Cultural Capital (Mis)match in the Classroom: How Syllabi Material Shape First-Generation and/or Low-Income and Continuing Generation Students’ Classroom Experiences

Abstract

Achievement gaps between first-generation and/or low-income and continuing-generation students may reflect not only differences in academic preparation, but also how college environments signal which forms of cultural capital are recognized and rewarded. One subtle way these signals may be communicated is through course descriptions, which can emphasize either abstract knowledge, reflecting more institutionally recognized and rewarded capital, or practical skills. This study examined whether course framing influenced undergraduate students’ expected performance, belonging, comfort, perceived recognition, anticipated stress, and academic resilience. Participants were randomly assigned to read either an abstract knowledge-focused, or a practical skills-focused course description. Students in the practical skills condition reported higher expected performance, belonging, comfort, and perceived recognition, as well as lower anticipated stress, than students in the abstract knowledge condition. Belonging also showed a marginal interaction with first-generation and/or low income students: practical framing increased anticipated belonging more strongly among these students than among continuing-generation students. Perseverance showed a second marginal interaction in the opposite direction, with first-generation and/or low-income students reporting higher perseverance in the abstract condition than in the practical condition. Together, these findings suggest that subtle institutional cues in syllabus language can shape students’ early perceptions of fit and success in higher education. Key words: cultural capital, first-generation and/or low-income, continuing-generation students, abstract knowledge-focused, practical skills-focused, belonging, institutional.