How to do things otherwise: Educational institutions as sources of belonging

"Belonging doesn’t ask you to change, it invites you to be," says third culture kid, coach and artist Stamatia Gotsi while international student Jimena Alvarez shares that it is difficult to think about belonging without thinking about distance.  

For too long I felt like I did not belong anywhere. This sense of not belonging adversely affected my life but eventually taught me that the personal is not only political but theoretical, too. Thus, academia became a true source of liberation for me and has been my loyal companion ever since. Precisely, a large part of my experience of belonging happened because of international higher education; it was formed at the universities where I had the privilege of studying. Through remarkable academics and mindful administrative staff, inclusive curricula and teaching methods, diverse fellow students, multifaceted university events and above all through the Erasmus+ programme.  

Against this background, various scholars have argued that a sense of belonging is a potential force for:  

• Reducing dropout intentions  

• Promoting student achievement 

• Promoting student well-being and mental health  

• Promoting self-efficacy 

• Promoting university engagement  

• Increasing life satisfaction 

Yilderim et al. (2021) highlight that for international students specifically, an increased sense of belonging is connected to "better well-being, higher study satisfaction, and lower drop-out intentions" with the first semesters being particularly crucial.  

Accordingly, Tovar and Simon (2010) underline that developing a sense of belonging is of utmost significance for disadvantaged, marginalised and underrepresented student groups, as they face more obstacles and higher levels of systemic discrimination than their more privileged peers. 

Thus, belonging is a concept to be reckoned with.  

The concept of student belonging 

Strayhorn (2012) writes that student belonging as a concept can be defined as "students’ perceived social support on campus, a feeling or sensation of connectedness, the experience of mattering or feeling cared about, accepted, respected, valued by, and important to the group (e.g., campus community) or others on campus (e.g., faculty, peers)." 

Somehow, Strayhorn’s definition implies that fostering a sense of belonging on campus is something the institution is solely in charge of and responsible for. In other words, HEIs develop inclusive strategies and policies that, if implemented correctly, create a sense of belonging among students. However, this is not the case.  

First and foremost, we must position our (international) students as actors who contribute to building a sense of belonging. It is an action we do collectively and a process that understands that belonging is not a unilinear, fixed and universal experience as Louie et all. (2022) highlight in their framework of radical belonging where they call us to accept heterogeneity as an essential resource for learning and change. 

Secondly, we have to be aware of cultural dominance and unjust power structures within our HEIs. A sense of non-belonging is not solely about individual feelings and personal failures, but about established and unfair structures and policies from which none of our educational institutions are exempt. Thus, we are required to dismantle them to co-create something better.  

How to do things otherwise  

Let us dive into practice now and look at three institutional examples that have embraced co-creation with their students as a tool to build and foster a sense of belonging.  

1. Northumbria University Newcastle: Student Inclusion Consultants (SICs): The university collaborates with students, who have lived experiences, or an understanding of the barriers that marginalised and underserved students might face, to achieve inclusive experiences for all. SICs collaborate with various stakeholders across the university while their activities range from analysing the impact university policies might have on specific student groups, to reviewing marketing materials to foster diverse recruitment strategies as well as analysing course materials to guarantee accessibility.  

2. The School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS): Decolonising Philosophy Curriculum Toolkit: The toolkit has been co-created by four SOAS undergraduate student interns and four SOAS academic philosophers from the Department of Religions and Philosophies to decolonise philosophy teaching and assessment at university and secondary school. The toolkit centres on marginalised thought that challenges the hegemony of Western philosophy as well as creates spaces to enter into transformative dialogues between intellectual systems. 

3. IDEM (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity in Mobility): The project which "seeks to enable student mobility in line with the recommendations included in the Erasmus Charter, the Commission's priorities and the goal of reaching 50% mobility for European Universities Alliances," quickly understood that due to structural barriers many students have difficulties participating in mobility programmes, which often results in students not even considering applying. Thus, IDEM identified self-exclusion/ not belonging as a strong factor that deters students from engaging with programmes such as Erasmus+. As a result, the need to rethink established processes and ways of reaching out became apparent, to invest more time and include students into the development and design of project results. The project also shifted its wording from underrepresented to underserved students to highlight HEIs institutional responsibility as opposed to individual disadvantages. 

The three examples show us how belonging in educational settings can be created by including our students in the process, by foregrounding and positioning them as speakers, describers of their own realities and needs, analysts of their situations on the ground, and actors of their future.  

Accordingly, the aforementioned examples emphasise that HEIs must take institutional responsibility and acknowledge shortcomings, by being accountable and centring repair while embracing the endless spaces and possibilities towards co-creating belonging in international higher education. This also means recognising that struggle is part of educational settings, that changes are not unilinear and that we constantly learn and unlearn.  

To reiterate, IDEM realised that good intentions are not enough, that the students the project aimed to reach are not used to being in the centre of university life, that investing time is significant, that established processes and means of communication need changes, that switching to a vocabulary that names unequal power dynamics within international higher education is crucial  and that the project as a whole could not function without the students in their diversity.  

SOAS with its philosophy toolkit strives to confront Western hegemony in its totality, its philosophy, pedagogy, the role of the educator, its methodologies, and by diminishing hierarchies among students and academics.  

Northumbria University acknowledges the importance of lived experiences, as valid sources of knowledge production towards creating university environments that do not equate experience with ‘white and heterosexual’, ‘able-bodied and middle-class’, but with a range of non-normative experiences and realities that challenge dominant positions to foster inclusion and belonging on its campus. 

To conclude, I invite us all, together with our students, to create multiple, alternative, liberatory, non-normative future realities and possibilities that reclaim other ways of mobility, strategy building, teaching, learning and researching so that everybody can belong.