1. Abstract
The First Ones: An Analysis of Three Studies on First-Generation College Students
This paper presents the findings of three qualitative research studies related to first-
generation college students. The first study explores the experiences of first-generation graduate
students, focusing on resiliency and persistence; the second study with undergraduate students at
small, private colleges, discusses the importance of developing a sense of home on the college
campus; and the third study concerns first-generation Hispanic males at two-year colleges. The
paper discusses themes found across the studies, and makes recommendations for advisors.

2. The First Ones: An Analysis of Three Studies on First-Generation College Students
As the number of first-generation college students has increased, researchers have
demonstrated that the success of these students depends largely upon academic advisors and
other college administrators developing a deeper understanding of their experiences (Longwell-
Grice & Longwell-Grice 2008; Vander Schee, 2007; Ward, Seigel & Davenport, 2012; Swecker,
Fifolt & Searby, 2013). As higher education continues to be a critical pathway to achieving
occupational success and social status, the value of a college degree has increased dramatically,
which is a major reason that college is attractive to first-generation students. In addition to
confronting all the anxieties, dislocations, and difficulties that most college students face, first-
generation students also experience unique cultural, social, and academic transitions (Ishitani,
2006; Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004). The data show that approximately 43%
of all beginning college students can be considered first-generation students (Chen and Carroll,
2005; Choy, 2001). Despite these numbers, however, first-generation students are less likely to
graduate than peers who have at least one parent with a college education (National Center for
Educational Statistics, 2005). Compared to students with college-educated parents, first-
generation college students receive less assistance in preparing for college (Choy, 2001), feel
less supported in attending college (Longwell-Grice & Longwell-Grice, 2008), and lack a sense
of belonging to the college they attend (Choy, 2001). All of these factors impact the recruitment
and retention of first-generation students and make the transition to college particularly
challenging for them (Lohfink & Paulsen, 2005).
According to Tinto (1990), one of the major factors affecting the retention of college students
is the relationship students form with their faculty. Longwell-Grice and Longwell-Grice (2008)
showed that this was also true for first-generation students, but they also found that first-

3. generation males were extremely reluctant to take the steps necessary to develop these
relationships. Similarly, Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak and Terenzini (2004) found that while
success for first-generation students (the majority of whom are low-income and working-class) is
dependent upon the formation of genuinely supportive relationships among faculty and staff,
these supportive relationships were difficult to find and maintain. These studies collectively
demonstrate how crucial the relationship between first-generation students and academic
advisors is to the retention of first-generation college students.
This paper presents findings from three separate qualitative research studies on first-
generation college students. The studies represent a cross section of the campus population and
demonstrate that the issues confronting first-generation college students cut across race, gender,
type of school, major, and even type of degree. The studies are snapshots of larger, in-depth
studies that were presented as a panel presentation at the 2008 NACADA conference (Longwell-
Grice, et. al, 2008). The selection of qualitative methods was specifically chosen for these
studies because this methodology provides researchers with an opportunity for rich reflection and
in-depth exploration of the complex, multidimensional experiences, and issues of first-generation
students.
The populations studied included: graduate students at a four-year public college,
undergraduate students at small private colleges, and Latino males at a two year college. All
three studies sought to further understand the complex issues confronting first-generation college
students. The purpose of the paper is to help educate advisors on the issues confronting first-
generation college students and identify ways in which academic advising offices can help first-
generation college students succeed.

4. The literature on first-generation students is inconsistent in how it defines first-generation
status (Inkelas, Daver, Vogt & Leonard (2007). While some like Longwell-Grice (2010)
included students so long as their parents never completed college, other studies have viewed
parental education in a variety of ways in order to allow for comparisons based on parental
education (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak, & Terenzini, 2004; Lee, Sax, Kim, & Hagedorn, 2004).
For the studies in this paper, students were considered first-generation if neither parent
completed a college degree.
Although the definitions used for first-generation vary, what is consistently documented
is the fact that first-generation students tend to lack the institutional knowledge needed to
achieve academic success. This lack of knowledge compromises first-generation students’
ability to ask the right questions that would enable them to navigate the culture and
bureaucracies of higher education. It is this lack of inquiry, compacted by the unlikelihood that a
call home to family members will provide them with the direction needed, that makes the
challenge of attaining a higher education seem insurmountable for first-generation college
students.
First-Generation Graduate Students
The first study was a qualitative interview study that attempted to better understand the
experiences of first-generation college students in Masters-level graduate programs at a four-year
public university in the Northwest. This study sought to investigate how first-generation
graduate students addressed and negotiated multiple identities, cultural transitions, and
marginality both with their family/home culture and the academic culture (London, 1992; Orbe,
2004; Ward, Siegal and Davenport, 2012). The underlying intent of this study was to identify
factors contributing to first-generation student persistence and resilience.

5. The researcher selected her sample from the population of all students in Masters-level
programs at this university, who were the first person in their family to graduate from college.
Snowball sampling was used to locate information-rich key informants who could, in turn, help
identify other information-rich individuals who would be willing to participate in the study.
Ultimately, the sample consisted of nine students (five men and four women; seven identified as
White or Caucasian, and two identified as non-White [American Indian and biracial]) in Master’s
programs who were the first person in their family to earn a bachelor’s degree.
The researcher used qualitative methods and conducted 90-minute, in-depth, individual
interviews to study the experiences of the nine narrators. The interview protocol (Appendix A)
was informed by the researcher’s literature review, particularly Orbe (2004) and his work on
multiple identities and first-generation students. It was also significantly influenced by the stories
of first-generation academics (Burke & Johnston, 2004; Dews & Law, 1995; Linkon, 1999;
Rendón, 1996; Warnock & Apple, 2012; Verdi & Ebsworth, 2009). The first two questions were
designed to establish rapport and place the student’s experience in the context of his or her
family’s experience with education. Questions three and four explored the student’s decisions to
go to college, both undergraduate and graduate. The next set of questions was designed to
engage the student in deeper reflection on her or his experiences in graduate school and how
being a first generation student might impact that experience. After these key questions about
school were three questions about how the student’s identity as a first-generation college student
did or did not affect relationships with family and friends. Finally, the interview ended with four
questions to close the interview and solicit any new insights or unexamined issues.
In order to field test this protocol, the researcher consulted with a student affairs
assessment professional and two first-generation graduate students. Based on the feedback

6. received from these individuals, the interview questions were modified and refined. Specifically,
the researcher added additional closing questions and expanded the number of follow-up or
“probing” questions associated with each of the original questions.
After conducting the interviews, the researcher followed the advice of Creswell (2003),
who writes that the analysis of qualitative data is “an ongoing process involving continual
reflection about the data” (p. 190). In addition to this ongoing reflection about the data collected
in the interviews, the researcher listened to the audiotapes and read the transcripts to develop a
general sense of the information. She began identifying commonalities and shared experiences
among the narrators. The researcher also looked for places where her data mirrored or expanded
upon the literature on this subject. After developing codes for these themes, she added the codes
to the transcripts and organized the data accordingly, looking for places where she could group
related topics together. She reported on these themes, both convergent and divergent, together
with salient quotes from the narrators.
The nine graduate students in the study shared several factors that contributed to their
educational resiliency, including attending schools that offered Advanced Placement (AP)
classes, challenging curriculums, an affluent parent population, and teachers who expected all
students to go to college. In addition to the resiliency factors that came from quality K-12
education, the majority of these first-generation graduate students benefitted from a significant
amount of emotional support from at least one parent. However, this support was general, not
specific. These were not the highly pressured offspring of the middle- and upper-middle class.
For the most part, parents of these students were proud of their accomplishments and pleased
with their abilities, but they did not push their children to succeed academically. Having a strong
work ethic was a third resiliency factor that the research participants shared. Other resiliency

7. factors that were present for some but not all of the participants included: aptitude for academic
work, love of learning, desire to serve others, ability to balance passion for a field of study with
career-minded practicality, interest in upward mobility, and financial resources above and
beyond their family’s regular income. Additionally, many students started at community
colleges, and one was able to participate in the federal Ronald E. McNair Post baccalaureate
Achievement Program as an undergraduate.
Overall, the students in this study did not express anxiety about academic competency or
competitiveness; after successful undergraduate experiences, they seemed secure in their
academic performance. However, several narrators described a discomfort with academic
discourse and the culture of academia that they struggled to overcome. Others shared stories of
classroom and department-based marginalization based on socioeconomic class.
The biggest cultural transition facing many of the students in this study was bringing their
graduate student identity home. For some, this simply did not happen. Several of the
participants—who made it clear that they valued the support and respected the intelligence of
their family members—expressed disappointment about no longer being able to talk with their
parents or other family members about issues or ideas that were important to them. One student
described this loss as “eclipsing” his family members. Like most graduate students, the
participants shared a passion for learning and a great enthusiasm for their subjects. They enjoyed
discussing big ideas and theoretical concepts. Ironically, what they loved resulted in an often
unwanted distance from the family members who originally encouraged them to attend college.
First Generation Undergraduates in Private Colleges
The second research study examined the experiences of first-generation undergraduate
college students in private institutions. The study was conducted as part of a research

8. apprenticeship in a doctoral program. As such, the initial research question was intentionally
broad in order to begin to explore the topic. The guiding question was: How do first-generation
college students make sense of their college experience in two- and four-year private schools?
The study makes clear that the experiences of first-generation students are both complex and
contextually situated, with participants needing to traverse the different worlds of home and
school that they inhabit. The researcher’s findings offer evidence of the complexity of these
transitional issues for first-generation students, as well as ways in which these students learn to
find their own way amid these complexities.
Fourteen first-generation college students from three different institutions of higher
education in the Northeast were recruited and volunteered for this study. These students
represented a diversity of gender, race, and ethnicity. First-generation students are not a
homogenous group, and this sampling recognizes the multiple and intersecting identities that can
complicate the ways first-generation students make sense of and navigate their experiences.
The three schools included a private two-year nursing college and two private four-year
universities, all in the Northeast. One four-year college was a medium-sized residential college,
and the other was a large, residential, research university. The sample selection allowed for
recruitment from three very different institutional types, which provided rich and diverse data.
This study employed qualitative research methods of semi-structured individual
interviews. The researcher chose individual interviews because of her interest in gaining a deeper
understanding of each informant’s experiences, to understand how the participants think and how
they make meaning of their experiences (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Participants were asked to
complete two to four interviews for 30-45 minutes each. Interviews were audiotaped and

9. transcribed by the researcher. The researcher also recorded general observations on each campus,
since each institution provided a different context.
The researcher developed a list of questions ahead of time (Appendix B) and used these
questions to loosely guide the interview, allowing informants’ talk to help guide the interview.
In some cases interviews followed a simple chronological progression from talking about the
high school experience, to how they made the transition to college (including how they decided
to go to college), then how they chose the college and what the first semester was like for them.
In follow-up interviews the questions were more structured, while also following up on key
aspects of the initial interview. Other times, the researcher used probes to find out more about a
topic that was touched on in the initial interview. For example, one student discussed her
experiences in the band in her first interview, and in the follow-up interview the researcher asked
questions that focused on her experiences in the band. These follow-up questions uncovered the
participant’s feelings of “culture shock” or a cultural clash that she had not experienced in other
places on campus. The result was an extensive discussion of the complexities of race, class, and
gender and how the student negotiated participation within a group that was also situated in the
dominant majority in terms of the college setting as a whole.
The researcher chose methods grounded in the symbolic interactionism approach,
allowing informants to share the ways that they make meaning of their experiences within a
given context (Blumer, 1969). How first-generation students make meaning of their experiences
at college is part of an interpretive process as well as a social context. That is, the individual
makes meaning of their experiences through interactions (Blumer, 1969). Participants in this
study made meaning of and interpreted their experiences through interactions in a specific
context (the college setting). Higher education is an important context for making sense of their

10. experiences, as college is the site where first-generation students are often confronted with new
sets of values and norms that make up the campus culture.
During the data analysis the researcher looked for relevant issues and engaged with
theories related to cultural capital to make sense of the themes. She used the theory of cultural
capital as a framework to help interpret this data (Bourdieu, 1977). These ideas help to explain
the “disconnect” for many first-generation students between home and school and how they
make sense of these differences. Informants described the ways that they had to work at home
and school in order to negotiate the two different contexts. At school, participants often
struggled with how to make sense of the values of the institution related to cultural and social
capital, while at home they saw that adopting the values of the institution could create distance
from their family.
Three themes emerged from this research. First, participants described the ways they
learned to navigate academia. Students described how they learned the rules guiding interactions
in and out of the classroom. Students portrayed a type of cultural dislocation, which they talked
about in terms of feeling lost and at times marginalized. Olivia, a Latina student at a private
university, explained it this way:
Um, (pauses) and I feel like there’s [sic] unwritten rules of a culture and it takes a while
to really adapt to them and I feel like even now I haven’t really caught all of ‘em. I’m
kinda oblivious to some things, you know.
She went on further and named the difference as one related to socioeconomic status, saying
“Mm, ‘cause, a lot of people here come from a very wealthy background so it’s really hard to
develop a good relationship with them”

11. Olivia recognized that the rules governing life at the private university she attended were
intricately connected to issues of class. As a student who described herself as growing up poor,
this created a sense of marginalization for Olivia and other first-generation college students.
Additionally, she needed to determine how to use these new rules in ways that felt comfortable
for her. Secondly, students demonstrated resilience as they negotiated the complexities
associated with their college experience. As both worlds (home and college) come into conflict
with each other, support structures become critical to the success of first-generation students.
One of the negotiation strategies that helped students in this study was finding support through
connections on campus. Jessica described how she relies on her mentors, but she wished she had
more support. She said, “I feel like I have four mentorships, seriously, I have [she names four
faculty members], but I don’t really know, but I definitely think of them as my mentors. I
definitely go to them for advice. Then I don’t mind being a [peer] mentor, but I need some
serious advising myself.” For the first-generation students in this study, the ability to work
through issues with mentors and peers was critical. Finding these connections is essential for
managing the extra work required of first-generation students as they traverse the margins of two
worlds.
Finally, participants described how they negotiated their family relationships based on
their changing identity as a college student and the resulting challenges. Some discussed the
varying strategies they used to maintain relationships and negotiate their role within the family as
they took on a new identity as a college student. As Liz, a young white woman who attended
one of the private four-year universities said:
So, (my mom) would be like, ‘oh college students like they think just ‘cause they go to
college they’re smarter and they deserve more money.’ So, it’s kinda like I hope she

12. doesn’t think about me. I mean I know she doesn’t because she wants me to be here and
she knows it’s good and she wants me to do better than she did. But, I felt like that the
first year like is my mom gonna think, ‘oh, she’s a college student.’
Liz found that she needed to integrate her role as a college student into her identity in a way that
allowed her to maintain her family relationships. Bobby, a transfer student at a private four-year
university, said that when he goes home:
My conversations are different, my perspective is different, um, just my mind is in a
whole different place and my family… it’s like, ‘Wallie thinks that his stuff don’t stink.’
[Yeah.] You know, and that’s a total misinterpretation because in their mind I abandoned
something.
This study addresses one small piece of a complex and important issue affecting degree
attainment in higher education. First-generation students are one group of students who are
gaining access, but without the necessary support structures, they may fall short of their
potential. The experiences of the students in this study illustrate how important faculty and
advisors are in helping first-generation students recognize and navigate the many unwritten rules
that operate on campus. This study, like the previous one, demonstrates how important it is for
advisors to understand how difficult it is for first-generation college students to navigate the
transition from home to college.
First-Generation Latino Males at a Two Year College
The third study was conducted with Latino male first-generation students at a two-year
public college in the Southwest. This study had a number of purposes, but the main purpose was
to develop a deeper understanding of the experiences of successful first-generation, first year
college Latino males. A second purpose was to use the knowledge gained to improve retention

13. efforts at schools that have a significant population of Latino males. The knowledge and deeper
understanding of this population can be utilized to improve the retention and academic success
rates of the Latino males at this, or other similar institutions.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2010), the ethnic population of the United States is
changing rapidly, with the majority of change attributable to the growing Latino population.
Latinos are the nation’s largest and fastest growing minority group, but the participation and
attainment rates of Latinos in higher education are cause for concern. Despite the growth and
size of this minority group, they continue to have the lowest educational attainment of all ethnic
minority groups (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Latino males have a high school graduation rate of
64%, as compared to Latino females who have a 61% high school graduation rate. This statistic
is of particular concern as there are 108 Latino males for every 100 Latino females, which is in
contrast to the total population equivalent of 97 males for every 100 females (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2010). Yet, it is within this sector (male) of the Latino population that the fastest growth
rate in the nation is taking place. Additionally, while fewer males may be participating in higher
education in general, those who are participating are highly likely to be first-generation students
and choosing community colleges as their first entry into higher education. Over 95% of the
enrollment at the college where this third study took place is comprised of Latino students.
Participants recruited into this study were first-generation, Latino males who were in the
first semester, and who were still enrolled for classes after the fall drop deadline. These students
were defined as ‘successful’ because they persisted through this fall drop deadline. Forty
students were invited to participate. Initially four focus groups were held with 4-6 students in
each group. The students in these focus groups were asked a series of questions designed to

14. identify 1) barriers they overcame; 2) knowledge they gained and; 3) actions they took in order
to persist in college.
The focus groups lasted approximately one hour each. Following the focus groups, the
students were asked to participate in an individual follow-up interview lasting approximately one
hour. Eighteen students agreed to participate in the follow-up interviews. The questions asked
in these individual interviews varied, based on the themes discovered in the focus groups, and
the response individuals gave during the focus groups. The questions used for the focus group
interviews can be found in Appendix C.
The researcher tape recorded all interviews and created verbatim transcripts. After
listening to the audio tapes, and reading the transcripts, themes were developed and analyzed
(Cresswell, 2003), especially those relating to barriers, knowledge, and actions affecting the
persistence of first-generation, Hispanic males.
Based on the interviews, the students identified a number of issues they felt acted as
barriers to success in college. The researcher felt three main themes emerged from these issues.
The first theme the researcher found related to the students’ transition from high school to
college. Students from each of the groups felt strongly that the transition from high school to
college was a barrier for them. They felt that adjusting to the new setting was very difficult. As
one student in the student described it:
So, actually, the first days of school, like you said the first 12 days of school, are actually
the hardest because you’re adjusting to a whole new setting and for example if you have
morning classes, that could be a problem. Waking up in the morning to something you’re
getting used to is actually quite a bit of a challenge. So is adjusting to a new surrounding
– a new setting.

