Promoting Post-secondary Student Well-Being

Ashley Filion*, Ella Blondin*, and Jeremy G. Stewart
Department of Psychology
Queen’s University

*denotes equal contributions as first authors

Introduction

Mental health has immense impacts on educational outcomes among post-secondary students. Adjustment problems, trouble coping with stress, supporting loved ones, symptoms of mental illnesses: these experiences, and many others, are part of what students bring with them to the classroom. Promoting student well-being and reducing the impact of mental health challenges on learning is part of effective pedagogy. However, addressing student mental health deliberately and directly may feel daunting.

In this chapter, we first describe why instructors should consider student mental health in course design and delivery. We then spotlight three actionable issues where instructors can make small adjustments that can have positive impacts for some students’ learning, attitudes towards education, and overall well-being. To facilitate the adoption of best practices, we provide concrete examples and directions. We close with suggestions for how instructors can develop and curate lists of mental health resources to support their students.

This chapter is not a “one stop shop”; we only skim the surface of how instructors can use techniques that promote well-being to improve students’ learning experiences. But there is great benefit in starting somewhere, and this is a good place.

A Global Perspective on Post-Secondary Student Mental Health

The World Mental Health International College Student (WMH-ICS) survey initiative was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2014. The initial round of surveys was completed by more than 14,000 students in 19 post-secondary institutions spread across 8 countries (for a detailed description, see Cuijpers et al., 2019). The WMH-ICS has generated reliable information on the prevalence and consequences of mental health problems among post-secondary students.

The WMH-ICS unequivocally demonstrated that mental disorders are common among post-secondary students. Approximately 35% of first-year students met criteria for a lifetime mental disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Mental Disorders – 4th edition (DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) criteria. Further, approximately 89% of lifetime cases were present in the year before students began their degree programs (Auerbach et al., 2018). Coping with mental health symptoms takes a toll on students’ functioning: it is related to disability and role impairment (Wilks et al., 2020). In addition, nearly one-third of first-year students report having had thoughts of suicide, and 4.3% have a history of one (or more) suicide attempts (Mortier et al., 2018). Lifetime nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is endorsed by over one-fifth (22.8%) and increases the odds of subsequent suicidal behaviour (Kiekens et al., 2018). Taken together, symptoms of mental illness are common among post-secondary students, and they often first emerge before students begin their studies.

Lifetime mental health problems have a well-documented impact on post-secondary performance. Pre-matriculation-onset mental disorders are significantly associated with (a) lower odds of completing post-secondary degrees and (b) higher odds of terminating studies before degree completion (attrition) (Auerbach et al., 2016). At a more micro level, recent mental health problems are estimated to lead to a 2.9-4.7% reduction in academic year percentage (0.2-0.3 Grade Point Average [GPA] points) in first year post-secondary students (Bruffaerts et al., 2018). For those who report prior suicidal thoughts and/or behaviours, the deleterious impacts on GPA (Mortier et al., 2015) and likelihood of graduation (Mortier et al., 2018) may be even greater. These striking statistics point to a clear avenue for improving learning experiences for post-secondary students: pedagogical practices that promote positive mental health will enhance students’ learning, and their learning attitudes.

Teaching Difficult Content: Challenges and Learning Opportunities

Interacting with content that we find upsetting is an inevitable hazard of learning. Sometimes, what upsets or even distresses us is also what moves and inspires us; for some, the seeds of lifetime endeavors (e.g., careers) are sown from things that are initially upsetting. As educators, we do not want to censor critical, learning-outcome-relevant content because we anticipate it being provocative.

Instructors are also charged with creating and maintaining safe learning environments wherein students can interact with course content productively. When we ask students to engage with difficult content, it is therefore necessary to have thoughtful supports in place. “Difficult content” sounds abstract, but it is easy to think of examples that would be relevant to coursework across academic disciplines. Post-secondary students will read about war, violence, individuals, and groups experiencing trauma, as well as (or in addition to) the consequences of structural racism, misogyny, and other expressions of hate. These are just some examples. As students bring unique experiences and personal contexts to the classroom, the list of course content that could evoke strong feelings or reactions is endless (see Stewart & Milanovic, 2019, for additional discussion).

Our conceptualization of “difficult” class content in the context of student experience overlaps conceptually with Trauma-Informed Care. Trauma-informed care is an approach to patient care that is taught in medicine and related clinical fields. A key feature of this approach is that it realizes the widespread impact of trauma (broadly defined) on symptoms and functioning and recognizes the variability in potential paths from traumatic experiences to what is happening in the “here and now” (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014). As in Trauma-Informed Care, it is important for instructors to acknowledge the connections between students’ prior experience and classroom content, and, as much as possible, to structure courses through that understanding.

Content Warnings

Using trigger or content warnings is a well-meaning but fundamentally flawed approach for handling difficult topics in post-secondary instruction. In an educational context, content warnings are advanced notifications about course content (e.g., readings, videos, lectures, discussions) that may be tied to students’ past negative experiences, or that may otherwise be upsetting. The intention of content warnings is to help students steel themselves for the material, or to provide an opportunity to avoid it entirely. Many instructors use content warnings believing that they will create safe learning environments and help students benefit from course content.

