First-generation college students in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

First-generation college students in the United States are college students whose parents did not attend college.[1] Compared with their continuing-generation college student counterparts, first-generation college students tend to be older,[2] come from families with lower incomes,[2][3] attend college part-time,[2][4] live off campus,[2] and have more work responsibilities.[2] They represent attendees of a diverse range of types of institutions.[2][3][4] Whether by race, culture, or social class, first-generation college students often experience some kind of mismatch between their home environment and the college environment.[5][6][7][8][9] Throughout the history of the United States, institutions of higher education have symbolized opportunity for social mobility of individuals.[5] In the case of African Americans in the post-reconstruction era, higher education was seen by some as a means of generating leadership to bring entire oppressed classes to recognition.[10] These students' likelihood to attend college in the first place is highly influenced by their parents' education level; when a parent's education level is higher, the student is likely to enroll in postsecondary education increases as well.[11]

Population trends[edit]

As reported by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 33.5% of undergraduate students had parents whose highest level of education was high school or less in the 2011–2012 school year.[12]

Age and dependency status[edit]

See also: Nontraditional student

In 2014 the NCES reported that the following percentages of college students by age had parents whose highest education level was high school or less.[12]

  • 27.5% of students 18 years old or younger
  • 27.4% of students 19–23 years old
  • 35.6% of students 24–29 years old
  • 42.1% of students 30–39 years old
  • 50.2% of students 40 years old or older

A review of the literature on first-generation college students published by the Texas Guaranteed Student Load Corporation (TGSLC) cites a 2001 study which reported that 31% of first-generation college students were 24 years of age or older.[2] A 1998 study cited in the same review reported that 13% of first-generation college students were 30 years of age or older.[2] Additionally, 46% did not start attending college immediately after high school graduation. 37% were not dependents, and 18% were married.[2]

The NCES report for the 2011–2012 school year states the shares of undergraduate students whose parents' highest level of education was high school or less by dependency and marriage status.

  • 25.4% of dependent students
  • 41.3% of independent students
  • 35.6% of students who are unmarried without dependents
  • 37.5% of students who are married without dependents
  • 47.5% of students who are unmarried with dependents
  • 44.0% of students who are married with dependents

Employment[edit]

According to the NCES report for the 2011–2012 school year, the share of undergraduate full-time employed undergraduate students whose parents' highest education level was high school or less was 38.0%. This is slightly higher than the share of undergraduate students who did not work while enrolled whose parents' highest education level was high school or less (34.1%). The share of part-time employed undergraduate students whose parents' highest education level was high school or less was 29.6%.[12]

Race[edit]

The NCES reported these percentages of undergraduate college students whose parents had a high school diploma or less for the 2011–2012 school year:[12]

  • 47.8% of Hispanic students
  • 42.0% of Black African-American students
  • 39.6% of American Indian students
  • 32.9% of Asian students
  • 27.9% of White students
  • 24.6% of Pacific Islander students
  • 23.9% of students of two or more races

Type of institution[edit]

The NCES report by Redford and Hoyer following students who were high school sophomores in 2002 states that 76% of first-generation college students first enrolled in public, 9% in private, and 16% in for-profit institutions.[3] Regarding the selectively of institutions where first-generation college students tend to enroll, the same NCES report states that 52% enrolled in 2-year institutions whose selectively is unclassified. Students enrolled at moderately selective 4-year institutions comprised 16%, at inclusive 4-year institutions 9%, at unclassified 4-year institutions 9%, at unclassified less than two-year institutions 9%, and at highly selective 4-year institutions 6% of the total first-generation college student population.[3]

The NCES 2011–2012 school year data shows that almost half of undergraduates enrolled in for-profit institutions have parents whose highest level of education was high school or less.[12] Students whose parents' highest education level was high school or less also represented

  • 33.0% of undergraduates at public universities
  • 56.2% of undergraduates at less that 2-year public universities
  • 38.3% of undergraduates at 2-year public universities
  • 25.9% of undergraduates at 4-year public universities
  • 23.1% of undergraduates at private nonprofit universities

Adult students' experiences[edit]

Through interviews with first-generation college students older than 25 at a small liberal arts college, researchers Kathleen Byrd and Ginger Macdonald found that these students considered their age to be a positive contributor to their time management and self-advocacy skills.[13] Having more experience navigating life and work contributed to their confidence.[13] Some interviewees expressed that their self-advocacy skills in particular had helped to compensate for what they lacked in background knowledge, or cultural capital, of the college system in areas such as financial aid, student advising services, and student-professor relationships.[13] Interviewees who were also parents cited their children as sources of motivation in their academic pursuits. In contrast to younger first-generation college students who may perceive their education as surpassing their parents, older first-generation college students may perceive their education in terms of being a role model for their children.[13]

Online learning[edit]

According to a study of adult first-generation and continuing-generation online college students by Susan Dumais et al., most adult online learners, regardless of parent education level, are confident that they will succeed academically.[14] However, ways that first-generation adult online learners differed from their continuing-generation counterparts in the study included "greater intrinsic motivation" to earn their degree and more usage of built-in student support services.[14] Additionally, the first-generation students reported having more demanding work environments and less support from their employers to balance their work responsibilities with their family and academic responsibilities.[14]

Social class and mobility[edit]

In an article from the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Stephens et al. observe that the institution of higher education in the United States of America is popularly viewed as an environment of equal opportunity regardless of social class background and a means for social mobility.[5] Indeed, a 2002 report by Connie Ayala and Al Striplen cited in the TGSLC literature review asserts that first-generation college students are involved in a "deliberate attempt" to achieve upward social, economic, or occupational mobility.[2] However, research by Jean Phinney et al. explain that first-generation college students' motivations for attending college also include helping one's family and responding to encouragement from others in addition to personal/career motivations.[6][15] A study by Rebecca Covarrubias and Stephanie Fryburg equates first-generation college student status with a working-class family background and the university as a middle class environment.[7]

Cultural capital[edit]

Stephens et al. show that working class and middle class societies have differing cultural capital and norms, and these differences are present in the way each class approaches and values higher education as well.[5] The "cultural mismatch" between the college environment and first-generation college students' working-class backgrounds can be a source of academic disadvantage.[5] Middle class students are typically socialized to value independence, and they are encouraged to approach college with the intention to "separate and distinguish themselves from their parents..., to find themselves, to develop their voices, to follow their passions, and to influence the world". On the other hand, working class students are often socialized to value interdependence, such as by "adjusting and responding to others' needs" and "being a part of a community", and may view college through a lens of interdependence as well.[5] The article shows how American first and second tier universities included in their study do indeed reflect the middle class values of independence, creating a mismatch between the environment familiar to students of working-class backgrounds and the college environment.[5] Stephens et al. propose that American institutions of higher education should broaden their cultures to include messages that accept and encourage interdependence so to mitigate academic disadvantages due to cultural mismatch.[5]

Social capital[edit]

Rice et al., in an article in the journal Counseling Psychology Quarterly, conducted qualitative interviews with 14 first-generation college students to better understand the social class worldview and identity of first-generation college students from the students' own perspectives.[8] When attempting to label their own social class, terms of social and cultural capital were more relevant than formal indicators of social class such as income, education, and occupation.[8] According to Stephens et al., first-generation college students' tendency to have different social capital than those they are surrounded by in the college environment makes it difficult for them to feel comfortable at college.[8] For example, first-generation college students may not have relationships with college graduates, or they may lack a sense of belonging among their classmates.[8] Some of the interviewees found that shared life experiences allowed them to bond with and feel comfortable around each other despite social class differences.[8] Studies show that the strongest predictors for college attendance and completion are academic preparation, social support, access to information, parental involvement and knowledge about college, and financial aid.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] Another form of social support is the prevalence of strong social networks that support a student's academic and emotional development[25][26][27]. Federally funded programs such as Upward Bound, Talent Search, Gear Up, and non-profit organizations such as AVID have been implemented at the secondary level to prepare first-generation students for college through academic counseling, college field trips, study skill development, and support from college graduates.[28][29][30][31]

Classism[edit]

In the Rice et al. article, classism is defined as the belief that all members of a certain social class possess certain characteristics inherent to that class.[8] Many of the interviewees found it hard to recall specific experiences of classism, but nevertheless experienced being generally "looked down upon".[8] Non-white first generation college students in the study would sometimes refer to their experiences using racial or ethnic terms interchangeably with class terms, showing that dimensions of their identities are not separable from one another.[8] Indeed, an article by Jessica Harris and Chris Linder discusses abundant literature reporting on the high prevalence of racial micro-agrression against graduate students of color within the university which becomes normalized due to its commonness.[32] The interviewees also acknowledged stereotypes of students of higher classes, including that they do not work as hard or value their education as much as less affluent students.[8]

Students of rural and agricultural background[edit]

Patrick Shultz conducted a study consisting of in-depth interviews with six first-year first-generation college students with both rural and agricultural backgrounds.[9] Many of these students associated their agricultural backgrounds with their hard-working character, which in many cases, helped the students maintain confidence that they could work hard to persist through the challenges of college too.[9] Sometimes, these students perceived that their peers at college did not share their past of having to work as hard as they had, which could make building relationships with these student's counterparts more challenging.[9] Their agricultural background was a source of pride and identity which also set them apart as multidimensionally "different" from their peers.[9]

The Talented Tenth[edit]

Battle and Wright, in their quantitative assessment of W.E.B. Du Bois's "Talented Tenth" in the Journal of Black Studies, discuss the conversation around higher education that took place among black intellectual leaders in the post-Reconstruction era.[10] Du Bois's philosophy was that the cohort of emancipated slaves who would go on to become college educated, or the "Talented Tenth", had a responsibility to become leaders and advocates for the whole of the African American community.[10] Du Bois wanted institutions of higher education to be a means by which the "humanity of African Americans" as a whole would be "recognize[d]".[10] Later in his life, Du Bois expressed disappointment in the Talented Tenth, accusing them of using their education for personal gain and losing solidarity with the rest of the black community.[10]

Family relationships[edit]

A 2014 study by Tiffany Wang in the Journal of Family Communication identified five thematic messages that 30 first-generation participants from a large public university received from their families.[33] The first theme was "remembering family", which included messages about the importance of maintaining strong emotional connection with and loyalty to one's family and background.[33] The second theme was "focusing on family", which included messages encouraging the student to prioritize the family highly.[33] The third theme was "counting on family", which included messages guaranteeing unconditional support.[33] Students who cited these messages also reflected that being at college had led them to cherish their family relationships more than in the past.[33] The fourth theme was "not worrying about family", and included messages of assurance that the student had made the right choice in pursuing education even if sacrifices of responsibility to and time with the family had to be made.[33] The fifth theme was "setting a good example", and included messages reminding the student of their responsibility to demonstrate maturity, hard work, and focus to younger family members and friends.[33]

Olson's literature review and research (2014) explores the unfamiliarity FGCS face when they navigate through their postsecondary education and the fact that they usually do this on their own.[34]

Olson cites how FGCS have been found to enter college with the expectation that it will lead to a high-paying or prestigious job, which are not guaranteed outcomes. Brooks-Terry (1998) explores FGCS go into college with faulty expectations and struggle with "double assignment",[35] which entail handling their courses while also learning and understanding the college lifestyle in general. Orbe (2008) explains that FGCS' understanding of the college culture becomes a "multidimensional identity negotiation"[36] against their home culture. FGCS have to acknowledge how they change in college while also relating that to their experiences with family and friends. Orbes mentions how FGCS might not even notice this, but their family and friends will acknowledge this change.[36] The challenge comes with the accusations that the student has changed or is not remaining true to their culture, which further complicates their identity and belief in their potential to succeed.

