U.S. Department of Education

Institute of Education Sciences

NCES 2005–171

First-Generation Students 

in Postsecondary 

Education

A Look at Their College 

Transcripts

Postsecondary Education

Descriptive Analysis Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2005–171 

First-Generation Students 

in Postsecondary 

Education 

A Look at Their College 

Transcripts 

Postsecondary Education 

Descriptive Analysis Report 

July 2005 

Xianglei Chen 

MPR Associates, Inc. 

C. Dennis Carroll 

Project Officer 

National Center for 

Education Statistics 
 

U.S. Department of Education 

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary 

Institute of Education Sciences 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Director 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Acting Commissioner 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and 

reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate 

to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United 

States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such 

statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and review and report 

on education activities in foreign countries. 

NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, 

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high quality 

data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. 

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a 

variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating information 

effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we would 

like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to: 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Institute of Education Sciences 

U.S. Department of Education 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 

July 2005 

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is http://nces.ed.gov 

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch 

Suggested Citation 

Chen, X. (2005). First Generation Students in Postsecondary Education: A Look at Their College Transcripts 

(NCES 2005–171). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

For ordering information on this report, write 

U.S. Department of Education 

ED Pubs 

P.O. Box 1398 

Jessup, MD 20794-1398 

or call toll free 1-877-4ED-PUBS 

Content Contact: 

Aurora D’Amico 

(202) 502-7334 

Aurora.D’Amico@ed.gov 
 

Executive Summary 

Recent research has generated a large body of 

knowledge about students who are the first 

members of their families to attend college 

(referred to as “first-generation students” in this 

report).1 The results show that such students are at 

a distinct disadvantage in gaining access to 

postsecondary education. Even those who 

overcome the barriers and do enroll have 

difficulty remaining enrolled and attaining a 

degree (Horn and Nuñez 2000; Nuñez and 

Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, and 

Nuñez 2001). 

What has not been well studied, however, are 

the coursetaking experiences of first-generation 

students after entering college. What do firstgeneration students study in college? How well do 

they do in their coursework? Is their coursework 

different from that of their peers whose parents 

went to college? This report explores these 

questions by using data from the Postsecondary 

Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the 

National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88) to examine the majors and 

coursetaking patterns of first-generation students 

and to compare their postsecondary experiences 

and outcomes with those of students whose 

parents went to college.2 This analysis focuses on 

a subset of the NELS 1992 12th-graders who had 

1 See, for example, Choy (2001). 

2 Two comparison groups were included in this report: those 

who had at least one parent with some college education, but 

neither parent attained a bachelor’s degree; and those who 

had at least one parent who earned a bachelor’s or advanced 

degree. The latter group was also frequently referred to as 

“students whose parents were college graduates” in this 

report. 

enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 

and 2000 and who also have complete 

postsecondary transcripts available; in addition, 

the analysis also required that parents’ education 

levels be reported. The findings of this study 

contribute to earlier research by distinguishing 

between first-generation students and their 

counterparts with respect to major fields of study 

chosen, the types of courses taken, amount of 

coursework completed, academic performance, 

and postsecondary outcomes. The major findings 

are summarized below.3 

First-Generation Students in 

Postsecondary Education: A Brief 

Portrait 

About 28 percent of the NELS 1992 12thgraders were first-generation students (figure A). 

However, they represented 22 percent of those 

who entered postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, indicating that first-generation 

students were less likely than other students to 

attend college within 8 years after high school.4 

Roughly 4 in 10 (43 percent) first-generation 

students who entered postsecondary education 

during this period left without a degree by 2000, 

while 24 percent had graduated with a bachelor’s 

3 For each indicator examined in this report, a parallel 

analysis was conducted for a restricted sample of students 

who attended a 4-year institution at any time in 1992−2000 

and expected to attain a bachelor’s degree. Most findings 

reported here also held for this subgroup. 

4 All comparisons made in the report were tested using 

Student’s t statistic. All differences cited were statistically 

significant at the .05 level. 

iii 
—

Figure A.—

Figure A.—

Executive Summary 

Figure A. Percentage distribution of generation status in 1992 12th-graders; and of those who had enrolled in 

postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, generation status by percentage distribution of 

postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 

Percent Percent 

100 

28 22 

100 

80 80 43 

39 

68 

14 

8 

39 

20 

6 

7 

60 60 42 41 10 

40 40 

36 

23 

20 31 20 

0 0 

24 

1992 12th-graders 1992 12th-graders who had First-generation Students whose Students whose 

enrolled in postsecondary students parent(s) had parent(s) had 

education in 1992–2000 some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

First-generation students No degree and not enrolled 

Students whose parent(s) had some college No degree, but still enrolled 

Associate’s or certificate 

Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s degree or higher Bachelor’s or higher 

NOTE: Except for the first two bar charts, all figures included only students for whom complete postsecondary transcripts were available 

and for whom parents’ education was known. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

degree (figure A). The opposite pattern was 

observed for students whose parents were college 

graduates: a large majority (68 percent) had 

completed a bachelor’s degree, while 20 percent 

left without a degree. 

As in earlier studies (Ishitani 2003), this report 

found that first-generation students had some 

family and background characteristics that are 

associated with attrition. Compared with their 

peers whose parents were college graduates, firstgeneration students were more likely to be Black 

or Hispanic and to come from low-income 

families (table 1). They were less prepared 

academically for college as demonstrated by their 

lower rates of taking higher-level mathematics 

courses in high school, their lower senior 

achievement test scores, and their lower college 

entrance examination scores. They were also more 

likely to delay postsecondary entry, begin at a 2-

year institution, and attend part time and 

discontinuously (table 2). These characteristics, as 

shown in earlier research, put them at potential 

risk for not persisting in their postsecondary 

studies and completing a degree (Nuñez and 

Cuccaro-Alamin 1998). 

Remedial Coursetaking 

Reflecting their weaker high school academic 

preparation, many first-generation students needed 

remedial assistance after they enrolled in college. 

A majority of first-generation students (55 

percent) took some remedial courses during their 

iv 
 Executive Summary 

college years, compared with 27 percent of 

students whose parents held a bachelor’s or 

advanced degree (table 3). In particular, 40 

percent of first-generation students took remedial 

mathematics courses, and 13 percent took 

remedial reading courses, compared with 16 and 6 

percent, respectively, of students whose parents 

had a bachelor’s degree or higher. The higher 

need for remedial education among firstgeneration students was apparent in many major 

fields of study. 

Undergraduate Major 

Choosing an undergraduate major appeared to 

pose a greater challenge for first-generation 

students than for other students. One-in-three firstgeneration students (33 percent) had not identified 

a major after entering postsecondary education, 

compared with 13 percent of students whose 

parents had a bachelor’s or advanced degree 

(figure B). 

Among those with a major, business and social 

sciences were the two most popular undergraduate 

fields for all three groups of students: between 7 

and 14 percent of students majored in these two 

fields. Despite this similar pattern, the differences 

in the choice of majors were evident among the 

three comparison groups. For example, firstgeneration students were more likely to choose a 

major in a vocational or technical field, whereas 

their counterparts whose parents had a bachelor’s 

or advanced degree were more likely to choose a 

major in science, mathematics, engineering and 

architecture, humanities, arts, or social sciences. 

Many factors are associated with a student’s 

choice of major. Weak academic preparation, for 

example, may deter first-generation students from 

choosing certain “high-skill” fields, such as 

mathematics and science. Perceived low-earning 

potential may also deter them from entering such 

fields as humanities, arts, and social sciences 

(Montmarquette, Cannings, and Mahseredjian 

2002). 

Credits Earned 

The sign that first-generation students trailed 

their peers in coursework appeared as early as the 

first year of college. First-generation students 

earned an average of 18 credits in their first year, 

compared with 25 credits earned by students 

whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher 

(figure C). First-year credit accumulation bears an 

important relationship to long-term postsecondary 

outcomes. For example, earning fewer credits in 

the first year may not only prolong the time to 

degree, but is strongly associated with leaving 

postsecondary education without earning a degree 

(table 7). 

As they progressed through postsecondary 

education, first-generation students continued to 

lag behind their peers in credit accumulation: 

overall, they earned an average of 66 credits 

during their entire enrollment, compared with an 

average of 112 credits earned by students whose 

parents were college graduates (figure C). The 

discrepancy in credits earned is due in part to firstgeneration students’ higher rates of late starts, 

disrupted enrollment, part-time attendance (table 

2), and leaving college without a degree (figure 

A). 

Coursetaking in Selected Areas 

Reflecting in part their preference for 

vocational/technical fields over academic ones, 

first-generation students were less likely than their 

peers whose parents were college graduates to 

take courses in various academic areas, including 

mathematics, science, computer science, social 

v 
—

Figure B.—

Executive Summary 

Figure B. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

by percentage distribution of undergraduate major 

14.2 

Business 13.9 

11.9 

4.7 

Education/library/social work 5.5 

6.0 

3.4 

Science 5.0 

8.4 

First-generation 3.9 students Engineering/architecture 4.1 

6.9 Students whose parent(s) 

had some college 1.1 

Computer 2.7 Students whose parent(s) 1.8 

had bachelor’s or higher degree 

0.1 

Mathematics 0.7 

1.1 

1.6 

Humanities 2.3 

6.7 

2.2 

Arts/applied arts 3.5 

6.0 

7.3 

Social sciences 9.9 

14.1 

8.0 

Health science/services 5.9 

6.2 

1.8 

Journalism/communication 2.4 

4.3 

2.6 

Human/protective services 2.7 

3.0 

6.2 

Vocational/technical fields 3.6 

2.4 

9.6 

Other 8.9 

8.3 

33.4 

No or unclassifiable major 29.1 

13.1 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

Percent 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

vi 
 

—

Figure C.—

Executive Summary 

Figure C. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

by average number of undergraduate credits earned in the first year and by 2000 

Number of credits 

112 

Credits earned in the first year Credits earned by 2000 

18 

66 

21 

84 

25 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

First-generation Students whose Students whose 

students parent(s) had parent(s) had bachelor’s 

some college or higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

studies, humanities, history, and foreign languages 

(tables 8 to 11). They also tended to earn fewer 

credits if they took courses in these areas. 

Taking mathematics as an example, 55 percent 

of first-generation students took at least one 

mathematics course in college, compared with 81 

percent of students whose parents had a bachelor’s 

degree or higher (figure D). Among those who 

took any mathematics, first-generation students 

earned an average of 8 credits, compared with 11 

credits earned by their counterparts. Moreover, the 

gap in advanced mathematics coursetaking (in 

both the likelihood of taking courses and credits 

earned) remained even among those who majored 

in mathematics and science (table 8). 

Postsecondary Performance 

In line with their greater need for remediation, 

first-generation students did not perform as well 

as their peers whose parents were college 

graduates as early as the first year of college. 

First-generation students had lower first-year 

undergraduate grade point averages (GPAs) (2.5 

versus 2.8) (figure E). This lower performance 

persisted throughout their entire undergraduate 

careers and was evident in many academic areas 

(e.g., mathematics, science, foreign language, 

history; table 14). 

In addition to having lower GPAs, firstgeneration students were more likely than other 

students to withdraw or repeat courses they 

attempted. In all undergraduate courses attempted 

vii 
—

Figure D.—

Figure D.—

—

Figure E.—

Figure E.—

Executive Summary 

Figure D. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 1992 and 

2000, by percentage who took various mathematics courses and average number of credits earned by those 

who took these courses 

Percentage who took various Average number of credits earned 

mathematics courses Number of 

Percent credits 

100 15 

80 

60 10 

40 

5 

20 

0 0 

55 

46 

12 

68 

57 

20 

81 

64 

34 

8 

5 

7 

10 

6 

10 

11 

6 

10 

Any 

mathematics 

Introductory 

college-level 

mathematics 

Calculus and 

advanced 

mathematics 

Any mathematics Introductory 

college-level 

mathematics 

Calculus and 

advanced 

mathematics 

First-generation 

students 

Students whose 

parent(s) had 

some college 

Students whose 

parent(s) had bachelor’s 

or higher degree 

NOTE: Introductory college-level mathematics includes courses below the level of calculus and above the level of algebra 2. Standard error 

tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

Figure E. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 1992 and 

2000, by first-year and overall grade point average (GPA) and percentage of courses withdrawn or 

repeated 

GPA Percent 

4.0 14 12 

12 

12 

2.9 2.8 3.0 2.7 2.6 2.6 10 

7 

2.5 

8 

2.0 

6 

4 1.0 

2 

0.0 0 

First-year GPA Overall GPA Courses withdrawn or repeated 

First-generation Students whose Students whose 

students parent(s) had parent(s) had bachelor’s 

some college or higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

viii 
 Executive Summary 

by students, the proportion of courses with 

withdrawal and repeat grades was 12 percent for 

first-generation students and 7 percent for students 

whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

Factors Related to Degree 

Completion and Persistence 

First-generation students were less likely than 

students with college-educated parents to earn a 

bachelor’s degree even after taking into account 

many related factors, including students’ 

demographic backgrounds, academic preparation, 

enrollment characteristics, credit production, and 

performance (table 15). This difference was 

observed even among students who attended a 4-

year institution with the intention of earning a 

bachelor’s degree. 

When the analysis included persistence as the 

outcome, before taking into account related 

variables, first-generation students were less likely 

than their peers whose parents attended college to 

persist in postsecondary education (i.e., they were 

less likely to earn any postsecondary credential or 

to be still enrolled as of 2000) (table 16). 

However, unlike the results for bachelor’s degree 

attainment, the difference in persistence 

disappeared after controlling for related factors. 

This finding differs from those of earlier studies, 

which found that first-generation students were 

less likely than other students to persist (e.g., 

Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, 

Bugarin, and Nuñez 2001). The reason for the 

change in results between the earlier studies and 

the current study may in part be due to the 

additional postsecondary coursetaking and 

performance variables introduced in the current 

analysis. These variables were not available for 

analysis in the previous studies and therefore, 

were not controlled for. 

Finally, this analysis demonstrated important 

associations between early credit production and 

academic performance and students’ success in 

postsecondary education. More credits completed 

and higher grades earned in the first year, and 

fewer withdrawn or repeated courses throughout 

enrollment were strongly associated with 

postsecondary degree attainment and persistence. 

Conclusion 

The findings from this report indicate that 

compared with students whose parents attended 

college, first-generation students consistently 

remained at a disadvantage after entering 

postsecondary education: they completed fewer 

credits, took fewer academic courses, earned 

lower grades, needed more remedial assistance, 

and were more likely to withdraw from or repeat 

courses they attempted. As a result, the likelihood 

of attaining a bachelor’s degree was lower for 

first-generation students compared to their peers 

whose parents attended college. This finding also 

held after taking into account variables related to 

degree completion including postsecondary credit 

production, performance, high school academic 

preparation, and student background 

characteristics. Even for students who attended a 

4-year institution with the intention of earning a 

bachelor’s degree, first-generation students were 

less likely to earn a bachelor’s degree than were 

their counterparts whose parents held a bachelor’s 

or higher degree. 

However, when the outcome measure was 

broadened to include persistence (i.e., the 

likelihood of earning any postsecondary credential 

or still being enrolled), no difference between 

first-generation students and their peers whose 

parents attended college was detected after 

controlling for related variables. 

ix 
Foreword 

This report uses data from the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the 

National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) to examine the majors and 

coursetaking patterns of first-generation students and to compare their experiences with those of 

students whose parents attended or graduated from college. The analysis presented in this report 

focused on a subset of the NELS 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000 and who also have complete postsecondary transcripts available and 

valid information on their parents’ education levels. 

The NELS:88 is a national longitudinal study that began in 1988 using a nationally 

representative sample of 8th-graders across U.S. schools. It tracked this cohort from middle 

school through secondary and postsecondary education and examined their labor market 

experiences, and marriage and family formation between 1988 and 2000. The PETS, collected as 

part of the NELS fourth follow-up survey in 2000, targeted the transcripts from all U.S. 

postsecondary institutions attended by NELS sample members in the 2000 survey. It supplements 

the postsecondary education information collected from the 1994 and 2000 follow-ups by 

including detailed information on the types of degree programs, periods of enrollment, majors or 

fields of study for instructional programs, specific courses taken, grades and credits attained, and 

credentials earned. 

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the NELS:88/2000 Data 

Analysis Systems (DAS). The DAS is a computer application that allows users to specify and 

generate their own tables and produces the design-adjusted standard errors necessary for testing 

the statistical significance of differences between numbers shown in the tables. It is available for 

public use on the NCES website at http://nces.ed.gov/das. Appendix B of this report contains 

additional information on the DAS. 

x 
Acknowledgments 

The author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of many individuals to the production 

of this report. At MPR Associates, Andrea Livingston, Barbara Kridl, Patti Gildersleeve, and 

Natesh Daniel edited, proofed, and formatted the report. Laura Horn provided guidance 

throughout the entire process. Ellen Bradburn and Robin Henke reviewed the early drafts and 

made helpful comments. 

At NCES, Dennis Carroll guided the development and review of the report through 

publication, and Paula Knepper and Marilyn Seastrom provided technical, methodological, and 

substantive reviews. Clifford Adelman (Office of Vocational and Adult Education), Michael 

Cohen (Bureau of Transportation Statistics), and Robert Lerner (NCES) also reviewed the draft. 

Outside the U.S. Department of Education, the author extends thanks to Alex McCormick 

(Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching), Jacqueline King (American Council on 

Education), and Dongbin Kim (the National Association of Independent Colleges and 

Universities) for their comments on the report at the planning and early draft stages. 

Lisa Bridges (Institute of Education Sciences) guided the final report through review by 

two outside peer reviewers. All of these reviewers provided insightful comments and helpful 

criticism. 

xi 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Contents 

Page 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. iii 

Foreword ................................................................................................................................... x 

Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................... xi 

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ xiv 

List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... xvi 

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 

Organization of the Report.................................................................................................... 2 

Data and Analysis Sample .................................................................................................... 2 

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education ....................................................... 5 

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? ........................................................ 11 

Remedial Coursetaking ........................................................................................................ 11 

Undergraduate Major ........................................................................................................... 12 

Credits Earned ...................................................................................................................... 16 

Coursetaking in Various Curricular Areas ........................................................................... 21 

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? .............................................................. 37 

Undergraduate Grade Point Average .................................................................................... 37 

Withdrawn and Repeated Courses ....................................................................................... 38 

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence ....................................................... 43 

Completion of Bachelor’s Degrees ....................................................................................... 44 

Persistence in Postsecondary Education................................................................................ 48 

Summary and Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 53 

References ................................................................................................................................. 55 

Appendix A—Glossary ............................................................................................................ 59 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology ................................................................. 73 

xiii 
List of Tables 

Table Page 

1 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of selected demographic and 

academic characteristics.................................................................................................. 7 

2 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of selected postsecondary 

enrollment characteristics................................................................................................ 10 

3 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage 

distribution of remedial courses taken ............................................................................ 13 

4 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of undergraduate major................. 15 

5 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage 

distribution of postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 .................................. 17 

6 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by average number and percentage distribution of total 

undergraduate credits earned in the first year and by 2000 ............................................. 19 

7 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000 and earned various numbers of undergraduate credits in the 

first year, by percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment and average time to 

bachelor's degree for those who earned a bachelor's degree ........................................... 20 

8 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by 

percentage who took various mathematics courses and average number of credits 

earned by those who took these courses.......................................................................... 23 

9 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by 

percentage who took various science courses and average number of credits earned by 

those who took these courses .......................................................................................... 26 

xiv 
List of Tables 

Table Page 

10 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by 

percentage who took any computer or engineering courses and average number of 

credits earned by those who took these courses .............................................................. 29 

11 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by 

percentage who took any courses in social sciences, foreign languages, humanities, 

and history, and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses..... 32 

12 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any courses in various 

curricular areas ................................................................................................................ 35 

13 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any courses in various 

vocational areas ............................................................................................................... 36 

14 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by firstyear and overall grade point average (GPA) and GPA in various academic areas ......... 39 

15 Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, percentage who had earned a bachelor's degree by 2000, and least 

squared coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics ................. 45 

16 Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, percentage who had attained a degree or certificate or were still 

enrolled by 2000, and least squared coefficients and standard errors, by selected 

student characteristics ..................................................................................................... 49 

Appendix 

B-1 Standard errors for table 2: Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled 

in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of 

selected postsecondary enrollment characteristics .......................................................... 77 

xv 
List of Figures 

Figure Page 

Executive Summary 

A Percentage distribution of generation status in 1992 12th-graders; and of those who 

had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, generation status by 

percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 ................ iv 

B Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of undergraduate major................. vi 

C Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by average number of undergraduate credits earned in the 

first year and by 2000 ...................................................................................................... vii 

D Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took various mathematics courses 

and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses......................... viii 

E Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by first-year and overall grade point average (GPA) 

and percentage of courses withdrawn or repeated........................................................... viii 

Text 

1 Percentage distribution of generation status among all 1992 12th-graders, among 

those who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, and 

among those who had enrolled and had complete postsecondary transcripts ................. 5 

2 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment and 

enrollment in 2000 .......................................................................................................... 6 

3 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000 and who completed various levels of mathematics in high 

school or had various levels of senior-year test scores, by percentage distribution of 

postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 .......................................................... 9 

xvi 
List of Figures 

Figure Page 

4 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any remedial courses ........................ 11 

5 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by average number of undergraduate credits earned in the 

first year and by 2000 ...................................................................................................... 18 

6 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took various mathematics courses 

and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses......................... 22 

7 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took various science courses and 

average number of credits earned by those who took these courses ............................... 25 

8 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any computer or engineering 

courses and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses............ 28 

9 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary 

credits between 1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any courses in social 

sciences, foreign languages, humanities, and history, and average number of credits 

earned by those who took these courses.......................................................................... 31 

10 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 credits in 

postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, by first-year and overall grade point 

average (GPA)................................................................................................................. 38 

11 Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000, by percentage of withdrawn or repeated courses in all 

courses attempted ............................................................................................................ 41 

xvii 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Introduction 

The college environment presents new academic, social, and personal challenges to many 

first-time students, but these challenges are often greater for students who are the first members 

in their families to attend college (referred to as “first-generation students” in this report) 

(London 1989; Levine and Nidiffer 1996; Weis 1992). The difficulties that such students 

experience are reflected in many indicators of postsecondary education success (Choy 2001). For 

example, compared with their peers who had college-educated parents, students from families in 

which neither parent attended college are at a distinct disadvantage in gaining access to 

postsecondary education (Berkner and Chavez 1997). Even those who overcome these barriers 

and do enroll have difficulty remaining enrolled and attaining a degree⎯a disadvantage that 

persists even after controlling for a wide range of demographic, academic, and enrollment 

characteristics (Horn and Nuñez 2000; Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, 

and Nuñez 2001). Taken together, these results suggest that growing up in a family in which 

neither parent has gone to college may have long-term consequences on students’ success in 

postsecondary education. 

What has not been explored in depth, however, are a number of questions that pertain to 

first-generation students’ coursetaking experiences. What do they study in college? How well do 

they do in their coursework? Is their coursework different from that of their peers whose parents 

went to college? Does coursetaking play a role in postsecondary outcomes? So far, answers to 

these questions are limited. Analyzing first-year data from 23 colleges (both 2- and 4-year 

institutions), Terenzini et al. (1996) found that compared with other students, first-generation 

students completed fewer first-year credit hours, took fewer humanities and fine arts courses, 

studied fewer hours, and were less likely to participate in an honors program. Similar findings 

were reported in another study that focused on first-generation students attending five community 

colleges located in five different states (Pascarella et al. 2003). While these studies are 

informative of first-generation students’ coursetaking in college, they are limited by the fact that 

they used small-scale local data or followed students only during the first year of college. 

This report provides a more comprehensive analysis of the coursetaking experiences of 

first-generation students by using national, longitudinal, and transcript-based data⎯the 

Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88). The advantages of using transcript-based data to analyze students’ curricular 

activities are evident: they provide comprehensive information about the number and types of 

1 
 

Introduction 

courses students actually take and the data are less error prone and more objective than selfreported data, all of which permits a more accurate analysis (Adelman 2004b). 

To be consistent with earlier studies (Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Horn and Nuñez 

2000; Warburton, Bugarin, and Nuñez 2001), this report defines students’ generation status 

according to the highest level of education attained by their parents. First-generation students are 

defined as those from families where neither parent attained any education beyond high school. 

These students are compared with two groups of students whose parents went to college: those 

with at least one parent who had some college education, but neither attained a bachelor’s degree; 

and those with at least one parent who earned a bachelor’s or advanced degree. 

Organization of the Report 

The report begins with a brief description of the background characteristics of firstgeneration college students and their enrollment behaviors, postsecondary persistence, and 

degree attainment. It then addresses what first-generation students study in college by focusing 

on their remedial coursetaking, choices of undergraduate majors, number of credits completed, 

types of courses taken, and amount of coursework completed. Next, the report examines 

students’ academic performance by focusing on two measures of performance: undergraduate 

grade point average (GPA) and the proportion of all attempted courses either withdrawn or 

repeated. The report concludes with an analysis of the relationship of first-generation status and 

coursetaking variables with selected postsecondary outcomes after taking into account 

interrelated variables. 

Data and Analysis Sample 

Data for the analysis are drawn from the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) 

collected in 2000 as part of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88). The 

NELS:88 is a national longitudinal study that began in 1988 using a nationally representative 

sample of 8th-graders across U.S. schools. This cohort was followed up in 1990, when most 

cohort members were in 10th grade; in 1992, when most cohort members were in 12th grade; and 

in 1994 and 2000, when most cohort members had been out of high school for 2 and 8 years, 

respectively.1 In addition, the study was designed not only to follow a cohort of students over 

time but also to “freshen” the sample in the 1990 and 1992 surveys in order to create a 

representative sample of students enrolled in 10th grade in 1990 and in 12th grade in 1992 that 

could be compared with the earlier cohorts from the National Longitudinal Study of the High 

School Class of 1972 (NLS:72) and the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study (HS&B). 

1 A summary of NELS base-year and follow-up surveys can be found in Ingels et al. (2002). 

2 
 

 

Introduction 

The data collection for the postsecondary transcripts began in fall 2000 and targeted 

approximately 9,600 students who participated in the 2000 fourth follow-up study and reported 

having attended at least one U.S. postsecondary institution (Adelman, Daniel, and Berkovits 

2003). Transcripts were requested from a total of 3,200 postsecondary institutions that students 

reported having attended. Based on the transcripts received and, when they were not, other 

corroborating sources from the National Student Loan Data System files, Advanced Placement 

and College Entrance Examination Board tests, and other student responses, about 9,400 students 

were identified as “likely postsecondary participants.” For more information about the NELS 

PETS data collection and design, see Adelman, Daniel, and Berkovits (2003). 

The analysis sample for this report includes students who were in 12th grade in 1992 

because that year marked the modal year of high school graduation and date of their initial entry 

into postsecondary education. Because this report focuses on coursetaking and requires full 

information on courses taken across all institutions attended, the sample was further restricted to 

NELS postsecondary participants who had a complete transcript record in the PETS file.2 Finally, 

the definition of first-generation students requires the sample members to have valid information 

on their parents’ education. Thus, students who did not have such information were excluded. 

These selections resulted in a final analysis sample of about 7,400 students, accounting for about 

87 percent (weighted) of all the NELS 1992 12th-graders who entered postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000. 

For most tables presented in this report, a parallel analysis was also conducted for a 

subsample of students who attended a 4-year institution at any time between 1992 and 2000 and 

expected to attain a bachelor’s or higher degree.3 This restriction allows examination of 

differences between first-generation students and their peers within the group of individuals who 

intend to earn a bachelor’s degree and, therefore may be more comparable academically. The 

findings for this group may also reduce potential effects of some confounding factors such as 

type of institutions attended, expectations, and degree goals. 

2 A complete transcript record means receiving all transcripts from all institutions students reported attending. Including 

incomplete transcripts may distort analysis of students’ coursetaking. 

3 These students are referred to as “students who attended a 4-year institution with bachelor’s degree goals” in this report. This 

group accounted for 59 percent (weighted) of all the NELS 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000. Throughout this report, students’ educational expectations in 1994 (as opposed to 1992) were used 

because 1994 expectations were probably more likely than 1992 expectations to reflect students’ current expectations in relation 

to their postsecondary coursetaking. 

3 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
—

Figure 1.—

Figure 1.—

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

About 28 percent of all the 12th-graders in the National Education Longitudinal Study 

(NELS) cohort were identified as having parents with no postsecondary education (figure 1). 

However, only 22 percent of the students who entered postsecondary education between 1992 

and 2000 had parents who did not go to college, indicating that students of parents without any 

college education are less likely than others to attend college after high school. The focus of this 

report is on the 21 percent of the NELS cohort who became first-generation college students by 

enrolling in postsecondary education by 2000 and who also had a complete transcript, and 

comparing their postsecondary experiences and outcomes with those of students in postsecondary 

education whose parents went to college. 

Figure 1. Percentage distribution of generation status among all 1992 12th-graders, among those who had 

enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, and among those who had enrolled 

and had complete postsecondary transcripts 

Percent 

100 

80 

60 

28 22 21 

42 42 

41 

40 

20 

0 

1992 12th-graders 1992 12th-graders who had 1992 12th-graders who had 

enrolled in postsecondary enrolled in postsecondary 

education between 1992 and 2000 education between 1992 and 

2000 with complete transcripts 

31 36 37

First-generation students 

Students whose parent(s) had some college 

Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 

NOTE: The column labeled “1992 12th-graders” includes students who had never enrolled in postsecondary education 

through 2000. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

5 
—

Figure 2.—

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

Consistent with findings reported previously (Choy 2001), first-generation students in the 

NELS cohort did not do as well as their peers in terms of postsecondary persistence and 

attainment. Of first-generation students who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, nearly one-half (43 percent) had left without a degree by 2000 and one-quarter 

had attained a bachelor’s degree (figure 2). By contrast, roughly two-thirds (68 percent) of 

students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher finished their undergraduate education 

with a bachelor’s degree, and 20 percent left without a credential. These differences held even 

among students who expected to earn a bachelor’s degree and attended a 4-year college. 

Figure 2. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 

All students who were enrolled in 

postsecondary education 

Percent 

100 

80 33 39 43 

8 60 8 13 10 

46 

14 

40 

23 

20 

0 

Total First- Students Students 

generation whose whose 

students parent(s) parent(s) 

had some had 

college bachelor’s 

or higher 

degree 

68 

7 

6 

20 

24 

39 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who 

attended a 4-year institution 

68 

6 

7 

20 

29 5 

3 

6 

9 7 

13 

24 

15 

63 

78 

No degree and not 

enrolled 

No degree, but still 

enrolled 

Associate’s or 

certificate 

Bachelor’s or 

higher 

47 

Total First- Students Students 

generation whose whose 

students parent(s) parent(s) 

had some had 

college bachelor’s 

or higher 

degree 

NOTE: In this figure and all subsequent figures in this report, only postsecondary students for whom complete transcripts 

were available and parents’ education was known are included. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard 

error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

As reported in earlier research (Ishitani 2003), the family and background characteristics of 

first-generation college students were typically associated with characteristics that placed them at 

risk for attrition. For example, compared with their peers whose parents were college graduates, 

first-generation students were more likely to be Black or Hispanic and come from low-income 

families (table 1). They were less prepared academically for college as demonstrated by their 

6 
 

—

Table 1.—

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

Table 1. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of selected demographic and academic characteristics 

Students Students whose 

First- whose parent(s) had 

generation parent(s) had bachelor’s 

Demographic and academic characteristics Total students some college or higher degree

 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Gender

 Male 46.5 39.8 45.4 51.5

 Female 53.5 60.2 54.6 48.5 

Race/ethnicity1

 American Indian 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.4

 Asian/Pacific Islander 5.1 4.7 3.9 6.5

 Black 10.5 13.7 13.6 5.3

 White 75.5 64.0 73.6 84.0

 Hispanic 8.4 16.9 8.3 3.8 

Family income in 1991

 Less than $25,000 24.1 50.3 25.9 7.4

 $25,000–49,999 35.0 34.3 44.7 24.8

 $50,000–74,999 24.4 12.7 23.1 32.3

 $75,000 or more 16.5 2.7 6.3 35.5 

Highest level of mathematics completed in high school

 Calculus or precalculus 28.3 15.2 22.5 41.5

 Trigonometry 13.6 9.2 14.1 15.4

 Algebra 2 31.4 30.4 34.0 29.1

 Geometry 13.6 22.2 14.3 8.4

 Algebra 1 10.4 15.3 12.8 5.2

 Other mathematics 2.7 7.7 2.3 0.5 

Composite achievement test score in 1992

 Low level 11.7 21.5 12.9 5.0

 Middle level 52.3 60.6 57.2 42.3

 High level 36.0 17.9 29.8 52.7 

Highest level of education expected in 1994

 High school or less 1.9 3.3 2.0 1.1

 Some college 12.7 22.2 15.6 4.1

 Bachelor’s or higher degree 85.4 74.6 82.4 94.8 

Took SAT/ACT

 No 37.9 50.2 39.7 29.0

 Yes 62.1 49.8 60.3 71.0 

SAT/ACT composite score of those who took it

 Low level 23.0 40.0 27.5 12.1

 Middle level 51.3 49.7 54.1 49.2

 High level 25.7 10.3 18.4 38.7 

1 American Indian includes Alaska Native, Black includes African American, Asian/Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, 

and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified. 

NOTE: In this table and all subsequent tables in this report, only postsecondary students for whom complete transcripts 

were available and parents’ education was known are included. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard 

error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 

1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

7 
First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

lower rates of taking higher-level mathematics courses in high school, their lower senior 

achievement test scores, and their lower college entrance examination scores. Although firstgeneration students had relatively lower educational expectations compared with their 

counterparts whose parents went to college or graduated with a bachelor’s degree, three out of 

four first-generation students expected to attain a bachelor’s degree. This high expectation, 

however, did not translate into a high bachelor’s degree completion rate: just 24 percent of firstgeneration students attained a bachelor’s degree by 2000 (figure 2). 

Academic preparation is associated with student persistence toward long-term degree 

completion. As shown in figure 3, completing only low-level mathematics courses or earning low 

test scores in high school decreased all students’ likelihood of obtaining a bachelor’s degree and 

increased their likelihood of leaving college without a degree. However, academic preparation 

did not entirely explain the differences between first-generation students and their peers in 

postsecondary attainment and persistence. Even among those who were considered well prepared 

academically (i.e., those completing calculus, pre-calculus, or trigonometry in high school or 

earning high scores on achievement tests), first-generation students were less likely to attain a 

bachelor’s degree and more likely to leave college without a degree than their counterparts whose 

parents graduated from college. 

Table 2 displays students’ postsecondary enrollment characteristics. Compared with the 

two groups of students whose parents went to college, first-generation students were less likely to 

begin their postsecondary education at a 4-year institution, enter college immediately after high 

school, and enroll full time and continuously. These enrollment characteristics may reflect firstgeneration students’ relatively poor academic preparation, insufficient family and financial 

resources, as well as their personal goals and preferences; and have been shown in earlier 

research to have negative consequences for postsecondary persistence, performance, and 

attainment (Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Terenzini et al. 1996; Warburton, Bugarin, and 

Nuñez 2001). The next section of the report explores the analysis of students’ coursetaking 

experiences and performance in college. 

8 
 

—

Figure 3.—

Figure 3.—

Figure 3.—

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

Figure 3. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000 and who completed various levels of mathematics in high school or had various 

levels of senior-year test scores, by percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment 

and enrollment in 2000 

Students who completed Students who completed 

calculus, pre-calculus, or trigonometry only algebra I or below 

Percent 

100 

4 

80 

73 

6 

16 

5 3

60 

55 

40 

57 63 

83 

12 

6 6 

25 22 

10 

8 

15 

60 59 58 

11 11 9 

7 

24 16 20 

0 

Total First- Students Students Total First- Students Students 

generation whose whose generation whose whose 

students parent(s) parent(s) students parent(s) parent(s) 

had some had had some had 

college bachelor’s college bachelor’s 

or higher or higher 

degree degree 

4 

27 

15 7 

24 

Students who had high Students who had low 

Percent senior-year test scores senior-year test scores 

100 

71 

6 

17 

5 

80 

23 

59 

27 

9 

2 

7 

5 

5 

16 60 

54 

11 15 

51 53 58 

40 82 

10 

9 

21 21 20 26

0 

Total First- Students Students Total First- Students Students 

generation whose whose generation whose whose 

students parent(s) parent(s) students parent(s) parent(s) 

had some had had some had 

college bachelor’s college bachelor’s 

or higher or higher 

degree degree 

39 

44 

11 

6 

15 8 12 

Bachelor’s or higher Associate’s or certificate No degree, but still enrolled No degree and not enrolled 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

9 
—

Table 2.—

First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education 

Table 2. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of selected postsecondary enrollment characteristics 

Students Students whose 

First- whose parent(s) had 

generation parent(s) had bachelor’s 

Postsecondary enrollment characteristics Total students some college or higher degree

 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Type of first institution

 4-year 57.4 40.3 48.8 76.3

 2-year 40.6 54.9 49.2 23.3

 Less-than-2-year 2.0 4.8 2.0 0.4 

Time between high school graduation and

 postsecondary entry

 Less than 1 year 85.8 78.3 82.8 93.2

 1–2 years 6.8 10.0 7.3 4.5

 More than 2 years 7.5 11.8 9.9 2.4 

Continuity of enrollment

 Continuous 67.0 51.7 63.7 79.1

 Stopout after 3 years of continuous 3.7 3.3 4.1 3.4

 Discontinuous 18.0 24.4 19.2 13.1

 Indeterminable 1.1 1.6 1.4 0.6

 Enrolled for less than 1 year 10.2 19.0 11.6 3.8 

Enrollment status

 Always full-time 62.7 55.5 60.3 69.4

 Part-time at least at one institution 37.3 44.5 39.8 30.6 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/ 

reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 

1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

10 
—

Figure 4.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

The following section examines what first-generation students study in college by focusing 

on their remedial coursetaking, choices of undergraduate majors, credit production, and types and 

amount of coursetaking in various areas. 

Remedial Coursetaking 

Many high school graduates lack adequate academic preparation for higher education and 

need remedial assistance to do college-level work (Parsad and Lewis 2003). Among the 1992 

12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education in 1992–2000, 4 in 10 (40 percent) 

took at least one remedial course, about 3 in 10 (27 percent) took remedial mathematics courses, 

and nearly 1 in 10 (9 percent) took remedial reading courses (figure 4). 

Figure 4. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any remedial courses 

All students who had enrolled in Students with bachelor’s degree goals who 

postsecondary education attended a 4-year institution 

Percent Percent 

100 

40 

27 

9 

55 

40 

13 

44 

31 

10 

27 

16 

6 

100 

80 80 

60 60 

40 40 

20 20 

0 0 

Any remedial Remedial Remedial reading 

31 

20 

7 

45 

34 

12 

37 

24 

8 

21 

12 

4 

Any remedial Remedial Remedial reading 

mathematics mathematics 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

11 
 

 

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

First-generation students, in particular, needed remedial help: 55 percent took remedial 

courses during their college years, compared with 27 percent of their counterparts whose parents 

held bachelor’s or advanced degrees (figure 4). Among those with bachelor’s degree goals who 

attended 4-year institutions, 45 percent of first-generation students took at least one remedial 

course, compared with 21 percent of students whose parents had at least bachelor’s degrees. 

Examining specific types of courses revealed that 40 percent of first-generation students 

took one or more remedial mathematics course, and 13 percent took one or more remedial 

reading course during their college years, compared with 16 and 6 percent, respectively, of those 

whose parents had at least bachelor’s degrees. As shown in table 3, the greater need for remedial 

education for first-generation students was also apparent in many major fields of study.4 For 

example, 59 percent of first-generation students majoring in social sciences/journalism/ 

communications took at least one remedial course, compared with 17 percent of students whose 

parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

It should be noted that taking remedial courses in college was also common among students 

whose parents had just some college experience: 44 percent of these students took at least one 

remedial course, and close to one-third took at least one mathematics course during their college 

years (figure 4). 

Undergraduate Major 

During the early stage of an undergraduate education, every student must choose a major 

field of study (Montmarquette, Cannings, and Mahseredjian 2002). To fulfill graduation 

requirements, students must earn enough credits in their major. Thus, to a large extent, students’ 

coursetaking is concentrated in those courses that fit into their major field of study. 

While choosing a major is difficult for many students, it may pose a greater challenge to 

first-generation students because their parents may be less able to offer them guidance. Table 4 

provides some evidence of first-generation students’ uncertainty in choosing a major: one-inthree first-generation students (33 percent) did not have a classified major5 after entering 

4 Except for mathematics/science and humanities/arts majors where no significant differences were found between firstgeneration students and those whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

5 This included “no” or “unclassifiable” majors. The undergraduate major field of study was created by taking 1) the major field 

code of the first bachelor’s degree for those who earned a bachelor’s degree; 2) the major code of the first associate’s degree for 

those who earned an associate’s degree but no bachelor’s degree; 3) the major code of the certificate for those who earned a 

certificate but neither a bachelor’s nor associate’s degree; and 4) the major code of those who did not earn any degree. For 

students who earned an associate’s degree or certificate, subsequently transferred to a 4-year institution, and earned more than 10 

credits from the 4-year institution, but had not earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000, their major fields were adjusted by taking the 

major codes from their non-degree transcripts from 4-year institutions. 

12 
—

Table 3.—

Table 3.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 3. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage distribution of 

remedial courses taken 

Remedial 

All remedial courses mathematics Remedial reading 

At Two Four At Two At Two

 least or or least or least or 

Generation status and undergraduate major one One three more one One more one One more 

All students 39.7 16.3 14.4 9.0 27.2 15.6 11.6 9.3 7.0 2.3

 First-generation students 54.6 18.3 22.1 14.2 39.6 21.5 18.1 13.2 9.8 3.4

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 43.9 19.1 14.2 10.7 31.0 18.5 12.5 10.3 7.2 3.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 26.6 12.1 10.3 4.3 16.1 9.1 7.0 5.9 5.1 0.9 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 54.6 13.1 29.7 11.8 27.7 13.2 14.5 8.1 6.1 2.0

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 40.4 17.0 12.3 11.1 20.7 10.2 10.5 8.6 6.3 2.3

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 24.8 9.5 13.0 2.4 10.4 7.3 3.1 9.1 8.6 0.4

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 52.3 16.3 27.4 8.7 38.9 13.7 25.2 13.6 7.4 6.2

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 36.2 18.6 8.6 9.1 24.3 12.3 12.0 10.1 4.2 5.8

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 30.3 16.3 10.7 3.3 16.7 8.2 8.6 5.0 4.6 0.3

 Mathematics/science

 First-generation students 22.9 10.6 7.6 4.7 14.5 11.4 3.0 0.6 0.6 #

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 26.4 13.8 11.8 0.8 18.2 15.4 2.8 3.9 3.9 #

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 16.2 9.4 6.1 0.7 1.6 1.3 0.3 2.4 1.7 0.7

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 37.5 11.7 21.7 4.1 26.4 19.9 6.5 4.4 4.1 0.3

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 34.4 21.0 7.1 6.3 23.3 16.2 7.1 1.5 1.5 #

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 7.5 2.8 3.3 1.4 2.9 1.6 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.5

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 33.6 5.4 15.4 12.7 28.1 8.4 19.8 8.1 6.9 1.2

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 27.9 14.6 7.1 6.2 17.4 11.6 5.9 6.0 3.3 2.7

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 18.0 8.7 3.4 5.9 13.1 5.7 7.3 2.6 1.8 0.8

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 58.6 26.9 17.5 14.1 47.9 33.1 14.8 7.2 6.7 0.5

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 36.2 22.6 8.9 4.7 26.1 19.6 6.5 6.0 5.7 0.3

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 16.7 10.7 4.8 1.3 11.1 8.2 2.9 2.4 1.9 0.5

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 49.9 23.0 22.1 4.9 37.4 27.7 9.7 13.6 9.1 4.5

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 39.6 19.2 13.1 7.3 23.9 18.2 5.7 9.8 9.8 #

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 24.4 7.4 11.7 5.3 17.3 8.0 9.3 4.4 3.3 1.1 

See notes at end of table. 

13 
—

Table 3.—

Table 3.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 3. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage distribution of 

remedial courses taken—Continued 

Remedial 

All remedial courses mathematics Remedial reading 

At Two Four At Two At Two

 least or or least or least or 

Generation status and undergraduate major one One three more one One more one One more

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 54.2 15.9 25.1 13.2 43.6 28.1 15.5 13.8 8.4 5.4

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 45.4 17.8 17.3 10.2 30.9 18.7 12.2 13.1 9.2 3.9

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 36.6 13.9 16.8 5.9 25.1 14.4 10.7 10.0 9.4 0.5

 Other

 First-generation students 58.5 8.6 31.5 18.4 49.4 24.4 25.0 16.0 9.5 6.5

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 59.7 18.5 22.2 19.0 45.6 21.5 24.1 22.9 12.4 10.5

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 40.6 16.8 14.1 9.7 26.9 10.7 16.3 10.5 9.5 1.0

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 62.1 24.1 18.1 19.9 44.9 21.5 23.4 19.0 15.4 3.7

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 54.8 20.5 19.1 15.3 43.3 24.8 18.6 12.8 9.1 3.7

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 57.3 24.4 23.8 9.1 39.1 23.7 15.4 13.4 11.0 2.4 

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/ 

reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

postsecondary education, compared with 13 percent of students whose parents had a bachelor’s 

or advanced degree. 

Among those with a major, the most popular field for first-generation students was 

business: 14 percent chose this field as their major. Following business, the next most popular 

fields were health science/services and social sciences: 8 and 7 percent, respectively, of firstgeneration students majored in these areas. Business and social sciences were the two most 

frequently selected fields for other students as well: between 10 and 14 percent of students whose 

parents went to college majored in these two fields. Despite this similar pattern, the differences 

in the choice of majors were evident among the three comparison groups. For example, although 

a relatively small percentage of students major in a vocational or technical field, first-generation 

students were more likely to do so than their peers whose parents attended college or held 

bachelor’s degrees (6 versus 4 and 2 percent). In contrast, students whose parents held bachelor’s 

degrees were more likely to choose a major in science, mathematics, engineering/architecture, 

humanities, arts, social sciences, and journalism/communication than first-generation students. 

14 
—

Table 4.—

Table 4. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, by per

of undergraduate major 

Educa- 

tion/ Engi- Journa- Human/ 

library/ neering/ Arts/ Health lism/ protec- 

Busi- social archi- Com- Mathe- Human- applied Social science/ commu- tive/ 

Generation status ness work Science tecture puter matics ities arts sciences services nication services All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 13.2 5.5 5.9 5.1 2.0 0.7 3.8 4.1 10.9 6.5 3.0 2.8  First-generation students 14.2 4.7 3.4 3.9 1.1 0.1 1.6 2.2 7.3 8.0 1.8 2.6  Students whose parent(s) had some college 13.9 5.5 5.0 4.1 2.7 0.7 2.3 3.5 9.9 5.9 2.4 2.7  Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 11.9 6.0 8.4 6.9 1.8 1.1 6.7 6.0 14.1 6.2 4.3 3.0 Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 13.4 7.6 7.8 6.3 2.5 1.0 5.5 5.2 14.8 6.5 4.2 3.1  First-generation students 14.2 7.8 5.8 5.2 2.0 0.1 2.5 3.6 10.7 8.1 3.5 2.9  Students whose parent(s) had some college 14.2 8.4 6.5 4.7 3.7 1.1 3.8 4.4 15.0 6.4 3.7 3.1  Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 12.5 6.9 9.5 8.0 1.8 1.2 7.7 6.3 16.1 6.1 4.9 3.1 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth 

Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 
 

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Such differences were also observed among students with bachelor’s degree goals who 

attended 4-year colleges at any time during 1992−2000: first-generation students were less likely 

than those whose parents were college graduates to have a classified major and to choose a major 

field in science, mathematics, humanities, arts, and social studies in particular. Many factors are 

associated with a student’s choice of major. For example, poor academic preparation may limit 

the ability of first-generation students to choose certain “high-skill” fields, such as mathematics 

and science. The perceived low-earning potential of certain fields may also deter them from 

entering such fields as humanities, arts, and social sciences (Montmarquette, Cannings, and 

Mahseredjian 2002; Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998). 

Comparing degree attainment by major field revealed some obvious differences in 

outcomes. Regardless of their parents’ education levels, students without a major or who had 

majored in human/protective services/vocational fields or “other” fields were consistently less 

likely than other students to earn a bachelor’s degree (table 5).6 Also, at least 81 percent of 

students without a major and at least 56 percent of students who had majored in “other” fields 

left college without earning any credential. 

Looking at the first-generation group, students with the highest rate of bachelor’s degree 

completion included those who had majored in education/library science/social work (72 

percent), social sciences/journalism/communications (67 percent), and mathematics and science 

(66 percent). Business and health sciences/services majors tended to lag behind (32 percent), but 

they were more likely than students with other majors (except for human/protective 

services/vocational fields) to earn a certificate. 

Credits Earned 

Previous research has found that students from disadvantaged backgrounds do not earn as 

many college credits as their more advantaged peers (McCormick 1999). They trail their peers in 

credit accumulation as early as the first year of their enrollment. Because first-generation students 

are more likely to come from low-income families and have similar risk characteristics, they 

exhibited the same patterns. As shown in figure 5, first-generation students trailed their peers in 

the number of credits earned beginning in their first year of college: on average, they earned 

about 18 credits in the first year, compared with 25 credits earned by students whose parents had 

a bachelor’s degree or higher. One-in-three first-generation students (33 percent) earned 10 or 

fewer credits in the first year, compared with 12 percent of those whose parents had at least a 

6 Due to small sample sizes, certain categories of majors were combined in table 5. 

16 
—

Table 5.—

Table 5.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 5. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage distribution of 

postsecondary attainment and enrollment in 2000 

Earned a degree Did not earn a degree 

Bache- Assolor’s or ciate’s Certi- Still Not 

Generation status and undergraduate major Total higher degree ficate Total enrolled enrolled

 Total 59.7 46.3 8.2 5.2 40.3 7.5 32.8 

First-generation students 46.8 23.5 12.7 10.5 53.2 9.9 43.3

 Business 78.5 31.9 19.4 27.2 21.5 3.5 18.0

 Education/library/social work 78.5 71.9 2.1 4.5 21.6 2.1 19.5

 Mathematics/science 80.6 65.5 15.1 # 19.4 5.1 14.3

 Engineering/architecture/computer 73.9 40.9 28.8 4.3 26.1 7.7 18.4

 Humanities/arts 55.9 42.4 13.4 # 44.1 9.6 34.5

 Social sciences/journalism/communication 80.2 67.2 12.1 1.0 19.8 3.1 16.7

 Health sciences/services 88.6 31.9 22.2 34.5 11.3 1.6 9.7

 Human/protective services/vocational fields 66.8 9.9 21.7 35.2 33.2 8.5 24.7

 Other 32.0 1.9 27.1 2.9 68.0 11.1 56.9

 No major or unclassifiable # # # # 100.0 18.5 81.3 

Students whose parent(s) had some college 52.9 38.5 9.5 4.9 47.1 7.6 39.4

 Business 81.1 50.4 19.2 11.4 18.9 2.1 16.8

 Education/library/social work 88.4 81.1 6.1 1.2 11.6 2.1 9.5

 Mathematics/science 83.0 70.0 3.5 9.5 17.0 6.5 10.5

 Engineering/architecture/computer 84.3 58.7 20.9 4.7 15.7 3.5 12.2

 Humanities/arts 79.9 70.2 8.8 0.9 20.1 3.4 16.7

 Social sciences/journalism/communication 85.4 80.4 4.8 0.2 14.6 3.3 11.3

 Health sciences/services 90.1 52.6 23.8 13.8 9.9 1.7 8.2

 Human/protective services/vocational fields 62.8 28.4 13.3 21.1 37.2 6.8 30.4

 Other 23.3 3.9 17.4 2.0 76.7 12.5 64.2

 No major or unclassifiable # # # # 100.0 15.0 85.0 

Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 74.3 67.5 4.3 2.5 25.7 6.0 19.7

 Business 95.3 86.9 4.6 3.8 4.7 1.6 3.1

 Education/library/social work 93.2 91.3 1.8 0.2 6.8 2.6 4.2

 Mathematics/science 92.8 90.5 2.3 # 7.2 2.8 4.4

 Engineering/architecture/computer 95.1 89.8 5.2 0.2 4.9 2.0 2.9

 Humanities/arts 85.0 81.9 2.5 0.7 15.0 6.8 8.2

 Social sciences/journalism/communication 93.9 91.9 1.5 0.5 6.1 2.0 4.1

 Health sciences/services 90.9 74.7 10.7 5.5 9.1 1.9 7.2

 Human/protective services/vocational fields 80.7 49.9 5.6 25.3 19.3 3.3 16.0

 Other 27.7 8.9 17.8 1.0 72.3 16.7 55.6

 No major or unclassifiable 0.6 0.6 # # 99.4 17.9 81.6 

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/ 

reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 

1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

17 
—

Figure 5.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Figure 5. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by average number of undergraduate credits earned in the first year and by 2000 

All students who were enrolled in Students with bachelor’s degree goals who 

postsecondary education attended a 4-year institution 

Number of Number of 

credits credits 

140 

22 

91 

18 

66 

21 

84 

25 

112 

140 

120 120 

100 100 

80 80 

60 60 

40 40 

20 20 

0 0 

Credits earned in the first Credits earned by 2000 Credits earned in the first year Credits earned by 2000 

year 

25 

116 

21 

98 

24 

113 

27 

123 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

bachelor’s degree (table 6). Like earlier studies demonstrating the relationship between credits 

earned and postsecondary outcomes (Adelman 1999; McCormick 1999), the current analysis 

shows that the fewer credits earned in the first year was associated with a reduced likelihood of 

attaining a degree and an increased time to degree for those who earned one (table 7). 

First-generation students continued to trail their peers in overall credit accumulation as they 

progressed through postsecondary education: they earned an average of 66 credits during their 

entire period of enrollment through 2000, compared with an average of 112 credits earned by 

students whose parents were college graduates (figure 5). Part of this difference reflects the fact 

that first-generation students were more likely than students whose parents had graduated from 

college to start college late, disrupt their enrollment, attend part time (table 2), and leave without 

a degree within the time period of the study (figure 2). The gaps in credits, both overall and in the 

first year, were also found among those with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year 

institutions (figure 5). 

18 
—

Table 6.—

Table 6. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, by ave

percentage distribution of total undergraduate credits earned in the first year and by 2000 

Credits earned in the first year Credits earn

0–10 11–29 30 credits 0–10 11

Generation status Average credits credits or more Average credits cre

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 21.8 21.9 48.5 29.7 90.8 10.1 2 First-generation students 17.9 33.2 48.6 18.2 66.0 17.2 3 Students whose parent(s) had some college 20.5 24.7 50.7 24.6 83.7 12.0 2 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 25.3 12.4 45.9 41.7 112.4 3.9 1Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended  a 4-year institution 25.3 10.0 52.5 37.6 115.8 3.2 1 First-generation students 21.5 19.8 57.6 22.6 98.5 8.0 1 Students whose parent(s) had some college 24.5 10.8 56.6 32.6 113.1 4.1 1 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 27.2 6.2 47.6 46.3 123.4 0.9 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/2000)

Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 
—

Table 7.—Table 7.—

Table 7. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000 and ea

of undergraduate credits in the first year, by percentage distribution of postsecondary attainment and average time 

for those who earned a bachelor’s degree 

Postsecondary attainment 

Any Bachelor’s 

Generation status and credits earned in first year degree or higher Associate’s Certificate d

 Total 59.7 46.3 8.2 5.2 

First-generation students 46.8 23.5 12.7 10.5 

 0–10 credits 20.0 1.3 8.2 10.6 

 11–29 credits 50.8 30.1 14.5 6.2 

 30 credits or more 84.8 46.6 16.2 22.1 Students whose parent(s) had some college 52.9 38.5 9.5 4.9 

 0–10 credits 14.3 4.4 4.9 5.0 

 11–29 credits 55.3 39.8 10.8 4.7 

 30 credits or more 86.9 70.2 11.5 5.2 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 74.3 67.5 4.3 2.5 

 0–10 credits 22.4 9.4 5.8 7.3 

 11–29 credits 71.3 63.6 5.4 2.3 

 30 credits or more 93.1 89.1 2.8 1.2 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/2000)

Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 
 

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Coursetaking in Various Curricular Areas 

First-generation students were less likely than their peers whose parents were college 

graduates⎯and to some extent those whose parents had some college⎯to take courses in various 

academic areas, including mathematics, science, computer sciences, engineering, social sciences, 

humanities, history, and foreign languages. Possible reasons for this difference include firstgeneration students being more likely to attend 2-year colleges and major in vocational or 

technical fields and taking fewer courses overall than their counterparts. The following analysis 

looks at the types of courses taken and amount of coursework completed in these curricular 

areas.7 

Mathematics Courses 

About 71 percent of students took at least one mathematics course in college (figure 6).8 

First-generation students, however, were less likely to do so than their peers: 55 percent, 

compared with 68 percent of students whose parents had some college education and 81 percent 

of students whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher. The difference existed at both 

introductory and advanced levels. 

Among students who took mathematics courses, first-generation students completed fewer 

credits in the subject than other students: an average of 8, compared with 10 to 11 credits earned 

by students in the two groups whose parents had attended college. This discrepancy was mainly 

due to the difference in credits earned in advanced mathematics courses, because no differences 

were detected between first-generation students and their counterparts in the number of credits 

earned in introductory mathematics courses. 

When examining mathematics coursetaking within major,9 differences were also evident. 

For instance, first-generation students majoring in business, social sciences/journalism/communication, humanities/arts, health sciences/services, and human/protective services/vocational 

fields were all less likely than their counterparts whose parents were college graduates to take 

7 The analysis in this section excluded students who earned just 10 or fewer credits during their postsecondary education. This 

criterion has been applied in many analyses of postsecondary transcripts (e.g., McCormick 1999; Adelman 1999, 2004a, 2004b). 

This group, often referred as “incidental students,” accounted for 12 percent of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in 

postsecondary education in 1992−2000 (see Adelman 2004b for more information about their demographic and academic 

characteristics). 

8 College-level remedial mathematics was excluded. 

9 Between 1 and 7 percent of students who majored in mathematics or sciences did not take any mathematics course (table 7). 

This is probably due to students who took only remedial mathematics courses, which were not counted as college-level 

mathematics courses, students who dropped or stopped out before taking any mathematics course, or students with science 

majors who used advanced/AP mathematics credits earned in high school to fulfill their degree requirements for mathematics 

coursework in college. 

21 
 

—

Figure 6.—

Figure 6.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Figure 6. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage who took various mathematics courses and average number of 

credits earned by those who took these courses 

Percentage who took various mathematics courses Average number of credits earned 

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

Number of Percent 

credits 100 

71 

58 

24 

55 

46 

12 

68 

57 

20 

81 

64 

34 

14 

80 12 

10 60 

8 

40 6 

4 20 2 

0 0 

Any mathematics Introductory college- Calculus and Any mathematics Introductory college- Calculus and 

level mathematics advanced level mathematics advanced 

mathematics mathematics 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 

Number of 

Percent credits 

10 

6 

10 

8 

5 

7 

10 

6 

10 11 

6 

10 

84 

69 

85 

32 

76 

66 

21 

71 

29 

86 

68 

38 

14 

12 

100 

80 

10 

60 8 

6 40 

4 

20 2 

0 0 

Any mathematics Introductory college- Calculus and Any mathematics Introductory college- Calculus and 

level mathematics advanced level mathematics advanced 

mathematics mathematics 

11 

6 

10 10

6 

7 

11 

6 

10 

12 

6 

10 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Introductory college-level mathematics includes courses below the level of calculus and above the level of algebra 2. 

Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

any mathematics courses (table 8). The gaps in advanced mathematics (both in the likelihood of 

taking courses and credits earned) between first-generation students and those whose parents 

were college graduates remained, even among those who majored in mathematics or sciences. 

Finally, the discrepancies held when the analysis was limited to only those with bachelor’s 

degree goals who attended 4-year institutions: first-generation students were not only less likely 

22 
—

Table 8.—

Table 8.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 8. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took various 

mathematics courses and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

Introductory Calculus and 

college-level advanced 

Any mathematics1 mathematics2 mathematics 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits 

All students 70.8 10.4 57.6 5.7 24.2 9.6

 First-generation students 54.7 8.4 46.2 5.5 12.3 7.3

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 68.3 10.1 56.8 5.7 20.3 9.8

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 81.2 11.2 64.0 5.7 33.8 9.8 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 54.6 8.9 45.9 5.3 20.0 4.5

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 72.1 10.3 64.4 5.8 33.2 4.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 92.8 11.7 78.8 6.2 52.2 4.5

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 80.0 6.8 53.1 4.8 5.6 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 87.8 8.1 71.6 4.8 9.5 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 89.3 9.0 65.7 5.6 11.8 ‡

 Mathematics/science3

 First-generation students 92.8 11.8 85.0 6.9 41.7 7.9

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 94.5 19.6 83.3 7.5 58.7 16.6

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 98.6 16.8 79.6 6.7 70.8 12.7

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 93.4 14.8 84.7 6.9 42.9 14.0

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 92.6 20.3 72.5 8.1 64.4 15.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 94.9 23.0 61.7 7.1 83.5 17.8

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 50.4 6.2 44.6 4.2 7.4 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 63.2 5.3 45.7 4.4 11.8 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 70.1 5.9 51.0 4.4 17.2 6.0

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 59.0 9.1 44.1 5.6 12.0 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 86.3 7.8 70.8 5.2 12.8 5.2

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 89.5 9.0 68.3 5.4 28.4 6.0

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 54.3 6.7 49.8 4.9 3.8 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 75.9 8.3 63.2 4.9 13.8 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 82.2 8.5 72.2 5.2 26.3 4.4

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 34.1 4.3 20.2 ‡ 1.9 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 44.8 6.1 30.4 5.1 3.4 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 70.3 7.0 52.1 5.7 10.4 ‡ 

See notes at end of table. 

23 
 

—

Table 8.—

Table 8.—

Table 8.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 8. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took various 

mathematics courses and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

—Continued 

Introductory Calculus and 

college-level advanced 

Any mathematics1 mathematics2 mathematics 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits

 Other

 First-generation students 75.2 7.2 72.1 5.8 9.5 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 63.1 7.6 55.6 5.6 10.6 6.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 74.9 8.9 70.7 5.6 17.4 7.5

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 27.9 6.2 25.1 4.7 4.8 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 39.9 5.4 33.6 4.6 5.1 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 40.7 7.2 35.0 5.1 7.0 ‡ 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 1 Credits earned in pre-collegiate and remedial mathematics were excluded. 

2 Introductory college-level mathematics includes courses below the level of calculus and above the level of algebra 2. 

3 Students who majored in mathematics or science and did not take any mathematics course may include those who took only 

remedial mathematics or those who dropped or stopped out before taking any mathematics course. 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

than other students to take mathematics courses, they also earned fewer credits if they took any 

mathematics courses (figure 6). 

Science Courses 

A majority of students (76 percent) took at least one science course in college (figure 7), 

but upper-level science coursetaking was most prevalent among mathematics/science and health 

science/service majors (table 9). As in mathematics, first-generation students were less likely 

than their peers whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher to take science courses, and 

they earned fewer credits if they took any science courses. The gaps in coursetaking existed in 

both lower and upper levels of science courses and among students with bachelor’s degree goals 

who attended 4-year institutions (figure 7).10 Unlike the pattern in mathematics, differences in 

science coursetaking (both in the likelihood of taking courses and credits earned at lower and 

10 Except for credits earned in upper-level lab sciences where no significant differences were detected between first-generation 

students and their counterparts whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

24 
—

Figure 7.—

Figure 7.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Figure 7. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage who took various science courses and average number of credits 

earned by those who took these courses

 Percentage who took various science courses Average number of credits earned 

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

Number of 

Percent credits 

76 

51 

32 

61 

38 

22 

72 

48 

28 

87 

61 

41 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

15 

10 11 

14 

9 

11 

14 

9 9 

17 

11 12 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

Any science Lower-level lab Upper-level lab Any science Lower-level lab Upper-level lab science 

science science science 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 

Percent Number of 

89 

62 

88 

40 

82 

55 

33 

62 

37 

65 

45 

credits 

20 

80 

15 

100 91

60 

10 40 

5 20 

0 0 

Any science Lower-level lab Upper-level lab Any science Lower-level lab Upper-level lab 

science science science science 

16 

10 

12 

15 

12 

9 

15 

9 10 

18 

11 

13 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

25 
—

Table 9.—

Table 9.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 9. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took 

various science courses and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

Lower-level Upper-level 

Any science lab science lab science 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits 

All students 75.6 15.1 51.5 9.7 32.0 11.1

 First-generation students 60.8 13.7 38.2 8.8 22.2 10.6

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 71.6 13.6 48.5 8.7 27.9 9.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 86.8 16.9 60.9 10.7 41.0 12.4 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 51.6 7.1 23.2 5.9 12.2 4.6

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 66.7 8.3 39.2 6.0 15.3 5.2

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 87.9 8.2 51.9 5.8 23.9 5.5

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 81.4 10.8 55.5 5.8 22.2 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 93.7 11.2 70.7 6.0 29.1 5.0

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 97.4 11.2 72.2 6.4 31.5 5.8

 Mathematics/science

 First-generation students 100.0 49.7 97.8 20.0 85.3 29.0

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 99.1 44.2 96.7 18.8 81.6 22.8

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 99.6 53.5 96.9 22.3 87.8 30.4

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 60.9 14.6 54.5 12.2 12.8 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 80.9 14.9 74.1 11.1 30.3 6.9

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 96.0 18.7 90.4 13.4 48.1 8.6

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 65.6 10.4 37.4 7.5 27.9 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 71.9 8.0 39.3 5.5 28.0 4.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 84.5 8.7 50.4 6.6 33.8 5.6

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 74.9 9.7 41.5 7.2 29.2 4.7

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 90.9 10.6 56.1 6.8 40.9 5.2

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 95.7 11.7 56.5 7.9 48.3 6.8

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 91.9 17.8 44.0 9.4 53.0 11.1

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 91.6 21.2 70.5 10.1 63.6 9.5

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 97.5 25.9 79.2 12.1 74.7 12.3

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 31.5 7.7 19.0 ‡ 6.7 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 48.4 7.1 21.7 5.1 13.6 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 74.6 7.9 50.2 5.8 20.6 4.1 

See notes at end of table. 

26 
 

—

Table 9.—

Table 9.—

Table 9.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 9. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took 

various science courses and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

—Continued 

Lower-level Upper-level 

Any science lab science lab science 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits

 Other

 First-generation students 87.0 12.2 64.9 7.4 27.4 5.8

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 74.7 9.5 49.0 6.6 20.5 6.0

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 82.4 10.6 48.7 8.3 26.5 6.5

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 33.4 7.5 20.5 5.2 6.6 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 43.6 6.3 23.7 5.5 7.6 6.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 46.9 10.3 29.4 7.8 11.8 12.3 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

upper levels) were not found between first-generation students and the other two groups of 

students among those who majored in mathematics and science. 

Computer and Engineering Courses 

Given the rapid growth and widespread use of information and computer technology, one 

might expect most students to take some computer courses in college. Based on the NELS 

transcript data, 58 percent of students took at least one computer course (figure 8).11 Fewer (19 

percent) took computer science courses, and those who took such courses were mostly 

engineering/architecture/computer majors (table 10). The likelihood of students taking at least 

one computer-related course was similar across the three groups of students, but first-generation 

students were less likely than students from the two other groups to take computer science 

courses. 

About 14 percent of students took at least one engineering course. Courses in this field 

were primarily taken by majors: between 86 and 92 percent of students who majored in 

engineering/architecture/computers took some engineering courses, but 25 percent or fewer of 

students majoring in other fields did so (table 10). Although no significant difference was found 

11 It is a broader category that aggregates all explicitly computer-focused courses, including core computer science courses, 

computer applications courses, basic computer operations training, computer engineering, computer engineering technology, 

computer repair, data processing, and business information system courses (see Adelman 2004b). 

27 
—

Figure 8.—

Figure 8.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Figure 8. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any computer or engineering courses and average 

number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

Percentage who took computer 

or engineering courses Average number of credits earned 

Percent 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

Any computerrelated 

58 

19 

14 13 

57 55 

12 12 

59 

21 21 

15 

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

Number of 

credits 

36 

30 

24 

18 

12 

6 

0 

7 8 

28 

6 

8 8

22 

9 

26 

6 7 

32 

Computer science Engineering Any computer-related Computer science 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 

Number of 

credits 

Engineering 

Percent 34 36 

100 

30 

80 

60 

23 

15 14 14 

22 

63 

18 

62 

26 

59 

15 

24 

60 

18 

40 12 

20 6 

0 

Any computer- Computer science Engineering Any computer-related Computer science Engineering 

related 

0 

7 8 

30 

7 8 

25 

8 

10 

27 

6 

8 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

28 
—

Table 10.—

Table 10.—

Table 10.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 10. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took 

any computer or engineering courses and average number of credits earned by those who 

took these courses 

Any computerrelated Computer science Engineering 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits 

All students 57.6 7.1 19.1 8.3 13.6 28.0

 First-generation students 55.4 6.3 11.8 7.5 11.9 21.8

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 59.1 8.2 20.7 9.3 13.3 25.6

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 57.0 6.4 21.0 7.5 14.7 32.5 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 84.5 7.2 8.4 ‡ 3.2 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 86.7 8.7 23.2 5.4 4.3 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 93.0 6.4 22.7 4.4 5.2 ‡

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 56.2 4.3 8.5 ‡ 6.4 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 65.5 3.8 12.3 ‡ 0.3 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 67.7 3.8 12.9 ‡ 3.7 ‡

 Mathematics/science

 First-generation students 61.0 4.7 16.1 ‡ 21.5 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 59.4 5.1 33.3 4.9 25.1 15.0

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 45.1 5.3 27.0 6.0 17.1 7.9

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 79.2 17.1 52.4 15.1 88.0 37.1

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 86.6 26.9 75.4 21.3 86.0 39.8

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 82.8 15.9 74.6 13.2 91.7 48.5

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 43.4 7.0 10.7 ‡ 9.7 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 48.1 5.5 16.2 ‡ 5.7 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 42.3 4.1 8.8 3.9 5.9 ‡

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 46.6 4.2 13.1 ‡ 1.7 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 59.6 4.7 16.2 4.2 3.6 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 45.6 3.8 13.3 4.1 4.0 ‡

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 51.8 4.0 9.9 ‡ 5.5 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 50.6 3.6 20.9 ‡ 8.6 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 54.6 3.4 9.8 ‡ 2.7 ‡

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 37.8 4.1 2.8 ‡ 16.3 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 47.9 4.7 9.1 ‡ 14.9 16.2

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 62.2 5.7 12.3 ‡ 12.0 ‡ 

See notes at end of table. 

29 
—

Table 10.—

Table 10.—

Table 10.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 10. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits 

between 1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took 

any computer or engineering courses and average number of credits earned by those who 

took these courses—Continued 

Any computerrelated Computer science Engineering 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits

 Other

 First-generation students 60.8 4.2 13.7 ‡ 6.2 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 55.8 5.5 13.4 5.1 6.3 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 53.6 5.0 21.1 4.9 9.8 ‡

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 38.3 4.9 6.8 ‡ 6.4 ‡

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 37.4 4.9 8.7 5.2 6.5 10.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 36.9 6.0 11.7 6.9 6.5 ‡ 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

in the likelihood of taking engineering courses, first-generation students earned fewer credits in 

engineering (if they took any) than students whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher. A 

similar difference was found for students who majored in engineering/architecture/computers, as 

well as among those with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year institutions (figure 8). 

Social Sciences, Foreign Languages, Humanities, and History Courses 

Reflecting the requirements of most colleges, coursetaking in social sciences and 

humanities was widespread: 9-in-10 students took courses in these subject areas (figure 9). About 

two-thirds of students took history courses, and one-third took foreign language courses. 

However, consistent with their lower likelihood to major in social sciences and humanities (table 

4), first-generation students were less likely than students whose parents were college graduates 

to take social science, foreign language, humanities, or history courses. They also earned fewer 

credits if they took any courses in these areas. These differences remained for number of credits 

earned among students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year institutions, although 

they appeared to be smaller. 

For those who majored in humanities/arts and social sciences/journalism/communication, 

differences between first-generation students and other students were not detected in their 

likelihood of taking social science, humanities, and history courses (table 11), but differences in 

30 
—

Figure 9.—

Figure 9.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Figure 9. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage who took any courses in social sciences, foreign languages, 

humanities, and history, and average number of credits earned by those who took these courses 

Percentage who took courses in social science, 

foreign languages, humanities, and history Average number of credits earned 

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

Number of 

credits Percent 

100 96 96 30 

80 25 

20 

60 

15 

40 

10 

20 5 

0 0 

Social sciences Foreign Humanities History Social sciences Foreign Humanities History 

languages languages 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 

Number of 

Percent credits 

98 98 97 98 98 97 99 98 

90 

35 

91 

67 

81 

26 

83 

52 

89 

30 

90 

64 

45 

77 23 

10 

18 

8 

19 

8 

14 

7 

21 

9 

17 

7 

26 

11 

22 

8 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

49 45 41 39 

30 

80 79 82 78 25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

26 

10 

21 

8 

23 

9 

18 

7 

26 

9 

20 

7 

27 

11 

23 

9 

Social sciences Foreign 

languages 

Humanities History Social sciences Foreign 

languages 

Humanities History 

Total Firstgeneration 

students 

Students whose 

parent(s) had 

some college 

Students whose 

parent(s) had 

bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

31 
—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 11. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took any 

courses in social sciences, foreign languages, humanities, and history, and average number of 

credits earned by those who took these courses 

Social Foreign 

sciences languages Humanities History 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits with any credits 

All students 90.2 22.7 35.3 9.9 91.1 18.4 67.0 7.6

 First-generation students 80.8 18.5 25.5 8.5 83.4 13.9 52.4 6.6

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 89.2 21.3 29.8 8.7 89.7 16.6 63.9 6.9

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 95.7 25.7 45.5 11.1 96.2 22.0 77.4 8.4 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 71.8 16.9 15.6 7.1 72.1 13.1 41.7 5.1

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 88.3 17.5 26.2 7.2 82.0 15.0 55.4 5.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 96.5 23.9 37.3 8.9 96.3 17.8 78.0 6.2

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 98.7 22.0 31.7 8.2 96.0 19.7 79.7 7.7

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 99.3 25.8 36.9 7.4 98.3 19.5 87.8 8.6

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 99.8 25.9 46.5 8.6 100.0 21.0 95.4 7.7

 Mathematics/science

 First-generation students 100.0 17.1 41.1 ‡ 98.9 16.0 80.8 6.8

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 99.1 17.9 30.7 7.8 98.9 15.9 85.4 6.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 98.5 18.4 52.5 10.1 100.0 19.1 77.2 6.9

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 91.5 10.5 18.7 ‡ 97.5 10.0 55.4 5.3

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 88.2 13.8 20.5 6.3 90.1 14.6 59.1 6.9

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 98.9 14.0 20.0 6.9 99.3 11.1 73.7 8.1

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 96.8 16.7 48.6 14.6 96.6 30.7 86.2 9.4

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 88.9 19.7 59.5 10.3 97.9 35.6 76.3 9.2

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 99.7 21.5 66.1 17.5 99.9 45.7 88.3 11.3

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 99.8 44.1 42.2 10.9 88.5 21.1 78.5 9.5

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 99.6 47.7 56.6 11.5 98.5 24.2 84.0 9.6

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 100.0 50.1 68.5 11.6 99.4 25.9 88.7 11.4 

See notes at end of table. 

32 
—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

Table 11. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by percentage who took any 

courses in social sciences, foreign languages, humanities, and history, and average number of 

credits earned by those who took these courses—Continued 

Social Foreign 

sciences languages Humanities History 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average 

Generation status and undergraduate major with any credits with any credits with any credits with any credits

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 76.4 14.1 16.8 ‡ 83.1 10.5 36.2 5.7

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 90.3 17.2 24.5 8.2 94.7 14.0 64.6 5.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 95.0 18.2 22.9 8.0 94.1 14.8 61.6 5.6

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 48.7 18.7 18.8 ‡ 63.8 10.4 28.0 5.7

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 62.8 23.5 19.1 6.7 63.5 14.4 44.4 6.4

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 84.1 28.2 28.3 8.0 86.5 17.8 65.3 7.7

 Other

 First-generation students 84.3 15.5 31.1 6.3 96.6 12.9 66.9 5.6

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 94.2 16.4 24.4 8.3 93.3 13.6 73.9 6.1

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 99.3 16.2 44.7 7.7 98.1 15.2 75.9 6.4

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 79.0 9.1 21.4 7.4 79.4 8.4 37.8 4.8

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 82.9 9.8 14.0 5.5 86.6 8.0 42.4 4.7

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 76.5 12.7 24.4 6.3 80.5 11.4 50.5 5.1 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

the number of credits earned remained. For example, first-generation students majoring in 

humanities/arts earned an average of 31 credits in humanities, compared with an average of 46 

credits earned by those whose parents had at least a bachelor’s degree. The pattern of firstgeneration students earning relatively fewer credits in humanities or social sciences was also 

found in other major fields, including business, mathematics/science, engineering/architecture/ 

computers, and health sciences/services. 

Coursetaking Across Curricular Areas 

Students whose parents were college educated appeared to have a wider range of curricular 

interests than first-generation students. For example, as parental education levels increased, 

33 
What Do First-Generation Students Study in College? 

students were more likely to take courses in every curricular area listed in table 12. The pattern 

was also observed among students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year institutions. 

For example, students whose parents held a bachelor’s or advanced degree were more likely than 

first-generation students to take courses in non-Western cultures/societies, environment/natural 

resources, ethics, fine and performing arts, media studies, religious studies, upper-level writing, 

international studies, and graphic arts/design. 

First-generation students were more likely than students whose parents held a bachelor’s or 

advanced degree to take various vocational courses. Such courses included business and legal 

support, computer support, construction technology/trade, and protective services (table 13). 

Similar differences were also found among students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 

4-year institutions: first-generation students were more likely than students whose parents were 

college graduates to take courses in business and legal support, computer support, protective 

services, and medical/health support. 

34 
—

Table 12.—

Table 12. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 1992 and 2000, by 

any courses in various curricular areas 

Non- Environ- Family/ 

Western Western ment/ child/ Fine and Ethnic/ Sports/ 

culture/ Edu- cultures/ natural youth perform- Media women/ Religious PE/recre- 

Generation status society cation societies resources Ethics studies ing arts studies culture studies ation 

All students who had enrolled  in postsecondary education 71.1 20.4 17.0 11.1 17.5 21.3 50.3 20.8 27.4 24.6 56.9  First-generation students 55.3 16.9 9.6 8.2 9.2 16.9 38.5 13.6 20.4 14.2 46.1  Students whose parent(s) had some college 69.4 19.6 13.4 9.8 16.2 20.9 46.1 16.4 25.3 21.4 57.4 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 80.4 22.8 24.1 13.8 22.7 23.8 60.4 28.7 33.0 32.7 61.7 Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 84.1 25.6 22.3 13.6 22.2 25.8 60.8 25.8 35.1 31.7 65.5 

 First-generation students 80.6 24.6 15.9 10.1 14.2 23.0 55.6 20.6 30.2 24.5 59.9  Students whose parent(s) had some college 84.9 27.2 19.4 13.2 21.8 27.2 58.7 21.9 36.1 29.0 69.5  Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 84.5 24.6 26.5 14.9 24.9 25.6 64.1 30.2 35.7 35.8 64.2 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth 

Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 
—

Table 13.—

Table 13. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 1992 and 2000, by 

any courses in various vocational areas 

Personal Electronic/ Industrial/ 

develop- Business communi- Construc- mechanical Market/ Per

mental/ and legal Computer cations tion occupa- sales/ food/

Generation status skills support support technology tech/trade tions hospitality s

All students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 36.9 18.7 7.1 7.3 3.9 7.1 7.4  First-generation students 38.1 27.8 8.6 7.2 5.9 8.3 7.1  Students whose parent(s) had some college 40.0 21.1 8.9 7.6 3.7 7.1 7.9  Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 33.3 11.8 4.6 7.0 3.2 6.4 7.1 

Students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution 37.3 13.5 5.8 7.1 3.2 5.7 6.8  First-generation students 36.2 22.5 7.0 7.2 4.2 5.2 7.0  Students whose parent(s) had some college 42.4 14.1 7.2 7.1 3.0 5.9 7.0  Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s or higher degree 33.8 10.3 4.3 7.0 3.1 5.8 6.5 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth 

Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 
 

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? 

Do first-generation students perform as well in college as other students? To address this 

question, the following analysis examined students’ overall undergraduate grade point average 

(GPA), first-year GPAs, average GPAs in various curricular areas, and the proportion of 

withdrawals and repeated courses. 

Undergraduate Grade Point Average 

First-generation students did not perform as well as their peers starting from the first year 

of college. As shown in figure 10, first-generation students had lower first-year GPAs than 

students whose parents had a bachelor’s or advanced degree (2.5 vs. 2.8).12 This observation also 

held among those with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year institutions. Like first-year 

credit production, academic performance in the first year bears an important relationship to longterm degree completion. Previous research found that the higher a student’s first-year GPA, the 

more likely that student was to receive a bachelor’s degree (McCormick 1999). 

The lower GPAs of first-generation students persisted throughout their entire undergraduate 

enrollment. Overall, first-generation students had an average GPA of 2.6, compared with an 

average GPA of 2.9 for students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. This difference 

was also observed among students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended 4-year institutions. 

The lower performance of first-generation students was also evident in most academic areas 

shown in table 14, including mathematics, science, computer science, foreign language, and 

history. Some of these differences remained even after controlling for major fields of study. For 

example, first-generation students majoring in mathematics and science on average earned GPAs 

of 2.6 in mathematics and 2.5 in science, compared with 3.1 and 2.9, respectively, for their 

counterparts whose parents completed college. First-generation students majoring in 

humanities/arts earned an average GPA of 2.5 in history, compared with an average GPA of 2.9 

for students whose parents completed college. 

12 Differences in GPAs, however, were not found between first-generation students and those whose parents had some college 

education. 

37 
—

Figure 10.—

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? 

Figure 10. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 credits in postsecondary 

education between 1992 and 2000, by first-year and overall grade point average (GPA) 

All students who had enrolled in Students with bachelor’s degree goals who 

GPA postsecondary education GPA attended a 4-year institution 

4 4 

2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.7 3 2.7 2.7 3 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.5 

2 2

1 1

0 0 

First-year GPA Overall GPA First-year GPA Overall GPA 

Total First- Students whose Students whose 

generation parent(s) had parent(s) had 

students some college bachelor’s or 

higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

Withdrawn and Repeated Courses 

In addition to lower GPAs, first-generation students were more likely than other students to 

withdraw from or repeat courses they attempted to study. As shown in figure 11, in all 

undergraduate courses attempted by the student, the proportion of courses with no-penalty 

withdrawal and no-credit-repeat grades was 12 percent for first-generation students and 7 percent 

for students whose parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher. The difference was also observed 

among students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution. Enrolling in a 

course and then withdrawing from or repeating it may delay their progress toward completing a 

degree. 

38 
—

Table 14.—

Table 14.—

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? 

Table 14. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by first-year and overall grade point 

average (GPA) and GPA in various academic areas 

GPA in various academic areas 

Generation status and undergraduate major 

GPA 

in first 

year 

Overall 

GPA 

Mathematics Science 

Computer 

science 

Foreign 

Engin- laneering guage History Allied 

health 

All students 

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.7 

2.5 

2.6 

2.8 

2.7 

2.6 

2.7 

2.9 

2.6 

2.5 

2.5 

2.7 

2.5 

2.4 

2.5 

2.6 

2.9 

2.7 

2.9 

3.0 

2.9 

2.8 

2.8 

2.9 

2.9 

2.7 

2.9 

3.0 

2.7 

2.5 

2.6 

2.8 

3.1

3.1

3.1

3.1 

Undergraduate major

 Business

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.8 

2.8 

2.9 

2.9 

2.9 

3.0 

2.7 

2.6 

2.8 

2.7 

2.6 

2.8 

‡ 

2.8 

3.2 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.0 

3.1 

3.1 

2.6 

2.6 

2.8 

3.3

3.3

3.3

 Education/library/social work

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.6 

2.8 

2.8 

2.9 

3.1 

3.1 

2.7 

2.7 

2.6 

2.5 

2.5 

2.6 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.0 

2.9 

2.9 

2.5 

2.7 

2.7 

‡

3.3

3.2

 Mathematics/science

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.9 

2.8 

3.1 

2.9 

2.8 

3.1 

2.6 

2.8 

3.1 

2.5 

2.6 

2.9 

‡ 

3.0 

3.0 

‡ 

2.6 

2.7 

‡ 

3.3 

3.3 

3.0 

2.9 

3.2 

‡

3.1

3.5

 Engineering/architecture/computer

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.8 

2.9 

3.0 

2.8 

3.0 

3.0 

2.5 

2.9 

2.8 

2.5 

2.7 

2.7 

2.9 

3.0 

3.1 

3.0 

3.0 

3.0 

‡ 

3.4 

3.2 

2.5 

2.9 

3.1 

‡

‡

‡

 Humanities/arts

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.6 

3.0 

2.9 

2.7 

3.0 

3.0 

2.6 

2.4 

2.5 

2.6 

2.7 

2.5 

‡ 

‡ 

2.4 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.0 

3.0 

3.1 

2.5 

2.7 

2.9 

‡

‡

2.7

 Social sciences/journalism/communication

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.7 

2.7 

2.9 

2.8 

2.9 

3.0 

2.6 

2.5 

2.7 

2.5 

2.6 

2.6 

‡ 

2.8 

2.9 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

2.7 

2.9 

3.1 

2.6 

2.8 

2.9 

3.2

3.0

3.2 

See notes at end of table. 

39 
—

Table 14.—

Table 14.—

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? 

Table 14. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who earned more than 10 postsecondary credits between 

1992 and 2000 and majored in various undergraduate fields, by first-year and overall grade point 

average (GPA) and GPA in various academic areas—Continued 

GPA in various academic areas 

Generation status and undergraduate major 

GPA 

in first 

year 

Overall 

GPA 

Mathematics Science 

Computer 

science 

Foreign 

Engin- laneering guage History Allied 

health

 Health sciences/services

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.9 

2.7 

2.9 

2.9 

3.0 

3.1 

2.7 

2.6 

2.9 

2.7 

2.6 

2.7 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.0 

3.3 

2.8 

2.9 

2.9 

3.2

3.1

3.2

 Human/protective services/vocational fields

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.7 

2.7 

2.7 

2.9 

2.8 

2.8 

‡ 

2.4 

2.5 

2.2 

2.4 

2.2 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.3 

2.9 

‡ 

‡ 

2.8 

2.7 

2.7 

2.5 

2.6 

‡

2.8

2.8

 Other

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

2.3 

2.3 

2.5 

2.4 

2.4 

2.5 

2.3 

2.3 

2.5 

2.1 

2.1 

2.2 

‡ 

2.7 

3.0 

‡ 

‡ 

‡ 

3.0 

2.8 

2.5 

2.4 

2.2 

2.6 

3.1

3.0

3.1

 No major or unclassifiable

 First-generation students 

 Students whose parent(s) had some college 

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 

1.9 

2.1 

2.1 

2.0 

2.0 

2.1 

2.3 

2.1 

2.0 

2.0 

2.0 

1.9 

‡ 

2.8 

2.5 

‡ 

2.4 

‡ 

2.0 

2.2 

2.5 

1.9 

1.9 

2.2 

2.4

2.3

2.6 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/ 

reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

40 
—

Figure 11.—

How Well Do First-Generation Students Perform? 

Figure 11. Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 

1992 and 2000, by percentage of withdrawn or repeated courses in all courses attempted 

Percent 

10 

7 

12 

9 

12 

7 8

6 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

All students who had enrolled Students with bachelor’s degree goals 

in postsecondary education who attended a 4-year institution 

Total First-generation Students whose parent(s) Students whose parent(s) had 

students had some college bachelor’s or higher degree 

NOTE: Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study 

of 1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

41 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
 

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

The tabular analyses described above revealed obvious differences between first-generation 

students and those with college-educated parents in terms of major fields chosen, number of 

credits completed, types of courses taken, amount of coursework completed, and academic 

performance. While these differences are noteworthy, college administrators, state legislators, 

parents, and, most importantly, students are most concerned with degree completion. The fact 

that 4-in-10 first-generation students left college without earning a credential is of concern 

(figure 2). When a student drops out, much is lost in terms of both financial resources and 

individual potential (Tinto 1993). To address some of these issues, the next stage of the analysis 

examines students’ degree completion. Because many factors related to degree completion are 

interrelated, an analysis was conducted to examine the unique relationship of each individual 

factor with selected outcomes while taking interrelated factors into account. This approach is 

sometimes referred to as “commonality analysis,” in which multiple linear regression is used to 

adjust for the common variation among a group of independent variables.13 This analysis focused 

on two main questions: How do the gaps between first-generation students and other students 

change after controlling for all the relevant variables? Are students’ coursetaking behaviors and 

academic performance ultimately related to degree attainment after taking such factors as 

demographic characteristics, academic preparation, and enrollment behaviors into account? 

For the purposes of this study, two separate commonality analyses were performed.14 The 

first analysis examined factors related to whether 12th-graders who had enrolled in 

postsecondary education in 1992−2000 had earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000. The second 

analysis broadened the definition of degree completion to include students who had completed 

any postsecondary credential or were still enrolled (referred to as persistence to a degree) as of 

2000. The independent variables included in each commonality analysis were as follows:15 

Students’ background: 

Generation status 

Gender 

13 See Technical Notes and Methodology in appendix B for more information about multivariate commonality analysis. 

14 These two commonality analyses were also performed on the restricted sample of students who attended 4-year institutions 

with bachelor’s degree goals. Most findings drawn from all enrolled students also held for this restricted sample. 

15 These independent variables were selected based on the tabular analyses described in the first part of the report rather than on 

a theoretical model. 

43 
Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Race/ethnicity 

Family income 

Academic preparation and expectations: 

Highest level of mathematics completed in high school 

Highest level of education expected 

College entrance examination scores 

Enrollment behaviors: 

Type of first institution 

Delayed entry 

Continuity of enrollment 

Enrollment status 

Postsecondary coursetaking and performance: 

Major field of study 

First-year credit production 

Number of remedial courses taken 

First-year GPA 

Proportion of withdrawn/repeated courses in all attempted courses 

Completion of Bachelor’s Degrees 

Table 15 presents the results of the analysis for students’ likelihood of earning a bachelor’s 

degree. The first column provides the observed percentages⎯that is, the proportion of students 

who had earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000 before controlling for all independent variables 

included in the analysis. The second column presents the least squares coefficients (expressed as 

percentages) from the commonality analysis. These coefficients represent the difference (either 

higher or lower) in percentage points that might be expected between the analysis group (i.e., 

students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher) and the comparison group (e.g., firstgeneration students) after controlling for the interrelationship of all other independent variables 

included in the analysis. Comparison groups are shown in italics. Significant least squared 

coefficients (indicated by asterisks) mean that the observed differences in the likelihood of 

attaining a bachelor’s degree between the comparison groups and the analysis groups remain 

even after taking into account the covariation of all other independent variables. 

Before controlling for any independent variables, first-generation students were less likely 

than their peers whose parents went to college to earn a bachelor’s degree. They continued to be 

44 
—

Table 15.—

Table 15.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 15. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000, and least squared coefficients and 

standard errors, by selected student characteristics 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

Student characteristics 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 

 Total 46.3 34.2 4.32 67.5 59.0 4.72 

Generation status

 Students whose parent(s) had some

 college 38.5 * 3.1 * 1.19 62.7 * 2.7 1.65

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 67.5 * 8.1 * 1.30 78.0 * 6.1 * 1.77

 First-generation students 23.5 † † 46.7 † † 

Gender

 Male 43.8 * -0.7 0.86 62.8 * -2.0 1.06

 Female 48.4 † † 71.8 † † 

Race/ethnicity4

 Asian/Pacific Islander 51.1 0.2 1.94 68.2 -4.3 2.36

 Hispanic 25.7 * 1.4 1.51 50.4 * 1.2 2.24

 Black 34.0 * 0.6 1.40 51.9 * -2.8 1.89

 American Indian 31.5 4.2 5.61 ‡ 1.8 8.15

 White 50.1 † † 70.9 † † 

Family income in 1991

 Less than $25,000 28.8 * -6.3 * 1.51 52.3 * -4.3 * 1.89

 $25,000–49,999 40.2 * -6.1 * 1.30 62.1 * -5.6 * 1.54

 $50,000–74,999 55.2 * -1.8 1.30 73.0 * -0.7 1.54

 $75,000 or more 73.1 † † 81.9 † † 

Highest level of mathematics completed in high school

 Calculus or precalculus 79.0 * 12.3 * 1.83 82.8 * 5.4 * 3.07

 Trigonometry 60.2 * 9.9 * 1.94 70.9 * 5.8 * 3.07

 Algebra 2 42.0 * 2.8 1.62 61.7 * 1.8 2.95

 Geometry 22.2 * -0.7 1.73 45.7 * -0.6 3.19

 Other mathematics 4.4 3.6 2.81 28.5 1.1 7.20

 Algebra 1 8.0 † † 30.2 † † 

Highest level of education expected in 1994

 Some college 2.0 * -8.1 * 3.13 — — —

 Bachelor’s or higher degree 53.7 * 8.8 * 3.02 — — —

 High school or less 9.0 † † — — — 

SAT/ACT composite score

 Middle level 57.3 * 5.9 * 1.40 68.7 * 6.6 * 1.77

 High level 82.3 * 7.0 * 1.83 85.7 * 5.7 * 2.24

 Did not take/missing 28.2 4.3 * 1.30 58.8 * 4.2 * 1.89

 Low level 29.1 † † 49.2 † † 

See notes at end of table.

45 
—

Table 15.—

Table 15.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 15. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000, and least squared coefficients and 

standard errors, by selected student characteristics—Continued 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

Student characteristics 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 

Type of first institution

 2-year 18.3 * -13.8 * 1.08 55.4 * -3.3 * 1.42

 Less than 2-year 1.3 * -29.5 * 3.24 ‡ -24.1 14.88

 4-year 68.6 † † 71.1 † † 

Time between high school graduation and postsecondary entry

 Less than 1 year 52.5 * 5.9 * 1.30 69.9 * 3.6 2.13

 More than 1 year 10.6 † † 34.1 † † 

Continuity of enrollment

 Discontinuous 8.7 * -15.1 * 1.08 19.4 * -22.2 * 1.54

 Indeterminable 18.4 * -14.7 * 3.99 36.9 * -8.6 5.79

 Continuous 64.6 † † 80.4 † † 

Enrollment status

 Always full-time 59.9 * 8.0 * 0.97 78.2 * 8.1 * 1.18

 Part-time at least at one institution 24.5 † † 43.7 † † 

Undergraduate major

 Education/library/social work 83.6 * 15.9 * 2.05 89.0 4.0 2.36

 Mathematics/science 80.5 * 2.9 1.73 87.9 -1.1 2.01

 Engineering/architecture/computer 70.3 * 1.3 2.70 83.3 -4.1 3.07

 Humanities/arts 74.4 * 2.6 1.83 80.8 -6.1 * 2.13

 Social sciences/journalism/

 communication 84.3 * 13.5 * 1.62 89.5 * 3.6 1.89

 Health sciences/services 55.2 -5.1 * 1.94 78.9 -7.1 * 2.48

 Human/protective services/vocational

 fields 29.8 * -13.3 * 2.05 65.2 -11.8 * 2.83

 Other 5.2 * -39.2 * 1.83 9.2 * -57.7 * 2.48

 No major or unclassifiable 0.1 * -31.0 * 1.62 0.3 * -53.0 * 2.36

 Business 58.5 † † 84.2 † † 

Credits earned in the first year

 0–10 4.4 * -0.8 1.62 14.2 * -7.2 * 2.36

 11–29 46.2 * -2.9 * 1.08 62.2 * -1.4 1.30

 30 or more 77.1 † † 89.1 † † 

GPA in the first year

 Less than 2.00 16.3 * -9.2 * 1.40 27.4 * -9.3 * 1.89

 2–2.49 46.1 * -4.7 * 1.30 63.6 * -4.9 * 1.65

 2.50–2.99 59.3 * -0.7 1.08 76.1 * -0.4 1.42

 3.00 or higher 64.0 † † 86.2 † † 

Number of remedial courses taken

 None 59.4 * 1.1 0.97 75.6 * 1.4 1.30

 At least one 26.2 † † 49.1 † † 

See notes at end of table. 

46 
—

Table 15.—

Table 15.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 15. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000, and least squared coefficients and 

standard errors, by selected student characteristics—Continued 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 1 3 1 3 Student characteristics percentages coefficient2 error percentages coefficient2 error 

Proportion of withdrawn/repeated courses to all courses

 None 55.0 * 10.9 * 1.19 82.2 * 15.7 * 1.65

 Less than 10 percent 66.6 * 15.3 * 1.08 78.9 * 16.3 * 1.42

 10 percent or more 14.7 † † 28.0 † † 

—Not applicable. (The variable was used to select the sample for this analysis.) 

†Not applicable for the reference group. 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

*p < .05. 

1 The estimates are from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) Data Analysis System. 

2 Least squares coefficients, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 

3 Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 4 American Indian includes Alaska Native, Black includes African American, Asian/Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and 

Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified. 

NOTE: The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. Standard error tables are available at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

so after controlling for all other independent variables included in the analysis. In other words, 

first-generation students still lagged behind their peers even if they had similar demographic 

backgrounds, academic preparation, enrollment characteristics, undergraduate majors, amounts 

of first-year credits earned, and postsecondary performance. Among students with bachelor’s 

degree goals who attended a 4-year institution, first-generation students were also less likely than 

their peers whose parents had a bachelor’s degree to earn a bachelor’s degree themselves after 

controlling for various factors. 

In addition to parents’ education levels, credit completion and performance in the first year 

bore an important relationship with students’ success in completing their bachelor’s degree 

programs. After controlling for first-generation status and a wide range of demographic, 

academic, and enrollment characteristics, students who completed at least 30 credits or earned a 

3.0 GPA or higher in the first year were more likely to complete a bachelor’s degree than their 

counterparts with fewer credits or lower grades. Also, students with fewer withdrawn or repeated 

courses (i.e., less than 10 percent in all attempted courses) were more likely than their 

counterparts with 10 percent or more of withdrawn or repeated courses to earn a bachelor’s 

degree. Major field was related to students’ success as well. Compared with business majors, 

47 
Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

students who majored in education/library science/social work and social sciences/journalism/ 

communication were more likely to earn a bachelor’s degree after controlling for all other 

variables; those with majors in health sciences/services, human/protective services/vocational 

fields, or other fields were less likely to do so. 

