New Conversation: The First-Year Experience Course

New Conversation: The First-Year Experience Course

In November 2024, JPHE Senior Editor Z.W. Taylor interviewed Dr. Tanja Stampfl, a tenured professor at the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, TX, USA. They discussed the first-year experience course, or a structured class offered by colleges and universities, typically designed to support new students in successfully transitioning to college life. These courses often focus on helping students build essential skills for academic and personal success, such as time management, study techniques, financial literacy, and critical thinking. They also introduce students to campus resources, foster a sense of belonging, and encourage connections with peers and faculty.

While FYE courses can vary across institutions, they generally aim to increase retention and engagement by creating a foundation for students to thrive academically, socially, and emotionally within their new environment.

Z.W. Taylor:

So, Tanja, tell me a little bit about yourself and your education experience.

Tanja Stampfl:

I’m Tanja Stampfl, and I am an English professor at the University of the Incarnate Word, where I’ve been teaching for 15 years now. I teach courses primarily in English, but also in Cultural Studies, Women's and Gender Studies, and first-year experience courses. Throughout my career, I’ve always been interested in initiatives and programs, both in and outside the classroom, that help students succeed. I’m also always exploring new ways on how I can help train colleagues and other professionals at the university to support students effectively.

Z.W. Taylor:

We’re going to discuss the background of first-year experience courses, but I think the first question is: can you describe what a first-year experience course is? I have my own perception of what I thought it was, but in your particular role, what exactly is a first-year experience course?

Tanja Stampfl:

I would define it as a course with multiple objectives that run parallel to typical academic preparation, helping students succeed as college students. So, what does it mean to be a college student, and what specific skills might you need for that? Just as important, I think, is helping them understand the institution they’re part of. You're not just joining any university; you’re joining this one. What does it mean to be part of this university? Since we're private and mission-driven, there's a particular focus on that, but I think this applies to any community you join. Then, how do things work at this university? I would say the third objective is that, as students learn about the institution and how to succeed as college students, they also come to recognize their support system and understand how they truly belong within this community.

Z.W. Taylor:

Yes. When I did my undergrad degree, I didn’t know what a first-year experience course was. I came in as a transfer student, having done two years at a community college, and only learned about the first-year experience course when I joined a separate mentoring program connected to the College of Education. In that program, juniors or seniors in the education track—those working toward their teaching licenses—would mentor freshman and sophomore students. The freshmen would talk about their GPS course, which was designed as a sort of 'university navigation' class for all first-year students. Back then, it was only open to traditional first-time-in-college students, so right out of high school at about 18 years old. It was intended specifically for students with little college experience. They didn’t call it a first-year experience course; they called it GPS, but it was essentially the same thing.

Part of the reasoning, especially in the United States—and I'm sure it varies in other countries, given the international readership of this journal—is that college experience level can often predict college success. For example, if you come from a family where multiple people have attended college, you’re likely familiar with when financial aid applications are due, how to apply for housing, scholarships, course registration, and how to advocate for yourself in changing a major—basic college navigation skills.

At the institution where I began my university studies about 20 years ago, they had the perspective that the GPS course should serve students with the least experience. There were other student organizations, such as those for military students, transfer students, and non-traditional adult learners, but there wasn’t a structured, graded course within the curriculum to support them in the same way.

Now, 15 to 20 years later, they’ve instituted a mandatory first-year experience course for everyone. If you’re a transfer student, there’s a specific transfer first-year experience course. If you’re coming from the military or returning after a significant gap—typically 10 years—you’ll take a first-year experience course designed for that demographic. I think this approach helps build community, fosters a sense of belonging, and helps socialize students with others who may have had similar experiences.

Does your university do something similar? Is this also the mentality behind your first-year experience course, where it’s designed for any student who might not yet be familiar with the institution?"

Tanja Stampfl:

Yes, we do something similar. We have several versions of the first-year experience course. One version is for incoming freshmen, and we identify those as FTIC (first time-in-college) students or transfer students with fewer than 30 hours. These students are enrolled in the first-year seminar during their freshman semester. We only started offering this seminar university-wide two years ago, after some pilot versions, but now we’re successfully enrolling all incoming freshmen.

Our reasoning for the 30-hour threshold is that, with dual credit and AP courses, some students may have taken a few hours at a community college. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t benefit from this foundational information.

We also have a separate course at the 3000-level called 'Dimensions of Wellness,' which is for transfer students who come in with more than 30 hours. This course has the same general objectives as the first-year seminar but is adapted for students who may be closer to graduation or already have some of the essential college skills. These students likely know how to be a student, but they still need to understand what it’s like to be a student at our university and how to connect with resources here. For instance, when we cover career and financial topics, it’s tailored to those who might be considering graduate or professional school or preparing to enter the workforce, with different considerations for non-traditional students.

I love this design because, when first-year seminars became popular many years ago, research showed they were among the best practices. But then, of course, research also began focusing on the 'sophomore slump' and what we’re doing for students beyond their first year. I really appreciate this recognition that students need mentoring and resources throughout their academic career, and those needs evolve over time. Much of what we cover in the first-year seminar sets them up for their first and second years, but more support is definitely needed after that."

Z.W. Taylor:

Totally agreed. Given that I’ve shared a bit about my background, I know your background didn’t include an undergraduate or bachelor’s degree in the U.S.; you studied at an international institution, at least from a U.S. perspective. What are your experiences and perspectives on how other educational systems around the world handle first-year experiences? What kinds of experiences did you have as a student, if any, in terms of orientation or transition support?

Tanja Stampfl:

Yes, I did my undergraduate studies at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, and there was nothing like this. It wasn’t very student-centered at all—there was no help. I remember even just trying to register for courses was confusing. This was about 25 years ago, and I know things have changed now, but back then, to register, you had to be at a specific office on a specific day and within a certain time frame. The first 25 people there would get into that class. If you wanted a different class, you had to be at a different office. This schedule wasn’t published anywhere; you had to find out where and when on your own, or you could send a friend as a proxy. It was just very confusing trying to understand which courses I could register for and whether I had the right ones.

Where I come from, South Tyrol in northern Italy, it was also common for most students going to university to be first-generation, so there was really no guidance. That’s something I really appreciated when I initially came to the U.S. educational system, first at the University of New Orleans as an international student, and later at Louisiana State University. Here, there's much more focus on helping students, on making information accessible, and on actively reaching out to students. As we know, if I don’t know what to ask, I don’t know what I’m missing, but there are people here who anticipate those needs and provide support. So, I see a huge difference there.

Z.W. Taylor:

Absolutely. This leads into what we'll discuss in a moment of challenges, but there’s a fundamental difference in the funding and fiscal structure of U.S. institutions compared to many other places, especially in Europe, where higher education is much more government-subsidized and not as reliant on student loan debt or tuition. In the U.S., I think there may be more capacity or willingness to spend on student services because students are paying for those services. In most U.S. institutions, government contributions to operating budgets are usually only about 10-15%, plus tax-exempt status. What universities rely on, at least in the U.S. context these days, is primarily student loan debt, which is largely backed by the federal government. However, these aren’t federal funds directly—it's individual students’ private loans that they eventually have to repay.

So, there may be a perception of more support services at U.S. institutions, and that’s something I’ve heard in prior interviews with people from international contexts. They often feel that U.S. universities have a lot of support, but that support is funded by students. I remember back in my last couple of years in undergrad, when money was really tight, I actually had to stop out several times to save enough money to pay tuition. If I couldn’t pay in cash, I wouldn’t attend that semester. I remember going to the registrar's office, which was essentially the cashier's office, to register for classes and arguing over student fees. There was a student fee and a student activities fee, and I thought, if I’m not participating in the activities, why should I have to pay for them? It was about $180 a semester, which was a lot at the time, and it was funding student organizations, the student union, athletics, etc. I felt that if I wasn’t using those services, I shouldn’t have to pay. But these were mandatory fees, and I later learned that part of this money was going toward the GPS course budget—student fees were helping cover instructor salaries and course credit, which had to be paid for somehow.

In the U.S., students often pay for more services, and many of those aren’t optional. You have to pay for them whether or not you use them. So, it’s a unique aspect of the U.S. context.

Transitioning now, where does the first-year experience course fit within the curriculum at the University of the Incarnate Word? Is it part of the general education curriculum or integrated into all degree programs? How is it structured academically?"

Tanja Stampfl:

It’s part of the general education core at the university, but this took negotiation and management to implement, and it still does. We have a coordinator, Dr. Emily Clark, and a FYES Faculty Advisory Board that oversees the course, functioning similarly to an academic department, though we’re not formally a department. The course is officially housed in the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, but the coordinator and the Faculty Advisory Board oversee the curriculum, staffing, and so forth, along with support from the CHASS dean and the Provost Office.

We continue to have discussions about the course structure. For instance, is it a CHASS course? It’s not exclusively taught within that college; it’s taught across the university. We have a strong health professions focus, with a School of Nursing and several healthcare professional schools affiliated with the university. Many undergraduates are on healthcare professions paths, so we offer versions of FYES tailored toward those fields. These sections fulfill the same outcomes but are adapted with activities targeted toward healthcare professions.

Additionally, some departments have long offered their own orientation courses. For example, in our School of Media and Design, several programs created discipline-specific orientation courses years ago for programs like Interior Design, and 3D Animation and Game Design to help orient new students directly into their major. Over the years, we’ve found a good compromise: these orientation courses are now classified as FYES courses, and instructors from these disciplines teach them. For instance, Interior Design majors will take a specialized orientation course that their department has always offered. For most other students, they’re placed into the general FYES sections we have.

It’s an ongoing process, with complex conversations about what our programs already do and the diverse needs of different departments. Programs and schools have identified whose responsibility it is to offer this course and service, and I think that has really strengthened the program. On the FYES Faculty Advisory Board, there is a representative from each school, which helps ensure everyone’s voice is heard. It’s a very collaborative process.

Z.W. Taylor:

Yes, having different academic units onboard with at least partial ownership of the first-year experience course or seminar is absolutely critical. I was part of a discussion at an institution in Texas, where the general education curriculum is essentially an extension of survey courses from high school—like history, science, biology, and math. Incarnate Word uses the term 'core,' while many institutions refer to it as general education, and it typically amounts to around 60 credits, or roughly a year and a half to two years of a student's academic career. That’s a significant amount of time and financial investment, so there’s always some jockeying among academic units, colleges, and departments about what should be included in general education. For example, economics departments might argue that students should learn microeconomics as part of general education to help secure faculty lines and maintain strong course enrollment.

One of the discussions I encountered was about whether the first-year experience course needed to be three credits. Could it be offered as a one-credit lab course instead, to minimize its impact on the general education core? Another question was about which colleges should take ownership of it. I think Incarnate Word is ahead of the curve because, around 2021-2022, the discussion was about how to incorporate major and career exploration into the first-year experience. This approach allowed different academic colleges to take more ownership. Nursing, for example, developed a first-year experience course specifically for nursing students, covering university navigation and also introducing them to their career path. Soon after, other majors, like history, business, and chemistry, followed suit, creating first-year experience courses that essentially became part of the major rather than the general education curriculum.

This raised some institutional challenges, especially since many majors in social sciences rely on general education enrollment to support faculty lines, as their majors often have lower enrollment than larger fields like business, nursing, STEM, and sometimes education. So, determining who would 'own' these first-year experience courses became a key issue, especially since many first-year students, particularly traditionally aged ones around 18, often don’t know what they want to major in and may be undeclared. Tracking them into a major in their first year might not be ideal for those students. We’re even seeing tracking happening as early as middle school in the U.S., with specialized programs encouraging career decisions by age 12.

Beyond governance and ownership, what other challenges have you experienced in administering the first-year experience course and creating curriculum? What were some of the obstacles you encountered?

Tanja Stampfl:

Well, certainly the challenges you described resonate with our experience as well. We decided to make our first-year seminar a two-credit course by replacing an existing 'Dimensions of Wellness' course, so we didn’t add any more hours to the core requirements.

One of the challenges with having major-specific sections, as you mentioned, is ensuring consistency and oversight. How do you maintain a cohesive course when it’s housed across different departments? That’s something we have to navigate.

Another challenge involves staffing. Each section of our first-year seminar includes a certified peer mentor, and all our instructors are certified through our mentoring program. We aim to have the best instructors for these courses, ideally full-time faculty or administrators who are certified mentors and teach it as part of their regular load. However, sometimes these courses are taught by part-time faculty or as overloads, which isn’t ideal. We wanted this course to be a regular teaching commitment for full-time faculty or administrators.

The peer mentors, who are usually juniors or seniors, often say, 'I wish I had a course like this; it’s so helpful.' But one challenge we face is that students, especially those with a major-driven mentality, don’t always see the value. For example, an engineering major might view any non-engineering class as a waste of time, especially a course like this, which emphasizes meta-skills rather than technical content. The course is designed to be low stakes, with few assignments or exams, and focuses on building community and creating individualized plans.

I think one of the main challenges is helping 18- or 19-year-olds see the value in this type of experience.

Z.W. Taylor:

Yes, exactly. It’s not just that students may not see the value in these courses—getting good faculty to want to teach them outside their discipline is also a challenge. This may be a bit off protocol, but it’s interesting because it raises a good point. Faculty can be very territorial, especially at four-year universities. At community colleges, you see professors get really excited to teach a specialized course like Shakespeare, which might come up every few years. For them, it's like the Super Bowl—they’re thrilled to dive into a subject they're passionate about.

With first-year seminars, however, the content is usually very general and not necessarily related to their discipline or what they specialized in during their PhD or doctoral studies. Yet, those faculty serve a key role as spokespeople and influencers for the university. Ideally, you want dynamic, engaging faculty in front of first-year students, not just teaching them how to navigate college but also promoting the university as a great place to stay, to continue their education.

So, could you describe the characteristics of those faculty members who excel at this role? Not their names, but who are the 'good' faculty—those who are actively doing retention work and are natural spokespeople for the institution?

Tanja Stampfl:

Yes, exactly. That was an initial challenge we discussed as well. Many faculty felt, 'I don’t know how to teach this course; it’s not my area of expertise.' So, what we’re really looking for are good teachers. The content of this course isn’t something you lecture on with PowerPoint slides every session; that approach would kill the purpose of the course.

The best teachers for this type of course are proven to be student-centered. We look for faculty who are experienced and flexible, who can adapt the material to meet different student needs, and who are creative with their assignments. These instructors are confident in assessing outcomes in a variety of ways and know how to give students space to engage. In many ways, these are the hallmarks of any good teacher: someone who understands the importance of building community, fostering meta-skills, and being intentional about helping students connect with each other.

A great first-year experience instructor should be able to step away from their lesson plan if they see that students need something else in that moment and respond to those needs directly.

Z.W. Taylor:

Those qualities really are rare—these are 'unicorn' faculty. It’s challenging to find teachers who are not only excellent educators but also committed to creating community, connecting with students, being intentional with their time, and listening. These soft skills require a genuine enjoyment of the work environment.

When I taught first-year seminar, both at my alma mater and for five years at a university in Texas, a significant part of orientation each year was essentially: 'Here’s how great our institution is, here are all the resources—please like us and enjoy working here.' I think faculty who are good teachers often have a positive, energetic attitude and see the world through a growth mindset. They’re not deficit-based; instead, they’re focused on amplifying students’ skills and seeing their potential. That quality is increasingly rare, especially with the mass exodus from higher education. Enrollment, interest, and financial support are all declining, and many talented teachers are choosing private industry for better pay, hours, and benefits.

Finding these 'unicorn' faculty who are great teachers, like where they work, are positive, and serve as role models for young people is tough. At Incarnate Word, you have quite a few faculty involved in the first-year experience program. Could you give me a ballpark figure of how many faculty members are involved?

Tanja Stampfl:

I probably would say around 40.

Z.W. Taylor:

And how many total faculty at the university?

Tanja Stampfl:

I think maybe 300, maybe 350, and that includes the professional schools.

Z.W. Taylor:

Yes, that’s a substantial commitment—over 10% of your faculty involved in first-year seminar is significant. If those faculty are engaged and enjoy where they work, it can make a real impact. I think one of the biggest factors, as you mentioned, is making it part of their regular teaching load rather than an overload or an extra responsibility. When it’s part of their regular duties, they don’t see it as 'extra,' so they’re more likely to give it the attention it deserves.

Has that been your experience as well? Has making it part of their load been an effective motivator?

Tanja Stampfl:

Yes, and it’s as much about the time as it is about the message. This is important work, and some of that perspective comes from a mentoring mindset—the idea that every student at UIW is 'my' student. When I embrace that, it means I feel responsible for all students, whether they’re in my core classes, like world literature, or in major-specific classes. I’m teaching them, regardless of their major, because they’re part of this university.

Your mention of 'unicorn' faculty made me realize that we might be in a somewhat unique position. We have a four-course teaching load, and we’re mission-driven, so when we hire, we prioritize finding committed, good teachers. Research is important but teaching takes precedence. This gives us a larger pool of strong teachers to draw from. Additionally, FYES instructors have to be certified mentors, which is a voluntary program. So, we’re already pulling from faculty who are not only strong teachers but also willing to make that extra commitment to serve students as mentors.

We also hold about two workshops each semester, designed by the FYES Coordinator and Faculty Advisory Board, and anyone teaching FYES must attend at least one of those. This creates a consistent feedback loop, allowing us to assess needs, provide ongoing training, and draw more people into the program. It’s a great way to reinforce our message and perspective.

It took time to establish this approach. It’s not simply a course where you pick up a textbook and follow a test bank; it requires much more. If that’s how someone thinks, this course isn’t for them.

Z.W. Taylor:

Yes, that really highlights the intersection of institution type and mission. When you initially attract a certain type of person, and the institution’s leadership buys into the idea, it helps establish guardrails. By requiring mentoring certification, evidence of good teaching, and meaningful engagement with the institution beyond their department, you’re setting the foundation for a successful first-year experience course.

Eighty percent of the battle in launching a successful first-year experience course is ensuring you have the institutional capacity and the right faculty in place. The institution’s mission and vision play a huge role, along with leadership support, to position the course as a core element rather than just an auxiliary student service. It must align with the mission of teaching, research, and service, not be seen as an add-on.

That’s a really interesting discussion. So, transitioning to the actual content of the first-year seminar: what topics do you see as essential for students to learn in their first semester? What core content do you feel is fundamental?

Tanja Stampfl:

For us, we take a very holistic approach because we're not just educating students; we're educating people, and we want them to be successful as individuals. This holistic approach came out of discussions with our retention committee, which included faculty from different schools, representatives from the Registrar's office, and staff from other departments. Together, we identified the main obstacles our students face and what we could do to address them. From these discussions, the first-year seminar and Mentor program emerged.

As a private institution, one of our focal points is mission alignment. We help students understand our mission, encouraging them to consider how it applies to them personally. Our mission is both a religious one and a commitment to social justice, welcoming people of any faith.

Another key focus is financial literacy. Given the rising costs of higher education and the challenges students face with accumulating debt, we felt it essential to teach financial literacy. We divide this into understanding financial aid—how to interpret financial aid letters, assess loans thoughtfully, and find a balance between avoiding loans altogether and maxing out loans unnecessarily. While we’re not financial aid counselors, we guide students on how to think critically about debt, helping them see when a loan might be beneficial and when it’s not.

We also address basic financial skills, including budgeting, emotional connections to money, and the importance of talking openly about finances. For example, in a recent class, I asked how many students had credit cards, and only two did. Many had been told credit cards are 'bad,' so we discussed how to use them responsibly, explaining interest rates, statement versus overall balance, minimum payments, and setting boundaries around spending.

Additionally, we introduce them to concepts like certificates of deposit, showing how even small investments can grow over time with minimal risk. We're not pushing stock market investments but instead encouraging them to view money as something manageable and not intimidating. Our goal is to equip them with the tools to manage their finances effectively, demystify financial terms, and make them feel in control of their money.

Ultimately, we want to empower them to get the most out of their financial resources and approach money with confidence, rather than fear.

Z.W. Taylor:

It's so interesting you mentioned the financial literacy component in the first-year experience course. I was talking with a friend who had started educational 529 plans for their kids when they were three years old, essentially saving enough for college tuition by middle school through tax-sheltered savings and maximizing educational tax benefits. They were also very strategic with credit, even taking out a joint credit card in their child’s name at a young age, building their credit over 15 years. By the time the kids needed an auto loan, they had perfect credit and got a great rate.

For example, the family set up auto-pay for three utilities—their cell phone, internet, and water bill—on the credit card, which was then paid off monthly. It was simple and automatic, and it set up the kids with strong credit. I think that speaks to the environment of financial literacy at home. Students who see credit cards as inherently bad probably didn’t grow up with that type of exposure to money management and learned behaviors around finances.

I share similar advice with my mentees. Many of them are at pivotal points with big decisions ahead, like moving, car purchases, or housing. I tell them that they’re consumers with choices, and by shopping around, they can find credit cards with better rates, rewards, and terms. If they’re budgeting for groceries and utilities anyway, they could put those on a credit card and pay it off regularly. I recommend they make a habit of paying their bill each week, if it helps. That way, they’ll never accumulate a balance or pay interest, and they’ll still build credit and earn rewards.

In an educational context, there are so many recurring expenses students could leverage to build credit. It’s encouraging to see new efforts, like counting on-time rent or medical bill payments toward credit scores, especially for lower-income individuals who may not have access to credit cards. This is critical since financial decisions in college can be high stakes. One or two quick decisions can add thousands of dollars in student loan debt with lasting repercussions. Early financial literacy discussions can really ease anxieties and make money less of a taboo topic, and the first-year experience course is a great place to do that.

When I taught first-year experience, my first-class activity was a walking tour of campus. I’d show them the advising office, the rec center, the health center, and even their voting location. I’d tell them, 'Take a picture of this if it helps you remember.' I wanted them to start with a mental map of campus because, for many, their summer orientation was two or three months ago. Summer orientation is often like 'drinking from a fire hose,' with too much information packed into two days and offices competing for students’ time. The first-year experience course allows for a more gradual orientation to campus life and resources.

I completely agree that financial literacy, mentoring, understanding how to manage time and workload, and balancing social and academic life are all essential topics.

Before we get into outcomes, I’d love to hear more about the role of peer mentors in your first-year experience courses. How are they trained, and what specific roles do they play in supporting students throughout the course?

Tanja Stampfl:

Our peer mentors, called 'Flight' peer mentors, go through mentor training adapted specifically for students, similar to the professional mentor training. In addition, they receive training tailored to the first-year seminar, since not all peer mentors work within FYES courses, but we aim to have one in each FYES section.

The peer mentors are primarily selected through faculty recommendations. We send out an email requesting nominations, and faculty recommend students they believe would make strong peer mentors. We’re currently funded by Title V, so we’re able to pay each peer mentor $1,000 per semester. This means they attend every class session, working closely with the instructor to align on course goals and define the mentor's role. There’s often a conversation between the instructor and peer mentor to clarify both what the instructor aims to achieve in the course and what the mentor hopes to gain from the experience.

Typically, peer mentors have a designated 'peer mentor corner' during class—a dedicated time to share their experiences. It’s important to clarify that a peer mentor isn’t a tutor, teaching assistant, or counselor. Instead, they provide insights from their personal journey. For example, after I introduce a topic and the students complete activities, my peer mentor, Julian (an English major), shares his perspective: 'This is what I did as a senior, and here’s what worked for me.' Students find this relatable, and it often sparks questions directed at him, which is fantastic.

Some mentors also hold informal sessions outside class, like office hours or events, to connect with students in a casual setting. Their role is informal yet approachable, making them a valuable resource that students generally love.

Instructors and peer mentors also meet periodically to discuss classroom dynamics. For instance, if I notice a few students are less engaged, I might ask Julian to chat with them during group work next time to help bring them in. It’s a team effort focused on being observant and responsive to students’ needs. Julian doesn’t handle grades or have access to academic records; he’s there purely to help build community, share experiences, and offer guidance.

Z.W. Taylor:

I can see there are actually a few different dynamics at play in the mentor-mentee pairing. Of course, we want to select peer mentors who share certain qualities with faculty, like being good teachers, having a positive outlook, a growth mindset, and serving as strong role models. But it’s also important to consider how well the peer mentor fits with the specific student makeup of the course. For instance, at a university I previously worked with, the business school assigned senior business majors as peer mentors in first-year business courses, which helped new students feel more connected to their major and eased their anxieties.

However, beyond the mentor-mentee dynamic, the relationship between the faculty and peer mentor is also key. That pairing needs to be strong for the course to succeed. Have you explored this aspect at Incarnate Word? Are you intentional about which mentors you assign to certain faculty or sections? How do you handle these pairings, and what factors do you consider for a good fit?

Tanja Stampfl:

Ideally, many of the pairings happen because I get one of the peer mentors I recommended. Of course, schedules don’t always align, so if a peer mentor can’t work with the faculty who recommended them, we aim to place them with a faculty member in their major or at least within their school.

For example, last time I taught the course, my peer mentor was a senior business major in management whom I didn’t know previously. Even though she was outside my discipline, it worked out well because we had clear parameters and shared goals. Since being a peer mentor is also a leadership opportunity, I wanted to ensure she got what she needed from the experience. I asked her, 'What would success look like for you in this role?' I know what I’m looking for, but her goals might be different, and I wanted her to have a say in shaping her role.

I also offered her a range of responsibilities, asking which ones she felt most comfortable with. It’s essential to have these conversations, as simply asking a peer mentor to lead a discussion or give a presentation isn’t realistic unless they’re prepared and supported. So, we work together to assess her current skills, identify areas she wants to develop, and figure out how I can support her growth in those areas.

Z.W. Taylor:

Absolutely, it's challenging not only to find the right faculty and mentors but also to align everyone’s schedules for successful mentor-mentee pairings. However, with the planning and preparation that goes into pairing faculty and peer mentors, people tend to gravitate toward each other naturally. I remember having a really outstanding peer mentor who worked with me for three years in the first-year experience course. We met during faculty training, clicked immediately, and shared similar attitudes toward education, as well as interests in pop culture, music, and art. Our strong connection made the course so much more successful. We complemented each other well, which contributed to a dynamic and effective classroom experience.

This type of relationship really makes a difference, but it can be difficult to maintain due to the nature of peer mentoring. There are only so many students who are capable and qualified to be good mentors. Faculty may be at an institution for decades, while students are ideally there for just four years, and often only eligible to be mentors for one or two of those years. This constant turnover creates challenges in maintaining a solid base of peer mentors, which is a significant consideration when administering a first-year experience course with an embedded mentoring model.

Finally, I’d love to talk about outcomes. There’s a method to the madness—most of the literature supports first-year experience courses as high-impact practices that facilitate belonging, help students connect, and familiarize them with campus. But when it comes to measuring success, what specific outcomes do you look for with the students in the class? What are the key metrics or results you’re most interested in?

Tanja Stampfl:

University-mandated outcomes are often the first focus, so we look at pass rates and the FDW (fail, drop, withdrawal) rates. This can be challenging because the first-year experience course often has a high FDW rate, not necessarily because of the course itself but because it includes all first-year students, who typically have higher attrition rates.

We examine FDW rates to identify strategies and interventions by instructor, teaching modality, and other factors to reduce them. However, we recognize that this course can also serve as an indicator of broader student performance. We conducted a study comparing FDW students in FYES with their performance in other courses, and we found a correlation: students who struggled in FYES were often struggling in their other classes too. This insight allows us to use the course as an early warning system, where we can provide targeted interventions sooner.

Assessing certain outcomes—like time management or career preparedness—can be challenging because these skills often manifest in later courses. We can test understanding within FYES, but the true impact of these skills shows up in other areas of students’ academic careers. To address this, we’ve introduced a basic survey to measure outcomes related to students' sense of belonging, and to gauge how meaningful they find the course.

We ask students about specific learning modules, including mission alignment, financial literacy, mentoring, career preparation, service, wellness, and study skills. This feedback helps us understand how students perceive the value of these topics. Ultimately, assessing these outcomes can be challenging because they represent skills that students continue to develop over time and across their college experience.

Z.W. Taylor:

Moving on to the student mentors and faculty—are there specific outcomes you're interested in for them? For mentors, are you focused on pre-professional skills development or employability? For faculty, is it about retention, engagement, or satisfaction? Are there any particular metrics you measure with these other stakeholders?

Tanja Stampfl:

No, we don’t measure those metrics yet. We do track how many eligible peer mentors choose to return, which can indicate whether they enjoyed the experience. For faculty, we’ve focused more on qualifications, aiming to reach a point where teaching FYES is seen as a badge of honor or a mark of quality, showing that an instructor is an excellent teacher.

For peer mentors, consistency has been a challenge. Our peer mentor coordinator went on sabbatical, was replaced by someone who then left the role, and now our FYES Coordinator oversees them. This semester, she is introducing a 'Peer Mentor Showcase,' a two-hour event where peer mentors share their experiences, what they learned, and what they hope to take away from the role. This event allows us to gather insight into the outcomes they achieved and identify areas for improvement. Our goal is to use this feedback to be more intentional in supporting their development, but it’s still a new process.