Additionally, Olson addresses the obstacles the FGCS faces when wanting to move out. London (1989) explains how families of FGCS assign roles[37] to keep them grounded to their families. Families may delegate the FGCS as the example for other members of the family, or keep them at home so they can remain reliant on family. Their success then becomes validated by family approval as well as by completing their own goals.

Furthermore, Olson applies SCCT when exploring self-efficacy in more depth. Bandura (1986) says that self-efficacy and success of FGCS may be "learned"[38] by watching their peers fail in college. It is likely that their perspectives are not accurate, and their families lack of education experience negatively reinforces the notion that they will not succeed. Gibbons and Borders (2010) highlight that while FGCS may overcome many obstacles, they still have the notion that they are not as successful as they should have been.[39] Regardless, SCCT predicts that if a FGCS has strong family support, they are more likely to believe in their personal goals and path to higher education and a stronger sense of self-efficacy.

Imposter Phenomenon[edit]

A 2016 journal article by Patrick Whitehead and Robert Wright discusses research that has found associations between first-generation college students and experience of the imposter phenomenon.[40] As described by Pauline Clance and Joe Langford, the imposter phenomenon is the internalization of the belief that one's luck, hard work, or manipulation of others is the source of one's success, not true competence.[41] Furthermore, people experiencing imposter phenomenon feel pressure to maintain their successful persona and fear of failing to do so and being exposed as incompetent.[41] In the context of first-generation college students, Whitehead and Wright found that the perception of one's college education as a process of "service to something greater" is a protective factor against not only imposter phenomenon, but other obstacles typically experienced by first-generation college students.[40]

Graduation Rates[edit]

DeAngelo[42] provides statistics on graduation rates among FGCS and non-FGCS in a framework of four, five, and six years as well as a table that breaks down the degree attainment by race/ethnicity. These images from the study provide a breakdown, and show the huge gaps in degree attainment.[42] A new study revealed that only 27 percent of first-generation students will earn a bachelor's degree within four years of entering college, lagging far behind their continuing-generation peers.[43]

Four, Five, and Six-year degree attainment rates by generation in college.
Four, Five, and Six-year degree attainment rates by Race/Ethnicity

Obstacles to access[edit]

In a 2001 US Department of Education report, Susan Choy explains that in order to becoming a college student requires a student proceed through multiple steps, starting with aspiring to earn a bachelor's degree, then achieving at least minimal academic preparation, then taking the SAT or ACT test, and finally, applying to a four-year institution.[44] Her report shows that as a students' parents' education level increases, so does the students' likelihood of completing each step along the way to enrollment at a four-year institution.[44] Choy also reports that the likelihood that a students will enroll in a four-year higher education institution is highly correlated with taking more advanced math courses in high school. While students whose parents had less education were less likely to take more advanced math courses, the likelihood of enrolling in college for students whose parents did not go to college greatly increases with the level of math course they take, especially if they take algebra in 8th grade.[44]

Regarding the last step in the college enrollment process, application, the literature review by Carmen Tym et al. explains that first-generation college students are not as likely to receive help from their parents nor their schools.[2] Additionally, prospective first-generation college students are less likely to have full access to internet, a highly useful tool for researching and applying to colleges.[2]

Because of a lack of experience, first-generation college students' parents do not always understand what the academic requirements are to attend a 4-year college; therefore they cannot prepare their children for admission to such universities. Students must rely on their teachers and counselors to place them on the correct track in order to enroll in any form of post-secondary education. DeAngelo (et al., 2011) explains how prior academic achievements impact degree completion. These are explored through SAT scores and high school grades.[42] FGCS with a higher-grade average in high school and SAT composite scores are more likely to graduate in 4 years. If these students don't understand the impact of their SAT scores and GPAs on their likelihood to graduate, they are not predisposed to take them seriously, while college experienced students know that based on their previous knowledge.

