The Pulse - November 2019 Edition

The newsletter of the Ontario association of college and university housing officers November 2019

Presidents Message

Mentorship Highlights

New

Research in the Field

New

Board of Directors PRESIDENT

Valerie Bruce Ryerson University vbruce@ryerson.ca

PRESIDENT ELECT / FINANCE DIRECTOR

Diane Rawlings University of Windsor rawlin1@uwindsor.ca

PAST PRESIDENT

Ian Crookshank Humber College Ian.Crookshank@humber.ca

CONFRENCE DIRECTOR

Lauren Gouchie University of Ottawa lgouchie@uottawa.ca

CORPORATE PARTNER RELATIONS DIRECTOR

Shaun McCracken Trent University shaunmccracken@trentu.ca

ADVANCED MEMBER AT LARGE

Steph Cullen University of Waterloo slcullen@uwaterloo.ca

COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

MEMBER AT LARGE

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

MEMBER AT LARGE

MEMBERSHIP ENGAGEMENT DIRECTOR

ASSOCIATION MANAGER

Daniel Brisebois University of Guelph dbrisebo@uoguelph.ca

Stewart Grunwell University of Guelph sgrunwel@uoguelph.ca

Kamadchi Karunanandan University of Waterloo Kamadchi.karunanandan@ uwaterloo.ca

Derek Worden Western University dworden@housing.uwo.ca

Stacey Phelps University of Waterloo sphelps@uwaterloo.ca

Carol Ford OACUHO info@oacuho.com

Presidents Message On

Continuing to Improve Processes

Hello!

Welcome to our November issue of the Pulse. This issue we are exploring ways we can focus on constant improvement in our practice. We all know that the work we do keeps us busy year round. And as the weather turns cold and students are in the midst of midterms and projects, the end of fall term may feel like a less than ideal time to review practices and procedures in your operation.

However, sometimes when you are experiencing the challenges of high needs students, prep for January, or major facilities project planning, you are able to identify challenges or brain storm efficiencies in those projects that you may be able to implement quickly. Or in the case of larger systematic changes to annual projects, like move in day, you are able to make sure that those are implemented.

I make a point of keeping an on-going list of issues to dig into during our busiest times, for example, during our annual hiring campaign, or recruitment events, so I and my team can focus on continuously improving our ongoing practices and identify in depth ways we can improve our systems and procedures. Those notes may not make their way around into implementation until the next cycle, but jotting them down in real time, while implementing small changes that can happen instantly can have a big impact!

So as you read through this issue of the pulse, or begin to prep for projects to be implemented in the new year, take a stock of what went well and where there is room for improvement, and maybe look to implement a change or two.

Wishing you all the best as we move into December!

Valerie

My First Role in Housing!

The OACUHO Membership Engagement Committee presents My First Role in Housing! The goal is for individuals in our association to share a photo from their first paraprofessional/professional role in Housing. In addition to the photo we would love members to share the description of the photo, their overall experience and what did they enjoy most about their role.

Our first entry, Sally Chen shared her first role as a Student Life Coordinator at Bader International Centre.

She is currently a Community Development Coordinator at the University of Toronto Mississauga. Here is what Sally shared: “Will you tell us about the other worlds out among the stars—the other kinds of men, the other lives?” (The Left Hand of Darkness, by Ursula K. Le Guin)

When I think about my first role in Student Housing, I always remember this final line—because I am a literature major; because it was a quiet and steadfast story about transformation; and because it embodies a resilience that I hope I can always take to my work in Student Housing. In the span of a single Fall term as a Student Life Coordinator at the Bader International Study Centre (or, “the Castle”), I packed a lot of experiences in while working with the Castle’s tight-knit community of Canadian and International students. I loved that I was encouraged to incorporate my interests in the arts, student engagement, and diversity, into residence programs and initiatives. I discovered new aspects about my own work style, ethics, and capability, in highly self-directed work. And, when I gave my notice of resignation to my supervisor, nearly in tears, I came to understand that I could have time and space—to care for my own wellbeing, and to carry on, as they say in the UK, when I’m ready to go again.

I don’t regret the short time that I spent at the Castle: first of all, it was a castle. It was a castle that gave me colleagues whom I hope will be my lifelong friends. A castle that taught me that I should not give up on what I hope for myself, personally and professionally. And, a castle that made me wonder what duty rounds at Hogwarts, as a student housing operation, might actually look like.

If you would like to be featured in a future edition of the Pulse with a picture of your first role in Housing, please contact our Membership Engagement Director Kamadchi Karunanandan at: k4karuna@uwaterloo.ca. We are continuing the first year in residence program, so feel free to contact Kamadchi about this opportunity!

Sally Chen Community Development Coordinator University of Toronto Mississauga

True Community Based Learning from Knowledge Keepers When I arrived at UTM 9 years ago, I never would have guessed that one of my proudest achievements during my time here would be helping to have guided and maintained a land-based Indigenous learning initiative, or that those who I met (or in the case of one of the knowledge keepers who I became reacquainted with) would become my ceremonial family.

Every year, approximately twice a year, we bring a group of students to land that is maintained as a teaching and ceremonial space by Mark and Wendy Phillips near Havelock, Ontario. These trips have been coined the “Waawaahte Northern Lights Initiative”, which was created and named by a student committee who organized the trip originally. Before students go we spend several hours briefing them about what to expect on the trip. One of the most difficult parts of this is trying to reiterate the lack of definitive schedule, or the way that Indigenous learning and pedagogy guides how the trip is conducted.

Over the years, we’ve had Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, staff and faculty from all three campuses involved in attending. This space has provided an opportunity for Indigenous students to explore and in some cases re-engage with their own cultures, and provided a platform of understanding for non-Indigenous learners that is centered outside the institution and therefore reframes and flips the structures of power and familiarity that is contained within traditional academic spaces.

The trip can be a day or up to four, depending on the time of year and usually right around when planning is happening for one of the two annual fasting camps that take place for community on the land following our trips. The weather can be inclement during this time (we’ve hosted the trip during a major ice storm) and it therefore provides some important lessons around reprioritizing what can feel important for students (i.e. shelter, food and ensuring protection from the elements becomes job one) who are often enmeshed in their day to day studies before going on the trip. We then spend several days around a fire listening to teachings that are deeply philosophical in nature, while importantly using the legacy of colonialism as a background for why some of these teachings and ceremonies were secret and hidden until relatively recently, based on Anishnaabeg prophecies.

Participants are able to ask questions and absorb what is being said through each day with a chance for reflection each evening when we get back to the hotel. The format of the trip has become more focused around the teachings and ceremonies as the years have gone on, and less about visiting a local First Nations community (although we do try and provide the opportunity to go to the Whetung Gallery on Curve Lake First Nation if there is time). One student who participated this year, when asked if they would recommend the trip to others responded: “Absolutely! I would tell them that it is a powerful and meaningful knowledge exchange that is important to understand Indigenous ways of living and also it gives you an opportunity to learn more about yourself.” We have about a decade of data such as this, that shows the efficacy of such trips both for personal growth and education around Indigenous ways of knowing and historical issues.

One of the biggest areas for consideration when creating a trip such as this is how to ensure that the community involved (and especially the knowledge keepers we are planning the trip with) are being engaged in ways that are reciprocal and thoughtful about how we can best ensure that they are benefiting from our institution coming and doing work with them. This can look like heading up ahead of time of the trip to purchase groceries and be part of the planning process to take some of that labour off of the organizers as well as ensuring we are regularly visiting (in Cree this is called pe-kiyoke and is a cultural term meaning to “come and visit”1) and

checking in with knowledge keepers around what financing is available and finding ways to work within what we are able to provide that helps cut some of the red tape around institutions. This can also mean building a relationship with finance people in our own departments so that we are able to purchase culturally relevant gifts such as cloth, blankets, or tobacco that may be helpful in facilitating these relationships (although it should be noted that different nations and peoples can have different types of gifts that are appropriate). These forms of meaningful engagement are beyond just best practice, but are critical in ensuring we are not replicating forms of harm or engaging in Indigenous “cultural tourism”2 which can be rampant.

The past two years, I have been fortunate to have my colleague Savannah Sloat (who I have worked on with many Indigenous initiatives at our home institution and for OACUHO – including winning this years Best Presentation at Spring Conference – join me in helping to organize and run the trip. Having a fellow Indigenous colleague to co-conspire with on the trip has made a lot of difference in planning and allowing it to utilize Indigenous frameworks and approaches. In many ways, this is the best of practices when working with Indigenous folx – give us enough people and resources to organize the work and giving us the space to do so.

The level of comradery and support that Savannah has brought to the table has really breathed new life into the initiative and has meant so much extra support for me as an organizer.

Last year we celebrated an anniversary of 10 years of organizing the trip, and we were able to bring a number of trip alumni back with us to the land. For those able to go, it was a reminder of the indelible impact such an experience has had on those former students, with folx who weren’t able to attend because of where life has taken them telling us “Thank you so much for this invitation - I am so sorry I wasn't able to respond and attend! This program greatly impacted me and truly changed my perspective and relationship to land.” It is a thing that has been repeated year over year and several other former participants passed on acknowledgement and thanks to Mark, Wendy and those of us who have organized it for doing so.

This trip is an incredible opportunity for students, staff and faculty, and one that I wish more folx had access to, but it is not without its costs. Over the course of the 9 years, we have navigated cuts to funding and intercampus politics. We’ve had supportive allies attend and advocate for the trip and have had to justify it existing.

There are few things that give me as much hope as being able to actually make an initiative that is tri-campus work in a system that is as complex and multidimensional as U of T and initiatives like this are the kinds of actual reciprocal engagement our institutions should be engaging in when we talk about moving beyond just reconciliation to centering Indigenous worldviews and perspectives as an ethical mandate.

1 Themamawiproject. [@themamawiproject]. (2019, August 16). Posts [@themamawiproject]. Retrieved November 18, 2019 from http://www.instagram.com/themamawiproject 2 Maximiliano Korstanje (2012) Reconsidering cultural tourism: an anthropologist's perspective, Journal of Heritage Tourism, 7:2, 179-184, DOI: 10.1080/1743873X.2011.639883

Sean Kinsella Coordinator of Residential Transition Programs University of Toronto Mississauga

My First Year in Residence The OACUHO Membership Engagement Committee presents My First Year in Residence! Members will share a photo from their first year and a bit about their experience that helped shape their future and career in student housing.

Our first entry, Zoë Neale, is a Residence Life Coordinator at the University of Windsor. Here is what Zoë shared: When I decided to go to the University of British Columbia back in 2010, I was excited to start university but also incredibly nervous, as many students are! Having moved out to BC from Ontario, I didn’t know anyone and had only spoken to my roommate over Facebook. I knew I needed to get involved and make friends! My roommate was fantastic, we got along so well and ended up having the same friend group. I’m surprised we never fought considering how much time we spent together. We are still good friends today! The photo attached is of myself (right) and my roommate Jenny (left) at the beach behind our building… that was a nice perk! My residence experience was filled with trying new things, getting involved and making connections. While in residence, I joined a few committees and was elected as a floor rep. I even got involved on campus, from trying ballroom dancing to being apart of the World Vision UBC club. I was that student that you see at every residence event, so it was no surprise when the RAs in my building encouraged me to apply for the RA role. That was one of the best decisions I ever made! I spent the next four years working for Residence Life, in different roles from RA to Residence Coordinator, loving every minute of it.

