Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010, pp. 25 - 33.

Beyond the classroom: a case study of first-year student perceptions

of required student-faculty conferences
Beth Kaufka1

Abstract: Instructors of first-year students must understand that many of the

frustrations they encounter with this demographic are a normal part of a
transition process. Not only are first-year students asked to adjust to new
academic demands, they also must learn how to live independently in a new
environment. An effective way to facilitate academic development is to require
conferences that: 1) address the student as a person within the first-year context,
and 2) focus on course content and academic development. The former is initially
prioritized over the latter to meet the specific needs of first-year students. In the
fall semester of 2009, the author conducted a case study with three sections of
Critical Writing, an interdisciplinary general education critical thinking and
writing course. Students met with the instructor throughout the semester, and at
the end of the course, they completed a 25-question in-class anonymous, multiple-
choice survey to gauge their perceptions of the impact of required conferences on
their academic experiences. The data show that students very clearly perceived
the conferences as helpful for their learning and overall experience of the course.

Keywords: freshmen, first-year students, required conferences; student-

faculty interaction, retention, transition, best practices, general education,
office hours, engagement.

I. Introduction.

Often, when I tell new academic colleagues what I do and what I love – “I teach first-year
general education” – I am met with groaning, exasperation, and frustration. They cringe, shrink
back into themselves and commend me for having the patience to deal with students at the
introductory level. Then, typically, they launch into dissertations about how unprepared first-year
students are, how freshmen don’t or can’t read, how they demonstrate all the signs of academic
apathy: tardiness, sleeping in class, cell phones, incomplete homework, poor grades. They stare
in disbelief when I say that I truly love teaching freshmen, that I find it a highly rewarding
experience filled with opportunities, and that really, when it comes down to it, I find it an honor
and privilege.
First-year students are unique in that, although they have expectations about what their
college experiences will be like – a blend of mythologies from the media, their friends, and their
own desires – many of them have little to no experience with college life and are flabbergasted
by the reality of their first year. As instructors of first-year students, we are able to help usher
these students into our institutions, these foreign lands where many of them are on their own for
the first time. We are able to witness their transformation from high-school teenagers to college
students exploring their new lives. At the same time, we have to be careful – much of the

1
Division of University Studies, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, 1601 E. Market St, Greensboro,
NC 27411, [email protected].
Kaufja, B.

discourse around first-year students is filled with all too romantic notions of transformation. We
also need to be realistic about the unique challenges these students present. Students new to a
university environment have a diversity of academic and non-academic obstacles to overcome,
particularly in their first semester.
I have been teaching first-year writing in various capacities for the past nine years. To
help address the specific needs of first-year students, I require two conferences during the
semester and structure them into my syllabus and grading scale. My experience with Writing
Center pedagogy has informed my desire to work one-on-one with students, but more
anecdotally, in the years I have required conferences, I have found that, if I make a personal
connection with students early on in the semester, they are more likely to return to office hours
when they need help with course content. My two conferences are semi-structured. The first acts
as an icebreaker, the second as personalized academic support.
In the fall semester of 2009, I conducted a case study with three sections of Critical
Writing, an interdisciplinary general education critical thinking and writing course. Students met
with me throughout the semester, and at the end of the course, they completed a 25-question in-
class anonymous, multiple-choice survey to gauge their perceptions of the impact of required
conferences on their experiences. The data show that my students very clearly perceived the
conferences as helpful for their learning and overall experience of the course. Required
conferences can be effective in any discipline and, although this paper specifically discusses
first-year students, may be implemented at any level.

II. What we know.

Over and over the research shows that students find it meaningful to build relationships with
faculty. Richard Light (2001), in Making the Most Out of College, reports that students “point
out repeatedly that getting constructive, somewhat personalized advice might be the single most
underestimated feature of a great college experience” and how “certain faculty members make a
special difference in their lives” (p.5). In one of his studies, Light also found that four-fifths of
students reported that the specific, critical moment that profoundly changed them happened
outside the classroom (p.8). Similarly, the first principle in Chickering and Gamson’s (1987)
highly referenced “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education” is contact
between students and faculty. As these authors argue, “frequent student-faculty contact in and
out of class is an important factor in student motivation and involvement. Knowing a few faculty
members well enhances students' intellectual commitment and encourages them to think about
their own values and plans” (Chickering and Gamson, 1987).
Student-faculty interaction is most often manifest through academically common
practices: collaboration on research projects, independent studies/special projects, departmental
or university committees, student organizations, advisement, and office hours. For example, the
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) findings support high levels of student-faculty
interaction. “Working with a professor on a research project or serving with faculty members on
a college committee or community organization lets students see first-hand how experts identify
and solve practical problems. Through such interactions teachers become role models, mentors,
and guides for continuous, life-long learning” (NSSE, 2008).
Although such avenues are well traveled and can positively impact students, these
interactions typically engage a certain type of student, one who is already prepared and
committed to high academic engagement. Traditional practices of student-faculty interaction are

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 26
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

often seen as rewards and are actively sought after by high-achieving, engaged students. They
are largely voluntary.
Requiring conferences for all students is an attempt to provide the opportunity for
increased student-faculty interaction to all enrolled in the course, to mandate engagement for
everyone. In the conferences, the students who sit in the back and avoid eye contact are required
to chat about the class, their experiences, and what they need to improve the conditions for their
learning. In an interview, John N. Gardner (2003), highlights mandatory interventions. He says:
“I think we’ve gotten too focused on treating them as independent adults and
letting them sink or swim on their own…but the older I got, the more I realized
that my students…were more likely to be successful if I made them do certain
things. Once the students did them, they found out that they were helpful, and
then they pursued them voluntarily. One of the things we’ve learned from the
instrument Your First College Year…is that students recognize they need help
and they report all kinds of stress, but do they go get the help? No, they don’t. A
best practice would be to mandate student participation in more of these
interventions” (p. 12).
Light (2001) reports that students who seem to grow most significantly in the higher education
experience include interacting with faculty as one contributing factor; however, they also report
that this interaction is difficult because it doesn’t always come naturally (p. 10).
I’d bet most faculty hold office hours, but I’d also bet that overall, the number of students
who attend are low – or at least until it’s nearly too late and the student’s learning (and grade) is
in jeopardy. Seeking out faculty for help can be especially challenging for first-year students
who might expect faculty to be unavailable, who might be intimidated by their professors, who
might have poor time management skills and therefore do not make the effort of attending office
hours, who might be overwhelmed with their transition into college life.
Tim Clydesdale (2007), author of The First Year Out: Understanding American Teens
After High School, found that "most of the mainstream American teens [he] spoke with neither
liberated themselves intellectually nor broadened themselves socially during their first year out."
Rather, he discovered that what teens really focus on during their first year is basic daily life
survival on their own, i.e. how to negotiate new friends, money, time management, dorm life. In
other words, rather than experiencing the mind-blowing, life-changing class that reorients the
student’s whole world view to an informed, academic one – the kind of experience we see in
movies like Wonder Boys – students are occupied with worries about finishing their homework
and getting to class on time when they need to replace the pre-paid cafeteria ID card they lost,
not wanting to call home to tell their parents they need help, and all of this in the midst of a new
group of friends, mere strangers.
This reality for first-year students is reflected in Upcraft and Gardner’s (1989) definition
of freshman success. They “believe freshman succeed when then they make progress toward
fulfilling their educational and personal goals: 1) developing academic and intellectual
competence; 2) establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships, 3) developing an
identity, 4) deciding on a career and life-style; 5) maintaining personal health and wellness; and
6) developing an integrated philosophy of life” (p.2). Telling is the fact that all but the first of
Upcraft and Gardner’s goals focus on psycho-social personal growth of first-year students.
It is also worthy to tangentially note that student perceptions of such interactions can
increase retention (O’Gara et al., 2009). Students who have that extra support feel more
connected to the university and are motivated to do what it takes to remain in the institution.

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 27
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

Jaswal et al. (2008) note that “retention research shows that the earlier a student is connected to
the social and academic systems of the college the greater their academic achievement and thus
their commitment to graduating” (p. 55). Retention of freshmen not only benefits the students
themselves, but also, from an administrative standpoint, benefits the entire institution.

III. Case Study.

As noted above, in the fall semester of 2009, I conducted a small case study with my three
sections of Critical Writing, a critical thinking and writing course in the University Studies
interdisciplinary general education core curriculum at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical
State University (A&T). North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University is a
historically black university in Greensboro, NC known for our civil rights legacy, particularly for
our A&T four – the four freshmen who refused to get up from the Woolworth’s whites-only
lunch counter. Currently, our first-year students are 91% African American, 52% female, and
largely from North Carolina at 78%. The average age of our first-year students is 20-years-old
(Wabash, 2009). Although A&T first-year students fit the standard prototype for “freshmen,”
(18-years-old, just out of high school, full-time students who reside on campus, attending a four
year university), it should be noted that nationwide, “The student landscape is dotted with almost
as many profiles as there are students, and our thinking about first year students should reflect
their diversity…The average age is slightly over 25 (Ishler, 2005, p.17). Overall, first year
students are diverse in age, class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, preparedness, etc. Our
course objectives include critical writing and reading skills, effective communication, research,
use of technology, assessment, and collaboration. As a required part of the curriculum, students
meet with me twice during the semester for one-on-one meetings, the first at the very beginning
of the course, and the second anytime thereafter. To gauge student perceptions of the impact of
these meetings on their learning, I gave students an in-class anonymous multiple-choice survey,
consisting of 25-questions.

A. Conference One.

The first required conference is a simple, friendly get-to-know-you meeting (unless the student
wants to work on course content), and happens within the first two weeks of the semester. I bring
a sign-up sheet to class and pass it around so students can sign up for a fifteen-minute
conference. In this conference, I do not prioritize academic issues because I really just want to
get to know my students. My objectives, made explicit, for the first conference are:
• To build trust with students by getting to know them on a personal level and allowing
them to get to know me too (not only as faculty, but also as a “real” person);
• To be sure my students know where my office is and to tell them on a one-on-one
level that I can and should be used as a resource;
• To be sure students understand the objectives of the course and to answer any
questions they might have early on.
Although we as instructors, of course, want our students to develop in academic course content
and process, it is critical that we recognize the fact that academics might be the last thing on
their minds and that this is a normal part of transforming into college students. As professionals,
we can help alleviate some of the burden of their transition and ultimately facilitate academic
success.

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 28
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

A study done by Palmer et al. (2009) shows that many first-year students feel as if they
don’t belong at the university because they reside in a liminal “betwixt space” (between their
home-space and the university-space) and that a variety of complex social-interpersonal
interactions influence how well they transition more fully into the university space. One thing we
can do as instructors is demystify the institution by giving the institution a human face, a kind of
mentor or in-between figure to help them bridge the gap. Shanley and Johnston (2008) state that
for first-semester college students, success is found not only in their organizational abilities and
time management skills, but also in knowing their professors [my emphasis].
From my conversations during these meetings, I have discovered that first-year students
typically expect two types of college professors: The hard-edged, unforgiving, stern professor, an
immovable stone wall of knowledge and high expectations or the sloppy liberal-minded
professor who doesn’t take attendance, is slack with assignments, has fun and engaging lectures,
and leaves class satisfied at her/his own brilliance. Both of these kinds of stereotypical professors
do not demonstrate the care that freshmen need and ultimately desire. Both prioritize easy
teaching and their own careers, and both unfortunately fail to demonstrate real concern for
student learning and tend to represent a cold institution that sees students as numbers.
So, during the initial required conference, I offer them a different kind of professor. I start
with personal, but not prying, questions about their college experiences so far. I ask questions
like: How are you? How’s the transition to college? From where did you move? What do your
friends and family think about you being in college? What is your roommate like? What is your
dorm like? What is the hardest thing you’re dealing with now, and how can I help? Do you have
a major? What classes are you really excited about?
I believe it is fair that while I ask students to disclose some personal information about
themselves that I also share personal information about myself throughout the conference,
although I am very intentional about not making the conference about me, my lessons, and my
advice. This first conference is devoted to making sure my students feel that they have a voice,
and that it will be heard. To close, I wrap it up by reiterating the objectives of the conference and
ask if they have any questions about the course. And finally, I casually sum up our conversation
to let my students know I have been listening and to help me solidify some of the individual
details in my own mind.

B. Conference Two.

Students schedule the second conference themselves at any time during the rest of the semester. I
have found that after my first conference, it is fairly easy to get most students to return. In fact,
many of them come regularly both to work on assignments and to just say hi when they’re in the
building. Because the students themselves schedule these conferences, they tend to be spread out
through the semester, so I do not have to set aside such a large amount of time at once. And, to
help alleviate some of the time demand, I encourage students to simply come to my office hours,
when I have time set aside for them anyway. The second conference tends to be around 30-
minutes, like a typical Writing Center session.
For the second conference, my objectives are different. Rather than a personal conference
just to get to know students, I focus on academic skills and strongly encourage them to bring in a
course project to work on. (But, I do give them credit anyway if they just want to talk about
something else.). In these conferences, I can explain things we discussed in class in a more
tailored way to suit individual students. I can “personalize instruction” by having a more

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 29
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

interactive dialogue with them. I can ask more direct questions, allow more time for them to
process, and focus our discussion more directly to their learning style. For example, if I know
someone is a visual learner, we can sketch out an image, a diagram, or a graph together to
elucidate concepts or make connections. Or, I can draw upon their specific interests, interests I
began to learn about in the first conference, and use examples/analogies that make more sense to
them as individuals. Most students find one-on-one help extremely enlightening; I can’t describe
how fun it is to witness students’ light bulbs turn on, and how excited they become when they
understand something in a new way.

C. Findings.

I have required conferences for years, assuming they made a difference, hoping the time I
invested was actually worth it; however, until this past fall, I did not collect data. Although my
case study is small, with only 52 participants, the findings are encouraging. Survey questions 1-3
provided logistical information: 78.8% met with me two or more times, with 34.5% meeting
more than the requirement. During the conferences, students reported that they mostly worked on
writing (88.5%), but also ranking high were their personal difficulties and/or student life (75%)
and overall academic performance (73%). 48% reported discussing academic motivation, while
32% said they worked on general study skills. 78.9% of the conferences lasted between 10-30
minutes.
The rest of the survey data is included in the following table, but it is interesting to
highlight some important content of the students’ perception of the conferences. 92% of students
believed the conferences helped them feel I cared about them as individuals. 71% believed the
conferences helped them with reading and writing skills, so much so that 82% believed the
course should continue to require conferences for this course. 88.4% agreed that, generally, first
year courses should require at least one conference. These numbers are obviously high, which
highlights the fact that over half agreed that they might not have met with me had the
conferences not been mandatory. Students very clearly perceived the helpfulness of the
conferences for their learning and overall experience of the course.
Table 1. Survey results for questions 4-25
Strongly Strongly
Survey Question Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree
I feel that the required conferences were worth my time. 73.1% 21.2% 5.8% 0% 0%
In general, it is important to me that I know my instructors care 78.8% 15.4% 5.8% 0% 0%
about me as an individual.
The conferences helped me feel my instructor cares about me as 67.3% 25% 4, 7.7% 0% 0%
an individual.
The conferences helped me develop my writing skills. 25% 46.2% 19.2% 9.6% 0%
The conferences helped me develop my reading skills. 25% 46.2% 19.2% 9.6% 0%
The conferences helped me develop my study skills. 13.5% 26.9% 44.2% 15.4% 0%
The conferences helped me feel more comfortable participating 15.4% 32.7% 40.4% 7.7% 3.8%
in class than I otherwise would’ve felt.
The conferences motivated me to stay on task and do my 26.9% 53.8% 13.5% 5.8% 0%
coursework.
The conferences helped me understand course content I did not 30.8% 34.6% 23.1% 9.6% 1.9%
understand in class.
The conferences helped me learn about other resources. 26.9% 36.5% 26.9% 9.6% 0%
The conferences helped me feel as though I am part of the A&T 11.5% 25% 46.2% 13.5% 1.9%
community.
The amount of time I spent on homework for this course 11.5% 30.8% 34.6% 19.2% 3.8%
increased because of the conferences.

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 30
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

During my conferences, I was able to ask questions that I would 46.2% 38.5% 11.5% 3.8% 0%
not have been able to ask during class time.
The level of my engagement in the course materials increased 17.3% 46.2% 28.8% 7.7% 0%
because of my conferences.
The conferences made me more comfortable approaching my 21.2% 38.5% 26.9% 13.5% 0%
other instructors in other courses.
The conferences made me feel a sense of belonging at A&T. 11.5% 26.9% 51.9% 5.8% 3.8%
Student conferences in this course should continue to be required. 55.8% 26.9% 13.5% 1.9% 1.9%
My conferences made it more likely that I stay at A&T for 23.1% 25% 23.1% 25% 3.8%
another year.
If conferences were not a requirement of the course, I might NOT 21.2% 32.7% 19.2% 19.2% 7.7%
Have met with my instructor.
In general, first-year courses should require at least one 59.6% 28.8% 4, 7.7% 1.9% 0%
conference.
I feel as though the conferences were an important part of my 28.8% 44.2% 15.4% 9.6% 0%
learning in this course.
Overall, my conferences improved my experience at A&T. 19.2% 32.7% 36.5% 5.8% 3.8%
*Data was collected on 12/1/2009 from Beth Kaufka’s fall 2009 sections of UNST 110 Critical Writing 014, 034, 036 from 52 respondents.

The degree to which my case study is generalizable is certainly questionable, largely due to my
small sample size and my particular personality. Furthermore, this study only assesses students’
perceptions of learning; the next step, then, is to investigate the correlation between student
perceptions and actual student learning, in addition to other student-related issues such as
engagement and retention. Note, however, that although this study itself may not be
generalizable, the survey findings are consistent with the literature on engagement and retention,
as cited in the literature discussed in this article. Either way, faculty should feel optimistic about
this method of interacting with students, in addition to the more traditional avenues such as
collaboration on research projects and serving on committees – and faculty should be encouraged
to design more thorough studies of the impact of required student-faculty conferences on
learning.

IV. Implementation Trouble Spots.

I’ll be the first to admit required conferences are necessarily time-consuming, particularly the
first round. Think about it. Let’s say you have 25 students in a class, and you teach three sections
of the course for a total of 75 students. Let’s say you spend fifteen minutes with each student,
this comes to nearly 19 hours without factoring in any breaks, any meetings that run over fifteen
minutes, students forgetting to come, getting lost on their way to your office, or standing you up
altogether. Depending on what you want your schedule to look like during the scheduled
conferences, this can take an entire week or even two. You might factor in some kind of
consequence for students who miss their first conference. I let students reschedule, but for only
partial credit. I recommend you run through familiar lesson plans and schedule light grading
during your week of scheduled conferences, in addition to scheduling around committee work;
I’ve never had to cancel a class for conferences.
Another significant challenge with time comes from the fact that, after their first
conference, after you demonstrate your capacity for support, many students will use your office
hours. (Some of us tend to relish our un-used office hours as a time to get work done. There are
certainly times that I do!). And outside of office hours, you’ll find that your students pop in “just
to say hi.” You can also expect to write more letters of recommendation for internships, jobs,
scholarships, and study abroad programs. This can be at once both an honor and a burden. (I
have been a reference for nine students already this semester, and we are just half way through.)
Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 31
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

One way to help manage time is to give your conferences some shape by defining your
goals. You will probably have larger, overarching goals like helping students develop into self-
regulated, self-motivated learners. But it is helpful to have specific conference goals, and to state
those goals up front with students so they understand the intentions of the meeting. Do you want
to focus only on course goals, for instance: clarifying the very first major assignment and helping
students get started? Or do you want to provide motivation and inspiration? Encouragement?
Consider, also, structure and amount of preparation. Do you want students to come with a
completed assignment to discuss? Will you have a time limit, and how will you stick to it? Do
you want to have a kind of script to ensure all students get the same kind of information and
attention from you? Or, do you want to just roll with it and see where the conversations lead
you? Whatever way, it is helpful to both you and your students to be clear about your objectives.
It is also critical that, despite how much you care about your students, you maintain high
academic standards and hold them accountable to course policies. When students make bad
choices, they must suffer through the consequences. If you are doing these conferences in an
effective way, they actually help students understand that you will hold them accountable for
their actions, and they will not resent you for doing so. In fact, effective conferences can mediate
the burden because students should know your expectations of them. One of my students wrote
in her end-of-semester reflection essay:
“The meetings gave me a better understanding of your expectations [my
emphasis] and my mistakes. This only allowed us to build a connection with you
as our teacher and in my opinion it showed me that you were a concerned teacher
who was willing to listen to our problems, assist us, motivate us, and point us in
the right direction. I guess this is why I looked forward to coming to class,
because you were the first teacher to show support.”
And, these conferences help mitigate the accusation that “you just don’t like me” when there is a
consequence for a poor academic choice. In fact, I have never had a student lodge that complaint
with me.

V. Conclusion.

As discussed above, the research clearly shows that students value personal relationships with
faculty, that good teaching and high quality interactions with faculty promote growth, and the
more contact students have with their teachers, the better. In general, good undergraduate
education teaching practice encourages high levels of student-faculty interaction. Required one-
on-one student-faculty conferences can be an effective way to positively affect student learning.
Required conferences ultimately become very memorable moments for students. For me,
they are critically important for setting the tone for the class and helping students feel cared
about in a way that enhances their learning. They often tell me about this directly, and many of
them write about it in their end of the semester reflections. They write in surprise that I actually
care about them. I am always both happy and saddened that this conference means so much to
them – happy that I have helped them in their overall experience of their first year, and saddened
that they don’t feel cared about (or respected) in many of their other courses.
The data here suggest that required conferences help students get off to a good start, help
facilitate in them an awareness of what kind of students they are, their learning styles, the
particular challenges they have overcome or are still dealing with. I can help them understand
themselves by listening to them and telling them what I think they are communicating: It sounds

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 32
www.iupui.edu/~josotl
Kaufja, B.

like you are an auditory learner; It sounds like you’re saying that you miss home; It sounds like
you’re saying you would be willing to get some tutoring. It is also nice that students can learn
about you, too, which helps facilitate a relationship of mutual respect. I tell them about my
children, about the kind of student I was/am, about my learning style and the subject areas and
skills that I find difficult, how I overcome my own obstacles with writer’s block, procrastination,
time management, and stress.
Part of our job as first-year instructors is to put a real human face on our institutions. We
have the responsibility of demystifying the university while simultaneously creating a feeling of
respect for higher education and creating a realistic version of what it takes to be successful. This
is all nice and good, but really, when I am honest with myself, my motivation is a selfish one.
The impact on student learning is secondary to the kind of joy I experience getting to know a
new group of unique, interesting, and fun students each and every semester. It helps take the
work out of my work.

References

Chickering, A. W., and Gamson, Z. E. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39 (7), 3–7.

Ishler, Jennifer L. Crissman. (2005). Today’s first year students. Eds. Upcraft, M. Lee, John N.
Gardner, and Betsy Barefoot. Challenging and Supporting the First-year Student. CA: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 15-26.

Jaswal, Faisal, and Teresa McClane Jaswal. (2008). Tiered mentoring to leverage student body
expertise. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2008 (144), 55-61.

O'Gara, Lauren, Melinda Mecher Karp, and Katherine Hughes. (2009). An exploratory study of
student perspectives. Community College Review, 36 (3), 195-218.

Palmer, Mark, Paula O’Kane and Martin Owens. (2009). Betwixt spaces: student accounts of
turning point experiences in the first-year transition. Studies in Higher Education, 34 (1), 37-54.

Schroeder, Charles. (2003). The first year and beyond. About Campus, 8 (4), 9-16.

Shanley, Mary Kay and Julia Johnston. (2008). 8 things first-year students fear about college.
Journal of College Admission, 3-7.

Upcraft, M. Lee, John N. Gardner and Associates. (1989). The Freshman Year Experience. CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Wabash National Study of Liberal Arts Education. (2008). Overview of findings from the first
year. Retrieved December 22, 2009, from http://www.liberalarts.wabash.edu/study-research/.

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 2010. 33
www.iupui.edu/~josotl