An experimental evaluation of a proactive pastoral care initiative within an introductory university course

ABSTRACT

Improving student retention and academic performance is a key objective for higher education institutions, and finding effective interventions for assisting with at-risk students is therefore important. In this article, we evaluate a proactive pastoral care intervention that was trialled in an introductory economics course in New Zealand. We first identified students at high risk of failure, and then randomized these students into two treatment groups and a control group. The first treatment group received an email with information about academic support, while the second treatment group received the email as well as a personal telephone call to follow-up. In evaluating the impact of the intervention trial, we found that the first intervention did not significantly improve student outcomes, but the second intervention improved outcomes in one of the two semesters evaluated. Overall, the initiative was a qualified success. It is both simple and cost-effective and should be considered for wider implementation and further evaluation.

JEL CLASSIFICATION:

• A22
• I21

KEYWORDS:

• Academic performance
• pastoral care
• student retention
• randomized-controlled trial
• New Zealand

Acknowledgements

We thank Steven Lim and Dan Marsh for their support for this initiative, and Gemma Piercy and two anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts of this article. The usual disclaimer applies.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

¹ The Smart Start programme is an orientation event for mature students that mimics the elements of teaching and learning, including lecture, tutorial, readings, assessment and contact with academic staff. The Charles Sturt University programme involves the provision of academic advice and guidance by telephone, to students repeating a paper they had previously failed at least twice.

² In this programme, small groups of students (6–10) met weekly for 6 weeks and discussed student-directed topics such as college resources, adjustment and relationships.

³ These results, alongside those for alternative cut-offs, are available from the authors on request.

⁴ Results available from the authors on request.