15. The second theme that emerged was related to financial aid. Due to the fact that the
college in this study is located in one of the poorest regions of the state, and the region itself is of
the poorest in the country, it perhaps was not a surprise to see this described as a barrier.
Although 90% of all students at this college qualify for aid, the students in this study felt it was
not sufficient to meet the true cost of their education. As one student stated:
Actually, money is a barrier. You have to work because financial aid might give you a
little money, but it’s nothing compared to what you need to eat, put gas in your car,
maintain your house, your car, and all that.
Since this is a two-year, non-residential school, the majority of students are commuters,
which makes parking and transportation a particularly big issue for students. Additionally, many
of the students did not have access to a reliable car. The students in one of the focus groups
discussed this as a possible reason why students who start in the fall might drop out by the
second week. One student hypothesized that some of the students did not have transportation.
Another speculated that many of these students either did not have a car to get to campus, or they
did not have a dependable ride so they missed out. A third student in the group said, “Almost
everyone here misses at least one day of transportation.”
The final theme the researcher identified was similar to that of the two previous studies:
the issue of college/home life balance. Several students in the study described problems at home
due to the lack of understanding by their family of what college was like: “You’re the first from
your family to go to college – you don’t really know how to start or where to start. You’re just
going blind cause you really don’t know anything.” Many of these students were also returning
adults with families and had to factor childcare and family time into their lives in addition to

16. their studies. This was another complicating factor in their already complicated lives and added
additional stress.
The notion of a gender gap in higher education is not new information. However, while
some researchers discount the overall gender differences in education, Mead (2006) did concede
that there are issues for some groups of males: “There’s no doubt that some groups of boys –
particularly Hispanic and black boys and boys from low-income homes – are in real trouble,”
(p.3). When we add to this factor first-generation college status, the odds of these students
succeeding in college becomes increasingly low.
Although this study identified a number of specific things that the two-year college where
the study was conducted could do for the Latino males in the study, it also found that these
students shared the issue of home/school transition with the others groups in this paper. The next
section, then, discusses this phenomena in more detail.
Discussion
As the research presented in this article has shown, the obstacles for first generation
college students are not simple to resolve, and the characteristics of this population are not fixed.
For those reasons it is important to communicate to others the magnitude and complexity of the
challenge for both the students and the institutions serving them. Still, any program seeking to
make long-term change must demonstrate to the students, their families and to the greater society
that it (the program) is not willing to overlook, understate or ignore the complexity of the
challenge.
While the three studies in this paper were conducted with dramatically different
populations and in different settings, they are linked by one common theme: the difficulty of
negotiating family relationships. Chickering and Reiser (1993) argue that for student

17. development to occur, college students must move through autonomy and toward
interdependence:
We can say that moving through autonomy toward interdependence involves three
components: 1) emotional independence – freedom from continual and pressing needs for
reassurance, affection, or approval from others; 2) instrumental independence – the
ability to carry on activities and solve problems in a self-directed manner, and the
freedom and confidence to be mobile in order to pursue opportunity or adventure; 3)
interdependence – an awareness of one’s place in and commitment to the welfare of the
larger community (p. 117).
Chickering and Reiser (1993) maintain that the first step toward emotional independence
involves some level of separation from parental involvement. However, this separation forces the
student to leave behind old dependencies, which can lead to a grieving process often
accompanied by anger. This transition is further hindered, they argue, when the home
environment is unsupportive of the changes students make. For example when Bobby (a student
in the second study) says that his family’s attitude towards him at times seems to be “Wallie
thinks that his stuff don’t stink,” his reaction is defensive, “You know, (that’s) a total
misinterpretation.” At the same time that Bobby appears angry about his family’s attitude, he
also understands because, as he said, “in their mind I abandoned something.” The transition
Bobby is experiencing is difficult for both he and his family. So how does Bobby (and the others
in these study) make sense of this? How do they manage to become bi-cultural in such a way
that they can easily negotiate the culture of academia without abandoning the culture they came
from? And do advisors help them negotiate this transition to bi-culturalism? This transition is
especially difficult for first-generation students (who are struggling to maintain family ties),

18. when they are encouraged by their colleges to demonstrate that they have made meaning of the
new knowledge and concepts they are learning. Making meaning requires students to engage in
meaningful dialogues, but many first-generation students (as these studies show) are denied this
opportunity at home. Conversations around the kitchen table about college are likely to end up
with the family expressing feelings like Bobby’s family expressed.
Nunez (2005), in her qualitative study of first-generation females transitioning to college,
found that first-generation students attempt to redefine their relationships with their families
instead of breaking away from them, a significant difference from what Chickering and Reiser
(1993) found. Nunez found that the qualitative research on first-generation students:
…suggests that first generation students must traverse a greater social and cultural
distance than other students to become part of the college community and to negotiate a
successful passage through college. (p. 88)
London (1992, 1996) similarly found that first-generation college students struggled with
competing pressures to stay connected with their family, to fulfill their parents’ wishes by doing
well at college, and to continue education without parental support. In the study of students
attending private colleges one student, Liz, talked about how her mom felt that college students
feel superior. According to Liz, her mom believes college students have an attitude of “they’re
smarter and they deserve more money.” This places Liz in an awkward spot. Isn’t this the
purpose of college? To make you “smarter” and to help you with your career so that you earn
more money? But should Liz show that she is getting smarter, and should she make more money
as a result of her degree, then she is just like the students her mother disdains. This bind leaves
Liz with some difficult decisions. Liz was attempting to integrate her role as a college student

19. into her identity in a way that allowed her to maintain her family relationships, in essence
becoming bi-cultural.
Nunez (2005) maintains that when first-generation students are also members of other
groups who traditionally have not had access to college, they may face additional pressures due
to their increased marginalized status. Longwell-Grice (2010) using the lens of social class,
found that for first-generation students (the majority of whom are from working class and low
income families), the transition to college involves a change in social class, resulting in “status
incongruity” (Sennett and Cobb, 1972). Longwell-Grice found that first-generation students
developed ambivalent feelings about which social class they belonged to, which resulted in their
feeling caught between two cultures and developing a sense that “something” is wrong. This
“something” is often the disconnect students feel as a result of their upward mobility (created by
their college education) from their social class of origin to a higher social class. In their study
with first-generation Latino students, Torres, Reiser, Lepeau, Davis and Ruder (2006) found
while most Latinos say their families support their pursuit of a college degree, their parents do
not actually understand what their life is like. While families offer support, they found, this lack
of understanding from parents creates a unique, and difficult, situation for students. Torres,
Reiser, Lepeau, Davis and Ruder’s study lends further support to the findings of the studies in
this paper.
Conclusions and Implications
Cultural capital has often been viewed as the linchpin for students feeling they belong on
the college campus. Bourdieu’s (1977) concept of cultural capital points to the advantages
certain groups have when they share the cultural values of an institution. There is often an
immediate sense of belonging for students who possess the cultural capital of the dominant

20. groups. On the other hand, using cultural capital to explain differences becomes problematic
when students who come from different backgrounds are viewed as “lacking” the necessary
cultural capital needed to integrate or assimilate into the college setting. By setting up programs
designed to give students a crash course in the capital they are “missing,” this theory is then
being used to support dominant norms and label students as deficient, under-prepared or at-risk.
This use of cultural capital to create “outsiders” is risky and is critiqued by critical race theorists
as another way to push “others” to the margins and ignore the types of capital they bring to an
institution (Yasso, 2005). Still, there are some things advisors can do to assist first-generation
students succeed in college.
According to Davis (2010), working effectively with first-generation college students
requires a combination of patience and a thorough understanding of the culture of college. It is
true that first-generation students are ill-equipped to navigate the culture of college as they lack
the insider knowledge of the unspoken expectations and the language and “hidden rules” of
higher education, knowledge non-first-generation students typically possess. Longwell-Grice
and Longwell-Grice (2008) argue that effective retention programs for first-generation students
not only provide continuing assistance to students, but they also act to ensure the integration of
first-generation students into the academic community. This integration helps nullify some of
the concerns expressed by Yasso (2005). The general college climate toward student diversity
can either support or impair the motivation of first-gen students (Browman & Destin, in press).
When students see evidence that their university cares about them, they feel more motivated than
when they see perceive that their school only cares for more wealthy students. We feel that
advising offices can establish this climate of support prior to students stepping foot on campus.

21. Contact with first-gen students before they arrive is one simple way to begin the advisor-student
relationship.
The research on academic advising has consistently shown that it has a positive influence
on student retention (Habley & McLanahan, 2004), and there is evidence that the number of
advisor-advisee meetings may positively affect student persistence (Ishitani, 2006). Vander
Schee (2007) also suggests that academic advising can affect retention because it can offer an
effective retention strategy for students, including first-gens, who are considered most at risk for
dropping out. Since advising appointments seem to be one of the few institutional mechanisms
that consistently connect students to the academic institution in meaningful ways (Swecker,
Fifolt & Searby, 2013), it makes sense to use academic advisors in order to connect with first
generation students.
As research continues to expose the challenges experienced by first-generation college
students, many colleges are indeed attempting to harness the potential power that advising has
shown, in order to address the issues first-gens face. Some schools have created programs for
first-generation students that include classes, support programs, and living-learning centers, for
example. In one intervention for incoming first-gen students, those who had the opportunity to
hear how other students used their different backgrounds as a strength to succeed subsequently
became more fully engaged in the college experience (Stephens, Hamedani, & Destin, 2014).
We believe that advisors should be mindful of their advising style, and strive to develop a style
that is inclusive of first-gens and non-first-gens alike, but allows advisors to pay added attention
to first-gen students. One specific advising tactic that shows promise with first-gen students is
Intrusive Advising (Heisserer & Parrett, 2002). Intrusive Advising is a deliberate, intensive
advising intervention with at-risk students designed to a) facilitate informed, responsible decision

22. making, b) increase student involvement in the campus community and c) ensure the probability
of the student’s academic success. This advising model is more direct and active than many of
the models currently used with students, and is very appropriate when working with first-
generation students. Intrusive Advising involves intentional contact with students with the goal
of developing a caring and beneficial relationship leading to increased academic motivation and
retention (Varney, 2007). Since research has shown the importance between first-gen success
and faculty/advisor relationships, this model is very appropriate for adoption by advising offices.
We also strongly recommend that institutions provide support and funding for
professional development/training so that advisors can learn more about the needs of first-
generation college students. While many of the programs offered by an institution may offer
support for first-generation students, the first step in truly supporting them is to be aware of the
challenges they face upon their transition to college. When advisors are informed of the issues
first-generation students confront as they transition into college, they will feel more comfortable
helping first-generation students deal with (and resolve) these issues. There is no doubt that
many first-generation college students turn to their academic advisors, not just for academic
advice, but for the guidance needed to navigate campus life on a daily basis (Sickles, 2004) and
advisors need to be able to respond when they do.
As higher education continues to be a critical pathway to achieving occupational success
and social status, the value of a college degree has increased dramatically. This, in turn, has led
to higher numbers of first-generation students attempting to earn a college degree. Despite this
increase, however, first-generation college students are still less likely than their peers to
graduate from college. Our job as advising professionals, then, is to help smooth the transition
into (and through) college for these students, and assist them through to graduation.

23. References
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of theory of practice. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bowman, A.S. & Destin, M. (In press). The effects of a warm or chilly climate toward
socioeconomic diversity on academic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin.
Burke, J. B., & Johnston, M. (2004). Students at the Margins: Searching for the American
Dream in Higher Education. Race, Gender, and Class in Education (Part III), 11(4),19-
35.
Chen, X. and Carroll, C. D. (2005). First-generation students in postsecondary education: A
look at their college transcripts (NCES 2005-171). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Chickering, A. W. & Reiser, L. (1993). Education and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Choy, S. (2001). Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access,
persistence, and attainment (NCES 2001-126). U. S. Department of Education, NCES.
Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Davis, J. (2010). The first-generation student experience: Implications for campus practice, and
strategies for improving persistence and success. Serling, VA, Stylus Publishing.

24. Dews, C. L. B., & Law, C. L. (Eds.). (1995). This fine place so far from home: Voices of
academics from the working class. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Habley, W. R. & McClanahan, R. (2004). What works in student retention? Four year public
colleges. Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
Heisser, D. L. & Parrett, P. (2002). Advising the at-risk students in college and university
settings. College Student Journal, 36,69-84.
Inkelas, K. K., Daver, Z. E., Vogt, K. E., & Leonard, J. B. (2007). Living-learning programs and
first-generation college students’ academic and social transition to college. Research in
Higher Education, 48(4), 403-434.
Ishitani, T. T. (2006). Studying attrition and degree completion behavior among first-generation
college students in the United States. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 861-885.
Lee, J. J., Sax, L. J., Kim, K., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2004). Understanding differences among
community college students across levels of parental educations. Community College
Review, 32(1), 1-20.
Linkon, S. L. (Ed.). (1999). Teaching working class. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts
Press.
Lohfink, M., & Paulsen, M. (2005). Comparing the determinants for first-generation and
continuing-education students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(4), 409-428.
London, H. B. (1992). Transformations: Cultural challenges faced by first-generation students. In
L. S. Zwerling & H. B. London (Eds.), First-generation students: Confronting the
cultural issues, New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 80 (pp. 5-11). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

