University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence

(USC Thesis Other)

Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Copyright 2016 Trista Beard

SIGNIFICANT OTHERS IN THE LIVES OF LATINO FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE
STUDENTS: HOW SOCIAL CAPITAL AIDS PERSISTENCE
by
Trista Beard

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2016
ii

DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my loving husband and two wonderful children, Mia and Lewis, who
supported my journey every step of the way.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I have to thank my partner in life, Chris, for encouraging me to pursue my passions,
which include education and research. You are a great sounding board for me when I need to talk
out concepts and ideas in my work and I could not have completed this dissertation without your
support.
Next I want to thank my committee members, Dr. Reynaldo Baca, Dr. Alan Green, and
Dr. Tatiana Melguizo, for pushing me to do my best work. My deepest thanks to you, Rey, for
taking hours-on-hours to meet with me and talk about this work. Thank you for sharing your
encyclopedic knowledge of research and theory with me. You maintained enthusiasm alongside
me for the entirety of the project, and I am grateful for your mentorship and advice. It was fun to
work with you – truly a pleasure to learn from you. ‘Thank you’ isn’t really a strong enough
sentiment, but it will have to be enough.
Lastly, I want to thank my Ed.D. “cheerleaders” – those students out there, past and
present, who cheered me on over the last three years. There are too many to name, but I hope you
know who you are. And I cannot forget my professional colleagues in Overseas Studies, who
have walked alongside me every day as I worked through this challenging project. I am so
appreciative of your support and encouragement. Thank you.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 3
Purpose of the Study 5
Significance of the Study 6
Key Definitions 6
Organization of the Study 8

Chapter Two: Literature Review 9
Integration Theory 9
The Development of Tinto's Integration Theory 10
Principles of Integration Theory 12
Prior Research Using an Integration Framework 15
Limitations of integration theory 22
Social Capital Theory 22
Prior Research Using a Social Capital Framework 28
Rationale for the Study 37

Chapter Three: Methodology 41
Qualitative Inquiry 41
Sample and Population 42
Sampling Method 43
Participant Selection 43
Data Collection 45
The Unfolding Matrix 45
Data Analysis 47
Credibility and Trustworthiness 50
Summary 51

Chapter Four: Findings 52
A Review of the Participants 54
Alexander 55
Andrea 56
Anthony 57
Christina 58
v

Cirah 59
George 60
Isabel 61
José 62
Robert 63
Sarah 64
Summary 65
A Process of Integration 66
Sense of Belonging 67
Overcoming Barriers to Integration 69
Integrative Support Agents and Networks 75
Summary 79
Significant Others as Support Agents 80
Social Support Agents 81
Apprentice Agents 84
Institutional Agents 88
Summary 95
The Benefits of Capital-Building Relationships 96
Conclusion 101

Chapter Five: Discussion 102
Discussion of the Findings 103
Implications for Policy and Practice 110
Recommendations for Further Research 114
Conclusion 116

Chapter Six: Epilogue 118
A Guide to Getting Through the University by the Latino Ten 118
Recommended Actions for Latino First-generation College Students 123

References 124
Appendices
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix 135
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 136
Appendix C: Typology of Support and Institutional Agents 138
Appendix D: Study Participation Request 139
Appendix E: Study Participant Solicitation Flyer 140
Appendix F: Information Sheet for Subjects 141

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Research Study Participants 44
Table 2: Universal Semantic Relationships 48
Table 3: Semantic Relationships Found Through Domain Analysis 49
Table 4: Research Study Participants by Institutional “Agency” Affiliation 94

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Concept Model of Theoretical Frameworks 38
Figure 2: The Stratification of Support Agents and the Resources Offered 81
Figure 3: A Local Path Model of LFGCS Persistence at an elite PWI 105

Figure 4: An Alternate Local Path Model of LFGCS Persistence 106
Figure 5: A Non-Hierarchical Model of Various Support Agents 109

viii

ABSTRACT
Latinos are the fastest growing population to enter postsecondary education and half of
them are of the first generation in their families to attend college. Although they are entering
colleges in record numbers, Latino first-generation college students are not completing degrees in
equal proportion to their peers who have college-educated parents. This study examines how
successful Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS), all seniors at a large, highly-selective
research university, integrated into chosen communities and built unique social networks to
support their persistence in college. Utilizing integration and social capital frameworks, and
analyzing the college life histories of 10 successful LFGCS, using ethnographic analysis methods,
a micro-theory was generated to model the process by which these students build networks to
support their persistence at an elite predominantly white university (PWI). Findings support the
theory that LFGCS rely heavily on emotional support from similar peers in order to integrate into
micro-communities in the college, building their sense of belonging. Only after some level of
adjustment and integration are LFGCS able to develop relationships with “agencies” (support
service offices and student collectives) and local apprentice agents that serve as bridges and guides
to institutional agents. This study examines near peer models, peer mentors, and local opportunity
brokers in a powerful new light. Where integration and social capital theory have previously
disregarded the emerging social capital of student collectives, experienced students, and support
agents with privileged knowledge of the university environment, this study uses social capital
theory to explore the privileged local capital provided by apprentice agents and how that essential
exchange supports persistence for LFGCS. In addition, the findings from this study illuminate the
cyclical nature of sense of belonging as both input to integration and output, the unique way
LFGCS describe reciprocity as a characteristic of social capital-building through a collective
ix

worldview lens, and the stratification of the significant others in their lives that provide emotional
support and motivation, localized capital, and high-status social capital. By examining this unique
population I am able to elicit a local student success model, make recommendations for
institutional action, and propose a future research agenda. This study concludes with a guide to
navigating the university, written in the voice of the study participants.

1

CHAPTER ONE
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
There has been significant growth in Latino students entering college with the hopes of
getting a college education and obtaining a certificate or degree. Enrollment of non-White
students in institutions of higher education has increased 10 times more quickly than enrollments
of White students (Li & Carroll, 2007). Between 1984 and 2004, minority student enrollment in
colleges grew from 1.9 million to 4.7 million, a 146% increase, while for White students the
increase in enrollments over that period was only 15% (Li & Carroll, 2007). However, the
outcomes do not show the same level of growth. White students are completing bachelor’s
degrees in six years at a rate of 62%, whereas the rates for African-American and Latino students
completing bachelor’s degrees are at 40% and 52% respectively (NCES, 2014a). Asian-
American and Pacific Islander student populations reflect the highest graduation rates of 70%
(NCES, 2014a).
Students of color, specifically Black and Latino students are not completing college
degrees in comparable numbers to their White and Asian-American peers, and the completion
rates for men of color are even lower. Latino males’ six-year graduation rate is 47%,
significantly lower than the national average for all students who began at four-year institutions,
which is 59% (NCES, 2014a). A growing body of research aims to examine the factors inhibiting
equal growth in graduation rates for racial minorities that would match the growth in minority
student enrollments. The literature includes investigations of campus climate, educational
engagement, student support resources, curriculum development, remediation, and pre-college
academic achievement in search of possible answers to the problem of minority student
persistence in college (Allen, 1999; Astin, 1984; Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, & Gonyea, 2008;
Museus, Nichols, & Lambert, 2008). Within this population, there are students who are also the
2

first generation in their families to attend college, adding another layer of complexity to the
student’s pursuit of a college education.
First-generation students are an invisible minority, with no outward marker that signals
they have disadvantages (Callanta & Ortiz, 2009). But first-generation students are
disadvantaged compared to their peers in regard to retention and graduation rates (Choy, 2001).
First-generation students are more likely to be working full-time while attending college, are
more likely to be over 24 years old, and twice as likely to have dependents as their traditional
peers (NCES, 2010). These barriers, and others, inhibit first-generation students’ progress toward
degree completion. Statistics from the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study
(BPS) show that the six-year completion rate of bachelor’s degrees as of 2009 for first-
generation college students was 40%, compared to 59% of all students entering four-year
institutions whom completed a bachelor’s degree (NCES, 2011; NCES, 2014a). Students with at
least one parent with a bachelor’s degree had a graduation rate of 66%, and students who had at
least one parent with an advanced degree had a graduation rate of 73% (NCES, 2011).
Much of the educational research on persistence has focused on barriers to persistence in
college for Latino students or for first-generation college students (Castillo et al., 2006;
Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004), but little has honed in on the intersection of
this population. In order to better understand the path to persistence of Latino first-gen college
students, this research study gave voice to Latino first-gen college students (LFGCS) and their
experiences at a large, elite predominately white university (PWI). In this study, the lived
experiences of LFGCS who have persisted to graduation were examined through the theoretical
lenses of integration and social capital so that practitioners might see the world through their
eyes and understand who and what has most aided them in completing college.
3

Statement of the Problem
Research on first-generation college students (FGCS) began to grow in the 1980s after
Billson and Terry (1982) clearly defined the term and the population as being students whose
parents did not attend any college. Since that time, researchers have established that there is a
definite achievement gap between FGCS and their non-first-generation student peers (Choy,
2001). Research has focused on several issues, including barriers to access, retention, and
completion rates. Moreover, numerous studies have tested pre-college variables and academic
engagement activities during the early college years with the hopes of finding predictors for
attrition and interventions to improve outcomes for FGCS (Billson & Terry, 1982; Mehta,
Newbold, & O’Rourke, 2011; Pascarella et al., 2004; Soria & Stebleton, 2012; Woosley &
Shepler, 2011).
The persistence of Latino students has similarly been studied with a lens most often
concentrated on variables that influence college departure. Hurtado, Carter and Spuler (1996)
found that for Latino college students, perceptions of a hostile campus racial climate impacted
both social and academic adjustment negatively. Castillo et al. (2006) found that a student’s
Latino ethnic identity was not a direct predictor of persistence attitudes, but that the campus
environment acted as a mediator. Beyond campus climate, other researchers have examined the
support networks of Latino students to see who offered encouragement and mentorship and who
contributed to feelings of belonging and well-being (Bordes-Edgar, Arredondo, Kurpius & Rund,
2011; Cabrera & Padilla, 2004; Rodriguez, Mira, Myers, Morris & Cardoza, 2003).
Latino students are the fastest growing population entering college. From 2002 to 2012,
the percentage of Latino 18-24 year olds who enrolled in degree programs jumped from 19% to
37%, far outpacing growth in enrollments by White, Black, and Asian students (NCES, 2013).
4

Half of the Latino students who enter degree-granting programs are the first in their families to
attend college (Santiago, 2011), while the national average of first-gen college students is closer
to 20% (Chronicle of Higher Education, 2014). The graduation rate for completion of bachelor’s
degrees for first-gen students, who begin at four-year universities, is 40% after 6 years, where the
national average is nearly 60% (NCES, 2011). For Latino students the completion rate is 52%
(NCES, 2014a).
Latino first-gen students are poised to make strides in social mobility that will
economically benefit them and their families. Latinos with a high school diploma can expect to
make $27,570 per year, while a college graduate can expect to earn $42,670 (NCES, 2014b) -- a
difference of 55% more earning power annually. The jobs that offer the most economic benefits
will require a college degree (Santiago, 2011). The likelihood that the children of Latino parents
with a college degree will also enroll in higher education is increased greatly over that of parents
with little or no college experience. In order for LFGCS to take advantage of the social mobility
that a college education can provide, they need to persist.
To provide educators a deeper understanding of LFGCS’s path to persistence beyond the
most-often examined predictive variables that influence departure, this study focused on the
narratives of LFGCS who have beat the odds and persisted to graduation. Students are agents in
their own success, but also rely on support networks and significant others to aid in that
persistence. In this qualitative inquiry, students articulated how they integrated into communities
inside and outside the college, who has supported them through college, and what benefits their
supports have provided. Learning from successful LFGCS, about how they navigated the
obstacles of a large PWI, allows for the development of a student success model that
5

demonstrates the interconnectedness of integration and social capital theories in the persistence
of LFGCS.
Purpose of the Study
This study aimed to examine the meaningful relationships with significant others as
identified by LFGCS and develop a micro-theory, or local process model, that helps explain how
this specific population builds social networks that support their persistence toward obtaining a
college degree. The three research questions guiding this study were the following:
1. How do Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) integrate into communities at a
large, elite, predominantly white institution (PWI)?
2. Who and what have altered the lives of LFGCS and how have significant others
supported their persistence in college?
3. What benefits do LFGCS perceive they have gained from the significant others in their
lives?
The theoretical framework most often found in research literature on college persistence is
integration theory (Tinto, 1993). This study did not rely alone on integration theory due to its
limitations to account for the experiences of non-traditional students, i.e. the working-class
minority students this study sought to give voice to. If integration theory, discussed in detail in
Chapter 2, suggests that students must integrate into the central campus culture to have the best
chance of persisting, what is the process like for lower status students who remain on the fringe
of campus culture and still graduate? Social capital theory, also reviewed in detail in Chapter 2,
proposes that it is through productive relationships that students learn new skills, gain access to
resources, and discover how to navigate college processes and foreign social circles. It is through
the support offered by significant others that students are able to integrate into sub-communities
6

in college that intensify their goal commitment. This study looked at how this unique population
navigates an elite PWI. This study explored how LFGCS integrate into chosen communities,
how students are active in cultivating support networks, and how the benefits of those network
impact student success.
Significance of the Study
The factors that contribute to Latino student persistence in college are complex and
multifaceted. Contributing factors interact and intersect and are unique for students of color
(Museus et al., 2008). The persistence of ethnic minorities is important for the nation as we are in
“desperate need of talented and well-educated minorities to provide effective leadership for their
respective groups” (Peltier, Laden and Matranga, 2000, p. 371). The education of citizens to
become productive contributors to our economy and our democracy is the overall mission of our
colleges and universities. Until students of color are persisting and graduating from colleges in
ratios to their enrollments that are in equal proportion to White students, there is an equity gap.
Learning directly from LFGCS who and what influenced them to continue in college is
beneficial. More analysis of student stories is valuable in creating a larger landscape of
persistence narratives for under-represented students. This study informs practitioners about the
social capital-building processes of lower status students -- uncovering previously unseen and
unnoticed productive relationships built by students and the significant others in their lives.
Key Definitions
There are a few key terms that guided this study and are used throughout this dissertation.
The term Latino is used as an inclusive term for individuals from Mexico, Central America,
South America, or the Spanish-speaking islands of the Caribbean, as well as those with ancestry
from these regions. Only subjects that self-identify as Latino were invited to participate in this
7

research study. The term Hispanic is occasionally referenced in this study, as it is used in prior
literature on Latino students and can be assumed to be synonymous with Latino for the purposes
of this study. The term first-generation college student or first-gen is used to define students
whose parents did not attend college (Choy, 2001).
The term lower-status students is borrowed from Stanton-Salazar’s (2001) seminal work
on the study of working-class minority youth and the reproduction of disadvantage that happens
when students are bound in a system of social inequity. His work defines a lower-status student
as one who is an ethnic minority and from a working-class family. Lower status students do not
have the privilege of whiteness or middle-class socioeconomic status. This definition was used in
order to define the selection of participants for this study also, as this study examined how Latino
students who are the first in their families to persist in college have utilized social networks to
support their path to completion.
The term persistence is drawn from Tinto’s (1993) model which defines persistence as
continued enrollment toward degree completion. Retention is often used synonymously with
persistence, but retention was not used in this study purposefully. Retention is defined by Berger
& Lyon (2005) as remaining within a particular institution, or rather an institution’s ability to
keep students enrolled. This study was not concerned with whether a student has been retained at
a particular college, but whether the student continued to exert effort toward his or her
completion goal.
Finally, the term significant others is used intentionally, and often instead of institutional
agent, so as not to infer any positional power of the support giver or social capital donor that may
be named by study participants. Significant others are defined in this dissertation in the
sociological context as a person or persons who alter one’s attitudes and aspirations (Haller &
8

Woelfel, 1972) and therefore influences educational and status attainment (Haller & Portes,
1973). The term significant others was operationalized in the context of this study as any agent
who is named by a participant as influential or impactful in regards to the student’s persistence in
college.
Organization of the Study
This research study used integration and social capital frameworks to explore the
narratives of 10 Latino first-generation college students attending a highly-selective, four-year
PWI. Chapter 2 presents the development and use of both theoretical frameworks in educational
research on persistence in college, and supports the need for further study merging these
theoretical models. Chapter 3 includes a detailed description of the methods used for this study.
Information on sample selection, interview protocols, data collection, analysis, and measures
taken to ensure credibility and trustworthiness of data is also addressed. Chapter 4 focuses on the
presentation of the data findings. Chapter 5 includes a discussion of the usefulness of the
findings and implications for practitioners, as well as recommendations for further research. This
dissertation concludes with an epilogue, in the voice of the study participants, based on an
amalgamation of the data, which serves to advise future LFGCS on actions they should take to
integrate into campus communities and build social capital which will positively influence their
persistence in college.

9

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review attempts to call attention to the importance of student integration
and engagement, support systems, and social capital, and to examine how these concepts
function in theory and practice, to impact college persistence. This review of theoretical concepts
and empirical research frames this dissertation by illuminating the ways in which lower-status
students gain social capital that impacts their likelihood of persistence in college.
The literature review for this study covers two primary theoretical areas: student
integration theory and social capital theory. This section begins with an overview of integration
theory as it relates to student persistence in college, how the theory has been used in the field of
education, and what it means to this study. The next section reviews the history and principles of
social capital theory, the development of the theory, its application in the field of education, and
its relevance for this dissertation. The third section of this chapter presents the conceptual model
that guided this study, making use of both theoretical frameworks, and establishing the need to
examine the lived experiences of Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) and the
significant others that support their persistence in college.
Integration Theory
Much of the literature on student persistence in college relies on integration theories to
explain student departure. Astin's (1984) theory of student involvement is often used by
researchers studying student engagement during the college years. Astin asserts that the more a
student is involved in academic activities, extracurricular activities, faculty and staff interactions,
and residential programs that engage the student's time, the greater the amount of learning.
Tinto's (1993) theory of student departure is one of the most cited theoretical frameworks in the
10

ongoing scholarship on student persistence in higher education. Tinto posits that students'
integration and connection to the institution determine their commitment level which greatly
influences persistence. Tierney (1992) criticized this theory for putting the pressure on the
student to assimilate to college culture, especially questioning the theory’s assumption that racial
minorities must separate from their home culture and adopt dominant cultural beliefs and
behaviors in order to commit and persist at college. Tierney's work was not highly visible in the
literature gathered for this review, but is an important framework that is mentioned here as a
historical counterpoint and extension to Tinto's student departure and separation theories.
Braxton, Sullivan, and Johnson (1997) also extended Tinto's theory to include more focus
on the variety of factors that influence integration at the college and consider the change in
student demographics at American colleges, which includes more non-traditional students than
when Tinto’s theory was first developed in the 1970’s. Braxton et al. suggest combining Tinto’s
model with other environmental models that more fully consider the student’s perception of the
institution as a hostile or safe environment, which will affect student engagement and departure.
In the third section of this chapter, integration theory is combined with social capital theory in
order to examine how the formation of supportive relationships is imperative for persistence in
college for Latino first-gen college students.
The Development of Tinto's Integration Theory
While Tinto’s (1987, 1993) predictive model of student departure has been tested,
examined, and questioned, it still remains the foremost theory that researchers rely on to explain
students’ departure decisions. Tinto (1993) used four sources of data (National Longitudinal
Survey, High School and Beyond studies, America College Testing Program survey data, and
Survey of Higher Education Institutions) to look for patterns in student departure. This enormous
11

data set spanned high school graduates and college beginners from 1972 to 1992. Because he
found more variety in patterns of leaving than ever before, Tinto suggested that there are
situational attributes and characteristics that predict departure and that these situations occur
during the college-going years.
Tinto's aim was to study the longitudinal process of student departure from college.
Building on sociological theory Tinto looked to Van Gennep's (1960) study of rites of passage to
borrow and adapt the idea that the process into and through college was a similar time of
separation, transition and incorporation. Similarly borrowing inspiration from Durkheim's (1951)
sociological theory of suicide, Tinto suggested that Durkheim's four forms of suicide are
analogous to the connections students make to communities in college, their external
communities, their feelings of isolation, and the levels of integration they experience, all of
which influence their decisions to leave college.
One of the most important characteristics of Tinto's (1993) theoretical model is that it
views college retention or departure as a longitudinal process. The model is not meant to focus
on what happens before or after the years in college, but what happens in the institution.
Although the reason a student leaves and what they do later, as far as transferring, taking time off
and returning to school at a later date, or not returning at all, are still part of a student's journey
of persistence, the theory is more concerned with explaining why an individual leaves an
institution and relies heavily on lack of integration into the central campus culture to explain
departure. Tinto's model is a descriptive model, an interactional model, and an explanatory one. I
would also argue that it is an ecological model, concerned not just with student and institution as
dichotomous players interacting and influencing student departure, but that the culture created by
12

the institution and the experiences that occur within the time frame a student is in college
influence departure as well.
Principles of Integration Theory
There are four main tenets of Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure. First,
integration into educational communities is a key component in turning commitment and
intention into integration leading to persistence. Second, both intellectual and social integration
are needed to increase the likelihood of retention. Third, the classroom is central to the building
of memberships in educational communities, which includes academic communities, social
communities, and connections with faculty who act as a proxy in communicating the institution’s
commitment to students. This point about the role of faculty is important and is a strong bridge to
social capital theory, which is addressed in a later section of this chapter.
The fourth tenet of the model is the assertion that the institution’s role as it affects
retention or departure is indirect. The institution can affect the climate that allows for and
encourages educational communities to be formed, and membership in communities helps
students integrate, and so integration aids in institutional retention. The model argues that
departure happens due to a longitudinal process of significant (or lack of) interactions between
individuals and communities within the college-going years. The communities that a student is
engaged in may deepen their commitment and intention to persist, but they may also be “pulled”
away. External communities and responsibilities can affect integration and commitment, and
therefore play a role in student departure. Both in-college and out-of-college communities
influence integration, commitment and departure, but it is the connection to the central culture of
the college that is predicted to increase the likelihood of persistence.
13

It has been useful for researchers to test specific variables and their influence on
commitment or intent to persist in different institutional types and with various non-traditional
populations. Nora (1987) tested Tinto’s (1975) initial model of student departure with Chicano
students at two-year college in south Texas and found minimal support for the link of academic
integration to retention and no significant support for the link of social integration to retention,
both of which are major influences on persistence decisions in the Tinto model. With survey
responses from 227 students, Nora found that institutional commitment was a significant
predictor of retention and that social integration did affect the commitment levels, providing
evidence that social networks within the college have an indirect effect on persistence.
Institutional/goal commitment was influenced by previous academic achievement and
encouragement from family and friends as well.
In considering the importance of Tinto’s integration theory, Cabrera, Nora, and
Castaneda (1993) wanted to compare and collapse the model with Bean’s (1980) theory of
student attrition. The authors analyzed the variables that Tinto and Bean named as most
influential on persistence intentions and found the theoretical models convergent and
overlapping. Both models infer that environment and context influence a student’s decision to
leave college, and both have been validated through multiple studies over the last 20 years. Both
models view persistence as a result effected by interactions, and both consider institutional fit or
congruence an integral part of persistence decisions. Where they differ is Bean’s consideration of
external influences such as family and friends from outside the college, as potential support
systems for integration and persistence in college, while Tinto viewed external influences as pull
factors that impact persistence negatively. Using the variables of the models that purport to
predict persistence, Cabrera et al. tested them on a longitudinal data set of traditional college
14

students via transcript reviews and surveys collected in freshman and sophomore year.
Measuring changes in academic performance, academic and social integration, encouragement
from family and friends, financial attitudes, and institutional and goal commitment, the authors
found the persistence paths of the models were validated (Cabrera et al., 1993). Integrating the
two models yielded the complexity of paths to persistence and the powerful interplay of factors
that influence persistence. Encouragement from family and friends was found to directly
influence social integration, academic integration, and institutional commitment which all
increase the intent to persist.
Tinto’s model of student departure is at its essence a process model that considers
different stages of student integration as inputs that influence or deter student persistence within
an institution (Tinto, 1993). Strengths of the model are that the variables are malleable and open
to interpretation. The model’s focus on interactions takes performance pressure off of the student
and shares responsibility with the institution. The process model is flexible and that is why it has
been used as a framework to examine different paths to departure. The weaknesses of the model
are that it lacks a cultural perspective that would include underrepresented minorities and the
potential of external communities that students may be deeply tied to (Kuh & Love, 2000).
Considering the ways LFGCS integrate into subcultures in college combined with an
examination of the significant others that students rely on for support and advice were the two
guiding concepts for this study. Literature in the next section supports the impact of student
characteristics, engagement, sense of belonging, and campus climate on integration which
contributes heavily to persistence in the integration theory paradigm.

