Abstract
The South African student profile has changed significantly over the last few decades. First-generation low-income students (FGLIS) in higher education (HE) make up a high proportion of students enrolled at universities around the country. FGLIS are identified as students who are at-risk and more likely to drop out when they encounter challenges. They are also more likely to arrive on campus unprepared for university. To mitigate this, scholars and HE practitioners have identified the need for support programmes to assist FGLIS succeed in HE. At the University of Johannesburg (UJ), there are a number of intervention programmes that seek to help FGLIS accumulate capitals and positively shape university experiences.
In Theory of Practice, Bourdieu (1977) argued that the habitus is gained through socialisation and cultural experiences. It is through the habitus that one’s thoughts, actions and preferences are shaped. Expanding on the role of culture, he introduced cultural capital, and argued that in addition to economic capital, individuals from the upper-class also have access to non-economic forms of capital, namely cultural and social. The forms of capital are transferred in various ways. Upper-class children have an advantage compared to working-class children in the schooling environment in that they are pre-exposed at home to codes and tastes that are rewarded at school. For Bourdieu (1977), this explained the differences in scholarly attainments of upper-class students compared to working-class students, who are less likely to be pre-exposed by their parents to tastes and codes that rewarded at school. This theory underscores the importance of institutional intervention programmes for working-class students.
This qualitative study sought to assess and interrogate whether intervention programmes at UJ were achieving their intended objectives. To achieve this, 20 participants were interviewed, and their accounts provided the study with insight into experiences of FGLIS at UJ. Participants were selective of intervention programmes that they prioritised and utilised, Due to online and blended learning as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, lived experiences of FGLIS were altered. The manner in which participants responded to intervention programmes highlighted the need for intervention programmes to address unique online and blended learning challenges while promoting academic success and reinforcing resilience and adaptability of FGLIS.
viii
The concluding chapters point out how intervention programmes play a crucial role in affording and equipping FGLIS with critical learning and support skills or capitals needed to succeed at university level. Drawing on Bourdieu, sustainable intervention programme strategies to ensure that the habitus of FGLIS is sustained as a mediating force in an online, blended, and contact learning environments are identified and recommended.