Student Experience and Wellbeing
Relationship-Rich Education, Well-Being, and Inclusive Environments
Universities worldwide are facing a decisive inflection point that demands strategic, systemic action to transform student experience and well-being. While student-centered education has long been supported by research on learning and critical pedagogy, its urgency has intensified due to demographic change, technological disruption, and profound social and economic pressures. These forces have redefined who accesses higher education, how learning occurs, and what students expect from universities. In the context of post-pandemic challenges and the rapid expansion of generative AI, institutions must reaffirm their role as human-centered environments that cultivate belonging, meaning, and resilience.
This paper argues that the future of higher education depends on embedding student experience and well-being into the core of institutional strategy and practice. Central to this transformation is the concept of relationship-rich education, understood as learning environments sustained by meaningful interactions among students, faculty, and staff. Evidence shows that strong academic and social relationships enhance cognitive development, mental health, persistence, and overall flourishing, benefiting not only students but also educators and institutional culture. However, structural constraints — including institutional scale, technology misuse, and misaligned incentives — frequently erode these essential connections.
To address these challenges, the report proposes eight strategic priorities: designing relationship-rich learning ecosystems; integrating active and collaborative pedagogies into curricula; empowering students as co-creators of academic and institutional life; adopting a holistic approach to well-being that includes students, faculty, and staff; fostering inclusive and equity-driven environments; guiding the use of AI and technology through human-centered principles; reimagining professional development as relational growth; and embedding belonging and purpose into institutional culture.
Together, these strategies outline a shift toward a relational, human-centered model of institutional excellence. By aligning mission, policy, and everyday practice around student experience and well-being, universities can strengthen learning outcomes, promote equity, and contribute more effectively to the public good.
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rastros Rostros
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Ética. La revista y su equipo editorial propiciarán, a través de sus políticas y actuaciones, la ética en los procesos de investigación, el uso apropiado de los contenidos protegidos por derechos de autor y la calidad de los trabajos que publica, de manera que los diferentes colaboradores (editores, autores y evaluadores) interactúen bajo principios de integridad académica.
- Autores. Se espera que los autores que participen en la revista presenten textos originales, de su propia creación, derivados de procesos de investigación rigurosos, que no hayan sido previamente publicados, usen de manera adecuada las fuentes que sirven de soporte bibliográfico y cualquier otro material que esté protegido por derechos de autor. Los textos también deben estar escritos de manera cuidadosa y considerando los requisitos de forma y citación que correspondan al estilo de la revista.
- Evaluadores. Se espera que los evaluadores de la revista realicen una lectura minuciosa y constructiva de cada artículo que acepten revisar, buscando no sólo emitir una recomendación de aprobación o rechazo para el editor, sino que sus comentarios permitan que los autores mejoren sus textos o reflexionen sobre los alcances, posibilidades o falencias de su manuscrito. Asimismo, los evaluadores deben considerar que los textos que el editor les ha confiado son inéditos, y cualquier uso indebido o no autorizado de la información allí contenida implicaría una falta ética grave. También, la responsabilidad de evaluar un trabajo, una vez se ha aceptado, no puede ser transferida a terceros, en especial, si no se ha justificado y consultado previamente con el editor. Finalmente, cualquier conflicto de intereses que el evaluador identifique después de haber recibido un trabajo y que potencialmente menoscabe su independencia en la elaboración de un concepto debe informarse.
Notificación sobre casos. Si hay alguna evidencia de problemas éticos en las investigaciones que presentan los trabajos publicados por la revista, dudas sobre su rigor científico, sospecha de falsificación o manipulación indebida de datos, conflictos de intereses no revelados, identificación de publicaciones previas (“refritos”), problemas de autoría o plagio, pedimos, por favor, que se contacte de manera inmediata al editor de la revista para que pueda ahondar en el caso y tomar las acciones que correspondan. Las notificaciones que se reciban sobre problemas éticos se manejarán con absoluta confidencialidad, protegiendo la identidad de la persona que ha detectado el problema, si así lo solicita.
Retractaciones, correcciones y resolución de conflictos. La revista sigue los lineamientos (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) y procedimientos (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) del Committee on Publication Ethics (cope) para el manejo de conductas inapropiadas en la publicación académica. Asimismo, se harán retractaciones o correcciones de artículos ya publicados cuyos contenidos presenten errores que afecten su calidad científica o el reconocimiento apropiado de sus autores, ya sea por equivocaciones involuntarias en el proceso de investigación y publicación o por problemas éticos serios como plagio, falsificaciones, manipulaciones de datos, entre otros.
Uso de los contenidos y autoarchivo. La revista publica sus contenidos en acceso abierto, sin que medie ningún periodo de embargo. Asimismo, todos los trabajos publicados aparecen bajo una licencia Creative Commons de Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), y su uso debe hacerse bajo esas condiciones de licenciamiento.
Aoun, J. E. (2017). Robot-proof: Higher education in the age of artificial intelligence. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11456.001.0001
Appiah, K. A. (2007). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. W. W. Norton.
Arney, J., Dale, T., Davis, G., & Kinzie, J. (Eds.). (2023). Radical reimagining for student success in higher education. Routledge.
Artze-Vega, I., Darby, F., Dewsbury, B., & Imad, M. (2023). The Norton guide to equity-minded teaching. W. W. Norton. https://seagull.wwnorton.com/equityguide
Austin, A. E., Finkelstein, N. D., Follmer Greenhoot, A., Ward, D., & Cornejo Weaver, G. (2025). Transforming college teaching evaluation: A framework for advancing instructional excellence. Harvard Education Press.
Astin, A. W. (1997). What matters in college? Jossey-Bass.
Baik, C., Larcombe, W., & Brooker, A. (2019). How universities can enhance student mental well-being: The student perspective. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(4), 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1576596 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1576596
Børte, K., Nesje, K., & Lillejord, S. (2023). Barriers to student active learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(3), 597–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1839746 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1839746
Bovill, C., Croft, A., Glover, C. D., & Felten, P. (2023). Is discussing identity more important than shared identity to student–staff relationship building? Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 11. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.17
Buckingham Shum, S., Ferguson, R., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2019). Human-centred learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2019.62.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2019.62.1
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
Felten, P., & Forsyth, R. (2025). Learning and teaching with AI. Change. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2025.2496117 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2025.2496117
Felten, P., Gardner, J. N., Schroeder, C. C., Lambert, L. M., & Barefoot, B. O. (2016). The undergraduate experience: Focusing institutions on what matters most. Jossey-Bass.
Felten, P., & Lambert, L. (2020). Relationship-rich education: How human connections drive success in college. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Felten, P., Lambert, L. M., Artze-Vega, I., Miranda Tapia, O. R., & (2023). Connections are everything: A college student’s guide to relationship-rich education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Gavassa, S., Benabentos, R., Kravec, M., Collins, T., & Eddy, S. (2019). Closing the achievement gap in a large introductory course by balancing reduced in-person contact with increased course structure. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-08-0153 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-08-0153
Glazier, R. A. (2021). Connecting in the online classroom: Building rapport between teachers and students. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Haidt, J., & Lukianoff, G. (2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure. Penguin.
Hallett, R. E., Kezar, A., Kitchen, J. A., & Pérez, R. J. (2023). Creating a campus-wide culture of student success: An evidence-based approach to supporting low-income, racially minoritized, and first-generation college students. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003443711
Hefner, J., & Eisenberg, D. (2009). Social support and mental health among college students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79(4), 491–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016918 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016918
Higher Education Authority of Ireland. (2025). Review of the Irish National Framework for Student Success in Higher Education: Report of the expert group. Higher Education Authority of Ireland.
Hogan, K. A., & Sathy, V. (2022). Inclusive teaching: Strategies for promoting equity in the college classroom. West Virginia University Press.
Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2018). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197
Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Lim, L.-A., Buckingham Shum, S., Felten, P., & Uno, J. (2023). “Belonging analytics”: A proposal. Learning Letters, 1, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.59453/EAXA8005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.59453/EAXA8005
Mayhew, M. J., Rockenbach, A. N., Bowman, N. A., Seifert, T. A., & Wolniak, G. C. (2016). How college affects students: 21st century evidence that higher education works. Jossey-Bass.
McClure, K. R. (2025). The caring university: Reimagining the higher education workplace after the Great Resignation. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Milem, J. F. (2003). The educational benefits of diversity: Evidence from multiple sectors. In M. Chang, D. Witt, J. Jones, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Compelling interest: Examining the evidence on racial dynamics in higher education (pp. 126–169). Stanford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804764537-009
Nieminen, J. H., & Yang, L. (2023). Assessment as a matter of being and becoming: Theorising student formation in assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 48(13), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2257740 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2257740
Nunn, L. M. (2021). College belonging: How first-year and first-generation students navigate campus life. Rutgers University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36019/9781978809536
Parker, E. T. III, Trolian, T. L., & Stolzenberg, E. B. (2021). Student–faculty interaction and academic self-concept: The intersection of race and gender. Higher Education Research and Development, 41(7). https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.2010666 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.2010666
Peseta, T., Pizzica, J., Beathe, A., Jose, C., Lynch, R., Manthos, M., Nguyen, K., & Raza, H. (2020). A partnership mindset: Students as partners in and beyond the academy. In The power of partnership: Students, staff, and faculty revolutionizing higher education (pp. 107–117). Elon University Center for Engaged Learning. https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa2.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa2.6
Pleschová, G., Roxå, T., Thomson, K. E., & Felten, P. (2021). Conversations that make meaningful change in teaching, teachers, and academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 26(3), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2021.1958446 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2021.1958446
Pope-Ruark, R. (2022). Unraveling faculty burnout: Pathways to reckoning and renewal. Johns Hopkins University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56021/9781421445137
Rainie, L., & Anderson, J. (2025). Many Americans expect AI to have significant negative impact on human capacities and behaviors such as social and emotional intelligence, analytical thinking and agency by 2035. Elon University’s Imagining the Digital Future Center.
Strayhorn, T. (2012). College students’ sense of belonging. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118924
Sutherland, K. A. (2018). Holistic academic development: Is it time to think more broadly about the academic development project? International Journal for Academic Development, 23(4), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2018.1524571 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2018.1524571
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., et al. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
UNESCO. (2025). Artificial intelligence in education. https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-education/artificial-intelligence?hub=32618
Waldinger, R., & Schulz, M. (2023). The good life: Lessons from the world’s longest scientific study of happiness. Simon & Schuster.
Warner, J. (2018). Why they can’t write: Killing the five-paragraph essay and other necessities. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932
