Research Concept Matrix

Article

Addressing the Sophomore Slump: First-Generation College Students’ Completion of Year Two of Study in a Rural Bachelor’s Degree Granting College

Davina Capik 1

and Matthew Shupp 1

Abstract

There is limited research on the experiences of first-generation students who have

completed their second year and enrolled for a third year in order to continue their

studies even though this population of students are the most likely to drop out of

college in their second year. The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand

how current first-generation college students, who are enrolled or completed the

second semester of their sophomore year, experience college as a first-generation

student and made the decision to persist toward completing their bachelor’s degree.

Through first-hand accounts of participants’ experiences of their time at the univer-

sity, this study highlights what factors students contributed to their persistence

toward graduation. The findings have the potential to facilitate a deeper understand-

ing of what stakeholders working with first-generation college students can do to

assist in retention efforts of this population.

1 Department of Counseling and College Student Personnel, Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania,

Shippensburg, United States

Corresponding Author:

Davina Capik, Department of Counseling and College Student Personnel, Shippensburg University of

Pennsylvania, 1871 Old Main Drive, Shippensburg, PA 17257, United States.

Email: [email protected]

Journal of College Student Retention:

Research, Theory & Practice

0(0) 1–25

! The Author(s) 2021 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/15210251211014868

journals.sagepub.com/home/csr

Keywords

first-generation, persistence, sophomore slump, retention

Introduction

Retention of first-generation college students, those whose parents do not

have a college education, has been a recent focus for higher education insti-

tutions nationwide due to the many challenges this population faces (Banning,

2014; Bui & Rush, 2016; D’Amico & Dika, 2013; Frogg�e & Woods, 2018; Hicks, 2003; Ishitani, 2016). Although this group of students make up a large

portion of the college student population, more than one third, they often

experience many difficulties that differ from their continuing-generation peers

during their time in college (Banning, 2014; Frogg�e & Woods, 2018; Hicks, 2003; McCarron & Inkelas, 2006). Due to college retention efforts being a

primary goal of institutions of higher education, it is important for college

student personnel to understand why students may not reach degree comple-

tion, especially those students who are first in their families to attend college.

Factors such as lower socioeconomic status, ethnicity, family college attain-

ment, and high school academic opportunities marginalized high school grad-

uates in accessing quality higher education compared to their continuing-

generation peers. First-generation college students enrolled in post-secondary education has

been declining over the last two decades. Between 1999-2000 and 2011-2012

the number of first-generation students decreased from 37% to 33% of students

enrolling. This troublesome statistic necessitates understanding the disadvan-

tages that first-generation college students experience in comparison to their

continuing generation peers and may be the first step in assisting these students

and providing stakeholders with the tools needed to aid in retention. According to Engle and Tinto (2008) in a Pell Institute study, first-generation

students lack the academic requirements that will aid in success in completion of

their first semester. For example, only 6% of first-generation students complete

an advanced-level math course such as calculus compared to their continuing-

generation peers who complete at 18% according to statistics from the Center

for First-Generation Student Success (RTI International, 2019). Moreover, high

school graduates who do graduate from a more rigorous academic, college-

ready preparation program, are not enrolling in 4-year bachelor’s programs

but instead opt for community colleges despite their academic qualifications

(Pham & Keenan, 2011). Pham and Keenan attributed this to the limited

college-readiness resources available to first-generation high school graduates

and their families.

2 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Review of Literature

There is limited research on the experiences of first-generation students who have completed their second year and enroll for a third year in order to continue their studies even though this population of students are most likely to drop out of college in their second year. According to Ishitani (2016), first-generation college students are approximately 80% more likely to drop out of college during their second year of study compared to students of the same year who have one or both parents that are college graduates. Less is known about the second (sophomore) year of college retention than any other point of study even though the National Student Clearinghouse reported that out of the Fall 2009 cohort only 50.8% of students returned for their junior year of college across all higher education institutions (Hall, 2017).

Colleges all across America are seeking ways to increase retention and com- pletion rates among their 4-year bachelor’s programs by adding courses to better prepare students for college and thereafter (Eichelberger et al., 2019). However, outcomes of these programs are often not tracked leaving higher education personnel unaware of what may or may not have been attributed to possible retention of these students (Whitford, 2018). One notion, however, points to the idea of “grit” or the perseverance and passion for achieving long-term goals (Almedia et al., 2019). An individual exhibiting grit approaches accomplishment as a marathon with the resilience, self-discipline, and perseverance needed to be successful (Bashant, 2014; Duckworth et al., 2007). Students who successfully complete college require a sense of motivation, personal desire and social capital to continue their studies despite perceived setbacks. This is especially true of first-generation college students (Almedia et al., 2019).

Many times, first-generation college students believe they are less prepared to attend college than their peers whose parent(s) have attended college, which contributes to feelings of lower self-confidence, discomfort around the admis- sion process, and lack of leadership skills (Banks-Santilli, 2014). Gahagan and Hunter (2006) branded college sophomores as the middle children as they receive the least amount of support and attention from college staff than any other class even though they are at the highest risk for leaving college. At many institutions it is commonplace to support students in their first-year such as first-year expe- rience seminars and orientations, which leaves second year students feeling left out and oftentimes unsupported even though this is the most challenging year for all college students due to the increased academic demands, higher stand- ards, and intensified curriculum (Lee & Leonard, 2009; Sanchez-Leguelinel, 2008). This lack of support, along with the pressures of the increased demands, may lead to the first-generation college student experiencing what is known as the “sophomore slump” (Jordan, 2011, p. 1). The sophomore slump has been identified as the leading cause of attrition in the second year, also coined the forgotten year (Sterling, 2018). Understanding the various experiences of

Capik and Shupp 3

the retained student population can better assist future first-generation college

students with successful transitions from high school to completion of a 4-year

degree in higher education. There are several factors that align with whether the

first-generation college student either does not register for courses or does not

go on to degree completion yet there is still a gap in the research on the second

to third year matriculation. The purpose of this qualitative study was to under-

stand how current first-generation college students, who are enrolled or com-

pleted the second semester of their sophomore year, experience college as a first-

generation student and made the decision to persist toward completing their

bachelor’s degree.

High School Supports

Students who have more support, directly related to aiding first-generation col-

lege goers throughout their high school career, results in higher levels of college

applicants upon graduation (Engle & Tinto, 2008). Unfortunately, in most high

schools across the United States, school counselor to student ratios are well

above the American School Counselor Association and the National

Association for College Admission Counseling recommended ratios which

makes the time to provide the individual student support necessary for success

almost impossible to achieve. Through the application of the social capital

theory approach, the preparation and counseling students receive in high

school plays a large impact on the students’ desire to attend college.

Furthermore, a high school counselor’s knowledge and ability to assist those

who may not understand the college admission process will reduce the

number of students not feeling as though college is a choice for them (Pham

& Keenan, 2011). There is often confusion about the process of college admissions, however,

understanding how to finance their education and the terminology associated

with the application process is also deemed a difficult task (Dockery, 2012).

Challenges first-generation students reported included academic preparation,

access to college information, college application process, college selection,

financial issues, and college engagement. According to Dockery (2012), the fam-

ilies and parents of these students many times are not equipped to assist their

children with higher education access and preparation. School counseling strat-

egies for each of the aforementioned issues were included as part of a review and

presented to counseling students and college personnel.

Academic and Familial Factors

Many continuing-generation college students receive information about college

from their family members who can communicate about the college culture and

what it is like being a college student while first-generation college students often

4 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

do not have these connections (Davis, 2012). In addition, communication of

college culture for continuing-generation students begins early in the students’

academic career (Davis, 2012). Therefore, students who have family support,

early in their school careers, are more likely to enroll in college and persist to

graduation (Bui & Rush, 2016). Unfortunately, many first-generation students

are likely to report less support from their families for attending college

(Covarrubias & Fryberg, 2014; Thayer, 2000). Even as early as eighth grade, students who had parents who took an active

role in their child’s academic achievement became interested in going to college

and sought out college information (Choy, 2001). However, whether or not a

student actively enrolls in postsecondary education is strongly related to

parents’ education even when other factors such as academic success, financial

impact and resilience are taken into account. High school grades as well as other academic measures such as standardized

tests, have been recognized as one of the most reliable predictors of academic

achievement and college persistence (Allen et al., 2008; Hoffman & Lowitzi,

2005; Stewart et al., 2018). However, first-generation students are likely to

enter college with less academic preparation and have limited access to infor-

mation about the college experience, either first-hand or from relatives (Thayer,

2000; Whitley et al., 2018). Oftentimes, family characteristics and pre-college academic performance are

attributed to a first-year college student being placed in remedial courses which

is the fate for many first-generation college students (Stewart et al., 2018).

Raphael and Kushman (2009) found statistical results that showed there is a

consistent association between completing higher level courses, mainly in math

and science, and positive postsecondary outcomes in their research on first-year

college students. Unfortunately, Tibbetts et al. (2016) found when neither parent

has attended a 4-year college, the students tend to not perform as well academ-

ically and feel concerned about whether or not they belong in college compared

to their peers who have at least one parent who attended college. First genera-

tion college students may find themselves academically underprepared when

they attend college as well as accruing higher educational costs and feelings of

disconnect with the college going culture. Researchers found familial factors are particularly difficult for all first-

generation college students as first-generation college students feel guilty

about educational achievements when their family members did not seek

higher education (Covarrubias et al., 2015). These students often experience

an additional barrier to attending college named “family achievement guilt”

(p. 2031). Family achievement guilt is described as a discrepancy between the

opportunities available to students and those available to non-college educated

family members (Cloyd, 2019; Covarrubias & Fryberg, 2014; Covarrubias et al.,

2015; Thayer, 2000).

Capik and Shupp 5

College life presents various new ideas, beliefs, and values, many of which may differ from what the student experienced in their family life and motives that students have for attending college, according to Dennis et al. (2005), are influenced by cultural values. During their college years first-generation college

students are transitioning from their interdependent to independent lives, which for some may cause distress due to the familial and communal values (Cloyd, 2019; Covarrubias et al., 2015).

Financial Factors

Rising costs of higher education make the dream of completing a 4-year degree nearly impossible for many students in the United States who come from lower socioeconomic status (Banks-Santilli, 2014; Pham & Keenan, 2011). First- generation college students receive less help from their parents in applying to

college and are more likely not to receive help from their high schools (Choy, 2001). Barriers such as having to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), not being able to understand financial terminology, unaware of the financial assistance and financial aid programs available to

them, as well as financial regulations are some of the factors contributing to those whose parents cannot assist with the college planning process. Ishitani concluded that students who experience financial struggles, familial and person- al, that continue throughout their entire higher education career is an obstacle in

student retention of first-generation students. Ishitani stated that family income is a factor significantly associated with student dropout rates. First-generation college students often need financial assistance with funding college. When a first-generation student receives loans to fund education, they have a higher

dropout rate or a longer path to graduation than those who received aid such as grants and scholarships. The amount of financial assistance received also influences the timing of departure. For instance, the higher award the more likely the student will persist to graduation. In addition, first-generation student

involvement in work study programs also promoted timely graduation as stu- dents felt a connection to the school environment (Ishitani, 2006).

Guiding Framework

Student persistence and retention is one of the most researched areas in higher education with its origins dating back to the 1600s (Demetriou & Schmitz- Sciborski, 2011; Tinto, 2006). More than one-fourth of students entering a 4-

year college depart by the conclusion of their first year leading to a growing interest in the areas of attrition and retention (Tillman, 2002). This research has mainly been targeted to first-year college attrition, with lesser studies on persis- tence in the second year of study. As a result of the first-year focus on retention,

transition programs were implemented in colleges and universities to add

6 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

student support systems and courses to address the needs of the first-year stu- dent. Recently, there has been a growing interest in retention efforts beyond the first year and how to continue these supports in order to meet the unique needs of the second-year college student experiencing the sophomore slump (Sterling, 2018).

Noel-Levitz (2013) reported that many of the challenges experienced by first- generation students included the absence of social capital to aid in transitions. Research suggested that due to lack of social support during the high school to college transition and beyond, students are often left feeling lost in the process and not confident in their decisions.

Social capital theory posits that students gain benefits such as institutional resources, required information, and support through their social networks to achieve success in higher education (Almedia et al., 2019). This is especially true for first-generation students who often lack these supports. Tinto (2012) sup- ported the belief that the lack of social capital would lead to dissatisfaction with college life and decrease in college graduation rates among first-year students. Tinto’s (1975, 1990) model for college attrition has been a long-standing model of student departure. The model theorizes that students who are socially inte- grated into the campus community are more committed to their programs and therefore, more likely to graduate. The model of college attrition has trans- formed over the past 35 years to include motivational variables and goal com- mitment as well as academic self-concept (Demetriou & Schmitz-Sciborski, 2011). For instance, Pascarella (1982) found that various measures of Tinto’s (1975) concepts of both social and academic involvement in college showed significant indications of whether or not students would be persistent in their programs or drop out. Concluding that students come to college with a range of background characteristics and goals that influence their college decisions and performance (Stewart et al., 2018). Therefore, applying this model to the second- year student by comparing indicators of sophomore slump to factors of first- generation college student obstacles can present a clearer picture of 4-year stu- dent retention among this population.

A more recent philosophy, Schaller’s theory of sophomore student develop- ment, has also become widely used to explore sophomore students who are entering a critical period for identity development (Sterling, 2018). Schaller (2005) concluded that second-year college students move through four stages of development in various times of their lives as they try to define themselves, their purpose, and relationships. If a student can progress successfully through these various stages, the result will be a successful collegiate experience with a higher commitment to their studies and the institution. Each stage of Schaller’s (2005) theory of student development offers a frame of reference for understand- ing the experiences and needs of second-year students in regard to the interper- sonal and intrapersonal changes that occur while they are attending their sophomore year of college. The stage of random exploration takes place

Capik and Shupp 7

during the first year and involves a combination of excitement and lack of reflection. Students in this stage are less concerned about future decision making but more concerned with becoming involved with their new environ-

ment. Another stage, focused exploration, is where students become self- evaluative, self-critical, and responsible. By the end of their second year of study, all students should be in the next stage, tentative choice (Schaller, 2005;

Sterling, 2018). In this stage sophomores should have a definitive picture of their future and feel a sense of responsibility for themselves and their personal academ- ics. They begin to test the choices they made during the focused exploration stage.

Lastly, during the commitment stage, sophomores complete their transition; how- ever, very few sophomores make it to this stage (Schaller, 2005). If students struggle with navigating the stages—random exploration, focused exploration,

tentative choice, and commitment—they are unlikely to fulfill their responsibilities and become disconnected with the college (Sterling, 2018). This disconnect may

lead to students dropping out of their college program.

Methodology

A qualitative research design through the use of narrative inquiry was utilized as a means to explore a deeper understanding of the experiences of first-generation college students and how students perceive their lived experiences contributed to

their persistence toward completing their bachelor’s program thus far Narrative Inquiry design was chosen because it provided a deep understanding of the human experience (Hays & Singh, 2012).

Sample

Student participants (N ¼ 10) were selected based on their current enrollment status at a rural bachelor’s degree granting institution in Pennsylvania.

The number of participants was chosen based on Creswell and Poth’s (2013) selection guidelines on effective qualitative data gathering based on the desire to maximize data. This allowed the researcher to gain full insight into student’s

personal perceptions through collection of themes to interpret the narrative’s meaning. Researchers such as Creswell (1998, 2005, 2014), Emmel (2013), and Morse (1994) have suggested that qualitative studies seek richness in data to

convey personal experiences in a phenomenological study. Unlike quantitative research which requires large samples, qualitative research involves a smaller sample of participants. For phenomenological studies the recommended sample

size is three to 10 with extensive detail being gained from each participant (Creswell & Poth, 2013).

Participants enrolled in the second semester of their second year of study or greater, within their respective programs, were eligible to participate in this

study. Students considered bachelor’s enrolled transfer or international students

8 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

were not eligible to participate in this study. All participants must have enrolled

in or completed at least 48 credits entering into their second semester of their

sophomore year to be potential participant and had to be actively attending the

university as a full-time student at the time of interviewing. Description data of

each participant are included in Table 1.

Research Protocol

A semi-structured narrative guide consisting of 10 open-ended questions was

utilized. Participants were asked to openly discuss their perceptions of their

time at their university, as well as past experiences pertaining to their transi-

tion from high school to college. Using open-ended prompts, participants were

given the opportunity to offer their perspectives without being guided in such

a way that could appear to sanction a particular response. This is a critical

aspect of narrative inquiry to ensure researcher neutrality (Mehra, 2002).

Moreover, the researcher was given an opportunity to gaze into the students’

perspective in its entirety. This study took place via web interviews at a loca-

tion of the participants’ choice. Although it was suggested that face-to-face

dialog is ideal when conducting interviews, web-based interviews through the

ZOOM video conferencing platform were conducted due to extreme cases such

as participants not being able to be on campus due to a campus wide shut

down, which was an unforeseen barrier to conducting face-to-face meetings.

As with all decisions about interview methods, thoughtful and careful consid-

eration around contexts of the interviewer and participant occurred and the

type of interview was congruent with the research question and objectives of

the study (Oltmann, 2016). All discussions were recorded using NVivo com-

puter software (QSR International, 2020) to gain first-person accounts of

their experiences. NVivo is a qualitative data analysis program designed

for qualitative research and used for reviewing and analyzing rich text

Table 1. Participant Descriptions.

Pseudonym College major

Cumulative GPA at

time of study

Alice Education 3.818

CiCi Accounting 3.318

David Social work 3.283

Fred Engineering 2.169

Jack Education 3.922

Jennifer Chemistry 3.953

Katie Education 3.616

Robin English as a second language 3.617

Capik and Shupp 9

through searching for combinations in texts or patterns in coding information (Bandara, 2006).

First-person accounts of lived experiences allowed for the researcher to inter- pret meaning of participant feedback and derive themes from the data. Following data collection and review of questionnaires and recordings, partic- ipants were contacted by email for follow-up if any clarification of responses were necessary.

Analysis

Transcripts of all narrative inquiry sessions were reviewed and bracketed. All questions centered around the student’s time being the first in their family to pursue higher education and attend a 4-year university. The Zoom meeting platform was used for all 10 narrative inquiries and all interviews were recorded via Zoom on the researcher’s personal cellular phone using the Otter phone application recorder (Otter.ai, 2020). As a means of ensuring trustworthiness, Otter recordings were utilized as an additional step to record and transcribe if it were necessary to verify any questionable NVivo transcription. Due to the pos- itive outcome of all transcriptions, Otter review was not used, and narratives were immediately uploaded onto the researcher’s password protected home computer. Once uploaded, all files were permanently deleted from any and all recording devices.

All participants were notified that their responses were recorded and tran- scribed. The investigator also informed participants that handwritten note taking occurred. The researcher reviewed all recordings and Zoom interviews and uploaded them into NVivo transcription software. The NVivo program allowed for the transcription from voice-to-text which allowed for easier review. The researcher reviewed all text transcriptions and compared them to voice transcription and field notes. Errors were corrected within the written transcriptions. The researcher then assessed all final transcriptions completely and thoroughly for accuracy before coding for the selection of emerging themes.

Ensuring goodness in the study was paramount throughout the process and this was accomplished in numerous ways. First, the researcher ensured that the narrative of personal reactions and opinions regarding literature and interview feedback was limited through the use of recording detailed field notes. As themes arose bracketing was utilized to identify and isolate any personal assumptions or preconceptions that may have interfered with the research pro- cess. Bracketing allowed for the isolation of reported information without the interference of researcher bias and assumptions (Hays & Singh, 2012).

Member checking is another way to ensure trustworthiness and what is at the core of high-quality qualitative research (Birt et al., 2016; Candela, 2019). Member-checking also offers the participant a place where they can offer more in-depth data through offering a place of openness, reciprocity, and

10 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

equality (Candela, 2019). It may reduce the potential for researcher bias by

actively involving the research participants in checking and confirming the

results (Birt et al., 2016). Member checking during the transcription stage was

applied to ensure themes that emerged were accurate. The participants were

given the opportunity to address whether or not the transcripts accurately por-

trayed their experiences or whether they felt it did not represent them or por-

trayed them in a negative way. Parts of the transcripts that were deemed

inaccurate or negative were discussed to decide if the participants wished to

have the negative or non-factual parts deleted or clarified. All participants completed and signed an informed consent letter using pro-

tected online documentation signature software, DocHub (2020). DocHub

securely offered each participant the opportunity to review and sign the

informed consent safely through providing their digital signature and obtaining

a copy of consent for their records.

Findings

After thorough analysis of the data, five themes emerged and are discussed

below.

Students’ Grit and Internal Drive Toward Attaining a Bachelor’s Degree

A report by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology (2013) identified grit, among additional non-cognitive factors, as

critical for success in the 21st century, even beyond test scores and intelligence.

According to Duckworth et al. (2007), grit necessitates working tirelessly toward

challenges, maintaining effort and interest over years despite failure, adversity,

and plateaus in progress. Duckworth et al.’s (2007) focus on grit thrusted the

concept into the spotlight for all students, including first-generation college

students. Therefore, the “gritter” the student, the more successful in reaching

long-term goals when coupled with supportive individuals. Participants in this study reported that their persistence and perseverance to

stay the course toward reaching their goal—graduating—contributed to their

motivation to succeed. Participant responses to narrative inquiry displayed the

concept of grit on many occasions throughout the study. For example, one

participant, Jack, displayed grit when he stated,

A lot of it was just kind of initiated myself. I was very stressed. Just did what I had

to do to get through the course. I would always try very hard . . . whenever I had a

big problem, I would try to go to office hours to talk through it. Keep focused on

the end goal . . . find a way to renew yourself every year. And sometimes you just

kind of have to take a leap on your own and find a way to make it work.

Capik and Shupp 11

This display of grit and persistence along with college student personnel readily available to the participant facing adversity provided the intrinsic motivation necessary to persist.

Importance of Understanding and the Involvement in College Life

As stated previously, first-generation students struggle to academically and socially fit into the college environment (Chen, 2005; Pascarella et al., 2004). Similarly, study participants reported that they felt somewhat out-of-place and lacked the social capital to understand what college life entails. Without depen- dence on other family members who previously experienced college culture, students turned to their innate personal desire for connection to find ways to unite with others. Many have contributed this personal desire as their persis- tence toward completing their degree.

The importance of connecting with college life was evident in the responses toward college graduation persistence. This desire to seek out social capital has been a topic of focus for past studies on first-generation college student reten- tion. As early as 1975, Tinto sought to gather insight as to characteristics stu- dents possess when entering college which either influences their persistence or departure through the model of student persistence. Oftentimes, first-generation college students arrive in the higher education system with certain expectations but quickly find themselves struggling to figure out where and how to integrate into college (Tinto, 1975). This uncertainty was evidenced by Talia’s report where it was difficult to figure out college life.

It was kind of a struggle at first to figure out, like, everything. To figure out how

college worked was complicated. Like it’s very different. So, it was kind of a whole

new world, just figuring out how different professors work every year. It’s so

different and just everything that comes with college. It was just interesting to

figure it all out. And I know some of my friends, they didn’t have the experience,

so they just went completely crazy . . . it was just like interesting to see everyone

figure out college in a different way because we didn’t know what college was like.

Talia continued to offer suggestions to future first-generation college students to better assist them with figuring out the “newness” of the college experience. Talia stated, “I say for those students who don’t know what they want to do yet, just to take the time and kind of figure it out by using university resources.”

This account necessitates the importance of communication of resources that are available to incoming students so that a new student does not feel the same uneasiness that Talia experienced with navigating the college culture. Higher edu- cation professionals should take heed of what students such as Talia are suggest- ing. Furthermore, not only communicating these resources to first-year first- generation college students, but also continue to identify their needs and address

12 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

what it is that maintains retention rates among this second-year population.

Successful transitioning of first-generation college students from year-to-year is

needed to develop a strong sense of understanding and belonging (Sterling, 2018). Most of the participants dialogued about their desire to understand and be an

active member of the campus community. College culture and finding their place

within the community was reported by many of the interviewees. Some of what

they reported is as follows. Jack said, “I definitely didn’t feel like, in touch with

the college culture. I struggled to get involved outside of that. Like my freshman

year, I joined some, like, clubs and stuff like that.” Overall, first-hand accounts of feeling welcomed by groups or individuals

whom they had a similar connection had proved to be a critical element in

their desire to become immersed in the college culture. Therefore, it is evident

that this connection to the campus culture supports college retention efforts.

Importance of Identifying Personal Campus Connections

Consistent with Tinto’s model of college attrition which posits that social capital

is an important variable in whether a student decides to complete their college

program. Longwell-Grice and Longwell-Grice (2007) indicated first-generation

students did not always seek out faculty for support for several reasons. Some

students felt the need to be able to do the work autonomously, while others felt

intimidated approaching faculty. Therefore, it was interesting to find a connec-

tion between the first-generation student and interactions with faculty, staff, and

other campus connections supplied additional confirmation to student reten-

tion. Having a mentor at the institution, especially when a student is identified

as first-generation, provided the students with someone they could rely on for

answering questions and assimilating into college culture in a non-threatening

way. When asked about any individuals whom she identifies as being an influ-

ence on her, like many, CiCi pointed out the professors who she credits with

helping her persist to her goal of completing an accounting degree. Cici stated I very heavily relied on a lot of my professors to answer questions. I mean, there

were some things that I found out I didn’t find out about my major until I was

already at [the university] for an accounting major. I relied very heavily on my

professors to kind of guide me through a lot of things that I had no experience in.

Meeting with the professors in their department and getting a feeling, you know,

create relationships with them and get a feeling for what kind of professors they are. Seeking out and identifying college personnel with whom they could foster rela-

tionships with was a common sentiment among many students identified as the first

in their families to pursue college. Many of those interviewed did not express strong

relationships with staff at their high school when asked about their high school

supports, most were very forthcoming with the satisfaction they felt with the con-

nections they maintain with college personnel. This is a crucial indicator for the need

Capik and Shupp 13

for identification and advisement training for college personnel as well as for high

schools to look at the gaps in their counseling and advising programs.

