News

'Double Whammy of Disadvantage'

June 16, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Much has been made of the need to improve access to higher education for students from low-income backgrounds and those who are part of the first generation in their families to attend college. But the many recent initiatives by colleges to increase their recruitment of and financial aid for such students will only truly succeed if the traditionally underrepresented students thrive academically once they're there.

New data compiled by the Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education suggest that on that count, the picture is not good.

The analysis, presented by the institute's interim director, Jennifer Engle, at the Student Financial Aid Research Network Conference Saturday in Baltimore, makes abundantly clear how the deck is stacked against students who both come from low-income families and are first-generation college students -- what the researchers call the "double whammy of disadvantage."

Students who are both low income and first generation are far less likely than their peers to transfer; six years after starting at public two-year or for-profit colleges, only 26 percent of low-income, first generation students have transferred anywhere else, compared to about 40 percent of those who are either first generation or low income and 62 percent of students who are neither. The numbers who have transferred to four-year institutions are even lower -- 14 percent for low-income and first-generation students, 25 percent for those who are one or the other, and 50 percent for students who are neither first generation nor low income.

And first-generation, low-income students are one fifth as likely -- 11 percent compared to 55 percent -- to have earned a bachelor's degree after six years as are students who are neither low income nor first generation.

"For too many low-income, first-generation students, the newly opened door to American higher education has been a revolving one," said Vincent Tinto, a Pell Institute Senior Scholar and distinguished professor of higher education at Syracuse University, who worked with Engle on the new data. "The unavoidable fact is that while college access has increased for this population, the opportunity to successfully earn a college degree, especially the four-year degree, has not."

Engle said the researchers had decided to focus intently on students who were both low income and first generation because such students are disproportionately represented in the TRIO programs, for which the institute's parent organization, the Council for Opportunity in Education, advocates.

Despite the increased emphasis by public and private four-year colleges on recruiting underrepresented students, low-income, first-generation students are disproportionately represented at public two-year and for-profit colleges, as seen in the table below:

Type of Institution Attended by Students Entering Postsecondary Education in 2003-2004

	Public Two-Year	Public Four-Year	Private Four-Year	For-Profit	Other	More Than One Institution
Low-Income, First-Generation	52%	13%	6%	21%	2%	5%
Low-Income or First-Generation Only	53	21	10	10	1	6
Not Low-Income and Not First-Generation	35	35	19	4	1	6

Nearly two-thirds of the low-income, first-generation students who enrolled in two-year public colleges said they intend to earn at least a bachelor's degree, Engle said.

But once they are enrolled, low-income first-generation students are far less likely to move through higher education and advance toward a degree. Twenty-six percent of those who enrolled in college in 1995-96 did not return enroll in their second year, compared to 7 percent of students who were neither low income nor first generation. The comparable figures were 32 percent and 15 percent at two-year institutions, 12 and 4 percent at public four-year institutions, and 26 and 18 percent at for-profit colleges.

After six years, as seen in the table below, just 11 percent of low-income and first-generation students have attained a bachelor's degree, compared to 26 percent of students who are one or the other and 55 percent of those who are neither low income nor first generation. (Just 5 percent of low-income/first-generation students at two-year institutions had attained a bachelor's, and less than 1 percent of those at for-profit colleges.) More than two in five first-generation, low-income students are no longer enrolled in any institution, compared to 20 percent of peers who are neither first generation nor low income.

Six-Year Outcomes by Type of Institution First Attended

	Low Income and First Generation	Either Low Income or First Generation	Neither Low Income or First Generation
All Institutions
Attained certificate or associate degree	32%	21%	11%
Attained bachelor's	11	26	55
Still enrolled	13	16	15
Not enrolled	43	38	20
Public 2-Year
Attained certificate or associate degree	30	23	23
Attained bachelor's	5	9	24
Still enrolled	14	19	23
Not enrolled	51	49	31
Public 4-Year
Attained certificate or associate degree	11	7	5
Attained bachelor's	34	50	66
Still enrolled	22	18	14
Not enrolled	33	25	15
Private 4-Year
Attained certificate or associate degree	9	6	2
Attained bachelor's	43	64	80
Still enrolled	16	9	7
Not enrolled	32	21	11
For-Profit
Attained certificate or associate degree	59	62	46
Attained bachelor's	0	3	8
Still enrolled	3	4	5
Not enrolled	37	31	4

Seventy-four percent of the low-income/first-generation students who enrolled in either two-year public or for-profit institutions never transferred to another institution, compared to 38 percent of peers who are neither low income nor first generation, according to the Pell Institute's data.

A broad mix of factors -- financial, cultural and academic -- may account for the underperformance of low-income first-generation students, the Pell Institute's data show. The students come into college with many more of the risk factors that researchers have widely embraced as diminishing college success, including delaying entry into postsecondary education after high school, attending college part time, working full-time while enrolled, having dependent children, being a single parent, and having a GED. The average first-generation/low-income student has three such risk factors, while the average student who is neither first generation nor low income has one.

Once they are in college, they are more likely to have unmet financial need than are other students. They also work significantly more than other students, and those who work more are less likely to have earned degrees and to remain enrolled six years after entering, as seen in the table below.

Six-Year Persistence Outcome by Hours Worked Per WeekWhen Last Enrolled

	Earned Certificate or Associate Degree	Earned Bachelor's Degree	Still Enrolled	Not Enrolled
*Low-Income, First-Generation*
Did not work	35%	17%	27%	22%
Worked 1 to 20 hours	25	46	16	13
Worked more than 20 hours	31	14	25	30
*Not Low-Income or First-Generation*
Did not work	8	73	16	4
Worked 1 to 20 hours	5	78	12	5
Worked more than 20 hours	16	41	21	23

The poor academic performance of students who are low income and first generation, particularly when they enroll in two-year and for-profit institutions, Engle said, suggests that more of those students should be encouraged to enroll in four-year colleges and universities, where their chances of ultimately attaining a bachelor's degree will improve.

But recognizing that significant numbers will continue to choose to attend two-year or for-profit institutions, or to have no choice but to do so, Engle and her fellow researchers offer a set of recommendations for those institutions and state and federal policy makers. Among them:

Strengthening academic preparation for college, such as greater access to quality college prep classes and better information about college "gateway" courses while students are still in high school.
Increasing financial aid for college.
Improving transfer rates to four-year colleges, by strengthening transfer counseling and developing favorable articulation policies and agreements.
Easing the transition to college, through better bridge/orientation programs and special programs for at-risk popultions.
Encouraging engagement on the college campus, including by creating better work study policies to let students work on campuses.

— Doug Lederman

Go to comments (16) »

Get Hired!

See all postings »

Matching Jobs

Most Popular

Comments on 'Double Whammy of Disadvantage'

Posted by Karl on June 16, 2008 at 7:30am EDT
Interesting article. I know something about this topic!
Having entered college as an offspring of a very low earning family farm family,whose parents, between them, had a combined educational experience of less than eight grades of school, I was personally responsible for the complete financing of my college education and subsequent medical degree.
Somehow missing from the above article is the primary need for competence and commitment on the part of the putative "under-privileged" student. Obviously, this story demonstrates the primacy of these requisites for any student, financially and family privileged, or not. Not knowing that I was poor or underpriviled, only "challenged" , I accepted the status as a barrier to be surmounted by me, an eventual graduate of the Harvard Medical School and now a retired (emeritus) Ivy League professor. Sure, things were harder for me than for my classmates, but the availability of scholarship aid for demostrated academic diligence and excellence certainly helped to even the playing field. This personal story, and the many others like it,are not Hoartio Alger stories, just simple examples of the role of competence and personal responsibility as requisites for success no matter what the impedimants.
By the way, my younger sister also is a retired professor.
It's possible!
Dr. Karl

It's Possible
Posted by James W. Gettys on June 16, 2008 at 9:35am EDT
Dr. Karl,
You, your sister, and many others like you are to be commended. You are the exceptions to the rule. Exceptions to the rule are possible!
One question: Do exceptions to the Rule imply that the Rule itself is okay?
Another question: If the larger wisdom of the collective somehow came to deem it better for society as a whole to change the rules, is that also possible? As in free higher education? As in economic restructuring? As in not such great disparities between high and low incomes? As in other social supports like Single Payer Health Care? As in money for education instead of prisons and wasteful, enemy-making military spending? As in the right of labor to organize for democracy in the workplace? As in balanced job complexes, full employment now defined as 24-30 hours a week? As in curtailing overconsumption and overproduction to sustain the earth that sustains us?
As in any number of other policy options not normally made available to the public by the Private few who Rule?
I have taught many students who also displayed hard work and personal responsibility. They just couldn't overcome all the impediments and setbacks from early childhood on into a demanding, working class adult life. Yet I saw that they had talent, immense things to offer the world at large if only the world weren't (I believe) artificially constructed according to rules that served a very steep social hierarchy.
I congratulate you and anyone who proves the exception to the rule. I don't believe that exceptions justify the Rule.

"Double Whammy of Disadvantage"
Posted by rosanne soifer on June 16, 2008 at 10:05am EDT
This article was very much on target. I'm an adjunct at a college that caters to non-traditional students, and before that I taught in a for-profit institution. Yes, it's commendable to be the first in one's family to attend college. But if a student is academically unprepared, has a poor work ethic, and is ( or were led to be ) totally misguided as to what's in store, not only will that student be the firstin his family to attend college, but also the first to drop out.Stricter entry guidelines --other than the ability to sign up for too mmany student loans--need to be enforced.

Beyond issues of transfer
Posted by David Eggenschwiler , prof. emeritus at Univ, So Calif. on June 16, 2008 at 12:35pm EDT
I agree, of course, that low income-first college generation students are often academically disadvantaged. Yet from children of immigrant friends I recognize other issues too, e.g. cultural differences that lead early to marriage and children while in school and cause dropping out or endlessly prolonging enrollments.
We also should modify the assumption that students in two-year institutions intend to transfer or even should. Some that I know intend to receive only AA degrees so that they can work in advanced trades, such as becoming X-ray technicians. In fact, I think that more and better emphasis should be placed on developing good post-secondary technical and commercial programs. I am not condescending; my father was a skilled machinist who served an apprenticeship and was well employed. There is now a shortage of skilled workers in the U.S. and we should recognized the trades as honorable professions and prepare people for them. To insist on B.A.'s for all is, inself, a class bias by academics.

Posted by Roving Adjunct on June 16, 2008 at 12:45pm EDT
As an adjunct who teaches in several universities with large groups of students from this demographic, what has struck me consistently is not only the enormous challenges these students face in preparedness and in financial and family stress, but also that higher education itself is letting them down because these days, academics takes a back seat. Often, tutorial programs that are made available are not well integrated into their courses so that they are only marginally effective and represent "one more thing" to add to their overly crowded to-do list. Add this to overly large classes increasingly taught by here today/gone tomorrow adjuncts who aren't around enough to truly mentor, and program disruptions of all sorts, at-risk students are far more likely to get lost in the shuffle. It does not diminish the incredible achievements of the the first writer and his sister one whit to point out that in his student days, academic infrastructure nowhere near so compromised. It shouldn't require such exceptionalism to succeed, but increasingly it does. To say that universities "can't afford" full time faculty and smaller classes is a matter of priority on the part of administrations. The priority now is in nurturing and expanding the institution as an entity rather than the specifics of why it was established to start with, and in such a climate, students lose.

Qualifications count
Posted by Michael on June 16, 2008 at 2:00pm EDT
The problem with this article is that those developing the statisticsseem to have purposefully ignored differences in the adequacy of preparation among the groups examined. Those who are economically disadvantaged and the first to attend college in their families do quite well if they are fully qualified.
I too came from a low income family (dad was a mechanic, and we with eight kids mom couldn't work outside the home). I started out in a 2 year public college studying Automotive Service Technology in NY and completed a doctorate in economics at Wisconsin. It is probably not true that we had better counseling back "then". While it's true there were fewer adjuncts, there were also many fewer paid professional counselers.

Posted by SWNID on June 16, 2008 at 2:45pm EDT
Even if all the suggestions offered by this study were implemented, many low-income, first-generation students would still be at risk because of the way their social networks draw them away from education. When family members and friends demand attention (often because of their own crises), class attendance, studying and submitting assignments suffers. Ironically enough, it's the role that the college student plays in that social network--the dependable person who always comes through to help others--that ultimately undermines the student's academic progress.
My limited experience suggests that aggressive on-campus mentoring is the best antidote, but by no means a panacea.
From another angle, is it a bad thing that a first-generation student finishes an associate's degree or certificate and not a bachelor's degree? Is that a more reasonable and profitable objective for the first person in the family who goes beyond high school, particularly if it provides entry into steady, decently paid employment without excess debt or delay. What will the next generation achieve on the shoulders of that achievement?

Pre-college Preparation
Posted by Eugene Cota-Robles , Emeritus Professor at UCSC on June 16, 2008 at 3:30pm EDT
I believe that strengthening academic preparation for college is the key.
I undrstand that Mr. Obama's Mother used to arise at 4am to work with her son to improve his vocabulary. I realize that this may be an unusual case but is one that could be emulated if not, it is an interesting model that does emphasize the need to foster academic interaction and development

Responsibility lies with college too
Posted by Wilson on June 16, 2008 at 4:30pm EDT
Many are quick to point fingers at the students--who have ALREADY accomplished much to get to college despite meager finances and no one at home with firsthand experience of the college culture. Institutions of higher education also have a responsibility to support their students--who are paying good money with high hopes for a quality education. Are teachers, staff, and administration ready to help? Are policies flexible enough to accommodate other than the non-first generation, non-low-income student?

Support for students and faculty
Posted by George K on June 17, 2008 at 5:05am EDT
I commend the Roving Adjunct's astute observations. Please read them if you haven't as yet. We need to understand that at base, it is administrative decisions and the working conditions of those teachers often most responsible for nurturing all students (including the allegedly disadvantaged) during their initial terms that need to be changed. Until we do that, we create revolving doors.
Kudos also to those who quite rightly warned us about the dangers of changing exceptions to the rule to justifications for it. No one would think that a person who smoked a pack a day and lived to be 95 without smoking-related problems should be cited as evidence that smoking has no impact on health or longevity.

Posted by Cameron on June 17, 2008 at 11:15am EDT
This is hardly interesting or surprising. It should be obvious that the aggregate of two challenges (in this case, low income and first generation status) are greater than one or the other alone. I really don't see what this research has uncovered; it's just stating what is blatantly clear already.

Bottom line
Posted by Mondo Fuego on June 18, 2008 at 11:50am EDT
Personal responsibility and pursuit of independence are the keys to excelling in any endeavor. All knowledge is contained in books. That's why they have books in school. The self-motivated individual will read the books and then harvest from the professors any extras that may exist. Money, or the lack thereof, and family background are all-too-often the excuse for, rather than the cause of academic underachievement.

Posted by Faith Harrison-Villegas on June 18, 2008 at 2:15pm EDT
It seems as though there is and will always be a catch 22 for many disadvantaged youth. The overall community from which that youth has been raised should also play a HUGE role in preparing the child for college and helping them to stay in college once they are enrolled. Many of the "disadvantaged" youth come from communities where education is not the priority but daily survival is. I believe that this is evidenced in the ##'s of youth who work longer hours while attending high school or dropout altogether in order to help their families. Another indicator may be the # of students enrolling in for-profit schools and 2 year colleges. These students may think that the faster they get it over with the faster they can earn more money for their families. Needless to say, there is still quite a bit of work to be done in our educational systems and overall communities.

Posted by NJ on June 18, 2008 at 5:15pm EDT
Mondo states, "Money, or the lack thereof, and family background are all-too-often the excuse for, rather than the cause of academic underachievement." While this may be true in some cases, I believe it is more often the "reason," not the "excuse," for such failures. And it doesn't help for people to take this insensitive/uncaring attitude. I am from a first-generation, low-income family. I made it through the AA program, but have yet to get the last two years of a four-year degree. While there are many more options today than when I first entered college, working full-time and going to school is far from easy even for those who wish to do so when there is no supportive network. My parents were of the belief that low-income was our lot in life and discouraged pursuit of higher education. They felt it our responsibility to help financially with the family by going to work immediately after high school.
Financial resources are the first issue, but time & energy are important issues also. The inability to do more than two classes at a time (and sometimes that was too much) with a full-time job caused the AA to take 8 yrs overall. I wonder how many of the more privileged, financially and socially, would have been willing to spend this much time in working towards their bachelor's degrees?

To Mondo Fuego
Posted by James W. Gettys on June 22, 2008 at 12:50pm EDT
"Personal responsibility and pursuit of independence are the keys to excelling in any endeavor."
For the reasons given by others here, I believe your statement is both true and woefully facile.
There is also the issue of relevance. It is often difficult for many students to grasp the relevance of formal education, especially general education, precisely because of the daily, immediate need to meet Maslow I priorities. This is the rule for whole populations in a class-based society. Yes, there are notable exceptions. Even those may not be entirely attributable to "personal responsibility" so much as hidden, intangible factors--what could only be called tapping into social privilege.
A good--I dare say educated--society consists of individuals practicing both personal AND social responsibility. Where only the former is ideologically privileged, the latter will suffer. Therefore, so also does the former.

Double Whammy of Disadvantage
Posted by Dr. Wallace Peace , Dr. at Wayne County Community College on June 26, 2008 at 5:20am EDT
How can one be surprised at these statistics? The Students cited come from the most overcrowded and poorly funded K----12 schools ever envisioned. And the situation does not hold much promice for the future as educators and the media-- most recently the Detroit Mi. News-- continually decry the poor performance of poor minorites in poor schooolsm but insist that putting money into the schools will not help the situation. That truism is so ingrained in the thought process that there are no efforts to test it. Meanwhile,can one imagine any other American Problem from HIV to outer space that cannot be solved or have its effects mitigated by not putting in more money? I didn't think so.

Search News