The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 43, No. 1 - 13

Family Income, Campus Residency, and Student Retention

While their representation on college campuses grows, so do the costs of higher education and, in kind, the spending on amenities
to attract afﬂuent students. Jacob, McCall,
and Stange (2013) describe this process as the
"college as country club" model. In a ﬁght for
higher rankings and to attract students who
can pay their own way, many colleges invest
in non-academic amenities, including posh
residence halls and student facilities, driving
up costs of college-going and living on campus
(Kirp, 2005; Jacob et al., 2013). New facilities
and non-academic amenities contribute to a
"country club"-like atmosphere and a climate
emphasizing middle- and upper-class values,
described next.
Students from low-income families face
two interwoven challenges: cultural differences between their background and the norms
of other students on campus, and structural
obstacles due to ﬁnancial constraints. Students
from similar class backgrounds share ﬁnancial, cultural, and social resources and lived
experiences that "shape their orientations to
college" (Armstrong & Hamilton, 2013). Given
the pervasiveness of afﬂuent students at fouryear colleges, their shared orientations create
dominant campus climates that clash with the
orientations of students from low-income and
working-class families, making their adjustment to college life difﬁcult (Aries & Seider,
2005; Armstrong & Hamilton, 2013; Stuber,
2011). Afﬂuent students tend to hold a social
class worldview with "signiﬁcant class 'blind
spots'" in which they are unaware of the difﬁculties of the less advantaged (Stuber, 2010,
p. 132). These students attribute their freedom
to partake in consumptive amenities-costly
clubs, studying abroad, and minimal time

spent working for pay-to their parents' values
rather than economic resources (Stuber, 2010,
p. 136). Oblivious to the challenges and ﬁnancial constraints of others, they may, by default,
interpret another student's decision to "skip
out" on a social outing as a preference, failing
to consider that some activities are cost-prohibitive. As a result, the dominant viewpoint on
campus is blind to the economic disadvantages
of some students.
For students from low-income and working-class families, the cultural orientation of
college and the social dynamics of campus interactions produce "psychic distance," feelings
of isolation despite close physical proximity to
peers, and "cultural mismatch," the perception
of differences between one's background and
the norms institutionalized at American fouryear colleges (Stephens et al., 2012; Stuber,
2011). The mismatch signals to students that
they do not belong, leading to feelings of intimidation, discomfort, inadequacy, exclusion,
and powerlessness (Aries & Seider, 2005; Stephens et al., 2012). Because campus residency
operates by further engaging students in the
campus community, if students are adversely
impacted by the culture, living on campus may
not offer positive impacts on college retention.
Students from low-income families also
face structural obstacles to college engagement. They are more likely to work for pay
during college than their peers (Belley &
Lochner, 2007; Roksa & Velez, 2010). Financial constraints impact students' time-allocation because pressure to work leaves less time
to interact with members of the campus community. They also impact students' ability to
participate in programming and activities that
have out-of-pocket expenses. A simple outing

V O L U M E 4 3 , NO. 1 * 2 0 1 6

13
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 43, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 43, No. 1
