Studies on first-year seminars offer a starting place to explore first-year specific teaching and learning approaches (from here on out, we will refer to this as “first-year pedagogies”). Research on University 101: The Student in the University at the University of South Carolina (Friedman, 2022; Gardner, 1978), the National Survey of First-Year Seminars (Cameron & Rideout, 2022), and transition pedagogy (Kift, 2009, 2015; Kift & Nelson, 2005) demonstrate that effective approaches for engaging first-year students in learning spaces requires educators to explicitly teach and encourage students to practice academic expectations and institutional norms, self-regulation and metacognition, and self-directed learning strategies. In addition, educators should provide structured opportunities for building belonging across university spaces (i.e., with peers, faculty, and staff inside and outside of the classroom), academic literacies, and navigational capital. Findings from these studies provide a starting point for understanding both the critical and unique pedagogical decisions that instructors must make when teaching within these contexts.

The first-year experience extends beyond the first-year seminar and is shared across campus in spaces with high first-year student participation (e.g., introductory general education courses or gateway disciplinary/major courses). While instructor support is typically targeted at first-year seminars, these tertiary experiences are often excluded, leaving faculty unaware (and potentially ill-equipped) that their courses are an integral part of that first-year transitionary experience for many students. Thus, the faculty development found to be essential for the effective delivery of first-year seminars (Gordon & Foutz, 2015; Groccia & Hunter, 2012; Smith & Barrett, 2019; Sobel, 2014) needs to be extended to faculty involved in these additional experiences. In these un-labelled first-year learning spaces, instructors build mentoring relationships and foster pivotal impacts on students’ sense of belonging during this transitional period, consequently impacting student success, retention, and attrition indicators (Bentrim & Henning, 2023; Robinson, Seymour, Jin & Whiteman, 2025; Strayhom, 2018). Below we outline how an institutional faculty development approach centered on first-year pedagogies became a vehicle for shared values, language, and instructional and curricular practices. We saw a need to support student learning and development in the first year across explicitly labelled first-year experiences (e.g., first-year seminars) and tertiary spaces fundamental to the first-year experience (e.g., general education courses and discipline/major gateway courses), and we leveraged intentional faculty development to do so.

Case Study: FYE Faculty Development at Elon University

Elon University is a mid-sized, private, comprehensive liberal arts university in central North Carolina. Elon defines the First-Year Experience (FYE) as a constellation of courses, programs, and opportunities designed to support the academic, personal, and social transitions of first-year students. Whether leading programming around the first-year common reading, teaching a residentially linked first-year seminar or gateway major course, or advising first-year students through ELON 1010: The First-Year Advising Seminar, the number of faculty and staff involved in a student’s first year at Elon is substantial. However, until recently much of this work was done in siloes and without consideration given to creating a shared space for faculty and staff involved in one or more of these experiences, which often led to students and educators not seeing the totality of the experience nor specialization of pedagogies. Identifying a need for shared understanding, language, strategies, and commitment, Elon began a concerted effort to align and expand faculty development efforts based on first-year student outcomes.

Utilizing assessment results from student, staff, and faculty surveys administered in 2023, along with literature on high-impact and inclusive teaching approaches, leadership from Elon’s Core Curriculum, ELON 1010: The First-Year Advising Seminar, Living & Learning at Elon, and Elon’s Center for the Advancement of Teaching & Learning developed an initial framework for first-year pedagogies contextualized for the culture and needs of the Elon campus community. The Elon Framework for First-Year Pedagogies (Figure 1) considered:

• WHO we teach. First, we must appreciate student demographics, major population, required versus elective status, etc. of one’s course where first-years are present. This context is important because it helps center students’ needs and the scaffolding required to support students’ transitions.

• WHAT we teach. Next, we need to consider the learning goals and outcomes of the course and how these goals and outcomes align horizontally with students’ other first-year experiences. At Elon, this involves contextualizing one’s course within a first-year experience that includes First-Year Foundations (seminar) courses, Elon 1010: The First-Year Advising Seminar, major gateway courses, living-learning community seminars, and a variety of common intellectual experiences integrated into campus life.

• HOW we teach. We also need to think about high-impact practices; strategies for student engagement and community-building; clarifying academic expectations and institutional norms; and supporting student development in areas like self-regulation, metacognition, and self-directed learning. As an experiential learning campus, Elon instructors consider how to introduce the characteristics of experiential learning to first-year students whose expectations around teaching and learning (which they were exposed to in their pre-university experience) might differ from that of our institutional culture.

• Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusivity. Each of the aforementioned steps is done with a shared commitment to Inclusive Excellence at Elon. Educators engage in critical self-reflection and programming supporting the integration of the values of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusivity throughout their considerations of who, what, and how they teach.

Figure 1

Elon Framework for First-Year Pedagogies

As the team developed this initial framework for first-year pedagogies, we understood the need for educator capacity-building to successfully enact it and developed specific programming to provide this support.

A community of practice (CoP) launched during 2024-2025 to refine and expand faculty development around first-year pedagogies. The CoP strategically recruited faculty and staff as first participants to help foster collective understanding, language, and practices. This year-long CoP included workshops and discussion sessions around four specific first-year student success pillars:

• Support through transitions: This includes developing student confidence and strong community.

• Preparations to navigate the four-year college experience: Taking a holistic view of the FYE across all academic and non-academic experiences as students journey toward their degree.

• Transformative learning: Centering purpose-driven learning and creating spaces where students feel safe-enough to be curious.

• Build self-efficacy and autonomy: Scaffolding support for self-regulation, metacognition, and self-directed learning strategies.

CoP assessment data highlighted the benefits and continued need for opportunities to share institutional context, real examples from colleagues teaching first-year students, and resources to support both faculty/staff and students in navigating these transitional periods through pedagogy. Additionally, it provided tangible ways to support student success through a thriving lens, just-in-time practices and debriefs aligned with the academic calendar, and developing a first-year educator identity.

The second iteration of the FYE workshop series and CoP, offered during the 2025-2026 academic year, involved pedagogical workshops facilitated by members of the first CoP and other campus partners, with bi-weekly open-ended CoP gatherings offered during non-workshop weeks.

Fall 2025 Workshops

• Understanding Our First-Year Students: Teaching with Intention. Participants gained insights into the goals of Elon’s First-Year Experience (FYE) and learned practical strategies to design courses and pedagogical approaches that meet students where they are—academically, socially, and developmentally.

• Supporting First-Year Students through the Mid-Semester Slump. This session explored how faculty could create classroom environments that support students’ well-being, executive functioning, and decision-making skills in the current semester.

• Empowering First-Year Students through Active Learning. In this interdisciplinary faculty panel, instructors shared practical strategies and classroom activities that foster community, support student agency, and ease the transition to college-level learning.

Spring 2026 Workshops

• Sustaining Motivation and Engagement in the First-Year Classroom. The workshop offered strategies to support first-year students in becoming active, self-aware learners and support faculty in designing activities and assessments that sustain motivation beyond the excitement of the fall.

• Helping First-Year Students Find Purpose and Meaning. Participants explored how to integrate wellness, meaning-making, and the liberal arts into any course—regardless of discipline—and offer strategies to help students navigate ambiguity, reconnect with their goals, and find a sense of purpose in their academic journey.

• Seeing Yourself as a First-Year Pedagogue. This session focused on offering participants dedicated time to reflect on their teaching practices, share insights, and reimagine how growth and learning—both their own and their students’—can guide and enrich their work in the classroom.

Beyond

Continuing to expand faculty development offerings for instructors supporting first-year students in a variety of course types and co-curricular programs, Elon’s next iteration of faculty development offerings includes a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning book discussion, FYE teaching institute, and facilitated course and co-curricular program (re)design sessions.

Recommendations for Faculty Development

With the first-year experience extending beyond first-year seminars to other courses and learning spaces, campuses need to cast a wider net with their faculty development offerings centered on supporting first-year students. Faculty development that includes first-year seminar instructors alongside those engaged in teaching and mentorship in tertiary experiences can help create shared understanding and investment in the first-year experience across the campus community. These offerings should highlight first-year pedagogies as unique and requiring a specialized set of knowledge and skills. Additionally, institutions might consider mapping the characteristics of effective research-based first-year pedagogies with the unique cultural traditions of the campus culture and backgrounds of the student body. By extending faculty development beyond the first-year seminar, campuses can better support first-year student success through intentionally developed educators who work with shared values, language, and pedagogical and curricular design strategies.

References

Bentrim, E., & Henning, G. W. (Eds.). (2023). The impact of a sense of belonging in college: Implications for student persistence, retention, and success. Taylor & Francis.

Cameron, R. B., & Rideout, C. A. (2022). ‘It’s been a challenge finding new ways to learn’: First-year students’ perceptions of adapting to learning in a university environment. Studies in Higher Education 47(3), 668-682. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1783525

Felby, L. C., & Ashwin, P. (2025). Reimagining the first year experience in higher education through a focus on knowledge engagement. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2532461

Friedman, D. B. (2022). Key ingredients to a successful first-year seminar. In D. B. Frideman, T. L. Skinner, & C. S. Greene (Eds.), From educational experiment to standard bearer: University 101 at the University of South Carolina (pp. 76-88). University of South Carolina Press.

Gardner, J. N. (1978). How to make students more effective consumers of their education: University l0l at the University of South Carolina. Journal of Southern College Personnel Association, 1(1), 61-68.

Gordon, L., & Foutz, T. (2015). Navigating the first-year program: Exploring new waters in a faculty learning community. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 27(1), 81-93.

Groccia, J. E., & Hunter, S. (2012). The first-year seminar: Designing, implementing, and assessing courses to support student learning and success: Volume two: Instructor training and development. National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition.

Keup, J. R. & Penaherrera, G. (2022). How HIP are first-year seminars for developmental education and provisionally admitted students? (Research Brief). University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition. https://strongstart.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/SStF_Research_Brief.pdf

Kift, S. (2009). Articulating a transition pedagogy to scaffold and to enhance the first year student learning experience in Australian higher education: Final report for ALTC Senior Fellowship Program. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. https://ltr.edu.au/vufind/Record/364842

Kift, S. (2015). A decade of transition pedagogy: A quantum leap in conceptualising the first year experience. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 2, 51-86. https://herdsa.org.au/herdsa-review-higher-education-vol-2/51-86

Kift, S., & Nelson, K. (2005). Beyond curriculum reform: Embedding the transition experience. In A. Brew, & C. Asmar (Eds.). Proceedings of the 28th HERDSA annual conference (pp. 225-235). HERDSA. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/3944/

Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010). Transition Pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE – A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1-20.

Robinson, J. M., Seymour, R., Jin, S., & Whiteman, R. S. (2025). Sense of Belonging, DFW Reduction, and Student Success: Centering Student Experience in Groups with Ethnographic Methods. Education Sciences, 15(5), 523.

Smith, T., & Barrett, C. (2019). Supporting first-year seminar faculty through assets-based communities of practice. Journal of Faculty Development, 33(3), 19-24.

Sobel, K. (2018). Recruiting faculty for first-year seminars: A review of the literature. Teaching & Learning Inquiry Journal, 6, 67-78.

Strayhorn, T. L. (2018). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. Routledge.

Author Note

Jennifer T. Stephens, Director of Academic-Residential Partnerships and Assistant Professor of Education at Elon University

Jill McSweeney, Assistant Director of the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning and Assistant Professor of Wellness at Elon University

Nina Namaste, Assistant Director of First Year Seminars in the Elon Core Curriculum and Professor of Spanish at Elon University

Brandy S. Propst, Director of Elon 1010 and Assistant Director of Academic Advising at Elon University

Submission intended for the “Making the Case: Revisiting the Why” section of Insights.

We have no known conflicts of interest to disclose.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jennifer T. Stephens, Elon University, 2675 Campus Box, Elon, NC 27244, United States. Email: jstephens17@elon.edu

How to cite this article:

Stephens, J. T., McSweeney, J., Namaste, N., & Propst, B. S. (2026). Faculty development beyond the first-year seminar: Making the case for faculty development centering first-year pedagogies. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

Introduction

The Foster Alumni can Succeed and Thrive (FAST) Academy is a summer bridge program at Texas Woman’s University (TWU) created in direct response to Texas’s alarming statistics: fewer than 4% of foster-care alumni statewide earn any postsecondary credential, and just 1.5% complete a bachelor’s degree (Grubbs, S., 2020). This aligns with national trends (National Foster Youth Institute, n.d.) and reflects the systemic barriers foster care-alumni face that persist beyond high school, such as lack of stable housing, financial insecurity, and minimal social support. The FAST Academy Program is designed to support students with lived experience in the foster-care system, a significant number of whom need developmental education interventions in order to become college ready.

The work of this program began with a simple yet urgent question: What would it take for foster-care alumni not just to enroll—but to become college ready? The answer was not just access to courses, but a well-thought out, comprehensive community of care. This focus sets FAST Academy apart from other developmental or bridge learning programs for students with lived experience of foster-care.

Program Description

First launched in summer 2024, the FAST Academy is built to address the aforementioned barriers, offering not just an opportunity to become college ready, but to gain the holistic support foster-care alumni deserve and need to thrive. As a three-week residential program, the FAST Academy provides foster-care alumni the opportunity to earn up to six credit hours—three in English and three in mathematics—at no cost to the student. In addition to academic coursework, participants have the opportunity to engage in community-building experiences that promote a sense of community and belonging on campus (e.g., living and dining on campus, field trips to local state parks, pools, Six Flags, etc.), supplemental instruction for academic support, and trauma-informed wellness practices (e.g., pet therapy, poetry slams, and art workshops).

Students are recruited through a variety of initiatives across the state using webinars, information tables, community events with high school counselors, family court judiciary staff, community-based care organizations, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS). Identifying students with lived experience of foster care presents a unique challenge due to confidentiality considerations and the sensitive nature of the circumstances that qualify them for a State College Tuition Exemption through DFPS. Interested students complete a FAST Academy Interest Form and then proceed to work through the TWU admissions process. They are interviewed by the program and selected based on their demonstration of motivation and potential for success. A distinctive feature of the FAST Academy program is that participation in the summer program does not require the student to go to TWU in the Fall. They have the ability to go wherever they want and have the assistance of the foster-care liaison officer of the institution to navigate the transfer process. Our motto has become: “Their voice, their choice.”

Utilizing data from the Texas Success Initiative Assessment 2.0 (TSIA2), our state exam that measures college readiness for Mathematics, Reading, and Writing, we found that 13 out of 18 inaugural participants, who are called FAST Academy Scholars, were not college ready in a combination of reading, writing, mathematics, or all three areas at the start of the program. Thus, class sizes were capped at 18 with an embedded secondary or “co-teacher” and at least six or more undergraduate or graduate tutors for one-to-one student support. Additionally, participating students received peer support in the residence halls, with a 1 to 5 student-to-resident leader ratio. Students were also given material supports to help them succeed, such as a brand-new Google Chromebook, free textbooks, course materials, weekly stipends, full meal plans, single-occupant dormitories, and more.

A key strength of the FAST Academy is the synchronization and teamwork required across numerous TWU departments to make it successful. To start, the program was collaboratively designed and implemented by over 50 faculty and staff across TWU’s departments of English, mathematics, and Campus Alliance for Resource Education (CARE) Office. Other campus partners in advising, housing, student life, financial aid, enrollment management, scheduling, civility, Counseling and Psychological Services, the Center for Women in Politics & Public Policy, TWU’s Chancellor’s Office, donors, and multiple other external partners have contributed. The program is housed under the umbrella of TWU’s Foster Care Alumni Success Team in Student Affairs. This reflects TWU’s deep institutional commitment to student success, particularly for historically underserved student populations.

Outcomes and Impact

The FAST Academy demonstrated a positive academic and socioemotional impact on students. Several key elements were used to assess the program, including a college-readiness assessment (TSIA2), pre- and post-surveys from students, an external evaluation in the first summer, and overall DFW rates in mathematics and English both summer iterations.

In the first summer of the program, student feedback exceeded expectations. Students reported—for the first time—feeling “seen,” “valued,” and “connected to a future I didn’t think I had.” What’s more, every student passed their math class, and a majority of students passed their English class (15 out of 18 due to 3 withdrawals). Overall, as demonstrated from pre- and post- test results, students reported significant increase in academic confidence, belonging, and intent to persist.

While the initial pilot was small, the educational outcomes for the inaugural class of FAST Academy scholars was deemed a tremendous success by the Texas State Legislature. They are now further committed to the rapid scalability of the program and long-term sustainability. As a result, the program was scaled to offer two sections of math and two sections of English in summer 2025, serving 30 students in total.

Summer 2025 student academic readiness profiles were similar to the inaugural cohort. That is, two-thirds or 20 out of 30 participants not being academically proficient in one or more subjects. Student outcomes included 24 total students passing with 4 withdrawals in English and 3 withdrawals in mathematics courses. Despite some students not passing or withdrawing, their enrollment is viewed as a success. Foster-care alumni enrollment in any higher education institution prior to turning 27 unlocks a state tuition waiver they can use for the rest of their life. Many foster-care alumni historically never obtain this waiver. Additionally, every student was told they belong in college. This is seen as a little victory, one we hope will pay dividends for these students in the years to come and as they navigate their future career paths.

Future Directions

In fewer than two years, the FAST Academy has already made a statewide impact. Based on early program success, the Texas Legislature awarded TWU $3 million to develop a Foster Care Alumni Success Center, positioning TWU as a statewide leader in serving this critical student population. Based on lessons learned, the Center will expand FAST Academy efforts to address postsecondary enrollment and navigation barriers by establishing a year-round resource hub. Staffed by success coaches, the hub will provide ongoing support and training for high schools and nonprofit partners across the state.

With new developments under way, FAST Academy is poised to continue innovating in the direction of meaningful, student-centered change. With wrap-around supports, such as integrated academic advising, wellness, mental health, career exploration, and housing support resources, students gain academic momentum and a tangible head start toward degree completion. At the same time, FAST Academy is more than a bridge program. It’s a statement about what’s possible when higher education prioritizes its most underrecognized population of students needing alternative pathways to college readiness — and does so with intention, compassion, and action.

Looking ahead, the next endeavor, FAST Forward, extends the work of FAST Academy to offer fully online, asynchronous college readiness and preparatory programming for students with lived experience in foster care. This new program was developed to address disparities in college readiness and respond to feedback from potential students who expressed concerns in program participation due to summer employment. In response, we are in the process of developing a fully online college readiness program using the NROC EdReady platform. This new program offers an alternative that is more adaptable for those unable to come to campus in summer. The program officially launched in spring 2026.

For too long, students with lived experience in foster-care have remained invisible in higher education, but FAST Academy is working to change that. What started as a simple question — What would it take for those with lived experiences not just to enroll but to become college ready? — has evolved into a program that is rewriting the narrative for students. Through careful synchronization with our campus partners and so many foster-care allies and liaisons across the state, dedicated attention to college readiness, and a deep commitment to uplifting students, FAST Academy is about more than starting college on the right foot; it’s about showing these students their voices (and choices) truly matter.

References

Grubbs, S. (2020, April). Helping foster youths in higher education: Texas programs assist vulnerable kids. Comptroller. Texas.Gov. https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2020/apr/education.php?utm_source=chatgpt.com

National Foster Youth Institute. (n.d.). Higher education for foster youth. https://nfyi.org/issues/higher-education/

How to cite this article:

Smith, S., Hoermann-Elliott, J., & O’Keefe, A. (2026). Their voice, their choice: Redefining college readiness for Texas foster-care alumni. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

Infusing inclusive teaching practices into first-year seminars helps instructors create equitable learning environments where all students feel valued, respected, and supported. Today’s students are more diverse than ever, including increasing numbers of students of color, first-generation students, individuals from low-income backgrounds, full-time workers, and students balancing college with parenting responsibilities (American Council on Education, 2025). As Hogan and Sathy (2022) highlight, when implemented well, inclusive practices can be transformational for students. Adapting an inclusive teaching approach means intentionally designing instruction, curriculum, and learning environments to provide opportunities for all students to succeed (Sanger, 2020). If learners do not feel understood or valued, they are less likely to engage in meaningful learning. As Hogan and Sathy (2022) suggest in their inclusive mindset checklist for instructors, “Ask yourself in every pedagogical decision you make: ‘Who might be left behind as a result of this practice?’ and ‘How can I invite those students in?’”.

The primary goal of this article is to examine the role of syllabus design and use as a way of integrating inclusive teaching practices into first-year seminars. It’s second goal is to give instructors the space to examine their own practices, question taken-for-granted norms, and consider how their syllabus design decisions shape who feels seen and supported in their classrooms. Far from just a simple logistical document, the syllabus serves as an early indicator to students of classroom culture, instructor expectations, and the extent to which students’ identities and experiences are recognized and valued by instructors. With this as our foundation, let’s explore syllabus design with inclusion in mind.

Syllabus Design with Inclusion in Mind

A syllabus is one of the most powerful tools instructors can leverage when setting the course tone and communicating instructor values and expectations to learners. Previous research suggests students perceive faculty associated with longer syllabi more positively than faculty using shorter syllabi (Saville et al., 2010) and appreciate the inclusion of policy information (Jenkins et al., 2014). A study by Harrington and Gabert-Quillen (2015) found including assignment details, study tips, and campus resource information can positively influence student perceptions of the course and professor. Additionally, a welcoming, inclusive syllabus signals to students they belong, and their diverse experiences and needs are acknowledged.

Shifts toward more inclusive syllabus design in first-year seminars can begin with language but should ultimately extend to the underlying structure and intent of course policies and expectations. While small changes in wording may seem minor, they can significantly influence how students, particularly those new to higher education, perceive their role in the learning environment. The following examples illustrate how instructors can move from traditional, compliance-oriented syllabus language to more inclusive, student-centered approaches:

Instructor tone and approachability (reducing intimidation in the first-year transition)

• Compliance-orientated: “This course will cover theories of X, Y, and Z. Students are expected to read Chapters 1–5 before Week 2.”

• Inclusive: “Welcome to Foundations of X! This first week is all about getting to know the course and each other. Take some time to review the syllabus and course schedule to get a sense of what’s ahead—no need to master the material yet. We’ll go over the schedule together in class, and I’ll answer any questions so you feel confident navigating the course.”

This shift reframes the course from a compliance-based model to a learning partnership, which is especially important in first-year seminars where students may be navigating academic expectations for the first time.

Transparency of expectations (addressing the hidden curriculum)

• Compliance-orientated: “Participation is required and will factor into your final grade.”

• Inclusive: “Participation includes asking questions, contributing to discussions, and engaging in small-group activities. You can participate in ways comfortable for you, such as speaking in class, contributing in writing, or meeting with me during office hours.”

First-year students may be unfamiliar with what “participation” entails. Making expectations explicit reduces ambiguity and increases equitable access to success.

Flexibility and acknowledgement of student realities

• Compliance-orientated: “Late work will not be accepted.”

• Inclusive: “I understand unexpected situations can arise, especially during your first semester. If you anticipate challenges with deadlines, please communicate with me in advance so we can make a plan to support your success.”

First-year seminars often serve students balancing new academic, social, and personal demands. This approach maintains academic standards while recognizing the complexity of students’ lived experiences.

Positioning the syllabus as a support tool (not just a contract)

• Compliance-orientated: “Students are responsible for reviewing all course policies outlined in this syllabus.”

• Inclusive: “This syllabus is designed as a guide to help you navigate the course and succeed. We will revisit key sections together, and I encourage you to refer back to it throughout the semester.”

Many first-year students are still developing the skills needed to interpret and use academic documents. Framing the syllabus as a resource supports their transition into independent learners.

Inviting student agency and belonging early

• Compliance-orientated: No explicit invitation for student input or voice.

• Inclusive: “Your perspectives and experiences are an important part of this course. Throughout the semester, there will be opportunities to shape discussions and connect course topics to your own goals and interests.”

First-year seminars play a critical role in fostering belonging. Explicitly inviting student voice helps position students as active contributors to the learning environment rather than passive recipients.

In summary, these shifts demonstrate inclusive syllabus design is not simply about adopting more welcoming language, but about intentionally rethinking how expectations, policies, and relationships are communicated. In the context of first-year seminars, where students are forming their initial perceptions of college learning environments, these design choices can have a lasting impact on engagement, confidence, and sense of belonging.

Quick Guiding Principles for Inclusive Syllabus Design

1. Adopt a student-centered, conversational tone in syllabus content. Writing the syllabus as a tool for students, not just a set of rules, signals to students their voices, experiences, and needs are valued. Inclusive teaching practices emphasize language shapes students’ sense of belonging and engagement; a welcoming tone can reduce anxiety, clarify expectations, and invite participation, particularly for first-year students navigating new academic environments.

2. Reframe academic and professional standards through an inclusive lens. Use course artifacts, including syllabi, assignment descriptions, grading policies, accessibility statements, and institutional support resources, not only to communicate expectations but also to make them transparent, equitable, and accessible to all students. Inclusive teaching practices prompt instructors to examine whose knowledge, skills, and experiences these standards recognize and actively revise policies or practices inadvertently privileging some students over others.

3. Engage in regular self-reflection to promote inclusivity. Ask questions such as, “Who might be left behind as a result of this practice?” and “How can I invite those students in?” Reflective practices like these help instructors identify potential barriers embedded in course design, language, and policies, and encourage deliberate strategies to foster equitable access and belonging. In First-Year Seminars, where students are still learning to navigate academic expectations, such reflection can guide instructors in creating more inclusive syllabi, assignments, and classroom experiences.

Thoughtful syllabus design and reflective practices lay the groundwork for inclusion, but cultivating a welcoming classroom environment requires extending these principles into daily interactions.

Conclusion

Inclusive syllabus design is more than a simple revision of wording or policy statements; it is an opportunity to intentionally shape how students experience belonging, support, and academic expectations. In first-year seminars especially, the syllabus often serves as students’ first interaction with college-level learning norms and instructor expectations, so by designing syllabi that are transparent, welcoming, and student-centered, instructors can help reduce barriers, demystify the hidden curriculum, and create learning environments where all students are better positioned to engage and succeed. Ultimately, inclusive syllabus design in first-year seminars is not about perfection, but about making purposeful, consistent efforts to affirm student identities, foster connection, and promote equitable opportunities for growth throughout their academic journey.

References

American Council on Education. (2025). Enrollment in undergraduate education. In Race and ethnicity in higher education. https://www.equityinhighered.org/indicators/enrollment-in-undergraduate-education/

Harrington, C. M., & Gabert-Quillen, C. A. (2015). Syllabus length and use of images: An empirical investigation of student perceptions. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(3), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000040

Hogan, K. A., & Sathy, V. (2022). Inclusive teaching: Strategies for promoting equity in the college classroom. West Virginia University Press.

Jenkins, J. S., Bugeja, A. D., & Barber, L. K. (2014). More content or more policy? A closer look at syllabus detail, instructor gender, and perceptions of instructor effectiveness. College Teaching, 62(4), 129–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2014.935700

Sanger, C. S. (2020). Inclusive pedagogy and universal design approaches for diverse learning environments. In C. S. Sanger & N. Gleason (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion in global higher education (pp. 1–24). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_2

Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Brown, A. R., & Marchuk, K. A. (2010). Syllabus detail and students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, (37)3, 186–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986283.2010.488523

How to cite this article:

Ibrahim-Taney, N. (2026). A practical guide to inclusive syllabus design in first-year seminars. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

“If you are working on something exciting that you really care about, you don’t have to be pushed. The vision pulls you.”

— Steve Jobs, visionary inventor and entrepreneur

The origin of the Genius Hour has a rich history. The 3M Company, initially known as the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, was established in 1901 in Two Harbors, Minnesota, and grew into a global conglomerate with over 60,000 products (Sekar, 2024). In 1948, McKnight introduced a rule allowing employees to spend up to 15% of their time on independent projects, fostering curiosity and exploration (Bustin, 2019). Stoll (2020) called this “corporate America’s most underrated innovation.”

The Google Corporation was founded in 1998 by American computer scientists Larry Page and Sergey Brin. The list of innovations this company has produced is impressive. It includes Google Search, cloud computing, video on demand (e.g., YouTube), Gmail, Google Maps, Google Earth, and Google Glass (Sykes & Matinde, 2023). When Google went public in 2004, its founders established what is now known as the 20% Rule:

We encourage our employees, in addition to their regular projects, to spend 20% of their time working on what they think will most benefit Google. This empowers them to be more creative and innovative. Many of our significant advances have happened in this manner (Clark, 2022).

Over time, the Genius Hour has evolved into an engaging educational method that sparks students’ curiosity and creativity by giving them dedicated time to explore their interests. This student-centered approach promotes independence and personalized learning, enabling students to immerse themselves in self-selected projects that foster critical thinking, problem-solving, and innovation. By combining student-led inquiry with opportunities for collaboration and reflection, the Genius Hour nurtures a love of learning and empowers individuals to take charge of their educational path.

Elements of the Genius Hour

Implementing the Genius Hour involves allocating a specific time during a program or course for students to explore their personal interests and questions (Alqahtani, 2021; McNair, 2022; Ozyer & Wilson, 2016). The process usually includes these main phases:

1. Passion: Students choose a topic they truly care about. For adult learners, this might connect to their current job or a field they want to learn more about.

2. Plan: Students will do preliminary research, create a structured plan, and establish clear goals for their inquiry.

3. Students share their project ideas and goals with peers during class discussions or online forums, explaining their planned research and anticipated results.

4. Project: Students actively work on their chosen topics, gathering information, designing, experimenting, and creating. Periodic updates in online discussions allow for peer and instructor feedback.

5. Product: The result of the project, which, depending on the subject, can be presentations, videos, websites, infographics, or other creative formats.

6. Presentation: Students share their completed projects with peers, discussing their process, key learnings, and final product. This presentation can be done in an online discussion format to promote engagement and reflection.

Figure 1

The Elements of The Genius Hour

The Genius Hour provides a flexible framework for promoting self-directed learning and encouraging students to connect their educational experiences to real-world issues. By offering structured support while allowing flexibility, educators can establish a supportive environment that nurtures creativity, curiosity, and lifelong learning.

Applying the Genius Hour in Education

The Genius Hour can be implemented at the course level or across an entire program in virtually any academic discipline. Consider these two applications:

First-Year Seminar

Incorporating the Genius Hour into a first-year seminar encourages students to take ownership of their learning right from the start of college. By setting aside dedicated time for students to explore a personally meaningful question, problem, or passion, the Genius Hour shifts the focus from mere compliance to curiosity. This approach not only boosts engagement but also helps students develop essential skills such as self-direction, research, creativity, and reflective thinking—skills crucial for long-term academic success. In a first-year seminar, where the goal is often to help students discover their purpose and place within the institution, the Genius Hour provides space for identity exploration and intrinsic motivation. Instead of just completing assignments, students begin to see themselves as creators of knowledge, making their transition into higher education more meaningful, empowering, and aligned with their future goals.

Here are some sample topics that can be addressed during the Genius Hour in first-year seminars:

• Do I Belong Here? A First-Year Reality Check

• Becoming Me: Designing My First Year (and Beyond)

• Why Am I So Overwhelmed? Mapping My Stress and Solutions

• What No One Tells You About College (But Should)

A well-designed Genius Hour can transform the first-year experience from simply completing assignments to actively discovering purpose, potential, and direction. By creating space for curiosity and self-directed exploration, institutions help students develop the confidence, skills, and sense of belonging that support success far beyond their first semester.

General Education

Applying the Genius Hour in general education courses can transform student resistance into genuine engagement by reframing these courses as opportunities rather than obstacles. When students are encouraged to pursue a personally meaningful question within a required subject, the gap between the course and “real life” diminishes. For example, a student in a general education math, history, or science class might explore how course concepts relate to their career goals, personal experiences, or current societal issues. This autonomy shifts the mindset from “Why do I have to take this?” to “How can this matter to me?” Genius Hour creates relevance by allowing students to incorporate their identities, goals, and curiosities into the curriculum, making abstract or seemingly unrelated content more tangible and meaningful. Consequently, students are more likely to invest effort, think critically, and recognize the broader value of general education as a foundation for informed, adaptable, and lifelong learning.

The following are sample Genius Hour topics for general education courses:

• Why Do I Do This? Understanding My Habits Through Psychology (Psychology)

• If This Event Never Happened: A Historical What-If (History)

• Why Is Everything So Expensive? A Student’s Guide to Inflation (Economics)

• When Will I Ever Use This? Math in My Daily Life (Mathematics)

By giving students the freedom to pursue meaningful questions, the Genius Hour transforms general education from a set of requirements into a gateway for discovery and personal growth. When students can connect course concepts to their own interests, they are more likely to find purpose in their learning and recognize the lasting value of a broad educational foundation.

Implementation of The Genius Hour

The following is a composite of the steps necessary to implement the Genius Hour (Downes & Figg, 2019; Ginsberg & Coke, 2019; McNair, 2022; Spencer, 2017):

Figure 2

Implementing the Genius Hour

1. Define the purpose and goals of the Genius Hour: Conceptualize how the implementation of the Genius Hour is aligned with course/program goals and learning outcomes.

2. Introduce the Genius Hour to Students: Give students an overview of the process, including examples of course/program activities and how this activity relates to current and future learning.

3. Provide guidelines and a structure for the Genius Hour: Make students aware of how the activities are integrated into the structure of a course or program.

4. Allocate Times for Genius Hour Activities: Allocate times for the Genius Hour activities at the course or program level and inform students of expectations and timelines. This includes how students will share the results of their investigations.

5. Guide Topic Selection: Help students choose topics that align with course or program learning outcomes, personal interests, and potential applications to their career goals. Help students develop a research question that will direct their efforts. In an online course, students could place their ideas in a discussion forum to get feedback from their classmates.

6. Provide resources and guidance on using research tools, such as university databases, Google Scholar, and ChatGPT, to help students research their topics of interest.

7. Establish Genius Hour checkpoints and milestones: Continuously highlight the relevant checkpoints and milestones at either the course or program level, incorporating formative assessments to provide valuable feedback.

8. Encourage creativity and innovation: During conversations with students, motivate them to think creatively about their projects and explore different possible outcomes.

9. Showcase results and reflect on the process: Provide students with opportunities to develop creative ways of sharing their discoveries and outcomes. However, students should also reflect on their Genius Hour experience, what they have learned, and what they have accomplished.

10. Assess the Genius Hour experience: Provide the students with a summative grading rubric and feedback on their performance.

By following these steps, educators can create a meaningful and engaging Genius Hour experience that empowers students to explore their passions and develop valuable skills. Consider encouraging your students to pursue areas of interest and passion.

Conclusion

The literature suggests that the Genius Hour provides a powerful framework for student-centered learning by fostering autonomy, engagement, critical thinking, creativity, and a growth mindset (Ramadhan et al., 2023). Research indicates that when students pursue topics aligned with their interests and goals, they become more motivated, develop valuable transferable skills, and gain opportunities to apply learning in meaningful, real-world contexts (Jacobsen, 2000; Kuhn, 2022; Woolford, 2022).

In addition, Genius Hour experiences support the development of practical competencies such as research, communication, problem-solving, collaboration, and digital literacy while helping students connect academic learning to future career aspirations (Coke, 2018; Kuswandi et al., 2023; Mitchell, 2022; Purcell & Purcell, 2021). Collectively, these benefits position Genius Hour as an effective strategy for promoting both academic success and personal growth in higher education (Alqahtani, 2021).

References

Alqahtani, M. (2021). Genius hour strategy. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, 20(2). https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/taboo/vol20/iss2/12/

Bustin, G. (2019, April 30). 5 reinvention rules that saved 3M from bankruptcy. Vistage Research Center. https://www.vistage.com/research-center/business-leadership/business-innovation/5-reinvention-rules-that-saved-3m/

Clark, D. (2022, January 7). Google’s “20% rule” shows exactly how much time you should spend learning new skills-and why it works. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/16/google-20-percent-rule-shows-exactly-how-much-time-you-should-spend-learning-new-skills.html

Coke, P. K. (2018). Using genius hour to change what we do with what we know. English Journal, 107(6), 26–30. https://doi.org/10.58680/ej201829707

Downes, T., & Figg, C. (2019). Including passion within teacher-candidate assignments: How genius hour has created a more positive perspective on teaching and learning. Teaching and Learning, 12(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.26522/tl.v12i1.438

Ginsberg, R., & Coke, P. K. (2019). Inspired inquiry: Three classroom-based approaches to genius hour. Voices from the Middle, 26(3), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.58680/vm201930010

Jacobsen, M. E. (2000). The gifted adult: A revolutionary guide for liberating everyday genius. Ballantine Books.

Kuhn, A. R. (2022). Benefits of genius hour framework: Motivation, autonomy, and teacher control. In M. Krebs & C. A. Torrez (Eds.), K-12 Teacher Inquiry and Reflections (pp. 81–108). Lexington Books.

Kuswandi, D., Soepriyanto, Y., & Ramadhan, D. P. (2023). Exploring genius hour: A literature study on concepts, benefits, and their application at every level of education in various countries. Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 10(3), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.21831/jitp.v10i3.61479

McNair, A. (2022). Genius hour: Passion projects that ignite innovation and student inquiry. Routledge.

Mitchell, M. (2022, September 27). Edmentum: What is genius hour? Fierce Network. https://www.fierce-network.com/more-education-news/what-geniushour

Ozyer, A., & Wilson, B. G. (2016). Inquiry and innovation in the classroom: Using 20% time, genius hour, and PBL to drive student success. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1631

Purcell, J., Burns, D., & Purcell, W. (2021). The interest-based learning coach: A step-by-step playbook for genius hour, passion projects, and makerspaces in school. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003238843

Ramadhan, D. P., Kuswandi, D., & Soepriyanto, Y. (2023). Exploring genius hour: A literature study on concepts, benefits, and their application at every level of education in various countries. Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 10(3), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.21831/jitp.v10i3.61479

Sekar, N. (2024, June 27). 3M’s 15% rule case study. Medium. https://medium.com/@nareshnavinash/3ms-15-rule-e1bbce0b4ec5

Spencer, J. (2017). The genius design. Educational Leadership, 74(4)16–21.

Stoll, J. D. (2020, May 15). Corporate America’s most underrated innovation strategy: 3 M’s 15% rule - WSJ [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2026 March 20]. Available from: www.wsj.com/articles/ corporate-americas-most-underrated-innovation-strategy-3ms15-rule-11589556171

Woolford, S. (2022). Impact of a free-choice (“genius time”) inquiry project on student skill-building, agency, and motivation. Inquiry in Education, 4(2), 1–31.

How to cite this article:

Garner, B. (2026). The Genius Hour. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

Introduction

Since 2021, the Maine Business School (MBS) at the University of Maine has undergone a significant transformation in how it defines, supports, and measures student success. This article outlines the historical context that prompted these developments, briefly describes several high-impact initiatives, including Business Bridge Week, Research Learning Experience (RLE), Gateway to Success (GTS) academic supports, and Business Living Learning Community (BLLC), and shares early retention outcomes. With a growing partnership between MBS and the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA), the college is now positioned to systematically evaluate its work and shape a sustainable, data-informed culture of student success.

Evolving a Culture of Business Student Success

Recent scholarship on first-year experience (FYE) design emphasizes the importance of comprehensive, integrated approaches that extend beyond the classroom to support student transition and success. Cuseo (2015) emphasizes that effective FYE programs are multi-dimensional, incorporating coordinated academic, social, and institutional support structures rather than isolated interventions. Complementing this, Tabvuma et al. (2023) demonstrate that structured co-curricular programming can significantly enhance first-year student engagement and academic outcomes, particularly when participation is intentional and embedded within the broader student experience. Central to these approaches is the concept of belonging and mattering; research by Cole, Newman, and Hypolite (2015) highlights that students who develop a strong sense of connection to peers, faculty, and their institution are more likely to persist and succeed. This body of literature informed the Maine Business School’s design of its first-year experience, which intentionally integrates academic coursework, co-curricular programming, residential communities, and proactive advising, to foster both student achievement and a strong sense of belonging from matriculation through the completion of a students’ first-year.

The University of Maine System (UMS), established in 1968, is a statewide, multi-campus public system comprising seven universities, including its flagship, the University of Maine (UMaine). UMaine, an R1 research institution, enrolls approximately 11,000 students. Each fall the Maine Business School (MBS), one of five degree granting colleges within UMaine, enrolls approximately 300 first-year students in multiple majors, including pre-business administration and students with an undeclared business major, for a total undergraduate enrollment of approximately 1,300 degree seeking students.

The groundwork for MBS’s modern student success efforts began to emerge in small uncoordinated areas of the college in 2021. In 2023, MBS created a dedicated position focused on student success, recruitment, and advising. This was the first role in the college intentionally designed to address the “whole student” with emphasis on academic planning and engagement. What began as small efforts quickly evolved into a coordinated, college-wide movement. To date, nearly every element of the first-year experience, advising model, and engagement structure has undergone systematic redesign.

Since spring 2023, MBS has introduced and piloted an integrated suite of evidence-based initiatives that collectively redefined the first-year experience. This was designed and overseen by the Director of Student Success and Recruitment with direct support and guidance from the Executive Dean. Throughout the development process, numerous ad hoc committees contributed, including the Living-Learning Community Planning Committee and the initial Bridge Week planning group both comprised of faculty, staff, students, and administration. These areas were prioritized because they addressed the most significant pain points, particularly in onboarding, and for their alignment with research identifying them as high-impact practices for student success.

MBS key first-year experience initiatives include:

• Requiring participation in Business Bridge Week experience the week before classes.

• Enrollment in the Research Learning Experience (RLE) first semester course.

• Engagement in the Gateways to Success (GTS) academic support model that includes course-specific study nights for challenging, high enrollment introductory courses and a drop-in lab for academic tutoring and advising.

• Participation in the Business Living Learning Community (BLLC). The BLLC evolved into the hall being reclassified as “continuous housing,” allowing it to remain open during academic breaks. This change helped address prior socioeconomic inequities and barriers that had disproportionately impacted student athletes and international students.

• Adopting a first-year academic advisor model, moving from progress-to-degree advising to proactive, holistic outreach.

• Introducing a one-stop support hub that shifted college culture around help-seeking.

• Redesigning recruitment, communication streams, and parent engagement.

• Strengthening partnerships with campus offices, including conduct staff, athletics, and international programs.

Together, these shifts represent a comprehensive redesign of the MBS student experience from recruitment to graduation. The initiatives reflect a deliberate, coordinated approach that integrates academic, residential, and co-curricular experiences to support students’ holistic success. By aligning evidence-based practices across multiple interconnected touchpoints, MBS has created a comprehensive first-year experience that promotes engagement, academic achievement, and a strong sense of belonging from day one.

Examination of Key Business Student Success Initiatives

MBS’s key first-year initiatives, such as the Business Bridge Week, Research Learning Experience (RLE) course, Gateway to Success Academic Support Model, and Business Living-Learning Community (BLLC), are highlighted due to their central role in shaping students’ initial engagement, academic preparedness, and sense of belonging. These programs are assessed through program-level evaluation metrics, including participation rates, student feedback, and performance indicators, which provide insight into their effectiveness in fostering early engagement and skill development. Retention outcomes, discussed in the following section, build on these program-level results to illustrate the broader impact on student persistence and success.

Business Bridge Week

Business Bridge Week launched in the fall of 2023 as a signature, required, immersive transition program held the week before classes. The primary objectives of the week are to strengthen students’ sense of belonging to the college and the larger university, prepare them academically, and foster an early connection to MBS faculty, staff, and peers. Students engage in experiential learning, participate in cohort-based activities, and gain exposure to professional expectations and standards.

Student responses to surveys conducted in fall 2023 and 2024 indicated that Bridge Week positively impacted their transition to the college experience. In the fall 2025 survey, students often stated that bridge week helped them make friends and build connections. One student shared that “Bridge week jump-started the connections I made and it made it easier to connect with friends.” Another noted, “It was a really great way to get to know people and make connections.” During focus groups conducted in fall 2025 and spring 2026, multiple students highlighted Bridge Week as playing a key role for them in making friends, gaining connections with peer mentors, and getting familiar with the campus. Analysis of student comments and survey responses are still underway.

Research Learning Experience (RLE) Course

The Research Learning Experience (RLE) course is an extended, project-based course designed to promote applied, experiential, inquiry-based learning and community engagement in the first semester. The three-credit-hour course consists of two contact hours of instructor lecture and one contact hour led by upper-class Peer Leaders on a weekly basis. In lecture, the instructor introduces foundational business concepts, topics, and fundamentals of professionalism in relation to the students’ experiential learning project. On Fridays, Peer Leaders help students put their knowledge into action by developing a business plan and preparing to pitch their ideas at the annual MBS Shark Tank Competition. Additionally, Peer Leaders facilitate meaningful peer-to-peer cohort connections, process students’ first semester, assist with registering for spring courses, develop LinkedIn profiles, craft resumes, and much more.

During a spring 2026 focus group, multiple students noted that Friday’s work time contributed significantly to their sense of belonging by helping them to develop strong connections with the Peer Leaders. Several students mentioned the value of the group project, even in cases where they did not enjoy the dynamics of their group, because of the opportunity to work with the Peer Leaders. In an end-of-semester survey one student noted that, “the Friday cohort helped me connect with other students with similar interests as me (being business majors and whatnot).”

Gateway to Success (GTS) Academic Support Model

GTS represents a coordinated academic support structure designed for courses with a historically high percentage of students enrolled in a course beyond the point in the term where courses appear on transcripts, withdraw from the course prior to a certain date, or received a grade of D, F, or L (the latter counts for an F due to lack of participation). Within UMaine, this is known as a high DFWL rate. Reducing these rates is a key metric of the GTS program.

Supported by UMS TRANSFORMS funding, part of a $508 million investment in UMS by the Harold Alfond Foundation, the MBS GTS initiative includes:

• Course-specific study nights staffed by trained tutors.

• A twice-per-week GTS Lab offering drop-in tutoring, snacks, and course resources.

• Close collaboration between instructors and advisors to identify potential academic barriers early.

In an end-of-semester survey when students were asked what has helped them feel like they belong at the University, one noted that “Building a connection with my advisor…has helped a lot. I feel like I can go to her with anything and she always has an answer to everything and a solution!” Another stated that “Bridge week in the beginning and all the events the MBS runs help me feel connected and like I belong here.”

Living Learning Community

The Living Learning Community provides an opportunity for MBS students to live together in one dorm, with coordinated community-building activities, such as ice cream socials and wing groups, that are convened by MBS staff during Bridge Week. These events are to help students make friends with others who also live in the dorm. A preliminary analysis of Living Learning Communities at UMaine conducted prior to the fall 2024 semester, showed promising first-year retention outcomes correlated with student residence in LLCs.

In focus groups conducted in the fall and spring semesters, students mentioned the social value of un-official events such as dorm room tours, with students traveling through the dorm in groups before the semester began, knocking on doors and meeting peers. In an end-of-semester survey, one student stated that what has helped them feel like they belong at UMaine is “My friends that live near me in [the LLC dorm].” Another mentioned “the living learning community of [the LLC dorm] and all the friends I have made there,” and another cited, “living with the business kids.”

Impact on Student Retention and Outcomes

The reimagined first-year experience programs indicated a positive impact on student outcomes, including retention, DFWL rates, and GPA. Analysis shows that fall to spring retention rates for the 2023 and 2024 cohorts that experienced the full implementation of all initiatives were significantly higher than the 2021 cohort even after controlling for high school GPA and other pre-enrollment factors (OIRA, 2025). Table 1 compares first to second year (fall to fall) institutional retention rates for fall 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 cohorts of first-year full-time MBS students. It demonstrates improvements in first to second year retention since full implementation of the MBS success initiatives (OIRA, 2026a). Although the raw retention rate decreased from 83% in fall 2023 to 77% in fall 2024, after controlling for high school GPA in a statistical regression model, there was no significant difference between fall 2023 and fall 2024.

Table 1

First-Year Retention Pre- and Post-Implementation of New MBS Success Programs

Preliminary data from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) also indicate promising gains in both course performance and progression. The average DFWL rate for fall 2023-2025 across the 6 GTS courses with highest MBS student enrollment improved by 2 percentage points compared to fall 2018-2022. For pre-business administration students, DFWL rates in 2023-2025 for these same 6 courses improved by 6% compared to fall 2018-2022 (OIRA, 2026b). Institutional data analysis also found evidence of higher first-term GPA for students in pre-business and undeclared business majors, compared to prior cohorts.

Strengthening Data Infrastructure Through Collaboration

MBS has actively strengthened its partnership with the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA), resulting in a critical collaboration. Prior to 2023, MBS lacked a consistent system for tracking longitudinal student data. Today, the collaboration includes:

• Customized dashboards for retention, progression, and course performance.

• Shared evaluation plans for Bridge Week, RLE, and advising interventions.

• Ongoing consultation on experimental design for qualitative and mixed-methods research.

• Consistent, formal data review meetings between OIRA and MBS leadership.

This partnership ensures that MBS decisions and future resource requests are grounded in evidence rather than intuition.

MBS is now preparing a second phase of mixed-methods research and evaluation in collaboration with OIRA, focusing on quantifying student outcomes and using qualitative research for deeper insights. Quantitative metrics include students’ grades, retention, and survey responses. Qualitative research will gather insights through focus groups and semi-structured interviews about students’ first-year experiences.

Conclusion

From fragmented efforts in 2021 to a fully reimagined model of holistic support in 2025, the Maine Business School has made remarkable progress in building a culture of student success. Bridge Week, the Research Learning Experience, and Gateways to Success initiatives demonstrate what is possible when practitioner insight, intentional design, and institutional data converge. With continued collaboration and sustainable investment, MBS is poised not only to sustain its progress but also to become a national model for business education focused on belonging, proactive support, and student development.

References

Cuseo, J. (2015). Cardinal features of an effective student retention and student success system. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4088.4562

Cole, D., Newman, C. B., & Hypolite, L. I. (2020). Sense of belonging and mattering among two cohorts of first-year students participating in a comprehensive college transition program. American Behavioral Scientist, 64(3), 276–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869417

Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA). (2025). Fall spring retention and spring term GPA findings for first-year full-time MBS students, focusing on pre-business and undeclared majors. University of Maine.

Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA). (2026a). Maine Business School (MBS) undergraduate retention and graduation rates (Retention & Graduation Report). University of Maine. https://umainesystem.sharepoint.com/:x:/s/UM-OnlineDocs/EV3-1HLd8HxBn3vKuPQ_m0cBJXjtLLX93EHjRJus79wObQ

Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA). (2026b). Gateways to success: UMaine fall 2025 DFWL outcomes (GTS Fall 2025 DFWL Report for UMaine, PowerBI Dashboard). University of Maine.

Tabvuma, V., Carter-Rogers, K., Brophy, T., Smith, S. M., & Sutherland, S. (2023). An experimental study of the impact of co-curricular first-year experience programming. Journal of College Orientation, Transition, and Retention, 30(1) https://doi.org/10.24926/jcotr.v30i1.4819

Author Note

Julia Van Steenberghe is the Director of Student Success and Recruitment at the Maine Business School, University of Maine

Laura Amity Millay is Student Success and Retention Evaluation Specialist at the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, working with UMS TRANSFORMS at the University of Maine

This work is supported in part by the UMS Transforms Student Success and Retention Initiative with funding from the Harold Alfond Foundation. Special thanks to Executive Dean of the Maine Business School Jason Harkins, Associate Provost for Institutional Research and Assessment Debra Allen, and the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment at the University of Maine for collaboration in this effort.

Contact Julia.Van@maine.edu or Laura.Millay@maine.edu with question about this article.

How to cite this article:

Van Steenberghe, J. & Millay, L. A. (2026). Evolving a culture of student success at the Maine Business School: A researcher–practitioner lens. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

Engaging with Scholarship: Featuring Dr. Annie Kelly

Insights for College Transitions was reimagined and relaunched in 2024 as a publication for practitioner-scholars to learn and share knowledge, evidence-based practices, and strategic insights from the field. The summer 2026 edition is the fifth issue of Insights and is the first summer publication. This special issue is created due to an increase in exceptional article submissions, and as the Insights Editor, I am eager to write and reflect on how engaging with meaningful scholarship can impact and drive our work.

In writing this article, I propose returning to the purpose of scholarship and how we can more intentionally consume, reflect, and apply it. This reflection comes at a time in my life where I feel split in different directions. Whether it’s leading a first-year seminar program, editing articles, or spending time with my children, I find my time is no longer my own. However, what I can control is how I use the unstructured pockets of time I have.

Frameworks inspire and help me making meaning, process, and act on information. Kolb’s (1984) Model of Experiential Learning, Dr. Jenny Bloom’s (2008) Appreciative Advising framework, and Patti Clayton’s (2009) DEAL Model for Critical Reflection are some examples of frameworks that have fundamentally shaped my pedagogical mindset and improved my teaching practices. Thus, I set forth to create a simple framework practitioners, especially those with limited time, can use for prioritizing how they consume and apply scholarship.

Engaged Scholarship Framework

The proposed Engaged Scholarship Framework (Figure 1) moves from passive, undirected consumption to meaningful, intentional scholastic engagement. Scholars can use the framework to clarify their engaged scholarship goal, identify what they consider scholarship, create scholarship criteria, and define how they will reflect and apply it. This framework helps to specify focus and parameters for consuming and engaging with scholarship. The following describes the framework components and provides my own example.

Figure 1

Engaged Scholarship Framework

Engaged Scholarship Goal: First, the scholar creates an engaged scholarship goal. What mindset, skills, knowledge, or competencies do you want to develop through scholarship?

1. What do I consider as scholarship?: Define what scholarship is to you. For instance, you may consider scholarship is defined by articles, books, research, assessment, podcasts, or presentations. Identifying what scholarship means to you opens later opportunities for critical reflection and application of knowledge.

2. What are my selection criteria?: Especially for those with limited time, it is critical to make active, intentional choices on which scholarship to engage. Consider your engaged scholarship goal and generate criteria that meets it, such as aligned topics, author expertise, and time.

3. How will I reflect on the scholarship?: Create a mechanism for how you will reflect on the scholarship, such as journaling with structured prompts or debriefing with a thought-partner.

4. How will I apply it?: Identify how you plan to utilize and apply the knowledge, skills, and competencies gained to further your engaged scholarship goal.

The Engaged Scholarship Framework is used to make deliberate decisions on the consumption and application of scholarship. It challenges the scholar to pay attention and make explicit how to engage, reflect, and critically think about scholarship, and how it is applied to an overarching, premeditated goal.

Engaged Scholarship Framework Example

The following is my own example of how I plan to use this framework to further my professional development around a structured goal over the summer months.

Engaged Scholarship Goal: Develop competencies around first-year teaching and learning pedagogy.

1. What do I consider as scholarship? I consider scholarship to be anything that exposes me to ideas and/or knowledge that furthers my professional/personal goals. This includes traditional forms of scholarship, such as books, articles, and research. I also believe learning can be social and co-created, and thus, I extend my definition of scholarship to include meaningful human interactions, such as through mentorship meetings, brainstorm sessions, informal presentations/ workshops, and team retreats, that hold value and intellectual stimulation.

2. What are my selection criteria? Topics that extend my knowledge on first-year teaching and learning from engaged practitioners.

3. How will I reflect on the scholarship? I will use structured journal prompts upon engagement, such as:

   1. Is the source trustworthy?

   2. What inspired me?

   3. What challenged my thinking?

   4. What is one new thing I learned?

   5. What do I want to do differently as a result?

4. How will I apply it? Scholarship will be applied in developing my pedagogical mindset, faculty development initiatives, and curriculum resources.

Upon investigation, the scholarship I plan to engage in the upcoming months include Relationship-Rich Education by Peter Felten and Leo Lambert, Teaching with AI by José Antonio Bowen and C. Edward Watson, and Designing Your New Work Life by Bill Burnett and Dave Evans. I will discuss these works with my teammates and reflect on them through the aforementioned structured journal prompts. Lessons from the books will be applied to our first-year seminar curriculum development, specifically surrounding career competencies, and upcoming AI faculty trainings.

Next Steps: Engaged Scholarship Challenge

Engaging with scholarship around a structured framework and goal can maximize time and create synergy in our work. In your unstructured pockets of time this summer, I challenge you with the following:

1. Enact the Engaged Scholarship Framework around one specific goal.

2. Select one piece of scholarship that inspired you recently, such as a book, podcast, or article (consider Insights for College Transitions!), and share with a colleague. Set-up a time to process and consider how to apply it to your work.

3. Schedule a time with someone who makes you think deeper. For example, a mentor, former professor, or colleague. Ask them how they define scholarship and note how they reflect and apply it.

Through intentional consumption, we can move from passive to active scholars and elevate our work in the process.

References

Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2009). Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1, 25–48.

Bloom, J. L., Hutson, B. L., & He, Y. (2008). The appreciative advising revolution. Stipes Publishing.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

How to cite this article:

Kelly, A. (2026). Engaging with scholarship: Featuring Dr. Annie Kelly. Insights for College Transitions, 21(3).

TL;DR:

• Order a copy of our new research guide, Faculty and Staff Guide to Conducting Data Quality Evaluations, published May 22.

• Register for our Institute on Community College Student Onboarding and First-Year Success through August 19.

• Register and/or submit a proposal for the 33^rd National Conference on Students in Transition; proposal submissions close July 16.

• Submit a nomination as part of our 2026-27 awards campaign; nominations close June 22.

• Apply for our $10k Paul P. Fidler Research Grant; application closes July 13.

*Just Published* | Faculty and Staff Guide to Conducting Data Quality Evaluations

ORDER YOUR COPY HERE

Higher education data quality evaluations, synonymous with data audits, are becoming increasingly important to institutions aspiring to provide evidence of student learning and success to a variety of stakeholders. This publication addresses some of the prevailing challenges in continuing to move the needle on data audit best practices. It also provides recommended activities to advance readers’ understanding and application of successful data quality evaluation strategies.

Institute on Community College Student Onboarding and First-Year Success

REGISTER HERE

The NRC is excited to partner with the NC State Belk Center for Community College Leadership and Research for our Institute on Community College Student Onboarding and First-Year Success, to be held September 9-10, 2026 in Columbia, SC. This event is designed for community college professionals who support students as they transition into college and navigate their first year. Through collaborative sessions and practical insights, participants will gain the tools to better support student success from initial entry through the critical first year of the college experience. Led by experts in the field, Institute sessions are designed to build on one another so that participants can leave with actionable ideas that can be implemented on their home campus.

33^rd National Conference on Students in Transition

REGISTER HERE

SUBMIT A PROPOSAL HERE

*Submission Deadline: July 16 by 11:59 p.m. PST

As college educators, we are challenged to provide support for students and improve their entire undergraduate experience. At the National Conference on Students in Transition, to be held virtually September 30-October 2, attendees will share with and learn from one another the latest trends, initiatives, best practices, ideas, research, and assessment strategies focused on supporting student success in the first college year and beyond. We invite you to be a part of this exciting learning experience!

2026-27 Awards Campaign

LEARN MORE ABOUT EACH AWARD HERE

SUBMIT A NOMINATION HERE

*Nomination Deadline: June 22 by 11:59 p.m. PST

The NRC is dedicated to setting a standard of excellence for supporting student transitions and facilitating educational success for a diversity of students in the 21st century. The Center’s efforts in this regard are inclusive of several national recognition programs that honor the outstanding achievements of higher education professionals from different sectors of higher education, as well as institutional types, campus roles, and disciplinary perspectives.

*NEW FOR 2026* | We are thrilled to offer 3 new transfer-focused awards as part of our awards campaign: the Bonita C. Jacobs Transfer Impact Award, the Outstanding Transfer Champion Award, and the National Transfer Student Ambassador Program.

2026 Paul P. Fidler Research Grant

VIEW SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS HERE

*Application Deadline: July 13 by 11:59 p.m. EST

The Paul P. Fidler Research Grant competition is open to faculty, staff, and graduate students who plan to conduct research on issues of college student transitions. Entries can be submitted for an individual researcher or a team. Ph.D. and Ed.D. students are strongly encouraged to apply. The award package includes an award of $10,000, priority consideration for publication in the Journal of The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, and more.

Contact Us

Have questions about the National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition? Don’t hesitate to contact us at fye@mailbox.sc.edu for assistance.

Have questions about this issue of Insights? Contact our Editor, Dr. Annie Kelly, at FYEInsights@mailbox.sc.edu.