt, M., & Searby, L. (2013). Academic advising and first-generation college
students: A quantitative study on student retention. NACADA Journal, 33(1), 46-53.
Research has shown that first-generation students do not always receive information
about college from their parents and rely on high schools and colleges to provide the
information (Aspelmeier, Love, McGill, Elliott, & Pierce, 2012). In this study historical
data was used from reports of student academic fact sheets that were kept in a student
registration system. This data consisted of information for first-generation students who
matriculated in fall 2009, the number of academic advisement meetings they had, and the
number of students who remained enrolled and in good standing in fall 2010. The results
indicated significance in retention of first-generation students who received academic
advisement. Limitations included self-reported updates on the student academic fact
sheets, what type of information was provided in the academic advisement meetings, and
only meetings with professional academic advisors.
Swecker and Searby indicated that limitations of the study consisted of the majority of
interactions being between students and professional academic advisors. Yet, faculty
interactions with students was determined to be an important factor in academic
achievement, retention, and graduation rates of first-generation students by research
found in McKay and Estrella (2008). Such findings are important in understanding what
first-generation students will need in the first years of college in order to help guide them
32
to success. Therefore, Swecker and Searbys research suggested that by understanding

the needs of first-generation students would help determine what supports to put in place
for them was accurate.
Wells, R. S., & Lynch, C. M. (2012). Delayed college entry and the socioeconomic gap:
Examining the roles of student plans, family income, parental education, and parental
occupation. Journal of Higher Education, 83(5), 671-697.
Wells and Lynch focused on high school students and the factors that affected the
possibilities of delaying postsecondary schooling. They presented this study to
investigate the reasons behind delaying postsecondary schooling and warned that this
delay usually decreased the chance of receiving a bachelors degree. They surveyed a
total of 11,330 students as 10th graders in 2002, 12th graders in 2004 and again in 2006.
This sample was limited to those who expected to complete at least some college at one
point in their life. In terms of first-generation college students, the results suggested that
these students are likely to plan to delay college enrollment, which coincided with lowSES students as well.
This study was one of the first of its kind in suggesting first-generation college students
are even reluctant to enroll in college after high school. Its implications on policy in
higher education and our study are that we must look to parental education and/or
occupation when identifying those who would be in need of assistance during the college
planning process. This study was supports Aspelmeier, Love, McGill, Elliott, & Pierces
(2012) findings that first-generation college students would benefit from services
provided in high school about college applications.
33
Woosley, S. A., & Shepler, D. K. (2011). Understanding the early integration experiences
of first-generation college students. College Student Journal, 45(4), 37-50.
Woosley and Sheplers study conducted research on the early integration experiences of
first-generation college students and what effects these experiences had on overall
satisfaction. The research looked at first-generation students social integration,
academic integration, institutional satisfaction and homesick-related stress, and tried to
find what predicted a successful or unsuccessful integration. This research found that
campus involvement and institutional involvement were the biggest predictors of a
successful college integration experience.
Woosley and Shepler did an excellent job of listing the limitations of their study, which
included the fact that their study was only conducted at one institution, and most of the
students at that particular institution were Caucasian. However, the researchers did point
out that little research has been completed concerning the experience of Caucasian firstgeneration college students. Therefore their research, while it was not the original
intention, may help to fill some of those gaps. This study supports the findings of Irlbeck,
Adams, Akers, Burris & Jones (2014) that first-generation college students who become
involved in campus activities tend to have a better college experience.

First-Generation Students-Research Packet

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

First-Generation Students-Research Packet

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Running head: FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education:

FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education:

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education: Interview Protocol

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education:

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education: Interview Summary

Names have been changed for anonymity.

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

Resources. The participants indicated the availability of resources to be an important

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION STUDENTS INTERVIEW SUMMARY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

First-Generation College Students and Higher Education:

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

First Generation College Students and Higher Education: An Annotated Bibliography

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

population of first-generation college students of other ethnicities as well as students in

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

DeFreitas and Rinn utilized a sample of 167 diverse undergraduate first*generation

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

generation and continuing-generation college students to create relationships together,

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

connected issues of retention and social capital to encourage institutions of higher

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

motivation was when the individual participated in an activity to receive external

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Strayhorn, T. L. (2006). Factors influencing the academic achievement of first-generation

Running head: FIRST-GENERATION ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

aspirations of first-generation students in relation to habitus and self-concept. Strayhorn