Onboarding, Orientation, and Student Readiness

The Orientation, Onboarding, and Student Readiness Quality Enhancement Plan focuses on helping students understand how college (and the college classroom) works by making expectations clear, consistent, and reinforced early in the student experience. This initiative builds on work already happening across courses, advising, and student support to reduce early confusion around systems, academic expectations, time management, and appropriate use of AI. By strengthening onboarding and classroom readiness as shared student success practices, the QEP aims to support persistence, improve early course outcomes, and help students start college with confidence. The focus is on practical, scalable strategies that enhance clarity for students while respecting faculty autonomy and existing workloads. 

What is the proposed QEP topic? 

Strengthening students’ understanding of how college works by providing clear, reinforced guidance on academic expectations, institutional systems, and foundational success skills early in their GHC experience.

What is the “big idea”? Why does this topic matter to GHC? 

The central idea of this QEP is that students cannot succeed academically if they do not first understand how college and the college classroom function. Many new GHC students arrive with limited knowledge of core systems and expectations, including D2L, financial aid processes, registration, withdrawal policies, time management, and appropriate use of AI.

College differs significantly from high school in structure, culture, and expectations, yet students are often expected to infer classroom norms on their own. By making onboarding, early readiness, and classroom expectations intentional rather than assumed, GHC can reduce confusion, build confidence, and create a stronger foundation for student success across all programs and modalities.

Why this idea & why now? 

Students today face increasing complexity as they enter college, including unfamiliar technology platforms, less structured time, and evolving expectations around academic integrity and AI use. Early misunderstandings—such as not knowing how to engage in class, submit assignments correctly, communicate with instructors, or manage deadlines—can quickly lead to disengagement or course withdrawal.

This moment is particularly important as GHC continues system-wide conversations around AI use, student success, and persistence. A QEP focused on onboarding, classroom readiness, and early navigation ensures that students receive consistent, reinforced guidance on expectations early and often, rather than encountering critical information only after problems arise.

What problem or opportunity does it address? 

Many students lack structured support to:

• Understand how college differs from high school academically and culturally
• Navigate core systems such as D2L, registration, financial aid, and withdrawal policies
• Understand expectations for college-level classroom engagement, including participation, communication with faculty, deadlines, and use of academic technologies
• Manage unstructured time and competing responsibilities
• Understand when and how AI use is appropriate
• Make informed registration and enrollment decisions

Currently, this information is often delivered once during orientation, inconsistently across programs, or learned through trial and error. This QEP addresses the opportunity to make onboarding and classroom readiness intentional, reinforced, and scalable, reducing early confusion that is unrelated to students’ academic ability.

How does it align with the mission and student success goals?  

This QEP directly supports GHC’s mission to provide high-value educational experiences that transform lives and enhance communities by removing early, preventable barriers to success that disproportionately affect first-generation, adult, and non-traditional students.

It aligns with GHC’s vision of being a leader in student success by focusing on the earliest predictors of persistence and completion. The initiative supports strategic priorities by contributing to:

• Access & Opportunity: clearer expectations and navigation for all entering students 

• Student Success: improved retention, lower DWF rates, and stronger gateway course outcomes 

• Responsible Stewardship: improving student navigation and classroom readiness using existing resources and structures 

What impact do we expect on student learning or success? 

We expect students to demonstrate greater understanding of institutional systems, clearer awareness of classroom and academic expectations, improved time management, and increased confidence navigating college processes. 

Institutionally, anticipated outcomes include improved course completion rates, reduced DWFs, earlier enrollment in subsequent terms, higher financial aid completion rates, smaller drop lists, improved classroom engagement, and positive student feedback regardingclarity and preparedness. 

At a high level, what might implementation look like? 

At a high level, this QEP could include:

• Short, interactive onboarding modules delivered through D2L
• Orientation content reinforced through course-embedded videos or activities
• Classroom readiness content addressing expectations for participation, communication, assignment submission, time management, and use of AI and digital tools
• Built-in knowledge checks or quizzes using existing platforms
• Optional faculty participation through low-stakes incentives such as extra credit or brief embedded activities
• Targeted pre-orientation communication addressing registration, financial aid, and payment plans

The emphasis would be on reinforcement over time, not a single orientation event, and on helping students understand expectations rather than prescribing instructional practices.

Who would it affect most directly in terms of implementation? 

All students (particularly new, returning, first-generation, and adult learners) would benefit from clearer onboarding and classroom readiness support. 

Implementation would involve shared participation across faculty, advisors, and staff in academic, student support, and administrative units. Rather than assigning responsibility to a single office, this QEP emphasizes coordination and consistency across existing roles and touchpoints, recognizing that readiness work is already occurring in distributed ways across the institution. 

At a very high level, what resources or support would be needed? 

Support would focus on coordination among existing units, development of reusable onboarding and classroom readiness materials, faculty support for embedding readiness content into courses, and use of existing technologies and platforms. 

The emphasis is on efficiency and sustainability, not new staffing or major budget expansion. 

How would we measure progress? What are the intended outcomes? 

Progress could be measured through completion of onboarding modules, student feedback and self-efficacy surveys, changes in DWF rates, early registration for subsequent terms, financial aid application and payment plan participation, reduced course drop rates, and student-reported confidence navigating classroom expectations and college systems. 

These measures align with existing student success metrics and provide early indicators of persistence and completion. 

What challenges/downsides does this topic pose? 

One challenge is avoiding information overload during orientation while ensuring students receive essential guidance. This requires careful sequencing and reinforcement rather than one-time delivery. 

Another challenge is faculty and staff capacity. Embedding onboarding and classroom readiness content must remain flexible and low-lift, with participation encouraged rather than mandated. Consistency across programs and modalities will require coordination without infringing on academic autonomy. 

Addressing these challenges will require phased implementation, clear communication, and ongoing collaboration to balance impact with sustainability.