Service-Learning and First-Generation University Students: A Conceptual Exploration of the Literature
Abstract
Background: Despite increased access to higher education in recent decades, first-generation (first-gen) university students continue to face challenges with persistence and completion. Recommended responses by universities include exposing these students to “high-impact” educational practices. Purpose: This article examines the potential of one of these practices—service-learning—to address the disadvantages faced by first-gen students. Methodology/Approach: We review the literature on first-gen students and service-learning and offer a conceptual critique of dominant approaches. Findings/Conclusions: Dominant conceptions of service-learning treat first-gen students as a homogeneous, deficient group and reduce learning to an input-environment-output model. We argue for a more conceptually nuanced understanding of the reasons for the cultural mismatch often experienced by underrepresented groups of students. Implications: The conceptual resources offered in this article are intended to help researchers and policy makers undertake research that captures the diversity and richness of students’ lives and leads to more equitable practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Challenges persist in technology-assisted service-learning, including uneven engagement, lack of personalisation, and difficulty sustaining reflective depth.
“However, challenges persist, including uneven engagement, lack of personalisation, and difficulty sustaining reflective depth (Taylor et al., 2019).”
From Enhancing service-learning through Generative AI: a mixed-methods study on educational Game design in a finance course (2025) · cites this paper as Taylor et al., 2019
Cites
Social Capital and Academic Motivation Among First-Generation Community College Students
Moschetti, R. V., & Hudley, C. (2015) · Community College Journal of Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/10668926.2013.819304 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wan, K., Woo, Y. Y., & Ho, G. T. S. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2592370 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“However, challenges persist, including uneven engagement, lack of personalisation, and difficulty sustaining reflective depth (Taylor et al., 2019).”
- Authors
- Taylor, A., Yochim, L., & Raykov, M.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- University of Malta (MT)
- Corresponding author
- Taylor, Alison
- Venue
- Journal of Experiential Education
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-07-17
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 349-363
- ISSN
- 1053-8259 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-009X
- OpenAlex
- W2962241380
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 8.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experiential Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435-2012-0301)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Service-Learning and Community Engagement
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- service-learning, first-generation college students, high-impact practices, student persistence, student completion, cultural mismatch, underrepresented students, higher education equity, student diversity, conceptual critique
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review