Equal opportunities for first-generation students

“In de buitenbaan” (De Groene Amsterdammer, 26th February 2020) and “Als eerstegeneratiestudent sta je met 1-0 achter” (NPO radio 1, 26th August 2018). For a number of years, this has been the narrative in the newspapers and on the radio when it comes to equal opportunities for students who are the first in their families to attend university or college, known as first-generation students. Therefore, Dialogic conducted research on behalf of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW) into equality of opportunity among first-generation students. In this study, we discovered that equality of opportunity for first-generation students is under pressure in several ways. Firstly: first-generation students have unequal development opportunities and are less likely to obtain their degree. Our quantitative analysis shows that these students have a significantly higher risk of drop-out and course switching, negatively impacting their chances of obtaining a degree. The unequal development opportunities of first-generation students can be explained by two central factors: they face biases and unintended negative effects in testing and the education system, and they engage in unnecessary self-selection. The latter is because first-generation students often feel less at home in college or university and have less confidence in their own abilities compared to their peers. Two important nuances need to be emphasized here. Firstly, there are groups of students who have an even higher likelihood of dropping out or switching compared to first-generation students and therefore also deserve attention, namely students in universities of applied sciences, undergraduate students, male students, students from lower income families, and students from migrant backgrounds. Secondly, intersectional effects come into play, meaning that within the group of first-generation students, some groups experience even stronger inequalities of opportunity. Particularly, first-generation students from migrant backgrounds and older first-generation students experience stronger inequality of opportunity than other first-generation students. They have a relatively high risk of drop-out and course switching and are therefore more affected by the causes of inequality of opportunity. First-generation university students and stacking first-generation students also have a relatively high risk of drop-out, but not of course switching. Nonetheless, this implies that the causes of inequality of opportunity for first-generation students are more pronounced in universities. Secondly: first-generation students have unequal selection chances, thus making them less likely to even reach college or university. Our analysis of literature and interviews indicates that biases and unintended negative effects in testing and selection make it harder for first-generation students to be selected for college or university. Our quantitative analysis partially confirms this. We see that the abolition of numerus clausus may slightly increase the chance for first-generation students to enroll, although evidence for this is limited in this study. Thirdly: first-generation students experience unequal societal opportunities. Our analysis of literature and interviews shows that first-generation students who do obtain a degree often experience limited academic and personal success. These students are more inclined towards self-selection, meaning they are less likely to engage in extracurricular activities that could support their personal development and future societal integration. This self-selection is often a result of the high pressure first-generation students feel to obtain their degree within the standard timeframe. This could limit their future societal opportunities as such extracurricular activities are increasingly valued and demanded in the job market. Furthermore, these activities can also contribute to building social and cultural capital, engagement in education, and academic success. To address this relevant societal issue, we make several recommendations:

• A policy solely focusing on first-generation students appears to be insufficiently effective based on our data, given the presence of other student groups with a higher likelihood of drop-out, course switching, or prolonged study durations.
• Expert interviews indicate that institutions can exert the most influence on reducing inequality of opportunity by strengthening social processes on campus, such as fostering a sense of belonging and reducing performance pressure.
• The transition from secondary school to university/college poses the greatest challenge. Existing interventions, like orientation programmes to enhance systemic and structural knowledge and scholarships, can promote equality of opportunity.
• Monitoring first-generation students for specific interventions seems to have more disadvantages than advantages.
• Additionally, experts highlight the need to address inequality of opportunity earlier in the educational chain.

The report was presented to the Second Chamber on 19th December. In the attached response, the minister indicates that this research will be considered in a further policy brief on enhancing academic success. We will continue to follow this brief and all developments on this theme with interest.