Significance of Financial Understanding and Responsibility

Navigating the financial complications regarding the college admissions process

was reported as a barrier to first-generation college retention in past studies by

various researchers including Banks-Santilli (2014), Pham and Keenan (2011),

and Ishitani (2006). In this study, interviewees reiterated the need for education

and preparation pertaining to financing college. Addressing adequate financial

preparation for college is beneficial for students seeking a bachelor’s degree to

alleviate the pitfalls they may find themselves facing. For example, paying con-

siderably more for education if they do not have the understanding of FAFSA

completion, how to find and apply for scholarships, and the “ins and outs’’ to

financial aid including timeframes and language. In addition, poor planning

academically and financially could be costly for those students who complete

their bachelor’s degree in 5-6 years compared to a traditional 4-year plan.

Consistent with many other studies, financing college for the first-generation

college student indicated the lack of parental knowledge of the terms and pro-

cesses related to financial aid and its complexities is limiting to many (Choy,

2001; Thayer, 2000; Whitley et al., 2018). This lack of family knowledge was

conveyed in the following responses. Talia expressed,

It was kind of a struggle at first to figure out, like, everything and figure out how to

pay for everything. I mean, it helped that I had like my older brother as someone to

look up to but like to fill out financial aid and all of that stuff, but kind of more

complicated and to figure out how college worked was complicated.

Importance of Family Support Systems

Lack of family support has been cited as a major factor of first-generation college

students choosing to apply to or discontinue their education (Covarrubias &

Fryberg, 2014; Thayer, 2000). Factors such as family achievement guilt or a lack

of parental involvement in the planning process, and the absence of encouragement

have been attributed to lack of first-generation college student persistence. Students

often felt that they fractured family relationships when they lost commonality with

ones they were closest to once they enrolled in college (Sterling, 2015). Inconsistent with previous studies, the researcher found that students reported

being highly satisfied with the level of family support they received with their

decision to pursue a 4-year degree. This is important information for high school

and college student personnel with planning their retention efforts at bachelor’s

degree granting institutions. Studies such as the one conducted by Mitchall and

14 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Jaeger (2018) found that the higher level of family involvement led to higher reten- tion efforts of first-year students. Participants interviewed in this study were also first-generation college students pursuing a 4-year degree and found similar results.

David offered his feelings of surprise when he told of wanting to pursue a college degree,

My mom and my stepdad, they’ve been very, very supportive. I thought initially

my mom might be a little mad, about it, but I think initially she was, maybe in the

first year or two. But then when she saw how serious I was about it, I knew that it

wasn’t just a passing whim.

Other participants reported entire support systems encouraging them to enroll in their bachelor’s program. This was the experience for Talia, “My family was very supportive. My parents, and my house parents at [a Pennsylvania private boarding school].” And Fred offered this sentiment regarding the support he felt from various members of his family when they learned of the choice to pursue higher education, “I live with my mom right now. Big support. Both my sisters were very ecstatic when learning I was going back to school. My mom’s family, her brothers and sisters, are very supportive.” Family support proved to be an indicator of student persistence throughout the study.

Implications and Recommendations

Improving college retention rates among the first-generation college student population continues to be a top priority for college student personnel (Gallup, 2016; Mitchall & Jaeger, 2018). Amid more first-generation college students desire to attain a bachelor’s degree, understanding factors attributing to persistence toward their goal and what stakeholders can do to assist is crucial for students to remain unwavering toward graduation. Moving away from def- icit models previously used (Tierney, 1999; Zervas-Adsitt, 2017), this study cen- tered on the experiences of achievement through overcoming those barriers. Therefore, this study makes several important contributions to the understand- ing of why first-generation college students who succeed beyond the first year of study persist past the second semester of year two.

It is known that all sophomore college students enter a critical period for identity development (Sterling, 2018). The second-year college students move through four stages of sophomore development—“random exploration, focused exploration, tentative choices, and commitment” (Sterling, 2015, p. 17). They struggle to define themselves, their purpose, and relationships (Schaller, 2005). As gathered from the feedback gained through dialog, first-generation students not only experience these phenomena, there are also additional barriers to suc- cess that their continuing-generation peers do not realize. Therefore, what one learns from these accounts will better inform stakeholders who work with first-

Capik and Shupp 15

generation sophomore students by providing them with the tools to support students through the stages, leading to better outcomes.

There remains a critical need for colleges and universities to provide the second-year student with as much attention and access to programs connecting to campus culture as a first-year student receives. Student support groups, mentoring, academic assistance, and family involvement opportunities can lead to higher retention rates among first-generation cohorts.

Integrating programs such as mentoring first-generation students and their families in order to navigate college culture including financial aid, higher edu- cation vernacular, as well as creation of programs to support first-generation college students beyond the first year will create a sense of belongingness as well as aid in retention of this student population. Furthermore, these initiatives will foster grit and motivation proven to contribute to success in higher education.

This research study generated findings that have implications for future matriculation and retainment of the first-generation college student population beyond the first year of study. For some time, higher education institutions have functioned as though the transitioning and support received during the first year would effectively address their needs in subsequent years (Sterling, 2018). This is not the case as there is an emerging interest in efforts on retention beyond the first year of college.

Highlighting first-hand accounts of what contributed to persistence toward graduation, stakeholders are provided with recommendations for the implemen- tation of new methods to assist with retention and improve on best practices. These recommendations include the need for mentoring beyond the first year, educating staff and faculty on the unique characteristics of the first-generation college student, opportunities for family involvement on campus that includes both informational and social needs and opportunities for high school and higher education partnerships to better prepare first-generation students and their families.

Limitations and Future Research

This research was conducted through the lens of Schaller’s (2005) sophomore development theory and the sophomore slump. Further research on these two phenomena is encouraged as research on progressing through the second year of study is still in its infancy. Further research on considering how various demo- graphic groups of students may move through the stages of development in different ways, and at various timeframes, would be especially beneficial while examining the impact of stressors on sophomore student persistence.

For this research, first-generation participants were identified based on parent’s level of education. Participants are currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree while neither parent has an earned bachelor’s degree. This does not assure that students identified to participate may have an older sibling or

16 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

other family member living in the home who has pursued a college education. In this regard, participants could have attained some knowledge about the college going culture though this channel resulting in a higher level of social capital. Future studies should take into account the impact of family member exposure to higher education and how this may influence college retention among those students whom neither parent earned a bachelor’s degree.

Although there are several similarities recognized among the first-generation student cohort it is important to note that this population is not homogenous (Longwell-Grice, 2016). For this study, the researcher did not collect participant demographic information pertaining to age, ethnicity, or reported gender. Since this research sought to learn what factors that guided first-generation sophomore (or beyond) to persist toward graduation, it was assumed that participants’ unique experiences would be expressed without taking into account intersection- ality of the individual and how that may affect their experiences. Future research- ers seeking to include a wider range of participants could include age, sex, gender, and race, which would offer more robust and inclusive dialog as well as how intersectionality among participants attributed to their experiences.

The number of participants for this particular study was chosen based on Creswell and Poth’s (2013) five approaches to a qualitative study in determina- tion of the samplesize. This sample size falls within the recommended guidelines for phenomenological studies and are consistent with previous educational stud- ies seeking to learn about students reported experiences (Guetterman, 2015), however, the small sample size of 10 participants may have contributed to an even narrower view of experiences. It is suggested that future studies include a larger sample size with a greater extent of demographic information collected.

With an increased need for technology due to Covid-19, the Zoom meeting platform is widely used today as a means of face-to-face dialog. As with any technology, it is not without flaws. With the increased demand for technology, there is also the risk for malfunction. During a few of the narrative inquiries, communication was interrupted by faltering technology due to a loss of signal or disconnection. This technological interruption would not present itself in face-to- face conversation. It is unknown if face-to-face inquiry would lead to a more robust narrative among parties. As with the use of any technology, there was a risk of malfunction. Although, there were very minimal occurrences during the 10 interviews, on two occasions, feedback became inaudible at an isolated timeframe.

The risk of privacy among parties was also a concern. Using an online plat- form, the researcher could not control for participant location. Thus, the risk of others within the location may have been privy to what was discussed during the narratives. Furthermore, this lack of privacy may have contributed to the par- ticipant not being fully engaged and feeling vulnerable. Therefore, recreating this study in person is recommended.

In addition, the researcher did not control for grade point average among participants. The 10 participants who responded to the recruitment email earned

Capik and Shupp 17

a mean GPA of 3.373 which is an equivalent of a Bþ letter grade at the uni- versity. This particular demographic information was not initially a focus on

recruitment to participate; however, the high GPAs were of significance once

this information was collected. Two participants fell below the mean GPA and

regardless of their lower to average scores, outcomes of what was found to help

students persist was not impacted in this study. However, it should be noted that the researcher is aware that this higher

academic group may have shown greater motivation to actively participate as

well as felt more confident in talking about their experiences. In a recent study

by Farruggia et al. (2018), it was suggested that higher academic achievement

may be attributed to student determination to reaching their college going goal;

therefore, their internal motivation may have far outweighed the perceived

obstacles. In the context of this study, when participants spoke of their chal-

lenges, having earned better grades may have contributed to a positive view of

their experiences at the university. In future studies, a larger range of grade

point averages may produce a deeper understanding of student experiences. Characteristics of the first-generation student barriers to success have

remained steady over time. Studies, such as the current one, have taken place

at various institutions that usually focused experiences of the first year. This

study was conducted at a rural, small state funded university and interested in

students beyond their first year of study. This location may not be universal to

what first-generation college students may be experiencing at a larger or urban

institution. Additionally, transfer students can also be sophomores if they have

not gotten the opportunity to participate in first-year programs. There is room

for research to understand the needs of transfer students who could be classified

as sophomores. Comparative studies from different 4-year institutions, 2-year

institutions, and not-for-profit institutions are other areas of opportunity that

could provide more insight into what sophomore’s experience. Lastly, further studies on grit among first-generation college student persistence

would allow stakeholders to benefit from what first-generation college students

attribute to barriers and deficits but instead focus on what attributes to a “gritty”

sophomore student. Past research places focus on the deficits which have general-

ized negative assumptions about academic, cultural, and social capital (Zervas-

Adsitt, 2017). It would be more beneficial to examine the forms of resilience that

successful students, like the ones in the current study, draw on to manage the

demands of college. In particular, based on what students in this study shared, a

more proactive support program could provide future models for the kinds of all-

inclusive, culturally sensitive, and supportive advisement that students receive.

Recreating this study in a larger and more diverse student population, separate

from a rural location, may provide dissimilar results and should be considered.

Moreover, sampling from various intersecting identities would allow for a clearer

representation of what situations first-generation college sophomores face.

18 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Conclusion

This study brings attention to the grit and tenacity displayed by 10 first- generation college students in their pursuit toward reaching their goal of earning a bachelor’s degree. The bachelor’s level participants shared several factors that they felt contributed to their persistence including college personnel relation- ships, family, and involvement in the college culture.

Traditionally, first-generation college students are faced with a myriad of possible obstructions to 4-year degree completion (Banning, 2014; Bui & Rush, 2016; D’Amico & Dika, 2013; Frogg�e & Woods, 2018; Hicks, 2003; Ishitani, 2016). In recent years, first-generation students’ obstacles to success have been studied using deficit models as a framework to identify and address at-risk populations (Tierney, 1999; Zervas-Adsitt, 2017). These deficit models focus more on what barriers present themselves rather than what strengths exist (Zervas-Adsitt, 2017). Retention efforts among the second year of study become even more challenging (Sterling, 2015) as explained by the sophomore slump phenomena and Schaller’s (2005) student development theories. Students in their second year of study are often labeled as forgotten due to the discontinu- ation of supports that were in place when they arrived in higher education institutions. However, as reported in the current study’s results, first- generation college student narratives encompassed recollections of grit, self- motivation, resilience, and the willingness to seek information as well as stories of personal determination to overcome the sophomore slump and persist toward their goals. The students desire for goal attainment was supported by developing the personal skills necessary for success.

Current study outcomes indicate the first two years in college are critical for predicting persistence at 4-year institutions (Stewart et al., 2018). Nevertheless, more research on the factors to first-generation college student persistence toward completion beyond the first year is still at its infancy. Higher education institutions typically invest heavily in student programs that target the first year of study in order to promote student perseverance (Sterling, 2018) even though it is the second year that is viewed as the period in which students encounter the increasing demands of academics and developmental and social challenges.

Through these first-hand accounts of student experiences detailing what drove them to persist, the researcher concluded that stakeholders must imple- ment programs that provide continuous support for retaining this population. These programs go beyond the first year such as family support and guidance, mentorships with college personnel, opportunities to become immersed into the campus culture, high school and college partnerships, and training for staff addressing the needs of first-generation college student. Finally, to overcome the sophomore slump, addressing the stages of the second-year student will prove beneficial to decision-making in addition to building and maintaining campus connections.

Capik and Shupp 19

Overall, it is critical that higher education best practices and programs are often re-evaluated for consistency and are delivered with fidelity to follow the first-generation student through goal attainment—graduation. Thus, adminis- tration, faculty, and staff should continue to have meaningful dialogue about creating an inclusive campus for all students, including first-generation college students.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,

authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publica-

tion of this article.

ORCID iD

Davina Capik https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0253-6813

References

Allen, J., Robbins, S. B., Casillas, A., & Oh, I-S. (2008). Third-year retention and trans-

fer: Effects academic performance, motivation, and social connectedness. Research in

Higher Education, 49, 647–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9098-3 Almedia, D. J., Byrne, A. M., Smith, R. M., & Ruiz, S. (2019). How relevant is grit? The

importance of social capital in first-generation college students’ academic success.

Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice. Advance

online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025119854688 Bandara, W. (2006). Using NVIVO as a research management tool: A case narrative.

Quality and Impact of Qualitative Research. Institute for Integrated and Intelligent

Systems 3rd Annual QualIT conference. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/67148/1/Bandara_

2006._Using_NVivo_as_a_Research_Management_Tool._A_Case_Narrative.pdf Banks-Santilli, L. (2014). First generation college students and their pursuit of the

American dream. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 5, 1–32. https://files.eric.ed.

gov/fulltext/EJ1060615.pdf Banning, J. H. (2014). First generation college student dissertation abstracts: Research

strategies, topical analysis, and lessons learned. Journal of Education and Learning,

3(2), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v3n2p14

Bashant, J. (2014). Developing grit in our students: Why grit is such a desirable trait, and

practical strategies for teaching and schools. Journal for Leadership and Instruction.

Fall, 14–16. Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking:

A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health

Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870 Bui, K., & Rush, R. A. (2016). Parental involvement in middle school predicting college

attendance for first-generation students. Education, 136(4), 473–489.

20 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Candela, A. G. (2019). Exploring the function of member checking. The Qualitative

Report, 24(3), 619–628. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=

3726&context=tqr Chen, X. (2005). First generation students in postsecondary education: A look at their

college transcripts. Postsecondary education descriptive analysis report (NCES 2005-

171). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.

https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005171.pdf Choy, S. (2001). Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access,

persistence, and attainment (NCES 2001-126). National Center for Education

Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://

nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001126.pdf Cloyd, M. C. (2019). Family achievement guilt as experienced by first-generation college

students: A phenomenology [Doctoral dissertation]. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/

849d/c271ef4a037c1ccbd975a10a50351854c97c.pdf Covarrubias, R., & Fryberg, S. (2014). Movin’ on up (to college): First-generation college

students’ experiences with family achievement guilt. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic

Minority Psychology, 21(3), 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037844 Covarrubias, R., Romero, A., & Trivelli, M. (2015). Family achievement guilt and mental

well-being of college students. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 2031–2037.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-0003-8 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. Sage. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quan-

titative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Pearson. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Sage. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing

among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage. D’Amico, M. M., & Dika, S. L. (2013). Using data known at the time of admissions to

predict first-generation college student success. Journal of College Student Retention:

Research, Theory & Practice, 15(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.2190/cs.15.2.c Davis, J. (2012). The first-generation student experience: Who they are, their character-

istics, and strategies for improving their persistence and success. Stylus. Demetriou, C., & Schmitz-Sciborski, A. (2011). Integration, motivation, strengths

and optimism: Retention theories past, present and future. In R. Hayes (Ed.),

Proceedings of the 7th national symposium on student retention (pp. 300–312). The

University of Oklahoma. https://studentsuccess.unc.edu/files/2012/11/Demetriou-

and-Schmitz-Sciborski.pdf Dennis, J. M., Phinney, J. S., & Chuateco, L. I. (2005). The role of motivation, parental

support, and peer support in the academic success of ethnic minority first-generation

college students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(3), 223–236. https://doi.

org/10.1353/csd.2005.0023gallup DocHub. (2020). Edit, send & sign PDF documents online for free. https://dochub.com/ Dockery, D. J. (2012). School counselors’ support for first-generation college students.

https://www.counseling.org/resources/library/vistas/vistas12/2012_vol_1_45-66/

Article_61.pdf

Capik and Shupp 21

Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit:

Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087 Eichelberger, B., Gerbing, D., & Gillpatrick, T. (2019). Financial education, college

retention, and graduation rates. College Student Journal, 53(4), 479–489. Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach.

Sage. Engle, J., & Tinto, V. (2008). Moving beyond access: College success for low-income,

first-generation students. The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher

Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504448.pdf Farruggia, S. P., Han, C., Watson, L., Moss, T. P., & Bottoms, B. (2018). Noncognitive

factors and college student success. Journal of College Student Retention: Research,

Theory & Practice, 20(3), 308–327. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/csra/20/3 Frogg�e, G. M., & Woods, K. H. (2018). Characteristics and tendencies of first and

second-generation university students. College Quarterly, 21(2). https://files.eric.ed.

gov/fulltext/EJ1180306.pdf Gahagan, J., & Hunter, M. S. (2006). The second-year experience: Turning attention to

the academy’s middle children. About Campus, 11(3), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/

abc.168 Gallup, Inc. (2016). Gallup college and university president’s study. https://news.gallup.

com/reports/194783/gallup-college-university-presidents-study-2016.aspx Guetterman, T. C. (2015). Descriptions of sampling practices within five approaches to

qualitative research in education and the health sciences. Educational Psychology

Papers and Publications, 263. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?

article=1275&context=edpsychpapers Hall, D.L. (2017). Overcoming barriers to college graduation: The sophomore student

experience with academic integration, retention and persistence (Publication No.

10690131) [Doctoral dissertation]. Hampton University. Available from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses. Hays, D. G., & Singh, A. A. (2012). A qualitative inquiry in clinical and educational

settings. Guilford Press. Hicks, T. (2003). First-generation and non-first-generation pre-college students’ expect-

ations and perceptions about attending college. The Journal of College Orientation and

Transition, 11(1), 1–17. https://digitalcommons.uncfsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti

cle=1009&context=soe_faculty_wp Hoffman, J. L., & Lowitzi, K. E. (2005). Predicting college success with high school

grades and test scores: Limitation for minority students. Review of Higher

Education, 28(4), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2005.0042 Ishitani, 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. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2006.0042 Ishitani, T. (2016). First-generation students persist at four-year institutions. College &

University, 91(3), 22–34. Jordan, T. K. (2011). Sophomore programs: Theory, research, and efficacy [Doctoral

dissertation]. Ohio State University. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_olink/r/

1501/10?p10_etd_subid=74219&clear=10

22 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Lee, K., & Leonard, R. (2009). Destination unknown. Addressing the sophomore slump.

NACE Journal, 70(2), 27–31. Longwell-Grice, H., & Longwell-Grice, R. (2007). Testing Tinto: How do retention the-

ories work for first-generation, working-class students. Journal of College Student

Retention, 9(4), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.2190/cs.9.4.a Longwell-Grice, R., Zervas-Adsitt, N., Mullins, K., & Serrata, W. (2016). The first ones:

Three studies on first-generation college students. NACADA Journal, 36(2), 34–45.

https://doi.org/10.12930/nacada-13-028 McCarron, G. P., & Inkelas, K. K. (2006). The gap between educational aspirations and

attainment for first-generation college students and the role of parental Involvement.

Journal of College Student Development, 47(5), 534–549. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.

2006.0059 Mehra, B. (2002). Bias in qualitative research: Voices from an online classroom. The

Qualitative Report, 7(1), 1–19. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol7/iss1/2 Mitchall, A. M., & Jaeger, A. J. (2018). Parental influences on low-income, first-gener-

ation students’ motivation on the path to college. The Journal of Higher Education,

89(4), 582–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1437664 Morse, J. M. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin ?0026; &

Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 220–235). Sage. Noel-Levitz. (2013). The attitudes of second-year college students. www.noellevitz.com/

SecondYearAttitudes Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the inter-

viewer and respondent contexts. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 17(2), 1–16. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/slis_facpub/32/

Otter.ai. (2020). Otter is where conversations live. https://otter.ai/login Pascarella, E. T. (1982). Validation of a theoretical model of college dropouts. National

Institute of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED221130.pdf Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-gener-

ation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The

Journal of Higher Education, 75(3), 249–284. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2004.0016 Pham, C., & Keenan, T. (2011). Counseling and college matriculation: Does the avail-

ability of counseling affect college-going decisions among highly qualified first-

generation college-bound high school graduates? Journal of Applied Economics and

Business Research, 1, 12–24. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chung_Pham3/pub

lication/278728755_Counseling_and_college_matriculation_Does_the_availability_

of_counseling_affect_college-going_decisions_among_highly_qualified_first-genera

tion_college-bound_high_school_graduates/links/5584a2b108aeb0cdaddbcb42/

Counseling-and-college-matriculation-Does-the-availability-of-counseling-affect-col

lege-going-decisions-among-highly-qualified-first-generation-college-bound-high-sch

ool-graduates.pdf QSR International. (2020). NVivo: Unlock insights in your data with powerful analysis.

https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home Raphael, J., & Kushman, J. (2009). Predicting postsecondary success. Principal’s Research

Review, 4(3), 1–7. https://cdn-files.nsba.org/s3fs-public/Predicting_Postsecondary_Success.

pdf RTI International. (2019). First year experience, persistence, and attainment of first-

generation college students. Center for First-Generation Student Success, NASPA. https://firstgen.naspa.org/files/dmfile/FactSheet-02.pdf

Capik and Shupp 23

Sanchez-Leguelinel, C. (2008). Supporting ‘slumping’ sophomores: Programmatic peer initiatives designed to enhance retention in the crucial second year of college. College Student Journal, 42(4), 637–646.

Schaller, M. A. (2005). Wandering and wondering: Traversing the uneven terrain of the

second college year. About Campus, 10(3), 17–24. Sterling, A. J. (2015). Persistence in the sophomore year following transition from success-

ful first-year program (Publication No. 3730498) [Doctoral dissertation]. Northeastern University. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Sterling, A. J. (2018). Student experiences in the second year: Advancing strategies for success beyond the first year of college. Strategic Enrollment Management Quarterly, 5, 136–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/sem3.20113

Stewart, S., Hun Lim, D., & Kim, J. (2018). Factors influencing college persistence for first-time students. Journal of Developmental Education, 38(3), 12–20. https://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1092649.pdf

Thayer, P. B. (2000). Retention of students from first generation and low-income back- grounds. Opportunity Outlook. Advance online publication. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED446633.pdf

Tibbetts, Y., Harachkiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Boston, J. S., Priniski, S. J., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). Affirming independence: Exploring mechanisms underlying a values affir- mation: Interventions for first-generation students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 635–659. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000049

Tierney, W. G. (1999). Models of minority college-going and retention: Cultural integrity versus cultural suicide. The Journal of Negro Education, 68(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/2668211

Tillman, C. A. (2002). Barriers to student persistence in higher education: A literature review. https://www.whdl.org/sites/default/files/v2n1_Tillman.pdf

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89–125. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 00346543045001089

Tinto, V. (1990). Principles of effective retention. Journal of Freshman Year Experience, 2(1), 35–48.

Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next? College Student Retention, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2190/4ynu-4tmb-22dj-an4w

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. The University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2013). Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. https://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/

uploads/2014/11/Expanding-Evidence.pdf Whitford, E. (2018). Maximizing success for first-gen students. Inside Higher Ed. https://

www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/10/04/institutional-change-required-better-serve- first-generation-students-report-finds

Whitley, S. E., Benson, G., & Wesaw, A. (2018). First-generation student success: A landscape analysis of programs and services at four-year institutions. Center for First-Generation Student Success. https://firstgen.naspa.org/files/NASPA-First-gener ation-Student-Success-Exec-Summary.pdf

24 Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 0(0)

Zervas-Adsitt, N. (2017). Stretching the circle: First-generation college students navigate their educational journey (Publication No. 10617890) [Doctoral Dissertation]. Syracuse University. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Author Biographies

Davina Capik is a practicing school counselor in Pennsylvania. She is a licensed professional counselor (LPC) in the state of Pennsylvania, a national certified counselor (NCC) and national certified school counselor (NCSC). She received her Ed.D. in Counselor Education and Supervision from Shippensburg University, Masters (M.S.) of Counseling from the University of Scranton, Masters (M.Ed.) in Educational Psychology from Edinboro University and Bachelors (B.S.) in Applied Psychology from Albright College.

Matthew Shupp is an associate professor in the Department of Counseling and College Student Personnel at Shippensburg University. He is a licensed profes- sional counselor (LPC) in the state of Pennsylvania, a national certified coun- selor (NCC), board certified as a tele-mental health provider (BC-TMH), and an approved clinical supervisor (ACS). He received his Ed.D. in Higher Education Leadership from Widener University and his masters (Counseling: College Student Personnel) and bachelors (Psychology) degrees from Shippensburg University.

Capik and Shupp 25