Is the “First-Generation Student” Term Useful for Understanding Inequality? The Role of Intersectionality in Illuminating the Implications of an Accepted—Yet Unchallenged—Term

IF 2.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Review of Research in Education Pub Date : 2018-03-01 DOI:10.3102/0091732X18759280
Thai-Huy Nguyen, Bach Mai Dolly Nguyen
{"title":"Is the “First-Generation Student” Term Useful for Understanding Inequality? The Role of Intersectionality in Illuminating the Implications of an Accepted—Yet Unchallenged—Term","authors":"Thai-Huy Nguyen, Bach Mai Dolly Nguyen","doi":"10.3102/0091732X18759280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"First-generation students (FGSs) have received a great deal of attention in education research, practice, and policy. The difficulty of understanding and subsequently addressing the various and persistent configurations of inequality associated with FGSs lies with the complicated yet obscure state of the FGS term itself. Leaving the term unquestioned limits the capacity to grasp how these students’ backgrounds and identities shape their decisions and relationships to others and to institutions, and risks reproducing the very inequality that education researchers wish to mitigate. This chapter begins to resolve these conflicts by offering a critical analysis and discussion—grounded by the concept of intersectionality—of the empirical literature on FGSs. We identify and discuss the dominant and problematic manner in which the FGS term has been operationalized in research and discuss the implications of their findings. We end with a discussion on emerging topics that extends the consideration of research on FGSs beyond the imaginary, traditional boundaries of college campuses.","PeriodicalId":47753,"journal":{"name":"Review of Research in Education","volume":"42 1","pages":"146 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3102/0091732X18759280","citationCount":"49","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18759280","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 49

Abstract

First-generation students (FGSs) have received a great deal of attention in education research, practice, and policy. The difficulty of understanding and subsequently addressing the various and persistent configurations of inequality associated with FGSs lies with the complicated yet obscure state of the FGS term itself. Leaving the term unquestioned limits the capacity to grasp how these students’ backgrounds and identities shape their decisions and relationships to others and to institutions, and risks reproducing the very inequality that education researchers wish to mitigate. This chapter begins to resolve these conflicts by offering a critical analysis and discussion—grounded by the concept of intersectionality—of the empirical literature on FGSs. We identify and discuss the dominant and problematic manner in which the FGS term has been operationalized in research and discuss the implications of their findings. We end with a discussion on emerging topics that extends the consideration of research on FGSs beyond the imaginary, traditional boundaries of college campuses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“第一代学生”这个术语对理解不平等有用吗?交叉性在阐明一个被接受但未被挑战的术语的含义中的作用
第一代学生在教育研究、实践和政策方面受到了广泛关注。理解并随后解决与FGS相关的各种持续的不平等配置的困难在于FGS术语本身的复杂而模糊的状态。让这个词不受质疑限制了理解这些学生的背景和身份如何塑造他们的决定以及与他人和机构的关系的能力,并有可能重现教育研究人员希望缓解的不平等。本章首先以交叉性的概念为基础,对FGSs的实证文献进行批判性分析和讨论,以解决这些冲突。我们确定并讨论了FGS术语在研究中的主要和有问题的操作方式,并讨论了他们的发现的含义。最后,我们讨论了一些新出现的话题,这些话题将对女性生殖器切割研究的考虑扩展到了想象中的、传统的大学校园边界之外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Research in Education
Review of Research in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Review of Research in Education (RRE), published annually since 1973 (approximately 416 pp./volume year), provides an overview and descriptive analysis of selected topics of relevant research literature through critical and synthesizing essays. Articles are usually solicited for specific RRE issues. There may also be calls for papers. RRE promotes discussion and controversy about research problems in addition to pulling together and summarizing the work in a field.
期刊最新文献
Creative Methods for Creativity Research(ers)? Speculations Creativity as a Racializing and Ableizing Scientific Object: Disentangling the Democratic Impulse From Justice-Oriented Futures To Democratize, First Decolonize: Approaches Beyond Eurocentric and Colonial Epistemologies in Creativity Unapologetically Black Creative Educational Experiences in Higher Education: A Critical Review Exploring Conceptions of Creativity and Latinidad in Environmental Education Through the Lens of Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1