25. London, H. (1996). How college affects first-generation students. About Campus, 1(5), 9-13,
23.
Longwell-Grice, R. & Longwell-Grice, H. (2008). Testing Tinto: How do retention theories
work for first-generation, working-class students? Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory & Practice, 9(4), 407-420.
Longwell-Grice, R. (2010). Working class and working college: A case study of
first-generation, working-class college students. Saarbrucken, Germany: Lambert
Academic Publishing.
Longwell-Grice, R., Adsitt, N., Mullins, K., Serrata, W. (2008). “Fear of Heights: A Panel
Discussion on First Generation College Students-From Theory to Practice.” Conference
presentation at the national NACADA conference in Chicago, IL.
National Center for Education Statistics (2005). Digest of education statistics, 2005. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/
Nunez, A. M. (2005). Negotiating ties: A qualitative study of first-generation female students’
transition to college. Journal of the First-Year Experience, 17 (2), 87-118.
Orbe, M. P. (2004). Negotiating multiple identities within multiple frames: An analysis of first-
generation college students. Communication Education, 53(2), 131-149.
Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation
college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The Journal
of Higher Education, 75(3), 249-284.
Rendón, L. I. (1996). Life on the border. About Campus, 1(5), 14-20.
Sennett, R. & Cobb, J. (1972). The hidden injuries of class. New York: Vintage Books.

26. Sickles, A. R. (2004). Advising first-generation college students. NACADA Clearinghouse of
Academic Advising Resources. Retrieved August 29, 2014 from
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu
Swecker, H.K., Fifolt, M., & Searby, L. (2013). Academic advising and first-generation college
students: A quantitative study on student retention. NACADA Journal, 33(1), 46-53.
Tinto, V. (1990). Principles of effective retention. Journal of the Freshmen Year Experience, 2,
35-48.
Torres, V., Reiser, A., LePeau, L., Davis, L., & Ruder, J. (2006). A model of first-generation
Latino/a college students’ approach to seeking academic information. NACADA Journal,
26(2), 65-70.
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Retrieved February 3, 2016 from
http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/education.html
Varney, J. (2007). Intrusive advising. NACADA Clearinghouse of Academic Advising
Resources. Retrieved August 29, 2014 from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu
Vander Schee, B. A. (2007). Adding insight to intrusive advising and its effectiveness with
students on probation. NACADA Journal, 27 (2), 50-59.
Verdi, G. G., & Ebsworth, M. E. (2009). Working-class women academics: Four socio-
linguistic journeys. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 4(2), 183-204.
Ward, L., Siegal, M. J., & Davenport, Z. (2012). First-generation college students:
Understanding and improving the experience from recruitment to commencement.
San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.
Warnock, D. & Appel, S. (2012). Learning the unwritten rules: Working class students in
graduate school. Innovative Higher Education, 37(4), 307-321. Burke & Johnston, 2004;

27. Yasso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital?: A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 9-91.

28. Appendix A
First Generation Graduate Students
1. What (and where) did you get your undergraduate
2. Tell me about your family’s history with education
3. When did you know you were going to college; Was there someone or something
that was particularly influential in that decision making process?
4. Tell me about your decision to go to grad school.
a. How did you feel about your decision?
b. When you told your family and friends about your decision, what did they say to
you?
a. How did you interpret their response(s)? What did it mean to you? How did it
affect you?
5. Describe what the first few days of grad school were like.
c. Who were some of the significant people or events?
d. How did you feel like you fit in?
a. Tell me about some of the important relationships you’ve developed in grad
school with faculty or staff?
6. What connects you to grad school?
7. If you had to come up with a title that described your experience so far in graduate
school, what would it be?
8. Some first generation graduate students describe academia as an “alien culture.” Is there
anything that feels unfamiliar or alien to you as a graduate student?
9. How do you think your first generation perspective adds to the classroom or your
academic work? Where does it trip you up?
10.How conscious are you about being the first in your family to attend college? What does
it mean to you?
11.Can you describe if and how being the first in your family to go to college has changed
your relationship with your parents or siblings?
12.What advice would you give other first generation college students preparing to attend
graduate school?
13.Now that we’ve talked about where you’ve been and where you’re at now, what has been
the most meaningful part of this conversation for you?
14.Is there anything important you left out?
15.What do you want to remember from this interview?
16.What do you think about my research topic?

29. Appendix B
First Generation Undergraduates in Private Colleges
Sample Questions
1. What did you first notice when you got to college?
2. What was your preparation for college like?
3. What was high school like?
4. Tell me about your decision to attend college.
5. Tell me about how you decided to attend (current institution).
6. What was it like when you first started college?
7. Tell me about your family.
8. What is it like being the first person in your family to attend college?

30. Appendix C
First-Generation Hispanic Males at a Two-Year College
Initial Focus Group Questions
1. Is this your first semester in college?
2. When did you register for Fall classes?
3. Did you encounter any barriers from the point you registered through the fall drop
out date?
4. Describe these barriers.
5. How did you overcome these barriers?
6. Have any of the rest of you faced similar barriers?
7. What percentage of Hispanic male students do you believe encounter such
barriers?
8. What knowledge do Hispanic male students need to overcome such barriers?
9. What actions do Hispanic male students need to take to overcome these barriers?
10. What changes could the college make to try and eliminate or minimalize these
barriers?