Kathryn M. Kroeper, Maithreyi Gopalan, Katherine T. U. Emerson, Gregory M. Walton
{"title":"谁才是大学的归属?机构如何评估和扩大校园归属感机会的实证研究","authors":"Kathryn M. Kroeper, Maithreyi Gopalan, Katherine T. U. Emerson, Gregory M. Walton","doi":"10.1007/s10648-025-10010-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over a dozen rigorous randomized-controlled trials show that recognizing worries about belonging in a new school as normal and as improving with time can help students stay engaged, build relationships, and succeed. Such “social-belonging” interventions can help students take advantage of opportunities available to them to develop their belonging in college—yet what is the institutional role? Drawing on past literature, and reporting novel data from the College Transition Collaborative’s massive trial of the social-belonging intervention (<i>N</i> = 15,143 control-condition students in 374 “local-identity” groups across 22 representative colleges and universities; Walton et al., 2023), we explore who gets to belong in college and what institutional leaders can do to expand these opportunities. First, we find that opportunities for belonging (i.e., “belonging affordances”) vary widely, both across institutions and systematically across groups. Notably, Black, Asian, and first-generation college student groups are each less likely than other groups to have minimally adequate opportunities for belonging. Second, all institutions are serving some student groups well, but all can improve: none provides adequate belonging affordances for all groups. Third, four classes of institutional factors predict belonging affordances at the identity-group level: (1) greater in-group representation, (2) more inclusive cultures, (3) greater opportunities for strong relationships, and (4) greater opportunities for productive learning. We conclude by discussing how institutions can learn for whom they are creating opportunities for belonging and for whom they are not, and how institutions can expand opportunities for belonging for groups that are not yet well served.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Gets to Belong in College? An Empirical Review of How Institutions Can Assess and Expand Opportunities for Belonging on Campus\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn M. Kroeper, Maithreyi Gopalan, Katherine T. U. Emerson, Gregory M. Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10648-025-10010-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Over a dozen rigorous randomized-controlled trials show that recognizing worries about belonging in a new school as normal and as improving with time can help students stay engaged, build relationships, and succeed. Such “social-belonging” interventions can help students take advantage of opportunities available to them to develop their belonging in college—yet what is the institutional role? Drawing on past literature, and reporting novel data from the College Transition Collaborative’s massive trial of the social-belonging intervention (<i>N</i> = 15,143 control-condition students in 374 “local-identity” groups across 22 representative colleges and universities; Walton et al., 2023), we explore who gets to belong in college and what institutional leaders can do to expand these opportunities. First, we find that opportunities for belonging (i.e., “belonging affordances”) vary widely, both across institutions and systematically across groups. Notably, Black, Asian, and first-generation college student groups are each less likely than other groups to have minimally adequate opportunities for belonging. Second, all institutions are serving some student groups well, but all can improve: none provides adequate belonging affordances for all groups. Third, four classes of institutional factors predict belonging affordances at the identity-group level: (1) greater in-group representation, (2) more inclusive cultures, (3) greater opportunities for strong relationships, and (4) greater opportunities for productive learning. We conclude by discussing how institutions can learn for whom they are creating opportunities for belonging and for whom they are not, and how institutions can expand opportunities for belonging for groups that are not yet well served.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10010-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10010-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
十几项严格的随机对照试验表明,认识到对新学校归属感的担忧是正常的,并随着时间的推移而改善,可以帮助学生保持投入,建立关系,并取得成功。这种“社会归属感”干预可以帮助学生利用他们在大学里获得的机会来发展他们的归属感——然而,机构的作用是什么?借鉴过去的文献,并报告了大学转型合作组织对社会归属感干预的大规模试验的新数据(N = 15,143名控制条件的学生,来自22所代表性高校的374个“本地认同”群体;Walton et al., 2023),我们探讨了谁可以进入大学,以及机构领导者可以做些什么来扩大这些机会。首先,我们发现归属的机会(即“归属能力”)在不同机构和不同群体之间都有很大差异。值得注意的是,黑人、亚裔和第一代大学生群体都比其他群体更不可能拥有最低限度的归属感机会。第二,所有的学校都很好地服务了一些学生群体,但都可以改进:没有一个为所有的群体提供足够的归属感。第三,四类制度因素预测了身份群体层面的归属支持度:(1)更大的群体内代表性,(2)更包容的文化,(3)更大的建立牢固关系的机会,以及(4)更大的生产性学习机会。最后,我们讨论了机构如何了解它们正在为哪些人创造归属感的机会,而不是为哪些人创造归属感的机会,以及机构如何为尚未得到良好服务的群体扩大归属感的机会。
Who Gets to Belong in College? An Empirical Review of How Institutions Can Assess and Expand Opportunities for Belonging on Campus
Over a dozen rigorous randomized-controlled trials show that recognizing worries about belonging in a new school as normal and as improving with time can help students stay engaged, build relationships, and succeed. Such “social-belonging” interventions can help students take advantage of opportunities available to them to develop their belonging in college—yet what is the institutional role? Drawing on past literature, and reporting novel data from the College Transition Collaborative’s massive trial of the social-belonging intervention (N = 15,143 control-condition students in 374 “local-identity” groups across 22 representative colleges and universities; Walton et al., 2023), we explore who gets to belong in college and what institutional leaders can do to expand these opportunities. First, we find that opportunities for belonging (i.e., “belonging affordances”) vary widely, both across institutions and systematically across groups. Notably, Black, Asian, and first-generation college student groups are each less likely than other groups to have minimally adequate opportunities for belonging. Second, all institutions are serving some student groups well, but all can improve: none provides adequate belonging affordances for all groups. Third, four classes of institutional factors predict belonging affordances at the identity-group level: (1) greater in-group representation, (2) more inclusive cultures, (3) greater opportunities for strong relationships, and (4) greater opportunities for productive learning. We conclude by discussing how institutions can learn for whom they are creating opportunities for belonging and for whom they are not, and how institutions can expand opportunities for belonging for groups that are not yet well served.
期刊介绍:
Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.