15

Prior Research Using an Integration Framework
In the integration framework, a student’s motivation, preparation, and culture will affect
their social integration, which influences institutional commitment, which in turn affects
persistence. A second factor that influences integration is student engagement. Finally, students’
sense of belonging, based on the perception of the campus climate, also impacts integration. This
section presents prior research examining variables that affect integration.
Student characteristics. Attempting to address the variable of motivation, Allen (1999)
used a motivation survey given to first-time, full-time freshman to assess the effects of a
student’s desire to finish college on his or her persistence and to determine if there is a difference
in the effects of motivation on persistence for White and non-White students. Allen asserted that
background variables and desire to finish college both contributed to persistence gains for non-
White students. The study found a unique direct effect for students of color whereby high school
GPA contributed to college GPA and to greater persistence for all students, but that motivation to
finish college had a direct effect on persistence only for ethnic minority students.
Zell (2010) also found, in a qualitative study with 15 Latina/o students from seven
colleges, that motivation was a key to the continual pursuit of the students’ educational goals.
Through in depth-interviews with the students about their decisions to go to college, what
motivated them to continue and barriers perceived, experienced, and overcome in college, Zell
learned that coming in with a sense of purpose was a critical component of the students’
persistence. The participants in Zell’s study were not well-integrated into communities outside
the classroom or concerned with fitting into the college culture but were driven to continue
because of the contributions they hoped to make to their families and communities.
16

Beyond motivation and sense of purpose as factors in persistence, self-efficacy has been
linked to social integration and persistence in college. Torres and Solberg (2001) tested a
pathways model of persistence for Latino students using four constructs drawn from Bandura
(1977) and Tinto (1975): self-efficacy, family support, social integration, and stress. Higher
levels of self-efficacy were found to be related to lower levels of academic stress. Higher levels
of stress impacted performance and persistence decisions. Students who perceived available
family support were found to be more likely to build connections with peers and faculty. Torres
and Solberg found that the model of family support influencing self-efficacy, and in turn
influencing social integration and persistence, was supported for Latino college students.
Contrary to expectations, social integration did not directly influence persistence intentions, but
self-efficacy influenced both integration and persistence (Torres & Solberg, 2001). This study
highlights the importance of family support as a precursor to self-efficacy development. Students
with higher levels of self-efficacy perceive academic and social challenges as transitions that can
be overcome instead of impossible tests that they feel may force their decision to depart. In this
way self-efficacy is a key component skill to creating meaningful social connections in college
that increase commitment to persistence.
Student engagement. Students’ ability to create social connections in college is
facilitated by engagement in campus activities, both academic and social in nature. In assessing
social and academic engagement to determine which contributed more to persistence, Hu (2011)
found that students who had high social engagement on their college campus had a higher degree
of persistence. Students who had high academic engagement (measured by time spent studying
with peers, discussing readings with peers or faculty outside of class, and working more hours
than expected to meet instructor’s expectations) did not persist as often those with a high degree
17

of social engagement (measured by participation in events sponsored by campus groups,
residence halls, cultural organizations and service activities) (Hu, 2011). In this case, dedication
of time to academic activities did not predict persistence as often as dedication of time to social
activities. This supports the need for combined frameworks, as used in this dissertation, that rely
on integration into campus communities, but also on social network-building, in order to analyze
how LFGCS persist to graduation.
In Padilla’s (2009) book, Student Success Modeling, the author used a dialogic technique
for focus group interviews called the unfolding matrix to gather responses from Hispanic and
non-Hispanic students at a large public university. Padilla’s inquiry revealed that for Hispanic
students that were first-generation college students, they overcame barriers to their success by
becoming engaged in campus life. The actions taken by first-gen students were to go see
professors and counselors, to join athletics and others activities, and to generally be involved in
social activities with other students.
Despite Hu’s (2011) findings that high social engagement leads more often to higher
persistence, a supposition which is also supported by Padilla’s (2009) qualitative research, Kuh
et al. (2008) found that students of color specifically benefitted more from academic engagement
activities than White students did in terms of higher levels of persistence. Hu’s (2011) findings
are interesting because they point to high social engagement as significant for persistence, but his
data was not disaggregated by race, so the different impact on White and non-White minority
students is not clear. Kuh et al. (2008) found that the more time minority students spent engaged
in educational activities directly correlated to greater persistence. Instead of the responsibility
being on the students to study more, Kuh et al. suggested that this is evidence institutions can use
to create more integrated learning activities, like group work assignments in and out of the
18

classroom, peer tutoring and mentoring schemes, theme-based housing constructs, and learning
support networks of faculty and staff that engage more of students’ time. These curricular design
suggestions again point to the need for both integration and social capital frameworks in
educational research on persistence.
Sense of belonging. Student involvement in curricular activities, social activities, and
peer groups, on-campus societies and organizations, mentoring, and engagement with faculty
contributes to a deeper commitment to college and higher likelihood of persistence (Peltier et al.,
2000). Before engagement in activities on campus can occur, students must feel a sense of
belonging; without that they are not likely to integrate into the college culture. Sense of
belonging is an important and necessary component of peer support and of persistence. Tinto's
(1993) theory of student departure posits that students' integration and connection to the
institution determine the commitment level and greatly influence persistence. Tinto’s premise is
that students must be actively engaged in some kind of community in order for them to be likely
to persist. Cerezo & Chang (2013) found that the perception of a sense of belonging and a
connection to other ethnic minority students was a predictor of college GPA for Latino students
at a predominately white institution. Ethnic peer support contributed to students of color
reporting they felt a cultural sense of belonging in the university (Cerezo & Chang, 2013).
In a recent dissertation study on Latino students at a community college and their
perceptions of belonging, Przymus (2012) found that students’ sense of belonging was often tied
to their being involved in campus communities. They reported (in focus groups and individual
interviews) that they wanted to be known and recognized for their activities and achievements
and felt they were a part of the college life. Students in the sample expressed that they felt a
sense of belonging increase they became involved in formal (clubs and organizations) and
19

informal activities (athletics, rallies, or festivals), as long as they were spending time with other
students and felt a sense of togetherness.
Considering the racial diversity of a college and how it may impact a student’s sense of
belonging Hausmann, Ye, Schofield, and Woods (2009) tested the isolated effect of sense of
belonging on institutional commitment and intent to persist for White and minority students at a
PWI. Using a quasi-experimental design with an intervention designed to increase sense of
belonging, the results showed an increase for White students but not for minority students. Even
for students whose sense of belonging was not impacted by the intervention, sense of belonging
was a significant factor of students’ institutional commitment level and intent to persist. Contrary
to previous research of Cabrera et al. (1993), social integration had only an indirect effect on
commitment, where sense of belonging was found to be a direct lever predicting commitment.
Perceiving a sense of belonging can also supersede engagement. A qualitative study on
community college students at a Hispanic serving institution (HSI), all of whom earned their
associate’s degrees, found that what influenced them to persist and complete their degrees was
the peer support of going to school with other non-traditional students who also reported
struggling to manage school, work, and family responsibilities, and being able to share an
understanding that they were all struggling together, motivated them to continue (Clark, 2012).
Students reported feeling a sense of belonging from the peer support they received in the
classroom. As part-time students and full-time parents and workers, the students described
having no extra time outside of class to engage in co-curricular educational activities, so the time
in the classroom, and the work with peers and faculty there was what encouraged them to
continue with their studies (Clark, 2012). These studies again support integration as a key to
20

persistence for ethnic minority students, but also highlight the importance of social support
networks and significant others, which has guided this dissertation study.
Campus climate. While sense of belonging is influential to engagement with and
integration into campus communities, sense of belonging can be sabotaged by a negative
perception of the campus climate. Hurtado, Carter and Spuler (1996) found that for Latino
college students, perceptions of an unwelcoming or hostile campus racial climate impacted both
social and academic adjustment negatively. Socializing with peers in the first year aided social
adjustment scores, but perception of racial tension on campus was related to lower levels of
adjustment and lower levels of commitment to the university (Hurtado et al., 1996). A student of
color attending a predominately White institution (PWI) may perceive the university
environment to be hostile and will not seek out on-campus support systems in peers or faculty,
and without institutional support will not engage in activities that will create the committed
connection to college that is key to persistence. How students perceive the campus environment
is a mediator of persistence for Latino students (Castillo et al., 2006; Museus et al., 2008; Yosso,
Smith, Ceja & Solórzano, 2009).
In a qualitative study of 37 Latina/o students across three predominately White
universities, Yosso et al. (2009) found that the campus racial climate impacted student’s self of
identity and self-efficacy, casting a shadow of doubt over their sense of belonging, and
increasing feelings of isolation. The study was primarily focused on student aspirations and
experiences with discrimination on campus, which revealed itself in numerous microaggressions
in all the respondent narratives. The campus climate was perceived as hostile, but subtly hostile,
so as to seem acceptable to White students, but maintaining a pressure on minority students, a
minority stress, that distracted them from their goals at times. In response to the negative campus
21

climates students formed communities outside of the dominant White culture of their campuses,
on the fringes, where they could celebrate their cultural wealth, resist the demands to assimilate,
and still persist in college, as a collective (Yosso et al., 2009).
In a study looking specifically at how the university environment was perceived by
Latino students, Castillo et al. (2006) used a campus climate evaluation collected from 180
Latino students at a western PWI. Researchers found that the student’s ethnic identity was not a
direct predictor of persistence attitudes, but that the campus environment played the role as
mediator. Students with high ethnic identity reported more negative perception of the university
environment (Castillo et al., 2006). Results from this study suggested that if the university was
active in creating a welcoming environment in consideration of Latino students’ needs and
culture, then their ethnicity would be perceived as an asset and their commitment to the
university would increase, as would their persistence (Castillo et al., 2006).
Museus, Nichols, & Lambert (2008) found that the relationship between the campus
racial climate, academic and social involvement, and goal and institutional commitment all
translate to degree completion in unique ways for different racial minority groups. While the
impact of high or low social engagement and high and low academic engagement influenced
completion in unique ways for White, Asian, Black, and Hispanic students, the significant
finding was that the highest measure found in all the models was the direct effect of campus
climate on institutional commitment (Museus et al., 2008). If the perceived racial climate is
positive and can impact institutional commitment, universities can use intentional policies and
practices to improve the environment and student persistence.

22

Limitations of integration theory
Student persistence, in the integration framework, is dependent on a complex relationship
of factors like student characteristics, the perception of the campus racial climate, student
engagement, and sense of belonging. Integration theory attributes persistence decisions to
commitment which is mediated by the student’s level of integration into or near the central
culture of the campus. Lower-status college students, such as the LFGCS interviewed for this
dissertation study, are often left out of this model, which depends on some attempt at
assimilation. A limitation of integration theory is the inability to explain the persistence of
students who remain on the fringes of the central campus cultural, stay connected to external
communities, such as their familial and ethno-cultural networks, and still persist. Perceptions of
campus climate influence sense of belonging, student engagement, and integration into the
campus culture. These factors are empirically supported influences for college persistence, but a
parallel current of social capital, built through meaningful connections to significant others
within the college, is also an important theoretical paradigm in gaining a deeper understanding of
the support, guidance, and access to resources provided to lower-status college students by the
significant others in their lives.
Social Capital Theory
The second theoretical framework used for this study considers the supportive
connections that LFGCS form and utilize to achieve and persist in college. Exploring the process
and benefits of relationships with significant others within the college environment demands an
examination of the forms of social capital that students are drawing upon and building through
the productive networks they form. This section looks at the development of social capital
23

theory, the evolution of the theoretical framework, and how it has been used to explore academic
achievement for Latino and first-generation college students.
Social capital has been defined as the use of relationships to gain access to knowledge
and resources to further achievement of one’s goals (Green & Sablan, 2014). The concept of
capital, drawn from Marxism, assumes that one can gain something that is valuable and
exchangeable, and could be used to reach better outcomes. Relationships that yield rewards and
benefits are the ones that build social capital. The “wealth” of social capital is in the productive
relationships, which lead to valuable resources.
The idea that participation in communities can yield positive results dates back to
Durkheim’s (1951) theory of suicide and was used by Tinto (1987, 1993) in developing his
theory of student departure also. The contemporary usage of social capital considers the
nonmonetary forms of accessing power and gaining benefits and resources through social
connections. Bourdieu (1986) offered the first modern analysis of social capital and defined it as
the total sum of resources gained (and potential) due to membership in social groups. Because a
group or network offers benefits, a group is solidified by its exchanges of information and
resources. Social networks are not automatically formed; they are constructed by individual
investment in relationships that yield returns (Portes, 2000).
Bourdieu (1986) presented two underlying principles in defining his concept of social
capital: social relationships allow individuals to access resources through others, and the number
of relationships and quality of those connections can vary. Loury (1977) explored the idea that
focusing on human capital and merit as a basis for social mobility ignored racial inequalities in
society that impact access to information and resources. Becker (1967) also alluded to this
systemic inequality in the access to cheap supply funds used to build human capital. Becker
24

explains that human capital is embodied in a person, but is built by investment (of time/energy)
in learning (gaining knowledge and skills). Some persons will be more skeptical of investing
huge amounts of time and money in higher education, with no guaranteed return, but more
experienced investors (such as those who already have human, social, and cultural capital) have
the luxury to forgo earnings as young adults and invest large amounts of time earlier in life,
which earns a higher return over the individual’s lifetime (Becker, 1967). A lack of focus on
structural barriers, like institutional racism, which inhibits equal access to education for all
students, has been a criticism of social capital theory and cannot be ignored in using the theory to
consider educational outcomes of non-traditional students (Dika & Singh, 2003; Stanton-Salazar,
1997, 2001; Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003).
Coleman (1988), moving Loury’s thesis forward, extended social capital as a precursor to
human capital and applied it to educational wealth also. Coleman also introduced the idea of
social control as a byproduct of social capital within strongly tied communities. Communities
exchange social capital by virtue of obligation and expectations, trusting that favors will be
repaid in time. The high value on trust creates a tight social network and makes it easier for
members to access resources, therefore within the group individuals share and exchange social
capital (Coleman, 1988). Social relations provide access to information as well, which is a form
of knowledge wealth. Social norms are controlled by social capital sharing. Ideal behavior is
rewarded and undesirable behavior is not (Coleman, 1988). Members of a tight knit society exert
social control over others via the behavioral norms that are modeled and expected. Coleman calls
this "closure" and expresses it as a system of maintaining social contracts, which protects trust
and obligation within the community. Coleman does not clearly delineate between the resources
25

gained by social connections and the ability to gain them when defining his concept of social
capital and this has been a central criticism of Coleman’s social capital model (Portes, 2000).
To study the impact that family characteristics had on social capital, Coleman (1988)
studied 4000 high school students' data, examining measures that approximated social capital
within the family, to predict the likelihood of high school completion. Considering the number of
parents in the home, the number of siblings (taxing family resources), and the expectation of the
parents in regards to college attendance, Coleman found that the likelihood was affected by these
variables. For instance, if a student has both parents at home, and only one sibling, and there is a
high expectation from parents that the student will go to college, then the chance of dropping out
of high school is only 8%, but a student with one parent at home, 4 siblings, and little
expectation from the parent that she will attend college, has a 30% chance of not completing
high school. This study supports the impact that familial networks, knowledge, resources, and
support can have on educational outcomes.
Outside of the family, the communities and relationships that students engage in, such as
churches, schools, neighborhoods, and teams or organizations where people know each other and
help each other access knowledge and resources are a powerful form of social capital. These
networks can provide students with non-familial sources of inspiration and expectation to
achieve better outcomes. There are significant actors that work as protective and institutional
agents that help minority youth gain social capital, which is produced by social networks (i.e.
relationships) that provide access to and knowledge of resources and processes that can improve
their lives (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Students may have strong cultural and familial ties that
provide them with knowledge and support, but may not be congruent with what institutions, like
schools and colleges, expect students to possess. Cultural funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti,
26

Neff & Gonzalez, 1992) are not universally accepted within dominant institutions of learning.
Without the “right” kind of social capital, minority youth may be barred from activities that
would enhance social mobility.
Stanton-Salazar (1997) asserts that it is more difficult to build productive relationships as
an outsider or lower-status minority youth. Purposeful and strategic educational opportunities for
meaningful relationship-making have to be designed for working-class minority youth. Like
Stanton-Salazar, Lin (2000) recognizes that historical oppression and segregation have created a
social hierarchy where the more privileged have benefits that others do not have access to,
namely through social networks. Disadvantaged groups are often strongly tied communities
where members exchange information and share resources. This limits the diversity of resources
at members’ disposal when they rely solely on those within the group (Lin, 2000). More
socioeconomically advantaged groups will have more diverse resource-rich connections. Ethnic
communities with strong ties that restrict entry of outsiders into the group will reproduce poor
social capital if their social networks remain homogenous.
Finding new connections will require minority students to make a purposeful effort and
could weaken a student’s own ethnic identity and/or weaken the connection to the home
community (Lin, 2000). In networks with resource-rich heterogeneity, useful information is
shared as a matter of routine with little extra effort expended, which Lin calls, the “invisible hand
of social capital” (p. 792). Disadvantaged students do not have the invisible hand at their
disposal, and must actively seek out information, resources, and useful social connections.
Strong ties within a community can be limiting if relationships with outsiders are discouraged,
but that is exactly what disadvantaged students need – new beneficial ties outside their kin and
community networks – in order to gain more access to resources (Lin, 2000). College provides
27

such an environment and opportunity for the formation of fictive kin groups, where students can
bond over shared interests and goals, and extend their networks (Tierney & Venegas, 2006)
Supportive and productive relationships with institutional agents outside of the family are
necessary for healthy development and success in educational settings and beyond (Stanton-
Salazar, 1997, 2001). Extended family, school, peer groups, and community organizations are
spheres in which social capital can be built. But there are barriers to accessing these donors of
social capital, such as pressure on working-class minority youth to acculturate to a dominant
standard of behavior, the discomfort they face in that acculturation, and the institutional
mechanisms that limit or discourage non-traditional help-giving actions in schools.
Relying on Bourdieu’s (1986) definition of social capital, that relationships can produce
benefits that are translatable to resources and other forms of capital (i.e. human and economic),
which is also supported by Coleman (1988), Stanton-Salazar acknowledges that these works
ignore systemic biases and oppression that work to limit social capital-building for
disadvantaged youth. In inquiring how minority youth overcome such structural barriers,
Stanton-Salazar found that key forms of institutional support were advantageous: bridges to
resource brokers, role models, and advocates who offer advice, feedback, and guidance. Students
also have agency in gaining social capital. Those who can decode their own culture and learn the
dominant discourses of other systems and environments will be able to form more diverse social
networks and therefore derive more benefits. Minority students who have not successfully
learned to code-switch will need bridges into the institutional culture and will benefit from the
support of institutional agents who can offer formal or informal mentorship and access to
resources (Stanton-Salazar, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2011).

28

Prior Research Using a Social Capital Framework
Examining the ways that students engage with and gain support from significant others,
and the type of support and resources provided by models and agents, illuminates the power of
social networks and the value of social capital. The next subsections examine prior literature that
investigated the support networks, institutional agents, and models that lower-status college
students engage in order to navigate, negotiate, and persist in college.
Support networks. Support networks within the college impact adjustment and improve
the likelihood of persistence from year to year. Beginning with Attinasi’s (1989) premise that
students must make sense of and learn how to navigate the complex environment of college, and
that mentors and knowledge sharing are tools that students use in order to make their way
through college processes, Hurtado et al. (1996) found that Latino college students relied on
upperclassman and resident advisors in order to successfully adjust to the new environment.
Latino students often report that family is a great motivational factor in getting to college
(Kim, 2009; Sánchez, Reyes & Singh, 2006). Rodriguez et al. (2003) examined family and peer
support separately under the assumption that different social support networks will offer different
benefits and opportunities to students. Not to discount the effect that families have on Latino
students’ success, understanding that culture and community play a role in preparing students to
face new challenges, the authors conducted a quantitative study that would measure and control
for demographic variables – SES, immigrant status, region of origin, and minority-related,
acculturative, and generic college stress – as well as sense of well-being and perception of social
support. The study found that peer support had the more powerful effect on adjustment into
college. Peers were able to provide guidance to resources needed to meet the new demands of
29

college. It was friends, and not family, that more often contributed to increased feelings of well-
being and belonging, as well as negating distress.
Kim’s (2009) qualitative study explored the reliance on peers in navigating academic
challenges in college for immigrant youth in their first year of college. Interviews with 49
college students revealed that they had unrealistic expectations of what college would be like
before matriculating, found themselves underprepared for self-directed study and time
management, and felt their study skills were underdeveloped in order to cope with the rigor of
college work. Students reported that they often did not pursue advice from advisors and faculty
because they did not feel the institutional agents cared for them or had time for them. Only with
encouragement from peers did students seek out faculty interactions. Peer support from others
within the college, specifically upperclassmen, gave students inspiration to persist and advice on
navigating college processes, which classes and professors to take, and how to study. First-year
students were also found to rely most often on peer networks within their own ethnic culture with
which they felt a bond and a sense of belonging.
Friends alone cannot provide all the support that Latino first-generation students need in
college. Using a social capital framework (Stanton-Salazar, 1997) that assumes relationships are
built to provide access to support and resources, Sánchez, Reyes, and Singh (2006) conducted
interviews with Mexican American students at a large four-year college, as well as interviews
with the persons they named as significant providers of support in their lives. Family, friends,
and institutional agents gave students emotional, cognitive, and experiential support as well as
served as models which helped them navigate college-going processes. Parents were named most
often as providing motivational support in persisting in high school and considering college, but
it was peers and older siblings (also serving as near peer models and informal mentors) who were
30

the most supportive in college-going decision-making, such as entrance exams, completing
forms, accessing resources, choosing courses and majors, and exploring career paths. Sánchez et
al. (2006) found that peer support relationships were reciprocal in and around the classroom as
well, where students often taught and tutored each other. Peers served to fill in gaps of support
that parents and institutional agents cannot provide. The authors suggest that no single support
provider will be reliable enough to provide all the support that Latino first-generation college
students’ needs, but that a support network with a portfolio of models and informal mentors will
best serve the varied needs of this underrepresented student population. Cabrera and Padilla
(2004), in a qualitative study of two Chicano college students, also found support for the
assertion that encouragement from a complex networks of family, friends, and mentors were
influential in persistence decisions.
Support networks are dynamic and change over time as students access them in order to
seek advice and strategize ways to face new challenges. Students form social networks while in
high school that support them in getting into college, but rarely can the same network of family
and high school institutional agents support them as they transition into and persist in college
(Rios-Aguilar & Deil-Amen, 2012). In interviews with 10 Latino students in a mentoring
program at a public research university, Hernandez (2002) found that many students expressed
difficulty adjusting to the academic expectation of college life. They felt underprepared and
articulated that they specifically chose not to get involved in student organizations the first year
so that they could focus on meeting the academic expectations. In relation to social adjustment,
some students discussed not feeling a sense of belonging or that their culture was not reflected in
the campus environment at the PWI. They sometimes felt torn between their home culture and
the new college culture and sought out the friendship of other Latino students who they felt
31

would understand them. All the students mentioned they were able to make some friends on
campus and nearly all spoke about family support as an integral piece in getting them to college
as well as in their persistence through the first year.
Institutional agents. Beyond support networks that provide encouragement and
advocacy, as well as academic advice, there are institutional agents that can offer resource-rich
connections and access to other individuals who can be mobilized to act on behalf of lower-
status students (Stanton-Salazar, 2001, 2011). Stanton-Salazar (2011) defines institutional agents
as high-status, non-kin, positioned to provide support and access, and who can transform the
lives of young people by explicitly teaching them about social stratification and how dominant
discourse can be and should be challenged. Stanton-Salazar's social capital framework focuses
on two precepts: that youth participate in multiple communities and that fictive kin play a role in
the educational achievement of lower-status students, defined as working-class, ethnic minority
students. Young adulthood is a time of socialization, whereby students learn from various
models, mentors, relationships, and interactions. During this time, young people are learning
how to navigate a variety of sociocultural circles, and what Gee (1989) would call primary and
secondary discourses. A key point put forth by Gee is that discourses are learned through
"apprenticeship" which is translated in the context of this dissertation study as learning to
navigate from interactions with others and productive relationships, i.e. social capital.
College personnel, such as academic counselors and faculty, serve as mediators of
persistence for lower-status students also. A qualitative study in which successful high-risk
students were asked who influenced them to stay in school and how they were influenced
(Schreiner, Noel, Anderson & Cantwell, 2011), identified faculty and staff that invested their
time in student support activities and communicated to students in subtle ways that the institution
32

valued them. Students of color in the study reported that influential faculty had made the overt
effort to connect with students around their interests, took time to learn their names (making
them feel valued as individuals), and made comments to them about continuing in college and
going on to do great things, communicating that someone at the college believed they had the
capacity to finish college and find a career (Schreiner et al., 2011). The support offered by
purposeful and intentional behavior of college personnel had a direct effect on student
persistence.
Hurtado, Carter, and Spuler (1996) found that Latino college students relied on
upperclassman and resident advisors in order to successfully adjust to the new environment.
Socializing with peers in the first year aided social adjustment, but scores on a social adjustment
inventory varied for those who sought assistance and support from other freshman versus those
who received support from resident advisors and upperclassman – students who had knowledge
of campus resources, and some with specific training, therefore having access to resources based
on a high-status position (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). Students who reported gaining support from
institutional agents showed higher levels of social adjustment (Hurtado et al., 1996). Peer models
may serve as support agents (more broker than capital-builder), helping students get familiar
with the environment, processes, and culture of the college, as well as offering guidance on
resources and opportunities.
Barriers to institutional agents. An important part of understanding and improving the
college experience for lower-status students is to capture their own stories in their own words.
Counterstories, a tenet of Critical Race Theory, allow researchers and educators to take a deeper
look at issues from the student perspective, often defying our assumptions (López, 2003).
Counterstories illuminate student persistence even as national graduation rates suggest that
33

college completion is less likely for Latino students and first-gen college students (NCES, 2011).
These narratives also shed light on the intersections of class, identity, and supportive social
networks.
In Muñoz and Maldonado’s (2012) case study of four undocumented Latina students who
successfully finished college, authentic and immediate truths about barriers to persistence for
lower-status students were revealed. The women who were interviewed reported they felt they
had to hide part of their identity and could not freely express themselves in class discussions, for
fear of discrimination as non-citizens (Muñoz & Maldonado, 2012). The students’ race and
citizenship affected their academic engagement activities. These students were able to succeed
without assimilating, in contradiction to previous research within the integrationalist tradition
framework that suggests students who break ties with their home communities will better
integrate and be more likely to persist (Elkins, Braxton, & James, 2000). These women were able
to persist because of family encouragement, and the peer support network they created around a
shared “outsider” culture. The students, through their stories, also demonstrated a strong desire to
complete college, and were able to navigate home life, work life, and school life in different
ways, and still maintain their aspirations (Muñoz & Maldonado, 2012). What is missing from
their stories, and is suggested by previous research presented in this chapter, is the presence of
faculty and staff that could have offered advice, access to resources, or knowledge about how to
navigate the system. The perception that these students needed to hide their identity or voice is
an indication that the college failed to offer access to beneficial social capital to support the
achievement of LFGCS. In the absence of any high-status institutional agents, the students
cobbled together a support network of their own to enable their persistence, relying heavily on
family and peers.
34

Models as bridges to institutional agents. Peers, and specifically peer models, have an
effect on students’ self-efficacy, decision-making, help-seeking, knowledge about campus
resources, and access to institutional agents. Vicarious experience through observing the success
of peer models can strengthen a student’s belief in their own abilities (Bandura, 1977). Seeing
others fail and continue (i.e. persist) provides evidence to students that effort has value and that
challenges are surmountable. Bandura advocates for cooperative learning environments where
students can work together and offer modeling and feedback to each other which promotes self-
efficacy and influences the likelihood of persistence and academic achievement. Engagement
with peer models within the college, specifically upperclassmen, gives students inspiration to
persist, as well as guidance on navigating college processes, choosing classes, professors, and
co-curricular opportunities, as well as study and time management skills (Kim, 2009).
Clark (2005) found that, once in college, students discovered their knowledge gaps by
talking to peers, and could then rely on peer support to overcome obstacles, such as shyness, lack
of knowledge of current events, lack of experience with campus resources, and underdeveloped
study skills. For example, a student reported that when faced with a poor mark and wanting to
improve the grade, her strategy would be to first ask a peer for advice, then talk with an advisor
and then see the professor if needed. First-generation college students lack knowledge of
opportunities and activities that can influence academic success, such as studying in groups,
seeking out faculty support and feedback, actively participating in classroom and co-curricular
activities, using support services, and developing mentoring relationships (Soria & Stebleton,
2012). Because students are socialized to understand and respect hierarchy, they often seek
advice first from peers and models, which can have a powerful influence on their decisions
(Stanton-Salazar, 2004).
35

Students actively seek out models who share their ideals, dreams, and goals (Tierney &
Venegas, 2006). These close relationships with others outside the family with whom individuals
share a goal, identity, or worldview are called fictive kin relationships (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986).
Students in fictive kin groups share a goal, as well as sharing resources related to the goal, hence
building social capital. Tierney and Venegas (2006) conducted focus groups with peer
counselors in low-income high schools in southern California in order to learn more about the
roles and perceptions of peer counseling and to discuss their training and knowledge around
college-going processes. The authors found that peer counselors volunteered because they
wanted to help others and also gain access to resource-ful information. The peer counselors were
bound by common goals, but they did not describe each other as friends. Participating in the
program allowed the students to share an identity as college-ready. Being part of a pro-academic
fictive kin group provided social capital that increased the likelihood of persisting in college.
Peer models contribute to building students’ knowledge of resources, study skills, and a
sense of community (Zalaquett & Lopez, 2006). By analyzing the written narratives of 13 Latino
college students at a large urban university, Zalaquett and Lopez learned what motivated students
to pursue college and how they overcame challenges. While formal and informal mentorship has
been shown to aid students’ pursuit of and performance in academic programs (Kram, 1983), the
results from this study showed only informal mentoring was significant to the students in
preparing for and navigating college. Student reported that their families were central in
supporting them in high school and in applying to college. Once enrolled, they relied on peer
support at the college to welcome them, and familiarize them with college resources and
processes. Peer support can also mediate stress and anxiety, allowing students who have faced
36

academic challenges due to psychosocial factors to overcome those challenge and achieve
academic outcomes similar to peers with low anxiety (Rodger & Tremblay, 2003).
The relationships that students build in college offer salient benefits that assist Latino
first-generation college students in persisting from year to year toward graduation. Dennis,
Phinney, and Chuateco (2005), utilizing an ecological framework, asserted that students who
think they have the support they need feel less stress, have more confidence and adjust and
perform better. Those who feel they lack support struggle to adjust and persist. The authors
found that the perception of lack of support was related to negative outcomes, while the
perception of having enough support had no effect. Actual availability of support networks does
not make a difference as much as the student’s perception of the environment. Empowering
students to connect with models, mentors, and institutional agents in and out of the classroom
helps them build the social networks they need to achieve and persist in college (Stanton-Salazar,
2001).
Stanton-Salazar and Spina (2003) analyzed interview data from 51 working-class
minority high school students to study their social networks and help-seeking behaviors and
found that informal mentors offered students access to benefits and resources that families could
not, extending students' social capital. The authors defined informal mentors as adults who offer
care and resources to young people without formal responsibilities. One student identified a
church leader, from a friend's church, as a meaningful mentor, saying he was like a father.
Another student reported that her boyfriend's mother had helped her with her depression after her
sister moved away. The boyfriend's mother had become a "second mom" to her. These informal
mentors take on familial qualities for young people and offer extra support and benefits that
families cannot.
37

Many participants in Stanton-Salazar and Spina’s (2003) study had an extensive network
of people they knew in their community, but that did not automatically provide them with social
capital. They did not always find support and guidance within their own network of contacts. It
was through peers that students were connected to adults who offered mentorship and problem-
solving assistance, and in this way peers, informal mentors and models within the context of a
college environment can mediate access to institutional agents and beneficial social capital.
Rationale for the Study
Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) are developing their sense of identity,
like all young adults, but are also reconciling multiple identities, community memberships, and
cultures inside and outside of the college environment. During this process they are seeking out
models and mentors, including institutional agents that can direct and connect them to resources
to help them achieve their goals. Models and mentors validate students, and this positive
reinforcement enables or encourages students to invest more in relationships and thus gain more
benefit, i.e. social capital (Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003). This increased social capital leads to
a more developed sense of self and desire for more social capital.
This study relied on both integration theory and social capital theory to guide the
investigation of significant others in the lives of LFGCS at an elite, urban PWI. Integration
theory assumes students are most likely to persist in college if they integrate into the central
culture of a college, and social capital theory asserts that relationships have value that is
translatable to other types of wealth or capital, such as human capital, i.e. education, knowledge,
and skills. Both integration and social capital are key for LFGCS to persist in college, but it is the
exploration of the link between them – networks of significant others – that has guided this study
(Figure 1).
38

Figure 1. Concept Model of Theoretical Frameworks.
This study began with the assumption based on the literature that LFGCS rely on
connections to models, informal mentors, and collaborative learning partners in order to gain
access to resources and learn to navigate the college environment. These relationships have value
as they build social capital and aid in students’ self-efficacy and commitment to school, which
influences persistence. Stanton-Salazar's social capital framework (2011) integrates the concepts
of institutional support, institutional agents, and social capital to describe the process of social
support systems that enable lower-status students to achieve their educational goals. Social
capital theory, used as a lens to lens to examine the lived experience of LFGCS, allows space for
students of color to integrate into an educational community without fully assimilating into the
dominant culture. Investigating the process by which LFGCS integrate into subcultures in
college, combined with an examination of the significant others that students rely upon for
Integration
Theory
Network
Connections to
Significant
Others

Social Capital
Theory
Persistence
in College
Completion Agenda for
Latino First-Gen Students
39

support, advice, and access to resources were the two guiding concepts for this study.
Padilla’s (1996) qualitative study of ethnic minority students at a single college campus
allowed students, in focus groups, to respond to a list of established barriers to persisting in
college, and to report how they faced those barriers, what they had to know to overcome them
(heuristic knowledge), and actions taken by the students to overcome them. Padilla’s (1996)
results demonstrated that students of color were successful because they learned how to get the
support they needed in the campus environment. They created for themselves what the institution
could not provide to them. While Tinto’s integration model (1993) focuses on factors that lead to
withdrawal, and social capital theory (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Stanton-Salazar, 1997,
2001) focuses on valuable relationships, the expertise model put forth by Padilla (1994) allows
me to get in between those frameworks -- to focus on who and what has guided and supported
these students on the path to success. Padilla reminds researchers that a focus on success rather
than failure allows for the development of new models of student completion from which asset-
minded strategies and interventions can be drawn. Further research on how students form support
networks in college is needed in order to understand how Latino first-gen students are agents of
their own success, how sense of belonging and campus climate are perceived and negotiated, and
how students benefit from engagement in internal and external communities that impact their
persistence – and that was the rationale for this study.
Our education system rewards dominant community values and those are reproduced by
sharing of social capital within privileged social networks (Green & Sablan, 2014). Those with
the most access via the most profitable social networks get the most resources, and so social
capital theory has been criticized as a deficit model (Dika & Singh, 2002). But it has also been
extended to consider ways in which social networks in non-White lower-income communities
40

function and benefit members of those communities (Lin, 2000; Stanton-Salazar, 1997, 2001;
Tierney & Venegas, 2006). Examining the process by which lower-status students locate and
connect with brokers of social capital in educational institutions is useful because it draws
attention to the students who are able to bridge the culture of the home community and the
school community, gives value to students’ funds of knowledge and ability to decode multiple
discourses, and gives practitioners a process map of the support networks that Latino first-gen
students develop as a means to persist in college. With this rich data and deeper understanding of
the student experience and the significant others in their lives, practitioners can facilitate social
capital network development and increase support for Latino first-gen students, furthering the
completion agenda for lower-status students and increasing their access to human and economic
capital, and social mobility.

41

CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
In the previous chapter theoretical models of integration and social capital were examined
and exemplified in prior literature. While both theoretical models have been independently
validated, the aim of this study was to examine the intersection of the two paradigms and draw
upon expert analysis techniques to learn from successful LFGCS, about their experiences at an
elite PWI and the social-capital-rich relationships they have relied upon to influence their
persistence in college.
This purpose of the study was to examine the meaningful relationships with significant
others as identified by LFGCS and develop a local model that helps explain how this specific
population builds social networks that support their persistence toward obtaining a college
degree. The three research questions for this study are:
1. How do Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) integrate into communities at a
large, elite PWI?
2. Who and what have altered the lives of LFGCS and how have significant others
supported their persistence in college?
3. What benefits do LFGCS perceive they have gained from the significant others in their
lives?
Qualitative Inquiry
Because the aim of this study was exploratory, to learn how something works, the
research questions demand that the methods be qualitative (Merriam, 2009). Maxwell (2013)
suggests that the learning goals of the researcher guide the development of research questions,
and that qualitative research is the approach to use when the researcher wants to gain a deeper
42

understanding of a particular site or a particular group and find meaning in the context of the
participant. Two other tenets of qualitative research that sustained the choice of methods for this
study are that generalizability is sacrificed for a deeper understanding of process and that
qualitative research is a partnership in which the participant has a voice (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam, 2009). Patton (2002) emphasizes that interviews specifically allow us to learn what is
not observable and to enter the world through another’s eyes. This study sought to learn from
students what their role had been in building networks, what kinds of support others had
provided and what benefits students gained as they overcame obstacles associated with persisting
in college. The goal was to see the unseen and notice the previously unnoticed. This information
could only be acquired through in-depth participant interviews.
Sample and Population
For the purposes of this study, I selected a population that would be able to answer the
research questions. The site, a highly selective, research university in the West (referred to as the
University), has approximately 40,000 students, of which 12% are Latino and 14% are first-
generation college students. I chose to locate this study at an elite PWI, so that I could examine
the experience and the expertise of this specific population that has managed to persist in college
year after year, despite the fact that national statistics suggest that it is more likely that lower-
status students will not complete a bachelor’s degree (NCES, 2014a). The challenges of being a
lower-status student in an environment that is predominately white middle- and upper-class
students were voiced by the students in the minority, and this provides practitioners with an
expert map on how these students navigated the campus climate, built productive relationships,
and adjusted and integrated into the academic and social life of the university in their own way.

43

Sampling Method
Using a purposeful sampling method, I sought out Latino first-generation college
students attending a highly-selective PWI, who were seniors, low-income need-based grant
recipients, and who expected to successfully graduate within the current academic year. I
emailed my participant request letter (Appendix D) to academic advisors that I knew worked
with first-gen students and asked them to forward it to students who met the criteria, and might
be interested in participating in the study. The select advisors were those that had connections to
scholarship programs on the campus that served low-income students (such as University
Scholars and Neighborhood Academic Initiative advisors). Other advisors I emailed to assist me
with outreach were in the business school and the communications school – both places where I
could not reach students through a structured support office or a student organization. I visited a
Latino Student Government meeting as well to make an in-person invitation and introduce the
project, and also asked the director of Latino Student Services to share my invitation to
participate in the study. I emailed the McNair Scholars program coordinator to ask for the
invitation to be shared with students, and well as the executive board of these student
organizations: Society for Hispanic Engineers, Chicanos and Latinos for Health Education, and
the Multicultural Greek Council. Lastly, I posted flyers around campus requesting study
participants (Appendix E). Twelve students were selected for interviews.
Participant Selection
Participants were selected based on convenience (i.e. they volunteered), but also on the
typicality of the student, based on the selection criteria. Drawing from Stanton-Salazar’s (1997,
2001) work on social capital as a means to increase social mobility for lower-status students, not
all Latino first-gen students at the research site fit the socioeconomic status implied in lower
44

status, meaning the students are ethnic minorities attending a predominately white middle-to-
upper class college, but that they are economically minority students also. Criteria for participant
selection were that students identify as Latino, are the first generation in their family to attend
college, and are also need-based financial aid recipients. A sample of 5 women and 5 men, all of
whom began at the four-year university as first-time, full-time freshman, were selected for in-
depth interviews (Table 1). Two additional students were interviewed, but the two interviews
were cut from the data corpus before analysis. Both participants were transfer students, and as
such did not have the longevity within the institution to provide a college life history at the
particular site. While the narratives are valuable in examining the process by which transfer
students build support networks at four-year colleges, their experiences were too dissimilar from
the larger sample and were not used for this study.
Table 1
Research Study Participants
ALIAS MAJOR AGE HOME STATE ETHNICITY GENDER
Alexander Global Health 21 CA Mexican
M
Andrea American Studies 21 CA Mexican
F
Anthony Business 29 CA Mexican
M
Cirah Public Relations 21 CA Mexican
F
Christina Health Promotion 21 CA Mexican
F
George Biochemistry 21 TX Salvadorean
M
Isabel Psychology 21 CA Mexican
F
José Health Promotion 21 CA Mexican
M
Robert Int'l Relations 21 AZ Mexican
M
Sarah Sociology 21 CA Salvadorean
F

45

Data Collection
The primary form of data collection for this study was interviews. Interviews allow for
in-depth insight into the experience and perceptions of others (Patton, 2002). I conducted, semi-
structured interviews, using an open-ended interview guide, based on Padilla’s (1994) unfolding
matrix model. Each interview was approximately 1.5 hours and aimed to capture the college life
history of the informants, particularly prying into support networks and chosen communities
within the college. Using concepts identified in the prior literature, including key forms of
support aligned with Stanton-Salazar’s (2001, 2011) typology of support and institutional agents
(Appendix C), I developed an interview protocol aligned with integration and social capital
theories (Appendix B). Padilla’s (1994) unfolding matrix technique was used in order to draw
out expert tacit knowledge that students may not be explicitly aware that they even possess. The
ethnographic interviews allowed me to elicit the unnoticed and unseen integration and social
network building strategies used by the participants.
The Unfolding Matrix
Influenced by Miles and Huberman’s (1984) discussion of the difficulty of bounding the
collection of data as it pertains to the research questions, Padilla suggested developing a matrix
of topics to be explored exhaustively so that interviews remain focused on the research
questions, while still delving deeply into the concepts that need examination. Padilla (1994)
recommended creating a cover term based on the literature that would open a line of inquiry to
answer well-formed research questions. This method of focused interviewing is aimed at
collecting data that will inform the research question, and allows the researcher to ask open-
ended probes to fully exhaust the cover term, reaching saturation. Padilla also suggested tandem
interviewing, asking small groups of participants to help complete a matrix, and allowing teams
to add material to another groups’ matrix, so that there is one large data set created for a
46

population. The limitation of tandem interviewing and having multiple teams completing a data
matrix is that the population being studied must be fairly homogenous. This method does not
allow for exploration of variation or comparisons between any sub-groups within the study
population. Due to these limitations, tandem interviews were not attempted for this study.
Individual interviews using the same semi-structured guide were conducted over a two-month
period.
Padilla (1996) explained how the unfolding matrix technique was used in a study to
capture data on what actions ethnic minority students took that influenced their success in
college. Padilla (1994) developed the unfolding matrix technique in order to be as efficient as
possible in data collection and to begin pre-coding and organizing data. This method of
collection does not take the place of rigorous data analysis, but it does ensure that the researcher
begins analysis by drawing connections and themes early in the process. Padilla (1996) also
asserts that the unfolding matrix is based in the camp of action research, which contributes to the
body of practitioner knowledge but also immediately informs the participants themselves, by
revealing to them the power of their expertise. In Padilla’s use of the unfolding matrix, the aim
was to develop a local model of student success, mapping out the actions that students took in
order to overcome barriers and realize their potential (Padilla, 1996, 2009). This dissertation
study was not dissimilar, but was focused on the exploring the process by which LFGCS
integrated into chosen communities and their productive relationships with significant others
who supported the students’ persistence in college.
Padilla’s expertise model was used in this study in order to validate students’ sense of
agency and funds of knowledge, acknowledging that successful LFGCS are experts on how to
persist at an elite PWI. To ascertain what actions LFGCS took to build relationships, who offered
47

them support, what did they learn from and through others, and what benefits do they perceive
they have gained from the support of others were the goals of this study. Padilla and Stanton-
Salazar both challenge the integration framework, based on Van Gennep’s (1960) principles of
separation which asserts that students must separate from the past/home community in order to
incorporate into a new culture. Instead, Padilla’s work and that of Stanton-Salazar, Spina,
Tierney, and others, suggest that ethnic minority students incorporate their home communities
into the campus culture and that supports their integration, social capital-building, and therefore,
their success in college. This study relied on qualitative inquiry methods focused on capturing
the expertise and lived experiences of LFGCS in order to create a local model of student success
based within a social capital paradigm.
Data Analysis
After each interview the audio recording was transcribed, verbatim, and hand-coded,
page by page, for open codes and empirical codes, drawn from the prior literature. Using an
ethnographic analysis method put forth by Spradley (1979) called domain analysis, I searched
the data for salient cover terms that connected the initial list of over 1000 codes, drawn from
approximately 250 pages of transcripts. Domain analysis is a way to analyze interview
transcripts pulling out the larger units of cultural knowledge (Spradley, 1979). Building on
Spradley’s assertion that symbols expressed in language communicate informant culture by
reference and relationship, I conducted a second round of analysis, on each transcript, by using
the cover terms, seeking out evidence in the data corpus that demonstrated the semantic
relationship between the cover terms.
Using domain analysis helps to categorize the culture of informants as they describe their
world. Because defining culture depends on the connection of symbols, creating relationships
48

helps to decode cultural meaning (Spradley, 1979). Domain analysis also allows for the creation
of boundaries around categories. Spradley advises beginning analysis immediately on each
interview as they are collected. Using a universal set of semantic relationships (Table 2),
domains can be created inductively and authentically from the data. During data collection, I
continually reviewed transcripts to create new domains to add to the growing master list. This
constant and immediate analysis also allowed for improved probes during subsequent interviews
in order to gain a deeper understanding of the productive relationships and support systems of
the Latino first-gen students at the study site.
Table 2
Universal Semantic Relationships (Spradley, 1979, p. 111)

Relationship Type Semantic Relationship
Strict inclusion X is a kind of Y
Spatial X is a place in Y, X is a part of Y
Cause-effect X is a result of Y, X is a cause of Y
Rationale X is a reason for doing Y
Location for action X is a place for doing Y
Function X is used for Y
Means-end X is a way to do Y
Sequence X is a step/stage in Y
Attribution X is an attribute/characteristic of Y

Spradley (1979) asserts that an ethnographic approach means finding out what people
know but also how they organize what they know. I was also keenly interested in how they know
what they know. Who taught them? Who helped them? An investigator using an ethnographic
approach aims to describe a culture and learn from the participants. This study relied on
49

Spradley’s analytical method of domain analysis in order to draw out themes from the data to
answer the research questions. After open-coding of each interview transcript, I compiled a list
of the open codes and put them into categories, or cover terms. Each coded transcript added to
the master list of domains, and as I went through them all again and in different orders, I reached
saturation of cover terms. At that point I had a single data corpus from which I could draw
meaning. The findings emerged from the data as the concepts with the most notations, and
therefore the most magnitude. An example of one of the cover terms was ‘difficulties faced in
integration’ and under that theme, I found evidence that helped explain each concept (Table 3).
Table 3
Semantic Relationships Found Through Domain Analysis
Strict inclusion X is a kind of Y
X is a barrier (Y)
to integration
Y is a struggle or a challenge that must be overcome for students to
build community and relationships that strength their commitment to
remain in college.
X= Lack of sense of belonging
X= Negative perception of campus climate
X= Feelings of isolation (in housing, in classes, away from family)
X= Culture shock
X= Lack of effort or time to get involved in activities

Another domain was ‘ways in which students integrate’ and this helped to uncover the
process (the means-end relationship) by which barriers can be overcome. Once these domains
were compiled and compared across the entire sample, I could see the magnitude of concepts,
such as ‘sense of belonging’, which came up as a barrier (i.e. a lack of a sense of belonging), an
antecedent to integration, and precursor to initiating network-building. Looking at the data by
theme, or domain, across the sample allowed me to draw out key levers and stages in the process
50

of LFGCS’ persistence in order to develop a local model that demonstrates the pathway to
completion for these students at this university. Qualitative research is inherently interpretive,
but using a structured, systematic method to find meaning in the narratives of informants (by
defining semantic relationships) helped to ensure the reliability of the findings.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

In order to ensure credibility and trustworthiness of my findings, I used several strategies
suggested by Merriam (2009) such as capturing rich, thick description, member-checking,
maximum variation, and reflecting on data and data collection throughout the process to check
biases. Throughout the process of data collection and analysis I wrote reflexive memos about my
own biases and worldview, such as the fact that as a first-gen student I did not share a cultural
identity with my peers in college, and that I did not feel a sense of community or feel mentored
by staff or faculty at my own undergraduate institution. I found several themes to be surprises
that needed to be followed and questioned, such as the impact of institutionally-sponsored
support programs for low-income students (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014). My last attempt
to validate my findings was to member-check the themes with several of the study participants. I
emailed eight of the participants to ask if they would consider the findings, and let me know if
they felt that their experience in college was well-represented or if my interpretive findings were
out of line with their experiences. Two participants were not in classes on campus at the time of
member-checking and so I did not contact them. I simplified concepts and jargon to be as
understandable as possible and asked for any feedback without leading toward soliciting
confirmation of my findings. I also expressed that I would be happy to meet in person to discuss
the findings or to listen of they wished to offer any further comments. I received no negative
51

response that the findings were misaligned with the participants’ experience, and I received four
positive responses that the findings did resonate with the participants’ college experience.
Summary
This chapter has presented the methodology and rationale for this study, explaining
sampling, instrumentation, data collection and analysis procedures. Chapter 4 will focus on the
presentation of the data. Chapter 5 will include a discussion of the findings and implications for
practitioners, as well as recommendations for further research. Lastly, Chapter 6 presents an
epilogue – a guide to getting through the college – articulated in the voice of the participants.

