Insights gained from a comparison of South African and Canadian first-generation students: the impact of resilience and resourcefulness on higher education success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First-generation students are often described as disadvantaged in university adjustment, self-efficacy and grades. Yet this deficit model of understanding first-generation students ignores their cultural capital, which could increase resilience and resourcefulness. Here, 844 students (31% first-generation) in South Africa and Canada completed measures of resilience, resourcefulness, university adjustment, academic self-efficacy and self-reported grades. Overall, the results reveal that the characterisation of first-generation students is culturally specific and, in some ways, differs between Canada and South Africa. That is, the deficit model may better describe Canadian than South African first-generation students. Yet, in many ways first-generation students are like their peers and their academic outcomes are predicted by their culturally specific levels of resourcefulness and resilience. This study support the notion that the positives students bring to university should be considered and that students would benefit from being taught the requisite skills involved in increasing resourcefulness and resilience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".