First-Year Experience or One-Year Experience? The Future of Civic Engagement in Higher Education

Abstract

Building on recent civic engagement conversations, this article considers several legal proposals and existing frameworks that are meant to expand opportunities for civic growth and interaction in higher education. Though well intentioned, these proposed and existing guidelines, as we demonstrate, in many cases, restrict the ability of students to learn in traditional ways that facilitate their civic interactions on campus. The suggested and recently implemented reforms include expanded Advanced Placement and Dual Credit opportunities, reduced support for general education classes, and 90 h degrees intended to replace 120 credit hour degrees. The issue with all of these ideas (implemented or not), as we show, is that they amputate what is critical to a genuine undergraduate civic engagement experience: time physically spent on campus, building bonds of trust within a cohort in a way that makes possible the tough conversations, without which true civic connection never becomes a reality. The recommendation of our article as a whole, then—at the local, state, and federal levels—is to use all available legal tools, including ones connected to financial aid and accreditation, to not further reduce time that students are required to spend on campus as a prerequisite of graduation. Maintaining residential requirements, as we further show, will also advance goals of equity and equal access.