Cohorts: Who’s on Your Team?
Abstract
The advantages of providing a cohort environment for transitioning students are reviewed. Cohort
outcomes for various levels of effort are discussed as are the administrative policies required to
establish a cohort program. The key players required to develop and maintain a cohort program are
identified and their roles are discussed. Cohort experiences from the University of Toledo and
Southern Utah University are presented.
Summary
Cohorts are mentored groups of students. All of the students in a cohort have the same major, work
on the same academic level, have similar class schedules and take several classes together. They
regularly meet outside of class (often with their mentor) to study, assess academic progress, discuss
career options and socialize. Well functioning cohorts will also meet impulsively. Cohort
participation provides students transitioning between any academic level an immediate association
with other students in similar circumstances, a group identity, and resources to solve problems.
Supporting the highly visible cohort is a dedicated team of faculty, staff and administration. Just
like the tip of an iceberg, the mentor and students are only a fraction of the team. Unseen is the
organization and structure that accommodates the apparently spontaneous cohort. To get a cohort
deliberately scheduled into the same section of two or three courses each semester, someone must
reserve required seats prior to open registration, essentially giving cohort students priority
registration. Accomplishing this requires the help (and blessing) of Chairmen, Deans, the Registrar,
Vice Presidents and the Provost. For entering freshman wanting to participate in a cohort, a first
year program must identify students during the application, admission or orientation process. Once
cohorts are established recruiters can become part of the team and invite students to participate or
perhaps choose the school based on the student-centered design. Assigning students to a unique
cohort is often discussed with or recommended by an academic advisor, and the support of course
instructors is invaluable. Administrative and financial support is important for social and academic
activities because the cohort seeks to support students in developing habits of a professional and
collegial life. The power of a pizza arriving during a study hall or a custom printed T-shirt cannot
be underestimated! If not part of a school’s or department’s design which rewards faculty for
actively supporting student learning, faculty mentors may be more willing to actively participate
with a stipend incentive. Of course, training requires time and money so that all of these players can
work as a coordinated team.
With a winning team and plan, transition woes decrease while enrollment, retention and the time to
graduation all naturally improve. A cohort achieves the initially challenging task of coordinating
learning and transforming students to become more accountable and authentic learners, and it does
it by putting the work of learning in their control.
Cohorts: Who’s on Your Team?
By Jill Wilks and Blair McDonald
Southern Utah University, Cedar City, Utah
Advantages of providing a cohort environment for transitioning students
It’s the first day of another fall term; the new freshmen are on campus and trying desperately to get
to their classes on time, or are they? Today’s transitioning students have a wide range of college
expectations. Some anticipate intense reading, twenty-page term papers and submersion in classic
theory while for others it’s no curfew, new avenues to freely explore, and parties every night! In the
midst of this confusion academic programs stand as a lighthouse, an ultimate goal and a path
through the chaos. Students in this transition need a well defined purpose that they can adopt and
follow. That used to be a major. Today, an increasing number of students commit to attend college
without knowing what they really want to study. Every student requires guidance at some level;
unfortunately, few students require exactly the same guidance, thus the effectiveness of cohorts.
By grouping students using well defined criteria, it is possible to provide common elements of
advising in a group setting. Student then begin to utilize other students for information, not just
authority figures. Through observation, faculty mentors are able to discern some of the individual
needs. Providing a means of handling the problems that are common to all, most or even many
students (without boring the remainder) is essential to being able to spend the time required to
satisfy the truly individual needs. This creation of an environment where the students interact and
suggest solutions to each other’s problems allows faculty to naturally assume a “guide on the side”
role and sets the scene for students to reduce dependence and increase interdependence and
independence. Cohorts essentially franchise some of the common elements of advising out to the
advisees under the oversight of an advisor.
The academic needs of students can not be completely separated from the social, moral and even
physical needs. All aspects of life must continue to mature and support the academic endeavors for
optimal progress; however, it is very difficult to provide direct advice to individuals in most of these
areas because what is right for A may be wrong for B. Providing a haven where a wide spectrum of
outcomes are allowed and even promoted allows the transitioning student a chance to flex, test their
individuality and grow without having to immediately commit to something that isn’t thoroughly
understood. Cohorts provide a common thread to every member and the interaction of threads with
every other member. In a cohort, students are no longer alone; they have a peer group and a campus
identity as early as the first day of classes. The cohort provides the safety net to catch those for
whom the general advice is not working.
Among the most difficult of advising tasks is discerning the progress of students, especially those
that are not progressing at a rate that will likely lead to personal success and program success
(timely graduation). Learning that a student is in trouble by reviewing the recorded final grade in a
class doesn’t provide an advisor any opportunity to help the student improve. Gaining a means of
recognizing inadequate progress early in a term, opens the door for remedial actions such as
additional study time, tutoring, schedule adjustments, and/or support services. In a cohort
environment, the mentor observes students working on their homework and the interactions
between students from the first day of classes. The strong students naturally help the weak and in
doing so both become stronger. The students that have taken courses that are above their ability are
quickly identified (they struggle with their homework, and with other students’ explanations of the
homework in the first week). After having been identified, these students’ needs can be addressed;
as a matter of fact, everyone faces challenges, which builds our character.
Cohort outcomes for various levels of effort
A cohort plan can be simple and involve only a couple of objectives, or it can be more
comprehensive with numerous objectives. The goals of the campus, college, department or program
organizing the cohort dictate the complexity. The support required to achieve the goals increases in
direct proportion, or maybe even exponentially to the level of complexity, but then so does the
payoff!
Some common objectives often associated with cohorts are: to attract students to a particular major,
retain a greater percentage of students through the transition to the second semester or year, improve
student academic performance, acquaint students with their peers within a major, acquaint students
with the specific features and resources available in a particular program, to facilitate better and
more frequent academic advising, and to get academic, social, and emotional support tools available
within a program into the hands of the students. In the simplest case, a single objective such as
getting peers to meet each other, forming a cohort may require little in the way of organization,
resources and effort. A professor could require that in a syllabus and a writing assignment. A room
might be reserved for a particular time each week and students invited to congregate and become
acquainted. Free pizza may be all that is necessary to attract an initial crowd, and with the right
cohort mentor that’s all that is needed to begin a self sustaining program.
Loftier objectives require greater support and organization. Building cohorts around a common
academic schedule to provide students peer group recognition and support in their studies requires
planning, advertising and follow through. The instructor’s of multiple courses have to cooperate (or
at least not object). The registrar has to provide a means of letting participating students enroll in a
common schedule. The program may be included in the degree program description in the school
catalog. Advisors and mentors have to plan interactions with the cohort that will provide enough
early exposure to assess the preparation of everyone in the cohort and insure that they are ready to
take the common schedule and a remedial plan needs to be in place for those students that are not
prepared so that they can quickly get help without having to leave the cohort.
Meeting the single objective of increasing retention
Achieving a higher rate of retention can be obtained by improving student satisfaction of a degree
program. Students stay in programs for several reasons: one, they are succeeding; two, they believe
they will obtain an interesting, productive and rewarding career; and three, they are attracted to
charismatic faculty associated with the program. Cohorts give faculty the opportunity to interact
with students outside of the classroom and formal teaching situations. The instructors become
mentors; they build a rapport with the cohort and individual students. As the students get to know
the mentors, communication becomes more open and relaxed. When the students become
comfortable in their degree program, they stay in the program, they make better progress, and they
look at more career options within the program. They become an integral part of the program.
The administrative policies required to establish a cohort program
Running a successful cohort program requires a certain amount of administration and organization.
The cohort requires students and mentors to spend a specified amount of time focused upon
succeeding in the degree program. An administrative decision has to be made regarding the
mentor’s time; is it part of the workload or a voluntary extra curricular? And the student’s time, will
the students be given transcript credit for participating in a cohort? Will cohort credit count toward
degree requirements? These questions must be answered by the program faculty, chair, dean and
even vice president during the cohort programs development stage. Is the cohort a deliberate plan
to aid students in succeeding or is it an experiment? Is there a budget? Money won’t insure a
program’s success, but not having adequate funding can insure a short project life.
The key players
The most essential players are the cohort mentors. They are the point of contact with the students;
they spend their time with the students and they often have a full teaching, service and scholarship
load before they add on cohort responsibilities and activities. They do it anyway! Mentors have to
want to participate and believe that cohort programs result in progress that can not be achieved by
any other means. They have to be proficient in assessing the real progress and needs of students
both individually and as groups. They can not do all of this on their own (at least not for very long),
they have to be supported with policies and resources that protect and promote the program, protect
the mentor and guide the mentor. The mentors have to be able to direct students to well trained
academic advisors, to any of the multitude of support facilities available on a modern campus, cut
through the fog that surrounds financial aid, venture into the realm of internships, CO-OP and workstudy, to answer degree program questions, the scheduling of classes, clubs, student housing, the
intricacies of general education, where to get a username and password, and straight up talk
regarding prerequisites. Even the campus super professor won’t know all the answers; however,
they know the people, programs and offices that have answers. That’s how they got to be super! In
each of the areas mentioned and hundreds of others, there is someone who can help the student find
their way…they are the team. Most of the players aren’t trained in how to work with a cohort of
students; they are trained, often highly trained, in their particular job. They should know of the
cohort and the value that the organizers place on their cohort’s success.
The second most essential players are the coordinators and recruiters. When there are multiple
cohorts, someone has to coordinate and track the activities and needs of each cohort. Someone also
has to take on the role of populating each cohort; finding the students and making the initial sort.
There is no sorting hat for this task and it is critical. Discerning the needs of new students and
grouping them with other students that will, in the end, support each others needs is difficult and
takes a very talented player. These players may not meet with the cohorts frequently or even at all
after they are initially organized; they work in the shadows making sure that all of the organizations
available resources are fairly distributed and best meet the needs of the cohorts as a whole.
Somewhere there is a person with a vision. They may have started the first cohort and grown the
program from humble beginnings; or have had the resources and station to create a fully functional
program from the top down almost overnight. Regardless of the means, they have a vision, they
share their vision and they are relentless in the pursuit of success! The program champion may not
even be in a position to work with a cohort, but they insure that those that are share the vision and
fervor.
A few experiences
Making it happen from the top down. Several years ago the College of Engineering at the
University of Toledo developed a college wide program they call Freshman Interest Groups or
FIG’s. While recruiting the freshman engineering class, prospective high school students were
introduced to the idea of working through their degree program with a small (8 to 10 students)
group of peers. As students were accepted into the program, they were given the opportunity to join
a FIG. Students participating in a FIG enrolled in the same section of several courses in the
engineering curriculum (such as calculus, chemistry, CAD/surveying and the freshman seminar);
the FIG also met frequently outside of the classroom with a faculty or upper class student mentor.
Participation in a FIG was not mandatory and did include some additional commitments to the FIG.
The benefit to most participating freshmen was immediately apparent; they knew where to go and
how to do things on campus faster than the students doing everything on their own. Because they
got answers to their questions almost immediately, including homework questions, they progressed
academically at a more rapid rate. Students working in a FIG that were not adequately prepared for
a class in their schedule, were immediately directed to outside help, additional study time with
peers, tutoring and in some cases changes in their schedule to more suitable courses. By insuring
that the FIG students succeeded in their course work, first semester and first year retention statistics
improved and the college became more successful.
Starting small; last year the Integrated Engineering program at Southern Utah University initiated a
cohort pilot during the first week of the fall semester. Freshmen were invited to attend a weekly
study hall with a faculty mentor and eventually provided a laptop computer. In order to participate,
the students had to be enrolled in a course schedule which would lead to completion of the four year
engineering degree in four years! Approximately two dozen students showed interest and attended
the initial study hall. After just a few weeks, the number of students attending the study hall
diminished to a dozen students who attended throughout their freshman year religiously. As the fall
mid term exam period approached, the cohort began to voluntarily meet outside of the mandatory
once a week two hour study hall and without the mentor. All of the students that participated
beyond the first three weeks indicated that the cohort was a good experience and that it had
improved their academic posture! Only one of these students left the program for another campus;
the reason, well it involved a girl and engineering didn’t stand a chance! Two other students
received two year academic deferments and are expected to return to the Integrated Engineering
program when they return to school. This fall, all of the other students in the cohort returned and
immediately formed a sophomore cohort.
During last years recruiting, the freshman cohort concept was introduced to prospective freshman
and even junior college transfers. The response was overwhelmingly positive and resulted in
doubling the size of the previous freshman class. This year all Integrated Engineering students were
invited to participate in a cohort. During the first week it was tough to find a seat in the computer
labs and classrooms reserved for the Tuesday night study hall. Within three weeks, attendance
dropped and has remained steady with about a third of the declared majors (approximately 40
students) participating. Over the first few weeks, the students were organized into groups of five to
ten and allowed to meet for two hours in a window from 4:00 to 10:00 PM on Tuesdays. The offer
was made to form a cohort for an alternate evening to accommodate any students that had Tuesday
conflicts. A few conflicts were identified; however, the students generally preferred to meet on the
original night and work around their schedules. The cohorts often mix-n-match as assignments in
various classes come due and students congregate to work on the common goal and teach each
other. This year all of the engineering professors are involved as mentors and several suggestions to
improve next years cohort startup are anticipated and welcomed.
A means of organizing and enrolling students in cohorts as they are admitted to the university and
enroll in their courses would be very beneficial. Having a course number that students could use to
enroll in might facilitate better scheduling and time management for students, and workload
management for faculty. With the sudden growth in cohort participation, having a coordinator to
track activities may be essential in the future. The cohort has facilitated more open and frequent
career advising; it has also provided opportunities to conduct informal assessment of student
progress. Additional assessment instruments could be introduced and may make the cohort even
more valuable in the future.
The positive response to engineering’s pilot effort has turned heads and opened minds throughout
the college and all across campus. Many programs are considering or implementing a cohort,
seminar or peer led instruction program. The greatest hurdle seems to be finding a champion and
mentors that are willing to take the time to succeed. Time is the most valuable of all resources and
it takes time to listen, time to assess, and time to develop good study skills. By working together,
time is often better utilized individually and collectively.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carter, Rita. Mapping the Mind. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1998.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihalyi. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and
Row, 1990.
Gardner, Howard. Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books, 1993.
Gibbs, Jeanne. Tribes: A New Way of Learning and Being Together. Sausalito, CA: CenterSource
Systems, LLC, 1995.
Gross, Ronald. Peak Learning: A Master Course in the Skills of Self Education. Los Angeles:
Jeremy Tarcher, Inc. 1991.
______________. The Lifelong Learner. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1977.
Kohn, Alfie. Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise and
Other Bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1993.
Langer, Ellen. The Power of Mindful Learning. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books, 1997.
Levine, Mel. The Myth of Laziness. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003.
Seligman, Martin. Learned Optimism: How to Change your Mind and Your Life. New York: Alfred
A Knopf, Inc., 1990.
_____________. The Optimistic Child. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1995.
Smilkstein, Rita. We’re Born to Learn: Using the Brain’s Natural Learning Process to Create
Today’s Curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2003.
Sternberg, Robert. Successful Intelligence: How Practical and Creative Intelligence Determine
Success in Life. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. Lancaster Place, London: Little Brown, 2004.
Authors Biographical Sketch
Jill Wilks has taught at Southern Utah University for 28 years and is currently the FYE
Coordinator/Designer. She designed and institutionalized a student success course to help
transitioning freshman become accountable for their learning. She is a champion of students doing
the work for their learning and a consultant that has helped universities design award winning
programs which incorporate effective learning habits, brain-based learning, student accountability
and authenticity, and result in improve retention. [email protected]
Blair McDonald is a Civil Engineer (University of Utah: BS 1984, MS 1990, Ph.D. 1996),
consultant, and Professional Engineer. He taught civil, geotechnical and environmental engineering
at the University of Utah (5 years) and University of Toledo (7 years). Currently, he teaches
Integrated Engineering at Southern Utah University (6th year), is a Service Learning
Representative, Academic Advisor, Cohort Mentor, Club Advisor, Freshman Year Success Advisory
Board member, and represents SUU engineering on a statewide articulation committee.
[email protected]