Peer Consultation: How Academic Libraries Can Better Serve Their First-Generation Students
Abstract
First-generation (FG) college students represent a growing population in North American higher
education. Yet, many academic libraries continue to rely on traditional, transactional service models
that conflict with these students’ documented preference for relational, peer-based support. This
conceptual paper synthesizes recent literature on FG students’ information behaviors and institutional
barriers to library use. Drawing on asset-based frameworks and Karen Fisher’s theory of Information
Grounds, the analysis reveals a critical paradox: FG students highly value library resources and
spaces, yet often avoid formal service points because of relational barriers with authority figures. To
address this gap, the paper proposes a Peer Research Conversation Program (PRCP), a librarybased
peer mentorship model that intentionally recruits successful FG students as consultants and
operates in a dedicated, low-stakes space separate from the traditional reference desk. The proposal
is supported by evidence-based justifications and aligned with the American Library Association’s
Code of Ethics and values of principlism.
education. Yet, many academic libraries continue to rely on traditional, transactional service models
that conflict with these students’ documented preference for relational, peer-based support. This
conceptual paper synthesizes recent literature on FG students’ information behaviors and institutional
barriers to library use. Drawing on asset-based frameworks and Karen Fisher’s theory of Information
Grounds, the analysis reveals a critical paradox: FG students highly value library resources and
spaces, yet often avoid formal service points because of relational barriers with authority figures. To
address this gap, the paper proposes a Peer Research Conversation Program (PRCP), a librarybased
peer mentorship model that intentionally recruits successful FG students as consultants and
operates in a dedicated, low-stakes space separate from the traditional reference desk. The proposal
is supported by evidence-based justifications and aligned with the American Library Association’s
Code of Ethics and values of principlism.