Posted: February 6th, 2021

Sociology Essay

Clearing the Path
for First-Generation
College Students
Qualitative and Intersectional
Studies of Educational Mobility
Edited by Ashley C. Rondini, Bedelia Nicola
Richards, and Nicolas P. Simon
Afterword by Jenny Stuber
LEXINGTON BOOKS
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
Published by Lexington Books
An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706
www.rowman.com
Unit A. Whitacre Mews, 26-34 Stannary Street, London SEI 1 4AB
Copyright ©2018 by The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
Chapter three was previously published as Elizabeth M. Lee and Rory Kramer. 2013.
“Out with the Old, In with the New? Habitus and Social Mobility at Selective Colleges.’
Sociology ofEducation 86, no. 1: 18-35
Chapter eight was previously published as Mullen, Ann L.. Degrees of Inequality:
Culture, Class, and Gender in American Higher Education, pp. 156-204. © 2010 The
Johns Hopkins University Press. Adapted and reprinted with permission ofJohns
Hopkins University Press.
All rights reserved. No part ofthis book may be reproduced in any form or by
any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who
may quote passages in a review.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Rondini, Ashley C., editor. | Richards, Bedelia Nicola, editor. |
Simon, Nicolas P., editor.
Title: Clearing the path for first generation college students : qualitative
and intersectional studies of educational mobility / edited by Ashley C.
Rondini, Bedelia Nicola Richards, and Nicolas P. Simon.
Description: Lanham : Lexington Books , [2018] | Includes – Get research paper samples and course-specific study resources under   homework for you course hero writing service – bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018011191 (print) | LCCN 2018016778 (ebook) | ISBN
9781498537025 (Electronic) | ISBN 9781498537018 (cloth : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: First-generation college students-United States. | People
with social disabilities—Education (Higher)—United States.
Classification: LCC LC4069.6 (ebook) | LCC LC4069.6 .C65 2018 (print) | DDC
378.1/98-dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018011191
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of
American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper
for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.
Printed in the United States ofAmerica
Contents
Acknowledgments vii
Introduction: Clearing the Path: Situating First-Generation Students’
Experiences in Qualitative, Intersectional Scholarship 1
Ashley C. Rondini, Bedelia Nicola Richards, and
Nicolas P. Simon
1 “Cautionary Tales”: Low-Income First-Generation College Students,
Educational Mobility, and Familial Meaning-Making Processes 19
Ashley C. Rondini
2 Interdependent Relationships and Family Responsibilities:
How Socioeconomic Status and Immigrant Histories Shape
Second-Generation Asian American Experiences 51
Fanny Yeung
3 Out With the Old, Tn With the New? Habitus and Social Mobility
at Selective Colleges 75
Elizabeth M. Lee and Roiy Kramer
4 Moving Between Classes: Loyalists, Renegades, and
Double Agents 10 5
Allison L. Hurst
5 Seeking Out Support: Looking Beyond Socioeconomic Status to
Explain Academic Engagement Strategies at an Elite College 135
Anthony Abraham Jack and Veronique Irwin
v
318 Chapter 10
7. The Summer Science Immersion program was developed by Dr. Melissa Kosinski-Collins, a professor at Brandeis University. She structured the program to include
a scientific book report, a poster presentation using primary scientific sources, as well
as lectures and/or labs in chemistry, biology, and physics.
8. Previous research on factors that positively impact students declaring majors in
STEM disciplines has overwhelmingly focused on the importance offaculty mentoring rather than on mentoring by graduate students or postdoctoral research fellows.
One of the few studies of the differences in mentoring was conducted by Cox and
Androit (2009), who studied differences in perceptions of undergraduates’ lab skills
in college among faculty mentors and graduate student mentors. However, this research did not compare how mentoring by graduate students differed from mentoring
by faculty.
11
Toward a Local Student Success Model
Latino First-Generation
College Student Persistence
Trista Beard
First-generation college students (FGS) are a diverse population, and yet
an invisible minority at most four-year colleges, with no outward identity
markers. Researchers have established that there is a definite completion gap
between FGS and their non-first-generation student (NFGS) peers (Chen and
Carroll 2005). FGS are less likely to take advantage ofstudy groups, professors’ office hours, tutoring, writing coaches, and other support services that
could help them achieve better marks in the first year of college (Chen and
Carroll 2005). FGS also enroll in fewer credit hours in the early years of
college, contributing to slower progress and higher attrition rates, especially
after the first year, when FGS are half as likely to return to school as NFGS
(Choy 2001; Pascarella et al. 2004; Soria and Stebleton 2012).
Latino students are also a rapidly rising population entering four-year universities, and halfofthem are the first in their families to attend college (Santiago 2011). In looking at how Latino students succeed in college and why
they depart, researchers have used variable such as campus climate (Castillo
et al. 2006; Hurtado and Carter 1997), minority stress (Wei, Ku, and Liao
2011), campus involvement (Museus, Nichols, and Lambert 2008; Prospero
and Vohra-Gupta 2007) and students’ support networks (Bordes-Edgar et al.
2011; Hurtado, Carter, and Spuler 1996). Much of the educational research
on persistence has focused on barriers to persistence in college for Latino
students or for first-generation college students, but little has honed in on the
intersection ofthese populations.
In thinking about the theme ofthis book, it is important to consider how institutions, educators, families, and policymakers can clear the path to college,
but also clear the path through college. “Access without support is not opportunity” (Engstrom and Tinto 2008, 46). This chapter focuses not on student
access, but on student success. While there is an abundance of quantitative
studies examining factors that influence college departure, there is a need for
more qualitative studies that seek to examine how first-generation students of
color overcome obstacles and complete four-year degrees. Qualitative studies
319
320 Chapter 11
allow researchers to explore a participant’s world, culture, and experience in
its entirety, allowing those voices to speak to the complexity ofintersectional
identity. Instead oftrying to control for demographic characteristics or to disentangle identity markers, it was the aim ofthis study to learn directly from
Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) about their unique experiences at a large, research-intensive, predominately white institution (PWI). A
single research question drove this study: How do Latinofirst-generation college students at this elite PWInavigate and negotiate barriers to persistence?