Unfortunately, content warnings do not work. In experimental studies, content warnings do not make participants feel more prepared to view difficult content (Bridgland et al., 2022) and they increase anticipatory anxiety, rather than providing intended emotional effects (Bridgland et al., 2019). Content warnings have no impact on reactions following the presentation of target content, nor on participants’ coping abilities (Bridgland et al., 2023; Sanson et al., 2019). Content warnings are designed to protect and support student mental health but may do the opposite.

Germane to instructional settings, content warnings also do not have beneficial effects on learning or understanding difficult material. For instance, when people view art depicting scenes that could putatively cause distress, content warnings (a) increase negative emotional reactions and decrease positive emotional reactions; and (b) reduce all aspects of aesthetic appreciation of the target pieces (Jones et al., 2023). Participants draw less meaning from, and make fewer interpretations of, the art in question. Overall, content warnings are not useful or appropriate pedagogical tools for instructors who teach difficult content.

One of our chief concerns about content warnings is that instructors may mentally waive responsibility for supporting their students as they learn about difficult content. Indirectly, content warnings may impede pedagogical techniques that enhance student engagement and learning, and that have the potential to move well-being in a positive direction. Relatedly, others have noted that content warnings may encourage inappropriate avoidance of certain types of information; people miss the opportunity to learn they can cope and interact productively with the content, which reinforces future avoidance (e.g., Gainsburg & Earl, 2018; McNally, 2014). We next present general course design choices and instructor-level considerations to use instead of content warnings.

Alternatives to Content Warnings: Course Design

Instructors should focus on design choices that maximize student agency and autonomy around difficult content. For example, sexual assault survivors feel most supported by representatives of post-secondary institutions when they use empowering language: support that unequivocally acknowledges negative impact of the assault and gives the survivor support in choosing courses of action (Bedera, 2021; Holland & Bedera, 2020). A straightforward way to empower students around difficult content is to provide lesson-by-lesson content details in the syllabus and/or overviews of lesson plans before classes. Instructors may then encourage students to look ahead and identify topics that could be difficult to learn about because of prior negative experiences. Further, educators can make themselves and/or other teaching staff available to answer questions about how the content will be dealt with, and, assuming instructor comfort, to problem-solve around any perceived barriers to learning. This approach does not patronize students, nor does it assume that “one-size-fits-all” when it comes to potentially upsetting or distressing course content. Instead, students are given more control, and the opportunity to reflect on what they need to benefit from lessons and assigned course content (Stewart & Milanovic, 2019).

The recommendations above are most effective when instructors take proactive steps to support those with past negative experiences that could be activated by course content. A general acknowledgement (e.g., in the course syllabus) of students’ lived experiences demonstrates that an instructor is (a) aware that course content can be distressing, (b) that students have diverse negative experiences that can be activated by course content and (c) will center or at least incorporate these experiences in course content. Ideally, this is reinforced with instructor-directed exercises to create a safe and supportive class climate.

To facilitate students’ autonomy, educators can curate a list of mental health resources for students. Optimally, the list includes general options, as well as resources more tailored to course content. For a course focused on self-injurious behaviours, for instance, instructors can provide suicide-focused websites, self-paced cellphone apps, text/phone hotlines, and specialized mental health services for students in the class (available here). Resource curation includes when each option is best used (e.g., in an urgent crisis), how to practically access them, and how to get more information to inform decision-making. Providing this information increases the chances that these resources are used when needed and reduces the considerable mental health burden of accessing help. For further discussions of using course design to improve instruction of difficult content, see Bedera (2021) and Stewart and Milanovic (2019).

Alternatives to Content Warnings: Instructor Considerations

Acknowledging lived experiences and empowering students increases the likelihood that they will share the (negative) experiences that connect with course content. Instructors thus are responsible for reflecting on how they would respond to student disclosures (e.g., firsthand trauma experiences) and ensuring they are sufficiently knowledgeable. Responses that (unintentionally) minimize lived experiences or that are otherwise inadequate can lead to experiences of institutional betrayal (i.e., a worsening of traumatic experiences due to institutional actions or inaction; Smith & Freyd, 2014). Acknowledging and allotting time for student’s disclosures typically goes a long way; giving lived experiences “airtime” in class communicates their importance and empowers students as experts on their circumstances (Bedera, 2021). Critically, educators are entitled to their own individual level of comfort with having students share their connections to difficult content in class. The key is clearly communicating limits – what an instructor is and is not prepared to support – in the context of a student-centered commitment to connecting students with resources or outlets to share their experiences.

Instructors must prepare for the rare cases where students voice unhelpful or hateful attitudes related to course content. For example, students might (purposefully or inadvertently) express victim-blaming or pro-violence attitudes. The educator’s priority is avoiding institutional betrayal; inaction in the face of comments that may be harmful to students can seem like instructor endorsement. Instructors should build an evidence-based response that debunks the misunderstandings that often underlie unhelpful attitudes that might be expressed in class. This has the dual benefit of keeping discussions on track (grounded in the material) and supporting students with lived experience by distancing the instructor from the unhelpful attitude.

Effectively teaching difficult content demands that educators “don [their] own oxygen mask before assisting others.” Instructors who prioritize their own well-being and work to combat burnout will be most effective at promoting student mental health. For example, we have used resources directed at people who care for individuals who experience suicidal thoughts (www.suicideisdifferent.org). Among their many benefits, these resources have helped with categorizing effective strategies by function (e.g., immediate coping; routine upkeep during the semester).  Bedera (2021) provides more examples of habits to consider while teaching difficult content. Although exact approaches to self-care will vary, an instructor should conduct routine “audits” of their own relationship with the difficult content they instruct, knowing that their appraisals and reactions will necessarily transact with their teaching experiences year over year.

Creating a Supportive Class Climate

Class climate can drastically alter students’ overall experience in a course. Enhancing how students perceive their learning environment and their ability to navigate barriers (e.g., mental health challenges) facilitates learning and academic persistence (Slavich & Zimbardo, 2012). Therefore, it is imperative that instructors are thoughtful about how their class climate is established and sustained to increase the likelihood of student success.

Syllabi

A course syllabus is often available to students before the start of classes and is a key tool for establishing class climate. A warm-toned syllabus that acknowledges the importance of mental health can result in instructors being perceived as more approachable (Gurung & Galardi, 2022; Waggoner Denton & Veloso, 2018); approachability is a trait that students value. When students feel that they can approach instructors when facing obstacles, it increases the likelihood of them disclosing barriers to learning, which in turn allows instructors to assist in a mental health promoting manner when possible (Meluch & Starcher, 2020).

Syllabi are also a place to first address values related to equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). Minoritized groups may face additional challenges in postsecondary settings (e.g., discrimination) and can feel that they are unable to seek support (Arday, 2018). Adding a personalized statement of commitment to EDI (avoid, or at least add to, generic language) in the syllabus would demonstrate that all students’ safety and comfort is important. This practice can help marginalized students feel more welcomed. For guidance on how this can be accomplished, see Cornell University’s Center for Teaching Innovation (n.d.) and Fuentes and colleagues (2021). Notably, it is important to act in accordance with what is being communicated to students regarding EDI and address behaviours in the class that deviate from it.

First Class

The syllabus can set the tone for class climate development, but more work must follow. In the first class especially, instructors should discuss the importance of mental and emotional well-being, and outline steps that can be taken should anyone need support throughout the semester (e.g., talking to the instructor or referring to resources in the syllabus). If educators do not feel comfortable engaging in these conversations, simply acknowledging that barriers may arise during the semester is beneficial to students. Instructors are in a position where they can promote student learning and personal growth (Slavich & Zimbardo, 2012). By engaging in these discussions, instructors are normalizing talking about mental health which can combat both public and self-stigma which are both barriers to the disclosure of mental health difficulties and accessing support (Perry et al., 2014).

Student Input

Students should be permitted to provide input about what they need to feel supported in educational settings. Allowing students to contribute to a shared vision of the class climate increases the chances that students will adopt and act in accordance with this vision (Slavich & Zimbardo, 2012). The needs of students will vary from class to class. For instance, the type of support required for a course on race and racialization may be different from a course on molecular biochemistry; the former may address topics that could evoke strong emotional responses from students due to personal experiences based on their racial identity. With that said, instructors should not assume that mental health is irrelevant in any course. Students come from diverse backgrounds and may have different relationships with course content that may not be obvious to the instructor. It is therefore critical to take into consideration feedback and suggestions from students to ensure that the climate that is being created fits their needs.

Class Size

No matter the class size, the recommendations outlined throughout this chapter can contribute to a more positive learning environment for students. However, smaller courses (e.g., seminars where enrolment might be 1-2 dozen students) present a unique opportunity to create a more personalized class climate. Seminars can allow for more back-and-forth discussions amongst students and instructors that can generate a clearer consensus regarding the class’s expectations and needs. For example, in a seminar that one of the authors attended, the instructor used a Google Jamboard to solicit and summarize students’ expectations for themselves, their peers, and their instructor when it came to creating and maintaining a supportive class environment. This anonymous exercise aided in the development of class norms as it generated a discussion on appropriate behaviours for the seminar.

In smaller courses, it is also potentially easier for instructors to foster stronger bonds with students. The strength of an instructor-student relationship influences the likelihood of students sharing when they are struggling (Fulginiti et al., 2015). Consequently, stronger relationships can promote more open communication regarding mental health and other obstacles that students may face throughout the semester which further emphasizes a supportive class climate for the students. With that said, tweaks to the delivery of large survey courses can make disarmingly significant differences to student experiences. For example, instructors can make use of free online polling software (e.g., Mentimeter; available here) to rapidly check in on class climate, and to normalize times of heightened stress/distress throughout the term. We have used techniques like generating real-time word clouds from student responses to stem questions about their mental health, specifically, or their experiences with their coursework in general. Instructors can use brief polls as a launching off point to solicit individual student comments, or as a simple visual reminder of shared experiences (e.g., that many in the class are experiencing ups and downs; that others share the feeling of being overwhelmed in the course).

Sustained Effort

After setting norms for the class from the outset, it is important to reinforce key elements that promote a positive class climate. Making statements throughout the semester signaling support for students’ mental health validates the difficulties that students may be experiencing (Coleman, 2022). This can be especially impactful during times, like exam season, when students experience more stress, or following critical local or geopolitical events (e.g., a student suicide on campus). For example, saying something like “I know this is a stressful time, so I wanted to remind you that you can come to me with any worries about coursework or if you need someone to talk to. There are also resources provided in the course syllabus that I encourage you to access should you need them.” Instructors are not expected to act as therapists, nor should they. Oftentimes, students are seeking guidance on how they can better support themselves. Instead, the instructor can act more as a gatekeeper or facilitator; being knowledgeable about resources available to students and, if possible, having some guidance for how to efficiently get connected with available resources can save students considerable time and hassle. Frustration with access to mental health resources has, for many, a noxious effect on well-being.

Prioritizing class climate also includes responding to behaviours that do not align with the values and needs that student established in the first few classes. By making a sustained effort, it demonstrates that an educator is not paying lip service to student mental health and validates those who may be struggling. Further, the instructor models behaviours that aligns with the students’ expectations of the class climate and generally fosters a positive learning environment.

Creating a supportive class climate requires active communication, collaboration, and ongoing commitment. As the saying goes, “a little can go a long way.” Instructors play a fundamental role in modelling normative attitudes and behaviours for their course. By embracing these practices, instructors can foster a positive learning environment that empowers students to succeed on an academic and personal level.

Helping Students Manage Stress

Post-secondary students routinely weather stressful experiences, including the explicit and continual evaluation of academic performance. Stress can be adaptive because it allows us to navigate situations that are challenging, unpredictable, or dangerous (Starcke & Brande, 2016). In fact, some research suggests that stress can promote motivation and goal attainment, thus contributing to positive learning outcomes (Rudland et al., 2019). However, stress can also have major consequences for mental well-being and academic achievement when effective coping resources are not available (Ellis & Giudice, 2014; Pascoe et al., 2019). Among other effects, stress can be detrimental to tasks that require executive functions (Starcke & Brand, 2016). Executive function skills allow us to monitor and control our behaviour (Shields et al., 2016). Some of the core processes subsumed under the umbrella of executive functioning are goal setting, maintaining focus, and inhibiting impulses (Shields et al., 2016). In high stress environments, our capacity to engage in executive functions becomes impaired (Shields et al., 2016; Starcke & Brand, 2016). Not only are these abilities essential for navigating everyday life, but they are necessary for optimal learning.

Flexible Course Design

Instructors can mitigate the negative impacts of stress on learning through careful curriculum design. Specifically, courses can be structured in a format that is conducive to stress management. Not only does this practice promote higher academic achievement but designing “stress-friendly” courses is also related to positive mental health outcomes for students (Capp, 2017). Grounded in universal design principles, the practice of incorporating flexibility into postsecondary course structure is a popular and evidence-based strategy for alleviating student stress (Fornauf & Erickson, 2020). One well known example of flexible design is the “Universal Design for Learning” (UDL) model.

The UDL highlights how adapting elements of more traditional course design to be considerate to variability in students’ learning needs and contexts can bolster student success and well-being in the classroom (Kennette et al., 2019). The core assumption of UDL is that the structure of environments should maximize accessibility and comprehension to the widest audience possible (Dolph, 2021; Kennette et al., 2019). Research indicates that the UDL model helps with managing student stress (Fornauf & Erickson, 2020). Specifically, UDL designs purport to minimize stress that students experience when there is a misfit between course structure and their learning needs, or when unnecessary rigidity in a course compromises the accessibility of learning experiences.

Instructors should apply several key aspects of flexible design to their courses to improve learning. For example, flexible design may involve presenting core concepts in multiple formats and allowing students to demonstrate their knowledge through multiple avenues (Capp, 2017). For instance, a flexibly designed course could include options for students to demonstrate their learning either through a standard essay-style assignment, or a creative, nontraditional product (e.g., a blog post). Increasing student agency is associated with academic and mental health benefits (Capp, 2017). Giving students choices where possible can generate learning environments where students feel they are capitalizing on their learning strengths to meet course demands. Choices may also allow students to capitalize on their learning strengths which generates positive emotions and enhances the efficiency of cognitive processes related to learning (Fredrickson, 2001; Fredrickson et al., 2005).

Flexible deadlines are another structural component of flexibly designed courses. The traditional approach is for deadlines to be rigid, and to penalize students for not meeting them. Alternatively, some instructors use “grace periods” in their courses. Grace periods typically mean that an assignment may be due on a certain day but has a “built-in” extension (e.g., three additional days). One benefit of the additional time is students have some control over how they organize their time and when they hand in the assignment. Students can use their discretion to either submit the assignment by the first deadline, or within the grace period if needed. Again, allowing students to have control of their learning pace is how flexible design may reduce student stress levels and improve learning outcomes.

Considerations for Flexible Course Design

Eliminating guidelines and deadlines can have unintended negative consequences. Excessive flexibility embedded in a course structure may promote a tendency to put off assignments. Procrastination – the act of delaying one’s intended course of action in a manner that is voluntary, yet irrational – has many consequences for students (Sirois, 2023; Zhang et al., 2019). Specifically, procrastination is strongly associated with more perceived stress and lower academic achievement. It is also quite common: an estimated 50-75% of postsecondary students engage in moderate to severe procrastination (Miyake & Kane, 2022; Steel, 2007). Unfortunately, putting off schoolwork often compromises the quality of the student’s performance and results in less learning (Rabin et al., 2010). Procrastination is also related to several negative mental health outcomes, including low self-esteem, anxiety, and depression (Kim & Seo, 2015; Rabin et al., 2010).

Given the consequences of procrastination, instructors should design courses that limit the use of this strategy and/or mitigate its impacts. Critics of flexible deadlines claim that affording “too much” flexibility in course structure can amplify procrastination. Lenient deadlines allow students to delay the completion of assignments for longer (i.e., past the initial deadline and into the grace period). Flexible course design aims to reduce student stress, but in some applications, it can increase procrastination and accompanying negative impacts on student mental health.

Courses should include elements of compassion and flexibility to alleviate some academic-related stress, while maintaining enough structure to prevent academic procrastination. Instructors can separate a large assignment into several smaller submissions throughout the term. For instance, students could first be evaluated on an essay outline, then use that feedback to compose their final paper. Research shows that separating information into smaller sections – a practice known as “chunking” – is advantageous for memory and learning (Thalmann et al., 2019). A series of smaller submissions also seems less daunting to students than a heavily weighted final assignment and can thus benefit stress management.

In line with flexible design, structured submissions can have built-in grace periods to allow for student agency throughout the term. To strive for a balance between flexibility and structure, instructors should ensure these grace periods are a reasonable length (i.e., two to three days after the initial deadline). Shorter grace periods are favorable; using grace periods that are multiple weeks, or removing deadlines altogether, can lead to procrastination and other negative consequences (Hills, 2022).

Educators should implement short and consistent automatic grace periods for numerous small assignments throughout the semester. In this format, there is sufficient rigidity to keep students on track while affording agency that reduces stress levels. Optimizing student wellbeing and cognitive ability requires balance. When it comes to deadlines and assignment submission, expectations should be communicated clearly in both an introduction at the beginning of the course and throughout the term (Moscardo, 2009). By deciding to structure courses that balance agency and structure, educators can cultivate positive impacts for their students’ mental well-being.

Developing and Curating Resources to Support Student Well-Being

Choosing among strategies, recommendations, and tools for supporting student well-being and determining how to get them to post-secondary students is challenging. We provide some general recommendations that may be helpful for curating mental health resources as well as an example at the end of the chapter (see Table 1).

Ideally, any instructor-level efforts to promote student mental health in the classroom occur in the context of a broader institutional commitment to student well-being. Well-staffed and funded student counseling services, centers devoted to assessing learning needs and disabilities to identify appropriate accommodations, and in-house medical services that include psychiatry are important components of overall mental health supports for students in higher education. In addition, instructors can support students in the classroom by preparing to confidently respond (if appropriate) when student mental health concerns impact learning. However, instructors vary in their levels of comfort when addressing students’ mental health (White & LaBelle, 2019) and some feel they are not appropriately trained in this area (Lipson et al., 2021). Institutions can provide basic mental health training to faculty and staff to alleviate some of these concerns. Another option is for educators to seek out training to increase their mental health literacy, which may enhance their effectiveness in promoting student mental health. For example, Queen’s University’s Human Rights and Equity Office developed a series of modules that all students, staff, and faculty are encouraged to take (see https://www.queensu.ca/hreo/education). As instructors build their knowledge, seeking support from colleagues – particularly those whose scholarship focuses on mental health – is a supplemental option. Instructors do not need to be mental health specialists; preparation and planning should fit the issues that may arise given the course content and instructor comfort. It would also be beneficial for institutions to have a mental health support structure in place for educators and staff should they need support after talking with students. People are in a much better place to support others when they themselves feel properly supported.

Many resources are available to students through their institutions (e.g., student wellness services and peer support programs) or online (e.g., crisis lines and websites). However, students often do not know all the resources that are available to them and how to access them. The vast choice can be overwhelming, and not knowing where to start can create a barrier to seeking support. Further, students in distress may be less willing or capable of searching for appropriate support. By creating a resource list for students that is easily accessible, instructors can offset this extra burden.

Throughout the semester, academic demands and stress levels fluctuate. Therefore, posting resource lists in course syllabi and on course webpages helps make these accessible for the semester or term. Resource lists should include information on the resource’s address (if applicable), link/URLs if it is an online resource, contact information, hours of operations, and any potential costs associated with the service (Coleman, 2022). For students attending courses on campus, instructors should include in-person, institutional resources (e.g., student wellness). However, in online or hybrid courses, many students may not have access to these services. Therefore, offering a mix of in-person and online resources is most helpful. Overall, inclusivity is a key to maximizing well-being for as many students as possible.

Instructors should also carefully consider the content and type of resources they curate. For example, sexual violence is common in post-secondary institutions (Howard et al., 2019) and students may benefit from the inclusion of resources specific to this experience. Additionally, students from diverse backgrounds may encounter entirely different stressors. For example, transgender students may have trans-specific experiences that contribute to poor mental health outcomes (e.g., poor reactions to coming out; Gnan et al., 2018). Feelings of alienation can be exacerbated when seeking support from resources that are not gender-affirming or relevant for trans folks (Goldberg et al., 2019). Therefore, to ensure that students from diverse backgrounds are adequately supported, instructors should include resources designed for specific experiences and identities.

Concluding Remarks

Mental well-being and learning are inextricably entwined. We discussed three ways that instructors can promote student well-being including presenting difficult content more effectively, fostering a supportive class climate, and using flexible course design principles to help students thrive in the face of stress. We concluded with suggestions for how to help students attain additional resources that support mental well-being. We hope this information is a useful starting point for instructors and administrators to engage in practices that enhance learning by attending to student mental health.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890420249.dsm-iv-tr

Arday, J. (2018). Understanding mental health: What are the issues for Black and Ethnic minority students at university? Social Sciences, 7(10), 196. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7100196

Auerbach, R. P., Alonso, J., Axinn, W. G., Cuijpers, P., Ebert, D. D., Green, J. G., Hwang, I., Kessler, R. C., Liu, H., Mortier, P., Nock, M. K., Pinder-Amaker, S., Sampson, N. A., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., Al-Hamzawi, A., Andrade, L. H., Benjet, C., Caldas-de-Almeida, J. M., Demyttenaere, K., Florescu, S., de Girolamo, G., Gureje, O., Haro, J. M., Karam, E. G., Kiejna, A., Kovess-Masfety, V., Lee, S., McGrath, J. J., O’Neill, S., Pennell, B-E., Scott, K., ten Have, M., Torres, Y., Zaslavsky, A. M., Zarkov, Z., & Bruffaerts, R. (2016). Mental disorders among college students in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Psychological Medicine, 46(14), 2955–2970. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291716001665

Auerbach, R. P., Mortier, P., Bruffaerts, R., Alonso, J., Benjet, C., Cuijpers, P., Demyttenaere, K., Ebert, D. D., Green, J. G., Hasking, P., Murray, E., Nock, M. K., Pinder-Amaker, S., Sampson, N. A., Stein, D. J., Vilagut, G., Zaslavsky, A. M., & Kessler, R. C. (2018). WHO World Mental Health Surveys International College Student project: Prevalence and distribution of mental disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 127(7), 623–638. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000362

Bedera, N. (2021). Beyond trigger warnings: A survivor-centered approach to teaching on sexual violence and avoiding institutional betrayal. Teaching Sociology, 49(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055×211022471

Bridgland, V. M. E., Barnard, J. F., & Takarangi, M. K. T. (2022). Unprepared: Thinking of a trigger warning does not prompt preparation for trauma-related content. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 75, 101708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2021.101708

Bridgland, V. M. E., Green, D. M., Oulton, J. M., & Takarangi, M. K. T. (2019). Expecting the worst: Investigating the effects of trigger warnings on reactions to ambiguously themed photos. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 25(4), 602–617. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000215

Bridgland, V. M. E., Jones, P. J., & Bellet, B. W. (2022). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of trigger warnings, content warnings, and content notes. Clinical Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/qav9m

Bruffaerts, R., Mortier, P., Kiekens, G., Auerbach, R. P., Cuijpers, P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Nock, M. K., & Kessler, R. C. (2018). Mental health problems in college freshmen: Prevalence and academic functioning. Journal of Affective Disorders, 225, 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.044

Capp, M. J. (2017). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A meta-analysis of literature between 2013-2016. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(8), 791-807. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1325074

Coleman, M. E. (2022). Mental health in the college classroom: Best practices for instructors. Teaching Sociology, 50(2), 168-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055×221080433

Cornell University. (n.d.) Incorporating diversity. Center for Teaching Innovation. https://teaching.cornell.edu/resource/incorporating-diversity

Cuijpers, P., Auerbach, R. P., Benjet, C., Bruffaerts, R., Ebert, D., Karyotaki, E., & Kessler, R. C. (2019). The World Health Organization World Mental Health International College Student initiative: An overview. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 28(2), e1761. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1761

Dolph, E. (2021). The developing definition of universal design. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v11i2.263

Fornauf, B. S., & Erickson, J. D. (2020). Toward an inclusive pedagogy through universal design for learning in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 33(2), 183-199. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped/archived-jped/jped-volume-33

Fredrickson B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.56.3.218

Fredrickson, B. L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Cognition & Emotion, 19(3), 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000238

Fuentes, M. A., Zelaya, D. G., & Madsen, J. W. (2021). Rethinking the course syllabus: Considerations for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion. Teaching of Psychology, 48(1), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320959979

Fulginiti, A., Pahwa, R., Frey, L. M., Rice, E., & Brekke, J. S. (2015). What factors influence the decision to share suicidal thoughts? A multilevel social network analysis of disclosure among individuals with serious mental illness. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 46(4), 398–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12224

Gainsburg, I., & Earl, A. (2018). Trigger warnings as an interpersonal emotion-regulation tool: Avoidance, attention, and affect depend on beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 252-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.006

Gnan, G. H., Rahman, Q., Ussher, G., Baker, D., West, E., & Rimes, K. A. (2019). General and LGBTQ-specific factors associated with mental health and suicide risk among LGBTQ students. Journal of Youth Studies, 22(10), 1393–1408. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2019.1581361

Goldberg, A. E., Kuvalanka, K. A., Budge, S. L., Benz, M. B., & Smith, J. Z. (2019). Health care experiences of transgender binary and nonbinary university students. The Counseling Psychologist, 47(1), 59–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000019827568

Gurung, R. A. R., & Galardi, N. R. (2021). Syllabus tone, more than mental health statements, influence intentions to seek help. Teaching of Psychology, 49(3), 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628321994632

Hill, M. (2022). Replacing power with flexible structure: Implementing flexible deadlines to improve student learning experiences. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 10(26), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.10.26

Holland, K. J., & Bedera, N. (2020). “Call for help immediately”: A discourse analysis of resident assistants’ responses to sexual assault disclosures. Violence against Women, 26(11), 1383–1402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801219863879

Howard, R. M., Potter, S. J., Guedj, C. E., & Moynihan, M. M. (2018). Sexual violence victimization among community college students. Journal of American College Health, 67(7), 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2018.1500474

Jones, P. J., Bridgland, V. M. E., & Bellet, B. W. (2023). Content warnings reduce aesthetic appreciation of visual art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000586

Kiekens, G., Hasking, P., Boyes, M., Claes, L., Mortier, P., Auerbach, R. P., Cuijpers, P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Kessler, R. C., Myin-Germeys, I., Nock, M. K., & Bruffaerts, R. (2018). The associations between non-suicidal self-injury and first onset suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Journal of Affective Disorders, 239, 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.06.033

Kim, K. R. & Seo, E. U. (2015). The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 26-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038

Lipson, S. K., Talaski, A., Cesare, N., Malpiede, M., & Humphrey, D. (2021). The role of faculty in student mental health. Boston University School of Public Health. https://marychristieinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/The-Role-of-Faculty-in-Student-Mental-Health.pdf

McNally, R. J. (2014, May 20) Hazards ahead: The problem with trigger warnings, according to the research. Pacific Standard. https://psmag.com/education/hazards-ahead-problem-trigger-warnings-according-research-81946

Meluch, A. L., & Starcher, S. C. (2020). College student concealment and disclosure of mental health issues in the classroom: Students’ perceptions of risk and use of contextual criteria. Communication Studies, 71(5), 768–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1771392

Meyer, I. H. (2015). Resilience in the study of minority stress and health of sexual and gender minorities. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2(3), 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000132

Miyake, A., & Kane, M. J. (2022). Toward a holistic approach to reducing academic procrastination with classroom interventions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(4), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211070814

Mortier, P., Auerbach, R. P., Alonso, J., Axinn, W. G., Cuijpers, P., Ebert, D. D., Green, J. G., Hwang, I., Kessler, R. C., Liu, H., Nock, M. K., Pinder-Amaker, S., Sampson, N. A., Zaslavsky, A. M., Abdulmalik, J., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., Al-Hamzawi, A., Benjet, C., Demyttenaere, K., Florescu, S., de Girolamo, G., Gureje, O., Haro, J. M., Hu, C., Huang, Y., de Jonge, P., Karam, E. G., Kiejna, A., Kovess-Masfety, V., Lee, S., McGrath J. J., O’Neill, S., Nakov, V., Pennell, B-E, Piazza, M., Posada-Villa, J., Rapsey, C., Viana, M. C., Xavier, M., & Bruffaerts, R. (2018). Suicidal thoughts and behaviors among college students and same-aged peers: results from the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 53(3), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-018-1481-6

Mortier, P., Auerbach, R. P., Alonso, J., Bantjes, J., Benjet, C., Cuijpers, P., Ebert, D. D., Green, J. G., Hasking, P., Nock, M. K., O’Neill, S., Pinder-Amaker, S., Sampson, N. A., Vilagut, G., Zaslavsky, A. M., Bruffaerts, R., & Kessler, R. C. (2018). Suicidal thoughts and behaviors among first-year college students: Results from the WMH-ICS project. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 57(4), 263-273.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.01.018

Mortier, P., Demyttenaere, K., Auerbach, R. P., Green, J. G., Kessler, R. C., Kiekens, G., Nock, M. K., & Bruffaerts, R. (2015). The impact of lifetime suicidality on academic performance in college freshmen. Journal of Affective Disorders, 186, 254–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.07.030

Moscardo, G. (2009). Meeting Your Own Deadlines: Introducing Flexibility into Student Assessment. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 8(2), 119-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220802634182

Pascoe, M. C., Hetrick, S. E., & Parker, A. G. (2020). The impact of stress on students in secondary school and postsecondary education. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2019.1596823

Perry, Y., Petrie, K., Buckley, H., Cavanagh, L., Clarke, D., Winslade, M., Hadzi-Pavlovic, D., Manicavasagar, V., & Christensen, H. (2014). Effects of a classroom-based educational resource on adolescent mental health literacy: A cluster randomised controlled trial. Journal of Adolescence, 37(7), 1143–1151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.08.001

Rabin, L. A., Fogel, J., & Nutter-Upham, K. E. (2011). Academic procrastination in college students: the role of self-reported executive function. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 344-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2010.518597

Sanson, M., Strange, D., & Garry, M. (2019). Trigger warnings are trivially helpful at reducing negative affect, intrusive thoughts, and avoidance. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(4), 778–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/216770261982701

Shields, G. S., Sazma, M. A., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2016). The effects of acute stress on core executive functions: A meta-analysis and comparison with cortisol. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 68. 651-668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.06.038

Sirois, F. M. (2023). Procrastination and stress: A conceptual review of why context matters. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(6). 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065031

Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 569–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9199-6

Smith, C. P., & Freyd, J. J. (2014). Institutional betrayal. American Psychologist, 69(6), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037564

Starcke, K., & Brand, M. (2016). Effects of stress on decisions under uncertainty: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(9), 909–933. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000060

Stewart, J. G. & Milanovic, M. (2019). Navigating Principles of Psychology. PSYC 100: Principles of Psychology (pp. 7-41). eCampusOntario. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/testbookje/

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach (HHS Publication No. [SMA] 14-4884). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://ncsacw.acf.hhs.gov/userfiles/files/SAMHSA_Trauma.pdf

Thalmann, M., Souza, A. S., & Oberauer, K. (2019). How does chunking help working memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000578

Waggoner Denton, A., & Veloso, J. (2018). Changes in syllabus tone affect warmth (but not competence) ratings of both male and female instructors. Social Psychology of Education, 21(1), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9409-7

White, A., & LaBelle, S. (2019). A qualitative investigation of instructors’ perceived communicative roles in students’ mental health management. Communication Education, 68(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2019.1571620

Wilks, C. R., Auerbach, R. P., Alonso, J., Benjet, C., Bruffaerts, R., Cuijpers, P., Ebert, D. D., Green, J. G., Mellins, C. A., Mortier, P., Sadikova, E., Sampson, N. A., & Kessler, R. C. (2020). The importance of physical and mental health in explaining health-related academic role impairment among college students. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 123, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.01.009

Zhang, S., Liu, P., & Feng, T. (2019). To do it now or later: The cognitive mechanisms and neural substraces underlying procrastination. WIREs Cognitive Science, 10(4), 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1492

Table 1

Free Mental Health Resources List for Students

About the authors

name: Ashley Filion

Ashley Filion (she/her/hers) received a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree from Queen’s University and is pursuing a Master of Public Health. She is dedicated to advocating for evidence-based practices to improve the well-being of people in the community. Her interests include enhancing inpatient mental health treatment and understanding the development of suicidal thoughts and behaviours.

name: Ella Blondin

Ella Blondin (she/her/hers) holds a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Queen’s University and is passionate about mental health advocacy and promotion. She worked as a researcher for PREVNet (Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network) and supported national health research efforts including the Health-Behaviours in School-Aged Children (HBSC) Study. Ella is dedicated to knowledge mobilization and using research to enhance and expand accessibility to mental health services across Canada.

name: Jeremy Stewart

Jeremy G. Stewart, PhD, C.Psych (he/him/his) is an Assistant Professor in the Departments of Psychology, Psychiatry, and Centre for Neuroscience Studies at Queen’s University. He is also a Licensed Psychologist with the College of Psychologists of Ontario authorized to practice in Clinical Psychology with adolescents and adults. Jeremy has devoted his research program to identifying predictors of the first onset of self-injurious thoughts and behaviours (e.g., suicide ideation; nonsuicidal self-injury) and to better understanding their escalation among youth. From a pedagogical perspective, he is interested in the application of creative techniques to maximize students’ engagement with emotionally difficult content in post-secondary settings.