Abstract

First-generation (FG) college students (students for whom neither parent has a 4-year degree) face a number of challenges as they attempt to obtain a post-secondary degree. They are more likely to come from working-class backgrounds or poverty (Reardon, 2011) and attend lower quality high schools (Warburton et al., 2001) while not benefiting from the guidance of a parent who successfully navigated the path to higher education. FG college students also contend with belonging or “fitting in” concerns due a perceived mismatch between their own values and the values implicit in institutions of higher education (Stephens et al., 2012a). Specifically, prior research has demonstrated that FG college students face an unseen disadvantage that can be attributed to the fact that middle-class norms of independence reflected in American institutions of higher education can be experienced as threatening by many FG students who have been socialized with more interdependent values commonly espoused in working-class populations. The present research examines this theory (cultural mismatch theory) in the understudied context of 2-year colleges and tests if a values-affirmation intervention (i.e., an intervention that has shown promise in addressing identity threats and belonging concerns) can be effective for FG college students at these 2-year campuses. By considering the tenets of cultural mismatch theory in the creation of the values-affirmation interventions we were able to vary different aspects of the intervention in order to examine how its effectiveness may depend on the nature and magnitude of a perceived cultural mismatch. Results from surveying faculty and students at 2-year colleges indicated that compared to traditional 4-year institutions, the norms of 2-year colleges and the motivations of FG students may be different. That is, FG student motives may be more consistent (and thus less mismatched) with the cultural context of 2-year colleges which could result in fewer belonging concerns when compared to FG students at 4-year institutions. This may carry implications for the efficacy of values-affirmation interventions and could help explicate why FG students in the current sample perceived a greater match with their college when they reflected on their interdependent values.

Highlights

  • First-generation (FG) college students face a number of challenges as they attempt to obtain a post-secondary degree

  • Compared with continuing generation (CG) college students, FG students struggle in college as they generally have higher drop-out rates, lower grades, and report more difficulty adapting to college (Terenzini et al, 1996; Pascarella et al, 2004; Sirin, 2005)

  • Stephens et al (2012a) have demonstrated that FG students face an unseen disadvantage that can be attributed to the fact that middle-class norms of independence reflected in American institutions of higher education can be experienced as threatening by many FG students who have been socialized with more interdependent values commonly espoused in working-class populations

Read more

Summary

Introduction

First-generation (FG) college students (students for whom neither parent has a 4-year degree) face a number of challenges as they attempt to obtain a post-secondary degree. In addition to the obvious social and economic barriers that FG students face, they contend with psychological challenges related to worrying about “fitting in” at college that can impair academic performance (Croizet and Claire, 1998; Ostrove and Long, 2007; Johnson et al, 2011; Smeding et al, 2013; Harackiewicz et al, 2014) This concern about fitting in or belonging in college may be a result of FG students experiencing an unintended identity threat (Stephens et al, 2012a). The present research examines this theory (cultural mismatch theory) in the understudied context of 2-year colleges and tests if a valuesaffirmation (VA) intervention (an intervention that has shown promise in addressing identity threats and belonging concerns) can be effective for FG students at these 2-year campuses

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call