The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2 - 72

Krista M. Soria * Leonard Taylor, Jr.

to bridge students' experiences across curricular and cocurricular settings and, as we saw
on this campus, be leveraged to further integrate housing-related efforts within the greater
campus community.
Engagement scholarship tends to focus on
students' interactions with professional staff
and faculty (Kuh, 2009; McCormick, Kinzie,
& Gonyea, 2013; Tinto, 2012b); however, these
ﬁndings suggest the value in continued explorations of the impact of students' interactions
with peer educators relative to their engagement
and retention. Because current student engagement literature focuses mainly on students' interactions with diverse peers (Harper & Quaye,
2009; McCormick et al., 2013), evaluating the
impact of interactions with student leaders and
peer educators could also enrich our understanding of students' engagement experiences.
A number of student engagement scholars assert the need for increased student
participation in the development of student
engagement initiatives (Harper & Quaye,
2009; McCormick et al., 2013). Student affairs
leaders may ﬁnd beneﬁt in increasing the
number of strengths-trained community advisors and similar peer educators on campus and
in encouraging more peer interactions around
strengths; for example, at this institution, the
departments of fraternity and sorority life, new
and transfer student orientation, and athletics
are all areas in which employees interact with
a large volume of students transitioning into
the university. Student leaders in these groups
trained as strengths peer educators could help

72

stimulate student engagement within these
populations and propel the culture of student
engagement through more comprehensive
strengths interactions.
Overall, the results of this study demonstrate the value of strengths-based practices
for ﬁrst-year students in housing contexts. We
recommend that scholars continue exploring
the outcomes of strengths-based approaches
within housing, including the effectiveness
of particular strengths-based initiatives and
practices such as one-to-one strengths conversations or strengths group activities. The potential impacts of strengths-based approaches
can also extend into the experiences of housing
staff, including resident assistants, directors,
and coordinators; consequently, we recommend that researchers also investigate the potential impacts of strengths approaches among
staff and student leaders. Finally, housing practitioners seeking to embed strengths-based approaches in residence halls are encouraged to
infuse strengths in all areas of housing. The
strengths practices at this university did not
occur in isolated pockets of housing and residence life but were instead integrated among
all staff, community advisors, and residence
directors. In addition, the strengths efforts on
this campus were supported by commitments
from central student affairs and embraced by
several individuals who were eager to adopt
strengths practices in their work. Practitioners
seeking to initiate strengths-based approaches
may achieve success by intentionally developing collaborations with other academic and
student affairs partners.

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2