Academic preparation played a positive role in bachelor’s degree completion. After 

controlling for all other variables, students who completed calculus, pre-calculus, and 

trigonometry in high school or obtained high scores on college entrance examinations were more 

likely to attain a bachelor’s degree than their counterparts who completed only algebra 1 or had 

low test scores. Other characteristics associated with higher bachelor’s degree completion rates 

included having higher educational expectations, entering postsecondary education immediately 

after high school, beginning postsecondary education at 4-year institutions, and enrolling full 

time and continuously. While family income continued to be independently associated with 

bachelor’s degree completion, neither race/ethnicity nor gender appeared to matter once other 

variables were taken into account. Remediation also did not appear to be independently 

associated with bachelor’s degree completion once other attributes were controlled. 

Persistence in Postsecondary Education 

Earlier studies found that first-generation students were less successful than their peers 

whose parents were college educated in terms of their postsecondary persistence (a concept 

defined as “either attaining a degree or being still enrolled”) even after controlling for relevant 

variables (Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, and Nuñez 2001). However, in 

this analysis, this finding was not observed after controlling for all other variables (table 16). The 

reason may be attributed to the fact that additional transcript-based coursetaking and academic 

performance variables were included in this analysis, which were not available to the previous 

studies. 

In addition to generation status, there were other variables that were significantly related to 

bachelor’s degree completion but not significantly related to persistence. These variables include 

family income, education expectations, type of first institution, time between high school 

graduation and enrollment, and enrollment status. 

As with degree completion, after controlling for all other variables, postsecondary 

coursetaking and academic performance were still significantly related to students’ persistence. 

Clearly, more credits completed in the first year, higher grades earned in the first year, and a 

lower proportion of withdrawn or repeated courses were related to students’ persistence in 

postsecondary education, regardless of their backgrounds, preparation, and enrollment behaviors. 

48 
—

Table 16.—

Table 16.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 16. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had attained a degree or certificate or were still enrolled by 2000, and least 

squared coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 1 3 1 3 Student characteristics percentages coefficient2 error percentages coefficient2 error 

 Total 67.2 81 5.06 80.3 82.9 5.23 

Generation status

 Students whose parent(s) had some

 college 60.6 -2.1 1.35 75.9 -2.7 1.74

 Students whose parent(s) had bachelor’s

 or higher degree 80.3 * 2.5 1.58 86.7 * 1.5 1.87

 First-generation students 56.8 † † 71.2 † † 

Gender

 Male 63.9 * -1.7 1.01 76.7 * -2.9 * 1.24

 Female 70.0 † † 83.6 † † 

Race/ethnicity4

 Asian/Pacific Islander 70.9 -1.8 2.25 84.8 -1.8 2.49

 Hispanic 51.2 * -2.2 1.80 67.9 * -1.3 2.37

 Black 58.7 * 0.8 1.69 70.0 * -2.2 1.99

 American Indian 54.8 1.3 6.64 ‡ 5 8.84

 White 70.1 † † 82.3 † † 

Family income in 1991

 Less than $25,000 59.5 * -0.2 1.80 72.1 * -1.7 2.12

 $25,000–49,999 63.4 * -4.1 1.58 77.2 * -4.4 * 1.74

 $50,000–74,999 71.5 * -1.5 1.58 83.2 * -0.9 1.62

 $75,000 or more 83.2 † † 89.0 † † 

Highest level of mathematics completed in high school

 Calculus or precalculus 87.2 * 6.3 * 2.25 88.8 * 4.0 * 3.36

 Trigonometry 76.6 * 6.3 * 2.25 82.5 * 4.3 * 3.36

 Algebra 2 66.2 * 2.8 1.91 78.2 * 2.9 3.11

 Geometry 57.0 * 3.0 2.03 68.5 0.7 3.49

 Other mathematics 32.7 * -7.0 * 3.38 55.6 -1.3 7.84

 Algebra 1 43.7 † † 59.2 † † 

Highest level of education expected in 1994

 Some college 43.9 -6.6 3.83 — — —

 Bachelor's or higher degree 71.2 * 4.0 3.60 — — —

 High school or less 41.3 † † — — — 

SAT/ACT composite score

 Middle level 75.3 * 4.3 * 1.69 81.8 * 7.7 * 1.99

 High level 88.6 * 2.5 * 2.14 90.5 * 7.1 * 2.37

 Did not take/missing 54.1 0.2 1.58 74.2 3.8 1.99

 Low level 59.7 † † 70.1 † † 

See notes at end of table. 

49 
—

Table 16.—

Table 16.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 16. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had attained a degree or certificate or were still enrolled by 2000, and least 

squared coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics—Continued 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

Student characteristics 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 1 percentages coefficient2 3 error 

Type of first institution

 2-year 51.8 * -1.3 1.24 83.5 8.1 * 1.62

 Less than 2-year 67.6 * -5.4 3.94 ‡ 13.8 16.06

 4-year 78.9 † † 80.0 † † 

Time between high school graduation and postsecondary entry

 Less than 1 year 71.0 * 1.0 1.58 81.8 * 2.6 2.37

 More than 1 year 46.7 † † 60.6 † † 

Continuity of enrollment

 Discontinuous 44.2 * 4.3 * 1.35 58.3 * 5.0 * 1.62

 Indeterminable 35.8 * -8.3 4.73 53.8 * -1.2 6.22

 Continuous 78.6 † † 86.3 † † 

Enrollment status

 Always full-time 75.6 * -0.7 1.13 85.4 * 0.4 1.37

 Part-time at least at one institution 54.3 † † 69.6 † † 

Undergraduate major

 Education/library/social work 90.9 0.5 2.48 93.1 -2.8 2.61

 Mathematics/science 92.3 0.0 2.03 94.1 -1.2 2.12

 Engineering/architecture/computer 91.2 -1.3 3.26 94.3 -4.1 3.36

 Humanities/arts 86.6 -5.4 * 2.25 88.6 * -8.2 * 2.37

 Social sciences/journalism/

 communication 91.6 0.2 1.91 94.3 -2.0 1.99

 Health sciences/services 91.8 1.5 2.36 95.8 -2.7 2.74

 Human/protective services/vocational

 fields 75.7 * -5.3 * 2.36 87.1 * -7.0 * 3.11

 Other 40.5 * -41.0 * 2.14 46.9 * -44.6 * 2.61

 No major or unclassifiable 16.8 * -60.2 * 2.03 21.7 * -66.6 * 2.49

 Business 87.6 † † 95.7 † † 

Credits earned in the first year

 0–10 32.8 * -5.9 * 1.91 47.7 * -3.3 * 2.61

 11–29 67.6 * -4.4 * 1.35 76.9 * -2.2 1.37

 30 or more 91.8 † † 93.7 † † 

GPA in the first year

 Less than 2.00 40.0 * -8.7 * 1.69 50.6 * -6.6 * 1.99

 2–2.49 64.4 * -10.7 * 1.58 77.0 * -4.5 * 1.74

 2.50–2.99 80.2 * -0.9 1.35 87.6 * 0.7 1.49

 3.00 or higher 84.2 † † 92.6 † † 

Number of remedial courses taken

 None 74.7 * -3.7 * 1.13 83.5 * -5.1 * 1.49

 At least one 55.7 † † 73.0 † † 

See notes at end of table. 

50 
—

Table 16.—

Table 16.—

Factors Related to Degree Completion and Persistence 

Table 16. Among 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, 

percentage who had attained a degree or certificate or were still enrolled by 2000, and least 

squared coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics—Continued 

Among students with bachelor’s 

Among all students who had degree goals who attended 

 enrolled in postsecondary education a 4-year institution 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard Unadjusted Least squares Standard 1 3 1 3 Student characteristics percentages coefficient2 error percentages coefficient2 error 

Proportion of withdrawn/repeated courses to all courses

 None 74.2 * 8.9 * 1.35 87.4 * 10.3 * 1.74

 Less than 10 percent 85.1 * 14.4 * 1.35 89.9 * 12.5 * 1.62

 10 percent or more 40.2 † † 53.9 † † 

—Not applicable. (The variable was used to select the sample for this analysis.) 

†Not applicable for the reference group. 

‡Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

*p < .05. 

1 The estimates are from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) Data Analysis System. 

2 Least squares coefficients, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 

3 Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 4 American Indian includes Alaska Native, Black includes African American, Asian/Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and 

Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified. 

NOTE: The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. Standard error tables are available at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

(NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.”

Although remedial coursetaking was not significantly related to bachelor’s degree 

completion (table 15), it was significantly related to students’ persistence in postsecondary 

education, even after controlling for generation status and other demographic, academic, and 

enrollment characteristics. One possible explanation for this result is that students who take 

remedial courses may need more time to complete their regular college program, therefore 

increasing their likelihood of remaining in school. 

51 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Summary and Conclusions 

This report used data from the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the 

National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) to examine the coursetaking 

experiences of first-generation students after they entered postsecondary education. Earlier 

research indicates that first-generation students are at a disadvantage in terms of their access to, 

persistence through, and completion of postsecondary education. While the results from this 

report were consistent with those of earlier research, this study further revealed that once in 

college, the relative disadvantage of first-generation students continued with respect to 

coursetaking and academic performance. For example, first-generation students were less likely 

than their peers whose parents were college graduates to major in academic fields such as 

mathematics and science, humanities and arts, and social sciences, and were more likely to have 

no major or to major in vocational and technical fields. First-generation students also completed 

fewer credits, were less likely to take academic courses, and lagged behind their peers in 

academic performance. Furthermore, they needed more remedial help for college-level work and 

were more likely than their peers to withdraw from or repeat the courses they attempted to study. 

As with earlier research, this study demonstrated that first-generation status was 

significantly and negatively associated with lower bachelor’s degree completion rates even after 

controlling for a wide range of interrelated factors, including students’ demographic 

backgrounds, academic preparation, enrollment characteristics, postsecondary coursetaking, and 

academic performance. 

On the other hand, when combining degree attainment and persistence as the outcome (i.e., 

students either earned a credential or were still enrolled as of 2000), after controlling for the 

variables mentioned above, no significant differences were detected between first-generation 

students and their peers whose parents attended college. This result differs from those of earlier 

studies, which found that first-generation students were less likely than other students to persist 

(e.g., Nuñez and Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, and Nuñez 2001). The change in 

outcomes between the earlier studies and the current study may in part be attributed to the 

additional postsecondary coursetaking and performance variables introduced in the current 

analysis. These variables were not available for analysis in the previous studies (Nuñez and 

Cuccaro-Alamin 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, and Nuñez 2001). 

53 
Summary and Conclusions 

Finally, as in Adelman (1999) and McCormick (1999), this report confirmed associations 

between early credit production, academic performance, and withdrawing from or repeating 

courses and students’ success in postsecondary education. More credits and higher grades in the 

first year and fewer withdrawn or repeated courses were strongly related to the chances of 

students persisting in postsecondary education and earning a bachelor’s degree. 

54 
References 

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the Toolbox: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and 

Bachelor’s Degree Attainment (PLLI 1999–8021). U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. 

Adelman, C. (2004a). The Empirical Curriculum: Changes in Postsecondary Course-Taking: 

1972–2000. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. 

Adelman, C. (2004b). Principal Indicators of Student Academic Histories in Postsecondary 

Education, 1972–2000. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: Institute of 

Education Sciences. Retrieved February 20, 2004, from 

http://preview.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/prinindicat/index.html. 

Adelman, C., Daniel, B., and Berkovits, I. (2003). Postsecondary Attainment, Attendance, 

Curriculum, and Performance: Selected Results From the NELS:88/2000 Postsecondary 

Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000 (NCES 2003–394). U.S. Department of Education, 

National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Aldrich, J.H., and Nelson, F.D. (1984). Linear Probability, Logit and Probit Models 

(Quantitative Applications in Social Sciences, Vol. 45). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc. 

Berkner, L., and Chavez, L. (1997). Access to Postsecondary Education for the 1992 High 

School Graduates (NCES 98–105). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Berry, W.D., and Feldman, S. (1987). Multiple Regression in Practice (Quantitative Applications 

in Social Sciences, Vol. 50). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 

Choy, S.P. (2001). Findings from The Condition of Education 2001: Students Whose Parents Did 

Not Go to College: Postsecondary Access, Persistence, and Attainment (NCES 2001–126). 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 

55 
References 

Curtin, T.R., Ingels, S.J., Wu, S., and Heuer, R. (2002). The National Education Longitudinal 

Study of 1988: Base-Year to Fourth Follow-up Data File User’s Manual (NCES 2002–323). 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Goodman, L.A. (1976). The Relationship Between Modified and Usual Multiple-Regression 

Approaches to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables. In D. Hoise (Ed.), Sociological 

Methodology (pp. 83–110). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Horn, L., and Nuñez, A.-M. (2000). Mapping the Road to College: First-Generation Students’ 

Math Track, Planning Strategies, and Context of Support (NCES 2000–153). U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

Ingels, S.J., Curtin, T.R., Kaufman, P., Alt, M.N., and Chen, X. (2002). Coming of Age in the 

1990s: The Eighth-Grade Class of 1988 12 Years Later (NCES 2002–321). U.S. Department 

of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government 

Printing Office. 

Ishitani, T.T. (2003). A Longitudinal Approach to Assessing Attrition Behavior Among FirstGeneration Students: Time-Varying Effects of Pre-College Characteristics. Research in 

Higher Education, 44(4): 433–449. 

Knoke, D. (1975). A Comparison of Log-Linear and Regression Models for Systems of 

Dichotomous Variables. Sociological Methods and Research, 3. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc. 

Levine, A., and Nidiffer, J. (1996). Beating the Odds: How the Poor Get to College. San 

Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 

Lewis-Beck, M.S. (1980). Applied Regression: An Introduction (Quantitative Applications in 

Social Sciences, Vol. 22). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 

London, H.B. (1989). Breaking Away: A Study of First-Generation College Students and Their 

Families. American Journal of Education, 97(1): 144–170. 

McCormick, A.C. (1999). Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree: An 

Analysis of Postsecondary Transcripts for Beginning Students at 4-Year Institutions (NCES 

1999–179). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

56 
 References 

Montmarquette, C., Cannings, K., and Mahseredjian, S. (2002). How Do Young People Choose 

College Majors? Economics of Education Review, 21(6): 543–556. 

Nuñez, A.-M., and Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (1998). First-Generation Students: Undergraduates 

Whose Parents Never Enrolled in Postsecondary Education (NCES 98–082). U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

Parsad, B., and Lewis, L. (2003). Remedial Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary 

Institutions in Fall 2000 (NCES 2004–010). U.S. Department of Education, National Center 

for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Pascarella, E.T., Wolniak, G.C., Pieson, C.T., and Terenzini, P.T. (2003). Experiences and 

Outcomes of First-Generation Students in Community College. Journal of College Student 

Development, 44(3): 420–429. 

Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple Regression in Behaviorial Research: Prediction and Explanation 

(3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 

Skinner, C.J., Holt, D., and Smith, T.M.F. (Eds.). (1989). Analysis of Complex Surveys. New 

York: John Wiley and Sons. 

Terenzini, P.T., Springer, L., Yaeger, P.M., Pascarella, E.T., and Nora, A. (1996). FirstGeneration Students: Characteristics, Experiences, and Cognitive Development. Research in 

Higher Education, 37(1): 1–22. 

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition (2nd 

ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Warburton, E.C., Bugarin, R., and Nuñez, A.-M. (2001). Bridging the Gap: Academic 

Preparation and Postsecondary Success of First-Generation Students (NCES 2001–153). 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Weis, L. (1992). Discordant Voices in the Urban Community College. In L.S. Zwerling and H.B. 

London (Eds.), First-Generation Students: Confronting the Cultural Issues (pp. 13–27). New 

Directions for Community Colleges, No. 80. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

57 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

This glossary describes the variables used in this report. The variables were taken directly from the NCES 

NELS:88/2000 Data Analysis System (DAS), which is an NCES software application that generates tables from the 

NELS:88/2000 database. Many variables from the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study are included in this 

DAS. A general description of the DAS software and of the NELS:88/2000 surveys can be found in appendix B. In 

the index below, the variables are organized by general topic and, within topic, listed in the order in which they 

appear in the tables. The glossary is in alphabetical order by variable names (displayed in capital letters to the right 

of the variable label) from the NELS:88/2000 database. 

GLOSSARY INDEX 

GENERATION STATUS AND FILTERS 

Generation status.......................................... F2PARED 

12th-grader in 1992...................................GRADE12A 

NELS enrollment status............................. NELSSTAT 

Completeness of transcript records .......... COMPLETE 

Combination of institutions attended.........INSTCOMB 

Education expectations in 1994.................EDEXPECT 

POSTSECONDARY ATTAINMENT AND PERSISTENCE 

Attainment through 2000............................. CREDRET 

Time to bachelor’s degree.......................... BACHTM2 

Enrollment status in 2000...............................PERSIST 

STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS 

Gender................................................................F3SEX 

Race/ethnicity..................................................F3RACE 

Family income in 1991........................................F2P74 

ACADEMIC PREPARATION 

Highest level of math in high school ........HIGHMATH 

Senior achievement test score ...................... F22XCEN 

College entrance exam score.......................SATREVQ 

ENROLLMENT CHARACTERISTICS 

Type of first institution enrolled...................REFTYPE 

Time between high school graduation 

and postsecondary entry .................................DELAY 

Continuity of enrollment ................................ CONTIN 

Enrollment status...................................... STUPTANY 

POSTSECONDARY COURSETAKING 

Aggregated major field of study for 

postsecondary education.................................UGMJR 

Undergraduate credits earned in the first 

calendar year ............................................... TCREDG 

Total undergraduate credits earned ................TCREDB 

Undergraduate credits in math ................... MTHCRD6 

Introductory college-level math credits...... MTHCRD2 

Calculus and advanced math credits........... MTHCRD3 

Science credits.................................................SCICRD 

Level-1 lab science credits ............................SCI1CRD 

Upper-level lab science credits .....................SCI2CRD 

Social sciences credits................................. SOCSCRD 

Foreign languages credits.............................FLANCR3 

Humanities credits........................................HUMCRD 

History credits.............................................. HISTCRD 

All computer-related credits........................ CRELCRD 

Computer science credits .........................COMPSCRD 

Engineering credits ...................................ENGINCRD 

Basic Western culture/society credits.........BWCSCRD 

Education credits..............................................EDCRD 

Non-Western culture/society credits ..........NWCSCRD 

Environment/natural resources credits ...... ENVIRCRD 

Ethics credits................................................. ETHCRD 

Family/child/youth studies credits.............. FAMCRED 

Fine and performing arts credits.....................FPACRD 

Media studies credits................................ MEDIACRD 

Ethnic/women/culture credits.......................MWSCRD 

Religious studies credits.............................RELIGCRD 

Sports/PE/recreation credits......................... SPTSCRD 

Upper-level writing credits........................WRITECRD 

International studies credits.......................... INTLCRD 

Graphics arts/design credits ........................ DESCRED 

Personal developmental skills credits...........PERSCRD 

Business and legal support 

occupations credits .................................... OCC1CRD 

Computer support occupation credits.......... OCC2CRD 

Electronic/communication technology 

occupations credits .................................... OCC3CRD 

59 
Appendix A—Glossary 

Construction technology and trade occupations 

credits ........................................................ OCC4CRD 

Industrial and mechanical occupations 

credits ........................................................ OCC5CRD 

Market, sales, and hospitality 

occupations credits .................................... OCC6CRD 

Personal, food, and home service 

occupations credits .................................... OCC7CRD 

Protective services occupations credits ....... OCC8CRD 

Medical and health support occupations 

credits ........................................................ OCC9CRD 

Number of remedial courses taken..............REMCRSE 

Number of remedial math courses.............REMMATH 

Number of remedial reading courses..........REMREAD 

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE 

GPA of first calendar year of attendance ............ GPA1 

Overall undergraduate GPA.......................GPA_PETS 

Undergraduate GPA in college-level math.GPACMTH 

Undergraduate GPA in science ....................... GPASCI 

Undergraduate GPA in computer science ...GPACMPS 

Undergraduate GPA in engineering .............. GPAENG 

Undergraduate GPA in foreign language .... GPAFLAN 

Undergraduate GPA in history courses ........ GPAHIST 

Undergraduate GPA in allied health ...........GPAHLTH 

Ratio of withdraw/repeats to all courses....WRPRATIO 

60 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Time to bachelor’s degree BACHTM2 

A transcript-based variable indicating the time from the true first date of postsecondary attendance to the last date 

enrolled for bachelor’s degree for those who earned a bachelor’s degree through 2000. 