Looking back, I’m so grateful for all the experiences I had, the connections I made with both students and staff, and how much I learned that has helped me in my current role at the U of Windsor. I found something I was passionate about and haven’t looked back since!

If you would like to be featured in a future edition of the Pulse with a picture or article of your first year in residence, please contact our Membership Engagement Director Kamadchi Karunanandan at: k4karuna@uwaterloo.ca.

Zoë Neale Residence Life Coordinator University of Windsor

Transitioning from Student Staff to Professional Staff: What We Can Do To Support Our New Professionals In the field of student affairs, one of our main goals as student housing professionals is to help to create a smooth transition for our first-year students moving into residence. During the month of August, we place emphasis on easing the transition into residence for our student staff who may be entering new roles for the upcoming academic year. For our new professionals, they are focusing on easing the transition and supporting our student staff who rely on us, but they are undergoing their own transition as well. This is the topic that I’d like to discuss in this article: The transition from student staff to professional staff in the realm of student housing.

Everybody starts somewhere. Whether we have a background in residence or not, every individual in this field has the one place where they began their journey. For me, my path started while I was a student staff at Wilfrid Laurier University. While I was completing my undergrad at Laurier, the thing that pushed me through the long nights of studying and provided me with the strongest sense of belonging was my role as a Residence Life Don in the Department of Residence. In my role as a student staff, I learned how to develop meaningful connections and relationships, stay on top of tasks, and foster environments that made students feel like they were home. Most importantly, from the moment I stepped into it, my role as a Don is what lead me to learn how to create goals, determine my passions, and most importantly, develop my identity as a student leader.

While I thought I had it all figured out, this was something that would soon change as I moved into a new role. At the end of my undergraduate career, I concluded that my passion and reasons for motivation exists in the field of student affairs. After some searching, I was lucky enough to receive an offer of employment as a full-time professional as an Assistant Residence Life Manager (ARLM) at the University of Guelph.

As I moved out of the student staff role and into the professional role, I soon recognized that there was going to be a significant change in my working life. As a student, your main areas of responsibility are to manage your academics, your extra-curricular, and your social life. For me, those 3 things made up my identity that made me who I was for 4 years- a student and a don. In June 2019, I graduated and moved into my new role as an ARLM. However, things were slightly different.

Academics were no longer my primary source of responsibility and I was able to focus my whole work day on a role similar to the one that I already loved. However, this role came with a whole new variety of things to learn how to manage. There were now a new number of individuals who depended on mestudent staff, 300 students, and a management team that I was now a part of. However, I was also one who was dependent on me. As a new professional at a new institution in a new city, there were a number of things that we as ARLM’s had to learn. In the ARLM role specifically, this included: learning how to work with a co-manager, how to manage and support a team of student leaders, how to process conduct in new system, how to do student reach-out, how to be the manager on-call (very different from student staff procedures), and how to conduct yourself in a professional role. In combination with learning the manager specific items, we also were learning things about the area of Guelph, the culture and different roles/titles within the residence department, as well as a whole new set of policies and procedures that were specific to the university- something that, for most of us, this was our first time doing outside of our home institution. However, while this was a confusing time for many of us, we were provided with a significant amount of support, direction, and reassurance from all of the individuals at the university.

We were integrated into the management team and department as equals from our first day on the job.

Similarly, we were brought into the university as Gryphons and welcomed with open arms. There are 2 lessons that I think were the most significant for me, at least, that I believe set an excellent foundation for our transition into the field: 1. It is okay to make mistakes, but more importantly, it is expected that you make mistakes as a new professional. What is important in this role is learning from them and moving forward in a constructive way.

2. At the end of the day, you are doing the most you can with the resources you have. There is no perfect formula to the job, and you can only do the best you can do.

When introducing new individuals to the field of student affairs, it is important to be patient and empathetic. It can be overwhelming for our new professionals who are transitioning into the field to be learning so many new things, adapting to a more professional way of work, and figuring out their identity outside of being a student. The difference between a positive or negative transition lies in the individuals who are helping with that transition into the field. It is important to remember that, moving forward, we have the capacity to inspire, improve, and enhance the experience and lives of other individuals. The little things add up and can really make the difference in one’s career. It is thus our responsibility to be the champions of those little things so that we too can have an impact on the individuals entering this field and be the mentors that we had when we were first beginning.

Alex Clarke Assistant Residence Life Manager University of Guelph

, r o t a n i d r o o C Project iversity Project Ethnic D

Mentorship Highlight The OACUHO Membership Engagement Committee presents Mentorship Highlight! Mentorship Highlight is an opportunity for a Professional Mentor/Mentee pairing to share their experience and provide any tips and tricks that helped build their relationship. Mentors and Mentees are also welcome to provide a photo.

Our first Mentorship Highlight is Diane Rawlings and Kamadchi Karunanandan!

Mentor: Diane is the Department Head of Residence Services at University of Windsor Mentee: Kamadchi is a Residence Life Co-ordinator at the University of Waterloo

Diane and Kamadchi were matched through the OACUHO Professional Mentorship program in Fall 2018. They immediately got along during their first Mentorship meeting, and shared their professional and personal journeys with each other. Throughout each conversation, Kamadchi and Diane would share what they were currently working on, trends from both their institutions and ensured there was time to discuss self-care and balance. With each conversation, Diane and Kamadchi slowly got comfortable speaking about a variety of topics, and Kamadchi found a lot of value speaking to Diane about being a young professional in Student Affairs and building her brand within the field. The conversation topics provided by the OACUHO Mentorship Program Coordinators were helpful to build rapport and have a guiding point for the check ins. Diane often remembered information Kamadchi had shared in previous conversations and would demonstrate great listening skills by asking follow up questions. As time went on, Kamadchi was able to reach out to Diane and ask for support on challenges in her role. Kamadchi and Diane spoke about staff supervision, the performance management/feedback process and Mental Health. Diane was a great support system throughout Kamadchi’s second year in the Residence Life Co-ordinator role as Kamadchi was thinking about next steps. Kamadchi and Diane had very similar energy levels and were able to get along and engage in many constructive and positive conversations. One tip that worked well for the pair is they would discuss any upcoming projects, vacations and overall workload so they could understand the next best time to connect. This experience was definitely a positive one and now the pair are working together on the OACUHO Board!

If you would like to be featured in a future edition of the Pulse with a picture or article of your Professional Mentorship experience, please contact our Membership Engagement Director Kamadchi Karunanandan at: k4karuna@uwaterloo.ca.

Diane Rawlings Department Head, Residence Services University of Windsor Kamadchi Karunanandan Residence Life Coordinator University of Waterloo

Literature Review: Sense of Belonging, Campus Inclusivity, and the Gender Inclusive Housing Experience.

Abstract. The following literature review is an excerpt from a research proposal that aims to explore the experiences of first-year undergraduate students residing in a gender inclusive housing program at one comprehensive university in southern Ontario. Gender inclusive housing is a subset of residence halls on university campuses where an institution permits students to reside together regardless of gender (Jefferies, 2018). Throughout this paper I use the term gender-inclusive housing (versus genderneutral) to acknowledge that gender has an influence on individual’s identities and experiences (Jones & Abes, 2013). As inclusivity is acknowledged as an underlying motivation for gender inclusive housing program development and an individual’s sense of belonging is a critical component to descriptions of inclusive campus communities, this literature review explores sense of belonging as a construct for consideration in gender inclusive housing program development (Hardy Cox & Strange, 2016; McGrath, 2010; OACUHO, 2017; Smith, 2009).

Introduction. Housing and residence life programs have long been a part of the university structure in Canada, housing students travelling to study at institutions (Lane Vetere, 2010). A recent study (Academica, 2017) suggests that first-year students living in residence halls in Canada experience gains in grade point averages, retention to second year, and persistence to graduation. While the landmark Canadian study (Academica, 2017) provides a foundation for further research, I found little literature relating to student belonging associated with student experiences in housing and residence life in Canada. As a result, I focus this literature review on student success literature originating in the United States.

Background. Residences are considered ideal space to build community and intercultural relationships amongst students (Blimling, 2015) but are gender inclusive housing programs doing what we want them to be doing? With limited resources, universities must make tough decisions about where to put their efforts and funds. The new offerings of gender inclusive housing at Ontario universities signals a possible new norm in housing and residence life programs. Housing and residence life professionals are interested in learning more about how to implement these programs and the influence these programs have on student experiences (OACUHO, 2017). Without literature or best practice to guide effective programs, there are concerns about the implementation of these programs. This is problematic when considering the importance of diversity programs within higher education and the impact of negative student experiences on student and institution outcomes.

Further, this leads me to wonder, what are the experiences of students living in gender inclusive housing and how do those experiences affect student sense of belonging?

Jen Coulter Director, Student Housing & Residence Life Trent University

The changes in Ontario legislation. Part of supporting student retention to the university includes establishing programs and practices that support student identity development (Blimling, 2015; Hardy Cox & Strange, 2016; McGrath, 2010). Student affairs practitioners have long been tasked with enhancing the development of students and the environment that creates a context for students to explore a sense of identity throughout their adult life (Torres, Jones & Renn, 2009). As social context, norms, values, and beliefs change within society, socially constructed identities and the way in which they are understood or present within a context can change (Torres et al., 2009).

In 1999, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) decided that the ground of sex under human rights law could be interpreted to include rights of trans* people to be free from discrimination (OHRC, 2019A).

Since that time, the OHRC has put in place policies to recognize gender identity. In 2012, Ontario added the grounds of gender identity and gender expression to the code (OHRC, 2019B). This was a watershed moment for the recognition of gender identity and expression within Ontario society which began conversations within higher education on how recognize the new standard.

In 2016, for the first-time, students applying to university in Ontario were no longer required to identify in the binary of male or female and could choose to check “another gender identity� or not to disclose their gender on the Ontario University Application Centre forms (University of Waterloo Staff Relations, 2016). At the same time the Ontario Association of College & University Housing Officers (OACUHO) began discussions on gender inclusive housing programs (OACUHO, 2017).

The first provincial report on gender inclusive housing programs was made available during the 2017-2018 academic year (OACUHO, 2017). Since this is a relatively new phenomenon, it requires further study.

The challenge. In the United States, between 2010 and 2018, the number of gender inclusive housing options offered on university

campuses quadrupled (Anderson, 2011; Jefferies, 2018; Taub, Johnson, & Reynolds, 2016). In Ontario, gender inclusive housing is an emerging trend, with recent news articles emphasizing the importance of these communities in supporting more inclusive campus communities (Basmaji, 2018; Li, 2017).

Although it is becoming more common on Ontario campuses, I have found little research that has been conducted on gender inclusive housing in a Canadian context.

If gender inclusive housing programs are seen as a way to enhance an inclusive campus community, exploration on the outcomes associated with these programs is needed. Torres et al. (2009) suggest that understanding identity development and constructing one dimensional support programs alone are not enough. Further, they (Jones & Abes, 2013; Torres et al., 2009) suggest that a focus on the various intersections of identity and the environment are key to understanding how to best support students.

Should housing and residence life professionals wish to develop and operate gender inclusive housing programs to support students and an inclusive campus community, more information and research is needed on the student experience within these programs.

The significance. Student outcomes associated with student success are important drivers to institutions as they are linked to funding, reputation, student recruitment, and academic missions. Kuh (2006) suggests that student success is also linked to various student and personal development outcomes that confer benefits on individuals and society (e.g., selfawareness, self-confidence, etc.). For institutions to demonstrate enhancements to student outcomes through NSSE Strategic Mandate Agreement targets, and the fulfilment of the promises in their mission statements, they must have in place supportive programs and initiatives that cater to student needs, support social interests, and enhance factors that influence student satisfaction and retention, including a sense of belonging and campus inclusivity.

Institutions of higher education are increasingly interested in improving and enhancing institutional reputation (LafuenteRuiz-de-Sabando, Zorrilla & Forcada, 2018). In Ontario, higher education has been in the news regularly as societal awareness of a variety of issues has caused public interest. In cases where universities are accused of wrong-doing, there are negative impacts to their reputation (Dicks, 2016). Human rights cases in particular, garner public attention. As gender identity and expression are newer code grounds in Ontario, having supportive programs that meet and exceed code grounds in thoughtful and meaningful ways mitigates risks associated with potential human rights complaints. Wellconstructed and thoughtfully delivered gender inclusive housing programs, routed in literature and best practices, may achieve that end.

Organization of the Literature. This initial review of the literature is organized according to my research questions, which are: 1. How do first-year undergraduate students’ experiences in gender inclusive housing affect how they understand their sense of belonging at university?

2. What are first-year undergraduate students, living in gender inclusive housing, perceptions of inclusivity on campus?

3. What barriers to sense of belonging do firstyear undergraduate students experience living in gender inclusive housing report?

The intentional organization of this literature review will assist in illuminating sense of belonging as a construct, before discussing the barriers to sense of belonging and inclusivity on campus. A deep understanding of sense of belonging is required as a foundation before engaging in a discussion on potential barriers that first-year students may experience related to their sense of belonging and the role of belonging in relation to inclusive campus environments.

Sense of belonging. Sense of belonging is often discussed as part of a broader conversation regarding student success, retention, and persistence

(Morrow & Ackermann, 2012; Tinto,1993; Johnson et al., 2007). Scholars (O’Keefe, 2013; Schlossberg, 1989; Strayhorn, 2019) suggest that the development of a sense of belonging is critical for the success of a student in a university environment. Conversely, the withdrawal of students from the university environment can stem from a lack of student involvement and poor fit to the institution (Morrow & Ackermann, 2012).

Student departure theory (Tinto, 1993) suggests that for a student to be retained to an institution, the student must be integrated within the social and academic systems of the university. Critics of Tinto suggest that student departure theory places too much responsibility for integration on the student and not enough responsibility on institutions (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Johnson, Soldner, Brown Leonard, Inkelas, Rowan-Kenyon, & Longerbeam, 2007; Tierney, 1993). For marginalized students, this responsibility to integrate may result in abandoning part of their culture, beliefs, and who they are (Hurado & Carter, 1997). To represent shared responsibility for student success, without requiring students to integrate at a cost to themselves, I found that sense of belonging, versus integration, has become the more prominent construct related to retention of students.

Strayhorn (2019) defines sense of belonging as “students perceived social support on campus, a feeling or sensation of connectedness, and the experience of mattering or feeling cared about, accepted, respected, valued by, and important to the campus community or others on campus such as faculty, staff, and peers” (p.4). As a basic human need, sense of belonging is crucial to human motivation and the emergence of higher-order needs (e.g., self-actualization) and for university students, a sense of belonging or lack thereof, can influence academic performance and their success (Maslow, 1943; Strayhorn, 2019).

Strayhorn (2019) suggests there are seven core elements of sense of belonging: 1. Sense of belonging is a basic human need; 2. Sense of belonging is a fundamental motive, sufficient to drive student behaviour;

3. Sense of belonging takes on heightened importance (a) in certain contexts (b) at certain times (c) among certain populations; 4. Sense of belonging is related to and seemingly a consequence of mattering; 5. Social identities intersect and affect college students sense of belonging; 6. Sense of belonging engenders other positive outcomes; 7. Sense of belonging must be satisfied on a continual basis, and likely changes as circumstances, conditions, and contexts change (p.159-163).

In literature relating to residence halls, sense of belonging and sense of community are often used to describe the student perception and feelings of membership, influence, and shared emotional connection (Johnson et al., 2007).

Similar to mattering, residence students’ importance to others and valued presence in residence are key components their sense of belonging to the campus environment (Blimling, 2015; Johnson et al., 2007; Schlossberg, 1989; Strayhorn, 2019). To further the discussion relating to sense of belonging and students residing in gender-inclusive housing I explore two components of the literature related to residence halls and sense of belonging: fit and valued involvement.

Fit. “Fit refers to the perception that one’s values or characteristics are congruent with others” (Hoffman, Richmond, & Salamone, 2002, p.229). Scholars (Cheng, 2004; Hoffman et al., 2002; Marrow & Ackermann, 2012) suggest that students fit when they not only perceive that their values are congruent, but that they are accepted, and differences respected and recognized. Residence halls provide a space of students to learn about each other, their values and characteristics (Schroeder & Mable, 1994).

Further, staff in residence halls can assist students with finding their fit on campus and within the residence community.

Based on my 15 years of work as a student affairs professional, my assumption is if fit is a component to students feeling congruent in their values with others and accepted, gender inclusive housing may be an important initiative

to further students sense of belonging wherever students are on the gender spectrum. In addition, I wonder if for students who opt into gender inclusive housing if the availability of the program influences their sense of belonging and or feeling of congruency with others. To this end, does the option of gender inclusive housing on a campus signal to students that there are others on campus that share similar values to them? Does gender inclusive housing reinforce that similarities and differences relating to gender will be recognized and respected? In addition, does gender inclusive housing reinforce or influence students’ sense of feeling valued at the institution and their perception of the campus environment?

Valued involvement. “Valued involvement refers to the perception that one is valued, needed, or important to others” (Hoffman et al., 2002, p.229). Whereas fit is related to a students’ perception that their values are congruent with others, valued involvement relates to students’ feelings of importance to others. In his study, Cheng (2004), notes that students who felt a sense of belonging felt cared about as an individual and accepted as an important part of the community. This is similar to findings in other work (Johnson et al., 2007; Hoffman et al., 2002; Marrow & Ackermann, 2012). Further, several studies note that a student connection with one person within the environment may impact their sense of belonging and ultimately their decision to remain in university (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; O’Keefe, 2013).

In my view, developing an environment for students to feel a sense of belonging is part of the important work of housing and residence life staff working and living in residence halls. If gender inclusive housing programs are designed to further enhance an inclusive environment, then to me a perception of being valued and sense of belonging would naturally follow.

Therefore, does gender inclusive housing signal to students that all genders are welcome and belong even before their arrival to campus?

Strayhorn (2019) suggests that sense of belonging is context dependent and therefore, as first-year students enter university, their belonging needs take on a heightened significance.

Belonging needs of first-year students. Beginning university as a first-year student is full of changes relating to relationships, roles, routines, and assumptions (Rygg, 2013; Strayhorn, 2019). Further, Schlossberg (1981) considers this period the transitional state which is “…a period marked by relational and personal changes, including attempts to deal with upset, tension, or fatigue and attempts to find new sources of support” (p.6). As students experience the new environment of university, the first-year experience of university students is one where the development of new sources of support become critical.

Supiano (2018) suggests that universities should have a structure in place that is designed to communicate to students that they matter.

For first-year students residing on-campus, residence halls provide the foundation for students to adjust to university and often, in my view, become the starting point for supporting the transition to university and establishing a sense of belonging (Blimling, 2015; Lane Vetere, 2010; Schroeder & Mable, 1994; Blattner, Cawthon, & Baumann, 2013). The adjustment issues of first year students as potential barriers to belonging are discussed in the next section.

Barriers to belonging for first-year students. The above section outlined the belonging needs of first-year students and the importance of developing systems to support first year student belonging. In my review of the literature I did not find any Canadian studies directly relating to sense of belonging of first-year students residing in gender inclusive housing and thus I focus this section on the barriers to belonging that first-year students may face regardless of living accommodations. Further, scholars (Friedlander, Ried, Shupak, & Cribbie, 2007; Hoffman et al., 2002; Marrow & Ackermann, 2012; Tinto, 1988) suggest that first-year students adjustment issues are largely grouped into two categories: coping with academic demands and developing social supports. As this study aims to understand the student experience from a co-curricular perspective, I focus the remainder of this section on the challenges that students may

face with the social component of adjustment.

Literature (Astin, 1993; Locks, Hurtado, Bowman & Oseguera, 2008; Tinto, 1993) submits that the social environment and peer relationships are important for student adjustment to university and to student success.

Linked to student success, Strayhorn (2019) and Locks et al. (2008) suggest that social support is critical for the development of a sense of belonging, thus, a lack of social support can challenge a student’s feeling of connection to the university. For first-year students residing in oncampus residence halls, living amongst a group of peers and developing friendships can be both exciting and a challenging experience.

Scholarship on student success (Tinto, 1988) tells us that the first six weeks of the academic year is the most significant period of adjustment for first-year students. It is during the first six weeks, that students are the most susceptible to feelings of marginality (Tinto, 1988).

Transition theory (e.g., Schlossberg, 1989) and student success theory (e.g., Tinto, 1988) suggest that the role of the concepts of mattering and belonging during an adjustment period are critical to student persistence. As firstyear students move on campus relocating away from family and developing isolation from peers can become concerns. While scholars (Pascarella, 1984; Pascarella, Terenzini & Blimling, 1994; Berger, 1997) suggest that students living in residence halls have higher levels of peer support and social integration and thus more opportunity to belong, for many students the transition period can be a difficult as they learn to cope without previous support structures (e.g.,, high school friend groups).

Jacobs and Archie (2008) identified that subgroups of student populations can influence the sense of community for the overall campus.

This causes me to wonder, if students living in gender inclusive housing could be considered a subgroup. Further, if there are some similarities within the group (e.g., appreciation for gender inclusivity), could these similarities contribute to their development of social support systems and consequently influence their sense of belonging?

A critical component of the rationale for student departures is a lack of sense of belonging (Cheng, 2004; Tinto, 1993). Based on the above, I submit that housing and residence life practitioners hoping to influence the student environment through gender inclusive housing must consider the barriers to sense of belonging in their planning, training, programming, marketing and communications with students. If gender inclusive housing programs are designed to enhance inclusivity on campus, I wonder if the experiences of students living within gender inclusive housing affect students’ perception of inclusivity on campus, or vice versa.

Inclusivity on Campus. Student sense of belonging is linked to the sense of community and inclusion that students feel on campus (Hardy Cox & Strange, 2016; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). A sense of community where students feel included as part of the campus, is an important component in supporting students attending higher education institutions in Canada.

DeLuca (2013) submits that “…In Canada, inclusivity mandates and initiatives are legislatively supported through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and provincial education acts” (p. 307). As a foundational aspect of Canadian society, inclusivity on campus is expected by all stakeholders. Inclusivity can be characterized as the sense or feeling of being affiliated, respected, and welcomed within the university community (Hardy Cox & Strange, 2016; Hoffman et al., 2002; Locks et al., 2008).

For students living in residence halls, their experience within the residence community can positively or negatively influence their experience with the university climate (Cheng, 2004).

Studies on campus climate suggest that interactions between peers and the context of the institution affect climate (Kuh & Whitt, 1988; Tierney, 1988; Clements, 2000; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen, 1998; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Locks et al., 2008).

Perceptions of a lack of campus inclusivity or hostility can have a negative effect on student outcomes (Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005).

2005) In various studies (e.g., Hurtado, 1994; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado & Ponjuan,

2005) the relationship between the selectivity of the institution, experiences of discrimination and or harassment, and campus tensions contribute to perceptions of a hostile environment.

University residences mirror global society and provide frequent and intense interactions with peers from diverse settings and identities (Hughes, 1994). This frequent interaction can be challenging as students learn how to interact with each other and develop their own value systems (Blimling, 2015).

Conflict can arise when students’ values do not align and when those values take the form of discriminatory behaviour. Oliver, Rodriguez and Mickelson (1985) found that students who experienced discrimination also felt a sense of alienation on campus. Further, studies (Nora & Cabrera, 1996; Hurtado, 1994) suggest that incidents of discrimination influenced the perception of tensions and hostility on campus which affected students’ social integration. The values espoused and a lack of alignment of values and behaviours suggest that there may be campus tensions when related to diversity and inclusivity on campus (Hurtado & Carter, 1997).

Conclusion. In this initial literature review, I have explored literature relating to the research questions of my study. While the purpose of this literature review was not to provide specific actions for OACUHO members, I suggest that from the literature there are implications for practice relating to institutional policies on gender inclusive housing, a need to reinforce sense of belonging as a priority in residence life programming, and an importance in aligning housing and residence life programs and communities to campus wide strategies to support inclusivity. In my view, each campus with its specific mission, values, and student needs should explore ways to ensure inclusivity goals are established and met. This literature review may assist in reinforcing the construct of sense of belonging and the role of residence life and housing programs in developing student belonging, examining the barriers to belonging that first-year students face, and the relationship between sense of belonging and perceptions of campus inclusivity.

References: Academica Group (2017). Good news for the champions of on-campus housing. Academica Forum.

Retrieved from: https://forum.academica.ca/forum/good-news-for-the-champions-of-oncampus-housing.

Anderson, M.A. (2011). Implicit inclusion is not enough: Effectiveness of gender-neutral housing policies on inclusion of transgender students (Unpublished master’s thesis). The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.

Basmaji, J. (2018, February 6). Starting in September 2018, Western students can now choose between single-gender housing and mix-gender housing on their residence applications. The Gazette. Retrieved from: https://westerngazette.ca/news/western-to-offer-mixed-genderhousing-in-september/article_c072b5d0-1353-11e8-83d9-2b30eda63c61.html.

Baxter Magolda, M.B. (2009). The activity of meaning making: A holistic perspective on college student development. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 621-639.

Berger, J.B. (1997). Students’ sense of community in residence halls, social integration, and first-year persistence. Journal of College Student Development, 38, 441-452.

Blattner, A., Cawthon, T., & Baumann, J.A. (2013). Milestones in campus housing. In N.W. Dunkel & J.A. Baumann (Eds.), Campus housing management: Past, present, & future (p. 2-27).

Columbus, OH: Association of College & University Housing Officers – International.

Blimling, G.S. (2015). Student learning in college residence halls: What works, what doesn’t, and why. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cheng, D.X. (2004). Students’ sense of campus community: What it means, and what to do about it. NASPA Journal, 41(2), 216-234.

Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.

AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.

Clements, E. (2000). Creating a campus climate in which diversity is truly valued. New Directions for Community Colleges, 112, 63-72.

DeLuca, C. (2013). Toward an interdisciplinary framework for educational inclusivity. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1), 305-348.

Dicks, B. (2016, December 21). Dalhousie’s dentistry scandal: A costly lesson in communications.

CTV Atlantic News. Retrieved from: https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/dalhousie-s-dentistry-scandal-acostly-lesson-in-communications-1.3212800 Friedlander, L.J., Reid, G.J., Shupak, N. & Cribbie, R. (2007). Social support, self-esteem, and stress as predictors of adjustment to university among first-year undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 48(3), 259-274.

Hardy Cox, D. & Strange, C.C. (2016). Student diversity in Canadian higher education. In. C.C. Strange and D. Hardy Cox. (Eds.). Serving diverse students in Canadian higher education (pp. 3-12).

Montreal, QC: McGill-Queens University Press.

Hoffman, M., Richmond, J., Morrow, J. & Salomone, K. (2002). Investigating “sense of belonging” in first-year college students. Journal of College Student Retention, 43(3), 227-256.

Hughes, M. (1994). Helping students understand and appreciate diversity. In C.C. Schroeder, P. Mable & Associates. Realizing the educational potential of residence halls (pp.190-217). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hurtado, S., (1994). The institutional climate for talented Latino students. Research in Higher Education, 35(1), 21-41.

Hurtado, S. & Carter, D.F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 324-345.

References: Hurtado, S., Milem, J.F., Clayton-Pedersen, A.R. & Allen, W.R. (1998). Enhancing campus climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The review of higher education, 21(3), 279-302.

Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the campus climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 235-251.

Jacobs, J. & Archie, T. (2008). Investigating sense of community in first-year college students.

Journal of Experiential Education, 30(3), 282-285.

Jeffries, M.S. (2018). Destablizing gender inclusive housing: A feminist postructural policy analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Washington State University, Pullman, WA. Johnson, D.R., Soldner, M., Brown Leonard, J., Alvarez, P., Inkelas, K.K., Rowan-Kenyon, H.T. & Longerbeam, S.D. (2007). Examining sense of belonging among first-year undergraduates from different racial/ethnic groups. Journal of College Student Development, 48(5), 525-542.

Jones, S.R. & Abes, E.S. (2013). Identity development of college students: Advancing frameworks for multiple dimensions of identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Krum, T.E., Davis, K.S., & Galupo, M.P. (2014). Gender-inclusive housing preferences: A survey of college-aged transgender students. Journal of LGBT Youth, 10(1), 64-82.

Kuh, G.D. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Commissioned report for the national symposium on postsecondary student success: Spearheading a dialogue on student success.

Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/Kuh_Team_Report.pdf.

Kuh, G. D. & Whitt, E. J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities.

ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: The Association for the Study of Higher Education Lafuente-Ruiz-deSabando, A., Zorilla, P. & Forcada, J. (2018). A review of higher education image and reputation literature: Knowledge gaps and a research agenda. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 24(1), 8-16.

Lane Vetere, H. (2010). Housing and residence life. In D. Hardy Cox & C.C. Strange (Eds.)., Achieving student success: Effective student services in Canadian higher education (p.77-88). Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen’s University Li, J. (2017, August 23). Ryerson introduces ‘all-gender’ student housing option. CBC News. Retrieved from: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ryerson-all-gender-housing-university1.4258820.

Locks, A.M., Hurtado, S., Bowman, N.A. & Oseguera, L. (2008). Extending notions of campus climate and diversity to students’ transition to college. The Review of Higher Education, 31(3), 257-285.

Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychology Review, 50, 307-396.

McGrath, C. (2010). Services for diverse students. In D. Hardy Cox & C.C. Strange. (Eds.).

Achieving student success: Effective student services in Canadian higher education (pp.153-164).

Montreal, QC: McGill-Queens University Press.

Morrow, J.A. & Ackermann, M.E. (2012). Intention to persist and retention of first-year students: The importance of motivation and sense of belonging. College Student Journal, 46(3), 483-491.

Nora, A. & Cabrera, A. (1996). The role of perception of prejudice and discrimination on the adjustment of minority students in college. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 387-409.

O’Keefe, P. (2013). A sense of belonging: Improving student retention. College Student Journal, 47(4), 605-613.

Oliver, M.L., Rodriguez, C.J. & Mickelson, R.A. (1985). Brown and Black in White: The social adjustment and academic performance of Chicano and Black students in a predominantly White university. The Urban Review, 17(1), 3-24.

References: Ontario Association of College & University Housing Officers (OACUHO). (2017). The state of gender inclusive housing in OACUHO. Toronto, ON: Author.

Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2019A). Code grounds: Sex. Retrieved from: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guid e/reference_list_electronic_sources.html.

Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2019B). Emerging human rights protections. Retrieved from: http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/policy-preventing-discrimination-because-gender-identity-andgender-expression/5-emerging-human-rights-protections.

Pascarella, E.T. (1984). Reassessing the effects of living-on campus versus commuting to college: A causal modeling approach. The Review of Higher Education, 7(3), 247-260.

Pascarella, E.T., Terenzini, P.T. & Blimling, G.S. (1994). The impact of residential life on students.

In C.C. Schroeder, P. Mable & Associates. Realizing the educational potential of residence halls (pp.

22-52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schlossberg, N.K. (1981). A model for analyzing human adaptation to transition. The Counseling Psychologist, 9(2), 2-18.

Schlossberg, N.K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. New Directions for Student Services, 48, 5-15.

Schroeder, C.C. & Mable, P. (1994). Residence halls and the college experience. In C.C. Schroeder, P. Mable & Associates. Realizing the educational potential of residence halls (pp.3-21). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Smith, D.G. (2009). Diversity’s promise for higher education: Making it work. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Strayhorn, T.L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed). New York, NY: Routledge.

Supiano, B. (2018). How colleges can cultivate students’ sense of belonging. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from: https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Colleges-CanCultivate/243123.

Taub, D., Johnson, R.B. & Reynolds, T. (2016). The implementation of gender-neutral housing: A mixed-methods study across ACUHO-I member institutions. Journal of College & University Student Housing, 42(2), 76-93.

Tierney, W.G. (1993). The college experience of Native Americans: A critical analysis. In L.Weis & M.Fine (Eds.). Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United States schools (pp.309232). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Tierney, W.G. (1988). Organizational culture in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 59, 2-21.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177.

Torres,V., Jones, S.R., & Renn, K. (2009). Identity development theories in student affairs: Origins, current status, and new approaches. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), p. 577-596.

University of Waterloo Staff Relations. (2016). University application forms change for transgender students. Retrieved from: https://uwaterloo.ca/stories/university-application-forms-changetransgender-students

Coming Soon…