Working for Social Justice: A Review of Students as Leaders in Pedagogical Partner Programs

Abstract

Students as Partners (SaP) programs have centered student voices since their inception. Student–faculty pedagogical partnerships are grounded in the notion that students have the expertise to contribute to faculty in preparing for, reflecting on, and revising teaching and learning practices in ways that are inclusive and responsive to all learners. This expertise is based in part on their lived experiences—both as students and as members of the student populations that SaP programs were intentionally created to help empower (e.g., first generation, low-income, BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of Color) and others marginalized in higher education). These students, in dialogue with faculty, help to expose equity issues across classrooms. As SaP programs have proliferated in colleges and universities across the globe, the student partners’ role as social justice advocates in these programs have expanded too. This review explores the pedagogical partnership literature over the past 20 years, to establish the ways in which undergraduate students and post-bacs have flourished in leadership roles in SaP programs: (a) acting as leaders for social equity on campus, (b) serving as peer mentors to new student partners in existing programs, (c) co-creating new programs, and (d) publishing in the literature. This review reveals opportunities for new directions with peer mentorship in SaP programs through the role of lead student mentors who can help to scale up SaP programs, support the emotional labor involved in partnership work, and create pathways to future social justice leadership opportunities.

1. Introduction

One of the first student–faculty pedagogical partnership programs that positioned students as partners in pursuit of equity and social justice in higher education was launched at Bryn Mawr and Haverford Colleges in 2006 (Cook-Sather 2018). This model of academic development for faculty would come to be called by many a students-as-partners (SaP) approach, and over the last decade, pedagogical partnership programs have proliferated across the globe (Healey and Healey 2024). The structure of SaP programs is designed to promote social justice values and create more equitable teaching and learning spaces on campus (Healey 2024), and an ever-growing body of literature focuses on the pedagogical partnership’s potential to support the pursuit of equity and social justice goals (de Bie et al. 2021).

Each pedagogical partnership in an SaP program encourages a collaborative and reciprocal process through which participants can contribute to conversations, decision-making, and implementation around teaching and learning in higher education (Bovill et al. 2014). These individual pedagogical partnerships challenge traditional hierarchical structures by positioning students as change agents in pedagogical processes (Dunne and Zandstra 2011) and centering their voices (Cook-Sather 2006). SaP programs offer a transformative approach to teaching and learning in higher education by integrating student expertise into pedagogical practices to foster social equity and inclusion.

In this way, the premise of SaP programs is to recognize and value student expertise in pedagogical partnerships in a variety of teaching and learning formats. Pedagogical partnerships elevate student voices because SaP programs believe that students have expertise to share with faculty as they prepare for, reflect upon, and revise their teaching and learning practices in ways that are inclusive and responsive to all learners (Cook-Sather 2018). This belief in student expertise evolves from elevating the student partners’ lived experiences as part of the populations that SaP programs were intentionally created to empower (e.g., first generation, low-income, BIPOC, and others marginalized in higher education). These students, in conversation with their faculty partners, raise issues of equity that may occur in classroom dynamics.

For example, Kandiko Howson and Weller explore a student-engaged model of pedagogical partnership through teaching observations in a United Kingdom context, where students and new faculty collaborate, highlighting the distinct perspectives that student partners bring, primarily based on their lived learning experiences, which can inform teaching practices (Kandiko Howson and Weller 2016). Mihans et al. examine a collaborative effort between faculty and undergraduate student partners to redesign a course at Elon University, reshaping the traditional roles between student and faculty and redesigning a course to better align with students’ needs and to preserve academic rigor (Mihans et al. 2008). Additionally, Pallant examines the concept of expertise in academia by emphasizing that student partners provide insights into classroom dynamics and broader college life (Pallant 2014). These insights aid faculty in creating more effective learning environments and highlight the value of diverse perspectives in building a more inclusive academic community (Pallant 2014). These examples of SaP programs highlight the important ways in which student partners can develop their skills as leaders for social justice on campus. However, SaP programs have faced challenges in addressing the traditional notions of expertise and power dynamics within academia as student partners’ insights are often valued for their emotional and experiential nature rather than being recognized as formal expertise (Kandiko Howson and Weller 2016). Still, as SaP programs have mushroomed at institutions of higher education, student pedagogical partners and their roles as social justice advocates in these programs have expanded too.

This review article explores student leadership roles in SaP programs using Cook-Sather’s framework for three distinct models of SaP engagement: embracing student expertise within the students’ home institution (Model 1), embracing former student partner expertise (Model 2), and embracing current student partner expertise at a different institution (Model 3) (Cook-Sather 2023). This article focuses particularly on the models of SaP programs that draw upon student expertise, and while we address several arenas in which student expertise is particularly relevant (disability, cultural competence), our focus is on the three models of engagement that Cook-Sather posits. Specifically, this review explores the SaP literature over the past two decades to determine the ways in which student partners have flourished in leadership roles in SaP programs within these three distinct models of SaP engagement. We further build upon Cook-Sather’s framework (Cook-Sather 2023) by grouping SaP student leadership opportunities into four categories—(a) acting as leaders for social equity on campus, (b) serving as peer mentors to new student partners in existing programs, (c) co-creating new programs, and (d) publishing in the literature. Acting as leaders for social equity on campus and serving as peer mentors to new student partners in existing programs align with Model 1, while co-creating new programs and publishing in the literature can relate to any of the three models.

This article will conclude by exploring how Model 1, which Cook-Sather describes as embracing student expertise within the students’ home institution, can be expanded beyond traditional pedagogical partnerships between students and faculty to a lead student mentorship model in which experienced, returning student partners mentor and guide new student partners in their partnerships with faculty. Instead of partnering with faculty, the lead student mentors are partnering with new student partners to support and advise them in their pedagogical partnerships in the SaP program. All three of the models that Cook-Sather puts forth, as well as the addition of the lead student mentor approach, enable student partners as part of SaP programs to address issues in the classroom such as accessibility and belonging, which can significantly enhance educational equity (Dewsbury and Brame 2019). Lead student mentor programs already exist at Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, Arizona (Best et al. 2024), Ursinus College (Skorina 2024), and our home institution, Yale University. Together, these three institutions illustrate the potential of peer mentorship as experienced student partners guide new participants, expand the reach of SaP programs, and elevate the emotional capacity of pedagogical partnerships (Best et al. 2024; Healey and France 2022). They highlight how SaP programs can expand upon Cook-Sather’s Model 1 to not only reshape pedagogical practices but also to cultivate a generation of students who advocate for equity and inclusion in higher education.

2. Method

Using Cook-Sather’s 2023 essay on the various models of student leadership as our conceptual framework, we searched the literature published in venues dedicated to student–staff partnership work for discussions of instances in which students took on leadership roles. The references included throughout this literature review indicate the publications we found that addressed this topic.

3. Findings

This section will begin with an overview of the evolution of students’ leadership roles in partnership programs using Cook-Sather’s 2023 framework. Then, each subsequent section will use the framework to explore the varied ways in which student partners lead: a description of how students can act as leaders for social equity on campus, examples of how experienced student partners can serve as peer mentors to new student partners, instances of how experienced student partners co-create new SaP programs, and cases of how student partners publish in the literature.

3.1. The Evolution of Student Leadership in Students-as-Partners Programs

SaP programs have evolved since their inception in the early 2000s by integrating student expertise into the development of teaching and learning practices. Alison Cook-Sather outlines three models for pedagogical partnerships that acknowledge and foster student expertise (Cook-Sather 2023):

• Embracing Student Expertise Within the Students’ Home Institution: Model 1 involves current undergraduate students participating in pedagogical partnership programs at their home institution, such as the Students as Learners and Teachers (SaLT) program at Bryn Mawr and Haverford Colleges. Students take on roles as pedagogical partners to faculty, conducting classroom observations and engaging in weekly discussions. Programs like this aim to create a space that challenges the deficit notions of students with marginalized identities and provides support for faculty from a broad range of backgrounds by recognizing the unique insights students bring due to their identities and experiences (Cook-Sather 2023).
• Embracing Former Student Partner Expertise: Model 2 focuses on recent graduates who have experience as student partners and are hired into temporary staff positions to support the development of SaP programs. Institutions like Trinity University and Berea College have adopted this approach, creating post-baccalaureate fellow roles that leverage the expertise of these former student partners. These positions have the potential to become permanent staff roles, offering a new career pathway for recent graduates (Cook-Sather 2023).
• Embracing Current Student Partner Expertise at a Different Institution: Model 3 involves current student partners at one institution supporting the development of pedagogical partnership programs at other institutions. For example, Nandeeta Bala, a student at Vassar College, assisted Emmanuel College in Massachusetts with their program launch. Similarly, McGill University in Canada hired SaLT student partners to facilitate meetings in their pilot partnership program. This model allows for the transfer of expertise across institutions and supports peer mentoring among students (Cook-Sather 2023).

Each of these models enables the student partners in SaP programs to become leaders who work towards social justice in classrooms by supporting the instructors to reflect on their assumptions and the power dynamics that shape their interactions with students (Allin 2014). Further, embracing student expertise in partnership work can lead to more equitable and empowering educational experiences for all involved (Cook-Sather 2023).

3.2. A Description of How Students Can Act as Leaders for Social Equity on Campus

SaP programs that embrace Model 1 (Embracing Student Expertise Within the Students’ Home Institution) are uniquely positioned to create opportunities for their student partners to be leaders for social equity on campus. By sharing their distinct perspectives on learning and teaching and challenging the conventional roles taken by students and instructors, student partners collectively influence the campus climate and pedagogical innovations (Tong et al. 2018). Healey et al. suggest that students and instructors working together in higher education is one of the most important developments for higher education in the 21st century (Healey et al. 2014).

In Model 1, student partners have championed a range of social equity issues such as belonging and accessibility. Ana Colón García, as a student partner in the Students as Learners and Teachers (SaLT) program at Bryn Mawr and Haverford Colleges, explored the idea of belonging in the classroom (Colón García 2017). Throughout her partnerships, she developed a collaborative relationship with her faculty partners that helped her rethink her rapport with her own professors and her role as a student in their classrooms. Making sense of her relationship with her collegiate community empowered her to advocate for belonging in classrooms more widely (Colón García 2017). This focus is important, as students who have a sense of belonging are more successful in college-level work; however, students from marginalized groups often report a lower sense of belonging, particularly at predominantly white institutions (Dewsbury and Brame 2019; Johnson et al. 2007), which makes Colón García’s work even more consequential.

Two other students working closely with the SaLT program, Abhirami Suresh and Piper Rolfes, also took on important roles as advocates for equity when co-facilitating Pedagogy Circles for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (Suresh and Rolfes 2023). These pedagogy circles were gathering spaces in which to discuss anti-racism, diversity, inclusivity, and equity within and beyond the classroom and were open to faculty, administrators, staff, and students across Bryn Mawr and Haverford Colleges, as an extension of the SaLT program (Suresh and Rolfes 2023). By leading these transparent conversations with participants from multiple levels of the institutional hierarchy, Suresh and Rolfes helped to foster new cross-disciplinary faculty relationships and create a community of university members who were joined by their passion for equity but who may not have otherwise met.

In addition to student belonging, the faculty’s sense of belonging matters greatly too, particularly for those who have been marginalized or ostracized in higher education spaces (Hartlep et al. 2024). Student partners can also play a leadership role in facilitating faculty belonging. Recognizing the need for community during and after the pandemic, student partners in the SaLT program led pedagogy circles for the BIPOC faculty by serving as co-facilitators, structuring and guiding discussions while creating a collaborative and open environment for the participating faculty (Cook-Sather et al. 2023). The student partners demonstrated their focus on social justice by introducing topics for discussion related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, offering prompts to spark reflection and dialogue. For example, they asked faculty to reflect on how they incorporate accessibility into their teaching or how they practice reciprocity in the classroom. By emphasizing the importance of an open, non-judgmental space where BIPOC faculty could share their challenges and insights freely, the students positioned themselves as partners in dialogue, helping faculty to reflect on their pedagogical practices and explore potential approaches together. Similarly to Suresh and Rolfes’ Circles for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, these cross-disciplinary conversations bridged the gaps between faculty from different departments and allowed for a sense of belonging among faculty while also allowing for transformative moments, such as when faculty rethought their teaching approaches related to accessibility (Cook-Sather et al. 2023; Suresh and Rolfes 2023).

Like these pedagogy circles, most social justice leadership opportunities for pedagogical partners center around the classroom context. However, some partnerships across the globe have focused more broadly on social justice at the university level for a growing population of students in higher education: students with disabilities who often experience significant barriers and delays in receiving the accommodations they need (Ristad et al. 2024). While many SaP programs encourage their student and instructor partners to make their courses more accessible, these collaborations do not always take place with insight from disabled student or faculty partners and this identity is not always actively considered when selecting partners. In a case study at McMaster University in Canada, students and staff with and without disabilities worked together to user test a university’s accessibility website, to which faculty and staff are regularly directed for resources on making their teaching more accessible (Brown et al. 2020). At Deakin University in Australia, students with disabilities mentored university staff to promote inclusive education and scalable academic development (Dollinger and Hanna 2023). Other pedagogical partnerships have paired students from the blind and deaf/hard of hearing communities with faculty where these students contribute as change agents by identifying barriers and co-creating inclusive strategies (Cook-Sather 2023; Schley and Marchetti 2022). Although students with disabilities were the primary focus, all students benefit from these co-constructed inclusive and equitable approaches to teaching and learning.

Another way that pedagogical partnerships have supported social justice at the university level more broadly is through cultural competency work. At the University of Sydney, six students served as Student Ambassadors for the university’s annual teaching conference, the Sydney Teaching Colloquium, in 2015, when the theme was “Cultural competence is everyone’s business” (Bell et al. 2017). In their role as ambassadors, the students were in conversation with faculty participants for several months about the role of cultural competency at the university and led a session at the conclusion of the colloquium presenting their recommendations for how the university can better address cultural competence (Bell et al. 2017). These efforts impacted a wide network of faculty with the colloquium drawing an audience of approximately 300 attendees, who were mainly academics (Bell et al. 2017). Student partners from the University of Queensland have also developed a cross-cultural framework for conducting pedagogical partner work grounded in cultural competency. By offering this framework they hope to combat the ways in which inequities in culture and power can be reproduced in partnership work despite the partners’ efforts to challenge these hierarchies. These examples demonstrate that SaP programs around the globe position student partners as social justice leaders working to co-create equitable campuses for students and faculty.

3.3. Examples of How Experienced Student Partners Can Serve as Peer Mentors to New Student Partners

Model 1 (Embracing Student Expertise Within the Students’ Home Institution) positions student partners as social justice leaders on campus as they partner with instructors on their courses or work for equity at the broader university level. Another way to support the students’ development as social equity leaders at their home institutions is to invite experienced student partners to mentor new student partners in existing SaP programs by having them offer one-on-one conversations and facilitating weekly student partner meetings to discuss new student partner experiences. Peer mentorship often happens in a variety of more informal ways across many SaP programs. For instance, returning partners might give advice to a new partner experiencing a challenge that they encountered previously in a past partnership or act as a “participant observer” in weekly team meetings (Jonsson 2020). Peer mentorship within SaP programs exists on a continuum, but formalizing this role can give students more authority and experience in advocating for equitable practices. Empowering experienced student partners to guide new student partners toward reciprocity in their relationships with their faculty partners is essential to creating egalitarian community spaces on university campuses (Matthews et al. 2018). Additionally, given the need for better balance in sharing both positive and negative partnership realities (Healey and France 2022), returning student partners are well-positioned, more so than the staff leaders in SaP programs, to provide insights on the challenges of sustaining a partnership over the course of a semester, along with the successes.

Ursinus College has built peer mentorship into their program through an apprentice model where each fall a returning pedagogical partner is matched with one or two new partners and a faculty member (Skorina 2024). For the first half of the semester, the new partner(s) focuses on observation, shadowing the returning partner and discussing with them one-on-one. Gradually, the new partner(s) takes on a more active role, leading meetings with the faculty member and receiving feedback from the returning partner. This process continues throughout the semester, and in the spring, all partners take on their own partnership. This apprenticeship model helps to build student confidence and prepares the new partners to take on a leadership role in the program when they have a partner shadowing them the following fall (Skorina 2024).

Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University’s Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence in Prescott, AZ, has implemented the peer mentor model where experienced partners mentor new partners in their SaP program. They have grown from a few partnerships to 30 partnerships in a few semesters by leaning into the model of experienced student partners leading and modeling the way for new student partners (Best et al. 2024). By developing some of their student partners into leaders to mentor new student partners, they have achieved several outcomes: (a) better student experience in the SaP program, (b) student partners as lifelong learners, and (c) student partners as self-regulated learners. By trusting student partners to lead and mentor other student partners, they have scaled up their program, achieving a large student partner community that has an impact across their campus (Best et al. 2024).

These examples from Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University and Ursinus College demonstrate how to expand upon Model 1 (Embracing Student Expertise Within the Students’ Home Institution) by positioning the existing student partners as leaders and mentors in an SaP program. Thus, SaP programs with experienced partners as mentors not only embrace the students’ expertise as learners, but also as social justice advocates beyond the classroom, expanding under their mentorship and influence across campus.

3.4. Instances of How Experienced Student Partners Co-Create New SaP Programs

By positioning experienced student partners as peer mentors in their home institutions, SaP programs lay the groundwork for experienced undergraduate student partners to co-create new SaP programs at other institutions, as Cook-Sather describes in Model 3 (Embracing Current Student Partner Expertise at a Different Institution). An example of a higher education institution enacting this model is McGill University in Canada. They hired student partners from the Students as Learners and Teachers (SaLT) to facilitate meetings in their pilot partnership program. This co-creation allows for the transfer of expertise across institutions and supports peer mentoring among students (Cook-Sather 2023). Creating these peer mentor roles for the student partners enables the experienced partners who assume these roles to later assume post-bac roles developing new SaP programs, which a recent review of the SaP literature suggests is a growth area in SaP programs (Mercer-Mapstone et al. 2017).

Another pathway for institutions to embrace student expertise in co-creating new partnership programs is to hire student partners as post-bacs in staff roles to launch new programs, which encompasses Model 2 (Embracing Former Student Partner Expertise). By using the tenets of “backward design” (identifying the desired results and goals, determining acceptable evidence of these goals, and planning structures and supports for evaluation), post-bacs who lead new pedagogical partner programs can focus on their lived experience as social justice leaders in their undergraduate SaP programs (Wiggins and McTighe 2005). Cook-Sather et al. argue that this backward design approach avoids the assumptions about credibility that typically apply when hiring recent graduates to design and lead new SaP programs; instead, a backward design approach, beginning with the desired results and goals, expands who is entitled to make claims about teaching and learning (Cook-Sather et al. 2019). Hiring post-bacs who were formerly student partners to launch new SaP programs expands the range of perspectives for educational development, since many of the post-bacs come from marginalized communities (Seay 2024). For example, Nandeeta Bala, who completed her undergraduate experience as a pedagogical partner at Vassar College, launched an SaP program at Emmanuel College (Bala 2022). Likewise, Khadijah Seay, who completed her undergraduate work as a student partner at Bryn Mawr, subsequently worked as a post-bac to co-create an SaP at Barea College and created a pathway for two more post-bacs to continue this important work in partnership (Ortquist-Ahrens 2021). Hiring post-bacs like Bala, Seay, and Graham into these new leadership positions can increase social justice perspectives as they bring an equity lens shaped by their lived experiences and their time in the SaP programs.

Although all three models (1, 2, and 3) create opportunities for students to lead with a social justice mindset, student partners who have an opportunity to participate in the co-creation of a new SaP program support the equity-driven mission of SaP programs and serve as advocates for social justice in a new institutional context. Cook-Sather argues that embracing student expertise in partnership work, particularly in developing a new SaP program, can lead to more equitable and empowering educational experiences for all involved (Cook-Sather 2023). Graham and Troyer also demonstrate the power of harnessing this post-bac expertise into a guide for other programs (Graham and Troyer 2024).

3.5. Cases of How Student Partners Publish in the Literature

Student leaders in all three models (1, 2, and 3) have published widely in the Students as Partners (SaP) literature, flourishing as social justice advocates by addressing inequities in education, centering student voices, examining systemic barriers, and sharing perspectives on topics like race, gender, disability and socioeconomic status within a partnership. These student-led publications have resulted in a deeper understanding of how to promote equity and inclusion within the learning spaces of higher education institutions, and position students as co-creators of knowledge with their own expertise and agency. These outcomes align with the current literature on the impact of students as authors (Cook-Sather et al. 2021; Felten et al. 2013; Marquis et al. 2017; Shank and Cruz 2023).

Despite the many contributions from student authors, a bias remains toward staff-centric authorship (Mercer-Mapstone et al. 2017). Additionally, when students are included in organizations that are centered on scholarship and publication, their expertise is not always respected (Yahlnaaw 2019). What better way to address these biases than to create a pathway to authorship for experienced student partners based on their leadership and mentoring experiences in SaP programs? Indeed, Mercer-Mapstone et al. conclude by calling for further research on partnerships that include student–student collaborations, which can include publishing based on their SaP experiences (Mercer-Mapstone et al. 2017).

One of the most accessible pathways to publication for SaP student leaders is the journal, Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education (TLTHE). The goal of the journal is to make publishing processes more accessible and less burdensome for students, faculty, and staff working in SaP programs, so it does not include peer review. It is a space for faculty, staff, or student partners to articulate how they work together to explore and enact effective classroom practice. Student partners who take on leadership roles in their SaP programs author many of the articles in TLTHE.

A subset of articles in TLTHE feature students who coordinate burgeoning SaP programs at their institution. Nandeeta Bala documented her role as student coordinator for the Students and Teachers Engaged in Pedagogical Partnership (STEPP) program at Vassar College (Bala 2021). Her understanding of social justice, particularly in the context of inclusive education and challenging traditional hierarchical structures within academia, evolved as she took on the dual role of coordinator and student partner. By working to disrupt traditional hierarchical structures and modes of interaction between faculty and student partners, she modeled pedagogical risk-taking and skillfully navigated complex power dynamics in educational settings (Cook-Sather et al. 2019). As shared previously, after her undergraduate experience at Vassar College, Bala spearheaded an SaP program at Emmanuel College, published about that experience, and invited other students to write about their experiences in the newly developed program (Bala 2022). Bala’s work led the way for the next generation of student partners to write and publish their work. Emmanuel College student Angelina Latin reflected on how the program influenced her perspective on pedagogy and further ignited her passion for social justice in STEM (Latin 2022).

Many other examples exist in the published literature of undergraduate students describing the opportunity to lead newly formed SaP or adjacent SaP programs. Specifically, the authors demonstrate how they lead with social justice in their respective SaP programs and mitigate inequities in classrooms through frank dialogue with faculty (Drake 2021; Jonsson 2020; Suresh and Rolfes 2023). Publications like these demonstrate how the student partners mentor the student and faculty partners, and advocate for SaP programs as vehicles for centering student voices and social justice. Some of the students who have published in the literature have matriculated for doctoral studies, publishing more broadly in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) literature, and guiding others on the co-creation of SaP programs. For example, L.P. Luqueño who co-wrote Promoting Equity and Justice through Pedagogical Partnership along with leading authors in the field, began in an SaP program as an undergraduate and eventually completed her doctorate (de Bie et al. 2021).

Two other journals that prioritize publishing student partner work that are peer reviewed include the Journal of Educational Innovation and Partnership and Change and International Journal for Students as Partners. Student leaders in SaP programs who publish in either of these journals gain experience and exposure to the peer review process in academic publishing. However, true collaboration between instructors and students to publish in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) literature requires conscious efforts to empower students and involve them deeply in research processes, which can lead to a more engaging and transformative educational experience (Allin 2014). However, as Allin, who has a dual role as instructor and staff at her institution explains, the existing power dynamics within higher education may prevent true equality between instructors and students. The hierarchical structure in academia unintentionally reinforces the authority of instructors over students, making collaboration more difficult to achieve. Allin suggests that faculty who publish with their students may want to draw upon Fielding’s (2001) model of student involvement in research: students as a data source; students as active responders; students as co-researchers; students as researchers (Fielding 2001). Achieving research collaborations that evolve beyond students as mere sources of data to more active co-authors will not only make way for new contributions to the SaP literature specifically and to SoTL more broadly but will also position students as social justice leaders beyond their own campuses through the reach of their publications.

4. Discussion and Future Directions

Students as Partners (SaP) programs have transformed higher education by integrating student expertise into teaching and learning practices. Alison Cook-Sather (2023) outlines three models: Model 1 involves current undergraduates partnering with faculty at their home institutions, such as Bryn Mawr’s SaLT program, emphasizing social equity and supporting marginalized communities. Model 2 engages former student partners in staff roles to develop new SaP programs, creating career pathways and expanding equity perspectives. Model 3 utilizes current student partners to co-create programs across institutions, fostering peer mentoring and knowledge transfer. These models empower students as social justice leaders, addressing issues like belonging and accessibility (Dewsbury and Brame 2019). For instance, Bryn Mawr’s SaLT program facilitated pedagogy circles for BIPOC faculty, emphasizing equity through collaboration (Cook-Sather et al. 2023).

Model 1 can be expanded into mentorship, where experienced student partners prepare new participants, enhancing their SaP experience and fostering leadership skills (Best et al. 2024; Skorina 2024). At institutions like Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University and Ursinus College, this mentorship supports the student partners as lifelong learners and community builders. Similarly, Models 2 and 3 position former and current student partners as co-creators of new programs, advancing equity and challenging traditional hierarchies. SaP students working with each of these three models have significantly contributed to scholarship publishing on equity, inclusion, and pedagogical innovation. These collaborative efforts not only empower students but also reimagine academia’s power dynamics, promoting co-creation and shared leadership in the scholarship of teaching and learning (Allin 2014). Through publishing, the students’ impact on the SaP programs lives on beyond the time of their undergraduate careers and beyond the scope of their institution alone.

As SaP programs have evolved, so too have the roles of the student partners in these programs. Although each program and partnership are uniquely shaped by the voices and creativity of those involved, SaP programs more broadly should consider expanding upon the peer mentorship model enacted at institutions like Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University, Ursinus College, and our home institution, Yale University. For example, in Yale University’s Pedagogical Partners program, the lead student mentors, who are selected after serving as student partners for two semesters, facilitate weekly student partner meetings, hold office hours for new student partners, and act as a liaison between the program and each faculty and student partnership. Not only can experienced partners help mentor new partners to get acclimated to an SaP program, the lead student mentors can also guide new partners by supporting them with the emotional aspects of working in partnership (Healey and France 2022) and help to scale up the SaP programs (Mercer-Mapstone and Marie 2019). Achieving these two outcomes with the lead student mentors empowers new student partners to be leaders for social justice at their institutions of higher learning by supporting the development of their voices for social equity and inclusion.

Healey and France acknowledge the emotional impact of SaP work and therefore propose a flexible support model drawing on (1) peer support, (2) mentoring, and (3) independent reflective writing (Healey and France 2022). All three of these recommendations align effectively with the lead student mentors (LSMs) guiding and mentoring new partners. LSMs, like many students in SaP programs, have experienced being silenced or marginalized in higher institution spaces. Thus, they have the potential to create spaces that challenge the deficit notions of students with marginalized identities while recognizing the unique insights that new student partners bring due to their identities and lived experiences. Through regular community meetings, journaling, and office hours, LSMs can discuss with new student partners the emotional labor that comes with disrupting the existing power relations between faculty and student partners and in the larger university setting. This gives students the opportunity to be social justice leaders on both the programmatic and classroom levels by guiding the broader direction and values of the SaP program and advising students in their individual partnerships. Although the staff at Centers for Teaching and Learning can also take on the work of mentorship in SaP programs, the spaces that staff inhabit on campus are often part of a larger context of Whiteness on campus (Gusa 2010).

Beyond the extensive emotional support that they can provide to new student partners and faculty partners, lead student mentors can also help with the scaling up of SaP programs on their home campuses and at other institutions, as in Cook-Sather’s (2023) Model 2 and 3. Specifically, at their home institutions, each lead student mentor can be assigned to a small subset of new student partners to support their transition into SaP partnership work. Typically, SaP programs have one staff member at the helm, which makes it difficult to bring a program up to scale, given the number of mentoring hours necessary to support each individual partner. Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University, Ursinus College, and Yale University recognized this challenge when they each began scaling up their partnerships from a small number to 30 and 10, respectively. By working with experienced student partners as the lead student mentors for other partners, the individual staff at these institutions were able to keep up with the demand and interest from instructors across their campuses while still centering social equity and inclusion as the hallmarks of their SaP programs.

5. Conclusions

The broader implications of a lead student mentor approach are that SaP programs have the potential to create pathways for student partners to gain valuable leadership experience in working for social equity and justice. Students may begin in a traditional pedagogical partner role with a faculty partner for a specific course (Model 1), transition to a lead student mentor role to support new partners (expanded Model 2), continue on to co-create a new SaP program as either an undergraduate or post-bac (Model 1 or 2), write about their experiences in the SaP literature or the SoTL literature more broadly (Model 1, 2, or 3), and even pursue a doctorate to potentially become a faculty partner on the other side of the SaP program. Student partners in SaP programs have historically been chosen because of their lived experiences—both as students and as members of the student populations that SaP programs were intentionally created to help empower (e.g., first generation, low-income, BIPOC and others marginalized in higher ed)—which makes the leadership opportunities and skill development that SaP programs offer even more vital (Fraser and Usman 2021; Seay 2024). The students who were in dialogue with faculty to help identify equity issues across classrooms may now be the campus leaders of tomorrow, working for social justice.