Transforming Living Learning Community Roles and Models of Student Engagement

Amber Manning-Ouellette, Ph.D., Oklahoma State University
Rodney Eksteen, Ph.D., Oklahoma State University
Leon McClinton Jr., Ph.D., Oklahoma State University

Higher education is under increased pressure to recruit and retain students, thus intensifying the need to improve and execute recruitment and support efforts (Busta, 2020). This article will highlight one support effort through a strategic partnership at Oklahoma State University (OSU) between the Department of Housing and Residence Life and the College of Engineering, Architecture, and Technology (CEAT). This student support strategy considered adjustments to existing programs that broadened the scope of traditional faculty-in-residence positions, resulting in modified in-residence learning community models to support first-year student success and positively influence recruitment and retention.

Student Success and Residential Settings

Housing programs recognize the critical nature of co-curricular activities and learning on college campuses. The residential setting should provide an opportunity to impact the holistic growth of students (Riker & DeCoster, 2008). Since students spend most of their time in their residential space, housing practitioners are responsible for finding ways to help students make the transition to college seamless and successful. Moreover, housing programs are integral to retaining first-year students through meaningful engagement (Soria & Taylor, 2016).

Over the last 25 years, many universities’ residential life departments have established intentional learning communities called Living Learning Communities (LLCs) (Arensdorf & Naylor-Tincknell, 2016; Mach et al., 2018). Living learning communities are residential programs incorporating academic themes and building community through common experiences (Brower & Inkelas, 2010; Arensdorf & Naylor-Tincknell, 2016). Living learning communities can be academic (i.e., students living together based on the same courses or major) and/or be based on common interests, identities, or characteristics (i.e., leadership developments, students interested in outdoor recreation, LGBTQIA+, and more) (Brower & Inkeas, 2010). 

Moreover, LLCs are considered high-impact practices in higher education because of the many ways they enhance student engagement (Kilgo et al., 2015; Kuh, 2008). Another high-impact practice among LLC models are faculty-in-residence roles (Brower & Inkleas, 2010). Historically, faculty-inresidence positions emerged in the 1640s on U.S. college campuses such as Harvard. These faculty were responsible for teaching courses and coordinating co-curricular activities while living at the college (Healea et al., 2015). Today, institutions with faculty-in-residence positions contribute to a culture of thriving student engagement (Schreiner, 2012). The residential life partnership with colleges at OSU is critical in developing and maintaining these facultyin-residence positions.

Strategies for Student Success and Residential Life at OSU

The academic programs at the CEAT are some of the most rigorous on the Stillwater campus. OSU prioritizes overall student success – thus committing to first-year student success. In 2016, the department of residential life proposed to the CEAT to consider adopting and placing all the CEAT-affiliated LLCs in one residence hall instead of being dispersed throughout multiple residential communities. The selected hall was initially constructed in the 1960s and currently houses over 200 first-year engineering students, providing a common living space near program related campus facilities. The department of residential life’s initial LLC proposal to the CEAT was a $2.5 million renovation to the residence hall to support student access to resources.

Establishing Space for Maximum Living and Learning

The collaboration between the residential life department and the CEAT identified key areas of advancement in planning, such as renovating existing spaces located within and in the proximity of the residence hall. The improvements included a renovated basement converted to a study hall with printing amenities and tutoring space, an old dining facility transformed into a classroom, and an upgraded apartment for the faculty-in-residence.

Transforming the Faculty-in-Residence Position

The most unique aspect of OSU’s faculty-in-residence position is that the residential life department was forced to think more broadly about the position due to faculty availability limitations. In this initiative, the residential life department and the CEAT found an opportunity to hire a doctoral engineering student and rename the position to CEAT inresidence. The “live-in” arrangement provides a space for meaningful engagement, which includes frequent formal and informal interactions with the CEAT in residence. The position supports student engagement, promotes leadership, and fosters relationship-building skills among academic mentors.

The CEAT LLC and the in-residence position supports a variety of interactions: student-to-student, student-with-mentor, student-withfaculty, and small group to larger hall interactions. Additionally, the CEAT in-residence position implements academic and intellectual activities to strengthen a sense of belonging and social interactions between students in strategic locations in the LLC. To reach a broader range of students, the in-residence position designs engagements with targeted programming based on the timely needs of students.

Moreover, since the in-residence position is a graduate student, they train with the housing staff and gain valuable experience designing and implementing co-curricular programs.

Strategies to Increase Student Engagement and Community: A Model

A critical strategy in the CEAT LLC and the in-residence position is to incorporate the mentors’ interactions with smaller groups of students in intentional locations, increasing belongingness. Moreover, each floor of the hall has unique characteristics and student populations. For example, one floor, called Maude’s Squad, maintains single-sex rooms and targeted programming for women in engineering, while another floor focuses on diversity and inclusion efforts. As the benefits of engaging students in the LLC emerged over the past few years, the inresidence position developed a CEAT LLC student engagement model (Figure 1).

Created in 2018, the CEAT LLC student engagement model was developed from concerns about low student engagement. The CEAT student engagement model conceptualizes a multi-level approach to student engagement that includes considerations for the individual student, intragroup interests, floor level, and programming for the entire LLC.

The CEAT LLC incorporates unique events, activities, and forms of engagement for students that increase community and sense of belonging, coordinated by the CEAT in-residence position. Therefore, some of the most successful programs include movie nights, the foam glider build-off challenge, board of director engagement, CEAT group dinners, paint parties (image 1), and service-learning projects throughout the year (image 2). These programs bring student communities together across floors and the entire building.

Figure 1. CEAT LLC Engagement Model

Image 1. Team Building with PEATE’s

Image 2. CEAT LLC Service-learning project

In-Residence and Student Engagement Model Findings

In CEAT LLC, high engagement and intentionality are critical components in the transformed in-residence role. The CEAT student engagement model helps facilitate opportunities to interact across student differences, providing the in-residence with proactive and strategic ways of engaging diverse student populations. The model capitalizes on existing community environments to create opportunities for engagement wherever and whenever they occur. The model supports an approach to enable successful outcomes in the LLC, such as psychological well-being, positive interpersonal and intragroup interaction, and student retention. One participant stated,

The community is amazing and something that I will definitely miss. I loved being able to go to the lobby or the basement and see my friends, especially when I needed to talk to someone. The abundance of support was amazing I wish I could live there next semester.

Given the support structures of the LLC, the in-residence position, and the intentional student engagement model of the last few years, overall GPAs, the impact on minoritized student success, and CEAT LLC retention have been positive. During the first year of the LLC, students GPAs increased significantly (9.5%) from 2018 to 2019, with a small decrease (1.1%) in GPA during the pandemic (Figure 2). Another unintended impact is the positive influence on minoritized student retention, which increased yearly from 2018 to 2020 (81.8% in fall 2018, 82.4% in fall 2019, and 85% in fall 2020) (Figure 3). Finally, overall retention increased from 84% in 2018-2019 to 87% in 2019-2020 (Figure 4). One student reflected, “I feel like the community was great, especially with the CEAT residents. They have provided endless support and entertainment through the movie nights and other activities.”

Figure 2. GPA Scores for CEAT LLC

Figure 3. Historically Minoritized Students Enrolled in the CEAT LLC

Figure 4. CEAT LLC OverallRetention

Discussion and Implications for Future Practice

The increases in diverse student enrollments, GPA, and retention reveal the impact of the new in-residence position, building renovations, intentional student engagement, and innovative ways of considering space and design in LLC student success. An essential consideration of the transformed in-residence role and the student engagement model is the improved relationship dynamics that doctoral student and their family have had in the LLC. The role has diminished how positional power has influenced other faculty-in-residence roles in the past and allowed for more balanced interactions and student camaraderie between the LLC and the in-resident.

Further, the flexibility of the live-in component allows for more organic work with minoritized students. The in-residence role can gather insights from frequent informal interactions, resulting in more community support for historically marginalized groups to feel an increased sense of belonging in the LLC through one-on-one interactions in living quarters, casual conversations including personal invitations to activities and events, as well as a reflective follow up after the programming has commenced. Most importantly, the CEAT in-residence role provides a continuous opportunity for meaningful engagement with all students, creating environments that enhance student learning, persistence, and academic achievement.

Lastly, the OSU residential life department seeks adaptive ways to establish additional major-specific LLCs on campus that foster student success among other colleges and diverse students. The residential life department also explores more ways to assess LLCs and their impact, which continues to evolve based on the knowledge gained through new roles and models. Other institutions may consider minor adaptions such as transforming a faculty-in-residence role, new models of engaging students through virtual methods or maximizing current residence hall space to accommodate major-specific academic support.

References

Arensdorf, J., & Naylor-Tincknell, J. (2016). Beyond the traditional retention data: A qualitative study of the social benefits of living-learning communities. Learning Communities: Research & Practice, 4(1), 4.

Brower, A. M., & Inkelas, K. K. (2010). Living-learning programs: One highimpact educational practice we now know a lot about. Liberal Education, 96(2), 36-42. https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/ living-learning-programs-one-high-impact-educational-practice-we

Busta, H. (2020, June 4). College recruitment rolls into a competitive and uncertain summer. Higher Ed Dive. https://www.highereddive.com/ news/college-recruitment-rolls-into-a-competitive-and-uncertainsummer/579243/

Healea, C. D., Scott, J. H., & Dhilla, S. (2015). The work of faculty-in-residence: An introduction and literature review. Work, 52(3), 473-480.

Kilgo, C. A., Sheets, J. K. E., & Pascarella, E. T. (2015). The link between highimpact practices and student learning: Some longitudinal evidence. Higher Education, 69(4), 509-525.

Kuh, G. D. (2008). Excerpt from high-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities, 14(3), 28-29.

Mach, K. P., Gordon, S. R., Tearney, K., & McClinton, L. (2018). “The help I didn’t know I needed”: How a living-learning program “fits” into the first-year experience. The Journal of College of University Student Housing, 44(2), 1026.

Riker, H. C., & DeCoster, D. A. (2008). The educational role in college student housing. The Journal of College and University Student Housing, 35(2), 8085.

Schreiner, L. A. (2010). The “Thriving Quotient”: A new vision for student success. About Campus, 15(2), 2-10.

Soria, K. M., & Taylor Jr, L. (2016). Strengths-Based Approaches in College and University Student Housing: Implications for First-Year Students’ Retention and Engagement. Journal of College & University Student Housing, 42(2), 60-75.

Contact

Amber Manning-Ouellette
amber.manning-ouellette@okstate.edu