Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improving part-time instructors’ student failure rate with an educational engagement information system

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational technology research and development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Higher education institutions rely on part-time faculty to teach a large percentage of courses in a range of disciplines. Existing research indicates that instruction by part-time faculty can negatively impact academic outcomes, student retention, and subsequent interest in a field of study. This study investigates if using a motivational information system can help close this performance gap. It introduces a type of motivational information system called an educational engagement information system (EEIS). EEISs draw on principles of behavioral economics, motivation theory, and learning cognition theory to help students want to improve their performance. The study compared student failure status in course sections taught by part- and full-time instructors both with and without an EEIS. Results suggest that using an EEIS can help improve student failure rates in courses taught by part-time faculty members and bring students’ performance to parity with the performance of students taught by a full-time instructor. Features of an EEIS, such as the additional structure, grade and outcome trackers, and motivational elements, can augment a part-time instructor’s approach and may compensate for limitations sometimes associated with part-time instruction including limitations of expertise, time, or rewards that can have a negative impact on students’ academic outcomes. As a result, students can experience higher completion rates and better performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrams, S. S., & Walsh, S. (2014). Gamified vocabulary. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(1), 49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association of University Professors. (n.d.). Background facts on contingent faculty positions. https://www.aaup.org/issues/contingency/background-facts

  • Andrade, M. S. (2013). Global learning by distance: Principles and practicalities for learner support. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 3(1), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijopcd.2013010105

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, M. S. (2014a). Course embedded support for online English language learners. Open Praxis, 6(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.1.90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, M. S. (2014b). Dialogue and structure: Enabling learner self-regulation in technology enhanced learning environments. European Journal of Educational Research, 13(5), 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, M. S., & Bunker, E. L. (2009). Language learning from a distance: A new model for success. Distance Education, 30(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910902845956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, E. (2002). How over reliance upon contingent appointments diminishes faculty involvement in student learning. Peer Review, 5(1), 4–10.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, E. (2003). Reappraisal and implications for policy and research. New Directions for Higher Education, 123, 79–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2010). Does cheaper mean better? The impact of using adjunct instructors on student outcomes. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 598–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolitzer, L. A. (2019). I really wanted to attend but it never happened: Instructional development for adjunct faculty. The Journal of Faculty Development, 33(2), 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burroughs, B. B. (2019). Managing the car when you cannot control the tracks: Understanding and supporting adjunct instructors. Teaching Theology & Religion, 22, 306–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/teth.12510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J. R., & Rich, P. J. (2018). Does educational gamification improve students’ motivation? If so, which game elements work best? Journal of Education for Business, 93(7), 315–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K., Hansen, Z., & Lowe, S. (2021). Why do we inflate grades? The effect of adjunct faculty employment on instructor grading standards. Journal of Human Resources, 56(3), 878–921. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.56.3.0518-9493R2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1111–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Marcos, L., Domınguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., & Pages, C. (2014). An empirical study comparing gamification and social networking on e-learning. Computers & Education, 75, 82–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Self-determination. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delphinium (2021). Delphi m.e. | Home. http://delphi-me.com/

  • Dembo, M. H., Junge, L. G., & Lynch, R. (2006). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Implications for web-based education. In H. F. O’Neil & R. S. Perez (Eds.), Web-based learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 185–202). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denny, P., McDonald, F., Empson, R., Kelly, P., & Petersen, A. (2018). Empirical support for a causal relationship between gamification and learning outcomes. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal QC, Canada.

  • Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification”. Paper presented at the 15th Annual International MindTrek, Tampere, Finland. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040

  • Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., De-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J. J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63, 380–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drace, K. (2013). Gamification of the laboratory experience to encourage student engagement. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 14(2), 273–274. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v14i2.632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farzan, R., DiMicco, J. M., Millen, D. R., Dugan, C., Geyer, W., & Brownholtz, E. A. (2008). Results from deploying a participation incentive mechanism within the enterprise. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 563–572.

  • Field, A. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figlio, D. N., Schapiro, M. O., & Soter, K. B. (2015). Are tenure track professors better teachers? Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(4), 715–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garaus, C., Furtmüller, G., & Güttel, W. H. (2016). The hidden power of small rewards: The effects of insufficient external rewards on autonomous motivation to learn. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goehle, G. (2013). Gamification and web-based homework. Primus, 23(3), 234–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2012.736451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, J. A., & Gilbert, B. D. (2001). Cafeteria-style grading in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(4), 490.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. A. B. (2018). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work?—A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

  • Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holman, C., Aguilar, S., & Fishman, B. (2013). GradeCraft: What can we learn from a game-inspired learning management system?. In Proceedings of the third international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 260–264).

  • Hurst, D., Cleveland-Innes, M., Hawranik, P., & Gauvreau, S. (2013). Online graduate student identity and professional skills development. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(3), 36–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Instructure. (2020). Educational software development. https://www.instructure.com/

  • Jaeger, A. J., & Eagan, M. K. (2009). Effects of exposure to part-time faculty on associate’s degree completion. Community College Review, 36, 167–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, A. J., & Eagen, M. K. (2011). Examining retention and contingent faculty use in a state system of public higher education. Educational Policy, 25(3), 507–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904810361723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, A. J., & Hinz, D. (2008). The effects of part-time faculty on first semester freshmen retention: A predictive model using logistic regression. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 10, 265–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenton, W., & Walters, T., (2020). Behavioral economics. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/behavioraleconomics.asp#:~:text=Behavioral%20Economics%20is%20the%20study,2

  • Kezar, A., DePaola, T., & Scott, D. (2019). The gig academy: Mapping labor in the neoliberal university. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2019). The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, D. A. (2018). Reflection: Benefits of gamification in online higher education. Journal of Instructional Research, 7, 125–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallin, M. L., & Pullins, E. B. (2009). The moderating effect of control systems on the relationship between commission and salesperson intrinsic motivation in a customer oriented environment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 769–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarney, R., Warner, J., Iliffe, S., Van Haselen, R., Griffin, M., & Fisher, P. (2007). The Hawthorne effect: A randomized, controlled trial. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7(1), 30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McEvoy, G. M. (2011). Increasing intrinsic motivation to learn in organizational behavior classes. Journal of Management Education, 35(4), 468–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). The condition of education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_csc.asp

  • Nevin, C. R., Westfall, A. O., Rodriguez, J. M., Dempsey, D. M., Cherrington, A., Roy, B., Patel, M., & Willig, J. H. (2014). Gamification as a tool for enhancing graduate medical education. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 90(1070), 685–693. https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2013-132486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ran, F. X., & Xu, D. (2017). How and why do adjunct instructors affect students’ academic outcomes? Evidence from four-year colleges. A CAPSEE working paper. https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments/how-and-why-do-adjunct-instructors-affect-students-academic-outcomes.pdf

  • Ran, X., & Xu, D. (2018). Does contractual form matter? The impact of different types of non-tenure-track faculty on college students’ academic outcomes. Journal of Human Resources, 54(4), 1081–1120.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183–203). University of Rochester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichardt, C. S. (2009). Quasi-experimental design. The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology, 46(71), 490–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (2008). Essentials of behavioral research: methods and data analysis (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61(2020), 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, E., Young, S., & Jouneau-Sion, C. (2017). Classcraft: From gamification to ludicization of classroom management. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 497–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuetz, P. (2002). Instructional practices of part-time and full-time faculty. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2002(118), 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsay, H. H. C., Kofinas, A., & Luo, J. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers and Education, 121, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UBS (2020). Richard H. Thaler. Nobel 2017. Perspectives on nudge theory & behavioral economics. https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/laureates/richard-thaler.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwq_D7BRADEiwAVMDdHr_wvVr9S35RUk-_55U-yNW-e125oNvpW-tepEnAL5eZ4H69o_PXvhoCxPQQAvD_BwE&campID=SEM-BRAND&s_kwcid=AL!602!3!460211322638!e!!g!!behavioral%20economics&ef_id=CjwKCAjwq_D7BRADEiwAVMDdHr_wvVr9S35RUk-_55U-yNW-e125oNvpW-tepEnAL5eZ4H69o_PXvhoCxPQQAvD_BwE:G:s&s_kwcid=AL!602!3!460211322638!e!!g!!behavioral%20economics

  • van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, D. (2019). Academic performance in community colleges: The influences of part-time and full-time instructors. American Educational Research Journal, 56(2), 368–406. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218796131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, M. (2021). Limited contracts, limited quality? Effects of adjunct instructors on student outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 85(2021), 102177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Dimensions of academic self-regulation: A conceptual framework for education. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 3–21). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective. Educational Psychologist, 33, 73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantis, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Woodbury School of Business, Utah Valley University, 800 West University Parkway, Mail Stop 119, Orem, UT, 84058, USA

    Jared R. Chapman & Maureen Andrade

Authors
  1. Jared R. Chapman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maureen Andrade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jared R. Chapman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We have no potential conflicts of interest to report.

Ethical approval

This study was conducted with IRB approval.

Informed consent

Participants in the treatment/control group approved an informed consent form. The full-time faculty, non-delphinium data (grades, withdrawals) was archival and informed consent was not obtained.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chapman, J.R., Andrade, M. Improving part-time instructors’ student failure rate with an educational engagement information system. Education Tech Research Dev (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10352-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10352-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation