Initiating and Maintaining Student-Instructor Rapport in Face-to-Face Classes
Saved in:
| Title: | Initiating and Maintaining Student-Instructor Rapport in Face-to-Face Classes |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Flanigan, Abraham E. (ORCID |
| Source: | Teaching in Higher Education. 2023 28(7):1620-1639. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 20 |
| Publication Date: | 2023 |
| Intended Audience: | Teachers |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research Tests/Questionnaires |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Teacher Student Relationship, In Person Learning, College Faculty, Teacher Attitudes, Teacher Behavior |
| DOI: | 10.1080/13562517.2021.1918662 |
| ISSN: | 1356-2517 1470-1294 |
| Abstract: | We examined college instructors' perceptions of the behaviors and contextual factors that allow them to initiate and maintain rapport with their students. Phenomenological interviews with 21 college instructors indicated that instructors rely on different strategies and contextual factors to initiate and to maintain rapport with students across the semester. At the beginning of the semester, these instructors rely on a variety of connecting, common grounding, and information sharing behaviors and leverage baked-in rapport to cultivate a sense of rapport from their students. After rapport has been initiated, these instructors place more emphasis on attentive and courteous behaviors, while continuing to engage in connecting behaviors. Furthermore, these instructors identified personalized instruction and tactful responses to delicate situations as essential for maintaining a strong sense of rapport across the semester. Findings from the present study provide college instructors with a framework for initiating and maintaining rapport with students in their classrooms. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2023 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1398678 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwF2_yAoUCTX-jC0Rin_TKe-AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLufEl0NA5dGoFCzcAIBEICBmxC3LPCa0tNq8fCOj4GaTuTclEnssuw0vXFqppBUvFW6doR7o5DkNi0MOt3vGwetbJU4Beo8tQy3LVDMq2L7OEGJevkWC1XDV4WDcNm_gCn2xq5wxnDhAh_JRH0tYl-KwmOhQhWNqnyxCTzTSKv5T0jI--TNsPa1A9FlEiJcQKlV2Z8sFHpm2cZtWWjBhDT5hbIEsr30GzEe3b5s Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0171996651;thd01oct.23;2023Sep20.05:21;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0171996651-1">Initiating and maintaining student-instructor rapport in face-to-face classes </title> <p>We examined college instructors' perceptions of the behaviors and contextual factors that allow them to initiate and maintain rapport with their students. Phenomenological interviews with 21 college instructors indicated that instructors rely on different strategies and contextual factors to initiate and to maintain rapport with students across the semester. At the beginning of the semester, these instructors rely on a variety of connecting, common grounding, and information sharing behaviors and leverage baked-in rapport to cultivate a sense of rapport from their students. After rapport has been initiated, these instructors place more emphasis on attentive and courteous behaviors, while continuing to engage in connecting behaviors. Furthermore, these instructors identified personalized instruction and tactful responses to delicate situations as essential for maintaining a strong sense of rapport across the semester. Findings from the present study provide college instructors with a framework for initiating and maintaining rapport with students in their classrooms.</p> <p>Keywords: College; instruction; student-instructor rapport; teaching</p> <p>The quality of the student-instructor relationship is consequential for how much learning takes place in the classroom (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref1">20</reflink>]; Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref2">12</reflink>]; Worley et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref3">39</reflink>]). Rapport is an important aspect of the student-instructor interpersonal relationship (Frisby and Buckner [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref4">11</reflink>]). <emph>Rapport</emph> is commonly defined by researchers as the sense of a harmonious, personal connection between two or more people that is characterized by trust, open communication, and mutual respect (e.g. Catt, Miller, and Schallenkamp [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref5">1</reflink>]). The amount of rapport students perceive to have with instructors is linked to engagement in the classroom (Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref6">12</reflink>]; Frisby et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref7">10</reflink>]), academic motivation (Frisby and Myers [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref8">13</reflink>]; Legg and Wilson [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref9">22</reflink>]), and learning outcomes (Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref10">3</reflink>]; Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref11">20</reflink>]).</p> <p>Researchers have identified a multitude of antecedents that help initiate a sense of rapport between students and instructors (e.g. Granitz, Koernig, and Harich [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref12">16</reflink>]). However, no known research explains how instructors attempt to maintain rapport with their students after it has been initiated. Yet, the sense of rapport students perceive towards an instructor can decrease across time if the instructor does not continue to engage in the kinds of prosocial behaviors that elicit a sense of rapport from their students (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref13">20</reflink>]), which may undermine the affective, motivational, and learning benefits students gain from having a strong sense of rapport with instructors. The initiation of rapport at the beginning of the semester does not guarantee that the sense of rapport will sustain across the semester. At present, it remains unknown if the strategies used by instructors to initiate and to maintain student-instructor rapport are similar or different. The purpose of the present research was to develop a framework to depict how college instructors attempt to initiate student-instructor rapport at the beginning of the semester and subsequently maintain that rapport across time in their face-to-face classes.