Students of rural background[edit]

A study by Mara Casey Tieken discusses the tension that many students from rural backgrounds face when deciding whether to attend college.[45] The choice between staying at home to working in a trade which does not require a college degree and pursuing an education which will likely result in that student permanently living away from where they grew up can be hard because of mixed expectations and hopes from the students themselves, their parents, and their advisors or mentors.[45] Many of the students of agricultural background interviewed by Patrick Schultz made the decision to pursue post-secondary education in late high school.[9] When a student's parents supported their pursuit of post-secondary education, the decision to attend college was much easier, but when parental support was absent, the decision was more likely to be conflicted and confusing.[9]

Supporting FGCS[edit]

The Institute for Higher Education (September 2012), provides an issue brief and describes how to support FGCS through classroom-based practices. Firstly, faculty can be key allies as they are the key point of contact for students in the classroom. When faculty are encouraged by their institutions to uphold strong leadership roles in FGCS initiatives, the results are extremely beneficial. The issue brief has a very helpful graphic that breaks down the strategies faculty can use to help students[46]

Strategies for Faculty to help FGCS

Additionally, the Institute for Higher Education (2012) identifies how it is crucial for institutions to examine barriers faced by FGCS and to redesign their curriculum to better serve these students.[46] Some possible approaches involve educators implementing tutoring programs and proving supplemental services to better serve this community. They can create an initiative to train faculty and instructors specially, while keeping in consideration the cultural obstacles these students may face. By identifying and integrating cultural characteristics into the way they serve FGCS, they are being more inclusive and creating stronger relationships between the students and faculty.

Because many Minority-Serving Institutions (MSI's) don't have a strong grasp on how many FGCS are on their campuses, they may not understand how to serve this community. The Institute for Higher Education (2012) emphasizes the need to use data (also known as evidence-based solutions) to support the efforts to strengthen programs to help FGCS.[46] Some methods include primarily identifying the number of FGCS and the qualitative and quantitative approaches to better serving the population. Schools can also use research models to not only design, but track the most effective practices that provide the utmost opportunities for FGCS. It is almost important that teachers and counselors understand how these students define success, and how it may not be measurable or equivalent to an average student whose parents have attended college before.

Although there are programs intact to help FGCS, The Council for Opportunity in Education states that these programs can only serve 11 percent of students.[46] The Institute for Higher Education also points out the obstacles that these programs may not be implemented early enough and may not necessarily be targeted only towards FGCS. If counselors, teachers, and administrators understand the cultural aspect that affects FGCS, they will have the tools necessary to take a holistic approach in proving these students with the specific help they need.

See also[edit]

In his article "Campus of Opportunity: A Qualitative Analysis of Homeless Students in Community College", Jarrett Gupton explains the positive and negative experiences that homeless community college students have on account of their invisibility. His recommendations to community colleges includes leveraging already existing student services such as those aimed towards first-generation college students to serve the specific needs of homeless students as well.[47]

References[edit]

