Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Gadfly Podcast
      • Flypaper Blog
      • Events
    • Covid-19
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
    • Our Work in Dayton
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Policy
    • High Expectations
    • Quality Choices
    • Personalized Pathways
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
    • Events
  • COVID-19
  • Scholars Program
Flypaper

Faculty engagement leads to student engagement in higher education

Amber M. Northern, Ph.D.
7.15.2020
Faculty engagement SR image
Getty Images/kasto80

There is a growing body of research that evaluates the effectiveness of supports for college students in helping them persist in school and complete their degrees. Anything from propitiously timed financial incentives to in-depth support systems can make the difference between continued attendance and dropping out, especially for first-generation, low-income, and other underrepresented students. A new NBER paper adds to that literature, examining the role that professors could play in supporting at-risk students.

Specifically, this study—a huge project including both a pilot and a scale-up intervention at a single large university—looks at the impact of personalized and strategically timed e-mails from professors to students as a means of increasing student engagement, performance, and persistence. These are large lecture courses, so this level of personal outreach is not typical. The first e-mail welcomes the students to the class and provides tips on how to succeed in the course in general; the second and third e-mails provide targeted performance feedback timed midway through the course and just before the final exam. In short, the professor e-mailed the treatment students individually to give them customized input on their latest assignments.

The three–e-mail intervention is implemented in two waves. First, in spring 2016, analysts randomly select one half of students in fourteen large undergraduate classes as the treatment group. Then, in the fall 2017, to assess whether spillovers might be biasing their estimates, they draw the treatment in two ways: in eight large classes, they randomly select a third of students into treatment and also randomly select the entire class to receive treatment in ten classes where the same professor taught two sections of the identical course. Because professors volunteered to participate, researchers also looked at differences between them, finding that, although their Rate My Professors ratings were not significantly different, there were demographic differences between them relative to gender and race. It is unclear what impacts those differences may have had.

On average, the e-mails had no discernible effect on student performance in the course, including by course grades, percentage of points earned, passing the course, and earning an A or B. However, student survey data show that, on average, treatment students responded that the professor was more approachable, available, and caring and that she or he kept them informed. When parsing heterogeneous effects, they find that first-year students particularly benefit, especially those who are less prepared according to their high school GPA (they outperform control students by around a third of a letter grade). Also, freshmen men of color—black and Latino—are six percentage points less likely to drop the course.

Researchers also find a positive and sizable “spillover effect” for additional nontreated courses (no professor e-mails) for black and Latino students who are first years, male, and have low high school GPAs. For instance, the treatment effects for black and Latino freshmen is 0.31 grade points for treated courses and 0.15 grade points for nontreated courses. In summary, this light-touch intervention significantly improved students’ perceptions of their professors and courses across the board and improved the course performance of underrepresented students in their first year of college in particular.

There is one significant unanswered question regarding the scalability and sustainability of the treatment protocol. Although student survey data show that personalized feedback on assignments likely enhanced outcomes—and this outreach is something that would, in a best-case scenario, routinely be part of a professor’s job—the time commitment in large lecture classes would likely preclude such feedback on a regular basis. Qualitative survey data from the professors underscore that reality. Still, any institution interested in supporting its most vulnerable students could do worse than learn how to build capacity for personalized faculty engagement with this light-touch intervention.

SOURCE: Scott E. Carrell and Michal Kurlaender, “My Professor Cares: Experimental Evidence on the Role of Faculty Engagement,” NBER Working Paper #27312 (June 2020).

Policy Priority:
Personalized Pathways
Topics:
Curriculum & Instruction

Amber Northern is senior vice president for research at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, where she supervises the Institute’s studies and research staff.  She has published in the areas of educational accountability, principal leadership, teacher quality, and academic standards, among others. Prior to joining Fordham, she served as senior study director at Westat. In that role, she provided evaluation services…

View Full Bio

Sign Up to Receive Fordham Updates

We'll send you quality research, commentary, analysis, and news on the education issues you care about.
Thank you for signing up!
Please check your email to confirm the subscription.

Related Content

view
Ohio charter news logo
School Choice

Ohio Charter News Weekly – 1.22.21

Chad L. Aldis, Jeff Murray 1.22.2021
OhioOhio Gadfly Daily
view
Gadfly Bites
School Funding

Gadfly Bites 1/22/21 – Strange but great

Jeff Murray 1.22.2021
OhioOhio Gadfly Daily
view
Quality Choices

The Education Gadfly Show: The education issues facing state legislatures in 2021

Michael J. Petrilli, Patricia Levesque, David Griffith, Amber M. Northern, Ph.D. 1.21.2021
NationalThe Education Gadfly Show Podcast
Fordham Logo

© 2020 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

1016 16th St NW, 8th Floor 
Washington, DC 20036

202.223.5452

[email protected]

  • <
Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]