Basic Western culture/society credits BWCSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in introductory level courses 

dealing with Western history, culture, arts, and society. 

Completeness of transcript records COMPLETE 

A transcript-based variable indicating whether a student has complete transcript records. This variable has three 

categories: complete, likely complete, and incomplete. In this report, this variable was used as a filter to select 

students who had complete or likely complete transcript records. 

Computer science credits COMPSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in computer science, which is 

narrowly defined and excludes the basic computer literacy course and all computer applications courses except those 

in engineering. 

Continuity of enrollment CONTIN 

A transcript-based variable indicating whether a student was enrolled continuously. In an 8.5-year transcript history, 

continuity of enrollment is defined more liberally than it would be in a 3-year history. The judgment of “noncontinuous” requires a break of more than one semester or two quarters or their equivalent, not including summer 

terms. This variable has five categories: continuous enrollment, stopout after 3 years of continuous enrollment, 

discontinuous, indeterminable, and enrolled for less than 1 year. 

Attainment through 2000 CREDRET 

A transcript-based variable indicating credit-retention account of highest level of attainment through 2000. The 

categories include bachelor’s degree or higher, associate’s degree, certificate, no degree but earned 60 or more 

credits, no degree but earned 30−50 credits, no degree but earned 11−29 credits, and no degree and earned 0−10 

credits. 

All computer-related credits CRELCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in all explicitly computerfocused courses in undergraduate study, including those in COMPSCRD. 

Time between high school graduation and postsecondary entry DELAY 

A transcript-based variable indicating time between high school graduation and postsecondary entry. This variable 

was coded into three categories: less than 1 year, 1−2 years, and more than 2 years. 

61 
Education credits EDCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in education. 

Education expectations in 1994 EDEXPECT 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Graphics arts/design credits DESCRED 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in design and graphics fields. 

Response to the question in the third follow-up survey on the highest level of education the student ever expect to 

complete. Three categories were used in this report: high school or less, some college, bachelor’s degree or higher. 

Engineering credits ENGINCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in engineering and 

engineering technology courses (construction technology and industrial safety were excluded). 

Environment/natural resources credits ENVIRCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in fields dealing directly with 

environmental issues and natural resources. 

Ethics credits ETHCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in ethics and applied ethics 

areas (including bioethics, environmental ethics, etc.). 

Senior achievement test score F22XCEN 

This is an equally weighted average of the 1992 reading and mathematics scores divided into centiles. This variable 

was recoded into three categories in this report: low level (i.e., scored the lowest 25 percent), middle level (i.e., 

scored the middle 50 percent), and high level (i.e., scored the highest 25 percent). 

Family income in 1991 F2P74 

Responses to the question to parents in the first follow-up survey on the total gross family income from all sources 

before taxes in 1991. Four categories were used in this report: less than $25,000, $25,000−49,999, $50,000−74,999, 

and $75,000 or more. 

62 
First-generation Neither parent had attained education beyond high school 

Some college At least one parent had some college education, but neither 

 attained a bachelor’s degree 

Bachelor’s degree or higher At least one parent earned a bachelor’s or advanced degree 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Generation status F2PARED 

This variable was derived from the composite variable that characterizes the highest level of education attained by 

either parent of the student. The highest level of parental education was constructed using the second follow-up 

parent questionnaire data. Students were classified into one of the following three groups: 

Race/ethnicity F3RACE 

This variable is based on the 1992 response (second follow-up) unless it was missing or incorrect. In addition, if it 

became apparent from responses to other questions that the 1992 response was incorrect, the value was corrected in 

1994 (third follow-up). Sample members with the value of “Other” were coded as missing for the analysis. The 

categories used in this report are: 

American Indian A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North 

America and who maintains cultural identification through 

tribal affiliation or community recognition. Includes Alaska 

Natives. 

Asian/Pacific Islander A person having origins in any of the peoples of the Far East, 

Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. 

This includes people from China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine 

Islands, India, Vietnam, Hawaii, and Samoa. 

Black A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of 

Africa. Includes African Americans. 

White A person having origins in any of the original peoples of 

Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. 

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South 

American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of 

race. Includes Latino. 

Gender F3SEX 

Response to the question in the second follow-up survey on student’s gender: male and female. 

Family/child/youth studies credits FAMCRED 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses dealing directly 

with family, children, and youth. 

63 
Overall undergraduate GPA GPA_PETS 

A transcript-based variable indicating overall undergraduate grade point average. 

GPA of first calendar year of attendance GPA1 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Foreign languages credits FLANCR3 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in all languages (at all levels) 

other than English, but excluding credits earned by examination. 

Fine and performing arts credits FPACRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in fine and performing arts. 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average for courses taken between the true first date 

of postsecondary education attendance and 11 months later. 

Undergraduate GPA in computer science GPACMPS 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in computer science, narrowly defined, and 

excluding the basic computer literacy course 

Undergraduate GPA in college-level math GPACMTH 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in college-level mathematics courses below 

the level of calculus. 

Undergraduate GPA in engineering GPAENG 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in all engineering and engineering 

technology courses. 

Undergraduate GPA in foreign language GPAFLAN 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in all foreign language courses (but not 

language proficiency tests). 

Undergraduate GPA in history courses GPAHIST 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in all history courses, including art history 

and American Civilization. 

64 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Undergraduate GPA in allied health GPAHLTH 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in allied health sciences/services and 

related fields, including nursing. 

Undergraduate GPA in science GPASCI 

A transcript-based variable indicating undergraduate grade point average in all science courses at all levels. 

12th-grader in 1992 GRADE12A 

Derived from the variable for the membership of 1992 12th-graders (G12COHRT), this variable includes students 

who were not identified as a member in G12COHRT but had evidence of receiving high school diplomas between 

January and July of 1992. This variable has two categories: 1992 member or not a member. It was used as a filter in 

this report to select students who were in 12th grade in 1992. 

Highest level of math in high school HIGHMATH 

A transcript-based variable indicating the highest level of mathematics courses completed in high school. The 

categories used in this report are the following: calculus or precalculus, trigonometry, algebra 2, geometry, algebra 1, 

and other mathematics. 

History credits HISTCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in history courses, including 

the history of art and architecture, and American Civilization. 

Humanities credits HUMCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in humanities fields and 

interdisciplinary humanities. 

Combination of institutions attended INSTCOMB 

A transcript-based variable indicating combination of institutional types attended, determined by requested 

transcripts, student claims, and unrequested transcript evidence found on received transcripts (e.g., cases where the 

student did not tell us about a school attended but where transfer credits were listed on a received document from a 

school the student had attended). Institutions attended prior to high school graduation are not included. The original 

categories include: 4-year only, 4-year then 2-year, 2-year then 4-year, alternating 2- and 4-year, 4-year plus 

incidental 2-year, 4-year plus other, 2-year only, 2-year plus other, other subbaccalaureate only, 4-year plus 2-year 

and other. This variable, combined with EDEXPECT (education expectations), was used as a filter to select a 

subgroup of students with bachelor’s degree goals who attended a 4-year institution. 

International studies credits INTLCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in international and area 

studies exclusive of courses dealing with literature, arts, and history. 

65 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Media studies credits MEDIACRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in the study of mass media, 

radio, television, video, film, advertising, public relations, and journalism. 

Introductory college-level math credits MTHCRD2 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in college-level mathematics 

courses other than calculus and post-calculus math. 

Calculus and advanced math credits MTHCRD3 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in calculus, differential 

equations, post-calculus topics, advanced mathematical statistics, engineering mathematics/statistics, numerical 

methods/analysis in computer science, and physics-with-calculus. 

Undergraduate credits in math MTHCRD6 

A derived variable that sums the number of undergraduate credits earned in college-level mathematics courses 

(MTHCRD2), calculus and advanced mathematics courses (MTHCRD3), statistics (STATCRD), and other 

mathematics courses (MTHCRD4). 

Ethnic/women/culture credits MWSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses dealing with 

domestic ethnic minorities, women and gender studies, and multiculturalism. 

NELS enrollment status NELSSTAT 

This is the sorting variable for students in the fourth follow-up survey who claimed to have attended a postsecondary 

institution at any time. There are 10 categories for this variable: 

1. Received one or more transcripts, at least one of which was not either a GED-level/all-basic-skills transcript 

or a one-course transcript. 

2. Either (a) one undergraduate transcript was imputed when a graduate transcript was received with the 

undergraduate school referenced—but the undergraduate transcript was not received, or (b) the primary 

institution of undergraduate attendance refused to send transcripts and where the student’s story line of 

attendance and degree attainment is credible and consistent. 

3. Received one or more transcripts, but all were either GED-level and (if more than one received) one-course 

documents. 

4. Received only one transcript with only one course or fewer than five attempted credits of any kind. 

5. Transcript(s) requested, none received, but student is a likely postsecondary participant based on loan 

disbursement records in the NSDLS file. 

6. Transcript(s) requested, none received, but student is a likely postsecondary participant based on his/her 

account of attendance, postsecondary experiences, attainment, occupation, income, financing of 

postsecondary education, and high school background. 

7. Student claimed postsecondary attendance but transcript was not requested, but student is a likely 

postsecondary participant based on either a loan disbursement in the NSDLS file or account of attendance, 

attainment, etc. 

66 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

NELS enrollment status—Continued NELSSTAT 

8. Transcript requested, but student is not a likely postsecondary participant either because (a) all received 

transcripts were out-of-scope (blank records or secondary school transcripts) or (b) the student’s account of 

attendance, attainment, etc., was contradictory, insufficient, and not credible. 

9. Student claimed postsecondary attendance but transcript was not requested and student is not a likely 

postsecondary participant because the student’s account of attendance, attainment, etc., was contradictory, 

insufficient, and not credible. 

10. No claim of postsecondary attendance was made either in FU3 (1994) or FU4 (2000). 

In this report, this variable was used as a filter to select students who had enrolled in postsecondary education 

between 1992 and 2000. 

Non-Western culture/society credits NWCSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in upper division or 

specialized courses dealing with history, culture, and arts of non-Western societies. 

Business and legal support occupations credits OCC1CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in business and legal support occupations. 

Computer support occupation credits OCC2CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in computer support occupations. 

Electronic/communication technology occupations credits OCC3CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in technical occupations in electronic and communications technology fields. 

Construction technology and trade occupations credits OCC4CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in construction technology, construction management, and construction trades. 

Industrial and mechanical occupations credits OCC5CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in industrial and mechanical technologies and trades. 

Market, sales, and hospitality occupations credits OCC6CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in specialized marketing, retail, sales, and hospitality occupations. 

67 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Personal, food, and home service occupations credits OCC7CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in personal, food, and home service occupations. 

Protective services occupations credits OCC8CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in protective services occupations, ranging from police and fire academy courses to the administration of 

criminal justice systems and hazardous materials control. 

Medical and health support occupations credits OCC9CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses preparing students 

for work in medical and health support occupations ranging from laboratory technology to nursing to nutrition to 

medical office specialties. 

Personal developmental skills credits PERSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses dealing with 

personal development, relationships, applied psychology, and personal skills. 

Enrollment status in 2000 PERSIST 

This variable was derived from enrollment status in 2000 and highest degree attained and has three categories: 1) 

attained a degree or certificate; 2) no degree, but still enrolled in 2000; 3) no degree and not enrolled in 2000. 

Type of first institution enrolled REFTYPE 

A transcript-based variable indicating aggregated Carnegie Class type of first true institution attended. The 

categories were collapsed into three categories: 4-year, 2-year, and less-than-2-year. 

Religious studies credits RELIGCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in religious studies, theology, 

history and philosophy of religion, and Bible studies. 

Number of remedial courses taken REMCRSE 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of remedial courses taken. Remedial courses counted 

included designated codes in English, mathematics, basic skills, basic science skills, preparatory chemistry, business 

English, and arithmetic-based business mathematics. 

68 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Number of remedial math courses REMMATH 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of remedial mathematics courses taken, including general precollegiate mathematics, arithmetic/pre-algebra, arithmetic-based business mathematics, basic algebra, plane 

geometry, and intermediate algebra when additive credit was not granted. 

Number of remedial reading courses REMREAD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of remedial reading courses taken, including basic reading, 

reading improvement, speed reading, college reading, advanced reading, and similar titles. 

College entrance exam score SATREVQ 

A derived variable made from the transcript-based variable (SATREV). SATREV is a composite variable that 

consolidates the college entrance examination test scores of SAT, ACT, and PSAT on a single band-scale. 

SATREVQ was recoded from SATREV and had four categories: low level (i.e., lowest quarter), middle level (i.e., 

middle two quarters), high level (i.e., highest quarter), and did not take or missing. 

Level-1 lab science credits SCI1CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in introductory laboratory 

science courses in biology, chemistry, and physics. The category excludes introductory applied and generalized 

renderings of the same subjects. 

Upper-level lab science credits SCI2CRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in laboratory sciences 

normally requiring, as prerequisites, SCI1CRD-level courses. 

Science credits SCICRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in all science courses, 

exclusive of applied sciences and engineering. 

Social sciences credits SOCSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in all social science fields, 

including selected courses in communications and interdisciplinary topics. 

Sports/PE/recreation credits SPTSCRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in sports, physical education, 

health education, and recreation, including courses in the study of sports, sports management, and recreation 

marketing. 

69 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Enrollment status STUPTANY 

This variable was made from responses to a question in the fourth follow-up survey of whether students had ever 

“attended less than full-time” for each school attended. This variable has two categories: always full-time, part-time 

at least one institution. 

Total undergraduate credits earned TCREDB 

A transcript-based variable indicating additive undergraduate credits from all sources (including examination and 

dual-enrollment—but not transfer). 

Undergraduate credits earned in the first calendar year TCREDG 

A transcript-based variable indicating additive undergraduate credits earned in terms with dates within first calendar 

year. 

Aggregated major field of study for postsecondary education UGMJR 

A derived variable made by taking 1) the major code of the first bachelor’s degree for those who earned a bachelor’s 

degree or higher; 2) the major code of the first associate’s degree for those who earned an associate’s degree but no 

bachelor’s degree; 3) the major code of the undergraduate certificate for those who earned a certificate but neither a 

bachelor’s nor associate’s degree; 4) the major code of those who did not earn any degree. For students with an 

associate’s degree or certificate who subsequently moved to a 4-year institution and earned more than 10 credits 

from a 4-year institution; but had not yet earned a bachelor’s degree by 2000, their major fields were adjusted by 

taking the codes of non-degree major codes. The detailed major fields were aggregated into the following categories: 

Business Agriculture business/production, accounting, finance, 

operations research/administration science, business 

administration/management, human resources 

management/labor relations, other business, 

secretarial/clerical, other business support, medical office 

support, marketing/distribution retailing, hospitality 

management, real estate 

Education/library/social work Early childhood education, elementary education, secondary 

education, special education, physical education, other 

education, child study/guidance, library/archival science, 

social work 

Science Agriculture/animal/plant science, conservation/natural 

resources, forestry, biochemistry, other biological science, 

environmental studies, biopsychology, integrated/general 

science, chemistry, geology/earth science, physics, other 

physical science 

Engineering/architecture Architecture/environment design, electrical/communications 

engineering, chemical engineering, civil engineering, 

mechanical engineering, other engineering, computer 

engineering, engineering technologies, computer technology 

70 
 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Aggregated major field of study for postsecondary education—Continued UGMJR 

Computer Information technology, computer programming, 

data/information management, computer science 

Mathematics Mathematics/statistics 

Humanities Foreign languages, English/American literature, 

creative/technical writing, inter-discipline humanities, 

philosophy, religious studies 

Arts/applied arts Textiles/fashion, interior design, graphic/print 

communications, graphic/industrial design, drama, speech, 

film arts, music, fine arts/art history, other FPA 

Social sciences American studies/civilization, area studies, ethnic studies, 

human ecology, law, woman’s studies, general social science, 

psychology, clinic/counsel psychology, 

anthropology/archaeology, economics, geography, history, 

sociology, political science, international relations 

Health science/services Medical/veterinary laboratory technology, dental 

assistance/Hygiene, HPER, practical nursing, other allied 

health, physical therapy, occupational therapy, respiratory 

therapy/technology, other therapies, radiological technology, 

speech path/audiology, clinical health sciences, nursing, 

health/hospital administration, public health, other health 

science profession, nutrition/food science 

Journalism/communication Journalism, communications, radio/TV/film 

Human/protective services Theology, bible studies, administration of justice, fire science, 

public administration, human/community services 

Vocational/technical fields Communication technologies, cosmetology, other personal 

service, culinary arts/food management, military science, 

recreation/sports, construction, mechanics and repairs, 

precision production, air transportation, other transportation 

Other General studies, basic skills, and all other fields not specified

above. 

No or unclassifiable major No major or major that is unclassifiable. 

Upper-level writing credits WRITECRD 

A transcript-based variable indicating the total number of undergraduate credits earned in courses dedicated to 

writing above the level of freshman composition, including writing for different media, technical writing, and 

creative writing. 

71 
Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Ratio of withdraw/repeats to all courses WRPRATIO 

A transcript-based variable indicating ratio of withdraw/repeats to all courses, i.e., the total number of courses with 

no-penalty Withdrawal and No-Credit-Repeat grades to all undergraduate courses attempted by the student. 

72 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

The National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 

The National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), a major longitudinal study 

sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES), began in 1988 with a nationally representative, two-stage stratified probability sample 

of 1,052 8th-grade schools across the nation and 26,432 sampled students in the schools. Of the 

sampled students, 24,599 participated. This cohort were followed up in 1990, when most of the 

cohort members were in 10th grade; in 1992, when most of the cohort members were in 12th 

grade; and in 1994 and 2000, when most of the cohort members had been out of high school for 2 

and 8 years, respectively. In addition, the study was designed not only to follow a cohort of 8thgrade students over time but also to “freshen” the sample in the 1990 and 1992 surveys to obtain 

a representative sample of students enrolled in 10th grade in 1990 and in 12th grade in 1992 that 

could be compared with the earlier cohorts from the National Longitudinal Study of the High 

School Class of 1972 (NLS:72) and the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study (HS&B). 

Along with the student survey, NELS:88 included surveys of parents, teachers, school 

administrators, and school dropouts. A majority of sample members also completed cognitive 

tests administered in 1988, 1990, and 1992. In 1992, high school transcripts were collected for 

sample members, and in 2000, postsecondary transcripts were collected, further increasing the 

analytic potential of the data. Consequently, NELS:88 represents an integrated system of data 

that tracked students from middle school through secondary and postsecondary education and 

examined their labor market experiences, and marriage and family formation between 1988 and 

2000. For more technical information about the NELS:88 surveys, see The National Education 

Longitudinal Study of 1988: Base-Year to Fourth Follow-Up Data File User’s Manual (Curtin et 

al. 2002). 

The NELS:88 Postsecondary Education Transcript Study 

The major source of data for this report came from the Postsecondary Education Transcript 

Study (PETS), collected as part of NELS:88 in 2000. The PETS targeted the transcripts from all 

U.S. postsecondary institutions attended by NELS sample members in the fourth follow-up 

survey. It supplements the postsecondary education information collected from the 1994 and 

73 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

2000 follow-ups by including detailed information on the types of degree programs, periods of 

enrollment, majors or fields of study for instructional programs, specific courses taken, grades 

and credits attained, and credentials earned. Compared with self-reported data, transcript data are 

less prone to error and more objective and permit a more accurate analysis for studies like this 

one. 

Approximately 12,100 students participated in the NELS fourth follow-up study in 2000 

(Adelman, Daniel, and Berkovits 2003). Within this panel, about 9,600 students (75 percent, 

weighted) reported having attended at least one postsecondary institution according to either the 

third follow-up study in 1994 or the fourth follow-up study in 2000. Within this sample of 

students, the transcript data collection further targeted students who attended only postsecondary 

institutions identified in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) 

institutional data file, therefore, excluding postsecondary information collected from foreign 

institutions, non-degree-granting programs, and non-credit-granting institutions. Transcripts were 

requested from a total of 3,200 postsecondary institutions. Based on the transcripts received and, 

when they were not, other corroborating sources from National Student Loan Data System files, 

Advanced Placement and College Entrance Examination Board tests, and other student 

responses, about 9,400 students were identified as “likely postsecondary participants,” resulting 

in a weighted overall response rate of 95 percent. These students form the base from which the 

analysis sample was selected. 

Analysis Sample and Weights 

The analysis sample for this report was first selected from 12th-graders in 1992 because 

that year marks the modal year of high school graduation and date of initial entry into 

postsecondary education. Because this report focuses on coursetaking and requires full 

information on courses taken across all institutions attended, the sample was further restricted to 

postsecondary participants who had a complete transcript record in the PETS. Finally, the 

definition of first-generation students requires the sample members to have valid information on 

their parents’ education. Thus, students for whom parental education was missing were 

excluded.1 These selections resulted in a final analysis sample of about 7,400 students, 

accounting for about 87 percent of all the NELS 1992 12th-graders who entered postsecondary 

education between 1992 and 2000. 

The sample selection process requires the weight used in this report to be applied to 1992 

12th-graders who participated in postsecondary education and had complete transcript records. 

1 Among all the NELS 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in postsecondary education in 1992−2000, about 8 percent did not 

have complete transcript records and 9 percent did not have information on their parents’ education. 

74 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Thus, throughout the report—with one exception⎯the weight variable WTN00 (corresponding 

to F4F2P3WT in the original data file) was used for all tables and figures. For figure 1, the 

1992−1994 panel weight (WTG00) was used; it represents 12th-graders in 1992. Both are 

poststratified and balanced repeated replication weights. For more information about the 

NELS/PETS data and survey design, see Postsecondary Attainment, Attendance, Curriculum, 

and Performance: Selected Results From NELS:88/2000 Postsecondary Education Transcript 

Study (PETS), 2000 (Adelman, Daniel, and Berkovits 2003). 

Accuracy of Estimates 

The statistics in this report are estimates derived from a sample. Two broad categories of 

error occur in such estimates: sampling and nonsampling errors. Sampling errors occur because 

observations are made only on samples of students, not entire populations. Nonsampling errors 

occur not only in sample surveys but also in complete censuses of entire populations. 

Nonsampling errors can be attributed to a number of sources: inability to obtain complete 

information about all students in all institutions in the sample (some students or institutions 

refused to participate, or students participated but answered only certain items); ambiguous 

definitions; differences in interpreting questions; inability or unwillingness to give correct 

information; mistakes in recording or coding data; and other errors of collecting, processing, 

sampling, and imputing missing data. See The National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988: 

Base-Year to Fourth Follow-Up Data File User’s Manual (Curtin et al. 2002) for details on 

efforts to minimize such nonsampling errors. 

Item Response Rates 

From the selected sample of this report, weighted item response rates were calculated for 

all variables used in this report by dividing the weighted number of valid responses by the 

weighted population for which the item was applicable. Most items had a high response rate (i.e., 

above 85 percent). For these variables, it is unlikely that reported differences are biased because 

of missing data. Two variables that had relatively lower item response rates (below 85 percent) 

are the highest level of mathematics completed in high school (84 percent) and senior 

achievement test score in 1992 (80 percent). These two variables were used as row variables in 

table 1, which shows the distribution of first-generation status according to selected demographic 

and academic characteristics. However, a bias analysis on these two variables did not find 

significant differences between first-generation students and the two other groups in terms of the 

proportion of missing cases on these two variables. Therefore, the statements drawn from these 

two variables based on table 1 should not be biased due to missing data on these two items. 

75 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Data Analysis System 

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the NCES Data Analysis 

System (DAS) for the NELS:88/2000 data. This DAS includes selected transcript variables from 

the PETS file. The DAS software makes it possible for users to specify and generate their own 

tables. With the DAS, users can replicate or expand upon the tables presented in this report. In 

addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates proper standard errors2 and weighted sample 

sizes for these estimates. For example, table B-1 contains standard errors that correspond to 

estimates in table 2 in the report. If the number of valid cases is too small to produce a reliable 

estimate (fewer than 30 cases), the DAS prints the message “low-N” instead of the estimate. All 

standard errors for estimates presented in this report can be viewed at http://www.nces.ed.gov/ 

DAS [table center]. In addition to tables, the DAS will also produce a correlation matrix of 

selected variables to be used for linear regression models. Included in the output with the 

correlation matrix are the design effects (DEFTs) for each variable in the matrix. Since statistical 

procedures generally compute regression coefficients based on simple random sample 

assumptions, the standard errors must be adjusted with the design effects to take into account the 

stratified sampling method used in the NELS surveys. 

The DAS can be accessed electronically at http://nces.ed.gov/DAS. For more information 

about the NELS Data Analysis System, contact: 

Aurora D’Amico 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

National Center for Education Statistics 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006–5652 

(202) 502–7334 

Aurora.D’Amico@ed.gov 

2 The NELS samples are not simple random samples, and therefore, simple random sample techniques for estimating sampling 

error cannot be applied to these data. The DAS takes into account the complexity of the sampling procedures and calculates 

standard errors appropriate for such samples. The method for computing sampling errors used by the DAS involves 

approximating the estimator by balanced repeated replication of the sampled population. The procedure is typically referred to as 

the balanced repeated replication method. The website address to view standard errors for all report estimates is 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

76 
 

 

—

Table B-1.—

Table B-1.—

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Table B-1. Standard errors for table 2: Generation status of 1992 12th-graders who had enrolled in 

postsecondary education between 1992 and 2000, by percentage distribution of selected 

postsecondary enrollment 

Students whose 

Students whose parent(s) had 

First-generation parent(s) had bachelor’s 

Postsecondary enrollment characteristics Total students some college or higher degree 

Type of first institution

 4-year 1.54 2.53 1.94 1.09

 2-year 1.59 2.58 2.01 1.12

 Less-than-2-year 0.21 0.71 0.43 0.15 

Time between high school graduation and postsecondary entry

 Less than 1 year 0.87 1.75 1.33 0.97

 1–2 years 0.64 1.21 0.94 0.89

 More than 2 years 0.50 1.20 0.89 0.51 

Continuity of enrollment

 Continuous 1.05 2.67 1.19 1.21

 Stopout after 3 years of continuous 0.31 0.53 0.53 0.46

 Discontinuous 0.72 2.01 0.95 1.17

 Indeterminable 0.19 0.55 0.35 0.22

 Enrolled for less than 1 year 0.60 1.65 0.86 0.54 

Enrollment status

 Always full-time 1.12 2.39 1.53 1.32

 Part-time at least at one institution 1.11 2.39 1.53 1.32 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Education Longitudinal Study of 

1988 (NELS:88/2000), “Fourth Follow-up, Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS), 2000.” 

Differences Between Means 

The descriptive comparisons were tested in this report using Student’s t statistic. 

Differences between estimates are tested against the probability of a Type I error,3 or significance 

level. The significance levels were determined by calculating the Student’s t values for the 

differences between each pair of means or proportions and comparing these with published tables 

of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing (p<.05). 

Student’s t values may be computed to test the difference between estimates with the 

following formula: 

E1 − E2 

= (1) 2 

2 

2 

1 sese 

t 

+ 

3 A Type I error occurs when one concludes that a difference observed in a sample reflects a true difference in the population 

from which the sample was drawn, when no such difference is present. 

77 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding 

standard errors. This formula is valid only for independent estimates. When estimates are not 

independent, a covariance term must be added to the formula: 

E -E 

t = 1 2 (2) 

se 2 + se 2 - 2(r)se se 1 2 1 2

where r is the correlation between the two estimates.4 This formula is used when comparing two 

percentages from a distribution that adds to 100. If the comparison is between the mean of a 

subgroup and the mean of the total group, the following formula is used: 

E sub − Etot t = (3) 2 2 2 se + se − 2p se sub tot sub 

where p is the proportion of the total group contained in the subgroup.5 The estimates, standard 

errors, and correlations can all be obtained from the DAS. 

There are hazards in reporting statistical tests for each comparison. First, comparisons 

based on large t statistics may appear to merit special attention. This can be misleading since the 

magnitude of the t statistic is related not only to the observed differences in means or percentages 

but also to the number of respondents in the specific categories used for comparison. Hence, a 

small difference compared across a large number of respondents would produce a large t statistic. 

A second hazard in reporting statistical tests is the possibility that one can report a “false 

positive” or Type I error. In the case of a t statistic, this false positive would result when a 

difference measured with a particular sample showed a statistically significant difference when 

there is no difference in the underlying population. Statistical tests are designed to control this 

type of error, denoted by alpha. The alpha level of .05 selected for findings in this report 

indicates that a difference of a certain magnitude or larger would be produced no more than one 

time out of 20 when there was no actual difference in the quantities in the underlying population. 

When we test hypotheses that show t values below the .05 significance level, we treat this finding 

as rejecting the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the two quantities. Failing to 

reject the null hypothesis (i.e., finding no difference), however, does not necessarily imply the 

values are the same or equivalent. 

4 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, A Note from the Chief Statistician, no. 2, 1993. 

5 Ibid. 

78 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

A third hazard in reporting statistical tests for each comparison occurs when making 

multiple comparisons among categories of an independent variable. For example, when making 

paired comparisons among different race/ethnicities, the probability of a Type I error for these 

comparisons taken as a group is larger than the probability for a single comparison. When more 

than one difference between groups of related characteristics or “families” are tested for 

statistical significance, one must apply a standard that assures a level of significance for all of 

those comparisons taken together. In this analysis, adjustments for multiple comparisons were 

not made because a subsequent multivariate analysis was conducted, which included all 

independent variables where significant differences were found (see description below). A 

difference that was significant by chance alone would not be found significant in the multivariate 

analysis. 

Linear Trends 

While many descriptive comparisons in this report were tested using Student’s t statistic, 

some comparisons among categories of an ordered variable with three or more levels involved a 

test for a linear trend across all categories (in particular for persistence risk index and income), 

rather than a series of tests between pairs of categories. In this report, when differences among 

percentages were examined relative to a variable with ordered categories, Analysis of Variance 

(ANOVA) was used to test for a linear relationship between the two variables. To do this, 

ANOVA models included orthogonal linear contrasts corresponding to successive levels of the 

independent variable. The squares of the balanced repeated replication standard errors (that is, 

standard errors that were calculated by the balanced repeated replication method), the variance 

between the means, and the unweighted sample sizes were used to partition total sum of squares 

into within- and between-group sums of squares. These were used to create mean squares for the 

within- and between-group variance components and their corresponding F statistics, which were 

then compared with published values of F for a significance level of .05.6 Significant values of 

both the overall F and the F associated with the linear contrast term were required as evidence of 

a linear relationship between the two variables. Means and balanced repeated replication (BRR) 

standard errors were calculated by the DAS. Unweighted sample sizes are not available from the 

DAS and were provided by NCES. 

6 More information about ANOVA and significance testing using the F statistic can be found in any standard textbook on 

statistical methods in the social and behavioral sciences. 

79 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Multivariate Commonality Analysis 

There are many ways for members of the public and other researchers to make use of 

NCES results. The most popular way is to read the written reports. (Other ways include obtaining 

and analyzing public use and restricted use data files. These allow researchers to carry out and 

publish their own secondary analyses of NCES data.) 

It is very important when reading NCES reports to remember that they are descriptive in 

nature. That is, they are limited to describing some aspect of the condition of education. These 

results are usefully viewed as suggesting various ideas to be further examined in light of other 

data, including state and local data, and in the context of the large research literature elaborating 

on the many factors predicting and contributing to educational achievement or to other outcome 

variables of interest. 

However, some readers are tempted to make unwarranted causal inferences from simple 

cross tabulations. It is never the case that a simple cross tabulation of any variable with a measure 

of educational achievement is conclusive proof that differences in that variable are a cause of 

differential educational achievement or that differences in that variable explain any other 

outcome variable. The old adage that “correlation is not causation” is a wise precaution to keep 

in mind when considering the results of NCES reports. Experienced researchers are aware of the 

design limitations of many NCES data collections. They routinely formulate multiple hypotheses 

that take these limitations into account and readers of this volume are encouraged to do likewise. 

As part of the Institute of Education Sciences, NCES has a responsibility to try to discourage 

misleading inferences from the data presented and to educate the public on the genuine difficulty 

of making valid causal inferences in a field as complex as education. Our reports are carefully 

worded to achieve this end. 

This focus on description, eschewing causal analysis, extends to multivariate analyses as 

well as bivariate ones. Some NCES reports go beyond presenting simple crosstabulations and 

present results from multiple regression equations that include many different independent 

(“predictor”) variables. This can be useful to the reader, especially those without the time or 

training to access the data on their own. Because many of the independent variables included in 

descriptive reports are related to each other and to the outcome they are predicting, a multivariate 

approach can help users to understand their interrelation. For example, students’ generation 

status and delayed enrollment are associated with each other and are each predictors of 

bachelor’s degree attainment. What happens to the relationship between students’ generation 

status and bachelor’s degree attainment when delayed enrollment differences are accounted for? 

This question cannot be answered using bivariate techniques alone. 

80 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

One way of answering the question is to create three variable tabulations. This method is 

sometimes used in NCES reports. When the number of independent variables increases to four or 

more, however, the number of cases in individual cells of such a table often becomes too small to 

find significant differences simply because there are too few cases to achieve statistical 

significance. To make economical use of the many available independent variables in the same 

data display, other statistical methods must be used that can take multiple independent variables 

into account simultaneously. 

Multiple linear regression is often used for this purpose: to adjust for the common variation 

among a list of independent variables.7 This approach is sometimes referred to as commonality 

analysis,8 because it identifies lingering relationships after adjustment for “common” variation. 

This method is used simply to confirm statistically significant associations observed in the 

bivariate analysis while taking into account the interrelationship of the independent variables. 

Thus, this multiple regression approach is descriptive. Significant coefficients reported in 

the regression tables indicate that when the variable is deleted from (or added to) the set of 

independent variables, it results in a non-zero change in R-squared, which is the basis of the 

commonality analysis. In other words, a significant coefficient means that the independent 

variable has a relationship with the outcome variable that is unique, or distinct from its 

relationship with other independent variables in the model. 

Multivariate description of this sort is distinct from either a modeling approach in which an 

analyst attempts to identify the smallest relevant set of causal or explanatory independent 

variables associated with the dependent variable or variables or an approach using one of the 

many varieties of structural equation modeling. In contrast, a multivariate descriptive or 

commonality approach provides a richer understanding of the data without needing to make any 

kind of causal assumptions, which is why descriptive multivariate commonality analysis is often 

employed in NCES statistical reports. 

When should commonality analysis be employed? It should be used in statistical analysis 

reports when independent variables are correlated with both the outcome variable and with each 

other. This will allow the analyst to determine how much of the effect of one independent 

variable is due to the influence of other independent variables, since in a multiple regression 

procedure these effects are adjusted for. For example, since the strength of the statistical 

relationship between students’ generation status and bachelor’s degree attainment may be 

affected by time of enrollment, computing a multiple regression equation that contains both 

7 For more information about least squares regression, see Lewis-Beck (1980) and Berry and Feldman (1987). 

8 For more information about commonality analysis, see Pedhazur (1997). 

81 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

variables allows the analyst to determine how much if any difference in bachelor’s degree 

attainment between first-generation students and other students is due to differences in the time 

of enrollment. 

As discussed in the section “Data Analysis System” above, all analyses included in PEDAR 

reports must be based on the DAS, which is available to the public online 

(http://www.nces.ed.gov/DAS). Exclusively using the DAS in this way provides readers direct 

access to the findings and methods used in the report so that they may replicate or expand on the 

estimates presented. However, the DAS does not allow users access to the raw data, which limits 

the range of covariation procedures that can be used. Specifically, the DAS produces correlation 

matrices, which can be used as input in standard statistical packages to produce least squares 

regression models. This means that logit or probit procedures, which are more appropriate for 

dichotomous dependent variables cannot be used.9 However, empirical studies have shown that 

when the mean value of a dichotomous dependent variable falls between 0.25 and 0.75 (as it does 

in this analysis), regression and log-linear models are likely to produce similar results.10 

The independent variables analyzed in this study and subsequently included in the 

multivariate model were chosen based largely on earlier empirical studies (cited in the text), 

which showed significant associations with the key analytic variable, bachelor’s degree 

attainment. Before conducting the study, a detailed analysis plan was reviewed by a Technical 

Review Panel (TRP) of experts in the field of higher education research and additional 

independent variables requested by the TRP were considered for inclusion. The analysis plan 

listed all the independent variables to be included in the study. The TRP also reviewed the 

preliminary results as well as the first draft of this report. The analysis plan and subsequent report 

were modified based on TRP comments and criticism. 

Missing Data and Adjusting for Complex Sample Design 

The DAS computes the correlation matrix using pairwise missing values. In regression 

analysis, there are several common approaches to the problem of missing data. The two simplest 

approaches are pairwise deletion of missing data and listwise deletion of missing data. In 

pairwise deletion, each correlation is calculated using all of the cases for the two relevant 

variables. For example, suppose you have a regression analysis that uses variables X1, X2, and 

X3. The regression is based on the correlation matrix between X1, X2, and X3. In pairwise 

deletion, the correlation between X1 and X2 is based on the nonmissing cases for X1 and X2. 

9 See Aldrich and Nelson (1984). Analysts who wish to estimate other types of models can apply for a restricted data license 

from NCES. 

10 See for example, Goodman (1976) and Knoke (1975). 

82 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Cases missing on either X1 or X2 would be excluded from the calculation of the correlation. In 

listwise deletion, the correlation between X1 and X2 would be based on the nonmissing values 

for X1, X2, and X3. That is, all of the cases with missing data on any of the three variables 

would be excluded from the analysis. 

The correlation matrix produced by the DAS can be used by most statistical software 

packages as the input data for least squares regression. The DAS provides either the SPSS or 

SAS code necessary to run least squares regression models. The DAS also provides additional 

information to incorporate the complex sample design into the statistical significance tests of the 

parameter estimates. Most statistical software packages assume simple random sampling when 

computing standard errors of parameter estimates. Because of the complex sampling design used 

for the survey, this assumption is incorrect. A better approximation of their standard errors is to 

multiply each standard error by the design effect associated with the dependent variable 

(DEFT),11 where the DEFT is the ratio of the true standard error to the standard error computed 

under the assumption of simple random sampling. The DEFT is calculated by the DAS and 

displayed with the correlation matrix output. 

Interpreting the Results 

The least squares regression coefficients displayed in the regression tables in this report are 

expressed as percentages. Significant coefficients represent the observed differences that remain 

between the analysis group (such as students whose parents had a bachelor’s or higher degree) 

and the comparison group (i.e., first-generation students) after controlling for the relationships of 

all the selected independent variables. For example, in table 15, the least squares coefficient for 

students whose parents had a bachelor’s or higher degree is 8.1. This means that compared to 

first-generation students, roughly 8 percent more of the group whose parents had a bachelor’s or 

higher degree would be expected to attain a bachelor’s degree, after controlling for the 

relationships among all the other independent variables. 

11 The adjustment procedure and its limitations are described in Skinner, Holt, and Smith (1989). 

83