Meghann Kuhlman

ENGL 467: English Studies Capstone Experience

Dr. A. Rupiper Taggart
03 December 2015
First-Year Student Living Experiences:
Assessing the Academic and Cultural Engagement at North Dakota State Universitys Arts,
Humanities, and Social Sciences Living-Learning Community
Introduction
Choosing a residence hall is one of the many steps in applying for colleges; it is filled with
questions about room size, what items are or are not allowed, or if there is air conditioning. With
different styles of housing, there are many customizations that a student can make to make their
new room feel like home. Many students may not be aware that they can even surround
themselves with students within the same major or with similar interests. These spaces, called
Living-Learning Communities, are available at many college and universities across the country.
Living-Learning communities differ from the average first-year residence hall
experience. This program assigns a faculty advisor and, potentially, a graduate assistant to the
community. Both program events and activities for students. This provides an opportunity for
students to make connections with both peers and faculty within the college. By having a
community that is specific to a students interest and pairing them with faculty, students have a
higher sense of satisfaction in both their living and learning experiences than those who live in
traditional residence hall settings (Frazier and Eighmy 25). Many times, community faculty
advisors team up to produce programs or activities that are open to the entire hall, rather than just
their respective communities. For over a decade, North Dakota State University (NDSU) has

2
hosted special Living-Learning communities for some of its student population. This program
aims to ...support students by providing a vibrant, healthy place to live and learn, (NDSU).
Currently, there are seven of these communities available: Engineering, Business, Human
Development and Education, Health Sciences, Wellness, Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences
(AHSS), and Transfer and International Exchange Students (TIES). These special communities
are offered mostly to first-year students who wish to live with students who have the same major
or majors within the same college.
These communities are mostly located in the four high rise buildings on campus. These
include Thompson, Pavek, Seim, and Sevrinson Hall. These are formatted in houses, with one
lobby floor and a balcony floor on top, which holds approximately 35 students. There is one
resident assistant (RA) per floor who work together and report to their hall director (HD) for
programming planning and other responsibilities. The entire buildings is not completely
dedicated to these unique communities; traditional communities are also offered. In fact, there is
research that indicates that the students who do not directly participate in the Living-Learning
program benefit from the program as well (Longerbeam, Inkelas, and Brower 26). If students
wish to participate in the Living-Learning program, they can indicate their interest on their
housing application and include which communities they are interested in living in. If there is a
shortage of participants, students who may not have been interested in joining the community
may be placed there is order to fill up bed space. In my experience, students who end up in this
situation enjoy living there, despite their lack of commonalities with their peers.
Faculty Advisors, RAs, and HDs work together to implement the Residence Curriculum
that is created by the assistant directors of the Department of Residence Life. This process
includes constant communication between all parties in order to ensure program attendance and

3
success. Currently, the final wave of this curriculum is a global citizen (Catherine 2015). The
journey for these students is separated into five distinct waves, each with specific outcomes and
activities that illustrate personal development and growth (Catherine 2015). While this journey
is neither linear nor sequential, the goal of this curriculum is to have a student move past Wave
1 and show signs of personal development by the end of their stay on campus (Catherine 2015).
This curriculum is supported by Chickerings Vectors of Development, which examines which
elements contribute to the formation of an identity. In my research, one vector in particular
strongly fit within this curriculum. Titled Moving Through Autonomy Toward
Interdependence, Higher Education leaders should arrange opportunities and environments that
nurture self-exploration in order to define personal morals, values, and aspects of their identity
(Owens 20). While this curriculum applies to all students who live on campus, the LivingLearning program creates an environment where more of these moments can be facilitated.
With so many factors surrounding such a large program, it can be difficult in order to
execute this idyllic vision for over 70 students at a time. Many roadblocks exist: lack of faculty
or student engagement, miscommunication between academic and student affairs, or goals for
student development not matching up between both parties. One or any combination of these
issues has the potential to negatively affect students or block them from achieving at a higher
level. Are these issues currently happening within NDSUs AHSS Living-Learning community?
If so, what can be done in order to fix these issues and ensure the success of these students each
year?
Methods & Procedures
Qualitative method were used to measure the success of this program. Three personal interviews
were conducted in order to see how each participants could vocalize their personal thoughts on

4
these three questions. All interviewees have been made anonymous in order to put the focus on
the data gathered in this project.
1. What is the definition of a global citizen?
2. How do you track student progress?
3. Is faculty engagement an important factor for the Living-Learning program?
The Assistant Director of Residential Education (Catherine), Thompson Hall Director
(Madeline), and faculty advisor (Laura) for the AHSS community were chosen to be interviews
for this project. While some questions were unique to each persons background, position, and
vision for the Living-Learning program, these aforementioned questions were the most important
pertinent to my research. Each were recorded to see if definitions for global citizen matched up,
how this curriculum is used differently in each position, and if faculty were indeed an integral
part of the entire Living-Learning experience in the AHSS community.
Interviews were used primarily to receive feedback about each position and its role
within the AHSS community. All members of these interviews work directly with the program
and help design new programs and procedures every year. These interviews focused on various
topics besides the previously stated questions, including: professional job descriptions and
responsibilities, personal experiences with the Living-Learning program, and the future of these
unique communities at NDSU. Each subject willingly participated these interviews with the full
knowledge that this information was being used for this final project and would be presented on
later in the semester. After all interviews were completed, the data was used to assess the
common themes between these three questions.
These interviews were needed in order to see if the three main questions asked were
uniform and how curriculum was applied for the participants of the program. Because the

5
Residence Life curriculum did not have a formal definition of global citizen which is the ideal
product, it was important to see if each individual had a similar or dissimilar vision for what this
entailed. Along with learning about specific job responsibilities were unique to each position,
these interviews also established the relationship between each individual and how they
interacted together to create the first-year experience in the Living-Learning program. By
understanding each role that the interviewee had, it illustrated how the Living-Learning program
works and why each role is needed. While some roles were more about connecting students
faculty, others helped design the framework for these interactions (namely, the curriculum). Each
has a different role in helping students expand their personal understanding of the world and how
they fit into it.
If there had been more time available, it would be recommended that there be a first-year
student and past participant student interviewed about their personal experiences. This would
have provided an opportunity to see the students perspective and how to make the program more
engaging for participants.
Results
The results of the interview will be assessed by looking at each common question that was posed
during each interview. This particular format will be able to best address the gaps that are present
between the academic and student affairs sides of the program. All of the questions asked during
all three interviews can be found in the appendix at the end of this research paper.
What is the definition of a global citizen?
Global citizenship is one of the more integral parts of the Residence Life curriculum. Students
who migrate from different waves would ideally become apart of global citizenship, thus

6
exhibiting certain qualities. As the curriculum that I found did not have a formal definition, I
wanted to see if these three individuals had similar ideas as to what a global citizen is.
Catherine (Residence Life): A global citizen is someone who can adapt and learn from
and grow from anyone they interact no matter where they are and have an appreciation for what
makes that person unique.
Madeline (Residence Life): Somebody who takes responsibility for their own actions,
who is a positive member of the community that they live in...they have each others backs, they
are willing to stand up for one another, theyre engaged in not only NDSU but in the FargoMoorhead community as well as out in the world... and there is also an awareness of things that
are going on so instead of living in your own little bubble of NDSU...to be aware of things that
are going on in the nation and in the world and to be able to have conversations about that and be
engaged.
Laura (Academic Affairs): I havent really had access to the curriculum...I probably
havent looked at in two years at least. I probably could find it if I wanted to but...its not
something I have ready access to.
How do you track student progress?
While Residence Life staff appears to use multiple tools in order to assess student progress,
academic affairs uses academic success and progress over the course of the entire school year.
The biggest difference is that Residence Life chooses to look at behavior and academics, while
Academic Affairs is concerned only with academics. They are also dependant on the Department
of Residence Life to supply this information.
Catherine (Residence Life): The student interaction reports (SIRS) are used [to track
student development]. This is the first year that weve incorporated that [waves] into the form

7
[software]...The convenience of having it there is a way to track where students see them
[residents]. The question that Hall Directors need to identify, for their staff, is where they see the
student in the waves in our community, or where they see that student in the waves based on
their experiences as a person.
Madeline (Residence Life): I think you cant look at a student and say They clearly are
now in wave two...I dont think its [the curriculum] set up concretely enough for that. And so
its a little bit up to what Im seeing or what the RAs are seeing and...our judgment. So it maybe
is a little fluffy...but hopefully youre going to be seeing some of the growth...
Based on the interactions our RAs are having and reporting on, the different touchpoints,
the different events, all of those things [are used to track student progress]. Maybe I look at it for
student conduct meetings and if theyre learning from those or not. Or if Im meeting with that
same student for the same things over and over and over...its kind of taking bits and pieces of
everything that we do to see where we think theyre [students] at.
Laura (Academic Affairs): We have access to GPAs at the end of the semester, I think
so...whether they did better one semester to another...That would be something Residence Life
would have to provide...
Is faculty engagement an important factor for the Living-Learning program?
All parties were in agreement about the importance of the presence of faculty within the LivingLearning program. This was the only questions where all parties were unanimous about the
positive benefits of collaborating with both departments in order for students to interact with
faculty outside of the classroom.
Catherine (Residence Life): There is a ton of research out there about faculty
engagement with students outside of the classroom and the benefit that has on student

8
persistence, retention, potentially GPA even...That person [faculty mentor] is essential, the
connection, with the college, and so Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences needs a point person
for us to connect with and for members of the college to connect with, to develop what happens
in the community as a result of being part of a community being dedicated to that college.
Madeline (Residence Life): Theres a lot of reasons that its important. For...The
learning communities that are focused on a specific major or college, the students there have a
much bigger opportunity to get to the students in their other classes and also working with the
same faculty mentor...They can make connections with the professional staff who can really be
an ally for them and give them advice and can help them through all of the ups and downs of
figuring out college as well as giving them academic support. But, in general, when they have
those connections with faculty, theres more...theres a higher rate of success, theres better GPA,
theres all of these things that make it worthwhile.
Laura (Academic Affairs): Students need to see faculty, I think, outside of the
classroom. I went to a really incredibly small school...and faculty were constantly in-and-out of
our residence halls talking to us, stopping by in the evenings with big bowls of popcorn...Ive
always wanted to try and recreate that sort of feeling for our students, and were actually pitching
ourselves as the small liberal arts college within a larger university, because our faculty do tend
to know their students...and so you get to know faculty and I think thats important. Faculty need
to be role models, they need to serve as references, and, to do that, they need to be spending time
with students.
Reflection
Interpersonal Conflict

9
The largest identifiable issues within this interviewing process was the interpersonal conflict
between the Faculty Advisor and the Department of Residence Life. While the Assistant Director
for Residential Education nor the Hall Director never discussed any conflict, the Faculty Advisor
made numerous statements that indicated negative feelings towards certain individuals working
within Residence Life. These toxic feelings, if not resolved, could lead to negative effects on the
AHSS Living-Learning program and its future as a community within Thompson Hall.
This personal conflict has affected the implementation the residence life curriculum in
this community. While it is enforced by the Hall Director and RAs at all times, it is not enforced
by the faculty advisor or the graduate student. As discussed previously, Laura does know that the
curriculum exists, but is not aware of how to get the updated version from the Department of
Residence Life or access it from the Residence Life website. Because she is unaware of the
curriculum, it cannot be discussed during staff interactions or through the programming
specifically created for the AHSS community. This is a detriment to students as they progress
through personal development and do not receive opportunities that would allow them to explore
their values, morals, and civic responsibilities.
Some of this lack of communication also comes from the Faculty Advisors view of the
future of this Living-Learning community. ...I could see next year being our last year...I respect
the purpose of them [Living-Learning communities], Im not sure NDSU is providing enough
support for them to be successful, (Laura 2015). It was evident that the academic side of the
community did not feel supported and has resulted in negative feelings. As none of these
previous issues were brought up in other interviews, it is possible that these feelings are merely
one-sided.

10
The curriculum, or lack thereof, also poses an interesting point between Academic Affairs
and Student Affairs. This term, while both heavily used on both sides, means completely
different things. In Student Affairs, curriculum acts more as a guide for student development as
they progress through the semester. By designing outcomes for this curriculum, it serves as a
guide with student-to-student interaction, along with professional-to-student interaction as well.
While the current curriculum for NDSU is very broad and does not have a specific end goal for
each student, it still is used in order to categorize students and see where theyre developing
within the spectrum. In Academic Affairs, creating a curriculum is a very long process, involving
approval by multiple committees throughout the university. It is like to be more concrete, as it
will establish and defend the educational outcomes it fulfills. Educational curriculum will collect
extra tuition money; the Residence Life curriculum will collect money regardless, whether there
is a curriculum or not. Many students or professional are not even aware that a curriculum is
being implemented or that their personal, social, or psychological development is being
monitored or tracked by RAs or HDs. By having such a different context for the word
curriculum, this potentially leads to disagreement over the importance or the impact of
Residence Life curriculum.
Another reason for this gap between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs is the
emphasis on personal development versus service. When talking to Laura, she discussed that her
philosophy on teaching the first-year participants emphasized serving others, rather than
developing into a global citizen (Laura 2015). While service is part of the Residence Life
curriculum has service as a part of it, personal development is needed in order to recognize the
importance of service (Catherine 2015). While neither of these is necessarily better than the
other, the split emphasis on two different subjects isnt conducive to having Academic Affairs

11
and Student Affairs working together. This program is rooted in these two departments working
in unison to create a great first-year experience living on campus. With a divide, this experience
is altered, either positively or negatively.
However, research reveals that Living-Learning communities are not required for student
success in college. According to a study conducted by Yongyi, Arboleda, Shelley II, and Whalen,
not all students benefit from a social living environment (22). Some students prefer to focus
mainly on their academic requirements rather than make interpersonal connections with their
peers. While this is somewhat jarring to those working in Residence Life, this is an important
component to consider. Perhaps this Living-Learning community will eventually end and will
not negatively impact students. It will certainly cease to exist if these conflicts are not fixed on
the academic and student affairs side.
Measuring Student Progress
From my interactions with all three individuals, there is a very clear divide between Academic
Affairs employees and Residence Life employees. The faculty advisor for this program had
decided not to implement the curriculum because she does not want to try to access it (Laura
2015). However, it is not clear if the Faculty Advisor is aware of the Student Interaction Reports
(SIRS) and touchpoints that are used to track student behavior and progress throughout their time
living on campus.
SIRS are a way to track student behavior throughout the year. RAs can record
conversations and interactions that they have with students living in their building, whether it is
formal (discussing multiple noise violations) or informal (How school is going, etc.).
Touchpoints, according to Catherine, are more so related to student engagement, either
spontaneous or planned (2015). The social elements of the RA position are important ones, as the

12
Department of Residence Life requires that all RAs interact with all residents multiple times
throughout the year. These tracking methods can also measure social connection, which is an
integral part to the quality of human life (Seppala, Rossomando, and Doty 430). In order to have
healthy social connection between peers within a community, residents must feel a sense of
similarity, emotional connection, and a sense of belonging (Seppala, Rossomando, and Doty 416418). While these Living-Learning communities ideally facilitate these components, it is
important that such aspects are tracked to make sure they are present throughout the year.
The Assistant Director for Residential Education was the only one that explicitly
discussed civility between students. In past years, it was noted that overall civility between peers
was low, as evidenced by unkind behaviors towards others (Catherine 2015). The AHSS LivingLearning community offers a unique setting that could potentially be used to support democracy
and civility between peers by getting involved in Hall Government or deciding on community
contracts or discussing what kind of programming students would prefer. Thomas discusses how
universities should be challenged to engage students in the democratic process and becoming
involved within the community (10). By encouraging students to take charge of their living space
and discussing their ideas with their peers, the AHSS community can take full advantage of this
ideal. By providing students with the opportunity to be responsible for their living space and
experience, students can learn about the importance of involvement. While the Living-Learning
program may not be considered an intentional democratic community, it does provide
experiences that broaden or possible change students perspectives. By allowing students to
participate and learn about the democratic process, individuals may be more inclined to become
more involved on campus on a larger scale, such as Student Government (Fried 65).

13
It appears that the academic side of this program only measures student progress by
assessing academic achievement. While this is an important part of student success, this is not a
holistic view of student achievement. Students may be doing well in the classroom, but their
mental and physical health could potentially be suffering. By looking at SIRS, touchpoints, and
academic progress, this will illustrate a better picture of an individual students experience at
NDSU.
Faculty Engagement & Involvement
All three interviews were unison in the importance of faculty interaction with students outside of
the classroom. As this was the only question that received similar answers from all three parties,
it was important that this component of the Living-Learning program be dissected further. This
element sets these unique communities apart from the traditional experience that most first-year
students have upon attending a four-year institution. While there are many perceived benefits,
they appear to be a blanket statement. The benefits make sense, but how well are they executed?
Students are not the only parties that benefit from sustained interactions with faculty from
the university. Faculty, especially when they participate in a Faculty-In-Residence (FIR)
program, experience rewarding relationships with students (Davenport and Pasque 56). By
interacting so often or even living in the same space, faculty are given the opportunity to learn
more about students beyond what they would have in the classroom (Davenport and Pasque 56).
This constant contact offers many benefits, such capitalizing on students interests when creating
lectures or lesson plans. Not only can they teach in formal classroom, they have an opportunity
to teach informally outside of academia. Davenport and Pasque refer to these as teaching
moments, where structure is present, but may be life-experienced based, rather than academic

14
(57). Faculty have a host of benefits from choosing to take time to interact with their students in
residence halls.
By having faculty advisors, mentors, and frequent interaction beyond the classroom,
students and staff have an opportunity to create positive interpersonal relationships. However,
boundaries play a significant role in the formation of these relationships. According to Hoffman,
both real and imagined boundaries can impede the creation of these positive relationships (18).
While these interactions are considered to be important, each party has a perceived set of
expectations for their roles. Students have a perception of how much information a professor
should disclose, while professors may feel as though the power differential destroys the chance
of creating satisfying relationships outside of class (Hoffman 18). Professors, while ideally
enjoying their time as teachers, also have other responsibilities to take care of in order to uphold
their position. Publication is a large part of this role, which requires frequent personal research
and time to write. This can even put a strain on teaching and interacting with students in the
class, as sometimes professors feel as though this can sometimes impede research interests and
agendas (Hershberger et al. 2). These roadblocks are important to document, as they need to
addressed in order to improve the Living-Learning program.
If the goal is to create global citizens, there needs to be a congruent curriculum between
Academic Affairs and Student Affairs implemented through continued faculty-student interaction
and programming. With such differing definitions about the ideal end product of the LivingLearning experience, it signifies the great divide between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs.
This is, ultimately, a disservice for students, especially because this community fosters all of the
basic necessities to create global citizens who care not only about their peers morals, values, and
backgrounds, but the world beyond their community and beyond NDSU.

15
Conclusions & Recommendations For Success
The AHSS Living-Learning community has many benefits for all parties surrounding the
program. Students and faculty are presented with opportunities that allow them to make positive
interpersonal connections throughout the year, hopefully lead to more engagement inside and
outside of the classroom. However, if the issues dividing the faculty from the department of
Residence Life is not addressed or fixed, the program may soon too many deficits that will
outweigh the positive aspects of this program.
The interpersonal conflict between the faculty advisor and the assistant director of
Residential Education poses a very serious negative outcome. This hostility shown by the faculty
advisor indicates that the program has taken a negative turn since new staffing changes two years
ago (Laura 2015). While these frustrations appear to be one-sided, it is clear that there needs to
be some sort of mediation in order to make amends. While conflict is inevitable when two very
large departments agree to collaborate, this issue has created a lack of interest in implementing
the residence life curriculum.
This choice does the students a disservice when they enter into this program. This
curriculum gives students opportunities to grow and learn about themselves and their peers in a
safe setting with multiple facilitators guiding the way. These opportunities will continue to be
missed, ultimately leaving students with a less static and dynamic learning experience. If this
experience were to be studied further, it would be in the researchers best interest to interview
students and their personal experiences within this community.
In order to get a more in-depth understanding of this program, getting students
perspectives on the program would provide another level of complexity. Due to time constraints,
this was not a possibility when this study was completed. As students are the target demographic

16
of this program, their experiences are integral to the communitys success. A snowball sample
would most likely yield a diverse sample of students perspectives and their personal opinions of
the Living-Learning program at NDSU. Even interviewing past participants would also show
how the program has changed over the past few years and how programming has either changed
to remained stagnant.
Overall, the AHSS Living-Learning program will need to fix the conflict that alienates
the faculty advisor from the rest of the team that works with this program. This has multiple
issues that in can stem from; some of it may possible come from different definitions on
curriculum or what should be the emphasis of living in the AHSS community. This conflict can
potentially end this community, ultimately doing a disservice to students who want to create
positive interpersonal relationships with their peers and their mentors. Upon clarifying some of
these issues, this community will be able to create positive, academically and culturally engaging
experiences for many first-year students. While not every student can become a global citizen,
there can be more opportunities for students to make progress towards this goal.

17

Works Cited
Catherine. Personal Interview. 05 November 2015.
Davenport, Amy M., and Penny A. Pasque. Adding Breadth and Depth to College and
University Residential Communities: A Phenomenological Study of
Faculty-in-Residence. Journal of College & University Student Housing. 41.1 (2014):
46-65. Web.
Ellet, Tom and Schmidt, Anna. Faculty Perspectives on Creating Community in Residence
Halls. Journal of College & University Student Housing. 38.1 (2001): 26-39. Web.
Frazier, William, and Myron Eighmy. Themed Residential Learning Communities: The
Importance of Purposeful Faculty and Staff Involvement and Student Engagement.
Journal of College & University Student Housing. 38/39.2/1 (2012): 10-31. Web.
Laura. Personal Interview. 13 November 2015.
Fried, Jane. Intentional Democratic Communities: Residential Education for Civic
Engagement. Journal of College & University Student Housing. 36.2 (2009): 56-67.
Web.
Hershberger, Andrew, Maria Spence, Paul Cesarini, Andrew Mara, Kathleen Topolka
Jorissen, David Albrecht, Jeffrey J. Gordon, and Canchu Lin. The Ripple Effect:
Lessons from a Research and Teaching Faculty Learning Community. The Journal on
Excellence in College Teaching. 20.3 (2009):145-173.Web.
Hoffman, Elin Myers. Faculty and Student Relationships: Context Matters. College
Teaching. 62.1 (2014): 13-19. Web.
Living-Learning Program. North Dakota State University. North Dakota State University,

18
n.d. Web. 15 November 2015.
Laura. Interview 13 November 2015.
Longerbeam, Susan D., Karen Kurotuschi Inkelas, and Aaron M. Brower. Secondhand
Benefits: Student Outcomes in Residence Halls with Living-Learning Programs. Journal
of College & University Student Housing. 34.2 (2007): 20-30. Web.
Madeline. Personal Interview. 13 November 2015.
Owen, Julie E. Using Student Development Theories as Conceptual Frameworks in
Leadership Education. New Directions for Student Services. 140 (2012): p.17-35. Web.
Seppala, Emma, Rossomando, Timothy, and Doty, James. Social Connection and
Compassion: Important Predictors of Health and Well-Being. Social Research. 80.2
(2013): 411-430. Web.
Thomas, Nancy. Reframing and Reclaiming Democracy: Higher Educations Challenge.
Peer Review. 10.2 (2008): 9-12. Web.
Wang, Yongi, Ana Arboleda, Mack C. Shelley II, and Donald F. Whalen. The Influence of
Residence Hall Community on Academic Success on Male and Female
Undergraduate Students. Journal of College & University Student Housing. 33.1 (2004):
16-22. Web.

19

Appendix
Catherine Interview Questions:
1. How did you come across the idea of creating global citizens?
2. How do you personally define a global citizen? What actions would students do in order to be
considered a global citizen?
3. How do you expect RAs to create the global citizens if they do not have a faculty mentor or a
faculty mentor that is not very involved in the community?
4. Is this a unique curriculum created by the staff at NDSU or is this a borrowed concept from
other colleagues and different universities?
5. What are the philosophical underpinnings of this curriculum?
6. Why is global citizenship so important to the department of residence life?
7. So, I see that residents optimally go through 5 waves throughout the year in order to become a
global citizen. Can you give me a metaphor or illustration that dictates the typical arc of a
first-year student?
8. Each RA has to complete 5 SIRS and 2 touchpoints a week. Can you define what those are
and the purpose of assigning these tasks to resident assistants?
9. Are SIRS and touchpoints used to keep track of students, or to map the growth or decline of
first-year students? Are they used in any other ways?
10. Do faculty mentors have to present a list of activities or events that they want to host for the
students? Do they have to apply to become apart of the program? Is it only for tenure track
professors/faculty members?

20
11. Are faculty mentors reimbursed for their time? Is their progress with creating positive
interpersonal relationships with students measured or analyzed?
12. What are the ideal components of a great faculty mentor?
13. How do RAs fit into their role as a middleman between faculty mentors and students? Why is
their role important? Is their interest in collaboration with the faculty mentor integral to the
faculty mentors success?
14. What happens if a student doesnt make it through all 5 waves of the curriculum? Is this
considered a failure? Is the university now required to make sure the student transforms into a
global citizen?
Madeline Interview Questions
1. What makes being a Hall Director for Living-Learning communities different than being a
Hall Director in a non-Living-Learning building?
2. Do you and faculty advisors discuss how to implement the Residence Life curriculum with
Linda? Or graduate assistant?
3. What is it important to have faculty be engaged with students?
4. Do you think this Living-Learning program helps students become successful college
students?
5. Could you give me a definition of what a global citizen is?
6. how do you know if a student has moved to a new wave? Do you measure it? How do you
know if a student is a global citizen?
6. What is the RAs role in these special communities?
7. Why do you think these communities have continued to stick around at NDSU? Do you think
they will grow?

21
8. What are some ways to improve the current AHSS Living-Learning community?
Laura Interview Questions
1.What is your position title and what are your responsibilities in regards to the AHSS LivingLearning community?
2. How long have you had this position?
3. With your position, how do you collaborate with Madeline, Catherine, and RAs? How often
do you collaborate with them?
4. With the RAs, do you primarily connect with them through email or special lunch? How does
it work?
5. Whats the graduate assistants role?
6. When collaborating with the Department of Residence Life, do you use the curriculum?
7. What is the definition of a global citizen?
8. How do you measure student progress? Do you look at it throughout the year?
9. Do you think its important that faculty be engaged with students?
10. With the AHSS Living-Learning program, do you think it creates successful college
students?
11. What is the RAs role in the Living-Learning community?
12. Why has the Living-Learning community continued to stick around at NDSU? Where do you
think it will go in the next few years?
13. If you could run the program, what you change about the Living-Learning community?
14. What are some positive experiences youve had with the Living-Learning community?

22