University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Navigating the academy and beyond: an examination of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students

(USC Thesis Other)

Navigating the academy and beyond: an examination of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Navigating the Academy and Beyond: An Examination of Major and Career Self-Efficacy
of Latin* First-Generation College Students

Serina Ody-Bravo

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

August 2023

© Copyright by Serina Ody-Bravo 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Serina Ody-Bravo certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Joseph Kitchen
Liane Hypolite
Zoe Corwin, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023
iv
Abstract
This study explores how Latin* first-generation college students develop major and career self-
efficacy. This study employs a qualitative case study approach and utilizes data collected during
the first phase of the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education’s Pullias
Center for Higher Education Promoting At-Promise Student Success project from 2015–2020.
Data analysis focuses on 124 interviews from 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the
Thompson Scholars Learning Communities (TSLC) program across the three University of
Nebraska campuses: University of Nebraska at Kearney, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, and
University of Nebraska at Omaha. Interviews were conducted during each student’s first 3 years
of university. Additional data includes 12 TSLC annual reports from 2015–2019. Findings
demonstrate that a combination of individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors
inhibit and promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
Implications for practice include practitioner and faculty advising approaches, academic and
career services, and family incorporation.
Keywords: major and career self-efficacy, Latin* students, first-generation college
students, low-income students, comprehensive college transition program

v
Dedication
To my loving parents, sisters, and grandma: Cynthia, Abel, Mariah, Isabel, and Irma. Mom, I am
grateful to not only call you my mom but also my best friend. Thank you for instilling the power
of education and reminding me to never settle. Dad, thank you for showing me how to balance a
strong work ethic and dedication to family. I appreciate everything you have done to support my
dreams. Mamas and Belly, my greatest role is being your older sister. I hope that my successes
inspire you to reach for your dreams and my failures remind you to never give up. Grandma, I
am grateful that you are always guiding and protecting me as my beautiful guardian angel. I love
you all so much.

vi
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, thank you to my dissertation chair, Dr. Zoë Corwin. Selecting you as
my dissertation chair was the easiest and best decision I made in this doctoral program. As a
Rossier master’s student in 2016, your Applied Educational Ethnography course was one of the
most challenging courses of the program, but your faith in my academic abilities and potential
affirmed that I could be successful in a doctoral program. I am so grateful that you were a part of
my master’s and doctoral journey, from writing letters of recommendation for PhD and EdD
programs to serving as my dissertation chair. Thank you for being there for me every step of the
way. Thank you to my dissertation committee for your constructive feedback and gracious
support. Joey, thank you for helping me organize and navigate the data and for your insightful
feedback. Liane, thank you for your suggestions that made me critically think how to strengthen
my dissertation.
Thank you to the Promoting At-Promise Student Success (PASS) research team for
welcoming me into the research team. Special shout out to Ralitsa and Christine for showing me
how to navigate Dedoose and Mariama for sharing advice on how to approach data analysis.
Thank you to the University of Nebraska at Kearney, University of Nebraska at Lincoln,
University of Nebraska at Omaha, and Thompson Scholars Learning Communities (TSLC)
program for opening your institutions and program to the PASS team. Thank you to the TSLC
students for opening your hearts and minds to the PASS project. In particular, thank you to the
Latin* first-generation college students in the TSLC program. I would not have been able to
write this dissertation without you. To the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, thank you for
establishing the TSLC program because the program is changing student lives every day.
vii
To my dissertation group, Alex, Billy, Claudia, and Khalilah, I am thankful I had you all
by my side as we took this unique and rigorous and research-intensive road less traveled. We did
it!
To my classmates, thank you for your encouragement, support, and laughter. Starting a
doctoral program during a global pandemic was extremely challenging. I am glad that I had you
all to lean on during the difficult academic, professional, and global moments.
To my colleagues, especially Julia and Mary, thank you for checking-in on me the past 3
years. Being a full-time employee and full-time doctoral student is strenuous, so thank you for
your support and encouragement inside and outside the office.
To my friends, thank you for providing significant moral and social support. Whether it
was a concert, vacation, movie, or night out, you all helped me maintain a vital work-school-life
balance.
Last but not least, I want to thank myself. Thank you for always dreaming big, never
giving up, and knowing your worth. I did it!
Overall, it took a community to get me to this finish line and I am thankful for everyone
that was a part of my journey to becoming Dr. Bravo.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ xii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiv
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background ......................................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 7
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework ............................................................................. 8
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 9
Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 10
Delimitations ..................................................................................................................... 11
Organization of Study ....................................................................................................... 11
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 12
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 15
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 16
Latin* First-Generation College Students ........................................................................ 16
Higher Education Advising............................................................................................... 28
Major and Career Outcomes ............................................................................................. 31
Theoretical Frameworks ................................................................................................... 34
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 37
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 38
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 39
ix
Site, Population, Sample, and Sampling Strategy............................................................. 41
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 43
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 49
Credibility, Trustworthiness, and Transferability ............................................................. 51
Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 54
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 55
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 56
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 56
Factors That Inhibit Major and Career Self-Efficacy ....................................................... 57
Factors That Promote Major and Career Self-Efficacy .................................................... 65
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 88
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 89
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 89
Relationship of Findings to Prior Research ...................................................................... 96
Implications for Practice and Research........................................................................... 100
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 106
References ................................................................................................................................... 107
Appendix A: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2016 ........................... 122
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 122
Wrap Up .......................................................................................................................... 123
Appendix B: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In January 2017 ..................................................... 124
Check In .......................................................................................................................... 124
Spring Semester 2017 ..................................................................................................... 124
Academics/Faculty .......................................................................................................... 124
Major/Career Progress .................................................................................................... 125
x
TSLC Experiences .......................................................................................................... 125
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 126
Appendix C: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In February 2018 ................................................... 127
Check In .......................................................................................................................... 127
Complete Demographic Sheet ........................................................................................ 127
Funds of Knowledge ....................................................................................................... 127
Campus Specific Questions ............................................................................................ 128
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 128
Appendix D: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Final Check In April 2018 ............................................... 129
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 129
Ideal TSLC Program Design Diagram Instructions ........................................................ 129
General Overview of Diagram Activity .......................................................................... 129
Complete Diagram Activity ............................................................................................ 130
Exploring Differences in TSLC Based on Race and Gender .......................................... 131
Wrap Up .......................................................................................................................... 132
Appendix E: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2016 ............................ 133
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 133
Warm-Up/Rapport Building ........................................................................................... 133
College Choice ................................................................................................................ 133
Expectations for College ................................................................................................. 134
Current Experiences ........................................................................................................ 134
Appendix F: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In January 2017 ..................................................... 136
Check In .......................................................................................................................... 136
Spring Semester 2017 ..................................................................................................... 136
Academics/Faculty .......................................................................................................... 136
xi
Career/Major Progress .................................................................................................... 137
TSLC Experiences .......................................................................................................... 137
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 138
Appendix G: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In April 2017 ........................................................ 139
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 139
Re-Connecting ................................................................................................................ 139
Semester Reflections ....................................................................................................... 139
TSLC Reflections............................................................................................................ 139
Reflections on Overall Collegiate Experiences .............................................................. 140
Wrap Up .......................................................................................................................... 141
Appendix H: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2017 ........................... 142
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 142
Reconnecting & Second Year Focused Questions.......................................................... 142
Mid-Term Meeting/Grade Check Focused Questions .................................................... 143
If Time Remains ............................................................................................................. 144
Wrap Up .......................................................................................................................... 145
Appendix I: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In March 2018 ........................................................ 146
Intro ................................................................................................................................. 146
Career Decision Making ................................................................................................. 146
Closing ............................................................................................................................ 148
Post-Interview Info ......................................................................................................... 148
Appendix J: Demographic & Academic Information Sheet ....................................................... 149

xii
List of Tables
Table 1: Thompson Scholars Learning Communities Student Participant Demographics 43

xiii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Thompson Scholars Learning Communities Program Elements 7

Figure 2: Influential Factors to Latin* First-Generation College Students’ Major
and Career Self Efficacy 37

xiv
List of Abbreviations
BIPOC Black, Indigenous, and people of color
CWW Community cultural wealth
NU University of Nebraska
PASS Promoting At-Promise Student Success
PWI Predominantly White institutions
SCCT Social cognitive career theory
TSLC Thompson Scholars Learning Communities
UNK University of Nebraska at Kearney
UNL University of Nebraska at Lincoln
UNO University of Nebraska at Omaha
1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
In higher education, Latin* first-generation college students are a growing student
population. According to the Center for First-Generation Student Success (2022), one in three
college students identify as a first-generation college student and 60% of Hispanic or Latinx/a/o
students are first-generation college students. Furthermore, many Latin* first-generation college
students may also identify as first-generation professionals, which are individuals who are the
first in their immediate families to enter the professional work environment (U.S Department of
Commerce, 2021). Thus, helping Latin* first-generation college students develop the skills to
execute academic and career-related tasks can provide confidence and validation for this
historically marginalized student population (Kitchen, 2021).
This study explores how Latin* first-generation college students develop major and
career self-efficacy. The current study is part of the larger Promoting At-Promise Student
Success (PASS) research project housed at the University of Southern California (USC) Rossier
School of Education’s Pullias Center for Higher Education and conducted in partnership with the
University of Nebraska’s 2-year college transition program the Thompson Scholars Learning
Communities (TSLC). The PASS project is a multi-year, mixed methods study of the TSLC
program at the three University of Nebraska campuses: University of Nebraska at Kearney
(UNK), University of Nebraska at Lincoln (UNL), and University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO).
The project is designed to gain a deep understanding of the academic, career, and psychosocial
outcomes of at-promise students (e.g., historically minoritized students) who participate in the
program (Bettencourt et al., 2023). The PASS project is divided into two phases, PASS1(2015–
2020) and PASS2 (2020–2025), with each phase consisting of different research questions,
student cohorts, and research team members. The project seeks to advance higher education
2

literature and provide empirically based recommendations for higher education practitioners and
researchers, including bolstering knowledge about students’ major and career self-
efficacy. Chapter One introduces key elements of this dissertation study including Latin* first-
generation college students, major and career self-efficacy, college transition programs, and the
TSLC program. Then the chapter segues into the purpose of the study, theoretical and conceptual
framework, significance of the study, limitations, delimitations, organization of study, and
definition of terms.
Background
This section outlines how Latin* first-generation college students, major and career self-
efficacy, college transition programs, and the TSLC program intertwine as the key components
of this dissertation study.
Latin* First-Generation College Students
Not only are Latin* first-generation college students a growing student population, but
they are also a growing population in the United States. According to the U.S. Census Bureau
(2022), Hispanic/Latino is the second highest population demographic in the United States.
Therefore, the enrollment of Latin* first-generation college students will most likely continue to
grow as the Latin* population in the United States continues to grow. Once in college, first-
generation college students are more likely than continuing-generation college students to choose
an applied major in comparison to an academic major (Wright et al., 2021). Applied majors have
a clear connection to a specific job, such as education, business, and law, whereas academic
majors do not have a clear connection to a specific job, such as mathematics, philosophy, and
English (Wright et al., 2021). In 2019, the top five bachelor’s degrees conferred by
postsecondary institutions for Hispanic students were business (51,567), health professions
3

(31,125), social sciences (24,209), psychology (23,068), and biological and biomedical sciences
(16,636) in the United States (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020). No national data
exist on major choice for Latin* first-generation college students specifically. Major and career
choice of Latin* first-generation college students is neglected despite 3.4 million Hispanic
undergraduate students enrolled in postsecondary institutions nationwide (Hispanic Association
of Colleges and Universities, 2022). The aforementioned data illuminates institutional
opportunities to nurture academic and career interests of the growing Latin* first-generation
college student and first-generation professional population.
Major and Career Self-Efficacy
The emerging concept of major and career self-efficacy builds upon academic self-
efficacy and career self-efficacy. Academic self-efficacy expands Bandura’s concept of self-
efficacy (1977) to the perceived capability of an individual to complete academic tasks in
particular academic contexts (Pajares, 1996). Academic self-efficacy within postsecondary
institutions has been researched in a variety of contexts such as 1st-year academic performance
(Chemers et al., 2001), international students’ English self-efficacy (Wang et al., 2018), and
college performance of Mexican American students (Aguayo et al., 2011). Relatedly, career self-
efficacy refers to self-efficacy in career domains and originated from Hackett and Betz’s
research on female career development (Betz & Hackett, 2006; Hackett & Betz, 1981). Their
groundbreaking piece increased scholarship regarding assessment and application of career self-
efficacy (Betz & Hackett, 2006; Betz & Luzzo, 1996; Taylor & Betz, 1983).
Major and career self-efficacy combines aspects of academic self-efficacy and career
self-efficacy. Major and career self-efficacy is defined as an individual’s belief in their ability to
successfully complete tasks to make academic plans of study and related career decisions
4

(Kitchen, 2021). Major and career self-efficacy provides students the metacognitive tools to
successfully complete major and career-related tasks that impact their academic and professional
future (Cummings, 2015; Howlett et al., 2021; Lumpkin, 2020). Major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students is especially important since they are most likely to be
the first in their families to navigate academic and career-related decisions pertaining to majors,
research, graduate school, internships, networking, and career pathways. There is substantial
literature on college students’ academic and career self-efficacy, with some specific literature
regarding first-generation college students and Latin* students. Yet, there is a glaring gap in the
current literature that combines major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. Although it is impactful to analyze and learn from major and career statistics, it is
equally imperative to have empirical evidence on contributing factors to Latin* first-generation
college students’ major and career decision making to suggest practical recommendations of
student support for practitioners and researchers. One possibility for increasing students’ major
and career self-efficacy is college transition programs (Kitchen et al., 2021b).
College Transition Programs
Postsecondary institutions regularly use college transition programs as an intervention for
supporting student success (Hallett et al., 2020). There are six common types of college
transition programs: summer and precollege, first-semester, 1-year, 2-year, full-college, and
post-college (Hallett et al., 2020). The various transition programs are tailored to address
different student needs and have different foci, timing, and durations (Hallett et al., 2020).
According to Hallett et al.’s (2020) college transition and support program typology, the 2-year
college transition model assumes that students take 2 years to fully adjust to college. Two-year
programs are designed to provide students with extensive academic, major, and career support to
5

provide a strong foundation for future upper-division classes, jobs, and internships (Hallett et al.,
2020). Students heavily participate in the transition program during the 1
st
year and steadily
decrease participation during the 2nd year (Hallet et al., 2020). The 2-year college transition
model applies to the current study by investigating how Latin* first-generation college students
develop major and career self-efficacy, with a particular focus on students in the 2-year TSLC
program.
Comprehensive and integrative college transition programs are more likely to set up
students for success (Kezar & Kitchen, 2020). Most college transition programs focus on a single
issue (e.g., study strategies, career development) whereas a comprehensive and integrated
college transition program targets multiple topics inside and outside the classroom, such as
academic, career, and social development (Kezar & Kitchen, 2020). Through this approach,
comprehensive and integrated college transition programs collaborate with various on-campus
departments which fosters a university-wide culture of care towards student success. This
collective and coordinated approach can be beneficial for minoritized student populations to
improve their major and career self-efficacy (Kitchen et al., 2021b). Latin* first-generation
college students often navigate higher education with less social capital than is valued and
exchangeable in predominately white institutions (PWI) settings compared to continuing
generation students (Garriott, 2020). Consequently, Latin* first-generation college students often
bear the responsibility to navigate major and career decisions in different ways than their
continuing generation peers. However, a comprehensive and integrative college transition
program can provide institutional support and resources to guide Latin* first-generation college
students towards major and career success.
Thompson Scholars Learning Communities Program
6

The current study concentrates on 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the
University of Nebraska’s TSLC program. The TSLC program is a comprehensive college
transition program housed on the UNK, UNL, and UNO campuses. TSLC serves at-promise
students who are typically low-income, racially minoritized, and first-generation college students
(Bettencourt et al., 2023; Kitchen et al., 2021b). If selected into the program, students receive a
5-year college scholarship and participate in activities with TSLC scholars such as orientation,
shared academic courses, career events, peer mentorship, and social events (Kitchen et al.,
2021b).
As shown in Figure 1, the TSLC program consists of nine program elements: 1st-year
seminar, peer mentors, academic, social, and career support, peer academic leaders, shared
housing or space, required events, shared courses and faculty, proactive advising, and financial
support (USC Rossier Pullias Center for Higher Education, n.d.-a). Continuous program staff
care and support are integral to ensuring student success for program participants (USC Rossier
Pullias Center for Higher Education, n.d.-a). Current research underscores the benefits of
participating in the TSLC program, such as increased sense of mattering to campus, sense of
belonging to campus, and academic self-efficacy (Kitchen et al., 2021b; Melguizo et al., n.d.).

7

Figure 1
Thompson Scholars Learning Communities Program Elements

Note. From Promoting At-Promise Student Success, by USC Rossier Pullias Center for Higher
Education, n.d. (https://pass.pullias.usc.edu/about/).

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore an under-researched but significant topic in the
higher education literature: the major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. As previously mentioned, ample literature exists on college students’ academic self-
efficacy and career self-efficacy. However, there is limited literature on the specific combination
of major and career self-efficacy relating to Latin* first-generation college students in a college
transition program. This literary gap is concerning given the large number of Latin* first-
8

generation college students in the United States (Center for First-Generation Student Success,
2022).
This study is designed to develop a better understanding of how Latin* first-generation
college students navigate college and prepare for life after graduation. Specifically, the current
study is designed to explore the following research question: How do Latin* first-generation
college students develop major and career self-efficacy? The sample for this qualitative case
study includes 10 Latin* first-generation college students from three University of Nebraska
campuses who participated in the TSLC program between 2015–2019. Study data derive from 12
TSLC annual reports that capture program activities from 2015–2019 and 124 interviews
conducted between 2015–2019.
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
The study’s conceptual framework, titled Influential Factors to Latin* First-Generation
College Students’ Major and Career Self-Efficacy, combines four elements that affect major and
career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students: (a) Latin* first-generation college
student identity; (b) family; (c) participation in the TSLC program; and (d) university context.
The four elements interact with each other to influence how Latin* first-generation college
students in the TSLC program experience major and career self-efficacy. The conceptual
framework guiding the study expands traditional notions of how scholars and practitioners
address major and career self-efficacy and target academic and career support for Latin* first-
generation college students. Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) and community cultural
wealth (CCW) are the two conceptual frameworks of this study (Lent et al., 1994; Yosso, 2005).
SCCT provides a framework for examining how major and career self-efficacy develop whereas
9

CWW provides a framework for critically understanding the cultural and racialized experiences
of Latin* first-generation college students.
Significance of the Study
The current study is significant for practice and research. Practitioners and faculty can
adopt the study’s recommendations in their advising and teaching practices to develop and
validate the major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. Program
administrators, especially of college transition programs, can implement the study’s advising
approaches, academic and career services, and family incorporation recommendations to
highlight and bolster the various capitals of Latin* first-generation college students and
professionals (Yosso, 2005). Furthermore, the results of this study can influence higher
education senior administrators to invest in academic and career services for at promise-students,
including Latin* first-generation college students, and in doing so, align with institutional
diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
Secondly, researchers can use this study to inform future scholarship. This study
contributes to the literature by analyzing how universities can leverage community cultural
wealth to support the development of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students (Yosso, 2005). Researchers can build upon this study by examining elements
that were not explored in this study. For example, researchers might explore how major and
career self-efficacy develops for at-promise students of different identities, for at-promise
students who attend different types of colleges and universities, and/or for at-promise students
who participate in different types of college transition programs. Researchers might also consider
a longitudinal study that investigates the enduring economic, career, academic, and psychosocial
10

outcomes of major and career self-efficacy for Latin* first-generation college students and first-
generation professionals.
Limitations
There are two noteworthy limitations of this study. The first limitation is that the data
were collected prior to my involvement with the PASS project. This study’s data derive from the
PASS1 project and were collected between 2015–2020. Since I joined the PASS2 team in
January 2022, I did not participate in developing PASS1 data collection instruments or defining
constructs. Moreover, I was not involved with data collection procedures including recruiting,
selecting, interviewing, and observing participants. Although examining pre-existing data for
dissertations is common practice, my absence from the PASS1 project is noteworthy because the
current study uses pre-existing interview protocols that were not specifically tailored for this
dissertation’s research question. Relatedly, the PASS project collects data from TSLC
participants of multiple backgrounds and identities, so data collection did not have an explicit
focus on Latin* first-generation college students. Therefore, interviews were not tailored to study
Latin* first-generation college students specifically, which can be limiting when analyzing the
data.
The second limitation is that data were collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The
data for this study reflects Latin* first-generation college students’ major and career perspectives
and experiences prior to a global pandemic. Participants’ responses to the interview protocols
may have been different if data were collected during and post-pandemic; the research team’s
data collection instruments, such as documents and interview protocols, would likely have
uncovered different insights given the historical global context. Despite this limitation, the
current study still provides significant insight into the research study’s larger purpose.
11

Delimitations
There are two delimitations of this study. One delimitation is that this study does not
examine the widest range of intersecting identities (e.g., citizenship status, gender,
spirituality/religion) that might influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students. This study only examines how a few intersecting identities (e.g., Latin*, first-
generation college student, low-income) influence major and career self-efficacy. The rationale
on selecting these identities as the focus of inquiry is based on sample size. Incorporating more
identities to the sample population narrows the sample size and decreases transferability. To have
as large a sample size as possible, this study solely focuses on the broad identities of low-
income, Latin* first-generation college students.
A second delimitation is that data only derives from two methods: documents and
interviews. The PASS dataset includes various forms of data such as documents, observations,
social media, digital diaries, interviews, focus groups, and surveys. Despite the various data
sources, this study solely focuses on two forms of data. This delimitation excludes significant
data but unfortunately due to time constraints, I cannot thoroughly analyze all available data.
This concern is mitigated by my analysis of two different forms of longitudinal data collected
over a 4-year period. Despite these two delimitations, the study is still poised to contribute to the
field because of its novel content and perspective.
Organization of Study
This study is organized around five chapters that guide the reader through the research
study. Chapter One provides an overview of the current study and its contributions to higher
education literature and scholarship. Chapter Two outlines the academic literature, conceptual
framework, and theoretical frameworks that inform the study. Chapter Three describes the
12

methodology selected for this study. Chapter Four presents the study findings and Chapter Five
discusses the implications and recommendations for practice and research. Lastly, the
Appendices include relevant documents to the study such as interview protocols and
demographic sheet.
Definition of Terms
This section defines key terms to familiarize the reader with language used throughout
the dissertation:
• Academic self-efficacy is the perceived capabilities of individuals to complete certain
academic tasks given particular academic contexts (Pajares, 1996).
• Aspirational capital is the
ability to maintain hopes and dreams for the future, even in the face of real
and perceived barriers … allow themselves and their children to dream of
possibilities beyond their present circumstances, often without the objective
means to attain those goals. (Yosso, 2005, pp. 77–78)
• At-promise students are students who have the potential to achieve more than they
currently are achieving, given institutional constraints (Matthews, 2009). “At-promise
students” is a counternarrative to the commonly used deficit term “at-risk students.”
For this study in particular, at-promise students refer to low-income, racially
minoritized, first-generation college students (Bettencourt et al., 2023; Kitchen et al.,
2021b).
• Belonging is a feeling of being connected to a group and being a part of a campus
community.
13

• Career self-efficacy is the perceived capabilities of individuals to complete certain
career tasks given particular career contexts (Beck & Hackett, 2006).
• Cultural capital is the “accumulation of cultural knowledge, skills, and abilities
possessed and inherited by privileged groups in society” (Yosso, 2005, p. 76).
• Exploring students are students who are still exploring majors and have not yet
declared a major (Lorenzetti, 2011). Commonly referred to as “undecided students.”
• Familial capital is “cultural knowledges nurtured among familia (kin) that carry a
sense of community history, memory and cultural intuition” (Yosso, 2005, p. 79).
Familial capital includes anyone whom an individual might consider as their family
such as immediate family, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, and friends (Yosso,
2005).
• First-generation college students are students whose parents did not complete a 4-
year college degree (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2017).
• First-generation professionals are individuals who are the first in their immediate
families to enter the professional work environment (United States of America
Department of Commerce, 2021).
• Hispanics are individuals of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central, South
American, or other Spanish culture or origin (Llagas & Snyder, 2003).
• Invalidation is when an individual does not feel recognized, affirmed, or enabled for
their innate capacities for learning and college success.
• Latin* students are students who identify within the spectrum of the Latin*
community, including but not limited to: Latinx, Latino, Latina, Latina/o, Latin@,
Latin, or Latin American (Salinas Jr., 2020). This study uses the term Latin* to
14

identify the overall ethnic student population of this study. However, each author uses
different terms to identify the Latin* community and thus, I honor an author’s term
when referencing their research or literature.
• Latinx is a gender inclusive alternative to the commonly used “Latinos/Latinas” terms
(Salinas Jr. & Lozano, 2017).
• Linguistic capital is the “intellectual and social skills attained through communication
experiences in more than one language and/or style” (Yosso, 2005, p. 79).
• Major and career self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief in successfully
completing tasks to make academic plans of study and related career decisions
(Kitchen, 2021).
• Navigational capital refers to the “skills of maneuvering through social institutions.
Historically, this infers the ability to maneuver through institutions not created with
Communities of Color in mind” (Yosso, 2005, p. 80).
• Predominantly white institutions are postsecondary institutions in which White
students comprise 50% or more of the enrolled student population (Lomotey, 2010).
• Proactive advising is an advising approach where advisors, practitioners, and/or
faculty take the initiative to connect with students before a student experiences
academic issues or concerns. Advisors, practitioners, and/or faculty display interest
and involvement with students early and consistently during their collegiate journeys
(Varney, 2012).
• Self-efficacy is the perceived capabilities of individuals to successfully complete
certain actions. Self-efficacy is domain specific (Bandura, 1986).
15

• Social capital refers to “networks of people and community resources” (Yosso, 2005,
p. 79). Social networks can help at-promise students navigate social institutions that
were not originally built for them.
• Students of color are students of African American, Latino, Asian American, and
Native American descent (Solórzano et al., 2000).
• Validation is an active, inclusive process consisting of proactive support and
messages from educators, staff, peers, or family that recognize, affirm, and enable
students’ innate capacities for learning and college success both inside and outside the
classroom.
Conclusion
Major and career self-efficacy is a vital metacognitive skill for successful academic and
professional development, especially for at-promise students. This study investigates the novel
and significant topic of how Latin* first-generation college students develop major and career
self-efficacy. The following chapter summarizes academic literature related to this study,
including Latin* first-generation college students, higher education advising, major and career
outcomes, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual framework.

16

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The purpose of this study is to examine how Latin* first-generation college students
develop major and career self-efficacy, so practitioners and researchers can better understand the
Latin* first-generation college student population and experiences. To do so, this chapter
examines several bodies of literature: (a) scholarship pertaining to Latin* first-generation college
students, highlighting the assets this student population brings into the university and the
challenges this student population experiences within the university; (b) literature that provides a
foundation for understanding higher education advising, which includes the history and impact
of academic and career advising in higher education; and (c) studies that discuss major and
career outcomes related to academic self-efficacy and major and career self-efficacy. Next is an
outline of the theoretical frameworks that guide this study: social cognitive career theory and
community cultural wealth. The chapter concludes with an explanation of the Influential Factors
to Latin* First-Generation College Students’ Major and Career Self-Efficacy conceptual
framework which highlights the interactions of the study’s concepts. The aforementioned
components are critical to guide understanding of how individual, family, programmatic, and
institutional factors influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students.
Latin* First-Generation College Students
This study centers analysis on Latin* first-generation college students. Latin* first-
generation college students possess strengths through their lived experiences (Demetriou et al.,
2017; Yosso, 2005), yet they also confront challenges because of their minoritized first-
generation college student status (Adams & McBrayer, 2020; Ellis et al., 2019; Means & Pyne,
2017; Pratt et al., 2019; Soria & Stebleton, 2012; Stephens et al., 2012; Vasquez-Salgado et al.,
17

2015; Yee, 2016). Latin* first-generation college students’ pre-existing and developing
metacognitive abilities provide the opportunity to reflect upon their strengths, interests, and skills
to make major and career related decisions.
First-Generation College Students
First-generation college students are a growing student population at colleges and
universities nationwide (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2022). Although first-
generation college students are not homogenous, there are commonalities among their
experiences that are significant to the purpose of this study. The following literature on first-
generation college students provides a foundation for the later discussion on the intersectional
Latin* first-generation college students.
The term “first-generation college student” has varying definitions. The term is often
used to describe a student whose parents have no postsecondary education experience or a
student whose parents have some postsecondary experience but no undergraduate degree
(Redford & Mulvaney Hoyer, 2017; Toutkoushian et al., 2018). The two definitions lead to
inconsistencies in data collection and recommendations for this student population (Nguyen &
Ngyuen, 2018). There are also complexities within the first-generation college student
population, such as intersectional identities, which researchers sometimes overlook (Ngyuen &
Ngyuen, 2018). This study relies on the Center for First-Generation Student Success definition of
first-generation college student, which is students whose parents did not complete a 4-year
college degree (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2017).
U.S. postsecondary institutions have increased enrollment of first-generation college
students within recent years. In 2022, nearly five million college students identified as a first-
generation college student (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2022). Specifically,
18

60% of Hispanic or Latinx/a/o students were first-generation college students; 59% of Black or
African-American students were first-generation college students; 54% of American Indian,
Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander were first-generation college students; 39%
of Asian students were first-generation college students; and 36% of White students were first-
generation college students (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2022). Additionally,
57% of first-generation college students were age 24 or older and 31% of first-generation college
students were age 23 or younger (Center for First-Generation Student Success, 2022). A large
percentage of first-generation college students come from low-income backgrounds. In 2017,
27% of first-generation college students came from household incomes of $20,000 or less and
50% of first-generation college students came from household incomes of $20,001-$50,000
(Redford & Mulvaney Hoyer, 2017). Despite the increase in first-generation college student
attendance, in 2018, 33% of first-generation college students left higher education without
earning a bachelor’s degree compared to 26% of continuing-generation students (Cataldi et al.,
2018).
Challenges
There are several challenges that first-generation college students confront during their
postsecondary journey. The challenges first-generation college students experience can directly
and indirectly influence their major and career goals. This section highlights several challenges
including experiencing financial stress (Adams & McBrayer, 2020; Pratt et al., 2019),
confronting inaccurate and deficit assumptions (Ellis et al., 2019; Means & Pyne, 2017),
engaging with academic programs (Soria & Stebleton, 2012; Yee, 2016), and navigating cultural
mismatch (Stephens et al., 2012; Vasquez-Salgado et al., 2015).
19

Experiencing Financial Stress. Financial wellness plays a pivotal role during a first-
generation college student’s educational journey (Heckman et al., 2014; Montalto et al., 2019).
The financial situation of a first-generation college student can influence the type of institution a
student attends, such as a less expensive public college or an expensive private college,
depending on the affordability of each option (Adams & McBrayer, 2020). An institution’s
financial aid package also can influence a first-generation college student’s enrollment decision
(Adams & McBrayer, 2020). Many low-income first-generation college students cannot
financially rely on their families during college, so students balance work and school (Adams &
McBrayer, 2020). Working while being a student comes with some challenges, such as inhibiting
opportunities for campus involvement including participating in student organizations, taking on
leadership positions, and engaging with research opportunities (Pratt et al., 2019). For some first-
generation college students, working also leads to poorer academic performance and lower sense
of belonging on campus (Pratt et al., 2019). Therefore, the financial situation of first-generation
college students can be a predictor of 1st-year to 2nd-year student retention (Pratt et al., 2019).
Despite the financial struggles that first-generation college students may face, they are often
motivated to persevere, obtain a college degree, and pave a path to future high-paying jobs
(Adams & McBrayer, 2020).
Confronting Inaccurate and Deficit Assumptions. Another challenge that first-
generation college students face is confronting inaccurate and deficit assumptions. One specific
factor within this overarching topic is microaggressions. A study found that first-generation
college students at a PWI experienced microaggressions in the form of microinsults,
microassaults, and microinvalidations (Ellis et al., 2019). The first-generation college students
reported that peers, staff, and faculty made negative assumptions about their backgrounds,
20

experiences, and identities based on the first-generation college student status (Ellis et al., 2019).
Comments directed at the students made them feel inferior because they did not have as much
knowledge about higher education and careers compared to continuing-generation college
students (Ellis et al., 2019).
Another study followed 10 low-income, first-generation college students in a college
access program. The study found that several peers, faculty, and staff possessed inaccurate
assumptions and deficit-thinking towards first-generation college students (Means & Pyne,
2017). These negative interactions affected the first-generation college students’ sense of
belonging and highlighted contradictory perceptions the students had of college such as college
is a welcoming /hostile and empowering/disempowering environment (Means & Pyne, 2017).
Engaging With Academic Programs. First-generation college students may face
challenges to meaningfully engage with academic programs. Soria and Stebleton (2012) found
that in comparison to continuing-generation students, first-generation college students had lower
academic engagement including fewer interactions with faculty, participation in classroom
discussions, integration of ideas from different courses, and lower likelihood of asking questions.
Another study investigated how social class differences among first-generation college students
and middle-class students (defined in this study as students whose parent(s) have a college
degree) resulted in different forms of academic engagement (Yee, 2016). Both student
populations engaged in academic strategies such as attending class, taking notes, studying, and
completing course assignments. However, first-generation college students held the belief they
must succeed on their own and engaged in independent academic strategies (Yee, 2016). The
first-generation college students did not reach out to professors, teaching assistants, or tutors
until their grades were at or near failing (Yee, 2016). On the other hand, the middle-class
21

students understood the value of assistance from professors, TAs, and tutors, and thus, reached
out to these support systems periodically (Yee, 2016). By doing so, the middle-class students
were more likely to academically succeed in their courses and build relationships with faculty,
staff, and classmates (Yee, 2016).
Navigating Cultural Mismatch. Cultural mismatch can affect first-generation college
students’ academic performance. Although most first-generation college students come from a
collectivist culture, postsecondary institutions promote an individualistic culture (Stephens et al.,
2012). The cultural mismatch between working-class interdependent values and middle-class
independent values can lead to low academic performance of first-generation college students
(Stephens et al., 2012). However, when universities frame the academic experience via
interdependent values (i.e., being part of a larger community, group assignments), first-
generation college students tend to experience high academic performance (Stephens et al.,
2012).
For Latino first-generation college students, home-school value conflict can pose a
challenge. Home-school value conflict is the dissension between a university’s individualistic
demands and a family’s collectivist demands (Vasquez-Salgado et al., 2015). Many Latino first-
generation college students come from a collectivist culture which prioritizes family
responsibilities. The collectivist values create a home-school value conflict among the
university’s individualistic values, which cause Latino first-generation college students to make
difficult decisions such as attending family events or doing schoolwork, allocating money to
travel home or educational expenses, or living on-campus or at-home (Vasquez-Salgado et al.,
2015). These conflicts may impact Latino students’ academic performance through difficulties
concentrating, earning poor grades, and feeling stress and guilt for disappointing family
22

(Vasquez-Salgado et al., 2015). Cultural mismatch and home-school value conflict can
negatively influence Latin* first-generation college students’ academic performance and
relatedly, their major and career self-efficacy.
Strengths
Although first-generation college students experience challenges en route to and during
postsecondary education, they also possess strengths that help them navigate higher education.
First-generation college students who take initiative to become engaged on campus can have
positive outcomes and experiences. Demetriou et al. (2017) investigated the experiences of
successful first-generation college students and found that students who engaged in coursework,
faculty-mentored research, and study/travel abroad had high academic performance and positive
experiences in the classroom. Engagement in co-curricular activities such as student
organizations and community service also influenced first-generation college students’
engagement and sense of belonging on campus (Demetriou et al., 2017). First-generation college
students are already trailblazers for pursuing higher education and they can continue taking
initiative by getting involved on campus. First-generation college students also have strengths of
community cultural wealth (Yosso, 2005) which is discussed in more depth in the theoretical
framework section of this chapter.
First-Generation College Student Career Development
A key component of this study is major and career self-efficacy, but how first-generation
college students access career services is a topic seldom addressed in the higher education
scholarship. The lack of literature regarding first-generation college students and career services
is concerning because career services often provide “one size fits all” advising and programming
that do not consider the unique needs of first-generation college students (Tate et al.,
23

2015). Several impeding influences on first-generation college students’ career development are
family pressures on career paths, lack of professional networks, personality traits (e.g., shyness,
aggressiveness), and an overall lack of understanding of the career development process (Levine
& Aley, 2021; Tate et al., 2015). The aforementioned impeding factors are compounded for
females, who are more likely to perceive career barriers than males (Levine & Aley, 2021). First-
generation college students also reference positive career influences such as family support for
educational and career goals, serving as a role model for siblings, participating in support
programs (e.g., 1
st
-year seminars), and self-concept (Tate et al., 2015). Career counselors who
self-disclose their first-generation college student experiences can be particularly influential as
their disclosure shows solidarity and increases the likelihood for social support for students that
feel isolated or lost during their career development journey (Krieger Cohen & Turner Johnson,
2020).
First-generation college students may become first-generation professionals which are the
first in their immediate families to enter the professional work environment (United States of
America Department of Commerce, 2021). First-generation professionals come from a variety of
backgrounds and may be the first in their families to transition from blue-collar to white-collar
jobs (Burwell & Maldonado, 2022). First-generation professionals tend to have minimal
institutional or social guidance regarding academic and career choices, post-graduation planning,
and social networks, and thus, may misunderstand the post-graduation job search process
(Hirudayaraj & McLean, 2018). Once offered a job, many first-generation professionals navigate
salary negotiation, time off, retirement, health insurance, and federal loan forgiveness programs
and can make mistakes along the way that prolong their economic and professional advancement
(Dominguez-Whitehead et al., 2021). Minoritized first-generation professionals may also
24

experience microaggressions and microinvalidations in the workforce, which can make it
difficult for them to be their authentic selves (Bechard & Both Gragg, 2020; Lintal, 2017). The
balance between professional identity, ethnic/racial identity, and expectations can cause stress
and anxiety (Leyva, 2011). Based on the literature, it appears vital to develop the major and
career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students to increase the likelihood that they
personally and professionally succeed in the workplace.
Latin* College Students
First-generation college students are not homogenous; they exhibit intersectionalities and
complexities in their identities and experiences. This study focuses specifically on Latin* college
students, who are historically underrepresented in higher education yet largely represented in the
United States population (United States Census Bureau, 2022). This section provides an
overview of who Latin* college students are, their motivations to attend college, college
transition experiences, and career development processes.
The Latin* population is the largest ethnic population in the United States but has the
fourth highest college enrollment rate (U.S. Department of Education, 2020; United States
Census Bureau, 2022). According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2022), the United States has a
population of 75.8% White, 18.9% Hispanic or Latino, 13.6% Black or African American, 6.1%
Asian, 2.9%, two or more races, 1.3% American Indian and Alaska Native, and 0.3% Native
Hawaiian residents. Between 2000 to 2018, the Hispanic undergraduate enrollment at degree-
granting postsecondary institutions increased from 1.4 million to 3.4 million students (U.S.
Department of Education, 2020). In 2018, the college enrollment rate for 18-to-24-year-old
Hispanics was 36%, which falls behind the college enrollment rate for Asian students (59%),
White students (42%), and Black students (37%) in the United States (U.S. Department of
25

Education, 2020). Furthermore in 2019, the graduation rate for first-time, full-time Hispanic
undergraduate students who began their bachelor’s degree at a 4-year degree-granting institution
was the fourth highest at 54%, behind Asian students (74%), White students (64%), and students
of two or more races (60%) in the United States (de Brey et al., 2019). As the data highlights,
there is a discrepancy between the high Latin* population in the United States and low Latin*
enrollment and graduation rates.
Motivations to Attend College
Latin* students may experience several motivational factors to enroll and persist in
postsecondary education, such as participating in academically rigorous high school courses,
engaging in positive interactions with high school personnel, receiving encouragement from
family or family role models, cultivating self-motivation and ambition, and future financial
salary (Prospero et al., 2012; Vega, 2016). Nevertheless, the literature highlights a common
sentiment of responsibility and honor as a first-generation college student (Easley, Jr. et al.,
2012; Vega, 2016). Latin* first-generation college students often bear the responsibility to be a
role model for their family, friends, and community (Vega, 2016). Further, a study of Mexican-
American first-generation college students explored the concept of “ganas” which is a “deeply
held desire to achieve academically fueled by parental struggle and sacrifice” (Easley, Jr. et al.,
2012, p. 169). Examples of “ganas” include when students acknowledged their parents’ struggles
and sacrifices to come to the United States, valued their ancestor’s history, gained parental
admiration and respect, felt motivated to repay their parents and pay it forward for the next
generation, and possessed the resilience and willingness to persevere (Easley, Jr. et al., 2012).
Despite the common motivational factors, some literature uncovered gender differences
in motivational factors. A study revealed how gendered familism, which is “the (re)production of
26

intersecting gender and racial/ethnic beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors” (Ovink, 2014, p. 268),
influenced college pathways of Latino/a students. The Latina students shared that their families
expect them to attend college to financially support themselves and their parents/siblings,
whereas Latino students shared that their families expect them to attend college to financially
support their future family (Ovink, 2014). Moreover, Latina students were motivated to achieve
higher education to obtain financial independence and not rely on a partner for money, whereas
Latino students had the expectation that they would become the main financial provider for their
future family (Ovink, 2014). Based on these factors, Latina students felt more pressure to attend
college compared to Latino students (Ovink, 2014).
College Transition Experiences
The college transition experience for Latin* students come with challenges and triumphs.
The college transition experience can be difficult because high school academic programs may
not prepare students for the academic rigor of college but advisors, time management,
organization, determination, hard work, independence, and intrinsic motivation can offset this
barrier (Boden, 2011; Duncheon, 2018; Trevino & DeFreitas, 2014). Once in college, Latin*
first-generation college students must navigate higher education’s White-centric practices and
norms (Graybill, 2019). As a result, students face stressors such as navigating a new educational
environment, living environment (if living on-campus), and professional environment (Graybill,
2019). Latin* first-generation college students can also feel achievement guilt, which is the
“discrepancy between the opportunities available to them and those available to their non-college
educated family members” (Covarrubias & Fryberg, 2015, p. 420). In fact, Latin* first-
generation college students experience achievement guilt more than White or continuing-
generation college students (Covarrubias & Fryberg, 2015).
27

A key component of the Latin* college student transition experience is balancing family
responsibilities and independence. Latin* first-generation college students experience difficulties
integrating into the campus community because of familial obligations such as providing parents
and siblings with emotional and financial support, language brokering, and sibling and parental
caretaking (Covarrubias et al., 2019; Duncheon, 2018). The balance between family
responsibilities and independence produces soft independence skills, such as self-expression,
maturity, and pursuing individual interests, and hard independence skills, such as resilience, self-
reliance, and breaking traditions for Latin* first-generation college students (Covarrubias et al.,
2019). When Latin* first-generation college students do have the opportunity to build peer
connections, they do so through residential communities, classes, and/or student organizations
(Duncheon, 2018).
Sometimes Latin* first-generation college students must work during college. However,
some positions can provide glimpses into meaningful careers, such as serving as a tutor or
mentor at local schools or administrative assistant at on-campus cultural centers (Nunez &
Sansone, 2016). These student employment opportunities can foster a sense of independence,
pride, and purpose (Nunez & Sansone, 2016). On-campus jobs also provide an opportunity for
students to develop transferable skills and relationships for the post-graduation job market
(Nunez & Sansone, 2016).
Career Development Processes
As previously mentioned, a motivating factor to attend college is career outcomes yet,
there are several perceived career barriers for Latin* students. Factors such as sex, acculturation,
and college environment predict perception of ethnic and gender career barriers (Holloway-
Friesen, 2018). In particular, Latinas are more likely to perceive career barriers than Latinos
28

because of gender discrimination and societal stereotypes (Holloway-Friesen, 2018). Latino/a
students who have a strong sense of belonging on campus anticipate experiencing less
discrimination in their careers than Latino/a students that do not have a strong sense of belonging
on campus (Holloway-Friesen, 2018). Furthermore, Latino/a students who acculturate to the
dominant culture (e.g., Anglo-culture) perceive fewer career barriers (Holloway-Friesen, 2018).
Higher Education Advising
As outlined in the previous section, Latin* first-generation college students enter higher
education with their own knowledge and experiences. However, they also gain new knowledge
and experiences based on interactions within the university context. Particularly, interactions
with academic and career services can influence the academic and career trajectory of Latin*
first-generation college students (Dey & Cruzvergara, 2014; Van Jura & Prieto, 2021; Zunker,
2016). This section features academic and career advising within United States higher education
to explore the history and impact of these two services on students’ major and career journeys.
Academic and career advising is important to this study because advisors can nurture
Latin* first-generation college students’ major and career self-efficacy through their interactions
with students. Advising approaches, services, events, and programs can impact a student’s
interests and goals towards a major and career. This section provides the history of collegiate
academic and career advising and includes an overview of proactive advising.
History of Academic Advising in United States Higher Education
Academic advising has experienced a series of changes over the centuries. The first era of
academic advising in the United States was from 1636 to 1870 (Gordon et al., 2008). During this
time, all students took the same courses, and no elective courses were available (Gordon et al.,
2008). Student affairs professionals did not exist, so faculty and university administration served
29

as academic advisors (Gordon et al., 2008). When the elective course system was introduced in
the 1870s, universities recognized the need for academic advisors to guide students in their
academic plans (Gordon et al., 2008). Additionally, the elective system required faculty to
specialize in an area of study, so they no longer had the capacity to academically advise students
(Gordon et al., 2008).
The second era of academic advising lasted from 1870–1970 (Gordon et al., 2008). The
elective course system began in 1870, which offered the opportunity for students to enroll in
practical courses as opposed to the traditional curriculum (Gordon et al., 2008). Universities,
such as Johns Hopkins University, clustered certain courses into groups which set the foundation
for “majors” that postsecondary education uses today (Gordon et al., 2008). As such, the
expectations and responsibilities of academic advisors expanded and a student-centered advising
approach emerged with the 1949 “Student Personnel Point of View” released by the American
Council on Education (Gordon et al., 2008). This report helped legitimize academic advising,
career advising, and personal counseling in higher education.
The third academic advising era is from the 1970s to the present (Gordon et al., 2008).
The National Academic Advising Association (NACADA) was created in 1977, which
centralized academic advisors, professional journals, national and regional conferences (Gordon
et al., 2008). Presently, cross-collaboration amongst academic advisors regarding best practices,
approaches, techniques, models, programs, and technology is normalized to support students
with their academic, personal, and career goals.
History of Career Advising in United States Higher Education
The role of career services in United States higher education continuously evolves in
response to the historical, economic, and sociopolitical landscape of the nation. In the 1900s–
30

1920s, career services emerged as vocational guidance to advise skilled workers in career and
technical education (Dey & Cruzvergara, 2014). The federal government even passed the Smith-
Hughes Act of 1917, which provided federal funding to states for vocational education
(Dougherty & Lombardi, 2016). Between 1920–1940, career advising shifted away from faculty
and towards administrative staff because of the increase of teachers entering the workforce (Dey
& Cruzvergara, 2014). The 1940–1970s career focus was on job placement, specifically for the
large number of graduating student veterans who needed jobs post-graduation (Dey &
Cruzvergara, 2014). Between 1970–1990, career centers adopted a developmental approach to
career guidance by teaching students career planning and job search strategies (Dey &
Cruzvergara, 2014). Between 1990–2010, career centers evolved because of the technological
boom (Dey & Cruzvergara, 2014). Career centers increased focus on student and employer
networking to increase student job placement and justify career service funding to senior
administration (Dey & Cruzvergara, 2014). From 2010–present, career services create
individualized and group student communities through experiential and global professional
opportunities (Dey & Cruzvergara, 2014; Zunker, 2016).
Proactive Advising
Advising is a powerful tool for student success. Robert Glennen (1976) developed
proactive advising (previously known as intrusive advising), which is when an advisor connects
with a student before the student experiences academic struggles and concerns. Proactive
advising strategies include “deliberate intervention to enhance student motivation, using
strategies to show interest and involvement with students, and working to educate students on all
options” (Varney, 2012, p. 1). Advisors must clearly state the purpose of proactive advising or
31

there may be student confusion and low participation in advising efforts (Van Jura & Prieto,
2021).
The academic literature features proactive advising in an academic advising context.
Proactive advising has proven to increase academic self-efficacy of at-promise students and
increase the GPAs of students on academic probation (Kitchen et al., 2021c; Vander Schee,
2007). Moreover, the number of meetings between a first-generation college student and an
academic advisor correlate to a strong predictor of student retention (Swecker et al., 2013). In a
study examining the connection between number of academic advising meetings and retention of
first-generation college students, the odds a student would be retained increased by 13% with
every academic advisement meeting (Swecker et al., 2013). Additionally, advisors with similar
identities (e.g., first-generation, BIPOC) can make students feel comfortable because of shared
similar life experiences (Van Jura & Prieto, 2021). Despite the empirically proven benefits of
proactive advising, there is minimal literature on proactive advising in a career advising context.
Proactive career advising is an area that higher education scholarship and practice could benefit
from, especially its implementation to increase major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-
generation college students (Kezar et al., 2019; Kitchen et al., 2021c; Perez et al., 2022).
Major and Career Outcomes
As outlined in the previous section, the interactions between a student and university can
influence academic and career outcomes. A student enters college with major and career
interests, but major and career interests are confirmed or altered during a student’s collegiate
journey. Additionally, major and career interests and outcomes are influenced by a student’s self-
efficacy (Cassidy, 2015; Gaylon et al., 2012; Honicke & Broadbent, 2016; Komarraju & Nadler,
2013; Komarraju et al., 2014; Putwain et al., 2013). Major and career outcomes directly relate to
32

the three components of one of the theoretical frameworks of this study, social cognitive career
theory: goals, outcome expectations, and self-efficacy. This section reviews the literature on
academic self-efficacy and major and career self-efficacy.
Academic Self-Efficacy
Academic self-efficacy influences academic-related performance, behaviors, and goals.
Academic self-efficacy is the perceived capabilities of individuals to complete certain academic
tasks given particular contexts (Pajares, 1996). A study found that students with high self-
efficacy have high levels of class participation and stronger exam performances (Gaylon et al.,
2012). Conversely, students with mid-to-low self-efficacy have lower levels of class
participation and exam performances (Gaylon et al., 2012). However, it should be noted that
GPA can moderate the relationship between self-efficacy and exam performance (Gaylon et al.,
2012). Additionally, effort regulation, deep processing strategies, and goal orientations can also
moderate the relationship between academic self-efficacy and academic performance (Honicke
& Broadbent, 2016).
Research shows that academic self-efficacy also influences students’ beliefs and goals.
Students with high academic self-efficacy are more likely to have growth mindset, seek
challenging academic goals, new knowledge, new skills, and higher academic resilience
(Cassidy, 2015; Komarraju & Nadler, 2013). Conversely, students with low academic self-
efficacy are more likely to have fixed mindset, have unclear goals, lower motivation to increase
academic performance, and lower academic resilience (Cassidy, 2015; Komarraju & Nadler,
2013). Academic self-efficacy in relation to study skills and behaviors predicted better academic
performance and high pleasant and low unpleasant learning related emotions (Putwain et al.,
2013). Moreover, research shows a relationship between culture and academic self-efficacy
33

(Aguayo et al., 2011). For example, socioeconomic status, generation status, enculturation, and
acculturation have positive effects on college self-efficacy for Mexican American students
(Aguayo et al., 2011).
Academic self-efficacy informs major self-efficacy. Students’ reflection and evaluation
of their academic capabilities can influence major choice. A student will most likely not choose a
major if they think they do not have the academic capability to successfully complete the major.
Relatedly, a student will most likely choose a major if they think they have the academic
capability to successfully complete the major. Therefore, academic self-efficacy is a facet of
major self-efficacy (Kitchen et al., 2021a; Rivera et al., 2022).
Major and Career Self-Efficacy
As previously shared, career self-efficacy is “self-efficacy beliefs with respect to possible
career-related domains of behavior” (Betz & Hackett, 2006, p.6). Career self-efficacy has been
studied in various postsecondary career contexts and a popular career theory, social cognitive
career theory, has built upon this concept (Betz & Luzzo, 1996; Betz & Hackett, 2006; Taylor &
Betz, 1983). Career self-efficacy literature shows that students with high career self-efficacy are
more likely to have increased motivation, satisfaction with information learned in career courses,
and satisfaction with their major (Komarraju et al., 2014). Major-related career courses are
beneficial because students can learn about careers in their major and align their collegiate
academic and career plans with their post-graduation career goals (Komarraju et al., 2014).
An emerging concept within the higher education scholarship is major and career self-
efficacy. Major and career self-efficacy is the belief in one’s ability to successfully complete the
necessary tasks to make decisions about a career (Taylor & Betz, 1983) and similarly, academic
plans of study. Academic and career self-efficacy are historically researched separately, so major
34

and career self-efficacy merges the two concepts. Major and career self-efficacy is significant
because of the connection with students feeling confident in choosing their major, and relatedly,
confidence in choosing a career path. Practitioners can develop students’ major and career self-
efficacy through an at-promise college student major and career self-efficacy ecology model,
where advisors employ validating, asset-based approaches to develop student’s major and career
self-efficacy (Kitchen, 2021; Kitchen et al., 2021a). Despite the literature on academic, major,
and career self-efficacy, there is still no research that specifically combines Latin*, first-
generation college students, and major and career self-efficacy. This study will fill the gap in the
literature by exploring how Latin* first-generation college students in a comprehensive college
transition program develop major and career self-efficacy.
Theoretical Frameworks
The theoretical frameworks that guide this study are social cognitive career theory
(SCCT) and community cultural wealth (CWW). SCCT provides a foundation to understand
major and career self-efficacy (Lent et al., 1994) whereas CCW provides a foundation to
understand the cultural and racialized experiences of Latin* first-generation college students
(Yosso, 2005). CWW and SCCT complement each other because CWW values BIPOC students
for their assets and critiques systems of exclusion in higher education. SCCT analyzes how
career and academic choices develop and overlap, which are often intertwined with student’s
navigation of historically exclusive colleges and universities. The following portion reviews the
history, components, and relevance of SCCT and CCW to the current study.
Social Cognitive Career Theory
Social cognitive theory (SCT) informs SCCT. SCT asserts that learning and cognition
occur in social contexts among reciprocal interactions between person, environment, and
35

behavior (Bandura, 1986; Schunk, 2020). SCT integrates components such as agency, self-
efficacy, self-regulation, outcome expectations, values, and goal setting in the learning process
(Schunk, 2020). Enactive learning (learn by doing) and vicarious learning (learn by observing)
are the two learning methods within SCT (Schunk, 2020). Modeling is a key element to SCT
because individuals use models to adopt how to behave in their own lives (Schunk, 2020).
SCCT expands upon SCT. SCCT integrates SCT and previous career theories for a
framework that highlights how career and academic interests develop, how career choices
develop, and how performance outcomes are achieved (Lent et al., 1994). Specifically, SCCT
highlights how self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and goals interact among the individual,
environment, and behavior (Lent et al., 1994). Self-efficacy is defined as “people’s judgements
of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types
of performances” (Bandura, 1986, p. 391). Self-efficacy relates to academic and career interests
because an individual’s perceived abilities can influence their academic and career behaviors.
Self-efficacy is dynamic and can change throughout one’s lifespan (Bandura, 1986). The second
SCCT component is outcome expectations, which are “personal beliefs about probable response
outcomes” (Lent et al., 1994, p. 83). In other words, outcome expectations are what one believes
will happen if they engage in an action or behavior. There are three areas of outcome
expectations: physical, social, and self-evaluative (Bandura, 1986). The third SCCT component
relates to goals, which are the “determination to engage in a particular activity or to effect a
particular future outcome” (Lent et al., 1994, p. 85). Goals are driven by one’s aspirations and
can be influenced by one’s self-efficacy and outcome expectations.
SCCT is relevant to this study because of its integration of academic and career interests.
To develop SCCT, Lent et al. (1994) recognized the connections among a student’s academic
36

interests, career interests, and social environments. This study integrates three components of
SCCT which make it an ideal theoretical framework: major, career, and self-efficacy. This study
seeks to advance the literature on major and career self-efficacy through the SCCT lens by
researching a unique student population, researching an emerging construct, and situating the
context within a college transition program.
Community Cultural Wealth
Students of color possess a plethora of capital based on their lived experiences. Yosso
(2005) noticed that much of the academic literature about students of color was framed through a
deficit-lens. In response, Yosso expanded Critical Race Theory to establish community cultural
wealth (CCW), which views students of color through a strengths-based lens. The CCW model
includes seven forms of capital: aspirational, cultural, familial, linguistic, navigational, resistant,
and social (Yosso, 2005). The theory posits that students of color obtain various forms of wealth
through their unique lived experiences. Students of color employ these forms of capital in
college, and research even highlights how CCW helps students navigate studying abroad (Wick
et al., 2019), learning online (Hands, 2020), attending Hispanic Serving Institutions
(Kouyoumdjian et al., 2017), and being a transfer student (Mobley & Brawner, 2019).
This study advances the application of CWW within Latin* first-generation college
students and major and career self-efficacy. CCW is relevant to this study because it is a critical
framework to analyze the cultural experiences of Latin* first-generation college students and
serves as a counternarrative to the deficit-lens narrative historically found in academic literature.
This study integrates the strengths-based theory to uplift the historically marginalized population
of Latin* first-generation college students. Scholars have researched how Latin* college students
37

utilize CWW to navigate a system (higher education) that was not originally built for Latin*
students (Luna & Martinez, 2013; Yosso, 2005) and this study builds upon the existing literature.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework guiding this study synthesizes how the main concepts of this
study influence and relate to each other. This study is guided by a conceptual framework that
illustrates the interconnected components that influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin*
first-generation college students: Latin* first-generation college student identity, family,
participation in the TSLC program, and the university context. A visual representation of the
conceptual framework is in Figure 2 followed by a written explanation of the framework.

Figure 2
Influential Factors to Latin* First-Generation College Students’ Major and Career Self-Efficacy

University
TSLC Program
Family
Latin* First-
Generation
College Student
38

The core of the framework is the Latin* first-generation college student because they are
the central focus of the study. Latin* first-generation college students are individuals with their
own backgrounds, experiences, perspectives, dreams, goals, and community cultural wealth.
Latin* first-generation college students possess a wealth of knowledge and capital from their
lived experiences and bring those varied strengths to the postsecondary context. The second layer
of the framework is family because family plays a significant factor in the motivation and
dedication of Latin* first-generation college students to pursue higher education and build a
successful career. The third layer of the framework is participation in the TSLC program which
includes TSLC events, TSLC classes, TSLC workshops, TSLC requirements, TSLC staff, and
TSLC faculty. The final layer of the conceptual framework is the university context, particularly
interactions with academic advisors, career advisors, faculty, and peers who have the potential to
influence Latin* first-generation college students’ academic and professional goals and
outcomes. All four components interact to influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin*
first-generation college students, as indicated by the Venn diagram.
Conclusion
The literature review provides contextual understanding of the three main elements of the
study: Latin* first-generation college students, higher education advising, and major and career
outcomes. Additionally, the theoretical and conceptual frameworks provide lenses to view the
current study. The literary and visual components provide a foundation that highlights the
importance of investigating major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. The following chapter discusses the methodology selected for this study.

39

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study is to deepen academic and practical understandings of the
under-researched topic of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. Specifically, this study explores the research question: How do Latin* first-generation
college students develop major and career self-efficacy? This research question puts the main
onus of responsibility on external factors that have the potential to influence Latin* first-
generation college student’s major and career self-efficacy (Krause, 2020), instead of criticizing
Latin* first-generation college student’s self-efficacy through a deficit-lens (Davis & Museus,
2019).
A qualitative research methodology involves “methods that typically seek to understand
social life as it unfolds in its natural environment” (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017, p. 93). As such, a
qualitative approach and related methods are a good fit for the aim of the study. The current
study encompasses the five common qualitative research characteristics outlined by Lochmiller
and Lester (2017): researcher as instrument, focus on context, emergent research design, unique
data sources, and use of an inductive approach. The PASS research team, self-included, are
research instruments because we collect and analyze data influenced by our own experiences and
positionality. This study has a specific contextual focus of major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students in the University of Nebraska’s TSLC program and
incorporates unique data sources from a 4–year period. Furthermore, I adapted and changed
aspects of the study based on emergent findings, such as the research question, data selected for
analysis, and analytic process. Lastly, the findings of this study are mostly inductive in nature,
largely emerging from analysis of Latin* first-generation college students’ reflections on their
major and career self-efficacy.
40

Specifically, the current study is a qualitative case study of Latin* first-generation college
students in the TSLC program. A case study “is an in-depth description and analysis of a
bounded system” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 37). The bounded system, or case, can be “a
single person … a program, a group, an institution, a community or a specific policy” (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016, p. 38). A case study provides a detailed study and analysis of the case within its
natural environment (Priya, 2020). For the current study, the bounded system, or case, is the
TSLC program at UNK, UNL, and UNO. The case study is aggregately analyzed to adhere to the
PASS project’s minimum requirement of 10 student participants. This dissertation study includes
common elements of a case study, including an explanatory question (“how”), multiple data
sources of documents and interviews, and prolonged engagement in the environment (Lochmiller
& Lester, 2017; Priya, 2020).
This study derives from the large multi-year, mixed methods PASS project conducted
through USC Rossier Pullias Center for Higher Education. The PASS project specifically uses
convergent parallel mixed methods, which is when researchers simultaneously collect
quantitative and qualitative data, integrate data analysis, and determine study findings (Creswell,
2014). The PASS team has quantitative and qualitative sub-teams that coordinate and collect
quantitative and qualitative data (Hallett et al., 2020). Each sub-team has a co-principal
investigator that leads their respective team meetings, data collection, and data analysis (Hallett
et al., 2020). The quantitative and qualitative sub-teams meet twice a month to ensure synergy in
data collection, analysis, and findings (Hallett et al., 2020). This chapter provides detailed
information regarding the study’s site, population, sample, sampling strategy, data sources, data
analysis, credibility, trustworthiness, transferability, and ethical considerations.
41

Site, Population, Sample, and Sampling Strategy
The following section describes the site, population, sample, and sampling strategy of the
current study.
Site
This study takes place at three diverse sites: UNL, UNO, and UNK. UNL is in the capital
of Nebraska and is the largest of the three universities. At the time of data collection, UNL was
part of the Big Ten Conference, which is renowned for its athletic teams and competitive
academic culture (Big Ten Conference, n.d.). UNO is in a metropolitan area and has the second
highest student enrollment. UNO students mainly originate from the Midwest and South,
specifically Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Texas, and Missouri (University of Nebraska
Omaha, n.d.). Notably, 41.3% of the UNO undergraduate student population is first-generation
college students and 4,051 are underrepresented students (University of Nebraska Omaha, n.d.).
Lastly, UNK is in a rural area and has the smallest student enrollment. UNK has 41.9% of the
undergraduate student population identifying as first-generation college students (University of
Nebraska Kearney, n.d.).
Population
The population of this study revolves around Latin* first-generation college students in
the TSLC program across UNK, UNL, and UNO. The University of Nebraska campuses are
public universities. UNL is in the Nebraska capital and enrolls approximately 20,000
undergraduate students; UNO is in an urban area and enrolls approximately 12,000
undergraduate students; UNK is in a rural location and enrolls approximately 4,000
undergraduate students (Kezar et al., 2022). There are approximately 2,700 TSLC participants
across all three University of Nebraska campuses, with 600–1,800 students enrolled during the
42

first 2 years of college (Kezar et al., 2022). TSLC participants come from low-income
backgrounds (expected family contribution is $10,000 or less) and receive a 5-year scholarship
for tuition and fees (Kezar et al., 2022). Furthermore, 60% of TSLC participants identify as first-
generation college students, and many TSLC participants identify as racially minoritized: 66% of
participants from UNO, 36% of participants from UNL, and 29% of participants from UNK
(Kezar et al., 2022).
Sample and Sampling Strategy
The PASS team collects data from students, staff, instructors, and stakeholders associated
with the TSLC program at the three University of Nebraska campuses. However, this study
solely focuses on a purposive sample of 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the TSLC
program across the three University of Nebraska campuses. A purposive sample is a specific
sample selected to answer the research question (Maxwell, 2013). The purposive sampling of
Latin* first-generation college students is appropriate for this study because it aligns with the
research question and purpose of the study. Additionally, per the PASS project requirements, a
minimum of 10 student participants is required for any research study. Table 1 shows a
demographic for the 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the study:

43

Table 1
Thompson Scholars Learning Communities Student Participant Demographics
Pseudonym Sex U.S. born Languages
spoken
Number of
interviews
Alberto Male Yes English,
Spanish, French
9
Alexandra Female Yes English, Spanish 14
Anthony Male Yes English, Spanish 14
Bella Female Yes English, Spanish 10
Carmen Female Yes English, Spanish 12
Freda Female Yes English, Spanish 12
Jackie Female Yes English 14
Luis Male Yes English, Spanish 11
Pedro Male No English, Spanish 14
Pilar Female Yes English, Spanish 14

The PASS team analyzes data on major and career self-efficacy of TSLC participants
(Kitchen, 2021; Kitchen et al., 2021b). However, the PASS team does not analyze specific data
on major and career efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students in TSLC. This criterion
is essential for participant selection for this study because the PASS project and larger higher
education community have not researched the major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-
generation college students. Higher education scholarship has also yet to investigate how
individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors interact to influence major and career
self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
Data Sources
Data derives from the first phase of the PASS project (2015–2020). The PASS team
collected data as part of the PASS project between Spring 2015–Spring 2020 (USC Rossier
Pullias Center for Higher Education, n.d.-b). The data sources include documents, observations,
44

social media, digital diaries, and interviews (Hallett et al., 2020). For this study, I examine
documents (e.g., annual reports from the TSLC program) and interviews.
Documents
The PASS team collects documents to provide contextual information about the history
and current state of the TSLC program (Hallett et al., 2020). Documents include annual campus
reports, training materials, syllabi, and academic course schedules (Hallett et al., 2020). Each
campus has different documents available for the PASS team to collect and analyze (Hallett et
al., 2020). For this study, I analyze the TSLC annual reports from 2015–2019 from UNO, UNL,
and UNK. Each campus formats the TSLC annual reports differently, but each report includes an
executive summary, demographic and campus specific information, budget, program goals and
student learning outcomes, and reporting tables for descriptive statistics. Analyzing the 12 annual
reports allowed me to contextualize my understanding of the TSLC program and understand the
major and career related components offered at each campus. Below is a summary of the key
TSLC major and career related components outlined in each campus’ annual report.
UNO TSLC Annual Reports Summary
The TSLC program at UNO offers various academic and career support for TSLC
students. The UNO TSLC program requires TSLC-only courses for 1
st
and 2
nd
year TSLC
students. First year students are required to take three TSLC courses in the fall semester and two
TSLC courses in the spring semester. Second year students are required to take two TSLC
courses in the fall semester and one TSLC course in the spring semester. One of the required 1
st

year courses is US1020 TLC Academic Success Seminar, which reviews academic strategies and
campus resources. Second year students enroll in US2020 TLC Sophomore Seminar, which can
be completed via two options: traditional or service learning. The traditional option explores
45

students’ strengths, goals, professional identity, and major and career exploration whereas the
service option applies students’ strengths through a community service project.
The TSLC program at UNO also provides academic support via peer mentorship. There
are three peer mentor programs offered: 1st-Year Peer Mentors, 2nd-Year Peer Mentors, and
Bridge Language Peer Mentor. Mentors are 3rd and 4th year TSLC students who advise 1st year
and 2nd year mentees, plan events, and co-teach a TSLC seminar. UNO also provides a Peer
Academic Leaders (PALS) program, who are 3rd and 4th year TSLC students that provide
academic support for 1st and 2nd year TSLC students in the TSLC classes.
The TSLC program offers additional academic support. All TSLC students receive a
TSLC planner which includes an academic calendar and information required for TSLC classes.
Additionally, the TSLC program coordinates events such as a Welcome Breakfast for new TSLC
students and a Welcome Back Brunch for 2nd year students, both which provide information
about UNO and TSLC. TSLC students are required to participate in midterm meetings with
TSLC staff and grade checks with all professors each semester during the 1st and 2nd year.
TSLC staff also conduct academic intervention meetings for students with a 2.0 GPA or lower.
Students on academic intervention are required to meet biweekly with a TSLC advisor and
complete mandatory study hours.
There are also a few career supports in place within the TSLC program. The 2nd year
TSLC events emphasize professionalism through an etiquette training dinner, dinner with
professionals, 2nd year launch networking event, mock interviews, resume reviews, career fair,
and networking event with the UNO College of Business. The TSLC program also requires 2nd
year students to participate in Passport Events which include a variety of career-related
workshops.
46

UNL TSLC Annual Reports Summary
The TSLC program at UNL offers several academic and career related services for
students. TSLC offers various academic workshops such as “Chart Your Course to Graduate
School,” “Exploring Majors,” and “Goal Setting.” TSLC also offers several career workshops
such as “Writing a Successful Resume and Cover Letter,” “Networking 101-Building
Connections,” and “UNMC Summer Internship Program Information Session.” The TSLC
program at UNL also hosts events related to academic success such as an achievement banquet
for students that receive a GPA of 3.5 or higher. Another notable program is “Take a Promising
Scholar to Lunch,” which encourages TSLC faculty to take a student that that can benefit from
additional academic support and outreach. The TSLC program also has academic retention
strategies such as new student enrollment meetings, mandatory academic advising meetings,
academic probation, and mid-semester grade checks.
TSLC students also have access to academic resources such as the TSLC Study Café and
TSLC Tutor Lab, both staffed by TSLC students. The TSLC peer mentor program also provides
1st year TSLC students support throughout the year. Peer mentors provide guidance to 1st year
students on academic, career, social, and personal concerns. Similar to UNO, TSLC at UNL
provides PALS for each 1st year experience course. PALS are 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th- year TSLC
students that provide instructor support, office hours, and grade assignments. Lastly, TSLC
students are required to enroll in TSLC classes during the 1st and 2nd year. First year students
must enroll in two TSLC classes per semester and 2nd year TSLC students must enroll in one
TSLC class per semester.
UNK TSLC Annual Reports Summary
47

The TSLC program at UNK offers many academic and career services similar to the
TSLC programs at UNO and UNL. First year TSLC students are required to enroll in two TSLC-
only courses in the fall semester and two TSLC-only courses in the spring semester. The required
1st year seminar covers topics such as study strategies, time management, leadership, and
wellness. Academic events that are offered exclusively for 1st year students include TSLC
orientation, undergraduate research information session, and the TSLC End of the Year Awards.
Second year TSLC students are required to enroll in one TSLC class in the fall semester
and one TSLC class in the spring semester. Second year TLSC students are required to attend
various career events such as an etiquette dinner, resume writing workshop, mock interview,
career fair, and an educator employment fair. Students that are still exploring majors or careers
are required to attend the CareerCode program. In the program, students learn how their interests
relate to majors and careers to help students create an academic plan before entering the 3rd year.
Mandatory events for 2nd year students include TSLC Orientation and a Halfway to Graduation
Celebration.
Moreover, the TSLC program at UNK also offers similar academic requirements and
support services. All 1st and 2nd year students are required to complete mid-semester grade
checks and TSLC advising meetings every semester. The program also offers TSLC peer mentors
for 1
st
year students, PALS, study hours, and an academic intervention program. Something that
UNK does differently is send a weekly newsletter to 1st and 2nd year students, which includes
academic dates and deadlines, campus resources, upcoming TSLC events and deadlines, and a
“student of the week” section. UNK also offers unique “Success Session” workshops which
include academic and career workshops such as “How to Ask for Letters of Recommendation,”
“How to Interview Effectively,” and “Professionalism and Leadership.”
48

Interviews
PASS researchers recruited students for interviews from the TSLC 1
st
year seminar course
(Hallett et al., 2020). The PASS research team presented information to students about the study
and distributed a sign-up sheet to participate in interviews; 20–35% of students volunteered for
interviews at each campus (Hallett et al., 2020). The research team conducted screening
interviews with the student volunteers to select the final participants for the study (Hallett et al.,
2020). Two cohorts were recruited (2015 and 2016) and received Amazon gift cards each year of
participation in the study for 3 years in total (Hallett et al., 2020). Students participated in three
interviews a semester during the first 2 years and two interviews a semester during the 3rd year
(Hallett et al., 2020). For the current dissertation study, a total of 124 interviews are analyzed
from the 10 Latin* first-generation college students. The total number of interviews per
participant is outlined in Table 1. The interviews are longitudinal in nature since they were
conducted over a 4–year period between 2015–2019 and during the student’s first 3 years in
college.
Interviews were conducted in-person, virtually, or via phone for approximately 30–60
minutes (Hallett et al., 2020). The interviews followed a semi-structured protocol which included
general introduction questions and then went into structured questions regarding certain
constructs (Hallett et al., 2020). The PASS team tailored portions of the interview protocol to
each student based on their digital diary entries (Hallett et al., 2020). The interview protocols
mostly related to major and career self-efficacy are in the Appendices. Each interview was
recorded and professionally transcribed (Hallett et al., 2020).
49

Data Analysis
Analysis of documents and interviews followed a multi-step process. The analytic
process began with document analysis. Specifically, I analyzed the TSLC annual reports from
2015–2019 to ascertain background context of the TSLC program goals, successes, and areas of
improvement. I analyzed four TSLC annual reports from UNO, four TSLC annual reports from
UNL, and four TSLC annual reports from UNK. The background context situated my
understanding of the study’s second data source of interviews. After completing the document
analysis, I analyzed 124 interviews from 10 Latin* first-generation college students. The student
participants were in the TSLC program across all three University of Nebraska campuses.
Interviews were collected during the first three years of college for each participant. To keep the
interview information organized, I created a Google Spreadsheet with detailed information about
each participant’s demographics. I then uploaded interview transcripts in a software, Dedoose, in
chronological order to easily read through the interviews. Overall, examining the documents and
interviews allowed me to grasp an overview of the data collected, whereas organizing the
documents and interviews provided structure for the analytic process.
The data analysis tools I used were memos, coding, and thematic analysis. Memos are
“reflections on your goals, methods, theory, or your prior experiences and your relationships
with participants” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 105). Memos helped me make sense of the findings by
reflecting on the coding process, emerging themes, and connections to the conceptual and
theoretical frameworks. I used Google Documents to write the memos and used the same
template for each memo. I initially wrote a memo after each interview for each participant. Due
to time constraints, I switched my approach halfway through the data analysis to one memo per
participant. With this new approach, I wrote my thoughts and insights after each participant’s
50

interview onto one long memo. Some categories within the memos are key topics discussed, key
quote excerpts, relation of interview to previous interviews with same participants and different
participants, and implications for practice (Saldaña, 2009).
Memoing and coding occurred concurrently. Coding is “a text-based label that gives
meaning to a segment of your data” (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017, p. 174). Coding is not a
scientific, but rather, interpretive act (Saldaña, 2009). I used the software Dedoose to upload and
code interview transcripts. Saldaña’s (2009) cycles of coding were implemented to analyze the
data. The first cycle of coding was the first attempt at coding, which included coding any text
that stood out among the data (Saldaña, 2009). First round coding resulted in 734 coded excerpts.
Second cycle coding was the second attempt at coding and was more refined than first cycle
coding (Saldaña, 2009). During second round coding, I examined each excerpt more thoroughly
to ensure the excerpt aligned with the code’s definition. The second round of coding resulted in a
decrease of 703 coded excerpts. Saldaña (2009) also encourages third and fourth round coding
but due to time constraints, I was not able to conduct third and fourth round coding.
I used different types of coding throughout the data analysis. I used descriptive codes and
a priori codes. Descriptive codes describe a main idea from the data (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
In this study, descriptive codes stemmed from my interpretation of the data and set the
foundation for the code list. On the other hand, a priori codes are connected to literature or
frameworks of a study (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). In this study, a priori codes stemmed from
the theoretical frameworks, SCCT and CCW. Some example codes from the theoretical
frameworks include the various aspects of cultural wealth (i.e., familial capital, aspirational
capital) and academic and career elements (i.e., academic self-efficacy, major and career self-
efficacy). To stay organized, I created a codebook with all the codes for data analysis. I also
51

incorporated codes from the PASS team’s existing codebook, such as belonging, validation, and
invalidation, to align with the PASS team’s research. Both codebooks contain codes, code
descriptions, and references (Saldaña, 2009). The PASS team’s codebook may be found in
Appendix K. Throughout the data analysis, I reflected on the coding process, emerging themes,
and connections to the conceptual and theoretical frameworks.
As previously mentioned, codes lead to categories which lead to themes. I transitioned
from codes to categories by grouping similar codes into a category. After the codes were
categorized, I reviewed the categories for themes. The themes were an outcome of coding and
categorizing and became the high-level results of the study (Saldaña, 2009). I employed thematic
analysis which is a “method for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within
data” (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 79). Themes are patterned topics within data and are a result of a
researcher’s interpretation of the data (Braun & Clarke, 2013; Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). I
followed Braun & Clarke’s (2006) six phases for thematic analysis which are: familiarizing
oneself with the data, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and
producing the report. To hold myself accountable during the thematic analytic process, I utilized
Braun and Clarke’s (2006) checklist of criteria for good thematic analysis which includes criteria
for the transcription, coding, analysis, and written report processes. Themes from the data are
discussed in Chapter Four and Chapter Five.
Credibility, Trustworthiness, and Transferability
I engaged with multiple tools to promote the credibility, trustworthiness, and
transferability of this study’s findings. One method of ensuring credibility, which is if a research
study’s findings are believable (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), is incorporating verbatim data.
Interview data was professionally transcribed and included ample direct quotes from participants.
52

Consequently, I analyzed and incorporated verbatim data from the interviews to strengthen my
findings. Triangulation, which is the use of multiple methods, data sources, investigators, or
theories to confirm findings (Denzin, 1978), also increases the study’s credibility. I used methods
triangulation by drawing from data collected through documents and interviews. This study also
entailed data triangulation by including numerous diverse participants and collecting data at
different points in time. The study also used investigator triangulation because there were
multiple people that collected and reflected on the data. The last credibility strategy implemented
in this study is prolonged engagement in the field. The PASS team spent 5–years at the three
University of Nebraska campuses to build and sustain student relationships for meaningful data.
This level of prolonged engagement in the field builds credibility because the longevity of the
researchers’ presence allowed them to obtain rich data thru researcher-participant relationships
and observable changes over time (Lincoln & Guba, 1986).
Trustworthiness is also embedded throughout the research design and analysis process.
Trustworthiness corresponds with the reliability of the research process (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Maxwell (2013) recommends being honest about researcher bias and positionality to
increase the trustworthiness of a study. As such, my personal and professional positionality
influence my interest in this study. As a Mexican American, first-generation college student at a
large public university, I experienced limited institutional major and career guidance. Using
navigational capital (Yosso, 2005), I learned major and minor requirements and mapped out my
4–year academic plan on my own. Within my 4 years as an undergraduate student, I never met
(nor was required) with an academic or career advisor to challenge and support me on my
academic and professional development.
53

I ultimately decided to pursue a career in education because I was familiar and
comfortable with the field. Growing up, I wanted to be an elementary school teacher and entered
college with this career in mind. However, during my third year in college, I pivoted my career
to higher education because it more closely aligned with my interests. Still, looking back, I wish
I had institutional guidance on additional career pathways that I could have pursued given my
academic and professional background. My current professional experience as a graduate student
advisor enlightens me to the need for institutional academic and career support. As an advisor, I
practice proactive advising by meeting with students early and consistently throughout their
academic journeys. Seeing the firsthand benefits of proactive advising solidifies the significance
and my interest of this advising approach on students’ academic and career success. Ultimately, I
seek to support university students in their academic and professional journeys, so they do not
experience the lack of academic and career support I experienced.
However, I remain mindful not to impose my own perceptions and experiences to the
data analysis. As Milner (2007) shares, researchers’ interests can easily overshadow participants’
interests. Reflecting on my own interest and power in relation to the study helped me navigate
commonalities and tensions within the study while working to honor participants’ truths. In
addition, I attended monthly PASS research team meetings to gain a deeper understanding of the
research project’s purpose and listen to the team’s perspectives and research related to major and
career self-efficacy. Hearing other researcher’s perspectives allowed me to remain open-minded
and flexible to different approaches and possibilities related to major and career self-efficacy.
Transferability pertains to the aspects of qualitative research findings that can transfer to
other contexts (Braun & Clarke, 2013). According to Braun and Clarke (2013) and Merriam and
Tisdell (2016), a study can increase its transferability by providing a “thick description” of the
54

setting, participants, and conditions of the study. Thick descriptions should include verbatim
quotes, documents, and field notes to provide additional context for a reader to determine if the
study’s findings are transferable. Since this study is a case study, transferability is limited, so it is
ultimately up to the reader to conclude if the study’s findings are transferable to other contexts.
Ethical Considerations
Ethics were taken into consideration throughout the research process. IRB was obtained
early in the research process. I was added to the existing IRB for the PASS project which
provided me access to data from the first and second phases of the PASS study. The PASS study
has high-caliber data security procedures to protect the interests and confidentiality of
participants. Data is stored in an electronic drive that only PASS team members can access and
each team member has a unique login to access data. Additionally, pseudonyms are used for
every participant in the study.
The topic of this study (major and career self-efficacy) is seemingly low stakes on the
surface. However, there is the possibility that a participant’s decision regarding a college, major
choice, and/or career path is rooted in an uncomfortable or traumatic experience. Therefore, I
deidentified data to respect participant confidentiality (Glesne, 2011). Another ethical
consideration is participant consent. Although the TSLC participants consented to data collection
for the first phase of the PASS project, the TSLC participants did not directly consent to data
collection for my dissertation. However, an option within the USC Doctor of Education program
is to join a research team in the USC Rossier School of Education. Therefore, I joined the USC
Rossier Pullias Center for Higher Education’s PASS research team to complete my dissertation.
Joining the PASS research team mitigates the consent concern because I followed all the high-
level security measures required by the funder and university and I continuously worked closely
55

with the PASS research team on appropriately honoring PASS data. Overall, I do not anticipate
participants being harmed or confidentiality compromised because of this study. However, the
strategies mentioned above hopefully alleviate any concerns.
Conclusion
Ultimately, this study’s research design and analysis aligns with the rigorous elements of
a qualitative case study. The research question, unique setting, sample population, data sources,
and analysis strategies helps examine the innovative topic of major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students. The following chapter reveals the findings of the study.

56

Chapter Four: Findings
Although there is a plethora of research regarding academic self-efficacy and career self-
efficacy, limited research exists on the combined concept of major and career self-efficacy.
Moreover, even though Latin* first-generation college students are one of the largest growing
student populations, limited research focuses on how Latin* first-generation college students
develop major and career self-efficacy. Major and career self-efficacy is important to understand
to provide insight into why Latin* first-generation college students reach or do not reach
academic and professional goals. The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that
influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. The research
question that guides this study is: How do Latin* first-generation college students develop major
and career self-efficacy? Using the frameworks of social cognitive career theory and community
cultural wealth, this study reveals how individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors
inhibit and promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
Chapter Four includes a brief overview of the 10 Latin* first-generation college student
participants whose insights are at the center of this study. Then, the findings of the study are
organized into two sections: factors that inhibit major and career self-efficacy and factors that
promote major and career self-efficacy. Each section has four subsections: individual, family,
programmatic, and institutional. Chapter Four concludes with a summary of the findings.
Participants
This study revolves around the experiences and insights of 10 Latin* first-generation
college student participants. Specifically, there are three participants from UNK, three
participants from UNL, and four participants from UNO. In addition to the demographic
information provided in Table 1 in Chapter Three, participants majors range from the physical
57

sciences, social sciences, education, business, languages, and art. Seven students are involved
with on-campus leadership positions, student organizations, and/or research programs. Six
students hold on and/or off-campus jobs to financially support themselves and/or families. Four
students are the eldest child in their family and three students have siblings in the TSLC
program. There is also a mixture of students that live off-campus and on-campus.
Factors That Inhibit Major and Career Self-Efficacy
The 10 Latin* first-generation college student participants graciously shared their
experiences and perspectives about their collegiate journeys at the University of Nebraska. The
124 interviews from 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the TSLC program at UNK,
UNL, and UNO provides rich data for understanding the factors that inhibit and promote major
and career self-efficacy. The following section highlights individual, family, programmatic, and
institutional components that inhibit major and career self-efficacy of the Latin* first-generation
college student participants.
Individual Level
At the individual level, self-doubt plays an influential role in inhibiting a student’s major
and career self-efficacy. Students share a range of thoughts such as feeling college is not meant
for them, being overwhelmed with the responsibilities of college, and experiencing anxiety over
creating 4–year academic plans and post-graduation career plans. One student even expresses
that they did not enjoy their first year in college.
Students also express self-doubt about their abilities to be successful in their major. For
example, Jackie shares how her feelings towards her major are both positive and negative. Some
days she is happy and confident in her major and other days she is crying and frustrated in her
major. Additionally, Pedro also expresses his struggles as an engineering major, including
58

changing his major four times. Although he academically struggles, Pedro still holds a passion to
pursue engineering.
Furthermore, students express self-doubt about their abilities to be successful in their
careers. As with their majors, some days students are confident in their career abilities and some
days students are not confident in their career abilities, as Luis highlights: “Like, I could wake up
thinking I’m gonna be a horrible therapist, and by the night, I think I’ve got a solid plan. I don’t
know, I have really bad mood swings.” Students’ perceptions of their ability to successfully
pursue a major or career often changes throughout the course of their studies. Self-doubt creeps
into students’ minds at different points of their collegiate journey which negatively impacts their
confidence in their academic and professional abilities and skills.
Family Level
Due to the collectivist nature of Latin* communities, Latin* students tend to have close
relationships with their families. The closeness of Latin* families is an asset but can also impose
challenges on the collegiate journeys of Latin* first-generation college students. This section
outlines how two family factors, conflicting beliefs regarding career choice and balancing home
and college, inhibit major and career self-efficacy of the Latin* first-generation college student
participants.
Conflicting Beliefs Regarding Career Choice
One challenge that affects major and career self-efficacy of the Latin* first-generation
college student participants is conflicting beliefs regarding career choice between parents and
students. The student participants want to pursue meaningful and impactful careers regardless of
financial outcomes. For them, their definition of success is based on how many lives they impact
in their lifetime. On the other hand, students share that their parents’ definition of success is
59

making a lot of money. In the parents’ perspective, they view college as a pathway to pursuing a
financially lucrative career. When several of the students share their interests to pursue a
historically low-paying career, the parents are confused and do not understand why their child
would pivot to a career that does not make a lot of money. The tension between family
expectations and a student’s career interests relates to the commonly shared pressure of being a
first-generation college student. Students note the pressure, mostly by family, to choose a certain
career path because they are the first in their immediate family to obtain a college degree and
thus, should pursue a historically high-paying career (e.g., doctor, lawyer).
The tension between student and family career intentions influences some students to
choose a major or minor to appease their family. Students report adding a major or minor
because their parents want them to work in a certain field, as Alberto demonstrates:
So, then I talked to [a TSLC staff member] about it. And he asked me, “Okay. So, why
did I want to go into radiography in the first place?” Which is the reason why I put that
health science minor on. And then I told him like throughout high school my mom always
told me, you know, go to college. Be a doctor or a lawyer or something like that. And
then when I went to new student enrollment day, I was talking to the advisor. She was
trying to help me narrow down what I wanted to do for to study. And I told her I wanted
to do something in the medical field and that I was interested in like medical imaging and
stuff. So, she, boom, put down pre-radiography. And my mom always told me like, you
know, you’ll get good money and all that stuff, and you’ll be happy. So, that’s kind of
where it originated from. And [A TSLC staff member] asked me like how I felt. Did I
enjoy the classes I was taking for those, for my health science minor and pre-radiography
stuff? And I told him, “No. I absolutely strongly dislike every class that I took.” And then
60

he asked me like if I would like one day want to work in a hospital setting and be a
radiographer. And like, “You know what? I don't know. I don’t think I’d like that too
much.”
The quote from Alberto highlights the common pressure from parents that students report to
pursue a financially lucrative major, minor, or career. Other students report adding a major or
minor because they feel a sense of obligation to financially support their parents. Their parents
financially struggle by living paycheck to paycheck, so the students feel a sense of responsibility
to pursue a financially profitable career to support themselves and their parents. In both
scenarios, students report not feeling content or fulfilled in the major or minor.
Balancing Home and College
Secondly, challenges balancing home life and college life affect major and career self-
efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. Many students share difficulties focusing on
schoolwork when visiting their families because family members often ask the students to
complete chores around the house, babysit younger siblings, and/or help parents with tasks such
as making appointments, paying bills, or completing taxes, as Bella illustrates:
Just like yesterday, I got a phone call and they’re like, “Oh, next weekend, you better be
here ‘cause we’re gonna do taxes.” I’m like, “You could have told me a little earlier.”
They’re like, “Oh, make sure you have all your forms ready. You’re the only one who
doesn’t have your forms. You should bring them.” I’m like, “What?” They’re like, “Oh
honey, your dad wants to get rid of this mole. How do you do that?” I’m like, “Mom, I
don’t know.”
Since families place various responsibilities on students during their visits, some students decide
not to visit home often. However, students find it difficult to articulate to their families the
61

challenges of balancing family expectations to frequently visit home versus college
responsibilities of schoolwork or co-curricular activities.
Students that live at home during college especially experience the challenges of
balancing home life and college life. Several students share that living at home has the
advantages of immediate and constant family support, such as words of encouragement and a
safe space to vent about college-related frustrations. However, the challenges of living at home
include difficulties studying and parents constantly monitoring the student’s activities.
Programmatic Level
There are three factors within the TSLC program that inhibit major and career self-
efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. This section outlines how discouragement,
impediments to cultural capital, and impediments to social capital negatively affect Latin* first-
generation college students’ major and career journeys.
Discouragement
One of the factors that inhibits major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students is discouragement, particularly from TSLC staff members. For instance, Bella
feels discouragement when her ideas to help her TSLC mentees are not supported by a TSLC
staff member. Another student, Jackie, reports that a TSLC staff member does not support her
decision to continue staying in her major, and thus Jackie must build her own confidence:
I don’t know if they really helped my confidence in this regard because I do remember, I
think it was my sophomore year maybe that [A TSLC Staff Member] was like, “You may
have to take a step back and realize that this isn’t for you, and that you need to change
your major.” She said she already had to do that with one student. I know they’re just
looking out for me, but in a way, I had to build my own confidence with it. You know?
62

Although Jackie appreciates discussing her academic journey with the TSLC staff member, she
feels that the advice was discouraging. Jackie is adamant about pursing her major and related
career and feels that the staff member’s advice discourages her from pursuing her passion.
Impediments to Cultural Capital
Another factor that inhibits major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students is impediments to cultural capital. Cultural capital is defined as “accumulation
of cultural knowledge, skills, and abilities possessed and inherited by privileged groups in
society” (Yosso, 2005, p. 76). For several students, some of the TSLC career events (e.g., mock
interviews, resume reviews) do not facilitate the growth of cultural capital that would behoove
them in mainstream educational or career settings. For example, although many TSLC students
find the mock interviews helpful, there are a handful of TSLC students that find the mock
interviews unhelpful. These students already have prior exposure to interviewing, whether
through previous jobs or part of their degree requirements, so they do not accumulate new
interview knowledge, skills, or abilities, as Anthony illustrates:
[Interviews were] not helpful for me. And I said that, and my review was like this is very
beneficial to a lot of people, but not me. All it did was—I got perfect score on everything
from my resume to the actual interview, which I fully expected to do, just because that’s
who I am. But there’s no opt-out clause for me.
The impediments to cultural capital are a result of developmental differences between students.
The students that possess advanced skills, knowledge, and abilities do not gain cultural capital
compared to students that possess little to no prior skills, knowledge, or abilities related to career
development. Although some students do not gain cultural capital from the mock interviews or
63

resume reviews, they still act courteously and professionally in order to fulfill the mandatory
TSLC requirements.
Impediments to Social Capital
The third factor within the TSLC program that inhibits major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students is impediments to social capital. Social capital is
“networks of people and community resources” (Yosso, 2005, p. 79). Several of the students
express that some of the TSLC career events (e.g., career fair, networking dinner) do not
facilitate professional connections. For example, Freda expresses how the networking dinner
does not have medical professionals for her to connect with and thus, does not create
professional networks for her:
There was no one really medically related. I still talked to a bunch of professionals, but
they kind of looked at my major and were like—“We don’t have anything for you” and
moved onto another person. So, I was like “Cool. All right.” I know my etiquette, and I
know how to talk to people, so it was just like, more practice in it, I guess. But a lot of the
professionals just kind of passed me by because, a [science] major, what can you do? I’m
already going to med school.
Similarly, some students report that the career fair does not facilitate social capital because there
are no employers within their area of interest. These students are not able to connect with
potential employers for internships or job opportunities, which could help their career
development.
Institutional Level
64

Within the larger university setting, the data reveals that invalidation and impediments to
sense of belonging negatively contributes to major and career self-efficacy of the Latin* first-
generation college student participants.
Invalidation
Study participants identify sources of invalidation outside of the TSLC program,
particularly from university staff and professors. As a reminder, invalidation is defined as when
an individual does not feel recognized, affirmed, or enabled for their innate capacities for
learning and college success. Jackie discusses how her academic advisor doubts her ability to be
successful as a science major which negatively affects Jackie’s wellbeing:
I feel like she will always have this certain portrayal of me and that even if I were to do
better, she would still question me and I don’t know. I just feel like I get that anxiety and
depression before it’s time to meet with her. I always do because I'm like, “Ugh,” because
I know I’m about to be brought down. So, I don’t know. It’s between a mix of both. I
wanna tell her how I feel, but then it’s like I don’t wanna waste so much time and energy
into those feelings and into her because I don’t know what she would do.
Jackie consults with a TSLC advisor on how to best approach the situation with her academic
advisor but is still unsure if she should tell her academic advisor how she truly feels. Jackie also
experiences invalidation from a science professor. Although Jackie and her White lab partner
collaborate on all lab assignments, the professor gave Jackie a lower grade on an assignment in
comparison to her lab partner. This incident makes Jackie question the professor’s perception of
Jackie’s race and academic abilities.
Impediments to Sense of Belonging
65

Another inhibiting factor to major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students is that institutions do not facilitate a sense of belonging for students of color.
Several students report that they are the only Latin* person in their class. To find community,
students join student organizations related to their major, career, and/or ethnic identity (e.g.,
Teachers of Color Association, Women in STEM). Yet, students are still sometimes the only
person of their ethnic identity in the organization, as shared by Alexandra: “I’m on the board of
the [student organization]. I’m the only Latina, too. I saw that right away when we had our first
meeting.” Although student organizations can foster a sense of community, they do not negate
the institutional failure of students being the only one of a certain identity in their class(es).
Although most students emphasize a sense of belonging within the TSLC community,
most students report not feeling a sense of belonging within the larger university. Invalidation
from staff and faculty as reported in the previous section contribute to students not feeling a
sense of belonging in their major or careers. Moreover, microaggressions from peers and
professors also contribute to students feeling like they do not belong, as Bella exemplifies: “I just
feel like sometimes people act a certain way and I’m like, ‘Should I question if that’s because
I’m Latina? Because I look a certain way?’” Microaggressions compound students not feeling a
sense of belonging when combined with the previously discussed inhibiting factors.
Factors That Promote Major and Career Self-Efficacy
Although there are factors that inhibit major and career self-efficacy of the Latin* first-
generation college student participants, there are also factors that promote major and career self-
efficacy. The following section highlights individual, family, programmatic, and institutional
components that promote major and career self-efficacy for the 10 Latin* first-generation college
students in the TSLC program.
66

Individual Level
The following section outlines individual factors that promote major and career self-
efficacy. In particular, Latin* first-generation college students utilize three types of community
cultural wealth to facilitate development of their major and career self-efficacy: aspirational
capital, linguistic capital, and familial capital.
Aspirational Capital
One factor that promotes major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students is aspirational capital. Aspirational capital is the
ability to maintain hopes and dreams for the future, even in the face of real and perceived
barriers … allow themselves and their children to dream of possibilities beyond their
present circumstances, often without the objective means to attain those goals. (Yosso,
2005, pp. 77–78).
Study participants emphasize three forms of aspirational capital: aspirations related to
college, aspirations related to graduate school and professional school, and aspirations related to
careers.
Aspirations Related to College. All participants possess aspirational capital to attend
college, hence their first-generation college student status. Courage appears to be connected to
aspirational capital and is a common sentiment among the students because they are the first in
their family to go to college, and often, the first in their family to move out of their hometown.
Courage is even more apparent for Latin* female students because of the traditional notion in
Latin* families that females should live at home until they are married. Yet, some of the Latin*
female student participants move out of their families’ homes to attend college, as exemplified in
Carmen’s situation: “I feel like I’m courageous because I’m the first one in my family to leave
67

without being married, and going to college away from my family, and I don’t mind taking
risks.”
The ability to be courageous in pursuit of one’s college aspirations displays the strength and
determination of Latin* first-generation college students.
Aspirations Related to Graduate and Professional School. Several students express a
desire to attend graduate or professional school. Students that plan to attend graduate or
professional school talk to TSLC and/or university staff and faculty to learn about the
requirements for graduate or professional school applications. Upon learning the application
requirements, students plan their collegiate academic or career plans to include relevant
extracurricular activities such as internships, job shadowing, or research. Although some students
have a clear direction of their post-college plans, some students express uncertainty of where
they want to attend graduate or professional school and their field of study. These students are
still exploring their options while in college but were certain they want to attend graduate school,
as Alberto underscores:
I guess like what exactly I want to do with my major and if I want to go either the
counseling route or the psychology route. Because I’m definitely confident in or feel
very, very comfortable with my majors right now. But it’s just afterwards what I want to
do with the career. Because I do definitely plan on going to graduate school, but just as to
what exactly I want to study for graduate school, either like the counseling stuff or the
psychology, that’s what I’m a little uncertain of.
Latin* first-generation college students have the hopes and dreams to attend graduate or
professional school but oftentimes need support and guidance on how to navigate graduate or
professional school pathways and the application process.
68

Aspirations Related to Careers. The theme of having a career versus a job often comes
up in participants’ stories. As mentioned in the previous section, students express their desire to
pursue a meaningful career that they are passionate about and will bring them fulfillment. This
mindset contrasts with some of the parents’ views on obtaining a financially lucrative career.
Students share how their parents commonly encourage them to obtain and stick with one well-
paying job for the rest of their life. However, the students express that they want a career, which
entails leaving a position if the position no longer brings fulfilment or career advancement. This
notion highlights the addition of making parents proud and making oneself proud, as Bella
outlines:
My success in college would be one, being proud of myself because I’ve always worked
hard for my school, particularly to make my parents proud. But now it’s like at that point
where it’s like you’ve done everything you’ve already accomplished for them. What are
you going to do for you? So, I want to be proud of myself when I graduate. I want to be
able to have different experiences that I know I can handle.
Students’ aspirations to pursue meaningful careers highlight the professional hopes and dreams
of the historically underrepresented Latin* first-generation college student population.
Furthermore, Latin* first-generation college students often must find the balance of making their
parents proud and oneself proud with their career aspirations.
Linguistic Capital
Since most participants are bilingual in English and Spanish, linguistic capital is a major
component to increasing students’ major and career self-efficacy. Yosso (2005) defines linguistic
capital as the “intellectual and social skills attained through communication experiences in more
69

than one language and/or style” (p. 79). Study participants identify two advantages related to
their linguistic capital: career opportunities and study abroad.
Career Opportunities. Students acknowledge how bilingualism in English and Spanish
can grant more job opportunities than people that solely speak English. The potential career
opportunities that students may obtain as a result of their linguistic capital and higher education
provides confidence in the student’s abilities to succeed in their chosen career field. One student,
Carmen, even discloses how she is paid more than her mother because of her bilingualism:
How I am right now is yes, my job pays the bills and yes, I actually make more than my
mom has ever made in her life. That’s just because I'm bilingual. The privilege I have
with that is I make a lot of money so that I don’t have to work full-time, which is good
‘cause then I can go to school.
The increased salary affirms Carmen’s, and other students’ assumption that bilingualism is
financially advantageous. Therefore, students leverage their linguistic capital in the professional
space which builds confidence in their unique skills and strengths.
Study Abroad. Another advantage of linguistic capital is studying abroad. For example,
Alberto is trilingual because he speaks English, Spanish, and French. Alberto starts learning
French in college through his French major. One of his French professors validates that Alberto
is learning the French language quickly for only taking classes in college. To further his French
fluency, Alberto plans to study abroad in France. Studying abroad in France will provide the
opportunity to practice the French language and immerse in French culture. Alberto’s linguistic
capital of English and Spanish provides him the confidence to choose a language major, French,
and pursue experiential opportunities to apply the language skills and knowledge.
Familial Capital
70

The third factor that promotes major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students at the individual level is familial capital. Yosso (2005) defines familial capital as
“cultural knowledges nurtured among familia (kin) that carry a sense of community history,
memory and cultural intuition” (p. 79). Study participants identify four main sources of familial
capital: receiving career advice from family, applying lessons from family, sharing knowledge
with family, and honoring parents’ sacrifices.
Receiving Career Advice From Family. Although students are the first in their family to
attend college, they often turn to family for career advice because they value their family’s
strong work ethic. Furthermore, students became confident in their ability to become successful
in a particular career if they see a family member’s career success. In fact, students consult with
family members for career advice, even if the family member has no direct career knowledge, as
outlined by Anthony:
When it comes down to something basic and logical, I am always going to turn to my
dad. It seems like he has the most logical, realistic point of view. … So, sometimes I just
go straight to him even if it’s in a field that he has never dabbled in or has no idea
anything about, he has had so much life experience and is very realistic, very logical, that
I would usually go to him.
Although family members may not have direct knowledge of a student’s career field, students
still value and respect the advice and guidance of family members to navigate professional
situations based on their lived experiences.
Applying Lessons From Family. Another theme that arose from the data is students
applying lessons learned from their family to college. Students share various lessons they learned
71

from their families such as independence, kindness, sacrifice, and effort. For example, Bella
highlights the lessons she learned from her mom and dad:
She’s taught me many lessons where it’s like, you really should pay attention because
there’s things that if you don’t stop, you’re gonna miss it. That is something I learned
from my mom. A lesson I’ve learned from my dad, which I feel like my dad, I think, has
provided me a ton of it, but it’s just the sacrifices that he’s done.
Additional lessons shared from family are asking questions, paying attention to teachers, and not
being shy. The familial capital of family lessons helps students navigate academic and career
challenges by giving students general but practical advice to succeed and persevere.
Sharing Knowledge With Family. Another way that students build major and career
self-efficacy is through knowledge sharing with family. Passing knowledge to family members
allows students to teach and apply their knowledge of a certain topic, which is evident in
Carmen’s example of sharing resume tips with her sister:
I told her if you can put a sticky note on it, then you don’t have enough stuff on it. And
the way to organize it. Like you know how a lot of people in the middle of the page they
put like their number, and like their e-mail, and something else, like those, and take up
three different lines. I told her to separate it in a straight line so it takes up less space and
it looks like a little bit more professional that way.
Sharing with another individual information on a certain topic allows students to practice what
they learn and by doing so, build confidence in their own abilities, skills, and knowledge. In
addition, sharing academic or career knowledge with family creates a positive cycle of capital-
building which benefits the whole family.
72

Honoring Parents’ Sacrifices. Lastly, students utilize familial capital to honor their
parents’ sacrifices. Most students share that they want to be successful to honor the sacrifices
their parents made for the student to attend college. Jackie highlights this point when discussing
how her parents did not attend college:
If I hadn’t gone to college and would have just worked, I would have seen myself as
successful still. But knowing that both of them never really got the chance to go to
college and me coming to college, I felt it was a really big success to show people that
even though your parents didn't have the opportunity to, doesn’t mean that you won’t.
Students often feel that they owe their parents for all they have done for them. Therefore, the
students are motivated to be successful in college and in their career to honor their family’s
sacrifices and again, make their parents proud.
Family Level
Various family aspects also affect the major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-
generation college students. Family influence students’ decisions to attend college. Students
share how witnessing the struggles and mistakes their family made as a result of not having a
college degree influenced them to pursue higher education. As previously mentioned, students
feel a sense of responsibility to prove that one can attend college and become successful to honor
their parent’s sacrifices. The pride parents have in their child to pursue higher education is an
honor and responsibility that the students did not take lightly.
Influence on Major or Minor
Family sometimes play an important role in influencing the majors or minors of students.
Some students are inspired to pursue a career because of past or current situations or issues that
occurred within their families. Some students share how they discuss with their family the major
73

or minor they should choose, whereas other students just pursue a major or minor that suite their
interests. When a student’s family is completely supportive in a student’s major or minor, they
feel more confident and empowered to pursue that path, as Alberto explains:
My brother tells me like, “Oh, that's good for you. Keep going after it.” My mom, it’s
harder to explain it to her. But she says, “Yeah. Yeah, looks like it’s going to be a good
career choice.” I know she wanted me to work in a hospital setting because my uncle and
stuff, when I was growing up and stuff, and my mom as well, they told me, grow up and
be a lawyer or doctor. It was either one of those options. You can go in the medical field
or in the–something like in the like law … good that I’m studying psychology, and some
of my uncles find it nice as well that I’m doing that and I’m seeking that kind of path. So,
yeah, it was well received by my family.
The family members serve as motivation for the students to honor their families through hard
work and perseverance. With family support on their major or minor pathway, students are able
to wholeheartedly pursue their interests.
Influence on Careers
Families of first-generation college students are positive and active participants to
fostering major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. Students use
social connections from family and friends to obtain internships or jobs in their related career
fields. For example, Jackie and Alberto connect with family doctors to conduct shadowing hours
for medical and occupational therapy program applications. Additionally, Jackie’s sister
introduces Jackie to her company to get her work related to clients with disabilities. Furthermore,
Anthony works as a nanny for a couple that works in real estate. Since real estate is Anthony’s
area of career interest, he talks to the nanny family for advice related to real estate and business.
74

Family support is also important when a student shares the plans for their career and it is well-
received by their family. When their family supports their career goals, students feel more
confident in pursing that major or career.
Support System
Family plays a vital support system while Latin* first-generation college students are in
college. Students share how their families encourage them to get through college with love,
support, encouragement, and positivity like Jackie’s mom exemplifies: “Whenever I came home
and I was like, ‘Mom, I got a C on a test,’ she’d be like, ‘Well, it’s better than a D.’ Just trying to
give that positive mindset. I was like, ‘Thanks, Mom.’” Although parents often cannot give
concrete advice on how to navigate the intricacies of college, many students value family’s
moral support and words of encouragement. The affirmations and encouragement increase
student’s confidence in their abilities to persevere in college. Family members in college
concurrently, such as the students that have siblings in TSLC, serve as a key source of support
through the difficulties of college and careers because they are only a call or text away. Students
sometimes even lean on the advice and opinions of their siblings to navigate major requirements
such as classes and registration.
Programmatic Level
Although Latin* first-generation college students enter college with various community
cultural wealth, the university has the responsibility to ensure that conditions are conducive for
students to develop their major and career self-efficacy. Universities hold the responsibility to
understand students’ backgrounds and help them flourish in college. There are five TSLC factors
that promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students:
75

facilitation of cultural capital, facilitation of navigational capital, facilitation of social capital,
validating approaches, and fostering sense of belonging.
Facilitation of Cultural Capital
The TSLC program facilitates the development of cultural capital for the Latin* first-
generation college student participants through career-related events such as a resume workshop,
etiquette dinner, and mock interview. Each of these events provide the opportunity for Latin*
first-generation college students to learn and develop professional skills for their future careers.
Noteworthy to mention that the cultural capital acquired through TSLC career events is a culture
that has value in mainstream White academic and professional society, which varies from the
multiculturally interconnected community of Latin* students.
TSLC Resume Workshop. Many students share how the TSLC resume workshop
provides helpful tips to improve their resume. During the resume workshop, TSLC staff
members provide direct, one-on-one feedback for students. The resume workshop helps students
prepare a competitive resume as Alexandra explains: “And they came to just go over our resume
and to kind of just give us some tips on how to improve, our resumes look just more competitive
I guess.” Several students also discuss how they share the knowledge learned about resume
writing to parents, siblings, or TSLC mentees. Teaching and sharing resume skills allows the
students to apply their knowledge and facilitate cultural capital for others.
TSLC Etiquette Dinner. Additionally, the TSLC etiquette dinner teaches students how
to approach a formal dinner setting that is valued in mainstream U.S. society. For many students,
the etiquette dinner is the first time a student participates in a formal dinner and learns table
placements. The knowledge gained from the etiquette dinner transfers to real-life scenarios as
shared by Carmen:
76

And I still refer back to what we learned in the diversity training that we went through,
and we had an etiquette training, which came in really handy at my job, because we had
at the Christmas party that was just last week, it was really fancy. Like, there was no
table, so we weren’t sitting. But, you know, it kinda did teach you how to talk to your
bosses or how to act, especially in a formal, formal type setting, and like, what you
should say, what you shouldn’t say, you know? How you should eat and how much you
should eat at a time, you know?
The skills and knowledge obtained at the TSLC etiquette dinner help students navigate formal
dinners within the professional and academic space, which will surely occur in college and the
professional workforce.
TSLC Mock Interview. The TSLC mock interview is also an important aspect to
facilitating cultural capital for student participants. Students express how the mock interview
helps them gain confidence by learning how to dress for an interview and respond to practice
interview questions. To illustrate, Alberto shares how the mock interview provides a foundation
for his career needs: “I guess for now, my basic needs, like dressing professionally and
interviewing effectively and having a competitive resume, for now I feel like those needs are
met.” The mock interview is repeatedly touted among students as beneficial for student’s career
development.
Facilitation of Navigational Capital
The TSLC program also facilitates navigational capital for the Latin* first-generation
college student participants. The following section outlines how TSLC staff, TSLC professors,
TLSC classes, TSLC events, and self-advocacy facilitates navigational capital in relation to
major and career self-efficacy for Latin* first-generation college students.
77

TSLC Staff. TSLC staff are often cited as a support system as students navigate college.
Staff members often guide students through difficult situations such as approaching
uncomfortable conversations with academic advisors and professors, conducting resume reviews,
providing study abroad advice, and sharing mental health resources. Jackie shares how a TSLC
staff member is helpful to supporting her through a situation with her academic advisor:
Actually, like with [A TSLC Staff Member] when she was helping me with the advisor
issue, even though I haven’t done anything, it was still nice to know that she had my back
and that she supported me and she gave me advice on how to handle it.
As a result of the close connections between TSLC students and TSLC staff, students feel
comfortable contacting TSLC staff for questions or advice regarding academic, career, family,
and social challenges.
TSLC Professors. TSLC professors also assist students’ major and career navigation.
Students express that TSLC professors appear to genuinely care about students’ wellbeing, offer
encouragement, and offer recognition for students’ hard work. Some students even have a TSLC
professor for more than one class, which allows the students to form a closer bond with the
professor. Since many TSLC professors are from the social sciences or humanities departments,
TSLC students with social science or humanities majors have great relationships with the TSLC
professors and feel they can easily talk to the professors.
TSLC Classes. TSLC classes build academic and career skills for students’ future roles.
For example, participants note that the research project conducted in a TSLC research class
increase students’ confidence in their research abilities. In fact, students are inspired to submit
research conference proposals or participate in the university undergraduate research program
after the TSLC research class. TSLC professors also hold high expectations for students which is
78

important to prepare students, as Jackie shares: “I think it made me like it a lot more, because
now like I understand the process behind it. I don’t think I fully understood what to do when
you’re researching.” The high standards from TSLC professors demonstrates the confidence they
have in students’ academic abilities which in turn, increases student’s confidence in their own
academic abilities.
TSLC Events. The various TSLC academic and career-related events help students
navigate aspects of majors and careers. As previously mentioned, many students express the
usefulness and applicability of the resume workshop, etiquette dinner, and mock interview.
Another beneficial TSLC event is the Halfway to Graduation Celebration which celebrates
second year-students. The event affirms and recognizes the milestone of completing half of
college. Another notable event is a TSLC workshop on communication, which centers around
communication styles in the workplace. Students find this workshop useful, especially in one’s
career since there will be different types of people in the work environment.
Self-Advocacy. Another finding that emerged is that the TSLC program develops self-
advocacy. The TSLC program provides students a plethora of information, knowledge, and skills
to navigate majors and careers. As a result of the accumulated knowledge, students feel
empowered to advocate for themselves inside the classroom, as Carmen highlights:
Before I went to college, I had no experience, no expectation, no–like I had no idea, you
know, what was gonna happen, how we were gonna be treated, you know, what
expectations the program had of us, and now I feel like I gained some experience, like a
year and a half experience. So, you know, I have expectations that I’m not willing to
negotiate for how I am educated. Like, you know, we worked really hard for our
scholarship, you know, our senior year in high school and, you know, it’s just something
79

that the advisors have told us this is our education and if something’s not clicking or if
you’re not really getting something then you need to ask for help or you need to address
whatever the problem is to the professor.
The self-advocacy that students develop relates to major and career self-efficacy because
students use their voice to confidently express their needs and wants inside and outside the
classroom.
Facilitation of Social Capital
Fourthly, the TSLC program facilitates social capital. The following section outlines how
the TSLC program’s network for majors and careers and TSLC faculty facilitate social capital
for Latin* first-generation college students.
Network For Majors and Careers. TSLC staff and classes play a major role in
facilitating the development of social capital for Latin* first-generation college students. TSLC
staff connect students to practitioners and scholars via a professional’s dinner, career fair, and
informational interviews. The social connections help students realize new career interests or
reaffirm existing career interests as exemplified by Pedro:
The last dinner we had, there were professionals coming to talk to us for each career, and
I sat at the engineering table, and [omit] was her name. She was pretty nice and talk about
other types of careers of engineering and how good it is … and then, after I went to that
dinner, I was like, “You know what? Engineering is it. It’s the career I want.”
TSLC classes also facilitate social capital. Students in a TSLC class related to their major
develop a network of TSLC students that they can rely on as they progress in their major courses.
Additionally, the TSLC seminars help connect students to career-related information such as
their strengths, networking, and networking career fairs.
80

Furthermore, TSLC staff members connect students to graduate school information. Staff
members help students search graduate programs and graduate program application
requirements. The one-on-one advising helps students plan their time in college to make their
academic and professional portfolio competitive for graduate school applications. This typically
means students participate in job shadowing, internships, research, and/or maintain a high GPA.
Letters of Recommendation. TSLC professors also facilitate social capital to Latin*
first-generation college students. Mainly, TSLC professors provide letters of recommendations
for internships, jobs, leadership positions, and/or research programs. Students feel comfortable
asking TSLC professors for letters of recommendation because of the close relationships
developed during TSLC classes.
Validating Approaches
Validation is a major component to increasing Latin* first-generation college students’
major and career self-efficacy. This section outlines how TSLC staff, TSLC professors, and
TSLC peers apply validating approaches to increase Latin* first-generation college students’
major and career self-efficacy.
TSLC Staff. Validation appears to promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-
generation college students. TSLC staff validate students by emphasizing and focusing on
students’ strengths. Staff acknowledge students’ efforts in private conversations and public
announcements such as the “Student of the Week” program. As exemplified with Bella, the
validation motivates her to do better:
Well, in part, it motivates me to do better and then it also makes me feel like I’m doing a
good job when sometimes I don’t think I am. … So, it’s nice that–it kind of brings me
back to earth and it’s like okay, you’re not doing as bad as you thought.
81

The validating approaches reaffirm student’s capabilities and remind students that they do belong
in college. Validating Latin* first-generation college student’s strengths is significant to retaining
students by increasing their major and career self-efficacy.
TSLC Professors. TSLC professors also provide validation to Latin* first-generation
college students. Students receive positive feedback from TSLC professors during the mid-
semester grade check process. The mid-semester grade check prompts conversations between
students and professors about their experiences in the classroom, academic goals, and career
goals. These conversations make students feel that they have a unique relationship with TSLC
professors which motivates them to perform better.
TSLC Peers. Validation from peers also increase students’ major and career self-
efficacy. Many participants serve as TSLC mentors and discuss positive experiences mentoring
the TSLC underclassmen. The students discuss how the role increases their leadership abilities,
relates to their future career goals, or simply provides joy. In particular, students find joy when
they guide mentees through a problem. However, there are instances when TSLC mentors turn to
a mentee for academic advice. In this situation, the mentees feel good that mentors turn to them
for advice, as Freda demonstrates:
I think both my mentors from last year and this year, I really like them and I think they
like me and know I’m a responsible person. So, a lot of the times they’ll talk to me or run
issues by me, or we’ll be doing something in class and they’ll be like what do you think
about this? It’s like, thanks for asking me for my opinion and for help and advice because
they’re a mentor and that just makes me feel better.
82

When peers seek guidance from a student, especially if the peer is older, it makes the student feel
good. The student feels confident because a peer reached out to them for advice instead of a staff
member or faculty member, which boosts their major and career self-efficacy.
Fostering Sense of Belonging
Lastly, a sense of belonging contributes to Latin* first-generation college student’s
major and career self-efficacy. TSLC staff, TSLC classes, and TSLC peers foster a sense of
community to positively influence the student participants major and career self-efficacy.
TSLC Staff. The TSLC program provides comfort and a sense of safety for students that
there are individuals on campus who are supportive. In fact, some students share that they go to
TSLC staff advisors for academic questions before speaking to their academic advisor. The
diversity of the TSLC staff also contributes to students’ sense of belonging, as Bella illustrates:
“I feel they can understand–sorry, but I just feel they understand you better. They–maybe–for me
I just feel sometimes I’ve discriminated against, and so maybe they understand that way too.”
Students share they relate more to BIPOC staff members because of similar shared experiences
at the university and in life.
TSLC Classes. Professors and classmates in TSLC classes provide a sense of belonging
which contributes to major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
TSLC professors create a sense of community in TSLC classes by learning every student’s
names, facilitating “get to know you activities” throughout the semester, and involving all
students to participate in class. Additionally, TSLC professors help students learn college skills
such as study strategies, time management, and note-taking strategies. Professors create safe
spaces for TSLC students to learn in a comfortable, friendly environment. TSLC students find
classmates in TSLC classes more approachable compared to classmates in non-TSLC classes. As
83

such, many students share that it is easier for them to talk to classmates in TSLC classes since
they develop close connections through classes and events. Additionally, the diversity within the
TSLC classes makes students feel more comfortable, as evident by Bella’s perspective:
So, I don’t know. I feel like just I always feel like in my other classes, I’m always just–
that’s also another thing with my [TSLC] classes. In my other classes, I always notice the
color difference. It’s so—I don’t know why, but when I’m in my [TSLC] classes, it’s like
I feel like I'm okay. I’m not scared to say things.
The diversity within the TSLC classes makes Latin* students feel comfortable because there are
students with similar identities and experiences. The sense of belonging that students feel in
TSLC classes creates a safe space for Latin* first-generation college students to engage and learn
in a supportive environment.
TSLC Peers. In fact, bonds between TSLC classmates lead to study groups and
connections that last after the TSLC class. TSLC students within the same major appreciate
having TSLC classmates so they do not feel alone in major classes. Being among TSLC
classmates makes students feel that they are not alone in their college struggles. As students
transition from general education courses to major courses, students do not interact with TSLC
classmate as frequently. Students tend to network with students in their major classes only, so it
is comforting for students to have TSLC classmates in their major classes, as Jackie outlines:
Because I only talk to my group or circle, my group of friends has really gone down this
year. So, I think that happens when people aren’t in your major or something. You never
see them, never have a reason to really talk to them. So, I really only talk to my major or
the Thompson scholars in my chemistry class. And again, the girl who’s a year ahead of
me, the Thompson scholar.
84

Having peers in major-related classes is helpful for students to turn to if they have questions
about course content, registration, faculty, or anything else related to their major. Cultivating
sense of belonging is especially crucial for Latin* first-generation college students as they
continue developing major and career self-efficacy throughout college.
Institutional Level
In addition to the factors mentioned within the TSLC program, the greater university also
contributes to students’ major and career self-efficacy by facilitation of navigational capital,
facilitation of social capital, validating approaches, and fostering sense of belonging.
Facilitation of Navigational Capital
The universities at-large facilitate navigational capital for the Latin* first-generation
college student participants. Within the universities at-large, academic advisors are influential.
Academic advisors help students understand undergraduate research programs, graduate school
requirements, and standardized tests for graduate school (i.e., GRE, MCAT). Students with a
positive relationship with their academic advisor feel valued by the major department and are
willing to talk to their academic advisor about major-related concerns. Similarly, students with a
positive relationship with faculty in their major feel valued and open to talk to faculty about
career-related concerns. Faculty help students understand pathways within a career field, which
is especially helpful for students that are still exploring career options. Major courses also
facilitate navigational capital via intentional academic and career planning courses. Additionally,
major courses increase students’ self-efficacy because a students’ interest and passion about the
subject matter gives them the confidence that they can academically succeed, as Alberto
demonstrates:
85

I really want to go to graduate school for psych and make a career out of it. That
definitely motivates me during my undergraduate career right now. I’m trying to soak up
as much information from my psych classes as possible.
Overall, major courses and subsequent connections with faculty and staff, can facilitate
navigational capital regarding degree requirements, career pathways, and graduate school or
professional school pathways.
Facilitation of Social Capital
University faculty also facilitate the development of social capital for Latin* first-
generation college students. University faculty connect students to individuals that help them
with their major or career through connections with other faculty. Additionally, faculty connect
students to professionals at local organizations through research partnerships. Students are able
to connect with professionals in the field while gaining research experience, as in Bella’s
situation:
So, first, my professor kind of talked to me about it, and I was like, “Ooh, I can’t do that.
That’s for smart people. I can’t do that.” So, I was like, “Okay, well, I’ll just try it out. I’ll
go and see what he has to say, and he’ll give his [speech], and then if I’m interested, I’ll
look into it.” At first, I was really confused as to what he was expecting of me, but then
he connected me with my faculty advisor, [Faculty Name], and she’s awesome. I look up
to her so much, and so she just kind of told me the meaning of it. The project is about
diversifying the teaching force in Nebraska, and so, yeah, I have such a want for it just
because I know how much it means to students to have those teachers. So, it’s an
impactful thing, and it’s not common, especially in Nebraska.
86

Social capital is important to connecting Latin* first-generation college students to individuals
within one’s major and career. The connections and subsequent academic and career
opportunities from that social capital can increase student’s confidence in their own capabilities,
knowledge, and skills because they are being promoted to opportunities that can help them reach
their future goals.
Validating Approaches
Students also receive validation from professors and classmates within the greater
university. Professors provide validation for students’ major choice and performance in major-
related courses. Professors that acknowledge a student’s progress makes the student happy and
motivates them to continue working hard. Classmates also relate to participants’ situations and
provide a safe space to vent frustrations and challenges within a particular major, as Jackie
shares:
Here at [University], I don’t know, probably my classmates because I’ll talk to them
about it and I’ll just explain my frustrations, and they’ll be like, “It’s gonna be okay. We
know you’ll be able to do it,” because they’re in the same boat I am.
The words of affirmation from professors and classmates makes students feel they have the
capabilities to succeed in the major, which is especially important during times that the students
feel self-doubt.
Fostering Sense of Belonging
There are also aspects of the greater university that contribute to the intersection of sense
of belonging and major and career self-efficacy for Latin* first generation college students. One
example is some students feel connected to campus buildings of their major classes. Campus
buildings can bring comfort because they are familiar with the area, as Jackie shares:
87

Yeah, and like my labs are there too, and it’s like, a comforting place to be. So, I would
relate it back to the anxiety thing, because I really you know, like walking around
campus, going where to be next, if I’m in the library and I just start feeling that anxiety
creeping up, I just, I go to the science building. Because it’s a comfort. Like, I recognize
more faces there.
Additionally, becoming involved in one’s major fosters a sense of belonging and
subsequently increases major and career self-efficacy. Students connect to their major when they
enjoy their classes, join major-related extracurricular activities, connect with departmental staff,
and connect with faculty. The connection to staff and faculty in one’s major can make students
feel valued by the department, even if they do not necessarily feel valued by other aspects of the
university.
Student organizations also increase student’s major and career self-efficacy because they
provide a sense of belonging. Several students express how they are the only Latin* person in
their classes. Being the only Latin* individual in class can be daunting, so students seek student
organizations that can foster a sense of belonging, as told by Bella:
Right now, I’m in this Teachers of Color Association, where we all meet up and talk
about how it feels ‘cause I’m the only Latina, any person of color in my math block and
in my lit block. … So, it’s a nice little group to just vent with.
Sometimes it can be uncomfortable to be the only Latin* student in a class, especially if the
student comes from a diverse background. However, student organizations can provide
connections for students to feel that they belong in their major or career.
88

Conclusion
In conclusion, there are several individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors
that inhibit or promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
The factors that inhibit major and career self-efficacy are self-doubt, discouragement,
impediments to cultural capital, impediments to social capital, impediments to sense of
belonging, conflicting beliefs regarding career choice, and balancing home and college. On the
other hand, factors that promote major and career self-efficacy are aspirational capital, linguistic
capital, familial capital, family, facilitation of cultural capital, facilitation of navigational capital,
facilitation of social capital, validating approaches, and fostering sense of belonging. Given the
inhibiting and promoting factors, the next chapter outlines several recommendations to facilitate
major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.

89

Chapter Five: Discussion
This study examines how Latin* first-generation college students in the Thompson
Scholars Learning Communities (TSLC) program at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln
(UNL), University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO), and University of Nebraska at Kearney (UNK)
develop major and career self-efficacy. A total of 124 interviews from 10 Latin* first-generation
college students in the TSLC program across the three NU campuses reveals individual, family,
programmatic, and institutional factors that inhibit and promote participants’ major and career
self-efficacy.
Chapter Five offers a discussion of findings from Chapter Four to further explore the
factors that inhibit and promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. This chapter also highlights the relationship of findings to prior research, including how
the current study supports or complicates existing research. Lastly, Chapter Five examines this
study’s implications for practice and research.
Discussion of Findings
The current study found individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors affect
Latin* first-generation college students’ major and career self-efficacy. This section further
discusses the study’s findings and implications at each level.
Factors That Inhibit Major and Career Self-Efficacy
There are individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors that inhibit major
and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students in the NU TSLC program.
This section summarizes the inhibiting factors and discusses the implications of the findings.
Individual Level
90

Self-doubt is the key individual factor that inhibits major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students in the TSLC program. Students’ doubts about their
academic and/or professional abilities negatively affects their confidence in pursuing their major
and careers. Students express an emotional roller coaster, where some days students feel
confident in pursuing their major and career and other days, students feel doubtful about
pursuing their major and career. The uncertainty of success in a major or career negatively
contributes to students’ confidence in their academic and professional capabilities.
Family Level
The family factors that inhibit Latin* first-generation college students’ major and career
self-efficacy include conflicting beliefs regarding career choice and balancing home and college.
Some students feel pressure to pursue a particular major or minor because of family interests or
financial obligations. The pressure to pursue a particular major or minor leads into conflicting
beliefs regarding career choice. As the findings highlight, there are generational differences in
motivations to pursue a career. Some parents encourage their student to choose a career based on
what would make the most money. On the other hand, students choose to pursue a career based
on their passion and interests. Another factor that inhibits Latin* first-generation college students
from developing major and career self-efficacy is balancing home and college obligations.
Students experience challenges focusing on college related obligations at home and struggle to
articulate to family the importance of focusing on collegiate responsibilities. The balance is more
so challenging for students that live at home.
Programmatic Level
Students report incidences of discouragement from TSLC staff, which leads students to
believe that they are not capable of success in their academic courses. Additionally, TSLC career
91

events do not facilitate cultural or social capital for all TSLC students. For example, some
students do not receive meaningful feedback from the mock interviews or meaningful
professional connections from the career fair. The TSLC program missed opportunities for some
students to acquire advanced skills and professional networks that can increase their career self-
efficacy.
Institutional Level
Additionally, students report invalidation from university staff and professors via
doubting a student’s academic abilities. Furthermore, impediments to sense of belonging from
being the only Latin* person in a classroom forces students to seek community with other Latin*
students via student organizations. Furthermore, microaggressions from peers and professors
contributes to students feeling that they do not belong at the university.
Implications of Findings
A combination of individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors negatively
influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. A factor at
one level can adversely impact a Latin* first-generation college students major and career self-
efficacy, but if the one factor is compounded with other factors, then it can be detrimental. The
findings are noteworthy because most of the inhibiting factors are external. The findings suggest
that external factors, especially at the family, programmatic, and institutional level, have
significant influence on how students view their academic and career capabilities. Therefore, it is
important for individuals within a family, comprehensive college transition program, and
university be mindful of the impact their actions, behaviors, and opinions can have on at-promise
students. Latin* first-generation college students already experience challenges navigating higher
education because they are the first in their family to navigate a social structure that was not
92

designed for minoritized individuals. With proper support from institutions, Latin* first-
generation college students can be equipped with the tools and skills to navigate academic,
career, and familial conversations.
Factors That Promote Major and Career Self-Efficacy
In addition to the aforementioned inhibiting factors, there are also individual, family,
programmatic, and institutional factors that promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin*
first-generation college students in the TSLC program. This section summarizes the promoting
factors and discusses the implications of the findings.
Individual Level
The individual-level factors that promote major and career self-efficacy are aspirational
capital, linguistic capital, and familial capital. Most students aspire to be the first in their family
to attend college, hence their first-generation college student status. Once in college, students’
aspirations expand to include graduate school, professional schools, and/or careers. Student
participants also possess linguistic capital with most participants speaking two languages
(English and Spanish) and one participant speaking a third language (French). Students
acknowledge the academic and professional advantages of bilingualism or trilingualism. Familial
capital is a third factor that promotes major and career self-efficacy, particularly receiving career
advice from family, applying lessons from family, and honoring parents’ sacrifices. Overall, a
family’s love, encouragement, and moral support provides students the motivation and
confidence to persevere in their academic and professional journeys.
Family Level
Family is the second component that promotes major and career self-efficacy of Latin*
first-generation college students. Specifically, family’s influence on majors, minors, and careers
93

and as a support system positively influences the student participants. Although the previous
section outlines how family influence on majors, minors, or careers can prohibit major and career
self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students, there are also situations when family
have a positive influence on majors, minors, and careers. Overall, family support provides the
encouragement and motivation for students to continue their studies and careers. The findings
surrounding family are significant because they confirm family’s influential role in Latin*
communities. As a result of the closeness of Latin* families, Latin* students feel both negative
and positive effects throughout their collegiate and professional journeys.
Programmatic Level
Within the TSLC program, facilitation of cultural capital appears via TSLC career events,
such as the resume workshop, etiquette dinner, and mock interview. The information acquired at
the TSLC career events increases students’ professional knowledge and skills. Students comment
how the information obtained at the TSLC career events is applicable to their current and future
professional development. The TSLC program also facilitates the development of navigational
capital via TSLC staff, TSLC professors, TSLC classes, TSLC events, and self-advocacy. The
close relationships between Latin* first-generation college students, TSLC staff, and TSLC
professors results in students feeling comfortable to seek professional guidance on navigating
college and careers. TSLC classes also assist students in navigating academia and TSLC events
validate students’ academic abilities and increases students’ academic and professional skills.
The TSLC program also facilitates social capital for Latin* first-generation college
students via a professional network for majors and careers and letters of recommendation. Social
networks are typically created through TSLC career events and TSLC classes. The social
networks allow students to create connections with professors and staff that they could ask to
94

write letters of recommendation for graduate or professional school applications. Fourthly,
validation from TSLC staff, TSLC professors, and TSLC peers also promotes Latin* first-
generation college students’ major and career self-efficacy. Validating students’ strengths, hard
work, accomplishments, leadership, and interests motivates students to confidently continue
pursuing their academic and career interests.
Lastly, a sense of belonging from TSLC staff, TSLC classes, and TSLC peers develops
major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. Students feel
comfortable among TSLC staff because they are approachable and available to students. The
TSLC cohort model also allows students to develop relationships with their peers, which makes
students comfortable to be themselves in TSLC classes. Ultimately, students feel they can pursue
their academic and career interests with ease because they feel they belong within the TSLC
program.
Institutional Level
Academic advisors and faculty members within the greater NU system facilitate
navigational capital by helping students navigate degree requirements and career pathways.
Furthermore, university staff and faculty facilitate social connections for students to further
understand majors and careers through conversations and university research programs.
Validation from university professors and classmates also promotes Latin* first-generation
college students’ major and career self-efficacy. Lastly, a sense of belonging from university
connections to major and student organizations develops major and career self-efficacy of Latin*
first-generation college students. Other facets where students feel a sense of belonging are one’s
major department and joining ethnic-related student organizations.
Implications of Findings
95

The individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors that promote major and
career self-efficacy are significant for several reasons. Since higher education was not designed
for BIPOC communities, the onus of responsibility lies on universities to create space, programs,
and policies that promote major and career self-efficacy for at-promise students. The bulk of this
study’s findings are at the programmatic and institutional level, which underscores the influence
programs and institutions have on major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation
college students. Although students come into college with their own forms of capital, the capital
can be diminished or increased based on interactions within comprehensive college transition
programs and institutions. Comprehensive college transition programs can provide the tools and
resources to support at-promise students’ academic, career, and psychosocial development, as
evident by the numerous positive factors that promote major and career self-efficacy. Notably, a
novel finding from the study is the influence peers have on students’ major and career self-
efficacy. Peers, such as classmates and peer mentors, can increase students’ major and career
self-efficacy through validating approaches and seeking advice inside and outside the classroom.
Lastly, family plays a significant factor in influencing student’s major and career self-efficacy
because of the closeness and interconnected dynamics of Latin* families.
Reflections on Factors That Promote and Inhibit Major and Career Self-Efficacy
The findings reveal that there are factors that both promote and inhibit major and career
self-efficacy such as invalidation/validation, impediments to cultural capital/facilitation of
cultural capital, impediments to social capital/facilitation of social capital, impediments to sense
of belonging/facilitation of sense of belonging. The contrasting findings are a result of
differences in student’s experiences. First, each student’s interactions are unique, so while some
students may have positive experiences within a factor, other students may have negative
96

experiences within that factor. For example, some students may report validation from staff and
faculty while other students report invalidation from staff and faculty. Second, one student can
have both positive and negative experiences within a factor. For example, a student can
experience a sense in belonging in TSLC classes but not a sense of belonging in major-related
courses. Third, developmental differences between the students also reflect the contrasting
factors. For example, students that report impediments to cultural capital have preexisting
knowledge or skills from previous academic or career experience versus students that report
facilitation of cultural capital do not have preexisting knowledge or skills. The differences in a
student’s development on a certain topic or within a certain factor highlights the differences in
experiences and impact on major and career self-efficacy development. The nuances within and
across students’ experiences highlight that students can negatively and positively experience the
same factor.
Relationship of Findings to Prior Research
The current study supports and complicates prior research studies on Latin* first-
generation college students and major and career self-efficacy. Although this study aligns with
much of the current literature, the study is still an important contribution to the field because of
its unique population, setting, and topic. The following section outlines how the current study
extends prior research regarding financial stress, inaccurate assumptions, cultural mismatch,
motivations to attend college, on-campus jobs, proactive advising, and the theoretical and
conceptual frameworks. Additionally, this section outlines how the current study complicates
prior research regarding achievement guilt, academic engagement, and academic performance.
How the Current Study Extends Prior Research
97

The current study extends prior research on Latin* first-generation college students by
examining students in a 2-year comprehensive college transition program. As the literature
review highlights, first-generation college students experience several challenges through their
collegiate journey, including financial stress (Adams & McBrayer, 2020; Pratt et al., 2019),
confronting inaccurate assumptions (Ellis et al., 2019; Means & Pyne, 2017), and navigating
cultural mismatch (Stephens et al., 2012; Vasquez-Salgado et al., 2015). The current study’s
findings align with the literature because participants express how the influence of their family’s
financial stress to pursue higher education and live a financially comfortable life. Participants
unfortunately also experience microaggressions and invalidation which aligns with the literature
regarding inaccurate assumptions. The microaggressions and invalidations make student
participants feel they do not belong or are not academically and professionally capable to
succeed in college and beyond. Additionally, the cultural mismatch between university
independent values and Latin* communities interdependent values prove to be a challenge with
participants when balancing home life and college life. Cultural mismatch directly plays an
inhibiting role in students’ major and career self-efficacy because of the stress and strain of
competing family and school obligations.
The current study also aligns with the literature regarding motivations to attend college.
The current study supports prior research’s discoveries that one of the common motivational
factors for Latin* students to attend college is honoring parent’s sacrifices (Easley, Jr. et al.,
2012; Vega, 2016). As the findings reveal, many of the students in this study feel the
responsibility to honor their parents sacrifices by attending college and establishing a successful
career. Students express a sense of responsibility to honor the sacrifices their parents made so
they can attend college. Furthermore, the current study supports prior research that on-campus
98

jobs can provide insight into meaningful careers and transferable skills for post-graduation jobs
(Nunez & Sansone, 2016) because students express how TSLC leadership positions confirm their
career interests or provide transferable skills to their career interest. Lastly, the current study
aligns with preexisting research on proactive advising’s effects on at-promise student’s retention
and self-efficacy (Kitchen et al., 2021c; Swecker et al., 2013; Vander Schee, 2007). The current
study finds that proactive advising techniques, such as mid-semester grade checks, mandatory
advising meetings, and academic and career event requirements, bolsters major and career self-
efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students by engaging students in their academic
progress and fostering communication between students, staff, and faculty.
Furthermore, the current study expands previous research on Latin* first-generation
college student’s major and career self-efficacy. There is limited research on the overarching
topic of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. The study in
itself expands the literature by contributing one of the first studies on the topic. This study also
enriches the topic of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students
through a community cultural wealth lens. The study examines how various types of community
cultural wealth are facilitated or not facilitated for the development of Latin* first-generation
college student’s self-efficacy. Furthermore, the study expands the research to examine how a 2-
year comprehensive college transition program inhibits or promotes major and career self-
efficacy of low-income, Latin*, fist-generation college students. The combined aforementioned
factors underscore the significant contribution of this study to better understand how internal and
external factors contribute to major and career self-efficacy of the growing Latin* first-
generation college student population.
99

As a reminder, this dissertation study is guided by two theoretical frameworks, social
cognitive career theory (SCCT) and community cultural wealth (CCW), and a conceptual
framework, Influential Factors to Latin* First-Generation College Students’ Major and Career
Self-Efficacy. The findings of this study expand SCCT because of the novel findings related to
major and career self-efficacy. The findings uncover how Latin* first-generation college students
view their academic and professional capabilities and their subsequent major and career
decisions. Additionally, the findings of this study expand CCW because of the unique student
population (low-income, Latin*, first-generation college students) in relation to major and career
self-efficacy. This study examines how various CCW is inhibited or promoted within the
individual, family, programmatic, and institutional level. The four levels relate to the conceptual
framework of this study, which include the Latin* first-generation college student identity,
family, TSLC program, and university context. Each level interacts and influences each other to
determine how Latin* first-generation college students think of their academic and professional
capabilities and subsequent academic and professional actions.
How the Current Study Complicates Prior Research
Although the current study aligns with prior research, this study also complicates prior
research. One complication between the current study and prior research is academic
engagement of Latin* first-generation college students. As one research study indicates, first-
generation college students have lower academic engagement compared to continuing-generation
college students, including fewer interactions with faculty, fewer participation in classroom
discussions, fewer integration of ideas from different courses, and lower likelihood of asking
questions (Soria & Stebleton, 2012). However, the findings of this dissertation study reveal that
TSLC students have high academic engagement, particularly in TSLC classes. Since TSLC
100

professors foster a sense of community, students feel comfortable interacting with TSLC
professors, participating in classroom discussions, asking questions, and being themselves.
Therefore, the outcomes of TSLC classes contradict existing research on low academic
engagement of first-generation college students.
Similarly, the current study complicates research regarding academic performance of
first-generation college students. Some literature suggests that first-generation college students
do not reach their full academic potential because they did not reach out to professors, teaching
assistants, or tutors until their grades were at or near failing (Yee, 2016). However, TSLC
requirements and services, such as mid-semester grade checks, mandatory advising meetings,
study café, and peer tutors, allows student participants to early and consistently utilize academic
services that encourage their academic potential. For example, the current dissertation study
finds mid-semester grade checks impactful for students to learn about their academic
performance while simultaneously build connections with professors. Additionally, mandatory
TSLC academic advising is a space for students to connect with a TSLC advisor to discuss their
academic, career, personal, and/or social concerns. Moreover, TSLC study café and peer tutors
are available for students who need extra academic support throughout the semester. Therefore,
the resources and requirements within the TSLC program encourage students, including Latin*
first-generation college students, to reach their full academic potential.
Implications for Practice and Research
The findings of this study are eye-opening to the intersecting factors that hinder and
encourage major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. A Latin*
first-generation college student enters college with community cultural wealth, but external
environments increase or decrease the student’s major and career development. Higher education
101

institutions are aware of their diverse student populations and thus, have a responsibility to set up
all students, especially at-promise students, for success during and after college. As such, the
current study has several implications for practice and research. This section outlines specific
recommendations for practitioners and researchers to support and expand major and career self-
efficacy of low-income, Latin* first-generation college students.
Implications for Practice
Higher education practitioners and faculty can incorporate the following
recommendations to support major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students: advising approaches, academic and career events, and family incorporation.
Advising Approaches
One of the key aspects to promoting major and career self-efficacy is proactive advising.
Proactive advising, including early and consistent communication, mandatory advising meetings,
mid-semester grade checks, and mandatory academic and career workshops, are approaches to
connect with students before they experience academic difficulties (Varney, 2012). Proactive
advising keeps students continuously abreast of their academic progress and encourages
collaboration between students, advisors, and faculty. Proactive advising from faculty is
especially helpful for students who may be the only person (or one of few) of an ethnic or gender
identity in a class. Faculty can also facilitate career and academic connections for at-promise
students to explore career pathways or research opportunities. A collaborative system between
students, staff, and faculty can foster consistent, crucial connections for Latin* first-generation
college students to thrive academically and professionally.
Practitioners and faculty can also validate and leverage Latin* first-generation college
students’ community cultural wealth. As the current study shows, Latin* first-generation college
102

students possess various forms of capital that are transferable to academia and careers such as
aspirational capital, linguistic capital, and familial capital. Practitioners can highlight these
strengths via leadership, research, study abroad, and career opportunities. Relatedly, validation is
significant in affirming the academic and career interests and abilities of Latin* first-generation
college students. Practitioners and faculty can validate students’ lived experiences, capabilities,
potential, interests, and dreams through words of affirmation, letters of recommendations,
encouragement to join extracurricular activities, or private and public recognition.
However, practitioners and faculty must keep in mind that “one size fits all” academic
and career counseling for Latin* students are insufficient to address the complexities within the
Latin* community (Zalaquett & Baez, 2012). Recognizing the complexity of the Latin*
community (e.g., first-generation college student, immigration status, family expectations,
financial responsibilities) is critical to tailor advising for each unique Latin* student (Zalaquett &
Baez, 2012). Advising does not have to be siloed because ethnic-specific services, such as a
Latin* students career support group for Latin* students to share their career-related thoughts,
concerns, and experiences, is powerful (Berrios-Allison, 2011). This shared community space
can help Latina/o students improve their wellness, academic performance, retention, and
graduation rates (Berrios-Allison, 2011). These empirical suggestions are noteworthy to consider
for developing Latin* first-generation college students’ major and career self-efficacy.
Academic and Career Services
In addition to advising approaches, practitioners and faculty can implement academic and
career services to support major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college
students. One example is academic and career presentations, which are helpful for Latin* first-
generation college students to obtain knowledge that furthers their major and career
103

development. Academic presentation topics can include 4–year academic planning, exploring
majors, switching majors, graduate school, study abroad, transitioning into the third year of
college, time management, research opportunities, and “you are not your grades.” Academic
events can include fall orientation, welcome back brunch, halfway to graduation celebration,
graduation celebrations, transition program faculty, staff, and student mixers, and major-related
faculty, staff, and student mixers.
Career presentations can include career pathways, switching careers, post-graduation
career planning, navigating careers as a new professional, finding community in the workplace,
salary negotiation, job shadowing or internships, negotiating promotions, and applying
transferable skills. Career events can include mock interviews, networking mixers, career fairs,
professional dinners, resume reviews, and alumni panels. Practitioners and faculty can also
consider mandatory informational interviews with professionals in a student’s field of interest
and mandatory semester-long internship, job, or job shadowing. Both career requirements will
encourage students to network with professionals and gain work-related experience in their field
of interest. However, all presentations and events should incorporate professionals from a wide
range of fields so students from all majors can develop at least one professional connection. It is
also helpful to have professionals and faculty of similar identities (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender,
college status) so at-promise students can identify and connect with professionals and faculty of
similar backgrounds to create a sense of belonging. Additionally, any college transition program
requirements should be flexible to provide alternative assignments for students that would not
find value in the required presentations or events.
Regarding tutoring services, this study reveals that not every student finds group tutoring
beneficial because of the large group size. Therefore, one-on-one tutoring should be considered
104

for students that prefer and thrive in a personalized setting. Furthermore, comprehensive college
transition programs can consider incorporating more major courses into their course
requirements. If there are not enough students in a major to have a program-specific major
course, there can be an exception for students to take a major-related course, so they do not fall
behind on their major requirements.
Lastly, practitioners and faculty can consider continuity of services as students transition
from the 2nd -year to the 3rd-year college. Several students expressed how they felt on their own
during the third and fourth years of college whereas some students appreciated the hands-off
approach. To ease the transition for students that desire additional support, comprehensive
college transition programs can host transition meetings between the second year and third year
of college. Comprehensive college transition programs can also collaborate with 3rd- and 4th-
year students via student panels for 1st- and 2nd -year students to connect with upper class
students in various majors or careers.
Family Incorporation
Another recommendation is to incorporate families into a comprehensive college
transition program. Some suggestions include family information sessions and family
orientation. Comprehensive college transition programs can also consider inviting families to
celebratory events such as a halfway to graduation celebration or welcome brunch. To
accommodate Spanish-speaking parents, program administrators can incorporate Spanish into the
aforementioned events via closed captioning and/or program materials. There can also be
information sessions and events in different languages (such as Spanish). Marketing materials
such as flyers and documents can also be in Spanish to create linguistic access for Spanish-
speaking parents. Additional family-related recommendations include “life skills” workshops for
105

students such as engaging in tough conversations with family and balancing home and college
responsibilities. The life skill workshops can incorporate staff, faculty, students, and alumni with
the Latin* first-generation college student identity so participants can hear suggestions from
individuals with similar backgrounds.
Implications for Research
There are several implications for research based on the study’s findings. Researchers can
consider further investigating the impact of linguistic capital and familial capital on Latin* first-
generation college student’s major and career self-efficacy. Although all forms of capitals are
significant, linguistic capital and familial capital are unique to Latin* first-generation college
students because of their native language and interdependent Latin* communities. Future studies
can deepen understanding on how linguistic and familial capital influence major and career self-
efficacy, especially during the later college years and post-college.
Additionally, future studies can investigate how different types of college transition
programs influence major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students.
The current study focuses on a specific case of a 2-year comprehensive college transition
program at the University of Nebraska campuses. Therefore, future research studies would
benefit from examining different types of college transition programs (e.g., first-semester, one-
year, full-college) and their related academic, career, and psychosocial outcomes for Latin* first-
generation college students.
Furthermore, future research can examine different student identities. This study solely
focuses on the identities of low-income, Latin*, and first-generation college student. Future
studies might examine how students of different financial and ethnic identities develop major and
career self-efficacy. Future studies can also expand the student participant population to include
106

additional identities such as gender, spirituality, and ability status, just to name a few. Overall,
researchers can gain valuable insights into the components that influence major and career self-
efficacy of different student populations.
Lastly, future studies can consider a longitudinal study to examine the long-term
economic, career, academic, and psychosocial outcomes of first-generation college students. As
previously mentioned, first-generation college students may become first-generation
professionals. Therefore, researchers can extend this dissertation study to observe the enduring
outcomes of Latin* first-generation college students/first-generation professionals major and
career decisions. Researchers can also study how Latin* first-generation college students/first-
generation professionals utilize community cultural wealth to navigate the professional space and
how companies facilitate community cultural wealth for employees from racially minoritized
backgrounds.
Conclusion
The current study is the first of its kind to examine how Latin* first-generation college
students in a comprehensive college transition program develop major and career self-efficacy
through a community cultural wealth lens. Learning about major and career self-efficacy has
practical ramifications for how the field can support Latin* first-generation college students’
academic and professional pathways. How Latin* first-generation college students think about
their academic and professional capacities can lead to long term academic, career, economic, and
psychosocial outcomes. Ultimately, the current study contributes to higher education literature
and practice by providing significant insight into the interaction among individual, family,
programmatic, and institutional factors to inhibit or promote major and career self-efficacy of
Latin* first-generation college students.
107

References
Adams, T.L. & McBrayer, J.S. (2020). The lived experiences of first-generation college students
of color integrating into the institutional culture of a predominately white institution. The
Qualitative Report, 25(3), 733–757.
Aguayo, D., Herman, K., Ojeda, L., & Flores, L.Y. (2011). Culture predicts mexican americans’
college self-efficacy and college performance. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,
4(2), 79–89.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84,191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice-Hall.
Bechard, A.L. & Both Gragg, J. (2020). Microaggressions and the marginalization of first-
generation faculty: Professional assimilation and competency development. Taboo, 140–
148.
Berrios-Allison, A.C. (2011). Career support group for latino/a college students. Journal of
College Counseling, 14, 80–95.
Bettencourt, G., Irwin, L., Todorova, R., Hallett, R., & Corwin, Z. (2023). The possibilities and
precautions of using the designation “at-promise” in higher education research. Journal
of Postsecondary Student Success, 2(2), 15–27.
Betz, N.E. & Luzzo, D.A. (1996). Career assessment and the career decision-making self-
efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4(4), 413–428.
Betz, N.E. & Hackett, G. (2006). Career self-efficacy theory: Back to the future. Journal of
Career Assessment, 14(1), 3–11.
108

Big Ten Conference. (n.d.). About the conference. Big Ten Conference.
https://bigten.org/sports/2018/6/6/school-bio-big10-school-bio-html.aspx
Boden, K. (2011). Perceived academic preparedness of first-generation latino college students.
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 10(2), 96–106.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners.
SAGE Publications.
Burwell, M. & Maldonado, B. (2022, January 7). How does your company support “first-
generation professionals”? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/01/how-does-
your-company-support-first-generation-
professionals#:~:text=Partnering%20with%20external%20learning%20institutions,help
%20bring%20in%20FGP%20talent.
Cassidy, S. (2015). Resilience building in students: The role of academic self-efficacy. Frontiers
in Psychology, 6(1781), 1–14.
Cataldi, E.F., Bennett, C.T., & Chen, X. (2018). First-generation students: College access,
persistence, and postbachelor’s outcomes. Stats in Brief, 1–31.
Center for First-Generation Student Success. (2017, November 20). Defining first-generation.
Center for First-Generation Student Success. https://firstgen.naspa.org/blog/defining-
first-generation
Center for First-Generation Student Success. (2022). First-generation college graduates:
Race/ethnicity, age, and use of career planning services. Center for First-Generation
Student Success. https://firstgen.naspa.org/files/dmfile/FactSheet-011.pdf
109

Chemers, M.M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B.F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year college
student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55–64.
Covarrubias, R. & Fryberg, S.A. (2015). Movin’ on up (to college): First-generation college
students’ experiences with family achievement guilt. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 21(3), 420–429.
Covarrubias, R., Valle, I., Laiduc, G., & Azmitia, M. (2019). “You never become fully
independent”: Family roles and independence in first-generation college students.
Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(4), 381–410.
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4
th
ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cummings, C. (2015). Engaging new college students in metacognition for critical thinking: A
developmental education perspective. Research and Teaching in Developmental
Education, 32(1), 68–71.
Davis, L.P. & Museus, S.D. (2019). What is deficit thinking? An analysis of conceptualizing of
deficit thinking and implications for scholarly research. Currents, 1(1), 117–130.
de Brey, C., Musu, L., McFarland, J., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Diliberti, M., Zhang, A.,
Branstetter, C., & Wang, X. (2019). Status and trends in the education of racial and
ethnic groups 2018. (NCES 2019-038). U.S. Department of Education.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019038.pdf
Demetriou, C., Meece, J., Eaker-Rich, D., & Powell, C. (2017). The activities, roles, and
relationships of successful first-generation college students. Journal of College Student
Development, 58(1), 19–36.
110

Denzin, N.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2
nd

ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Dey, F. & Cruzergara, C.Y. (2014). Evolution of career services in higher education. New
Directions for Student Services, 148, 5–18.
Dominguez-Whitehead, Y., Phommasa, M., & Caudillo, A. (2021). Unmasking first-generation
college students and professionals. Journal of First-Generation Student Success, 1(2),
145–155.
Dougherty, S.M. & Lombardi, A.R. (2016). From vocational education to career readiness: The
ongoing work of linking education and the labor market. Review of Research in
Education, 40, 326–355.
Duncheon, J.C. (2018). “You have to be able to adjust your own self”: Latinx students’
transitions into college from a low-performing urban high school. Journal of Latinos and
Education, 17(4), 358–372.
Easley, Jr. N., Bianco, M., & Leech, N. (2012). Ganas: A qualitative study examining Mexican
heritage student’s motivation to succeed in higher education. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, 11(2), 164–178.
Ellis, J.M., Powell, C.S., Demetriou, C.P., Huerta-Bapat, C., & Panter, A.T. (2019). Examining
first-generation college student lived experiences with microaggressions and
microaffirmations at a predominately white public research university. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(2), 266–279.
Garriott, P.O. (2020). A critical cultural wealth model of first-generation and economically
marginalized college students’ academic and career development. Journal of Career
Development, 47(1), 80–95.
111

Glennen, R.E. (1976). Intrusive college counseling. The School Counselor, 24(1) 48–50.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Pearson.
Gordon, V.N., Habley, W.R., & Grites, T.J. (2008). Academic advising: A comprehensive
handbook (2
nd
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Graybill, T.L. (2019). Soy el primero: First-generation latino/a college students’ experiences of
acculturative stress and coping response in college [Doctoral dissertation, University of
Missouri-Kansas City]. ProQuest.
https://search.proquest.com/openview/672439c31dd7395fa3078c5b8476abce/1?pqorigsit
e=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Hackett, G. & Betz, N.E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18, 326–339.
Hallett, R.E., Kezar, A., Perez, R.J., & Kitchen, J.A. (2020). A typology of college transition and
support programs: Situating a 2-year comprehensive college transition program within
college access. American Behavioral Scientists, 64(3), 230–252.
Hallett, R.E., Kezar, A., Kitchen, J., Perez, R., & Reason, R. (2020). Qualitative methods
narrative: Promoting at-promise student success (pass) project. USC Rossier Pullias
Center for Higher Education. https://pullias.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/PASS-
Qual-Methods-Narrative_Final.pdf
Hands, A.S. (2020). Tapping into the assets of first-generation students during times of
transition. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(7/8), 611–618.
Heckman, S., Lim, H., & Montalto, C. (2014). Factors related to financial stress among college
students. Journal of Financial Therapy, 5(1), 19–39.
112

Hirudayaraj, M. & McLean, G.N. (2018). First-generation college graduates: A
phenomenological exploration of their transition experiences into the corporate sector.
European Journal of Training and Development, 42(1), 91–109.
Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities. (2022). 2022 Hispanic higher education and
hsis facts. Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities.
https://www.hacu.net/hacu/HSI_Fact_Sheet.asp#:~:text=3.4%20million%20Hispanic%20
undergraduate%20students,compared%20to%209%25%20in%202011
Holloway-Friesen, H. (2018). Acculturation, enculturation, gender, and college environment on
perceived career barriers among latino/a college students. Journal of Career
Development, 45(2), 117–131.
Honicke, T. & Broadbent, J. (2016). The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic
performance: A systemic review. Educational Research Review, 17, 63–84.
Howlett, M.A., McWilliams, M.A., Rademacher, K., O’Neill, J.C., Maitland, T.L., Abels, K.,
Demetriou, C., & Panter, A.T. (2021). Investigating the effects of academic coaching on
college students’ metacognition. Innovative Higher Education, 46, 189–204.
Kezar, A., Hypolite, L., & Kitchen, J.A. (2019). Career self-efficacy: A mixed-methods study of
an underexplored research area for first-generation, low-income, and underrepresented
college students in a comprehensive college transition program. American Behavioral
Scientist, 64(3), 298–324.
Kezar, A. & Kitchen, J.A. (2020). Supporting first-generation, low-income, and
underrepresented students’ transitions to college through comprehensive and integrated
programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 64(3), 223–229.
113

Kezar, A., Hallett, R.E., Perez, R.J., & Kitchen, J.A. (2022). Scaling success for low-income,
first-generation in college, and/or racially minoritized students through a culture of
ecological validation. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1–14.
Kitchen, J.A. (2021). Promoting college students’ major and career self-efficacy through
validating support. Journal of College Student Development, 62(4), 422–437.
Kitchen, J.A., Kezar, A., & Hypolite, L.I. (2021a). At-promise college student major and career
self-efficacy ecology model. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1–15.
Kitchen, J.A., Kezar, A., & Hypolite, L.I. (2021b). More than a pathway: Creating a major and
career ecology that promotes the success of low-income, first-generation, and racially
minoritized students. About Campus, 25(6), 4–12.
Kitchen, J.A., Cole, D., Rivera, G., & Hallett, R. (2021c). The impact of a college transition
program proactive advising intervention on self-efficacy. Journal of Student Affairs
Research and Practice, 58, 29–43.
Komarraju, M. & Nadler, D. (2013). Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit
beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 67–
72.
Komarraju, M., Swanson, J., & Nadler, D. (2014). Increased career self-efficacy predicts college
students’ motivation, and course and major satisfaction. Journal of Career Assessment,
22(3), 420–432.
Kouyoumdjian, C., Guzman, B.L., Garcia, N.M., & Talavera-Bustillos, V. (2017). A community
cultural wealth examination of sources of support and challenges among latino first-and
second-generation college students at a hispanic serving institution. Journal of Hispanic
Higher Education, 16(1), 61–76.
114

Krause, H. (2020, May 22). Framing research questions that reflect who is expected to change.
We All Count. https://weallcount.com/2020/05/22/framing-research-questions-that-
reflect-who-is-expected-to-change/
Krieger Cohen, P. & Turner Johnson, A. (2020). Career counselors self-disclosing to first-
generation college students: A grounded theory study. Journal of Career Development,
49(3), 1–14.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of
career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
45, 79–122.
Levine, K.J. & Aley, M. (2021). Career barriers affecting first-generation college students: Can
socializing messages increase career confidence? Southern Communication Journal,
86(5), 498–510.
Leyva, V.L. (2011). First-generation latina graduate students: Balancing professional identity
development with traditional roles. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 127, 21–
31.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in
naturalistic evaluation. In D.D. Williams (Ed.), Naturalistic Evaluation (1
st
ed., pp.73–
84). Jossey-Bass.
Lintal, A.F. (2017). Supporting first generation professionals. National Association for Law
Placement.
https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&context=fac-works
Llagas, C. & Snyder, T.D. (2003). Status and trends in the education of hispanics. National
Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003008.pdf
115

Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. SAGE Publications.
Lomotey, K. (2010). Predominately white institutions. In Encyclopedia of African American
Education (Vol. 1, pp. 524–526). SAGE Publications.
Lorenzetti, J. (2011). Got major? Program aims to aid undeclared students’ persistence.
Recruitment & Retention in Higher Education, 25(6), 5–6.
Luna, N.A. & Martinez, M. (2013). A qualitative study using community cultural wealth to
understand the educational experiences of latino college students. Journal of Praxis in
Multicultural Education, 7(1), 1–18.
Lumpkin, A. (2020). Metacognition and its contribution to student learning introduction. College
Student Journal, 54(1), 1–7.
Matthews, J. (2009, November 16). A ‘feel-good’ label for ‘at-risk’ kids? The Washington Post.
Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. SAGE
Publications.
Means, D.R. & Pyne, K.B. (2017). Finding my way: Perceptions of institutional support and
belonging in low-income, first-generation, first-year college students. Journal of College
Student Development, 58(6), 907–924.
Melguizo, T., Martorell, F., Swanson, E., & Kezar, A. (n.d.). Increasing student success:
Understanding the impact of a comprehensive college transition program. Stakeholder
report for the thompson scholars learning communities. USC Rossier Pullias Center for
Higher Education.
Merriam, S.B. & Tisdell, E.J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Jossey-Bass.
116

Milner IV, H.R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers
seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
Mobley, C. & Brawner, C.E. (2019). “Life prepared me well for succeeding”: The enactment of
community cultural wealth, experiential capital, and transfer student capital by first-
generation engineering transfer students. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 43(5), 353–369.
Montalto, C.P., Phillips, E.L., McDaniel, A., & Baker, A.R. (2019). College student financial
wellness: Student loans and beyond. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 40, 3–21.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Bachelor’s degrees conferred by postsecondary
institutions, by race/ethnicity and field of study: 2017–18 and 2018–19 [Data set].
National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_322.30.asp
Ngyuen, T.H. & Nguyen, B.M.D. (2018). Is the “first-generation student” term useful for
understanding inequality? The role of intersectionality in illuminating the implications of
an accepted-yet unchallenged-term. Review of Research in Education, 42, 146–176.
Nunez, A. & Sansone, V.A. (2016). Earning and learning: Exploring the meaning of work in the
experiences of first-generation latino college students. The Review of Higher Education,
40(1), 91–116.
Ovink, S.M. (2014). “They always call me an investment”: Gendered familism and latino/a
college pathways. Gender & Society, 28(2), 265–288.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research,
66(4), 543–578.
117

Perez, R.J., Bettencourt, G.M., Hypolite, L.I., & Hallett, R.E. (2022). The tensions of teaching
low-income students to perform professionalism. Journal of Diversity in Higher
Education, 1–12.
Pratt, I.S., Harwood, H.B., Cavazos, J.T., & Ditzfeld, C.P. (2019). Should I stay or should I go?
Retention in first-generation college students. Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory, & Practice, 21(1), 105–118.
Priya, A. (2020). Case study methodology of qualitative research: Key attributes and navigating
the conundrums in its application. Indian Sociological Society, 70(1), 94–110.
Prospero, M., Russell, A.C., & Vohra-Gupta, S. (2012). Effects of motivation on educational
attainment: Ethnic and developmental differences among first-generation students.
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 11(1), 100–119.
Putwain, D., Sander, P., & Larkin, D. (2013). Academic self-efficacy in study-related skills and
behaviours: Relations with learning-related emotions and academic success. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 633–650.
Redford, J. & Mulvaney Hoyer, K. (2017). First-generation and continuing-generation college
students: A comparison of high school and postsecondary experiences. Stats in Brief, 1–
27.
Rivera, G.J., Kitchen, J.A., & Cole, D. (2022). Program staff as facilitators of academic self-
efficacy, academic behavioral change, and achievement among low-income, first-
generation, and minoritized students. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice,
1–18.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications.
118

Salinas Jr., C. (2020). The complexity of the “x” in latinx: How latinx/a/o students relate to,
identify with, and understand the term latinx. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
19(2), 149–168.
Salinas Jr., C. & Lozano, A. (2017). Mapping and recontextualizing the evolution of the term
latinx: An environmental scanning in higher education. Journal of Latinos and
Education, 18(4), 302–315.
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective. (8
th
ed.). Pearson.
Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and
campus racial climate; The experiences of african american college students. Journal of
Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60–73.
Soria, K.M. & Stebleton, M.J. (2012). First-generation students’ academic engagement and
retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 673–685.
Stephens, N.M., Fryberg, S.A., Markus, H.R., Johnson, C.S., & Covarrubias, R. (2012). Unseen
disadvantage: How american universities focus on independence undermines the
academic performance of first-generation college students. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 102(6), 1178–1197.
Swecker, H.K., Fifolt, M., & Searby, L. (2013). Academic advising and first-generation college
students: A quantitative study on student retention. NACADA Journal, 33(1), 46–53.
Tate, K.A., Caperton, W., Kaiser, D., Pruitt, N.T., White, H., & Hall, E. (2015). An exploration
of first-generation college students’ career development beliefs and experiences. Journal
of Career Development, 42(4), 294–310.
Taylor, K.M. & Betz, N.E. (1983). Applications of self-efficacy theory to the understanding and
treatment of career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 63–81.
119

Toutkoushian, R.K., Stolberg, R.A., & Slaton, K.A. (2018). Talking ‘bout my generation:
Defining “first-generation college students” in higher education research. Teachers
College Record, 120(4), 1–38.
Trevino, N.N. & DeFreitas, S.C. (2014). The relationship between intrinsic motivation and
academic achievement for first generation Latino college students. Social Psychology
Education, 17, 293–306.
United States Census Bureau. (2022, June 5). Quick facts: United states. United States Census
Bureau. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221#PST045221
United States of America Department of Commerce. (2021, February 1). First generation
professionals initiative. Office of Civil Rights. https://www.commerce.gov/cr/programs-
and-services/first-generation-professionals-initiative
University of Nebraska Kearney. (n.d.). Fall terms first generation students summary. University
of Nebraska Kearney. https://www.unk.edu/factbook/firstgeneration_totalhc_02f20f.pdf
University of Nebraska Omaha. (n.d.). Facts and figures. University of Nebraska Omaha.
https://www.unomaha.edu/about-uno/rankings-and-statistics.php
U.S. Department of Education. (2019, October 18). Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). White
House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic
Opportunity for Hispanics. https://sites.ed.gov/hispanic-initiative/hispanic-serving-
institutions-hsis/
U.S. Department of Education. (2020). The Condition of Education 2020. Institute of Education
Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020144.pdf
USC Rossier Pullias Center for Higher Education. (n.d.-a). About. PASS: Promoting at-promise
student success. https://pass.pullias.usc.edu/about/
120

USC Rossier Pullias Center for Higher Education. (n.d.-b). Methodology. PASS: Promoting at-
promise student success. https://pass.pullias.usc.edu/methodology/
Van Jura, M. & Prieto, K. (2021). Navigating college with MAAPS: Students’ perceptions of a
proactive advising approach. NACADA Journal, 41(2), 27–39.
Vander Schee, B.A. (2007). Adding insight to intrusive advising and its effectiveness with
students on probation. NACADA Journal, 27(2), 50–59.
Varney, J. (2012, September 1). Proactive (Intrusive) Advising! Academic Advising Today,
35(3). https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Academic-Advising-Today/View-
Articles/Proactive-Intrusive-Advising.aspx
Vasquez-Salgado, Y., Greenfield, P.M., & Burgos-Cienfuegos, R. (2015). Exploring home-
school value conflicts: Implications for academic achievement and well-being among
latino first-generation college students. Journal of Adolescent Research, 30(3), 271–305.
Vega, D. (2016). “Why not me?” college enrollment and persistence of high-achieving first-
generation latino college students. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice,
10(3), 307–320.
Wang, T.R. (2014). “I’m the only person from where I’m from to go to college”: Understanding
the memorable messages first-generation college students receive from parents. Journal
of Family Communication, 14(3), 270–290.
Wang, C., Harrison, J., Cardullo, V., & Lin, Xi. (2018). Exploring the relationship among
international students’ english self-efficacy, using english to learn self-efficacy, and
academic self-efficacy. Journal of International Students, 8(1), 233–250.
121

Wick, D., Willis, T.Y., Rivera, J., Lueker, E., & Hernandez, M. (2019). Asset-based learning
abroad: first-generation latinx college students leveraging and increasing community
cultural wealth in costa rica. Journal of Study Abroad, 2, 63–85.
Wright, A.L., Roscigno, V.J., & Quadlin, N. (2021). First-generation students, college majors,
and gendered pathways. The Sociological Quarterly, 1–24.
Yee, A. (2016). The unwritten rules of engagement: Social class differences in undergraduates’
academic strategies. The Journal of Higher Education, 87(6), 831–858.
Yosso, T.J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
Zalaquett, C. & Baez, J. (2012). Career counseling with Hispanics/latinos/as. Career Planning
and Adult Development Journal, 57–71.
Zunker, V.G. (2016). Career counseling: A holistic approach (9
th
ed.). Cengage Learning.

122

Appendix A: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2016
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in October and November 2016.
Intro
• Thank participant for continued engagement.
• Reminder that we’ll have four more videos this semester and one more check-in this
fall.
Questions
• How have things been going since we last met?
o Ask about things we know–work, clubs/orgs, relationships.
o Probe to get at new experiences, areas of challenge, and successes.
• How have your classes been going this semester?
o What has been your favorite class? What do you like about it?
o What class have you enjoyed the least? What don’t you like about it?
o To what extent has your academic performance been what you expected?
▪ What’s helped you meet those expectations?
▪ What’s made it difficult to meet your expectations?
• What has your experience in TSLC been like this semester?
o To what extent has your experience in TSLC this semester been what you
expected?
o What has your experience in [TSLC Class] been like?
o What has your relationship been like with your advisor?
o What has your relationship been like with your peer mentor?
123

• What was the networking dinner like?
o Was the event what you thought it would be?
o What did you think about changing the event from an etiquette dinner to a
diversity networking dinner?
o What did your learn or take away from attending that dinner?
• How has your second year of college been different from your first year?
o What changes have you liked?
o What do you wish was more similar to your first year?
o What things do you still want to change this year?
• When we last met, we talked about goals you have for this year. To what extent are
you making progress towards those goals?
o What’s helped you make progress?
o What’s been more challenging to achieve and why?
o What support do you need to achieve your goals?
• What’s on your mind as we approach the final part of the semester?
o What are you most looking forward to?
o What are you most concerned about?
• Is there anything else you want to tell me about that we haven’t had a chance to
discuss yet?
Wrap Up
• Thank participants for their time.
• Next video due on Friday, November 4
• Next check-in in late November/early December
124

Appendix B: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In January 2017
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol that was used to interview
TSLC students at the University of Nebraska campuses in January 2017.
Check In
• Follow up on Jan. 13
th
video responses.
o How are things going since we last met? How was break? The transition
back?
o How did finals go last semester? How were your grades?
Spring Semester 2017
• How do you feel about starting the spring semester? Does it feel similar or different
from last spring?
• What do you think this final semester in TSLC will be like?
• What are your personal goals for this semester? What do you plan to do differently
this semester and why? What has been working for you that you’ll continue to do?
Academics/Faculty
• How have your first few weeks of classes been? What are you taking?
• How connected do you feel to faculty members?
o Is there a difference between your interactions with TSLC and non-TSLC
faculty?
o Are there faculty members you really connect with? Who are they?
o Do you interact with faculty outside of class? What does that look like?
o What would you like from faculty that you don’t always have in relationships
with them?
125

o Have your interactions with TSLC faculty helped shape your thoughts about
your major or potential careers?
Major/Career Progress
• How would you describe your confidence level at this point regarding your major
choices, career options, and career preparation? Why?
o Has your confidence level changed since coming to college? What’s
contributed to that change (or lack thereof)?
o What would help you feel more confident?
• How helpful have you found the second year programming related to careers and
majors?
TSLC Experiences
• How would you describe the TSLC community?
o What’s led you to feel this way?
o What’s missing from the community?
• How has your view of the TSLC community changed over time if at all?
• How is TSLC different this semester than last semester?
o What do you think of having undergraduate assistants or students who might
help with things like advising?
o Did you have the opportunity to meet with candidates for the advisor
positions?
o What do you think it will be like to have new folks in the office?
• After a year and a half in the program, how would you describe the TSLC to a friend?
How about to someone who was interested in applying to TSLC?
126

• What advice would you give to first year TSLC students as they enter into their
second semester that you wish you had received?
• How are you feeling about the upcoming transition out of the formal TSLC program?
How are you preparing for that transition?
Closing
• Opportunities to meet in person later this spring in March and April?
• Will be on campus in February but we won’t be doing check-ins.

127

Appendix C: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Check In February 2018
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol that was used to interview
TSLC students at the University of Nebraska campuses in February 2018.
Check In
• How have things been since we last met?
Complete Demographic Sheet
• Note that we gathered this information early but want to make sure it’s accurate since
some of it can change.
• Encourage student to use the language and terms they are most comfortable with.
Funds of Knowledge
• We spoke about this early in the project, but how do you define success?
o What’s influenced this definition?
o Has that changed over time? (If yes) How so?
I want to understand your family and community a bit better. I am going to have you
create an educational and work history of your family (and other important people in your life.)
As you do this, consider the following:
• Where did they go to school? What was the highest level of education of education
they completed?
• What do you remember about the jobs they have worked over the course of your life?
• Are they working now? If so, where?
Today we are also going to talk about things that you learned in your family and community.
• What were the most important lessons you learned about education at home/in your
community that have helped you be successful?
128

• How have they helped you?
• What lessons have you not able to use or have found more difficult to use in college?
• How do you make sense of that?
• What groups or communities are you most invested in now?
o How did you become invested in these groups?
o What do you get from those groups?
o What do you give back to those groups?
o Follow up on mentoring or other connections to the program with focus on
reciprocity.
Campus Specific Questions
• Have you connected with anyone from TSLC this semester?
• Are there ways that you’d like to be involved with TSLC going forward?
Closing
Final check in will be in April and there will be opportunity to meet in person.

129

Appendix D: Cohort 1 Digital Diary Final Check In April 2018
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol that was used to interview
TSLC students at the University of Nebraska campuses in April 2018.
Intro
• How have things been going since we last talked?
• What was your biggest success this year? Biggest challenge?
Ideal TSLC Program Design Diagram Instructions
Now that you’ve experienced a full year of college since formal TSLC program
requirements ended, we wanted you to reflect on your experiences in the program, and whether
and how it helped you to be successful in college overall.
Based on your own personal experiences with the program and what helped you
personally be successful in college; we want you to think about how you would design your own
ideal TSLC program. When designing your program, we want you to think about the pieces of
the program that definitely helped you be successful, the pieces that could have helped you be
successful if some changes were made to them, and the pieces of the program that you definitely
would not include in your ideal program because they were not much help to your own personal
success. [Present the diagram]
General Overview of Diagram Activity
Explain the overall purpose of the activity to the students and then permit them time to
complete the diagram as a whole. Not every circle has to be filled in but encourage them to
identify the key components for each section.
• Section 1: For the first section of this diagram, we want you to identify the pieces of
the TSLC program that you would definitely include in their current form, if you
130

were to design the ideal TSLC program for your success based on your experiences
with the program.
• Section 2: For the second section of this diagram, we want you to identify the pieces
of the TSLC program that you might include if you were to design the ideal TSLC
program, only if there were some changes or alterations made to that piece of the
program. For example, maybe the mentors would be included in your ideal TSLC
program, but only if there were more frequent meetings with them.
• Section 3: For the last section of this diagram, we want you to identify the pieces of
the TSLC program that you would definitely not include if you were to design the
ideal TSLC program because they did not help you be successful, personally.
Complete Diagram Activity
Following completion of the whole diagram, go section by section to have the student
verbally explain why they placed the components where they did in the diagram.
Let’s start with section 1.
If you were to design the ideal TSLC program that would best support you and your
success in college, what are the important pieces of the TSLC program that would you include in
their current form, and why? Have them describe each component they identified in the first
section and why it is in this section. Be sure to probe for examples of how the program
component (in its current form) supported them and their success.
Let’s move on to section 2.
If you were to design the ideal TSLC program that would best support you and your
success in college, what are the important pieces of the TSLC program would you include, but
only if you were able to make some changes to them? Have them describe each component they
131

identified in the second section and why it is in this section. Be sure to probe for the changes to
the program component they would suggest and why they would make the changes they are
suggesting.
Let’s talk about section 3.
If you were to design the ideal TSLC program that would best support you and your
success in college, what pieces of the TSLC program would you definitely not include because
they were not helpful for your own personal success? Have them describe each component they
identified in the third section and why it is in this section. Be sure to probe for why they would
not include the program components they identified.
In designing your ideal TSLC program, are there other things you wish the program offered that
would have helped you be successful in college that you would add to the program?
Probe for why they would add the program piece.
Are there pieces of the program that you now think were helpful that you didn’t think were
helpful at the time?
Probe for what led to changes in mindset/opinion.
Exploring Differences in TSLC Based on Race and Gender
• Research generally suggests that race/ethnicity influences how students experience
college. However, our initial findings suggest that students from various racial
backgrounds have similar experiences in the TSLC program. What are your thoughts?
Can you give an example that helps us understand why you think this is or is not
accurate?
132

• We also noticed that students have a similar experience regardless of gender. What
are your thoughts? Can you give an example that helps us understand why you think
this is or is not accurate?
Wrap Up
Reflecting back on your participation in the digital diaries project, how would you
characterize your experience?
• What were the best parts of participating in the digital diary project?
• What were some of the challenging aspects of it?
• How do you feel like the digital diary project influenced your college experience?
• What do you think you’ve learned or taken away from participating in the digital
diaries project?
This will be our final digital diary check-in for the research project. We would like to
thank you for your participation [personalize thank you]. Inform them that their gift code will be
provided by email.

133

Appendix E: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2016
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in October and November 2016.
Intro
• Introduce yourself and provide some background to build rapport.
• Remind participants that they will complete videos x2 a month after Blackboard is set
up and check-ins to every 6 weeks. We they’ll likely submit 2 videos and complete
one more check-in this semester.
Warm-Up/Rapport Building
Since we haven’t had a chance to meet, tell me a little bit about yourself. Explore choice
of major, extracurricular activities, and family.
College Choice
• How did you decide to apply to college?
o Did anyone help you apply? How did they help?
o How did you decide to come to [institution]?
• What was your experience like applying for the Buffett scholarship?
o Who helped you, if anyone, and how did they help you?
o How did you find out about it?
o What steps did you take to complete it?
o Did anyone assist you in completing the application?
o Did you decline other offers to accept this one?
o If you had not received a Thompson Scholars award, what were your financial
aid plans?
134

Expectations for College
• What did you think college would be like?
o What led you to have those expectations?
o To what extent have your experiences met your expectations?
o What has most surprised you about your experiences thus far?
• What did you think TSLC would be like?
o What led you to have those expectations?
o To what extent have your experiences met your expectations?
o Probe as needed to understand expectations of programs, classes, interactions
with peers, faculty, and staff.
• What expectations did you have for yourself coming into college?
o What led you to have those expectations?
o To what extent have you met your expectations?
o What has helped you meet those expectations? What has hindered you from
meeting your expectations?
Current Experiences
• How have your classes been going this semester?
o What has made them easy? Challenging?
o What has been your favorite class? Least favorite?
o Try to draw out information about TSLC classes.
• What has been the best part of being in TSLC this semester?
• What has been the most challenging or difficult part of being in TSLC this semester?
• Who have been your biggest sources of support of semester?
135

o Who have you felt most connected to in TSLC? Why have you felt connected
to them?
o Who do you wish you felt more connected to in TSLC?
• What are you most looking forward to as you look towards the rest of the semester?
• Is there anything else that you wanted to share about your experiences thus far that I
didn’t ask you about?
If additional questions are needed:
• What has been your most memorable experience this semester?
o What made it memorable?
o What did you learn or take away from the experience?
• What has been your most challenging or difficult experience this semester?
o What made it challenging?
o How did you did you figure out how to navigate it?
o What did you learn or take away from the experience?

136

Appendix F: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In January 2017
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in January 2017.
Check In
Follow up on Jan. 13 video responses:
• How are things going since we last met? How was break? The transition back?
• How did finals go last semester? How were your grades?
Spring Semester 2017
• What are your personal goals for this semester?
• What do you plan to do differently this semester compared to last semester? Why?
What has been working for you that you’ll continue to do?
Academics/Faculty
• How have your first few weeks of classes been? What are you taking?
• How connected do you feel to faculty members?
o Is there a difference between your interactions with TSLC and non-TSLC
faculty?
o Are there faculty members you really connect with? Who are they?
o Do you interact with faculty outside of class? What does that look like?
o What would you like from faculty that you don’t always have in relationships
with them?
o Would you feel comfortable approaching a TSLC faculty member with
questions about the class? About careers? About research or internship
opportunities?
137

o Have your interactions with TSLC faculty helped shape your thoughts about
your major or potential careers?
Career/Major Progress
How would you describe your confidence level at this point regarding your major
choices, career options, and career preparation? Why?
• Has your confidence level changed since coming to college? What’s contributed to
that change (or lack thereof)?
• What would help you feel more confident?
TSLC Experiences
• What has TSLC been like this semester?
o How is TSLC different this semester than last semester?
o What has remained the same since the fall semester?
o What are you most looking forward to in TSLC?
o What aspects of TSLC are you less excited about this semester?
• I’ve heard there are some things that are changing in TSLC:
o What do you think of having undergraduate assistants or students who might
help with things like advising?
o Did you have the opportunity to meet with candidates for the advisor
positions?
o What do you think it will be like to have advisors in the office?
• How would you describe the TSLC community?
o What’s led you to feel this way?
o What’s missing from the community?
138

• The TSLC Mentor applications will be due soon. Do you plan to apply? If so, why?
• Are there people other than your assigned TSLC mentor that you meet with regularly
(e.g., TSLC staff, other TSLC students, TSLC faculty) and that you would consider to
be one of your mentors or sources of support?
o How did that relationship develop?
o How do they mentor or support you?
o What support might you need that you aren’t getting in TSLC?
• Reflecting back on your first semester, how would your experience at [institution] be
different if you did not have TSLC? Do you feel you would have been as successful
academically? Personally? Socially?
• After a semester in the program, how would you describe the TSLC to a friend? How
about to someone who was interested in applying to TSLC?
Closing
• Opportunities to meet in person later this spring in March and April.
• Will be on campus in February but we won’t be doing check-ins.

139

Appendix G: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In April 2017
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in April 2017.
Intro
• Welcome back for the final last check-in of the year!
• Remind participants to submit the last two videos for this year.
Re-Connecting
• How have things been going since we last met?
o What’s new or different?
o Follow-up on any critical information that was mentioned in DD videos.
• How have your classes been going since we last met?
o Try to draw out information about TSLC classes.
o How are you feeling going into finals?
Semester Reflections
• What has been your most memorable experience this semester?
o What made it memorable?
o What did you learn or take away from the experience?
• What has been your most challenging or difficult experience this semester?
o What made it challenging?
o How did you did you figure out how to navigate it?
o What did you learn or take away from the experience?
TSLC Reflections

140

• How would you describe your first year in TSLC? Is it what you expected? Why or
why not? What has been the best part of being in TSLC this year?
o What has been the most challenging or difficult part of being in TSLC this
year?
o What do you wish you could have changed about your TSLC experience this
year?
• Can you tell me about a time when someone in TSLC recognized or affirmed
something you said or did? How did that make you feel? How did that affect you?
• Looking back, how do you think TSLC has affected you this year?
o What’s the most important thing you’ve learned or taken away from being in
TSLC?
o What advice would you give to an incoming first-year student?
• What do you think your experience with TSLC will be like as a second year student?
o How do you think things will be different?
o What do you want to stay the same?
Reflections on Overall Collegiate Experiences
• How are you defining your success in college?
o How, if at all, has TSLC affected your belief in your capacities to succeed as a
college student?
o Who or what affected this belief?
• As you think about your first year college, what are the most important things that
you’ve learned this year? Probe for where the learning is occurring, role of TSLC.
• How do you think you’ve changed if at all since coming to college?
141

o What do you think contributed to those changes?
o How have these changes affected your…
• Academic success?
• Relationships?
• Confidence?
• Are there particular ideas or experiences that you hope to explore more during your
second year at [institution]?
o What’s led you to be interested in this idea/experience?
o To what extent do you think TSLC will help you explore these
idea/experiences?
• Is there anything else you want to tell me about that we haven’t had a chance to
discuss yet?
Wrap Up
• Thank participants for their time and provide information about compensation for the
year.
• Videos and check-ins will start again next fall, and I will be back in touch with
additional information about the timeline for submissions.

142

Appendix H: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In October and November 2017
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in October and November 2017.
Intro
• Thank participant for continued engagement.
• Reminder that we’ll have four more videos this semester and one more check-in this
fall.
Reconnecting & Second Year Focused Questions
• How have things been going since we last met?
o Ask about things we know–work, clubs/orgs, relationships.
o Probe to get at new experiences, areas of challenge, and successes.
• How have your classes been going this semester?
o What has been your favorite class? What do you like about it?
o What class have you enjoyed the least? What don’t you like about it?
o To what extent has your academic performance been what you expected?
▪ What’s helped you meet those expectations?
▪ What’s made it difficult to meet your expectations?
• What has your experience in TSLC been like this semester?
o To what extent has your experience in TSLC this semester been what you
expected?
o What has your experience in [TSLC Class] been like?
o What has your relationship been like with your advisor?
o What has your relationship been like with your peer mentor?
143

• What was the networking dinner event like?
o Was the event what you thought it would be?
o What you like most about the event?
o What did you find less helpful or difficult about the event?
o What did your learn or take away from attending that dinner?
Mid-Term Meeting/Grade Check Focused Questions
We’re going to spend time talking about your experiences with the mid-term meetings
that are required for the TSLC.
• Can you walk me through the mid-term meeting process?
o Did you discuss other issues (other than grades) with faculty or TSLC staff
during the grade check process/meeting? Why or why not?
o Did grade checks affect your ability to connect with faculty members or with
the TSLC staff? Please explain.
• How did the mid-term meeting affect you emotionally? How did they make you feel?
Why?
• Does this process help you better assess your own progress/grades? How so?
• Have you gotten better at reflection and self-assessment over the years? How so?
• What do you do after you’ve completed the mid-term meeting?
o Did you change your behavior after mid-term meetings? Why or why not?
o Did you implement any suggestions from faculty or the TSLC staff as a result
of meetings? If yes, did it affect your success? How so?
144

• Have mid-terms meetings affected your sense of confidence in your academic
abilities? How about your confidence in your ability to succeed academically? Please
explain.
• We hear from a lot of students that mid-term meetings “matter.” Can you help us
makes sense of if/why these meetings seem to matter to students?
• How the mid-term meeting process connected with the rest of the program?
o Tell me where mid-term meetings “fit in” with the rest of the second year
TSLC experience.
o How do mid-term meetings relate to the rest of the first year/second year
TSLC experience?
If Time Remains
• How has your second year of college been different from your first year?
o What changes have you liked?
o What do you wish was more similar to your first year?
o What things do you still want to change this year?
• When we last met, we talked about goals you have for this year. To what extent are
you making progress towards those goals?
o What’s helped you make progress?
o What’s been more challenging to achieve and why?
o What support do you need to achieve your goals?
• What’s on your mind as we approach the final part of the semester?
o What are you most looking forward to?
o What are you most concerned about?
145

Wrap Up
Is there anything else you want to tell me about that we haven’t had a chance to discuss
yet?

146

Appendix I: Cohort 2 Digital Diary Check In March 2018
The information served as a guide for the interview protocol for TSLC students at the
University of Nebraska campuses in March 2018.
Intro
• How have things been going since we last talked?
o How are your classes going?
o Follow-up on issues from prior videos/interviews
• What are you doing over the spring break?
Career Decision Making
We’ve discussed this before, but for this check-in, I’d like to spend a bit more time
talking about your major and career path and decision-making.
• What are the main reasons you chose (or are thinking about) your current career path
(e.g., happiness/fulfillment, money, parents picked it, etc.)?
• Overall, how confident are you in your choice of major? How confident in your
career path (or ability to choose a career, if they haven’t selected one yet)?
o Probe for their confidence in their ability to:
▪ seek and find information related to their intended career
▪ make a plan for achieving their career goals
▪ accurately assess their own skills and abilities
o What are the main factors that affect your confidence in your career path?
o What are the main obstacles to achieving your career goals at this point?
• How does your level of confidence in your career path affect your motivation in
college if at all?
147

• Would you say that your confidence in your major has changed or stayed about the
same over the course of your second year? Why? Has your confidence in your career
path changed at all over the course of this year?
• What do you believe it take to be successful in your intended career?
o Do you believe you have the skills and abilities to be successful in your
intended career? Why or why not?
o Do you have any career role models? What makes them a role model for you?
o Who/what do you turn to for guidance related to your major or career path?
Why?
• What kind of messages have you received about choosing your major from your
family? What have they told you about choosing a career? How have those messages
affected your decision-making?
• Are there specific college experiences or messages that have affected your decisions
related to your major or career? Please explain.
o Probe for particular activities they’ve engaged in that have helped shape their
perspective on their major/future career (internships, job shadowing, good/bad
experience with a class).
o Probe for whether they have utilized career planning services on campus
outside of the TSLC (e.g., career services office, advising office, etc.).
o Probe in depth for TSLC program activities they’ve engaged in that have
shaped their confidence in their career path (and why) if it was not explored in
the previous question (e.g., mock interviews, dinner w/ professionals, TSLC
seminar).
148

• Do you feel like your major and career planning needs are currently being met?
o Are there ways that the current TSLC career activities could be improved to
make you feel more confident about your career path and preparation?
o Are there other kinds of career-related activities you think it would be helpful
for the TSLC program to offer that would help you with your career planning
and preparation?
Closing
• How are you feeling about the end of your second year in TSLC?
• What do you think the TSLC launch will be like?
• Is there anything that you wanted to share with me that I didn’t ask you about?
Post-Interview Info
• Continue to submit videos as you are able through the end of the semester.
• One more check-in this semester before finals (Late April on campus).

149

Appendix J: Demographic & Academic Information Sheet
The following document is an interview protocol that was used to obtain demographic
and academic information from student participants.
Name:
Age:
Race/ethnicity:
Gender:
Marital Status (Are you married, engaged, single, etc.?):
Parental Status (Are you a parent or guardian?):
Country of birth:
Languages spoken/Primary Language:
Highest level of education Parent/Guardian 1:
Highest level of education Parent/Guardian 2:
Work:
Do you work?
If so, how many jobs do you have?
How many hours do you work?
How many hours per week?
Name of High school:
Do (or did) you participate in any college preparation program (e.g., TRIO, college possible,
etc.)? If so, which one(s):
Did you receive a Pell grant?
What is your current major? Minors?
150

Are you in the university Honors program?
Are you in a social fraternity or sorority?
Have you participated in CAPS/counseling sessions?
Have you been on academic or Foundation (UNK/O: or “Learning Community”) probation?
What clubs/organizations/activities have you participated in on campus? Have you had
leadership roles?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study explores how Latin* first-generation college students develop major and career self-efficacy. This study employs a qualitative case study approach and utilizes data collected during the first phase of the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education’s Pullias Center for Higher Education Promoting At-Promise Student Success project from 2015–2020. Data analysis focuses on 124 interviews from 10 Latin* first-generation college students in the Thompson Scholars Learning Communities (TSLC) program across the three University of Nebraska campuses: University of Nebraska at Kearney, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, and University of Nebraska at Omaha. Interviews were conducted during each student’s first 3 years of university. Additional data includes 12 TSLC annual reports from 2015–2019. Findings demonstrate that a combination of individual, family, programmatic, and institutional factors inhibit and promote major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students. Implications for practice include practitioner and faculty advising approaches, academic and career services, and family incorporation.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Beyond persistence and graduation rates: examining the career exploration processes of first-generation college students

PDF

First-generation professionals: career transition and success

PDF

The relationship between parenting styles, career decision self-efficacy, and career maturity of Asian American college students

PDF

A formative evaluation of the student support services TRIO program for low income and first generation college bound students self-efficacy at Butte-Glenn Community College District

PDF

Program customization in a comprehensive college transition program for low-income students

PDF

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

PDF

Designing college transition programs for low-income, first-generation commuter students

PDF

Transfer first-generation college students: the role of academic advisors in degree completion

PDF

Exploring faculty-student interactions in a comprehensive college transition program for low-income and first-generation college students

PDF

The use of students funds of knowledge to increase college success among low-income and first-generation students

PDF

The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready

PDF

What will I be when I grow up? Understanding how the lived experiences of African American community college students impact their academic major choices

PDF

What is the relationship between early childhood teachers' training on the development of their teaching self-efficacy?

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Leadership, accountability, and decision-making: An examination of first-responder experience and self-efficacy in real-time decision-making to improve community outcomes

PDF

Walking away from the game: a phenomenological study on student-athletes career transition

PDF

Pay to play: a qualitative study on how the perception of the continued rise in college tuition impacts first-generation, loan-borrowing graduates and their financial well-being

PDF

The relationship of gratitude and subjective well-being to self-efficacy and control of learning beliefs among college students

PDF

Examining Financial Well-being and Financial Stress: Experiences of Low-income and First-generation Postsecondary Students

Asset Metadata

Creator Ody-Bravo, Serina (author)

Core Title Navigating the academy and beyond: an examination of major and career self-efficacy of Latin* first-generation college students

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-08

Publication Date 08/09/2023

Defense Date 06/21/2023

Publisher University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag comprehensive college transition program,first-generation college students,Latin* students,low-income students,major and career self-efficacy,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Corwin, Zoe (committee chair), Hypolite, Liane (committee member), Kitchen, Joseph (committee member)

Creator Email odybravo@usc.edu,serinacbravo@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113297733

Unique identifier UC113297733

Identifier etd-OdyBravoSe-12230.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-OdyBravoSe-12230

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Ody-Bravo, Serina

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230809-usctheses-batch-1082 (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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu