Well-being Initiatives for First Year Student Depression

Inadequate support and understanding of student challenges results in suicide, with one student dying by suicide every four days.

By Samantha Newport.

Further to my earlier article, ‘Biophilic Innovation: a strategy to improve student well-being’, I have worked to expand upon this topic with a particular focus on First Year University Students.

First Year University students can become vulnerable to mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, binge drinking/eating (amongst other issues) for a variety of reasons. This might be due to feeling homesick, experiencing social disconnection, struggling to manage new demands and responsibilities, experiencing an imbalance with time, money, or skills, navigating a new cultural environment and social world, and so much more. The pressures and changes new University students face are significant and should not be overlooked. Increased awareness and support for First Year students is critical so to maintain retention rates and to also save lives.

Research has repeatedly established how inadequate support and understanding of student challenges has resulted in suicide (Taub & Thompson, 2013), with one student dying by suicide every four days in the UK (Top Universities, 2018). Poor support has also contributed to increased drop-out rates (Paddick, 2019), internet addiction (Lan et al., 2020), loneliness, stress, and burn-out (Nilufer et al., 1986; Stoliker & Lafreniere, 2015).

Therefore the holistic initiatives discussed in this article works to incorporate redefinitions of University culture and the employment of coping strategies, so that Universities can operate in a way that will protect their students, improve their well-being, and aid adjustment to their new lives.

Initiative 1: Three-tier Coping Strategies

Coping involves adapting to external and internal demands and is something University students may struggle with during their first year. Therefore, a three-tier coping initiative incorporating schedules designed to aid organisation and balance, may improve overall productivity, well-being, and individual sense of control.

Students could be encouraged to use single-tasking (Rosen, 2008; Chapman, 2013) with learned optimism (Seligman, 1998). Too much multitasking can cause Undergraduates to become stressed and less productive. By encouraging students to formulate their own learning plan outside of their mandatory lesson schedule, so to manage their workload and personal activities, students may experience enhanced clarity and focus; improving mental health, performance, and well-being.

Incorporating learned optimism may remove obstacles to one’s progression and improve mental health, as optimism removes perceived obstacles whilst pessimism reinforces them (Seligman, 1998). Therefore Universities could redefine their culture to incorporate optimism by teaching students how to react to adversity - by not reacting to the event itself, but feelings toward it. This could alter cognitive patterns positively through better self-regulation, improving well-being. 

In conjunction, this initiative could incorporate principles from Lazarus and Folkman's Transactional Model of Problem Focused Coping; defining problems, designing solutions, establishing alternatives and choosing one for action. Emotion-Focused coping would also be beneficial, as the stress of students wanting to fit in whilst balancing workload is likely to be a pressure that remains unchanged.

Kanner et al., (1991) demonstrated that daily hassles can cause more stress and psychological damage than major life events. This is significant evidence that in order to maintain well-being, First Year University students need access to coping initiatives that also teach them both schedule management and optimism. Failure to implement such support might result in the Undergraduate becoming overloaded, affecting their confidence, stress levels, and mental health.

Limitations of this initiative may be that single-tasking involves prioritisation with a centralised focus. This may be difficult for those with attention disorders or multiple deadlines within a tight time frame. First Year students may also experience an initial resistance to single-tasking due to Western culture typically operating in a multitasking fashion.

Learned optimism also has limitations of repression. For example, Seligman’s well-being tool had been used in the U.S armed services and proved disadvantageous as soldiers were taught to deny stress and trauma under the guise of “resilience”. This could be detrimental to vulnerable First Year students' well-being, especially if they have any pre-existing psychiatric issues. Learned optimism could also mean that students design unrealistic goals, leading to failure or becoming pressured under time, causing an increase in stress rather than a decrease.

Issues incorporating Folkman's Transactional Model to this initiative is that this model focuses on psychological factors, with less emphasis upon physiological stress responses. Therefore it may not truly enable students to manage stress resulting from overloading. This model also doesn't consider cultural, social or environmental factors with regards to how individuals perceive stress.

Therefore, to balance the specific risks highlighted, another initiative should be incorporated in tandem.

Initiative 2: Mind-Body Therapy, featuring Silence.

University can be demanding on new students as they adapt to increased workloads, different learning structures, and less contact and support from tutors.

To remedy this, an initiative involving Mind-Body Therapy workshops could be offered at Universities in the run-up to, and during, exam periods. Mind-Body Therapy was originally introduced to the West in 1920 by Paramahansa Yogananda, an Indian spiritualist. Hussain & Braj (2010) supports that meditation reduces negative effects on health, cognition, and disordered symptoms. This initiative incorporates relaxation, systematic desensitization, and release of repressed memories so to lower stress, promote brain function and health. These benefits have been supported by the American Psychological Association (1977), stating that meditation as a therapy promotes psychological health. By also incorporating mindful silence, students will better be able to centre themselves, reach self-actualisation (Maslow, 1962), and transcendence (Seligman, 2003). This may enforce fulfilment of the highest needs, relieve stress and tension, and replenish mental resources; elevating well-being.

Mind-Body Therapy could also enhance First Year students' well-being by encouraging self-regulation practices to control mental processes by focusing attention and awareness (Walsh and Shapiro, 2006). Undergraduates could use this to eliminate negative thoughts and anxiety that prevent happiness, clarity in their studies, and mental function. This could also improve students’ sense of control and organisation, easing their transition into becoming a successful First Year student.

This well-being initiative is effective and inexpensive with self-care-based activities. However, it is unclear whether this therapy alone can alleviate issues and increase well-being long-term and therefore might be stronger when used in tandem with other initiatives (read on). Moreover, using Mind-Body therapies unsupervised may be hazardous to students with certain conditions or disabilities. Similarly, Mind–Body therapies undertaken by students with unstable psychological issues, such as PTSD, may result in worsened symptoms if the student does not have sufficient oversight. Therefore, appropriate referrals to this initiative should be assessed by professionals in some cases (Wolsko et al., 2004).

This initiative may also cause students to experience a "responsibility paradox" (Davidoff, 1998), in that they end up experiencing guilt if the therapy does not provide them with the results they expected, feeling that they should have controlled their mind better for a better outcome. This risk could be managed by also offering support and activity groups (both online and offline) featuring similar mind-body practices, allowing students to socialise and engage on activities together, promoting opportunities for friendship development whilst also receiving guided support from a professional (e.g., offering yoga for anxiety, guidance counselling, art therapy, mindfulness practices and guided mediation).

Initiative 3: Biophillic Innovation

A third initiative would also be best effective when looking to tackle student well-being – which can simply come from our environment. Read all about the third initiative in my previous article, here.

---

Do you have some of your own suggestions? Leave your thoughts in the comment section!

Moreover, if you were/are a University student and have a story to tell about your experience, get in touch and get it published to our ‘Real Life: True Stories’ section, either anonymously or with credit.  

References

Baicker, K., Cutler, D., Song, Z., 2010. Workplace Wellness Programs Can Generate Savings. Health Affairs, 29 (2), pp. 304-311.

Chapman, S. B., 2013. Why Single-Tasking Makes You Smarter. Jersey City, Forbes. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2013/05/08/why-single-tasking-makes-you-smarter/#28b9cedb5063 [Accessed 1 June 2017].

Davidoff, FF, 1998. Weighing the alternatives: lessons from the paradoxes of alternative medicine. Ann Intern Med, 129 (12), pp. 1068-1070.

Dilwar, H., & Bhushan, B., 2010. Psychology of Meditation and Health: Present Status and Future Directions. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy; Almería, 10 (3), pp. 439-451.

Frizzell, N., 2015. Yes, you can crawl out of your first-year depression at university. London, The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/29/first-year-depression-university-counselling-student [Accessed 30 May 2017].

Heath, R., 1998. Coping – Martin Seligman “How you handle adversity in the workplace tends to have much more impact on your career than how you handle the good stuff.” Philadelphia, Fast Company.  Available from: https://www.fastcompany.com/35969/coping-martin-seligman [Accessed 1 June 2017].

Heerwagen, J. H., 1998. Design, productivity and wellbeing: What are the links? Available from: http://plantsolutions.com/documents/DesignProductivityWellbeing.pdf [Accessed 1 June 2017].

Maslow, A. H., & Mintz, N. L., 1956. Effects of esthetic surroundings: I. Initial effects of three esthetic conditions upon perceiving “energy” and “well-being” in faces. The Journal of Psychology, 41 (2), pp. 247-254.

Ratcliffe, R., 2013. Students stay silent about mental health problems, survey shows. One in five suffer psychological ill health, but most shun university counselling. London, The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/may/20/students-stay-silent-about-mental-health-problems [Accessed 30 May 2017].

Rosen, C., 2008. The Myth of Multitasking. The New Atlantis, 20, pp. 105-110.

Seligman, A, 2003. Modernity’s Wager: authority, the self, and transcendence. Baskerville, Princeton University Press.

Taylor, J., 2011. Technology: Single Tasking Can you focus on a single task?. New York City, Psychology Today. Available from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-power-prime/201104/technology-single-tasking [Accessed 1 June 2017].

Taylor, J., 2013. Teach Your Children to Single Task, not Multitask. Do your children know that multitasking is bad for them?. New York City, Psychology Today. Available from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-power-prime/201301/teach-your-children-single-task-not-multitask [Accessed 1 June 2017].

Walsh, R., & Shapiro, SL., 2006. The meeting of meditative disciplines and Western psychology: a mutually enriching dialogue. American Psychologist, 61, pp. 227-39.

Wolsko, P., Eisenberg, D., Davis, R., Phillips, R., 2004. Use of Mind–Body Medical Therapies. Results of a National Survey. Journal of International Medicine, 19 (1), pp. 43–50.