As access to tertiary education expands, universities are facing not only a growing number but also a greater diversity of students (Hussey & Smith, 2010). One consequence of the growing demographic diversity is the significant number of first-generation college students (FGCS), whose parents did not attain more than secondary education (Pascarella et al., 2004) and who make up more than 50% of university students in the Czech Republic (Hündlová & Šmídová, 2020). Depending on their social class background, applicants for university studies may differ in financial, social, and cultural resources (Stuber, 2009). Specifically, FGCS come from families with little or no experience of college education, which influences their ability to meet college expectations (Collier & Morgan, 2008). At the same time, FGCS are more at risk of experiencing a cultural mismatch between the values of academic institutions and the values of their family environment, which affects their academic performance (Stephens et al., 2012), and of dropping out of school (Ishitani, 2006). However, the experiences of FGCS in the Czech Republic are largely neglected, despite the Czech tertiary education's high dropout rate, especially in the first year of study (MŠMT, n. d.).

An effective way to reduce the number of students dropping out of higher education is to successfully integrate them academically and socially (Tinto, 1975). However, the integration process tends to be more challenging for FGCS (Soria, Stebleton & Huesman, 2013). A key factor in successful integration is the formation of a new identity as a university student (Whitehead & Wright, 2017). The changes and challenges that students face during the transition from high school to university transform their identities (Hussey & Smith, 2010) and group membership. The process of identification with a new group is influenced by the perceived compatibility of existing and new identities, which tends to be lower for FGCS, making it more difficult for them to identify with their college peers (Iyer et al., 2009). However, the construction of a strong social identity as a university student, in the sense of affiliation with a group of university students and professionals in the field of study, contributes to both psychological well-being and academic success (Mavor et al., 2017).

The presented research project examines how the process of construction of FGCS’ university student identity develops during the transitional first year of their university studies. It maps the challenges influencing this process and potentially threatening students’ academic success, and the protective factors through which they are able to face or avoid these challenges. The aim is to show how aspects of their diversity (e.g., learning and coping strategies) and other developed or developing identities enter into their interactions with the conditions and actors with whom they meet during their studies, and into their emerging university student identity. Identity is perceived from the perspective of social constructionist psychology as multidimensional, relational, contextual, and fluid (Burr, 2015) and through the lens of intersectionality as shaped by interwoven multidimensional power relations determined by class, gender, and other inequalities (Brenner, 2000).

In this longitudinal qualitative study examining first-generation students from the beginning of the first year to the beginning of the second year of their university studies, research data were obtained using semi-structured interviews, shadowing, and a focus group. Participants were interviewed and shadowed several times to capture the important turning points in the process of construction of their university student identity. At the end of the first year of their studies, a focus group was conducted. The obtained data are processed qualitatively within an interpretative framework using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022). The studied sample consists of 7 first-generation university students between 19 and 30 years of age (4 female and 3 male) attending various faculties at Charles University and studying different fields of study. Two students studied through distance learning; one of them interrupted his studies after the first semester.

The empirical research study allowed us to show the variability of the construction of university student identity influenced by FGCS’ learning and coping strategies, other identities, and interactions with the conditions and actors of the university environment. The formation of a strong future professional identity related to the field of study; the transformation of study habits from surface to deep learning and learning with classmates contributing to good academic performance; establishing new friendships with classmates and a sense of shared purpose, which help to cope with possible challenging moments or partial academic failures; fulfilling family expectations; planning to return and help the original community; and an effort to avoid undesirable consequences of early withdrawal from studies (the need to work in non-graduate positions, taking on full financial responsibility, the threat of deportation from the country) can be considered protective factors supporting the formation of a strong university student identity and helping to remain in university studies. Factors that weaken the process of forming a university student identity and potentially lead to a greater risk of early dropout include surface learning, poor or deteriorating academic performance, comparing one's academic performance with that of others, isolation from classmates, fear of stigma related to heterosexism and ableism, weak identification with the field of study and potential future profession, creating a strong professional identity in an area where a university degree is not required, unfulfilled expectations or disappointment in studies, and imposter syndrome. In summary, the output is a visualization of the development of a university student identity, providing an opportunity to reflect on factors significant for the success of their university studies.

Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage. Brenner, J. (2000). Conclusion – Intersections, Locations, and Capitalist Class Relations. In Brenner, J. Women and the Politics of Class (s. 293–324). New York: Monthly Review Press. Burr, V. (2015). Social constructionism (3rd edition). London: Routledge. 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, 425–446. Hündlová, L., Šmídová, M. (2020). Netradiční studenti a studentky vysokých škol: studie z šetření EUROSTUDENT VII. Praha: CSVŠ. Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2010). Transitions in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(2), 155–164. Ishitani, T. T. (2006). Studying attrition and degree completion behavior among first-generation college students in the United States. The Journal of Higher Education, 77, 861–885. Iyer, A., Jetten, J., Tsivrikos, D., Postmes, T., & Haslam, S. A. (2009). The more (and the more compatible) the merrier: Multiple group memberships and identity compatibility as predictors of adjustment after life transitions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 707–733. Mavor, K., Platow, M. J., & Bizumic, B. (2017). Self and social identity in educational contexts. Routledge. MŠMT. (n. d.). Analýzy. Ministerstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy. https://www.msmt.cz/vzdelavani/vysoke-skolstvi/analyzy Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experience and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 75, 249–284. Soria, K. M., Stebleton, M. J., & Huesman, jr., R. L. (2013). Class counts: Exploring differences in academic and social integration between working-class and middle/upper-class students at large, public research universities. J. COLLEGE STUDENT RETENTION, 15(2), 215-242. Stephens, N., Fryberg, S., Markus, H. R., Johnson, C., & Covarrubias, R. (2012). Unseen disadvantage: How American universities’ focus on independence undermines the academic performance of first-generation college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1178–1197. Stuber, J. M. (2009). Class, Culture, and Participation in the Collegiate Extra-Curriculum. Sociological Forum 24(4), 877-900. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89–125. Whitehead, P. M., & Wright, R. (2017). Becoming a college student: An empirical phenomenological analysis of first-generation college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41(10), 639–651.