Tag: wellbeing

  • Understanding how inflation affects teacher well-being and career decisions

    Understanding how inflation affects teacher well-being and career decisions

    Key points:

    In recent years, the teaching profession has faced unprecedented challenges, with inflation emerging as a significant factor affecting educators’ professional lives and career choices. This in-depth examination delves into the complex interplay between escalating inflation rates and the self-efficacy of educators–their conviction in their capacity to proficiently execute their pedagogical responsibilities and attain the desired instructional outcomes within the classroom environment.

    The impact of inflation on teachers’ financial stability has become increasingly evident, with many educators experiencing a substantial decline in their “real wages.” While nominal salaries remain relatively stagnant, the purchasing power of teachers’ incomes continues to erode as the cost of living rises. This economic pressure has created a concerning dynamic where educators, despite their professional dedication, find themselves struggling to maintain their standard of living and meet basic financial obligations.

    A particularly troubling trend has emerged in which teachers are increasingly forced to seek secondary employment to supplement their primary income. Recent surveys indicate that approximately 20 percent of teachers now hold second jobs during the academic year, with this percentage rising to nearly 30 percent during summer months. This necessity to work multiple jobs can lead to physical and mental exhaustion, potentially compromising teachers’ ability to maintain the high levels of energy and engagement required for effective classroom instruction.

    The phenomenon of “moonlighting” among educators has far-reaching implications for teacher self-efficacy. When teachers must divide their attention and energy between multiple jobs, their capacity to prepare engaging lessons, grade assignments thoroughly, and provide individualized student support may be diminished. This situation often creates a cycle where reduced performance leads to decreased self-confidence, potentially affecting both teaching quality and student outcomes.

    Financial stress has also been linked to increased levels of anxiety and burnout among teachers, directly impacting their perceived self-efficacy. Studies have shown that educators experiencing financial strain are more likely to report lower levels of job satisfaction and decreased confidence in their ability to meet professional expectations. This psychological burden can manifest in reduced classroom effectiveness and diminished student engagement.

    Perhaps most concerning is the growing trend of highly qualified educators leaving the profession entirely for better-paying opportunities in other sectors. This “brain drain” from education represents a significant loss of experienced professionals who have developed valuable teaching expertise. The exodus of talented educators not only affects current students but also reduces the pool of mentor teachers available to guide and support newer colleagues, potentially impacting the professional development of future educators.

    The correlation between inflation and teacher attrition rates has become increasingly apparent, with economic factors cited as a primary reason for leaving the profession. Research indicates that districts in areas with higher costs of living and significant inflation rates experience greater difficulty in both recruiting and retaining qualified teachers. This challenge is particularly acute in urban areas where housing costs and other living expenses have outpaced teacher salary increases.

    Corporate sectors, technology companies, and consulting firms have become attractive alternatives for educators seeking better compensation and work-life balance. These career transitions often offer significantly higher salaries, better benefits packages, and more sustainable working hours. The skills that make effective teachers, such as communication, organization, and problem-solving, are highly valued in these alternative career paths, making the transition both feasible and increasingly common.

    The cumulative effect of these factors presents a serious challenge to the education system’s sustainability. As experienced teachers leave the profession and prospective educators choose alternative career paths, schools face increasing difficulty in maintaining educational quality and consistency. This situation calls for systematic changes in how we value and compensate educators, recognizing that teacher self-efficacy is intrinsically linked to their financial security and professional well-being.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Supporting the Supporters: Promoting Educators’ Mental Health – Faculty Focus

    Supporting the Supporters: Promoting Educators’ Mental Health – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Supporting the Supporters: Promoting Educators’ Mental Health – Faculty Focus

    Supporting the Supporters: Promoting Educators’ Mental Health – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • There’s no magic wand for student wellbeing

    There’s no magic wand for student wellbeing

    At a conference in the mid-2010s an American colleague described UK student services and support as “an emerging profession.” He was wrong: universities have always supported students beyond the classroom. From Oxford dons to Bologna priests, pastoral care was never a bolt-on or mission drift. It was a crucial part of enabling students, especially those from challenging backgrounds, to succeed.

    Where he may have been right was in the contrast between his side of the Atlantic and mine. The United States has built structured, well-resourced systems of student support, while in the UK our approach remains patchy and ill defined. A decade later, demand has continued to grow exponentially. Expectations are higher, university services are stretched, and public health provision is thinner.

    The Hogwarts problem

    Have universities become places where students expect to be looked after as much as taught? At times, it feels that way. Today many students’, and their parents’, earliest frame of reference for support in a residential education setting comes from what they saw or read happen for Harry Potter.

    Students paying fees understandably expect a full package: excellent teaching, clear employment prospects, and a safety net that catches every wobble in closed, secure setting, with or without owls.

    On top of that, many of today’s students have grown up talking openly about mental health on Instagram, TikTok, and in group chats. That cultural shift is a win for stigma reduction, and means more students are willing to ask for help in a context where expectations were already increased.

    Add in a more diverse student body, and the equation is simple: higher expectations + greater volume and diversity of students + greater willingness to express need = demand growing exponentially.

    At the sharpest end, universities are managing cases of student suicide, with all of its devastating consequences for families, friends and staff. The stakes could not be higher.

    We are also picking up the pieces from past cuts elsewhere. In Wales and England cuts to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) since 2010 mean many students are arriving at university with needs that have not been addressed before.

    The opportunity to get it right

    Providers across all four UK nations and beyond are grappling with the same pressures. The answer lies not in expending capacity and energy on demonstrative quality marks and badges, but in creating real-world systemic change rooted in regulation, leadership, defined boundaries, curriculum design, and rapid adoption of AI.

    Make mental health a strategic priority: The first step is leadership. Mental health and wellbeing must be owned at the highest level of every university. The Universities UK Stepchange framework made this clear in 2016, and it still holds true today. Vice chancellors and governing bodies need to lead visible strategies, set measurable goals, and proactively monitor progress.

    This is not about box-ticking. It is about embedding wellbeing in strategy so decisions about teaching, estates, finance, and partnerships all factor it in, just like they do health and safety. This commitment sends a powerful signal: facilitating good mental health is not peripheral. It is part of the core mission and enables better outcomes.

    This needs to be set against formal regulation with common terminology, standards and risk measures; moving beyond the voluntary and variance we see now, setting common boundaries to what the sector provides and what can be expected for all.

    Set boundaries and build healthcare partnerships: Universities are not healthcare providers, and pretending otherwise is not sustainable. Equally, it is not realistic to say “this is not our role.” Students and their families, often in crisis, need a sympathetic explanation of what support universities can and cannot provide, and a clear route to accessible health services.

    That means developing formal partnerships with health providers. The South East Wales Mental Health Partnership shows what is possible. Since 2019 this partnership has been creating bespoke referral pathways, training university staff in triage, and coordinating with NHS colleagues. The partnership has managed demand while helping the NHS plan for the pressure created by a time-limited, transient student population.

    The structures of health services differ across the four UK nations, but the approach is transferable. Formal, regional partnerships are the only sustainable way to respond.

    Embed wellbeing in the curriculum: Wellbeing can be built into curriculum design in ways that both support students and improve academic outcomes. Group projects foster connection and reduce isolation. Linking assignments to real-world challenges boosts motivation. Even something as simple as coordinating deadlines across modules can contribute to a healthier, more balanced experience. Peer support can be impactful for everyone involved.

    This reflects what many modern workplaces already expect: collaboration, resilience, and balance. Embedding wellbeing into learning design is part of preparing students for life after graduation.

    Use AI wisely: Around 80 per cent of teenagers aged 13–17 have used generative AI tools like ChatGPT. In developed economies there is growing evidence that this demographic will look to AI for emotional support with good outcomes, so it seems clear future students will look to AI first for help. A response which ensures strained provision adapts to demand change is critical.

    Handled properly, AI could transform student services. Chatbots can answer routine questions, signpost students to resources, and triage requests before they reach staff. This is not an opportunity to cut spending; it is an opportunity to repurpose skilled staff enabling focus on the most complex cases and multi-agency referrals, or in other words, the work where human expertise is most impactful.

    The danger is that we repeat past sector mistakes: commissioning bespoke systems slowly and at high cost. Instead, universities should move quickly to adopt and embed proven tools ensuring people, not algorithms, make the biggest difference.

    What’s next?

    Universities aren’t Hogwarts – and they need to be explicit about what they can and cannot do. It is possible to do this in a positive way and work with partners to build systems that meet new demand appropriately.

    That means leadership taking a proactive strategic approach, clear and compassionate boundaries, embedding wellbeing in the curriculum, and smart use of AI to manage resource and demand. It also means governments in each part of the UK moving beyond voluntary, third-party charters – to frameworks with teeth.

    Without that shift, staff will continue to be asked for miracles without a wand, and universities will continue to be held responsible when those miracles don’t happen.

    Source link

  • Therapy Dogs Boost Graduate Student Well-Being

    Therapy Dogs Boost Graduate Student Well-Being

    Laura Fay/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Therapy dogs are often touted as a way to give students a reprieve from busy academic schedules or remind them of their own pets at home, but a recent study from Chatham University found that engagement with therapy dogs can instill a sense of social connection for students at all levels.

    An occupational therapy student at Chatham who researched how weekly therapy dog interactions could impact graduate students in health science programs found that the encounters produced benefits for students’ social and emotional health.

    The background: Past research shows animal interventions can mitigate homesickness for first-year students who miss their pets and academic stress for nursing students. Students who participate in “dog office hours” also experience increased social connection and comfort. Shelter dogs can also motivate students’ physical well-being, as demonstrated by the University of South Carolina’s canine fitness course.

    Graduate students in health science programs, in particular, report high rates of anxiety, depression and stress, according to the study.

    Regardless of their program of study, graduate students also tend to be removed from general campus services and activities due to physical campus layouts, residing and working off campus, or a misalignment of schedules between resources and their responsibilities. Therefore, identifying services specifically for graduate students can improve their access and uptake.

    How it works: Twenty-five students were recruited to participate in the study, meeting weekly to engage in activities with a group of therapy dogs, including petting, playing with, brushing, holding and walking the animals. Students could interact with the dogs for up to two hours over the course of the seven weeks. Before and after each puppy playdate, participants completed pre- and post-test surveys to gauge their feelings and the effects of the animal intervention.

    Survey results showed students were less likely to report feeling stressed and more likely to say they felt happy after engaging with the dogs.

    “I’ve really enjoyed this experience,” one participant wrote. “I feel like this has positively impacted my mood and well-being overall. I always leave feeling more relaxed and happier.”

    In open-ended questions, students said the dogs made them feel happy, loved, calm, relaxed, motivated and connected. Many said they also appreciated the opportunity to engage with their peers, noting that the regular cadence allowed them to socialize and meet new people, including the therapy dogs’ owners. Students indicated they wanted the visits to continue in some way if possible.

    The average student spent around 30 minutes with the therapy dogs during the trial, and, if they had the opportunity, a majority said they would participate in therapy animal groups on campus three to four times per month.

    Other Comforting Canines

    Chatham University students aren’t the only graduate students learning to destress from dogs. Here are some other examples of animal-assisted interventions across the country:

    • At Virginia Tech, graduate students at the Innovation Campus receive love and cuddles from Allen, a therapy dog who is co-handled by Barbara Hoopes, the graduate school’s associate dean for the region.
    • The City University of New York’s School of Public Health has hosted a therapy dog visit from the Good Dog Foundation to encourage graduate learners to relax and take a break during their week.
    • The University of Cincinnati featured therapy dogs at their Graduate Student Appreciation Week in April, honoring the hard work students do and helping them break their usual routines.

    Source link

  • Student Wellbeing in the AI Era: Stress, Confidence, and Connection – A Global Snapshot

    Student Wellbeing in the AI Era: Stress, Confidence, and Connection – A Global Snapshot

    • This HEPI blog was authored by Isabelle Bristow, Managing Director UK and Europe at Studiosity.

    Studiosity’s ninth annual Student Wellbeing Survey, conducted by YouGov in November 2024, gathered insights from university students on their experiences and concerns, and made recommendations to senior leaders. This global research included panels from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, the UAE, the UK and the US (see below for the country sample size breakdown).

    The report highlights key learning on AI’s rapid integration into higher education and its impact on student wellbeing. The following are the key takeaways, specifically examining country-specific differences in student experiences with AI, alongside broader issues of stress, connection, belonging, and employability.

    AI Adoption and Its Impact

    AI is now a pervasive tool in higher education, with a significant 79% of all students reporting using AI tools for their studies. While usage is high overall, the proportion of students saying they use AI ‘regularly’ to help with assignments shows interesting variations by country:

    • UK: 17%
    • USA: 27%
    • Singapore: 31%
    • UAE: 38%

    This greater scepticism towards AI among UK students also shows up elsewhere, with students in the UK least likely among the eight countries to expect their university to offer AI tools.

    However, the widespread adoption of AI tools is linked to considerable student stress. The survey found that 68% of students report experiencing personal stress as a result of using AI tools for their coursework. From free text comments, this might be for a number of reasons, including the fear they might be unintentionally breaking the rules; there are also concerns that universities are not moving fast enough to provide AI tools, leaving students to work out for themselves how best to use AI tools. This highlights that navigating the effective and appropriate use of AI is a significant challenge that requires support.

    Furthermore, the way AI is currently being used appears to be affecting students’ confidence in their own learning. Some 61% feel only ‘moderately’ or less confident that they are genuinely learning and improving their own skills when using generative AI.

    Perhaps as a result of this uncertainty, students often seek ‘confidence’ when using university-provided AI support, desiring guided tools that help them check their understanding and validate their genuine learning progress. This motivation was particularly strong in countries like:

    • New Zealand: 31%
    • Australia: 25%
    • UK: 25%

    This suggests a tension between unstructured AI use (linked to lower learning confidence) and the student desire for confidence-building support (which AI, when properly designed for learning, offers).

    Perceptions of how well universities are adapting to AI also vary globally, with 56% of students overall feeling their institutions are adapting quickly enough. However, scepticism is notably higher in certain regions:

    • UK: 53% feel institutions are not adapting fast enough
    • Canada: 52% feel institutions are not adapting fast enough

    Conversely, students in other countries feel their university is adapting fast enough to include AI support tools for study:

    • UAE: 72%
    • Singapore: 66%
    • Saudi Arabia: 65%
    • USA: 58%

    Study Stress: Beyond AI

    While AI contributes to stress, study stress is a broader, multi-faceted challenge for student wellbeing, with frequency and causes differing significantly across countries. Students reported experiencing stress most commonly on a weekly basis (29% overall), with more students than average in Australia and New Zealand (both 33%) experiencing stress on a weekly basis. However, the intensity increases elsewhere:

    • Saudi Arabia: 27% felt stressed daily
    • Canada: 24% felt stressed daily, and a notable 17% felt stressed constantly
    • USA: 16% felt stressed constantly

    The top reasons for general study stress also vary, pointing to the diverse pressures students face:

    • ‘Fear of failing’: significantly higher in the UK (61%) compared with the global average of 52%
    • ‘Not having enough time to balance other life commitments’: significantly higher in the UK (52%) and Australia (48%)
    • ‘Difficult course content’: Singapore (38%)
    • ‘Paying for degree’: Canada (35%) and the USA (31%)
    • ‘Sticking to the rules around integrity and plagiarism’: over-indexed in the UAE (23%) and Saudi Arabia (22%)

    Belonging and Connection

    A sense of belonging is a crucial component of student wellbeing, and the survey revealed variations across countries. Students in Australia (62%) and the UK (65%) reported lower overall belonging levels compared to the global average. What contributes to belonging also differs:

    • ‘Confidence to reach out to teachers’: significantly higher factor in the UK (64%)
    • ‘A flexible schedule to help balance work and study’: dominated as a top reason in Australia (63%) and Singapore (62%)
    • ‘Ease of connecting with a student mentor’: featured prominently in Saudi Arabia (47%), UAE (48%), and USA (43%)
    • ‘Access to mental health support’: over-indexed as a key reason for belonging in Saudi Arabia (47%) and Canada (44%)

    The study also explored direct connections, addressing concerns that AI might reduce human interaction. Students were largely neutral or unsure if generative AI impacted their interactions with peers and teachers (including 63% of students in the UK and 55% in New Zealand). In contrast, students in Saudi Arabia (64%) and the UAE (61%) were most likely to report more interaction due to AI use, followed by Singapore (42%) and the USA (41%).

    Beyond AI’s influence on connection, the survey found that four in ten students (42%) were not provided a mentor in their first year, although over half (55%) would have liked one. Difficulty asking questions of other students was also mentioned by one in ten (13%) students overall. This difficulty was reported more by:

    • Female students: 14% vs 10% for males
    • Older cohorts (50+ year olds): 18% vs 13% for 18-25 year olds
    • Students in the UK (17%), Australia (17%), and New Zealand (16%) compared to other regions.

    Employability Confidence

    Employability is another key area impacting student confidence and overall wellbeing as they look towards the future. The survey found that 59% of students are confident in securing a job within six months of graduation, an increase from 55% in 2024, though concerns remain higher in Canada and the UK. Overall, 74% agree their degree is developing necessary future job skills, although Canadian students were less confident here (68%). Specific concerns about the relevance of a job within six months were more pronounced among:

    • UK students: 20% disagree they will get a related job
    • Canadian students: 14% disagree

    Conclusion

    The YouGov-Studiosity survey provides valuable data highlighting the complex reality of student wellbeing in the current higher education landscape. Rapid AI adoption brings new sources of stress and impacts confidence in learning, adding to existing pressures from general study demands, financial concerns, belonging, connection, and employability anxieties. These challenges, and what supports students most effectively, vary significantly by country. Universities must respond to this complex picture by developing tailored support frameworks that guide students in navigating AI effectively, while also bolstering their sense of belonging, facilitating connections, addressing mental health needs, and supporting their confidence in future careers, in ways responsive to diverse national contexts.

    By country totals: Australia n= 1,234: Canada n= 1,042: New Zealand n= 528: Saudi Arabia n= 511: Singapore n= 1,027: United Arab Emirates n=554: United Kingdom n= 2,328: United States n= 3,000

    You can download further Global Student Wellbeing reports by country here.

    Studiosity is a HEPI Partner. Studiosity is AI-for-Learning, not corrections – to scale student success, empower educators, and improve retention with a proven 4.4x ROI, while ensuring integrity and reducing institutional risk.

    Source link

  • From playground to lecture hall – working with schools to support wellbeing throughout education

    From playground to lecture hall – working with schools to support wellbeing throughout education

    Higher education institutions are increasingly acknowledging the importance of wellbeing in shaping meaningful and sustainable learning experiences. However, the wellbeing of students and staff is often treated as a separate or secondary issue, addressed through isolated initiatives rather than embedded into the fabric of university life.

    I propose adopting a lifelong approach to wellbeing in education grounded in appreciating that schools and universities are not distinct spheres. Rather, they are stages on a continuous educational journey. The way we foster wellbeing in schools must inform, and align with, our practices in higher education.

    Foundations for wellbeing

    The foundations laid in schools play a crucial role in shaping how learners experience their transition into university. When educational environments nurture emotional resilience, social connection, and inclusive responses to academic pressures, learners arrive in higher education with a stronger base of support. In contrast, when wellbeing is not prioritised earlier in the educational journey, the structural and emotional demands of university life can amplify existing challenges. This underscores the need for continuity and care across the educational continuum, rather than placing responsibility on individuals to adapt alone.

    In many school systems, wellbeing is increasingly recognised as integral to education. A holistic, strengths-based approach helps ensure that wellbeing is supported through curriculum design, teaching practices, and whole-school approaches and policies. Programmes focused on social and emotional learning are embedded, and collaboration across sectors – education, health, and community – creates a network of support that extends beyond the classroom.

    In higher education, this picture is evolving. The work on wellbeing spearheaded by Universities UK in recent years has helped universities to become more attuned to the importance of wellbeing, yet academic culture often remains shaped by competitiveness, performance metrics, and output-driven models. This dynamic also influences schools in some contexts, particularly where high stakes testing and narrow accountability frameworks dominate. However, there tends to be greater acceptance within schools that wellbeing and learning are deeply interconnected.

    In the university context, structural pressures, including institutional expectations and the demands of competitive academic cultures, continue to affect both students and staff, contributing to stress, burnout, and mental health difficulties. Although there is growing attention to student wellbeing in policy and strategy, support for staff wellbeing remains less visible, despite its clear influence on teaching quality and the wider learning environment. There is a need for a joined-up, systemic approach recognising the interdependence of student and staff wellbeing.

    Whole institution approaches

    A whole-university approach, as promoted by Universities UK, is a strategic, institution-wide commitment to embedding wellbeing into every dimension of university life, echoing the well-established whole-school model in many primary and secondary education systems. Just as whole-school approaches integrate wellbeing into teaching, leadership, curriculum, and engagement with families and communities, a whole-university approach ensures that wellbeing is not confined to support services or stand-alone initiatives. It becomes a shared responsibility, woven into the ethos, governance, and daily practices of the institution.

    Rather than relying on reactive services, this model positions wellbeing as a core value that shapes leadership, curriculum, pedagogy, and institutional relationships. It calls for cultural transformation, redefining success to focus not solely on outcomes, but on flourishing. This includes embedding wellbeing in teaching and assessment, professional development, work-life balance, and inclusive, compassionate organisational values. It requires systems that promote flexibility, equity, and psychological safety as the norm.

    Universities must be understood as ecosystems. When this ecosystem is well, everyone within it is more likely to thrive. This involves designing curricula that support engagement and wellbeing, adopting inclusive policies, and nurturing cultures of trust, care, and belonging in both academic and administrative contexts.

    Higher education can also learn from the progress made in schools. Many school systems have already developed comprehensive frameworks for promoting wellbeing – such as the Health Promoting Schools model – which successfully embed wellbeing into governance, pedagogy, and wider school life. Higher education has much to gain from adapting these models to its own settings, helping to ensure continuity of support as learners move between sectors.

    Embedding wellbeing through national frameworks

    Aligning approaches across schools and universities creates a more cohesive experience for learners and reduces the sense of disorientation that often accompanies educational transitions. It also enables valuable exchange between sectors, where shared learning can lead to better outcomes for all.

    Within this context, and especially given the significance of the transition from school to university, national leadership is essential in embedding wellbeing consistently across education systems. The move into higher education is more than a change of setting; it is a profound developmental shift, often marked by increased autonomy, identity exploration, and academic complexity. While this transition can be exciting, it also brings vulnerability and emotional strain. Maintaining wellbeing support across this bridge is therefore not optional; it is essential. Yet it is precisely at this stage that inconsistencies and gaps often emerge. National policies that intentionally bridge sectors can ensure wellbeing remains a continuous thread throughout a learner’s journey.

    One crucial aspect of national leadership is the development of robust policy and strategy relating to wellbeing, both within institutions and at a broader, systemic level. Country-wide initiatives create coherence, consistency, and a shared vision – particularly important when seeking to strengthen the links between schools and universities. Ireland, for instance, has implemented a national policy and strategy around mental health that spans multiple sectors, not just education. This kind of joined-up approach exemplifies how public policy can help to sustain cultural change across the education system and beyond.

    The wellbeing of our educational communities is not a peripheral concern. It is central to the very purpose of education. By embedding wellbeing across every level – through policy, pedagogy, leadership, and institutional culture – we not only support individuals to succeed, but also help to build resilient, compassionate institutions where everyone can flourish.

    Source link

  • Supporting Student Wellbeing in Uncertain Times

    Supporting Student Wellbeing in Uncertain Times

    Higher education is operating in a time of rapid change and uncertainty. Changes in federal and state policy, funding, and increasing polarization are reshaping campus environments and profoundly affecting many students’ experiences. As leaders, it is critical to understand how these forces are impacting student wellbeing—and what actions institutions can take to adapt and strengthen their supports for students.

    The Action Network for Equitable Wellbeing (ANEW) is a networked community of higher education changemakers working together to advance systems-level transformation to improve student wellbeing. Drawing on the involvement of more than 200 colleges and universities, our experience shows that while there is no single solution, institutions can act quickly and intentionally to strengthen student support using a practical, data-driven, human-centered approach.

    Through this collaborative work, we’ve identified three strategies that are helping campuses respond more effectively to the rapidly evolving needs of their students: using real-time disaggregated data, conducting empathy interviews, and building a rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making.

    Collect real-time quantitative data and analyze it thoughtfully

    How students are doing can change rapidly as policies and rhetoric shift, availability of external resources change, significant events on campus or in the world occur, and new barriers or supports emerge. Relying on older data (e.g. survey data collected nine months ago) can miss important changes. Without timely insight, decisions may be based on outdated information or an incomplete understanding. Systematically collecting real-time data helps institutions stay aligned with students’ current realities.

    To support this kind of real-time data collection, ANEW institutions have used the Wellbeing Improvement Survey for Higher Education Settings (WISHES)—a short survey, available at no cost, that provides institutions with timely and actionable data on a range of outcomes and experiences influencing student wellbeing. WISHES helps institutions monitor student wellbeing and stay responsive to the present moment.

    But aggregate data tell only part of the story. To understand how different groups of students are faring, disaggregating data by relevant student characteristics can reveal patterns that may be hidden in campus-wide averages and allow institutions to focus support where it is most needed, such as groups of students who might be disproportionately struggling.

    In fall 2023, the University of California, Irvine administered WISHES, disaggregated its data, and found that Middle Eastern students seemed to be experiencing more challenges than their peers in some measures. “Aggregate data really doesn’t tell you anything [about what to do]—you have to disaggregate,” said Doug Everhart, director of student wellness and health promotion at UC Irvine. “In order to find meaning behind the data, you have to follow up and ask questions to dig into the lived experience and the ‘why’. That focus is what makes [the ANEW] approach so useful.” The real-time disaggregated data allowed the team to better understand the Middle Eastern student experience and develop strategies responsive to their needs.

    Conduct empathy interviews to develop actionable, human-centered insights

    Real-time disaggregated survey data can reveal where differences exist—but it likely won’t explain them. Empathy interview is a method used in diverse sectors and settings to understand what’s behind the patterns in quantitative data. These insights are important for informing what specific changes are needed to better support students.

    An empathy interview is a one-on-one session that uses deep listening and responsive prompts to explore the lived experience of an individual on a specific topic such as wellbeing. Empathy interviews uncover holistic and nuanced perspectives about a student’s life—including what they’re facing, what matters to them, and how they navigate challenges and opportunities. Empathy interviews are not formal research, but they offer a structured way for leaders to move beyond assumptions and gain insights that are authentic, revealing, and actionable from those who are most affected.

    Katy Redd, executive director of the Longhorn Wellness Center at the University of Texas at Austin, reflected on the value of this strategy, “Going through this process pushed us to confront the gap between how we assume students experience college and what their day-to-day reality actually looks like for low-income students. Listening closely helped us notice invisible norms and structures that many students are expected to navigate without support. It shifted our mindset—away from surface-level solutions and toward deeper questions about how our systems function and for whom.”

    Michelle Kelly, assistant vice president for health and wellbeing at the University of Texas at Arlington, described a similar shift in perspective: “There was a moment after our empathy interviews where it just clicked: we’d been asking students to navigate systems we ourselves hadn’t fully mapped. It was humbling—but also motivating. Hearing their stories reminded us that the data isn’t just about trends—it’s about real people trying to make it through college while juggling a hundred other things.”

    These interviews, coupled with WISHES data, revealed insights that were difficult to uncover through other methods and have helped institutions think and act more systematically about what’s shaping students’ experiences and outcomes.

    Develop a rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making

    Being responsive to student needs isn’t about changing course in response to every complaint—it’s about noticing patterns early and adjusting when needed, which requires more than one-time or yearly data collection. Institutions that build a regular rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making are better equipped to detect shifts, learn from them, and adapt in ways that support student wellbeing.

    WISHES is most effective when administered multiple times per semester over many years. Data collected frequently over time provide helpful context when trying to understand how students are impacted by significant events on campus or in the world. Institutions can better answer questions like: Are students struggling more or less than they were at similar points of the semester in previous years? In times of extraordinary change, it is easy to imagine that students are doing worse than they were previously. Frequent data collection and sense-making allow us to objectively determine if this assumption is true.

    ANEW institutions that frequently collect data over time using WISHES have been able to understand in close to real time how large external events—such as the pandemic, October 7, and the shifting political environment—have impacted student wellbeing. Schools have reported that WISHES data enabled them to check their assumptions about the impact these events had on student wellbeing. In some cases, assumptions have been disproven using data, allowing schools to avoid trying to solve nonexistent problems or the wrong problem.

    As the University of Maryland reflects, “We’ve administered WISHES 10 times over the past two years and have seen firsthand the benefits of frequent data collection and are excited for the future. We most recently have begun to build a dashboard to display our WISHES metrics over time and democratize these critical insights to a myriad of roles within our campus community, which we hope will lead to more effective support for students across our university.”

    In the face of today’s challenges, higher education has a powerful opportunity—and responsibility—to lead with empathy, insight, and action. By embracing a data-driven, student-centered approach, institutions can move beyond assumptions and truly understand what their students need to flourish. The experiences shared by ANEW institutions demonstrate that meaningful change is not only possible but already underway. Now is the time for campuses to lean in, listen deeply, and build the systems that will support every student’s wellbeing.


    This post was written by Joanna Adams (Rochester Institute of Technology), Jennifer Maltby (Rochester Institute of Technology), and Allison Smith (New York University), with the co-leadership and insights of hundreds of changemakers contributing to the Action Network for Equitable Wellbeing.


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Five New Well-Being Spaces on College Campuses

    Five New Well-Being Spaces on College Campuses

    Personal well-being—particularly related to mental health—is one of the greatest threats to persistence among college students.

    Forty percent of students say mental health has “a great deal” of impact on their ability to focus, learn and perform academically, according to a May 2024 Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab. Additionally, 19 percent of respondents believe their physical health impacts their academic success a great deal.

    Colleges and universities are responding to this growing need for support; a 2024 Inside Higher Ed survey of college presidents found that 70 percent of respondents had invested in wellness facilities or services to promote overall well-being among students in the past year.

    But students aren’t entirely satisfied with the offerings on their campuses; only 46 percent of Student Voice respondents rated the quality of campus health and wellness services as good or excellent.

    Inside Higher Ed compiled five examples of new support resources universities are offering to improve student well-being and, in turn, their retention and graduation. Many focus on students’ self-regulation through meditation and reflection, tools that can help them manage physical and socio-emotional health.

    1. University of Texas, Dallas: Brain Recharge Station

    In a small room located in the Eugene McDermott Library and Center for Brain Health, students are encouraged to take “brain breaks,” or short, intentional pauses to prime themselves for more focused, deeper thinking.

    The room can only be used by one person at a time, and visitors are encouraged to turn off devices and set aside reading materials during this break.

    1. San Diego State University, Imperial Valley: Student Wellness and Success Center

    The SDSU, Imperial Valley, administration cut the ribbon on a new wellness and success center in March, creating dedicated space for counseling and health services—as well as career, veterans’, student success and retention services. The goal is to offer holistic support in a one-stop shop. Imperial Valley is a commuter campus, with student housing under construction, making these resources particularly helpful for those living and studying in the area.

    Counseling center services include crisis intervention, assessment and short-term therapy. The health center provides low- or no-cost medical services including preventive care, immunizations and psychiatric treatments.

    1. Clemson University: Wellness Zone

    Clemson’s Fike Recreation Center is home to the Wellness Zone, a private room that an individual or group of students can reserve to engage in various activities. Created as a virtual fitness space, the room includes a touch-screen TV and zero-gravity chairs. Students can participate in self-paced yoga, stretching, mindfulness, breath work and meditation, as well as traditional exercises guided by an instructor on the TV.

    1. Indiana University, Bloomington: Wellness House

    IU repurposed an old sorority house on campus to centralize mental and physical health service offices, combining Student Wellness, Substance Use Intervention Services and the Collegiate Recovery Community offices under one roof.

    In addition to staff offices, the new Wellness House also features reservable spaces for campus groups and four rooms where students can relax and meditate. Each room has a different theme and features; for example, the Fireplace Room is focused on studying and unwinding, whereas the Quiet Room has flexible seating such as beanbags and pillows for greater relaxation.

    The goal is to provide an entry point for students who may be overwhelmed, potentially connecting them with relevant offices located in the Wellness House while they engage in other activities.

    1. Yale University: The Good Life Center

    In 2021, Yale opened the doors to its Good Life Center, a space for unwinding and destressing; this year the university doubled the size of the space to accommodate more students.

    The expansion includes five more themed rooms: the tree house, music room, game room, sensory room and balance room. Each offers wellness activities and features related to its theme, such as musical instruments, mini basketball hoops and sound-absorbing chairs.

    The sensory room was designed in collaboration with Student Accessibility Services to provide specialized furniture and resources for students of all needs and abilities.

    Do you have a wellness intervention that might help others promote student success? Tell us about it.

    Source link

  • Tackling accent bias in Higher Education could improve students’ success, sense of belonging, and wellbeing

    Tackling accent bias in Higher Education could improve students’ success, sense of belonging, and wellbeing

    Accent Bias in Higher Education

    UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have a diverse population, encompassing students and staff from numerous linguistic backgrounds. Yet this linguistic diversity is often overlooked in university strategies, discourse, and practices, and students report experiencing accent-based stigmatisation. Worryingly, 30% of university students report having their accent mocked at university and 33% are concerned about their accent affecting their future success.

    Accent bias can have profound negative consequences throughout an individual’s life, affecting their school experience, job opportunities, work performance evaluations, and access to housing. These biases arise because accents trigger stereotypes about the social class, ethnicity, region, nationality, gender (and more) of the speakers. Such stereotypes can lead us to perceive certain speakers as more or less intelligent, competent, or fluent.

    In line with the Government’s mission to “Break Down Barriers to Opportunity”, addressing the negative consequences of accent bias in Higher Education (HE) is essential to ensure equal opportunities for young people to thrive at university and “follow the pathway that is right for them”.

    But what is the hidden impact of accent bias across UK HE? How does it influence students’ academic life, belonging and wellbeing?

    The Hidden Impact

    In our current research (Tomé Lourido & Snell, under review), we conducted an accent bias survey with over 600 students at a Russell Group University in the North of England. It showed that a significant number of students experience accent-based disadvantages that have a lasting negative impact on their academic life. Negative experiences were most frequently reported by students from the North of England, especially from working-class backgrounds, and students who did not grow up speaking English, especially from minoritised ethnic backgrounds. These include:

    • Being marked as different or inferior through negative evaluation, miscategorisation and frequent microaggressions, such as having their accent mimicked, mocked and commented on.
    • Facing barriers to academic engagement and success. Students from these groups report feeling that their contributions in academic settings are not valued because of their accent, which makes them reluctant to participate in class. Some feel pressured to change their accent, adding an additional cognitive burden to in-class participation. These students are disadvantaged because they miss opportunities to develop and refine their thinking through dialogue with others.
    • Impacts on wellbeing and career aspirations: Due to negative past experiences, some students internalise negative perceptions of their accent, affecting their confidence and wellbeing, and making them reluctant to take up new opportunities or follow certain career paths. This can have a knock-on effect on their mental health.   

    The accent-based disadvantages reported by students are not simply representative of wider societal prejudices; for many, the university context was unique in highlighting and amplifying these prejudices. Students also recognised that accent bias intersects with other forms of discrimination – class, race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality and disability – in complex ways.  Thus, we argue that HEIs should turn an analytic lens on themselves and take action to tackle accent bias and related inequities.

    From Awareness to Action: A Collaborative Approach

    There is work to be done for all of us in HEIs to embrace a true multilingual and multicultural ethos and challenge the idea that there is an idealised type of university student. We must “de-normalise” the microaggressions against students with accents perceived as “regional” or “foreign” and ensure that students from all backgrounds are able to participate in the classroom without feeling out of place. We propose four areas of interdisciplinary and collaborative work across the organisation:

    1. Raise awareness of accent bias and its negative consequences in collaboration with students and student unions. Create a communications campaign, provide targeted student and staff training, engage with career offices and employers.
    2. Tackle accent-based inequities by adopting a good practice statement about linguistic diversity and incorporating action into Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) policy and practice. Include content on linguistic diversity and discrimination in relevant university policies (e.g. mutual respect), strategies, student communications, and training (e.g. induction).
    3. Create a safe report and support route within existing systems for linguistic discrimination, bullying and harassment. Train staff supporting students, including personal tutors, on accent bias and its impact on academic life.
    4. Evaluate the effect of accent bias on students’ success, belonging and wellbeing. Track linguistic diversity. Assess the success of initiatives. 

    In addition to our own work, recent projects highlight the need for HEIs worldwide to address linguistic discrimination and its role in perpetuating existing inequalities. Initiatives led by Walt Wolfram (NC State University, US), John Hellerman and collaborators (Portland State University, US), and Christian Ilbury and Grace Mai Clark (University of Edinburgh, UK) have implemented cross-campus programs within their institutions. However, to effect sector-wide change, many more HEIs need to get involved.

    A Call for HEI Senior Leaders to Lead the Change

    Accent bias remains a largely unaddressed issue in large organisations. HEIs can play a pivotal role in leading a much-awaited societal change.

    Addressing accent bias in Higher Education is about breaking down barriers to opportunity and creating an environment in which all students, regardless of their background, can succeed in their studies, secure jobs, and contribute positively to society. By doing so, HEIs will support the employability of their students, a key metric for prospective students when selecting a university, and contribute to economic growth and social mobility.

    We encourage senior leaders to take proactive steps to tackle the negative consequences of accent bias and foster a more inclusive and equitable Higher Education system where students from all linguistic backgrounds can thrive.

    Source link