Why not call this, say, the faculty engagement or interaction project?

Part of it is, we had to pick something. But we also went with approachable because you could argue that being approachable facilitates interaction and engagement.

Also, approachability as a personality characteristic is important in and of itself in making students feel like they are part of a community. Feeling like they can approach, even if they don’t, could matter.

One concern with using the word approachability is that some perceive it as a gendered term in that women are praised for being, and expected to be, approachable. But, we decided to try to reclaim the term. More on this below in the Build capacity, spread responsibility section and the Culture and assessment section.

As concerns about student well-being and success have accelerated, the role of faculty has received greater attention.

Yet, for all the apparent agreement about the contribution faculty might make to important student outcomes, it is almost impossible to find a college or university that has an explicit, integrated plan for this.

The first steps in your planning process, therefore, are:
-To establish a consensus that faculty-student engagement is not just a platitude but a key institutional goal and,
-That the pursuit of this goal has to be holistic, use shared concepts, and be subject to measurement.

While all interactions between faculty and students can’t be scripted, the types/outcomes of interaction can be prioritized, with some framework in place to guide what role faculty play and what role other personnel and resources play.

Faculty’s role could be:
-To provide direct assistance or advice
-To facilitate and provide information,
-To create supportive experiences, and
-To triage to the correct source of assistance or advice.

On that note, you might want to think in terms of a “service model” when thinking about the pathways and processes through which students with certain needs and interests get matched with information and solutions.

Aspects of a service model include: Entities and resources available
Information that guides students to the best entity or resource, and
-Some kind of triage or referral structure by which a “service provider” (if you will) can direct students when needed.

Each institution will have its own formulation, but outcomes/goals of faculty-student engagement to consider include:

-A general sense of belonging and
connection
-The sense that a student can approach the faculty when appropriate and necessary
-Course-specific assistance
-Academic advising (e.g., major selection and course selection) -Mental health
-Financial aid and term bill information
-Learning about the discipline and career development
-Human and leadership (some would say “soft”) skills, self-awareness
-Self-assurance and confidence -Meta-cognition

Triage can be powerful. Think about how faculty can be trained to publicize and promote campus services, and to refer students when necessary.

One way to make sense of the multitude of ways a student might obtain help is to do some “journey mapping” and come up with profiles of students that embody more common scenarios in terms of their needs and how they might approach or be influenced by faculty.

There are not enough faculty to effectively meet all student needs under the sun. At large institutions, it’s unlikely faculty will even get to know all of their students. And, of course, there are certain forms of support that faculty would be the first to admit they are not trained to provide.

There are several ways to begin to address this. The first, noted above, is to create a schema to identify the types/outcomes of different interactions and decide what personnel or resources on campus (including digitally) might be responsible for what. Again, there’s no perfect science or ability to tame all the complexity of human behavior here.

The second is to build capacity in all the various realms. For faculty, this includes giving them the resources (maybe even a cheat sheet or a link to a chat bot) to answer the most common basic questions and some training or resources on how to triage students to the right place.

The third is to provide effective information to students about what is available and where they’d be best served to go in what situations. Pro-active outreach to students is one tactic to consider. Put another way, you need a coordinated institutional communications strategy.

Digital resources are often helpful and may add a unique dimension to services. A section below explicitly considers technological solutions that provide enhanced or more scalable assistance and support.

*******************************

As for fairness, the first thing is to acknowledge and surface disparities in what faculty are doing what, and to establish the goal of including all faculty in the important venture of supporting students. Slouches should be identified and trained/motivated to change. One way to do this is through assessment.

As for the under-performers, some might say that they are too busy with important research. Others might be disinterested even if they’re not cranking out new findings. Others might be deemed to be ineffective in interacting with students, either due to their manner or whatever other factor. How to address those issues is a question for leadership. But there is plenty of room to move things in the right direction before we get to the “hard” cases.

Your planning should account for the many reasons that affect whether students approach faculty or feel comfortable doing so, as well as their likelihood of knowing about and then utilizing other services and information.

These can be divided into what sociologists would call distal and proximate causes. For example, a first-generation (distal characteristic) student might have less awareness of office hours (proximate cause), thus reducing uptake. No need to get too caught up in that — just acknowledging that there is overlap in what is mentioned below.

Dimensions of student variation include:
-Ascribed characteristics and demographics, which might not cause variation per se but that might be correlated with it. These range from race, gender, and sexuality to first-generation, transfer, and Pell Grant status.
-Cognitive and social characteristics, including autism spectrum and other forms of neurodiversity.
-Level of shyness and fear of interacting with an authority figure.
-Physical accessibility profile, including mobility and perception.
-Student time availability.
-Where students live, including commuting versus on-campus.
-Nature of assistance or information needed.

You’ll never be able to imagine the multitude of situations, so focus more on providing multiple channels and establishing a way for students to communicate their needs (including just emphasizing frequently that you welcome that information). Another approach, discussed elsewhere, is for faculty to proactively reach out and maybe even mandate some kind of check-in with students.

While institutions should create the context to support faculty-student engagement, it’s helpful to prepare students to play their part. Instructors should explain office hours, as discussed below. Orientation for incoming students can include a conversation about engaging with faculty. Information can be made continually available on the web and pushed out via social media.

These conversations and information sources can include guidance for students about other resources aside from faculty that are available for students — thus helping to meet their needs in a scalable and sustainable way.

As Taylor Swift sings, in a different context, “ I’m not tryin’ to mess with your self-expression. . .” Likewise, one wants to be careful about dictating to faculty what their affect should be.

But they can be reminded of their potential impact on student well-being and success and the reluctance some students feel about speaking to faculty, and given some tactics. Smile. show up early to class and make small talk, reveal some life details and their own doubts (i.e., display their humanity and step down from the pedestal that they themselves might not realize they’ve been placed on). A little goes a long way here!

You can get a lot of bang for your buck by targeting some of the key levers of faculty approachability.

Office hours: Make sure they are at a good time and that they are also by arrangement. Make sure students feel comfortable asking for a time outside scheduled hours.

Explain what office hours are for and, preferably, let them know that you want them to come to office hours. Others have advocated calling them something besides office hours. Whatever the case, demystify them! You might pre-program office hours by noting some sample questions or topics that could be discussed. Or say something like, “This week, we will focus on X topic or Y math problem in office hours. Just show up!”

Encourage students to come to office hours in duos or groups if that proves to be helpful. Review sessions are another way to be welcoming to students who might avoid one-to-one interaction.

Some faculty mandate attendance at office hours or just some form of email/online or face-to-face interaction. In addition to driving at least one visit, it also helps signal a general sense that faculty want to see students.

Perhaps the main conduit of faculty-student interaction outside of class time is the learning management system. Faculty can be supported in learning how to deploy the LMS to display and/or increase their approachability. Other digital channels include email, social media, and surveys/polling questions - the latter being both synchronous and asynchronous.

Course size matters. You should think about the distribution of course enrollment sizes at your institution.

You should also develop a student-level perspective that focuses not on course offerings but on the actual mix of courses student enroll in. Just because a large institution offers some smaller classes does not mean all students take those classes. That distinction between course offerings and what courses students actually take is critical but often overlooked.

For courses offered and registered in, aim to understand patterns by discipline and program level/year of student. Pay special attention to the experience of first-year and transfer students, and others who might benefit the most from engagement with faculty.

One way to increase the approachability of faculty is through pedagogy choices and other teaching approaches.

Active learning and experiential learning are some of the ways to achieve this. They create opportunities for conversation, by breaking down the wall created by one-way content delivery and by getting students engaged with — one hopes — interesting and interactive assignments and projects.

On top of actual engagement, the sense of connection and mere perceived ability to approach the faculty member can be good for student belonging and mental well-being.

Faculty can also shape the course experience and make pedagogy choices that further student belonging, well-being, and success above and beyond faculty approachability.

One example of this is to create group assignments, which increase the chance of student connections if they are designed and executed properly. This website provides a more comprehensive set of tips.

