Search for: All records

Abstract Existing qualitative research in higher education on students’ work and family commitments already suggests that time as a resource for college is likely not distributed equitably by race/ethnicity or gender. However, the relationship between race/ethnicity, gender, and time as a resource for college has yet to be quantitatively measured in large-scale higher education research. This study explored whether gender or race/ethnicity correlated with differences in time as a resource for college; and further, the extent to which differences in time as a resource for college may be explained by other factors such as age, number of children, and access to childcare. Retrospective survey responses (n = 41,579) on self-reported time use were merged with institutional data records from students at the City University of New York (CUNY), a large diverse public university in the U.S. Women, Black, and Hispanic students were all significantly more time poor than male, White, or Asian students. Age accounted for significant portions of these differences, perhaps because it correlates with increased work and family responsibilities. Having children as well as a student’s access to childcare also explained a significant portion of inequitable distributions of time as a resource for college. 

We present a model of capital that expands existing models to introduce two new forms of capital (time and body capital) as sources of inequity in education. The aim is to (a) make visible core resources that are relevant to educational outcomes and also (often hidden) sources of inequity, (b) identify commonalities across diverse empirical and theoretical research strands, and (c) reconceptualize existing research from an asset rather than deficit framework. We explain how time and physiological resources can be conceptualized as forms of capital and link this to extant empirical and theoretical research across fields. Then, we describe how students may have different amounts and types of time and body capital, as well as different drains on capital, and how this may lead to educational inequities. We close by describing the affordances of using this theory as a lens for analyzing existing educational structures, policies and practices. 

Existing research demonstrates gender- and race/ethnicity-based inequities in college outcomes. Separately, recent research suggests a relationship between time poverty and college outcomes for student parents and online students. However, to date, no studies have empirically explored whether differential access to time as a resource for college may explain differential outcomes by gender or race/ethnicity. To address this, this study explored the relationship between time poverty, gender or race/ethnicity, and college outcomes at a large urban public university with two and four year campuses. Time poverty explained a significant proportion of differential outcomes (retention and credit accumulation) by gender and race/ethnicity. More time-poor groups also dedicated a larger proportion of their (relatively limited) discretionary time to their education, suggesting that inequitable distributions of time may contribute to other negative outcomes (e.g., reduced time for sleep, exercise, healthcare). This suggests that time poverty is a significant but understudied equity issue in higher education.