Conference Agenda

Abstract

This presentation explores the critical relationship between study pressure, sense of belonging, and general student satisfaction within the Dutch higher education landscape. As higher education institutions strive to strengthen trust with society, understanding the student experience, specifically how students feel connected to their programs and manage their academic workload, is paramount. And as the pressures of modern life grow stronger this becomes even more relevant in the European sphere.

About the research

The central aim of this research was twofold: (1) to examine how perceived study pressure relates to student satisfaction and belonging, and (2) to investigate whether a meaningful and statistically reliable “sense of belonging” construct can be developed using existing NSE items.

Methodology

The study utilizes extensive longitudinal data from the National Student Survey (NSE) in the Netherlands, covering the period from 2021 to 2025 and over 1.3 million student responses. A central contribution of this research is the development of a new "Sense of Belonging" (SoB) construct. Using factor analysis, seven existing NSE items were selected to measure SoB: program atmosphere, feeling safe to be oneself, feeling at home, teacher involvement, teacher inspiration, the accessibility of teachers for questions, and the perceived room for curricular flexibility. (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.816).

Perceived study pressure was measured directly through the NSE item “I experience study pressure as: [much too low – much too high].” In 2025, 58% of students reported study pressure as “just right,” while 29% found it (much) too high. Across 2021–2025, the proportion reporting study pressure as (much) too high decreased slightly. The findings highlight a non-linear relationship: both excessively high and excessively low study pressure correlate with a diminished sense of belonging and lower general satisfaction.

Key Findings

Sense of belonging is not directly measured in the NSE. Therefore, we developed a new scale based on seven NSE items reflecting programme atmosphere, psychological safety, feeling at home, perceived teacher involvement and inspiration, and the extent to which teachers create a climate in which asking questions feels comfortable.

The research indicates that the average sense of belonging among students in 2025 was 3.83 on a five-point scale. Regression analyses reveal that "Sense of Belonging" is a powerful predictor of overall student satisfaction. Furthermore, the study identifies significant variations across different student groups and sectors. For instance, students in Master’s programs and Associate Degrees report a higher sense of belonging than Bachelor’s students. Students in fields such as Agriculture or Language and Culture report significantly higher belonging compared to those in Economics or Law. Demographic factors also play a role; students living independently report a stronger sense of connection than those living with their parents.

Implications for Trust and Student Experience

These results demonstrate that "Sense of Belonging" is intrinsically linked to the perceived quality of teaching and the learning environment, particularly the role of teachers and the social climate of the program. For higher education institutions, the ability to foster a strong sense of connection and manage academic pressure is essential for student wellbeing and success. By operationalizing national survey data into meaningful constructs like Sense of Belonging, institutions can more effectively monitor and improve the student experience. Ultimately, creating an environment where students feel safe, valued, and appropriately challenged is a fundamental step in strengthening the trust between higher education and the broader society it serves.

Given the limited availability of Canadian longitudinal data, large regional micro-datasets such as the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Grade 9 cohort dataset have served as important proxies for national research on postsecondary access and success (see, e.g., Robson 2021). A recent analysis of TDSB students entering Grade 9 between Fall 2004 and Fall 2009 (N = 101,590) revealed a 17% gender gap in postsecondary graduation. This gap emerged in two phases: (a) an 8% difference in postsecondary or apprenticeship entry and (b) a further increase to a 17% gap in completion rates at universities, colleges, and apprenticeships.

The present follow-up analysis focuses on the first stage—the postsecondary entry gap—by examining the 21% of TDSB students who did not transition to postsecondary or apprenticeship pathways. Consistent with prior findings (e.g., Pizarro Milian et al., 2024), secondary school achievement variables remain significant predictors of later outcomes. To explore these patterns further, a composite academic challenge variable was developed from six dichotomous indicators of potential barriers: participation in special education programming, high absenteeism in Grade 9, enrolment in non-Academic programming, suspensions, failure to achieve eight credits in Grade 9, and earning a Grade 9 mark below Level 1. Scores range from 0 to 6, reflecting increasing academic challenge; all six indicators have previously been linked to lower postsecondary access and completion (e.g., Brown et al., 2021).

Logistic regression models revealed strong associations between this composite score and postsecondary access (1 = did not attend, 0 = attended). Relative to students with no indicators (44% of the cohort), those with higher scores had sharply reduced odds of entering postsecondary education. Students with one indicator were twice as likely not to attend; those with two were three times as likely; those with three were six times as likely; and those with four or more were eleven times as likely not to transition. Other significant risk factors included being male, being born outside Canada, speaking only English, residing in lower-income neighbourhoods, and earning no university-level (“U”) courses in Grades 11–12 (see Brown et al., 2025). Students without any “U” courses were four times less likely to progress.

Importantly, all six components of the composite challenge score were disproportionately male: males were 140% more likely to be suspended, 65% more likely to receive special education programming, and 47% more likely to take non-Academic courses. Consequently, the highest-risk categories—students who did not complete secondary school, those who graduated but did not pursue postsecondary education, and apprentices—were dominated by males, while university graduates with no mobility represented the most female group. This pattern suggests a potential interaction between gender and academic challenge to be explored in future research.

Further extensions of this work will include comparisons with findings from the Class of ’73—Canada’s longest-running cohort study of educational and occupational pathways—to better situate contemporary patterns within a half-century trajectory of gender and access in Canadian education.

For centuries, universities have played a central role in fostering socially responsible global citizens and in supporting society's capacity to address complex societal challenges. At the same time, higher education (HE) institutions are increasingly expected to contribute to innovation and digital economic growth (Gibbs & Maassen, 2021). Although universities are fundamentally intended to serve broader societal interests, HE has become „more public managerial than public good“ (ibid., p. 2). The present era thus represents a shift from the traditional social contract between society and HE, signalling a shift towards stronger integration between society and science (Nybom, 2013) and what has been described as the “fetishisation of the market” (Marginson, 2004, p. 47). Within Europe, the Bologna Process has accelerated this shift, promoting a competence-based educational (CBE) agenda closely aligned with innovation and market needs. As a result, universities find themselves at the crossroads of meeting the accountability- and performance-oriented expectations associated with knowledge-economy policies while at the same time fostering – or even redefining – society's trust in HE‘s commitment to the public good.

This study addresses a key tension within this landscape: whether universities and their CBE agenda, which guide their study programmes primarily through market-oriented definitions of competence, could define competence from a perspective oriented towards the public good? The dominance of market-aligned competence frameworks poses risks of narrowing the educational mission of HE and undermines public trust in HE as a socially responsible institution.

While the CBE agenda is often framed as a “paradigm-shift on skills” (European Commission, 2020, p. 3) inteded to ensure "fluid continuity of experience and learning" (UNESCO IBE, Chapter 11, 2025, p. 87) and fostering students’ competences “that can best satisfy personal aspirations and societal needs” (Yerevan Communiqué, 2015,p. 2), in practice, this shift has remained largely rhethorical. As much as we would like to promote a holistic approach to competence and its development, the CBE agenda continues to focus on a compartmentalised view of objectified learning outcomes. This study argues that the issue must first be addressed at the conceptual level: the way competence is defined shapes curricular design, teaching and learning practices, and assessment, and ultimately influences how society perceives the value and purpose of HE.

The major aim of this study is to propose a reconceptualisation of competence from the perspective of complexity theory (Morin 2007; Cilliers, 1998) and its applications in educational research (Davis & Sumara, 2008; Mason, 2008; Lemke & Sabelli, 2008; Jacobson et al., 2016). Current notions of competence are often rooted in representationalist and market-oriented assumptions that frame competence as a combination of specific knowledge, skills, and dispositions, more often than not aligned with labour-market demands. By contrast, understanding competence as a complex adaptive system (CAS) foregrounds its dynamic, relational, and emergent character and opens space for educational approaches that prioritise fostering socially responsible and critically engaged citizens.

This research introduces translator education as a particularly revealing case. The rapid rise in neural machine, AI, and large language models-based translation technologies has left the future of the profession increasingly uncertain, contributing to declining trust in translation study programmes and dramatically decreasing student enrolment (Fantinuoli, 2025; HEPI, 2025). The qualitative study draws on semi-structured and focus group interviews with international translator educators (N=10), translation students (N=11), and professional Lithuanian translators (N=5), followed by thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Based on the research data, a conceptual model of translator competence as a CAS was developed and subsequently evaluated by an international group of experts in translator education (N=7).

The research findings highlight the need to expand current understandings of competence beyond its multi-componentiality towards its complexity. Reframing (translator) competence as a CAS positions market and industry demands as only one element within a broader system rather than its central organising force. Furthermore, the study highlights the non-linear, dynamic, and emergent nature of (translator) competence, questioning the objectification of learning outcomes. Such a conceptual shift has further implications for curriculum design, educational practice, and assessment. Hopefully, this study contributes to the topic of how future research and policy discussions should explore how universities can reclaim conceptual authority over the notion of competence and use it to articulate educational futures that serve both professional and societal needs.