52

CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS
This chapter presents the findings from an examination of the process by which LFGCS
integrate into chosen communities in college and the significant others in their lives that help
them navigate the new terrain of the elite PWI, and aid in their accumulation of social capital.
The term significant others was operationalized in this study as any agent who is named by a
participant as influential or impactful in regards to the student’s persistence in college.
Through ethnographic interviews (Spradley, 1979) aimed at exploring the college life
histories of successful senior Latina and Latino students, participants shared their personal
narratives, their struggles in college, and described the important people who influenced them to
integrate and persist to graduation. Integration is defined in this study as a result of sustained
engagement with persons and activities within the university. Tinto (1993) defined integration as
becoming incorporated into intellectual and social communities that intensify connection to the
institution. Realizing that this model of retention is deficient in explaining alternate modes of
integration via micro-community building, this study has relied on a social capital framework
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997, 2001, 2011) to reveal community-building processes and significant
actors in the donation of support and social capital that helps LFGCS persevere at this university.
This purpose of the study was to examine the meaningful relationships with significant
others as identified by LFGCS and develop a local model that helps explain how this specific
population builds social networks that support their persistence toward obtaining a bachelor’s
degree at a four-year university. The three research questions for this study were:
1. How do Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) integrate into communities at a
large, elite PWI?
53

2. Who and what have altered the lives of LFGCS and how have significant others
supported their persistence in college?
3. What benefits do LFGCS perceive they have gained from the significant others in their
lives?
In response to the first research question, three key findings emerged that explain the
process by which this specific sample of LFGCS integrated into chosen communities in college.
First, sense of belonging was confirmed to be a key component in connecting students to others
within the college environment. Findings support the theory that LFGCS rely heavily on
emotional support from similar peers in order to integrate into micro-communities in the college,
building their sense of belonging (Hurtado & Carter, 1997). Sense of belonging served as both an
input and output of integration. Secondly, students were able to overcome struggles and barriers
to integration with the aid of peer support and other social support agents. Lastly, the data
pointed to support agents who were instrumental in the integrative process, such as professors
and near peer models who brokered access to agencies, collectives, and academic and
professional networks.
Addressing the second research question, the data exposed a range of significant others,
identified by informants as those persons who impacted their persistence and goal attainment.
What emerged from the data was a system of stratified support agents and agencies with varying
levels of status and resources that is inversely related to power and trust. The lower-status social
support agents have less social capital, but more trust and credibility with LFGCS which aids
sense of belonging and integration efforts. Mid-level status agents (apprentice agents) have some
privileged knowledge, experience, and access to local resources (local capital) which further aids
integration efforts and social capital-building capability. Institutional agents and agencies are
54

harder to acquire, but offer students access to high status mentorship, advising, referrals,
knowledge and resources that are useful within the confines of the college and beyond as well.
The ranks of agents described here serve different functions in supporting student persistence for
LFGCS.
Finally, the results of the third research question revealed previously unnoticed benefits
of social capital-building outside of Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) typology. The benefits of
connections to social support agents, apprentice agents, and institutional agents were reported by
the informants as emotional/psychological support (i.e. encouragement, motivation, kinship),
local guidance (i.e. navigating the new terrain), and access to privileged knowledge and
resources within the institutional and professional domains. Other notable benefits of social
networks that emerged from the data were a collectivist concept of reciprocity and an awareness
of the need for diverse circles of social support that cross race and class boundaries.
This chapter is organized in four parts: first, a brief biographical thumbnail sketch of
each of the participants is provided, and then three sections follow that address each research
question. This chapter is followed by Chapter 5, which includes a discussion of the meaning of
the findings, their usefulness, implications for practitioners, and recommendations for further
research.
A Review of the Participants
A brief portrait of each informant is included here. The students are presented in
alphabetical order using self-selected pseudonyms. It is my intention that the reader, through
these short biographical portraits, is able to learn about the unique experiences of each student
and also see similarities across the sample. This section is followed by a presentation of the
findings from this study.
55

Alexander
Alexander is a soft-spoken, tall Mexican-American male. He is 21 years old, a senior, and
a Global Health major who is also ‘pre-med’, meaning he plans to go to medical school after
taking a year off to work and do more research and health-related volunteer work. His parents
emigrated from Mexico as a young couple and settled in central Los Angeles. He is the first in
his family to attend college, making him a first-generation college student, and he is a child of
immigrants, making him also a first-generation American. Alexander has three younger siblings,
one of whom is just beginning at regional, public four-year college. Alexander is a cheery
student who loves school. “I don’t ever want to graduate. I want to be in school forever,” he said
laughing. He also has a positive view of help-seeking which he attributes to his supportive
family. He expressed that, “it would be more shameful if I did horrible in a class than for asking
a simple question…my parents told me when you need help, ask for it, you know, don’t keep
anything to yourself.”
Alexander was part of the Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI) which recruits local
middle school students from low-income areas around the university and offers them a college
prep program, with extra tutoring, weekend classes, and parental support for six years. If students
stay committed and finish the six years of co-curricular instruction, they can earn a significant
scholarship to university. Once in the university, NAI Scholars also receive extra advising
support that is not available to all students. Alexander is also a University Scholar (US), which
has put him in a community of other University Scholars with whom he has had to attend
retreats, mixers, and community service events every semester. Alexander lived in the dorms his
freshman year. He works in the NAI office assisting the project manager in preparing materials
for Saturday tutoring sessions. He also volunteers at a local hospital which connects him to
56

physicians and allows him to observe the practice of medicine in a low-income urban center.
Lastly, Alexander reported that important resources that have aided his persistence have been his
continual involvement with the NAI advisors and the student organization, Chicanos for Health
Education (CHE) which has served as a community of peers “where I felt like they understood
my struggles.”
Andrea
Andrea is a 21 year old Mexican American student from a southern California border
town. She is a self-described “anchor baby.” Her mother came across the border from Mexico to
give birth so she would be a U.S. citizen. Andrea grew up as a small child in Mexico, but then
settled on the U.S. side of the border when it was time to go to school. She was raised by her
mother and her aunt, whom she calls her “two moms”. She is an American Studies major who
plans to pursue a Ph.D. in history after graduation. Andrea has been involved in a dance
performance group since her first year at the university and cites the group as the place where
she feels a strong sense of belonging at the university, because it allows her to represent the
university to an outside audience.
Andrea is also a University Scholar (US), like Alexander and José, and receives a large
scholarship and institutional support from dedicated program advisors. She named the staff and
students of the US program as her “family” at the university. The US program is aimed at
funding and supporting low-income students, who are nearly all first-gen college students and
90% ethnic minorities. Andrea lived in the dorms, on a special interest floor for Latino students,
her freshman year and found it easy to make friends and form bonds there. “I think this happens
with any themed floor, you automatically like glue on to each other… so I made a ton of
friends.” Andrea has also had to opportunity to participate in directed research with two
57

professors whom she now considers mentors. One professor in particular has been influential in
pushing her to think of goals beyond college. “[He] has been my bible. Any question I have
about schools that I want to go to for a PhD program, how a PhD program works. He’s
introduced me to professors from different places that can possibly be my mentors.” Andrea also
describes him as “like a father to me.” Her fictive kin relationships have been significant sources
of support for her while at the university.
Anthony
Anthony is the only “older” student in the sample and by far the oldest at 29 years old.
Anthony is a business major, now a senior, and is from south Los Angeles. Both of his parents
came here from Mexico, and he has 2 older sisters. He is an NAI scholar and is funded by grants,
scholarships, and loans. Anthony began at the university as an 18 year-old, first-time, full-time
freshman, like all the other students in this sample. However he never lived on campus, choosing
to live at home since his first year in exchange for a car from his parents. Because he never lived
at the residential campus, he only came to campus for classes and never got involved in student
activities or organizations. This lack of involvement contributed to his diminished sense of
belonging. “It is something I do regret, that I didn’t get into [a student] association or something
like that.” He attributed his own departure to feeling uncomfortable and “minoritized” (Harper,
2012) and to not becoming involved. “It was because, you know, of course because of that
difference, but also because like I said I didn’t want to fully submerse [sic] myself.”
As an NAI scholar who had been attending Saturday Academy and tutoring on campus
for years, he felt he knew the campus and so he did not spend extra time in the first year building
bonds with peers, staff or professors. After one year, he started dropping his courses halfway
through each term. After a year of withdrawing from courses, he was dismissed from the
58

university. During his three years away from the university, he worked and helped his family
while his sister, and later his father, went through treatment for cancer.
Anthony was fortunate that he maintained contact with the NAI advisors during his 3
years away from the university. He kept a part-time job at the NAI office and was able to use
those contacts to get advice on how to be re-admitted. Anthony had to take courses at a local
community college to show he could complete coursework and earn decent marks before he was
allowed to return. By a stroke of good fortune, he was also able to maintain his scholarship –
because he had dropped classes instead of failing them. After facing life-threatening illnesses
with his family, he re-evaluated his goals and was motivated to take action to see them through.
He attributes his new commitment to having gone through the intense health crises with his
family.
Christina
Christina is a 21 year old female, who is a Health Promotion major and is taking pre-med
science courses as she plans to attend medical school after graduation. She is a senior, the middle
child in a family of five children, and both of her parents were born in Mexico. Even though she
is studying only 15 minutes’ drive from home, she still felt very homesick in the first few weeks
at college and felt a sense of culture shock, which she described as a surprise. “There were just
people from whole different walks of life and I have to be honest, I never grew up around people
of different backgrounds… so something like that, like they were really like big culture shock
experiences for me.”
Christina lived in the dorms her first year, on the Latino floor (like Andrea and Cirah),
and through this positive experience, formed bonds with other Latino students and participated in
student organizations that appealed to her, like Chicanos for Health Education and a Latina
59

sorority. “So when I got there, I got connected with some friends who really liked the same
things I like. They were pre-med and studying bio too, and we got involved with different
community outreach organizations, like Chicanos for Health Education.” Christina has also
relied on the older sisters in her sorority to offer guidance on resources and “kind of showing me
the ropes” including advising on courses, professors, and other co-curricular programs. Last year
she served as a Residential Advisor in the dorm and the training sessions helped her become
aware of her own identity and the challenges that college students face as they adjust and
integrate. Christina also had the opportunity to do research in two different biology labs on
campus, putting her in close and sustained contact with professors who served as models,
mentors, and cultural guides for her, and heightened her commitment to her studies.
Cirah
Cirah is a 21 year old female, Mexican-American, who is a public relations major. She is
from a city in northern California, about 6 hours from campus. Cirah is not a “scholar” of any
embedded program, like NAI or US. She receives a Pell grant which designate her as a low-
income student (like 90% of the study sample) and receives other grants and loans that help pay
for school. Cirah’s parents emigrated here as a young couple from Mexico, and she and her
younger sisters were born in the U.S. Cirah lived on the Latino floor in her freshman dorm, like
Christina and Andrea. She explained that the themed-housing provided her with a community
that she understood, and it “felt a little safe in that sense, because [the University] is very
foreign.”
Cirah attributes much of her success to just being a curious and open person willing to try
new things. Although she admitted she struggled in the first year to find her purpose. “I just felt a
lot of pressure to understand and like figure out what I was doing here.” An influential support
60

agent for Cirah was her resident advisor (RA) in the dorm, a Latino student just a few years older
than her, who provided emotional support, but also served a credible model of success. “He was
just the first person that I considered someone like me, but older that has gone through what I
was going through.” She stated that the support of peers and her RA helped her through the
“culture shock. 100% culture shock…I felt lost and confused.” Cirah has maintained her ties to
the Latino students she met in her first year, as well as joining a more dominant-culture
organization: a traditional sorority. She admits to feeling a sense of belonging with both
communities, but that there are separate worlds.
George
George is a 21 year old, biochemistry major, who is currently applying to medical
schools. He is from Houston, Texas, and both of his parents emigrated here from El Salvador
when they were in their early 20’s. He is the youngest of five children, and the first to attend
college. George, like Cirah, is not embedded in any institutional support program on campus,
like NAI or US. He did not attend a summer bridge program or any other university-sponsored
prep program. When George first arrived on campus he was intensely homesick and felt instantly
“minoritized” (Harper, 2012).
It was kind of a cultural shock, considering that we are, like Latino students are, the
minority, and I came from a dominantly [sic] Latino school, so being one out of a
thousand kind of was a huge new thing to me.
George, like other students interviewed for this study, chose not to live on the Latino floor,
thinking that he came from a predominately Hispanic neighborhood and school system and so it
was time to branch out. However, he struggled to connect with peers. George said, “It was kind
of weird being around so many people, yet feeling like no one was around.”
61

George found his way to the Latino floor as a visitor and made some contacts there. It
was students there that told him about Latino organizations, and he became particularly
interested in the smaller multicultural fraternities that exist outside of the typical and dominant
Greek organizations on campus. George reported that he had been focused on becoming a
physician even before coming to college, so his goal has always been to get through college and
do well so he could get into medical school. In a large first-year biology course, George felt
motivated by seeing a Latino professor in the sciences “because I saw someone that was kind of
in my shoes being able to succeed.” The Latino fraternity that George joined his sophomore year
has also provided him with a community that is alternate to the central and dominant culture of
the college, and a place where he feels a “sense of home.”
Isabel
Isabel is a 21 year-old psychology major who plans to pursue a master’s degree in
Occupational Therapy after graduation. She is from South Los Angeles and lives at home with
her parents. Isabel is Mexican American, and is the first in her family to attend college. Her
grandparents immigrated to the U.S. in the 1960’s when her father was a young boy, but her
mother was born in the U.S., and so were her and her older sister. He older sister become a
mother as a teen and Isabel helps tutor her young niece and nephew, trying to serve as a role
model for them. “I really try to help them,” she said.
Isabel is an NAI scholar (like Alexander and Tony) and is fully-funded by grants. While
Isabel commutes to school now, she did live in the dorms her freshman year, but only for one
year. She chose the particular dorm because it was the lowest cost, and while she said she liked
her roommate, she struggled to form bonds, “I’m a shy person, so it’s really hard to…there are so
62

many cultures here and so many people.” The fact that Isabel has always had to work two jobs
has also limited her time to be involved in campus communities.
I did try other groups here and there but I was working two jobs and I still work two jobs
so it wasn’t that I didn’t want to have more groups, it’s just that with two jobs that I was
juggling, I really didn’t have the time to find other groups.
Isabel has integrated into one social support network through the bonds she formed in Las
Hermanas (LH), a Latina empowerment organization. The 15 women in the group were
accessible to her because of their shared culture and she found “it was really easy to fit in with
them” and that has provided her with a college community where she feels a sense of belonging,
“They have the same background -- we have the same stories. It’s very comfortable. That’s the
word I would use. I feel like there is a lot of [shared] culture that you can confide in.”
José
José is a pre-med student, like George, Alexander, and Christina. He is 21 years old, is
majoring in Health Promotion, and is from a mid-sized city about 6 hours north of the campus.
José’s parents emigrated from central Mexico as young adults, and both parents are agricultural
workers in California’s central valley. He has an older brother who completed college and two
younger brothers, twins, both 18, who hope to attend college next year. José is a University
Scholar and has a scholarship from the US program, as well as from five other national
foundations outside of the university. Combined with need-based grants, he pays nothing and has
no loans, but still must work two jobs to pay for local living expenses and to send remittances
home to his family.
José did not live in traditional dorms in his first year, but in university-owned shared
apartments just a block away. That distance was enough to keep him isolated from a myriad of
63

campus activities. “I didn’t go to a single activity. Why, I have no idea. And I was like, I was
secluded. I don't know why I didn’t attend.” Instead of getting involved in campus activities, José
volunteered off-campus, teaching leadership in local high schools and “that helped me get the
confidence I needed to explore different clubs.” Because José is very focused on studying
science, he has invested what little extra time he has outside of work and classes to interning in a
research lab at the nearby medical school and volunteering at a hospital where he can shadow
physicians. These activities put him in contact with powerful mentors and models, but limit his
integration into campus communities. Although José is not well-integrated into campus
communities, he is integrated into pre-professional networks outside of the campus environs.
His own drive to make the absolute most out of the college experience, and the need for him to
work and help his family, have impacted his integration, but also heightened his commitment to
his educational goals, which extend beyond his undergraduate program.
Robert
Robert is a senior, 21 years old, and is from Arizona. He is an International Relations and
Global Business major. His parents are from Mexico and immigrated to the U.S. as adults.
Robert (like José, George, and Andrea) speaks only Spanish at home and says it’s difficult to
translate his struggles and triumphs to his family, describing the college environment as a new
world. Robert has two younger sisters and is the first in his immediate and extended family to
attend college. He is motivated by his responsibility as a role model to others in the family and
by the fact that he will be able to support his parents one day.
Robert has not been embedded in a formal support program from the beginning of
college, like NAI or University Scholars (US), but he volunteered with the US program in order
to be involved in that community of peers and support staff, and have access to the privileged
64

resources this “agency” can provide. Robert took part in a summer bridge program in the
summer before his freshman year and explained that the program helped him begin to socialize
and acclimate to the campus. Robert chose not to live on the Latino floor his freshman year so
that he could “be exposed to other cultures, socioeconomic backgrounds, etcetera.” He expressed
openness and awareness about making new connections in order to learn new discourses that
would aid his own goal of social mobility.
You can only go so far with the people of your same social economic background…you
need to branch out to other people who are – perhaps their parents are – well-connected
or have external resources that can help them. And just becoming friends with them, they
can bring you along with them.
Because Robert has been focused on getting an education to find professional work and create a
real opportunity for social mobility for his family, he has been involved throughout his college
life in internships, career center programs, and professional clubs, like the Latino Alumni
Association and Latino Business Students’ Organization.
Sarah
Sarah is a 21 year old female, of Salvadorian descent. Her mother was born in the U.S.,
and her father emigrated to the U.S. as a young boy, and has since become a citizen. Sarah is a
senior, majoring in Sociology, and is the first in her family to attend college. Sarah has one
younger brother and two younger sisters, one of which is a high school senior whom Sarah is
now helping with college applications. Sarah has lived in central Los Angeles, in a low income
area with a large African-American and Latino population, all her life. Coming to the University
was a huge culture shock for her and she has never become very comfortable. Sarah came to the
university with a great distrust of white students and teachers and has a negative perception of
65

the campus racial climate. Sarah explained, “Because I can’t see past the issues that happen on
campus and the things that happen to people like me on this university, I can’t be a part of that
family.”
Sarah lived in dorms her first year, purposefully choosing not to live on a special interest
floor, like the Latino floor, hoping that she would meet new kinds of people. She was
discouraged early in her first year when she felt she was being watched like a criminal by white
peers and was distressed by students joking about being poor. Sarah’s feelings of being
“minoritized” in the dominant white environment have inhibited her sense of belonging and
added to her stress level throughout college (Harper, 2012). Sarah maintains a high GPA (above
3.5) and is a University Scholar which provides her with a large scholarship as well as access to
support services that help her navigate university resources and allow her a place to go that is
free from the emotional stress she feels across the wider landscape of the campus. She is also
aware of her resilience.
It’s tough having to fall on your face and then get back up and fall on your face again, get
back up. But I’m – you know, I do it and I think that that’s part of the reason why I’ve
done good at this university, because I have – I have the support of my family, I have the
support of my friends and I have that fighter mentality within me because of what I’ve
been through at home.
Sarah reported that an older student, a near peer model, was her most trusted advisor within the
college. “She’s been my mentor in the sense of showing me the resources.”
Summary
These biographical portraits provide a glimpse into the lived experience of LFGCS. All
of these students are of the first-generation in their families to attend college, and some are the
66

very first person in their family to attempt this goal. All are children of immigrants. All of these
students are recipients of significant financial aid packages, including large need-based grants,
confirming they are low-income, working-class minority youth, also considered lower status in
the confines of this study. Where they differ is in their unique college life experiences. They
have each found differing levels of support, different communities within the campus that impact
their trust and sense of belonging, and each has a varied perception of the campus culture. All of
these variables impact the students’ sense of belonging and therefore the level of integration. The
next section will discuss the process by which these students integrated into the university.
A Process of Integration
It has been well-established that integration into the central culture of a college will
greatly increase the likelihood of a student’s persistence (Tinto, 1993). Tinto defined integration
as becoming incorporated into intellectual and social communities that intensify connection to
the institution. Integration is the result of sustained engagement with people and activities inside
the college environment. What Tinto’s integration theory leaves out is the ability of the lower
status student to integrate into communities far from the central campus culture, sometimes
beyond the “black box” of the university, and still persist to completion. This section examines
how the LFGCS in this study found ways to integrate into college communities. The first
research question was, how do Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS) integrate into
communities at a large, elite PWI?
Three significant themes that emerged from the data analysis and help explain the process
by which LFGCS integrate at this university. The three findings related to the first research
question are presented in the next 3 subsections, in ascending order of magnitude: sense of
67

belonging, overcoming struggles and barriers to integration, and the power of support networks
that aid adjustment.
Sense of Belonging
Sense of belonging was found to be an important lever in the process of integration.
Sense of belonging is defined in this context in concordance with Hurtado and Carter’s (1997)
usage of the term to mean a feeling of affiliation and identification with the campus community.
For many of the students in this sample feeling a sense of belonging enabled them to access and
integrate into a campus community. Students experienced a sense of belonging when they were
able to bond with peers around their cultural heritage. Isabel found her community when she
found other women who knew her world.
So when I came here I realized that…the people I talked to never had tacos on the street
or had Mexican food. But when I found these girls, they all knew the same music I was
talking about, who I was talking about or what shows I was talking about. …All of us
were kind of in the same income level, so it was really easy to fit in with them.
For Isabel, meeting the other young women who made her feel she belonged, because they
shared at least some part of her cultural life and identity, was a pre-cursor to joining a campus
community.
Christina also had an experience where it was shared cultural identity that increased her
sense of belonging. She lived on an ethnic-specific themed-floor in her freshman dorm and from
there “got interested in a Latina sorority…and I would just go and hang out with them and see
what it was all about, kind of just trying to meet new people and things like that.” Because the
Latino floor had provided a safe and supportive space to adjust to the new world of college,
Christina could venture out safely from there, form new bonds and join other communities.
68

Being immersed in a living learning community like an ethnic-specific residence also
gave visibility to the community for Christina.
You don’t really see many Latinos around, unless you kind of like look for them or
you’re already involved in things that cater toward Latinos or that kind of attract us. So
for example if I wasn’t on the floor, I feel like I wouldn’t have seen them.
Students like Christina and Isabel found a community of peers with whom they felt a bond, a
sense of belonging, and with whom they could be themselves, which eased their adjustment
stress. For Alexander, who became involved in Red Cross and Chicanos and Latinos for Health
Education (CHE) in his first year, it wasn’t a sense of ethnic community that strengthened his
bond at the university, but a connection to others over shared interests.
I definitely felt freshman year, I didn’t – feel like I didn’t belong here. I felt, I'm not rich
enough. I’m not smart enough. But now I think I can honestly say I feel like I belong
here… I belong in my major, global health. I feel like some of – most of my closest
friends are from my major. I feel like we share common interests.
For others students, feeling that they belonged at the university and translating that to integration
in campus communities was much more difficult.
José said from his first visit to the campus that he felt it was a place that he belonged and
could be successful.
You know, it was beautiful, and I also saw a lot of people from, you know, different — I
saw Asian people, I saw black people, I saw Mexicans, I saw whites, and I loved it. So I
mean that was my first impression. I was like, wow, you know, like I belong here.
But the real work of finding people to connect with over similar goals, shared interests, or
cultural heritage in order to create community was more difficult to realize. José felt a
69

connection to the ethnic working-class communities outside of the campus where he volunteered,
places where “it feels like, again, like I’m at home, because it’s that type of environment, those
type of people. I speak Spanish so I like the fact that I can talk to them.”
José does not have a fraternity or social organization or even pre-professional
organization that provides him with a stronghold within the institution which strengthens his
commitment. I would even say he was not well-integrated into any campus community, and
certainly not into the central culture or any dominant society within the confines of the
university. He has a long-term goal to become a doctor, like George, and getting through college
is part of that process. He is an example of a student who has persisted without being well-
integrated into campus communities. José is integrated into professional contexts outside the
university environment, where he has insinuated himself in order to gain pre-professional
experiences. His persistence is supported by his own drive and by the support networks he has
access to, such as the physicians he shadows. The functions and benefits of support agents are
discussed in a later section of this chapter.
Overcoming Barriers to Integration
Overcoming barriers to integration was the second-most significant finding in the search
for insights into how LFGCS integrate into college communities. The process of integration
(again, defined as a result of sustained engagement with selected communities) for these
students, at this study site, began with a sense of belonging which enabled them to overcome
challenges related to integration. One reason a student struggles to integrate is due to various
barriers, hurdles, struggles, and challenges that impede community building, which include a
lack of sense of belonging. While the barriers and struggles described by students in the
interviews for this study were innumerable, it is in keeping with the purpose of this study to
70

explore ways in which students were active in overcoming such barriers. Sarah, for instance, is a
student who articulated several barriers that inhibited her integration into campus communities.
From the start Sarah did not feel comfortable in the predominantly white, middle class residence
hall, or the competitive environment of her science courses. She felt a growing distrust of
advisors who she said pressured her to take courses she wasn’t prepared for and didn’t
understand that she came from a poor and ill-equipped high school.
I spoke to academic advisors, but from the experience I had at orientation, I was a little
worrisome and hesitant to meet with the advisors on campus. Mostly because when I was
here at orientation my first day, like officially as a student here, the advisor was the
person who pressured me to take so many of the courses, the statistics, the biology, the
heavy hard science courses and I told her, you know, I come from this high school, our –
you know, the academics – it’s not that great there and I was worried about coming into
this school and taking so many hard science courses and not being prepared because I had
heard of students who came here, wanted to be a doctor, wanted to pursue this and they
took the courses and it, you know, completely blew up on them. So letting her pressure
me into taking all these courses and then coming here and taking the courses and
realizing like ‘hey, I should have just gone with my gut’ made me hesitant to go see other
people because I figured they’d tell me the same thing, which has kind of been my
experience at [this university] with some academic advisors.
Sarah had to overcome the lack of sense of belonging, the negative perception of the campus
environment (which for her was embodied in the staff and students that she did not find
welcoming or understanding), and the external pull of her local family’s needs, which she feels
she must support – all of which have impeded her integration.
71

There’s an intense connection that I have with my family. For a really long time, I –
since forever, I would say, I’ve been sort of like second mommy almost to my family and
it’s difficult to come here and to know that like your family’s still struggling financially,
that there are still things going on at home that… you know, you need to babysit, you
need to do this or you don’t need to but you want to. Like and I – you know, I say need
because I – I feel like it’s my responsibility to do those things, not because my mother’s
pressuring me but because I was raised in a community and an environment where
everyone pitched in, you know? Everyone helps with everything. And so to be here not
only physically away from my family but also just like separated financially, to not know
like how the spending is going, how – you know, what they’re eating, what they’re doing,
like how the kids are getting to school, how my mom is doing at work, like how is her
health? All of that, it’s really tough. …I feel an obligation to still be there. So
sometimes I can’t mentally always be in class because I’m worried about what’s going on
at home.
One way in which Sarah overcame such barriers was to form bonds within the confines
of the institution. She found one confidante, “one friend who I opened up to…we were pretty
much in the same boat…I could trust what she would tell me.” One early connection allowed
Sarah to fight through some of the obstacles barring her from joining other campus communities.
Sarah took action to talk about her frustrations and found support to overcome them.
For George, it was much harder for him to talk about his struggles to adjust and integrate.
“I was pretty homesick. Because I didn’t feel like I belonged anywhere… I didn’t talk to anyone
about it, for the most part. I kind of just kept — I keep my problems to myself most of the time.”
George reported that he didn’t know what to do or what to join and so he just kept to himself in
72

the beginning, trying to get over the shock of the academic rigor and the homesickness. He chose
not to live on the Latino floor, but he made a few contacts there, who served as bridges for
George to find the right community for him. George was active in the process, “in looking for
what organization I wanted to commit myself to.” He explained that he asked around the Latino
floor for more information on the multicultural fraternities, actively seeking referrals and
endorsements.
I kind of just tried figuring things out on my own [in the first year]. But I kind of was
humbled and I kind of had to figure out — I can’t do this on my own. So I looked for that
new group of people to kind of help guide me.
Andrea, like Sarah, José, and Alexander, is embedded in the University Scholar network.
Being embedded in an institutional support program is not a guarantee of integration into campus
communities. For Alexander, the peers he met through US were not interested in the same
passions he had and the bonds didn’t hold in spite of being from “the same background.”
At the [US] retreats, like they’re great and everything but I felt the one thing that people
like, the other upperclassmen would [say was] like ‘you know, as Latinos, we’re
underrepresented’ or stuff like that. And I feel like so much people tell you that, that you
kind of believe it. I think it took me a while to realize, you know, it’s not true, you know?
There are people out there who are from your same background, Latinos that aren’t going
to be your friends. There’s people who have different cultures, different things that you
might find a lot of things in common. So that took me a while but I feel like I definitely
grasped it. I feel like doing different volunteer projects, and going abroad and like
different volunteer projects helped me meet people who aren’t from the same – the same
skin color, the same economic status -- but who share the same beliefs in like, helping
73

other people and stuff like that.
Conversely, for Andrea, the US “family” provided space and community where “I was
comfortable” and “that made a big difference.” Because Andrea had found some comfort within
the larger university, her sense of belonging grew and she was able to integrate into chosen
campus communities.
Now I have like my very few close friends and a lot of them are from the [Latino] floor,
but I think as a freshman it’s important to be able to just like walk onto a floor and be
able to talk to anyone, and that’s how the floor is… Like [US] I felt like set up my
family, along with the Latino floor. My dance team would later become pretty much my
everything, and Latino Alumni really showed me that I needed to grow up, and be a little
more professional, be a little more into networking , and how to handle the business
cards. I’ve never seen anything like that so I think that’s where all those things came
from for me, my freshman year.
By getting involved in student activities, like a performance group, taking classes that she was
interested in, not just the ones in a course plan provided to her, and being active in making the
college space and experience what she wanted it to be. Andrea was an active participant in
finding communities to be a part of (i.e. she chose dance, the Latino floor, and Latino Alumni
society) and shaping her integrative experience by participating in college life in various ways.
I think belonging at [this university] is like- you can think of the stereotype, which is like,
[legacies], goes to football games since he was year old, and all that. Or, you can just
claim [it] and I feel like I claimed [this place], maybe I felt like I didn’t belong in certain
situations… I definitely felt like I didn’t belong my first year, but I put in [the energy],
like, I shaped it, in a way I felt like it needed to be shaped…if you don’t see a lot of you
74

in a place, you need to go in there and open a door so people can come in through that
door and open more doors.
Andrea also became active in undergraduate research with a professor/mentor. The intensive
time spent working on research projects, experience which she sought out, put her in sustained
contact with institutional agents that have influenced her goals beyond college. That experience
will be further discussed in a later section of this chapter on support agents.
Robert came to campus early in his first year to be part of a summer bridge program,
which allowed him to get a taste of college classes, dorm life, and learn about campus resources
and services. While this opportunity allowed him to begin to socially adjust before the official
start of the term, he still had to take initiative once school began to find communities that fit.
Through my first year, I had no idea what I wanted to do with my career. So I just kind
of just like dipped my toe, I was in a lot of different organizations… I tried doing
university student government as just like a delegate. I also got myself involved with
NAI as a math tutor for them, for high school students. I also got myself involved with
University Scholars…because a lot of my friends that I first met were either NAI scholars
or University Scholars so I was curious and I would hear so much from them that I got
myself involved with those.
Robert took the initiative to find ways to volunteer and be a part of groups on campus where he
might find friends, support, new resources, or new knowledge. Being far from home produced
anxiety in Robert, mostly due to the cultural differences he knew he would face.
My high school, 99% of the population in my high school was like Latino. And so we all
come from the same background and we all like live in the same town, so we all know
each other and we all know – like we’re all pretty interconnected. And so there’s a lot of
75

like similarities between us because we’re all Latino. We’re all Mexican. And so coming
here, it’s – you know, there’s everything. You know, we’re like the most international
school and [the university] I guess has this like brand of – of like the University of [rich
kids]. So like that kind of made me like nervous to like meet people because I didn’t
know if I’d be able to like relate to them, because I sure wasn’t rich and I don’t know if
we would think the same.
Robert was able to overcome his anxiety in the new world of college, far from his family in
Arizona, because he had bonded with other low-income Latino, first-gen students in the bridge
program. Those students formed his “safety net.” Robert was able to integrate into other student
communities because he had established a foundation for further community-building.
I think the best way to go about it is like building first your community of the same
background and then from there, like branching out and meeting everyone else, because
then you can always like fall back on that same community that understands you the
most.
This statement demonstrates how a sense of belonging was key to Robert’s integration efforts,
and with the “community that understands you” by his side, he was able to be active in finding
other groups to mix with, overcoming his integration barriers of anxiety, culture shock, and
confusion of how to navigate to college environment.
Integrative Support Agents and Networks
In Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) typology of institutional agents, those that help students
integrate do so by introduction to or endorsement of campus networks and professional
associations and environments. This type of high status, well-connected agent was rarely
presented in the narratives of the LFGCS interviewed for this study, in regards to how they
76

integrated into campus communities. Only in the case of Andrea, where she reported that a
professor she befriended in her first year helped her feel comfortable, gain confidence, and
become an active participant in college life, and no longer a “background character.”
I think being a little bit older naturally [helped] but also just like, being more comfortable
with Doctor _______ and, um, my confidence completely transformed… so I was more
vocal and, more outspoken. I took classes with professors that I had already taken classes
with because I think that’s very valuable if you like your professor, and so I was very
much more outspoken in class too -- it was just a confidence boost.
Most often cited as the support agents who aided the participants in integrating into
campus communities, organizations, and collectives were the peers and near peer models who
offered emotional and psychological support, which eased adjustment stress, allowing for
community and network building. These communities and networks are the operationalization of
integration in this context. If students have formed a bond with others within the university, and
that bond strengthens the student’s sense of belonging, then the student is integrated, to a degree.
Alexander was invited by an upperclassmen he met at a US function, to attend a CHE meeting.
CHE has become Alexander’s most meaningful network on campus, where he feels a sense of
purpose and passion for his academic and professional interests and can share that with others. In
this situation, it was the near peer model, with some privileged information on the collective,
who served as a bridge to integration.
It was during our [US] retreat, there was a scholar there who was a senior. He was
president at that time. So he had actually gone to the same high school I went to. And
then we were – we sat on the bus and he was like ‘oh, you know, you should come out to
our first meeting, check [CHE] out’. I knew he was pre-health. And he’s like, ‘come
77

check it out, there’s people you’ll like – we do great things, like we focus on the
community around us’ and stuff like that. So I’m like, ‘I’ll come check it out’. I went and
– so yeah, so – so it was really nice, you know, for him just to like be very open and be
like, ‘come join us’. So I went to the first general meeting and I fell in love with the
organization.
Robert also relied greatly on peer advice to integrate into campus societies. It was peers who
were involved in US that inspired him to investigate the collective or “agency” further and see
how he could become involved. Robert describes the US staff and students as a “small, close
family” that “help each other” and this community has become central to Robert’s integration at
the university. While Robert had peers he met in his summer bridge program to enhance his
sense of belonging, which helped him meet support agents and further integrate in campus
societies, George and José struggled to make those initial connections to emotional support
agents. George expressed his feelings of isolation like this, “I didn’t necessarily know where my
group was. I didn’t feel — because I know one of my roommates, he had a band, and he felt
super involved with that. And me, I just — like on a Friday night, I wouldn’t know what to go
do, because I didn’t have that kind of group of friends to go to.” George also explained where he
did find a sense of home, and it wasn’t on the campus.
I remember I was homesick and then I went to get a haircut and all those people cutting –
like cutting hair, they’re all Latino, so like for that split second I felt like I was at home
again. I was like, man, I should get my hair cut more and more often. It was weird,
because that was like the one time I felt like at home for that one semester.
George was far from home, felt isolated, intensely homesick, and overwhelmed by the cultural
diversity of the campus, feeling out of place and out of his comfort zone in the predominately
78

white and, to his eyes, very wealth campus. When I asked George his perception of who belongs
on this campus, he replied with honesty, but with no anger in his voice.
Blatantly, like the high upper middle class, for the most part. There’s a huge difference
between — I don’t know, I can’t speak for all Latino community, but a huge majority of
them, seeing that a lot of us are here on full scholarships, grants, there’s – there’s a huge
socioeconomic difference between us. And you can kind of feel it on campus.
George was dependent on the guidance of peers, specifically other working-class Latino students
that he trusted, to help him find potential communities to which he could dedicate his time. “I
asked other people on the Latino Floor. I asked them, ‘what other fraternities are on campus?’
And they actually said there was five other ones and in all honesty, I didn’t even know there was,
like, five other Latinos on campus besides people on the [Latino] floor. So I was pretty surprised
to hear all these other organizations existed.”
Both Cirah and Christina reported that they benefited from living in the ethnic-specific
housing, or themed floor, during their freshman year, particularly from the resident advisor (RA)
who was a key support agent for adjusting and integrating. First the RA served as a fictive kin,
“like he was my big brother.” Secondly, the RA provided direct emotional support as students
struggled to adjust to the new environment. “He was someone you could talk to about literally
everything. He was there. He was always there. I would have like actual meltdowns and he was
there.” Also, the RA served as a resource guide, encouraging students to become active in
campus collectives.
I asked him a lot [of questions]. I actually talked to him a lot about the Latina sororities
as well when I was a freshman, like ‘how are they, how do you think they are?’ and he’d
always tell me, ‘Oh, they’re cool, like, go. Go talk to them’.
79

A support agent is able to aid LFGCS integration because of an initial tenuous bond of trust. In
the cases presented here, the peer or near pear model was able to assist and guide the LFGCS
because he or she was trusted. Nearly all students reported that they trusted peer guides because
they were “someone like me.”
Unfortunately, in this sample, it seems that if this kind of support for integration does not
happen early in the college years, it does not happen at all. Tony and José had unique distractions
that that pulled them away from possible support agents. Tony lived at home and commuted to
campus, so even though he was familiar with campus from his years in the NAI program, he was
not in contact with many peers and near peer models that could encourage him to become more
involved. For José, his drive to work two jobs to help his family back home, and his desire to
volunteer off-campus with kids that “have like the same background as I do” were external
forces that pulled him further from institutional communities. However, these students still have
a strong sense on intention and commitment, even without integration. Tony and José have been
able to persist in college despite not being well-integrated into campus communities that
heightened their sense of belonging and institutional commitment. Without integration, it is the
influence of support agents that can affect persistence. How support agents impact student
persistence is discussed in the next section of this chapter.
Summary
This section highlighted some of the key findings on the process by which LFGCS
integrated into the university via individual support agents that influenced their sense of
belonging, being embedded in institutional programs that provide a community of trusted peers
and/or staff, and by taking individual action, and therefore agency, to be a part of peer groups
that share a similar identity or ideology. Nearly all (90%) of the students described the college’s
80

dominant culture as a place of white privilege using words like “legacy,” “greek,” “privileged”
and even “trust fund babies.” The informants in this sample made it clear that they noticed the
class gap between them and the larger population of middle-class white peers. This cultural gap
is so immense that most of the students, all but Robert and Cirah, reported that they rarely mixed
with middle and upper class white students. Robert and Cirah were both forthright in explaining
that they purposefully chose to mix in circles of other kinds for students in order to take
advantage of as many networks as possible in order to further their career goals.
In the next section, networks and strata of support agents are examined in order to answer
the question of who and what alters the lives of LFGCS and how do these significant others, in
the form of support agents, aid student persistence.
Significant Others as Support Agents
Significant others are defined in this dissertation in the sociological context as a person
or persons who alter one’s attitudes and aspirations (Haller & Woelfel, 1972) and therefore
influences educational and status attainment (Haller & Portes, 1973). The term was purposefully
chosen so I would be forced to remain open to emerging themes and concepts as I collected and
analyzed data (instead of assuming all persons with influence are institutional agents).
Informants for this study reported, in their college life histories, about the significant VIP’s in
their lives who specifically impact their educational aspirations and outcomes. The findings in
this section correspond to the second research question, who and what have altered the lives of
LFGCS and how have significant others supported their persistence in college? Three types of
support agents emerged, with varying levels of power and access to social capital:
 Social support agents
 Apprentice agents
81

 Institutional agents
These three types of agents and examples of how they have aided students’ persistence in college
(Figure 2) will be explained in this section of chapter four.

Figure 2. The stratification of support agents and the resources each can offer.
Social Support Agents
Social support is the emotional support provided by persons near to the LFGCS in this
sample. Social support provided by the social support agents identified by informants came in
the form of stress relief, motivation, encouragement, comfort, and caring. The agents in this
foundational category do not have social capital. To have social capital, a person has to have
status and position which gives them access to privileged resources and other people with status
and position (R. Stanton-Salazar, personal communication, October 22, 2015). The social
support agents in this category are essential for establishing support to LFGCS in order for them
to form further bonds with higher status agents and to stay motivated to persist in college.
Institutional Agents: well-connected
persons with social capital who serve as
institutional and professional bridges,
advocates, advisors, and guides
Apprentice Agents: local guides and
emerging agents within the university,
who share privileged knowledge of local
resources and make referrals to more
powerful agents
Social Support Agents: family, fictive kin,
peers who provide stress relief, comfort,
sense of belonging, motivation
82

For nearly all the informants in this sample, peers within the university environs who
were “like family” served as fictive kin and emotional support for students. Fictive kin is used to
describe kinship-like relationships where social ties are formed over a shared worldview, identity
or goal (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986). In the same way that students depended on others they felt
they could trust in order to form bonds that aided integration, these LFGCS relied on some of the
same significant others for emotional support. “My sense of community and my comfort and
support has come from my peers. It definitely has,” said Sarah. For George, it is also bonds
with peers in his fraternity that make him feel supported – “They understand where I’m coming
from” – and provide opportunities to socialize and “de-stress.” The fictive kin network that
George has developed with his fraternity brothers situates him in a family within the institution
that aids his persistence by being concerned with his well-being.
One of the things we stress is academics, but we also want to make sure you’re healthy as
like a person, as a being, so we want to be able to look out for you. Not just mental —
like not just you’re being able to perform, but being complete as a person. Feeling
comfortable, being happy. That’s one of the things you kind of look out for — because
they are your — in like the easiest term, they are your brothers, so you have to look out
for your brother.
For Alexander, Cirah, and Christina, the RA’s in their freshman dormitories were also social
support agents, assisting the students as they worked through the stress of adjusting to the new
environment. Alexander said, “I feel like we had a very good bond and connection. Every time, I
had a bad day, I would be like – I would go into her room and, you know, just vent and she’s like
‘no, that’s okay, like you’re going to be fine’.” For all three of these students, the RA was
described as an older, more experienced student who was also Latina/o.
83

The emotional support needed to overcome obstacles to persistence, including one’s own
self-doubt, is provided by social support agents both inside and outside the university. For José,
Tony, and Robert, parents were an important part of the social support network. José relied on
US staff advisors, peers and family to overcome his homesickness and to come to terms with his
feelings of guilt about his new life in the privileged environs of the college.
I wasn’t confident, [not] as confident as I was back home, and I don't know why. I mean I
did well in high school, you know. I think it was like the fact that I didn’t feel support. I
mean, I had the support from like people from [US] and stuff, but, you know, my parents
were far away. Knowing that I was here, living well, and my parents were back home
struggling, it was like, all like mixed emotions… You know, at one point I was like, man,
I don't want to be here. I’m like so blessed to be able to be here, but at the same time, I
don't want to be here. So I talked to my parents, some friends, to [the US advisors]. You
know and they could all relate in some way, so that was always nice. But they ultimately
made me realize that I was, you know, blessed to be able to be here in the first place and I
should take advantage of it.
José had to employ multiple support agents to support him through an emotional struggle, and it
was combined support from inside and outside the university that was helpful to him.
For emotional support, when he is struggling in classes or feeling “stressed because of
this class or this midterm,” Robert uses a combination of social support agents, including family
and peers. “I talk to [my parents] for partial emotional support but I guess the main people are
my friends because I feel like they understand –specifically the people I met at Summer Bridge
because they’ve been the closest people I’ve had.” Robert has also relied heavily on familial
bonds to stay motivated to persist. “I think just having [them in] the back of my head, how
84

eventually like I’ll be able to support them, like, they’re my motivation to stay in school.”
Having a goal to contribute to the social mobility of his family is a major motivator for Robert,
and other LFGCS in this sample.
Unique in the participants for this study is Tony, whose motivation to persist and
complete college, after being academically disqualified from the university, is very much tied to
his family. He attributes his departure to his lack of focus, lack of engagement, and his own
unwillingness to ask for help. “I wasn’t fully submersing [sic] myself in the process, so I didn’t
really make an attempt to reach out.” After leaving the university, and helping his family while
his father and sister were struggling with serious health issues, he said that experience
“strengthened us. When my dad was, again, miraculously in remission, I’m just thinking ‘why
are we given these opportunities if we’re not taking advantage of them?’ So we all made
decisions that we were gonna make goals.” For Tony, overcoming a real life-and-death crisis
with his family motivated him to commit to his goal of college completion and confirmed for
him that he had a social support network on which he could rely in order to achieve that goal.
Apprentice Agents
In the context of social capital theory, there have been clear descriptions of the types of
agents that offer social capital, which are those with valuable resources or networks connecting
them to other persons or groups with privileged resources. Institutional agents are persons with
status, and a wealth of access to resources and networks (R. Stanton-Salazar, personal
communication, October 22, 2015). In Stanton-Salazar’s framework, students do not have status
and cannot serve as institutional agents. With permission from the author to further develop the
idea of stratification in social capital agents, what I conclude, based on the evidence presented in
85

the data corpus, is that there is a layer of privileged agents and agencies that have emerging
capital. The term for these support persons with emerging status is apprentice agents.
Apprentice agent is a term not used in any context in educational, sociological, or
economic literature, but can be found in research on artificial intelligence and software systems
development. Apprentice agents, in software architecture, are used to do simpler functions that
aid intelligent agents, who oversee larger processing functions (Nwana & Ndumu, 1996). In the
context of this study, the apprentice agents are not merely social support agents and not yet
institutional agents, but are near peer models, peer advisors, staff advisors, and opportunity
brokers who have access to privileged knowledge and resources. This middle-status capital
donated by apprentice agents is called local capital and is used within the “marketplace” of the
university. This is a different usage than Putnam’s (1995) term of localized social capital which
is associated with establishing trust and norms, but has no privilege attached, and therefore no
status. In the context of this study, the apprentice agents’ local capital is valuable knowledge of
the institution and how to maneuver within this marketplace. This local capital is institutional
capital.
Apprentice agents are individuals that act as guides and advisors, helping students
navigate the dominant discourses of the elite PWI. Apprentice agents have privileged experience
and knowledge of campus resources and connections. From that position, these agents can give
unique advice on social capital-building. For Cirah, her RA encouraged her to build networks
both within and outside of the Latino community in which she lived.
One of the things my RA told me was ‘Don’t get stuck in this world, because it’s a very
exclusive world. If you get stuck in this world, you're never going to get out’…he told me
86

that if you get put into this place and you identify yourself solely as Latina, that is how
people are going to look at you.
In this instance, Cirah’s RA gave her expert advice on building a network that involves varied
communities. Cirah took his advice “to heart,” she said, understanding that she wanted to be
involved in communities around her cultural heritage, her major, her career aspirations, and other
parts of her identity and interests.
Cirah and other students, like Isabel and Andrea, also reported that it was trusted peer
advice that they took when considering which professors and courses were best. Academic
advisors were less trusted because they had not actually taken the courses, but the experienced
peers had concrete knowledge of professors. They were credible and could give advice on
courses, professors and campus jobs. Andrea’s comments provide an example of the usefulness
of apprentice agents, who serve as bridges.
I was really shy, so I was never speaking to anyone, but then one of the older students
came up to me, and he just started talking to me about what I wanted to do, and if I had a
job yet, and I was like “no” and he told me “oh, where do you want to work?” and I had
no idea, but he started pitching ideas to me and introducing me to other students that
work at different places.
Besides serving as advisors and guides for navigating campus resources, processes, and the
academic terrain, these knowledgeable apprentice agents also serve as bridges to institutional
agents, directing students to professional opportunities and even mentors. José, who was not
engaged in student clubs on campus, found out about shadowing at a local hospital from another
student who had done it. He said, that it is students “that provide you with advice you can’t really
get anywhere else” and that their advice was trusted “because they were similar to me.” While it
87

is important to get students to interact with professors and professional models and mentors from
whom they can learn how to navigate professional worlds and dominant discourses, the power
distance can seem impossible to surmount. José said, “I mean, sometimes we think of a professor
as like, oh, they’re not even human.” Apprentice agents can play an important role in mediating
this stage of social capital-building. Robert explained, “I think I was really scared to meet my
professors. I wouldn’t go up to them just because I would feel nervous. I wouldn’t know what
to ask…I would then reach out to the small study groups that I formed and ask them questions
and clarify.”
Near peer models, like recent alumni, are not institutional agents with status inside and
outside of the university, but are emerging institutional agents. George reported that two of his
fraternity brothers who are in medical school now have been key guides for him in navigating the
college experience and preparing and applying for medical school. “The upperclassman from my
[fraternity], the alumni, they kind of guided me like what to do…like one of my brothers helped
get me a research opportunity…he got me to the door, but then the rest was up to me.” This is a
typical example of how social capital works, but if it is understood that the peers and near peers
of the LFGCS cannot have social capital because they do not have high status networks, then it is
the local capital, the privileged knowledge of the local landscape, that must be acknowledged as
valuable.
Apprentice agents are not only individuals, but also can be student collectives, or
apprentice ‘agencies’ in this context. For Isabel, the collective of Las Hermanas (LH) provided
her with peer emotional support, but also put her in a network of older students who shared their
privileged knowledge and experience – local capital.
88

