Last year, one of my advisees was taking a required general education course that has a notorious reputation for being dull and pointless, yet easy to pass. (It was not General Psychology.) As a result, many students skipped classes and turned in assignments late. To try to address the problem, the department instituted strict course policies. If students missed more than two classes for any reason, they would be docked a letter grade for each absence, and no late assignments would be accepted. My advisee had already missed a class due to illness. Then one morning she woke up with a sore throat. Not wanting to take any chances, she went to the health clinic to be tested for COVID-19 instead of going to class. It took a long time, and by the time she got done, she had missed the deadline for an assignment by 10 minutes. She wrote a note to the instructor explaining her situation. The instructor praised her for doing the right thing but warned her, per class policy, that another absence would lower her grade and told her she would get a zero for the assignment. The instructor was simply following course policies listed on the syllabus, but the impact on my advisee’s interest and motivation in the class was devastating. She was tempted to drop the course, but she would just have to take it again, so she stayed in.
The policies, though within the purview of the instructor and applied uniformly, undermined student effort and learning. The most obvious issue with these policies is that they pitted doing the right thing for the health of the students against doing well in the course. There is, however, a deeper issue. The policies undermined student trust in the teacher. They assumed a negative view of students, that they are unmotivated, eager to skip classes, and seek easy ways to pass. Second, the policies also prioritized compliance without regard to the life stresses experienced by students. The policies were both demeaning to students and dismissive of the demands in their personal lives.
I’ve recently been exploring student trust in the teacher and its role in student motivation and perseverance. We know that trust is vital in social relationships and organizations, but there is remarkably little research on the role of trust in educational settings. Trust is interpersonal, and it involves a subjective judgment about the motives of others that may or may not be accurate. In teaching, students make judgments about the motives of their teacher. Furthermore, trust is most important when people feel most vulnerable and at risk of failure. Students seek trust in teachers when taking courses that are both challenging and required for their major or that cover a topic in which students feel anxious and insecure. Minoritized students who feel outside the mainstream culture of the campus will be especially sensitive to the trustworthiness of their teachers.
In my research, I define student trust in the teacher as a student’s willingness to risk vulnerability and pursue challenging work due to the belief that a teacher is competent, will demonstrate integrity, and will act in ways that are beneficial to the student’s learning and development. This definition has three components. The student must perceive the teacher as having:
- Competence: The teacher has both the disciplinary knowledge and teaching skill to teach a successful class
- Integrity: The teacher is truthful and conscientious, and treats students respectfully
- Beneficence: The teacher will work to promote and enhance the learning and development of students in the class
The policies that my advisee encountered violate both integrity and beneficence. They do not regard students as people with meaningful stresses and constraints in their lives, and they are not designed to promote optimal student learning. Violation of integrity and beneficence probably leads to a low judgment of teacher competence. The policies seem to use grading authority to compensate for problems with the course design and delivery, rather than trying to improve teaching.
My students and I have conducted both experimental and correlational research showing that students are more willing to work hard and take on more challenging work when trust in the teacher is high (Chew et al., 2020). They are more likely to “buy in” to active learning strategies that are more effortful than passive learning. Violations of any of the three components, especially integrity and beneficence, can lead to a damaging overall loss of trust and perceived teacher competence.
Trust in the teacher is often confused with student-teacher rapport, but my research shows that these concepts are distinct. Rapport refers to a personal connection between students and teacher (Benson, Cohen, & Buskist, 2005). Teachers who create good rapport with students are seen to be approachable, accessible, encouraging, respectful, and caring of students. Clearly, there is some overlap in terms of being respectful and caring, but trust involves competence and beneficence, which are not part of rapport. Students may see a teacher as friendly and approachable but may not trust them. On the other hand, students may find a professor aloof and intimidating, but still perceive them as reliable and helpful in their learning. Both rapport and trust increase student effort and motivation, but trust is the more potent variable. When it comes down to it, it is more important for students to trust us than to like us.
If student trust is so important, how can faculty encourage it in their students? We’ve looked into factors that both augment and undermine student trust, but the work is ongoing. Here are some things to do if you want to build student trust:
- Acknowledge any particular student anxieties.
- Be transparent in your course goals and methods; explain the value of the course and the methods you are using to achieve course goals.
- Promote belongingness and community within your courses.
- Establish norms of dignity and respect.
- Give students multiple opportunities and means to demonstrate their learning.
- Provide frequent formative feedback.
- Show flexibility in assignments and deadlines to let students do their best work.
- Admit when you are in error.
Here are some things to avoid if you don’t want to undermine student trust:
- Show indifference or irritation at student concerns and questions.
- Be inconsistent or arbitrary in administering policies.
- Play favorites in class.
- Humiliate or embarrass students.
- Make insensitive or prejudicial remarks.
- Base actions on personal convenience rather than what is best for student learning.
References
Benson, T. A., Cohen, A. L., & Buskist, W. (2005). Rapport: Its Relation to Student Attitudes and Behaviors Toward Teachers and Classes. Teaching of Psychology, 32(4), 237–239. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top3204_8
Chew S. L., Berry, J. W., & Fineburg, A. (August, 2020). Student trust in the teacher: Its measurement and impact on academic success [Conference Session]. American Psychological Association.
