Fresher to Thriver: Cultivating Belonging and Growth in Engineering Education

Responding to a need 

Engineering and computer science students commonly experience a high-pressure transition into university study, where intensive curricula and large cohorts can amplify stress, social isolation, and a reduced sense of belonging. In transnational education (TNE) settings, these challenges are compounded by cultural, linguistic, and institutional distance, often making it harder for students to build peer relationships and approach staff for support. At Queen Mary, these needs are particularly salient given a highly diverse student community, with students representing over 170 nationalities, alongside large-scale TNE provision, including more than 2000 TNE students studying in Beijing.  

F2T was designed as a strategic response to “re-humanise” the early student experience in an age of AI-enabled learning, where students can feel disconnected from educators, peers, and the learning process. Rather than treating transition as a one-off onboarding problem, F2T frames it as a developmental journey requiring evolving support, from academic adjustment and study confidence to agency, identity, and purpose. Early survey evidence differentiated priorities across cohorts, informing targeted emphases (e.g., social integration and belonging in London; academic skills and help-seeking confidence in Beijing).

Context and Principles 

F2T is a year-long ecosystem that integrates active, inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogy with structured opportunities for community-building. It is built around five mutually reinforcing components: developmentally responsive design, joyful learning via Festive Engineering, co-creation and student agency, peer support and wellbeing pedagogy, and purpose-driven learning. The structure was informed by student belonging theory (Tinto, 1993; Tinto, 2025), transition pedagogy (Kift et al., 2010), experiential learning (Kolb and Kolb, 2005) and co-creation in higher education (Bovill and Bulley, 2019).  

Design: Evidence-informed and developmentally sequenced

Design began with diagnostic listening: a First-Year Transition Survey and subsequent feedback loops were used to identify students’ academic, social, and emotional priorities, then translate these insights into the content, sequencing, and delivery of workshops across the year. Importantly, the programme was context-sensitive. In London, activities include Festive Engineering sessions, co-curricular initiatives and community-building events that foregrounded belonging and participation in student life. In Beijing, delivery prioritised structured academic skills workshops, competence--building activities, and social events for student–staff interaction to strengthen relational engagement. 

Implementation: Workshops, joyful practice and community infrastructure

• Developmentally responsive workshops offered scaffolded learning on how to learn and how to thrive: Active Learning sessions (e.g., engaging with Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom (DIKW) model and addressing the illusion of competence), GenAI for Learning workshops (hands-on, learning-by-doing with prompt engineering and applications such as embedded systems and web development), Team Building for group coursework, and a capstone reflection workshop using Gibb’s Reflective Cycle. 

• Festive Engineering translated technical learning into low-stakes, high-belonging experiences by embedding circuits and making into global festivals (e.g., LED pumpkins, “Love Circuit”, Christmas soldering, Easter sensors and lab “bunny hunt”, and culturally grounded activities such as shadow puppets and traditional Chinese painting). These events were intentionally designed as relational spaces, where laughter, creativity, and shared making become pedagogical tools for engagement, confidence, and intercultural connection.   

• Co-creation and student agency were operationalised through tangible roles for students as designers and leaders: a logo design competition, student-staff co-development of an AI literacy workshop, and a student-created metaverse mentoring space that extended peer support beyond physical campuses. Co-creation was treated not as a tokenistic consultation mechanism, but as capability-building, supporting students to shape their learning culture and exercise leadership. 

• Peer support and wellbeing pedagogy were embedded through a co-designed Peer Mentorship Programme, delivered in-person and via metaverse-enabled sessions, positioning belonging and help-seeking as learnable practices rather than optional “support services.”

Participation in programme activities was voluntary. Data collection for surveys adhered to institutional ethical guidelines and received ethical approvals (QMERC20.565.DSEECS24.008, QMERC20.565.DSEECS24.009, and QMERC20.565.DSEECS24.105). All responses were anonymised and analysed in aggregate form to ensure confidentiality. 

Impact

In its inaugural year (2024/25), F2T reached 1,880+ students across London and Beijing contexts, with 900+ active participants engaging in workshops, Festive Engineering, and peer mentoring (including metaverse sessions). 

Evaluation evidence indicates consistently strong outcomes across belonging, engagement, and capability development. Across surveys completed by 710 students, 85%+ reported increased belonging, enjoyment in learning, and clarity of academic purpose; 66%+ reported confidence using GenAI tools; and 90%+ rated the teamworking workshop as helpful/very helpful. Festive Engineering in particular showed 95%+ reporting enhanced community connection, with qualitative responses clustering around “fun,” “informative,” and “practical” (with culturally nuanced expressions of value such as “useful” in the TNE cohort).    

Student testimonials illuminate the “why” behind these metrics: learners emphasised pride and identity (“I felt so proud and excited to be an engineer”), stress relief through joyful making (“I’ve never imagined I could learn circuit building in such a fun way!”;“it was a relaxed session.”“…I'm so happy I got to learn how to soldier with the help of staff.” “”), and the value of authentic community and mentoring relationships (“Mentoring was such a highlight! I got to meet amazing people, lead fun sessions, and build skills I’ll carry with me long after uni.”). 

F2T has also demonstrated institution-facing impact. It received formal recognition through a Faculty Education Excellence Award for Festive Engineering, and the programme’s contribution to improved National Student Survey (NSS) outcomes, including perceptions that “lecturers genuinely care” and provision of “great extracurricular opportunities”, was explicitly acknowledged by the Vice Principal (Education). Four student co-creators have been recognised through Student Enhanced Engagement and Development (SEED) awards: one for co-creating a GenAI literacy development workshop; one for contributions to an AI-enhanced education project; and two for developing a metaverse virtual space for peering mentoring, signalling that the initiative builds leadership and partnership capacity, not only student participation. 

Recommendations 

• Treat transition as a developmental curriculum, not an induction event. Use early diagnostics (survey/focus groups) to sequence support that evolves from adjustment → confidence → agency → purpose. 

• Embed belonging in disciplinary practice. “Joy” is not a soft add-on: in F2T, festive making creates psychologically safe entry points into technical identity, especially for students who may not yet see themselves as engineers.  

• Design co-creation as capability-building. Provide defined roles, artefacts, and recognition (e.g., competitions, co-facilitation, co-authorship) so partnership develops leadership rather than simply collecting opinions. 

• Integrate AI literacy within human connection. Position GenAI as a tool for learning-by-doing and reflective judgement, while safeguarding relational pedagogy and community, particularly important where AI can increase isolation. 

• Plan for scale with fidelity. Document activity designs, facilitation guides, and student partner pathways early; align to Graduate Attributes and secure cross-unit support for sustainable delivery.

From the 2025/26 academic year, the F2T programme has expanded from primarily supporting first-year students to engaging students across multiple years of study within EECS. The model has also begun to be introduced and adopted by other faculties across the university, demonstrating its potential for wider institutional impact. 

References

• Kift, S., Nelson, K. and Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE – A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1–20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v1i1.13 
• Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. 
• Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.  
• Tinto, V. (2025). Student Persistence Through a Different Lens. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 26(4), 959-969. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/15210251241249158 
• Verbree, A.-R., van der Schaaf, M., Wijngaards-de Meij, L. and Dilaver, G. (2025) ‘Students’ sense of belonging and authenticity in higher education’, British Educational Research Journal. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.411 
• Youtube: https://youtu.be/Ub_BxRgin9A?t=5