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-2">Rapport, affect, and academic outcomes</hd> <p>The emotions students experience while engaged in academic tasks predict engagement and learning. Experiencing positive emotions while learning is positively associated with motivation, engagement, the use of adaptive learning strategies (Kiuru et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref14">19</reflink>]; Mega, Ronconi, and De Beni [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref15">25</reflink>]), and academic achievement (Kiuru et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref16">19</reflink>]; Pekrun, Elliot, and Maier [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref17">31</reflink>]). Pekrun ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref18">29</reflink>]) referred to emotions that enhance student motivation and elicit adaptive learning strategy use as <emph>positive activating emotions</emph>. Researchers studying the influence of emotions on learner outcomes often differentiate between positive and negative affect (e.g. Pekrun [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref19">30</reflink>]; Turner, Thorpe, and Meyer [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref20">37</reflink>]). Positive affect refers to the experience of positive emotions while engaged in the learning process, such as enjoyment, excitement, and curiosity; negative affect refers to the experience of negative emotions while learning, such as anger, frustration, and resentment. Positive affect while learning can be a positive activating emotion that leads to enhanced motivation and greater use of adaptive learning strategies (Efklides [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref21">5</reflink>]; Erez and Isen [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref22">6</reflink>]), while negative affect can act as a deactivating emotion and diminish motivation and learning strategy usage (Turner, Thorpe, and Meyer [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref23">37</reflink>]), with both affective states ultimately influencing academic achievement.</p> <p>Student perceptions of rapport with course instructors is predictive of their affective state while engaged in academic tasks. Students who perceive a greater amount of rapport with an instructor tend to experience more positive affect than students who experience a weaker sense of rapport with that instructor (Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref24">12</reflink>]; Frisby and Myers [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref25">13</reflink>]). The positive association between student-instructor rapport and student affect is often linked to increases in student engagement during class (Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref26">12</reflink>]; Frisby and Myers [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref27">13</reflink>]), expectancy for success (Estepp and Roberts [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref28">7</reflink>]), and academic achievement (Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref29">3</reflink>]; Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref30">12</reflink>]; Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref31">20</reflink>]). The affective and learning benefits stemming from student-instructor rapport are especially pronounced for participation-apprehensive students, who are more likely to participate in ongoing classroom activities when they experience a strong sense of rapport with their instructor (Frisby et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref32">10</reflink>]). Furthermore, students feel a stronger sense of classroom connectedness and are less likely to miss class when they feel a sense of rapport with their instructor (Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref33">3</reflink>]; Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref34">12</reflink>]). Given the consistent link between rapport and learner affect, instructors should be mindful of promoting a healthy sense of student-instructor rapport in their classrooms (Worley et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-3">Factors that influence student perceptions of rapport</hd> <p>Research into the factors that influence student perceptions of rapport with their instructors commonly identifies three main influences: instructor behaviors, the design of course syllabi, and class size. All three factors are discussed in turn.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-4">Instructor behaviors</hd> <p>Most research into student-instructor rapport has focused on identifying specific instructor behaviors that influence student perceptions of rapport towards their instructors. Webb and Barrett ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref36">38</reflink>]) provided perhaps the most comprehensive catalog of instructors' rapport-building behaviors. Two hundred and thirty undergraduates were surveyed about the instructor behaviors that improve student perceptions of student-instructor rapport. Commonalities in participant responses resulted in the emergence of five categories of rapport-building behaviors. <emph>Uncommonly attentive behaviors</emph> are those through which instructors show genuine personal interest in students or show recognition for student accomplishments. Examples include calling students by name, praising student performance on assessments, promptly replying to student emails, and meeting with students outside of regularly scheduled office hours. <emph>Connecting behaviors</emph> demonstrate that instructors are personable and approachable. Examples include injecting humor into lessons, creating an inviting classroom atmosphere, and engaging in informal conversations with students before and after class. Relatedly, Legg and Wilson ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref37">22</reflink>]) found that sending a welcoming email to students prior to the first day of class boosts student perceptions of rapport. <emph>Information-sharing behaviors</emph> are those through which instructors show a commitment to communicate course policies and expectations clearly. Examples include sending reminder emails, stating the learning objectives of each lesson, and writing an unambiguous syllabus. <emph>Courteous behaviors</emph> occur when instructors show respect and empathy for their students. Examples include being open to student questions, showing compassion, showing a reasonable amount of flexibility with course policies, and respecting different student opinions. Instructors also believe that engaging in courteous behaviors cultivates rapport with students. Forty college instructors were surveyed on their views regarding how they can best establish rapport with their students (Granitz, Koernig, and Harich [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref38">16</reflink>]). Instructors identified treating students with respect and showing compassion as the two most influential ways to establish rapport with students. <emph>Common grounding behaviors</emph> occur when instructors find similarities with students. Examples include asking students about their personal interests and goals, pointing out similarities between the instructor and their students, connecting course content to student interests and goals, and showing an understanding of the issues facing college students inside and outside of the classroom. Numerous other studies have similarly surveyed students and identified instructor behaviors that fit within one or more of these five categories of rapport-building behaviors (e.g. Hoffman [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref39">17</reflink>]; Hong and Shull [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref40">18</reflink>]; Shaw, Kominko, and Lennox Terrion [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref41">33</reflink>]; Solis and Turner [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref42">34</reflink>]; Trammell and Aldrich [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref43">36</reflink>]).</p> <p>Findings from Webb and Barrett's ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref44">38</reflink>]) cataloging of rapport-building instructor behaviors focused on overt prosocial behaviors instructors can demonstrate. However, instructors also behave in more covert ways that are intended to maintain the quality of student-instructor rapport after it has been established. For instance, Flanigan and Babchuk's ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref45">8</reflink>]) interviews with college instructors found that responding strategically to student use of digital devices for off-task purposes during class was a commonly used strategy to protect the quality of rapport student-instructor rapport. Many of these instructors avoid reacting in ways that might be seen by students as harsh—such as verbal public reprimands or docking of attendance points—when they see students misbehaving with digital devices during class. Instead, they take a less confrontational approach, such as verbally reminding the whole class to put their mobile phones away or sending private one-on-one emails to the off-task student after class. These instructors take this less confrontational approach due to concerns of alienating students and diminishing rapport if they appear too harsh when reacting to student digital distraction. The approach taken by these instructors to address student digital distraction suggests that instructors can be mindful of the rapport they established with students and behave in deliberate ways to sustain that rapport across time. However, no known research differentiated between the strategies used by instructors to initiate rapport and to maintain rapport across time after it has been initiated. Yet, student perceptions of rapport towards instructors can decrease across time (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref46">20</reflink>]), which may threaten the affective, motivational, and learning benefits students gain from having a strong sense of rapport with their instructors. Hence, understanding which instructor behaviors are most beneficial for initiating rapport and which are most beneficial for maintaining rapport following initiation could help instructors sustain strong interpersonal relationships with students across time.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-5">Syllabus and course policies</hd> <p>The way a syllabus communicates course policies influences students' initial perceptions of rapport towards instructors (Richmond et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref47">32</reflink>]; Stowell, Addison, and Clay [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref48">35</reflink>]). In one study, researchers provided 90 undergraduates with one of two syllabi for an introductory-level psychology course (Richmond et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref49">32</reflink>]). One syllabus was written to be learner-centered—it contained encouraging messages, rationales for course policies, information about resources available to students outside of the classroom, and learning outcomes tied to specific assignments. Furthermore, the learner-centered syllabus indicated that students would have choice in how assignments were completed and be given the opportunity to help shape some course policies. The other syllabus was written to be teacher-centered—it was written in a punitive tone and provided no rationales for course policies or information about resources available to students. Moreover, the teacher-centered syllabus stated that the teacher would determine all course policies. Participants who read the learner-center syllabus rated the potential teacher higher in perceptions of rapport than participants who read the teacher-centered syllabus. In a similar study, undergraduate participants who read a syllabus that encouraged the use of mobile technology in the classroom for on-task purposes (e.g. taking notes) rated the potential teacher higher in perceptions of rapport than participants who read a syllabus that discouraged—but did not forbid—the use of mobile technology in the classroom for on-task purposes (Stowell, Addison, and Clay [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref50">35</reflink>]). Findings from these two studies indicate that the way course policies are communicated within the syllabus can influence initial student perceptions of rapport towards course instructors without even having met the instructor.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-6">Class size</hd> <p>Course enrollment has long been identified as a contributor to student-instructor rapport. In general, students report having stronger interpersonal relationships with their instructors in classes that have smaller enrollments (e.g. less than 50 students) (e.g. Marsh, Overall, and Kesler [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref51">23</reflink>]; Marsh and Roche [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref52">24</reflink>]). It is easier for instructors in such classes to have one-on-one interactions with a greater proportion of the students and establish interpersonal connections than in larger lectures where students have fewer direct interactions with their instructors (Myers [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref53">28</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-7">The present study</hd> <p>There were two overarching goals for the present study. First, we sought to identify the factors that contribute to the maintenance of student-instructor rapport across time. To date, no known research has differentiated between the factors that initiate rapport and the factors that help maintain student-instructor rapport across time. As a result, it remains unknown if the strategies used by instructors to initiate and to maintain student-instructor rapport are similar or different. The present study addressed this gap in the existing literature to establish clarity about instructor behaviors and other factors that are consequential for rapport before and after the student-instructor relationship has been formed. The knowledge gained from establishing such clarity could be used to help instructors sustain rapport in their classrooms, which can promote positive student affect, motivation, and learning. Second, by combining the factors that contribute to the initiation and maintenance of student-instructor rapport into a single framework, the present research provides the first framework of the contributors to student-instructor rapport across time (Frisby and Buckner [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref54">11</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-8">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0171996651-9">Participants</hd> <p>Twenty-one college instructors participated in one-on-one interviews during Summer 2019, Fall 2019, or Spring 2020. This sample size is consistent with guidelines for conducting phenomenological research (Creswell and Poth [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref55">2</reflink>]; Moustakas [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref56">27</reflink>]). Participants were recruited from two separate universities following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from University A and University B. University A is a large, public university in the midwestern United State and University B is a large, public university in the southern United States. Twelve participants were instructors at University A and nine participants were instructors at University B. Participants varied in the amount of years spent teaching undergraduates, ranging from 7 to 45 years of face-to-face teaching experience. All participants are the sole instructors in their courses. See Table 1 in Appendix A for an overview of participant demographics. Due to confidentiality concerns regarding the potential identification of participants, we were unable to gather information regarding participant age, race/ethnicity, and gender.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-10">Data collection</hd> <p>Data collection occurred in two stages. First, three pilot interviews were conducted to refine the interview protocol. Based on these three pilot interviews, slight modifications were made to the wording of two interview questions and two follow-up questions were added to the protocol. The pilot interviews resulted in the final semi-structured interview protocol consisting of seven primary interview questions and six planned follow-up questions. See Appendix B for the final interview protocol. Then, semi-structured open-ended interviews were conducted using the finalized list of interview questions.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-11">Participant interviews</hd> <p>The primary investigator conducted semi-structured one-on-one interviews in either a private office or via the Zoom teleconferencing platform. These 21 interviews ranged between 25 and 60 minutes. Participants also completed the three-item demographic survey located in Appendix C. Each participant was asked to provide a pseudonym before the interview began and their legal names were never attached to the interview data. All participants agreed to have their interviews recorded using an audio recorder. Audio recordings were transcribed prior to data analysis. Interviews were conducted until the data saturation point was reached, which occurred around the eighteenth interview when interviews were no longer yielding new strategies used to initiate or maintain student-instructor rapport and no new contextual factors. Three additional interviews were conducted to confirm that interviews were no longer yielding novel data.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-12">Data analysis</hd> <p>We drew upon Moustakas' ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref57">27</reflink>]) transcendental phenomenological data analysis approach and applied widely-used initial and focused coding procedures (Creswell and Poth [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref58">2</reflink>]; Merriam and Tisdell [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref59">26</reflink>]) to identify emergent categories within the interview response data. See Table 2 in Appendix D for an overview of our data analysis procedures. First, Moustakas' ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref60">27</reflink>]) horizonalization procedure was applied to the data. During this step, the primary and secondary investigators each independently extracted 'significant statements' from the interview transcripts—with each significant statement representing an individual statement provided by a participant that was relevant for addressing our research questions. After each investigator extracted significant statements from the interview data, the investigators convened to review the interview transcripts and determine that no additional significant statements could be extracted from the interview data. This process resulted in the extraction of 691 significant statements.</p> <p>After the extraction of significant statements, the primary and secondary investigator independently applied initial codes to each statement. The initial coding process allows for researchers to identify major categories of response topics within interview data (Creswell and Poth [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref61">2</reflink>]; Merriam and Tisdell [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref62">26</reflink>]). For instance, the statement, 'I spend a few minutes before each class chatting with the students who have already arrived,' was assigned the initial code 'Chats with Students,' and the statement, 'I try to help my students feel like my classroom is a safe place where they can interact,' was assigned the initial code 'Cultivates Safe Classroom Environment.' The initial coding procedure resulted in the creation of 58 unique codes. Focused coding procedures were then used to refine the initial codes by combing codes that overlapped with each other. For instance, the initial codes 'Tells Relevant Jokes' and 'Uses Funny Relevant Videos' were combined into the focused 'Use Humor' code. Our focused coding procedures reduced the number of codes from 58 to 39. The primary investigator then independently grouped the focused codes into categories based on similarities before sending them to the secondary investigator for review. For example, the focused codes 'Use Humor' and 'Informal Conversations Before and After Class' were grouped together within the emergent 'Connecting Behaviors' category. Focused codes were grouped together until the saturation point when no more overlap existed (Creswell and Poth [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref63">2</reflink>]), resulting in the emergence of seven categories of rapport-initiators and five categories of rapport-maintainers. Follow-up emails were then sent to each participant for member checking to validate these emergent categories. Participant responses confirmed the categories and did not result in the creation of new categories or the removal of any existing categories.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-13">Results</hd> <p>Findings pertain to the behaviors and contextual factors that our participants identified as being influential to their ability to initiate and maintain rapport with their students. Our participants viewed all five categories of instructor behaviors identified in Webb and Barrett's ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref64">38</reflink>]) survey of college students as consequential for student-instructor rapport. However, only three of those behavior categories (connecting, common grounding, information sharing) were deemed consequential for the initiation of rapport and only three of those behavior categories (attentive, courteous, connecting) were deemed consequential for the maintenance of rapport across time.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-14">Initiators of student-instructor rapport</hd> <p>The following behaviors and contextual factors were identified by our participants as influential in the initiation of rapport with their students. See Table 3 in Appendix E for an overview of the initiators of student-instructor rapport.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-15">Connecting behaviors</hd> <p>Our participants intentionally behave in ways that communicate to students that they are approachable and willing to form healthy and appropriate interpersonal relationships. For all our participants, forming connections with students begins on the first day of class. Disclosing small, personal details about themselves is one of the first ways these instructors try to humanize themselves to students. Becky, a biology instructor, said, 'At the beginning of the semester, I share a lot of stuff about myself. If they don't know I like baseball by the end of the semester, then they aren't paying attention.' Self-disclosures are often followed by asking students to talk about themselves, an attempt to signal to students they are valued as individuals. Brooklyn, a communication studies instructor, said:</p> <p>I tell them small, personal things, like that I'm a Packers fan. Just little bits about me. Then I ask them to introduce themselves, as well. If you do zero of that, then it's hard to have rapport with your students.</p> <p>These instructors use a variety of strategies to get students to share about themselves. Sherri's chemistry students create biographies on postcards she hands out. José's biology students create a PowerPoint slide about themselves. And, Edmund's biology students complete a brief questionnaire. Then, all instructors give students time to tell the class about themselves.</p> <p>Taking time for self-disclosures is not the only way that these instructors try to make connections with their students. Memorizing and using students names was often stressed as a necessary ingredient for rapport. Sheri said, 'Once the students realize an instructor knows their name, then they believe the instructor is actually invested in them.' Jeremy agreed, saying that his foreign language students 'love it' when he addresses them by name. Having informal conversations with students before and after class is another way to initiate a connection. Margaret, a history professor, said, 'If there are a few students who come into class early, then I can start some brief conversations. Any time the instructor shows a genuine interest in students as a human being, it makes building rapport easier.' And, these instructors viewed the use of humor as a potent way to initiate a connection with students. Brett, a media arts professor, summarized the influence of humor when he said, 'I'm a big believer in the power of laughter and humor to build connections. Sometimes it will be a running inside joke amongst people in the class. Other times I plan a joke during my lesson. It all helps.'</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-16">Common grounding behaviors</hd> <p>These instructors believe that finding common ground with students can humanize instructors and initiate rapport. José summarized the importance of finding common ground when he said, 'Finding areas that we share in common helps them see me more as a human and not just as another professor.' And, these instructors waste no time in finding that common ground. For instance, Magda, a foreign languages instructor, said, 'I usually spend the first day just talking about who we are. I tell them about me and then I ask them about who they are. I try to establish links over things that we have in common—the things that we like and don't like.' Once common ground has been identified, it can be much easier to talk informally with students before and after class and strengthen that rapport. Lori, a biology instructor, said, 'If a student sees me connecting with other students and having positive interactions with them, then they might be more willing to engage with me.' Such statements illustrate the importance these instructors place on finding commonalities with their students and using those commonalities to establish a rapport.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-17">Information-sharing behaviors</hd> <p>Building courses with an organized structure and clearly communicating course policies and expectations right at the beginning of the semester were seen by our participants as essential components for initiating rapport. Sheena, a geography instructor, said:</p> <p>Students want to see organization. They want to see that you are investing in them. If you're not organized and if you're not showing evidence of taking time to do your responsibilities in the classroom, then they can have a negative attitude about you.</p> <p>Other instructors agreed that lacking organization or clarity can send the message to students that you are not fully invested in your responsibilities as a teacher. Brook, a business instructor, said, 'It's critical that we are clear about what we want to accomplish. Until students understand the structure or the learning targets, you really can't build rapport.' Providing students with a weekly overview of readings and due dates, building syllabi that clearly state course policies and expectations, and overviewing these materials during the first week of class were commonly identified as useful ways to provide students with the information, organization, and clarity that they appreciate.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-18">Baked-in rapport</hd> <p>Our participants believe that many students have already developed a perception of their instructors before the first day of class—whether that perception is good or bad. Specifically, our participants noted that instructor reputations among the student body can influence student perceptions before entering the classroom. Tom, a communication technology instructor, said, 'For a lot of students, it is the case that rapport is already baked in when they come into the class. They've heard of you before and react based on that—whether that's good or bad.' Helen described a similar experience in her history classes. Helen said, 'You hear from students that they were told by a friend to take a certain class with you instead of a different professor. They say, 'I heard you were amazing,' or that sort of thing.' Our participants believe that this kind of baked-in perception makes it easier to initiate and build a rapport with these students. However, a bad reputation among the student body can make it harder to initiate rapport. Tom said, 'If the reputation is bad, maybe you're known as a harsh grader or some students had a bad experience, then students won't be as willing.'</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-19">Class size</hd> <p>These instructors believe it is easier to initiate rapport in classes with smaller enrollments. In courses with larger enrollments, it can be difficult to have the kinds of one-on-one interactions needed to build rapport with students. As a group, participants classified small classes as courses taking place in a typical classroom setting with an enrollment of approximately 20–40 students. Lecture classes with enrollments greater than 50 students were classified as large classes. Margaret said, 'In larger classes, it's difficult to get to know students and feel that human connection. With a larger number of people, some students seem to feel more anonymous.' Other instructors described similar situations, whether it was in Cormack's sociology courses, Brett's media arts courses, or Sheena's geography courses. Cormack said, 'Let's say there are 70 students in the room. That's tough. I'm able to develop a genuine rapport with a small core group of them, but not all.' Sheena added, 'Rapport in the larger classroom where you have 120 students versus 20 students is based more off of my teaching methodology and style.' Tom said rapport in larger classes is based on his 'performance' and the 'info-tainment' he can provide students through this teaching style and persona. Brett summarized the dynamic in a large classroom when he said, 'In smaller classes, I concentrate on relationships with individual students. In larger classes, my sense of rapport is based on the vibe I get from the whole class.'