First-Generation College Students and Satisfaction with Student-Success-Technology

  • Hans VanDer Schaaf
  • Dara Shifrer
Part of the Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management book series (ITKM)


In today’s digital age, fueled by consumers’ expectations for robust and personalized digital experiences, the adoption and use of electronic services (e-services) by customers and constituents is critical. In higher education there is an immense need for institutions to build service and digital experiences that match what students experience in their broader lives. In parallel, public universities are under tremendous budgetary and performance pressure from the general public and state legislators to increase graduation rates while living up to their goals for improving access to higher education. Central to their efforts is a focus on assisting first-generation college students graduate, as they are less likely to persist after their first year and less likely to graduate, compared to their non-first-generation peers [1–3]. One tool in these efforts is technology that students can use to support their own continued enrollment, and technology for faculty and staff to use to support student success—commonly referred to as student success technology (or student-success-technology). In the context of recent critiques of higher education, including demands to lower costs, deliver a more educational value, and provide an educated workforce to meet economic demands, this work is critically important [4].


  1. 1.
    Cataldi, E. F., Bennett, C. T., & Chen X. (2018). First-generation students: College access, persistence, and postbachelor’s outcomes. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved February 12, 2018 from
  2. 2.
    Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(3), 249–284.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pratt, I. S., Harwood, H. B., Cavazos, J. T., & Ditzfeld, C. P. (2017). Should i stay or should i go? Retention in first-generation college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 1–14.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brooks, C., & Pomerantz, J. (2017). ECAR study of undergraduates students and information technology, 2017. EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Banks-Santilli, L. (2015, June 03). Guilt is one of the biggest struggles first-generation college students face. The Washington Post. Retrieved March 18, 2018 from
  6. 6.
    Collier, P. J., & Morgan, D. L. (2008). ‘Is that paper really due today?’: Differences in first-generation and traditional college students’ understandings of faculty expectations. Higher Education, 55(4), 425–446.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). First- and second-generation college students: A comparison of their engagement and intellectual development. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(3), 276–300.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Central Intelligence Agency. (2017). The world factbook — Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved June 4, 2017 from
  9. 9.
    Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2016). Online shopping and e-commerce. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from
  10. 10.
    Massey, A. P., Khatri, V., & Montoya-Weiss, M. M. (2007). Usability of online services: The role of technology readiness and context. Decision Sciences, 38(2), 277–308.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bitner, M. J., & Brown, S. W. (2008). The service imperative. Business Horizons, 51(1), 39–46.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kurfalı, M., Arifoğlu, A., Tokdemir, G., & Paçin, Y. (2017). Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 168–178.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tiwana, A., & Ramesh, B. (2001). E-Services: problems, opportunities, and digital platforms. In Proceedings of the 34th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (8pp).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Crawley, A. (2012). Supporting online students: A practical guide to planning, implementing, and evaluating services. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim-Soon, N., Rahman, A., & Ahmed, M. (2014). E-service quality in higher education and frequency of use of the service. International Education Studies, 7(3), 1–10.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alzaza, N. S., & Yaakub, A. R. (2011). Students’ awareness and requirements of mobile learning services in the higher education environment. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 3(1), 95–100.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dirr, P. J. (1999). Putting principles into practice: Promoting effective support services for Students in distance learning programs: A report on the findings of a survey. Boulder, CO: Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    LaPadula, M. (2003). A comprehensive look at online student support services for distance learners. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 119–128.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morshed, J. (2016). Today’s student, yesterday’s technology: A digital upgrade hits campus. Planning for Higher Education, 44(4), 75.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jaradat, M.-I. R. M. (2010). Understanding the acceptance of Mobile university services: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 4(4), 407–427.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Traxler, J. (2010). Sustaining mobile learning and its institutions. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 2(4), 58–65.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    NCES National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). NCES national center for education statistics fast facts tool (2017). NCES National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from
  23. 23.
    Fletcher, J., Grant, M., Ramos, M., & Karp, M. M. (2016). Integrated planning and advising for student success (iPASS): State of the literature (CCRC working paper No. 90). Community College Research Center. Retrieved from
  24. 24.
    Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Barneveld, A., Arnold, K. E., & Campbell, J. P. (2012). Analytics in higher education: Establishing a common language. Educause. Retrieved from
  26. 26.
    Natsu, J. (2010). Advanced analytics: Helping educators approach the ideal. eCampusNews. Retrieved January 23, 2018 from
  27. 27.
    Lumina Foundation. (2017). Lumina fact sheet. Lumina Foundation. Retrieved April 23, 2017 from
  28. 28.
    Lumina Foundation. (2018). A stronger nation: Learning beyond high schools builds american talent (national report 2018).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Braxton, J. M., et al. (2013). Rethinking college student retention. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2015). Completing college: A national view of student attainment rates – Fall 2009 cohort. National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Retrieved June 4, 2017 from
  31. 31.
    Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014). Today’s college students infographic. Bill & Melinda Gates foundation - Postsecondary success. Retrieved June 4, 2017 from
  32. 32.
    Sharpe, R. E. (2017, November 03). Are you first gen? Depends on who’s asking. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    McDonough, P. M. (2004). Counseling matters: Knowledge, assistance, and organizational commitment in college preparation. In W. G. Tierney, Z. B. Corwin, & J. E. Colyar (Eds.), Preparing for college: Nine elements of effective outreach (pp. 69–87). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blackwell, E., & Pinder, P. (2014). What are the motivational factors of first-generation minority college students who overcome their family histories to pursue higher education? College Student Journal, 48(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Terenzini, P. T., Springer, L., Yaeger, P. M., Pascarella, E. T., & Nora, A. (1996). First-generation college students: Characteristics, experiences, and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 37(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Garriott, P. O., Hudyma, A., Keene, C., & Santiago, D. (2015). Social cognitive predictors of first- and non-first-generation college students’ academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 62(2), 253–263.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    DeRosa, E., & Dolby, N. (2014). ‘I don’t think the university knows me.’: Institutional culture and lower-income, first-generation college students. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 10(2). Retrieved from
  38. 38.
    Vasquez-Salgado, Y., Greenfield, P. M., & Burgos-Cienfuegos, R. (2014). Exploring home-school value conflicts: Implications for academic achievement and well-being among Latino first-generation college students. Journal of Adolescent Research, 30(3), 271–305.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Covarrubias, R., & Fryberg, S. A. (2015). Movin’on up (to college): First-generation college students’ experiences with family achievement guilt. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(3), 420–429.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gore, P. A., Jr. (2006). Academic self-efficacy as a predictor of college outcomes: Two incremental validity studies. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 92–115.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Slate, J. R., Manuel, M., & Jr Brinson Kenneth, H. (2002). The ‘digital divide’: Hispanic college students’ views of educational uses of the internet. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(1), 75–93.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2015). Americans’ internet access: 2000–2015. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Retrieved June 15, 2017 from
  43. 43.
    Britto, M., & Rush, S. (2013). Developing and implementing comprehensive student support services for online students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(1), 29–42.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brooks, C. (2016). ECAR study of undergraduates students and information technology, 2016.pdf. EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Peng, H., Tsai, C.-C., & Wu, Y.-T. (2006). University students’ self-efficacy and their attitudes toward the internet: The role of students’ perceptions of the internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), 73–86.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shea, P., & Armitage, S. (2002). Guidelines for creating student services online. Boulder, CO: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Unit4. (2016). 73% of students are dissatisfied with their university’s digital strategy. Unit4. Retrieved June 26, 2017 from
  48. 48.
    van Dijk, J. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4), 221–235.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Junco, R., Merson, D., & Salter, D. W. (2010). The effect of gender, ethnicity, and income on college students’ use of communication technologies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13(6), 619–627.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jesnek, L. M. (2012). Empowering the non-traditional college student and bridging the ‘digital divide. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 5(1), 1.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Goode, J. (2010). The digital identity divide: How technology knowledge impacts college students. New Media & Society, 12(3), 497–513.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mamonov, S., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2017). Exploring factors affecting social e-commerce service adoption: The case of Facebook gifts. International Journal of Information Management, 37(6), 590–600.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ahuja, M. K., & Thatcher, J. B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory of trying: Effects of work environment and gender on post-adoption information technology use. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 29(3), 427–459.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115–139.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Li, S., Glass, R., & Records, H. (2008). The influence of gender on new technology adoption and use–Mobile commerce. Journal of Internet Commerce, 7(2), 270–289.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Charness, N., & Boot, W. R. (2009). Aging and information technology use: Potential and barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 253–258.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Morris, M. G., & Venkatesh, V. (2000). Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychology, 53(2), 375–403.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Jackson, L. A., et al. (2008). Race, gender, and information technology use: The new digital divide. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 11(4), 437–442.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Lopez, M. H., Gonzalez-Barrera, A., & Patten, E. (2013). Closing the digital divide: Latinos and technology adoption. Pew Research Center: Pew Hispanic Center. Retrieved February 22, 2018 from

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans VanDer Schaaf
    • 1
  • Dara Shifrer
    • 1
  1. 1.PortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations