Why Supporting First-Generation Students Matters for Jobs and Economic Growth
Executive Summary
By 2030, an estimated 50 million first-generation (FiF) students will enter higher education globally. This is a transformation fueled by policy reforms, demographic shifts, and unrelenting aspirations for upward mobility (UNESCO GEM, 2022; NCES, 2024).
This growth also mirrors a broader global surge in tertiary enrollment, as evidenced by national projections and policy targets. For instance, UNESCO forecasts that tertiary enrollment in Sub-Saharan Africa will double in the coming years, reflecting rapid demographic expansion and increasing demand for higher education. In the United States, projections indicate an influx of 4.6 million new higher education students by 2031, underscoring continued growth in educational participation. Similarly, India’s National Education Policy (NEP, 2020) sets an ambitious goal of achieving a 50% gross enrollment ratio in higher education by 2035, highlighting a strategic push to expand access and capacity. Together, these examples illustrate a widespread and accelerating global trend toward participation in higher tertiary education.
This growth has not eliminated the persistent challenges facing students who are the first in their family to attend university. Funding shortages and dropout risks continue to undermine an equitable transition to the workforce for first-in-family (FiF) students. According to IFC Vitae data, FiF students have an 18% lower graduation rate, are 27.8% more likely to work in jobs unrelated to their field of study and face a 36.3% unemployment rate compared to 31.1% among their continuing peers, defined as students with parents or siblings who have higher education experience. Although career mentorship is a proven strategy to help close these gaps, only 21.3% of FiF students report access to such support. These disparities significantly impact access to graduate-level jobs and limit broader economic advancement.
The primary source of analysis in this report draws on IFC Vitae surveys pooled from 15,749 graduates (cohorts starting 2019) across 34 institutions in 12 African countries and 22 institutions in 8 Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries. The anonymized survey captured three key demographic traits:
- gender,
- age,
- first-in-family status determined by the question: “Were you the first in your family to attend a tertiary educational institution?” (Yes/No)
By focusing on the education and employment outcomes of the first-in-family group, this report lays the groundwork for future studies to explore additional factors and impacts.
The Vitae data reveals four key insights emerging from the analysis of first-in-family graduates in low and middle income regions. These graduates are likely to experience:
- Challenges in persistence and completion
- Disciplinary divides
- Difficulties navigating the job market
- The transformative impact of career services and mentorship
The underlying message from these insights is that universities hold the key to unlocking this group’s transformative potential but only if they act decisively. Understanding unique needs and patterns and offering timely, personalized career services and mentorship could be the game-changer and a critical lifeline in leveling an uneven playing field for FiF graduates.
Challenges in Persistence & Completion
Global research on first-generation (FiF) students is limited, but where it does exist, it largely focuses on trends in dropout rates and degree completion. An Australian national study reported 41% of FiF students have seriously considered leaving school or are at risk of dismissal (Nkansah et al., 2024; Hanson 2024). Similar trends are observable in other countries as follows:
- United States: Only 50% of FiF students graduate within six years (vs. 65% of peers), debt and work obligations recur as key barriers (NCES, 2021).
- India: Just 12% of FiF students’ complete degrees (8% in rural areas) due to poverty and academic support gaps (NSSO, 2021).
- Mexico: A 40% FiF dropout rate is linked to unaffordable fees and increased familial obligations (INEGI, 2021).
Consistently, financial hardship appears to be a significant factor influencing attrition, and studies show that FiF students continue to face academic and economic challenges that affect their persistence (Fongwa, 2018).
These patterns are reinforced when analyzing the Vitae alumni dataset. Figure 1 clearly shows the likelihood of graduation varies significantly by country. This suggests systemic inequities rather than individual capability plays a greater role in influencing graduate outcomes.
Local factors such as financial aid access, cultural attitudes toward education, institutional support, and labor market conditions shape FiF student outcomes and highlight the need for targeted, context-specific interventions.
In figure 1, it must be noted that in every country except China, Lebanon, and Chile, FiF graduates were less likely to graduate than their continuing peers within the same systemic context, reinforcing the different realities of the two groups.
A key factor behind lower persistence among FiF graduates is that they receive significantly less financial support from their families, 15.3-percentage points less than their continuing counterparts (see figure 2).
This group predominantly relies on external funding sources, highlighting the systemic inequities that FiF students face throughout their academic journey. The data shows that FIF graduates are more likely to self-fund while also relying on other sources like government grants, bursaries, scholarships, loans, and to a lesser extent employer support.
Figure 3 reveals striking regional differences in how students finance their education, particularly in Africa and the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) regions.
LAC graduates reported relying far more heavily on personal income, with 49.8% citing it as a primary funding source, more than double the 20.9% reported by African graduates. In contrast, African respondents depend more on institutional support, with 39.1% utilizing bursaries, grants, or government subsidies compared to their Latin American peers.
To meet up with financial obligations, FIF students in LAC are more likely to be self-funded (see figure 4), taking on full-time employment commitments while pursuing their studies.
Unfortunately, this has its implications. While attempting to address financial shortfalls, students find themselves in a precarious balancing act, juggling work and studies because of the absence of financial safety nets.
The pressure may also compel students to prioritize income over academics, increasing the risk of burnout and attrition. Overall, struggling academically presents a cruel paradox: students that attempt to extend their studies increase costs in the long run, while cutting back on coursework to work more undermines progress.
The challenges highlighted so far call for a comprehensive, interconnected approach that recognizes the complex realities students face. To address systemic inequities, institutions must first expand financial assistance programs designed with these group differentials in mind. From a policy perspective, rather than relying on uniform aid packages; funding should be calibrated to bridge gaps in regional resource availability, ensuring FiF students or those from economically strained communities aren’t excluded by hidden costs.
Regardless of how studies are financed, without familial guidance, FiF students often lack access to institutional resources or networking opportunities that could mitigate these challenges. The lack of cultural capital required to navigate academic systems cannot be ignored. Academic success also hinges on guidance that families may struggle to provide, particularly in households where higher education is unfamiliar terrain. Implementing robust mentoring programs pairing students with advisors who demystify academic processes, career pathways, and institutional expectations can also level the playing field, transforming uncertainty into agency.
Academic structures also need to adapt to students balancing work, caregiving, or other duties. Flexible options like modular coursework, evening classes, and credit for prior experience help students manage both learning and survival. Early and proactive support, including workshops on academic systems, peer networks for belonging, and skill-building initiatives, can empower students before challenges turn into crises.
Together, these strategies form a scaffold that doesn’t merely react to dropout risks but actively cultivates resilience. By addressing financial precarity, knowledge gaps, and cultural disconnection in tandem, institutions can transition from gatekeepers into stewards of equitable opportunity.
Future research provides an opportunity to examine intersecting factors like gender and field of study, while centering on the experiences of those who ultimately withdrew. These are critical voices often missing from institutional retention data. Only by addressing both the financial and academic dimensions of this challenge can institutions start breaking the limiting cycle of FiF student attrition.
The Disciplinary Divide
The absence of academic capital has far-reaching consequences, one of which is the uneven participation of First-in-Family (FiF) students in high-mobility disciplines, particularly STEM fields. These fields offer strong prospects for economic advancement, yet FiF students remain underrepresented, raising equity concerns and perpetuating cycles of socioeconomic inequality.
That said, the critical role of family mentorship in shaping STEM pathways is well-documented.
- FiF STEM students are more likely to encounter enrollment gaps: 13 points in the US (24% vs. 37%) and 17 points in the UK (18% vs. 35%) (Sutton Trust, 2022).
- Furthermore, a 2023 US study conducted by the Journal of STEM Education found FiF STEM students are three times less likely to receive family mentorship than peers with college-educated parents. While students with STEM-educated parents were 50% more likely to gain early career exposure through family networks.
A similar disciplinary divide is reflected in Vitae data from low and middle income regions. FiF enrollments are most concentrated in fields such as Services, Education, and Business & Law, while representation in STEM remains low surpassed only by Humanities and Arts.
The Vitae data shows a pattern that underscores a deeper narrative: disciplines like STEM often require extensive guidance, preparation, and sustained resources, advantages more accessible to students whose families can provide career-specific mentorship. In addition, FiF students may feel greater pressure to enter the workforce quickly, making them more risk-averse to degrees that are longer or more costly to complete due to extended tuition, living expenses, and delayed earnings.
While this report draws on valuable data from low and middle income regions, its primary aim is to illuminate the structural and disciplinary divides facing FiF students and advocate for stronger support mechanisms. There is also scope to gather further insights from program-level interventions, but broader, longitudinal research is needed to fully understand and address the barriers to equitable participation in high-mobility fields.
Employment Outcomes: Navigating Jobs
First-in-Family (FiF) graduates often encounter significant challenges in securing employment and accessing quality job opportunities.
They tend to experience higher unemployment rates compared to their continuing peers. Vitae data reflects this pattern in both Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Africa, where structural barriers are especially pronounced for FiF students from African countries.
African FiF graduates face the highest unemployment rate at 50.2%, 6.1 points above their African continuing peers and 19.3 points higher than FiF graduates in Latin America. This regional divergence reflects how local labor markets can amplify structural barriers.
Access to jobs is not the only challenge; the quality of employment reveals further inequities. OECD research shows FiF graduates are 30% more likely to work outside their field of study, very often finding themselves in lower-skilled roles due to financial pressures and inadequate career guidance. In regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America (where social capital heavily dictates labor market access) UNESCO Global Education Monitor reports 40–50% of FiF graduates struggle to secure roles matching their qualifications. Further perpetuating cycles of under-employment that stifles economic mobility despite academic achievement.
The Vitae graduate data remains consistent with global data. In assessing the quality of employment outcomes, 57.5% of FiF graduates reported finding work related to their studies compared to 61.5% of continuing peers. While this gap is notable, the disparity becomes more pronounced when looking at salary outcomes. In the survey, graduates were asked to estimate their gross monthly salary ranges, expressed in the currency of their country. This was divided into five categories in accordance with the accepted dispersion and the Vitae dataset was standardized into salary quintiles, as shown in Figure 7. The result was that as salaries increased, FiF graduates were increasingly underrepresented in higher earning bands compared to their continuing peers.
In addition, the income data in figures 8 and 9 paint a sobering picture of economic inequality for first-in-family graduates across the two regions in focus. In Africa, nearly 60% of FiF alumni find themselves trapped in the bottom two income quintiles, a reflection of limited earning potential despite their educational attainment. The situation grows even more dire in Latin America, where 64.7% of FiF graduates cluster in the lowest salary tiers.
What makes these figures particularly troubling is the consistent pattern they reveal across regions; FiF graduates invariably earn less than their continuing counterparts from similar institutions and programs. This persistent wage gap reinforces the impact of systemic barriers, from unequal access to high-paying industries to implicit bias in compensation decisions, that extend far beyond individual qualifications or career choices.
The financial consequences compound over time, as these early-career earnings disadvantages typically follow graduates throughout their professional lives, perpetuating cycles of intergenerational inequality that higher education alone cannot break.
The evidence is unequivocal: FiF graduates face compounded barriers, higher unemployment, greater job mismatches, and lower wages, potentially rooted in unequal access to networks, guidance, and equitable hiring practices. These challenges are most acute in Africa and LAC but persist globally, demanding targeted interventions like:
- Career navigation programs to bridge network gaps
- Employer partnerships to counter hiring biases
- Salary transparency initiatives to address wage disparities
Without intentional action, the promise of upward mobility through education will remain unfulfilled for FiF graduates.
The Transformative Role of Career Services and Mentorship
“While previous data revealed that 59.9% of African and 64.7% of Latin American and Caribbean FiF graduates remain trapped in the lowest income quintiles, with degrees that fail to deliver the promised mobility. Additional results demonstrate the potential for targeted career support to disrupt these persistent inequities.“
The guidance gap occurs early: only 28% of FiF students receive career advice from family compared to 65% of their continuing-generation peers (Strada, 2023) leaving them unprepared to navigate labor markets. OECD data also reports that FiF students are 2-3 times less likely to receive career mentorship from family or personal networks compared to peers with college educated parents. Behind these statistics lies a more fundamental gap: the importance of a well-paved path of family experience that most privileged students take for granted.
An Australian study found that first-in-family graduates faced challenges due to limited career guidance when entering the job market (O’Shea et al, 2021). Additional research confirms that earning a credential is just the first step, and long-term success requires comprehensive career support (De Schepper, 2024). Collectively, these findings highlight the urgent need for targeted career services and mentorship programs that close the guidance gap and support FiF students’ professional futures.
The Vitae alumni regional data for LAC & Africa further quantifies both the crisis and the solution. The majority of first-generation (FiF) graduates in Latin America and Africa reported a lack of career support; 81.4% in Latin America and 76.5% in Africa said they had not received any career assistance and that the gap in support had a clear impact on their employment outcomes.
As career support emerges as a decisive factor in shaping employment outcomes for graduates, the data shows those receiving career assistance saw a 9-percentage point increase in full-time employment and an 11-percentage point reduction in unemployment, further underscoring its broad relevance.
The regional data also amplifies this trend.
Access to career guidance significantly improves employment outcomes for first-in-family (FiF) graduates, particularly in regions where labor market barriers are pronounced. While continuing-generation graduates reported better employment outcomes overall, FiF graduates who received career support fared significantly better than those without it. This trend held across both LAC and Africa, though employment outcomes in LAC were consistently higher than in Africa, regardless of career support.
In Africa, FiF graduates who received career assistance had an unemployment rate of 33.4%, compared to 55.3% among those without support, a striking 21.9-percentage point reduction. Similarly, in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), career support was associated with a 7-percentage point drop in unemployment (from 29.9% without support to 22.9% with it).
Career guidance was also linked to increased full-time employment. In Africa, full-time employment among FiF graduates rose from 32.0% without support to 47.7% with support, an increase of 15.7 percentage points. In LAC, the gain was 8.9-percentage points, from 56.5% to 65.4%. These findings underscore the need for targeted career services that help close opportunity gaps and support smoother work transitions for FiF graduates.
Despite these improvements, disparities between FiF and continuing-generation graduates persist. In Africa, FiF graduates with career support still faced higher unemployment than their peers (33.4% vs. 27.8%), with the gap widening significantly in the absence of support (55.3% vs. 44.4%). A similar pattern appeared in LAC, where the unemployment gap without support was narrower (29.9% for FiF vs. 27.8% for peers), but was substantially reduced when support was provided (22.9% vs. 15.8%).
This further highlights the critical importance of targeted career services and mentorship for FiF students, intentional career programming can meaningfully improve employment outcomes and reduce equity gaps.
These figures confirm two critical points: career assistance dramatically improves employment outcomes, particularly for FiF graduates, but structural inequities persist even with support. The data reinforces the call for expanding career services while addressing systemic barriers to close the remaining gaps. In other words, investing in career guidance is not just beneficial, it is essential to level the playing field.
The fascinating part of the survey data was that though FiF graduates face tough job markets, they still place a high value on their education (see figure 12).
In both LAC and Africa, FiF graduates were more likely to agree that the benefit of attending the institution outweigh the cost. The higher perception of value is often due to FiF viewing higher education as a transformative milestone, both personally and for their families, and this increases their appreciation of its value. Despite facing more barriers and sometimes earning less than continuing peers, the relative impact of a degree on their lives can feel more significant.
When asked how they would rate their overall experience, over half (52.6%) of FiF graduates compared to 48.2% of their continuing peers rated their overall institutional experience as “better or much better than expected,” demonstrating that FiF graduates maintain an aspirational drive that transcends employment outcomes (see figure 13).
The implication is that unlike continuing peers, FiF graduate expectations may be more grounded, leading them to view the benefits of university as outweighing the costs more positively.
Further analysis may point to how graduates evaluate the return on their educational investment. Respondents were asked if the benefits received from attending their institution outweighed the financial costs incurred. Suffice to say, career assistance further amplified this positive sentiment: 73.8% of those receiving support reported an experience above expectations, compared to 52.1% among those without such support (see figure 14).
While there was only a marginal difference between FiF and continuing graduates, the FiF African respondents showed a slight 3-percentage point higher positive response than their peer continuing graduates. Among those who received career assistance, 53.2% reported that the benefits outweighed the costs, versus only 39.0% that did not receive such support and reported the same.
This pattern was consistent across both Africa and Latin America regions, reinforcing the measurable value of career services in shaping perceptions of educational ROI. It must be noted that African FiF graduates without career support emerged as the most vulnerable, 35.2% of them did report that the benefits did not justify the costs.
