Age as a Factor in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives in Higher Education.

Demographic shifts and the growth of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives are occurring simultaneously on college campuses. This study seeks to understand their intersection by focusing on age in DEI initiatives on college campuses. Findings from six focus groups suggest that age is not given much attention in DEI initiatives. Participants acknowledge the issue of age; but in general, they strive to keep other identities, like race and gender, in the forefront, especially in the face of low resources. While it may be difficult to elevate age in DEI initiatives on campuses, interventions were identified.

Using an age-friendly university lens to explore community member engagement during the pandemic.

The COVID-19 global pandemic forced institutions of higher education to adapt quickly to virtual connection platforms to maintain ties with their learners. After transitioning to virtual programming, the number of participants in our lifelong learning program more than quadrupled. As a member of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) global network, we saw this as an opportunity to continue expanding our age-inclusivity efforts and capitalized on this engagement by inviting attendees to participate in a brief online survey related to several of the AFU principles. Respondents requested, although not exclusively, continued virtual access to programming. Results emphasized the need for flexible and diverse access points, supported by age-inclusive campus infrastructure, for continuity in respondents engaging with the university post-pandemic. Our path forward is discussed, highlighting successful strategies by other AFU global partners.

An environmental scan of methods for assessing age-friendliness in post-secondary institutions.

The University of Calgary joined the Age-Friendly University (AFU) Global Network in 2018. As part of our university's AFU action plan, a baseline assessment of the institution's age-friendliness will be conducted to identify areas of strength and growth. To inform our approach and that of other institutions undertaking this work, an environmental scan was performed to determine methods used by post-secondary institutions to date to assess age-friendliness. Both academic and grey literature published between 2012 and 2022 in the English language was searched using diverse keywords. The academic literature was identified from four databases (Abstracts in Social Gerontology, Academic Search Complete, Education Research Complete, Scopus) and the grey literature from 84 institutional websites of AFU Global Network members. Twelve academic sources and four grey sources were included in the analysis. Seven methods were used to assess age-friendliness, with the most common approaches being surveys, inventories, focus groups, interviews, and photovoice. The Age-Friendly Inventory and Campus Climate Survey (Silverstein et al., 2022) was selected to evaluate the University of Calgary's age-friendliness due to its alignment with all 10 AFU principles, comprehensiveness, and involvement of multiple stakeholders. Other post-secondary institutions should consider their context and resources when selecting an assessment method.

Early Intervention in Psychosis Treatment Components Utilization in Patients Aged Over 35.

Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services have been youth-focused since their inception. In England, recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines and new National Health Service (NHS) Standards for EIP recommend the expansion of the age acceptability criterion from 14-35 to 14-65. In the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough EIP service (CAMEO), we ran a service evaluation to assess the initial impact of this policy change. It aimed to elicit EIP treatment components utilization by patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP) aged over 35, in comparison with those under 35. We found that the over-35s required more contacts from EIP healthcare professionals, especially from care coordinators (coefficient = .239; Robust SE = .102; Z = 6.42; p = 0.019) and social workers (coefficient = 18.462; Robust SE = .692; Z = .016; p < 0.001). These findings indicate that FEP patients aged over 35 may present with more complex and sustained clinical/social needs. This may have implications for EIP service development and commissioning.

Age-Friendly Universities (AFU): Possibilities and Power in Campus Connections.

Shifting age demographics are reshaping societies and challenging institutions of higher education to respond to aging populations through new approaches to teaching, research, and community engagement. The Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative offers a set of guiding principles institutions can use to assess the extent to which their programs and practices are age inclusive, as well as identify gaps and opportunities. However, institutions need guiding change models to help them mount more comprehensive, integrated age-friendly efforts. Hirschhorn and May's campaign approach to change in higher education offers one such model. Drawing on its four core elements (i.e., "listen in" to the institution, develop a strategic theme, sweep people in, build the infrastructure), the present paper shows how AFU partners are working to move their age-friendly efforts across their campuses by building connections, coalitions, and partnerships. It is argued that such relationships are essential for achieving and sustaining an institution's age-friendly vision.

Assessing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education: Introducing the Age-Friendly Inventory and Campus Climate Survey (ICCS).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study introduces a theoretical framework for assessing age inclusivity in higher education environments and describes the Age-Friendly Inventory and Campus Climate Survey (ICCS). The ICCS measures age-friendly campus practices as reported by administrators, perceptions of age friendliness by campus constituents, and the fit between objective practices and subjective perceptions as an overall indicator of age inclusivity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The ICCS was administered at a public university in the northeastern United States. Administrators completed the Inventory of potential age-friendly campus practices associated with their units. Campus constituents (n = 688) completed the online Campus Climate Survey to assess subjective awareness of these practices, perceived age-friendliness, and personal beliefs about age inclusivity. RESULTS: The Inventory yielded a score of 66% of potential age-friendly practices in place as reported by administrators. The Campus Climate Survey showed low overall perceptions of age-friendliness and varied beliefs about age inclusivity on campus. Fit was measured by comparing the Inventory practices and Campus Climate Survey awareness of the existence of 47 of 73 potential practices. Convergence on this campus showed an awareness of 36% of age-friendly practices. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Based on the proposed theoretical framework for age inclusivity, the ICCS offers a way of assessing the age-friendliness of the objective environment across campus functions, the subjective environment across campus constituents, and the fit between subjective and objective environments on campuses. The ICCS will help higher education institutions identify strengths and challenges for advancing age inclusivity.

Assessing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education: Introducing the Age-Friendly Inventory and Campus Climate Survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study introduces a theoretical framework for assessing age inclusivity in higher education environments and describes the Age-Friendly Inventory and Campus Climate Survey (ICCS). The ICCS measures age-friendly campus practices as reported by administrators, perceptions of age-friendliness by campus constituents, and the fit between objective practices and subjective perceptions as an overall indicator of age inclusivity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The ICCS was administered at a public university in the northeastern United States. Administrators completed the Inventory of potential age-friendly campus practices associated with their units. Campus constituents (n = 688) completed the online Campus Climate Survey to assess subjective awareness of these practices, perceived age-friendliness, and personal beliefs about age inclusivity. RESULTS: The Inventory yielded a score of 66% of potential age-friendly practices in place as reported by administrators. The Campus Climate Survey showed low overall perceptions of age-friendliness and varied beliefs about age inclusivity on campus. Fit was measured by comparing the Inventory practices and Campus Climate Survey awareness of the existence of 47 of 73 potential practices. Convergence on this campus showed an awareness of 36% of age-friendly practices. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Based on the proposed theoretical framework for age inclusivity, the ICCS offers a way of assessing the age-friendliness of the objective environment across campus functions, the subjective environment across campus constituents, and the fit between subjective and objective environments on campuses. The ICCS will help higher education institutions identify strengths and challenges for advancing age inclusivity.