  1. ^ U.S. Department of Education. (1998). National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. "First-generation students: Undergraduates whose parents never enrolled in post-secondary education."
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Tym, Carmen; McMillion, Robin; Barone, Sandra; Webster, Jeff. "First-Generation College Students: A Literature Review." Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation (12 November 2004).
  3. ^ a b c d Redford, Jeremy, and Kathleen Hoyer. "First-Generation and Continuing-Generation College Students: A Comparison of High School and Postsecondary Experiences." National Center for Education Statistics. September 26, 2017.
  4. ^ a b "Factsheets." PNPI. Accessed February 04, 2018.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h Stephens, Nicole M., Hazel R. Markus, Stephanie A. Fryburg, and Camille S. Johnson. "Unseen Disadvantage: How American Universities' Focus on Independence Undermines the Academic Performance of First-Generation College Students." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102, no. 6 (June 2012): 1178–197. Accessed February 4, 2018. doi:10.1037/a0027143.
  6. ^ a b Phinney, J., Dennis, J., & Osorio, S. (in press). Motivations to attend college among college students from diverse ethnic and social class backgrounds. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology.
  7. ^ a b Covarrubias, R., & Fryberg, S. A. (2015). "Movin' on up (to college): First-generation college students' experiences with family achievement guilt." Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(3), 420–429. doi:10.1037/a0037844.
  8. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Rice, Alexander J., Alexander J. Colbow, Shane Gibbons, Charles Cederberg, Ethan Sahker, William M. Liu, and Kristin Wurster. "The social class worldviews of first-generation college students." Counselling Psychology Quarterly 30, no. 4 (2016): 415–40. doi:10.1080/09515070.2016.1179170.
  9. ^ a b c d e f g Schultz, Patrick. "Upon Entering College: First Semester Experiences of First-Generation, Rural Students from Agricultural Families." The Rural Educator 26, no. 1 (Fall 2004): 48–51.
  10. ^ a b c d e Battle, Juan, and Earl Wright. "W.E.B. Du Bois's Talented Tenth: A Quantitative Assessment." Journal of Black Studies 32, no. 6 (2002): 654–72. JSTOR 3180968.
  11. ^ Choy, S., (2001). Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access, persistence, and attainment. In Findings from the Condition of Education 2001: Students Whose Parents Did Not Go to College. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. doi:10.1002/ir.10704.
  12. ^ a b c d e U.S. Department of Education. (2014, October). National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. "Web table: Profile of Undergraduate Students 2011–2012".
  13. ^ a b c d Byrd, Kathleen L., and Ginger Macdonald. "Defining College Readiness from the Inside Out: First-Generation College Student Perspectives." Community College Review 33, no. 1 (2005): 22–37. doi:10.1177/009155210503300102.
  14. ^ a b c Dumais, Susan A., Tracey E. Rizzuto, Joe Cleary, and Luke Dowden. "Stressors and Supports for Adult Online Learners: Comparing First- and Continuing-Generation College Students." American Journal of Distance Education 27, no. 2 (2013): 100–10. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.783265.
  15. ^ Jessica M. Dennis and Jean S. Phinney and Lizette Ivy Chuateco. "The Role of Motivation, Parental Support, and Peer Support in the Academic Success of Ethnic Minority First-Generation College Students." Journal of College Student Development 46, no. 3 (2005): 223–236. doi:10.1353/csd.2005.0023.
  16. ^ Adelmon, C. (1999). "Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor's degree attainment".
  17. ^ Alexander, K.L.; Pallas, A.; Holupka, S. (1987). "Social background and academic determinants of two-year versus four-year college attendance: Evidence from two cohorts a decade apart". American Journal of Education: 56–80.
  18. ^ Cabrera, A.F.; La Nasa, S.M. (2000a). "On the path to college: Three critical tasks facing America's disadvantaged".
  19. ^ Cabrera, A.F.; La Nasa, S.M. (2000b). "Understand the college choice process".
  20. ^ Cabrera, A.F.; La Nasa, S.M. (2000). "Understanding the college choice of Disadvantaged students": 5–22.
  21. ^ Horn, L.; Kojaku, L.K.; Carroll, C.D. (2001). "High school academic curriculum and the persistence path through college: Persistence and transfer behavior of undergraduates 3 years after entering 4-year institutions" (PDF).
  22. ^ Kane, J.; Spizman, L.M. (1994). "Race, financial aid and college attendance: Parents and geography matter". American Journal of Economics and Sociology: 85–97.
  23. ^ McDonough, P.M. (1997). "Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity".
  24. ^ Stage, F.K.; Rushin, P.W. (1993). "A combined model of student predisposition to college and persistence in college". Journal of College Student Development: 276–282.
  25. ^ Berkner, L.; Chavez, L. (1997). "Access to postsecondary education for the 1992 high school graduates".
  26. ^ Cabrera, A.F.; La Nasa, S.M. (2000a). "On the path to college: Three critical tasks facing America's disadvantaged".
  27. ^ McDonough, P.M. (1997). "Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity".
  28. ^ "Upward Bound Program". U.S Department of Education.
  29. ^ "Talent Search Program". U.S. Department of Education.
  30. ^ "Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs". U.S. Department of Education.
  31. ^ "AVID, Advancement Via Individual Determination". AVID.
  32. ^ Harris, Jessica, and Chris Linder. "The Racialized Experiences of Students of Color in Higher Education and Student Affairs Graduate Preparation Programs." Journal of College Student Development 59, no. 2 (March/April 2018): 140–58. doi:10.1353/csd.2018.0014.
  33. ^ a b c d e f g Wang, Tiffany R. "'I'm the Only Person From Where I'm From to Go to College': Understanding the Memorable Messages First-Generation College Students Receive From Parents." Journal of Family Communication 14, no. 3 (2014): 270–90. doi:10.1080/15267431.2014.908195.
  34. ^ Olson, J.S. (2014). "Opportunities, obstacles, and options: First-generation college graduates and Social Cognitive Theory." Journal of Career Development. 41(3), 199–217. doi:10.1177/0894845313486352.
  35. ^ Brooks-Terry, M. (1988). "Tracing the disadvantages of first-generation college students: An application of Sussman's option sequence model." In S. K. Steinmetz (Ed.), Family and support systems across the lifespan (pp. 121–134). New York, NY: Plenum Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2106-2_10.
  36. ^ a b Orbe, M. P. (2008). "Theorizing multidimensional identity negotiation: Reflections on the Lived experiences of first-generation college students." In M. Azmitia, M. Syed, & K. Radmacher (Eds.), New directions for child & adolescent development: No. 120. The intersections of personal and social identities (pp. 81–95). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/cd.217.
  37. ^ London, H. B. (1989). "Breaking away: A study of first-generation college students and their families." American Journal of Education, 97, 144–170. doi:10.1086/443919.
  38. ^ Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. doi:10.1017/S0813483900008238.
  39. ^ Gibbons, M. M., & Borders, L. D. (2010). "Prospective first-generation college students: A social-cognitive perspective". The Career Development Quarterly, 58, 194–208. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2010.tb00186.x.
  40. ^ a b Whitehead, Patrick M., and Robert Wright. "Becoming a College Student: An Empirical Phenomenological Analysis of First Generation College Students." Community College Journal of Research and Practice 41, no. 10 (2016): 639–51. doi:10.1080/10668926.2016.1216474.
  41. ^ a b Langford, J., & Clance, P. R. (1993). "The imposter phenomenon: Recent research findings regarding dynamics, personality and family patterns and their implications for treatment." Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 30(3), 495–501. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.30.3.495.
  42. ^ a b c DeAngelo, L., Franke, R., Hurtado, S., Pryor, J.H., & Tran, S. (2011). Completing college: Assessing graduation rates at four-year institutions. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.
  43. ^ "Wide Gap in Support for First Generation Students at Institutions [Study]". The College Post. 2018-10-05. Retrieved 2018-10-05.
  44. ^ a b c U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Students Whose Parents Did Not Go to College: Postsecondary Access, Persistence, and Attainment, NCES 2001-126, by Susan Choy. Washington, DC: 2001.
  45. ^ a b Tieken, Mara Casey. "College Talk and the Rural Economy: Shaping the Educational Aspirations of Rural, First-Generation Students." Peabody Journal of Education 91, no. 2 (2016): 203–23. doi:10.1080/0161956x.2016.1151741.
  46. ^ a b c d Institute for Higher Education, P. (2012). "Supporting First-Generation College Students Through Classroom-Based Practices." Issue Brief. Institute for Higher Education Policy.
  47. ^ Gupton, Jarrett T. "Campus of Opportunity: A Qualitative Analysis of Homeless Students in Community College." Community College Review 45, no. 3 (July 2017): 190–214. doi:10.1177/0091552117700475.