A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students in the Midwest
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lindenwood University Digital Commons@Lindenwood University Dissertations Theses & Dissertations Spring 4-2018 A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students in the Midwest Juanika Q. Williams Lindenwood University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/dissertations Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons Recommended Citation Williams, Juanika Q., "A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students in the Midwest" (2018). Dissertations. 184. https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/dissertations/184 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses & Dissertations at Digital Commons@Lindenwood University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Lindenwood University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students in the Midwest by Juanika Q. Williams A Dissertation submitted to the Education Faculty of Lindenwood University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education School of Education A Mixed-Method Comparative Analysis of First-Generation and Non-First-Generation Students in the Midwest by Juanika Q. Williams This dissertation has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education at Lindenwood University by the School of Education Declaration of Originality I do hereby declare and attest to the fact that this is an original study based solely upon my own scholarly work here at Lindenwood University and that I have not submitted it for any other college or university course or degree here or elsewhere. Full Legal Name: Juanika Q. Williams FIRST-GENERATION VS. NON-FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE Acknowledgements I would like to thank my entire dissertation committee for their support and encouragement through this difficult process. To my chair Dr. John D. Long for his guidance and support; I would like to send a special thanks to one of my undergraduate professors Dr. Jayashree Balakrishna for her continued support and constant encouragement. To Dr. Ramey who would also encourage me while giving positive feedback; to Dr. Winslow who took the time to sit down with me to help me understand how to run and understand the statistical test. Of course, this achievement would not be possible without my family. I want to thank my parents for instilling in me the importance of education and for their continued support throughout my journey, my Aunts Dana and Rivian for their support, and my favorite cousin Adrian who has been by my side and supporting throughout the entire time. When I would get discouraged he always knew what to say to encourage me. When I began to slack, he would also light the fire under me to get things completed. Finally, my incredible family, my husband William and daughter Ronney. Seeing them daily was a reminder just how important it was for me to complete my research. i FIRST-GENERATION VS. NON-FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE Abstract The purpose of this study was to complete a mixed-methods comparative analysis of first- generation and non-first-generation students in the Midwest to determine potential differences between students’ college satisfaction, retention factors, college selection, college experience, and deciding factors on attending college at private, public, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities. The Primary Researcher believed that a students’ classifications (first-generation or non-first-generation) and the type of university that they chose to attend would yield different results in their overall college experiences. The Researcher conducted the study in different settings and did not compare by the type of university or the type of students who attended the universities. The previous research was conducted in different regions. The Primary Researcher was not able to find extensive then- current research on first-generation and non-first-generation students in the Midwest. The results found did not show that being a first-generation or a non-first-generation student at a Historically Black College and University, public, or private university made a difference. The Primary Researcher found that overall, first-generation students had a more positive perception of their college experience than their non-first-generation peers. ii FIRST-GENERATION VS. NON-FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... i Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ x List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... xii Chapter One: Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Background of the Study ...................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................. 2 History of TRIO .................................................................................................................... 3 Criteria for Upward Bound ................................................................................................... 5 Purpose of TRIO Upward Bound ......................................................................................... 5 Benefits of Upward Bound ................................................................................................... 6 Rationale ............................................................................................................................... 8 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................................... 8 Hypotheses .......................................................................................................................... 10 Hypothesis 1.................................................................................................................... 10 Hypothesis 2.................................................................................................................... 10 Hypothesis 3.................................................................................................................... 10 Hypothesis 4.................................................................................................................... 10 Hypothesis 5.................................................................................................................... 10 Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 10 RQ1 ................................................................................................................................. 10 iii FIRST-GENERATION VS. NON-FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE RQ2 ................................................................................................................................. 10 Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 11 Definitions........................................................................................................................... 11 Competence..................................................................................................................... 11 Cultural capital ................................................................................................................ 11 Disadvantaged ................................................................................................................. 11 Deficit thinking ............................................................................................................... 12 First-generation students ................................................................................................. 12 HBCU ............................................................................................................................. 12 Low income .................................................................................................................... 12 Persistence....................................................................................................................... 12 Post-secondary institutions ............................................................................................. 12 Retention ......................................................................................................................... 12 Self-efficacy .................................................................................................................... 12 Summary ............................................................................................................................