https:
doi.org/10.1177/ XXXXXXXXXX
Journal of Experiential Education
2019, Vol XXXXXXXXXX –363
© The Authors 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: XXXXXXXXXX/ XXXXXXXXXX
journals.sagepub.com/home/jee
Article
Service-Learning and
First-Generation University
Students: A Conceptual
Exploration of the Literature
Alison Taylor1 , Lorin Yochim2 ,
and Milosh Raykov3
Abstract
Background: Despite increased access to higher education in recent decades, first-
generation (first-gen) university students continue to face challenges with persistence
and completion. Recommended responses by universities include exposing these
students to “high-impact” educational practices. Purpose: This article examines the
potential of one of these practices—service-learning—to address the disadvantages
faced by first-gen students. Methodology/Approach: We review the literature on
first-gen students and service-learning and offer a conceptual critique of dominant
approaches. Findings/Conclusions: Dominant conceptions of service-learning
treat first-gen students as a homogeneous, deficient group and reduce learning to
an input-environment-output model. We argue for a more conceptually nuanced
understanding of the reasons for the cultural mismatch often experienced by
unde
epresented groups of students. Implications: The conceptual resources
offered in this article are intended to help researchers and policy makers undertake
esearch that captures the diversity and richness of students’ lives and leads to more
equitable practices.
Keywords
higher education, service-learning, social justice, literature review, methodology
1The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
2University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
3University of Malta, Msida, Malta
Co
esponding Author:
Alison Taylor, Department of Educational Studies, Faculty of Education, The University of British Columbia,
Vancouver Campus, 6445 University Boulevard, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z2.
Email: XXXXXXXXXX
863452 JEEXXX10.1177/1053825919863452Journal of Experiential EducationTaylor et al.
esearch-article2019
https:
us.sagepub.com/en-us/journals-permissions
https:
journals.sagepub.com/home/jee
mailto: XXXXXXXXXX
350 Journal of Experiential Education 42(4)
Despite increased access to higher education in recent decades, young people whose
parents did not complete university, or first-generation (first-gen) students, continue to
lag behind continuing-generation peers in terms of their persistence and completion
(Whitley, Benson, & Wesaw, XXXXXXXXXXThese students are generally perceived to be less
prepared, less supported by families, and less engaged in their studies. In addition to
cocu
icular supports, colleges are exploring pedagogical strategies to help these stu-
dents fulfill their potential (Chatelain, 2018).
Among these, high-impact practices are believed to be especially beneficial for
such historically underserved students (Kuh, XXXXXXXXXXOne of these practices, service-
learning, is the focus of a growing evaluation literature. However, many such studies
treat first-gen students as a homogeneous, deficient group and reduce learning to an
input-environment-output (I-E-O) model. Instead, this article argues for closer atten-
tion to the reasons for the cultural mismatch often experienced by first-gen students. It
draws on two thinkers in particular. Pie
e Bourdieu’s work encourages us to pay more
attention to the problematic effects of institutional policies and practices that value the
capitals of privileged students. Contemporary writers drawing on Lev Vygotsky’s
work suggest how pedagogies can be more culturally responsive. Taken together,
Bourdieu and Vygotsky promote understandings of student diversity that are more
attentive to structural inequalities and to learning processes as social and cultural.
The “Problem” With First-Gen Students
Most authors define first-gen students as those who do not have at least one parent
with a bachelor’s degree, although definitions vary across studies (Nguyen & Nguyen,
2018). Definitions aside, these students are usually seen as having fewer economic,
social, and cultural resources than continuing-generation students. For instance, par-
ents of first-gen students are perceived as less able to provide academic guidance
(Aries & Seider, XXXXXXXXXXEconomic and social factors reportedly contribute to first-gen
students “feeling out of place” and seeing their background as a burden (Granfield,
1991). The literature finds that compared with continuing-generation students, low-
income, first-gen students are more likely to attend community colleges than universi-
ties (Levin, 2007), are older (Engle & Tinto, 2008), work more hours off campus
(Walpole, 2003), lack social capital (Moschetti & Hudley, 2015), are less likely to be
integrated into university life (Davis, 2010; Pike & Kuh, 2005), have a weaker sense
of belonging (Ostrove & Long, 2007), and drop out of postsecondary institutions at
higher rates (Chen, XXXXXXXXXXLow-income and racialized minority students, especially
Black and Hispanic/Latino, are more likely to be first-gen (Aries & Seider, 2005;
Pelco, Ball, & Lockeman, 2014), an intersectionality that demands more attention in
esearch (Nguyen & Nguyen, XXXXXXXXXXIn sum, these students are seen as challenged or
deficient in various ways.
