DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A STUDY

MEASURING FINANCIAL KNOWLEDGE, BEHAVIORS, SKILLS,

ATTITUDES, AND DESIRES OF ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS

A Dissertation Submitted to the

W
College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
IE in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree

EV
Doctor of Social Science
PR

Angela Yvonne Hunt

Wilmington University

December 2020
 ProQuest Number: 28257083

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

W
IE
EV
ProQuest 28257083

Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All Rights Reserved.

PR

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 W
IE
EV
PR

© 2020 Angela Yvonne Hunt

All Rights Reserved

ii
 Wilmington University
College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Doctor of Social Science in Prevention Science

We hereby approve the Doctor of Social Science dissertation of

Angela Yvonne Hunt

Candidate for the degree of Doctor of Social Science in Prevention Science

11-12-2020 Signature on File

_______________ __________________________________________

W
Date Mary Stephanie Berridge, Ed.D.

IE
11-12-2020 Signature on File
______________ __________________________________________
EV
Date Allan R. Zaback, Ed.D.
PR

ACCEPTED

Signature on File 11-12-2020

__________________________________________ _______________
Edward L. Guthrie, Ed.D. Date
Dean, College of Social and Behavioral Sciences

iii
Title: Development and Evaluation of a Study Measuring Financial Knowledge,
Behaviors, Skills, Attitudes, and Desires of Economically Disadvantaged
First-Generation College Students

Author: Angela Yvonne Hunt

PSC Dissertation Chair: Dr. Mary Stephanie Berridge

PSC Dissertation Committee Member: Dr. Allan R. Zaback

Financial literacy education and financial capacity building are important building blocks

for adult economic success. Young adults who come from disadvantaged socioeconomic

backgrounds have the least amount of access to financial literacy education, as concepts

are generally not taught in the home (Lewis & Scott, 2002) and K-12 education in most

W
U.S. states does not require students to complete a financial literacy curriculum (Urban et
IE
al., 2015). The existing financial literacy education curricula lack diversity and are not

generally adapted for specific populations, so therefore are not as effective for all
EV
students exposed to them (Watson, 2006). Guided by social justice theory, this mixed-

methods research study sought to explore the best practices of existing financial literacy

and capacity-building programs through a comprehensive review of existing literature

PR

and a survey of a sample of low-socioeconomic first-generation college students to gauge

their financial knowledge, behaviors, skills, attitudes, and desires, as well as interviews

with several survey respondents. The purpose of the study was to inform the development

of a financial literacy and capacity-building program to be deployed at colleges and

universities and adapted for high school students to serve this population.

Keywords: financial capacity building, first-generation college students, poverty

prevention, financial literacy education

iv
 REFLEXIVITY STATEMENT

My interest in the subject of financial literacy education has developed over the

last 12 years working as a financial aid administrator for a mid-sized private, open-access

commuter university. In my experience over the years, I have seen many students get

excited over their acceptance into the university and their coursework, but have no idea

how they will pay for it, or even worse, expect that whatever financial aid they get will be

the answer to all of their money problems in and out of school. Year after year, these

students are unpleasantly surprised when they learn that they do not qualify for grant or

W
gift aid, that they are not eligible to receive enough aid to cover their entire tuition and

fees, that their aid package included loans (which they actively accepted), and that these
IE
loans must be repaid. The list goes on and on.

Most of the time, my own experience as a college freshman keeps me empathetic

EV

to the students’ struggles with financial literacy; I attended a large university, had a

minimum-wage campus job, and amassed 14 credit cards that were quickly “maxed out.”
PR

I came from a middle-class home with two working parents who attempted to give me

and my sister practical money advice; however, it was never really concrete for me until I

found myself having to confess to them the $2,000 debt I accumulated and had no way to

pay.

Professionally, I want to help my employer develop a financial literacy and

capacity-building program to help enrich the academic education of our students and

provide essential life skills that will maximize the benefits of their degrees and, in some

cases, give them tools to complete their degrees.

v
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation exists not only through my labor, but through the support and

encouragement of the village of friends, family, colleagues, and educators in my life over

the last 3 years. I pursued this endeavor to show my children Adam and Ava that even in

less than ideal circumstances, they can do anything they are determined to do. I thank my

parents and sister for never doubting my success and my countless friends and colleagues

whose support and well wishes were just what it took to recharge my draining endurance.

To my tireless dissertation chairperson, Dr. Stephanie Berridge, you have been

W
my most supportive cheerleader from the day I decided to pursue this degree. You have

always “gotten” me, and I will be forever grateful for your time, care, editing advice, and
IE
droll sense of humor.

To my committee member, Dr. Zaback, I have appreciated getting to know you

EV

during this process and am pleased to have made such an accomplished, thorough, and

critically thinking professional acquaintance whose brain I look forward to picking for
PR

years to come.

To the Prevention Science Doctoral Program Chairs, Dr. Debra Berke and Dr.

Shawn Stevens, thank you for designing and executing this program to be timely,

practical, and multidisciplinary as well as challenging and rewarding. I also thank you for

admitting the women who, along with myself, make up Cohort 1. This formidable group

of women are not just colleagues to me, they are my family. I am proud to share the title

of Doctor of Social Science with Dr. Cheeseman, Dr. Hitchens, Dr. Huhn-Murphy, Dr.

Johnson, Dr. King, Dr. Mason, Dr. Raymond, and Dr. Trent.

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

I INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1

Background ..............................................................................................................1
Statement of the Problem .........................................................................................5
Significance of the Study .........................................................................................7
Research Questions ..................................................................................................8
Working Model ........................................................................................................9
Hypothesis..............................................................................................................10
Definition of Terms................................................................................................10
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................12

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................................................................13

W
Inclusion Criteria ...................................................................................................14
Importance of Research .........................................................................................15
Theoretical Perspectives ........................................................................................18
Social Justice Theory .......................................................................................19
IE
Economic Stress Model Theory .......................................................................22
Self-Determination Theory ..............................................................................23
Key Constructs or Variables ..................................................................................24
EV
Relationships Among the Constructs .....................................................................27
Commonalities in FLE Best Practices .............................................................27
Population-Specific Needs ...............................................................................29
Social Justice Perspectives ...............................................................................32
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................33
PR

III METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................34

Research Design.....................................................................................................34
Sample Characteristics and Sampling Procedure ..................................................36
Assumptions, Delimitations, and Limitations ........................................................37
Informed Consent...................................................................................................40
Ethical and Human Subjects Considerations .........................................................41
Data Collection ......................................................................................................42
Instruments .............................................................................................................43
Quantitative ......................................................................................................43
Qualitative ........................................................................................................45
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................46
Quantitative Data Analysis ..............................................................................47
Qualitative Data Analysis ................................................................................48
Data Integration ...............................................................................................49
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................50

vii
IV RESULTS ..............................................................................................................52

Participant Demographic Information ...................................................................53

Questionnaire Respondents ..............................................................................53
Interviewees .....................................................................................................56
Response Rate ..................................................................................................57
Quantitative Results ...............................................................................................59
Financial Skill ..................................................................................................59
Financial Behavior ...........................................................................................61
Financial Knowledge .......................................................................................62
Overall Quantitative Findings ..........................................................................63
Hypothesis Testing...........................................................................................67
Qualitative Results .................................................................................................68
Overall Qualitative Findings ............................................................................69
Data Integration .....................................................................................................73
Analysis of the Qualitative Sample’s Questionnaire Results ..........................73
Joint Display of Integrated Data ......................................................................75

W
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................79

V DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS ..................................80

IE
Summary of Research Questions, Hypothesis, and Findings ................................80
Internal Validity .....................................................................................................84
Limitations .............................................................................................................85
EV
Assumptions as a Limiting Factor ...................................................................85
Response Rate and Sample Size ......................................................................86
Conceptual v. Semantic Knowledge ................................................................88
Relationship to Other Research .............................................................................90
Recommendations for Practice ..............................................................................92
PR

Logic Model and Theory of Change ................................................................93

Recommendations for Future Research ...........................................................96
Conclusion .............................................................................................................98

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................100

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................116

Appendix A – Year Up Racial Demographics .....................................................116

Appendix B – Human Subjects Review Committee Approval ............................119
Appendix C – Questionnaire Invitation ...............................................................121
Appendix D – Consent Form ...............................................................................122
Appendix E – CITI Certification .........................................................................123
Appendix F – Questionnaire ................................................................................124
Appendix G – Interview Invitation, Protocol, and Questions ..............................128
Appendix H – Data Analysis Codebook ..............................................................131
Appendix I – Peer Examination Checklists .........................................................135

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Participant Demographics ......................................................................................53

2 Response Rate by Week and Device .....................................................................57

3 Respondents’ Methods for Saving Money in the Past 12 Months .........................60

4 Overall Quantitative Findings by Positive Response Percentage per

Demographic Category ..........................................................................................65

5 Independent Samples Test .....................................................................................67

6 Thematic Elements Revealed from Qualitative Assessments ................................68

W
7 Cross-Case Comparison Using Three Participants and Integration of
Questionnaire Scores and Risk and Protective Factors Derived
from Interviews ......................................................................................................75

8
IE
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................81
EV
9 Logic Model: Recommendations for a Postsecondary LIFG Financial
Literacy and Capacity-Building Program ..............................................................94
PR

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1 Working Model of the Project .................................................................................9

2 Key Constructs in the Literature ...........................................................................26

3 Mixed-Methods Design .........................................................................................35

4 Procedural Diagram for Explanatory Sequential Design .......................................49

5 Respondents’ Methods for Making Ends Meet .....................................................59

6 Respondents’ Financial Knowledge Responses.....................................................62

W
7 Reported Employment Statuses of Year Up Interns ..............................................88

IE
EV
PR

x
 CHAPTER I:

INTRODUCTION

Background

A report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2018) indicated

that 20% of all suicides in the United States resulted from a job loss, financial problem,

or loss of housing. The report also listed strengthening economic supports—household

financial security and housing stabilization policies—as its number one suicide

prevention strategy. Among college students, 78% who attempted suicide cited financial

W
stress as a reason (Westefeld et al., 2005). While suicide is an extreme response to

financial stress, financial literacy and financial capacity building are areas that are ripe
IE
for inclusion in prevention strategies to prevent financial exclusion, reduce poverty,

reduce dependence on public assistance, and increase financial knowledge and skill
EV

(Friedline & West, 2016; Grimes et al., 2010; Kafka, 2019; LeBaron et al., 2018).

A 2006 episode of the popular comedy television show Saturday Night Live
PR

presented a sketch featuring a couple sitting in their kitchen, balancing their checkbook,

and expressing concerns about being able to pay their bills. A spokesman appears in their

kitchen, and they engage in the following exchange:

Spokesman: Did you know that millions of Americans live with debt they cannot
control? That’s why I developed this unique new program for managing your
debt. It’s called [presents book] “Do Not Buy Stuff You Cannot Afford.”
Wife: Let me see that. . . . [Grabs book, reads.] “If you do not have any money,
you should not buy anything.” Hmm, sounds interesting.
Husband: Sounds confusing.
Wife: I do not know, honey; this makes a lot of sense. There’s a whole section
here on how to buy expensive things using money you save.
Husband: Give me that. . . . [Grabs book.] And where would you get this saved
money?

1
 Spokesman: I tell you where and how in Chapter 3. (Fey et al., 2006)

The sketch continues, and for every question the couple asks, the spokesman essentially

reiterates the same idea of not spending money they do not have.

This sketch is a simplistic and comedic example of what most Americans would

define as financial literacy, or financial illiteracy in this couple’s case. Huston (2010)

loosely defined financial literacy as a combination of knowledge and application of

human capital specific to personal finance. Financial literacy is an important life skill that

needs to be taught and practiced from an early age; however, how, when, and where

financial literacy education (FLE) takes place are questions that experts have been

W
debating for some time. Friedline (2015) determined that children are developmentally
IE
capable of economic agency (the capacity to act independently and make free choices

with their money) as early as age 5 or 6 and make gains in economic knowledge and
EV
behavior at this age in tandem with developmental gains in cognition, social

relationships, and language. The fact that children exhibit economic agency at young ages
PR

lends support for encouraging financial capability early in life (Sherraden, 2013).

Participants in a study by LeBaron et al. (2018) expressed that if they had been given

more knowledge as children, they would be making fewer mistakes and be more

financially stable as emerging adults and adults.

Lerman (2000) reported that while in high school, the youth less likely to have a

job were low income. Factors that contributed to low teen employment in this group were

lower motivation, a disadvantage in finding work, and lack of encouragement from their

parents to work. Lewis and Scott (2002) hypothesized that a range of economic activities,

not only allowance practices, are less common in poorer homes, where parents are in

2
nonprofessional occupations and have fewer educational qualifications. Interestingly,

while Lewis and Scott (2002) found that financial activities were more common in

professional families with older children, large majorities of these households felt that

schools should be providing advice on how to manage personal finances. Parents in semi-

skilled and unskilled manual occupations saw less need for schools to provide personal

finance education (Lewis & Scott, 2002).

In 2006, the United States launched a first-ever national strategy to improve

financial literacy (U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Financial Education, 2006).

This strategy was, unfortunately, initiated without clearly defining financial literacy or

W
how it should be measured. From 2006 to 2009, organizations and individual researchers
IE
who were conducting program evaluations and applied research on the topic of financial

literacy used their own definitions and measures of financial literacy until a conceptual
EV
definition of financial literacy was added to the U.S. national strategy in 2009. This

inconsistency certainly slowed progress and hindered the ability to design effective FLE

programs (Remund, 2010). In her quest to narrow down the content areas for which
PR

financial literacy could be measured, Huston (2010) discovered that four distinct content

areas surfaced across various measurement tools that were utilized over several years:

• Money basics: time value of money, purchasing power, personal financial

accounting concepts

• Borrowing: bringing future resources into the present through the use of credit

cards, consumer loans, or mortgages

• Investing: saving present resources for future use through the use of saving

accounts, stocks, bonds, or mutual funds

3
 • Protecting resources: making use of insurance products or other risk management

techniques

The inclusion of these content areas varied across the tools and measurements of

financial literacy, with money basics appearing in more than half but all four appearing in

only 25% of the tools. Huston’s (2010) research concluded that measures that included all

four content areas were most likely to have the highest degree of accuracy.

A valid and reliable measurement tool for financial literacy did not exist until

2011 when the International Network on Financial Education and the Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) developed the OECD Financial

W
Literacy Questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed after several reviews and
IE
comments and a large-scale pilot project in 13 countries. The final version incorporated

the feedback from the pilot study, the views of expert subgroup members, and the results
EV
of the analysis process (OECD, 2011).

The 2012 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Financial

Literacy Framework was the first large-scale international study to assess the financial
PR

literacy of young people. The PISA 2012 financial literacy assessment was administered

to approximately 29,000 students in 13 countries and economies representing 40% of

world gross domestic product (OECD, 2014). The 2012 PISA study found that

• Shanghai, China had the highest average score in financial literacy.

• Only 1 in 10 students across participating countries was able to tackle the hardest

financial literacy tasks: analyze transaction costs, understand the inclusion of fees

in the calculation of account balances, and demonstrate an understanding of the

implications of income tax brackets.

4
 • On average, a more socioeconomically advantaged student scored 41 points

higher in financial literacy than a less-advantaged student across participating

countries and economies.

• Gender gaps in financial literacy among 15-year-olds were small, unlike those

found in adult populations.

• Students’ attitudes toward learning, such as perseverance and openness to

problem-solving, were positively associated with financial literacy.

The results of the most recent PISA financial literacy assessment were announced

in May of 2020, and OECD reported that the 2018 PISA assessment results are largely

W
consistent with previous findings and that 10% of students who completed the assessment
IE
scored at level 5, the highest level of proficiency, and 15% scored at or below level 1

(Schleicher, 2019).
EV

Statement of the Problem

The problem addressed by this study is the logistics of when, where, to whom,
PR

and how financial literacy and capacity-building education should be disseminated.

Research findings have presented conflicting information, as the individuals who need

FLE the most (those with a lower income and education) do not have access to FLE at

home and their parents do not believe that it needs to be taught in school (Lewis & Scott,

2002). Additionally, in the United States, FLE has only recently been mandated at the

state level for K-12 education. According to the Council for Economic Education (2020),

only 21 states require high school students to take a course in personal finance, and five

states and the District of Columbia do not require personal finance in their K-12

standards. The 24 remaining states generally only require that an FLE curriculum is

5
offered as a stand-alone course or integrated into the curriculum of another course (Urban

et al., 2015).

FLE programs should be adapted for the population for which they are aimed, yet

in most secondary and postsecondary schools where they are presented, they are not

(Tisdell et al., 2013). Furthermore, exposure to an FLE curriculum in high school is

voluntary in 24 states (Urban et al., 2015), and in college is primarily aimed at business

majors (Fry et al., 2013). Secondary- and postsecondary-level FLE programs seldom

approach students where they are, meaning that the curriculum generally focuses on

learning objectives that may be beyond the scope of knowledge of the learner. For

W
example, Delaware’s Financial Literacy Standard 3 states: “Students will evaluate the
IE
costs and benefits of major savings and investing options” (Delaware Department of

Education, 2018, p. 3). Students in grades 9 to 12 are expected to be able to “evaluate the
EV
role of the government and financial markets in savings and investment decisions” (p. 3)

in order to meet the standard. To meet Standard 4, “Students will understand how to

evaluate financial products and services to minimize financial risks” (p. 4), high school
PR

students must be able to “analyze costs and benefits of various methods of managing

risk” (p. 4). Expectations to meet these standards at the high school level are ideal at best,

but are lofty for a significant portion of college students whose reality involves living

paycheck to paycheck (Catalidi et al., 2018). According to a Charles Schwab study,

investing, let alone having choices of investments, is something that is not considered

because young adults do not think they have enough money to merit a formal financial

plan that includes making investments (Shariff, 2018).

6
 Significance of the Study

As it relates to the prevention of financial exclusion, individual economic failure,

and increasing college retention, a study that investigates the best practices of college-

level FLE curricula will inform the development of an FLE and financial capacity-

building program aimed at first-generation college students from economically

disadvantaged backgrounds.

Research from Ma, Pender, and Welch (2019) supports the claim that earning a

bachelor’s degree is a protective factor for preventing antisocial and poor economic

behavior. In 2015, the median full-time earnings of bachelor degree recipients aged 25

W
and older were 67% higher than those of high school graduates (Ma et al., 2019). In that
IE
same year, the unemployment rate for 25- to 34-year-olds with at least a bachelor’s

degree was 2.6%, compared to 8.1% of high school graduates in the same age range.
EV
Additionally, of adults aged 25 and older who live in poverty, 13% were high school

graduates compared to 4% who had earned a bachelor’s degree. College completion also

increases other prosocial behavior in 25- to 34-year-olds, like volunteerism (39% vs.
PR

16%), participation in voting in elections (45% vs. 20%), decreased smoking (8% vs.

26%), and increased exercise (69% vs. 45%) (Ma et al., 2019).

First-generation students make up one-third of all American college students, with

an increase in enrollments from 17.5 million to 20.0 million between 2005 and 2015

(Snyder et al., 2018). However, first-generation students are at high risk for dropping out

of school, as they possess demographic and enrollment characteristics like low

socioeconomic status and lower enrollment intensity, often related to financial

constraints, which are correlated with poor college retention (Catalidi et al., 2018).

7
 The investigation and collection of best FLE practices is a primary step towards

the development and adaptation of an evidence-based FLE curriculum for first-generation

students most at risk of dropping out of college for financial reasons. Further, completing

an effective financial literacy program will be a key theoretical element that influences

the adult financial behavior of the students receiving it as well as strengthening the

students’ probability of completing their degrees, which acts as a protective factor and

influences other prosocial adult behavior (Ma et al., 2019).

Research Questions

W
Three primary research questions evolved from the problems related to when,

where, to whom, and how financial literacy and capacity-building education should be
IE
disseminated. Two subquestions were added to further enhance understanding of the

target population.
EV

1. What are the current best practices in higher education FLE programs?

2. What are the most common underdeveloped financial literacy elements among low-
PR

income first-generation (LIFG) higher education students?

a) What financial literacy elements do the LIFG population think they need

to master to become financially literate?

b) In what ways does the LIFG population’s perceived lack of financial

literacy mastery align with their actual financial literacy development

needs?

3. How can these best practices inform the development of a postsecondary financial

capacity-building program geared towards LIFG college students?

8
 Working Model

Figure 1 represents a working model of the research study. Themes and constructs

discovered in the review of current literature are displayed as interconnected circles that

diagram the rationale and direction of the study. Starting with the exploration of unique

stressors and origins of financial behaviors and attitudes common in the target

population, the study’s review of current literature identified best practices in FLE

curriculum development and instruction. Quantitative and qualitative data to determine

the baseline needs of the population were collected and discussed within a social justice

framework. Finally, a discussion of the next steps included recommendations for the

W
development of a postsecondary FLE program specialized for low-socioeconomic-status
IE
and first-generation college students.

Figure 1
EV

Working Model of the Project

PR

9
 Hypothesis

The study hypothesized that the population of LIFG students have similar

financial behaviors, but levels of financial knowledge and skill differ due to variation in

exposure to FLE and finance education in the population. As discussed further in Chapter

III, the study sample came from a population of students who were enrolled in a

mentorship program that provided them with personal financial coaching and other

opportunities for FLE within the program. The expectation is that alumni of the program

would score higher on the financial knowledge and skill questions in the study. This

hypothesis was formed based on the review of the literature and various study findings

W
discussed in detail throughout the literature review as well as knowledge about the study
IE
sample’s specific exposure to FLE.

Definition of Terms
EV

For purposes of this study, the following terms are defined:

• Economic agency: The capacity to act independently and make free choices with
PR

one’s money (Friedline, 2015).

• Financial attitudes: Attitudes and preferences related to finances, such as towards

saving and making longer-term financial plans versus prioritizing short-term

wants (OECD, 2013).

• Financial behavior: Behavior such as planning expenditures and building up a

financial safety net. Positive outcomes from being financially literate are driven

by these behaviors; conversely, certain behaviors, such as overusing credit, can

reduce financial well-being (OECD, 2013).

10
• Financial capacity: The ability to manage one’s financial affairs in a manner

consistent with personal self-interest and values. Financial capacity has been

equated in importance to other key indicators of adult overall health and is closely

related to personal independence and successful functioning in the community

(Marson, 2016).

• Financial exclusion: The state of an individual as being considered unbanked or

underbanked. Unbanked households do not have an account at an insured

institution, while underbanked households have an account but have used

alternative financial services (payday loans, cash checking) within the past 12

W
months (Yun, 2017).

•
IE
Financial knowledge: Basic knowledge of key financial concepts and the ability

to apply numeracy skills in financial situations as part of financial literacy

EV
(OECD, 2012).

• Financial literacy: The ability to use knowledge and skills to manage financial
PR

resources effectively for a lifetime of financial well-being (President’s Advisory

Council on Financial Literacy, 2009).

• Financial resilience: The ability to cope with external shocks, at least in the short

term (OECD, 2016).

• Financial skill: The ability to apply relevant knowledge and comprehension to

manage or solve a financial situation (expected or unexpected).

• First-generation college student: American undergraduate student whose parents

or grandparents have not attended college (Catalidi et al., 2018).

11
 • Intergenerational transmission of poverty: The phenomenon whereby the

probability of being poor is increased based on having impoverished parents. Of

those who do not emulate their parents’ poverty level, about 50% have a net

family income that amounts to less than twice the poverty line (Rodgers, 1995).

For 2020, the poverty guideline for a family of four is a household income of

$26,200 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020).

Chapter Summary

This chapter introduced the history and significance of FLE in the United States.

W
The chapter outlined the problems that are associated with the current state of FLE in the

United States as well as specific challenges for first-generation college students and how
IE
those two issues converge. Research questions that address the problem were presented

as the framework for the study to determine best practices in postsecondary-level FLE
EV

and assess the levels of financial knowledge, behavior, skills, attitudes, and experiences

of low-socioeconomic-status, first-generation college students. Finally, definitions of

PR

terms were provided for this research project.

Chapter II explores the relation between FLE and low-socioeconomic-status first-

generation college students via analysis and synthesis of the available current literature.

12
 CHAPTER II:

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

A letter from President John Adams to Thomas Jefferson in August of 1787

contained a quote that is believed to be one of the earliest acknowledgments of both the

importance and lack of financial literacy in America (National Financial Educators

Council [NFEC], 2019). Adams stated, “All the Perplexities, Confusions and Distresses

in America arise not from defects in their Constitutions or Confederation, not from a

want of Honour or Virtue, So much as from downright Ignorance of the Nature of Coin,

W
Credit and Circulation” (as cited in Boyd, 1955, p. 55). Because the human lifespan has

increased and new financial products are prevalent and easily accessible, individuals find
IE
themselves making more financial decisions in their lifetimes than ever before (Lusardi,

2019). Combining these trends with globally low financial literacy is a call to action to
EV

elevate financial literacy education (FLE) (Lusardi, 2019).

As it applies to this study, the literature on FLE and related topics triangulates
PR

around Adams’ sentiment and supports the magnitude of the topic and its influence over

several facets of an individual’s life experiences, specifically college completion and

intergenerational transmission of poverty. This review of the literature explores how the

theoretical perspectives of social justice, economic stress, and self-determination are

intertwined with the needs of the target population (first-generation and low-

socioeconomic-status college students), the best practices of secondary- and

postsecondary-level FLE curriculum and program development, and the benefits of

including FLE under the scope of prevention as it relates to the target population and the

prevention of intergenerational transmission of poverty.

13

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.