Not so different and not deficient: First- and continuing-generation students' selves and self-discrepancies

Previous research has often portrayed first-generation college students - students whose parents do not have a four-year university degree - through a deficit lens, depicting them as lacking in skills, knowledge or potential compared to continuing-generation students. It, however, remains unknown how first-generation and continuing-generation students perceive themselves with respect to their own goals and obligations. Who do they want to be and to what extent do they think of themselves as meeting their own goals and obligations? To answer these questions, we assessed students' ideal and ought selves, as well as self-discrepancies, based on Higgins's theory (Higgins, 1987), in a relatively large sample of students in the US (N = 1244) across three waves. Overall, we found no significant differences in the content of ideal and ought selves, or perceived self-discrepancies between first-generation and continuing-generation students. Responses were strikingly similar, with both groups mentioning almost identical characteristics for their ideal and ought selves. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in ideal or ought self-discrepancies between the two groups of students. Despite common deficit narratives, first-generation students did not think of themselves as being further away from their aspired selves than continuing-generation students.