Intentional Interventions: A Robust Strategy for Augmenting Student Success
(unpublished manuscript)
Laurie L. Hazard, Ed. D.
Some students may be at-risk at the point of admission to an institution. Others may be
considered at-risk, after they receive their mid-term grades. Still others are identified as at-risk, if they
fail their first-year seminar course or end up on academic warning or probation. Institutions of higher
education are adept at identifying the variety of factors that make students vulnerable to failure or worse
yet, subsequent dismissal. The question is though, how to approach students who exhibit the warning
signs. Certainly, early intervention is the ideal, but as much as institutions try to "frontload,” there are
always students who don’t have the epiphany that is hoped for during the first semester. Unfortunately,
some students need to experience a failure before they “wake up.” That is not to say, don’t bother
frontloading; nevertheless, intervention strategies should vary depending on the circumstances. The
following intentional intervention strategy draws from the helping professions of coaching, counseling,
advising, and crisis intervention.
Most often, your first-year seminar instructors are in the best position to identify early risk
indicators, but they must be skilled at identifying them, and subsequently prepared to “confront” student
who exhibit the signs. Instructors need to “tune in” to how students make sense of their first year
experience in class discussions. For example, when students describe their experiences, do they exhibit
an external locus of control? Researchers have identified locus of control as a distinct attitude that
mediates academic achievement (Cone & Owens, 1991; Lefcourt, 1982; and Hazard, 1997). Psychologists
define locus of control as a personality trait involving a generalized expectancy people hold regarding the
degree to which they control their own fate. Internals attribute outcomes to themselves, whereas externals
attribute outcomes to luck, fate, chance or powerful others. Perhaps the most infamous expression of an
external locus of control is when students say, “That professor gave me an ‘F.’”-a clear expression of a
“powerful other” controlling an outcome. It should come as no surprise then, that internality has been
correlated with higher grade point averages; therefore, expressions of externality should be directly
addressed
Besides locus of control, researchers point to another indicator related to intelligence. Pay close
attention to students who muse, “I have always been horrible at math. I think I was just born that way.”
Dweck and Leggett (1988) propose that how students conceive of their intelligence influences
achievement. Individuals hold two basic views of intelligence: an incremental view and an entity view.
Incrementals believe intelligence involves skills that can be improved through effort; whereas, those who
hold an entity viewpoint believe that ability, not effort, is the key factor that determines performance. The
entity perspective has implications for help-seeking behaviors. Student who believe they were born with
poor math skills are less likely to obtain a tutor, for example.
Other early risk indicators are much more obvious such as excessive absences, observing students
who appear sleep deprived, withdrawn, or perhaps even under the influence of a substance. Once firstyear seminar instructors identify particular risk factors, they must be willing to address the observation
with students, and approach the student if necessary.
Instructors need not think of approaching the student as a confrontation, but rather an intrusive
advising strategy that will hopefully act as a preventative measure. Intrusive advisors proactively make
the initial contact with students. The goal is to help students feel cared for by the institution. Students who
perceive that someone cares about them and that they belong to the school community are more likely to
be academically successful than those who do not feel any sense of care by the institution (Heisserer &
Parette, 2002). Once you decide to be intrusive, switch to a coaching mode. Employ the “sandwich
approach,” which involves the delivery of a compliment, a future oriented instruction, and lastly, a
compliment (Weinberg & Gould, 2007). For example, “Gee, Susan, I really like the comment that you
made in class today, but I noticed you seemed a little tired. Do you think you can get more rest next week
before you come to class? I appreciate your contributions.” This exchange shows that you value the
1
relationship with the student and provides an opening for them to share what might be going on. If they
“bite,” probe and intrude-it may be the only opportunity to find out if the student needs help. On the other
hand, if the student resists your efforts, they simply may not be ready. Unfortunately, some students just
aren’t ready until second semester after the experience of failing.
Crisis intervention tools are useful when students have received some type of concrete
information about their academic progress. For some students it could be as small as a failed quiz grade;
for others, it might have to be a failed semester or impending dismissal. In these cases, the personnel
implementing the strategy might be a counselor, an advisor, the first-year seminar instructor or a learning
specialist:
Establishing A Positive Relationship
The goal is to let the student know you care about their progress: “I really want to see you be successful.
My role is to assist you with your academic, social, emotional, and intellectual transition. Let’s use those
four areas to guide our conversation. Now that you have received concrete information about your midterm grades, I’d like some feedback from you about how you are doing with your academic
adjustment………”
Understanding and Clarifying the Problem
This part is crucial. DON’T look at the mid-term grades, see a C- and simply refer the student to
tutoring. DO peel back the onion layers” to determine the nature and cause of the low grade. For
instance, is the C- a resulting from procrastination and motivational issues? Poor reading comprehension
skills and/or deficiency in tacit knowledge? Missing class because of sleep problems, alcohol issues, or
general health and wellness concerns? Inability to focus because of Interpersonal issues (intimate
relationships, roommates, family)? Challenges with the pedagogical techniques of the instructor?
Feeling marginalized because of race, culture, religion and/or sexual orientation?
Assessing “Lethality”
Although academic failure may not be considered lethal, it still constitutes a crisis for the student. Once
the problem is clarified, in partnership with the student, find out what they really want to get out of the
semester and what the chances are for him or her to “turn things” around. Here’s where you’ll utilize
success counseling techniques. What is the student doing to get what he or she wants out of the semester?
Is it working? What needs to change?
Assessing and Mobilizing Resources
What personnel from the institution does the student need assistance from in order to be successful? Is
tutoring necessary? Does the student need personal counseling? Does the student need to speak with a
Resident Assistant? Do they feel supported by the institution, their parents, and friends? What do they
think they need to be successful?
Formulating A Plan
Often in this stage, one or more referrals may have been necessary. Follow up once you have made a
referral. For instance, if you do determine that the student needs to see a tutor, counselor, faculty
member, and/or advisor, give them a specific, agreed upon deadline to obtain the services. Once the
deadline has passed, follow up with both the student and campus resources to see if the student followed
through. If students don’t follow through, be intrusive. Find out what prevented them from doing so.
Scheduling issues? Work? Lack of motivation? Peer pressure? When students do follow through, find
out how their session with the tutor, advisor, and/or counselor went. Was it effective? Did they get what
they needed?
The final step, though not a formal part of the crisis intervention model, is to assess the students’
self-efficacy. That is to say, does the student believe that he or she possesses the abilities, skills, and
2
motivation to follow through with the plan? If not, assist the student in ways to effectively create
accountability. Would it be helpful if you checked back in with them? How often? In what ways?
These intervention strategies drawn from coaching, counseling, advising, and crisis intervention
provide techniques for effectively approaching at-risk students in ways that can help them achieve
academic success. Moving away from the idea of confronting students, toward partnering with them in an
intrusive advising relationship, will allow institutions to support students in their process of goal setting,
self-regulation, and increased autonomy. Meeting students at their level of readiness will ultimately lead
to greater self-awareness.
3
References
Comer, R.J. (2007) Abnormal Psychology. New York: Worth Publishers.
Cone, A.L., & Owens, S.K. (1991) Academic Locus of Control Enhancement in a Freshman
Study Skills and College Adjustment Course. Psychological Reports, 68, 1211-1217
Hazard, Laurie. (1997). The Effect of Locus of Control and Attitudes Toward Intelligence On
Study Habits of College Students. Michigan: UMI.
Heisserer, D.L. & Parette. P. (2002 March). Advising at-risk students in college and university
settings. College Student Journal, 36(1), 69-84. Retrieved April 1, 2007 from
EBSCOhost database.
Lefcourt, H.M. (Ed.). (1984). Research With The Locus of Control Construct. New York:
Academic Press, Inc.
Weinberg, R.S., & Gould D. (2007). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology. Illinois:
Edward Brothers.
4
5