Looking Ahead to the Next Ten Years

Steven Smith; Tom Brophy; Adam Daniels; Amy McEvoy

13 Looking Ahead to the Next Ten Years

Tom Brophy & Steven M. Smith

If you have gotten to this final chapter of the monograph, you will no doubt be impressed, inspired, and hopeful. As the chapters outline, there are amazing things happening across the country, and there are remarkable innovations being implemented at colleges and universities from coast to coast to coast. One of the goals of this monograph was to consider what had changed in FYE and SIT programming in Canada since the 1997 monograph came out. The short answer is – quite a lot! Yet there is still much to do. Our goal for this chapter is to consider what might come next. With the changes occurring at all of our institutions, what might we expect to see in the next decade in terms of program development, and the role of retention in post-secondary education?

Trends in PSE in Canada

It is important to note that what we are discussing in this chapter is of course speculative – we do not have any special knowledge that others do not – but our speculations are based on the trends we are seeing, and the contents of the preceding chapters. There are some clear “educated guesses” we can make. First, we will provide some suggestions, based on the specific chapters in the monograph, of things we are likely (or should) see in the coming years as programs evolve.

Programs for Black Students

As noted by Adrian Leckie in his chapter, and in the chapter on the national survey, there are still a dearth of programs that specifically engage Black students. Part of this is a result of lack of funding and of institutional will but part of it is also about data and awareness. In the coming years, we need to challenge institutions to be more systematic in optionally giving students a chance to self-identify. Incorporating broad principles of strategic enrolment management, we need to be clear on what the Black student recruitment goals are, and for what programs. We also need to have actionable steps, policies and procedures to attain those goals. Institutions need to be intentional in tracking and reporting success rates. There are operational points where institutions are (or should) be collecting optional identifying information for Black students. It is becoming more commonplace to collect this information upon admissions (although as noted in the chapter on the national survey – still relatively rare), but it also needs to be offered every year in connection to the registration process.

We know that within the Canadian context we have a imbedded history of being led by white leaders (mostly men) and in a colonial manner. Not surprisingly, Black students may have a well-founded lack of trust in Post-Secondary Institutions (PSIs) that they do not see as including them. They may be reluctant to identify on an application. Yet as they become more comfortable over their years at the institution, they may be more willing to identify as such; hence the need to be prompted at the registration process each year. Of course, this will require transparency from PSIs as to what the benefit of such identification is; what is the benefit to them beyond just tracking of enrolment. They will need to see that self-identifying directly connects them to services, entitles them to scholarships, bursaries, awards and provides other beneficial opportunities. They will need to be clear on who sees this information and what is done with it as well.

Beyond all this, student development theorists such as Perry (1970; 1981), and more specific Black identity development theorists such Cross (1991), we know that student identity changes as young people mature and with experiences. As such, students may not appreciate the salient importance of their Black identity upon applying to post-secondary but may likely come to crystallize their identity throughout the experiences in post-secondary. Hence the need for self-identity prompts each year. More assessment and understanding of Black student needs are required, and that can only come from continual quantitative and qualitative research. Further, data is needed to better understand how (or if) the experience of domestic Black students differs from that of international Black students (and even, further does this differ for students coming from the Africa versus the Caribbean versus other aspects of the African Diaspora). It goes beyond just collecting data and research but converting findings into actionable and impactful actions on behalf of Black students. One such finding that will become more likely as a result of what we know now, and as more Black students express their identity on our campuses, is that there will be more and more need for dedicated Black student spaces. All of these areas for development speak to the necessity of a national assessment of research on services provided for Black students to provide benchmarks on recruiting and retaining Black students.

Student Mental Health

As noted by Matthew MacLean in his chapter, there has been an increased emphasis on mental health service awareness and resiliency for students (see also, Filion et al., 2024). In addition, there has been a growing emphasis on mental health and wellbeing of faculty, staff, and Student Affairs and Services professionals (e.g., Brophy et al., 2024). It is important for professionals and paraprofessionals delivering programming to make sure they are able to better adhere to work-life balance and their own mental health needs. As the airline safety instruction goes “you must secure your oxygen mask first before trying to help anyone else with theirs”.

The impact of the pandemic will have lingering impacts on the post-secondary sector as students impacted by the pandemic continue to work through the K-12 system on into the post-secondary sector. Although we know the pandemic in many cases showed our vulnerabilities, it likely has done some benefit from a mental health services perspective. The pandemic emphasized the need for rapid and effective supports for students and equally the increased options for virtual care through various video-capable platforms.

As more research on special populations such as Indigenous, Black Student, 2SLGBTQIA+, students with disabilities, etc. continues to be established, it is likely we can expect the development of specialized mental health supports for prevention initiatives targeted at these groups (indeed, as we will discuss below, mental health services are a clearly identified need for these students). Further, reactive and postvention strategies and services are likely to continue to evolve as well. Students have been very clear that they need to see counsellors who both understand and represent the similar lived experiences they have, if they are to be considered as credible. The diversification of counselling supports is likely both needed and is destined to occur as continued emphasis on resiliency training.

Student Accessibility

As highlighted by Frederic Fovet in his chapter, diversity within funding models, changing political landscapes, and varied legislation across jurisdictions creates challenges in developing a national understanding of current realities and future practices. A dialogue that looks to develop a national standard, maybe one reflective of our current human rights legislation, could be a useful starting point for finding effective ways to develop and deliver programming for students who have accessibility needs. It is pivotal that this be a first-voice led initiative where we hear from the students to better understand their needs, rather than imposing a well-intentioned but potentially disconnected structure. It is also vital that as we move forward in program development, and we engage relevant public and private partnerships.

How we define, understand and proactively and reactively respond to accessibility both in relation to disabilities, but more broadly EDIA, will shape our approaches going forward. Most institutions have specific requirements that need to be met (e.g., psycho-educational assessments) before a student can access services. But for many this is unattainable, and thus we have significant numbers of student who need supports but are unable to get them given the barriers they have already experienced – further exacerbating their challenges.

As programs develop, and as the importance of supports for accessibility becomes clearer, we can demonstrate that a ‘rising tide that lifts all ships’ rather than ‘competition for scarcity of resources’ (which is often all too prevalent in society and the higher education sector). As noted in the chapter we need to continue to evolve our understanding of universal design for learning and intersectionality of diverse populations. Segmenting may help with identification of unique attributes. There is a need for the understanding of intersectionality that is critical to program design (see also Karasewich, 2024). It is safe to assume accessibility services will continue to grow but maybe more in the field of university design than specifically for students who have identified as having a disability.

FYE & FY Seminars

William Kay and his colleagues provide a strong argument for the clear benefit of working across silos in post-secondary education in order to best serve students. Too often institutions are arbitrarily split in the “academic” and “non-academic” sides of the house. This artificial separation is far more psychological than real and can make it very difficult for student affairs and services professionals to work with faculty members to solve the real problems they are facing in helping students succeed. This chapter illustrates the vital importance of strategic and supported partnerships between faculty, staff and students to support student success and retention, and shows that more engagement and investment is needed to develop effective retention programs. Further, this chapter demonstrates the value of a sound assessment plan that demonstrates measurable impacts of such programs. Being able to demonstrate impact (both qualitative and quantitative) shows clear justification for investments (both financial and personnel) in student retention (see also Smith et al, 2023). The future of such programs and by default institutional-wide efforts is reliant on taking a more entrepreneurial approach that incentivizes faculty to participate. In addition, there need to be incentives for academic and non-academic leadership, such as using a budget model that rewards increased retention with increased operational funding that can be reinvested in hiring more faculty and staff. It is equally likely that either PSIs determine this pathway internally or government funding may become contingent on retention and graduation rates, which is common in the United States.

The Importance of Assessing Impact

As noted by Heather Doyle, Nathan Bnarton & Jack Killeen, assessment is a critical part of our work. There is a growing need for data informed programming and assessment within the FYE and SIT landscape. The need for this is multi-faceted, but as budgets get squeezed, we all must demonstrate effectiveness if we are to retain funding for our programs. Further, proper assessment is necessary so we can continue to develop targeted programming for special populations and connect those programs to success outcomes. If a dedicated assessment role is not embedded within your respective area, you need to recognize its importance as being a vital, but not urgent, part of what we do.

Not urgent? Is this blasphemy? No. It is not urgent as rarely will people come rushing through our office door asking about assessment, whereas there are so many other issues that do make themselves urgent. Recognizing that student affairs and services staff may not have capacity to assess every program every year, maybe it is best to develop a plan to work on an assessment cycle within your units over a 3 to 5-year period.

There is also a need to continue to place emphasis on equity and diversity in assessment. This can ensure, where data allows, that we are understanding the disaggregated experiences of our student body. Finally, to illustrate return on investment, it is a useful endeavor to try to connect outcomes (year over year retention and or graduation rates) to program engagement. This can turn programs from a “nice to have” to a “need to have” for those who control budget allocations.

2SLGBTQIA+ Students

As noted by Frederick Ezekiel and Kayla Goruk, the presence of members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community within post-secondary education institutions will continue to grow in the years ahead. It is reasonable to assume that there may some desire to splinter from this broad grouping in efforts to develop more specific services for any of the sub-communities within this grouping (e.g. students identifying as transgender may strive for unique services separate from other groups).

This increase in specification should not be looked upon as a de-evolution of this movement, but more an expected next step as historically equity-denied groups strive for inclusion. Equally, for many equity-denied groups we are hopefully moving from a stage of tokenism, defined by Merriam Webster as, “the practice of doing something (such as hiring a person who belongs to a minority group) only to prevent criticism and give the appearance that people are being treated fairly,” to an environment of true inclusion.

There is a need for enhanced first-year programming for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community as well as supports throughout. Similar to the evolution we have seen around sexual violence in the last decade or so, an equivalent commitment is needed for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community. Positions need to be hired, spaces need to be created, peer empowerment needs to be fostered, and sufficient operating budgets need to be allocated. These are not all the needed steps but would be a good start.

Indigenizing and Decolonizing Post-Secondary Institutions

Michelle Pidgeon’s (et al.), chapter clearly presented her Indigenous Wholistic Model and succinctly provided an overview of some of the defining differences of the Indigenous Student experience. Recognizing this and responding accordingly will be pivotal for PSIs on a go-forward basis. We have more than an EDIA mandate to do so, we are on Indigenous lands and are all treaty people — there is a special obligation to do so, both contractually and morally.

Recognizing, as Pidgeon et al. did in their chapter, that the term Indigenous is not a homogenous group: people who identify as Indigenous have different experiences, cultural backgrounds, urban vs. rural experiences, and educational experiences (on reserve or off) among others. As noted by Pidgeon and her colleagues and in the chapter on international examples of programming, much of FYE and SIT programming is led by Indigenous offices or affiliated with them. PSIs need to be aware of striking a balance of ensuring the Indigenous first-voice experience is reflected, but this should not be seen as a way of deferring all related work of decolonize PSIs to Indigenous students, faculty, and staff. Doing so can re-traumatize, overburden and potential lead to more at-risk outcomes. Furthermore, it shirks the responsibility of PSIs to work to learn, undo harm, and put into action what it really means to be Treaty People.

We need to continue to advocate for culturally informed assessment of FYE, SIT and Indigenous services more broadly. Closing the loop in the feedback back to Indigenous students will be invaluable in helping to rebuild Indigenous trust in assessment. The continued adoption of enrolment encouraging practices such as specialized admissions to PSIs, specific academic programs, dedicated student housings, scholarships, bursaries and awards are all important steps. But so too is how we address the challenge of determining how we confirm Indigeneity. There is much on-going discussions around this and many First Nations, Metis, and Inuit organizations are advocating for PSIs to establish these. What the final outcome of this important process will be remains to be seen as there are varying perspectives on how this is to be best achieved.

With continued emphasis on meeting the goals identified through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the continued data indicating higher birthrates in Indigenous communities, there are also return on investment motivations as to why programming and services for Indigenous students will continue to grow in the next ten years. Dedicated staffing and additional staffing will be needed to develop sustainable and specialized programming to meet the needs and wants of the next generation of Indigenous students.

Welcome Week Programming

As Tom Brophy’s chapter identifies, the history of Orientation programming is long, both in Canada and more broadly the U.S., and really would become the foundation of programming from which most of the other chapters in this monograph have evolved. What is clear in reading this chapter is that transition programming to welcome and engage students in post-secondary life are very much reflective of the social changes that occur externally to the sector. World Wars, pandemics, baby booms, declining birth rates, and better identification and engagement of historically equity denied groups have all significantly altered the needs and expectations of governments, post-secondary institutions, external stakeholders and the students we serve.

The chapter explores how originally, we were treating the on-boarding and transition of new students as being a homogenous approach and how we have evolved based on broader factors, research and assessment. It considers how the program has morphed from simply a way to engage students in societal causes, to welcome sessions, and to academic preparation at the beginning of the semester. It has changed from arrival on campus in-person, to be on-line, pre-arrival, university and student government partnered, and extended beyond the first arrival period and well into the first semester (and beyond).

By being able to compare two orientation related Canadian surveys both in 2016 and in 2022-23 we are able to see how effectively post-secondary institutions have extended the stakeholder focus of orientation programming. Although not a clean point in time comparison as responders were not clearly repeated in both, there are indications of adoption of more diverse programming, both for unique stakeholders being engaged, as well as key societal themes such as alcohol education, academic integrity and gender-based violence.

The future of orientation and transition programming will continue to be one of interest to watch. Will we see further specialization of programming within the unique stakeholder populations. For example, will Indigenous programming diversity to be reflective of variance between, First-Nation Canadian, First Nation International, Inuit and Metis students. Further, will the growing numbers of students with disabilities enrolling in post-secondary, we see diversified needs (such as students with mental health related accommodations) and a divergence of needed accommodations based on identified student disability. How will the federal government immigration changes impact on the programming provided for international students? All of these of these issues will need to be addressed; and that is within a budget environment that is trimming staff and budgets. How will geopolitical realities impact on how these transitional programming? There are certainly always pressure points and if approached strategically, opportunities that will continue to make this an exciting and challenging area of FYE and SIT.

International Student Programming

Sonja Knutson’s chapter on internationalization, notes the web of federal, provincial and municipal governmental supports that exist for international students, but also highlights the complexities of inter-institutional services spanning recruitment, student affairs, international student services (both in and outbound), academic supports, and others. The complexity of the current situation is likely going to create an environment where even more dialogue is needed at all levels to resolve the challenges students and administrators face.

As noted above, recent developments in this sector have dropped the veil of how truly important international students are to the post-secondary sector in Canada. The approach Canada adopted in 2023 to curb the number of international students coming here has resulted in a clear interpretation from many international students that as of now international students are not as welcome as they have been in the past. Only time will tell if this changes in the future. As a result, institutions who have built an overreliance on tuition revenue from international students (partially due to the fact that international tuitions are less regulated than domestic tuition) are now forced to reimagine their budget models.

Maybe the transition of no longer seeing international students as financial windfalls to being a financial vulnerability will allow us to reset to the point of truly valuing what having students from different countries and cultures can bring to our institutions. The potential for intercultural learning and growth and for establishing a more inclusive, accepting and welcoming institutions, is great. Internationalization in Canada is most certainly in flux as of 2025. With changes in federal and provincial governments being a constant (along with an undercurrent of xenophobia) it is difficult to predict how things will unfold. Almost certainly, it is safe to assume if international student numbers drop (along with associated revenue), so too will the allocation of staff and resources to support them. Equally, if international student numbers stabilize it is reasonable to expect there will be a right-sizing of programs and services.

Certainly, international enrolment is now part of the Canadian cultural acumen; whereas domestic enrolment certainly does not seem to be near as well known. There is much clearer and focused discussion on international enrolment, by country, graduation rates and staying within Canada. There is much less emphasis on similar domestic categories. This will lead to continued federal and provincial scrutiny and accountability. This is not necessarily a bad thing; one challenge being addressed currently is that when post-secondary institutions recruit international students, we have an inherent responsibility to support them both in their educational journey and in their longer term plans post-graduation. Doing so is morally the right thing to do and is what is needed for our Canadian, provincial and institutional brands and reputation. Work in supporting students around academic integrity will be another continued area of growth and responsibility with the ever-evolving presence of artificial intelligence (see also Christensen & Hughes, 2024; Joordens & Kaur, 2024). As these policies continue to evolve we can be certain that restricted immigration policies may result in a constriction of staffing and related funding.

What can we Learn from Programs Outside of Canada

Clayton Smith, Nosisana Mkonto, Keith Connell, and Toyosi Bamgboye’s chapter on the diversity of programing outside of Canada illustrates the differences that exist between the Confucius and Socratic models and highlights how different countries government philosophies and approaches shape the delivery of higher education services and curriculum. Within the Canadian context this is further complicated by the legislated decentralization of education as being a provincial responsibility, but still involves challenges with provinces advocating for federal funding while staunchly defending against federal oversight. The 2023 restrictions on international student arrivals in Canada is a good example of how federal policy change can play out in very complex ways across the provinces and territories.

This means that leadership, administrators, and faculty members will be wise to be conscious of the dynamics that are inherent with multi-jurisdictional issues. Governments are clearly seeing that education is a determinant of future opportunities and success. How this is operationalized varies but the trend line within Canada seems to indicate further governmental intervention with funding both declining overall. In addition, continuing funding may be more and more being tied to performance indicators both around institutional enrolment, program enrolment, graduation rates, and sector specific graduation rates for programs (including trades-based programs and other specialized programs; many of which are within the health care field) (see Butler, 2024). One result of the evolution of this landscape is the need to have our own assessment metrics be aligned with government indicators of success. This further justifies the overall need to invest in assessment, data collection and analysis. Therefore, post-secondary institutions need to be intentional in creating programs that reflect activity on topics identified as being priorities from governments.

Although all institutions are heavily regulated by governments, this is not to say the private sector are also not key influencers of post-secondary programming and training. Industry requires certain professional standards for many fields and ultimately students have become much more utilitarian in their post-secondary choices. There have been clear indicators over the past couple of decades showing a motivation for finding a job, establishing a career and making money consistently being in the top five reasons noted by students for choosing post-secondary education (e.g., CUSC, 2022). Some institutions and faculty members may grapple with this reality, but students are now voting with their feet. They are determining their institution of choice based on these motivational factors. Prudent programming will need to stay conscious of this in the curriculum institutions develop, how they promote their programs, and how they measure and promote employment outcomes post graduation.

Conclusion

In closing, we want to circle back to some of the comments made by John Gardner in his preface. This monograph has a focus on programming that is being put in place for students largely by Student Affairs and Services professionals. However, this monograph is for all educators. As highlighted in the chapter on co-curricular programming, student success is not only a shared responsibility between students, faculty, and staff, but absolutely needs all parties to play a role in order for student retention to become the focus it needs to be for post-secondary institutions to succeed in our current (and future) environment.

Post-secondary institutions are quite reasonably focused on revenue, and see recruitment as the solution to financial needs. Literally millions of dollars are spent each year exploring new markets and targeting a wide variety of students from around the world, and non-traditional students domestically. Although it is vital that we continue to bring students “in the door” post-secondary institutions need also to understand the tremendous opportunity retention programming provides. A student who feels like they belong at the institution is more likely to be retained to the second year, is more likely to graduate, and is more likely to become a contributing alumnus. This is of course good for the student, the institution’s reputation, and for society. Importantly, however, this contributes to the bottom line of the institution, and professionals who can make effective arguments about the win-win-win aspect of student success initiatives will be better placed (and resourced) to support their students.

Post-secondary education certainly does not operate in a vacuum, and we need to stay aware of external influencers, societal change, economic shifts, political shifts, and birth rate changes. Watching these and negotiating an educational system that is grounded in foundational learning traditions, but nimble to respond to the changing landscape, will be a critical challenge that may even dictate the success or failure of post-secondary institutions as they move forward.

References

Brophy, T., Leary, T., & Ezekiel, R. (2024). Campus mental health: A whole community responsibility. In M. E. Norris and S. M. Smith (Eds.), Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University, eCampus Ontario. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Retrieved from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/campus-mental-health-wholecommunity-responsibility/

Butler, M. (2024). Financing Canadian Colleges and Universities in the 21st Century. In Norris, M. & Smith, S. M. (Eds.) Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: eCampus Ontario. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Retrieved from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/campus-mental-health-wholecommunity-responsibility/

Christensen Hughes, J. (2024). The essentiality of academic integrity in an increasingly disrupted and polarized world. In M. E. Norris and S. M. Smith (Eds.), Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University, eCampus Ontario. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Retrieved from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/the-essentialityof-academic-integrity-in-an-increasingly-disrupted-and-polarized-world/

Cross, W. E. (1991). Shades of Black: Diversity in African-American identity. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

CUSC (2022). The 2022 CUSC-CCREU Survey of First-Year Students is copyrighted and cannot be used or reproduced without written consent. Canadian University Survey Consortium. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/s8276961/Downloads/CUSC-CCREU-2022-First-Year-Master-Report.pdf

Filion, A., Blondin, E., & Stewart, J. G. (2024). Promoting post-secondary student well-being. In M. E. Norris and S. M. Smith (Eds.), Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University, eCampus Ontario. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Retrieved from: https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/promoting-post-secondarystudent-well-being/

Joordens, S., & Kaur, I. (2024). Re-imagining education for an uncertain future: Can technology help us become more human? In M. E. Norris and S. M. Smith (Eds.), Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University, eCampus Ontario. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Retrieved from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/re-imaginingeducation-for-an-uncertain-future-can-technology-help-us-become-more-human/

Karasewich, T. A. (2024). Accessibility in higher education. In M. E. Norris and S. M. Smith (Eds.), Leading the Way: Envisioning the Future of Higher Education. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University, eCampus Ontario. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Retrieved from https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/futureofhighereducation/chapter/accessibility-in-higher-education/

Kwon, E., Kwak, M., Smith, S. M., Zhang, M., Carter-Rogers, K. & Manels-Murphy, M. (2024). The transition to online education amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on international students’ physical and mental health and well-being. In Turner, N, Baker, N., Hornsby, D., Germain-Rutherford, A., Graham, D., & Wuetherick, B (Eds.). Online, Open and Equitable Education – Stories of Teaching and Learning During the Global Pandemic. pp 148-177. https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa7

Perry, W.G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Perry, W.G. (1981). `Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning’, in Chickering, A. (ed.), The Modern American College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 76–116.

Smith, S. M., Brophy, T. & Daniels, A. (2023). The ROI argument for SEM: It makes more than Cents. Strategic Enrolment Management Quarterly. 11 (3), 57-65.

Smith, S. M., Carter-Rogers, K., Norris, M. E., & Brophy, T. (2022). Students Starting University: Exploring Factors that Promote Success for First-Year International and Domestic Students. Frontiers in Education DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2022.779756

Tabvuma, V., Carter-Rogers, K., Brophy, T., Smith, S. M., Sutherland, S., & Kay, W. (2023). The Impact of Co-Curricular First-Year Experience Programming. Journal of College Orientation Transition and Retention, 3(1) 1-20.