Breaking Through the Social Reproduction. How?
A Qualitative Research on the Experiences of First Generation High Educated
People in the Netherlands
Melissa Koeiman (10342672) Master Thesis Sociology General Sociology Track
Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences Supervisor: Dr. Margriet van Heesch Second reader: Dr. Marci Cottingham
University of Amsterdam June 2016
ii
Image Front Page: by Andrew Solomon
iii To all the Possible First Generation High Educated People Out There:
Push on and don’t care what other people have to say about you. –Jasmin
You deserve to be here as much as anyone else! Even if it is higher vocational education or university,
you deserve it! –Samantha
Go for it! You are not less than anyone else. You are not the first and not the last who is in this situation and nothing is impossible. At the end of the day it is all about what you have
done…about what you have made out of it! If you stay focused and you are determined…you will make it for sure! –Juni
Reach as far as you can! –John
If you want to achieve it, than you can. But you are going to have to put in more effort than a not first generation student. You have to work harder. So it is going to be hard, but you can do it! –Lisa
Although you may have the feeling that you don’t belong, make your own place. –Gabriella
Work hard! That is it…because I have the feeling that because you are a first generation student you a have an amount of disadvantage…and you have to
catchup…and you can do this through working hard and by not making any mistakes. –Kevin
Have fun in what you do. You have to have pleasure in what you do, if you have fun in what you do, than it goes easy. You have to stay close to yourself and then it will go well. If you stay close to yourself, something will come on to your path that matches you. -Tom
Go as far as you can. Do your best. This means that if Master is your level, go for it and if secondary vocational education level 1 is your level, also go for it. Take use of the resources that you have, otherwise you will regret it. –Jenny
Just go for it! And begin very early with orientating for what you are interested in and want to study. –Kiara Believe in yourself and focus.
I think that you can achieve anything if you focus!
-Melinda
Believe that you can…even if it gets difficult. If you think that you can do
it…just do it! –Amanda Don’t worry about where you will land…go get an education because you find it interesting…and take it seriously…and enjoy! Do it for the enjoyment and not for the money nor the social mobility. –Wim
Try to do the best that you can and know what you love to do! –Elsa Just go on. Do not let anyone or yourself tell you that the
university level is not for you. Just go on…because one day you will see if it is or is not for you…but if you never try…you will never know. Also look for people who have been through the same situation…because it is very important to have role models to look up too. Because you are not alone…although you may feel like you are the only one. –Danique
iv
Preface
Before you lies my Master’s thesis, which I had a tremendous joy in writing. Next to joy, I experienced growth, patience and more understanding of the social reality. As academics within the social science, we are not only critical towards the social reality, but also towards ourselves. So deciding when our work is ‘good enough’, can sometimes be hard. However, a very intelligent and joyful woman, Dr. Margriet van Heesch, told me to write something that in the end I would be proud of. So I no longer stressed to make this thesis ‘good enough’, because if we are honest, ‘good enough’ will always be subjective, but I worked hard to make myself proud. Moreover, I managed to do this. I did not achieve this completely on my own, so I have to give some acknowledgements.
Firstly, I would like to thank my God, who is perfect and lovely in all of His ways and that has guided me throughout my life and of course also during the writing of this thesis. Secondly, I would like to thank my respondents for their time and their great stories that they shared with me. Without them, this research would not be possible. Thirdly, I would like to thank my thesis supervisor, Dr. Margriet van Heesch, for her motivation, her great words, her feedback and her time. I would also like to thank my second reader, Dr. Marci Cottingham for her great feedback and time. Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Ruthline Koeiman-Benschop and Hensley Koeiman for their support throughout my years of education. I could not have done it without them.
Hoofddorp, June 2016
v Table of Contents
Preface... iv
Chapter 1. How My Theory about My Success was Stated False ... 1
1.2. Framing this Research: The Dutch Education System ... 3
1.3. Bourdieu, Cultural Capital, Habitus and the Reproduction Theory ... 5
1.4. Technical Skills and Academic Skills ... 7
1.5. Gender, Ethnicity and Knowledge of School and Work ... 8
1.6. Personal Attributes ... 9
Chapter 2. Methodology ... 11
2.1. The Research Methods and the Research Design ... 11
2.2. The Respondents ... 12
2.3. Research Instruments and Research Techniques ... 15
2.4. Experiences Interviews ... 16
2.5. Data Analyses ... 16
2.6. The Replicability of this Research ... 17
Chapter 3. Earlier Theory and Research on First Generation High Educated People ... 18
3.1. First Generation College Students in the United States ... 18
3.2. The Amount Of First Generation College Students Increased Over The Years ... 19
3.4. Cultural Capital among First Generation Students ... 20
3.5. First Generation College Students are more Likely to Drop Out, But have the Same GPA Average as Traditional Students ... 20
3.6. First Generation College Students are Less Engaged, but when Engaged, Benefit More ... 21
3.7. First Generation College Students And Their Families ... 22
3.8. Conclusion ... 23
Chapter 4. How These First Generation High Educated People Managed to Get a High Education ... 24
4.1. A Stable Home ... 25
4.2. Hardworking Parents ... 28
4.3. Intelligent Parents ... 30
4.4. Getting An Education As The Most Important Thing ... 32
4.5. Motivational Teachers ... 35
4.6. Conclusion ... 35
Chapter 5. The Personal Factors that Played a Role ... 37
5.1. Easy Learners with Long Roads... 37
vi
5.3. Conclusion ... 46
Chapter 6. The Experiences At The University ... 48
6.1. Is Studying at the University Difficult? ... 49
6.2. I Wish I had more Support from my Parents ... 49
6.3. The University is White, Elitist and not Always very Homey ... 52
6.4. The Good Experiences ... 57
6.5. The New Elite... 58
6.6. Feelings of Alienation ... 60
6.7. Conclusion ... 60
Chapter 7. Final Conclusion ... 62
7.1. Answer to the Main Question... 62
7.2. Connection Between Findings And Literature ... 63
7.3. Shortcomings of this Research ... 64
7.4. Recommendations ... 65
Appendix 1. Table Information Respondents ... 70
Appendix 2. Interview ... 71
Chapter 1. How My Theory about My Success was Stated False You remember those smart kids in class in elementary school and high school, who didn’t have to do a lot and just got good grades? The ones who seemed to have everything figured out and had a lot to say in class, as if it were their home? Well I was one of those kids. The older I got, the more I started to think about why some children did not have everything figured out and did not get good grades as easy as I did. I came up with my own theory from all my observations. It was simple: I and the other kids that were similar as me, we were, well, just smarter. At that time for a kid of eleven it made sense. It was also partly what I have heard trough out my life that made me come to this conclusion, namely “oh, of course you got that grade, because you are just smart” or “It is harder for me, because I am not as smart as you are, you know”.
It was not until my last years in high school when I realized that it was more than just “being smart” that influenced my success in school. I just knew how to behave. I always knew what to say and most importantly: how to say it. The teachers just seemed to like me. I always had good conversations with the teachers, without trying and despite sometimes my nonchalant teenager behavior, the teachers always believed in me. More importantly, I felt at home. This was not the case for all the students in my class, despite the fact that I studied at the highest level of high school (pre-university education) in Curaçao, where it is safe to say that a part of the smartest students in Curaçao attend. Some fellow students of mine, no matter how smart they were, or how many times they sat in the front row of class, just didn’t seem to have the same success as I and some others had.
In my first year as a sociology student, I have learned that my early year’s assumptions, about how very smart I was, indeed were false. According to the French sociologists Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claud Passeron (1977) the education system in the past was designed by the elite, who designed it in a particular way so that their children would stay in the top of the society. The elite designed the school systems with their values, norms and habits, so it would be easy for their children to stay at the top. Next to the theory of Bourdieu and Passeron there was a lot of scientific research done that reinforced his statements1. Thus being "smarter" is indeed, just as I thought, not only inborn (thus due to intelligence), but is also partly due to class, upbringing and habitus of "being smart". Being smart partly has to do with being perceived, or assumed to be smart.
1 See paragrapgh 1.2. and 1.3.
2
My success in school and the fact that I almost immediately felt at home at the university, just as I did in primary school and high school, had indeed partly to do with my intelligence and working hard, but it also had a lot to do with the fact that my parents were both highly educated. The education that I got at home had many similarities with the school system and therefore, I knew almost exactly how to behave in school. Because of the norms, values and habits I got from home I was highly successful at school. Following Bourdieu and Passeron, the education system is simply not fair for every child. Because of this unfairness, it would seem normal that only kids from high educated parents, such as myself, would make it to universities and eventually graduate with a master’s degree or with a PhD. This is sadly true for the most part, but there are people that manage to break through this reproduction (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2011). These people have parents who are low educated, but they still, despite the norm and the reproduction that usually occurs, get high educations. They are the first generation of high-educated people. About these people and their experiences there is very little research done in the Netherlands. This is why these people took my interest and this is why they will form the basis of this Master’s research. How do
children with low educated parents negotiate to get high educations? This question forms the
main question of this research.
To get answers to this question, three sub questions have been defined, namely:
1. How did the topic of first generation high-educated people emerge in history and already existing theory and research?
2. How do first generation high-educated people explain; narrate how they were influenced to pursue a high education?
3. How did/do first generation high-educated people experience their high education practices?
One of the relevancies of this research is that it covers an important topic, namely, ‘how some people managed to break through the social reproduction’, that has barely been researched. In this way, this research fills a gap in the social science. As already mentioned above, little research has been conducted on this topic in the Netherlands. Most research that has been conducted is about the reproduction through school systems that, as mentioned above, usually occurs and the little research that is done on the first generation high-educated people is mostly quantitative of nature and has little attention for the experiences of these people. Another relevance of this research is that it looks at an aspect that is social relevant at this
3
moment in the Netherlands. A few months ago an article was published in the one most popular Dutch newspapers, namely ‘de Volkskrant’, which pointed out that children of low educated parents are constantly being misplaced to lower educational levels than their potential and that because of this, their talents a is often not used (de Volkskrant, 2016; Dutch Education Inspection, 2016). Thus by doing research on this topic clarifies in a way this statement, because if these respondents have also been misplaced, it becomes clear how they overcame this.
Next to this, this research is also relevant because it offers a framework to first generation high-educated people with experiences of other first generation high-educated people that have gone through the same. This framework can be helpful, because it can function as guidance when going through comparable situations. In addition, the findings can function as a motivation for possible first generation high-educated students. Reading about others with a similar backgrounds that have made it far in the educational system, can function as a motivation booster. Student’s decision to invest in their education and study hard depends partly on their expectations of whether people from their class tend to be successful (Swartz, 1997). Finally, these findings can be relevant to the (high) education systems. Experiences of first generation high-educated people can be relevant for redevelopments of the school systems in the framework of diversity, so that more students can feel at home in schools, which contributes to a more democratic education system.
Now that the research topic, research questions and the research relevance have been presented, in the next section a social context and literature perspective for this research will be drawn.
1.2. Framing this Research: The Dutch Education System
In this section, I firstly will explain how the Dutch educational system works. Herewith, I aim to form a social context for this research. Secondly, literature about relevant educational theory will be discussed to form a theoretical perspective for this research.
The Netherlands has a particular education system. From the age of five, all children in the Netherlands are obligated to start school, although the majority of children start school when they are four years old (Droog, Wooning, Ree, van der, & Directies Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2005).These children start their school career at primary school, which lasts eight years. Each year the child moves up to a higher grade. When the child reaches the eighth grade around the age of twelve, a selection is made for the child’s further education (high school). This selection is most of the time based on firstly: a
national-4
test that students take in the eighth grade and secondly: on the recommendation of the eighth grade teacher. There are three levels of high school in the Netherlands that the students can attend. Firstly, there is the ‘preparatory secondary vocational education’, which takes four years, followed by the ‘higher preparatory secondary vocational education’, which is of a higher level and takes five years to complete. Lastly the ‘pre-university education’, which is the highest level of high school in the Netherlands and takes six years (Droog, Wooning, Ree, van der, & Directies Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2005). Interesting and relevant for this research is half of the children with high-educated parents are sent to the two highest levels of high school, but merely one fifth of children with low-educated parents are sent to the two highest high school levels. After finishing one of these three high school levels, students can proceed to a higher education (Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). Students who finish their ‘preparatory secondary vocational education’ can continue with a ‘secondary vocational education’, which is internally divided in four levels. Students who finish a ‘higher preparatory secondary vocational education’ can continue with a ‘higher vocational education’ and finally attain a Bachelor’s degree. Students who finish their ‘pre-university education’ can continue with a ‘science education (university)’ and these students can finally attain a Bachelor’s and/or a Master’s degree (Droog, Wooning, Ree, van der, & Directies Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2005).
Interesting about the Netherlands is that the selection for an education level takes place relatively early, when the child is in the eighth grade, around the age of twelve. Most other countries have a much later selection. Another interesting factor of the education system of the Netherlands is that there is space for circulation between the different levels of education. For example, when a student has graduated from his or her ‘preparatory secondary vocational education’, he or she can enroll in the ‘higher preparatory secondary vocational education’. Another example is that when graduating from ‘higher preparatory education’, a student can enroll into a university.
In the Netherlands the ‘higher preparatory education’ and the university are legally seen as high-level education. The ‘secondary vocational education’ on level four, ‘higher vocational education’ and ‘pre-university education’ are legally seen as middle-level education. Finally, ‘the ‘preparatory secondary vocational education’ and ‘secondary vocational education’, level one to three are seen as low-level education (Droog, Wooning, Ree, van der, & Directies Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2005).
Merely 14.6% of the people in the Netherlands have a university education, which is approximately 2.400.000 of the total of 16.500.000 people (Droog, Wooning, Ree, van der, &
5
Directies Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, 2005). From these students, 60% have educated parents. Thus, as mentioned in the introduction, children with high-educated parents are the most represented in the universities (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2011).
Now that the structure of the Dutch education system has been explained and hereby a social context has been drawn, in the next section relevant literature on this research topic will be presented to form a theoretical perspective.
1.3. Bourdieu, Cultural Capital, Habitus and the Reproduction Theory The literature that will be primarily presented to draw a theoretical perspective for this research is regarding the theory about cultural capital, habitus and social reproduction. This theory explains how the education system works and how this system is strongly related to social class.
According to French sociologist, Pierre Bourdieu (1973), in the education system it appears that students are being rewarded for their natural academic talents, but this is not the case. Students in the education system are rewarded for their cultural capital. The American sociologist David Swartz (1997:74) describes cultural capital as: “verbal facility, general cultural awareness, aesthetic preferences, information about the school system, and educational credentials”. Students in school are rewarded for their dominance of the dominant linguistic competencies, valuing of art and other cultural activities and being familiar with the school culture. Thus, students are awarded for knowing how to behave in school.
The cultural norms that are rewarded in schools can only be transmitted by upbringing and can only be strengthened in school (Bourdieu, 1973). These norms may be seen as the embodiment of dominant norms and values that forms a kind of “habitus” (Bourdieu, 1973; Bullen & Kenway, 2005). Habitus can be seen as a ‘having’ that has converted into a ‘being’ (Bourdieu, 1989).
The Dutch linguists Ella Bohnenn and Fouke Jansen (2006) explain for example how the dominant language that plays an important part in cultural capital is unevenly transmitted. Bohnenn and Jansen (2006) explain that mothers play a important role when it comes to a child’s verbal development. They discovered in their research that the language selection that high-educated mothers use, when communicating with their children, corresponds better with the language that is used in schools, than the language that low-educated parents use with their children (Bohnenn & Jansen, 2006).
6
The school language is often abstract and the children have to think on a high level, because the subjects that are covered are not directly related to their context. Low-educated parents communicate less with their kids than high-educated parents and when communicating, the language they use is syntactically less complex (Bohnenn & Jansen, 2006). Low-educated parents use language often only to drive behavior or to correct. Higher educated parents talk more to their kids in general and they talk in a more complex manner and context. This difference in the use of language is partly found in the vocabulary development of a child. Children from low social economic backgrounds have 20 to 30% less vocabulary skills than children from high social economic backgrounds (Bohnenn & Jansen, 2006).
Next to the transmission of the dominant language through communication, reading to a child also plays a major role in transmitting cultural capital (Bohnenn & Jansen, 2006). Reading to a child positively influences the school success and the control that the child has on the dominant language used in schools. It also familiarizes the child with books, which is one of the most used tools in the educational system. High-educated parents start earlier with reading to their children and they also read more often to them (Bohnenn & Jansen, 2006). Finally high-educated parents also have more books at home, which contribute to the reading advancement of a child (Notten, Kraaykamp & Konig, 2011).
The rewarding of cultural capital, that happen in schools, is therefore problematic and unfair because cultural capital is not equally divided in society. Families of high and middle economic and social class have more cultural capital than families of a low economic and social class, as mentioned above. Because cultural capital can only be strongly transmitted through upbringing, children of upper-class families do better in school.
Following Bourdieu, the cultural capital thus plays a major role in the reproduction of the social class structure (Dumais & Ward, 2010). Students from upper-class families that have more cultural capital, receive more attention from teachers, better grades, and more encouragement to pursue higher education. As a result, children with more cultural capital are more likely to finish higher education (Dumais & Ward, 2010).
Now that theory about the education structure and its functions has been presented, which explained the important place of the cultural capital in the education system, in the next section a research will be presented that sees to extend to definition of cultural capital with technical and academic skills.
7
1.4. Technical Skills and Academic Skills
The American sociologists Annette Lareau and Elliot Weininger (2003) argue that the way that Bourdieu looks at cultural capital, which has been explained in the paragraph above, is too abstract and misses some essential factors that play an important role when looking at success in school (Lareau & Weininger, 2003). They argue that technical and academic skills, which are on a micro-interactional level, have to be taken into account as well when looking at cultural capital. The necessity of an active parent role in a child’s education has increased. Professionals have changed their opinion about what according to them are appropriate methods for child rearing (Lareau & Weininger, 2003).
In the earlier years, the advice of professionals and doctors was taken very seriously, but today the norm has become “trusting oneself”. Professionals have established new standards where parents are responsible in different areas of the child’s life, such as school activities, leisure activities and healthcare. But, to fulfill this new view, parents have to be active and involved. Although this view is widely praised, the childrearing skills and practices necessary for this parent involvement is not evenly distributed across social classes (Lareau & Weininger, 2003).
Lareau & Weininger (2003) show, for example, that parents from a middle-high social class know their way around the system and are more hands-on and active. In their research Lareau & Weininger put two cases next to each other to make their point clear. These two cases will shortly be explained below.
A student of a concerned parent with a middle-high social background was not admitted to the school’s gifted program, because she missed a few points on the test. The mother of this student was convinced that the school accepts scores from private testing institutes and paid 200 dollars so that her child could be re-tested. Even though, even on the private test, her child still scored below the cut-off, she advocated that her daughter should be in the gifted program and she succeeded (Lareau & Weininger, 2003). This same parent went to talk to the gymnastics teacher when her child was upset about a happening during gymnastics classes and afterwards also advised her child to think about how she was going to turn down the offer to be part of the elite gymnastics team.
On the other hand, the sociologists observed another student with concerned parents, but with a low social background, who showed the opposite behavior. In a school meeting, they observed that the mother was not very assertive. For example, the teacher pronounced her kid’s name wrong over and over again, but she never corrected her, while she seemed frustrated about it. In addition, when the teacher gave suggestions for bettering her child’s
8
work, she did not follow up on the suggestions by asking questions, although she was convinced that her son should be in a higher grade (Lareau & Weininger, 2003). Lareau and Weininger (2003) argue that through the happenings explained above, the child of the parent of a middle-high social economic class who is active and hands-on, influences the position of her child in an institute and transmits to her child a sense of entitlement in her dealings with institutional agents (Lareau and Weininger, 2003). Also when advising her daughter to think about how she was going to turn down the gymnastics position, she was training her daughter to rehearse in advance and to assess critically people in authority positions. In this way, parents of a middle-high social economic class sought to instill the skills eventually needed to undertake such interventions that are very common in formal institutions and schools and have a positive influence on education success (Lareau and Weininger, 2003).
These skills are handy for example when talking to professors/teachers, debating in class or saying something when one does not agree with one’s grade or with a decision. While the parent with low social economic class, although he/she is interested in his/her child’s development, because of his/her not assertive attitude and lack of knowledge and skills, has a lot less influence on the position of the child in the school system. Alongside this parent is also lacking to prepare the child how to be active when dealing with people in authority (Lareau and Weininger, 2003).
Now that the concept of cultural capital has been extended with technical and academic skills, in the next section, literature on the influence of gender, ethnicity and knowledge of school and work on the education of an individual will be presented.
1.5. Gender, Ethnicity and Knowledge of School and Work
Besides cultural capital, different studies show that gender, ethnicity and knowledge of school and work also influence the educational success of students. In this section, theory around these different influential factors will be presented.
Studies show that the study aspirations and expectations of boys exceed those of girls. In addition, it is established that there is a bigger consistency between the aspirations of boys and expectation than that there is for girls (Crowly & Shapiro, 1982; Marini, 1978; Marini & Greenberger, 1978; Hanson, 1994). Women are namely more likely than men to downward their expectations over time, especially with the prospect of marriage and children (Hanson, 1994).
The lower expectations that women usually have, has to do with the inequality that they perceive in the labor market (Mickelson, 1989). Nevertheless, the American Sociologist
9
Roslyn Mickelson (1989) stated that women of younger generation have bigger expectations than women of the earlier years, because they see gender inequality as something only of the earlier years. Thus, following Mickelson (1989) gender differences educational expectations are decreasing.
Ethnicity also has influence on the expectation of students (Ogbu 1987; Hanson, 1994). The Nigerian-American anthropologist and sociologist John Ogbu (1987) states that when minority groups experience discrimination in the labor market, this information is channeled back to shape children’s school achievement. Ogbu (1987) states that because of these negative experiences that are channeled back to minority youth, they put less effort into school rational judgment of the payoffs of these efforts.
Finally, knowledge of school and work of students, influence attitudes and choices students make (Gaskell, 1985; Hanson, 1994). These attitudes and choices reproduce class structure. In her research on course selection (decision-making) the American sociologist Jane Gaskell noticed that young women from a low social economic background rejected academic schooling, because it seemed irrelevant. They chose vocational courses instead because these courses are less disciplined and restraining and because these courses seemed more relevant for pink-colored jobs. Thus, the choices these students make are highly influenced by their knowledge of society and school and these choices maintain as mentioned class structures and even gender inequalities.
Now that the influences of gender, ethnicity and knowledge of school and work on education have been presented, in the next section attention will be shed on the influence of personal attributes on education.
1.6. Personal Attributes
Also, personal attributes influence a person’s success in school. In this section, attention will be shed on this factor. The Dutch psychologist and sociologist Koen van Eijck and the Dutch sociologist Paul de Graaf (2011) did research from a psychological perspective on personal attributes of students and their effect on their school performance.
According to Van Eijck and de Graaf (2011) most studies on the educational career of students are normally focused on cultural, economic, sex and surrounding factors, while personal attributes are left out. The main reason that personal attributes are barely looked at is that these attributes are highly influenced by cultural, economic and surrounding factors. Because of this, Van Eijck and de Graaf in their study looked at personal attributes of people that are merely related to surroundings. In their research they looked at five personal
10
attributes, The Big Five, namely: extraversion, friendliness, precision, emotional stability and openness. Precision is strongly related with perseverance and the will to reach a goal. The characteristics that are related with precision are systematic and careful handling (Wolfe & Johnson, 1995). Openness is really close with intelligence and it has relations with intellectual curiosity and involvement in task performance. In addition, creativity and resourcefulness are aspects of openness that have positive effects on school performance. Extraversion has a less permanent role in school success. In primary schools, children that are extraverted are more successful, but in later years introverted children are more successful (Goff & Ackerman, 1992). Reasons that are given for this change is that introverted teenagers are more eager to learn, while extraverted teenagers are more interested in social events, going out, sports and sex (Yates, Yates & Lippelt, 1995; Eysenck, 1992).
Being friendly has a positive influence on the relationship with teachers and their fellow students (Vandell & Hembree, 1994). Finally, emotional stability functions to deal with challenges and obstacles without the panicking. Emotional stability relates with self-regulation, which is important for school performances (Eysenck, 1992).
Now that the effects of personal attributes on education performance have been presented, in the last section a summary of the presented theoretical framework will be presented.
To summarize, different factors influence the education career of people. One of the most determined factors is the social economic class grows up in and the cultural capital one owns. This factor plays such a big role, because as mentioned in the education students are being mostly rewarded for their cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1973). Next to this, also gender, ethnicity and knowledge of school and work play an important role. Finally, personal attributes of the individual also play a role. Now that on the basis of the different relevant theory regarding the education system and, a social context and a literature perspective has been drawn, in the next chapter the method that was used in this research will be explained.
11
Chapter 2. Methodology
With this research, I aim to answer the question ‘how do children with low-educated parents negotiate to get high education?”. To answer this question, as already explained in the introduction, three sub questions were constructed (1. How did the topic of first generation high-educated people emerge in history and already existing theory and research? 2. How do first generation high-educated people explain, narrate how they were influenced to pursue a high education? 3. How did/do first generation high-educated people experience their high education practices?).
To get answers to these questions and hereby eventually also to the main question, I have decided to do literature research and empirical research. In this chapter I will elaborate on how these two forms of research, helped me to answer the different sub questions, how these two forms of research have been executed and how the data collected has been analyzed. Next to the explanation of how this research has been executed and the data analyses, the experiences during the data-collection of the empirical research form will also be presented. Thus in this chapter the method used in this research will be presented.
2.1. The Research Methods and the Research Design
This research, as mentioned, consisted of two parts, namely a literature research and an empirical research. The first part of this research, which is the literature research, functioned to answer the first sub question of this research (How did the topic of first generation high-educated people emerge in history and already existing theory and research?). In this first research phase, literature around earlier researches on first generation people has been conducted.
The reason for gathering already existing literature on first generation students was firstly to get an overview of the already existing facts of first generation students. The second function of this literature research was to form research questions for the empirical part of this research. Finally, the literature part of this research functioned to extend the framework of this research. The main source for this literature research was the internet search engine “google scholar” which is a source of scientific articles and books. Besides this resource, different libraries in the Netherlands have been visited in connection with this literature research. The conducted literature was read closely, relations were made between the literature and the relevant literature was put together to answer sub question one. In chapter three the results of sub question one are presented.
12
the research was qualitative in nature. This part of the research has been used to answer the second and the third sub questions (sub question 2: What are the elements that played/play a role in the life of first generation high educated people that have influenced them to get a high education? sub question 3: How did/do first generation high educated people experience their education?).
The reason for this qualitative empirical method was that this research sought to get a deep understanding of the experiences of first generation high-educated people and this was possible through interviews (Bryman, 2012; see 2.3.). Through words, the respondents could share their experiences and through the analyses of these words, deep understandings of their experiences have been conducted. This brings me to the epistemological position of this research, namely interpretivism. This research has an interpretive epistemology because when looking at the experiences of respondents, it is being looked at according to the interpretation of the world by the respondents.
The research design in the second part of this research is a ‘case study’. Each respondent in this research was seen as a separate case. Each case (respondent) was intensively examined in relation with the research topic. There was a focus on the life history and detailed personal experiences in relation to education, throughout the life of each respondent. The purpose of this approach was to come to understand the complexity and the nature of the first generation high-educated person (Bryman, 2012).
Now that the two research methods used in this research are explained, in the next section there is attention for the respondents who participated in the second part of this research.
2.2. The Respondents
The respondents in this research were selected on the basis of their educational level, the educational level of their parents, their gender and their ethnicity. Firstly, the respondents in this research had to have low-educated parents. Low-educated in this research is defined as having a ‘secondary vocational education’ or lower2. Secondly, the respondents had to be very high educated. Very high educated in this research is defined as having a Master’s degree or in the process of finalizing a Master’s degree. In addition, PhD students and Post doctorates (who automatically have a Master’s degree) form part of this study.
The reason for this choice had to do with the fact that I wanted to look at people that have reached the highest option possible in education. These people are the ones who have
13
made the biggest stratification compared to their parents. Thirdly, there was an attempt to interview the same number of men and women. The reason for this decision is that gender differences3 wanted to be taken in to account, partly so that gender effects could be excluded and partly for comparison purposes. Fourthly, there was an attempt to get respondents from different ethnicities, also in order to take ethnic differences into account4.
In total, 15 respondents were interviewed (N=15)5. This number of respondents has to do with the limited timeframe of my Master’s research. These respondents have been gathered through the snowball approach (Bryman, 2012). Firstly, contact was made with a group of first generation people and secondly these people were used to gather other first generation high-educated. After every interview with a respondent, I asked if they knew other first generation high-educated students and if this was the case, I asked them to put me in contact with them.
The first group of first generation people I approached was fellow students of mine from which I knew that they were first generation students and through them, I got the most of my other respondents. I also used two Facebook groups to gather my last respondents. This form of sampling is not random and for this reason not generalizable, but this was also not the purpose of this study (Bryman, 2012). The purpose of this study was to make an approach to get a deep understanding of the experiences of some first generation high-educated people. However, it would be interesting and relevant if the results of this study are expanded into further research to increase the external validity of this research.
In total, I interviewed five men and ten women. As I have mentioned, the aim for this research was to interview as many women as men. However, due to the snowball sampling method and the limited time, this was not possible. Most of the respondents that I first approached were women and the respondents that they put me in contact with were most of the time women. To get more men to participate in my research, I posted in two Facebook groups of my university and explained that I was in need of first generation men for my Master’s research. My posts were really helpful, because in one day I have gotten a few male participants. Although I do not have as much men as women in my research, I’m still satisfied that I have interviewed a handful of men and women. Therefore, comparison between genders in my research was still possible. In addition, variety in nationality and ethnicity was difficult in the first instance, using the snowball method. At first, I realized that
3
See paragrapgh 1.5.
4 See paragraph 1.5.
14
I had managed to get respondents of a variety of minority groups in The Netherlands, which is very interesting. But, I had also realized that I had very few native Dutch respondents. The reason for this is that most of the respondents that form part of minority groups in The Netherlands mostly knew first generation people that were also part of a minority groups. Because this research takes place in the Netherlands, I found it relevant to also have Native Dutch respondents. This gives me the opportunity to compare differences between first generation people of minority groups and first generation people of the majority group in the Netherlands.
To get more diversity in my respondent group, just as I did to get more male respondents, I wrote in the two Facebook groups of my university and explained that I am in need of first generation Dutch autochthonous respondents. Through these posts, I have managed to get more Dutch autochthonous respondents. In total, I have five respondents who are Dutch autochthonous and ten that are from different minority groups in the Netherlands, such as Dutch-Turkish, Dutch-Moluccan, Dutch-Cape Verdean, Dutch-Egyptian-Indonesian and Dutch-Syrian6.
Finally, it has to be mentioned that most of my respondents have studied in the area of social studies. This has to do with the fact that I myself am a Sociology student and that I started my snowball sampling with by reaching out to students in my faculty. Still, I managed to interview students who have done studies in other areas also, such as Chemistry and Lifestyle informatics. Next to the fact that most of the respondents have studied in the area of social science, most of the respondents also have attended the one or both of the two universities in Amsterdam, namely University of Amsterdam and de VU University of Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam). The fact that most of the respondents are from the University of Amsterdam and de VU University of Amsterdam also has to do with the snowball sampling and the fact that I studied in Amsterdam at the University of Amsterdam. Next to students from the University of Amsterdam and de VU University of Amsterdam, also students of Utrecht University and the Nijmegen University have been interviewed.
Now that information about the respondent population and the respondent recruitment have been presented, in the next section the research instruments and the research techniques used in the empirical part of this research will be explained.
6 See appendix 1
15
2.3. Research Instruments and Research Techniques
As mentioned in this section the research instruments and research techniques that were used in the empirical part of this research will be presented. In the empirical part of this research, a semi-structured interview was used, so that structurally a number of subjects could be covered and at the same there was space to ask on7. Semi-structured interviews also give the respondents space to elaborate on their answers, which was also very important for getting a deep understanding of their experiences in connection with getting a high-education. The interviews started with personal questions to the respondents about; their age, education history (schools attended, duration of educations and studies followed), family background, upbringing and current occupations. These questions were relevant to get a better image of who the respondents are. This first round of question also functioned as an easy start of the interview, so that the respondent would feel more comfortable in the rest of the interview.
The second part of the interview functioned to get answers from the respondents on the elements that played/play a role in them getting a high education. The questions were formed on the basis of the explained theories in the literature framework and theories about the first generation high educated. When conducting the interview, before going into the interview questions, there was firstly openly asked to the respondents why they think they managed to get a high education. The reason for these open questions is to get an idea of how the respondents relate to their educational success without leading them in a certain way. After this first question, follow-on questions were asked to the respondents about their personal attributes, their knowledge of work and school options, the value they see in education, self-assurance they have/had when in school, importance of school for their parents, their environment growing up, interests when growing up and exceptional events regarding their school success.
The third and last part of the interview functioned to get answers from the first generation high-educated respondents about their educational experiences. In addition, these questions were formed on the basis of the explained theories in the literature framework and theories about the first generation high educated. Questions in the interview were regarding: their attitudes at the university (participation, motivation, self-regulation etc.), their relationship with the teachers/professors, their relationship with their fellow students, their performances in at the university, feeling at home at the university, their experience with the
7 See appendix 2
16
habit’s, norms and values at the university, exceptional moments that influenced their educational career, uncomfortable moments during university encounters, the struggles and successes they encountered at the university, how their environment reacted to their educational success and possible alienation feeling with old friends and family members.
The interviews were taken individually with the respondents, so that all the attention could be on one person. I believe that this maximizes the information transfer between the interviewer and the respondent. The interviews were also recorded in connection with the data-analyses. Finally, the interviews took on average about one hour and twenty minutes per person.
Now that the research instruments and the research techniques used in the empirical part of this research are presented, in the next section attention will be shed on the experiences during the interviews.
2.4. Experiences Interviews
I have experienced the interviews with the first generation high-educated people as very interesting and informative. Very quickly, I learned that the respondents were positive to tell their stories. An interesting aspect of the interviews was that the respondents told me about their education and life experiences, that have happened long time ago, in great detail. This made it clear that education formed a big part of their lives. Another interesting aspect of the interviews was that the respondents sometimes remembered and told me things that they thought that might be interesting for my research. Therefore, I can say that they were not only answering questions but were also actively thinking along with me sometimes. I surely think that this had a positive influence on the information that I have gathered. Lastly, as I have mentioned the interviews lasted on average of one hour and twenty minutes per person. Only two out of the fifteen interviews lasted for about an hour, but most of the interviews lasted about one hour and twenty minutes. The longest interview lasted one hour and forty minutes. In the beginning, I thought that the interviews would last about forty-five minutes to one hour. But, I have learned that for this research, to get a deep understanding of the experiences of the respondents it takes more time.
2.5. Data Analyses
In this last section of chapter two, the data analyses method that was used for the empirical part of this research, to answer the sub questions two and three (2. How do first generation high-educated people explain, narrate how they were influenced to pursue a high education? 3. How did/do first generation high-educated people experience their high
17
education practices?) will be presented.
The recorded interviews were transcribed in connection with the data-analyses. To analyze the gathered data, the close reading method was used. All the transcripts were printed and closely read. There was looked at the interviews ‘word by word’, ‘line by line’, ‘incident by incident’ and without any (established) theoretical framework (Charmaz, 2006). In these analyses I looked at what the respondents said, the way they said it and how this relates to the research question and the sub-questions. For each respondent a summary of what they mentioned during the interview was made. These summaries were used to answer the sub questions and also to compare respondents with each other, so that a bigger perspective could be gathered on their experiences. During this comparison, gender, ethnicity and age were being taken into account. Finally, on the basis of results of the sub-questions, a final conclusion was drawn to answer the main research question. In chapter four and five the results for the sub question two are presented and in chapter six the results of sub question three are presented. Finally, in chapter seven, the final conclusion, which functions to answer
the main question of this research, is presented.
2.6. The Replicability of this Research
To finalize this chapter, attention will be shed on the replicability of this research. This factor plays an important role in social research. Replicability has to do with the replicating of an already conducted research (Bryman, 2012). There are different reasons why one would replicate a research. For example, if a research does not match other evidence, it can be conducted again for reliability. To replicate a research, the research must be replicable (Bryman, 2012). For a research to be replicable, the researcher must have spelled out his/her procedure in great detail (Bryman, 2012). As notable, the procedure of this research has been explained in detail in this chapter and in this way there has been tried to make this research replicable for if necessary.
Now that the methodology of this research has been presented in the next chapter, the results of the first sub question of this research will be presented.
18 Chapter 3. Earlier Theory and Research on First Generation High Educated People
With this research, as already mentioned, I aim to answer the question ‘how do children with low educated parents negotiate to get high education?’. This question is relevant because the school- and the university systems are dominated by the culture that is familiar to the higher social-economic class, (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). Still, and this is important, some children of low-educated parents manage to find their ways to and at the university. Their specific and individual coping strategies with the dominant culture, will gain insight in how to make the educational system more democratic.
To answer the main question of this research, as already mentioned, three sub questions were defined: How do first generation high-educated people explain, narrate how they were influenced to pursue a high education? And subsequently, how do first generation high-educated people experience their high education practices? But first I want to turn to the background and the theoretical settings of this topic by posing the question: ‘How did the topic of first generation high-educated people emerge in history and already existing research?’. The relevance of this sub question (and thus this chapter) is that firstly, it gives an overview of the already existing facts of first generation students and that secondly it extends the framework of this research. Extending the framework of this research creates more material to finally analyze the empirical results with.
Therefore, I conducted a literature research. For this literature research, the online search engine ‘Google scholar’ was used and different libraries in the Netherlands have been visited. The results of found in this literature research, and with this the answer to the first sub question of the main research, are presented in this chapter.
Different topics regarding first generation university students were approached in this chapter. Information about the collected literature, the numbers regarding first generation university students, the cultural capital of these students, the dropout rates and the GPA average of these students, the effect of engagement on these students and the influence of the families of these students on their academic career are all presented.
3.1. First Generation College Students in the United States
Like as mentioned in the introduction, very little research is done in the Netherlands regarding first generation highly educated people. In the United States there is more (quantitative) research done in this area. This is the reason that most of the literature, which will be explained in this chapter, was conducted in the United States and are of quantitative nature. An important side note hereby is that the educational system in the United States
19
differs from that of the Netherlands. In the United States there are only two forms of high education after high school, namely Community College and College. After attending Community College, the highest degree one can receive is you an associate’s degree (not a Bachelor’s degree). After finishing College, you receive a Bachelor’s degree. After receiving a Bachelor’s degree (College level), you can proceed to get your Master’s degree (University level) and after your Master you can proceed to attain a PhD (University level).
In the Netherlands, as already explained in chapter one, there are three levels of higher preparatory education, namely: ‘higher preparatory education’, ‘secondary vocational education’ and ‘university’8
. In this research I only looked at the people that attended/are attending the highest form of college in the Netherlands (university) and have a Master’s degree or higher or that are finalizing their Master9. Still, the literature conducted remains relevant, because the overall college/university in the United States is comparable to the ‘university’ here in the Netherlands.
Now that information about the collected data is presented, in the next section, information about the amount and amount development of first generation university students will be presented.
3.2. The Amount Of First Generation College Students Increased Over The Years As mentioned in the Netherlands merely 14.6% has a university education, which is around 2.400.000 of the total of 16.500.000 people (Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). From these students, 60% have high-educated parents. Thus, less than the half of university students have low-educated parents. This inequality between the children with high-educated parents and the children with low-educated was higher in the earlier years. According to a longitudinal research that has been done in 1996, children of low-educated parents had 9 times less the probability to attend university (Bosma & Cremers, 1996). Thus, a change is occurring in the direction of more equality between social-economic classes in regards to attending university, but there is still a noticeable inequality. Also in the United States, the amount of first generation college students has increased (Choy, 2001).
A result of this increase is that the college demographic population is more diverse. There is more diversity in ethnicity, social background and gender.
Now that the information about the number and number development of first
8 See paragraph 1.2
20
generation university students has been presented, in the next section literature regarding first generation college/university in relation with cultural capital will be presented.
3.4. Cultural Capital among First Generation Students
Because of the major influence that cultural capital has in education, in this chapter the findings on this area will firstly be presented. Following Bourdieu and his concept of habitus10, most first generation students will self-select out of pursuing a college education, because of the feeling that it is “not for them” (Lareau, 2003). Through the years, as mentioned, the number of first generation has increased and thus there are clearly many exceptions. Because of this change, the underlying idea has become that first generation students although attending college, do not have the same entitlement or belonging in college as traditional students (Swartz, 1997).
According to Lareau (2003) because these students lack “feel for the game”, they are relative disadvantage compared to the traditional students. Because of the lack of cultural capital first generation students may experience difficulties not only in connection with, adjustment to a new environment, courses, and campus life, but also with learning new culture involving a certain style of dress, kind of vocabulary, and/or, taste in music (Hsiao, 1992). The styles found in the college environment are namely closely aligned with the cultural capital possessed by students mainly from parents who have attended college.
Now that literature regarding first generation college/university in relation with cultural capital was presented, in the next section literature and research about dropout rates and GPA average of first generation college/university students will be presented.
3.5. First Generation College Students are more Likely to Drop Out, But have the Same
GPA Average as Traditional Students
Another aspect that emerges a lot when studying first generation college students is the persistence of these students (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004). Out of different researches it appears that first generation students are more likely than students whose parents are college graduates to leave college in the first year. In addition, these students are less likely to remain enrolled in college or be on a persistence track to a Bachelor’s degree after five years (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004).
In the Netherlands, similar findings occur. 52% of first generation high-educated students make it through their first year and from the students with low-educated parents, 5%
10 See chapter one
21
less make it through their first year, namely 47%. In the second year, the difference is 24% against 18%. Also after three years of university, more children of low-educated parents than of high-educated parents drop out (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2001). Interesting about these findings is that although these students tend to drop out more often, being a first generation student has no significant effect on the GPA of a student (Dumais & Ward, 2010). Also, it is interesting that this difference in dropping out compared to traditional students is never bigger than 5%.
Now that literature and research about dropout rates and GPA average of first generation college/university students has been presented, in the next section literature around the engagement of first generation college/university students will pre presented.
3.6. First Generation College Students are Less Engaged, but when Engaged, Benefit More
Another difference found between traditional students and first generation students is that first generation students are less engaged with the university on a social, peer and content level. First generation college students study fewer hours than the other college students do and that they worked more hours beside their study. That first generation college students worked more hours has to do with the fact that their families often have low incomes (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2003). Also, first generation college students were less likely to participate in honors programs and they were less likely to perceive that faculty’s care about the students and teaching.
Finally, first generation college students are less likely to live on campus (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004). The fact that these first generation students are less engaged is interesting, because they are the ones who benefit the most out of these engagements according to research. Theory suggests that extra-curricular activities and peer involvement is very relevant for gaining cultural capital for first generation students and that this helps them succeed academically and that they benefit cognitively (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988).
Although first generation students are less engaged on a social and peer level, involvement on this area has had a more positive influence on their critical thinking, degree plans and sense of control their own academic success, than for the other students. The fact that first generation students are less involved does put a limit on what the positive effects can do. In addition, the engagement of first generation students in academic or classroom activities has a more positive influence on their education benefits than this same engagement
22
from the other students (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004).
On the other hand, volunteer work, employment and participation in intercollegiate athletics all tended to have a more negative impact on first generation students than on the other students (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2004). This has to do with the fact that these activities remove or isolate students from exposure to other peers and the campus culture.
Now that literature about the first generation students has been presented, in the next section literature about the influence of first generation students and their families on their academic career, will be presented.
3.7. First Generation College Students And Their Families
The American psychologists Dollean York-Anderson and Sharon Bowman (1991) found differences between the first generation college students and traditional students in respect to their basic knowledge of college. First generation college students have a lot less basic college knowledge than traditional students do. This knowledge has to do with college costs, application processes etc. That these first generation college students have less knowledge is due to the fact that their parents did not attend college. Besides the fact that first generation students have a lack of knowledge because their parents did not attend college, generation college students receive less encouragement to attend college from their families than the traditional student (Pascarella, Pierson, Wolniak & Terenzini, 2003).
Further, these students have less support from their family when attending college, because of the fact that their parents did not attend college. Their parents, for example, cannot help them with academic tasks (Brooks-Terry, 1988).
Another relation between first generation college students and their parents was specifically true for minority students. According to the Asian-American psychologist Vivian Tseng (2004), first generation students of minority groups may be expected to fulfill obligations for their families that conflicts with their college responsibilities, which has a negative influence on their study. For example their parents keep expecting them to help around the house.
On the other hand, still many minority students who are first generation college students do very well because their family situation motivated them (Gandara, 1982; Dennis, Phinney & Chuateco, 2005). These students see college, most of the time, as a way to better their life and to avoid the difficult lives of their parents (Lopez, 2001).
23
influence of first generation students their families on their academic success) has been presented, a conclusion will be drawn in the next section in the form of an analytic summary.
3.8. Conclusion
To summarize: in comparison to traditional college students, first generation students, because of their lack of cultural capital, may experience difficulties in adjusting to the new environment, courses, and campus life; but also with learning a new culture, involving a certain dress style, kind of vocabulary, and/or, taste in music (Hsiao, 1992). First generation students are less engaged with the university on a social, peer and content level (Terenzini, Springer, Yaeger, Pascarella & Nora, 1996). Finally, first generation students drop out more than traditional students and have less support from their parents. Besides all these facts, first generation students still have the same GPA average as traditional students have. Interesting about the gathered literature, as already mentioned, is that it is very quantitative of nature and here for concisely; this is why it lacks the close experiences of these students. The profundity and the deep disclose that it misses, is what I partly want to fill by doing this research.
Now that literature around the first generation college students has been presented, which functioned to answer the first sub question of this research, in the next chapter the first empirical results will be presented.