Service-Learning in Universities
Service-learning is a form of experiential learning in which students learn and
develop through participation in thoughtfully organized service experiences that
Taylor et al. 351
meet community needs, are integrated into students’ academic studies, and extend
students’ classroom learning into the community (Furco, XXXXXXXXXXIdeally, through
such experiences, students gain “further understanding of course content, a
oader
appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility” (Bringle
& Hatcher, 1996, p XXXXXXXXXXSince the 1980s, service-learning in the United States has
een constructed primarily as an “educational reform strategy that complemented
the traditional discipline-based cu
iculum and emphasized the student’s cognitive
development” (Lounsbury & Pollack, 2001, p XXXXXXXXXXA meta-analysis of research on
service-learning (Celio, Durlak, & Dymnicki, 2011) indicates its positive impact on
a variety of outcomes, including attitudes toward self, attitudes toward school and
learning, civic engagement, social skills, and academic performance.
No doubt the range of approaches to service-learning contributes to varied out-
comes. Butin (2010), for example, describes four different approaches described as
technical, cultural, political, and anti-foundational. While technical service-learning
aims to identify best practices to achieve improved student outcomes, anti-founda-
tional service-learning is more likely to question taken-for-granted ideas and practices.
According to Butin, this diversity of service-learning approaches makes it difficult to
achieve consensus on best practices. He further notes that while researchers are able to
identify positive impacts of service-learning, there is a notable gap in the literature
about how such outcomes occur.
Critical Service-Learning and First-Gen Students
Researchers interested in the impacts of student engagement have examined rela-
tionships between “educationally purposeful activities” and student success
(Strayhorn, 2008, p. 5). For example, Astin’s XXXXXXXXXXI-E-O college impact model
has been used to explore connections between active learning activities (including
service-learning) and personal/social learning outcomes. Other writers further
argue that the disadvantages faced by first-gen students can be addressed using
active learning or high-impact practices, including service-learning (cf. Pelco et al.,
2014, p. 51). Yeh (2014), for example, suggests that community-based education
strategies have the potential to engage marginalized students more than traditional
pedagogies “academically as well as psychosocially” (p. 2). Similarly, service-
learning reportedly helps first-gen students achieve their academic goals and feel
etter integrated into a college community (McKay & Estrella, 2008; Wilsey,
Friedrichs, Ga
ich, & Chung, 2014).
Of particular interest is the work of writers who assume that social justice should
e a key aim of service-learning for first-gen students. York (2013), for example,
points out how critical theory aids the development of critical consciousness and
iculturalism in low-income, first-gen students. Critical service-learning models that
emphasize “true community partnerships” can “help students navigate issues of power,
privilege, and systematic oppression” (p XXXXXXXXXXIn the same vein, Conley and Hamlin
(2009) suggest that because justice-oriented service-learning “provokes specific ques-
tions related to power, privilege, and difference in contemporary society, it can poten-
tially provide a space that recognizes new forms of agency and engagement for
352 Journal of Experiential Education 42(4)
traditionally marginalized students” in and out of the classroom (p. 48). Thus, justice-
oriented learning can help students
idge these spaces.
The promise of justice-oriented service-learning, then, is threefold. First, it can help
first-gen students
idge two communities otherwise seen as incompatible—home and
university (Conley & Hamlin, XXXXXXXXXXSecond, engaging first-gen students in work that
ings them closer to communities similar to their own helps them “build stronger rela-
tionships in communities” (Wilsey et al., 2014, p. 91). Third, the critical orientation of
justice-oriented service-learning means first-gen students gain a more complex under-
standing of social structures so that they can become agents of community change.
Although we agree that service-learning has significant potential as a culturally
esponsive pedagogy (see Colvin & Tobler, 2013; Kiyama, Rios-Aguilar, & Deil-
Amen, 2018), we are critical of the suggestion that it can help first-gen students fit
etter into universities. Rather, shifting the discourse from that of “college-ready stu-
dents” to “student-ready colleges” calls on systems, not just students, to change in
esponse to growing diversity of student needs and realities (McNair, Albertine,
Cooper, McDonald, & Major, 2016).
Complicating First-Gen Students and Service-Learning
We are not the first to critique literature on first-gen students and service-learning for
its methodological limitations, for example, small and unrepresentative samples, and
lack of comparison of first-gen with “continuing generation” students (Wilsey et al.,
2014). Our main complaints, however, are conceptual. By paying insufficient attention
to the diversity and richness of first-gen students’ lives and to learning as a complex
social practice, studies on first-gen students and service-learning are limited in their
capacity to explain why students experience universities in different ways, as well as
how service-learning can help institutions become more student-ready.
From the Adaptive Student to the Transformative University
It is problematic to essentialize first-gen students—to assign to them particular traits
that are then seen as determining their responses to university experiences. This sec-
tion highlights, instead, the relational and shifting character of social class and consid-
ers the ways in which pedagogical practices differentially value students’ backgrounds
and experiences.
Scholars who draw on the work of Pie
e Bourdieu see universities and colleges as
sites of production, reproduction, and contestation of social class positions and identi-
ties and seek to demonstrate how this occurs. Stuber (2011), for instance, contends that
the model of the highly involved college student is not class-neutral. Higher education
works as both a “sieve” that filters out student from lower class backgrounds over time
and an “incubator” that develops students’ social and cultural competencies in and out
of the classroom (p XXXXXXXXXXThe confidence or pride felt by working-class or first-gen
students upon entering university