When I began [LH] I was the only freshman. It was mostly juniors… they were helpful in
the sense that they could guide me. There was one girl who was a psychology major and I
would ask her who, or what professors or what classes she would recommend. They
would share their own stories of what they were feeling at the moment so it prepared me
of what I had to look forward to.
In this case, the collective is a place where resources and advice are shared, and the collective
has combined resources and a greater amount of local capital. Robert spoke of the Latino
Business Students’ Organization (LBSO) and the Student-Alumni Society in the same way, as
places to combine resources and build ties that aid in navigating the campus and larger
professional environs. “I got a lot of advice from actual professionals working in the field and
them encouraging me what I should major in and what’s the best route.” It was the local capital
of the student collective that was strong enough to bridge connections to agents with higher
status. “LBSO brings in a lot of great employers and companies…it’s also the people of the same
background who are just there to learn about how to be professional, how to interview and like
the ethics of applying to companies.” For Robert, these apprentice agencies provided real-world
social capital-building practice that can be used locally, but may be translated into more valuable
access to resources and networks when Robert has to use the dominant discourses – the
unspoken rules of social interactions – in the professional world after college.
Institutional Agents
Institutional agents is a term introduced into the educational sociology lexicon by
Ricardo Stanton-Salazar and refers to individuals in positions of authority, with access to
networks and resources, who are well-positioned to support students, particular working-class
minority youth, in navigating educational institutions (1997, 2001). Stanton-Salazar’s typology
89

of institutional agents (2011) was formative for me when developing this study, and aided
greatly in data analysis because it allowed me to see an agent by their function (making them
visible by their action) and the function as a benefit to the student. Institutional agents appeared
in the narratives of these LFGCS in the roles presented by Stanton-Salazar (2011): bridging
agents, resource agents, knowledge agents, cultural guides, brokers, coaches, advocates, and
advisors.
One example of an institutional agent identified by several of the informants was a well-
connected and knowledgeable academic advisor. Alexander, Cirah and Isabel named their
advisors as bridges to other resources, as well as advocates that demonstrated caring and
protection.
[My advisor] helps me in everything from understanding how to graduate in time, to
helping me negotiate different classes for minors, from telling me who to talk to for job
advice, from just listening to me when I'm overwhelmed with classes and helping me
prioritize with classes. I have never had an advisor as caring as her. Because even if she
doesn’t know the answer to something, she'll at least guide me somewhere. (Cirah)
For Alexander and Isabel, the responses were similar. They formed connections to institutional
agents, staff advisors with positional knowledge and resources, that were also willing donors of
social capital. An important attribute of institutional agents is that they are willing participants in
the venture, like investors in a social enterprise that expect results but not individual
remuneration. Students described institutional agents that made time for them. The students had
to seek out the agents, but the agents also had to want to invest. “He’s extremely busy. He’s a
brain surgeon. So the fact that he even met with me was like amazing to me.” (José)
90

Andrea also described having to seek out a professor she wanted to learn from, but that
once she showed she was interested, the professor made himself available to her.
I literally followed him into [the building] and stopped him and I got into his class, ‘cause
I mean he’s busy so -- he was down to talk to me but it was harder to get him to actually
like sit down with me ‘til I was in his class, and yeah, now I’ve done research, well, my
own research, but he mentored it through directed reading.
For Andrea, this interaction and others like this have deepened her interest in her studies and her
commitment to her goals beyond college. This is one way institutional agents promote
persistence.
Alexander also discussed an important professor who he felt invested in him and instilled
a sense of responsibility in him that improved his effort. “[In] classes where professors want you
to succeed, you just – you put more time into it or you put more effort into it because you don’t
want to disappoint them in a way. So yeah, so I took that professor and I took her again this
semester again because I loved her so much.” Because Alexander felt encouraged by the
instructor, he invested effort in his work for the course, and the mentor-mentee relationship grew
as he took more of her courses. “We talk about immigration and stuff, like, health problems in
immigrants and health problems in Latinos in California, stuff like that.” Alexander is benefiting
from his relationship with this professional guide, who is more than a mere instructor.
At times, professors, staff advisors, and supervisors, as possible institutional agents, are
passed over for the more trusted advice of apprentice agents. “I go to [advisors] for advice on
what classes I need to take… but I feel like the students are more forthcoming and honest about
what the class is really like, because they have taken it,” said Isabel. Apprentice agents are closer
91

to the experience or situation on which the student is seeking advice. The apprentice agent is a
more credible guide, situated in the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978).
Beyond some students’ elevated trust in apprentice agents with local capital, over more
authoritative agents, there were also reports of distrust in institutional agents. One poor
interaction with an institutional agent can sour the likelihood of further investment and exchange.
Both Robert and Sarah reported on initial dealings with institutional staff that weakened their
trust in others across the university, “I felt like my academic advisor didn’t really know me or
like wasn’t interested in knowing me,” said Robert. Sarah reported several accounts of trying to
talk to her advisors about feeling underprepared for college-level science courses and being
repeatedly given the same course plan, or being referred to a health administration program that
she wasn’t interested in, because she wanted to drop her science major. “I should have just gone
with my gut. [It’s] made me hesitant to go see other people because I figured they’d tell me the
same thing, which has kind of been my experience [here] with some academic advisors.” Sarah
felt that she wasn’t being listened to and that institutional agents did not “understand the specific
perspective that I have.” These reports illuminate the severe impact that purely prescriptive
interactions can have on students’ relationships to institutional agents.
Other types of institutional agents that emerged in the data were aspirational agents –
individuals who demonstrated what the students could become or may want to become. Several
students had participated in faculty-mentored research which put them in close contact with
institutional agents that subtly teach dominant discourses, as well as provide new, previously
unrealized professional aspirations. Christina worked in a genetics research lab with female post-
doctoral researcher.
92

And she did bio and chem and she got her PhD in molecular biology. I’m like ‘dang, this
is so cool’… And then she gave me a lot of tips about my track, my PA track, she’s like
‘even if you don’t think you’re going to do research your whole life, like having your
research background is really, really important’.”
Institutional agents with authority, position, and privileged access to resources and networks can
offer guidance, connections, referrals, and introductions to students – social capital – as well as
serve as role models for LFGCS, who have not typically been situated among such powerfully
connected individuals. No gender disparity was found in the presence of aspirational agents.
Three women and three men in the sample described the impact of an institutional agent who
inspired them consider their educational and/or professional goals beyond college. Alexander
reflected on his freshman-year volunteer trip in a way that demonstrates how aspirational agents
make a difference.
So, right after freshman year I went to Ecuador on a MedLife trip, so right there we did
medical stuff, health promotion. …I think the physicians that I worked with in Ecuador
was the reason why I knew — because freshman year I didn’t know I wanted to do pre-
med. I knew I wanted to help other people — but then I think the Ecuador trip made me
realize this is what I want to do.
Outside of individuals as institutional agents, the data in the student narratives collected
for this study also point to institutional “agencies” as a source of access to privileged knowledge,
resources, and high status networks. Six out of the 10 informants were embedded in an
institutional agency from the first day of college or even before matriculation. There were no
gender differences within this sample. Three students were part of the NAI program which
helped them prepare for college, but not necessarily adjust. Once students arrive and begin
93

college, they have access to academic advisors that check in with them to see how they are
adjusting and progressing, but it isn’t the same amount of structure and support they were used in
high school. “A lot of classmates have felt — like from my high school – like they were
abandoned, and I didn’t feel that way,” said Alexander. Alexander, Tony, and Isabel stayed
involved with the NAI program, working in the office and as tutors to other middle-school and
high school students. These students had the opportunity to stay engaged in an institutional
agency, in a network of support agents who had privileged knowledge of the institution and
resources across the university.
But also when you meet with them individually the counselors also help you see, well,
what you are looking for. They kind of guide you in the individual sessions to what you
want to do and how you might go about it and give you advice. I remember once [the
NAI advisor] sent out a 15 page list of internships and summer programs, if you are
interested in doing any. (Isabel)
The four students embedded in the University Scholars (US) program (Table 4) also have similar
access to social capital because of the status of the agency. The collective power of the agency
puts these LFGCS in a network of fictive kin, peers and peer models that are similar and
credible, and staff advisors with connections to mentors, academic support workshops, career
planning resources, alumni networks, internship opportunities, and the experience to coach and
advocate for students navigating the challenging foreign world of the university. “It was finding
people who looked like me, finding out what they knew and luckily, I had [US] too, you know,
administrators and staff here who knew the resources,” said Sarah.

94

Table 4
Research Study Participants by Institutional “Agency” affiliation/involvement
ALIAS MAJOR GENDER AGENCY AFFILIATION
Alexander Global Health M NAI and University Scholars
Andrea American Studies F University Scholars
Anthony Business M NAI
Cirah Public Relations F
Christina Health Promotion F
George Biochemistry M
Isabel Psychology F NAI
José Health Promotion M University Scholars
Robert Int'l Relations M
Sarah Sociology F University Scholars

For the four students that were not embedded in institutional agencies, they had to find
collectives on their own, or push on without that particular social capital resource. Robert found
a way to be involved in student government, mentorship programs through the career center and
alumni associations, and situated himself in University Scholars by volunteering with the
program. Christina chose a Latina sorority as a collective of social support and apprentice agents,
and became involved in research opportunities with faculty, which put her in networks with
high-status knowledge agents. George found a multicultural fraternity, predominately Latino,
which connected him to social support and apprentice agents who offered him guidance on
getting through college and preparing for medical school. George also took the initiative to seek
out advice from pre-med counselors. “Like I went there for interview advice, they told me the
etiquette I had to use, how to dress. That’s the main things they did.” George relied on peer
models, i.e. knowledgeable apprentice agents, because they had gone through the preparation
95

program, the application process, and were accepted into medical school, therefore he trusted
their advice. The LFGCS in this sample who were not embedded in institutional agencies had
less contact with higher status knowledge and resource agents, and spent more time in apprentice
agent collectives.
From the perspective of the students who did have access to these agencies, it was clear
that they had access to a privileged network. Andrea said, “I mean I’ve seen people drop out of
[this university], like people who lived on the Latino floor with me, and I think that something
about University scholars or the US community and our supporters and our mentors, they don’t
let us leave, which is a good thing.” Isabel echoed the benefits she has as a student embedded in
a capital-rich program that not everyone has access to. “I’ve talked to other people who have not
gone thru NAI and some in [Las Hermanas], the girls in there aren’t from NAI or from the
neighborhood and they are having trouble and sometimes they don’t know where to go.” It is
obvious to students embedded in agencies that there is an unequal distribution of access to
networks and institutional agents across the university population of LFGCS. The benefits of
these capital-rich connections will be explored in the next and final section of this chapter.
Summary
This section addressed the second research question, which was who and what altered the
lives of LFGCS and how have these significant others aided student persistence. The data points
to a stratification of support agents and agencies with varying levels of status and resources that
is inversely related to power and trust. The lower-status social support agents have less social
capital, but more trust and credibility with LFGCS which aids sense of belonging and integration
efforts. Mid-level status agents (apprentice agents) have some privileged knowledge, experience,
and access to local resources (local capital) which further aids integration efforts and social
96

capital-building capability. Institutional agents and agencies are harder to acquire, but offer
students access to high status mentorship, advising, referrals, knowledge and resources that are
useful within the confines of the college and beyond as well. The ranks of agents described here
serve different functions in supporting student persistence for LFGCS. The last section of this
chapter will address the perceived benefits that students report they have gained from the
significant others in their lives.
The Benefits of Capital-Building Relationships
Students benefit from the diversified support provided by their social networks. Some of
the significant others in the lives of these LFGCS offer important emotional support, some offer
essential local guidance, and still others offer powerful connections to resources across and
beyond the university walls. The third research question for this study was: what benefits do
LFGCS perceive they have gained from the significant others in their lives? The benefits of the
connections to social support agents, apprentice agents, and institutional agents and agencies
were reported by the informants as emotional/psychological support (i.e. encouragement,
motivation, kinship), local guidance (i.e. navigating the new terrain), and access to privileged
knowledge and resources within the institutional and professional domains.
Examples of these types of support can be seen in the evidence presented in previous
sections of this chapter. Andrea’s comment that her professor/mentor was “like a bible”
whenever she had questions about graduate school and the recent alumni in George’s fraternity
that “guided” him on medical school application processes are examples of how these LFGCS
benefited from social network connections, i.e. social capital. The students had access to
concrete advice on navigating new processes inside and beyond the university because of their
advocates, guides, and knowledge agents. Christina states it very simply, “Like people or sisters
97

who have already graduated, who have gone on to do things that I possibly want to pursue. And
then kind of showing me the ropes as to like how to go about it.” Having social support agents,
apprentice agents, and institutional agents to ‘show you the ropes’ is the primary means by which
significant others support student persistence.
Two other noteworthy benefits of social networks that emerged in the data were the
concepts of reciprocity as an output and of the need for multiple circles. Reciprocity is used in
previous discussions of social capital as the expectation that favors will be repaid (Coleman,
1988). In the context of this study reciprocity is used to describe an output of social capital
exchanges. Students reported over and over again that they would guide others because they
received guidance and mentorship. “I had no idea how much of a privilege and a blessing it is to
be a University scholar, and the responsibility -- because I do think you carry a responsibility to
other students,” said Andrea. Many of these students had knowledge agents direct them to
resources to help them persist and overcome challenges within the college and now they can
guide others.
You have to give back to everyone that’s helped you get to the point where you’re at.
And that’s what I see. Absorb all of this knowledge and at the end give it all back. And
that’s one thing that I’m trying to do. (Tony)
Beyond the sense of duty to reciprocate support to others within the college, many of the
students become coaches to family members as well. “I have a sister who is going to be a senior
this year so she’s going to be applying for colleges and I’m going through all of that with her,”
said Sarah, who has helped her sister research colleges, assess her qualifications, revise personal
statements, and prepare for interviews. José has two brothers in high school that he is coaching,
98

and Andrea and George helped their cousins with college applications as well. These students are
credible models and trusted apprentice agents for others, inside and outside the college.
The idea of reciprocity and giving back as much social capital as you have is also filtered
through the students’ collectivist worldview lens. This lens would likely not pertain to all types
of students, but was found in this sample of LFGCS.
I was part of [NAI]… and I felt they're a great reason why I came to college in the first
place. So then when I started college, I was like, I want to give back in some way. I
didn’t know how – I didn’t know how I could give back, but then I realized, oh, I could
be a tutor, you know, I could tutor these kids who, I was in their place once, so you know,
being able to maybe be a role model and just try to influence them in a positive way.
(Alexander)
Students reported that they were aware of the privilege around them, and the opportunities they
had for social mobility and that helping others was payment in some way for the gifts they were
being given. George said of his fraternity brother mentors, “I don’t think I would’ve stood a
chance if I didn’t have help, in all honesty, because I just wouldn’t know what to do, where to
go…I couldn’t be more thankful and I’m definitely going to pay it forward.” For Sarah, the
success she experienced is also a collective success, to be shared and celebrated with the family.
It’s a sign to like my little brothers and sisters that they can do it. It’s a sign to my mom
that like she can go back to school and get it done. It’s an accomplishment for the family.
This is a success for all of us. So to, you know, let myself down is to let my family down
and to succeed on my own is to succeed with my family.
Reciprocity was not found to be a precursor to social capital donation. It was not expressed in
any of the narratives that there was an expectation that a favor would be returned to any donor of
99

resources or knowledge. Reciprocity, giving back, and a sense of duty or responsibility to do so,
was found to be an output of social capital exchanges for LFGCS. There was also a slight gender
imbalance, with all 5 of the males mentioning giving back to their communities, which they
described as other low-income Latinos, but only 2 of the women described such a sense of duty.
In addition to the benefits of support agents outlined in previous sections of this chapter,
and the output of reciprocity, which benefits both students and communities inside and outside
the college, one other important benefit of social network development was identified. Several
students cited the need for multiple circles of support, advocacy, and access to resources as key
to their persistence. Robert and Cirah both articulated the benefits of having multiple circles. He
said, of his many networks, from the summer bridge program, to a dance team, from a Korean
club to the alumni society, “So like having all these little small communities and getting different
perspectives has helped me.” For Robert, maximizing human capital via social connections was a
clear benefit to building up a diverse network within the college. “I feel like you can only learn
so much from that small community of similar background and then you can learn a lot more
from different cultures and people from different background, socioeconomic backgrounds and
the connections they have.”
Cirah, like Robert, is a very ambitious and motivated student. She is very curious about
different micro-societies within the college. She, like Robert, is removed from her home
community and did not express any sentiments of feeling pulled away from school by issues at
home. She described herself as belonging 25% to her sorority, 25% in her major, 25% in her
Latino community and 25% in her job. She found “a home” in multiple societies or circles within
the college.
100

I have a lot of role models. Yeah, I think I have role models for different things… like I
want to be like, Dr. ______, because he's my role model with like how to directly affect
people’s lives in a positive way… my mom and my dad are my role models for a lot of
other reasons, [and] for like professional settings, like [my boss is] my role model for
now. But I have a lot of role models.
Cirah has been purposeful and proactive in cultivating relationships with mid-level and high-
level status agents, “different people to help me in different places in my life.” She is keenly
aware that through new connections she can gain exponentially more social capital than she can
by utilizing only social support agents. Cirah is not concerned with merely getting through
college, but getting ahead by way of college – that includes the education and the experience.
I think I have role models for different things. People I want to be and — because I have
role models as like… a professional, like, oh, I want to be like ________, who was the
VP at [the media company]. I want to be like her. Like, I look up to her, and I have a
lunch with her scheduled — like, I want to be her and the only way to be her is by
knowing more about her. So professionally, I have a role model… But I have a lot of role
models. I look up to a lot of people because I want to be a lot of things, you know. Like I
said, I don’t just want to be like the CEO of this or that and I don’t just want to be this
person who has really good grades in MBA school or I don’t just want to be — not that
this is anything bad, but I don’t just want to be a good mom, you know. I also want to be
a good human and whatever. And take over the world. But like, that takes time, and that
takes a lot more learning and stuff.
Developing multiple circles can be seen as a precursor to social capital, or as a part of the
process, but in this context I present this as a benefit. Developing multiple circles is a dividend
101

that pays off only after students have had success seeking initial investment of time and trust in
an agent that has offered emotional support, privileged knowledge or resources, or higher status
connections. Once this occurs, students have the scaffolding to continue building local capital-
rich and social capital-rich networks or circles.
Conclusion
This chapter presented the findings from interviews with 10 Latino first-generation
college students at an elite PWI. From an in-depth ethnographic analysis of the narratives of
these students’ college life histories, compelling themes emerged that help to explain how these
students integrated into college communities, who and what altered their lives and support their
persistence, and what benefits beyond the functions of archetypical agents were perceived and
expressed by the informants. In this chapter, the process of integration was explained through
three dynamic features: sense of belonging, ways in which students overcome barriers to
integration, and the usefulness of support agents in the process of integration. ‘Significant
Others’ was defined in greater detail by the identification of social support agents, apprentice
agents, and institutional agents, stratified by function and status. Lastly, other benefits of social
network development and social capital-building (outside of those related to agent functions)
were illuminated. Those salient benefits discussed were reciprocity and the development of
multiple circles. Chapter 5 offers further discussion of the findings, including a local path model
or local theory of Latino first-gen student persistence, and recommendations for institutional
action and further research.

102

CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to explore the ways in which Latino first-generation
college students (LFGCS) integrate into college communities and build social networks that
support their persistence. With the number of Latino students entering post-secondary education
far outpacing other ethnic groups (NCES, 2013), and with half of Latino college students being
the first in their family to attend college (Santiago, 2011), this is an important population to
watch. In order to increase degree attainment for LFGCS, educators and students need to have
local pathways models of persistence. It was the goal of this study to develop such a model,
demonstrating a successful pathway for LFGCS to integrate and persist at an elite PWI. Because
this study was couched in between integration and social capital frameworks, it was important to
look at the intersection and interplay of these theories.
Using the concept of Padilla’s unfolding matrix as a guide to create an open-ended
interview protocol, data was collected from one-on-one ethnographic interviews with ten LFGCS
who are seniors at one highly-selective research university. The interview protocol was aimed at
capturing data on the students’ college life histories, including the communities they belonged to,
the significant others in their lives who offered them support in getting through college, and the
ways that members of their support network aided their persistence or otherwise offered benefit
to them. Study participants tendered their personal experiences, their perception of the university
environment, and shared intimate details about the special people in their lives that have
impacted their success in college. The findings point to a previously unseen peer-activated social
network model that builds valuable local institutional capital. Students learn from near-peers
how to transform informal social capital into more powerful currency as they move in and out of
103

academic, social, and professional spaces. These emerging institutional agents with privileged
knowledge of the college environment, apprentice agents, also help LFGCS negotiate the power
distance between themselves and established institutional agents. This chapter presents an
analytical discussion of the findings introduced in Chapter 4, as well as implications for practice,
policy, and further research.
Discussion of the Findings
This section presents a discussion of the findings from this study which included
interviews with 10 Latina/o, first-generation college seniors at a single, elite PWI. In particular,
this section proposes a theoretical model of Latino first-gen student persistence that merges
integration theory and social capital theory, showing the interdependence of the two frameworks.
Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure holds in several of the narratives captured for this
study if it is distilled down to a single predictive statement, such as, if students are integrated into
educational communities they have increased commitment and intention that improves the
likelihood of their persistence. This study was not designed to test the theory but to examine the
congruency of the theory in the college life histories of my sample population.
Not all the students in the sample were well-integrated. Some had very high levels of
commitment without strong ties to educational communities, as in the case of José, who was
incredibly determined and focused on his goals, intrinsically, and motivated by external factors,
like his family. In the case of Anthony, another outlier, a lack of integration in any campus
community very likely influenced his stop-out. It is supported in the previous literature that
social and academic engagement is a measure of integration and a predictor of persistence
(Astin, 1984; Hu, 2011, Kuh et al., 2008). The integration experienced by the students in this
104

sample is associated with their persistence, but is part of a larger process, and not a lone
predictive variable.
Sense of belonging emerged as a significant factor in integration and social network-
building. Sense of belonging is defined in this context as a feeling of affiliation and identification
with the campus community (Hurtado and Carter, 1997). Sense of belonging functions as a lever
that amps up integration, or enables it, as well as being further increased by integration. Sense of
belonging can be seen as an input and output in the process of integration in this model. A lack
of or low level of sense of belonging seemed to negatively impact integration, as in the case of
Anthony, Cirah, José, and other students who struggled to find communities in their first year in
particular. As students adjusted to the new environment and got more comfortable, they began to
feel a sense of belonging, then were able to slowly form connections with people they trusted.
From those initial tenuous connections, sense of belonging grows and stronger network ties can
be developed to integrative agents and more powerful institutional agents. The formation of
network connections, like integration, is enabled by sense of belonging, which works as a
lubricant for social capital-building (Figure 3).
In the case of the students in this sample who did not integrate well into campus
communities, the sense of belonging was slow to grow until they connected with trusted
communities members, such as a peer or job supervisor who they deemed a credible model to
learn from. I would use the example of Sarah as a case in point: she did not feel a strong sense of
belonging, perceived the campus racial climate to be hostile, and struggled to find communities
where she felt she fit, but once she found a peer guide, her sense of belonging increased and she
could slowly build a few other connections with like-minded individuals with whom she could
105

Figure 3. A local path model of LFGCS persistence at an elite PWI that relies on sense of
belonging to promote integration and social network-building.

share her struggles and frustrations. Having significant others (even one) for emotional support
and knowledgeable peer guides as apprentice agents, helped her take advantage of the
institutional agency (the University Scholars Program) in which she had been situated since day
one.
José’s story is also one that points to an alternate model by which students do not
integrate within the college, but integrate into chosen pre-professional contexts outside the
university. These activities are educational and professional, putting the students in sustained
contact with high-status institutional agents. José (and Alexander as well) learned about research
opportunities at the nearby medical school and about shadowing at a local hospital from other
students and from the University Scholars office. These activities resulted in integration in
communities that increased commitment, but are not the institutional communities described in
Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure. This conceptual model (Figure 4) extends Tinto’s
(1993) paradigm well beyond the boundaries of the university. This social capital-building
Sense of Belonging Initial
Integration
into Chosen
Communities
Increased Sense of
Belonging
Social Network
Connections to
Support Agents
Social Support Agents
Apprentice Agents
Institutional Agents
Emotional/Psychological Support
Access to Privileged Knowledge & Resources
A Network of Significant Others that Aids Persistence
Latino First Gen
College Student
Completion
Self-efficacy Building; Bridges to IAs
106

activity aids persistence in college by increasing the students’ goals to those beyond the college
years.
_

Figure 4. An alternate local path model of LFGCS persistence at an elite PWI -- without
integration into college communities -- that relies on social capital-building to increase intention
and the likelihood of persistence.

Sarah’s story, and that of José, allowed me to question the assumption that students
embedded in institutional agencies are already integrated. Until trust is built, and that takes time
and investment of individuals (both student to student and student to staff member), authentic
exchange of support, knowledge, and/or resources cannot begin. Just having an institutional
agency is not enough to guarantee integration or the formation of support networks that influence
persistence. In the case of Anthony this was also true. His involvement in an early entry and
preparation program did not influence his integration, and although he has persisted to the degree
completion, his 3 year stop-out could have easily become a complete drop-out. It was his
external support network -- his family -- that had a major impact on his motivation to commit
and continue his studies to completion. The campus job he was able to maintain while on leave
Academic Engagement outside of the
University, in Professional Contexts,
with Institutional Agents
Integration into a
Profession & Social Capital-
Building
Heightened Sense of Self-efficacy, Extended
Goals, and Deepened Commitment
Latino First Gen
College Student
Completion
No/Low
Sense of
Belonging
Little-to-No
Integration
into Campus
Communities
107

also kept him in a circle of bridging agents who could advise him on how to re-enter the
university. Institutional agents kept Anthony involved in educational life and he chose to stay
close as well. This is a rare exception to the more oft-told story, that students are derailed on
their path to college completion by external pulls. This dissertation presents some counter-
narratives to the previous canon of research on student departure.
Consistent with Kim’s (2009) study in which first-gen students reported near peer
models, older siblings and cousins as their most trusted advisors, the findings from this study
point to the important place that apprentice agents hold in the process of building support
networks and building social capital. It is my suggestion, based on the data presented in this
dissertation that social capital is built in stages -- particularly the social capital that aids college
persistence. Social capital is slowly acquired, like all forms of capital. It grows exponentially –
once some is attained more can be attained – but that is only possible if one gains the skills and
self-efficacy needed to continue to build productive relationships. This is a learned investment
strategy, and social capital-building in this context requires some integration or foundational
connections that scaffold the power distance. The term power distance is borrowed from
Hofstede’s (1997) cultural theory used to describe a dimension of culture that creates and
naturalizes hierarchy, and explains the management of people with less power by those with
more power.
No students in this sample were able to build a social capital-rich relationship with a high
status agent without first building the scaffolding needed to get to that platform. José revealed
students’ perceptions of professors in his comment, “sometimes we think of a professor as…
they’re not even human.” Other students also expressed this sentiment, that professors were
initially viewed as untouchable, unknowable authority figures. As Robert expressed, there is a
108

real fear in speaking to and getting to know professors. “I was really scared to meet my
professors. I wouldn’t go up to them just because I would feel nervous.” This study found that
students could gain access to professors and mentors with social capital only after they
developed connections with apprentice agents – those emerging agents within the institution,
usually more experienced and knowledgeable peers, upperclassmen and recent alumni – who
serve as bridges to resources and higher level agents. The apprentice agents also serve to provide
practice in the art of network-building, without as much risk. Self-efficacy is built only with the
practice of challenging tasks (Bandura, 1977). Power distance is difficult to negotiate and helps
explain the usefulness of apprentice agents, those middle-status donors of local capital who
share their privileged knowledge of the college terrain, offer advice, and broker access to
resources. While the presentation of the strata of capital agents is shown as vertical and
hierarchical (see Figure 3), it should also be thought of as a horizontal, or more equalized model,
where all types of support and funds of knowledge are equally valuable in supporting LFGCS’
persistence in college (Figure 5).
109

Figure 5. A non-hierarchical model of various support agents.

While a model of stratified support agents is presented in this study and the data support
the supposition that agents vary in function, type, and status, there are also examples of agents
that cut across the boundaries of social/emotional support, local capital, and higher-status social
capital. The multi-purpose institutional agents are considered multistrand agents, because they
offer more than one type of support or play multiple roles in the lives of the minority youth
(Stanton-Salazar, 2001). The multistranded relationships described by informants in this study
identified high-status institutional agents who performed as knowledge agents, teachers, mentors,
professional coaches and advocates. Alexander, Christina, and Andrea were able to develop
relationships like this with professor/mentors, through an investment of their own energy and
initiative. All three became involved in undergraduate research projects which put them in close
contact with these agents, over a longer period of time, working one-on-one. It is only with
Social Support Agents:
family, fictive kin, peers who
provide stress relief,
comfort, sense of belonging,
motivation
Apprentice Agents:
local guides and
emerging agents within
the university, who
share privileged
knowledge of local
resources and serve as
bridges to other agents
Institutional Agents:
well-connected persons
with social capital who
serve as institutional
and professional
bridges, advocates,
advisors, and guides
110

investment can this most productive social capital be raised. Social capital exchanges are social
investments that require trust, authenticity, and two willing parties. The “market conditions”
must be right for engagement to occur. The next section offers recommendations for institutional
actions that could improve integration and social capital-building opportunities for LFGCS that
would aid their persistence.
Implications for Policy and Practice
The study of Latino first-gen students at an elite PWI illuminated the process by which
students integrate into campus communities and how they build social capital over time, relying
on a series of stratified support agents. This study brought to light the difficulty Latino first-gen
students face in reaching across what I have termed here to be a power distance. Schreiner et al.
(2011) highlighted the positive effect on persistence that intrusive faculty and staff can have by
purposefully reaching out to lower status students to connect with them over shared interests and
commonalities (and thereby building trust and rapport) and not having a purely transactional
relationship. Academic advisors and programmatic staff, such as those at campus cultural
centers, student activities, and scholarship offices, can also enable the self-efficacy needed to
bridge the power gap by explicitly talking about network formation. While Lin (2000) describes
social capital as an invisible hand, this process of network-building can be unpacked and openly
discussed. It is in the best interest of LFGCS that social capital as a practical concept is discussed
in the training of staff who support first-gen students, and that staff and faculty understand how
they are viewed by lower status students – often as untouchable and unapproachable. Students
have to be encouraged and taught how to speak to high-status agents that they may feel are out of
their realm, and staff and faculty have to present themselves as human, accessible, and amicable
members of the campus community.
111

A policy change that impacts the culture of faculty training is also necessary. A shift is
needed in the expectation that faculty at a research-intensive university should be concerned with
only research and teaching rigorous content and not consider the cultural context of the language
and pedagogy used in the classroom. A policy swing towards a culture in which faculty are
expected to learn from students about their perceptions of bias in the classroom and across the
campus could improve the learning environment, and positively impact students’ sense of
belonging and institutional commitment. That policy change would also need to include support
and rewards for formal and informal mentoring and coaching which is often not part of
institutional service expectations. I recommend that other local spaces (e.g. academic
departments, student services, and cultural centers) at the University engage in the type of
qualitative inquiry and assessment used in this dissertation in order to develop a deeper
understanding of how students navigate and perceive their support services.
Mentorship was also found to be a key function of apprentice agents, helping LFGCS
learn to navigate the environment, processes, and resources within the university. Both formal
and informal mentorship programs are recommended to increase the local capital and thereby the
retention and persistence of LFGCS. A dedicated First-Generation Student Services Office
(First-Gen Office) should be established in order to oversee such initiatives as staff training,
mentorship programs, and increased involvement of first-gen students in co-curricular academic
programming that would increase the time they spend with potential models, professional guides,
cultural guides, and institutional agents. Staff training is particularly important since several of
the students in the sample expressed their frustration at receiving prescriptive advising, when
they needed more developmental help. The establishment of such an office could also
compensate for the gap in support between what is provided to students who are part of
112

institutional agencies, such as NAI or US who receive extra advising and direction to resources,
and the lower level of service provided to others, who do not win these competitive scholarships.
Andrea’s sentiment makes it clear there is a need for more services, outreach, and support for
LFGCS. “All of the things that [US] gives me, other kids don’t get, and they need, just as much
as I do.” Isabel and others echoed this same notion. More institutional agencies should be
developed, like a First-Gen Office, so that every student without an off-campus network of
college-goers can be embedded in an on-campus network of apprentice and institutional agents
who know the resources available, how to access them, and how to form bridges to more diverse
forms of social capital.
Beyond the need for practitioners to help scaffold the power distance between lower
status students and high-status institutional agents, and the demand for a first-gen services center
on campus, there is data in this dissertation that argues for two other institutional actions:
purposefully inclusive parental programming and more living learning communities. Students’
sense of belonging was impacted by the perception that they could not find a place or space to fit
their families into their new experience. Andrea, for example, perceived a lack of inclusion for
families.
I think there needs to be more access to orientation and parents’ weekend and things like
that for families who don’t speak English. Like I don’t think they translate anything,
which is mind blowing to me ‘cause if my high school can translate stuff for parents I
feel like [this university] should be able to. And make it more accessible. It’s really
expensive too. I’ve never brought my mom to parents’ weekend. It’s very expensive and I
feel like, ‘why should I bring her if there’s nothing here towards her?’
113

Language barriers were mentioned by more than half the participants in this sample as a
prominent boundary for their families. Not only does the lack of any Spanish-language
programming keep parents at a distance, but it sends a message to students that ‘there isn’t space
for that here’ and can be interpreted as ‘there isn’t space for you here.’ This study, through the
narratives provided by the informants, highlights the negative impact to sense of belonging when
Latino families are not explicitly included in the initial integrative process. A forced separation
of old world and new world or home culture and college culture also divorces students from
protective agents that may provide much-needed emotional support.
Another recommendation for institutional action is to increase the number of
purposefully-designed living learning communities to accommodate more first-gen college
students. While only three of the informants reported they lived in the special interest housing
offered to Latino students, the respondents spoke highly of the experience as one that aided their
initial adjustment, sense of belonging, and integration, as well as put them in contact with near
peer models and apprentice agents that offered guidance in navigating the new environment. Five
of the other informants reported that they wished they had lived on the themed floor of the
dormitory and chose to spend significant time there, over their own residence hall, because they
found there was a critical mass of students there with whom they could identify and feel
comfortable. Peers that are “like me” serve to fill in gaps of support that parents and institutional
agents cannot provide (Sánchez et al., 2006), and increase sense of belonging to levels that
enable integration into chosen campus communities. This campus has space for only 32 residents
on the Latino floor, but has over 300 Latino and Hispanic freshman begin each year. There is a
critical need for more special interest housing. Based on data collected for this study, I
recommend that all first-generation college students be housed in intentional living learning
114

communities to increase the exchange of local capital which apprentice agents provide, as well
as ease adjustment and sense of belonging. A follow-up study on a larger cohort of LFGCS who
lived in special interest housing and a control group who did not is worth considering. Further
recommendations for expanding this line of inquiry are presented in the next section of this
chapter.
Recommendations for Further Research
While the findings from this study are not generalizable to LFGCS across all 4-year
colleges, the examination of the lived experience of LFGCS and their social networks allowed
me to theorize a process by which they are active agents in their integration, by which integration
efforts may be minimized or hindered, and from whom they gain social support, local capital,
and social capital. This local model of LFGCS persistence brings to light some of the interacting
and bi-directional variables that impact student persistence. More research is recommended to
test the interdependence of integration and social capital frameworks. Can students develop
social capital rich networks that aid them in persisting in college without being well-integrated
into campus communities? A model is proposed here (see Figure 4) based on the experiences of
a particular informant. I believe this warrants further investigation.
A second line of inquiry that should be pursued is the concept of power distance in the
social capital building process of lower status students. Hofstede (1997) originated the term of
power distance in describing how individuals in societies with large personal wealth gaps
manage the distribution or sharing of power. Societies with larger gaps in capital holdings
between the bottom and top are found to have a smaller power center whose leadership remains
unchallenged by a larger un-empowered populace who often accept their lower status position
(Hofstede, 1997). Informants in this study explained that it was difficult to approach institutional
115

agents (professors and professionals) that seemed beyond their cultural reach, and so viewed
themselves as lower status and the ‘other’ as more important. An investigation of this concept at
work in the process of social capital-building for minority college students could clarify the
psychological effect on self-efficacy in social capital-building within colleges and further
substantiate the significant role of apprentice agents in mediating power distance.
Additional research is also needed to understand the social capital-building process for
lower status students throughout college, and in different types of institutions. I recommend a
larger longitudinal study that would follow students from day one of college to completion to
map the growth of their networks and accumulation of social capital. Alongside this, or
integrated into the study, should be ongoing evaluation of interventions that enhance social
capital-building, such as those recommended in the previous section of this chapter. The
programs and agencies designed to situate students in support networks where they can access
local capital and social capital are institutionally-sponsored and therefore reproduce what the
university would wish to reproduce. It is not the place of this dissertation to be critical of those
programs, but it is a question worth exploring in further research. Are there other programmatic
models beyond those devised by the university to support the university’s goals? An exploration
of the process by which students build social capital that intensifies their goals and commitments
would elucidate the significant agents who act as levers in the persistence process and where
there are gaps to be filled. The more we can learn about successful students and how they do
what they do, the more pathway models we can build to guide students through the college
experience and increase completion rates for working-class minority youth.

116

Conclusion
This study aimed to explore the college life experiences of Latino first-generation college
students at an elite university, particularly inquiring as to how they integrate into communities at
a PWI, and how they develop support networks and social capital-rich relationships. Using data
collected from 10 in-depth interviews with LFGCS at a single university, the findings, presented
in Chapter 4, point to a significant reliance on social support network agents to adjust and
integrate into campus communities, after which students build up local capital and social capital
(via agents) sequentially and exponentially. The significant others revealed in the college life
histories of the informants range from parents and peers, to peer mentors, RA’s, upperclassman,
and recent alumni, to professors, research supervisors, and managers.
The data from this study establish that there are levels of support agents associated with
different kinds of benefits. The description of and differences between protective agents and
institutional agents is explained in Stanton-Salazar’s (1997) work, but the gap between social
support and social capital became more distinct as it was described in the narratives of these
LFGCS’s lived experiences. There are mid-level apprentice agents within the university
environment that have some privileged information, access to resources, and lived experience
that can be shared in order to scaffold the social capital-building process for LFGCS. Using this
data to tap into that leadership and talent on college campuses could improve completion rates
for first-gen students.
This study exposed the tacit social capital-building strategies that successful students
utilized to navigate and get through this university. These students have become experts on their
own journey as Latino first-generation college students who have succeeded in completing
college. This is no small feat when viewed in light of national college completion rates for first-
117

generation students (NCES, 2014a). Learning from the students in this study about the
importance of their complex network of support agents in getting through college offers
practitioners insight on how they might support the efforts of students in the process of social
capital-building. As an educator and a first-generation college student, I felt that I learned
something new from the study participants about the unique ways they integrated and built social
capital in college. Because the LFGCS who informed this study are experts in navigating the
University, it is their direct advice, their “local capital,” that should be shared with other LFGCS
entering the University. Because this knowledge should be shared and not only inform
institutional practice, I felt compelled to include an epilogue as the final chapter of this
dissertation. This epilogue serves as a guide to getting through the college, and the advice in this
epilogue emerged from the data and the voices of the informants. This epilogue serves as another
way of presenting the data.
Social capital is an educational investment, just like human capital, by which working-
class minority youth can achieve some social mobility. Social capital-building is governed by
unspoken rules and invisible measures of returns. We must continue to study social capital-
building to construct process models that can be applied in educational settings and not settle for
accepting what we cannot see. Minority students and low-income students are not invisible and
the way they work through the dominant culture of predominantly white institutions – and persist
to degree completion – deserves to be made visible as well.

118

CHAPTER SIX
EPILOGUE
A Guide to Getting Through the University by the Latino Ten
Welcome new first-generation Latino college students to this prestigious and selective
university! You have worked hard to earn a spot at this university and now you are entering new
and unfamiliar terrain! But please know that you are not alone. We, the Latino Ten, first-
generation college students and now graduating seniors, have come before you and are here to
help guide you. We have succeeded in reaching our goal of graduating from college and are the
first in our families to do that. This is a milestone achievement for us and it will be for you too.
You are just starting your journey in this college and it will be tough – no doubt about that – but
you can persist and reach your goals. Just don’t give up on your plans for the future, and take our
advice for getting through this university.
First, you are going to need people. We cannot stress enough that you need to make
connections! It is very difficult at first to figure out where to go and which organizations might
be right for you. You have to be open to people and try to get to know them and let them get to
know you. In the beginning, in the first semester, go to everything! If there is a ‘welcome week’
or involvement fair or open house at a cultural center or academic department – JUST GO! We
know, it’s easy to stay in and it’s easy to get overwhelmed by all the new people and activities,
but you can’t meet people and make new connections without introducing yourself to others and
sharing your experiences.
Secondly, dorm life is essential to making some early friends who will be your support
group in the first year. Many of us didn’t want to live in a Latino dorm or a floor for first-gen
scholars, but then later we wished we had because those were people who already knew
119

something about us, our homes, our families, our culture and experiences. You think that you are
limiting yourself if you live in the Latino floor, because you want to meet diverse groups of
people, but it’s just a place to start. Themed-dorms, or living communities, allow you to build
relationships with peers who already share one part of their identity with you. You are so much
more than just Latino, and college is a time to explore all the parts of your identity that make you
a whole, complex, amazing, unique person. A themed floor or dorm gives you a safe place to
start exploring and often becomes a home away from home in that first year.
Next, join activities and organizations based on your interests and values. There are so
many clubs on campus and you have to try some out to find the right community for you.
Political clubs, volunteer clubs, language clubs, academic clubs, faith-based clubs, sports clubs,
traditional and cultural fraternities and sororities, alumni societies and professional organization
are some of the categories that you’ll come across. Just get on the email lists and go to the first
meeting or two. If it doesn’t feel right, then you move on, but at least you tried something new,
maybe met a few people. College is a time to explore and you have to be an active participant in
that exploration in order to find out where your passions lie.
Speaking of passions, follow them. We know it may sound frivolous. You come to
college to get the education you need to get a good job, and you may feel guilty if you aren’t
working all the time. Or you feel guilty if you are exploring and socializing. But that is part of
the learning that you will do here, and it is part of building a support network to help you in
school. People to cheer you on and people to study with and people to give you advice and point
you to resources you may need. Most of us would describe a successful student as one who
follows their passions. Figure out what is meaningful to you and do that. Meet other people who
do that. Whether that is Kicks for Kids, Campus Crusade, Engineers without Borders, student
120

government, investment club, tutoring others, doing research or interning, you have to engage in
what really excites your heart and mind or you won’t be making the most of your college
experience. Getting involved in activities beyond your classes, with other students, will give you
a rich college life and community outside of the classroom and that helps you IN the classroom
too. It helps you stay committed to finishing college.
We recommend you tap into all these people you are meeting to ask about classes and
professors. It has been the other students we’ve seen in classes over and over or in our dorms or
in clubs that we ask about what certain classes are really like, what is the toughest part of a class,
how to get the best grades, how to approach the exams, and which professor is best for a certain
course. No professor or advisor can answer that for you. Only your peers that have taken these
courses before you can advise you on the in-class experience. Use these informal peer advisors
and peer mentors to your advantage, and please know that they want to help you. That local, on-
the-ground knowledge is indispensible. The only way to get to know upperclassman is to get
involved in activities where they are, and ask questions. Developing relationships with students,
alumni, and even staff that you trust is like tending a garden. You plant a seed, but you don’t just
get vegetables right away. You have to invest energy into growing your relationships.
Finding staff people that you can talk to, who can offer you good advice, is really
important too. Staff people are the advisors and office workers who will help you with your
course planning and your campus jobs. They staff the church, the library, academic advising, the
career center, the financial aid office, and more. Staff work for the university, but are not the
faculty (which are the teachers/professors). Staff persons run all kinds of programs and can be
potential mentors and guides to navigating the university. You do not need to worry about them
grading you or assessing your work, which is great because you don’t need to be afraid of doing
121

something wrong and hurting your grade. You should find someone that you trust, that you feel
knows you and understands where you are coming from and where you want to go. Many of
these people have a lot of knowledge about the university and know where to go for help with
certain tasks, and where the best resources and opportunities are. You will meet some advisors
who you don’t click with or who you don’t find helpful, but keep talking to people because there
are some gems out there. There are people who know how to get things done at the university
and that are willing to advocate for you. You have to find one that sees you as more than just a
number, and shares their interests with you. Once you bond with someone over a shared interest,
developing a good working relationship is easier. Don’t be afraid to talk about yourself. People
are interested in your story, we promise.
In regards to talking to people, you also have to talk to professors! This is the toughest
and scariest thing, we know. It seems impossible, and you wonder what to say, and you feel like
an intruder or a burden. This is a mental block and you have to get over it. It is a fear you have to
face. We have all been there and it really does get easier -- but only if you practice. Professors
are powerful people in the university and you will meet many powerful people in your life, some
who can impact your grades or your job prospects or your salary. You have to practice talking to
them, human to human, and express that you really are interested in learning. As you do this your
confidence will grow. If you like a professor, then go to their office hours. Go in with a question
about the class or the readings and ask a personal question too. Try to get to know them, and
maybe you can connect over a shared interest. Ask them where they went to college? Do they
remember struggling with certain material or concepts? What do they like most about their field?
What do they like to do for fun outside of work? Anything can get a short conversation going. If
122

it goes well, then ask if you can come back again if you have more questions, and if you like
them, then go back. This is how you build a relationship. You can do this.
Our last piece of advice is to remind you that your failures and flops are OK. If you are
doing what you love, working toward your goal to finish college and toward your goals beyond
college, you will stay motivated. You have to have goals, so dream big. Set high goals for
yourself, out of your comfort zone. Don’t get discouraged, when you do poorly on a test or don’t
get the internship you wanted. Remember that it happens to everyone and it is a bump in the
road, not a permanent state of affairs. Because you fail an exam doesn’t mean YOU are a failure.
You just have to adjust your strategy, and try again to face that challenge. If you have built a
network of support around you, as we suggested earlier in our letter, then you have people
around you to help you and advise you and make you stronger.
There is so much more power in the collective, than in the individual. It’s called synergy,
when the combined actions of people, working together, are greater than the sum on their
individual actions. Remember this when you think, “I can do it alone.” Yes, you can. Maybe. But
we are here to tell you that you will be more powerful when you connect with others. You will
have bridges to their friends and mentors, access to new knowledge, resources and opportunities,
and the support of those special people with whom you have shared your stories, passions,
culture, interests, and questions. We, the Latino Ten, first-generation college students who have
persisted to graduation, are here to tell you, to get involved, live in special interest dorms, be
open to new people and experiences, find communities of people that you respect and trust,
follow your passions, connect with people who know more than you, and share your story. If you
take our advice, you can get through this large, elite, predominately white university and achieve
your goals of completing college. Now start making plans for what’s beyond college! Lograrás!
123

Recommended Actions for Latino First-generation College Students
(Suggested by the Latino Ten)
 Live in themed dorms or special interest housing, based on your interests and/or
ethnicity. You will begin college surrounded by people with whom you already share
something.
 Be open to new people and activities. You have to get out of your comfort zone. It’s
tiring, but it’s the only way to get adjusted.
 Join something(s) right away.
 Find an organization with a purpose. This will help you develop your passions and figure
out what you value most in your life.
 Don’t limit your connections. The Latino community can’t be your whole world. You are
a whole and complex person. Explore all the parts of your identity by being active in lots
of different circles.
 Remember that you are stronger with others by your side.
 Graduation is attainable. You are here working on that goal. Start setting higher goals,
beyond college, and making a plan to reach them.
 Find role models, like you, who have achieved what you hope to achieve and learn from
them.
 Explore your passions.
 Share your experiences and your stories. You can inspire others and connect with people
who will see you are strong and smart and have the potential to do great things.

124

References
Allen, D. (1999). Desire to finish college: An empirical link between motivation and persistence.
Research in Higher Education, 40(4), 461-485.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of college student personnel, 25(4), 297-308.
Attinasi Jr., L. C. (1989). Getting in: Mexican Americans' perceptions of university attendance
and the implications for freshman year persistence. The Journal of Higher Education,
247-277.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a causal model of student
attrition. Research in higher education, 12(2), 155-187.
Becker, G. S. (1967). Human capital and the personal distribution of income: An analytical
approach (No. 1). Institute of Public Administration.
Berger, J. B., & Lyon, S. C. (2005). Past to present: A historical look at retention. College
student retention: Formula for student success, 1, 1-30.
Billson, J. M., & Terry, M. B. (1982). In search of the silken purse: Factors in attrition among
first-generation students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of
American Colleges, Denver, CO, January 1981; revised January 1982. Retrieved from
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED214431
Bordes-Edgar, V., Arredondo, P., Kurpius, S. R., & Rund, J. (2011). A longitudinal analysis of
Latino students' academic persistence. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 10(4), 358-
368. doi: 10.1177/1538192711423318
125

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education. New York, NY: Greenwood.
Braxton, J. M., Sullivan, A. V. S., & Johnson, R. M. Jr. (1997). Appraising Tinto’s theory of
college student departure. In J.C. Smart, (Ed), Higher education: Handbook of theory and
research (pp. 107-164). New York: Agathon Press.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1993). College persistence: Structural equations
modeling test of an integrated model of student retention. Journal of Higher Education,
123-139.
Cabrera, N. L., & Padilla, A. M. (2004). Entering and succeeding in the “culture of college”: The
story of two Mexican heritage students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 26(2),
152-170.
Callanta, G, & Ortiz, A. (2009). The first generation student journey: Dismantling obstacles to
success. The Vermont Connection, 30, 73-86. Retrieved from
http://www.uvm.edu/~vtconn/
Castillo, L., Conoley, C., Choi-Pearson, C., Archuleta, D., Phoummarath, M. J., & Van
Landingham, A. (2006). University environment as a mediator of Latino ethnic identity
and persistence attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(2), 267-271.
Cerezo, A., & Chang, T. (2013). Latina/o achievement at predominantly white universities: The
importance of culture and ethnic community. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
12(1), 72-85.
Choy, S. (2001). Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access,
persistence, and attainment. (NCES Statistical Report 2001-126). Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp
126

?pubid=2001126
Chronicle of Higher Education. (2014). A profile of freshmen at 4-year colleges: Fall 2013.
Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/A-
Profile-of-Freshmen-at/147335/
Clark, L. (2012). When nontraditional is traditional: a faculty dialogue with graduating
community college students about persistence. Community College Journal of Research
and Practice, 36(7), 511-519.
Clark, M. R. (2005). Negotiating the freshman year: Challenges and strategies among first-year
college students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(3), 296-316.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of
sociology, 94, S95-S12.
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.
Dika, S. L., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: A critical
synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31-60.
Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide (J.A. Spaulding & G. Simpson, Trans.). Glencoe, IL: The Free
Press.
Elkins, S. A., Braxton, J. M., & James, G. W. (2000). Tinto's separation stage and its influence
on first-semester college student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 41(2),
251-268.
Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the “burden of
‘acting white’”. The Urban Review, 18(3), 176-206.
127

Gee, J. P. (1989). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education,
171(1), 5-176.
Green, A.G., & Sablan, J.R. (2014). Social capital. In D. J. Brewer & L. O. Picus (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Education Economics & Finance (683-7). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Haller, A. O. & Portes, A. (1973). Status attainment processes. Sociology of education, 51-91.
Haller, A. O. & Woelfel, J. (1972) Significant others and their expectations: Concepts and
instruments to measure interpersonal influence on status aspirations Rural Sociology,
37(4), 591-622. doi:10.1177/0049124190019001006
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9-29.
Hausmann, L. R., Ye, F., Schofield, J. W., & Woods, R. L. (2009). Sense of belonging and
persistence in White and African American first-year students. Research in Higher
Education, 50(7), 649-669.
Hernandez, J. C. (2002). A qualitative exploration of the first-year experience of Latino college
students. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 40(1), 69-84.
Hofstede, G. H. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Hu, S. (2011). Reconsidering the relationship between student engagement and persistence in
college. Innovation in Higher education, 36, 97-106.
Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus
racial climate on Latino college students' sense of belonging. Sociology of education,
324-345.
128

Hurtado, S., Carter, D. F., & Spuler, A. (1996). Latino student transition to college: Assessing
difficulties and factors in successful college adjustment. Research in higher education,
37(2), 135-157.
Kim, E. (2009). Navigating college life: The role of peer networks in first-year college
adaptation experience of minority immigrant students. Journal of the First-Year
Experience & Students in Transition, 21(2), 9-34.
Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management journal, 26(4),
608-625.
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J. & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects
of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of
Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563. doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0019
Kuh, G. D., & Love, P. G. (2000). A cultural perspective on student departure. In J. M. Braxton
(Ed.), Reworking the student departure puzzle (196-212). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt
University Press.
Li, X., & Carroll, C. D. (2007). Characteristics of minority-serving institutions and minority
undergraduates enrolled in these institutions: Postsecondary education descriptive
analysis report (NCES 2008-156). National Center for Education Statistics. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008156
Lin, N. (2000). Inequality in social capital. Contemporary Sociology, 785-795.
Lopez, G.P., (2003). The (racially neutral) politics of education: A critical race theory
perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 68-94.
129

Loury, G. (1977). A dynamic theory of racial income differences. In P.A. Wallace & A.M. La
Mond (Eds.), Women, minorities, and employment discrimination, (86-153). Lexington,
MA: Heath.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Los
Angeles: Sage Publications.
Mehta, S., Newbold, J., & O’Rourke, M. (2011). Why do first-generation student fail? College
Student Journal, 45(1), 20-35.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3
rd
ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching:
Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into practice,
31(2), 132-141.
Muñoz, S. M., & Maldonado, M. M. (2012). Counterstories of college persistence by
undocumented Mexicana students: Navigating race, class, gender and legal status.
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(3), 293-315.
Museus, S. D., Nichols, A. H., & Lambert, A. (2008). Racial differences in the effects of campus
racial climate on degree completion: A structural model. The Review of Higher
Education, 32(1), 107-134.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Table 3.11: Percentage distribution of
undergraduates, by the highest level of education completed by either parent and selected
130

institutional and student characteristics. 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid
Study. Washington, DC; U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/npsas/undergraduate.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Table 347: Percentage distribution of first-time
postsecondary students starting at 2- and 4-year institutions during the 2003-04 academic
year, by highest degree attained, enrollment status, and selected characteristics.
Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study. Washington, DC; U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/
tables/dt11_347.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Table 302.60. Percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds
enrolled in degree-granting institutions, by level of institution and sex and race/ethnicity
of student: 1967 through 2012. Digest of Education Statistics. Washington, DC; U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/
tables/dt13_302.60.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014a). Table 326.10. Graduation rates of first-time,
full-time bachelor's degree-seeking students at 4-year postsecondary institutions, by
race/ethnicity, time to completion, sex, and control of institution: Selected cohort entry
years, 1996 through 2006. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS)
Graduation Rates component. Washington, DC; U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_326.10.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014b). Table 502.30. Median annual earnings of full-
time year-round workers 25 to 34 years old and full-time year-round workers as a
percentage of the labor force, by sex, race/ethnicity, and educational attainment: Selected
131

years, 1995 through 2012. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/
tables/dt13_502.30.asp
Nora, A. (1987). Determinants of retention among Chicano college students: A structural model.
Research in higher education, 26(1), 31-59.
Nwana, H. S., & Ndumu, D. T. (1996). An introduction to agent technology. BT Technology
Journal, 14(4), 55-67.
Padilla, R. V. (1994). The unfolding matrix: A technique for qualitative data acquisition and
analysis. In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), Studies in qualitative methodology, Volume 4 (273-285).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Padilla, R. V. (1996, April). The unfolding matrix: A dialogical technique for qualitative data
acquisition and analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
Padilla, R. V. (2009). Student success modeling: Elementary school to college. Stylus
Publishing, LLC.
Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation
college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The Journal
of Higher Education, 75(3), 249. doi:10.1353/jhe.2004.0016
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods, Third edition. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Peltier, G. L., Laden, R., & Matranga, M. (2000). Student persistence in college: A review of the
literature. Journal of College Student Retention, 1(4), 357-375. doi: 10.2190/L4F7-4EF5-
G2F1-Y8R3
132

Portes, A. (2000). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. LESSER, Eric
L. (Ed.). Knowledge and Social Capital. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, 43-67.
Przymus, E. R. (2012). Perceptions of belonging: A qualitative study of Latino community
college students. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of democracy,
6(1), 65-78.
Rios-Aguilar, C., & Deil-Amen, R. (2012). Beyond getting in and fitting in an examination of
social networks and professionally relevant social capital among Latina/o university
students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 11(2), 179-196.
Rodger, S., & Tremblay, P. F. (2003). The effects of a peer mentoring program on academic
success among first year university students. Canadian Journal of Higher Education,
33(3), 1-17.
Rodriguez, N., Mira, C. B., Myers, H. F., Morris, J. K., & Cardoza, D. (2003). Family or friends:
Who plays a greater supportive role for Latino college students?. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9(3), 236.
Sánchez, B., Reyes, O., & Singh, J. (2006). Makin’ it in college: The value of significant
individuals in the lives of Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, 5(1), 48-67.
Santiago, D. A. (2011). Roadmap for Ensuring America's Future by Increasing Latino College
Completion. Excelencia in Education (NJ1).
Schreiner, L. A., Noel, P., Anderson, E., & Cantwell, L. (2011). The impact of faculty and staff
on high-risk college student persistence. Journal of College Student Development, 52(3),
321-338.
133

Soria, K. M., & Stebleton, M. J. (2012). First-generation students’ academic engagement and
retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 675-685. doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.
666735
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority children and youths. Harvard educational review, 67(1), 1-41.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin support
networks of US-Mexican youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students. School
connections: US Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement, 18-38.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents
and their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth & Society,
43(3), 1066-1109.
Stanton ‐Salazar, R. D., & Spina, S. U. (2003). Informal mentors and role models in the lives of
urban Mexican ‐origin adolescents. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 34(3), 231-254.
Tierney, W. G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in college. The
Journal of Higher Education, 63(6), 603-618.
Tierney, W. G., & Venegas, K. M. (2006). Fictive Kin and Social Capital The Role of Peer
Groups in Applying and Paying for College. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(12),
1687-1702.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of educational research, 89-125.
134

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2
nd
ed.).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Torres, J. B., & Solberg, V. S. (2001). Role of self-efficacy, stress, social integration, and family
support in Latino college student persistence and health. Journal of vocational behavior,
59(1), 53-63.
Van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage (M. Vizedon & G. Caffee, Trans.). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Woosley, S. A., & Shepler, D. K. (2011). Understanding the early integration experiences of
first-generation college students. College Student Journal, 45(4), 700-714.
Yosso, T., Smith, W., Ceja, M., & Solórzano, D. (2009). Critical race theory, racial
microaggressions, and campus racial climate for Latina/o undergraduates. Harvard
Educational Review, 79(4), 659-691.
Zalaquett, C. P., & Lopez, A. D. (2006). Learning from the stories of successful undergraduate
Latina/Latino students: The importance of mentoring. Mentoring & Tutoring, 14(3), 337-
353.
Zell, M. (2010). Achieving a college education: The psychological experiences of Latina/o
community college students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9(2), 167-186.

135

APPENDIX A
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ALIGNMENT MATRIX
Research Question Theoretical Framework Interview Items
1. How do Latino first-
generation college students
(LFGCS) integrate into
communities at a large,
elite, predominantly white
institution (PWI)?

Integration Theory (Tinto,
1993; Astin 1984)

Questions 4-9, 12-17
2. Who and what have altered
the lives of LFGCS and
how have significant
others supported their
persistence in college?

Social Capital/Institutional
Agents (Stanton-Salazar 1997,
2001)
Questions 10-11, 18-22,
24-35
3. What benefits do LFGCS
perceive they have gained
from the significant others
in their lives?

Social Capital Theory
(Bourdieu,1986)
Questions 36-41, 44
Demographic Questions Questions 1-3, 23, 42-43

136

APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
INTRODUCTION
A. Introduce myself.
B. Briefly explain the purpose of the study and expected length of interview.
C. Ask for permission to audio-record. Explain confidentiality procedures. Allow
participants to select pseudonyms.
D. Present Information Sheet.

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Where is your home?
2. What part of the world is most of your family from, where is your heritage?
3. Are you a Pell grant recipient?
4. When you first came to USC, what kind of activities did you get involved in your first
year?
5. What motivated you to get involved in that activity?
6. When you think about a successful student at this school, how would you describe a
successful student at USC?
7. When you first came to USC did you feel welcomed here?
8. In what ways was it difficult to adjust to college in the first year?
9. What did you find confusing or hard to understand about coming to college in your first
year?
10. Who do you feel taught you the most about navigating college?
11. How were the RA’s and other people on the floor or in the dorm? Did you learn from
people?
12. When you think about belonging here, who belongs at this college?
13. Do you feel that there is a central culture to this college and do you feel you’re a part of
it?
14. How would you describe this college to another student who is thinking to come here?
15. Were there other things that made it difficult to get involved or adjust to school in the
beginning? Barriers you had to overcome?
16. What other groups besides the one(s) you mentioned from first year are you involved in
now?
17. Would you say that the group you are most active in helps you feel that you belong at
USC? How would you describe how they have helped you w/ school?
18. What kinds of activities do you do (w/ your student groups)?
19. When you began the group were there older students that acted as mentors or models for
you to help you navigate college?
20. Who do you talk to about home life and family and homesickness?
137

21. Who do you talk to about your home life and family?
22. Who do you get advice from about what classes to take?
23. What’s your major?
24. Have you ever struggled in a class?
25. Who are the people you ask about which professors to take?
26. Has anyone given you study tips?
27. Has anyone given you advice on time management?
28. What stresses you out most during a regular semester?
29. Who do you talk to about that?
30. Has anyone given you advice about campus resources?
31. What about career advice? Who do you talk to about your career path?
32. Are there any places on campus you would NOT go for help?
33. Can you tell me about a time you were having a crisis of some kind since you came here
to college?
34. Who did you talk to about that?
35. Who has provided you with the most support in order for you to complete college?
36. Do you feel that you have access to the resources you need here to be a successful
student?
37. Who has provided you with the most support in order for you to complete college?
38. In what ways did he or she support you?
39. Who is your biggest advocate for completing college (someone who motivates you to
keep going)?
40. Based on what you have learned from your experiences, what advice would you give to a
Latino first-gen student entering this university?
41. What are the benefits of being a part of _________ club/organization (named by
informant)?
42. Did anyone else in your family go to college?
43. Do you expect to graduate this year?
44. This interview has been about how you integrated into this college, found community,
and who was in your social network that helped you to be a successful student. So that’s
what I’ve enjoyed hearing about. Is there anything that I missed, that you think I should
know about your social network, your community, or the people who help empower you?

138

APPENDIX C
TYPOLOGY OF SUPPORT AND INSTITUTIONAL AGENTS
Type of Support Types of Institutional
Agents
Demonstrated Actions
Direct Support Resource Agent
Knowledge Agent
Advisor
Advocate
Networking Coach
-Provides access to resources
-Knows the environment
-Offers guidance
-Promotes and protects
-Models and teaches how to
network
Integrative Support Integrative Agent

Cultural Guide
-Coordinates students’
participation in networks
-Guides students in new
social spheres
Systems Support Programs Developer

Lobbyist

Political Advocate
-Embeds students in systems
of agents and resources
-Lobbies for resources for
students/support
-Advocates for policies and
resources for target groups
Networking Support Recruiter

Bridging Agent

Institutional Broker

Coordinator
-Recruits students into
programs
-Connects students to other
agents
-Knows who controls what
resources and can negotiate
access
-Assesses student’s needs,
coordinates access
Source: Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional
agents and their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth & Society,
43(3), 1066-1109.

139

APPENDIX D
STUDY PARTICIPATION REQUEST

Dear [Name],

My name is Trista Beard, and I am a doctoral student in the Rossier School of Education. I am
conducting a research study as part of my dissertation, focusing on the support networks of
successful Latino first-generation college students.

If you are a student who identifies as Latino, is expected to graduate in the next academic year,
and you are the first in your family to attend college, please consider participating in this
research study.

Participation would require one interview of up to 1.5 hours, with the possibility of a 1-hour
follow-up interview.

Participation in this study is entirely voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study and all interviews will take place in a
classroom space on campus.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at tbeard@usc.edu or at
213-821-2342.

Thank you for your consideration,

Trista Beard, Principal Investigator
tbeard@usc.edu
University of Southern California

USC UPC IRB-Approved.
Study ID: UP-15-00359
Valid From: 6/29/15

140

APPENDIX E
FLYER SOLICITING STUDY PARTICIPANTS

141

APPENDIX F
INFORMATION SHEET FOR SUBJECTS

University of Southern California
(Rossier School of Education, Los Angeles, CA)

INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

The Significant Others in the Lives of Latino First-generation College Students: How Social Capital
Aids Persistence
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Trista Beard under the supervision of Dr.
Reynaldo Baca at the University of Southern California for the purposes of a dissertation. You are invited
to participate because you are a Latino first-generation college student aged 18 and up with knowledge on
how to persist in college. In order to qualify for this study, you must be a senior planning to graduate
within the next academic year, and must be a need-based financial aid recipient. Your participation is
voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not
understand, before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the
consent form. You may also decide to discuss participation with your family or friends. You may keep a
copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to gain a more in depth understanding of who and what has supported your
commitment and persistence in college, and to learn from you what actions you have taken to build a
support system in college, and how you feel that may have aided your success thus far in college.

The researcher hopes to learn more about how students connect with institutional agents within the
college in order to navigate and persist in college, to strengthen their goal commitment, and to gain access
to resources.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to answer a series of interview questions
over a period of approximately 1.5 hours. The interview will be audio-recorded and will be conducted at a
location of your convenience. If you do not wish to be audio-recorded, you may not participate in the
study. There may be an opportunity for a 1 hour follow-up interview. Participation is completely
voluntary.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks. You do not need to answer any questions you do not want to.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There are no direct benefits to participants. The anticipated benefits to society are the opportunity to learn
from students what support networks they were able to build to improve their success in college. Future
students and educators may benefit from the study of successful models of student persistence.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
142

At the completion of the interview, you will receive a $10 Starbucks gift card. You will receive the gift
card, even if you decide to end the interview early. You will not be compensated for any follow up
interviews.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information collected from this interview or subsequent interactions will be kept confidential as far
as permitted by law. However, if we are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential
information about you. The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s
Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

The audio data may be transcribed by a transcriptionist who has signed a confidentiality agreement. The
audio data will be stored in a password protected computer and the interview notes will be stored in a
locked filing cabinet. Your responses will be coded using a participant ID, and maintained separately
from your identifiable information. The coded data will be secured in a password protected file.

At the completion of the study, audio recordings will be destroyed. Identifiable data will be destroyed
three years after the study has been completed. The remaining de-identified data may be maintained
indefinitely and used in future research studies. If you do not want your data used in future studies, you
should not participate.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information
will be used. Confidentiality will be maintained by using pseudonyms in the written report.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to participate will involve no penalty or loss
of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies
because of your participation in this research study.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your university will not be affected whether
or not you participate in this study.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Trista Beard at 213-
821-2342 or tbeard@usc.edu or THH341.

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research
in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of
the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South
Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examines how successful Latino first-generation college students (LFGCS), all seniors at a large, highly-selective research university, integrated into chosen communities and built unique social networks to support their persistence in college. Utilizing integration and social capital frameworks, and analyzing the college life histories of 10 successful LFGCS, using ethnographic analysis methods, a micro-theory was generated to model the process by which these students build networks to support their persistence at an elite predominantly white university (PWI). Findings support the theory that LFGCS rely heavily on emotional support from similar peers in order to integrate into micro-communities in the college, building their sense of belonging. Only after some level of adjustment and integration are LFGCS able to develop relationships with “agencies” (support service offices and student collectives) and local apprentice agents that serve as bridges and guides to institutional agents. This study examines near peer models, peer mentors, and local opportunity brokers in a powerful new light. Where integration and social capital theory have previously disregarded the emerging social capital of student collectives, experienced students, and support agents with privileged knowledge of the university environment, this study uses social capital theory to explore the privileged local capital provided by apprentice agents and how that essential exchange supports persistence for LFGCS. In addition, the findings from this study illuminate the cyclical nature of sense of belonging as both input to integration and output, the unique way LFGCS describe reciprocity as a characteristic of social capital-building through a collective worldview lens, and the stratification of the significant others in their lives that provide emotional support and motivation, localized capital, and high-status social capital. By examining this unique population I was able to elicit a local student success model, make recommendations for institutional action, and propose a future research agenda. This study concludes with a guide to navigating the university, written in the voice of the study participants.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Staff members’ transfer of social capital to first-generation, low-income Latino/a students of Mexican descent

PDF

The intersection of grit and social capital: a mixed methods examination of successful first-generation college students

PDF

The impact of college success program on first generation college students in their preparation for college

PDF

Deconstructing persistence in academic language among second-generation Latino language minority students: how do second-generation Latino language minority community college students alter their...

PDF

Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital

PDF

The lived experience of first-generation latino students in remedial education and navigating the transfer pathway

PDF

First-generation college students: perceptions, access, and participation at urban university

PDF

Impact of academic scholarships on persistence of first-generation low-income students

PDF

College readiness and transitional experiences: the factors that contribute to first-generation Latino students’ persistence and retention to achieve higher education degrees

PDF

Examining the networks of program leaders in the community college component of the Puente Project within the context of a social capital framework

PDF

“Mismatched”: matching Latino/as from API 1-2 high schools to an elite public university

PDF

Latino male community college students' persistence to transfer

PDF

Undocumented students' personal reflections on the role institutional agents play in providing social capital towards post-secondary education

PDF

Engineering my community cultural wealth: testimonios of male Latino community college engineering students

PDF

His story: African-American male college students’ journey to success

PDF

Peers as institutional agents: acquiring social capital through peer interactions

PDF

The revolution just might be digitized: toward a critical race theory of the African-American igeneration's online social enfranchisement

PDF

Noncredit programs: catalyst for development of social capital in adult students

PDF

AB 540 community college students in Southern California: making connections and realizing dreams

PDF

Latino high school students: Self-efficacy and college choice

Asset Metadata

Creator Beard, Trista A. (author)

Core Title Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 04/15/2016

Defense Date 03/09/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag College students,first-generation,Integration,Latino,OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,sense of belonging,social capital

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Baca, Reynaldo (committee chair), Green, Alan G. (committee member), Melguizo, Tatiana (committee member)

Creator Email tbeard@usc.edu,trista40@hotmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-228531

Unique identifier UC11278083

Identifier etd-BeardTrist-4254.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-228531 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BeardTrist-4254.pdf

Dmrecord 228531

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Beard, Trista A.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA