First-year relationships and students’ perceived access to learning

Updated Sep 07, 2026

Relationships can affect whether first-year students feel able to ask questions and engage with a subject. Laura Cordes Felby, Rikke Trige Jensen and Mathilde Fibiger examine those experiences in The stars, compass, and anchor, published in Studies in Higher Education on 17 August 2026.

The distinction in the title matters: the study concerns students’ perceived access to disciplinary content. It does not test whether particular relationships cause measurable learning gains.

What the researchers did

Twenty-five volunteers aged 20 to 25 took part across ten programmes and all five faculties at one Danish university. Students were interviewed midway through their first and second semesters, in groups where possible and individually where participation or scheduling required it.

The researchers used reflexive thematic analysis, then reanalysed the findings through metaphors, drawing on Self-Determination Theory. Their focus was how students described relationships with lecturers, teaching assistants and peers. The range of programmes adds variety, but voluntary participation at one institution does not make the sample statistically representative.

Relationships that helped and hindered

Lecturers were compared with stars. Participants valued expertise, enthusiasm and explanations that made the subject approachable. Expertise could also feel distant when explanations assumed knowledge students did not have. The analysis describes both inspiration and difficulty asking questions.

Teaching assistants were compared with compasses. In this context, they were generally advanced students who helped with teaching outside lectures. Participants valued their ability to explain material and navigate expectations. One participant described the ability to:

“turn professorial language into human language”

The quotation comes from student 19 in the first semester. Other accounts described uncertainty about an assistant’s knowledge or role. The paper treats assistants’ position as both relatable and potentially difficult, rather than automatically beneficial.

Peers were compared with anchors. Students described shared notes, aligned expectations and supportive discussion. They also described comparison, pressure and reluctance to ask basic questions. Close friendships could make constructive criticism harder. The authors additionally discuss useful relationships beyond the immediate programme, so academic connection is not confined to one classroom.

These are interpretations of students’ accounts. They should not be converted into a ranking of staff roles or an estimate of how much any relationship improves attainment.

Questions for programme teams

The following are editorial suggestions for local testing, not interventions evaluated by this paper.

Ask when explanations felt accessible, when students felt able to admit uncertainty, and what made asking a question difficult. Invite examples rather than presuming that a particular teaching role helped or hindered everyone.

Discuss teaching-assistant responsibilities with staff and students. Check how questions beyond an assistant’s expertise are handled and whether the route to further help is clear. For study groups, explore whether shared expectations make discussion useful and whether anyone feels unable to contribute.

Review feedback alongside participation coverage and programme context. Student voice can guide follow-up, but a theme about confidence is not a measure of knowledge gained. Evaluate any proposed change using evidence appropriate to the outcome being claimed.

FAQ

Does the study prove that stronger relationships increase learning?

It explores perceived access to knowledge, not assessed learning gains or a causal effect of an intervention.

Can teaching assistants be assumed to provide better support than lecturers?

No. The accounts describe helpful and difficult aspects of each role. The metaphors are interpretive, not a comparative effectiveness score.

How should the findings inform first-year feedback?

They can prompt questions about explanation, approachability, uncertainty and peer dynamics. Test those questions locally and leave room for experiences outside the paper’s framework.

Review note, 7 September 2026: checked against the full published paper shared by an author. Retained the verified quotation and methods, and clarified perceived access versus measured learning throughout the title, overview and practical discussion.

Reference

Laura Cordes Felby, Rikke Trige Jensen and Mathilde Fibiger (2026). “The stars, compass, and anchor: how relationships shape first-year students’ perception of their access to disciplinary content.” Studies in Higher Education. Publisher article.