Innovative living-learning programs enhance community and leadership in engineering students, suggesting a positive impact on academic success.
Abstract [Program 1] and [Program 2] are two innovative engineering Living-Learning Programs (LLPs) housed within the [College of Engineering] at the [University]. These LLps are two-year residential programs designed to support first and second-year engineering students by fostering community, academic success, and professional development through a blend of curricular and co-curricular programming. Both programs provide students with opportunities to connect with peers, faculty, and industry professionals while exploring engineering pathways and developing leadership skills. [Program 1] and [Program 2] emphasize the importance of community, inclusion, collaboration, and social change within engineering. Through shared events, professional development workshops, and mentorship opportunities, students from diverse backgrounds are encouraged to learn from each other, work together, and foster a sense of belonging within the larger engineering community. Students participate in specialized coursework that promotes teamwork, leadership, and holistic academic and career support, preparing them for success both during college and beyond. This WIP paper will explore the structure, impact, and evolution of the [Program 1] and [Program 2] programs, highlighting best practices for creating community-based supportive learning environments within engineering. We will present quantitative and qualitative data to illustrate how participation in these programs enhances student retention and graduation in engineering and confidence in pursuing engineering careers. By fostering intentional collaboration and promoting inclusive excellence, these LLPs help cultivate future engineers prepared to work in diverse teams and contribute to a more equitable engineering profession.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Murillo et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: