University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

First-Generation, Low-Income Latina Students and Cultural Capital: A Case Study for
Academic Advisors
by
Julia A. Martínez

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

May 2022

© Copyright by Julia A. Martínez 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Julia A. Martínez certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Sheila Bañuelos
Raquel Torres-Retana
Patricia Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
First-generation, Pell-eligible Latinas are a growing population in higher education, yet their
completion rates are lower than their peers and a deficit mindset dominates the literature about
this group. This qualitative case study was meant to understand self-identified first-generation,
Pell-eligible Latina students’ experiences with academic advising at a 4-year, private research
PWI through 14 semi-structured interviews. Findings indicate that participants utilized all six
forms of cultural capital to promote their academic self-efficacy, though the pandemic,
adaptation to the academic workload, and limitations in advising support at this institution,
served as challenges to fully utilizing their cultural capital.
Keywords: first-generation college students, low-income college students; Latina
students; cultural wealth; cultural capital; academic self-efficacy; academic advisors; academic
success

v
Dedication
To my family who inspired me to begin this doctoral journey and who encouraged me every step
of the way.

To my grandmother Flora, grandfather Arsenio, and grandmother Maria Gomicinda de la Luz
(“Lucy”) who were unable to see me finish.

To my mother Denise, my father Arsenio, and my stepmother Valerie: their love and sacrifices
motivated me more than they will ever know.

To my padrinos, Roy and Olivia, who have always been there for me.

To my sisters, Christina Feliz and Melanie, and to my aunts, Cathie and Linda, for reminding me
to enjoy the journey.

To Michael, my amazing partner, and most dedicated cheerleader. This is for all of you.

vi
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my supervisor, Deise Benitez, for her support and understanding
over the past 3 years. Dr. Patricia Tobey, I hit the jackpot with you for my chair! Thank you for
guiding me with patience, understanding, and your great sense of humor. Dr. Raquel Torres-
Retana, thank you for inspiring me to explore this topic further and for providing feedback to
help me take my writing to the next level. Dr. Sheila Bañuelos, thank you for joining my
committee, cheering me on along the way, and providing such detailed edits. I would also like to
thank Dr. Artineh Samkian for teaching me about research methods, helping me narrow down
my topic, and encouraging me to be thorough with my research.
I would like to thank my advisors in the Doctoral Support Center, Dr. Evelyn Castillo,
and Dr. Sierra Senzaki. Dr. Castillo, thank you for reviewing my final assignments throughout
my doctoral program, providing feedback on several drafts of my dissertation, and meeting with
me to answer my questions. Dr. Senzaki, thank you for reviewing my newer sections and for
teaching me about reader-based prose. I would like to acknowledge Melanee Vicedo for teaching
me how to navigate USC Libraries and improve my research strategies to maximize results.
Thanks also to my editor, Dr. Guadalupe Montaño, for helping me polish my manuscript.
I would like to acknowledge Ray Gonzalez for helping me brainstorm appropriate
sampling methods. I would also like to thank my colleagues, Alexandra Hong, D’Andre Coats,
Toni Richardson, Javier Mulato, Frank Chang, Dr. Trista Beard, Dr. Rick Trevino, and Serina
Bravo, for their help with strategizing participant recruitment. I appreciate Sarah Hazan for
providing feedback on my recruitment flyer. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. José Navarro
for guiding me on my population of interest in the preliminary stages of my research. Thanks
also to Dr. Alexander Yin for serving as a mentor for me throughout the dissertation process.

vii
Thank you, Julian, for your friendship and for helping me improve my slides. Thank you again to
my partner Michael for everything you did to support me throughout my doctoral journey, both
personally and professionally. Thanks also for helping me remember to keep my writing
substantive and “punchy”! Lastly, I would like to thank my research participants for sharing their
stories with me. For this, I am extremely grateful.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study ...............................................................................................1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................1
Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................6
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................7
Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................8
Researcher Role .................................................................................................................10
Overview and Definition of Terms ....................................................................................10
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................................13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................14
Campus Environments .......................................................................................................14
First-Generation, Low-Income Latina Undergraduates .....................................................28
Intersectionality..................................................................................................................40
Academic Advisors ............................................................................................................42
Conceptual Framework: Community Cultural Wealth Model ...........................................46
Summary ............................................................................................................................48
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................50
Research Design.................................................................................................................50
Sample and Population ......................................................................................................51
Instrumentation ..................................................................................................................54

ix
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................55
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................57
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................57
Summary ............................................................................................................................64
Chapter Four: Findings ..................................................................................................................66
Participants .........................................................................................................................67
Cultural Background and Student Academic Self-Efficacy ..............................................71
Academic Advisor Support of Student Academic Self-Efficacy .......................................83
Summary ............................................................................................................................87
Chapter Five: Discussion ...............................................................................................................89
Discussion: Cultural Background and Student Academic Self-Efficacy ...........................90
Discussion: Academic Advisor Support of Student Academic Self-Efficacy ...................94
Implications for Practice ....................................................................................................98
Future Research ...............................................................................................................106
Conclusions ......................................................................................................................107
References ....................................................................................................................................109
Appendix A: Figures and Tables .................................................................................................122
Appendix B: Recruitment Flyer ...................................................................................................130
Appendix C: Screening Questionnaire.........................................................................................131
Appendix D: Study Information Sheet ........................................................................................132
Appendix E: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................135

x
List of Tables
Table A1: Conceptual Framework Alignment Matrix 125
Table A2: Participants’ Self-Identified Place of Origin and Languages Spoken 126
Table A3: Self-Identified Class Year, Major of Interview Participants 127
Table A4: Emergent Findings for Research Question 1 128
Table A5: Emergent Findings for Research Question 2 129

xi
List of Figures
Figure A1: Financial Aid: Any Grant or Scholarship 122
Figure A2: Financial Aid: Pell Grants 123
Figure A3: Conceptual Framework: Community Cultural Wealth Model 124

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Students who are first-generation, low-income, and Latina have a unique intersection of
minoritized identities. Students with these identities are among the fastest-growing populations
in higher education (NCES, 2020a). However, they tend to have lower reports of feelings of
mattering (Dueñas & Gloria, 2017), well-being (Case & Hunter, 2012; Flett & Nepon, 2020;
Kilgo et al., 2019), and college completion rates (Excelencia in Education, n.d.) than their White
counterparts. These outcomes are problematic and highlight that college environments continue
to privilege White, middle-class students with familial knowledge of college. Most literature
focuses on first-generation college students (Ishitani, 2016) or Latina students (Storlie et al.,
2014) separately but rarely on students with a combination of these identities. Even the literature
on students whose identities intersect at college generational status, socioeconomic background,
ethnic identity, and gender identity tends to do so inadvertently. Thus, a gap exists in the
research on first-generation, low-income Latina students in higher education, and more research
is needed on this unique population. This study fills this gap in the literature by focusing on how
first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates use their cultural wealth and how academic
advisors, as institutional representatives, may facilitate their academic success. The study is a
case study based on one institution to allow for an in-depth examination of participants’
experiences.
Background of the Problem
Despite efforts to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion, higher education institutions
do not serve all students equitably. Historically, these institutions were created to train White,
upper- and middle-class men to become leaders (Lucas, 2006). This historical legacy of higher
education as a White supremacist, classist, patriarchy is still present as college environments
2

continue to be isolating and hostile places for minoritized students (Harper & Hurtado, 2007;
Hurtado, 1992; Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2012). Although institutions may focus on expanding
access to first-generation low-income students of color, these students are not set up for success
upon arrival (Harris et al., 2015). For example, an institution may tout that most students receive
financial aid, but scrutiny of the numbers may reveal that a low percentage of students receive
Pell grants, a proxy for low socioeconomic status (SES), while a larger percentage pay full
tuition. In this example, the institution prioritizes merit-based aid over need-based aid, creating
inequitable access and opportunities for low-income students. An inequitable experience for
these students can lead to further financial difficulty.
In addition, reports indicate notable disparities in well-being for first-generation and
Latina students compared to their counterparts (Case & Hunter, 2012; Flett & Nepon, 2020;
Kilgo et al., 2019). For example, at the case study institution, first-generation college students
reported a statistically significant negative difference in their sense of belonging and equitable
treatment in university spaces. At the same time, Latina students did not report such great
disparities, though disparities were still notable and included at-risk drinking. At institutions
where these disparities exist, an inequitable experience can have additional negative effects on
student well-being, such as mental health disparities.
Furthermore, some educators in higher education institutions have a deficit mindset
concerning minoritized students and assume that these students do not have cultural capital.
Cultural capital is defined as the “knowledge, skills, abilities, and contacts possessed and utilized
by Communities of Color to survive and resist macro and micro-forms of oppression” (Yosso,
2005, p. 77). As evidenced by this definition, Communities of Color possess cultural capital, but
their form of cultural capital goes unacknowledged by educators in higher education institutions.
3

This lack of institutional acknowledgment of minoritized students’ cultural capital affects
how these students engage on campus. Here, engagement consists of “educationally effective
practices, both inside and outside the classroom” (Museus et al., 2019, p. 2). According to Kuh’s
(2001, 2003) theory of engagement, which is prominent in the literature, equal responsibility is
placed on the student to engage in the higher education environment and on the higher education
environment to engage the student. In this way, students are partners with higher education
institutions in their overall educational experience. The problem with this concept is that not all
students enter college with the same knowledge or resources. Minoritized students may begin
college without understanding how a higher education system operates, without awareness of on-
or off-campus resources, and without familial experience from which to draw advice, guidance,
or financial support. However, if the cultural capital they already possess is unacknowledged and
they do not receive institutional support, minoritized students are not positioned to have an
equitable educational experience. They may be unable to fully engage or disengage entirely from
fatigue or in protest (Locke & Trolian, 2018). Minoritized student disengagement can negatively
affect their GPAs, possibly leading to academic probation, temporarily stopping out of the
campus, or leaving permanently.
To avoid disengaging or losing minoritized students, it is in the best interest of higher
education institutions to provide them with an equitable experience. First, doing so affects
retention and graduation rates. In turn, these rates affect popular rankings, such as those provided
by U.S. News and World Report, which include average 6-year graduation rates and 1st-year
retention rates (Morse & Brooks, 2020). High school students, families, and counselors often use
these rankings to identify schools where they will apply, visit, and enroll. For first-generation,
low-income students, these rankings may be one of the most significant drivers of their ultimate
4

decisions regarding higher education. Thus, providing an equitable experience for minoritized
students can improve student retention and graduation rates, enhance institutional reputations,
and help future students in the application process.
Second, institutions have a vested interest in providing an equitable experience for
minoritized students because they have an ethical and legal responsibility to do so. Ethically, it is
a socially just action to take. Most higher education institutions highlight the education of
students in their mission statements. The lack of specificity in these statements implies that the
educational experience is meant for all students. Equally as important as the ethical responsibility
is the legal one. Institutions must legally provide all students with academic freedom or the right
to learn (Kaplin & Lee, 2014). Therefore, denying minoritized students an equitable educational
experience is morally wrong and illegal.
To provide minoritized students with an equitable experience, educators in higher
education institutions must shift from a deficit to a strengths-based perspective. This can involve
removing the assumption that first-generation college students know how to navigate the higher
education environment. Also, institutions can consider alleviating financial burdens for students
from low-income backgrounds. Moreover, institutions can be more proactive about learning
about the populations they admit, the cultural strengths that minoritized students possess upon
entering higher education, and how to reinforce these strengths. Now is a critical time for student
services staff in higher education to reconsider their approach to serving minoritized students.
Academic advisors serve students regularly by helping them understand what to expect in
college, guiding them to services and resources, and connecting them to mentors and peers. Due
to the structure of student service units at 4-year, private, research predominantly White
institutions (PWIs), academic advisors are constrained by their roles as specialists who serve
5

many students (Hirt, 2006). These large caseloads make it more difficult for academic advisors
to provide equitable support to minoritized students and place the burden on these students to
locate and utilize advising services on their own. Unfortunately, due to the structure of their
work environment, academic advisors in this institution type are not positioned to serve
minoritized students adequately, and therefore minoritized students do not receive equitable
academic advising support in these settings.
This study is necessary because the experiences of first-generation, low-income Latina
students in 4-year, private, research PWIs need to be better understood. In the literature, student
identities are studied separately but not together (Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; O’Shea, 2015).
Learning from students with a combination of these unique identities will reveal insights for
academic advisors who serve these students. Further insight will enable academic advisors to
better understand this population’s unique needs, strengths, and experiences at 4-year, private,
research PWIs. This increased understanding will help academic advisors better support students
by reinforcing their cultural wealth.
In addition to increasing understanding of first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates, this study is needed because this population is growing. Between 2000 and
2018, Latinas’ college enrollment rate increased by 40% (NCES, 2020a). Additionally, students’
financial need is greater now than ever before (Brown & Mangan, 2020). According to NCES
(2020b), between 2000–01 and 2016–17, “the percentage of first-time, full-time
degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students who were awarded financial aid,” largely
determined by financial need, grew “across public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit
institutions” (para. 2). The recent pandemic and poor economic climate exacerbated student
financial needs (Brown & Mangan, 2020). The growing population of first-generation, low-
6

income students in higher education needs institutional support in the form of tailored
institutional knowledge and resources.
Not providing this support could lead first-generation, low-income students to perceive
the campus climate negatively. In turn, these negative perceptions can lead to maladjustment,
disengagement, and attrition, consequences that might be prevented through institutional support
of students’ skill development, adjustment, social capital, identity formation, and academic self-
efficacy (Museus et al., 2019). Institutional support for first-generation, low-income students will
have long-lasting benefits for students, higher education institutions, and society.
Statement of the Problem
First-generation, low-income Latina students’ higher education completion rates are
lower than White students (Excelencia in Education, n.d.). In addition, their well-being suffers in
higher education environments (Case & Hunter, 2012; Flett & Nepon, 2020; Kilgo et al., 2019).
Student well-being and completion rates are correlated, as lower reports of well-being may lead
to stopping out or departure.
Additionally, there is a cultural and economic disconnect between the demographic that
higher education institutions were designed to serve and this special population’s needs. The
legacy of higher education institutions as training sites for White, middle- and upper-class men
continues through a lack of acknowledgment of minoritized student cultural wealth. This lack of
acknowledgment manifests in several ways, including through inequitable support structures like
large academic advising caseloads at 4-year, private, research PWIs. The disconnect in academic
advising support for first-generation, low-income Latina students may contribute to these
students’ lower completion rates and feelings of well-being.
7

Moreover, a focus in the literature on this population’s deficiencies exacerbates the
negative effects of the disconnect between their needs and academic support structures. Students
with this unique combination of identities have many strengths, including resilience, self-
confidence, familial support, internal motivation, and a strong work ethic (Crisp et al., 2015;
Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015; Storlie et al., 2014; Yosso, 2005).
The literature’s focus on deficiencies related to first-generation, low-income Latina students
serves as a barrier to solutions to the problem of the disconnect between academic support
services and these students’ needs. Academic support structures designed with an understanding
of these students’ cultural wealth and higher education experiences may help improve their
academic outcomes.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to understand the strategies this population used for
academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI. Additionally, the purpose was to hear
from participants about the specific challenges they experience at this institution type (Lippincott
& German, 2007). Also, the purpose was to hear from participants about what was missing from
the current academic advising structure at the case study institution that would better support
their academic success. Finally, the purpose of this study was to provide recommendations for
changes and improvements to academic support for this special population at this study site. Two
research questions guided this study:
1. How do first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize their cultural background
toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI?
8

2. How have academic advisors utilized first-generation, low-income Latina students’
cultural backgrounds to support these students’ academic self-efficacy at a 4-year,
private, research PWI?
This study took a qualitative approach through interviews. There were 14 open-ended,
semi-structured individual interviews with undergraduates who self-identify as first-generation,
Pell-eligible, and Latina. Participants were sampled purposefully and recruited via flyers shared
in email newsletters and posted in physical spaces used by Latinx student organizations at the
case study site. These communities were more likely to include the target population. Interviews
included questions that centered around Yosso’s (2005) community cultural wealth (CCW)
model, and they were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes.
Significance of the Study
This study is significant because it contributes to the broad literature in higher education.
First, it presents perspectives from a unique population of students: first-generation, low-income
Latina undergraduates. These perspectives will help fill the current gap in the literature for
research on this growing population in higher education. Additionally, this study examined a
specific institution type: a 4-year, private, research PWI. Previous literature yields inconclusive
information regarding the connection between institution type and student outcomes. Examining
the specific challenges for the target population may provide further insight into this area of the
literature. Another contribution of this study to the literature is that it explores the student
experience throughout all class years, whereas previous research on one or more aspects of this
population concentrates on the 1st year of college (O’Shea, 2015). Further, this study contributes
to limited research on student services staff and the role they play in student success, whereas
9

previous research focuses on faculty (Museus et al., 2019). In these ways, my study will add to
the literature in areas where there are gaps or clarification is needed.
Moreover, this study is significant because it contributes to solving a problem in higher
education. For example, a better understanding of first-generation, low-income Latina students’
cultural wealth and higher education experiences may help higher education leaders provide
academic advising services tailored to these students’ unique needs. This study will help inform
targeted services through a strengths-based perspective. Overall, the population of focus will
benefit from more equitable support services, leading to improved academic outcomes, such as
academic self-efficacy, feelings of mattering, overall engagement, greater reports of well-being,
and higher completion rates.
I hope that this study will teach student services staff about how first-generation, low-
income Latina students utilize their cultural wealth for academic self-efficacy at a 4-year,
private, research PWI. Also, I hope that academic advisors will better understand the unique
needs of this population, their cultural wealth, and how to leverage their cultural wealth to
promote their academic self-efficacy. In addition, these learnings will benefit higher education
institutions and society in general. With knowledge from my study, higher education institutions
can improve their retention and graduation rates, enhance their reputations, and fulfill ethical and
legal responsibilities. Society will also benefit from these students serving as role models for
future generations. Lastly, communities can reinvest in first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduate students through additional research and tailored services.

10

Researcher Role
I, the researcher, am an academic advisor for graduate students at the study site. In
addition, I identify as first-generation, a Pell recipient, and Latina. My experience advising
students in my professional role and my social identities may pose an issue of internal validity
due to researcher bias and reactivity. To preemptively address this issue, I notified potential
participants of my professional role in academic advising at the study site and that I was only
acting as a researcher during the study and not in my role as an academic advisor. I addressed the
power imbalance between participants and me by conducting my study with integrity and rigor,
by strategizing for validity and reliability, and by demonstrating respect, caution, and active
listening (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Smith, 2012). I discuss these limitations and my
positionality further in Chapter Three.
Overview and Definition of Terms
Depending on the date, literature on Latina students uses different terms (e.g., Hispanic,
Latina/o, Latin@, and Latinx). It is important to understand the meaning of these terms, their
origins, who uses them, and how they are used. Hispanic, Latina/o, Latin@, and Latinx have all
been used to describe U.S. residents with Spanish-speaking Latin American or Spanish ancestry
(Noe-Bustamante et al., 2020; Taylor et al., 2012). The term “Hispanic” was the first to appear in
1976 with Public Law 94-311, which allowed the U.S. government to count the number of
people with this identity background through the U.S. Census (Taylor et al., 2012). In the 1990s,
the term “Latino” was introduced, again mandated by the U.S. government (Taylor et al., 2012).
In the early 2000s, the term “Latinx” appeared on online message boards among the LGBTQ
community to embrace gender-neutrality and reject the gender binary of “Latino” or “Latina/o.”
11

Among U.S. residents with Spanish-speaking Latin American or Spanish ancestry, those
whom pan-ethnic terms are meant to describe do not fully embrace terms “Hispanic,” “Latino,”
and “Latinx.” In 2012, a national bilingual survey through the Pew Hispanic Center, out of the
Pew Research Center, found that 51% of survey respondents preferred to self-identify with their
original or ancestral home countries instead of a pan-ethnic label like “Hispanic” or “Latino”
(Taylor et al., 2012). More recent studies have shown that the numbers have not changed
significantly. For example, in a 2020 study by Noe-Bustamante et al. through the Pew Research
Center, only 3% of U.S. residents with Spanish-speaking Latin American or Spanish ancestry
used the term “Latinx” to describe themselves.
People who use the term “Latinx” tend to be scholars, students, and women under age 30
(de Onís, 2017; Noe-Bustamante et al., 2020; Salinas & Lozano, 2019). Scholars use the term,
sometimes without explanation and often with an awareness of its political nature (de Onís,
2017; Vidal-Ortiz & Martínez, 2018). They agree that the term should be used to empower
individuals to challenge linguistic rules and question the status quo of how people are included
or excluded through language (de Onís, 2017). While most scholars agree on this usage, debate
continues regarding the benefits and drawbacks of using the term “Latinx.” Students use this
term in higher education as a type of freedom for people who do not identify with the gender
binary (Salinas & Lozano, 2019). The term does not create inclusivity for all communities, as
most people have either not heard of the term or have heard of it and prefer not to use it (Noe-
Bustamante et al., 2020; Salinas & Lozano, 2019).
Within this context, my study is written for an audience of deans and provosts, student
services staff, and academic advisors. I focus on Latinx students who identify as female. For
12

these reasons, I use the term “Latina” rather than “Latinx.” I use other terms to describe studies
where scholars used other terms in their research. In all other areas, I use the term “Latina.”
The following is a list of operational definitions for other key terms I will use throughout
this study and an explanation of why I chose some of these terms over others, whenever relevant.
Academic self-efficacy: Personal beliefs about how one can learn or perform
academically in higher education (Rueda, 2011; Schunk, 2020).
Campus climate: the constructed environment that influences the behavior of those who
participate in it (Strange & Banning, 2015).
First-generation college student: “an individual both of whose parents did not complete a
baccalaureate degree; or in the case of any individual who regularly resided with and received
support from only one parent, an individual whose only such parent did not complete a
baccalaureate degree” (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.).
Low-income: a student who is eligible for a Pell Grant, usually determined by a formula
that factors a student’s expected family contribution, year in college, enrollment status (full-time
or part-time), and the cost of attendance at the chosen institution (Federal Student Aid, 2021).
Latina: a female-identifying individual with Latin American ancestry. I chose this term
instead of the more recent and increasingly popular “Latinx.” I acknowledge and honor the
fluidity of gender identity embraced by “Latinx” (Salinas & Lozano, 2019). However, my goal is
to hear the specific perspectives of female-identifying individuals within the Latinx community.
Navigational capital: the ability to make one’s way around an institution through a
combination of individual agency and social networks (Yosso, 2005).
Social capital: “networks of people and community resources” (Yosso, 2005, p. 79).
13

Organization of the Study
This study consists of five chapters. In Chapter One, I introduce the problem, background
information, purpose, significance, limitations and delimitations, and key terms. In Chapter Two,
I review the literature on campus environments, first-generation, low-income Latina students,
intersectionality, and academic advisors. I also introduce my conceptual framework, Yosso’s
(2005) CCW model. In Chapter Three, I describe the methodology for the study, including
sample and population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis. In Chapter Four, I
present the findings by research question and discuss how they relate to the literature. In Chapter
Five, I discuss the findings, implications for practice, future research, and conclusions.

14

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This study sought to understand how first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize
their cultural background toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI and
how academic advisors have utilized students’ cultural backgrounds to promote their academic
self-efficacy at the study site. First, I rely on the literature on campus environments to gain a
broad understanding of my study site. I narrow my research to include studies that examine or
discuss campus climate for racial and ethnic diversity at PWIs, campus climate for
socioeconomic diversity at 4-year, private, research institutions, and assessing campus climate. I
also include research on campus culture, leading culture change, and institution type. Second, I
include research to better understand my student population, as literature on this group is
minimal. For this reason, I divide the literature into first-generation, low-income students, and
then separately, Latina students. Also, I include research on students with all four identities at 4-
year, private research PWIs and how this population has been affected by the pandemic. Third, I
incorporate research on intersectionality to address the importance of examining intersecting
minoritized identities. Fourth, I include research on academic advisors, the profession, and their
approach to advising first-generation, low-income Latinas. Lastly, I discuss my conceptual
framework, Yosso’s (2005) CCW model.
Campus Environments
The literature on campus environments can help frame a better understanding of the
higher education experience for students from various backgrounds in different institution types.
In this section, I discuss campus environments (Astin, 1991; Astin & Antonio, 2012; Hurtado,
1992; Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999; Strange & Banning, 2015).
First, I discuss campus climate (Harper, 2012; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, Alvarez et al.,
15

2012; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999). Within campus climate research, I examine racial and ethnic
diversity at PWIs (Case & Hunter, 2012; Daniels et al., 2021; Harris et al., 2015; Hurtado & Ruiz
Alvarado, 2012; Kilgo et al., 2019). Also, I discuss campus climate for socioeconomic diversity
at 4-year, private, research institutions (Locke & Trolian, 2018; Park et al., 2013; Warnock et al.,
2018). In addition, I discuss models for assessing campus climate (Harris III & Bensimon, 2007;
Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2015; Witham & Bensimon, 2012). Second, I discuss another aspect
of campus environments: campus culture (Kezar, 2012; Museus et al., 2019; Witham &
Bensimon, 2012). Within campus culture, I discuss models for leading culture change (Bolman
& Deal, 2017; Fullan, 2007; Gallos & Bolman, 2021; Kotter, 2011; Schein, 2010). Third, I
examine institution type (Arum et al., 2018; Harris, 2019; Mayhew et al., 2016). This section
concludes with a summary of recommendations for research and practice based on the campus
environments literature.
In 1991, Astin provided a conceptual model for assessment in higher education based on
previous research, which he updated in 2012. The model came to be known as the input-
environment-outcome model and included a focus on student characteristics (inputs), their
experiences in higher education (the environment), and different dependent variables (outcomes),
such as academic success. Hurtado, Milem, et al. (1999) expanded on the concept of campus
environments by suggesting that student services staff must understand how different individuals
in the community perceive the environment to create learning environments that serve all
students. Strange and Banning (2015) suggested that educators can intentionally shape campus
environments to foster student learning and development. Strange and Banning (2015)
introduced four types of human environments: physical, aggregate, organizational, and socially
constructed. The socially constructed environment was based on how the environment affects
16

student attitudes and behaviors through perceptions of the individuals in that environment. The
socially constructed environment is a useful type of environment to study to better understand
first-generation, low-income Latina students in 4-year, private, research PWIs.
Campus Climate
Campus climate involves individuals’ perceptions (Museus et al., 2019). Research in this
area has primarily focused on the experiences of ethnically and racially minoritized students
(Harper, 2012; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 1992; Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012; Hurtado,
Milem, et al., 1999). Most of the research has taken a qualitative approach (Harper, 2012; Harper
& Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999), though a few
studies have taken a quantitative approach (Hurtado, 1992). Hurtado, Milem, et al. (1999) and
Hurtado, Alvarez, et al. (2012) presented frameworks for improving campus climate and for
conducting research and practice. Other studies utilized existing frameworks, such as Bonilla-
Silva’s minimization of race frame (Harper, 2012).
Within the environments studied, campus climates were revealed to have modern
challenges stemming from racial-colonial foundations in higher education. Historically, higher
education was designed for White, middle- and upper-class men (Lucas, 2006). Colonial colleges
pressured Native Americans to raise funds for higher education institutions, and some of these
colleges profited from the enslavement of Black people (Stein, 2018). Findings from a 2007
study by Harper and Hurtado revealed that campuses continued to have racist reputations and
legacies, and Whiteness pervaded the campus environment.
In Harper and Hurtado’s (2007) study, modern challenges of the racial-colonial
foundations of higher education appeared in many forms. For example, race was a taboo topic.
For staff, this taboo was evident in research that did everything but explicitly name race and
17

racism (Harper, 2012). Minoritized staff may have been aware of this taboo but may not have felt
they could do anything about it. As a result, students were not taught about racial understanding
(Harper & Hurtado, 2007). For students, the climate for diversity varied depending on their racial
and ethnic backgrounds (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999). White students
perceived minoritized students to be satisfied with the campus racial climate (Harper & Hurtado,
2007), while minoritized students perceived racial conflict (Hurtado, 1992). The campus climate
for ethnic and racial diversity could also be tied to student outcomes (Astin, 1991; Astin &
Antonio, 2012; Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999). For example, in Harper and Hurtado’s (2007)
study, satisfaction with social support varied by race. White and Asian American students could
not identify what they would change about their campus environments, while Latino students
were aware of a lack of social support, and Black students were very dissatisfied.
Campus Climate for Racial and Ethnic Diversity at Predominantly White Institutions
Campus climate at PWIs also focused on issues of ethnic and racial diversity (Harris et
al., 2015; Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012; Kilgo et al., 2019), the student experience (Daniels et
al., 2021), and creating safe spaces (Case & Hunter, 2012). According to a quantitative study by
Hurtado and Ruiz Alvarado (2012), campus racial climates were more welcoming on more
diverse campuses. It would logically follow that because PWIs are not diverse, their campus
racial climate was inhospitable for ethnically and racially minoritized students. Similarly, in
another quantitative study, Kilgo et al. (2019) found that the effect of student diversity
interactions on well-being depended on race. This finding is problematic considering Harris et
al.’s (2015) analytic claims based on critical race theory (CRT) that institutions have used
diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives to reinforce the status quo, with modest improvement
18

for students of color. In other words, although institutions were increasing their diversity, equity,
and inclusion efforts, students of color were not benefitting from them.
As Harris et al. (2015) discussed, diversity has become a focus in admissions through
affirmative action. However, access does not always mean success. A higher education
institution may recruit a diverse group of students, but those from historically minoritized
backgrounds may continue to experience class- and race-based microaggressions (Locke &
Trolian, 2018). White students may perceive satisfaction among minoritized students (Harper &
Hurtado, 2007), whereas low-income and Latino students specifically experience conflict in
addition to negative well-being and distress (Flett & Nepon, 2020; Kilgo et al., 2019).
In a qualitative, phenomenological study, Daniels et al. (2021) found that the student
experience was influenced by several factors, including “(a) peer support, (b) institutional
support, (c) academics and faculty engagement, and (d) campus climate contributions and
challenges” (p. 8). These findings are like those of other researchers in terms of peer support
(Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Museus et al., 2019), institutional support (Harper, 2012; Harper &
Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 1992; Museus et al., 2019), faculty engagement (Museus et al., 2019),
and campus climate contributions and challenges (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 1992;
Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999; Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2012). The role of campus climate on
the student experience is notable.
Another theme that emerged from campus climate research for racial and ethnic diversity
at PWIs was safe spaces. In a 2012 study, Case and Hunter took a psychological approach to
present a conceptual framework centering on counterspaces, places where oppressed people
challenged deficit-based perspectives and experienced psychological well-being. Based on Case
19

and Hunter’s (2012) argument, historically minoritized students at PWIs benefited significantly
from counterspaces.
Campus Climate for Socioeconomic Diversity at 4-Year, Private, Research Institutions
In addition to race and ethnicity, campus climate research also examined socioeconomic
diversity. A lack of a positive climate for socioeconomic diversity reflected a modern
continuation of the racial-colonial foundations of higher education institutions, in that class-
based norms were common (Locke & Trolian, 2018; Stein, 2018). Socioeconomic diversity had
both positive and negative outcomes for students. Positive outcomes included more frequent
cross-racial interactions and greater involvement in and out of the classroom as the campus
became more socioeconomically diverse (Park et al., 2013). Negative outcomes were notable for
low-income and middle-class students. For example, in a 2018 quantitative study, Warnock et al.
discovered that low-income students tended to feel more uncomfortable on campus and
perceived the climate more negatively. Similarly, middle-income students reported hearing about
classist experiences and having cross-class conversations less often. These findings reflected
research on racial and ethnic diversity, where campus racial climates were more hospitable on
more diverse campuses (Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2012), and minoritized students had more
negative perceptions of the campus climate for diversity (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado,
1992; Kilgo et al., 2019).
Assessing and Changing Campus Climate
Campus climate can be assessed for racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity. Once
assessed, campus climate can be intentionally changed. Strategies for using inquiry to change
campus climate include Harris and Bensimon’s (2007) and Witham and Bensimon’s (2012)
work. In 2007, Harris and Bensimon worked with researchers at the University of Southern
20

California’s Center for Urban Education to create the equity scorecard. The goal of the scorecard
is to increase awareness of inequities for minoritized students and emphasize accountability for
eliminating inequitable outcomes. In this model, campus constituents come together to ask
questions, develop indicators to include on the scorecard, and disseminate their findings with
recommendations for action and research. In 2012, Bensimon collaborated with Witham to write
a chapter on creating a culture of inquiry for the success of ethnically and racially minoritized
students. The chapter focuses on a scenario for appropriately responding to low graduation rates
for minoritized students: a double-feedback loop where student services staff question the status
quo and how traditional approaches may exacerbate the problem. The implication of Witham and
Bensimon’s (2012) work is that by changing the campus culture around inquiry, student services
staff can help change perceptions of diverse student groups so that these students feel more
welcome and supported.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2015) offered an evaluation plan to change organizational
climate. Although their model was not designed for higher education, it has been proven
effective over many years for diverse types of programs. The model has four levels: results,
behavior, learning, and reaction. Results include the degree to which participants achieve desired
outcomes. Behavior involves whether participants apply what they learned in the training.
Learning is whether participants met the learning outcomes. Lastly, reaction is whether
participants were engaged by the training and found it relevant to their work. Like Harris and
Bensimon’s (2007) equity scorecard, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s model outlines a prescriptive
plan for creating climate change. Through campus climate assessments, student services staff can
better understand inequitable student experiences on their campuses and focus on addressing
them through positive change.
21

Campus Culture
Campus culture is another aspect of the campus environment that influences the student
experience. According to Northouse (2019), campus culture is a set of shared values and the
mode of operation for those in an environment. Unlike climate, culture is more embedded and,
therefore, more difficult to change. This subsection includes three literature reviews of campus
culture for students of color (Kezar, 2012; Museus et al., 2019; Witham & Bensimon, 2012).
Kezar (2012) provided evidence to support collaborative leadership. Witham and Bensimon
(2012) focused on inquiry through a double-feedback loop to promote student equity and
success. Museus et al. (2019) presented recommendations through the lens of student
engagement.
These authors all focused on what student services staff members could do to enhance the
educational experience for ethnically and racially minoritized college students (Kezar, 2012;
Witham & Bensimon, 2012). Additionally, reflection was involved at an institutional level
(Kezar, 2012; Witham & Bensimon, 2012). Moreover, these authors encouraged questioning the
status quo (Museus et al., 2019; Witham & Bensimon, 2012). The use of inquiry (e.g., through
climate assessments) was presented as a strategy (Museus et al., 2019; Witham & Bensimon,
2012).
Some significant differences in the campus culture literature were also evident. For
example, although Kezar (2012) and Witham and Bensimon (2012) focused on leadership,
neither discussed how to include students. Museus et al. (2019) discussed student leaders,
whereas Kezar and Witham, and Bensimon only discussed student services staff and
administrators. Another major difference was that, although reflection was emphasized at the
institutional (Kezar, 2012) and individual level (Witham & Bensimon, 2012), none of these
22

authors made it clear that individual reflection was required before institutional reflection and
change could occur. This lack of connection may have resulted from Kezar’s focus on a
collaborative approach, while Witham and Bensimon stressed on an individual approach. Finally,
Museus et al. mentioned staff, but their strategies for student engagement only involved faculty.
This overreliance on faculty was a deviation from Witham and Bensimon’s advice to involve
student services staff and administrators for long-lasting change.
Leading Culture Change
Within the campus culture research, several models outline how to lead culture change.
Culture change entails shifting the values and mode of operation of a campus. In this section, I
present culture change models by Fullan (2007), Kotter (2011), Schein (2010), Bolman and Deal
(2017), and Gallos and Bolman (2021). I also review the similarities and differences between
these models.
Each culture change model presented here is meant to assist educational leaders with
managing culture change at the individual or institutional level. For example, Fullan (2007)
focused on how organizations can become learning-centered to survive change. Similarly, Kotter
(2011) and Bolman and Deal (2017) offered recommendations for avoiding potential obstacles
during culture change. These culture change models have a similar purpose.
At the same time, each culture change model offers a different approach. For example,
Kotter’s (2011) eight-stage process of change begins with creating a sense of urgency for
change. Kotter discussed anchoring change in an organization’s existing culture and
communicating with new management about how the change had improved performance so that
culture change could ultimately occur. In this way, even though Kotter (2011) discussed rooting
change within an existing culture, the organization would evolve in the long term. In contrast,
23

Fullan (2007) and Schein (2010) emphasized creating a new culture as leaders focused on a spirit
of continuous improvement and worked to support resistance to change. Additionally, Bolman
and Deal (2017) and Gallos and Bolman (2021) offered a new perspective on Kotter’s (2011)
model and on Argyris and Schon’s (1974, 1996) framework for skilled incompetence. Bolman
and Deal’s (2017) new perspective was based on their four frames model, in which leaders could
use one or more of the following views to address issues in organizational change: (a) the human
resource frame, based on relationships, (b) the structural frame, based on function, (c) the
political frame, based on power and conflict, and (d) the symbolic frame, based on meaning.
Fullan (2007) took the approach that schools, like businesses, must become learning
organizations to survive change. None of the other authors took this approach, which is
significant because it suggests that only by being receptive to learning can long-term culture
change occur. These culture change models offered recommendations for how student services
staff can manage culture change through different approaches. I return to these recommendations
in Chapter Five.
Institution Type
Research on institution type was inconclusive. An extensive literature review by Mayhew
et al. (2016) revealed that the literature defined institution type in many ways (e.g., 2-year versus
4-year, Carnegie classification, mission, public versus private, large versus small). The Carnegie
classification system organized baccalaureate colleges differently, leading to inconclusive
research on Carnegie classification differences. Some research on institution types confused type
with selectivity, size, and curriculum offerings. In addition, some research had methodological
issues, such as not controlling for educational ability. These complications made it difficult to
reach definitive conclusions about the relationship between institution type and student
24

outcomes. Research that identified relationships between institution type and student outcomes
had mixed results and small or nonexistent connections. Overall, measures of institution type did
not accurately measure the learning environment.
Harris (2019) worked to resolve these issues by reverse-engineering six types of 4-year
institutions from IPEDs data in 2016, using variables based on four aspects of institutional
diversity. One aspect was systemic, and institutional diversity was a part of that. The new
institution types that Harris (2019) identified are (a) residential and expensive private, (b) niche
and baccalaureate, (c) access and minority-serving, (d) flagship and regional comprehensive, (e)
online and adult-serving, and (f) elite research.
Beyond identifying different institution types, the research examined how student
experiences varied by one or more social identities within a particular institution type. For
example, Arum et al.’s (2018) literature review examined differences in experience based on
class, race, ethnicity, and gender identities at 4-year institutions. Findings by class indicated that
institutions actively worked to recruit more socioeconomically advantaged students who were
familiar with the “party pathway” (Arum et al., 2018, p. 389) while low-income students needed
additional advice and intervention to identify and follow the “professional pathway” (Arum et
al., 2018, p. 392). Findings by race and ethnicity revealed that racial and ethnic identities greatly
affected student experiences, which were marked by challenges within the environment. For
example, cross-racial interactions and race discussions were infrequent and racial stereotypes
shaped racially and ethnically minoritized students’ academic self-concept. Lastly, Arum et al.’s
findings on experiences by gender showed that although women had greater access to higher
education than in the past, they had inequitable experiences related to relationships, sexuality,
and sexual violence. Low-income women were particularly unfamiliar with relationship culture.
25

At the same time, women, in general, were stigmatized through sexual expectations (i.e.,
conflicting messages), and they were more vulnerable to sexual assault because of their
positionality related to power.
Recommendations
The research literature on higher education campus environments yielded
recommendations that fell within six themes: (a) research and assessment at the institutional
level, (b) research and assessment at the individual student level, (c) diversity initiatives, (d)
student development and outcomes, (e) student services staff intra- and interpersonal skills, and
(f) strategic planning. Within each theme, the literature included recommendations for practice
and research.
Recommendations for Practice
Recommendations for practice for campus climate assessment at the institutional level
included identifying and resolving cultural issues first, before conducting assessments (Schein,
2010). Researchers also recommended using data to guide conversations and planning efforts to
change daily behavior (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Witham & Bensimon, 2012). For assessment at
the individual student level, academic advisors could move beyond access for minoritized
students and provide equitable opportunities, resources, and support (Harris et al., 2015).
In terms of diversity initiatives, scholars could address climate while increasing campus
diversity (Hurtado, Milem, et al., 1999; Hurtado & Ruiz Alvarado, 2012; Kilgo et al., 2019; Park
et al., 2013). Additionally, student services staff could become more aware of inequities between
minoritized and other students, hold colleagues accountable for eliminating these outcomes, and
develop guides for creating campus climate change (Harris III & Bensimon, 2007; Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2015; Witham & Bensimon, 2012). Student services staff could also avoid
26

resistance to culture change by establishing safety for those seeking to understand the
organizational culture (Schein, 2010).
On the theme of student development and outcomes, researchers recommended that
student services staff facilitate student success and belonging through intentionally designed,
culturally affirming environments (Daniels et al., 2021; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Museus et al.,
2019; Strange & Banning, 2015). In addition, student services staff can educate all students
about social diversity, class diversity, privilege, and microaggressions (Kilgo et al., 2019; Locke
& Trolian, 2018). Through intentionally designed learning environments and education about
socioeconomic diversity, student services staff would be helping all students develop and
achieve a variety of better outcomes.
To address intra- and interpersonal skills, scholars recommended that academic advisors
continue to develop these skills. First, academic advisors could engage in critical self-reflection
and practice self-assessment and self-awareness (Harris et al., 2015; Locke & Trolian, 2018;
Witham & Bensimon, 2012). At the same time, researchers emphasized the importance of
incorporating trust and a confrontational approach into interpersonal interactions with colleagues
(Kezar, 2012). Deans and provosts should be patient, persist, and trust the process during culture
change (Gallos & Bolman, 2021). Second, deans and provosts could help manage culture change
by creating a powerful sense of urgency, creating a powerful guiding coalition, establishing a
vision, communicating the vision well and often, anchoring changes in the culture, confronting
conflict, and mourning symbolic losses (Kotter, 2011; Bolman & Deal, 2017). By tending to
their intra- and interpersonal skills, student services staff could help manage culture change
within campus environments.
27

The final theme from the research on campus environments regarding recommendations
for practice was for strategic planning. Deans and provosts should work to remove obstacles to
their vision for culture change, plan for and create short-term wins, and realign roles and
relationships (Bolman & Deal, 2017; Kotter, 2011). Through strategic planning, deans and
provosts can also determine a direction for culture change within campus environments.
Recommendations for Research
Within the campus environments literature, recommendations for research included
assessment at the institutional and individual level, diversity initiatives, student development and
outcomes, and intra- and interpersonal skills. Assessment at the institutional level included
conducting proactive audits of campus climate and culture (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Kilgo et
al., 2019; Locke & Trolian, 2018) to identify how institutions reproduce inequities (Arum et al.,
2018; Hurtado, Alvarez, et al., 2012). At the individual level, future scholars should study how
student experiences and meaning-making vary across social identities (e.g., race/ethnicity, social
class, gender, sexuality, disability status), institutional size, and forms of capital (Arum et al.,
2018; Hurtado, 1992). To address diversity, future research could examine specific individual
experiences with diversity and how those experiences might change as a campus becomes more
diverse (Daniels et al., 2021; Kilgo et al., 2019). For student development and outcomes,
scholars could name student services staff explicitly to acknowledge their importance in
students’ out-of-classroom experiences (Museus et al., 2019). Much of the current literature
names faculty but omits staff. For intra- and interpersonal skills, future scholars should bridge
Kezar’s (2012) collaborative approach to Witham & Bensimon’s (2012) more intrapersonal
approach so that the connections between individual and institutional networks of individuals are
more clearly addressed. Future research should also incorporate student leaders into the notion of
28

institutional leadership, particularly as it relates to creating coalitions of change agents across
campus (Kezar, 2012). Future research on assessment, diversity initiatives, student development
and outcomes, and intra- and interpersonal skills can promote understanding of campus
environments. I revisit these recommendations in Chapter Five.
First-Generation, Low-Income Latina Undergraduates
Since this study aimed to understand how first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates utilize their cultural backgrounds, it is important to understand the literature on
this group. As more research covers these identities separately, I begin this section with a
presentation of studies on first-generation, low-income students (Havlik et al., 2020; Ishitani,
2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015). Next, I discuss research on Latina students
(Crisp et al., 2015; Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Perez, 2020; Storlie et al., 2014; Wagner, 2015).
Then, I review studies on students with all these identities, even if inadvertent by the authors. I
focus the discussion on 4-year, private, research PWIs (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Dueñas &
Gloria, 2017; Perez, 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Then, I discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic
has affected this population (Aucejo et al., 2020; Hoyt et al., 2021; Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022;
Soria et al., 2020). This section concludes with recommendations from the literature for practice
and future research.
First-Generation, Low-Income Students
The literature on first-generation, low-income students indicated that this population had
areas of strength and weakness. I discuss areas of weakness first since they were more prevalent
in the literature. The first area of weakness was with academic integration, defined as
participation in activities like interactions with study groups, faculty, and academic advisors
(Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015). The 1st year was critical for
29

appropriate academic integration because that was when significant effects were strongest
(Ishitani, 2016). Additionally, a higher percentage of first-generation, low-income students
withdrew during their 2nd year (Ishitani, 2016). When students could not succeed academically,
either by their measures or those of their institutions, their withdrawal seemed to be the solution.
Withdrawal became more likely as students felt they were merely surviving and as family issues
arose (Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015).
The second area of weakness was arriving and adjusting to college life (Lippincott &
German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015). In this process, students described feeling othered. This finding
was problematic for many reasons, including that social support from peers and faculty in
college has a significant effect through the end of the 3rd year (Havlik et al., 2020; Ishitani,
2016). The need for social support in college was ongoing. Institution type seemed to play a
significant role in student adjustment, with those at 4-year, private, research PWIs having a
significantly different experience than those at 2-year community colleges and 4-year public
colleges (Lippincott & German, 2007).
Despite all the conversations in the literature surrounding areas of struggle and weakness
for first-generation, low-income students, few discussed areas of strength in depth (Havlik et al.,
2020; O’Shea, 2015). Strengths-based studies found that student success was the last step after
arriving and surviving (O’Shea, 2015). Success for first-generation, low-income students looked
like motivation and persistence to degree completion in the face of numerous stressors and
barriers (Havlik et al., 2020).
Latina Students
Research on Latina students in higher education was primarily qualitative (Crisp et al.,
2015; Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Storlie et al., 2014) and used interviews, content analysis, and
30

literature reviews. A few studies took quantitative (Wagner, 2015) and mixed methods
approaches (Perez, 2020). The quantitative study discussed here used data from the National
Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen. The mixed-methods study used several sources of data: a
survey, interviews, focus groups, and document analysis.
Literature on Latina undergraduates yielded several themes: navigational support, student
characteristics, the environment and experiences within the environment, and pre-college or pre-
existing characteristics. In this literature, navigational support was an institutional responsibility
and appeared in the form of resources, connection to those resources (Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012;
Perez, 2020), and support from individuals (Crisp et al., 2015; Perez, 2020; Storlie et al., 2014).
Student characteristics in the literature on Latina students described some of the strengths that
propelled them forward: self-efficacy and self-confidence (Crisp et al., 2015; Storlie et al., 2014),
internal motivation (Crisp et al., 2015), a positive perspective (Storlie et al., 2014), hard work
(Storlie et al., 2014), coping mechanisms (Crisp et al., 2015), and ethnic/racial awareness (Crisp
et al., 2015; Storlie et al., 2014). These findings mirrored the recommendations in the literature
on first-generation, low-income students, where scholars recommended a shift to a strengths-
based perspective (Havlik et al., 2020; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015).
The next theme that arose in the findings was the campus environment and student
experiences within it. Student perceptions of climate were related to graduation rates (Crisp et
al., 2015; Wagner, 2015). Similarly, some students had negative college experiences (Storlie et
al., 2014). Based on studies by Crisp et al. (2015) and Wagner (2015), negative college
experiences may have also harmed graduation rates. Additional findings indicated the
importance of institution type. Crisp et al. and Wagner found that institution type was also
related to undergraduate Latina graduation rates. This finding reflected Lippincott and German’s
31

(2007) research on the importance of institution type for first-generation, low-income students.
National Center for Education Statistics data indicated that Latino students at the study site had a
1% lower graduation rate than White students. Thus, institution type was important for Latina
students’ experiences and academic success (NCES, 2021c).
The final theme for Latina undergraduates was pre-college characteristics. These
included sociocultural characteristics like gender, parental education, SES (Crisp et al., 2015),
financial and linguistic barriers (Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Storlie et al., 2014), and high school
academic and social support (Crisp et al., 2015; Wagner, 2015). Crisp et al. (2015) found that
gender, parental education, and SES were related to Latina student academic success outcomes
during college. Mahaffy and Pantoja (2012) and Storlie et al. (2014) found that financial and
linguistic barriers influenced the Latina college student experience. Crisp et al. (2015) and
Wagner (2015) found that high school academic and social support had a positive effect on
graduation rates. Thus, even though the college environment was important, systemic barriers
outside higher education and pre-college characteristics also influenced Latina student
experiences and success.
First-Generation, Low-Income Latinas at 4-Year, Private, Research Predominantly White
Institutions
Literature encompassing first-generation college status, low-income background, and
Latina identity at 4-year, private, research PWIs was minimal. However, a few studies included
all or almost all these identities (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Dueñas & Gloria, 2017; Perez, 2020;
Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Half the studies in this section took a quantitative approach (Cerezo &
Chang, 2013; Dueñas & Gloria, 2017), while the others used either a qualitative (Santa-Ramirez,
32

2018) or mixed-methods approach (Perez, 2020). Santa-Ramirez (2018) used the concepts of
sense of belonging and CRT.
Within these studies, two themes emerged: social support and navigational support.
Personal connections and support from staff or ethnically similar peers were important in first-
generation, low-income Latina student GPAs, retention and graduation rates, involvement, and
sense of mattering (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Dueñas & Gloria, 2017; Perez, 2020; Santa-Ramirez,
2018). Navigational support was also important, with student services staff teaching students
how to make their way through college, advocating for students, and encouraging students to
take charge of their own college experiences.
First-Generation, Low-Income Latinas and the COVID-19 Pandemic
Research on first-generation, low-income Latina students and the COVID-19 pandemic is
still emerging. The coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was first identified in Wuhan, Hubei
Province, in China (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). Like previous research
on this population, authors on the topic of the pandemic and its effects on this population tend to
focus on one or a few social identities rather than on their intersection. In this section, I discuss
overall findings from research on first-generation, low-income Latinas and COVID-19 by
generational status, socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, and gender.
Overall, research in this section is from quantitative studies conducted in the spring and
early summer of 2020. Each study conducted a survey. Some overlap emerged in the findings for
SES and race/ethnicity, where SES could partially explain the inequities by race and ethnicity
(Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022). Similarly, some overlap existed in the findings for SES and gender,
where women were more likely to be low-income (Aucejo et al., 2020). Overall, Harris & Wood
(2020) found that the pressures experienced by minoritized students in the initial weeks of the
33

transition to remote learning in spring 2020 included the following: access to technology,
campus resources, services, and information; basic needs insecurities; and difficulty balancing
personal and academic demands. These findings were based on a questionnaire completed by
Chief Student Services Officers at community colleges. Although the findings were specific to
community college students, they can be applied to students in other institution types.
In terms of generational status, Soria et al. (2020) conducted a survey through the Student
Experience in the Research University (SERU) Consortium at nine public research universities.
The authors found that first-generation college students were more likely to experience financial
hardships, food and housing insecurity, higher rates of mental health disorders, and difficulties
adjusting to online learning. They were also less likely to live in safe environments (Soria et al.,
2020). First-generation college students were more negatively affected by the pandemic than
their continuing-generation peers.
Studies on SES found that the pandemic harmed mental health, academic outcomes, and
expected career, financial, and health outcomes. For example, low-income students reported
slightly higher anxiety and stress than high-income students (Hoyt et al., 2021). Although Hoyt
et al. (2021) measured income level explicitly, the authors acknowledged that they measured
income as self-reported pre-pandemic family income, which may explain why their study yielded
few income-related group differences. In contrast, Aucejo et al. (2020) aimed to study the
experiences and expectations of undergraduate students with the COVID-19 pandemic in
general, though their findings yielded evidence of a socioeconomic divide. Aucejo et al. (2020)
found that low-income students were 55% more likely to have delayed their graduation and 41%
more likely to report that COVID-19 affected their major choice. In addition, the gap between
expected GPAs for low-income and high-income peers widened.
34

To add to the pandemic’s negative effects, low-income students also expected lower
financial and health outcomes. For example, low-income students were 10% more likely to
expect to default on debt payments and 16% more likely to have a close family member with
reduced income. Moreover, low-income students perceived their health as worse overall than
higher-income students, and they thought they had a higher probability of being hospitalized
with COVID-19 than their counterparts (Aucejo et al., 2020). Comparably, Reyes-Portillo et al.
(2022) found that SES may have partially explained racial and ethnic inequities of the effects of
the pandemic. These findings are consistent with previous studies that found that SES individuals
are more likely to be female, Black, Latino, Asian, first- or second-generation immigrants, and
non-native English speakers (Chen & Nunnery, 2015; Franco & Kim, 2018).
Research indicated that the pandemic also had heterogeneous negative effects on students
by race and ethnicity. Reyes-Portillo et al. (2022) found that although students surveyed
experienced worsening anxiety and depressive symptoms, these findings were exacerbated for
students of color. For example, Black and Latinx students were more likely to report losing a
loved one, being uncertain about their ability to complete coursework, and being unable to pay
for their food and education (Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022).
Literature on gender revealed that women reported worse mental health symptoms than
men. For example, although Hoyt et al. (2021) aimed to study stress and anxiety symptoms
during COVID-19 in general, their findings yield evidence of how the pandemic had a greater
effect on women’s mental health. They found that women reported higher anxiety and stress
compared to men. Additionally, Aucejo et al. (2020) found that women experienced greater
economic and health shocks. This finding was consistent with other research indicating that
35

women were more likely to be low-income (Aucejo et al., 2020; Chen and Nunnery; 2015;
Franco and Kim; 2018).
In this section, I discussed how the COVID-19 pandemic was detrimental to first-
generation, low-income students. Overall, this group was more likely to experience higher rates
of mental health disorders, specifically anxiety, depression, stress, and health shocks (Aucejo et
al., 2020; Hoyt et al., 2021; Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022; Soria et al., 2020). In addition, ethnically
and racially minoritized students were more likely to feel pressured about accessing resources,
contacting staff, and finding information (Harris & Wood, 2020). Moreover, the pandemic has
lowered this group’s academic and career outcome expectations (Aucejo et al., 2020). Similarly,
first-generation, low-income Latinas were more likely to experience financial hardships and
basic needs insecurities, such as those related to food and housing (Aucejo et al., 2020; Harris &
Wood III, 2020; Soria et al., 2020). Finally, first-generation, low-income Latinas were more
likely to live in unsafe environments and experience challenges transitioning to online classes
(Harris et al., 2020; Soria et al., 2020). The pandemic has negatively affected first-generation,
low-income, ethnically and racially minoritized women.
Recommendations
Literature on first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates yielded
recommendations for practice and research. In this section of the literature review, I review
recommendations from the literature for practice, research for this population at 4-year, private
research PWIs and for this population related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Recommendations for Practice
The literature yielded four themes for practice related to the population of interest: (a)
education and training, (b) social support, (c) services and resources, and (d) an adjusted
36

approach. The first theme of education and training applies to students, staff, and faculty. Deans
and provosts can first educate students, faculty, and staff about the racial-colonial history of
higher education and how this history continues to affect institutional culture, such as through
class-based normative assumptions that all students begin college with the knowledge they need
to succeed (Locke & Trolian, 2018; O’Shea, 2015; Stein, 2018). Also, institutions can educate all
constituents on the unique strengths and needs of first-generation, low-income Latinas.
Educational efforts could include an understanding that students from first-generation, low-
income Latina backgrounds may compare themselves to their peers, feel embarrassed about their
need to work or ask for help, and be financially constrained (Havlik et al., 2020; Lippincott &
German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015). Third, once students’ needs are better understood, student
services staff could learn how to approach students’ needs from an intersectional perspective and
utilize students’ strengths to promote academic success in higher education, including through
mental health services (Crisp et al., 2015; Havlik et al., 2020; Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Perez,
2020; Soria et al., 2020; Storlie et al., 2014; Wagner, 2015). A strengths-based approach could
include reviewing culturally relevant practices, microaggressions, and how to hold colleagues
accountable for anti-racism (Harris & Wood, 2020). Lastly, within the context of COVID-19,
academic advisors could provide educational information to promote better understanding among
students and strategies for safe practices (Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022). Through increased
understanding and intentional implementation of practice, academic advisors could improve
higher education for minoritized groups.
The second theme in the recommendations for practice related to the target population is
social support. Researchers recommended that academic advisors take on the role of a friend by
recognizing when students made progress and celebrating with them when they met their goals
37

(O’Shea, 2015; Rendon, 1994; Schlossberg, 1989). Additionally, academic advisors can ensure
that students have social support, especially from ethnically similar peers and mentors (Cerezo &
Chang, 2013; Havlik et al., 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Academic advisors could help ensure
academic success for first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates through social support.
The third theme in recommendations for practice for this population was services and
resources. Student services staff could foster institutional cultural humility by striving to better
understand how students might experience their campuses and provide support to enrich the
student experience. Additionally, student services staff could work to meet students’ needs on
campus, such as through bilingual support, campus life activities, and inclusion in course
curriculum and campus programming. Student services staff could aid with additional needs by
developing programs, recruitment strategies, and counterspaces (Cerezo & Chang, 2013;
Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Santa-Ramirez, 2018; Storlie et al., 2014). Moreover, student services
staff could focus on financial and health outcomes and be community-focused by providing
resources on the specific issues with which this population grapples. Lastly, student services staff
could help increase safety and food and housing security in the following ways: reserving
emergency housing; expanding hours, availability, and food options; and providing pick-up and
delivery services for food pantries (Soria et al., 2020). Through additional targeted services and
resources, student services staff could better support first-generation, low-income Latina
students.
The fourth theme in the recommendations for practice for this population was an adjusted
approach. This was in the form of proactive, targeted interventions. For example, academic
advisors could reach out through different modalities and not wait for students to approach first
(Harris & Wood, 2020). Another recommendation from Harris and Wood (2020) was to use clear
38

and validating communication (Harris & Wood, 2020). Academic advisors could respond more
quickly and conduct direct hand-offs for referrals (Harris & Wood, 2020; Soria et al., 2020).
Deans and provosts could focus on financial and health needs by being flexible and
compassionate by reviewing and adjusting policies that create unnecessary burdens for students
(Aucejo et al., 2020; Harris & Wood, 2020). Student services staff could help reduce financial
barriers, which could include proactive outreach with employment opportunities, broadened
access to career resources for family members, and proactive assistance with the FAFSA (Aucejo
et al., 2020; Soria et al., 2020). Student services staff could also help increase safety, food, and
housing security by connecting students to resources through food pantries, reducing on-campus
housing costs, and providing more flexible housing options, such as short-term stays (Soria et al.,
2020). Lastly, student services staff could adjust their approach by enlisting the help of faculty to
provide targeted outreach to students in need of mental health services (Soria et al., 2020). By
adjusting their approach, student services staff could promote equity among minoritized students.
Recommendations for Research
Recommendations for research on first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates
span three themes: (a) assessment, (b) this population, and (c) COVID-19’s effects. The first
theme, assessment, includes promoting retention by researching the campus climate for this
group based on their experiences with academics, cultural relevance, stressors, and social support
(Crisp et al., 2015; Storlie et al., 2014). Assessment could also focus on specific issues of
concern for this group, including financial and health needs (Aucejo et al., 2020; Harris & Wood,
2020). For the second theme, additional research on first-generation, low-income Latinas is
necessary. Research on this population can encompass this population’s strengths (Havlik et al.,
2020; Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015), this population at different
39

institution types, and this population at 4-year, private, research PWIs (Cerezo & Chang, 2013;
Dueñas & Gloria, 2017; Perez, 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Further research on first-generation,
low-income Latinas could promote better practices for supporting their academic success in
higher education.
The third recommendation for future research is on COVID-19’s effects. Within COVID-
19 research in higher education, the heterogeneous effects on ethnic and racial identities could be
further explored. For example, Reyes-Portillo et al. (2022) recommended researching cultural
factors that protected individuals from the effects of the pandemic and how different ethnic and
racial groups recovered from the effects of COVID-19. Additionally, the pandemic’s effects on
different intersectional identities could be further researched. For example, longitudinal effects
on first-generation, low-income Latinas and students’ expectations and outcomes related to the
pandemic over time warrant further attention (Aucejo et al., 2020; Hoyt et al., 2021). Also,
although Reyes-Portillo et al. (2020) discussed the correlation between race/ethnicity and SES
and Aucejo et al. (2020) highlighted the connection between gender and SES, future research
could examine these correlations in more depth. Moreover, other qualitative studies on the
effects of the pandemic on this population and on mental health and this population specifically
are also needed. For example, Hoyt et al. (2021) called for research on how social identities
intersect with mental health. Reyes-Portillo et al. (2022) also recommended studying the effect
of COVID-19 on grades and how grades and mental health are connected, if at all (Reyes-
Portillo et al., 2022). Reyes-Portillo et al. (2022) recommended researching the correlation
between changes in mental health and predictor variables over time. In general, research should
explore how the pandemic has increased disparities in higher education over time (Hoyt et al.,
2021). Continued research on the effects of COVID-19 on this population would better inform
40

institutions as they transition back to in-person classes and student services and would be helpful
in case of emergency transitions back to online learning.
Recommendations for academic advisors serving first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates included education and training on the history of higher education, the strengths
and needs of this population, and COVID-19 information. Academic advisors can adjust their
approach by considering intersectionality and strengths, and by offering additional and targeted
services and resources. Future research should explore assessment of campus climate and issues
of concern, this population’s strengths and experiences at different institution types, and the
pandemic’s effects by social identity. Future research should include qualitative and longitudinal
studies and explore different outcomes, such as mental health and grades. These
recommendations have many implications for future practice and research for this population,
and I will return to them to inform the discussion and implications for practice and future
research in Chapter Five.
Intersectionality
This section concludes with a brief discussion of relevant literature on intersectionality
(Collins, 2015; Crenshaw, 1991; Harris & Patton, 2019). Studies on first-generation, low-income
Latina students examined social identities separately, often focusing on only one or two social
identities at a time. For this reason, I include a discussion of intersectionality research. I
recognize that a thorough discussion of intersectionality is beyond the scope of this review, and
my study does not include intersectionality as a framework, so my discussion is brief. I refer
readers to a more detailed and historical review by Harris and Patton (2019) and the work by the
other women of color scholars they cite.
41

In 1991, Crenshaw coined the term “intersectionality,” though as Harris and Patton
(2019) later noted, she was not the concept’s originator. Crenshaw’s (1991) piece was written for
the Stanford Law Review and focused on battery and rape to discuss how race and gender
intersected at structural, political, and representational levels. Crenshaw made a compelling case
for how an intersectional lens should be considered to understand how women of color were
positioned differently depending on the context. In addition, failure to recognize the
intersectional aspects of identity for women of color could lead to denying the validity of one
identity or strengthening each of the intersecting forms of subordination.
In 2015, Collins presented an article discussing the challenges of defining
intersectionality. She analyzed intersectionality as a field of study, as an analytic strategy, and as
critical praxis. A limitation of this piece was that Collins did not attempt to define
intersectionality, but she discussed and described it instead.
In 2019, Harris and Patton conducted a literature review on intersectionality to
understand how higher education scholars did or used intersectionality in their work. Their study
was heavily influenced by Harper’s (2012) study in terms of methodology and data analysis.
Harris and Patton (2019) found that intersectionality was used as a buzzword and a framework,
where the concept was often used to frame racially minoritized groups, but a class analysis was
regularly missing. Harris and Patton (2019) also found that most research mis-defined
intersectionality as simply identitarian (their term) and misapplied it from what Crenshaw (1991)
originally encouraged by not connecting intersectionality to intersecting structures of oppression.
Lastly, the authors found that most scholars on intersectionality did not cite women of color.
Work by Crenshaw (1991), Harris and Patton (2019), and Collins (2015) highlighted that
first-generation, low-income Latina women experience multiple intersecting forms of oppression
42

such as classism, racism, and sexism. Intersecting forms of oppression provide much more
complex and detailed insight into these students’ higher education experiences than a study
focusing on only one social identity. This study aimed to contribute to research focused on
students holistically, considering how all their identities converge along intersecting forms of
oppression to create unique experiences and strengths, requiring special consideration and more
strategic support.
Academic Advisors
Academic advisors can play a significant role in providing strategic support to first-
generation, low-income Latina students at 4-year, private, research PWIs. Multiple studies
identified student services staff as important in supporting these students (Ishitani, 2016; NSSE,
2019; Perez, 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). As some of the first and only student services staff
with whom students interact outside of the classroom, academic advisors serve as institutional
representatives to help students make meaning of their experiences, make decisions and locate
additional campus resources (Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education
[CAS], 2019). Academic advisors serve as a constant source of support throughout a student’s
higher education experience, and they build coalitions with other student services staff across
their campuses to ensure student retention and graduation (CAS, 2019). Although academic
advisors are not the focus of this study, their incorporation of students’ cultural wealth, from the
student perspective, can be useful in identifying successful strategic support initiatives for the
academic self-efficacy of first-generation, low-income Latina students in higher education. In
this section, I review the literature on academic advising as a profession (CAS, 2019; National
Academic Advising Association [NACADA], 2006, 2017a, 2017b; U.S. Department of Labor,
2021). Next, I discuss research studies on academic advising support for first-generation, low-
43

income Latina students (Ishitani, 2016; NSSE, 2019; Roberts & Lucas, 2020; Soria &
Stubblefield, 2014).
Academic Advising
As a profession, academic advising originated in the 1970s to support faculty in helping
students. The National Academic Advising Association (NACADA) was formed in 1977 to
formalize the profession. The association put forth a statement on the concept of advising, a
report of core values, and a model of core competencies for academic advisors. The NACADA
(2006) statement on the concept of academic advising was developed by a NACADA
community task force and vetted by NACADA members at 10 regional conferences. All
NACADA members had a formal role as advisors for students in higher education. The
statement outlined three components of academic advising: curriculum, pedagogy, and student
learning outcomes. The statement was complemented well by NACADA’s (2017a) core values:
respect, professionalism, integrity, inclusivity, empowerment, caring, and commitment. The
NACADA (2017b) model of core competencies was developed by the Professional Development
Committee for NACADA leadership and covered conceptual, informational, and relational
content areas.
A complement to the NACADA documents was the CAS (2019) standards on academic
advising. These standards were developed outside of NACADA by voluntary leaders of
professional associations in higher education. However, NACADA leaders may have been
involved in the development of the standards (CAS, 2019). These standards explained the
importance of academic advisors and were divided into 12 sections covering topics ranging from
mission to infrastructure.
44

Separately, the U.S. Department of Labor (2021) provided a summary report on
educational counselors and advisors, including academic advisors. The National Center for
O*NET Development created this report through the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment
and Training Administration. This report was the only source not sponsored by an advising-
based organization, such as NACADA, or an educational organization, such as CAS. The report
included a detailed description of the knowledge, skills, and career outlook for the academic
advising profession. Academic advisors needed extensive preparation, and most academic
advising jobs required graduate school and more than 5 years of experience. Thus, academic
advisors spent a tremendous amount of time preparing to advise students at higher education
institutions. Nevertheless, research recommended that academic advisors receive training,
implying that professional development should be ongoing throughout an academic advisor’s
career (Museus et al., 2019; Rendon, 1994; Santa-Ramirez, 2018).
A higher education institution organizational structure determines academic advising
operations. There are two types of organizational structures: hierarchical and organic (Mindtools,
2021). A hierarchical design is decentralized into different units, very formal, with little
employee involvement in policy design, and communication is top-down (Mindtools, 2021). In
contrast, an organic organization structure is more centralized, and less formal, where employees
contribute more to policies, and communication flows in different directions (Mindtools, 2021).
Within these organizational structures, there are also three models for academic advising:
decentralized, centralized, and shared. A decentralized model is more typical in hierarchical
organizations where academic advising is separated into different academic units. A centralized
model is common among organic organizational structures, where academic advising occurs in
one main advising center. A shared model for advising blends the decentralized and centralized
45

models, with some advising occurring in academic units and some taking place in a central
location (Pardee, 2004). According to Pardee (2004), the type of advising model should be based
on factors like institution size and student needs.
Academic Advising for First-Generation, Low-Income Latinas
In this section, I discuss studies that examined or included academic advising as a
concept and first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates in the samples. The research on
this subtopic primarily took a quantitative approach (Ishitani, 2016; NSSE, 2019; Soria &
Stubblefield, 2014), with one study taking a qualitative approach (Roberts & Lucas, 2020).
Findings indicated that academic success outcomes, such as self-efficacy, engagement, and
persistence (Ishitani, 2016; Soria & Stubblefield, 2014) were connected to creating a positive
student experience. Soria and Stubblefield (2014) found that strengths awareness improved self-
efficacy and engagement. In addition, Ishitani (2016) found that academic integration was
greater in the 1st year. Similarly, NSSE (2019) reported that the quality of academic advising
relationships was more important than quantity, as measured by the number of times a student
discussed academics, course selection, or academic performance with an advisor. Thus, the
quality of academic advising relationships in the 1st year drastically increased the likelihood that
first-generation, low-income Latinas would persist to their 2nd year. This finding also implied
that the quality of time and effort an institution dedicated to interacting with students led to better
student outcomes.
In addition, social interactions were important from the 2nd year through the third
(Ishitani, 2016). In a 2020 study, Roberts and Lucas reported that students found social support
through a Title V center, a resource funded by the U.S. Department of Education for Hispanic-
serving institutions to offer activities, such as educational materials, academic tutoring, or
46

counseling (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). Although my study site is a PWI, much can be
learned from what HSIs have done to engage Latinas in academics through culturally affirming
spaces. Roberts and Lucas (2020) also discussed how the Title V center provided a counterspace,
which reinforced the work by Case and Hunter (2012) and Santa-Ramirez (2018).
Recommendations for academic advisors included using a strengths-based approach
(Soria & Stubblefield, 2014). This was reflective of similar recommendations by Havlik et al.
(2020), Lippincott and German (2007), and O’Shea (2015). In addition, institutions can develop
resources, programs, and touchpoints for interacting with first-generation, low-income Latinas in
their 1st year (Ishitani, 2016). This recommendation expands the focus from the 1st year, as it is
important to consider students’ experience at all stages of their academic careers (NSSE, 2019).
Future research should explore first-generation, low-income Latina students’ needs in the 2nd
college year and beyond. Lastly, a major recommendation from the literature was to provide
opportunities for academic advisor professional development (NSSE, 2019), which could be
facilitated by NACADA’s (2017b) model of core competencies or the CAS (2019) standards for
academic advising. This professional development could focus on this population’s unique
backgrounds and needs and how advisors could utilize this knowledge to help these students
become academically self-efficacious.
Conceptual Framework: Community Cultural Wealth Model
In this section, I present the guiding framework for my study, Yosso’s (2005) CCW
model. I also review studies that used Yosso’s CCW model to understand students with social
identities from my population of interest (Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2013; O’Shea,
2015).
47

Yosso’s (2005) CCW model was based on CRT and challenged racist, deficit-based
perspectives of Communities of Color to reflect the wealth these communities have and bring to
educational settings. One of the central components of CRT is voice or counternarrative
(Ladson-Billings, 2013). CCW appeared in the form of six types of capital: (a) aspirational
capital, (b) familial capital, (c) linguistic capital, (d) navigational capital, (e) resistant capital, and
(f) social capital (Figure A3). Aspirational capital included the concept of resilience. Familial
capital was knowledge through family relationships. Linguistic capital consisted of the skills that
bi- or multi-lingual individuals gained from communicating in more than one language, style, or
method. Navigational capital was about how Communities of Color made their way through
institutions not created for them by relying on their agency and social networks. Resistant capital
was comprised of the behaviors and perspectives that changed the status quo. Social capital
consisted of “networks of people and community resources” (Yosso, 2005, p. 79).
In this section, I include three studies that utilized Yosso’s (2005) CCW model or a
similar model. Due to the nature of Yosso’s framework, which explored how Communities of
Color made sense of the world, all three studies used a qualitative methodology (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). These authors used data sources like focus groups, interviews, observations, and
document analysis (Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2013; O’Shea, 2015).
Duncheon (2018) and Luna and Martínez (2013) framed their findings in terms of
different types of cultural capital. Their studies yielded results in the same areas: aspirational
capital, familial capital, social capital, and navigational capital. Aspirational capital was
connected to academic achievement (Duncheon, 2018). Familial capital was connected to
aspirational capital, as participants’ family hopes became their own (Luna & Martínez, 2013).
Additionally, participants used their family situations as the inspiration for their dreams of
48

attending college (Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2013). Familial capital also facilitated
integration into campus life (Duncheon, 2018). Social capital was identified in participants’
social support systems that helped them get to college and through the transition to college life
(Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2013). Lastly, navigational capital was intricately
connected to social support for understanding the education system, finding resources, and
getting assistance with academics (Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2013).
Since O’Shea’s (2015) study was based on the concept of cultural capital but did directly
utilize Yosso’s (2005) model, the findings were presented more as general themes: arriving,
surviving, and succeeding. O’Shea also referred to knowledge capital to describe how student
services staff assumed that students knew how to navigate these spaces upon arrival. Like the
other forms of cultural capital in Yosso’s (2005) model, knowledge capital was closely related to
navigational capital. Although O’Shea (2015) did not directly use Yosso’s (2005) CCW model,
she advanced the model by introducing knowledge capital, another form of cultural capital.
Summary
In this review, I discussed campus environments, specifically campus climate, campus
culture, and institution type research for racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity at 4-year,
private, research PWIs. I explored research on first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates by focusing on generational and SES, then ethnicity and gender. I discussed
studies that encompassed all identities, private, research PWIs, and how COVID-19 has affected
this group. I concluded the section on students by discussing intersectionality and the importance
of taking discussions of intersectionality beyond identity to include interlocking systems of
oppression. Then, I discussed academic advising and how academic advisors are positioned
49

within higher education to support first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates and their
academic success. Lastly, I presented my conceptual framework, Yosso’s (2005) CCW model.

50

Chapter Three: Methodology
In this chapter, I describe the qualitative research, including research design, sample and
population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis used to conduct this study. The
purpose of this study was to understand the strategies that first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduate students utilize for academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI. The
research questions are as follows:
1. How do first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize their cultural background
toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI?
2. How have academic advisors utilized first-generation, low-income Latina students’
cultural backgrounds to support these students’ academic self-efficacy at a 4-year,
private, research PWI?
Research Design
This study used a qualitative approach because the purpose was to understand
participants’ experiences utilizing specific strategies for academic self-efficacy and how they
made meaning of those experiences (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In
the literature, of the four studies on first-generation, low-income Latina students at 4-year,
private, research PWIs, only one used a qualitative approach. Santa-Ramirez (2018) conducted
two separate semi-structured interviews with six individual first-generation, Latina/x students to
identify their support system at a PWI. Santa-Ramirez used member checking of the interview
transcripts and a narrative analysis approach. More qualitative research is needed to understand
first-generation, low-income Latina students at 4-year, private, research PWIs. Also, qualitative
research is the most appropriate method for this study because it can reject deficit-based
perspectives of minoritized populations by empowering them to tell their own stories in their
51

own words, from a CRT and CCW lens. In contrast, quantitative methods are meant to generalize
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), and that was not the goal of this study.
Sample and Population
Participants were required to meet all the following characteristics, which were entirely
self-reported: (a) aged 18 or older, (b) enrolled full-time in at least 16 units as an undergraduate
student at the study site, (b) parents did not attend college, (c) received a Pell Grant, and (d)
Latina. My interest in studying first-generation, low-income Latina students stems from my
identities, lived experiences, and the gap in the literature for research on this population at this
institution type.
Study Site
The study site was chosen because it is a 4-year, private, research PWI in the western
United States. Sunny Glen is a functional type of hierarchy because each unit functions
separately and is led by a senior administrator who reports to the president (Mindtools, 2021).
Each academic unit is led by a dean, and each dean oversees operations for their academic units.
These operate semi-independently from those of other academic units, but each dean reports to
the provost, who reports to the president. As the literature generally predicts for this institution
type, at the study site, academic advisors serve many students. These large caseloads and the
decentralized advising structure, systematically prevent minoritized students from receiving the
information and guidance they need to have an equitable higher education experience (Arum et
al., 2018; Hirt, 2006; Lippincott & German, 2007). The purpose of using this study site was to
contribute to the literature on this institution type.
The following data are from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data Set and the
source is not cited further to conceal the identity of the study site. At the study site, there were
52

approximately 20,000 undergraduates enrolled in 2019–20. Of this number, nearly 20% were
first-generation, and about 20% were awarded Pell grants. Approximately 15% of all students
enrolled (about 46,000) in Fall 2020 were Hispanic, and 54% were women. There were over
16,000 staff members, with fewer than 1% in student and academic affairs and other education
services, the category that includes academic advisors. Within this category, two-thirds were
full-time. Thus, approximately 130 full-time academic advisors were serving 20,000
undergraduates. The average caseload was about 154 students. This number is a generalization.
More realistically, in academic units with larger enrollments, some academic advisors may have
had larger caseloads.
In addition to large caseloads, the institutional climate and culture for minoritized groups
were problematic at this study site. For example, the institution touted that many students
received financial aid. As Figure A1 (Appendix A) illustrates, 65% of all undergraduate students
received any grant or scholarship aid in the 2019–20 academic year. However, only 20% were
awarded Pell grants, and 35% paid full tuition (Figure A2 in Appendix A). These rates imply that
the institution favors merit aid over need-based aid. Merit aid has been shown to affect financial
aid, access, and success for low-income students and ethnically and racially minoritized students
(Conner & Rabovsky, 2011). The study site must shift focus from access to equitable
opportunities, resources, and support, to help minoritized students succeed. This study will help
identify how to do so.
Recruitment Process
Recruitment took place at the study site between September and November 2021 using
two methods. First, I used non-probabilistic sampling and emailed relevant staff, faculty, and
students on campus to request that they share my recruitment flyer digitally on social media, in
53

newsletters, or post it physically in their campus spaces. Staff affiliated with the academic
advising professional organization on campus, student identity-based support centers,
undergraduate advising departments, freshman seminars, and the student learning center were all
contacted and asked to share the information with anyone who might be interested in
participating in the study. Faculty members affiliated with the departments of psychology, ethnic
studies, and Latin American cultures were contacted via email. They agreed to forward the
announcement to colleagues and students. Then, I emailed students through relevant student
organizations and special interest housing. In addition to email, I attended meetings, visited
classes, and posted physical flyers on bulletin boards in campus spaces where large numbers of
students attended classes.
Second, I used snowball sampling, where I identified the first participant and then
allowed them to provide recommendations for the rest of the sample. I did this by asking the first
several participants, at the end of the interviews, to share my email address with other students
who may have fit the study criteria and who may have been interested in participating in the
study. Potential issues for snowball sampling include the risk of losing some control over the
final sample and the need to be thoughtful about confidentiality (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). To
address these risks, I trusted the process and assigned pseudonyms to each participant.
The recruitment flyer included a small monetary incentive, information about the purpose
of the study, eligibility criteria, and my contact information (Appendix B). Individuals self-
identified and emailed me to indicate their interest in participating in the study. Those who
contacted me were vetted with a short questionnaire to ensure that they met the inclusion criteria
(Appendix C). Participants were invited to copy and paste their responses into an email for their
convenience. If participants met the inclusion criteria, they were sent the study information sheet
54

(Appendix D) and invited to schedule an interview. Initially, I coordinated interview scheduling
via email, but I quickly switched to Calendly to improve efficiency and to reduce the burden on
the participants.
Instrumentation
The sources of data in this study were semi-structured, open-ended, individual interviews.
Interviews were an ideal method for this study because my purpose was to understand student
experiences. Interviews allowed me to, as Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed, enter the
mindset of my participants in a way that other methods, such as observations and surveys, did
not. Also, as highlighted previously, additional qualitative research is needed on first-generation,
low-income Latina students at this institution type. Moreover, according to Patel (2015) and
Smith (2012), interviews give voice to participants, which is important to me as I strive to help
decolonize educational research. The voices of my participants are also important because they
are minoritized students in higher education. Through the interviews, participants provided
counterstories to the dominant deficit-based narrative by sharing their CCW. Semi-structured
interviews allowed flexibility for probing and following up for a more in-depth description of
experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
In the interviews, I followed a protocol (Appendix E) with the possibility for a second
interview to follow up on anything requiring further clarification. To develop the interview
protocol, I listed my research questions and reviewed the concepts from the literature on my
topic, including the conceptual framework. Next, I brainstormed questions and drafted them,
experimenting with different question types and ensuring that the ideas from my conceptual
framework were addressed. Then, I determined the flow of the interview by organizing the
questions topically. The main topics became transition points in the interview protocol. After
55

organizing the questions topically, I reviewed the several types of interview questions, including
Patton’s (2015) six types of questions and Strauss et al.’s (1981) four questions. I went through
the question list I brainstormed to decide which questions fit with the topics outlined. I removed
those that overlapped. Next, I reviewed guides for good interview questions (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016; Patton, 2002), re-reading each question out loud to determine if it met the criteria. I also
mapped out the research question each interview question would help address, relevant concepts
from the conceptual framework, and the interview question type. For a detailed mapping of the
interview questions to the research questions, please see Table A1. Lastly, I re-read the interview
protocol for a conversational tone.
I developed the interview questions methodically and thoughtfully. I also collaborated
with my peers and an expert in the field to vet the questions. Also, I conducted two pilot
interviews with self-identified first-generation, Pell-recipient, Latina graduate students to test the
interview protocol. In the pilot interviews, I asked participants for feedback on the questions and
gained experience interviewing via Zoom. This process allowed me to revise and test the
interview questions, as recommended by Krueger and Casey (2015).
Data Collection
Data were collected at the study site between October and November 2021 using the
interview protocol to conduct 14, 45- to 60-minute individual interviews via Zoom. I conducted
14 interviews because a) it was an ideal sample size given the time constraints associated with
the Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership (EDL) program at the University of Southern
California, for which this dissertation was completed and b) this number of interviews allowed
in-depth exploration of each participant’s experience. As outlined in the protocol, in each
interview, I reviewed the purpose of the study and asked verbal permission to record the
56

interview. All participants provided this permission. The recordings were saved to the cloud in a
password-protected Zoom account. The interviews were transcribed by Zoom and the
transcriptions were edited thoroughly for accuracy. At the end of each interview, I emailed a $10
Amazon gift card to each participant as a small token of my appreciation.
Confidentiality
Participants may have been harmed if it was revealed that they participated in my study.
Doing so would have disclosed that they possessed all the social identities required for
participation: first-generation college status, Pell eligibility, and Latina heritage. These are all
minoritized identities at the study site. Participants would have been most harmed by disclosure
of their Pell eligibility. Moreover, my findings regarding student experiences with academic
advising could have jeopardized participants’ relationships with their academic advisors, as not
all findings were positive. I maintained confidentiality for this study to the extent permitted by
the law. I removed names and other identifiable information from the transcripts and stored this
information separately from the recordings, transcripts, and list of pseudonyms. I also assigned a
pseudonym to each participant that started with different letters than their actual first and last
names. I saved the interview transcripts in a password-protected Google Drive folder. The
interview recordings, de-identified data, and transcripts will be retained for 3 years and then
destroyed. As the investigator, I was the only person with access to the data.
Risks and Discomforts
One ethical consideration for this study is that some of the interview questions addressed
sensitive topics and may have made participants feel uncomfortable talking about their
experiences. For example, participants may have had negative experiences at the study site or
with their academic advisor. I notified participants of these possible risks and discomforts by
57

informing them that they could stop answering the questions at any time in both the study
information sheet (Appendix D) and the interview protocol (Appendix E).
Participation and Withdrawal
In addition to risks and discomforts, I informed participants in the study information
sheet (Appendix D) and interview protocol (Appendix E) about the voluntary nature of
participating in the study and procedures for withdrawal. This was ethically important because
participants may have perceived me to be in a position of power at the study site, as I was an
academic advisor for graduate students and a doctoral student. Participants may have felt
pressured to participate because of this perceived power (Glesne, 2011; Lochmiller & Lester,
2017). To address this pressure, I clarified that they could stop participating at any time.
Data Analysis
To answer both research questions, I followed Tesch’s eight steps, as outlined by
Creswell and Creswell (2018). I started by organizing and preparing the Zoom transcripts,
recordings, and interview notes for analysis. Next, I listened to the recordings and double-
checked the Zoom transcripts. Then, I read through the transcripts, studied them, and identified
emerging themes. I allowed sufficient time for this process. Lastly, I followed up with
participants as needed for a second interview and to conduct member checks.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study includes several limitations and delimitations. Limitations are the items that
were outside my control as the researcher. They include my positionality or identity as a researcher.
Limitations also include general limitations and transferability, or the extent to which findings
apply to other situations, as determined by the reader. Another limitation was confirmability, the
extent to which data can be traced back to original sources (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Delimitations
58

are items within my control. They include credibility, strategies I used to increase trustworthiness
and dependability, and the integrity of the research design and process (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
In this section, I begin by discussing my positionality and then other limitations and delimitations
of my research study.
Researcher Positionality
My positionality as a researcher was shaped by my individual lived experiences. I am a
New Mexican, born and raised in the Land of Enchantment, like multiple generations before me.
I am a woman, daughter, sister, partner, and friend. I am an educator, a student services scholar-
practitioner. My background and individual lived experiences sparked my interest and agenda
related to this problem of practice and these research questions.
I was the first in my immediate family to attend college. I went to a small, private liberal
arts college in New York City. There, I struggled to adapt my cultural wealth to an environment
not created for someone from my background. Throughout my life, my parents instilled in me
the importance of higher education, but upon beginning college, I felt lost. I did not have familial
knowledge to rely upon for navigating the college environment. As a working-class student, I
worked to pay for my education. Meanwhile, my peers spent their time studying and
participating in student organizations. Additionally, I felt out of place with other Latinas because
I did not speak Spanish fluently and because I was not from a Spanish-speaking country. At the
time, I could not identify the similarities between us. In brief, I found myself questioning my
belonging and struggled academically, financially, and socially.
My experiences as an undergraduate student inspired my passion for supporting students
in higher education, especially those from backgrounds like mine. I am now dedicated to
critically examining campus environments for equitable approaches and strategies to support
59

students whose strengths are not recognized in traditional campus spaces. I am interested in
examining how students from first-generation, low-income Latina backgrounds contribute their
cultural wealth to the campus environment and how educators can learn from these strategies to
better support student academic success.
I am aware that my identities as a first-generation, low-income Latina and my
undergraduate experiences led me to have biases toward my research topic. This bias may
influence my research. For example, I would expect that other students with similar identities
may have had experiences like mine. To address this bias, I disciplined my subjectivity by (a)
respecting that each participant has a unique experience and (b) keeping a dissertation journal to
track my thoughts throughout the research process, including whenever I was aware of
something resonating with my subjectivity (Peshkin, 1988). I used my journal to write reflections
and memos throughout the research process. I checked my reflections regularly for potential
signs that my bias may have been encroaching on the research.
Limitations
This study included three general limitations specific to qualitative research, case studies,
and time constraints. One of the limitations of qualitative research is that studies are often
difficult to replicate (Simon & Goes, 2013). To help other researchers trace data back to the
original sources, I took detailed notes during recruitment and the interviews (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This strategy helped me make connections and provide evidence for
how I reached my findings. Also, I utilized an interview protocol for future researchers to follow
(Appendix E).
Within qualitative research, case studies have their own limitations. For example,
findings are specific to the study site. As this is a case study in the qualitative tradition, the
60

findings from the interview data may not be transferable outside of the setting (Maxwell, 2013).
However, the goal of qualitative research is to understand the meaning-making experience
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, researchers may identify similarities between their
institutions or student populations and those of the participants. Thus, the findings of this study
may only apply to other similar institutions or student populations, and transferability is for other
researchers and academic advisors to determine. To address the limitation of transferability and
to improve trustworthiness, I utilized thick, rich descriptions of the interview setting and my
findings.
A third general limitation of this study is centered around the time constraints associated
with the doctoral program, which requires full-time enrollment. The curriculum is designed such
that the dissertation is completed with simultaneous enrollment in full-time classes. The program
is 3 years long, but the dissertation is not formally started until over halfway through the
program, with four semesters for completion. Only one semester is dedicated to data collection.
Thus, time was limited, and the study length was constrained. I worked within these time
constraints.
Specific limitations also arose. One was the semi-structured interview protocol. Semi-
structured interviews are more open-ended and less structured than highly structured interviews,
though not as loose as unstructured or informal conversational interviews (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). This middle space in terms of structure means that semi-structured interviews are difficult
nor easy to analyze (Patton, 2002). I analyzed the interviews to the best of my ability using
Microsoft Excel.
Additionally, the sample had some limitations. All participants opted into the interview
process and their characteristics and experiences were entirely self-reported. The nature of self-
61

reported information required my trust as the researcher that their self-reports were accurate.
Also, the specific participants who opted into the study were beyond my control. I vetted
participants using a screening questionnaire to ensure that they confirmed the participation
criteria (Appendix C). Another limitation of the sample was that six of the participants discussed
lived in special interest housing. As discussed in Chapter Three, I used the snowball sampling
technique and one of the possible limitations is the loss of control of the final sample (Lochmiller
& Lester, 2017). In this study, half of the participants were likely more culturally aware than
their peers and therefore approached the study with a different mindset than those who did not
live in special interest housing. This mindset may have affected the data.
Lastly, confirmability was a limitation of this study. To improve trustworthiness, I
followed Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) recommendations and considered my reflexivity. Also, I
kept a detailed audit trail in the form of a research journal where I engaged in critical self-
reflection throughout data collection. Reflection helped me consider what Maxwell (2013)
identified as one of the main threats to validity: bias. Journaling helped me track my thoughts
and reactions as I conducted the interviews, transcribed them verbatim, and analyzed them for
themes. I saved the journal entries in a password-protected Google document. Through reflection
in the form of journaling, I addressed the confirmability limitation.
Delimitations
There were many delimitations or areas where I made deliberate choices in this study.
The purpose of this study was to understand how participants used their cultural background for
academic self-efficacy, to hear the challenges they experienced, to hear what they identified as
missing from academic advising at the study site, and provide recommendations for academic
62

advisors. I did not study academic advisors specifically because I wanted to focus on the student
perspective in depth.
In addition to deciding on the above delimitations, I made deliberate choices on the
literature I did not review. First, I did not review intersectionality research thoroughly because I
did not use intersectionality as my conceptual framework. In addition, a more detailed review of
intersectionality research was beyond the scope of my literature review. I addressed this
delimitation by referring readers to Harris and Patton’s (2019) work and other women of color
scholars whom they cited. Second, although my conceptual framework was based on CRT, I did
not review CRT literature because this area of research was also beyond the scope of my
literature review. Instead, I focused on research that specifically used the CCW model (Yosso,
2005) while acknowledging the model’s roots in CRT. Third, I did not review the literature on
undocumented students because although some first-generation, low-income Latinas are
undocumented, it was not feasible to include a systematic review of this area of research. Fourth,
I did not review the literature on transgender or non-binary students. My goal was to hear the
specific perspectives of female-identifying people within the Latinx community. To my
knowledge, none of my participants were transgender or gender non-binary. Additionally, to
include a review of literature on the entire Latinx community would not have been feasible.
Another deliberate choice I made was within the conceptual framework. Since Yosso’s (2005)
CCW model is about cultural wealth, and my purpose was to study cultural backgrounds, it was
logical not to use a different model.
In terms of methodology, I did not choose a quantitative methodology because the
purpose of quantitative research is to explain and predict behavioral patterns (Lochmiller &
Lester, 2017). Since the purpose of my study was to explore experiences, a quantitative study
63

was not appropriate. I deliberately did not choose to take other qualitative research approaches,
such as focus groups, observations, or document analysis. I did not conduct focus groups because
focus groups are best for topics that are not too sensitive (Krueger & Casey, 2015; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The interview questions included sensitive topics about academic advising
interactions. In addition, focus groups would have required more than one researcher, which was
beyond the scope of this study. I did not conduct observations, which allow researchers to
understand how inequities are reproduced through interactions by providing a holistic
interpretation of a phenomenon. Observations are best for observing behavior firsthand or for
when people cannot or will not talk about a particular research topic (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The virtual format of student services offerings during the research design phase and the
potential discomfort that would ensue from observing an advising interaction made observations
problematic. I chose not to conduct document analysis because document analysis is typically
used as part of data triangulation to provide context and supplementary information (Bowen,
2009). This form of research was not directly relevant to my purpose.
Other areas of the study where I made deliberate choices were the study site and
participant recruitment. I did not choose another study site because the one selected was a 4-year,
private, research PWI. This institution type was central to my purpose to hear from participants
about the specific challenges at this institution type. Additionally, I did not recruit participants
from sororities. Greek life is a unique involvement experience that was not directly relevant to
my study and its focus on participants’ academic self-efficacy through academic advising
experiences.
In terms of data analysis, I made choices related to credibility and dependability. To
ensure credibility, I used the strategy of member checks by requesting feedback on emerging
64

themes from some participants to confirm whether they agreed with my observations and
findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Some of the participants had the opportunity to suggest how
to make my preliminary analysis clearer. In this way, participants were included in the research
process and had some ownership over how their experiences were shared. Also, I completed a
total of 14 interviews, a number that allowed me to explore participant experiences in depth
within the time constraints associated with this study. To increase dependability, I ensured my
research and design matched. Also, I checked the transcripts carefully for accuracy against the
recordings and analyzed the themes meticulously.
The limitations and delimitations of my study are important to acknowledge, though they
do not pose any major obstacles to the significance and usefulness of this study to the literature. I
took several steps to address the limitations. For example, in the data analysis process, I used
triangulation and thoroughness to improve trustworthiness. Additionally, all delimitations were
guided by my purpose. Future researchers can use the information I have provided to conduct my
study at other sites or to make informed decisions about how the findings may reflect similar
situations at their institutions.
Summary
This is a qualitative research study with participants who self-reported as 18 or over,
first-generation, Pell-recipient Latinas. They were all full-time undergraduate students at a 4-
year, private, research PWI in the western United States. Recruitment took place between
September and November 2021 using both non-probabilistic and snowball sampling. Participants
contacted me directly and were vetted with a brief questionnaire. Once vetted, I sent participants
more information about the study, including risks, discomforts, participation, and withdrawal. I
invited participants to schedule an interview with me, reiterated the study information, and
65

conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 participants. In the interviews, I followed a
protocol that was developed methodically. Data were collected between October and November
2021 in 45- to 60-minute recorded Zoom interviews. At the end of the interviews, participants
were sent a digital, $10 Amazon gift card as a token of my appreciation for their time. I
maintained participant confidentiality by removing names and identifiable information from the
transcripts, assigning pseudonyms, and storing the information securely on a password-protected
Google Drive folder. Lastly, I checked the transcripts, identified themes, and maintained a
detailed audit trail throughout data collection and analysis.

66

Chapter Four: Findings
The 14 interviews with participants yielded both expected and unexpected findings. The
problem of practice this study examined is that first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates are among the fastest-growing populations in higher education (NCES, 2020a),
yet they have lower college completion rates than White students (Excelencia in Education, n.d.).
Additionally, existing academic advising services at 4-year, private, research PWIs do not meet
the needs of this special population, and a deficit mindset dominates the literature about these
students (Crisp et al., 2015; Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015; Storlie et
al., 2014; Yosso, 2005). The CCW model (Yosso, 2005) serves as the theoretical framework for
this study. The previous chapter discussed the methodology for this study. This is a qualitative
research study at Sunny Glen, a 4-year, private, research PWI in the western United States. I
conducted 14 individual, semi-structured 45- to 60-minute Zoom interviews with participants
who self-identified as first-generation, Pell-recipient, Latinas. After the interviews, I reviewed
the transcripts, took notes, and organized responses by research question and then by interview
question. Next, I reduced responses into clusters and codes. The most common codes became
themes. Themes were not always the most common codes by the number of participants. Instead,
themes were the most common codes by the frequency with which they were mentioned. This
chapter discusses the themes that emerged from the interviews. First, I present information that
participants shared, such as place of origin, language(s) spoken, class year, major, and other
biographical information. Next, I present the results for Research Question 1. Then, I present the
results for Research Question 2. The chapter concludes with a summary of these findings.

67

Participants
The participants in this study were 14 self-identified first-generation, Pell-eligible, Latina
undergraduates at the study site. Participants were mainly from the Western region of the United
States, and most had Spanish language skills. Table A2 illustrates each participant’s self-
identified place of origin and the languages they speak, using pseudonyms to protect their
identities. Additionally, participants were evenly spread across class years and majors. Table A3
shows a breakdown of each participant’s self-identified class year and major, again using
pseudonyms to protect their identities.
Each participant had a unique story to share in terms of background and college
experience. Sharing participant stories is important for two reasons. First, the theoretical
framework for this study, the CCW model (Yosso, 2005), is based on CRT, in which counter-
narrative is critical. In this study, the counternarrative directly responds to the deficit-based
perspective of first-generation, low-income Latinas. Second, this study used a qualitative
methodology. Two of the goals of qualitative research are to understand participants’
experiences and understand how they make meaning of their experiences (Lochmiller & Lester,
2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For these reasons, the following sections detail brief
biographies to share some of each participant’s story.
Alicia
Alicia is from the West and speaks Spanish fluently. She is a sophomore majoring in
journalism. She volunteers with the first-generation student center and is part of a scholarship
program. She enjoys exercising, drinking coffee, journaling, and listening to podcasts or music.
Alicia also participates in The Women’s Network.

68

Flor
Flor is from the Northeast. She is a native Spanish speaker and is interested in learning
business Spanish. Flor is a junior majoring in business. Outside the classroom, she serves on the
executive board for the main Latinx student organization and holds an executive board position
in the Latinx business student organization. She works part-time as a technical support
representative for her college. Flor applied for a Maymester class through the Spanish
department. She also has an internship lined up for the summer in investment banking and is
considering going into investment banking as a career.
Ida
Ida is from a neighborhood near Sunny Glen in the West. She is fluent in Spanish and a
beginner in Mandarin. She is a senior in her last semester majoring in sociology. Outside the
classroom, she volunteers with a neighborhood coalition that helps promote college-going among
students in elementary, middle, and high school. She also works in a math and reading tutoring
program through a work-study job.
Inez
Inez is from the Southeast. She speaks Spanish fluently and is a beginner in French. She
is a freshman majoring in theater. Inez currently lives in Latinx special-interest housing. She
participates in a screenwriting club, attends Latinx cultural center events, and participates in the
business school entertainment club to prepare for life after graduation.
Kassandra
Kassandra is from the West. She is a native Spanish speaker, a beginner in American
Sign Language, and somewhere between beginner and intermediate in Italian. Kassandra is a
junior transfer student and a sociology major. Outside of her classes, Kassandra participates in a
69

Latina sisterhood and a cinema club for Latinx students. Kassandra is minoring in screenwriting
and aspires to work in the film industry. Kassandra hopes to contribute to a more accurate
representation of minoritized communities in film.
Neci
Neci is from the Southeast. She is fluent in Spanish and intermediate in French. She is
also a freshman majoring in English. Outside of classes, she lives in Latinx special-interest
housing, participates in the business school entertainment club, a screenwriting club, a literary
club, and attends Latinx cultural center events. Neci also participates in a first-generation student
program and has been paired with a student mentor who is also first-generation.
Paloma
Paloma is from the West. She speaks Spanish fluently. Paloma is a senior majoring in
urban planning. She is active in her neighborhood council. Paloma also holds two jobs, one in
the ticket office and one in a civic engagement organization where she teaches an urban planning
class in her previous high school and works with public works. She is also a resident assistant for
Latinx special-interest housing. Paloma dreams of earning her master’s degree in urban planning.
Petra
Petra is from the West. She is a native Spanish speaker and is a beginner in French. Petra
is a sophomore majoring in legal and cultural issues. She holds an executive board position in the
legal justice club, and she participates in the civil rights club, which is application-based and
offers the opportunity to participate in three internships over 2 years. She hopes to find an
internship in government or law. After her undergraduate degree, Petra plans to enlist in the
military or enroll in law school to eventually become a lawyer.

70

Queena
Queena is from the Southwest. She speaks Spanish fluently and is a beginner in French.
Queena is a freshman majoring in guitar performance. Outside the classroom, she gives music
lessons to low-income fifth-grade students at a local school. She lives in Latinx special-interest
housing, participates in welcome events, and has formed a new mariachi group on campus. She
plans to earn her doctorate in guitar performance, and teach and perform. Her long-term goal is
to be part of a nonprofit organization that provides music education to low-income students.
Teresa
Teresa is from the West. She is a native Spanish speaker. Teresa is also a freshman
business and entertainment major. She participates in several activities, including a Christian
club, the Latinx entertainment club, and the business and entertainment club. She is also part of
two mentorship programs. One mentorship program is through the female and gender-
nonconforming entertainment club, and the other is through the first-generation student program.
In addition, Teresa contributes to a web series and volunteers as a production assistant on set for
upperclassmen. Teresa’s career aspiration is to work in the film industry.
Wera
Wera is from the West. She is a native Spanish speaker, and she is a beginner in Nahuatl,
a native language from central Mexico. Wera is a freshman business major. Although Wera was
a member of the real estate club, she recently left the group due to a negative experience. She
remains extremely interested in pursuing a career in real estate.
Xochitl
Xochitl is from the West. She is fluent in Spanish and is a beginner in Mandarin Chinese.
Xochitl is a senior philosophy major. She has three jobs. One of her jobs is through an identity-
71

based leadership program. Her second job is through the first-generation student center.
Xochitl’s third job is through a freelance agency where she does script coverage. Her script
coverage job is unstructured in terms of hours and projects. Outside of classes, Xochitl watches
television shows and writes to develop her portfolio. She also spends a considerable amount of
time caring for her parents and helping with her younger teenage sister, who is attending high
school. Xochitl plans to have a career in writing and development for television.
Zia
Zia is from the West. She speaks Spanish fluently and is a 1st-year student majoring in
biological science. Outside the classroom, she likes to exercise by running, going to the gym, or
weightlifting. She lives in Latinx special-interest housing. She is part of a neighborhood coalition
scholarship program that also serves as a college prep program partnering with local schools,
where she plans to teach an advising class. Zia plans to be a veterinarian.
Zoe
Zoe is from the West. She speaks professional Spanish and is a beginner in French,
Korean, and Japanese. She is a sophomore majoring in sociology. Zoe lives in Latinx special-
interest housing. She is in a scholarship program, serves as a social justice peer educator,
participates in the legal justice club, and participates in the main Latinx student organization on
campus. Zoe applied to work at the first-generation student center and as an admissions tour
guide for the next semester. Zoe also works at a convenience store.
Cultural Background and Student Academic Self-Efficacy
Research Question 1 asked, “How do first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize
their cultural background toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI?”
Research Question 1 was guided by the CCW model (Yosso, 2005) to acknowledge participants’
72

cultural wealth in the form of six types of capital. The results for Research Question 1 fell in
each of the CCW model’s (Yosso, 2005) six types of cultural capital: aspirational, familial,
linguistic, navigational, resistant, and social. Each type of cultural capital yielded two themes,
one for each interview question. However, navigational and social capital yielded additional in
vivo themes not directly addressed through the interview questions. Findings for Research
Question 1 are summarized in Table A4.
Aspirational Capital
According to Yosso (2005), aspirational capital stems from minoritized communities’
hopes and dreams. Two interview questions specifically addressed aspirational capital. Question
3 asked, “What were some of the factors that led you to choose Sunny Glen specifically?”
Question 9 asked, “How do you expect you will do academically by the end of this semester?”
The interview responses showed that participants utilized their cultural background toward
academic self-efficacy through hopes connected to geography and high academic expectations.
Theme 1: Geography
When asked about the factors that led participants to choose Sunny Glen specifically, the
main topic that arose was geography. Ten separate participants mentioned geography 16 times.
Of these, seven participants described remaining close to home, one mentioned having family
nearby, and one described a desire to live near a Latino community. For example, Queena stated,
“That’s what I wanted, somewhere that I felt like home.” Participants referred to geography three
other times in terms of leaving their homes to remove themselves from a difficult situation or to
gain independence. For example, Inez said, “I honestly wanted to get out of my comfort zone
and not stay with my family because I knew if I stayed over there, I would stick with them, and I
wanted to become independent and try new things. So, I really wanted to come out here.”
73

In addition, participants discussed geography three times in terms of the employment and
networking opportunities offered by the metropolitan area in which Sunny Glen is situated.
Participants chose Sunny Glen either because it was near or far from their homes. In this way,
geography enabled them to take steps toward fulfilling their aspirations either with their family’s
support or on their own. Through high expectations, participants used their aspirational capital to
further their own beliefs about how they could learn or perform academically at Sunny Glen.
Theme 2: High Expectations
I asked participants how well they expected to do academically by the end of the
semester. Nine responded that they expected to do very well or well. In the context of a grading
scale, very well or well translated to earning As or Bs. Flor and Petra discussed using the pass/no
pass grading option strategically to earn or maintain a high GPA. Ida, Kassandra, and Neci
discussed being willing to accept grades below As either because they were tired, simply aiming
to pass, or had adjusted their expectations from the grades they earned in high school.
Familial Capital
According to the CCW model (Yosso, 2005), familial capital is the knowledge that
minoritized individuals gain through their families. Participants used familial capital in the form
of parental encouragement and familial support for their academic self-efficacy.
Theme 1: Parental Encouragement
I asked participants how their family influenced their goal of attending college, if at all.
Twelve separate participants mentioned that their parents encouraged, pushed, or supported
them. This theme was mentioned 17 separate times. For example, Ida said, “College was the
number one goal, the only option.” Petra stated, “They supported my goals of going into higher
education.” Xochitl stated, “My parents really were on top of me about getting good grades. For
74

them, education was kind of the path, the way to success and nothing else.” Parental
encouragement was connected to the knowledge that not many people can attend college and
reflected parental hopes for their daughters to have a better life. Participants also discussed the
desire to make their parents proud or to help their families. For example, Queena, a guitar
performance major, discussed her parents’ dreams for her: “I obviously want to make them
proud, but it was hard too because they expected me to be a doctor or lawyer or something like
that, and I just never felt a passion for that, you know, I don’t want to be a doctor. I’m not going
to like it.” For participants, familial capital in the form of parental encouragement influenced
their goal of attending college.
Theme 2: Familial Support
Participants responded positively when asked how their families felt about their
daughters attending Sunny Glen. Thirteen participants endorsed the theme of familial support.
They mentioned how proud their parents were 10 times. Parental pride manifested in the form of
bragging or showing off. For example, Xochitl stated her mother asked her to wear her Sunny
Glen sweatshirt to family functions. Participants discussed four instances where their families
were happy in general and happy for them. Alicia said, “They’re very, very, very proud and
happy that I’m here.” Participants discussed their families being excited three times. For
example, Ida used the words “love” and “excited.” Three participants described they and their
families were still working to understand what it meant for the participant to be attending Sunny
Glen. Two participants discussed familial support that took the form of more broad support and
acceptance. Two other participants discussed how their families supported them but for goals
that were different from their goals for themselves. For example, Wera seemed disappointed,
stating, “personally, I did want to go to cosmetology school, but again, to make my parents
75

proud, I attended Sunny Glen.” Similarly, Xochitl, a philosophy major who aspires to go into
writing and development for television, discussed how difficult it was for her to tell her parents
that she was not going to be making as much money as they expected after graduation: “I’m
going into, obviously, entertainment and it’s very uncommon to get a very good paying job out
of college […] So it’s going to be another hard bandage to rip off soon.” Paloma also expressed
feeling pressure because three of her sisters who attended college did not finish for financial
reasons. Overall, participants used familial support of their attendance at Sunny Glen to promote
personal beliefs about their academic potential and to determine whether they would pursue their
expectations or those their families held for them.
Linguistic Capital
Linguistic capital comes from the ability to communicate in more than one language or
style. In the interview protocol, I addressed both language abilities and understanding of the
culture at Sunny Glen.
Theme 1: Spanish Language Abilities
When I asked what other languages the participants spoke, if any, the most common
response was Spanish. All 14 participants were either native, fluent, or professional-level
Spanish speakers (Table A2). Even so, at least five of them placed a qualification on their
fluency. For example, Flor described being a native speaker but that she was “forgetting some
words.” Petra described herself as a native speaker but that she “only” spoke “informal or
“conversational” Spanish. Ida described speaking Spanish “fluently-ish” and speaking
“Spanglish” with her siblings. Another discussed taking preventative measures to avoid losing
her language abilities. Participants cultivated Spanish as part of their identities and most believed
they could operate at a fluent or almost-fluent level.
76

Theme 2: Understanding Campus Ethnic and Racial Challenges
To learn about the participants’ understanding of the status quo at Sunny Glen, I asked
them what some of the institution’s unwritten rules were. Although the theme of understanding
campus ethnic and racial challenges is related to navigational capital, I list it under linguistic
capital because it arose when students discussed their interpretation of the institution’s culture.
Seven participants endorsed this theme. These seven mentioned ethnic and racial challenges in
the environment 11 times. For example, five participants discussed experiencing ethnic and
racial segregation and exclusion and feeling underrepresented and unsafe. Inez used words like
“suffocated,” “disconnected,” and “not enough” to describe how she felt. Additionally, Petra
said, “An unwritten rule for me, personally, is just not to attend any parties which are
predominantly White. I don’t feel safe in that environment at all.” Relatedly, participants
discussed six examples of closely monitoring and controlling their speech and behavior to avoid
being perceived negatively. For example, Zoe said, “I think that a lot of people who are not from
here or have parents who are not from here, realize what to do and what to say when and where.”
Similarly, Flor said, “People don’t want to accept me for who I really am, so I just code-switch
in all my classes.” She defined code-switching as not using slang, speaking more slowly,
enunciating more, and ensuring that what she said sounded “smart.” One participant described
careful self-monitoring accompanied by exhaustion. In this case, participants’ linguistic capital
negatively affected their academic self-efficacy. They used their understanding of ethnic and
racial challenges to determine how they did or did not speak in certain contexts.
Navigational Capital
Navigational capital is minoritized people’s ability to make their way through
organizations not created for them (Yosso, 2005). Participants indicated they used peer support
77

and connections to faculty to help them navigate Sunny Glen and as they strived for academic
self-efficacy. Within this area of the CCW model, two additional themes arose that were not
directly addressed in the interview protocol: pandemic-related difficulties and adaptation to the
college workload.
Theme 1: Peer Support
Participants were asked what they would advise a new student with the same identities
about obtaining academic support at Sunny Glen. Ten participants responded with the
recommendation to seek peer support. Participants mentioned eight instances related to peers in
special-interest housing, student centers, and in classes. For example, Teresa suggested, “seek
advice from upperclassmen because they’re gonna tell you things that professors can’t.”
Similarly, Kassandra stated:
Talk to other students to see what they’re doing because we’re all going through a similar
process. So, talking to somebody else and seeing “Whoa, what is it that you do to help
you?” [That] might be something that’s helpful to do so that maybe you can implement
those things into your, into the way that you do things for your classes.
Lastly, Petra recommended a visit to the Latinx cultural center: “I’d highlight them as a great
resource because they can provide a space where you can go study and just go immerse yourself
with other people who identify in a similar manner as you do.” Participants would recommend
that a student with similar identities obtain peer support to help navigate through Sunny Glen.
Theme 2: Engaging with Faculty
When asked what other insights, if any, participants would like to share about how to be
academically successful at Sunny Glen, the most common response was related to engaging with
faculty. Six participants discussed attending faculty office hours, talking to them, emailing them,
78

and connecting with them. Flor explained that having a connection with her professor helped
when she experienced an academic setback: “I think having your professor liking you, having a
connection with your professor does help, too.” Paloma took this recommendation to connect
further by discussing the importance of having a relationship with a faculty member to help one
navigate a demanding situation or write a strong letter of recommendation: “find that one
professor that you want to build a relationship with,” she said. Participants equated faculty
engagement with academic success.
Theme 3: Pandemic-Related Difficulties
The opening question in the interview protocol asked participants about their semester.
The most common response was connected to pandemic-related difficulties. Six participants
endorsed this theme. Five participants had difficulty transitioning from online to in-person
classes. They used words like “overwhelming” to convey this difficulty. For example, Flor
described feeling a stark contrast between her remote life and her in-person life: “I’ve been
working from home, doing school from home and I have a dog. I adopted a dog over quarantine,
so I’m just so used to doing everything at home. And then, now I feel like I’m never home.”
Similarly, Zoe felt isolated and unsure of what to do when she experienced an academic setback
while taking online classes. She did not communicate that she was struggling and tried studying
alone. However, in her second semester, she asked for help at the student learning center. For
Paloma, the pandemic affected financial aid eligibility. She stated that if attending school were
her only priority, she would do well academically. However, since she had to work, if she did not
do well, it would be for financial reasons. Alicia, a sophomore, described feeling like a freshman
again because her 1st year of classes had been delivered remotely. Pandemic-related difficulties
hindered participants’ abilities to obtain peer support and engage with faculty.
79

Theme 4: Adaptation to the College Workload
A second theme that appeared but that I did not ask about in the interviews was adapting
to the college workload. In response to the opening question, five participants were surprised by,
adjusting to, or struggling with, the amount of work involved in college-level academics. For
example, according to Inez, “Honestly, I thought college was going be, like, oooh! After I
worked so hard to get here, it’d be easy. But it was a lot more work than I thought.” The
workload also served as an obstacle for participants in obtaining peer support and engaging with
faculty.
Resistant Capital
Resistant capital is minoritized people’s cultural wealth that counters the status quo.
From their responses to the interview questions that addressed resistant capital specifically,
participants indicated they formed a community and sought help as they strived for academic
self-efficacy at Sunny Glen.
Theme 1: Forming Community
To address resistant capital, I asked participants about one thing they did to stay true to
their identities at Sunny Glen. The most common topic mentioned was forming a community.
Twelve participants endorsed this theme. For five of these participants, forming a community
entailed giving back in the form of volunteer work, paid work, or mentorship. Queena, for
example, explained, “I give [guitar] lessons to low-income students.” For three participants,
attending programs and events and being present in the physical space of the Latinx cultural
center were important. Three others discussed participating in relevant student organizations. For
example, Teresa replied, “I was born and raised Christian, so one of the first things I looked for
on campus to get involved in was a Christian community or club.” Two participants discussed
80

living in special-interest housing. Two others discussed surrounding themselves with people who
had common experiences. At the same time, six participants described the negative associations
with not finding a strong sense of community in some spaces. For example, Neci described
feeling “left out” in the general campus community but discussed finding community in her
special-interest housing and the Latinx cultural center. Participants used their resistant capital to
form their own community despite the ethnic and racial challenges at Sunny Glen.
Theme 2: Help-Seeking
Another interview question meant to address resistant capital asked participants to think
about a time when they experienced an academic setback at Sunny Glen and to describe what
they did in response. Help-seeking was mentioned 19 times by 13 separate participants. Five
participants discussed seeking help from their faculty or teaching assistants (TAs). For example,
Petra explained she had fallen ill earlier in the semester: “I reached out to my teachers and my
TAs and just kind of let them know that I’d be missing in attendance for a discussion.” There
was sometimes guilt involved in asking for help from faculty or TAs. For example, Neci
described feeling “bad” whenever she had to email her professor. Three participants discussed
seeking an advisor for a scholarship program, the student services emergency support
department, or the student learning center. Two others described seeking help from peers,
including for essay review. Participants used their resistant capital in the form of help-seeking to
further their academic success.
Social Capital
Social capital is the cultural wealth that minoritized people possess in their networks and
community resources. In response to interview questions addressing this aspect of the CCW
model (Yosso, 2005), participants discussed participating in major and career-related activities
81

and relying on their families for emotional support as they strived for academic self-efficacy at
Sunny Glen. One theme that arose but that I did not ask about directly in the interviews was a
newfound sense of independence in the college environment.
Theme 1: Major and Career-Related Activities
To address social capital, I asked participants what activities they participated in outside
of their classes, if any. Eleven unique participants mentioned major or career-related activities 23
separate times. For example, Zoe, a sociology major, and Petra, a legal and cultural issues major,
participated in the legal justice club. Petra also participated in the civil rights club. Similarly,
Inez, a theater major, participated in the business school entertainment club. Teresa, a business
and entertainment major, participated in the business and entertainment club and the Latinx
entertainment club. Participants utilized their social capital by engaging in major- and career-
related activities.
Theme 2: Family as Emotional Support
To address social capital, I asked participants whom they contacted when they needed
emotional support. Nine participants mentioned family 11 times. Alicia, Flor, Inez, Teresa,
Wera, and Zia discussed contacting parents for moral support. For example, Flor contacted her
father but also described a hesitancy about not wanting to “stress him out too much.” Other
participants were more reliant on their parents. For example, Teresa described talking to her
mother on the phone two or three times daily. Inez, Kassandra, Neci, and Paloma all contacted a
sibling. For example, Flor had a go-to sister who helped her process stressful situations. Wera
mentioned she reached out to a cousin. Participants utilized their social capital by relying on their
families as a source of emotional support outside of the Sunny Glen environment.

82

Theme 3: Independence
Independence was a theme that was not part of the CCW model (Yosso, 2005) but that
emerged through participant responses. This theme arose in response to the opening question and
appeared in the form of the established higher education system, and then there was that which
participants created themselves. Five participants endorsed the theme of independence. In terms
of the established system, Wera, a freshman, explained that college is:
A shock compared to high school. It’s all different. The level of freedom that we get is
very hard to manage. Now that I’m in college, I don’t have any teachers on my shoulder
telling me to do this, do that. It’s usually all up to me, and it’s very pressuring.
Wera explained that college is set up for the student to be independent of authority figures from
high schools, such as teachers, who told the student what to do. Petra described encountering
similar independence after she transitioned from remote learning to in-person classes:
When I was at home, I would have to help out my family. Whereas here, I am more
independent and by myself, and I have more freedom. But with that freedom comes a lot
more responsibility to further my own studies, and it’s just difficult to manage a time
when there is no outside force telling me to do something else.
Xochitl created her independence by establishing boundaries with her parents by requesting they
stop visiting her every weekend to bring her food. After setting boundaries with her parents,
Xochitl prepared her own food and had a social life on the weekends. She described this
newfound independence as having “certain costs” because her parents did not respond positively.
Although participants utilized their social capital through major- and career-related activities and
their families, they also grappled with independence.
83

Academic Advisor Support of Student Academic Self-Efficacy
Research Question 2 asked, “How have academic advisors utilized first-generation, low-
income Latina students’ cultural backgrounds to support these students’ academic self-efficacy at
a 4-year, private, research PWI?” Research Question 2 was meant to identify, from the
participants’ perspectives, how academic advisors had supported them. Research Question 2
yielded expected results based on the CCW model. Table A4 summarizes the most common
findings by code.
Aspirational Capital: A Positive Shift in Perspective
In Research Question 2, all six forms of cultural capital appeared in the interviews. I
asked participants how their expectations about their academic performance changed after
interacting with an academic advisor, if at all. Eight participants discussed feeling a positive shift
in perspective 14 times. These participants described feeling less stressed and more reassured,
confident, balanced, encouraged, rejuvenated, and realistic. For example, Flor stated that
changing her minor in coding to a specialization and adding a Spanish minor reduced her stress,
“provided a little bit more relief,” and confirmed that she would finish her degree program on
time. Alicia similarly described a positive shift in perspective after interacting with an academic
advisor:
I think speaking with my [journalism school] advisor reassured me that I was doing well
and that I had a plan for what I wanted to do for the rest of the 4 years. I always walk out
of advising appointments or after responding to emails and stuff…all that
communication. I always feel almost rejuvenated in a sense because I know I get really
stressed out sometimes but then after speaking with my advisor, it almost puts everything
84

into perspective. And that makes me feel better about the progress I’m making. And
makes me feel like “Okay, yeah, I am doing good. I can do this.”
Alicia also indirectly referred to feeling more confident after speaking with her academic
advisor. Participants reported that their academic advisors helped them shift their perspectives.
Familial Capital: Connection to Peers
To assess how academic advisors utilized participants’ familial capital for their academic
self-efficacy, I asked participants how their academic advisor connected them to other students at
Sunny Glen, if at all. Eleven participants responded that their advisor had not connected them to
other students. Of these 11, only two added to their responses. For example, Paloma mentioned,
“When I meet with her, I only meet with her, and I think one of the reasons, too, is because she
knows that I’m really busy.” Paloma explained the lack of connection to peers as due to her lack
of time as a student. Similarly, Teresa replied,
We did not get a chance to do that, but I do feel like I met and [have] gotten to know a lot
of people, so I didn’t expect that from them. I’ve always found a way to just do that on
my own.
For Teresa, her academic advisor’s role was not to connect her with other students. Based on this
finding, academic advisors did not seem to utilize participants’ familial capital for participants’
academic self-efficacy.
Linguistic Capital: Navigational Support
When I asked participants how their academic advisor helped them learn the unwritten
rules of Sunny Glen, if at all, nine participants responded that their advisor had not helped them
in this way. Zoe described her advisor as being reassuring in the beginning, then unresponsive.
Her advisor eventually left the university. Additionally, Inez said,
85

I honestly don’t think she’s really helped that way because all we’ve been talking about is
classes. We talked a little bit today about the support systems, but they’re not really
[knowledgeable]. Ask someone else, you know what I mean? It’s not her place. Ask
another resource. So, I feel like my advisor hasn’t really helped with that.
Inez had previously described ethnic and racial segregation as one of the unwritten rules of
Sunny Glen. However, she only discussed classes with her advisor. When another topic arose,
Inez’s advisor referred her elsewhere. Similarly, Petra explained that her advisor did not help her
learn the unwritten rules. Petra viewed her academic advisor as “strictly for matters of academic
importance” and went on to state that she did not speak to academic advisors about topics like
unwritten rules. In these ways, academic advisors did not help most participants learn to “speak”
the cultural language of Sunny Glen, which consisted of ethnic and racial challenges.
Navigational Capital: Connection to Programming and Spaces
To address navigational capital, I asked participants which academic resources their
academic advisor shared with them, if any. Ten participants shared 18 accounts of how academic
advisors connected them to information, policies, and opportunities related to their major. For
example, Kassandra, Petra, and Zia received emails from their advisors about internships, work-
study jobs, and opportunities to work with faculty. Participants also stated their advisors
connected them to centers on campus, including the student learning center (Ida, Paloma), math
tutoring center (Zoe), and the writing center (Ida). Additionally, Flor, Neci, Petra, and Teresa
mentioned their academic advisors connected them to digital spaces, such as websites for
research or their major, email addresses, and Zoom meeting links for other departments.
Participants reported that their academic advisors connected them to programming and spaces
that could help them make their way through the ethnic and racial challenges of the institution.
86

Resistant Capital: Advocacy
To better understand how advisors used participants’ resistant capital toward their
academic self-efficacy, I asked how their academic advisor advocated for them, if at all. Four
participants shared eight responses about how their academic advisors had advocated for them in
diverse ways, such as requesting support, providing scaffolded support, guiding participants to
different resources, modeling how to seek support, and seeking help on behalf of the participant
regarding financial issues. One participant mentioned her advisor framed problem solving using
words like “we” so that the participant felt that she was part of a team. Participants reported their
academic advisors advocated for them to help participants resist the status quo, including ethnic
and racial challenges.
Social Capital: Open Availability
To determine how effectively academic advisors utilized participants’ social capital to
promote their academic self-efficacy at Sunny Glen, I asked participants how available their
academic advisor was when they needed support. Although several participants had interacted
with multiple advisors, all 14 described at least one experience when an academic advisor had
been available and responsive to them. For example, Ida described her advisor as generally
available via email or through walk-in advising. Seven participants indicated that academic
advisors had been available with limited interaction. For example, Queena had only spoken with
her advisor about course registration for 30 minutes before the semester began and mentioned
that her academic advisor responded to emails within the same day. Four described academic
advisors as available but with barriers to interaction. For example, Zia explained that she must
schedule an appointment in advance to speak with her academic advisor. She emailed her advisor
and went back and forth with them to solidify an appointment time. Zia described the process as
87

“stressful,” particularly around important deadlines, such as registration. For example, Zia
mentioned that she was one of many students trying to seek last-minute advice. All participants
had experienced at least one academic advisor who had been available and responsive to them.
At the same time, about half experienced limited interaction, such as the camera being off during
virtual appointments. A few participants described barriers to connection.
Summary
This chapter described the participants and presented findings related to all six types of
capital in the CCW model (Yosso, 2005). The results regarding Research Question 1 revealed
strategies participants used towards their academic self-efficacy. Participants either remained
close to home or moved away and maintained high expectations of themselves. They used
familial capital in the form of parental encouragement and familial support to pursue their goals
at Sunny Glen. Participants used their Spanish language skills to maintain their identities and
their understanding of the ethnic and racial challenges in the environment to help them speak in a
way that was consistent with the status quo in that environment. Participants used peer and
faculty support to help them learn, though the pandemic and workload were obstacles to
connecting with peers and faculty. Participants coped with the ethnic and racial challenges in the
institution by forming their own community and seeking help academically. Lastly, participants
participated in major- and career-related activities while relying on their families for emotional
support, which yielded struggles with independence.
Results for Research Question 2 showed strategies academic advisors used. Participants
revealed that academic advisors helped them shift their perspectives. Although academic
advisors did not help participants connect to peers or learn about the ethnic and racial challenges
in the environment, academic advisors did connect participants to programming and spaces that
88

could help participants make their way through the challenges at the institution. Academic
advisors also advocated for students to help them resist ethnic and racial challenges and were
generally available as part of the participants’ networks and community resources.

89

Chapter Five: Discussion
This study found that first-generation, Pell-eligible Latina undergraduates at Sunny Glen
University utilized various forms of cultural wealth to build their academic self-efficacy, though
challenges and limitations in support from academic advisors may have prevented them from
fulfilling their full academic potential. The problems addressed in this study were that the target
group’s higher education completion rates are lower than those of their counterparts; thus, their
well-being suffers, and higher education institutions were not designed to serve their needs (Case
& Hunter, 2012; Excelencia in Education, n.d.; Flett & Nepon, 2020; Kilgo et al., 2019). Also, a
deficit-based perspective dominates the literature about this group. The purpose of this study was
to (a) understand how participants used their cultural wealth for academic self-efficacy, (b) hear
about their challenges, (c) hear what was missing from academic advising, and (c) provide
recommendations for academic support for this group at this study site. The research questions
were as follows:
1. How do first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize their cultural background
toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private research PWI?
2. How have academic advisors utilized students’ cultural backgrounds to promote
students’ academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private research PWI?
These research questions were addressed through 14 semi-structured, 45- to 60-minute Zoom
interviews with participants who opted in and self-reported their social identities. In the previous
chapter, I presented the findings. In this chapter, I discuss the findings, their alignment, and areas
of dissonance, and connect them to the literature. Then, I offer implications for practice,
recommendations for future research, and concluding thoughts.

90

Discussion: Cultural Background and Student Academic Self-Efficacy
The first research question was based on the CCW model (Yosso, 2005),
recommendations from the literature, and conflicting findings in previous research. The CCW
model assumes that participants bring wealth to the higher education environment. One of the
themes in the research about Latina undergraduates was pre-college characteristics, including
high school academic and social support (Crisp et al., 2015; Wagner, 2015). The theme of pre-
college characteristics supports the CCW model’s assumption that participants bring cultural
wealth to the study site. Additionally, Research Question 1 was based on the recommendation
from the literature for additional research on the strengths of first-generation, low-income
students. Moreover, academic integration or participation appeared in the literature as a
weakness for first-generation, low-income students, though one of the strengths for Latina
students was self-efficacy (Crisp et al., 2015; Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007;
O’Shea, 2015; Storlie et al., 2014). These findings conflict because the research is unclear about
whether academic self-efficacy is a strength or a weakness for first-generation, low-income
Latina students. The goal of Research Question 1 was to gain clarity on this population’s
academic self-efficacy. Interview questions one through 11 and 18 addressed Research Question
1 and covered topics like identity, family, and in-college academic and social experiences.
Among the findings, several areas of alignment and dissonance arose.
Alignment Among Themes
Alignment arose for findings related to high expectations, parental encouragement,
understanding ethnic and racial challenges, forming community, family as emotional support,
and independence.
91

High Expectations from Parents and for Oneself
The themes from within aspirational capital and familial capital were geography, high
expectations, parental encouragement, and familial support. These themes share a connection
between high expectations and the family. Within aspirational capital, participants discussed
high hopes for their grades at the end of the semester. Participants’ high expectations for
themselves reflected the high expectations that many of their parents held. Thus, participants’
familial capital was connected to their aspirational capital, where their families’ hopes became
their own (Luna & Martinez, 2013). As discussed in Chapter Four, Paloma felt the weight of her
family’s hopes for her to complete college, as her siblings did not finish due to financial issues.
This finding is consistent with studies conducted by Duncheon (2018) and Luna and Martinez
(2013). Paloma and other participants used their families as the catalyst for their aspirations.
Resisting Ethnic/Racial Challenges by Forming Community
The two themes of understanding ethnic and racial challenges and forming a community
are similar. By identifying the unspoken ethnic and racial challenges among White students and
students of color at the study site, participants resisted the institutional culture by forming their
own community. This finding reflects the theme of counterspaces from Case and Hunter (2012)
and Roberts and Lucas (2020), in which minoritized individuals challenged deficit-based
perspectives and experienced psychological well-being. In this study, participants formed their
own community within the PWI environment and resisted the ethnic and racial challenges of
being minoritized individuals on campus.
Parental Encouragement, Emotional Support, and Independence
Although participants indicated that parental encouragement provided familial capital and
family as an emotional support system provided social capital, participants also described
92

encountering independence in the college environment. The independence they encountered was
either already built into the system or established by them as a form of boundary-setting.
Duncheon (2018) had similar findings: familial capital facilitated integration into campus life. In
this study, students adjusted to campus life through familial support and by staying close to
home. Alternatively, students’ adjustment was facilitated by setting boundaries with family and
moving away geographically or distancing themselves through boundary-setting.
Dissonance Among Themes
Among the themes that emerged for Research Question 1, several were dissonant when
considered in relationship with each other. Dissonance emerged for findings related to the
following themes: high expectations and familial support; understanding racial and ethnic
dynamics, peer support, and engaging with faculty; high expectations and pandemic-related
difficulties; pandemic-related difficulties, forming, community, and help-seeking; familial
support, family as emotional support, and independence.
High Expectations of the Family for Oneself
Participants’ familial aspirations did not always become their own. As discussed in
Chapter Four, Queena and Xochitl went against their parents’ aspirations for them, which had
been difficult. Queena’s parents ultimately accepted her decision. Xochitl was postponing what
she anticipated would be a difficult conversation for as long as possible. Similarly, although
Wera’s original career aspirations went against those of her parents, she decided to attend Sunny
Glen to appease them. In this way, Wera sacrificed her own career aspirations for those of her
family. However, she found a way to connect her parents’ dreams for her with her dreams for
herself, by pursuing a career in real estate. The high expectations of the family and expectations
for oneself are different from findings by Luna and Martinez (2012), which indicated an
93

alignment between self-expectations and familial expectations. This study found that there is
sometimes tension between the two which is resolved through the pursuit of individual desires,
compromises, or sacrifices for the family.
Understanding Ethnic/Racial Challenges and Peer and Faculty Support
Another area of dissonance between themes was that participants understood the ethnic
and racial challenges associated with being Latinas at a PWI, yet this understanding led to
challenges with two of the main ways they navigated the institution: peer support and
engagement with faculty. The literature highlighted the importance of support from peers and
faculty, especially for this population’s GPAs, retention and graduation rates, level of
involvement, and sense of mattering (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Daniels et al., 2021; Dueñas &
Gloria, 2017; Havlik et al., 2020; Ishitani, 2016; Museus et al., 2019; Perez, 2020; Santa-
Ramirez, 2018). In this study, participants found peer support through counterspaces like the
first-generation student center and Latinx special interest housing. Only one participant discussed
engaging with faculty outside the classroom, and it was not in a counterspace. This finding
reflects the literature, in which only one study by Roberts and Lucas (2020) discussed faculty in
counterspaces.
High Expectations and Pandemic-Related Difficulties
The findings indicate that participants’ high expectations about their academic
performance were affected by pandemic-related difficulties. Participants discussed the
difficulties of transitioning from remote to in-person classes and how parental employment status
during the pandemic affected their financial aid eligibility. For example, Paloma’s financial
challenges reflected studies that found first-generation, low-income students were more likely to
94

experience financial hardships and have lower expected financial outcomes due to the pandemic
(Aucejo et al., 2020; Soria et al., 2020).
Pandemic-Related Difficulties, Forming Community, and Help-Seeking
Pandemic-related difficulties hindered participants from help-seeking as navigational
capital and from forming community as resistant capital. Participants described help-seeking as a
way of adapting to the academic workload in college. They sought help from similar peers and
faculty. However, participants struggled to seek help while managing the negative effects of the
pandemic. As discussed in Chapter Four, Zoe did not seek help during remote learning because
she felt isolated. Participants struggled to seek help during the pandemic, so their community-
building required adaptation.
Familial Support, Family as Emotional Support, and Independence
Another notable area of tension arose among the following three themes: (a) familial
capital in the form of familial support, (b) social capital in the form of family as emotional
support, and (c) independence. For some participants, the resolution to the tension among these
three themes was establishing independence from their families through boundary-setting. For
others, the resolution took the form of incorporating their families into the college experience
through regular phone calls or visits. The literature did not address this tension in-depth.
Discussion: Academic Advisor Support of Student Academic Self-Efficacy
Research Question 2 was about academic advisors’ support of participants’ academic
self-efficacy. This research question was based on the CCW model (Yosso, 2005) and the
literature on how academic advisors contributed to participants’ navigational support to improve
the student experience through connections with peers, resources, and counterspaces (Cerezo &
Chang, 2013; Havlik et al., 2020; Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; Mahaffy &
95

Pantoja, 2012; O’Shea, 2015; Santa-Ramirez, 2018; Storlie et al., 2014). Research Question 2
was also based on literature indicating that strengths-awareness improved student academic self-
efficacy and engagement (Soria & Stubblefield, 2014) and that the quality of an academic
advising relationship was critical for persistence (NSSE, 2019). Interview questions 12 through
17 addressed Research Question 2 and covered topics like academic expectations and academic
advisor availability and type of support. Among the findings, additional similarities and areas of
tension arose.
Alignment Among Themes
The findings related to connection to programming and spaces, academic advisor
advocacy, and availability, were all in alignment.
Connection to Programming/Spaces and Advocacy
Participants reported that their academic advisors helped them navigate the institution by
connecting them to programming and spaces. Participants also reported that academic advisors
helped them go against the status quo by advocating for them. For this population, the literature
indicated that academic advisors could consider the mental aspects of engagement and facilitate
student engagement with the campus community by providing resources and programs (Havlik et
al., 2020; Ishitani, 2016; Lippincott & German, 2007; O’Shea, 2015). Thus, academic advisors
connected students to programming and spaces where the student would find a sense of
community to counter the culture of a PWI campus. Future research can explore whether
academic advisors make this connection intentionally.
Advocacy and Availability
Two additional similar themes include advocacy, a form of resistant capital, and
availability, a type of social capital. The literature emphasized that navigational support was
96

important for first-generation, low-income Latinas at 4-year, private, research PWIs. Staff
advocacy was especially important (Perez, 2020). By making themselves available, academic
advisors provided students with social capital. Through advocacy, academic advisors also helped
participants by offering suggestions and modeling behaviors and perspectives that helped them
resist the status quo.
Dissonance Among Themes
Among the themes for Research Question 2, a few areas yielded dissonant findings in
that participants reported that academic advisors were providing support in one area but not in
others. The following subsections address these conflicting findings.
Navigational Support and Connection to Programming/Spaces
Two themes that initially seemed contradictory were that, according to participants,
academic advisors did not provide navigational support by helping participants learn the
unwritten rules of Sunny Glen. However, academic advisors connected participants to
programming and spaces. In the literature on Latina undergraduates, navigational support was an
institutional responsibility and appeared in the form of connections to resources (Mahaffy &
Pantoja, 2012; Perez, 2020). Thus, although academic advisors did not directly help participants
process the ethnic and racial challenges at Sunny Glen, their referral to programming and spaces
may have helped participants process those challenges. Academic advisors may have viewed the
programming and spaces to which participants were referred, such as the Latinx cultural center
and the first-generation student center, as generally better equipped to support students with
these difficult topics.
97

Connection to Peers and Connection to Programming/Spaces
Similarly, there is dissonance between participants’ reports of a lack of connection to
peers and simultaneous connection to programming and spaces by their academic advisors. The
concept of academic advisors facilitating connections to similar peers came directly from
Yosso’s (2005) CCW model, where familial capital was cultural knowledge shared by kin.
NACADA’s (2017b) model of core competencies and the CAS (2019) standards also supported
this concept, as both emphasized academic advisor awareness and connection of students to
different resources that support student success. Connection to peers was also an emergent theme
and recommendation from other researchers (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Havlik et al., 2020; Santa-
Ramirez, 2018; Storlie et al., 2014). At the same time, most participants said that their academic
advisors provided them with academic resources and connected them to programming and
spaces. The literature discusses counterspaces and the importance of connecting students to these
safe spaces (Case & Hunter, 2012; Roberts and Lucas, 2020). However, academic advisors may
have recognized that counterspaces served a different purpose than they could provide as
individual student services staff (Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Thus, although academic advisors may
not have directly connected participants to similar peers, they did guide participants to
programming and spaces where participants could connect with peers.
Navigational Support and Availability
The last area of dissonance for themes was between linguistic capital in the form of a lack
of navigational support and social capital in the form of availability. According to the literature,
social capital should not just be about the transition to college life. It is also important for
academic advisors to examine how students navigate the environment once they are in college
(Duncheon, 2018; Luna & Martínez, 2018). In this study, academic advisors did not help
98

participants understand the ethnic and racial challenges of the environment, but they were
generally available to participants. Based on the interviews, participants seemed to understand
that advisors were resources for academic-related matters. According to the NACADA (2017b)
model of core competencies, an effective advisor helps students understand the curriculum. Even
so, limited interaction or barriers to interaction with an academic advisor may have contributed
to the ethnic and racial challenges some participants experienced at Sunny Glen. Although
participants reported receiving connections to programming and spaces and general academic
advisor availability about half the time, they also reported not receiving navigational support.
Implications for Practice
The findings revealed that participants at Sunny Glen experienced ethnic and racial
challenges, pandemic-related difficulties, struggles adapting to the workload, and difficulty
balancing independence with familial support. They also reported that their interactions with
academic advisors did not include connection to peers, navigational support, and availability. In
this section, I discuss the implications of these findings for practice. Although overlap exists
among the different implications, each is addressed in the most relevant section below.
Understanding Ethnic and Racial Challenges
Participants experienced Sunny Glen to be unwelcoming for ethnic and racial diversity.
They described changing their language and behavior in response to the campus climate and
culture. Both climate and culture must be addressed at the study site.
Assessing Campus Climate
The theme of ethnic and racial challenges for participants implies that additional
assessment needs to be conducted at the institutional level on the climate for diversity.
99

The provost can utilize the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2015) model to conduct this assessment,
beginning with goals, then considering what is needed to produce satisfactory results and for
people to do their jobs well. Then, training can be conducted to help academic advisors and other
staff enhance their skills to create a more welcoming climate for ethnically and racially diverse
students. Staff training can review culturally relevant practices, microaggressions, and how to
hold colleagues accountable (Harris & Wood, 2020; Kilgo et al., 2019; Locke & Trolian, 2018).
Additionally, staff training can address the assumption that all students have the knowledge
needed to succeed in college (Locke & Trolian, 2018; O’Shea, 2015). A specific training session
for academic advisors can revisit the purpose of advising to help students make meaning of their
experiences and make decisions (CAS, 2019). This purpose was evident only half the time in
participants’ experiences with their academic advisors. Additional training for academic advisors
can focus on professional development, as facilitated by NACADA’s (2017b) model of core
competencies or the CAS (2019) standards for academic advising (NSSE, 2019). Training could
also be expanded for students to increase their awareness of diverse groups and their experiences
(e.g., affirmative action and diversity programs for women and other minoritized students).
Leading Culture Change
In addition to assessing campus climate, the culture of academic support at Sunny Glen
needs improvement. This can be accomplished by revisiting the findings from the campus
climate assessment and using the information gained to design specific, additional targeted
support to meet students’ needs. For example, bilingual support, campus life activities, and
inclusion in course curriculum and campus programming can be helpful. Additional support for
first-generation, low-income Latinas and other minoritized students at Sunny Glen can be
provided through additional programming and enhancement of counterspaces for any additional
100

needs (Cerezo & Chang, 2013; Mahaffy & Pantoja, 2012; Santa-Ramirez, 2018; Storlie et al.,
2014). For example, academic advisors could present targeted workshops in counterspaces to
help students adapt to the college academic workload. This idea stems from a combination of
research by Cerezo and Chang (2013) and Santa-Ramirez (2018) and my professional experience
as an academic advisor.
Adaptation to the Workload
These targeted workshops could be featured in spaces like the Latinx cultural center or
first-generation student center. Topics could include not comparing oneself to others, utilizing
self-talk as a form of mindful self-compassion, combating imposter syndrome, and balancing
independence with familial support. Academic advising workshops could also help change the
perception that academic advisors are unapproachable, unavailable, or uncaring by meeting
students where they are.
Pandemic-Related Difficulties
After a campus climate assessment and senior leaders identify goals for climate and
culture change, improvements can focus on helping students with pandemic-related difficulties.
For example, first-generation, low-income Latina students experienced significant difficulties
with completing coursework and lowered expectations for GPAs and graduating on time (Aucejo
et al., 2020; Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022). As the pandemic is still ongoing, students will need
continued interventions and support in these areas. For example, academic advisors should
devote extra attention to helping students transition back to in-person learning from online
learning. Support can be in the form of quick response times and direct handoffs for referrals
(Harris & Wood, 2020; Soria et al., 2020). By providing support for pandemic-related
101

difficulties, academic advisors will also be improving the quality of navigational support
provided to students.
Independence
Like the theme of pandemic-related difficulties, independence can be better addressed
after a thorough campus climate assessment and the development of a training program. Prepared
with information from the campus climate assessment and staff training, academic advisors
could provide students with intentional, scaffolded support. This support could be offered in the
form of resources, programs, or touchpoints and should teach students how to navigate the
campus. Through scaffolded support, students can gradually take charge of their learning,
including how and when to ask for help. Special attention should be given to students in their 2
nd

year and beyond, as the literature indicates that the focus tends to taper off after the 1
st
year
(Ishitani, 2016; NSSE, 2019).
Connection to Peers and Navigational Support
One of the findings revealed that participants need additional support from academic
advisors to utilize social capital and navigational capital. According to 11 participants, their
academic advisors did not connect them to peers, and nine said their academic advisors did not
help them navigate the institution. Ideally, through staff training, academic advisors can learn
about the target populations’ strengths, including connections to similar peers and knowledge
about how to navigate an organization for academic success. Through increased understanding,
academic advisors can help participants utilize their strengths through more deliberate
connections to other students with the same identities and process unwritten rules at Sunny Glen,
such as the unwelcoming climate for racial and ethnic diversity (Crisp et al., 2015; Mahaffy &
Pantoja, 2012; Perez, 2020; Storlie et al., 2014; Wagner, 2015). As Ida pointed out, Sunny Glen
102

could hire additional academic advisors with similar identities. Lastly, academic advisors who
share social identities with participants that may not be readily apparent, such as first-generation
college student status, can be trained on appropriately disclosing this information to help bond
with their students.
Connection to Peers
To address the finding of a lack of connection to peers, academic advisors must ensure
that students have social support, especially from ethnically similar peers and mentors (Cerezo &
Chang, 2013; Havlik et al., 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). One way to introduce a more deliberate
connection to peers is a peer advising program. Like a peer mentorship program, where students
help other students, a peer advising program can empower students to help their peers with basic
academic advising questions and concerns. Since academic advising support at this campus is
constrained by large caseloads and minoritized students are burdened with locating and utilizing
academic advising services (Hirt, 2006), a peer advising model could be helpful. Academic
directors will need to be mindful to hire students from the target population for this program to
best serve students with the most need. Alternatively, a peer advising program could be created
specifically for the target population and could include a partnership between the academic units
and one or more counterspaces where these students already spend time on campus. A peer
advising program would help first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize their familial
capital through connections with similar peers.
Navigational Support
The lack of navigational support by academic advisors at Sunny Glen for first-generation,
low-income Latinas can be addressed in several ways. First, academic advisors can explore more
creative methods of communication than email. For example, short videos may be more helpful
103

than long emails with many links and directions. Short videos can help reduce stress, anxiety,
and the possibility of information overload (Harris & Wood, 2020). Academic advisors could
even release short videos for the target population to introduce academic advising, what to
expect from academic advising, and how to utilize academic advising services. Students could
also be informed through an introductory video that they should meet with their academic
advisor first to begin their academic journey, rather than trying to do research and planning on
their own before a meeting. Second, in appointments, academic advisors could model for
students how to navigate the university by contacting other offices with the student present to ask
questions that the advisors are unable to answer. Paired with scaffolded support, modeling can
help students learn how to take charge of their own academic experience. Third, academic
advisors can move beyond connecting students to other programs and spaces and offer
programming in counterspaces where students with the most needs typically spend their time.
Through creative messaging, modeling, and service offerings, academic advisors at Sunny Glen
can improve navigational support for the target population.
Academic Advisor Availability
The theme of limited academic advisor availability can be addressed through
organizational structure changes, an adjusted advising approach, and streamlined processes. The
academic advising structure at Sunny Glen is decentralized, within a hierarchical structure. This
type of organizational design is currently operating to meet some of the institutional goals, as set
by the university, such as efforts to increase affordability and diversity, equity, and inclusion, as
set by the president and other constituents through the strategic plan. However, some elements of
the system are no longer working. For example, a lack of coordination exists among academic
units, including for academic advising. Although a central academic advising professional
104

organization operates on campus, not all policy changes are communicated effectively from this
organization to the individual academic units. Based on the large institution size and 15%
Hispanic student population, senior staff members at Sunny Glen should consider implementing
the decentralized advising model. A compromise would be to incorporate elements from the
shared advising model (Pardee, 2004). More realistically, though, structural changes could be
incremental and Sunny Glen could maintain the current decentralized advising model. At the
very least, resources and training should be centralized and shared (Pardee, 2004). A centralized
academic advising professional organization does exist at Sunny Glen. However, updates from
CAS, NACADA, and the institution, could be better communicated through this institutional
academic advising organization. Senior staff members should consider conducting an audit at
least once every 5 years to ensure the quality of services and that students’ needs are being met
(Pardee, 2004).
Additionally, academic advisor availability could be determined by caseload and vary
based on the unit. Sunny Glen’s decentralized academic advising model is likely driven by
financial considerations. According to Pardee (2004), one of the benefits of a decentralized
advising model is that space and money are saved, Sunny Glen senior administrators should
carefully consider whether the current model is meeting its institutional goals, particularly for
minoritized students. This study suggests it could better meet the needs of first-generation, low-
income Latina undergraduates. If a central advising center is not financially feasible, Deans
should hire more academic advisors in general and more from similar populations to that of this
study’s participants, to support the high student demand within each academic unit. These
changes may also apply to other higher education institutions with high academic advising
caseloads and decentralized academic advising models.
105

Through structural changes, academic advisors may be better able to increase their
interaction with students through a proactive advising approach. This was a recommendation
offered by Harris and Wood (2020) and Queena. The informational videos mentioned previously
can be one form of outreach. Other messaging should be clear and validating (Harris & Wood,
2020). Advising appointments should be more personalized, as recommended by Zoe and Wera.
For example, advisors should learn student goals and guide the conversation around those goals.
Moreover, to help remove barriers, academic advisors at Sunny Glen can streamline the
process of scheduling appointments. For example, in the current structure, academic advisors
expect students to send an email expressing interest in meeting, which launches a back-and-forth
email exchange to solidify the details. As Zia highlighted, this process is stressful, and it burdens
minoritized students. Instead, academic advising units can invest in technology like Calendly,
which allows students to schedule an appointment if they have access to the scheduling link. In
addition to improving appointment accessibility, academic advising units can bolster availability
just before major deadlines. Rather than expecting students to change their behavior, advising
units can increase advising availability at times of increased demand. Similarly, advising units
can adjust policies around other forms of advising accessibility (Harris & Wood, 2020). For
example, students who attend walk-in advising but do not receive support before the advising
period ends can get priority the next day instead of being required to reset under the first-come,
first-served model. Through proactive outreach, validating messaging, personalized
appointments, and streamlined accessibility processes, academic advisors can become more
available even within the constraints of the current advising model.
106

Future Research
This study has implications for future research. As discussed in the limitations and
delimitations section, there were several areas where this study was constrained by
circumstances or by choice. These constraints would be a strong starting place for future
research. For example, one of the limitations was that, due to the nature of a case study, the
findings are not transferable to other settings. Additional research can examine whether the
findings also apply to these other settings through different methodological approaches.
In terms of delimitations, I focused on the student experience. Future scholars can
interview advisors to learn more about the strategies they use, from their perspective, to support
first-generation, low-income Latina students. Moreover, I studied one institution at one point in
time. Future researchers can conduct longitudinal studies and cross-institutional comparisons
across different institution types. More research is needed on first-generation, low-income
Latinas at different institution types, including 4-year, private, research PWIs (Cerezo & Chang,
2013; Dueñas & Gloria, 2017; Perez, 2020; Santa-Ramirez, 2018). Future research can expand
on the knowledge about the target population in higher education through these methods.
In addition, this study’s interview protocol was designed to address questions related to
the CCW model (Yosso, 2005). However, a few themes arose that were not directly addressed
through the interview questions: pandemic-related difficulties, adaptation to the college
academic workload, and a struggle for independence while maintaining familial support. These
themes could be incorporated into future qualitative studies to gain further insight. Pandemic-
related difficulties can be explored through longitudinal and qualitative studies and those that
focus specifically on examining how social identities and cultural wealth may have affected this
population during and after the pandemic (Hoyt et al., 2021; Reyes-Portillo et al., 2022).
107

Adaptation to the college academic workload could be explored through the 2nd year to fill the
gap in the literature beyond the 1st year, particularly for this group (Ishitani, 2016; NSSE, 2019;
O’Shea, 2015). Lastly, the tension between independence and familial and social capital should
be studied explicitly to better understand first-generation, low-income Latina undergraduates’
relationships with family and how those relationships may change as these students move
through their college careers.
Conclusions
This qualitative case study explored how first-generation, low-income Latina
undergraduates utilized their cultural wealth for academic self-efficacy at Sunny Glen, a 4-year,
private, research PWI in the western United States. The study also examined how academic
advisors utilized participants’ cultural wealth to support their academic self-efficacy. Findings
from 14 semi-structured individual interviews indicated that participants used all six forms of
cultural capital to enhance their academic self-efficacy. Three unanticipated findings included
pandemic-related difficulties, adaptation to the workload, and the quest for independence while
maintaining familial emotional and general support. Participants reported that academic advisors
did not connect students to similar peers or help them navigate the university, and participants
experienced obstacles to academic advising, such as limited interaction or scheduling barriers.
Implications for practice include staff training on the needs of first-generation, low-
income Latinas, workshops in counterspaces on topics of concern for this group, and scaffolded
support transitioning back to in-person activities. Recommendations for filling the gaps in
academic support reported by participants include introducing a peer advising model,
approaching messaging more creatively, modeling help-seeking in advising appointments,
offering programming in counterspaces, conducting proactive outreach, and presenting a more
108

streamlined process for scheduling advising appointments. Future research can utilize other
research methods and approaches, such as longitudinal studies, cross-institutional comparisons,
and focus groups. Additionally, gaining academic advisors’ perspectives and exploring the
previously unanticipated themes would provide further insight into the experiences of first-
generation, low-income Latinas in higher education.
Academic advisors must seize this historical moment to provide services to better meet
the needs of first-generation, low-income Latina students. Doing so would benefit students,
higher education institutions, and society. With more targeted support, students from this
population can enhance their academic self-efficacy and improve their graduation rates, thus
inspiring future generations. Higher education institutions can also benefit by improving
retention and graduation rates, enhancing reputations, and fulfilling ethical and legal
responsibilities. As greater numbers of first-generation, low-income Latina students enter the
workforce with bachelor’s degrees, they can help reinvest in their communities through
additional research and more tailored services. These individuals’ perspectives are needed in
society to help imagine possibilities for our society’s most intractable problems.

109

References
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness.
Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice.
Addison-Wesley.
Arum, R., Roksa, J., Cruz, J., & Silver, B. (2018). Student experiences in college. In B.
Schneider (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of education in the 21st century (pp. 385–
403). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76694-2_17
Astin, A. (1991). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
evaluation in higher education. American Council on Education.
Astin, A. W., & Antonio, A. L. (2012). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice
of assessment and evaluation in higher education. Rowman & Littlefield
Aucejo, E. M., French, J., Araya, M. P. U., & Zafar, B. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on
student experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey. Journal of Public
Economics, 191, Article 104271.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, L. G. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(6th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a research method. Qualitative Research Journal
9(2), 27–40.
Brown, S., & Mangan, K. (2020, May 28). What college students need now. The Chronicle of
Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/what-college-students-need-now
Case, A. D., & Hunter, C. D. (2012). Counterspaces: A unit of analysis for understanding the
role of settings in marginalized individuals’ adaptive responses to oppression. American
110

Journal of Community Psychology, 50(1-2), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-
012-9497-7
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). 2019 novel coronavirus.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html
Cerezo, A., & Chang, T. (2013). Latina/o achievement at predominantly White universities: The
importance of culture and ethnic community. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
12(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192712465626
Chen, X., & Nunnery, A. (2015). Profile of very low-and low-income undergraduates in
2015 –16. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020460.pdf
Collins, P. H. (2015). Intersectionality’s definitional dilemmas. Annual Review of Sociology, 41,
1–20. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112142
Conner, T. W., & Rabovsky, T. M. (2011). Accountability, affordability, access: A review of the
recent trends in higher education policy research. Policy Studies Journal: the Journal of
the Policy Studies Organization, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-
0072.2010.00389_7.x
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2019). CAS professional
standards for higher education (10th ed.).
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence
against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
111

Crisp, G., Taggart, A., & Nora, A. (2015). Undergraduate Latina/o students: A systematic review
of research identifying factors contributing to academic success outcomes. Review of
Educational Research, 85(2), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551064
Daniels, J. R., Thomas, B. L., & Libengood, D. S. (2021). The lived experiences of high-
achieving historically underrepresented students at four CCCU institutions. Christian
Higher Education, 20(5), 304–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/15363759.2020.1871119
de Onís, C. M. (2017). What’s in an “x”?: An exchange about the politics of “Latinx”. Chiricù
Journal: Latina/o Literature. Art, and Culture, 1(2), 78–91.
Dueñas, M., & Gloria, A. M. (2017). ¿Pertenezco a esta universidad?: The mediating role of
belonging for collective self-esteem and mattering for Latin@ undergraduates. Journal of
College Student Development, 58(6), 891–906. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2017.0070
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2017.1355248
Excelencia in Education. (n.d.). Latino college completion: United States [Infographic].
Retrieved April 18, 2021 from https://www.edexcelencia.org/sites/default/files/
LCCStateStats/Exc-2020-50StateFS-USA-05.pdf
Federal Student Aid. (2021). Wondering how the amount of your federal student aid is
determined? https://studentaid.gov/complete-aid-process/how-calculated
Flett, G. L., & Nepon, T. (2020). Mattering versus self-esteem in university students:
Associations with regulatory focus, social feedback, and psychological distress. Journal
of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38(6), 663–674.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282919890786
112

Franco, M. A., & Kim, Y. K. (2018). Effects of campus climates for diversity on college GPA
among Latinx students at selective universities: An examination by gender, first-
generation college status, and immigrant status. In L. Soria (Ed.), Evaluating campus
climate at US research universities (pp. 25–48). Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94836-2_2
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Gallos, J.V. & Bolman, L. G. (2021). Reframing Academic Leadership. John Wiley & Sons,
Incorporated.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson.
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. Review of Higher Education, 36(1S), 9–29.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2012.0047
Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for
institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 7–24.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.254
Harris, J. C., Barone, R. P., & Davis, L. P. (2015). Who benefits?: A critical race analysis of the
(d) evolving language of inclusion in higher education. National Education Association.
Harris, J. C., & Patton, L. D. (2019). Un/doing intersectionality through higher education
research. The Journal of Higher Education, 90(3), 347–372.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1536936
Harris, M. S. (2019). An empirical typology of the institutional diversity of US colleges and
universities. Innovative Higher Education, 45, 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-
019-09494-6
113

Harris, F., III, & Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The equity scorecard: A collaborative approach to
assess and respond to racial and ethnic disparities in student outcomes. In S. R. Harper &
L. D. Patton (Eds.), Responding to the realities if race on campus (New directions for
student services, no. 120, pp. 77-84). Jossey-Bass.
Harris, F., III, & Wood, J. L. (2020, April 9). Equity-minded student services in the online
environment [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGoldJP4Xl8.
Havlik, S., Pulliam, N., Malott, K., & Steen, S. (2020). Strengths and struggles: First-generation
college-goers persisting at one predominantly White institution. Journal of College
Student Retention, 22(1), 118–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025117724551
Hirt, J. B. (2006). Where you work matters: Student affairs administration at different types of
institutions. University Press of America.
Hoyt, L. T., Cohen, A. K., Dull, B., Castro, E. M., & Yazdani, N. (2021). “Constant stress has
become the new normal”: stress and anxiety inequalities among US college students in
the time of COVID-19. Journal of Adolescent Health, 68(2), 270–276.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. The Journal of Higher
Education, 63(5), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1992.11778388
Hurtado, S., Alvarez, C. L., Guillermo-Wann, C., Cuellar, M., & Arellano, L. (2012). A model
for diverse learning environments. In J. Smart & M Paulsen (Eds), Higher education:
Handbook of theory and research (Vol 27, pp. 41–122). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2950-6_2
Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1999). Enacting diverse learning
environments: Improving the climate for racial/ethnic diversity in higher education.
114

(ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Vol. 26, No. 8). Association for the Study of
Higher Education.
Hurtado, S., & Ruiz Alvarado, A. (2012). The climate for underrepresented groups and diversity
on campus. Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA.
Ishitani, T. T. (2016). First-generation students’ persistence at four-year institutions. College and
University, 91(3), 22–34.
Kaplin, W., & Lee, B. (2014). The law of higher education: Student version (5th ed.). Jossey
Bass.
Kezar, A. J. (2012). Shared leadership for creating campus cultures that support students of
color. In S. D. Museus & Jayakumar, U. M. (Eds.), Creating campus cultures: Fostering
success among racially diverse student populations (pp. 150–167). Routledge.
Kilgo, C. A., Linley, J. L., & Bennett, L. M. (2019). Critically examining the relationship
between peer diversity interactions and psychological well-being. Journal of Student
Affairs Research and Practice, 56(1), 63–77.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19496591.2018.1490305
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. (2015). An introduction to the new world Kirkpatrick model.
https://www.cpedv.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/introduction_to_the_
kirkpatrick_new_world_model_-eval_002.pdf?1526668240
Kotter, J. P. (2011). Leading change. Harvard Business School. On change management.
Harvard Business Review Press.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
115

Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey
of Student Engagement. Change, 33(3), 10–17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NNSE: Benchmarks for
effective educational practices. Change, 35(2), 24–32.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604090
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Chapter 3. Critical race theory–What it is not. In M. Lynn and D.D.
Dixon (Eds.) Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 34–47). Routledge.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Lippincott, J. A., & German, N. (2007). From blue collar to ivory tower: Counseling first-
generation, working-class students. In J. A. Lippincott & R. B. Lippincott (Eds.), Special
populations in college counseling: A handbook for mental health professionals (pp. 89–
98). American Counseling Association.
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. SAGE Publications.
Locke, L. A., & Trolian, T. L. (2018). Microaggressions and social class identity in higher
education and student affairs. New Directions for Student Services, 2018(162), 63–74.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20262
Lucas, C. J. (2006). American higher education: A history. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
1-137-10841-8
Luna, N. A., & Martínez, 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), 2. https://doi.org/10.9741/2161-2978.1045
116

Mahaffy, K. A., & Pantoja, C. (2012). Latina/o students’ needs. Journal of College Student
Retention, 14(3), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.14.3.e
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mayhew, M. J., Rockenbach, A. N., Bowman, N. A., Seifert, T. A. D., Wolniak, G. C.,
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2016). How college affects students: 21st century
evidence that higher education works (Vol. 3). Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Wiley.
Mindtools (2021). Organization design. Understanding and influencing organizational structure.
https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_95.htm
Morse & Brooks. (2020, September 13). How U.S. News calculated the best colleges ranking.
U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-
colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings
Museus, S. D., Griffin, K. A., & Quaye, S. J. (2019). Engaging students of color. In S. J. Quaye,
S. R. Harper, & S. L. Pendakur (Eds.), Student engagement in higher education:
Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations (pp. 15–35).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429400698
NACADA. (2006). NACADA concept of academic advising.
https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Pillars/Concept.aspx
NACADA. (2017a). NACADA statement of core values.
https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Pillars/CoreValues.aspx
NACADA. (2017b). NACADA academic advising core competencies model.
https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Pillars/CoreCompetencies.aspx
117

National Center for Education Statistics. (2020a, May). College enrollment rates - Indicator.
National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cpb.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020b). Fast facts: financial aid.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=31
National Center for Education Statistics. (2021c). College navigator.
https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
National Survey of Student Engagement. (2019). Engagement insights: Survey findings on the
quality of undergraduate education. Center for Postsecondary Research.
Noe-Bustamante, L., Mora, L., & Lopez, M. H. (2020). About one-in-four US Hispanics have
heard of Latinx, but just 3% use it. Pew Research Center.
Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage.
O’Shea, S. (2015). Arriving, surviving, and succeeding: First-in-family women and their
experiences of transitioning into the first year of university. Journal of College Student
Development, 56(5), 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0053
Pardee, C. F. (2004). Organizational structures for advising. NACADA Clearinghouse of
Academic Advising Resources. http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/
View-Articles/Organizational-Models-for-Advising.aspx
Park, J. J., Denson, N., & Bowman, N. A. (2013). Does socioeconomic diversity make a
difference? Examining the effects of racial and socioeconomic diversity on the campus
climate for diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 50(3), 466–496.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212468290
118

Patel, L. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315658551
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. SAGE Publications.
Perez, D. (2020). Latina baccalaureate attainment: A mixed methods case study of a TRIO
intervention. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(3), 250–265.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192718777862
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17–
21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1174381.
Rendon, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33–51.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191156
Reyes-Portillo, J. A., Masia Warner, C., Kline, E. A., Bixter, M. T., Chu, B. C., Miranda, R., ...
& Jeglic, E. L. (2022). The psychological, academic, and economic impact of COVID-19
on college students in the epicenter of the pandemic. Emerging Adulthood, 10(2), 473–
490. https://doi.org/10.1177/21676968211066657
Roberts, S. A., & Lucas, K. L. (2020). A Title V center as a counterspace for underrepresented
minority and first-generation college students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
2020, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192720951307
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
119

Salinas, C., Jr., & Lozano, A. (2019). Mapping and recontextualizing the evolution of the term
Latinx: An environmental scanning in higher education. Journal of Latinos and
Education, 18(4), 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2017.1390464
Santa-Ramirez, S. (2018). “Mi familia”: Counterstories of first-generation Latina/x students
navigating a racially hostile campus climate. In K. Soria (Ed.), Evaluating campus
climate at US research universities (pp. 151–168). Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94836-2_7
Schein, E. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. New
Directions for Student Services, 1989(48), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.37119894803
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Simon, M.K. & Goes, J. (2013). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success.
Dissertation Success LLC. https://ders.es/limitationscopedelimitation1.pdf
Smith, L. T. (2012). The indigenous people’s project: Setting a new agenda. In L. T. Smith (Ed.),
Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples (pp. 203–211). Zed
Books.
Soria, K. M., & Stubblefield, R. (2014). First-year college students’ strengths awareness:
Building a foundation for student engagement and academic excellence. Journal of the
First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 26(2), 69–88.
Soria, K. M., Horgos, B., Chirikov, I., & Jones-White, D. (2020). First-generation students ’
experiences during the covid-19 pandemic. Student Experience in the Research
University (SERU) Consortium
120

Stein, S. (2018). Confronting the racial-colonial foundations of US higher education. Journal for
the Study of Postsecondary and Tertiary Education, 3, 77–98.
https://doi.org/10.28945/4105
Storlie, C. A., Moreno, L. S., & Portman, T. A. A. (2014). Voices of Hispanic college students:
A content analysis of qualitative research within the Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 36(1), 64–78.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986313510283
Strange, C. C., & Banning, J. H. (2001). Educating by design: Creating campus learning
environments that work (The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series). Jossey-
Bass.
Strange, C. C., & Banning, J. H. (2015). Designing for learning: Creating campus environments
for student success. John Wiley & Sons.
Strauss, A., Schatzman, L., Bucher, R., & Sabshin, M. (1981). Psychiatric ideologies and
institutions. Transaction Publishers
Taylor, P., Lopez, M. H., Martínez, J. H., & Velasco, G. (2012). When labels don’t fit: Hispanics
and their views of identity. Pew Hispanic Center.
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.), Higher Education Act. (1996), “Higher education act
amendments subpart 2 – federal early outreach and student services programs,” Chapter
1 – Federal TRIO Programs Sec. 402A. 20 USC 1070a–11.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/trio/triohea.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2021). Developing Hispanic-serving institutions program - Title
V. U.S. department of education. https://www2.ed.gov/programs/idueshsi/index.html
121

U.S. Department of Labor. (2021, May 1). Summary report for 21-1012.00 - Educational,
guidance, and career counselors and advisors.
https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/21-1012.00
Vidal-Ortiz, S., & Martínez, J. (2018). Latinx thoughts: Latinidad with an X. Latino Studies,
16(3), 384–395. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41276-018-0137-8
Wagner, J. M. (2015). Hispanic minority college students at selective colleges: What matters
with degree completion? Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 14(4), 303–326.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192714568807
Warnock, D. M., Hurst, A. L., Barratt, W., & Salcedo, J. G. (2018). Students’ perceptions of
campus climate by social class background. In K. M. Soria (Ed.), Evaluating campus
climate at US research universities (pp. 103–124). Palgrave Macmillan.
Witham, K. A., & Bensimon, E. M. (2012). Creating a culture of inquiry around equity and
student success. In S. D. Museus & U. M. Jayakumar (Eds.), Creating campus cultures:
Fostering success among racially diverse student populations (pp. 46–67). Routledge.
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.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

122

Appendix A: Figures and Tables
Figure A1
Financial Aid: Any Grant or Scholarship

Note. Adapted from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, 2020. In the public
domain. Institutional identifiers removed for confidentiality.

65%
35%
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS
RECEIVING FINANCIAL AID 2019-20
Any grant or scholarship Total
123

Figure A2
Financial Aid: Pell Grants

Note. Adapted from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, 2020. In the public
domain. Institutional identifiers removed for confidentiality.

20%
80%
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS
RECEIVING PELL GRANTS 2019-20
Pell grants Total
124

Figure A3
Conceptual Framework: Community Cultural Wealth Model

Note. Adapted from “Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth” by. T. J. Yosso, 2005, Race, Ethnicity and Education. 8(1), p. 78.
(https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006).

125

Table A1
Conceptual Framework Alignment Matrix
Research question
Area of conceptual
framework
Questions
Screener a, b, c, d
Demographic 1
How do first-generation, low-income Latina
students utilize their cultural background
toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year,
private, research PWI?

Aspirational capital 3, 9
Familial capital 2, 4
Linguistic capital 7, 8
Navigational capital 11, 18
Resistant capital 1, 10
Social capital 5, 6
How have academic advisors utilized first-
generation, low-income Latina students’
cultural backgrounds to support these students’
academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private,
research PWI?

Aspirational capital
16
Familial capital 15
Linguistic capital 14
Navigational capital 13
Resistant capital 17
Social capital 12

126

Table A2
Parti c ipant s’ Self-Identified Place of Origin and Languages Spoken
Participant U.S. region of origin Other languages
Alicia West Spanish (fluent)
Flor Northeast Spanish (native)
Ida West Spanish (fluent), Mandarin (beginner)
Inez Southeast Spanish (fluent), French (beginner)
Kassandra West Spanish (native), American Sign Language
(beginner), Italian (beginner/intermediate)
Neci Southeast Spanish (fluent), French (intermediate)
Paloma West Spanish (fluent)
Petra West Spanish (native), French (beginner)
Queena Southwest Spanish (fluent), French (beginner)
Teresa West Spanish (native)
Wera West Spanish (native), Nahuatl (beginner)
Xochitl West Spanish (fluent), Mandarin (beginner)
Zia West Spanish (fluent)
Zoe West Spanish (professional), French (beginner), Korean
(beginner), Japanese (beginner)

Note. Language proficiency was grouped as either native, fluent, professional, intermediate, or
beginner.

127

Table A3
Self-Identified Class Year, Major of Interview Participants
Participant Class year Major
Alicia Sophomore Journalism
Flor Junior Business
Ida Senior Sociology
Inez Freshman Theater
Kassandra Junior Sociology
Neci Freshman English
Paloma Senior Urban planning
Petra Sophomore Legal and cultural issues
Queena Freshman Guitar performance
Teresa Freshman Business and entertainment
Wera Freshman Business
Xochitl Senior Philosophy
Zia Freshman Biological science
Zoe Sophomore Sociology

128

Table A4
Emergent Findings for Research Question 1
Research question
Area of
conceptual
framework
Interview
questions
Codes
How do first-generation
college, low-income
Latina students utilize
their cultural
background toward
academic self-efficacy
at a 4-year, private
research PWI?
Aspirational
capital
3
Geography
9
High expectations
Familial capital
2
Parental encouragement
4
Familial support
Linguistic capital
7
Spanish language abilities
8
Understanding racial and
ethnic challenges
Navigational
capital
11
Peer support
18
Engaging with faculty
In Vivo
Pandemic-related difficulties +
adaptation to the workload
Resistant capital
1
Forming community
10
Help-seeking
Social capital
5
Major/career-related activities
6
Family as emotional support
In Vivo Independence

129

Table A5
Emergent Findings for Research Question 2
Research question
Area of conceptual
framework
Interview
questions Codes
How have academic
advisors utilized
students’ cultural
backgrounds to promote
students’ academic self-
efficacy at a 4-year,
private research PWI?
Aspirational capital 16 A positive shift in
perspective
Familial capital 15 Limited connection to
peers
Linguistic capital 14 Limited navigational
support
Navigational capital 13 Connection to
programming and spaces
Resistant capital 17 Advocacy
Social capital 12 Availability

130

Appendix B: Recruitment Flyer

131

Appendix C: Screening Questionnaire
Has either of your parents attended/completed a 4-year higher education institution?
_Yes
_No
Have you ever received a Pell Grant?
_Yes
_No
Do you self-identify as Latina?
_Yes
_No
What is your current class level?
_ Freshman
_Sophomore
_Junior
_Senior
_Other (please explain): _______

132

Appendix D: Study Information Sheet
Study Title: First-generation, Pell-eligible Latina Students and Academic Self-Efficacy: A Case
Study

Principal Investigator: Julia A. Martínez

Department: Educational Leadership, Rossier School of Education

INTRODUCTION

I invite you to take part in a research study. Please take as much time as you need to read this
information sheet. You may want to discuss it with your family or friends. Please feel free to ask
questions.

DETAILED INFORMATION
PURPOSE
1. Understand how first-generation, Pell-eligible Latina students succeed despite economic
and other challenges
2. Hear from these students what is missing in terms of the support structure to better enable
success
3. Identify specific challenges at 4-year, private, research universities vs. other institution
types
4. Strategize specific recommendations for changes and improvements to academic support

PROCEDURES
If you decide to take part, this is what will happen:
• You will be assigned a pseudonym, which will be used throughout the study.
• You will be invited to participate in one individual Zoom interview for no more than 60
minutes. You will be asked your permission for the interview to be recorded. If you do
not want to be recorded, handwritten notes will be taken. The investigator will interview
at a time that is convenient for you.
• The interview questions will ask about your background and your experiences in college
related to academic support and academic advising.

RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
Possible risks and discomforts you could experience during this study include talking about your
experiences.

Interviews: Some of the questions may make you feel uneasy or embarrassed. You can choose
to stop answering any questions you don’t want to answer.

BENEFITS
There are no direct benefits to you from taking part in this study. However, your participation in
this study may help us learn more about how first-generation, Pell-eligible, Latina students use
strategies for academic self-efficacy. Additional benefits to society from this study include more
133

strategic academic support and advising services for undergraduate students with these social
identities.

PRIVACY/CONFIDENTIALITY
Participant records for this study will be kept confidential to the extent permitted by the law.
Participants will be assigned a pseudonym, which will be used throughout the study. The
investigator will remove any identifiable information and store it separately from recordings,
transcripts, and pseudonyms. The investigator will destroy direct identifiers and the audio
recordings at the end of the study.

Participant responses will be saved on a password-protected USC Google Drive folder. If
handwritten notes are taken, they will be saved in a locked physical file in the investigator’s
workspace. The interview audio recordings, de-identified data, and transcripts will be retained
for 3 years and then destroyed. The investigator will be the only one with access to the data.

The investigator will share findings in a doctoral dissertation, using participant pseudonyms. The
data collected as part of this research may be used in future publications or conference
presentations. Any information that identifies a participant (such as their name) will have been
removed before being shared with others.

ALTERNATIVES
There are no alternatives to participating in this study other than to not participate.

PAYMENTS / COMPENSATION
If you participate in an interview, you will choose whether you want to receive a $10 gift card to
Amazon or $10 sent directly through Venmo or PayPal, at the end of the interview.

VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION
It is your choice whether to participate. If you choose to participate, you may change your mind
and leave the study at any time. If you decide not to participate, or choose to end your
participation in this study, you will not be penalized or lose any benefits that you are otherwise
entitled to.

WITHDRAWAL FROM STUDY INSTRUCTIONS
If you decide to withdraw from the study, please notify Julia Martínez via email at
juliamar@usc.edu.

CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, complaints, or think the research has harmed you, talk to the
study investigator, Julia Martinez, Principal Investigator at juliamar@usc.edu, or the faculty
advisor for this project, Dr. Patricia Tobey at tobey@usc.edu.

This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
134

research participant or have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at (323)
442-0114 or by email at irb@ucs.edu.

135

Appendix E: Interview Protocol
This study asked the following research questions:
1. How do first-generation, low-income Latina students utilize their cultural background
toward academic self-efficacy at a 4-year, private, research PWI?
2. How have academic advisors utilized first-generation, low-income Latina students’
cultural backgrounds to support these students’ academic self-efficacy at a 4-year,
private, research PWI?
Introduction
Thank you for taking the time to participate in this interview with me today. I know you
are a busy student. This interview will take between 45 and 60 minutes. Does that still work for
you?
As I mentioned in my email, I am a graduate student and academic advisor here at Sunny
Glen. I also identify as a first-generation, Latina, and I was a Pell recipient in college. I am trying
to better understand how first-generation, working-class Latinas, use their cultural background
for academic success at Sunny Glen. My goal is to make recommendations for advisors. I am
especially interested in how academic advisors use students’ cultural backgrounds to promote
academic success. I will be talking to about fourteen students.
During the interview, I will ask you to share your experiences with me. I know that
everyone has a unique experience, and my goal is to understand yours. As the study information
sheet mentions, it might feel uncomfortable to talk about this topic, so you are welcome to stop
the interview at any time.
I’ll start by asking you about your experiences before Sunny Glen. Next, I’ll ask about
your in-college experiences. Then, I’ll ask about your experiences with academic support and
136

academic advising. What you share in the interview will be kept confidential. I will not share
your name with anyone. When I draft my final paper, I will highlight themes and probably use
direct quotes. If I use any of yours, I will use your assigned pseudonym. I will also do everything
I can to remove any other identifying information.
If we record today’s interview, I will save the recording on a password-protected Google
Drive folder. I will destroy the recording after 3 years.
Do you have any questions before we begin? I would like to record our conversation. I would be
the only person with access to the recording. May I have your permission to record?
Setting the Stage: Sociodemographic Questions
Opening question: I notice you are currently a (class level). How’s your semester going so far?
(demographic)
1. I also notice you identify as (first-generation, a Pell recipient, and Latina). What is
one thing you do to stay true to your identities at Sunny Glen? (RQ1, resistant capital,
background/demographic question)
Can you give me an example? (probe)
Heart of the Interview
Pre-college/Family/Outside Community Experiences
2. How did your family influence your goal of attending college, if at all? (RQ1, familial
capital, opinion and values question)
3. What were some of the factors that led you to choose Sunny Glen specifically? (RQ1,
aspirational capital, knowledge question)
4. How does your family feel about you attending Sunny Glen? (RQ1, familial capital,
feeling)
137

In-College Experiences
Social
5. What are some of the activities you participate in, outside of your classes, if any?
(RQ1, social capital, experience and behavior question)
6. Who do you reach out to for emotional support, if at all? (RQ1, social capital,
experience, and behavior questions)
Language/Codes
7. What other languages do you speak, if any? (RQ1, linguistic capital, knowledge
question)
a. What is your level of fluency? (RQ1, linguistic capital, knowledge question)
8. What are some of the unwritten rules at Sunny Glen? (RQ1, linguistic capital, opinion
and values question)
a. Can you give me an example? (probe)
Academics
9. How do you expect you will do academically by the end of this semester? (RQ1,
aspirational capital, opinion and values question)
a. What factors contribute to these expectations? (RQ1, aspirational capital,
opinion and values question)
10. Think about a time when you experienced an academic setback at Sunny Glen. What
did you do? (RQ1, resistant capital, experience and behavior question)
138

11. If a new student, with the same identities as you, were to ask your advice about
getting academic support at Sunny Glen, what would you tell them? (RQ1,
navigational capital, hypothetical question)

139

Academic Advising Experiences
12. How available is your academic advisor when you need support? (RQ2, social capital,
opinion and values question)
13. Which academic resources has your academic advisor shared with you, if any? (RQ2,
navigational capital, experience and behavior question)
14. How has your academic advisor helped you learn the unwritten rules of Sunny Glen,
if at all? (RQ2, linguistic capital, opinion and values question)
a. Can you give me an example? (probe)
15. How has your academic advisor connected you to other students at Sunny Glen, if at
all? (RQ2, familial capital, experience and behavior question)
16. How did your expectations about your academic performance change after interacting
with an academic advisor, if at all? (RQ2, aspirational capital, experience and
behavior question)
17. How has your academic advisor advocated for you, if at all? (RQ2, resistant capital,
opinion and values)
18. What other insights, if any, would you like to share about how to be academically
successful at Sunny Glen? (RQ1, navigational capital, opinion and values question)
Closing Comments
Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with me today! Everything you have
shared has been helpful. May I follow up if I have any questions? If so, what is the best way to
contact you? Do you know anyone else who may be interested in participating in an interview?
Here is a small token of my appreciation.
Thank you!

Abstract (if available)

Abstract First-generation, Pell-eligible Latinas are a growing population in higher education, yet their completion rates are lower than their peers and a deficit mindset dominates the literature about this group. This qualitative case study was meant to understand self-identified first-generation, Pell-eligible Latina students’ experiences with academic advising at a 4-year, private research PWI through 14 semi-structured interviews. Findings indicate that participants utilized all six forms of cultural capital to promote their academic self-efficacy, though the pandemic, adaptation to the academic workload, and limitations in advising support at this institution, served as challenges to fully utilizing their cultural capital.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Academic coaching for Pell-eligible, academically at-risk freshmen: an evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

Women in academic leadership: the systemic struggles and representation of Latinx women in higher education

PDF

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

PDF

From classrooms to careers: an exploration of how undergraduate Latina engineering students achieve their post-baccalaureate

PDF

Well-being and healing as resistance: testimonios of Latina students’ arrebatos in California community colleges

PDF

And still we rise: examining the strengths of first-generation college students

PDF

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

PDF

Exploring the undergraduate Latina/o experience: a case study of academically successful students at a research institution

PDF

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

PDF

Examining the relationship between Latinx community college STEM students’ self-efficacy, social capital, academic engagement and their academic success

PDF

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

PDF

Addressing financial barriers to college completion through community cultural wealth

PDF

Graduate academic advisor training course

PDF

First-generation student retention and completion at a California community college: evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

The role of family and ethnic identity in the college choice process for first-generation Latinas

PDF

“It was a shitshow”: testimonios of Latina student affairs mother-practitioners navigating personal and professional worlds during COVID-19

PDF

Chinese-Vietnamese American college students: narratives of educational experiences and college success

Asset Metadata

Creator Martinez, Julia A. (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/05/2022

Defense Date 04/14/2022

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

Tag academic advisors,academic self-efficacy,academic success,cultural capital,cultural wealth,first-generation college students,Latina students,low-income college students,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Bañuelos, Sheila (committee member), Torres-Retana, Raquel (committee member)

Creator Email julia.a.martinez@gmail.com,juliamar@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111259023

Unique identifier UC111259023

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Martinez, Julia A.

Type texts

Source 20220506-usctheses-batch-938 (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 MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu