by Ryan W. Erck, Lauren G. Ross, and Mona M. Choucair
When it comes to campus partnerships, there is perhaps no better example of where the in- and out-of-class experience consistently come together than in residential learning communities (RLCs). An umbrella term for programs such as living-learning communities or residential colleges, RLCs are opportunistic spaces on campus to truly pursue the mission of whole-student development. These types of programs benefit students because they pull expertise and resources from across an institution and locate them all in one setting. Having the pieces nearby is convenient; getting them to work in harmony is another more challenging story. As Karen Inkelas and her co-authors write in Living-Learning Communities That Work, RLC spaces require more than simply acknowledging the academic within the residential, but instead call for the intentional integration of the two.
Integration may indeed bring diverse parts together; however, the integration doesn’t truly become intentional unless it employs a shared framework for navigating collaborative partnerships. These partnerships often entail connections between hall directors and faculty but frequently extend to include other student affairs and academic support functional areas. To capitalize on their potential as a centralized space for collaboration, there are three pillars that encourage the success of partnerships within RLCs: a culture of student support, a consensus to share resources, and a commitment to frequent communication. These elements may not appear groundbreaking on their own, but as best practices, existing literature, and our professional experiences show, they are vital for RLC successes.
As the foundation for an RLC team’s efforts, a basic underlying assumption should be that all the individuals involved are present to support the community’s residents and help them succeed. Once this culture becomes assumed in a partnership, the efforts that follow (i.e., programming, assessment, supervision) can emanate from the same cornerstone. Lauren Oliver, associate director of the Office of Living-Learning Programs at Virginia Tech, illustrates this commitment to building a culture of student support. “When we are establishing [RLCs], the core assumption is that students’ holistic development is our central purpose. Program leadership . . . is not only committed to bringing their expertise to support students but also their common humanity as co-learners in the world.” Oliver notes that through 2020 and into 2021, amid the challenges of a pandemic, she has witnessed countless examples of how a strong RLC culture plays a role in championing students’ growth. “Whether a live-in faculty member is playing soccer with students or a hall director is leading a Principal’s Tea,” she has seen her RLC teams show up where needed, driven by their shared culture of student support.
Neely Martin-Whitaker, coordinator of the residential colleges program at Louisiana State University (LSU), also understands the value of sharing this culture among partners. She notes that LSU’s residential colleges have a designated faculty member (called a rector) and academic advisor who, in addition to their own functions, lobby additional faculty to hold classes and office hours in the residence hall, establish in-hall tutoring, and plan programs to help students connect what they are learning in class to real-life experiences. Building this culture of support requires buy-in from various constituents across campus, but identifying and drawing in partners who share the passion for student success is critical for a flourishing community.
Sometimes these partners can be students. At Baylor University, for example, the residential community is strengthened through a collective investment in student leaders. Whether it is through community leaders (the equivalent of resident assistants), a hall leadership team, or academic council executive leaders, when investment is made in RLC student leaders, there is a trickle-down effect. Essentially, those student leaders go on to positively impact their spheres of influence in the community, which in turn contributes greatly to the program and team culture.
This mission of student success as being central to RLC team culture is echoed by Matt Kwiatkowski, associate director for academic initiatives at Virginia Tech. He emphasizes that “When both sides are at the table working on a common experience, like a retreat or workshop series, all sides of the university are pulled in for the students’ benefit. The result is not only a well-thought-out, stellar experience, but one that has in mind all aspects of what the student is bringing to the university environment and what will benefit them to thrive.” Although a student success ethos proves important for partnerships, it is not truly ingrained unless RLC team members also agree to share their respective resources.
Bringing together a diverse set of resources allows RLCs to maximize support structures and services in the pursuit of student success. These resources include not only financial capital, but also expertise, time, networks, and political capital. Nick Blair, residential community director at Southern Methodist University (SMU), identifies how their Residential Commons system integrates the academic, residential, and social experiences for students, which cultivate a sense of belonging on campus. “The staff, faculty, and student leadership teams of the Commons are committed to cross-campus collaboration and sharing of resources – be they fiscal, physical, or human effort in nature. Numerous programs intersect with the Commons experience, maximizing the impact on student education.” Similarly, Martin-Whitaker emphasizes that RLC hall partners (residential education staff, faculty rectors, advisors) at LSU often join forces in supporting students through directed outreach. Such efforts exemplify the importance of sharing resources in conducting successful partnerships.
To capitalize on their potential as a centralized space for collaboration, there are three pillars that encourage the success of partnerships within RLCs: a culture of student support, a consensus to share resources, and a commitment to frequent communication.
At Baylor, each of the RLCs has a designated team consisting of a residence hall director, program director, and faculty-in-residence representative. Graduate students also participate in roles such as resident chaplains and graduate assistants. Housed in several areas across campus, there are reserves of certain resources (again, not necessarily financial) that can be tapped. These often include the resource of time, but also personal relationships across campus that are lobbied to create more opportunities for student interaction. This joint effort makes the program more robust and valuable for students.
Kwiatkowski reiterates the benefit of sharing resources in RLCs. “Faculty not only bring their content-level knowledge and expertise to the setting, but resources from their academic college, such as the ability to easily bring more faculty members into the residence hall environment for student engagement. Student affairs professionals bring a vast knowledge of organizational politics and student development to the table.” Sharing resources contributes to a strong student-centered team (and community) and helps partners establish patterns of frequent communication.
Communication often seems like a given in highly collaborative RLC teams. However, this aspect of collaboration can often fall through the cracks as professionals are pulled in different directions by additional commitments. By committing to a regularly scheduled meeting, whether there is extensive information to share or not, team members are more apt to genuinely learn about each other, both personally and professionally. In doing so, RLC team members have a better grasp on each other’s work styles, expectations, goals, and hopes for the students and community.
In the residential colleges at LSU, faculty partners and residence coordinators share their calendars and meet monthly, though more frequent touch-base conversations are expected, says Martin-Whitaker. At SMU, Blair meets weekly with his faculty-in-residence partner, “even if just for a few minutes, to touch base and share news and updates of the week – both personal and professional.” It seems like common sense, but committing to frequent conversation with partners creates accountability, especially when burgeoning mid-semester tasks crowd everyone’s schedules. This communication serves as a valuable resource as RLC teams share an understanding of their collective efforts in their shared environment. Blair continues to emphasize that through “broad communication about what is going on, we are often able to land on creative or innovative solutions to problems based on solutions or input from one another that we didn’t anticipate.”
For all the talk that “that meeting could have been an email,” experience shows that purposeful, recurrent interactions build team camaraderie, which in turn translates to colleagues knowing one another on a deeper, more personal level. These interactions allow teams to consider resources creatively and to determine where they can be implemented across a community. This further strengthens the culture of student support. Clearly, these pillars of a successful partnership are closely intertwined. One without the others appears helpful but is ultimately incomplete.
Collaboration in RLCs, when done well, requires a promise from team members to stay in touch on issues surrounding their community and work. This commitment relates back to RLC efforts that contribute to students’ success. Kwiatkowski summarizes this well. “It is hard to think of one other model in the university environment where faculty and student affairs professionals are truly working hand in hand to benefit the student experience.” These types of partnerships are unique and allow RLC communities, as well as their students, to flourish.
Countless scholars and practitioners offer resources and wisdom regarding the navigation of team dynamics, and these may help clarify what meaningful collaboration is on a college or university campus. However, in the context of RLCs, knowing what kind of pillars are needed to support partnerships can help define the critical aspects needed to promote success in these partnerships. As housing departments attempt to blend in- and out-of-class experiences for students through RLC initiatives, a culture of student support, a consensus to share resources, and a commitment to frequent communication contribute to the success of the team, and, as a result, the success of the students.
Ryan W. Erck, Ph.D., is the program director of Impact LLC at Baylor University in Waco, Texas. Lauren G. Ross, M.S.Ed., is the residence hall director in Impact LLC. Mona M. Choucair, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer in Baylor’s School of Education and College of Arts & Sciences and the faculty-in-residence in Impact LLC.
