This article presents results of a multiple case study involving four first-generation, working-class, white male college freshmen who discuss their perceptions of faculty support. These perceptions are analyzed using Tinto's theories of student retention, specifically as they relate to faculty-student interaction. The study found that first-generation, working-class students are intimidated by the idea of seeking out faculty for support, resulting in a lack of support from their faculty. Since Tinto's theories find a strong link between faculty support and student retention, this study suggests that colleges need to be more strategic and systematic in finding ways to develop faculty-student interactions for first-generation, working-class college students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChoyS. (2001). The condition of education, 2001. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (Publication No. 2001072). Available online at www.nces.ed.gov.
2.
CresswellJ. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
3.
JacobyB. (2000). Why involve commuter students in learning?New Directions for Higher Education, 109, 1–12.
4.
LareauA. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60, 73–85.
5.
LeeJ.SaxL.KimK. & HagedornL. (2004). Understanding students' parental education beyond first-generation status. Community College Review, 32, 1–20.
6.
LittletonR. (1998). Developmental education: Are community colleges the solution? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED414982).
7.
LohfinkM. & PaulsenH. (2005). Comparing the determinants of persistence for first-generation and continuing-generation students. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 409–428.
8.
LondonH. B. (1989). Breaking away: A study of first-generation college students and their families. American Journal of Education, 97, 144–170.
9.
Longwell-GriceR. (2003). Get a job: Working class students discuss the purpose of college. The College Student Affairs Journal, 22(2), 40–53.
10.
McDonoughP. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity. New York: State University of New York Press.
11.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12.
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). (2006). Post secondary success of first generation students. Retrieved March 20, 2008 from: www.nces.gov/.
13.
NunezA.-M. & Cuccaro-AlaminS. (1998). First generation students: Undergraduates whose parents have never enrolled in postsecondary education (NCES 98–082). U.S. Department of Education, NCES. Washington, DC. Available online at www.nces.ed.gov/.
14.
OkunB. F.FriedJ. & OkunM. (1999). Understanding diversity: A learning-as-practice primer. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
15.
PascarellaE. T. & TerenziniP. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
16.
PascarellaE. T.WolniakG.PiersonC. & TerenziniP. T. (2003). Experiences and outcomes of first generation students in community colleges. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 420–429.
17.
PhillippeK. & ValigaM. (2000). Faces of the future: A portrait of America's community college students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED439760). Retrieved March 20, 2008 from ERIC database.
18.
PiorkowskiG. K. (1983). Survivor guilt in the university setting. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 61, 620–622.
19.
RichardsonR. C.Jr. & SkinnerE. F. (1992). Helping first generation minority students achieve degrees. In ZwerlingL. S. & LondonH. B. (Eds.), First generation students: Confronting the cultural issues. New Directions for Community Colleges, 80, 29–43.
20.
SennettR. & CobbJ. (1972). The hidden injuries of class. New York: Knopf.
21.
Stanton-SalazarR. D. & DornsbuschS. M. (1999). Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school students. Sociology of Education, 68, 116–135.
22.
TerenziniP. T.SpringerL.YaegerP.PascarellaE. T. & NoraA. (1996). First generation college students: Characteristics, experiences, and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 37, 1–22.
23.
TintoV. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections on the longitudinal character of student living. The Journal of Higher Education, 59, 438–455.
24.
TintoV. (1990). Principles of effective retention. Journal of the Freshman Year Experience, 2, 35–48.
25.
TintoV. (1999). Taking retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. NACADA Journal, 19, 5–9.