There are ways to structure in faculty-student engagement. These all require proper faculty training and being mindful about bandwidth.

Some institutions have faculty serve as advisors. That can include full-scale academic advising and course registration guidance across students’ entire schedules. Or, it can be limited to the major: Explaining the major to students looking to declare or change majors, discussing course pathways and registration for existing majors, and discussing graduate school and career topics.

Larger universities can establish small seminar programs to promote faculty-student connection. Research programs are another way to bring faculty and students into collaboration.

Faculty can also do things like guest-speak for student clubs and show up at activities, even something as simple as a volunteer event or a 5K. It could make a world of difference.

The physical campus is a critical part of the student experience. It should strategically planned and intentionally activated as part of an ecosystem that includes technology, courses, conversations, programming, and networks.

Your institution can take advantage of how spaces are designed, located, and activated/scheduled. Integrating action across these domains is one of the wonderful ways that the Faculty Approachability Project can help build bridges across your institution.

Pay attention to where students meet with their professors. The design of faculty offices — including type and layout of furniture — can make a difference. So can the location of faculty offices within a building and on campus. On that note, physical signage and digital wayfinding resources can be difference-makers.

But, you should think more broadly. Visiting the faculty office can be intimidating for various reasons and inconvenient for busy students — and that’s for well-designed and located offices.

Consider the role of conference rooms and third spaces. Having faculty hold office hours there could be a game-changer for some students.

How can you get more of these facilities near your classrooms and other learning spaces? Of course, these can be made a priority in the design of new buildings, but what about existing structures? It shouldn’t be too hard to find existing spaces to repurpose or furnish to allow meetings and collaboration.

Ideally, these spaces will be visibly located in high-traffic areas. Meet students where they are — classroom buildings, the student union, and libraries. Finally, reach out to departments and even individual faculty to let them know these conveniently located spaces are available for their use!

Whatever the location try to make the spaces welcoming. Glass walls and large windows — and anything that makes the entry experience more comfortable — are a plus.

Meeting at learning and tutoring centers is another option — and these locations may already have the ideally designed meeting space you need. The nice thing about libraries and learning centers is that they are spaces students will benefit from being introduced to.

Don’t forget about informal plunk-down spaces that might be as simple as a high-top work table. These aren’t suitable for confidential conversations but can be great to follow up on a topic from class after you have to vacate the classroom.

The third leg in this stool is how spaces are scheduled and activated. Campus-wide scheduling systems should include spaces that can be used for faculty-student meetings. Including these spaces in room databases makes them more visible and encourages their utilization — in part by ensuring they’ll be available when needed.

Promoting faculty approachability and faculty-student engagement is a great chance to create collaborations across the institution. Everyone has a role to play, whether it’s direct action, persuading others, or shaping culture. Who can get in on the fun, in addition to campus leadership?

-Faculty themselves
-Students
-Undergraduate chairs/UG program directors
-Faculty development pros
-Instructional designers
-Counseling center
-Academic advisors
-Student affairs
-Librarians
-Academic technologists
-Space planning/campus planning
-Interior designers
-Facility design and construction
-Career services
-Tutoring/learning centers
-Other front-line student services, including one-stop service centers

Driving organizational culture is its own huge topic. One resource we love is the book Great Mondays. This book was written for employers looking to design a great work culture, but its template are perfect for other contexts.

One of the keys to culture, as well, is to understanding and improving on your strategy, is a formal assessment strategy.

Assessment can include response items added to course assessments, other student surveys, focus groups, and other methods. Measurement can focus on inputs and faculty practices or on outcomes.

We can’t stress enough that assessment should carefully account for the fact that faculty that do the most emotional and other unrewarded work tend to be women and under-represented minorities. One specific concern to guard against is that student evaluations are well-known to be skewed by the attributed characteristics of faculty.

Get in touch for help creating a customized inventory to start plotting action and assessment. Consultation ranges from initial workshops and needs assessment to project management and more robust planning. Initial investments can be modest, more expansive engagements are budget-conscious, and the return on investment is always significant.