The European agenda for widening participation in Higher Education (HE) aims for a reflection of the diversity of the European population in the student body as well as equity of opportunity in education (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2015, 2020). This has led to an increase in so-called non-traditional students (NTS) entering universities throughout Europe (ibid.). The term “non-traditional student” includes but is not limited to students who, e.g., are first-generation students, are engaged in regular paid employment, belong to an ethnic or migrant minority or have care responsibilities (Gillen-O’Neel, 2021; Nairz-Wirth & Feldmann, 2018). NTS, however, are overrepresented among HE dropouts (Thaler & Unger, 2014; Tieben, 2020; Wolter et al., 2017), which contradicts the European Union’s above stated goals. This may be due to HE-institutions' predominant orientation toward “traditional” full-time students with tertiary-educated parents etc., which may cause NTS to experience additional difficulties in HE (Nairz-Wirth & Feldmann, 2018). The majority of HE dropouts happen during the transition to university (Aina et al., 2022), which can therefore be described as a particularly challenging time for students.

To deal with challenges, students need resilience, the ability to adapt to and grow during challenging times. As NTS may face additional difficulties in HE (see above), they would especially benefit from a high level of resilience. Previous empirical research established that resilient students are significantly less likely to drop out of HE than less resilient students (see e.g., Ayala & Manzano, 2018). An important dimension of resilience is the perceived self-efficacy (Jardim et al., 2021, p. 6). Bandura’s  (1994) conception of self-efficacy is employed to define a university student’s study-related perceived self-efficacy: The study-related perceived self-efficacy therefore describes the belief/expectation of a student to achieve certain levels of performance in their studies through their own abilities and actions, e.g., during an exam, which in turn affect the student’s progress, e.g., through the result of this exam.  Low-threshold access to study-related information capital strengthens the expectation of self-efficacy (Crozier & Reay, 2011), especially during the transition to university. Because students can make decisions on which skills to acquire and which actions to take to positively influence their study progress only based on appropriate information. Notably, access to informal high-quality information capital, so-called hot knowledge (Strecker & Feixa, 2020), e.g., information exchanged through informal chat with other students, is critical for a student’s perceived self-efficacy. Cold knowledge, e.g., the information displayed on the homepage of a study program, in contrast, embodies formal information capital, which often does not match the quality of hot knowledge (Strecker & Feixa, 2020). NTS, especially first-generation students, may be at a disadvantage in accessing hot knowledge, as they cannot access it through their families (Strecker & Feixa, 2020).

This contribution aims to identify study conditions, which facilitate student’s access to hot knowledge and are therefore, as conceptualized above, suitable for enhancing student’s resilience. For this purpose, Bourdieu’s relational theoretical framework with the concepts habitus, field and capital (Bourdieu, 1977, 1983) is applied and expanded by information capital as a combination of social and cultural capital (Lessky et al., 2021). As different fields of study vary greatly regarding the accessibility of hot knowledge due to differing field structures and conditions, three vastly different study programs are investigated with each being viewed as a specific social field. This leads to the central research questions of this contribution:

1. Which study conditions are suitable for facilitating student’s access to hot knowledge during the transition to university?

2. How do three different study programs compare regarding the student’s access to hot knowledge?

As our focus is on student’s experiences with and perceptions of study conditions regarding the accessibility of hot knowledge, we chose a qualitative research approach. 26 problem-centered interviews (Witzel, 2000) and eight group discussions provide the basis of the empirical study presented here*. The interviews and group discussions were conducted with non-traditional students from three different study programs at Austrian state universities (human medicine, engineering and an undergraduate program that combines business, economics and social sciences), which were chosen because of their greatly varying study conditions. The interviews took place between 2019 and 2023 and ranged in length from 18 to 135 minutes. At the time of the interviews, the interviewees were between 20 and 34 years old. To gain further in-depth insights into the topic (Kühn & Koschel, 2011, pp. 23–24), semi-structured group discussions with three to four participants each, took place in 2021, 2022 and 2023. Two group discussions were held with engineering students and three each with human medicine students and students of business, economics and social sciences. One out of the three group discussions with human medicine students and with students of business, economics and social sciences each also included a lecturer. The group-discussions ranged in length from 52 to 94 minutes. The interviews and group discussions were audio-recorded with informed consent (Witzel 2000) and subsequently transcribed verbatim for coding and analysis. We used pseudonyms throughout to guarantee anonymity. The data was analyzed using the ATLAS.ti qualitative data analysis software program. In accordance with the principles of Constructivist Grounded Theory, open coding was initially used, whereby the codes were developed based on the statements of the interviewed students. In a further step, the resulting codes were divided into categories, which were then assigned to Bourdieu's theoretical concepts. The interpretation of the data was therefore primarily guided by Bourdieusian theory, but sufficient care was taken to ensure that the process was not only deductive but also inductive, thus avoiding any mono-theoretical reductionism. *The empirical study presented in this article is based on the analysis of part of the qualitative data material collected as part of a research project (No. 18454), funded by the OeNB Anniversary Fund. The project is being carried out by the Education Sciences Group at the Vienna University of Economics and Business.

In the three fields of study examined, students obtain information capital in the form of hot knowledge from peers, digital groups, student councils and the student union. However, the sources of hot knowledge vary in the three fields analyzed due to the different institutionalization of access to information capital. In the study program of business, economics and social sciences, students mainly obtain hot knowledge from peers and digital groups, as well as from the student union. The digital groups are of particular relevance in this field regarding access to hot knowledge. This may be due to the low level of institutionalization of access to social capital, the peers. Engineering students also obtain hot knowledge from digital groups, but to a lesser extent, as access to information capital is more institutionalized in this field due to the student council’s services. These services include providing networking opportunities and spaces, and students obtain hot knowledge from the peers they get to know this way. In the field of human medicine, access to social capital is most strongly institutionalized due to the prevalence of a small group system; students obtain hot knowledge primarily from peers within the small group, but also from digital groups and the student union. Peers are the most important source of hot knowledge for students in all three fields of study, as digital groups, student councils and the student union are also primarily maintained by students. Accordingly, the results highlight the connection between access to social capital, relationships with peers, and access to information capital in the form of hot knowledge. Relationships with peers as well as the associated access to hot knowledge, promote students’ resilience. In addition, digital groups can be clearly assigned to hot knowledge.

Aina, C., Baici, E., Casalone, G., & Pastore, F. (2022). The determinants of university dropout: A review of the socio-economic literature. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 79, Article 101102, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2021.101102 Ayala, J. C., & Manzano, G. (2018). Academic performance of first-year university students: The influence of resilience and engagement. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(7), 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1502258 Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4, 1–65. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge studies in social anthropology: Vol. 16. Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1983). Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In R. Kreckel (Ed.), Soziale Ungleichheiten (pp. 183–198). Schwartz. Crozier, G., & Reay, D. (2011). Capital accumulation: Working-class students learning how to learn in HE. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(2), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.515021 European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2015). The European higher education area in 2015: Bologna process implementation report. Publications Office of the European Union. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/182EN.pdf https://doi.org/10.2797/998555 European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2020). The European Higher Education Area in 2020: Bologna Process Implementation Report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/c90aaf32-4fce-11eb-b59f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-183354043 https://doi.org/10.2797/756192 Gillen-O’Neel, C. (2021). Sense of Belonging and Student Engagement: A Daily Study of First- and Continuing-Generation College Students. Research in Higher Education, 62(1), 45–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-019-09570-y Jardim, J., Pereira, A., & Bártolo, A. (2021). Development and Psychometric Properties of a Scale to Measure Resilience among Portuguese University Students: Resilience Scale-10. Education Sciences, 11(2), Article 61, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020061 Kühn, T., & Koschel, K.‑V. (2011). Gruppendiskussionen (2nd ed.). Springer VS. Lessky, F., Nairz-Wirth, E., & Feldmann, K. (2021). Informational capital and the transition to university: First-in-family students' experiences in Austrian higher education. European Journal of Education, 56(1), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12437 Nairz-Wirth, E., & Feldmann, K. (2018). Hochschulen relational betrachtet. In AQ Austria (Ed.), Durchlässigkeit in der Hochschulbildung. Beiträge zur 5. AQ Austria Jahrestagung 2017 (pp. 79–94). Facultas. Strecker, T., & Feixa, C. (2020). Gender and social class in study choice: narratives of youth transitions in Spain. Gender and Education, 32(3), 429–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2018.1495831 Thaler, & Unger (2014). IHS_Dropoutstudie2014. Tieben, N. (2020). Non-completion, Transfer, and Dropout of Traditional and Non-traditional Students in Germany. Research in Higher Education, 61(1), 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-019-09553-z Witzel, A. (2000). Das problemzentrierte Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 1(1), 1–7. Wolter, A., Dahm, G., Kamm, C., Kerst, C., & Otto, A. (2017). Nicht-traditionelle Studierende: Studienverlauf, Studienerfolg und Lernumwelten. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF)