University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A pathway to success: experiences of first-generation minority students in academic jeopardy

(USC Thesis Other)

A pathway to success: experiences of first-generation minority students in academic jeopardy

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A Pathway to Success: Experiences of First-Generation Minority Students
in Academic Jeopardy
Vanesa J. Morales
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2024

© Copyright by Vanesa J. Morales 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Vanesa J. Morales certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Sheila Banuelos
Rashitta Brown-Elize
Ruth H. Chung, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand how first-generation minority
community college students who were formerly on academic probation or dismissal, navigated
their return to good academic standing. Student departure theory, student involvement theory,
and sense of belonging theory provided the theoretical framework for examining factors
influencing these students’ engagement with their institutions and outside factors while in
academic jeopardy. The results revealed three themes: psychological impact, social factors, and
institutional systems. Despite significant academic and personal challenges, these students
demonstrated high resilience and returned to good academic standing through support networks,
mentorship, and an increased sense of belonging. However, institutional barriers, such as unclear
academic probation policies and limited access to resources, posed additional challenges. Caring
counselors who understand students’ challenges beyond their academic realities were highlighted
as aiding their academic success. This study emphasizes the need for educational institutions to
revise academic probation policies and implement dedicated support programs tailored to firstgeneration minority students. Ultimately, the study found that, with appropriate on- and/or offcampus support, students can overcome academic probation and achieve their educational goals.

v
Dedication
To my loving parents, Juan Carlos and Jannet. I could not have achieved this without your
sacrifices, your hard work, and the unconditional love you have provided my entire life.
To my resilient siblings, Jennifer, Jocelyn, and Jose Carlos. Thank you for your all your love and
support and for being my inspiration to finish this degree.
To my loving partner, Jonathan. Thank you for your patience and understanding, thank you for
pushing me every single day, and thank you for never giving up on me.
To all the institutions I have attended and worked at. Thank you for nurturing me, inspiring me,
and supporting my personal and professional growth.
To this study’s participants and any student who has experienced academic challenges. I dedicate
this dissertation to your persistence and your resilience.

vi
Acknowledgments
I would like to first thank my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Ruth H. Chung, for her
support and kindness. You never gave up on me, and you kept me accountable until the end. Dr.
Sheila Banuelos, thank you for your empathy, your knowledge, and your kindness. Your
resiliency through challenging times inspired me to push through. Dr. Brown-Elize, thank you
for being my inspiration to pursue this degree, and thank you for your support and flexibility as I
navigated the dissertation process. I am forever grateful for having had the opportunity to be
guided by amazing women leaders who inspired me to preserve and complete my doctoral
degree.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 3
Problem Statement .............................................................................................................. 8
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 10
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 13
Involuntary College Departure ......................................................................................... 13
Theoretical Foundation ..................................................................................................... 22
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 29
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 30
Research Methods ............................................................................................................. 31
Population and Sample ..................................................................................................... 32
Instrumentation and Data Collection ................................................................................ 35
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 37
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 37
Positionality of the Researcher ......................................................................................... 38
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 39
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 40
Participant Profile Narratives ............................................................................................ 41
Presentation of Findings ................................................................................................... 47

viii
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 73
Summary of the Findings.................................................................................................. 73
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 79
Limitations........................................................................................................................ 83
Delimitations..................................................................................................................... 83
Recommendations for Future Research............................................................................ 84
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 85
References..................................................................................................................................... 86
Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................... 94
Research Questions........................................................................................................... 94
Introduction....................................................................................................................... 94
Information Sheet.............................................................................................................. 95
Questions........................................................................................................................... 95
Closing Questions............................................................................................................. 99
Debriefing ......................................................................................................................... 99
Appendix B: Qualtrics Recruitment Questionnaire .................................................................... 100

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Interviewees’ Demographic Data 42

1
Chapter One: Introduction
Although we have extensive knowledge of the obstacles that lead first-generation
minority college students to academic jeopardy, there is minimal knowledge on how institutions
and practitioners can help them navigate back to good academic standing. Students who
experience academic probation and disqualification need institutional support to overcome this
educational barrier that can lead to their premature, involuntary, and permanent departure from
college.
Educational research has extensively focused on college persistence and retention to
address early college departure, which, on average, can account for 40% of students who leave
higher education without completing a college degree (DeAngelo et al., 2011; Mann et al.,
2004). Early college leavers mainly fall into one of two departure categories: voluntary and
involuntary. Voluntary leavers withdraw from college by choice, while involuntary leavers are
forced out of college based on institutional policy. Few studies explore involuntary college
departure exclusively, particularly concerning students who leave under academic probation and
dismissal, considered students in academic jeopardy. Yet, these students make up a significant
percentage of early college departures across higher education institutions in the United States.
Each year, students who leave involuntarily under academic jeopardy can account for an average
of 25% of all institutional departures (Seirup & Rose, 2011; Tinto, 1993; Tovar & Simon, 2006),
making them the largest single category of students who depart prematurely from college each
year.
Research often overlooks academic probation and disqualification, so these topics lack
depth and exploration, particularly when it comes to their effect on traditionally
underrepresented students, such as first-generation students and racially minoritized groups, who

2
are disproportionately harmed by these policies. While assumptions are that students who leave
under academic jeopardy simply could not meet their college’s academic standards (Tinto,
1993), this is too broad a supposition and an oversimplification of this population’s experiences.
The scarcity of research on academic probation and dismissal also adds to the stigmatization of
students in academic jeopardy, which can be especially problematic for first-generation minority
students who already have difficulty finding a sense of belonging in higher education (Hurtado &
Carter, 1997). There is a need to expand qualitative research on involuntary leavers that centers
the perceptions, experiences, and narratives of students who undergo academic probation and
disqualification and overcome it.
While theories of student departure provide foundational knowledge that can apply to
involuntary leavers (Tinto, 1993), there is a need to further understand how departure might
differ for first-generation minority students in academic jeopardy (Hurtado & Carter, 1997). A
focus on student engagement and sense of belonging within this population would be of value as
research has repeatedly demonstrated that active and holistic engagement leads to higher
academic success rates (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993; Harper & Quaye, 2014; Hurtado & Carter,
1997; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Furthermore, gaining a holistic understanding of the
experiences of first-generation minority students who navigated out of academic jeopardy would
contribute to student success efforts.
It is important to highlight that there is a considerable increase in new research, mainly in
the form of dissertations, focused on some aspects of academic probation and dismissal (Beck,
2017; Cummings, 2020; Hernández, 2018; Mahan, 2017; McNabb, 2017; McPherson, 2019;
Rivera, 2019; Rodríguez, 2019; Thomas, 2004). The increase in this research further speaks to
the urgency and relevancy of expanding knowledge on involuntary student departures to mitigate

3
the rate at which underrepresented students leave higher education without a degree. This study
aimed to provide meaningful information on the type of institutional support and engagement
needed to create a pathway out of academic jeopardy.
Although some countries use academic probation policies as a tool to guide students in
finding a better career match, in the United States, it is used as a wake-up call for students not
making satisfactory academic progress (Sneyers & De Witte, 2018). In my experience as an
educational advisor in educational access and equity programs, I have worked directly and
primarily with first-generation students from underrepresented backgrounds, where academic
probation and disqualification were a true and frequent reality. On their own, the terms
“probation” and “disqualification” carry a negative/deficit connotation; however, when a firstgeneration student receives this label, it feeds and magnifies the stigma they already battle. As an
advisor, I observed how that status lowered students’ self-confidence, self-esteem, efficacy, and
mental health, and it would often lead them to face academic disqualification, as was the case
with my own undergraduate experiences. Through this study, I aimed to acquire knowledge that
could support students regain good academic standing and explore which academic and
nonacademic factors aided or hindered their progress toward that good standing.
Background of the Problem
It is easy for a student to fall under academic probation and reach disqualification,
especially during their 1st year in college (Nance, 2007), yet most students entering higher
education, particularly first-generation students, are often unaware of these policies. Firstgeneration students face a difficult transition into college. They need to adjust to new academic
standards, a new school environment, new professors and classrooms, new competing
responsibilities at home, school, and their personal lives, and the added stress caused by their

4
new financial obligations. These challenges often lead to academic jeopardy early on, which can
be hard to overcome without adequate support structures.
Overview of Probation and Dismissal Policies
Postsecondary academic probation and dismissal occur when students fail to meet
predetermined institutional benchmarks for satisfactory academic performance. Traditionally,
before dismissing a student, campus officials will place them on academic probation. At most 2-
year and 4-year higher education institutions, students enter academic probation when their
cumulative grade point average (GPA) falls below 2.0. Academic dismissal or disqualification
occurs when a student is unable to raise their GPA enough within a predetermined timeframe,
typically one or two semesters. However, there are often other calculations considered, such as
the percentage of total attempted units where the student received a “W” (withdrawal), “I”
(incomplete), and/or an “NP” (no pass) grade.
Although most higher education institutions follow similar policies, there can also be vast
differences in how each institution handles students on academic probation and/or reach
academic disqualification, which can cause further dissonance when researching this topic
(Lindo et al., 2010). While most 4-year institutions have stricter academic regulations, 2-year
institutions offer more flexibility for gradual improvement before forcing students out.
Community college students typically remain on academic probation for two to three consecutive
semesters while attempting to improve their grades. Similarly, at 2-year institutions, students can
submit a petition for reinstatement, which would allow them to continue their enrollment the
semester after their appeal is approved. At 4-year institutions, dismissal regulations often involve
students having to leave the institution completely for at least a year and attend community
college to increase their GPA before they can apply for reinstatement or readmission.

5
The reinstatement process varies by college, and satisfactory academic progress affects
financial aid eligibility. Lastly, academic probation and dismissal can also deter students’
progress toward graduation. Most colleges’ policies also include unit limitations, which restrict
students from enrolling in more than a determined number of units, which can vary depending on
the student’s status and the institution the student attends.
These differences in policies and protocols pertaining to satisfactory academic progress,
academic probation, and dismissal can be noted within the same higher education system, such
as California community colleges, which will be further discussed in Chapter Two. In addition,
most institutions lack targeted support and dedicated programming efforts to address the needs of
students in these circumstances (Bledsoe, 2018). This lack of uniformity complicates efforts to
conduct large-scale studies on these student populations to address attrition and equity concerns
across higher education institutions.
College Completion
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2019), “The 6-year
graduation rate for first-time, full-time undergraduate students who began seeking a bachelor’s
degree at 4-year degree-granting institutions in fall 2011 was an overall 60 percent” (p.3).
Similarly, only 13% of community college freshmen receive an associate degree within 2 years,
and 31% do so within 3 years (National Center for Education Statistic, 2019). Completion rates
play a fundamental role in the economic growth of California (Public Policy Institute of
California, 2019) and the United States (Koropeckyj et al., 2017; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2020), and educational funding has recently shifted to using more performance-based funding
models and increasingly focus on fiscal accountability (Blankenship et al., 2020; Humphrey,

6
2005) further emphasizing the importance of degree completion and success rates (Gándara &
Rutherford, 2020) to ensure the prosperity of community colleges in the future.
College attrition rates have caused educational research to shift from access to student
retention and success while forcing higher education institutions to analyze internal practices and
policies that might hinder student success and act as institutional barriers. Furthermore, the
effects of early college departure extend beyond the economic/financial impact it has on the
nation and higher education institutions, as college attrition is undeniably linked to educational
inequity, given that there are larger completion gaps among ethnic/racial minority students.
Since academic dismissals account for a substantial percentage of students who depart
early from postsecondary institutions in the United States (Tinto, 1993; Tovar & Simon, 2006),
data disaggregation on degree completion numbers allows us to see that traditionally
underrepresented, first-generation college students and Latinx and African American students are
disproportionately impacted by early departures when compared to their counterparts. A study by
the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA (DeAngelo et al., 2011) reported that only
27% of first-generation students graduated within 4 years compared to 42% of students whose
parents attended college. This disparity remained consistent for 5-year and 6-year graduation
rates. The data presented in this study shows that even at the 6-year graduation mark, there is still
a 14% difference in graduation rates between first- and continuing-generation college students
(DeAngelo et al., 2011). Similar inequities can be observed in 4-, 5-, and 6-year graduation data
disaggregated by race and ethnicity. Degree attainment data shows significant achievement gaps,
particularly among American Indian, African American, and Latinx students, with an average
success gap of 21.6% across the board. These degree attainment gaps persist when we intersect
students’ race and ethnicity with their generational status, where data shows that attainment gaps

7
by first-generation status are largest among African American and American Indian students
when compared with their continuing-generation counterparts (DeAngelo et al., 2011).
Probation and disqualification policies also disproportionately harm racial minority
students when compared to their counterparts (Museus & Quaye, 2009). Once students disenroll
from an institution, they rarely return, even if they were not officially disqualified (Kopp &
Shaw, 2016). The situation is even more dire for students officially asked to withdraw. Only a
small fraction of students in academic jeopardy return to higher education and earn a degree
(Kopp & Shaw, 2016). Students on academic probation and academically disqualified students
represent a blind spot for institutions and practitioners attempting to address high attrition
(Bledsoe, 2018), as they have rarely focused on providing targeted support and services to these
students. Support systems for these students serve to address completion gaps across
ethnic/racial groups.
Characteristics of Students in Academic Jeopardy
The experiences of students on academic probation and disqualification are complex as
they often come with significant academic, financial, familial, and psychological implications for
students while in college and beyond (James & Graham, 2010; Kopp & Shaw, 2016; McPherson
& Marrero, 2021). Isaak et al. (2006) defined students in academic jeopardy as students whose
GPAs fall below 2.0 and are subject to academic probation, suspension, or dismissal. Students in
academic jeopardy have vastly different characteristics than their counterparts in good academic
standing.
In a comparative study by Isaak et al. (2006), the results showed that both students on
academic probation and students in good academic standing have problems with procrastination
and time management. However, students in academic jeopardy identified having more stress-

8
related and motivational problems than their counterparts. Moreover, students who enter this
status after their 1st year reduce their probability of graduating within 6-years by almost 15%
(Lindo et al., 2010). Lindo et al. (2010) found that probation doubles the probability that males
will leave school; however, grades improve among students who return.
Mental health also plays a role in how students experience this situation. In a recent study
on Latinx students, McPherson and Marrero (2021) found that “Latinx college students described
experiencing shame, confusion, and sadness at having been placed on probation” (p. 38). After
facing academic disqualification, these students become invisible to the university as retention
efforts mainly focus on students who are still enrolled, and student departures are rarely
disaggregated by voluntary and involuntary withdrawals (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). Similarly,
educational research has primarily focused on access and retention efforts, overlooking this
sensitive student population (Bledsoe, 2018). Academic disqualification should not be the end of
these students’ stories. My experience has shown me that with adequate structural, academic, and
dedicated support, these students can persevere and navigate back into a system that repeatedly
discounted them. These students inspired my pursuit of this research.
Problem Statement
Students who land on academic probation and dismissal make up a complex and
heterogeneous group. Despite being very common at most higher education institutions, policies
on these topics are rarely seen as areas of opportunity to increase student completion rates.
Relevant literature on academic probation and disqualification is sparse (Wright, 2020), and it
has primarily focused on student characteristics and performance predictors (Cogan, 2011),
which approaches the affected students as a homogenous group (Arcand & LeBlanc, 2012;
Humphrey, 2005). There has also been some focus on evaluating the effectiveness of existing

9
intervention programs that aimed to help students get out of academic jeopardy (Arcand &
LeBlanc, 2012; Kamphoff et al., 2007), yet this study did not provide a holistic picture of
students in academic jeopardy.
Furthermore, research has often focused on student deficits as the cause of academic
probation and disqualification (Arcand, 2013). When a student involuntarily departs from
college, the assumption is that they did so because they failed to meet academic standards (Tinto,
1993), blaming the departure on the student’s academic abilities or preparedness. Yet, for firstgeneration minority students, the answer is not that simple. Academic disqualification tends to
directly blame the student, which discounts the institution’s role and other internal and external
influences on the student. This placing of blame disproportionately harms first-generation
minority students. It also increases attrition rates and widens achievement gaps, necessitating an
investigation into how higher education institutions and practitioners can better support students
in academic jeopardy.
To address this gap in the literature, emergent research on this topic has shifted the focus
to directly exploring students’ lived experiences with academic probation and/or dismissal
(Arcand & LeBlanc, 2012; Beck, 2017; Cummings, 2020; Hernández, 2018; Mahan; 2017;
McNabb, 2017; McPherson, 2019; Rivera, 2019; Rodríguez, 2019; Thomas, 2004) which
provide a more holistic understanding of the needs of this student population. Bledsoe (2018)
supported the need for this type of research and argued that qualitative research on academic
probation and academic dismissal students could provide a further understanding of why and
how students experience academic jeopardy (p. 561), information which is highly needed to
create proper institutional changes and support for these students. The need to explore the
experiences of first-generation minority students who navigated their way out of academic

10
jeopardy is related to the institutional need to investigate how students in academic jeopardy
engage with the institution and whether these students have access to adequate resources and
support systems that can help them reach good academic standing, and consequently degree
completion.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to better understand the experiences of first-generation
minority student who navigated academic probation and/or dismissal while enrolled at a
California community college. I used Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement, Tinto’s (1993)
theory of student departure, and Hurtado and Carter’s (1997) sense of belonging model as
theoretical frameworks for the study. Four research questions guided this study:
1. How did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy navigate back to good academic standing?
2. What did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy perceive to be most helpful in navigating back to good academic standing?
3. What types of academic support resources did first-generation minority students who
have returned from academic jeopardy perceive to have facilitated or impeded their
return to good academic standing?
4. What role did faculty and staff play in facilitating the return of first-generation,
minority students in academic jeopardy to good academic standing?
This study used qualitative methodology to explore the experiences of first-generation minority
students who faced academic probation or disqualification at 2-year institutions. The goal was to
understand the factors that either helped or hindered their return to good academic standing. This

11
research aimed to inform higher education practitioners on how to better support these students
as they navigate academic challenges.
Definitions
For consistency, this study used terminology commonly applied to students experiencing
academic difficulties. While most terms are standard across higher education institutions, some,
like “academic dismissal” and “academic disqualification,” may be specific to certain
institutions, though both refer to students required to leave due to continued poor academic
performance. This study used these terms interchangeably to include students from any
institution who fall under this category. Additionally, this study defines a first-generation student
as a student from a family where neither parent earned a 4-year college degree. Lastly, the terms
“ethnic/racial minorities” and “racially minoritized” are used interchangeably to refer to students
who come from underrepresented ethnic and racial backgrounds. However, recent research has
argued that the term “racially minoritized” is more indicative of structural racism, and it
“implicates racism and racialization as agents of inequality rather than indicting race” (Black et
al., 2023, p. 1).
Below are additional key terms used.
Academic dismissal and academic disqualification are interchangeable terms used at the
discretion of each institution, and they both refer to “a student who was not permitted by the
institution to continue enrollment” (Berger et al., 2012, p. 12) after being unable to get out of
academic probation.
Academic jeopardy identifies college students with a GPA below 2.0 who are more
susceptible to academic probation, suspension, or dismissal (Isaak et al., 2006; Kopp & Shaw,
2016).

12
Academic probation is the transition period from unsatisfactory performance to either
good academic standing or dismissal (Arcand & LeBlanc, 2012).
Good academic standing: Students who earn a cumulative GPA of 2.0 or higher each
academic semester.
Reinstatement refers to students being allowed to return to a higher education institution
after being academically dismissed/disqualified. Reinstatement is often at the institution’s
discretion (Kopp & Shaw, 2016).
Sense of belonging refers to students’ connectedness and perceived social support from
peers, staff, and faculty (Sandoval, 2018; Strayhorn, 2012).
Student involvement is the amount of physical and psychological energy a student devotes
to the academic experience through spending time on campus, studying, participating in student
organizations, and regularly interacting with their peers, staff, and faculty (Astin, 1984).

13
Chapter Two: Literature Review
On average, 25% of college students are placed on academic probation or academically
dismissed from 2-year and 4-year higher education institutions each academic year (Seirup &
Rose, 2011; Tinto, 1993; Tovar & Simon, 2006). When entering a state of academic jeopardy,
this student population requires support and services to help them navigate their current
academic standing and meet a satisfactory academic status. Both probationary and academically
disqualified students are less likely to reach their academic goals (Lindo et al., 2010). The
likelihood that a student in academic jeopardy will complete a college degree is further
exacerbated by their intersectional identities, such as their generational status and racial/ethnic
background (Hurtado & Carter, 1997). This chapter begins with an overview of involuntary
college departures and literature on academic probation and dismissal, followed by a brief
section on support programs and interventions to address this issue. Lastly, this chapter
concludes with an overview of the conceptual framework guiding this study.
Involuntary College Departure
Students depart early from higher education without reaching their educational goals for
countless reasons. However, regardless of the reasons students leave prematurely, they fall under
one of two departure categories: voluntary or involuntary departures. Voluntary departures, more
commonly and informally referred to as “dropouts,” refer to students who decide not to continue
their enrollment at any higher education institution. Although voluntary leavers often have valid
reasons for not continuing their enrollment, the label “voluntary” implies that the student chose
not to continue, meaning that the institution did not dismiss them or otherwise impede their reenrollment (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). On the other hand, involuntary departures refer to students

14
whom a college or university formally dismisses; in other words, students did not decide to leave
but were suspended or disqualified based on a school’s academic or disciplinary policies.
Although a small fraction of involuntary departures can be attributed to medical or
disciplinary matters, most involve students who did not meet satisfactory academic progress.
This group of students is often referred to as academically dismissed or academically
disqualified. Dismissal or disqualification are terms used interchangeably to describe students
who were first placed on academic probation for not meeting satisfactory academic progress,
failed to reach good academic standing within a predetermined time frame, and were dismissed
from their institutions. These policies can lead students to an early and involuntary termination
of their academic pursuits.
Voluntary and involuntary departures differ; however, early college leavers are often
grouped under one category when examining college retention (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). This has
created a scarcity of disaggregated data that can inform us how academic dismissal and
disqualification policies affect students’ retention and success outcomes. Some researchers have
addressed this lack of data by conducting comparative studies involving students who leave
college in good standing (GPAs 2.0 and above) and students who leave under academic jeopardy
(GPAs below 2.0). Yet, retention literature focusing exclusively on probationary and dismissed
students must expand to further understand these populations’ needs. Prior research will be
discussed below, including a literature review on support programs and interventions for students
in academic jeopardy.
Academic Probation and Probationary Students
Academic probation is a common institutional policy in higher education, yet most
incoming students are unaware of this policy when they start their college careers. This is

15
particularly true for first-generation and underrepresented student groups who have limited
knowledge about the structure of higher education and have limited access to guidance and
support. Typically, when students reach this status, their institution notifies them of their
standing. This notice can be daunting, as it includes information on policies, why the student is
on probation, steps to maintain enrollment (e.g., meet with an advisor, complete probation
orientation, enroll in an academic improvement course), and the consequences of not meeting
satisfactory progress within a determined period (Lindo et al., 2010; Wright, 2020).
Occasionally, they also provide a list of resources that can help students improve their academic
performance.
After receiving this notice, it is up to the student’s discretion to follow the steps outlined
and create a plan to improve their grades. However, in a study conducted by Moss and Yeaton
(2015) on whether these letters influenced student achievement, results showed that warning
letters (delivered via U.S. mail or email) failed to significantly increase subsequent semester
GPAs, which suggests that further institutional action and protocols are needed to motivate and
support the affected students.
Conceptually, academic probation policies are an alert system or wake-up call for
students who do not meet the institution’s academic standards (Sneyers & De Witte, 2018).
Nevertheless, students who breach these policies are more prone to leave higher education
without earning a degree (Kopp & Shaw, 2016), which brings into question the effectiveness of
this policy. Lindo et al. (2010) supported the idea that probation can be seen as a dangerous
opportunity (Tovar & Simon, 2006), confirming that, while meant to be a wake-up call, it comes
with dueling implications (McPherson & Marrero, 2021). On the one hand, it can cause some
students to improve and meet performance standards. On the other hand, it discourages others

16
from returning to school, causing them to drop out even before being officially dismissed (Lindo
et al., 2010). These students find themselves in a transition period that will lead them either to
regain good academic standing or to academic disqualification (Arcand & LeBlanc, 2012).
Further research is needed to investigate what influences a student to respond positively or
negatively.
Furthermore, research has found that students on academic probation share similar
characteristics, which include low motivation (Isaak et al., 2006; Tinto, 1993), poor time
management (Isaak et al., 2006), the need for further guidance in developing academic, personal
and career goals (Tovar & Simon, 2006) and have a harder with academic and social integration
(Tinto, 1993). In addition, Seirup and Rose (2011) claimed that students on academic probation
are less likely to seek assistance, putting them at higher risk for disqualification. Yet, we still
have limited empirical research that examines how students this situation versus why.
In one study conducted by Lindo et al. (2010), the authors examined student responses to
being placed on academic probation using a regression discontinuity design. Examining the topic
from a psychological perspective, academic probation is a negative stimulus aimed at
encouraging improved academic performance. Lindo et al.’s (2010) study framed probation as a
negative incentive/punishment and analyzed students’ responses, taking into account ability,
gender, and performance standards. The findings showed that being placed on probation doubled
the probability that a male student would drop out but had no impact on females’ re-enrollment
rates, which is consistent with other studies (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). These gender differences
could be attributed to coping mechanisms, self-esteem, and societal expectations. In addition,
research showed that female students are more inclined to seek support and persevere.

17
Lindo et al. (2010) also found that for students who performed above average in high
school, being placed on academic probation in college doubles their probability of leaving school
altogether. This was primarily attributed to students’ perceptions of failure and lower confidence
and motivation. Similarly, phenomena can be observed in research by Kamphoff et al. (2007),
where students in probationary standing were not expected to underperform based on their
above-average high school GPAs and SAT scores. These findings are worth highlighting as
higher education institutions and retention theories (Tinto, 1993) often point to low academic
preparation as a reason students fall into academic jeopardy (Humphrey, 2005; Tovar & Simon,
2006).
Humphrey (2005) found consistent results for Virginia Tech’s class of 2007. Despite
strong characteristics for entering cohorts (high GPA and SAT scores) and strong support
programs on campus, 1,100 students earned less than a 2.0 GPA. Studies like this one illustrate
that the effects of probation can be greater for students who entered college better prepared,
which challenges the common deficit-based perceptions of students in academic jeopardy. These
findings shift the narrative on this topic.
While probation presents many challenges, such as limiting students’ ability to reach
their academic goals, it holds potential as an intervention tool. Lindo et al. (2010) found that
being on probation improved grades for returners across all subgroups, which means that
students can be prompted to transform their academics, which is why researchers see it as a
dangerous opportunity (Lindo et al., 2010; Tovar & Simon, 2006). Current research stresses the
need for qualitative investigations of how students react to probation policies, the factors that
influence their ability to reach good academic standing, and how they overcome barriers.

18
Academic Dismissal
Academic dismissals or disqualifications are the primary cause for early, involuntary
student departures (Seirup & Rose, 2011; Tinto, 1993; Tovar & Simon, 2006). Naturally,
academically dismissed students share common characteristics with students on academic
probation since the former first have to undergo a probationary period. Dill et al. (2011) studied
the success of a retention program for academically disqualified students and observed that
common characteristics and issues for these students were low socioeconomic status, long work
hours, familial problems, competing social priorities, low self-esteem, lack of motivation and
career goals, and poor time management, hindering their availability to navigate back to good
academic standing. Sneyers and De Witte (2018) argued that academic dismissal policies can
lead to higher drop-out rates and the dismissal of capable students if these students do not receive
institutional support.
In an attempt to gather large-scale data on involuntary college departures, Kopp and
Shaw (2016) conducted a study using the academic jeopardy designation to differentiate students
who leave on good academic standings versus those who leave under academic dismissal.
Because data on academic dismissal is often not readily available, this research method has been
used to examine involuntary departures, as most students who leave under academic jeopardy
can fall under the academic probation and academic dismissal categories. In their study, using
data provided by 110 4-year colleges and universities, Kopp and Shaw (2016) found that 60% of
students who left in good academic standing obtained a degree from a 4-year institution,
compared to only 11% of those who left while in academic jeopardy, showing a significant
completion gap between both groups.

19
Like other studies, Kopp and Shaw (2016) also found that first-generation students,
students from low parental income, male students, and underrepresented minority students were
more likely to leave under academic jeopardy (Lindo et al., 2010; McPherson & Marrero, 2021).
In other words, the intersection of students’ identities can shape their responses and experiences.
These findings accentuate the need to understand the implications of probation and
disqualification policies for marginalized students (Hurtado & Carter, 1984), as these students’
intersecting identities can influence their retention and completion rates. Prior research on
disqualification and dismissal brings to light the need to explore why and how first-generation
students and students from minority backgrounds are disproportionately affected by these
policies.
Support Programs and Interventions
Academic probation and dismissal literature on the effectiveness of targeted support
programs for students in academic jeopardy has found that these programs can increase retention.
In recent years, several intervention efforts have been developed to help students reach
reinstatement and satisfactory academic standing. Trombley (2001) argued that intervention
program development often lacks a holistic understanding of the student populations the
intervention seeks to support.
These interventions can often be either voluntary or mandatory for students (Seirup &
Rose, 2011). Kamphoff et al. (2007) claimed that intervention or support programs “for students
in academic probation tend to fall into two structural categories: (a) those where students are
involved in classroom or workshop-based interventions, and (b) those where students work
individually with a counselor or advisor” (p. 398). Nevertheless, emerging intervention programs

20
are being developed intentionally with student achievement and success in mind (Kamphoff et
al., 2007), which often involve multiple approaches.
One emergent intervention program is the Strategies for Academic Success (SAS)
program, whose effectiveness and success Kamphoff et al. (2007) evaluated. The SAS program
is an intervention for students in academic jeopardy housed at The University of North Carolina
Greensboro. This intervention program follows a motivational/empowerment model that includes
key topics: personal responsibility, positive affirmations, goal setting/life planning, and selfmanagement, as well as group and individual interactions. The program also incorporates
academic counseling to help students address academic and nonacademic barriers. This program
was implemented for students on the verge of dismissal, and it incorporates a high-consequences
component since students the institution will suspend students who did not register for this
course. Students would also be suspended if they missed any SAS program requirement, such as
attending class or individual and group meetings (Kamphoff et al., 2007).
The strictness and high stakes were essential program components, as these forced
students to take the program seriously. The program’s composition included interactions with
faculty and peers on academic probation; group and one-to-one discussions encouraged and
fostered reflection and self-disclosure. Participation in the SAS program proved effective in
helping students achieve academic success. Compared with students in academic jeopardy who
were not required to enroll in the SAS program, Kamphoff et al. (2007) found that SAS
participants had significantly higher GPA gains and academic achievement. Other studies
support the need to incorporate self-awareness and self-reflection within intervention programs
to overcome academic jeopardy, as psychological perceptions of the self can influence

21
achievement. Seirup and Rose (2011) argued that individuals need to believe that success is a
possibility to overcome obstacles. Other intervention programs yielded similar results.
Humphrey (2005) offered an overview of another support program for students on
academic probation called Project Success, which was designed to help students reach good
academic standing. The framework of the project utilized individual and group intervention to
help develop key skills such as time management, study habits, and building accountability.
Using a data analyst, three studies were conducted to compare Project Success students to
control groups of students on probation (Humphrey, 2005). Results from all three studies
indicated that Project Success completers demonstrated overall more success than the control
group. For instance, one of the results showed that, after two semesters, 78% of project
participants were retained compared to 57.6% of the control group. Similarly, Boyd et al. (1996)
found that 64% of academically dismissed students who attended a summer success program
remained enrolled at the university compared to only 49% of those who did not. This success
was attributed to the program’s composition, a 14-session noncredit workshop series where
students focused on topics like time management, goal setting, listening, note-taking, career
exploration, textbook mastery, and working with the university system.
Noncognitive Factors and Help-Seeking Behavior. Noncognitive factors are central to
students’ ability to persevere through challenging times (Dueñas et al., 2021). Factors such as
resilience, motivation, emotional growth, and students’ concept of self significantly influence
their capacity to navigate and overcome academic difficulties, especially when they face
setbacks. By fostering these noncognitive skills, students are better equipped to handle adversity
and maintain their progress toward academic goals.

22
In contrast, research on the influence of noncognitive factors on students going through
academic probation found that their beliefs about the causes of their lack of academic success
significantly affect their reinstatement process (Robinson & Shi, 2022). Robinson and Shi’s
(2022) research on attribution theory, shame, and academic identity in students going through
academic probation found that “students with positive attribution perspectives respond to their
academic failure by employing success strategies with a belief they can learn from their mistakes
and that their success is linked to their effort” (p. 80). Helping students find an optimistic
perception of themselves could positively influence students’ ability to return to good academic
standing.
While some intervention methods have been more successful than others, the literature
states that any intervention can improve students’ academic success. However, programs built
with more intentionality, student input, and the application of best practices for student success
are bound to be more effective in helping students reach good academic standing by increasing
their involvement, engagement, and sense of belonging at their institutions.
Theoretical Foundation
Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure, Astin’s (1984) student involvement theory,
and Hurtado’s (1997) sense of belonging theory serve as the theoretical foundations for this
study. These theories explore the challenges students encounter while navigating transitions into
and through college. These frameworks also emphasize student integration, involvement, and
belongingness in reaching academic success.
Student Departure Theory
Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure provided a theoretical foundation highlighting
involvement in higher education. Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure has been vastly

23
studied, applied, and revised to allow for its application within various student groups. Tinto’s
(1993) theory offers a longitudinal model of voluntary student departure that explores the various
academic and social systems within formal and informal educational settings that impact
students’ likelihood of persistence. In presenting his theory of departure, Tinto (1993) wanted to
explain the linear process of the “why” and “how” students choose to voluntarily depart from
their institutions without earning a degree (p. 112), which he saw as necessary to understand how
to improve student retention.
Although Tinto’s theory primarily spoke to voluntary departure and seldomly addressed
involuntary departure, Tinto’s theory fits this study as it is one of the first retention theories to
shift the narrative from blaming student withdrawal solely on student attributes. It incorporates
the institution’s role in the withdrawal process (Tinto, 1993), moving away from a deficit model.
Examining the institution’s role is imperative when studying retention issues and, to a greater
extent, involuntary student departures, as these are linked to official institutional policies.
Nonetheless, Tinto’s academic or social systems do not directly address the impact of academic
performance policies on student persistence.
Tinto (1993) described the academic system as the formal education of students, which
takes place inside academic settings, such as classrooms and laboratories, with the involvement
of faculty and staff. Similarly, Tinto described the social system as encompassing the personal
needs and interactions of all the institution’s members, which mainly take place in informal
settings outside of the classroom scope. One aspect or system that might be hidden between the
academic and social systems is one within which the student navigates academic and
nonacademic institutional policies and regulations. Prior research has already documented that
probation and dismissal policies can significantly influence a student’s academic and social

24
systems (Lindo et al., 2010; Tovar & Simon, 2006), and both institutional and student actions are
needed to produce positive outcomes.
In discussing academic dismissal within his model of student departure, Tinto blamed
students’ academic dismissal on their own inability to assimilate into the academic structure of
their institutions. Although Tinto argued that his model of student departure is relevant to
educational policy, it fails to incorporate institutional policy as a key element of student
departure in the same way he incorporated academic and social elements). Yet, it is evident that
when students experience academic probation and dismissal, they are having an interactive
experience with the institution through their policies. These experiences can be seen as a
“negative or malintegrative experience” (p.115) as they highlight to students their failure to meet
their institution’s standards and their disconnection from their academic environment.
These negative experiences can damage students’ academic and social systems. In the
academic sphere, they put pressure on the student to perform better and improve their academic
standing to avoid facing dismissal, and in the social sphere, they lower students’ sense of
belonging, self-esteem, and motivation as they might see themselves as “non-college material.”
These student engagement experiences become more complex for students who are
underrepresented in higher education, such as first-generation students and racial/ethnic
minorities.
Tinto argued that these types of negative experiences weaken a student’s commitment to
the institution and to completing a degree program. In a sense, Tinto’s model of student
departure calls for an amendment that incorporates policy and focuses on involuntary student
departure since probationary and dismissal policies can greatly impact students’ commitment to
the institution (Kamphoff et al.,2007). Furthermore, emergent research has found that probation

25
and disqualification are not necessarily linked to a student’s inability to meet the academic
demands of higher education institutions (Kamphoff et al., 2007; Lindo et al., 2010), which is
what Tinto attributed to academic dismissal.
Within his theory, Tinto (1993) uses Durkheim’s theory of suicide to draw an analogy
between egotistical suicide and voluntary institutional departure because it “highlights the ways
in which the social and intellectual communities that make up a college come to influence the
willingness of students to stay at that college” (p. 104). While Tinto’s analogy has been
criticized, a similar analogy can also be drawn between fatalistic suicide, the “result of excessive
normative control” (Tinto, 1993, p. 101), and involuntary student departure.
While not a perfect analogy, it does call attention to the consequences’ severity for
students, as most who leave college under academic jeopardy never return or complete a degree
program (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). Similarly, as Hurtado and Carter (1997) suggested, Tinto’s
theory must be modified to properly address the experience of integration for racial/ethnic
minority students. For this reason, it is important to understand how racial/ethnic minority
students in academic jeopardy perceive their engagement with the campus. Tinto’s (1993) model
of student persistence provides foundational knowledge on successful forms of engagement and
involvement for these students.
Student Involvement Theory
Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement explains the importance of involvement in
achieving student success. Astin developed the theory of student involvement to organize often
contradicting student development theories. It built on research focused on environmental factors
influencing student development. The theory of student involvement is one of the first
measurable student development theories. Astin (1984) defined involvement as the amount of

26
physical and psychological energy a student devotes to their academic experience (Astin, 1984),
which can include the time spent studying, going to tutoring, and talking to professors and peers.
This definition bridges conceptual frameworks with tangible measures of student development,
such as behavior. What makes involvement theory different is that it implies a “behavioral
component” (p. 519), which shifts the focus to what a student “does” within their environment
rather than how the general environment is impacting their learning and success.
Furthermore, the postulates outlined by Astin (1984) assume that “the amount of student
learning and personal development through educational programs is proportional to the quantity
and quality of student involvement in the program” (4th postulate; p. 298) and that “the
effectiveness of any educational policy or practice is directly related to the capacity of that policy
or practice to increase student involvement” (5th postulate; p. 298). Furthermore, student
involvement theory embraces student time as the higher commodity and resource within higher
education.
Astin’s (1984) fourth and fifth postulates are of particular importance to this study, as
both can serve as frameworks through which we can examine the involvement of students who
are on academic probation, paying attention to what types and levels of engagement were
beneficial in their pathway toward good academic standing. Similarly, Astin’s theory can help
assess the effectiveness of intervention efforts. Astin argued that administrators and faculty
members must recognize that every institutional policy and practice can affect how students
spend their time and the amount of effort they devote to academic pursuits (Astin, 1984, p. 523).
Moreover, Astin (1984) stated that college environmental factors can affect students’
level and quality of involvement. Examples of positive contributors to student involvement are
living on campus, working on campus, being involved in fraternities or sororities, sports, and

27
contact with faculty, staff, and students. Negative contributors represented reduced involvement
and included working full-time outside off campus, commuting to campus, attending 2-year
versus 4-year institutions, college size, part-time enrollment, and part-time faculty. While Astin
claimed the ultimate form of noninvolvement is the act of dropping out, this assumption
challenges existing equity-based knowledge, as first-generation students of low socioeconomic
status might choose not to be involved but be forced to prioritize other needs. Similarly, these
students might not feel they belong at the college and might have difficulty deciphering how they
can engage with campus services, programs, and organizations. When discussing the
involvement of students in academic jeopardy, it is necessary to think about how these students
invest their time inside and outside the classroom and beyond the institution’s bounds.
Sense of Belonging
While the concept of sense of belonging is not new, Hurtado and Carter (1997) immersed
the importance of sense of belonging within higher education as a major factor that impacts
students’ retention and persistence and within student populations that might be seen as marginal
such as first-generation and ethnic/racial minorities. Hurtado and Carter (1997) argued that to
understand the achievement and persistence of students who have been historically excluded
from and within education, it is important to understand these students’ views about their own
engagement in college. While Hurtado and Carter (1997) built their theory on existing work
around involvement and integration, it also calls for revisions that incorporate integration and
involvement from the perspective of historically marginalized students.
Furthermore, Hurtado and Carter (1997) criticized theories of integration as requiring
students to fully assimilate into a new culture by forgetting their cultural background and
adopting the values of the dominant environment (p. 327). Particularly, Hurtado and Carter

28
criticized Tinto’s premise on separation, which he based on Van Gennep’s (1960) stages of
separation, transition, and incorporation. Hurtado and Carter argued that most students do not,
should not, or cannot go through a separation phase to fully assimilate, particularly as there is an
increase in nontraditional students such as part-time students, reentry students, students who live
at home and cannot separate from their communities. Such is the case for most first-generation
students who find themselves in the margins at school and home, being the first in their families
to experience college. Moreover, contrary to Tinto’s premise of separation, Hurtado and Carter
stated that studies have found that by maintaining a supportive relationship with their home
communities, students adjust to college better.
Hurtado and Carter’s (1997) work supports relevant and targeted services to increase the
engagement and involvement of students who might see themselves at the margins while
acknowledging that students do not need to acculturate, conform, or adopt the majority’s values.
Students who consider themselves to be in the margins include first-generation students,
ethnic/racial minorities, and students in academic jeopardy.
Hurtado and Carter's (1997) model of students’ sense of belonging incorporated a
relationship between students’ background characteristics, college selectivity, ease in transition
to college in the 1st year, and perceptions of hostile racial climate in the second year (p. 330).
These measures were used to assess significant contributors to students’ college transition and
their impact on student’s sense of belonging. After testing their model on a large study on Latinx
college students, results showed that student engagement with peers on course material has a
positive impact on their sense of belonging; similarly, they found that early membership to
organizations and clubs (including mainstream and culturally related activities) on campus can
have a lasting impact on students’ sense of belonging. Being part of culture-related activities

29
appeared to also have a positive impact on students’ sense of belonging, even when racial-ethnic
tension has been reported on campus; Hurtado and Carter (1997) argued that this could be
because students might experience common problems related to their feelings of marginalization,
meaning that students relate to each other’s sense of belonging within the margin.
Summary
Much literature explores the experiences of college students who go through academic
probation and/or dismissal. First-generation students and racial/ethnic minority students are
disproportionately harmed by these policies, with higher percentages of these students
withdrawing. Once on probation, the probability that a student will persist and graduate
significantly decreases (Lindo et al., 2010). While much research examines what might lead
students to reach academic jeopardy, little is known about the experiences of students attempting
to navigate that process. Intervention programs have been created and implemented in an effort
to support these students. Most intervention programs were built around increasing student
engagement with peers, faculty, and resources on campus, yet some programs have proven to be
more effective than others at increasing student sense of belonging and academic confidence.
Furthermore, research is needed to explore how involvement theories (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993),
and particularly Hurtado’s (1997) sense of belonging model, can be applied to improve support
services for students in academic jeopardy, as well as to develop more intentional intervention
programs that account for the needs of first-generation ethnic/minority students who are most
affected by these academic policies.

30
Chapter Three: Methodology
Better supporting first-generation minority students who experience academic probation
and dismissal requires understanding how they engage with their institutions and learning about
other factors contributing to their academic challenges. The purpose of this study was to
understand the lived experiences of some of these students to learn how they navigated and
overcame these challenges. This study focused specifically on first-generation racially
minoritized who experienced academic probation and/or disqualification while attending a
California community college.
The theoretical framework used to analyze the experiences of these students was Tinto’s
(1993) student departure theory, Astin’s (1984) student involvement theory, and Hurtado and
Carter’s (1997) sense of belonging theory to determine what factors hindered or aided these
students’ engagement with their institutions while in academic jeopardy. Student involvement
and sense of belonging are integral to the success of students in academic jeopardy since these
factors influence students’ engagement with campus resources and stakeholders who can enable
their path back to good academic standing. Four research questions guided this study:
1. How did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy navigate back to good academic standing?
2. What did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy perceive to be most helpful in navigating back to good academic standing?
3. What types of academic support resources did first-generation minority students who
have returned from academic jeopardy perceive to have facilitated or impeded their
return to good academic standing?

31
4. What role did faculty and staff play in facilitating the return of first-generation,
minority students in academic jeopardy to good academic standing?
Research Methods
Implementing a phenomenological approach allows us to give meaning to an observed
phenomenon. Therefore, it facilitated an unbiased understanding of the experiences of my
sample population. The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand how firstgeneration, minority community college students formerly on academic probation or dismissal
navigated toward good academic standing. Phenomenological inquiry assumes that there is an
essence to shared experience, and through this inquiry, “the experiences of people are bracketed,
analyzed, and compared to identify the essences of the phenomenon” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016,
p. 26).
I used qualitative methods to answer this study’s research questions. Qualitative methods
allow the researcher to understand how people make meaning of a process or interpret what they
experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Qualitative research consists of data conveyed through
words that support the use of interviews to centralize the experiences of the study’s participants.
It framed the interview data as funds of knowledge that could inform the creation of support
services and practices to assist students in academic jeopardy with reaching academic success. I
used a qualitative approach to better understand the lived experiences of first-generation minority
students who faced academic probation and disqualification at a California community college
Qualitative research allowed the researcher to be centered as the primary instrument for data
collection and analysis.

32
This chapter provides information on the study’s population and sample and data
collection strategies, as well as an overview of data analysis, validity, ethical considerations, and
my positionality as the researcher.
Population and Sample
Qualitative research calls for purposeful sampling and typically includes a small sample.
The target population for this study was first-generation minority students formerly placed on
academic probation or dismissal/disqualification who navigated back toward good academic
standing. Creswell (2013) advises that the size of phenological studies ranges from three to 10
participants. As such, I interviewed eight participants who met the study criteria.
Purposeful sampling occurred in collaboration with student support services and
programs such as Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS), CalWORKs, Summer
Bridge, Umoja, Puente, and the counseling department, which are found at most California
community colleges. These programs provide support services to educationally disadvantaged
and disproportionately impacted students, such as first-generation and racially minoritized
students. Collaboration with these student support services and programs was my primary
recruitment strategy, as these programs helped me reach students who fit the participant criteria.
Recruitment began by sending emails to the gatekeepers and colleagues at these student services
units so that they could assist me in distributing my recruitment email to their student cohorts. I
also employed snowball sampling for one participant scenario by receiving a referral from a
participant who had already interviewed for my study, and who knew another student that met
the participant criteria.
Students were contacted via email. The recruitment email reflected the information
included in the consent letter. The email provided the recipients with information on the purpose

33
of the study and how participation might benefit future educational practices. It also highlighted
that participation was voluntary, and therefore, they were allowed to leave the study at any point
without penalty. Students who showed interest in participating received an additional email to
confirm their interest. The follow-up email contained the invitation to participate in the
interview, and it invited them to participate in the interview via videoconference.
To support purposeful sampling, individuals had to meet the following parameters. First,
they had to self-identify as first-generation college students. Second, they had to identify as
members of racial/ethnic minority groups. This study defined minority students as those who
identify as Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, Asian American/Pacific Islander, Native
American/American Indian, or Native Alaskan. Third, they had to have been placed on academic
probation for one or more semesters while attending a community college in California. Fourth,
they returned from being academically dismissed/disqualified by reaching good academic
standing. To have a broader range of experiences, participants did not need to be currently
enrolled at a community college at the time of their participation. Individuals who experienced
academic probation or dismissal at a community college within 5 years of their interview could
participate in this study even if they were no longer enrolled.
While attending a particular community college was not part of the sample criteria, the
primary recruitment campus was Pleasant Community College (PCC) due to convenience and
easier recruitment accessibility. In 2019, PCC reported that an average of 25% of incoming
students are first-generation. In addition, for Fall 2019, the enrolled student population at PCC
was 37.65% Asian, 24.73% Hispanic or Latino, 13.81% White, 4.96% two or more races, 2.73%
Black or African American, 0.82% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders, and 0.16%
American Indian or Alaska Native. To make sure the study met the suggested sample size to

34
conduct a phenomenological study (Creswell, 2013), I recruited students who attended or were
currently attending any community college in the state if they met the recruitment criteria.
Academic probation and dismissal/disqualification can be a daunting process for any
student. The academic standing policy at most California community colleges is complex, and it
can include multiple different standings that a student can fall under while in academic jeopardy.
As an example, below are the academic standings as described in Pleasant College’s academic
standing policies and academic regulations website:
• Probation: A student who attempts 12 or more semester units and earns a cumulative
GPA of less than 2.00 during the regular semester shall be placed on probation the
following semester. Probationary status is removed when the cumulative GPA
reaches 2.00 or above. Any student whose cumulative GPA remains below 2.00 will
continue to be on “probation” as long as the GPA is 1.75 or above.
• Academic: Subject to dismissal: A student will be subject to dismissal when:
• The student has attempted 12 or more units and earned a cumulative GPA at
Pleasant College of less than 1.75 for two consecutive semesters.
• The student is in the first semester of attendance after having been reinstated
subsequent to dismissal from Pleasant College or any other college.
• Academic dismissal: A student who has attempted 12 or more units and has earned a
cumulative GPA of less than 1.75 for three consecutive semesters shall be dismissed.
• Progress probation: A student who has attempted 12 or more units shall be placed on
progress probation when the percentage of all units attempted for which entries of
“W,” “I,” and/or “NP” are recorded reach or exceed 50 percent. A student shall be
removed from probationary status when the percentage of all of the units in which the

35
student has enrolled for which entries of “W,” “I,” and/or “NP” are recorded is below
50%.
• Progress subject to dismissal: A student who has attempted 12 or more units shall be
placed on progress subject to dismissal when the percentage of all units attempted for
which entries of “W,” “I,” and/or “NP” are recorded reach or exceed 50 percent for
two consecutive semesters.
• Progress: dismissal: A student who has attempted 12 or more semester units shall be
dismissed when the percentage of all units attempted and for which entries of “W,”
“I,” and/or “NP” are recorded, reach or exceed 50 percent for three consecutive
semesters.
• Typically, once students reach a semester with a cumulative GPA of 2.0 (or above
and their units of “W,” “NP,” and/or “I” do not reach or exceed 50%), they can be
classified as being in clear standing, more commonly known as good academic
standing or having satisfactory academic performance.
Similar academic standing policies and regulations can be found at all 116 California
community colleges. For this reason, while Pleasant College was used as a primary recruitment
site due to convenience, students from other community colleges in California who met the study
criteria were invited to participate.
Instrumentation and Data Collection
Interviews and documents were the data collection instruments used for this study. As a
token of gratitude, each participant received a $25 gift card upon completion of their interview. I
used a semi-structured interview protocol to address the research questions and allow flexibility

36
to engage in conversation with study participants (Merriam, 2009). The data came from eight
interviews.
Semi-structured Interviews
The primary data sources were semi-structured interviews guided by a protocol
developed to better understand how the interviewees made meaning of their experience regaining
good academic standing. I chose a semi-structured interview protocol, as it is more conducive to
conversation with the participants (Merriam, 2009), and it allowed for flexibility in case
clarifications and follow-up questions were needed. Semi-structured interviews support the use
of probing questions. I designed the interview questions to prompt responses that spoke about the
students’ academic, personal, familial, and social aspects that might have contributed to both
their academic underperformance and their success in regaining a good academic status.
I asked potential participants to fill out a short questionnaire using Qualtrics (Appendix
B), an online software tool for creating and implementing surveys. This questionnaire asked
simple demographic questions, which assisted with demonstrating that they met the study
criteria. Demographic data also helped gain a more holistic understanding of each interviewee.
Due to the convenience and flexibility of online meetings, I conducted all interviews via
videoconferencing using the Zoom application. Interview dates and times were established based
on the convenience and availability of each interview participant.
The interview protocol contained 25 questions aimed to answer one, two, or all research
questions. Appendix A presents the interview questions. Each question was supported by probing
questions to encourage depth in the participants’ responses (Creswell, 2013). Moreover, with
each participant’s permission, I recorded interviews for accuracy using the Zoom

37
videoconferencing application. The interviews lasted 35 to 60 minutes on average, but their
length varied based on the depth of information interviewees shared.
Participants received consent forms that included information regarding the safekeeping
of their data and identity, particularly regarding confidentiality. Their identities and the names of
their institutions at the time of probation or dismissal were protected through pseudonyms
(Creswell, 2013). Similarly, I reminded participants that they were allowed to withdraw from the
study at any point without penalty.
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts were data sources for this study. Documents and artifacts helped
me better understand how academic standing policies and regulations are implemented or
communicated. The primary documents used were institutional websites that contain information
on these policies and regulations. Websites also allowed me to explore how students are
informed and guided through campus regulations and expectations.
Data Analysis
The intent of data analysis is to make sense of the data (Creswell, 2013). The data
analysis began as soon as the first interview was completed, with reflective notes on and
transcription of the interview. Interview transcripts and reviews of relevant documents initiated
the data analysis (Creswell, 2013). Data organization and coding followed to bring forward
overarching themes. I used descriptive and in vivo coding to create a map of emerging themes.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Creswell (2013) described validity as one of the strengths of qualitative research. Validity
is established by whether the researcher or the participants determine findings to be accurate
from their standpoint. The use of multiple validity strategies helped strengthen this study’s

38
validity. To establish trustworthiness in the data collection, I triangulated the data from
interviews and document analysis. Additionally, I collected and used rich, descriptive data when
presenting findings and themes, which increased this study’s validity and helped reach data
saturation. Lastly, my positionality is presented in the section below to clarify any possible bias
the research brings into the study (Creswell, 2013).
Positionality of the Researcher
My personal and professional experiences guided my query, as I witness students’
experiences of academic probation and disqualification. I am aware of the lack of resources,
support, and information available to first-generation minority students navigating this process.
As the researcher in this qualitative study, I was the primary instrument for data collection and
analysis; therefore, I made sure to be aware of any biases that could threaten the study’s validity.
As a higher education practitioner and a first-generation Latinx woman who experienced
academic probation and disqualification, I knew that I would share similar experiences, thoughts,
and feelings with some participants and that my experience was also distinct or possibly
contradictory to the experience of others. My ethical duty as the researcher was to accurately
present the findings, including data that might be considered negative or discrepant information
that contradicts emerging themes (Creswell, 2013). Data triangulation, saturation, and the use of
rich descriptive data helped ensure the accuracy and validity of data interpretation. While my
positionality can be seen as a limitation, I feel my personal and professional experiences
strengthen this study as I relate to the participants’ experiences, as a student and as a practitioner,
which helped me capture and frame themes during the data analysis.

39
Summary
This qualitative, phenomenological study used interviews and documents to understand
participants’ experiences of academic probation and/or dismissal and regaining good academic
standing. This chapter discussed the population and sample and the data collection and analysis. I
also addressed the study’s validity and reliability, as well as the role of the researcher.

40
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter presents the findings that emerged through the collection and analysis of
qualitative data. Using a semi-structured interview protocol, I interviewed eight participants who
self-identified as first-generation, minority students who experienced and overcame academic
probation while attending a California community college. This study’s purpose was to learn
from community college students who experienced this phenomenon about the factors that either
supported or hindered their academic success. This study’s overall goal was to inform educators
and higher education leaders on how to best support students who experience academic
challenges by learning from students who overcame them. In addition, this study also hopes to
inform the development of new support programs, best practices, and changes to improve the
effectiveness of current policies. In this chapter, I will present the findings guided by the
conceptual framework presented in this study, which uses Astin’s (1984) student involvement
theory and Hurtado’s (1997) sense of belonging theory and their relation to Tinto’s (1993) theory
of student departure within the context of overcoming academic probation policies.
This study aimed to answer the following research questions:
1. How did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy navigate back to good academic standing?
2. What did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy perceive to be most helpful in navigating back to good academic standing?
3. What types of academic support resources did first-generation minority students who
have returned from academic jeopardy perceive to have facilitated or impeded their
return to good academic standing?

41
4. What role did faculty and staff play in facilitating the return of first-generation,
minority students in academic jeopardy to good academic standing?
I gathered qualitative data from eight participants who met the study’s criteria. Through
one-to-one interviews, they discussed their firsthand experiences navigating academic probation
policies. They shared their reflections on the influence of being first-generation students. The
interviews led to common themes that address this study’s research questions. The key findings
include the psycho-social implications of being on academic probation as well as the social
factors and institutional systems that supported or hindered students’ academics. This chapter
will be organized into two parts: a profile narrative for each participant and the presentation of
findings. This chapter will be followed by Chapter Five, which will discuss the findings and
implications for future research, policy, and practice.
Participant Profile Narratives
In this section I will present a brief personal narrative for each study participant crafted
from the information provided through the interviews. An overview of the study participants
including student demographics, generational status, and their campus involvement, can be seen
in Table 1.

42
Table 1
Interviewees’ Demographic Data
Participant Gender Race/ethnicity Academic
history
Student
Support
Programs
Student
parent
Anita Female Latinx Academic
probation
EOPS,
MEChA
Yes
Carolyn Female Filipino Academic
probation
EOPS,
CalWORKs
Yes
Dayana Female Latinx Academic
probation
EOPS,
MEChA,
Puente
No
Eduardo Male Latinx Academic
probation
EOPS, Dream
Center
No
Isabel Female Filipino/Nativ
e American
Academic
probation
EOPS,
CalWORKs
Yes
Nicole Female Latinx Academic
probation
None No
Rosie Female Latinx Academic
probation &
dismissal
None No
Stephanie Female Latinx Academic
probation
EOPS,
CalWORKs
Yes
Each participant’s story and demographic background influenced how they engaged and
experienced higher education and academic probation. Seven out of eight participants identified
as female, and only one out of the eight participants identified as male, which could be connected
to existing research that showed that being on probation doubles the probability that a male
student would drop out entirely (Kopp & Shaw, 2016). Moreover, six of the participants
identified as Latinx, one identified as Filipino, and one identified as bicultural. Lastly, half of the
study participants were also student parents, which could be indicative of an increased risk of
academic challenges for parenting students. Nonetheless, all study participants shared common
experiences. The following profiles expand on each participant’s background, including some

43
factors that directly or indirectly contributed to each student’s academic experience before and
during academic probation. The following section presents brief participant profiles in
alphabetical order, based on each participant’s pseudonym, followed by a presentation of the
main findings.
Anita
Anita is a nontraditional college student who grew up in a mixed-status family. Anita
restarted her higher education 20 years after graduating high school. She enrolled at her local
community college and worked toward transferring to a 4-year university. She started her college
experience as an older student and a single mother, working part-time and attending school fulltime. However, various obstacles led her to be placed on academic probation on multiple
occasions, including being diagnosed with cancer, having her home burned down, experiencing
homelessness with her children, and dealing with severe mental health issues. Despite these
obstacles, Anita earned an associate degree and gained admission to the California State
University campuses to which she had applied 20 years earlier as a high school graduate.
Carolyn
Carolyn’s college experience was nontraditional, as she first studied tourism and
hospitality in the Philippines. However, Carolyn moved back to the United States due to familial
pressures. Upon her return, her husband became incarcerated, prompting her to enroll at her local
community college so she could provide a better future for her 5-month-old son. Carolyn had to
juggle her academic responsibilities, single motherhood, her husband’s court hearings, and the
pressure from her family to pursue a major that was most lucrative. These competing priorities
harmed Carolyn’s mental health and her academic performance, which led her to academic

44
probation. However, Carolyn overcame these obstacles and reached her career goal. She
currently works as a preschool teacher.
Dayana
Dayana enrolled at her local community college due to the low cost and pressure from
her family. Dayana was placed on probation after her second semester in college, and the factors
that contributed to that included not feeling comfortable asking for help, wanting to do things on
her own, not having guidance from her parents or older siblings, and choosing to enroll in
college due to familial pressures. Once on probation, Dayana began to seek resources, and met
with counselors who helped her discover her career interests and developed a plan for her. She
also became involved with the Puente and the MEChA student club, where she connected with
peers and faculty. Dayana improved her grades. She is currently on track to obtain an associate
degree and transfer to a 4-year institution.
Eduardo
Eduardo immigrated to the United States when he was 2 years old. He attempted to enroll
at various community colleges, but the enrollment process became overwhelming due to his
undocumented status. After taking a gap year, Eduardo enrolled at a community college.
However, he was placed on probation after his 1st year and remained so for two semesters.
Eduardo attributed this outcome to lacking a sense of belonging and not connecting with peers,
staff, or faculty. Eduardo attributed his eventual academic success to his increased campus
involvement with EOPS, the Dream Center, and the AB540 student club. Eduardo obtained an
associate degree and earned a degree in psychology. Currently, he is enrolled in a master’s
degree program in counseling and works as a full-time staff member at a California State
University Dream Center.

45
Isabel
Isabel’s path to higher education was nontraditional. After graduating high school, she
attended vocational school and joined the workforce for 10 years before enrolling at a
community college. While in college, Isabel was diagnosed with attention deficit disorder
(ADD). During her 1st year, Isabel had to learn to work with her new diagnosis while juggling
her priorities as a mother and wife during a global pandemic. These challenges led Isabel to
academic probation. Fortunately, Isabel’s diagnosis also allowed her to access more support
through her college’s accessibility services department and EOPS. Isabel overcame academic
probation, remains enrolled at her community college, and is on track to graduate.
Nicole
Nicole moved out of her mother’s house at age 18 and was working full-time when she
enrolled in community college. When she started college, she was doing well academically, but
she experienced a family loss that heavily damaged her mental health. She withdrew from all her
classes in multiple semesters. This circumstance led her to academic probation, and she did not
enroll again for 3 years. She re-enrolled during the pandemic. Unable to connect with her
campus, Nicole relied on the support and mentorship of her third-grade teacher to persevere and
received guidance from a classmate on navigating academic probation, withdrawal policies, and
appeal procedures to remove the withdrawals from her records. Nicole earned an associate
degree and transferred to a California State University campus, where she has connected with her
campus community and counselors.
Rosie
Rosie started her education in the United States as an English as a second language
student in high school. As a recent immigrant, her transition to community college was difficult.

46
Rosie felt lost, as she did not know what classes to take, did not understand what a major was,
and did not know campus resources. Rosie was placed on probation in her third semester and
eventually became academically disqualified. Being on academic dismissal forced Rosie to
enroll in a different district due to district policies. While Rosie returned to her home college and
graduated, it took her 8 years to earn an associate degree and transfer to a 4-year university.
Rosie completed her bachelor’s degree and became the first in her family to graduate from
college. She is currently working full-time while enrolled in a master’s program in nursing.
Stephanie
Stephanie grew up in the foster care system. She is a single parent of two. When she first
enrolled in college, she did not think college was for her and felt like she did not belong. She
dropped out and reenrolled several times without completing a degree program, which also led
her to be on academic probation. The last time Stephanie returned to college, she had recently
had her second son and was going through a difficult divorce. Stephanie used her situation as her
motivation to find her passion and connect with campus resources. She became more involved
with the campus, particularly with the CalWORKs program, where she created support groups
for single parents like herself. Stephanie improved her grades, and she graduated from
community college with honors. Stephanie recently earned a bachelor’s degree.
The participant biographies presented in this section provide insight into the
interviewees’ lives and the circumstances that contributed to their academic challenges. This
section presents the differences and similarities among the challenges that the interviewees
overcame in higher education. These are important to highlight to help identify how institutional
structures might hinder first-generation students’ academic success. Moreover, it also helps us

47
reflect on better practices outside of the academic realm that can support first-generation
students.
Presentation of Findings
I used a combination of open coding and Atlas.ti coding software to assist with the data
analysis. The data from each transcribed interview was coded with tags relevant to the study and
categorized using axial coding into emergent themes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The data
analysis highlighted three emergent themes in this study: psychological impact, social factors,
and institutional systems. The first theme describes participants’ experience with academic
probation’s effect on their mental health and emotional well-being. The second theme focuses on
the social agents that participants highlighted as impactful in relation to academic probation. In
the third theme, participants discuss the institutional barriers and sources of support that
influenced their education. This section will present in-depth descriptions of each major theme
and subtheme, supported by the narratives and experiences of the eight study participants. This
chapter will conclude with a summary of the data findings. Chapter Five will discuss the findings
and recommendations for future research.
Psychological Impact
Study participants shared how being placed on academic probation significantly harmed
their mental health, motivation, emotional state, and their identity as students. They questioned
whether they should remain in college because they lacked a sense of belonging to their campus,
did not believe they had the academic capabilities to succeed, or felt they lacked support from
their colleges and families.
Participants shared that getting on academic probation created feelings of failure and fear,
which harmed their mental health. Accordingly, this section will discuss the psychological and

48
emotional implications on study participants, and their identity discovery and resilience as they
attempted to improve their academics. This section presents three subthemes: the implications of
academic probation on mental health, cultural and generational experiences, and emotional
resilience/mental maturity.
Implications of Academic Probation on Mental Health
The study participants shared that being placed on academic probation harmed their
mental well-being and caused feelings of self-doubt, lack of motivation, uncertainty, isolation,
and failure. Rosie explained that when she got on probation, she felt “completely lost.” Most
interviewees faced significant stressors and doubts about their future and ability to continue their
college education. When Rosie talked about her reaction to finding out she was on academic
probation, she stated,
I was really disappointed and kind of lost hope. I didn’t know what else to do. I didn’t
know what was next. If I was to fail my classes, if they were going to kick me out, if I
was going to be re-admitted again.
Similarly, all participants indicated that receiving their academic probation notice caused
substantial anxiety. Even though their experiences varied, their reactions aligned in four ways.
First, they experienced fear and uncertainty. Secondly, they lacked a full understanding of the
policy. Dayana stated, “At first, I was very scared because I didn’t know what was going to
happen, and even if I did the courses or the stuff that they asked me for, I didn’t know if that was
going to work or not.” Third, the interviewees questioned their academic abilities and sense of
belonging. When Anita found out about her status, she shared,

49
I was very sad. I was beating myself like, “What did I do wrong? I totally messed up.” I
just kept beating myself. I was really hard on myself. I literally cried because I [thought]
am not doing enough. I am not good enough.
Most respondents reported that getting on academic probation fed into their feelings of
inadequacy, and lack of sense of belonging in college.
Finally, study participants also discussed how undertaking academic probation cultivated
their emotional resilience and supported their pathway to self-discovery and self-growth. While
asking for help did not come easy for most study participants, they felt forced to adjust. All
tapped into their various forms of social capital to get help understanding and navigating
academic probation. Each participant discussed reaching out to friends, peers, counselors, or
other institutional agents.
Overall, going through academic probation was a pivotal experience for the interviewees.
They identified that being a first-generation student made the experience feel much more
catastrophic. Carolyn, a single mother, echoed this sentiment:
The moment I was placed on academic probation, I was like, “What if I could never
recover from this, or what if this ruins my chances at anything going forward?” I guess I
would never have thought that I’d be where I am now as a preschool teacher. I thought
the academic probation would have ruined that chance for me.
Moreover, if participants had not reached out and accessed support and guidance from
sources outside of themselves, academic probation could have become the end of their academic
pursuits.
Probation Notice. For all participants, the simple act of receiving the notice informing
them that they were on academic probation had a significant effect on their mental health and

50
how they saw their positionality at their college. About how they felt after receiving their notice,
their responses included words and phrases like: “I was disappointed at myself,” “scared,” “I felt
I was at the rock bottom,” “embarrassed to tell my family,” “lost for hope,” “panic,”
“confusion,” and “guilt” or feeling like “it’s all my fault.”
Furthermore, the content of notices was described as distressing by study participants.
For example, Nicole shared,
I got an email. I think it wasn’t even the counselor. It was like an automated email, and [it
said] that I had been put on academic probation for too many withdrawals, and I was like,
“Wait, what?” And it wasn’t until I met with the counselor. And I asked, “What is it like?
What does this mean?” And then she kind of told me, “Well, you’re not going to get any
funding if you don’t pick it up. You will have to pay for school on your own.”
Moreover, the participants also viewed the notices as confusing. This was a major
obstacle to their ability to navigate the policies at their campuses. The notices on their own were
not sufficient to help the participants improve their academic performance. On the contrary, the
notices made them question whether college was for them. Similarly, participants recalled that
the content of the notices lacked guidance. Rosie stated, “I don’t remember seeing [anything]
that said that they will help with classes or anything like that.” Respondents shared that the
notices primarily highlighted their academic shortcomings and the consequences. In discussing
the content of this notice, Eduardo recalled,
I just got an email saying, “You are on academic probation for failing more than half of
your units taken,” and they were like, “You need to make sure that you pass the next two
semesters. You need to pass more than half of your units taken, or else you’re going to
get disqualified from the college.”

51
Furthermore, most participants described being unaware of these institutional policies
and recalled that they assumed that community college worked like high school. Stephanie
shared that she did not know probation existed and that she thought that “they were just going to
push me through like they did in high school.” Similarly, Eduardo mentioned, “I did not even
know [probation] was an option. I did not even know this existed.” Most participants described
learning about academic probation through their notices. Moreover, participants shared that they
knew they were not doing well academically, but they did not know that their performance was
being evaluated and that it could hinder their ability to achieve their educational goals.
When participants received their notices, they had to process the emotions that came with
them and learn what the policies meant and how to navigate them. Participants would have liked
more support from their institutions. Nicole mentioned that when she got her notice, she felt
disappointed in herself and her institution:
They [college leaders] only like to pay attention to you when you’re doing bad as
opposed to, you know, always keeping track of you. It is always just like once you are
doing bad. That’s when they start noticing things.
Academic Probation Letter Content. Participants shared that the notice did not connect
them with resources that could help them. Instead, the notice primarily highlighted the
consequences if they did not improve their grades. Even after getting out of academic probation,
participants recalled not having a good understanding of how they did so, and they mainly
discussed the consequences emphasized in their notices. For example, Nicole stated,
I, even today, I don’t really even know what it meant. It was kind of confusing for me.
They just said, “You’re going to lose your grants, the Cal Grants, and your financial aid.”

52
So, I’ll have to pay out of pocket for school, and that was the gist of [the letter], and, you
know, this will be on your record forever.
Participants emphasized how the notice highlighted their academic underperformance but
lacked concrete guidance on how to get out of academic probation or what resources were
available to them.
Furthermore, all participants shared feelings of anxiety and stress after reading their
letters. Anita, a single mother and nontraditional-aged student, found out she was on probation
through her school’s financial aid department. When Anita received the notice, “I started
freaking out. I just started having panic attacks.” The notice and the entire experience harmed the
participants’ mental health. For Stephanie, it caused stress and placed her in a vulnerable
situation. Stephanie shared,
When I lost my job because of my GPA, it [put] me in a vulnerable spot because I lost
money, and as a student [who] depends on financial aid, that was a scary spot to be in. I
think that’s when it really hit me. I felt like I was at the rock bottom. [Climbing] out of
that hole, it was pretty impossible to find the way to climb out.
Moreover, for participants who were already experiencing personal obstacles, receiving
the notice exacerbated their circumstances. A participant shared that her neurodevelopmental
disorder caused her to get on probation and heightened her reaction to it. Isabel shared, “Because
of my [ADD], my emotions have a tendency to get very big, so at the moment, I was really
stressed about it.” Other participants discussed not taking academic probation too seriously at the
beginning. These participants shared that they initially felt they could overcome it on their own,
but this was not the case. Eduardo stated,

53
When I got the notice, I didn’t think it was a big deal. Like, yeah, you know, I failed a
few classes, but I’m going to do better. I know I am going to do better next semester. I
won’t let this happen to myself. I won’t let myself get disqualified.
Carolyn shared a similar reaction when she described herself as headstrong for not taking
the notice seriously and asking for help sooner. For Dayana, the notice did what it was intended
to do: provide a warning. Dayana shared,
After getting the academic probation statement, I think it kind of more encouraged me to
start actually doing better because, to me, it was kind of like a wake-up call. I need to
start asking for help whenever I need it, or I need to also by myself find resources if I
don’t understand something.
While participants’ reactions to the notices varied, they all converged in sharing that they
caused overwhelming feelings of anxiety and confusion. Moreover, the notices’ content failed to
deliver the “correct” message for seven out of the eight interviewees.
Cultural and Generational Experiences
Participants also discussed their generational and cultural identities and how these
identities influenced their education. Being first-generation students, they shared that when they
found out they were on probation, they felt like they did not have anyone to whom they could
turn. Rosie said she felt invisible on campus. In most cases, the participants were the first in their
families to attend college, so they had no older siblings to look up to for help. Additionally, for
Stephanie and Eduardo, being the first in their families to go to college meant that there was a
sense of needing to “figure things out on your own.” As Eduardo reflected on this experience, he
shared,

54
Honestly, it was really hard at the beginning because I just didn’t know what I had to do,
and I think, you know, being a first-gen, you don’t like asking for help. You’re like, “I
need to figure it out,” but you know, it is hard to figure it out when there is no one to
guide you.
Participants shared feelings of “shame” about their standing and sharing it with others.
Dayana shared that her parents really wanted her to continue her education, and to have to share
that she was on probation was scary. Similarly, Rosie also described stress and shame when it
came to her relationship with her family. When Rosie was disqualified, she attended a
community college outside of her district, which meant she had a longer commute with no
reliable transportation. However, regardless of the difficulties, she refused to involve her family.
She shared,
I was so embarrassed to tell my family that I got kicked out. I actually never told them. I
just continued to attend a different college than they thought I was until I got back in. It
was very frustrating and difficult times.
While most participants shared having parents or families who supported their college
education, the responsibility of being a first-generation student created an additional obligation
that participants needed to carry.
Furthermore, for study participants who lacked familial support, going through academic
probation reinforced the negative perceptions they brought into college. Stephanie shared that the
lack of support from her family further hindered her belief in herself. She stated,
I didn’t believe in myself because everyone growing up told me that I wouldn’t make it in
college, or I wouldn’t be able to do it, or that I wasn’t smart enough, so I started believing

55
the words that they were saying to me. I was like, “Yeah, that’s not me [college]. That’s
not my life.”
Cultural expectations also factored in some participants’ experiences. Carolyn had to
learn to juggle the guidance she received at school with her family’s expectations. She shared,
I was always advised [by counselors] to take just two or three classes, but I was so
pressured to take full units, and you know, just being Asian American and coming from
an Asian family, [my family was] always telling me to take full credits, so I could finish
faster. I guess that all just piled up, and I couldn’t keep up anymore.
Familial and cultural expectations intertwined with students’ experiences in college, and
they became more salient when encountering academic probation. As first-generation students,
the process felt very isolating, and in most cases, if students were not part of a campus support
program, they had limited access to support and guidance.
Emotional Resilience/Mental Maturity
Academic probation also pushed all study participants toward personal growth. They
reflected on their personal and academic experiences and demonstrated significant growth and
resiliency as they worked to overcome their academic struggles. Interviewees overall shared that
they had to learn to process what was happening and that it did not represent the end of their
higher education. Some prominent areas of growth were self-efficacy and accountability, as well
as increased help-seeking behavior. They also engaged in identity discovery, which included a
clearer vision of who they are and what they want to be after college. The following sections
discuss these subthemes in more detail.
Self-Efficacy and Accountability. Going through academic probation pushed
participants to change how they approached their education. For Eduardo and Rosie, this meant

56
reflecting on how their academic habits might have led to their circumstances. This reflective
process made them think about what did not work for them and guided them to utilize better
learning techniques. For example, Rosie shared,
I had to learn to seek resources out of school because school didn’t have any resources.
So, I had to look elsewhere, like YouTube channels or Quizlet, to help me. Just honestly
doing research on my own on how certain things, like math problems, worked [and]
understanding terms. Pretty much [learning] things on my own.
Similarly, students also reflect on how they changed as students after overcoming
academic probation. About how she changed after this experience, Rosie shared,
I was more aware, at my age, [that my] education depended on me [and] that I had to be
the one to seek resources. The resources were not going to be given to me. If I wanted to
pass a class, I had to do the job. I knew that I had to dedicate every single minute, and
hour, and everything to … all of my classes. I wasn’t afraid to ask anymore. I was not
afraid to go to admissions [or] to counselors. It was different when I came back.
For Eduardo, working at the Dream Center was a turning point. Having this job on
campus pushed Eduardo to see himself as a role model to other students like himself, and this
new mindset helped him increase his self-efficacy and his accountability to himself and others.
Eduardo shared that he did not want to be a role model who would tell students to do good in
class while being on academic probation, so he pushed himself to do better academically.
Similarly, the support and encouragement received from various social systems, such as
counselors, faculty, peers, and other mentors, increased students’ feelings of self-efficacy. Anita
shared that every time she landed on academic probation, the people in her EOPS program were
there to uplift her and “give [her] that little push and [she] needed to get out of academic

57
probation.” Rosie also relied on the encouragement and guidance she received from her friend to
keep moving forward, and eventually, she learned to seek resources on her own. Furthermore,
students also became strategic about choosing the right classes and connecting with peers who
would support their academic success. For example, Stephanie shared that she gained the
confidence to create study groups in her classes, first with students sitting near her and
eventually being more selective and seeking study groups with the highest-performing students.
The participants learned to use the probation experience as a source of motivation to do
better in school, change their habits, and become more involved on campus. Dayana shared that
she increased her involvement with MEChA and Puente. In those groups, she found people who
provided knowledge she had previously lacked.
Help-Seeking Behavior. Before entering academic probation, most interviewees
described themselves as disconnected, lost, or uninterested in their classes. In some cases, if a
student thought of a class as being difficult, they shared that they would give up without
attempting to get help from their professors or accessing other resources on campus. Dayana
knew from the beginning of her college enrollment that she would struggle with math. She
shared,
I had a feeling of when I would have some trouble with assignments, so after a while, I
am not going to lie, for homework assignments, there were sometimes that I would say,
“You know what? I am not really in the mood to do this.” And me not doing those things
was bringing me down in class.
In addition, asking for help was intimidating, and the interviewees saw it as a form of
weakness. Dayana mentioned that she never asked for help: “I was too embarrassed to ask. So, I
am going to try to solve it by myself.” She said this technique never really worked. The

58
interviewees consistently discussed being embarrassed to ask for help or wanting to find
solutions on their own. However, post-academic probation, participants emphasized their
newfound ability to seek help and resources. Dayana shared that she asked questions in class
even if she thought she had the right answer, and she described her experience as a “wake-up
call.”
Furthermore, academic probation for Eduardo allowed him to reflect on his entire college
education. He shared the following reflection on how he saw himself after that experience:
I would describe myself as aware. Just aware of the consequences and aware of different
things that are on campus. The good and the bad, whether there’s no resources or there
are resources, but I am just not seeking them. And then just being aware of the impact of
community, and the impact of being vulnerable and letting other people help you.
Nicole also sought help from mentors, such as her third-grade teacher, who always
supported her academics. Further in-depth research would be needed to identify what motivated
these students to make such a swift change in their academic behavior. Further exploring this
phenomenon would aid institutions that are working on creating better intervention strategies for
students in academic jeopardy.
Identity Discovery. Academic probation became a time for self-discovery or rediscovery
for students. In most cases, it forced students to think about who they were and who they hoped
to be. Consequently, this led to a reevaluation of their academic and professional goals. For
Eduardo, the experience led him to discover that he wanted to be an academic counselor to
support students who struggle academically. Nicole reevaluated her goals and changed her
major. Similarly, before entering academic probation, Stephanie described herself in the
following way:

59
I think I changed my major six times while at community college. I had no focus. I just
didn’t care. I didn’t believe in myself. I didn’t have the confidence. I didn’t have any
goals. I didn’t have anything like that. I just knew that I needed to get a degree.
However, post-academic probation, Stephanie saw herself as driven, focused, and knowing what
[she] wanted, which led her to complete community college with a high GPA.
Students also noted increased self-esteem and self-confidence. Anita shared that after she
got out of probation, she felt accomplished. She shared, “[I felt like] I am a badass. Si se puede. I
got this. I got myself out of this. I got my outlets, my resources, and I feel empowered.” Along
with improving her academic performance, Anita learned to be more intentional about accessing
mental health services at her community college.
This section presented the findings connected to the psychological implications of
academic probation on the interviewees. Study participants perceived academic probation as a
failure, which led them to question their sense of belonging in college. Furthermore, they saw the
content of the notices they received as ineffective. In addition, findings also showed their
growth, increased self-efficacy, newfound ability to seek help, and identity discovery.
Social Factors
This section presents the findings on various social factors that influenced students’
educational experiences, particularly related to academic probation policies. Existing research
focused on student persistence and success has noted that access to various forms of social
capital greatly influences students’ ability to succeed (Astin, 1984; Bourdieu, 1986; Yosso,
2005). Yosso (2005) argued that social capital can be understood as networks of people and
community resources, and these networks can provide both instrumental and emotional support
to navigate society’s institutions (p. 79). Thus, this section focuses on the various forms of social

60
capital identified by study participants as sources of emotional, motivational, and navigational
support that contributed to their ability to overcome academic probation policies. For clarity, this
section discusses the following three subthemes: (a) institutional agent support, (b) familial
support, and (c) peer support.
Institutional Agent Impact
One of the primary subthemes within social factors was the impact of institutional
support offered to students through their interactions with faculty, academic counselors, and
student support programs, which Tovar (2015) referred to as institutional agents. Six participants
identified that at least one or more institutional agents contributed to their ability to navigate
higher education. Some institutional agents were academic counselors, financial aid advisors,
program coordinators, and faculty members. They also became involved with equity student
support programs such as EOPS, CalWORKs, Puente, and undocumented student services
centers.
Counselors. The participants noted that these institutional agents provided them with
guidance and support and, overall, contributed to their ability to improve their academics. Five
interviewees talked about the positive influence of academic counselors, and six attributed their
academic success and resilience to the support they received through their membership in student
equity programs and student clubs, while two participants mentioned not having any support
from institutional agents and relying on the support received through their family and/or peers.
Participants reported that one-to-one interaction with counselors, particularly those
housed under equity programs like EOPS and CalWORKs, functioned as important support
systems. Equity programs often have in-house counselors and coordinators solely focused on
providing academic, emotional, and career development support to program participants. The

61
interviewees highlighted that their equity counselors cared for their success and took an interest
in them beyond academics. Stephanie shared that her EOPS and CalWORKs counselors
consistently motivated her. When talking about the role of her academic advisors, Stephanie
mentioned,
My counselor was probably one of the biggest parts in it that sort of showed me my
timeline and would tell me, “You are almost done. You can see the white flag at the end.
You are almost there.” They [my counselors] were probably my biggest supporters.
Moreover, Stephanie mentioned that her counselor took considerable time fixing her
transcript and helping her write appeal letters. She shared,
I didn’t have a job. I wasn’t getting child support, and I was financially impacted. My
counselor got me money that I needed for school. … He literally went through my entire
transcript and helped me clean it up and write up a letter [appeal letter]. And that was
probably the biggest thing that helped get out of academic probation and make me
believe in myself again.
In addition, students who were part of support programs on campus turned to their
assigned counselors for emotional support, which was particularly evident when students were
processing their feelings and emotions about being on academic probation and the factors that
might have contributed to their academic challenges.
Lastly, the interviewees described counselors as essential in breaking down academic
probation policies to make them more digestible. Dayana shared that her counselor aided her
with understanding the policies’ requirements.

