Continuing-Generation College Research Articles

Professional Identity Formation Among Diverse U.S. Medical Students: A Quantitative Analysis of the Impact of Socioeconomic Status.

Purpose: Professional identity formation (PIF) is described as “a multifactorial phenomenon, shaped by ways that clinical and non-clinical experiences, expectations and environmental factors merge with individual values, beliefs and obligations.” 1 Data suggest that students’ personal characteristics factor in the PIF process. 2,3 This study examined how socioeconomic status (SES) (measured by generation college status [first-generation college graduate (FCG) vs continuing-generation college graduate (CCG)] and household income [high vs low]) might influence PIF among a national cohort of U.S. medical students. Method: We analyzed cohort data from an existing dataset of deidentified records from the Association of American Medical Colleges Graduation Questionnaire (GQ). 4 The GQ asks 2 questions related to PIF: (1) “My medical school has done a good job of fostering and nurturing my development as a future physician” and (2) “My medical school has done a good job of fostering and nurturing my development as a person.” We used GQ data from academic years 2014–2015 and 2015–2016. Multivariate regression models explored relationships between 4 categories of students’ SES with measures of PIF, controlling for covariates such as sex and race/ethnicity. CCG status was defined as having at least 1 parent/guardian with a bachelor’s degree. FCG status was defined as students with no parent with a bachelor’s degree. Household income was determined using 2 self-reported measures of income status: receipt of state or federal financial assistance, and parental income reported on the Matriculating Student Questionnaire. 5 Students were considered low-income if they indicated that their families were recipient of state/federal financial assistance programs (e.g., Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) or if their self-reported parental income was within the lowest 2 quintiles nationally (less than $41,187 for 2014–2015 cohort, and less than $43,512 for 2015–2016 cohort). A 4-level variable SES variable was created to reflect SES: continuing-generation college graduate/high income (CCG/HI), continuing-generation college graduate/low income (CCG/LI), first-generation college graduate/high income (FCG/HI), and first-generation college graduate/low income (FCG/LI). Statistical analyses were performed using STATA16.1. Results: Of the 24,796 students in our sample, 64.4%, 20.9%, 4.2%, and 10.5% identified as CCG/HI, CCG/LI, FCG/HI, and FCG/LI, respectively. CCG/LI respondents were less likely than CCG/HI peers to report that their medical school had done a good job of fostering and nurturing their development as a person (aOR: .79, 95% CI: .74, .85) and that their medical school had done a good job of fostering and nurturing their development as a future physician (aOR: .71, 95% CI: .63, .80). Similarly, FCG/LI respondents were less likely than FCG/HI peers to report that their medical school had done a good job of fostering and nurturing their development as a person (aOR: .85, 95% CI: .78, .94) and that their medical school had done a good job of fostering and nurturing their development as a future physician (aOR: .72, 95% CI: .62, .84). No significant differences were observed between FCG/HI and CCG/HI respondents on either aspect of PIF. Discussion: Our study illuminates nuances in PIF and provides new knowledge that, regardless of college graduate generation status, students who self-identified as being from low-income backgrounds were less likely than their high-income peers to report that their medical schools were doing a good job fostering personal and professional identity formation. Significance: These results reinforce that understanding the PIF experiences of diverse groups of medical trainees is critical to advance equity. More attention must be paid to the experiences of low-income students to ensure that they are and feel supported in their professional development and leave medical school equipped to thrive in their subsequent careers.

The Formation and Role of Social Belonging in On-Campus Integration of Diverse First-Generation College Students

First-generation college students (FGCS) experience high rates of attrition compared to continuing generation college students. FGCS frequently identify with several other historically marginalized identities on college campuses. The development of a sense of belonging on-campus is one of the main drivers of retention. The current study examines how sense of belonging on-campus develops during the first-year of college for different FGCS and how attitudes about on-campus relationships evolve over time. Thirteen participants were interviewed at three time points during their first year of college. Grounded theory analysis revealed four themes: 1) higher education provides a cultural learning environment; 2) multiple factors create challenges to relationship building; 3) extreme value differences create hard limits around friendships; and 4) within group friendships provide social and psychological value. Findings extend the current literature on the importance of social belonging for retention of diverse FGCS and highlight the importance of intersectionality in this work.

The Interaction Between Generation Status and Sex on Drinking Motives and Behaviors

Participants included 483 undergraduate drinkers who were assessed on drinking motives and alcohol behaviors. Results indicated differences in coping drinking motives and alcohol-related negative consequences between first-generation college students (FGCS) and continuing generation college students (CGCS) status depended on sex. Implications for prevention and intervention efforts with FGCS are discussed.

Pushing and Pulling Emerging Adults Through College

Interview, survey, and academic transcript data with a diverse sample of first-generation college (FGC) and continuing generation college (CGC) premedical intended emerging adults are analyzed to study academic outcomes and any differences in the availability and use of social capital the first year of college. CGC students know many people with college degrees including those in careers they aspire to obtain, while FGC students do not. All students identify parents as very important forms of social capital who contribute to their success in college, but the types of support differs by educational background. Students whose parents have at least a bachelor’s degree (CGC) are “pulled” through their first year with specific advice from their parents about how to succeed in college, while FGC students are “pushed” by their parents with support. In addition, CGC students display evidence of enacting Lareau’s concept of concerted cultivation, being much more likely than FGC students to approach and gain assistance from professors, openly critiquing those professors and classes in which they are not doing well and showing a sense of entitlement to and confidence in their ability to stay on the premedical track, even when receiving low test scores.