While FiF graduates may face more challenging employment outcomes, their heightened satisfaction with their educational experience reflects a deep-seated optimism and commitment to overcoming adversity. This aspirational drive is not only reflected in their personal assessments of institutional value but also in the transformative impact of career services, which can elevate both their career prospects and overall satisfaction with their educational journey.
Conclusion
The IFC Vitae data presents a powerful yet paradoxical narrative about first-generation (FiF) graduates across Africa and Latin America. While representing 42% of respondents, these students face a dual disadvantage in labor markets, and not only are they more likely to experience unemployment, but they also disproportionately occupy lower-paying jobs mismatched to their qualifications compared to their continuing peers. This quantitative and qualitative employment gap reveals systemic barriers that extend far beyond the classroom.
The challenges are multifaceted. Many FiF students navigate their academic journeys while balancing work and financial pressures, often in fields of study that don’t align with labor market realities. This disciplinary mismatch leaves them particularly vulnerable in competitive job markets, where social capital and career guidance often determine success. Yet, even amid these obstacles, their resilience shines through. A striking proportion of FiF graduates report high satisfaction with their education, believing its benefits outweigh the costs, a testament to the enduring value they place on learning, despite uneven post-graduation outcomes.
The data also points to solutions. Financial support mechanisms such as bursaries, campus work opportunities, and targeted grants emerge as critical retention tools, while enhanced career services and mentorship can bridge the guidance gap that perpetuates employment disparities. The Australian example is instructive: strategic government funding increased FiF undergraduate enrollment by 51%, proving that policy interventions can dramatically expand access.
However, access alone is insufficient. To truly level the playing field, institutions must adopt a holistic approach aligning career support with field-specific labor demands, easing financial burdens, and fostering mentorship networks that help FiF students translate education into opportunity. The potential is immense: by addressing these interconnected challenges, universities and policymakers can transform FiF struggles into engines of inclusive economic growth.
The call to action is clear. If education is to be a true equalizer, systemic reforms must prioritize the unique needs of first-generation students. From targeted funding to wraparound career support, the tools for change are within reach. The question is whether stakeholders will seize them and in doing so, unlock the full promise of a generation determined to succeed.
EVALUATE THE PRACTICES OF YOUR INSTITUTION WITH OUR BENCHMARKING TOOL AT https://www.vitaeready.org/benchmarking/
SOURCES:
IFC VITAE Alumni Survey (2019–2024), N= 15,749 graduates across 56 countries in Africa and Latin America.
UNESCO GLOBAL EDUCATION MONITOR
https://www.education-inequalities.org/
NCES, 2024 https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2024/2024034.pdf
NEP, 2020 https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf
Russell et al., 2022 https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/first-generation-students-share-their-experiences-in-higher-ed
Hanson, 2024 https://educationdata.org/college-dropout-rates
American Educational Research Association, 2023 https://www.aera.net/Newsroom/Study-Diverse-College-Classrooms-Linked-to-Better-STEM-Learning-Outcomes-for-All-Students
De Schepper, 2024 https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/bafc1bmotoM4c
Nkansah, 2024 https://repository.eduhk.hk/en/publications/what-drives-first-generation-college-students-to-be-resilient-in-
Fongwa, 2018 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328782154_Towards_an_Expanded_Discourse_on_Graduate_Outcomes_in_South_Africa
Journal of STEM Education
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1149413
Lourens & Fourie-Malherbe, 2016, https://www.econ3x3.org/sites/default/files/articles/Lourens%20%20Fourie-Malherbe%202016%20Employability%20and%20HE%20graduate%20identity%20FINAL.pdf
NCES, 2021https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612942.pdf
NSSO, 2021 https://www.isid.ac.in/~acegd/acegd2023/papers/GopinathAnnadurai.pdf
INEGI, 2021 https://en.www.inegi.org.mx/
NSFAS, 2023 https://static.pmg.org.za/Minister_of_DHET_NSFAS_Annual_Report_2022_23.pdf
O’ Shea et al., 2021 https://ojs.deakin.edu.au/index.php/jtlge/article/view/982
OECD
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/education-at-a-glance_19991487.html
STRADA
https://www.strada.org/reports/major-influence
Sutton Trust. (2020). University Access, Participation and Success. Retrieved from https://www.suttontrust.com