62
Support Programs. For six interviewees, their involvement with EOPS or similar equity
programs such as Puente, CalWORKs, undocumented student support centers, and MEChA
made the “reaching out” process easier. Carolyn shared,
My EOPS/CalWORKs counselor was very easy to talk to. She’s understanding. She was
able to empathize with my situation. The thing with my CalWORKs counselor is that
when you talk to her about things, she doesn’t pressure you one way or another. She’ll
listen, and at the same time, she’ll respect your decision but also give you advice.
By being part of EOPS, Carolyn received dedicated guidance that helped her increase her
confidence, improve her grades, and overcome probation. Counselors in EOPS typically follow a
developmental and holistic counseling model that goes beyond students’ academic needs, and
they meet with students more frequently than a general counselor does. As a result, they build a
stronger bond with students. For Isabel, being part of EOPS and CalWORKs allowed her access
to this counseling model, which helped her discover that she has ADD. As Isabel summarized,
Through the suggestion of a counselor in a personal development class and meeting with
my counselor, I ended up talking to my general practitioner and getting a
recommendation for psychological testing, and it turned out I have [ADD].
Isabels’s academic counselors played a key role in the trajectory of her academic journey. This
diagnosis had a significant psychological, emotional, and educational impact on her. However,
her EOPS counselor and her accessibility services counselor were sources of significant
navigational and emotional support.
Membership in equity programs provided students with a home base on campus where
students have easy access to guidance and support. Every time Anita landed on academic

63
probation, she turned to EOPS for emotional and navigational support. Anita summarized her
experience in the following way:
EOPS [was] always there to lift me up. I just talked to the right people, and then they
lifted me up. They connected me to the right people, and then I [knew] where to go or
who to talk to about the academic probation. I think that’s what got me through when I
was in college. It’s just actually EOPS [that] has been there for me this whole time.
For students, EOPS represented more than an academic support system. It became a
source of hope, care, and support. One participant shared that everyone in the EOPS program
knew her, her story, and her struggles, and they provided her with immense academic, emotional,
and motivational support, particularly as she went through academic probation, homelessness,
and illnesses. Dayana’s and Eduardo’s membership in student clubs facilitated their success in
improving their grades.
Faculty Support. While not as frequent, two participants identified faculty members as
important sources of motivational and navigational support. Participants described building an
impactful relationship with their faculty when their instructors took an interest in their personal
lives. Carolyn shared receiving guidance through her challenging times from her child
development professor because that professor was “the most empathetic to and understanding of
all the instructors.” Another participant mentioned connecting with her professors during office
hours. She shared that this professor made her “feel like a real person and not just a number
passing through.”
Participants also discussed how building a relationship with faculty could also have a
positive effect on their academics. Carolyn reflected,

64
Definitely, talking to your instructors after the class helps a lot because [it] makes a
whole difference in building a relationship with your teacher, whereas if you just sit there
listening to the lecture. If you get to know them a little, or they get to know you a little,
they would understand what’s going on behind your grades or behind the words you
choose on an essay.
These faculty connections aided students will feeling more visible, understood, and
valued. In both cases, participants highlighted those meaningful interactions with faculty that
happened outside of the classroom, which is consistent with Tovar’s (2015) theory of studentfaculty engagement.
While institutional agents were of benefit to most participants, a few also identified
having had negative interactions with institutional agents and the institution itself, creating
feelings of anxiety, isolation, abandonment, and resentment toward the institution. This was the
case with Rosie and Nicole, who shared that they did not feel their community college cared for
their success, which almost led them to drop out of college. Nicole shared that probation made
her feel disappointed in herself. She also shared,
I was disappointed in the system that was in place because it just kind of felt like it was
thrown on me. Nobody bothered to really ask, “Hey, what is going on?” Because I had
always been a straight-A student throughout all my years. So, for me, I just [felt] like
maybe I am not supposed to be in college. Maybe I should just take this L and just give
up.
The interviewees also brought up the lack of support from the institution. Eduardo stated,
“I don’t feel like the institution did much to help students of out probation, at least when I was on
probation.” Furthermore, other participants emphasized that accessibility to counselors or finding

65
counselors who cared enabled them to do well in school or get out of probation. Nicole stated, “I
feel like it would have been a lot better if the counselors were more … attentive.”
In summary, institutional agents significantly influenced students’ abilities to overcome
academic probation, gain access to navigational and emotional support while in college, and
regain good academic standing.
Peer Support
Participants frequently identified peers as a source of social, emotional, and navigational
support. Study participants described their peers as pivotal in helping them navigate higher
education. In most cases, participants described these peers as students with college experience
who understood how college worked and what it entailed to be a successful student. After
encountering academic probation, participants mentioned being more intentional about looking
for peers who would support their academic growth and peers to whom they could relate. For
Stephanie, this meant creating a student support group for parenting students.
Another participant also discussed the role his peers had in this academic journey. As an
undocumented student, Eduardo shared that a fellow peer helped him navigate the cumbersome
enrollment process. He expressed,
I took the year off, and then one of my friends was in college, and he was pretty active on
campus, and he knew people, so he was like, “Let’s go; I’ll go with you.” And he literally
walked me through it, step by step of how to enroll.
Additionally, participants said peers helped increase their sense of belonging on campus.
Eduardo shared that his connection with his institution grew when he joined the AB540 student
club. Because of this peer group, Eduardo became more comfortable with his student identity,

66
increased his involvement with EOPS, and connected more frequently with his EOPS academic
counselor, who was also the AB540 student club advisor. Eduardo shared,
When I was on probation, I was just trying to stay focused on my classes, and then the
second semester before I got off probation, I joined the AB540 student club, and I think
that helped keep me motivated with classes and stuff. Seeing other people who were also
kind of going through the same thing. Everyone’s just trying to manage both their
academic life [and] being part of the club and having different things in their lives. That
helped me get a sense of belonging: “Well, if I’m disqualified, I can’t be with them.” So,
I think that helped motivate me into doing better academically.
In some cases, peers were the only source of campus support identified by participants. In
their interviews, Nicole and Rosie discussed how they leaned on their peers for support. Rosie,
who experienced both academic probation and dismissal, shared that she received little to no
support from counselors, faculty, or any other institutional agent at the community colleges she
attended. Instead, she relied on support from a friend who had also experienced academic
probation. She shared,
One of my friends was at a university, and I reached out to her, and I told her what was
going on. She advised me to look into another county for a community college so I
wouldn’t miss a semester, and so I wouldn’t waste my time pretty much, so that is
actually what I did.
While talking to her peer, Rosie received navigational support similar to the support
received by other participants through institutional agents. Likewise, participants also mentioned
the importance of having a peer that understood what it was like to be a student. One participant
shared,

67
Having friends from school that would be like, “Hey, let’s go study. Let’s do this
together.” And it would be school-related, and it wasn’t just going out to eat or
something. We were actually setting time aside and having that support [from] friends
[who] go to school and understand the school workload. That was definitely really
helpful.
Peer support or peer connections also became important for students after they got out of
academic probation. Stephanie mentioned that once she got out of academic probation, she
became more strategic about connecting with peers who would support her education. Overall,
upon readmission, most participants shared becoming more engaged with their peers through
study groups, student clubs, and involvement with academic support programs.
Familial Impact
Being the first in their families to attend college, the subject of family impact and
generational status was very present. Families or family members both aided and hindered
educational experiences. Most participants’ families expected them to go to college, but in most
cases, the families were unable to offer guidance. Reflecting on being a first-generation student,
Dayana shared,
In the beginning, it was hard just because my parents [did not go] to college. There were
some things going into college where you don’t really know what the process is. For
example, my parents would ask me all the time, “When are you going to graduate?” or
“Do you know this, or do you know that?” And sometimes, it was hard for me to explain
certain things because I didn’t know myself.
For parenting students like Carolyn, Stephanie, Isabel, and Anita, their children were
motivational support. Stephanie, who attempted community college several times, found her

68
drive after becoming a single mother of two. She said her circumstances “put a fire in [her] gut
that pushed her to graduate and transfer.” Similarly, Carolyn enrolled in college after her
husband’s incarceration. As a single mother, she sought college to cope with her sadness and to
provide for her child.
For other students like Nicole, family became an additional obstacle. When the school
placed Nicole on academic probation, she shared her struggles with her mother. Rather than
provide comfort, her mother intentionally belittled Nicole by saying, “You’re going to be a
dropout like your sisters.” This comment gravely lowered her self-esteem and led her to
experience high levels of anxiety and confusion.
Institutional Systems
This section will discuss the institutional system that supported or hindered students’
academic journey through academic probation and beyond; subthemes include institutional
barriers and sources of support for students. Prior research on academic probation highlighted
institutional policies’ effects on students (Arcand & LeBlanc, 2012; Bowman & Jang, 2022). The
interviewees discussed positive and negative interactions with their institutions. This section
discusses two subthemes: institutional barriers/experiences and sources of support.
Institutional Barriers/Experiences
Most participants talked about feeling unseen on campus. Rosie described her college
experience as “feeling lost and invisible on campus.” Similarly, all participants shared that they
had limited or no knowledge of how college worked or their probation policies. Nicole talked
about how her college did not communicate information clearly. Regarding whether she was
aware of on-campus support services before she got on probation, she shared,

69
I heard about them, but I didn’t know where they were. [The college] would say,
“Contact the learning center for help,” but how do I do that? Where do I go? They would
always just kind of mention it but not really tell you how to go about it.
Similarly, Rosie shared that her experience entering college and going through probation
was more challenging than the experience she had when she first moved to the United States and
had to enroll in high school with no knowledge of the language. Rosie shared,
I thought high school was difficult because I didn’t know the language, and it was just so
hard. But community college life was even harder. Like, I knew the language already. I
understood what they were saying, but I was so lost. It was very, very difficult for me.
She further explained how when she started, she had no idea what a major was or how to
choose classes, much less how to enroll in them. Like Nicole, most students felt that their college
did not provide sufficient support to their students. Rosie shared, “On the letter, … I don’t
remember seeing anything that said they will help me with my classes or anything like that.”
Similarly, Eduardo felt like students on academic probation were not supported and,
instead, pushed out. He shared, “I think the institution was just like, “This is how it is, you
know.” You either make it out or don’t, and then try again. Go to another college.’” Based on
most participants’ experience, community colleges’ policies do not help students connect with
resources to improve their academic performance (Bowman & Jang, 2022).
Limited Access to Faculty/Staff on Campus
Another institutional barrier that continuously came up for students was not knowing how
to engage with faculty or staff on campus. As Rosie continued her 1st year of college, the only
resource she eventually became aware of was her professor’s office hours. Regarding the
experiences that led her to academic probation, she replied,

70
I did not know of any resources that can help me with my classes [and] with homework. I
tried staying in office hours with professors, but they had so many other students that
they can only dedicate, I do not know, 20–30 minutes to you. I think the resources
weren’t there, and I felt very lost.
Eduardo encountered institutional barriers even prior to entering college. Eduardo’s
immigration status made his journey into higher education more challenging. Eduardo tried
navigating the admissions processes on his own but eventually took a year off. Eduardo shared
the following about the beginning of this college journey:
I did not know what to do. I tried. I did try to go right after high school, but there’s a lot
of steps that I didn’t know how to do. I remember I tried to go to a local college. I took
the placement test, but I was confused about my status. I didn’t know how to do anything
about this.
Reflecting on his first reaction to academic probation, Eduardo stated, “I didn’t know
who to go to. I didn’t know how the counselor system worked. Who do I talk to?” Accessibility
to counselors became a repeated obstacle for students. Eduardo mentioned that he did not see a
counselor until he was off probation. Furthermore, he emphasized that while the probation letter
he received from his college did include a few resources, it did not include information on how
to access them. As participants entered academic probation, they experienced institutional
barriers such as not understanding the college process, not understanding educational policies,
and being unable to access counseling.
Limited Counseling
Two participants, Rosie and Nicole, reported having limited or meaningless experiences
with their academic counselors at the community college. Nicole would say that her college

71
would encourage her to meet with a counselor but did not show her how to find her counselor.
She mentioned, “They would send you an email that said, “Register for classes.” Well, I don’t
know what classes I need to be taking. I don’t know what I am supposed to be doing.” Even once
she met with a counselor, Nicole stated,
The counselors weren’t much help either. They would say, “Oh, just do this and that,” but
I think I was 18 at the time, and I was like, “I just got out of high school. I never had to
do this. My family doesn’t know how to do this.” So, I felt like I would try to reach out to
counselors, but they weren’t much help either.
Nicole also shared that she wished her counselors would have been more “attentive,” but at the
same time, she empathized with them: “I feel like [counselors] are just so overwhelmed because
there’s so many students, and they are understaffed so they are just rushing through things.” For
Rosie and Nicole, their experiences with counseling and counselors were only transactional
interactions where counselors only reviewed a standard academic plan with them and showed
them a list of classes to pick from, but they did not feel like their counselor took an interest in
them.
Student Memberships
Membership in equity support programs such as EOPS and CalWORKs, as well identitybased programs such as the Puente program, MEChA, or the AB540 student club, enabled the
students to overcome academic probation, increase their sense of belonging and grow as students
and individuals with their campus.
After returning to good academic standing, Eduardo became more involved on campus;
he joined EOPS and became involved with the AB540 student club. Eduardo mentioned that
being involved “helped [him] get that sense of belonging” and mentioned thinking, “Well, if I’m

72
disqualified, I can’t be here with [my friends]. So, that helped motivate me into doing better
academically.” Stephanie also shared that she found a support group through a personal
development workshop series that her CalWORKs program offered to students. She shared that
the workshops helped her build her confidence and discover who she was. She also bonded with
the other workshop participants. She reflected,
I grew up with those girls in the workshop because it was all girls. I grew with those girls.
We bonded over personal situations. Like, we had a lot of the same stressors. We had a
lot of the same things that impacted us growing up. … That class probably helped me
build my confidence and what I was able to achieve.
Programs like EOPS and CalWORKs created engagement opportunities for students that
allowed them to connect with other students who shared similar experiences and backgrounds,
which made a difference in how they experienced their educational journey.
Whether the interviewees were able to build community by being a part of equity
programs and clubs or by connecting with counselors or faculty, having a community of support
on campus outside of the classroom was key to creating a sense of belonging. Before being
involved in programs and clubs, Eduardo shared feelings of loneliness and isolation, particularly
when he had a 6-hour gap. He mentioned, “I was there all day, and I was just by myself. It
affected the way I experienced college.” He later reflected on how difficult college can be
without having a community on campus, but at the same time, he emphasized how hard it can be
to make friends and build connections on campus.

73
Chapter Five: Discussion
This study explored the academic experiences of first-generation community college
students who navigated academic probation or dismissal, addressing a gap in retention research
that rarely focuses on this demographic. The findings shed light on the academic and
nonacademic experiences that contributed to students’ academic challenges, probation status, and
ability to regain good academic standing following academic probation.
The study highlighted how students experienced academic probation, including how they
received from the institution and its support structures. Through eight semi-structured interviews,
the participants reflected on their academic journeys, sharing insights into the factors that
hindered their progress and those that supported their perseverance.
These student experiences generated in-depth data that revealed that academic probation
was influenced by more than just academic ability. The data provided a holistic understanding of
the circumstances that can place students in academic jeopardy. Academic and social support
structures and sense of belonging at their institution emerged as key components for persistence.
These findings align with existing retention research (Astin, 1984; Hurtado & Carter, 1997;
Tinto, 1993). The results emphasize the need for institutions to adopt a more holistic, studentcentered approach when creating and implementing probation policies, recognizing how
academic probation can disproportionately impact certain student groups, such as first-generation
and racially minoritized students.
Summary of the Findings
The data analysis yielded three overarching themes: students’ mental health and
noncognitive factors, social support factors, and institutional barriers. These themes emerged as

74
central factors in understanding how students managed and overcame the complexities
associated with academic probation. Each theme is discussed below in relation to the literature.
Students’ Mental Health and Noncognitive Factors
All participants acknowledged facing psychological challenges, either triggered or
worsened by their academic probation status. As first-generation students, they entered college
feeling lost and lacking a sense of belonging. The probation notice amplified their negative selfperceptions, leading many to see themselves as failures for not meeting institutional academic
expectations. This finding aligns with work by Arcand and LeBlanc (2012), who found that
academic probation can cause students to doubt their abilities, and by Caporale-Berkowitz et al.
(2022), who noted that students on probation often question their fit and motivation for
completing college. These psychological impacts highlight the need for mental health support for
students facing academic challenges.
Participants’ strong negative reactions to probation notices underscored that institutions
must improve how they communicate this information. Consistent with Bowman and Jang
(2022), who found that underrepresented racial minority students often receive messages
suggesting they are not academically capable, participants interpreted their probation status as a
sign of not belonging. Many participants felt confused about what probation entailed, even after
receiving notices, and some were unclear about how to access counseling services, indicating a
broader issue of inadequate institutional communication. In contrast, participants involved in
support programs like EOPS and CalWORKs felt comfortable and confident with reaching out to
dedicated counselors for guidance.
Interestingly, academic probation also served as a turning point for participants,
encouraging them to develop a growth mindset and seek help. It prompted some to change

75
majors, refine study habits, or become more engaged on campus. For at least five participants,
probation also initiated a focused effort to improve their mental health and address the
underlying issues that may have contributed to their academic challenges. As Kamphoff et al.
(2007) and Humphrey (2005) discussed, these results also point to the need for intervention
programs that emphasize self-awareness, goal setting, and personal responsibility, which have
been effective in helping students overcome academic challenges. Furthermore, this study
reinforces that such programs, combined with a supportive and empathetic institutional
approach, can significantly impact first-generation and minority students’ ability to overcome
academic challenges.
Resilience emerged as a key factor in helping participants overcome academic and
personal challenges. The findings revealed participants’ awareness of their mental health and its
effects on their academic journey. Recognizing and addressing their mental health enabled them
to persist through adversity. As first-generation college students, participants were learning to
navigate the complexities of college life, manage a heavier workload, and grasp academic
expectations, all while striving to make new friends, communicate effectively with faculty, and
balance familial pressures. These combined responsibilities led to significant stress and anxiety
for those in this study. Moreover, some participants experienced intensified stress due to
personal challenges, including the death of a family member, parental responsibilities, cancer,
and spousal incarceration, among other hardships.
Participants recognized the importance of reaching out for help to improve their academic
performance. The participants’ experiences demonstrate that help-seeking facilitates the
successful navigation of academic probation, echoing the need for an institutional environment
where students feel comfortable asking for assistance. This highlights that students need help

76
developing noncognitive factors such as resilience, motivation, and a positive self-perception,
which are key to students’ ability to recover from academic setbacks, as Dueñas et al. (2021)
emphasized. Participants primarily sought support from academic counselors in equity programs
and gradually learned to ask for help from professors, a behavior they had not practiced before
probation.
Realizing they were on academic probation and at risk of not continuing their education
motivated the participants to change. This concept of a dangerous opportunity, as Tovar and
Simon (2006) described, was evident in how the participants reacted to that realization by using
it as a catalyst for positive change. Tovar and Simon’s characterization of probation as an
opportunity for growth aligns with the findings, highlighting that while traumatic, it can motivate
students to change their approach to college if they have adequate support systems. This positive
change may not occur if students do not seek or find adequate support systems. Furthermore,
Tovar (2015) argued that addressing students’ psychological and academic needs enhances their
college experience and fosters a greater sense of belonging.
Social Support Factors
The findings also emphasized the importance of participants identifying navigational
(Yosso, 2005) and emotional sources of support, both on and off campus. Participants sought
support from institutional agents, including counselors, staff, faculty, and equity programs, as
well as from peers and family members. Study participants most frequently utilized academic or
mental health counseling as their source of institutional support. Additionally, participants found
new sources of social capital (Yosso, 2005) through engagement with identity-based student
clubs, such as the CalWORKs student club and the AB540 student club. These clubs provided a
sense of community and belonging, allowing participants to connect with others who shared

77
similar experiences and challenges. For example, the CalWORKs student club offered resources
and encouragement for students balancing academic responsibilities with parenting duties, while
the AB540 student club created a supportive environment for undocumented students navigating
their challenges in higher education. Involvement in these clubs fostered friendships and
facilitated the sharing of valuable resources and information, further empowering participants to
overcome the obstacles associated with academic probation. Consistent with Tinto’s (1993)
work, social engagement on campus helped students feel more connected to their peers and
institutions, and it contributed to students’ persistence through academic probation. Involvement
in these clubs helped participants build a structured network of support that strengthened their
resilience and motivation.
In contrast, participants who faced greater difficulties connecting with their campus
primarily relied on peers and family for social, navigational, and emotional support. This reliance
builds on Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure, which highlights that student persistence
necessitates social integration. These study participants relied on their familial capital (Yosso,
2005), as they particularly sought advice from peers or mentors with prior college experience,
looking to them for guidance. This finding reinforces Isaak et al. (2006) and Seirup and Rose’s
(2011) assertion that students are more likely to overcome academic challenges when they feel
connected to a supportive community. By leaning on these informal support networks,
participants gained insights and strategies that helped them cope with academic challenges,
illustrating how connections outside the formal campus structure increased students’ ability to
overcome academic problems.

78
Institutional Barriers
Another significant finding revealed that participants experiencing probation faced
numerous roadblocks in understanding and navigating the probation process, a challenge many
attributed to their status as first-generation college students. This generational status often left
them without the prior knowledge or support systems that can facilitate academic success,
making the complexities of probation even more daunting. Participants believed that having prior
knowledge about resources on campus, such as tutoring and counseling, would have prevented
them from landing on academic probation. The participants’ experiences confirm that academic
probation is often not just a reflection of academic performance but a result of challenges related
to being first-generation and from underrepresented backgrounds, as Hurtado and Carter (1997)
suggested. Other participants emphasized their lack of awareness about probation and how they
assumed college would work like high school in the sense that they would just be pushed through
the pipeline.
Similarly, the findings indicated that most participants were initially unaware of the
detrimental impact that academic probation could have on their college careers. Many did not
fully grasp the potential consequences, such as the risk of losing financial aid—often their only
means for affording their education—and the possibility of losing campus employment tied to
their GPA. Moss and Yeaton (2015) noted that probation warning letters often fail to motivate
students to improve, partly because they do not clearly outline the steps students should take to
return to good standing. This study’s participants similarly expressed that probation notices
lacked clarity and failed to provide actionable guidance, leading to increased anxiety and
uncertainty about how to proceed. This perspective also aligned with Bowman and Jang (2022),
who argued that while the intent of an institution in sending an academic probation notice is to

79
connect students with resources that could aid their academic progress, students frequently
perceive it as punishment or a reflection of their inability to succeed in college (p. 1290).
Furthermore, academic probation notices often fail to significantly impact subsequent semester
GPAs (Moss & Yeaton, 2015), suggesting that additional institutional support is needed to make
academic probation an effective tool. The lack of clarity and guidance in probation notices
emphasizes the need for institutions to improve how they communicate with students facing
academic challenges, ensuring that notices are more informative and supportive rather than
punitive.
Lastly, the study found that institutional processes, such as academic counseling,
financial aid, or tutoring services, were often difficult to navigate. This finding mirrors the
findings of Seirup and Rose (2011), who emphasized that students on probation are less likely to
seek assistance due to institutional barriers, such as complicated procedures, limited availability
of support services, or a lack of awareness about where to find help. Participants who did not
have access to programs like EOPS or CalWORKs struggled more to connect with support
services, indicating that institutional structures can be especially challenging for those without
established support networks.
Implications for Practice
This study’s findings contribute to the growing body of literature in higher education
research focusing on increasing support for students who might be considered at-risk,
particularly first-generation, racially minoritized, and underserved populations facing academic
challenges. While this study specifically examined the impact of academic probation at the
community college level, the results can also inform 4-year universities, which often have large

80
numbers of students on academic probation and typically implement stricter academic probation
policies.
This study highlights the psychological impact that probation notices can have on
students, shaping their relationship with the institution. For many students, getting on academic
probation can represent their first meaningful interaction with their campus. Therefore, revising
the content of probation notices could aid in improving the way students react to being on
academic probation. Participants in this study highlighted that their probation notices lacked
empathy and information on resources to support their academic challenges. In addition, for firstgeneration students, the emotional toll needs to be addressed before effective retention strategies
can be implemented. Institutions should prioritize educating all students about academic policies
and resources to help them navigate potential challenges, even before issuing probation notices.
Similarly, there is a need to develop strengths-based interventions to support firstgeneration, minoritized students going through academic probation. Findings showed that
participants unknowingly relied on the use of various forms of cultural capital (Yosso, 2005) to
be able to successfully navigate academic probation, particularly familial, social, and
navigational capital. While all students bring various forms of capital into college, it is critical to
develop academic probation interventions or counseling models that are centered around helping
first-generation, minoritized students learn how to utilize their existing community cultural
wealth to overcome academic obstacles. These types of intentional interventions and counseling
approaches would help students learn how to capitalize on the cultural wealth they already bring
into college by turning them into transferable skills.
The results also showed that first-generation students benefit from high-touch academic
support programs, such as EOPS and CalWORKs, that provide access to dedicated counselors

81
and additional support services like personal and career development workshops. Six participants
stressed the value of having a caring and empathetic counselor who understood their
circumstances. Programs like EOPS can serve as intermediaries between students and their
institutions regarding academic probation. Furthermore, as Kamphoff et al. (2007) and
Humphrey (2005) suggested, intervention programs focusing on self-awareness, goal setting, and
personal responsibility are highly effective. This study reinforces that such programs, combined
with a supportive and empathetic institutional approach, can significantly help first-generation
and minority students overcome academic challenges. Connections with faculty are particularly
important for students not eligible for these programs. Therefore, educators’ teaching practices
should foster relationships, particularly in courses designed for incoming or 1st-year students, to
provide additional support.
In addition, access to counseling support was critical in helping students demystify
academic probation policies and supporting them through academic challenges. Accessibility to
dedicated counseling for students on academic probation is essential for their success. These
counselors could support conducting personalized outreach to students on academic probation to
ensure they understand the policy and provide support in navigating the intricacies of academic
policies. Moreover, it is important for students to have access to counselors from diverse
backgrounds who can understand students’ circumstances and connect with their personal stories
and struggles. Lasty, counselors can help students with increasing their campus engagement by
referring academic probation students to other support programs and student clubs on campus
that can help increase their sense of belonging. Being part of various programs and student clubs
on campus would also help students build on their existing social capital (Yosso, 2005).

82
This study also extends Astin’s (1984) student involvement theory by demonstrating how
academic probation and dismissal can influence student engagement with their institution as they
strive to regain good academic standing. All interviewees reported increased academic
involvement, with many joining support programs or student clubs. Once they returned to good
standing, they were more inclined to interact with faculty, ask questions, and utilize office hours.
This behavior change suggests that students who overcome probation often experience
significant personal and academic growth, becoming more strategic, resilient, and proactive in
college. The intervention programs Kamphoff et al. (2007) and Humphrey (2005) discussed
share key elements with the support programs that were most helpful to this study’s participants,
such as personalized guidance, opportunities for self-reflection, and skill development. These
components fostered a sense of empowerment and belonging, which students needed as they
worked to regain good academic standing.
Academic probation represents a dangerous opportunity for both students and institutions
(Lindo et al., 2010; Sneyers & De Witte, 2018; Tovar & Simon, 2006). While it serves as a
wake-up call, the responsibility for overcoming academic challenges should not rest solely on the
student. Institutions and educators must reassess policies, focusing on their implementation and
how students perceive the information. In addition, there is a need for more student-centered
intervention programs that can support students through their academic probation journey. Future
research should evaluate the effectiveness of probation policies, especially regarding how
students are informed, the content of notices, and the support systems available to those who
receive them. The results would help ensure academic probation becomes an opportunity for
growth and recovery rather than an obstacle to student success.

83
Limitations
This study has limitations. The fact that all participants identify as first-generation
students limits the generalizability of the findings. It could be that non-first-generation students
experience academic probation differently based on the support they received from their collegeeducated parents, or they experience fewer personal and academic hardships that could
potentially impact their ability to improve their grades. For this reason, it is important to conduct
comparative studies that include first-generation and non-first-generation college students.
Furthermore, while these findings could inform 4-year higher education institutions, it is
important to replicate the study in a university setting before utilizing its findings. Similarly,
while this study attempted to incorporate students who experience both academic probation and
dismissal, only one participant went through both. Therefore, all findings primarily focus on the
academic probation experience and the dismissal process. For this reason, it is important to
conduct similar studies to determine whether students who go through dismissal have different
experiences than those who only experience academic probation. Lastly, while this study
expanded on the existing research, it is worth noting that the results are not representative of all
reinstated students, and it also does not reflect the experiences of all students who go through
academic probation or dismissal.
Delimitations
This study focused exclusively on community college students who overcame academic
probation. It excluded students still going through the process, students who did not overcome it,
and students at 4-year institutions. It also excluded students who did not identify as firstgeneration minority students. Similarly, while the study was open to students from any
California community college who met the participant criteria, six participants came from a

84
single community college in the Bay Area, and the other two came from two colleges in
Southern California. Additionally, participation was voluntary, excluding students who did not
feel comfortable sharing their experiences in an interview.
Recommendations for Future Research
Future research should incorporate the experiences of students who never returned to
good academic standing and left the institution without completing their programs.
Understanding these students’ challenges can provide insights into the factors contributing to
persistence and attrition. Additionally, conducting comparative studies between students who
returned to good academic standing and those who left the institution would illuminate the
effectiveness of academic probation policies and the differing circumstances influencing each
cohort’s experiences. Similarly, more comparative studies would help discover whether
generational status, race, ethnicity, or other demographic factors could affect certain groups more
than others.
Furthermore, the effectiveness and implementation of probation policies must be
assessed, particularly in terms of the notices students receive. Future research should analyze the
impact of different notice delivery methods (e.g., email, mailed letters, portal notifications) and,
more importantly, the language used to deliver this information to students. Similar studies
should also be replicated at 4-year institutions, which often have stricter academic policies, to
enhance the broader conversation about this topic.
Given that most participants were part of support programs, it would be beneficial to
replicate the study with students who are not involved in such programs or are not eligible for
such support programs; this could further illuminate issues of accessibility to support services,
sense of belonging, and access to effective counseling resources. Finally, there is a need for

85
further research on the connection between mental health and academic probation.
Understanding that connection can inform the development of more humanistic support
strategies. By addressing these areas, future research can provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the factors influencing academic probation experiences and inform policies and
practices that better support students through academic and personal challenges.
Conclusion
This research was inspired by personal and professional experiences with academic
probation and dismissal policies. The purpose of this study was to highlight the experiences of
first-generation racially minoritized , who are often overlooked or deemed academically
underprepared. These students demonstrated high resiliency and returned to good academic
standing regardless of their academic and personal challenges. The intent of this study was also
to create a space for these students to be heard and to share their personal experiences, including
their frustrations and their ability to persist through tribulations.
The participants provided a deeper understanding of how students experience academic
probation. The findings emphasize the need to revise policies and their implementation, as
academic probation has immediate and significant implications for students. This study also
underscored the importance of establishing or enhancing dedicated support programs and
systems. Institutions should adopt a more personalized, hands-on approach, ensuring that
students have access to caring and empathetic counselors who understand their challenges and
connect with students more intentionally. Ultimately, academic probation is an opportunity for
institutions to recapture and retain at-risk students and for students to reassess their priorities and
recommit to their academic goals. To conclude, this study demonstrates that students can
overcome academic challenges, regardless of their circumstances.

86
References
Arcand, I. (2013). "I refuse to give up!" A qualitative investigation of the conditions and
experiences undergone by students on academic probation who participated in academic
companioning in a university context (Doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa,
Canada). UO Research. https://ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/23903
Arcand, I., & LeBlanc, R. N. (2012). “When you fail, you feel like a failure”: One student’s
experience of academic probation and an academic support program. Alberta Journal of
Educational Research, 58(2), 216–231.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297–308.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Liberal Education, 79(4), 4–15.
Beck, M. E. (2017). Experiences of first-year online community college students on academic
probation: A phenomenological study (Publication No. 10265033) [Doctoral dissertation,
10265033]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Berger, J. B., Ramirez, G. B., & Lyons, S. (2012). Past to present: A historical look at retention.
In A. Seidman (Ed.), College student retention: Formula for student success (2nd ed., pp.
7-34). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Black, C., Cerdeña, J. P., & Spearman-McCarthy, E. V. (2023). I am not your minority. Lancet
Regional Health Americas, 19, Article 100464.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100464
Blankenship, B. B., Canning, P. C., & Deasy, P. (2020). Does our peer mentoring program help?
Effects on probation students’ academic possible selves, GPA, and retention. Journal of
Organizational Psychology, 20(3), 91–101. https://doi.org/10.33423/jop.v20i3.2942

87
Bledsoe, R. K. (2018). Facing academic dismissal: An adaptive organizational approach
preparing all students for success. Community College Journal of Research and Practice,
42(7-8), 550–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1439418
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.
Bowman, N. A., & Jang, N. (2022). What is the purpose of academic probation? Its substantial
negative effects on four-year graduation. Research in Higher Education, 63(8), 1285–
1311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09676-w
Boyd, V. S., Hunt, P. F., Hunt, S. M., Magoon, T. M., & Van Brunt, J. (1996). A summer
retention program for students who are academically dismissed and applied for
reinstatement. Higher Education Abstracts, 31(2), 247.
Caporale-Berkowitz, N., Boyer, B. P., Muenks, K., & Brownson, C. B. (2022). Resilience, not
grit, predicts college student retention following academic probation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 114(7), 1654–1669. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000721
Cogan, M. (2011). Predicting success of academically dismissed undergraduate students using
quality point status. Journal of College Student Retention, 12(4), 387–406.
https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.12.4.a
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cummings, C. R. (2020). Exploring students’ perceptions of overcoming academic probation
(Publication No. 28026182) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania].
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

88
DeAngelo, L., Franke, R., Hurtado, S., Pryor, J. H., & Tran, S. (2011). Completing college:
Assessing graduation rates at four-year institutions. Higher Education Research Institute,
UCLA.
Dill, A. L., Gilbert, J. A., Hill, J. P., Minchew, S. S., & Sempier, T. A. (2011). A successful
retention program for suspended students. Journal of College Student Retention, 12(3),
277–291. https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.12.3.b
Dueñas, J. M., Camarero-Figuerola, M., & Castarlenas, E. (2021). Academic help-seeking
attitudes and their relationship with emotional variables. Sustainability, 13(11), Article
6120. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116120
Gándara, D., & Rutherford, A. (2020). Completion at the expense of access? The relationship
between performance-funding policies and access to public 4-year universities.
Educational Researcher, 49(5), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20927386
Quaye, S. J., & Harper, S. R. (2014). Student Engagement in Higher Education: Theoretical
Perspectives and Practical Approaches for Diverse Populations (Second edition.).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203810163
Hernández, A. C. (2018). The experiences of first year community college students on academic
probation (Publication No. 10642442) [Doctoral dissertation, California State University,
Fullerton]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Humphrey, E. (2005). Project success: Helping probationary students achieve academic success.
Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 7(3), 147–163.
https://doi.org/10.2190/AMQ4-13VE-RBH7-6P1R

89
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,
70(4), 324–345. https://doi.org/10.2307/2673270
Isaak, M. I., Graves, K. M., & Mayers, B. O. (2006). Academic, motivational, and emotional
problems identified by college students in academic jeopardy. Journal of College Student
Retention, 8(2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.2190/4LPY-Y21T-BY3Q-Q9VM
James, C., & Graham, S. (2010). An empirical study of students on academic probation. Journal
of the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 22(2), 71–91.
Kamphoff, C. S., Hutson, B. L., Amundsen, S. A., & Atwood, J. A. (2007). A
Motivational/Empowerment Model Applied to Students on Academic Probation. Journal
of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(4), 397–412.
https://doi.org/10.2190/9652-8543-3428-1J06
Kopp, J. P., & Shaw, E. J. (2016). How final is leaving college while in academic jeopardy?
Examining the utility of differentiating college leavers by academic standing. Journal of
College Student Retention, 18(1), 2–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115579670
Koropeckyj, S., Lafakis, C., & Ozimek, A. (2017). The economic impact of increasing college
completion. American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Lindo, S., Sanders, N. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2010). Ability, gender, and performance standards:
Evidence from academic probation. American Economic Journal. Applied Economics,
2(2), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.2.2.95
Mahan, T. L. (2017). Assessing the Relationship between Grit, Efficacy, Mindset & Motivation
(GEMM) and Academic Probation among Community College Students. eScholarship,
University of California.

90
Mann, J. R., Hunt, M. D., & Alford, J. G. (2004). Monitored probation: A program that works.
Journal of College Student Retention, 5(3), 245–254.
McNabb, M. B. (2017). Voices of beginning college students on academic probation: A
classroom ethnography (Publication No. 10278058) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana
University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
McPherson, M. P. (2019). Understanding the experiences of Latino community college students
on academic probation: A case study (Publication No. 13886480) [Doctoral dissertation,
Concordia University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
McPherson, M. P., & Marrero, F. A. (2021). Latinx community college students on academic
probation: Struggles and success. The Journal of the National Academic Advising
Association, 41(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-20-15
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.
Moss, B. G., & Yeaton, W. H. (2015). Failed warnings: Evaluating the impact of academic
probation warning letters on student achievement. Evaluation Review, 39(5), 501–524.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X15610192
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. Review of Higher Education, 33(1), 67–94.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0107
Nance, M. (2007). The psychological impact of academic probation. Diverse Issues in Higher
Education, 24(12), 12–13.

91
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Undergraduate retention and graduation rates.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/ctr
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of
research (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Rivera, M. D. (2019). “Scary but a little bit motivating”: Understanding the lived experiences of
academic probation and deciding to participate in an academic intervention program
(Publication No. 31482017) [Doctoral dissertation, Old Dominion University]. ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses Global.
Robinson, C., & Shi, R. (2022). Noncognitive factors for probationary students engaged in
academic recovery courses: A preliminary study. NACADA Journal, 42(2), 75–85.
https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-21-04
Rodríguez, J. (2019). “I think of probation and I think of prison.” The lived experiences of
community college students on academic probation: A phenomenological study
(Publication No. 27664888) [Doctoral dissertation, California State University,
Fullerton]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Sandoval, E. (2018). More than violence: UndocuQueers’ narratives of disidentification and
world-making in Seattle, Washington, USA. Gender, Place & Culture, 25(12), 1759-
1780. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2018.1558179
Seirup, H., & Rose, S. (2011). Exploring the effects of hope on GPA and retention among
college undergraduate students on academic probation. Education Research
International, 2011, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/381429

92
Sneyers, E., & De Witte, K. (2018). Interventions in higher education and their effect on student
success: a meta-analysis. Educational Review, 70(2), 208–228.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1300874
Strayhorn, T. L. (2012). College students' sense of belonging: A key to educational success for
all students. Routledge.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.).
University of Chicago Press.
Thomas, F. C. (2004). The experience of students being on and overcoming academic probation
(Publication No. NQ84644) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto]. ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses Global.
Tovar, E. (2015). The role of faculty, counselors, and support programs on Latino/a community
college students’ success and intent to persist. Community College Review, 43(1), 46–71.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114553788.
Tovar, E., & Simon, M. A. (2006). Academic probation as a dangerous opportunity: Factors
influencing diverse college students’ success. Community College Journal of Research
and Practice, 30(7), 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920500208237
Trombley, C. M. (2001). Evaluating students on probation and determining intervention
strategies: A comparison of probation and good standing students. Journal of College
Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 2(3), 239–251.
https://doi.org/10.2190/4MY9-LB3T-D5Y0-APUQ
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020, September 1). Employment projections: 2019–2029
summary [Economic News Release]. U.S. Department of Labor.

93
Van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage. University of Chicago Press.
Wright, N. A. (2020). Perform better, or else: Academic probation, public praise, and students’
decision-making. Labour Economics, 62, Article 101773.
Yosso, T. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

94
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
The following sections present the interview protocol used in this study.
Research Questions
1. How did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy navigate back to good academic standing?
2. What did first-generation minority students who have returned from academic
jeopardy perceive to be most helpful in navigating back to good academic standing?
3. What types of academic support resources did first-generation minority students who
have returned from academic jeopardy perceive to have facilitated or impeded their
return to good academic standing?
4. What role did faculty and staff play in facilitating the return of first-generation,
minority students in academic jeopardy to good academic standing?
Introduction
I would like to thank you once again for taking the time to meet with me and participate
in this interview. Before starting the interview, I wanted to provide you with a quick overview of
my study. I am a doctoral student at USC, and I am conducting this study as part of my
dissertation as well as my own interests, both professional and personal. I am particularly
interested in learning more about the experiences of first-generation racially minoritized who
experience academic difficulties while attending community college, particularly as it relates to
academic probation and/or academic dismissal. The data collected from this interview will be
solely used for this study. During this interview, we will discuss your educational experience as a
first-generation racially minoritized student, your educational challenges, your college’s support
services, and your resilience in getting out of academic jeopardy. Please feel free to be as candid

95
as possible, as this will help us gain a better understanding of how we can better support students
who experience academic challenges.
Information Sheet
You were given an information sheet prior to your interview. It explains that your
participation in the study is voluntary and that your name will not be used in reports on this
study. This form also tells you that the interview will be recorded for the purpose of accuracy. If,
at any point, you would like me to pause or stop the recording, please let me know. Are there any
questions before we get started? You can also ask any clarifying questions throughout and after
the interview.
Questions
As mentioned earlier, I would like to begin by learning about your educational journey
and experiences as a first-generation student of color.
1. Can you tell me a little bit about yourself and your educational goals? Why did you
choose to pursue a college education at Pleasant College? (Background)
2. Can you share with me more about your experiences as a first-generation student at
Pleasant College? (Background)
3. Can you share with me more about your experiences as a student of color at Pleasant
College? (Background)
4. Are there any particular challenges that you faced as a first-generation minority
student attending community college? (Background, RQ1)
5. Can you share with me some of the academic support resources that you were aware
of when you started college? (Background, RQ1, RQ2)

96
6. How aware were you of probation and disqualification policies when you first
enrolled in college? (Background, RQ1)
• When was the first time you heard these terms?
• What was your understanding of how probation and disqualification policies
worked?
Now, let’s talk a little bit more about your experience with getting on academic probation
or being academically disqualified.
7. What year were you at Pleasant College when you were placed on academic
probation? (RQ1)
8. Can you share with me how you found out you were placed on academic probation?
(RQ1)
• What happened after you found out you were on academic probation? How
did you feel?
• What did you do next? Who did you talk to about it?
9. If applicable, can you share with me how you found out you were academically
disqualified? (RQ1)
• What happened after you found out you were disqualified? How did you feel?
• What did you do next? Who did you talk to about it?
10. Once you were placed on probation, what was your understanding of your academic
standing within the college? (RQ1)
11. If applicable, once you were placed on academic disqualification, what was your
understanding of your academic standing within the college? (RQ1)

97
12. Were there particular experiences that you think contributed to you being placed in
academic jeopardy? What were some competing priorities, if any, that might have
impeded your availability to remain in good academic standing? (RQ1, RQ3)
13. What obstacles did you encounter, if any, while you were going through academic
probation or academic disqualification? (RQ1, RQ3)
14. What other implications or complications came with being placed on academic
probation? If at all, how was your financial aid impacted? Was your motivation
impacted? Did it cause any issues/stresses in your personal life (with friends, family,
significant others)? (RQ1, RQ3)
Now let’s discuss how you were able to persevere and get back on good academic
standing.
15. What types of resources were made available to you after you were placed on
academic probation? What type of support did you think you received (if any) from
your institution? (RQ1, RQ2, RQ3)
16. When you were placed on probation, what campus services did you access? (RQ1,
RQ2, RQ3)
• Which offices, if any, did you visit to get help? How do you believe they
helped you?
• Did you reach out to any individuals in particular? How did this individual(s)
support you?
17. Which faculty and/or staff at your campus, if any, did you reach out to for help or
guidance on how to get out of academic probation or how to return from academic

98
disqualification? How did faculty and/or staff support your journey back to good
academic standing? (RQ3)
18. What role, if any, did your academic counselor play throughout your academic
journey, including your experience with academic probation? (RQ3)
19. What types of interactions do you think were helpful to you while you were going
through academic probation or disqualification? Who were your support systems, and
why? Friends, family, peers, faculty, specific campus resources (tutoring, counselor,
student support programs)? (RQ2, RQ3)
20. What are some adjustments you had to make as a student, if any, in order to get out of
academic probation? (RQ1, RQ2)
21. At the time that you were placed on academic probation/dismissal, were you part of
any student groups or programs on campus such as EOPS, CARE/CalWorks, TRIO,
Summer Bridge, MEChA, or BSU? Did you join any student groups or programs
after being on probation? (RQ2, RQ3)
22. How would you describe yourself as a student before you were placed on academic
probation? (Reflective, RQ3)
• Did you participate in class? Did you feel comfortable talking to your
professor or asking questions? Participating in class?
• Did you ask questions about assignments or lessons? Would you ever go to
office hours to meet with your professor?
23. How would you describe yourself as a student after you returned to good academic
standing? What are some changes, if any, that you had to make to help you avoid
experiencing academic difficulties or probation again? (RQ1, RQ2)

99
24. What or who do you think helped you return to good academic standing? How long
did it take you to return to good academic standing? (RQ1, RQ3, RQ4)
25. In reflecting back on your academic journey, what advice would you give institutions
that are working on better supporting students who experience academic probation
and disqualification? What advice would you give a student who was recently placed
on academic probation? (Reflective)
Closing Questions
Before we end, is there anything I missed that you would like to add? Have you said
everything that you anticipated wanting to say? Do you have any last comments or questions for
me?
Debriefing
Thank you for participating in today’s interview. I appreciate you taking the time and
sharing your experiences with me. I also want to restate that what you have shared with me is
confidential. No part of our discussion that includes names or other identifying information will
be used in any published reports. Do you have any questions at this time? Do you know anyone
who might be interested in participating in this study that meets the criteria?

100
Appendix B: Qualtrics Recruitment Questionnaire
Thank you for participating in this questionnaire. There is no obligation for you to
participate in this questionnaire, and you can choose not to complete it at any time. There is no
negative impact if you choose not to participate. Your responses will remain confidential. If you
are interested in participating in a confidential Zoom interview for a doctoral dissertation
research study, please enter your contact information at the end of the questionnaire.
Are you 18 years of age or older?
o Yes
o No
Are you a first-generation college student? (A first-generation student from a family
where neither parent completed a four-year college degree in the United States)?
o Yes
o No
Did you, or are you currently attending a California Community College?
o Yes
o No
If you selected yes, please provide the name of the community college(s) you are
attending or have attended.
Have you already graduated or transferred out of your community college?
o Yes
o No
If yes, what year did you graduate/transfer from your community college?
Are you currently enrolled at a California Community College?

101
o Yes
o No
While attending community college in California, were you ever placed on academic
probation or academically dismissed?
o Yes
o No
If yes, please select all that apply:
o I was on academic probation.
o I was subject to dismissal.
o I was on academic dismissed.
Were you able to achieve good academic (get out of academic danger) after being placed
on academic probation or academic dismissal?
o Yes
o No
Do you identify as Latinx/a/o or Hispanic or Chicanx/a/o?
o Yes
o No
How would you describe yourself?
o American Indian or Alaska Native
o Asian
o Black or African American
o Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
o White

102
o Decline to state
Would you be interested in participating in a 45–60-minute interview via Zoom?
o Yes
o No
If yes, please provide the following information:
Name: ________________________
Phone number: ________________________
Email address: ________________________
Other contact: ________________________

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand how first-generation minority community college students who were formerly on academic probation or dismissal, navigated their return to good academic standing. Student departure theory, student involvement theory, and sense of belonging theory provided the theoretical framework for examining factors influencing these students’ engagement with their institutions and outside factors while in academic jeopardy. The results revealed three themes: psychological impact, social factors, and institutional systems. Despite significant academic and personal challenges, these students demonstrated high resilience and returned to good academic standing through support networks, mentorship, and an increased sense of belonging. However, institutional barriers, such as unclear academic probation policies and limited access to resources, posed additional challenges. Caring counselors who understand students’ challenges beyond their academic realities were highlighted as aiding their academic success. This study emphasizes the need for educational institutions to revise academic probation policies and implement dedicated support programs tailored to first-generation minority students. Ultimately, the study found that, with appropriate on- and/or off-campus support, students can overcome academic probation and achieve their educational goals.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Testimonios of part-time enrolled Latina students: the challenges and experiences at a Hispanic-serving California community college

PDF

The relationship of ethnicity, gender, acculturation, intergenerational relations, and sense of belonging in the institution to academic success among Asian American undergraduates

PDF

Relationships between a community college student’s sense of belonging and student services engagement with completion of transfer gateway courses and persistence

PDF

Latine college belonging: influences and differences of immigration and college generation

PDF

First-generation, low-income Latina students and cultural capital: a case study for academic advisors

PDF

Sense of belonging among Black business students at a predominantly White institution

PDF

Exploring racialized experiences of Asian Pacific Islander Desi students through Asiancrit theory…

PDF

Échale ganas: the transition experiences of first-generation Latinx students and their parents to college

PDF

Examining the influence of new student orientation on graduate international students’ campus involvement, intent to persist, and sense of belonging

PDF

Improving first-generation students' sense of belonging at university

PDF

Planting the seeds of change: a journey of resilience and challenges faced by men of color in community colleges

PDF

Identifying resiliency factors viewed by fourth and fifth grade teachers that foster academic success in elementary minority Hispanic students in Orange County

PDF

Students’ sense of belonging: college student and staff perspectives during COVID-19

PDF

Student support professionals: drivers of community cultural wealth aligned practices through support programs for first-generation college students of color amidst institutional shortcomings

PDF

Understanding academic advisor training and professional development experiences

PDF

Non-academic factors affecting sense of belonging in first year commuter students at a four-year Hispanic serving institution

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

Faculty experiences: sense of belonging for sexual and gender minority college students

PDF

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

PDF

Beyond deficit thinking: highlighting the strengths and resilience of Black indigenous and people of color students thriving in higher education

Asset Metadata

Creator Morales, Vanesa Jannet (author)

Core Title A pathway to success: experiences of first-generation minority students in academic jeopardy

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2024-12

Publication Date 11/08/2024

Defense Date 10/15/2024

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

Tag academic challenges,academic dismissal,academic jeopardy,academic probation,academic probation policies,academic success,community college,first-generation,minority students,OAI-PMH Harvest,probation notice,sense of belonging,support programs

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Chung, Ruth H. (committee chair), Banuelos, Sheila (committee member), Brown-Elize, Rashitta (committee member)

Creator Email vanesa.j.morales@gmail.com,vjmorale@usc.edu

Unique identifier UC11399DBHL

Identifier etd-MoralesVan-13621.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MoralesVan-13621

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Morales, Vanesa Jannet

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20241108-usctheses-batch-1221 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu