The Interactive Relationship Between Class Identity and the College Experience: The Case of Lower Income Students

Abstract

To probe the role that college context plays in influencing the class-based aspects of identity for lower income students, we interviewed 30 lower income students, 15 from an elite college and 15 from a state college. Significant disparities of wealth between students at the elite college heightened awareness of class, and led to feelings of intimidation, discomfort, inadequacy, deficiency, exclusion, and powerlessness among lower income students, feelings that were less prevalent among state college students. Students at both colleges acquired new forms of cultural capital and coped with class-based discontinuities between who they were before college and who they were becoming, but these issues became heightened for the elite college students.

Out with the Old, In with the New? Habitus and Social Mobility at Selective Colleges

“…Academics and other professionals from poor or workingclass backgrounds frequently recall college as a difficult transition period (e.g., Dews and Law 1995;Ryan and Sackrey 1984), marked by feelings of ''wanting'' rather than ''belonging'' (Ostrove 2003). This is complemented by the findings of sociologists arguing that students from these backgrounds-particularly those at elite campuses-find it difficult to connect with peers, feel at home, and make the most of academic opportunities because they lack cultural capital (Aries and Seider 2005;Ostrove 2003;Stuber 2009Stuber , 2010. Sociologists typically focus on how cultural capital and habitus function within these elite settings; that is, they are concerned with the mechanisms and interactions that take place in the site of mobility.…”

Constructing and protecting identity in a diverse higher education context

“…This is due partly to the widespread perception among workingclass students that the more elite universities are the preserve of the middle class and, thus, such institutions are "off limits" (Reay et al, 2010;Thomas & Quinn, 2007). The anticipation of being rejected or excluded by others due to an aspect of one's identity can render salient the belonging principle of identity, and individuals may make choices about university entry based on perceptions of where they are likely to fit in and derive feelings of acceptance and inclusion (Aries & Seider, 2005;Crozier et al, 2008). However, it is increasingly the case that the elite, as well as the post-92, universities are becoming increasingly diverse, particularly as these institutions make greater attempts to engage diverse sections of the population, including first-generation working-class students (McDonough & Fann, 2007).…”

Distancing to self‐protect: the perpetuation of inequality in higher education through socio‐relational dis/engagement

“…Similarly, in Goodwin's (2002, 168) US study, contact between the relevant student groups was usually limited to 'a "hi" or a smile in passing' and other students were not regarded as being particularly friendly or easy to get to know. Research also suggests that working-class students tend to 'stick together' on campus rather than making new friends, particularly where they have gotten to know each other in some form of pre-entry programme (Crozier et al 2008;Christie, Munro, and Wager 2005;Aries and Seider 2005;Goodwin 2002). Goodwin argues that this is not merely a function of having bonded at the pre-entry stage, but is also 'a reaction to a social climate that they either couldn't understand or of which they didn't want to be a part ' (2002, 166).…”

“…This self-segregating behaviour is essentially a self-protective buffering strategy in the face of an external threat. There is evidence from the literature that these students feel intimidated by the affluence and other markers of middle-class culture and lifestyle amongst other students (Aries and Seider 2005;Goodwin 2002;Lynch and O'Riordan 1998). However, most research in the area (although not all; cf.…”

“…Research has found that this is a strategy used by students from under-represented groups to manage tension between external and HE lives (cf. Aries and Seider 2005;Bufton 2003;Goodwin 2002). Those female participants who had children most strongly compartmentalised their HE and non-HE lives, and more firmly distanced themselves from the social realm, and particularly 'typical' student identity, than did those without children, probably as a result of having less time and more responsibilities.…”