LITERATURE REVIEW
In considering what promotes student persistence in college from year to
year, many researchers have looked to Astin’s (1984) theory of student
involvement. Astin asserts that the more a student is involved in academic
activities, extracurricular activities, faculty and staff interactions, and residential programs that engage the student’s time, the greater the amount of
learning. Kuh (2001) defines engagement as cocurricular activities such as
campus clubs and societies, relationships and interactions with peers and
faculty, mentoring programs, and educational activities like group projects,
study groups, and course-related field trips. The concept of high-impact
practices has also been associated with engagement activities that make the
most impact on student commitment and persistence—i.e. capstones, internships, service learning, global learning, and undergraduate research, all of
which require application of classroom skills in new contexts (Kuh 2008).
First-gen students often find it more difficult to decode the behaviors necessary to succeed in college, such as “attending class, asking questions, visiting
professors, and being involved on campus in organizations and with peers”
(Mehta and Newbold 2011, 30). Mehta and Newbold found that FGS were
less likely to be engaged in campus activities, both academic and social, and
that GPA and completion rates were affected by this.
Museus, Nichols, and Lambert (2008) suggest that the relationship between
campus racial climate, academic and social involvement, and institutional
commitment all relate to degree completion in unique ways for students of
color. For Latino students, the most significant positive effect on degree completion was a lower amount of social involvement, assuming that social time
detracted from academic engagement (Museus, Nichols, and Lambert 2008).
Prospero and Vohra-Gupta (2007) also found a strong correlation for FGS
between engagement and academic achievement. Hernandez (2002) validated
this experience through interviews with Latino students at a four-year PWI
who reported that because they felt underprepared, they specifically chose
Toward a Local Student Success Model 321
not to get involved in student organizations the first year so that they could
focus on meeting academic expectations. The benefit of academic activities is
higher for FGS “because these experiences act in a compensatory manner and
thus contribute comparatively greater incremental increases in first-generation
students’ stock of cultural capital” (Pascarella et al. 2004, 280).
How LFGCS negotiate the campus climate impacts their commitment and
persistence at an institution (Hurtado and Carter 1997). First-gen students of
color have unique intersectional identities. In a qualitative study, Orbe (2004)
found that the first-generation student identity was most salient for those who
also identified as an underrepresented minority on their campus. It was the
intersectional identities ofrace and class that exacerbated students’ feelings
of difference and minority status, especially at the most selective colleges.
When the students felt that they were the minority within the minority, they
kept their first-gen status hidden until they found individuals like them, with
whom they could share their status.
Social support from peers then becomes a lifeline for students marginalized by the dominant institutional culture. Specifically, mentoring (formal
and informal) by either peers, faculty, or staff increases the likelihood of
persistence for Latino students (Bordes-Edgar et al. 2011). Mentors can
guide students in turning desire to complete college into behaviors that will
aid persistence. The literature also suggests that FGS who perceive they
have the support they need feel less stress, have more confidence, and adjust
and perform better. Those who feel they lack support struggle to adjust and
persist (Dennis, Phinney, and Chuateco 2005). Students who perceived they
had less social support also had low self-efficacy scores (Phinney and Haas
2003). Disentangling self-efficacy and social support as influential variables
in how first-gen students of color cope with stressful situations in college is
incredibly difficult. Using a narrative approach allows for this complexity.
Just as intersectional identities cannot be unraveled, neither can the intrinsic
mechanisms students use to succeed in college. Instead of controlling for
variables looking for causation, starting this study with an awareness ofstudents’ multiple identities and compound strategies for problem-solving gives
credit to students’ funds of knowledge and community wealth.
Yosso (2005) explains that traditional notions of cultural capital ignore the
unique knowledge that students of color bring with them to college, and that
their home communities have infused them with cultural wealth that they can
use to succeed in dominant spaces. An example ofhow students use community cultural wealth is found in Munoz and Maldonado’s (2012) case study
of four undocumented Mexican women, all first in their families to attend
college. The students reported that they were able to persist because offamily
support, and that they created their own peer support and cultural circle. The
322 Chapter ll
students, through their stories, also expressed a strong desire to complete college, and were able to navigate home life, work life, and school life in different
ways, and still maintain their aspirations (Munoz and Maldonado 2012). Padilla’s (1996) qualitative study ofstudents of color at a single college campus
allowed students, in focus groups, to respond to a list of established barriers
to persisting in college and to report how they faced those barriers, what they
had to know to overcome them (heuristic knowledge), and actions taken by
the students to succeed and persist. Padilla’s (1996) results demonstrated that
students of color were successful because they learned how to get the support
they needed in their campus environment. His argument necessitated my own
study: ifwe know, based on tested theoretical models, that integration and involvement increase persistence (Astin 1984; Tinto 1993), and yet graduation
rates have changed very little in fifty years (see Iffert 1957; NCES 2016), then
we must look more deeply at student experiences to see what actions work for
students and what institutions might do to eliminate barriers and better serve
students. A singular focus on models ofstudent success allowed me to learn
from students’ expertise. This focus situates the study on a longer line of action research that acknowledges LFGCS’ funds of knowledge.
METHODS
The expertise model put forth by Padilla (1994) allowed me to explore the
process by which LFGCS at an elite PWI gained heuristic knowledge that impacted their persistence. A focus on success rather than deficits allows for the
development ofnew models ofstudent completion from which asset-minded
strategies and interventions can be drawn. This study aimed to explore the
ways successful LFGCS persisted and navigated the college and to examine the role that students play as agents of their own academic success, as
measured by persistence to degree completion. One research question drove
this study: How do Latinofirst-generation college students at this elite PWI
navigate and negotiate barriers to persistence?
Padilla’s (1994) expertise model fit this study because it validates students’
sense of agency and funds ofknowledge, acknowledging that successful LFGCS are experts on howto persist at an elite PWI. Yosso’s (2005) community
cultural wealth framework also informed the study, keeping the focus on
what assets LFGCS brought to campus with them. Yosso’s theory allows for
a wider conceptualization of cultural capital that values aspiration, bilingualism, interdependence, familial strength, and resistance, among other values.
The community cultural wealth model combined with Padilla’s expertise
model helped center the study on the participants as I sought to highlight their
Toward a Local Student Success Model 323
lived experiences and their unique ways of getting through the new terrain of
college as Latino students and first-gen college students.
To build a local model around LFGCS and their pathways to persistence
was the goal ofthis study. The primary form of data collection for this study
was interviews, which allowed me to gain insight into the experience and
perceptions ofothers (Patton 2002). I conducted in-depth interviews (on average, ninety minutes) with ten participants (five men and five women), using
a semistructured interview guide, based on Padilla’s (1994) unfolding matrix
model. Padilla’s unfolding matrix technique helped to draw out expert tacit
knowledge that students may not be explicitly aware that they even possess.
Where Padilla used this technique with focus groups, I conducted one-onone interviews in order to explore with each participant the barriers to their
integration and engagement in college and the ways in which they faced and
overcame those barriers.
Site and Sample Selection
The site was a single predominately white research university in the West:
highly selective, with nearly 18,000 undergraduates, 23 percent low-income
(Pell-eligible), about 20 percent first-generation and 14 percent Latino. As
with the national average (Santiago 2011), half ofthe Latino undergrads are
first-gen. All interview participants were rising seniors and first-generation
college students who self-identified as Latino. This study used the federal
TRIO programs’ definition of first-generation: students whose parents have
not earned a bachelor’s degree. The university has three single-ethnicity cultural centers and an LGBT resource center, but no transfer center or first-gen
office. The culture is one where, like many colleges, ethnicity is part ofthe diversity discussion but class is not yet. Some students’ identities are validated
by the university, as cultural centers are a visible way the university says “you
belong,” but for many others, when there is no space, there is no place, and it
is more difficult to find community and sense of belonging.
All ten participants were the children of immigrants, and high financialneed students (also described as low-income). All interviews took place in the
fall term ofthe students’ senior year. Participants were purposefully invited
to interview because they were LFGCS and were seniors making successful
progress toward graduation. Invitations to interview were sent out via academic advisors across the campus, student organizations, including Latino
student government, and through scholarship program offices that support
first-generation and low-income students.
324 Chapter 11
Data Analysis
All interviews were transcribed and then analyzed for common themes and
categories following Padilla’s unfolding matrix method, detailed in Student
Success Modeling (2009). Transcripts were coded first for open codes and
then grouped into cover terms developed through interpretive analysis. All
categories related to barriers and obstacles were listed under one domain, and
the strategies used to overcome reported barriers and obstacles were listed under the second domain. The purpose ofthe domain analysis was to establish a
model ofhow first-generation students perceived and overcame challenges as
they arose, within the boundaries ofthe college years and the college environment. All interviews were viewed as a single case study, representing a collective experience at one particular site. Themes that were reported by only
a single participant were considered outliers as they were not corroborated
by additional participants, and as such, were not included in either domain.
Interview texts were analyzed to the point of saturation.
FINDINGS
In participant interviews, students described the obstacles to successful
completion of college as well as the ways in which they were able to take
action to overcome such difficulties as they arose. The following tables present the barriers by category (table 11.1) and the strategies for navigating such
impediments (table 11.2). While the sample is small, and not generalizable
to all LFGCS at large research universities, there is value in learning how a
particular group ofstudents interpreted the institution, reported the obstacles
that could derail student success, and suggested their own tested strategies.
Table 11.1 Barriers to Latino first-generation college student persistence at a large
PWI.
Type of Barrier Barriers and Obstacles to Persistence
Academic
1. academic struggle
2. felt academically underprepared
3. afraid to speak up in class
4. lack of academic support
5. lack of study skills
6. did not seek out advice from instructors
Toward a Local Student Success Model 325
(continued)
Behavioral
7. did not want to try new things
8. lack of help-seeking behaviors
9. lack of willingness to share emotions and struggles
Cultural
10. cultural stigma to counseling
11. negative perception of help-seeking
12. culture shock
13. feeling separated from home
14. feeling stereotyped
15. feeling “minoritized”1
16. to not assimilate takes energy
Emotional
17. afraid of being seen as an imposter/not good enough
18. afraid to ask for help (fear of rejection)
19. anxiety
20. difficulty managing emotions
21. fear of not belonging
22. fear of talking to instructors/faculty
23. feeling isolated
24. lack of sharing emotions/struggles
25. overwhelming stress (distraction)
Familial
26. family issues at home (takes energy)
27. difficult to explain academic challenges
28. difficult to explain social challenges
29. lack of parental involvement/advocacy at college
Financial
30. worry over finances
31. lack of clear understanding of financial aid
32. works more than twenty hours per week
33. work conflicts with office hours on campus
34. works off-campus
35. works to send money home
36. work conflicts with clubs/co-curricular activities
37. work conflicts with tutoring/academic support
326 Chapter 11
1.1 use “minoritized” in this study as used by Shaun Harper in his work Race Without Racism (2012). Harper
explained that many students of color do not feel like a minority until they enter the predominately white
space. Minority status is a social construction put upon them, not a natural state of being.
Institutional
38. competitive peers in class
39. poor advising
40. distrust of academic advisor
41. professors are not approachable
42. support resources are hidden
Integrational
43. commutes from home
44. work conflicts with clubs/co-curricular activities
45. does not join social or academic communities
46. feels lost
47. does not feel a sense of belonging
Knowledge
48. does not know how to navigate campus resources
49. does not know how to network
50. difficulty with time management
51. difficulty balancing work and academics
52. difficulty balancing academic and social engagement
53. lack of study skills
54. lack of heuristic knowledge (how to learn)
Motivational
55. lack of commitment
56. lack of goals/sense of purpose
Selt-efficacy
57. lack of confidence
58. self-doubt
59. lack of effort to access support resources
60. lack of models
Social
61. does not join social communities
62. difficulty finding “people like me”
63. lack of models
The research question that drove this study was How do Latino first-generation college students at this elite PWI navigate and negotiate barriers to
persistence? The detailed items in table 11.1 provide a clear picture of the
difficulties students encountered at this particular college. As I sat through
interviews and listened to students talk about their frustrations and successes,
their ups and downs in college, I asked them to tell me more about how they
got past obstacles such as fear of speaking to professors, or lack of study
Toward a Local Student Success Model 327
skills, or feeling that they didn’t have a purpose. Table 11.2 comprises the
aggregate responses from this line of inquiry.
Table 11.2 Strategies identified by Latino first-generation college students as ways to
overcome obstacles to persistence in college.
Type of
Barrier Strategies and Actions for Persistence
Academic
1. ask for advice
2. ask professors for study advice particular to field of study
3. ask TAs for study tips
4. connect with a professor over shared interests
5. sign up for enrichment programs
6. find mentors
7. find models
8. find study groups
9. follow others
10.participate in high-impact practices
11.take peer advice and share resources
12. identify peer models/mentors
13.view professors as models
14. study with trusted peers
15.talk to advisors
16.talk to professors about coursework and college life
17.talk to professors about career ideas/paths
18.use academic support resources (tutoring/SI)
19.use learning center (academic coaching)
20.find a job that allows for study/time space
21.join learning communities around field of study
Behavioral
22. explore your interests
23. show your interests
24. speak up in class
25. talk about career ideas/pathways
26. talk about your goals
27. be willing to try new things
28. practice help-seeking behaviors
Cultural
29. find a way to connect with ethnic community/-ies
30. connect with others around all identity markers
328 Chapter 11
Table 11.1 (continued)
Type of
Barrier Strategies and Actions for Persistence
Emotional
31. de-stress with peers
32. gain emotional support and encouragement from peers
33. find a confidante
Financial
34. financial aid is an incentive to stay
35. campus job provides funds and connections
36. find a job which allows study time/space
Institutional
37. advisors are bridges to resources
38. professors offer advice and mentorship
39. learning center offers coaches
Integrational
40. assimilate or code-switch
41. claim space
42. be active in cultural centers
43. live in dorms
44. cultivate fictive kin/trusted peer network
45. find a sense of home
46. join communities
47. join a team
48. be active in dorm events
49. stay involved in campus activities/groups
50. join learning communities around field of study and
professional interests
Knowledge
51. ask advisors questions to get referrals
52. find study spaces that work for you
53. learn to study
54. use resident advisors as near peer coaches
55. take advantage of academic and pre-professional opportunities
Motivational
56. find purpose
57. find role models
58. set goals beyond college
59. help others
60. join organizations with a purpose/ideology
61. remember your success is part of a collective success
62. be part of a peer group that motivates you
63. put in effort
64. feeling a sense of duty
65. set higher, long-term life goals
Toward a Local Student Success Model 329
Self-efficacy
66. ask for advice from models
67. accept short-term failure as part of skill-building
68. be willing to make changes
69. focus on a few goals
70. go to offices for help
71. practice self-care
72. self-exploration (goals, interests)
73. self-talk
74. gain confidence through navigating challenges
Social
75. awareness of need to build new ties
76. connect over shared identity
77. connect with peers
78. develop a support network
79. find peers who share values
80. find trusted peers for emotional support
81. join social events
82. meet a wide range of people
83. join learning communities around field of study and
professional interests
First, the matrix ofreported barriers revealed little in the way ofnew insights.
The categories ofbarriers and examples (table 11.1) described by the participants in this study are in line with previous literature (Chen and Carroll 2005;
Choy 2001; Pascarella et al. 2004; Tinto 1993). One category of barriers that
is not present in the first-gen persistence literature was the institutional barriers that students described here (table 11.1, items 37-41). These items are
particularly important to consider since they convey how LFGCS interpret
and understand the institution. Students do not depart college simply because
they are not motivated, committed, or connected to the university; they also
may be repelled and pushed out by hostile campus climate or unnavigable
bureaucratic systems.
The first item in this category was “competitive peers in class.” Multiple
participants reported that they could not connect with peers in classes, particularly in biosciences, because the courses were large and graded on a curve.
No one wanted to study together or support others. They explained that there
were only so many high scores to be doled out and students were afraid they
would be sabotaged by their peers.
330 Chapter 11
It’s weird, because it feels like at any moment you can’t really trust other
students, because it’s a huge curve, and everyone’s like “oh, it’s a 50 percent
acceptance rate to get into medical school.” You want to be above the curve, so
if you’re helping anyone, that might put you down a little bit.
Students interpreted grading on a curve as being measured against—and
therefore in competition with—their classmates. Faculty could mediate this
problem by explaining that students working together to review and study
material before each exam generally do better. The benefits of study groups
are academic, but they also provide opportunities for social engagement,
which students reported as a helpful strategy for persistence in college.
Also in the institutional barriers category, participants reported that they
received poor advising from professional academic support staff, and that
they were mistrustful of advising staff. Positive interactions with faculty and
staff can increase student persistence (Schreiner, Noel, and Cantwell 2011).
A negative experience or repeated negative interactions caused distress for
the students in this study and increased the difficulty they were already having in navigating the college environment.
When I was here at orientation, my first day. like officially as a student here, the
advisor was . . . just pressuring me into other [classes], so I really had to figure
it out on my own, I feel like, in terms of navigating [this school], especially
because they’re not—at least the advisors that I’ve encountered, not many of
them are first-gen and not many ofthem are people of color, so they don’t—and
they’re also not—at least from what they’ve expressed to me, they don’t come
from low socioeconomic backgrounds, so they don’t understand the specific
perspective that I have and that my friends have.
The students who felt they were not listened to, or not understood as firstgen, working-class students of color, were dissuaded from further help-seeking because they lost trust in the institution and its agents. This exemplifies
institutional failure to serve students who are both first-gen and Latino. Every
interaction with students is key to building their connection to the institution
and their academic journey.
The last two items in the institutional barriers category (table 11.1) were
“professors are not approachable” and “support services are hidden.” Much
like the negative impact of advisors, students perceived their instructors as
unapproachable. Students spoke of professors as “not even human.” None of
the students felt empowered early in their college years to speak with their professors. Some participants explained that they were able to speak to professors
once they gained confidence and heard from other people (e.g., peers, peer
mentors/models, advising staff) that they were supposed to go to office hours,
ask professors questions, and talk about their own interests and goals as a way
Toward a Local Student Success Model 331
to get feedback. Endorsements and advice from trusted sources, especially
peers—that is, fellow LFGCS—is one ofthe most noteworthy findings from
the analysis ofthe strategies used to overcome barriers (table 11.2).
Peer networks were a valuable way to adjust to the new terrain, learn about
and gain entry to other communities, and acquire academic advice. The use of
social support came up as a strategy under the academic, cultural, emotional,
integrational, motivational and self-efficacy cover terms. This excerpt demonstrates how LFGCS’s network-building impacts integration, engagement
(both academic and social), and even aspirational capital:
So when I got there, I got connected with some friends who liked the same
things I like. They were pre-med or they were studying bio too. And we got
involved with different community outreach organizations, so for example.
Chicanos for Health Education. We’d go to the weekly meetings, and I think
it helped that we would all go together kind of. And I also got interested in a
Latina sorority my first year and I would just go and hang out with them and
see what it was all about, kind ofjust trying to meet new people and things like
that…. One ofthe first girls I met, we got in contact because she was my same
major and she was already a senior but I was a freshman. I was like “oh, what
about this class?” or you know, “what about this professor?”
These students had a natural impulse to tap into the local community
cultural wealth (Yosso 2005) within the college. Participants explained that
when they saw people “like me,” they felt a sense oftrust. For one student,
that person was her resident advisor (RA) in the dorm, a Latino student just
a few years older than her, who provided emotional support, but also served
as a credible model ofsuccess. “He wasjust the first person that I considered
someone like me, but older, that has gone through what I was going through.”
She stated that the support of peers and her RA helped her through the “culture shock. 100 percent culture shock. … I felt lost and confused.” Others
found empowering, credible models through joining a cultural organization
that offered a community ofpeers who shared class, gender, and ethnic identity, as well as navigational capital.
When I found these girls they all knew the same music I was talking about, who
I was talking about or what shows I was talking about… and all ofus were kind
ofin the same income level, so it was really easy to fit in with them. It is easy to
fit in with the girls there [in Las Hermanas]…. They really were helpful in the
sense that they could guide me. There was one girl who was a psychology major and I would ask her what professors or what classes she would recommend.
They would share their own stories ofwhat they were feeling at the moment so
it prepared me ofwhat I had to look [forward] to. It wasn’t like guiding in the
332 Chapter 11
sense of advising, but guiding in the sense of what they were feeling or what
they went through and it prepared me for what I would face.
Beyond the power ofpeers to support many ofthe strategies used by these
LFGCS and the drawing upon of community cultural wealth, it is important
to note that there is no consistent correlation between a struggle and its
resolution. The barriers and strategies are categorized and can be coupled by
matching theme. For instance, a student who felt they were academically underprepared (table 11.1, item 2) might have tried strategies from the academic
section (see table 11.2) as well as strategies from the institutional section.
For each barrier there are multiple strategies that will help to mitigate the
problem. For cultural barriers (table 11.1, items 10-16), there are few specific
“cultural” strategies that align with these obstacles. Students in this sample,
Latino first-gen college students, used a multipronged approach to resolving
those kinds of difficulties.
Like my mom worked all day and she didn’t really speak English so I was the
one handling stuff at high school and [college], but here it’s like, parents fight
for their kids with their counselors, it’s like—that’s cool, but when are you going to learn to do that for yourself, you know? So all that was very confusing
to me. Um, yeah, I think I was blessed too, because I was American Studies, I
took a lot of classes that were already empowering with professors of color, or
professors from different backgrounds, so I think I’m very lucky in that sense.
This student felt separated from home, felt a lack offamilial support in the
college environment, but was empowered to persist because of models she
found in faculty of color, coursework that validated her experiences, and the
independence and self-efficacy she brought with her to college. A cultural
barrier (“feeling separated from home”) and a familial barrier (“lack ofparental involvement/advocacy”) were alleviated by academic (“viewprofessors as
models”) and motivational solutions (“put in effort” and “find role models”).
Another way to look at this is that a high-impact solution, like finding models, helps to diminish multiple obstacles, hurdles, and/or stressors. Since barriers and obstacles are often compounded for working-class minority youth,
then so must their strategies for persistence be compounded, complex, and
multipronged. Because there is not a clear alignment ofstrategies to barriers,
I found it essential to look more closely at the most “high-impact” actions that
yielded multiple benefits, and from there begin to create models ofthe most
advantageous actions.
Toward a Local Student Success Model 333
DISCUSSION
The results indicate that barriers to persistence for LFGCS are in line with
prior research on Latino students and first-gen college students, although
little research has been done on this intersectional population. Barriers such
as familial demands, conflicts between needing to work and needing time for
engagement activities, feeling minoritized, and difficulty finding community
are not surprising. The LFGCS’s discussion of specific institutional barriers
was unique to this study: competitive peers, negative advising experiences,
and the perception that support services are hidden. Whether these barriers
are particular to the population, the type ofuniversity, or this site specifically
is not clear without investigating the perception ofthese barriers at other sites.
As students explained that they felt isolated, overwhelmed, underprepared,
and cut offfrom familial communities, I thought ofthe unique situation they
are in, where they have to navigate a maze from within the maze. Latino
students have been found to scale down the geography of the university in
order to be able to find a way through the unfamiliar terrain (Attinasi 1989), I
found this to be true for these LFGCS as well. What becomes important here
is to illustrate how they were able to accomplish this. All the students demonstrated through their strategies that a sense of agency and social learning
were integral to their persistence.
First, a sense of agency was exemplified through the students’ actionoriented strategies, such as asking for advice, exhibiting help-seeking behaviors, joining communities, and participating in “high-impact practices” (Kuh
2008). While all the students explained that their first-year adjustment was
particularly difficult and they “felt lost,” they were still willing to ask questions, to talk to peers about their struggles, and build some initial support
networks that could be scaffolded and built upon as their confidence grew.
Many students were aware oftheir poor help-seeking behaviors and talked
about their lack of confidence or cultural barriers that kept them from asking
for help and advice. However, participants expressed that after some critical
incident offailure or faltering, they realized that ifthey want to be successful
and complete college (i.e., ifthey were motivated to persist), they would have
to be active in help-seeking and community-building. Many ofthe students
also elected to participate in cocurricular high-impactpractices (Kuh 2008).
These activities were not part ofthe required course ofstudy, but the fact that
90 percent ofthese successful students voluntarily took part in undergraduate
research, service learning, overseas studies, internships, or capstones validates the students’ sense of agency and supports the powerful effect of such
activities on persistence in college.
334 Chapter ll
Secondly, social learning (Bandura 1963) was demonstrated through the
intricate system ofmentors, models, and brokers that students reported were
integral to their persistence. One student described her varied networks as
“ropes of people” while another said, “I have a lot ofrole models. I look up
to a lot of people because I want to be a lot ofthings, you know?” Each described peer models and coaches who gave them emotional support; advice
about campus resources; academic advice on study skills, courses, and professors; as well as connected them to other communities on campus. Learning
how to navigate college and how to be a successful student was learned in
a social context. Students spoke to peers and near-peer models about their
goals. This allowed for articulation of goals and immediate feedback or advice on local resources that could be utilized. Many ofthe success strategies
that participants identified are dependent on activating social networks and
social learning. The community cultural wealth model helps to explain how
the Latino first-gen students in this sample motivated and inspired each other
and bonded over aspects of shared culture. They exchanged navigational,
social, and aspirational capital among their trusted peers, and they invested
in others without any expectation of favors being reciprocated. The peer
network became a fictive kin network, and trusted peers took the place of
familial networks within the college environment.
A final point for discussion is the finding that some strategies for persistence identified by participants addressed multiple barrier types. For instance,
two male students described their time volunteering at a local hospital and
being allowed to shadow healthcare professionals as significantly contributing to different categories of barriers to persistence (figure 11.1). “Helping
others” diminished motivational, emotional, social, and academic difficulties.
The many benefits that this volunteer experience provided to the students
validate that this is a type ofhigh-impact action, even though volunteering is
not one ofthe cocurricular activities described among the high-impact practices that increase retention (Kuh 2008).
Toward a Local Student Success Model 335
motivation;
sense of
purpose
confidence;
setting longterm goals
helping
others
high impact
practice
(academic
engagement
access to
mentors/
models
social
engagement;
new ties
For three ofthe female participants, their first year in the dorms living in an
ethnic enclave (an all-Latino dorm floor) made a positive impact on their
initial adjustment to college life at the large urban PWI, providing them with
access to various networks that again helped them face multiple types of barriers (figure 11.2). These are just a few examples of how actions taken by
successful Latino first-generation college students were a type ofsignificant
investment that paid dividends in breaking down other barriers they encountered as they worked to persist to graduation. Models like these can help
students see the value oftheir actions and may increase motivation to persist.
A future project will be to continue mapping key actions that yielded such a
powerfiil effect in mitigating obstacles.
336 Chapter 71
integrated
into chosen
communities;
sense of
belonging
shared
resources/
advice
among
community
lived in
special
interest
housing
celebrated
identity and
cultural
assets
access to
peer models
social
engagement;
support
network
LIMITATIONS
The generalizability of this study is limited because of the single site and
small sample. It was not my intention that the findings be scaled up to a
larger population or be interpreted as applicable at other institutional types.
The findings present a starting point for action research and analysis of student success strategies at other sites. The second limitation is the complex
entanglement of barriers and strategies for success, and in particular, the
compounded struggles with which Latino first-generation students at an elite
PWI have to contend. Culture shock as a barrier to student persistence was
reported by nearly all the students and explained in so many ways that it was
difficult to unpack. The jumble or piles of frustrations and roadblocks that
come along with encountering so much new “culture” (for example, socioeconomic class difference, racial and ethnic difference, linguistic difference,
differences in parental educational history and parental occupations, new unspoken social norms and rules, privilege, minoritization, and other “shocks”)
are very difficult to tease out. I would suggest a project that focuses solely
on culture shock as a barrier to student adjustment and integration, and that
a dynamic model should be created to demonstrate what aspects of “culture”
Toward a Local Student Success Model 337
push levers on LFGCS’s sense of belonging and how they negotiate or assimilate to each facet of “culture.”
The third limitation of this study is that it cannot separate, and therefore
control for, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, immigrant status, or parents’
educational level in sorting out which factors might contribute more heavily
to barriers and which strategies mitigate those. The delimitation ofthis is that
I remained focused on the homogenous nature ofthe sample. All participants
met the same criteria, and so from them I could learn something about the
experience ofthis population at this institution. Unable to tease the identity
markers apart, I accepted my participants as complex subjects, and acknowledged that all the barriers, and strategies for diminishing them, were unique
to the reporting population, a sample ofstudents with intersectional identities.
The results presented here inform the discussion on models for student success, but cannot be presumed to represent a solution for all students.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND FURTHER INQUIRY
In terms of using these findings to create an action plan or interventions to
improve graduation outcomes for Latino first-generation college students at
four-year universities, I recommend first creating intentional programming
around the strategies identified by the study participants. The high-impact action models (figures 11.1 and 11.2) presented here demonstrate the numerous
benefits that productive activities provide. Many of the strategies that students identified for overcoming obstacles can be grouped together and can be
modeled and taught to first-year students. Having resident advisors and peer
mentors explain how certain high-impact actions yield multiple results may
increase sense of agency and encourage help-seeking behaviors early in college. Since LFGCS do not have their parents’ college knowledge to fall back
on, they must get all their information about college from within college,
and so faculty, staff, and students become the teachers and disseminators of
that knowledge. Every interaction matters, and I would add, especially those
interactions with people employed by the university to teach and administer
programs and services. How might faculty training on heuristic knowledge
and the geography ofthe college impact students’ help-seeking behaviors and
sense of belonging?
Faculty should receive overt training on minimizing the power distance
between themselves and first-gen students of color, particularly those who
may feel marginalized or feel that their voice does not matter. There may be
implicit bias at work in the way instructors communicate (too subtly) that
they are available to students. Ifinstructors are explicit about wanting to see
338 Chapter 11
students at office hours and conferences, and explain why students should be
speaking with professors about coursework, study practices, and academic
opportunities across and beyond the college, could this improve cultural capital building for first-gen students? These actions are not obvious to first-gen
students, as many were not socialized to engage in help-seeking or networkbuilding behaviors, and therefore would need extra encouragement to build
that bridge with staff and faculty.
As for students’ perception that “support services are hidden” or difficult
to find, how might the institution remedy that? Administrators say that support services are available, but they cannot make students use them. From
student reports, we learn that first-gens were often not aware of free campus resources, such as tutoring, supplemental instruction, writing centers,
academic coaches, support groups, career coaching, and other spaces where
students get advice and assistance with academic, social, and other types of
difficulties. It is necessary to realize that students with little knowledge ofthe
college terrain will not be expecting these types ofservices or know that they
are free and accessible to them. LFGCS need a clear map and an overt welcome mat in the form ofinstitutional agents who meet them where they are.
Could faculty, especially those teaching first-year students, involve support
services staff in the classroom experience, integrating heuristic and content
knowledge, as well as endorsing campus support services and normalizing
help-seeking behaviors? Another opportunity might be to assign first-year
students to visit support service offices as part of assignments, aligning the
course content with exploration of campus resources.
Lastly, I would advocate for a visible First-Generation Students’ Services
office. First, this would add depth and counterpoint to race-based diversity
efforts in bringing socioeconomic class and privilege to the forefront. Second, through its very existence such an office would raise the profile of and
celebrate students who are doing something extraordinarily challenging by
being the first in their families to attend college. Third, a campus center would
allow for this population with no visible markers to share an identity and to
connect and share resources. Iftrusted peers that are “people like me” are so
important for community-building and social support, but there is no space to
connect on campus, how does one find their first-gen and low-income peers?
The institution can ease this burden, especially at a campus with 20 percent
first-generation college students. The larger question is whether it is the institution’s responsibility to provide spaces for students to connect around socioeconomic class. Class is left out ofthe diversity initiatives at most universities.
Could a more intentional and open acknowledgment of class as an identity
marker strengthen community on campus and mitigate marginalization?
First-gen status often becomes a proxy for low-income (although this is not
Toward a Local Student Success Model 339
always the case). A center that celebrates student achievement, offers space
for community-building, and increases awareness ofunderrepresented populations would allow for class-based diversity work to come out ofthe shadows,
further supporting students with intersectional identities across the campus.
CONCLUSION
When we explore the lived experience ofstudents, we validate their funds of
knowledge and we demonstrate that students are what make a college a place
oflearning and growth. Even the most prestigious research university is only
a think tank (at best) without students. This study aimed to explore the college
life experiences of Latino first-generation college students at an elite PWI,
particularly inquiring as to how these students navigate and negotiate barriers
to persistence. This rich data, even from a small sample, yielded a comprehensive list of barriers and obstacles that Latino first-gen students faced, as
well as an extensive list of strategies for overcoming such obstacles. These
successful seniors created their own support networks and shared heuristic
knowledge and their understanding ofthe geography ofthe campus with each
other. They also identified peers and mentors who were credible models from
whom to learn, building their self-efficacy and sense ofbelonging in the process. Studying successful students allows us to build up the literature focused
on assets and to develop models of student potential and achievement. As
educators, we must continue to learn from our students and be mindful and
accepting ofthe lessons they can teach us.
REFERENCES
Astin, Alexander W. 1984. “Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for
Higher Education.” Journal ofCollege Student Personnel 25, no. 4: 297-308.
Attinasi, Louis C., Jr. 1989. “Getting hi: Mexican Americans’ Perceptions ofUniversity Attendance and the Implications for Freshman Year Persistence.” The Journal
ofHigher Education 60, no. 3 (May-June): 247-77.
Bandura, Albert. 1963. Social Learning and Personality Development. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Bordes-Edgar, Veronica, Patricia Arredondo, Sharon Robinson Kurpius, and James
Rund. 2011. “A Longitudinal Analysis of Latina/o Students’ Academic Persistence.” Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 10, no. 4: 358-68. doi:
10.1177/1538192711423318.
Castillo, Linda G., Collie W. Conoley, Catherine Choi-Pearson, Debra J. Archuleta,
Marion J. Phoummarath, and Alisa Van Landingham. 2006. “University Environ­
340 Chapter 11
ment as a Mediator of Latino Ethnic Identity and Persistence Attitudes.” Journal
ofCounseling Psychology 53, no. 2: 267-71.
Chen, Xianglei, and C. Dennis Carroll. 2005, “First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education: A Look at Their College Transcripts. Postsecondary Education
Descriptive Analysis Report. NCES 2005-171.” National Center for Education
Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2005171.
Choy, Susan. 2001. “Students Whose Parents Did Not Go to College: Postsecondary
Access, Persistence, and Attainment. Findings from the Condition of Education,
2001.” http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=200l 126±
Dennis, Jessica M., Jean S. Phinney, and Lizette Ivy Chuateco. 2005. “The Role of
Motivation, Parental Support, and Peer Support in the Academic Success ofEthnic
Minority First-Generation College Students.” Journal ofCollege Student Development 46, no. 3: 223-36.
Engstrom, Cathy, and Vincent Tinto. 2008. “Access without Support Is Not Opportunity.” Change: The Magazine ofHigher Learning 40, no. 1: 46-50.
Harper, Shaun. R. 2012. “Race without Racism: How Higher Education Researchers
Minimize Racist Institutional Norms.” The Review ofHigher Education 36, no. 1:
9-29.
Hernandez, John C. 2002. “A Qualitative Exploration ofthe First-Year Experience of
Latino College Students.” NASPA Journal 40, no. 1: 69-84.
Hurtado, Sylvia, and Deborah Faye Carter. 1997. “Effects of College Transition and
Perceptions of the Campus Racial Climate on Latino College Students’ Sense of
Belonging.” Sociology ofEducation 70, no. 4: 324-45.
Hurtado, Sylvia, Deborah Faye Carter, and Albert Spuler. 1996. “Latino Student
Transition to College: Assessing Difficulties and Factors in Successful College
Adjustment.” Research in Higher Education 37, no. 2: 135-57.
Iffert, Robert E. 1957. Retention and Withdrawal ofCollege Students. U.S. Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare, Office ofEducation, Bulletin 1958, no. 1.
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
ED543830.pdf.
Kuh, George D. 2001. “Assessing What Really Matters to Student Learning Inside
the National Survey of Student Engagement.” Change: The Magazine ofHigher
Learning 33, no. 3: 10-17.
Kuh, George D. 2008. “High-Impact Educational Practices: A Brief Overview.” (Excerpt from High-Impact EducationalPractices: What TheyAre, Who Has Access to
Them, and Why They Matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges
and Universities.) https://www.aacu.org/leap/hips.
Mehta, Sanjay S., and John J. Newbold. 2011. “Why Do First-Generation Students
Fail?” College Student Journal 45, no. 1: 20.
Munoz, Susana Maria, and Marta Maria Maldonado. 2012. “Counterstories of College Persistence by Undocumented Mexicana Students: Navigating Race, Class,
Gender, and Legal Status.” International Journal ofQualitative Studies in Education 25, no. 3: 293-315.
Toward a Local Student Success Model 341
Museus, Samuel D., Andrew H. Nichols, and Amber D. Lambert. 2008. “Racial
Differences in the Effects of Campus Racial Climate on Degree Completion: A
Structural Equation Model.” The Review ofHigher Education 32, no. 1: 107-34.
National Center for Education Statistics. 2016. “The Condition of Education 2016.
NCES 2016-144.” Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016144.pdf.
Orbe, Mark P. 2004. “Negotiating Multiple Identities within Multiple Frames An
Analysis of First-Generation College Students.” Communication Education 53,
no. 2: 131-49.
Padilla, Raymond V. 1994. “The Unfolding Matrix: A Technique for Qualitative Data
Acquisition and Analysis.” In Studies in Qualitative Methodology vol. 4, edited by
R. G. Burgess, 273-85. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Padilla, Raymond V. 1996. “The Unfolding Matrix: A Dialogical Technique for
Qualitative Data Acquisition and Analysis.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting
ofthe American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
Padilla, Raymond V. 2009. Student Success Modeling: Elementary School to College.
Herndon, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Pascarella, Ernest T., Christopher T. Pierson, Gregory C. Wolniak, and Patrick T.
Terenzini. 2004. “First-Generation College Students: Additional Evidence on College Experiences and Outcomes.” Journal ofHigher Education 75, no. 3, 249-84.
Patton, Michael Q. 2002. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Third edition.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Phinney, Jean S., and Kumiko Haas. 2003. “The Process of Coping Among Ethnic
Minority First-Generation College Freshmen: A Narrative Approach.” The Journal
ofSocial Psychology 143, no. 6: 707-26.
Prospero, Moises, and Shetal Vohra-Gupta. 2007. “First Generation College Students: Motivation, Integration, and Academic Achievement.” Community College
Journal ofResearch and Practice 31, no. 12: 963-75.
Santiago, Deborah A. 2011. Roadmapfor Ensuring America’s Future by Increasing
Latino College Completion. Washington, DC: Excelencia in Education.
Schreiner, Laurie A., Patrice Noel, and Linda Cantwell. 2011. “The Impact ofFaculty
and Staff on High-Risk College Student Persistence.” Journal ofCollege Student
Development 52, no. 3: 321-38.
Soria, Krista M., and Michael J. Stebleton. 2012. “First-Generation Students’
Academic Engagement and Retention.” Teaching in Higher Education 17, no. 6:
673-85. doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.666735.
Tinto, Vincent. 1993. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures ofStudent
Attrition. Second edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wei, Meifen, Tsun-Yao Ku, and Kelly Yu-Hsin Liao. 2011. “Minority Stress and
College Persistence Attitudes Among African American, Asian American, and
Latino students: Perception of University Environment as a Mediator.” Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 17, no. 2: 195-203.
Yosso, Tara J. 2005. “Whose Culture Has Capital? A Critical Race Theory Discussion
of Community Cultural Wealth.” Race, Ethnicity and Education 8, no. 1: 69-91.