</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-20">Student-student rapport</hd> <p>Helping students feel comfortable with each other was an often-cited strategy to make students feel more receptive to the formation of student-instructor rapport. Brook said, 'Helping develop student-to-student rapport at the beginning makes students a little more comfortable.' Brook and other instructors explained how small group activities during the first few days of class seems to help students build a sense of community amongst themselves. This sense of community, in turn, appears to make their students more amicable to their rapport-initiating overtures. Becky explained how this process unfolds in her biology courses when she said, 'I try to set a comfortable tone where they feel comfortable talking to each other first ... then they naturally start to open up towards me, as well.' Such comments suggest that promoting student-student rapport in the classroom might be an important first step towards helping some students feel more receptive towards developing a sense of rapport with their instructors.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-21">Student receptivity to rapport-initiating overtures</hd> <p>Establishing rapport is a two-way street. Instructors can engage in rapport-initiating behaviors, but successful initiation of student-instructor rapport ultimately comes down to whether students are receptive to such overtures. Edmund described student receptivity by saying, 'There's always a group of students who seem to think, 'Hey, just give me the lecture and tell me what to memorize for the exam." Edmund explained that such students seem apathetic towards cultivating any sense of an interpersonal connection with him, but that it is important not to push those boundaries or you risk alienating or making students feel uncomfortable in your classroom. Cynthia agreed, noting that some students in her physics and astronomy courses 'are quieter and don't want to engage with you personally. I can respect that.' Identifying and respecting students' boundaries was often cited by our participants as an important consideration that should be accounted for when interacting with students.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-22">Maintainers of student-instructor rapport</hd> <p>The following behaviors and contextual factors were identified by our participants as being influential for maintaining rapport with their students across time after it has been initiated. See Table 4 in Appendix 4 for an overview of the initiators of student-instructor rapport.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-23">Attentive behaviors</hd> <p>These instructors stressed the importance of being attentive to student needs to maintain the sense of rapport and goodwill that was cultivated at the beginning of the semester. Promptly replying to emails is one way to be attentive. Brooklyn said, 'Email is a big thing with students today. I feel like if you're not responsive to their emails, then their respect for you just tanks. And without respect, you can't have rapport.' Furthermore, being proactive and reaching out to struggling students—often through email—is another way to show students you care about their success. Helen said, 'I like to reach out to struggling students sooner rather than later. I talk to them about what's going on and what we can do about it.' Roger agreed, mentioning that he emails his students at the first sign of trouble in his child and family studies courses. Soliciting feedback from students during the semester is how many of our participants identify and address the needs of their students. Brooklyn said, 'I do the Keep-Stop-Start survey then report back to them. Synthesize the points and then put it up on the board and talk through it. I heard your voice, and here's what I'm going to do.' Helen explained a similar process in her classes and stressed the importance of following up with students after you have reviewed the feedback—which sometimes might involve critiques of the class. Helen said, 'You have to absorb it. It stinks sometimes.' By using these techniques to respond to student needs, these instructors believe they can maintain the rapport that was initiated in the early days of the semester.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-24">Courteous behaviors</hd> <p>These instructors believe it is important to treat students with courtesy and fairness. First, many of these instructors send weekly emails to remind students about upcoming due dates and other important announcements. Sheena said, 'Writing an email to remind them about important dates helps show your investment in them.' Marie echoed that sentiment. Marie said, 'Sending an email reminder about an approaching due date shows students that I'm invested in their success.' Second, many of these instructors are cognizant about when they can be flexible with their course policies, within reason. Medical emergencies, unforeseen technological issues, and students' personal and professional lives outside of the classroom were all identified as factors that might contribute to some flexibility with course policies. Cynthia said, 'As best as I can, I try to be aware of their personal circumstances, how the circumstances are presenting challenges to them for their education, and then making accommodations where I can.' Brett agreed, saying, 'Empathy implies listening well and being accessible and being sensitive to things. To me, having a sense of empathy as a teacher is really important.' However, these instructors also stressed the importance of equitable enforcement of course policies. Jeremy said, 'If a student feels like you're playing favorites, that's going to erode rapport probably quicker than anything.' Cynthia said that it is important to be both flexible and fair. For Cynthia, balancing flexibility and fairness requires establishing boundaries with students. Cynthia said, 'Establish the give-and-take. It sets boundaries in the context of students knowing the professor will give and take this much, so let's not ask for more than that.' By acting in ways that are courteous, flexible, and fair, these instructors believe students will continue to view them in a positive light across the semester.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-25">Connecting behaviors</hd> <p>Instead of letting their one-on-one connections with students fade across time, these instructors continue to engage in connecting behaviors across the semester. Continuing to informally chat with students before and after class was a commonly cited strategy. Brett said, 'I just chat with them and see how they are doing. I think it comes across as if I just want to know how they're doing, that I'm still interested in them.' Similarly, Helen chats with her health science students to help them continue feeling welcome in the classroom. Helen said, 'I start off each class period by asking students how they are doing, how their other classes are going. It really seems to help them stay comfortable in my classroom.' Such conversations are intended to signal to their students that maintaining a strong connection is important to these instructors.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-26">Personalized instruction</hd> <p>Many of these instructors modify their instruction to align with the interests and goals of their current students. José explained how personalized instruction is mostly intended to promote academic motivation and facilitate learning. However, José and other instructors also recognized that delivering a personalized learning experience has the added benefit of sustaining rapport. To provide personalized instruction, these instructors refer back to what they learned about their students in the early days of the semester. José said, 'Throughout the semester I try to use personalized examples. I use what I learned about the students at the start of the class.' Similarly, Jeremy said, 'I have students fill out a basic questionnaire on the first day. Then, I make a point to remember what I learned about them and bring it back into the fold later.' Providing students with individualized feedback also puts a personal touch on their learning experience. For instance, Allison views personalized feedback as the engine that keeps rapport humming in her writing and linguistics classes. Allison said, 'I maintain rapport with individual students through feedback. Written feedback on assignments. I always try to include something positive or encouraging so they don't feel disheartened by the constructive feedback.' Allison and other instructors believe that providing students with a personalized learning experience not only promotes learning, but also helps keep rapport alive in their classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-27">Tactful responses to delicate situations</hd> <p>Participants explained how their responses to students behaviors are oftentimes intended to protect the quality of rapport in their classrooms. For instance, many of these instructors explained how tricky it is to respond to student misuse of digital devices during class for non-class purposes (e.g. texting, scrolling through social media) in a way that does not alienate or embarrass the student—which can erode rapport. Margaret said, 'I don't call anyone out as an individual. The student being called out will resent you. It's going to sour that one-on-one rapport.' Sheena agreed, saying, 'I don't call that person out in class because then that really makes a spectacle of that person and creates negative energy between you and them.' Instead of reprimanding off-task students in front of their peers, many of these instructors use less confrontational strategies. For instance, Cormack, Marie, and others explained how they give the whole class a gentle reminder to put their phones away when they see students getting off-task. If the off-task behavior continues, then private one-on-one emails are sent to students after class to further address the issue. Throughout the process, the goal is to decrease the off-task behavior while simultaneously protecting the quality of rapport with the students in their classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-28">Discussion</hd> <p>The present study investigated the behaviors and external factors college instructors identify as consequential for initiating and maintaining rapport with students in their face-to-face courses. Given that the strength of student-instructor rapport is linked to a host of affective (Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref65">12</reflink>]; Frisby and Myers [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref66">13</reflink>]), motivational (Estepp and Roberts [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref67">7</reflink>]; Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref68">12</reflink>]), and learning (Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref69">3</reflink>]; Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref70">20</reflink>]) outcomes for students and that student-instructor rapport can decrease across time (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref71">20</reflink>]), it is important that researchers and practitioners understand how instructors can maintain a strong sense of rapport with their students. Although previous research has focused exclusively on the antecedents of student-instructor rapport (e.g. Granitz, Koernig, and Harich [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref72">16</reflink>]; Legg &amp; Wilson, 2019; Richmond et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref73">32</reflink>]), findings from the present study indicate that instructors rely on different behaviors to initiate and maintain student-instructor rapport and identify different contextual factors as influential for rapport initiation and maintenance. Such findings suggest that avoiding a dip in student-instructor rapport involves the application of different instructor behaviors at the beginning of the semester and later in the semester as the class is ongoing. Furthermore, with respect to Pekrun's ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref74">29</reflink>]) cognitive-motivational model, instructors who are mindful about maintaining student-instructor rapport across the semester are likely to help their students experience the kinds of positive activating emotions that lead to adaptive motivational, metacognitive, and self-regulated learning behaviors that promote learning.</p> <p>To date, Webb and Barrett's ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref75">38</reflink>]) survey of undergraduates provided perhaps the most comprehensive cataloging of instructors' rapport-building behaviors. Findings from the present study indicate that college instructors recognize the importance of the five categories of instructor behaviors identified in Webb and Barrett's research—suggesting that students and instructors share similar views about the kinds of instructor behaviors that affect student-instructor rapport. However, our findings indicate that instructor reliance on these five behavior categories differs across the semester. At the beginning of the semester, our participants rely on three of Webb and Barrett's behavior categories to initiate rapport with their students—connecting, common grounding, and information sharing. Once rapport has been initiated, our participants rely on some new behaviors to keep that sense of rapport from fading across time—such as attentive and courteous behaviors—and also continue to engage in connecting behaviors like informal conversations before and after class. Hence, only one category of the behaviors identified by Webb and Barrett were seen by these instructors as being particularly consequential for both the initiation and maintenance of rapport—connecting behaviors. The other four categories of instructor behavior were deemed by these instructors as more consequential for either the initiation (i.e. common grounding and information sharing) or maintenance (i.e. attentive and courteous) of student-instructor rapport. Such findings can inform how university instructors approach interpersonal relationships with their students. At the beginning of the semester, focusing one's efforts on building strong interpersonal connections with students, identifying and highlighting common ground shared with students, and beginning the semester with an organized course structure and clearly communicating course policies and expectations to students appears to help instructors form a rapport with students. Then, remaining attentive to student needs, acting in ways that can be seen as courteous, fair, and flexible, and continuing to facilitate strong interpersonal connections with students could help instructors avoid the potential dip in student-instructor rapport across the semester that has been detected previously (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref76">20</reflink>]).</p> <p>Findings from the present research also shed light on a tricky issue facing college instructors in contemporary classrooms: reacting to student digital distraction. Many of our participants expressed a collective hesitation about responding to off-task use of digital devices in their classrooms in ways that might negatively affect student-instructor rapport. The concern about reacting to student digital distraction in ways that hinder student-instructor rapport has been expressed by other faculty members, as well (e.g. Flanigan and Babchuk [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref77">8</reflink>]). And, such concerns seem warranted. Student-instructor confrontations have been identified by students as relational turning points that can negatively affect student perceptions of rapport and reduce student engagement during class (e.g. Docan-Morgan and Manusov [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref78">4</reflink>]; Gorham and Christophel [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref79">15</reflink>]). Many of our participants attempt to avoid such confrontations by responding to student digital distraction nonconfrontationally—such as gentle reminders to the whole class about the course technology policy or private one-on-one emails to off-task students after class ends. Other instructors take a similar approach. For instance, in addition to the kinds of nonconfrontational strategies used by our participants to curb distraction, the college instructors interviewed by Flanigan and Babchuk ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref80">8</reflink>]) often incorporate active learning experiences in their classrooms (e.g. small group work, whole class discussions, project-based learning) so students feel less temptation to get off task and confrontations can be avoided. Furthermore, Flanigan and Kiewra ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref81">9</reflink>]) provided a menu of recommendations to curb student digital distraction without confrontations. For instance, these scholars recommended that instructors rationalize course technology policies to students to increase buy-in, offer a small amount of extra credit or some other incentive to motivate students to relinquish their mobile phones during class, or tailor instructional design to transform digital devices into learning tools. By following these kinds of recommendations, instructors can be better positioned to curb the prevalence of digital distraction in their classrooms in ways that do not threaten the quality of the rapport they have established with their students.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-29">Limitations and future research</hd> <p>Although our study contributes to a deeper understanding of how instructors attempt to cultivate student-instructor rapport across the semester, there were a few limitations that could be addressed in future research. First, participants in the present study represented a broad number of academic disciplines. However, participants were only recruited from two universities. Future research could include instructors for numerous universities to determine the uniformity of rapport-initiating and rapport-maintaining strategies applied by university faculty. Second, the present study employed single one-on-one interviews with participants. Future research might incorporate multiple rounds of interviews or include focus group interviews to further flush out the strategies used by college instructors to cultivate student-instructor rapport. Third, participants in the present study were only interviewed about their experiences teaching face-to-face courses. However, student-instructor rapport has also been linked to student motivation and learning outcomes in online classes (Glazier [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref82">14</reflink>]; Lammers &amp; Gillaspy, Jr., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref83">21</reflink>]). Thus, future research should focus on the strategies used by online instructors to initiate and maintain student-instructor rapport. Perhaps the strategies used to initiate and maintain student-instructor rapport in online courses differ from those identified in the present research. Finally, findings in the present study emerged from one-on-one interviews with college instructors and did not account for student perceptions. Although present findings align with prior research that captured student perceptions (e.g. Legg &amp; Wilson, 2019; Webb and Barrett [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref84">38</reflink>]), future research would benefit from interviewing and comparing the perceptions of both students and instructors. By addressing these limitations, future research could continue expanding the higher education community's collective knowledge about factors contributing to student-instructor rapport in face-to-face and online learning environments.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-30">Conclusion</hd> <p>Student-instructor rapport has emerged as an important ingredient for student motivation and learning in college classrooms (e.g. Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref85">3</reflink>]; Frisby and Martin [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref86">12</reflink>]; Worley et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref87">39</reflink>]). If instructors do not continue to engage in the kinds of prosocial behaviors that elicit a sense of rapport from their students, then it is possible that both the quality of rapport (Lammers, Gillaspy, and Hancock [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref88">20</reflink>]) and student learning (Demir, Burton, and Dunbar [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref89">3</reflink>]; Pekrun [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref90">29</reflink>]) will dip. When paired with prior research involving undergraduates (e.g. Trammell and Aldrich [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref91">36</reflink>]; Webb and Barrett [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref92">38</reflink>]), findings from our interviews with these college instructors suggest that students and instructors identify many of the same behaviors as being consequential for eliciting a sense of rapport from undergraduates. However, our study is the first to delineate between the behaviors and factors deemed by instructors as most consequential for the initiation and maintenance of rapport with students in their classrooms. Given the positive outcomes stemming from a healthy sense of student-instructor rapport, we encourage all college instructors to be thoughtful about how to initiate and maintain rapport with their students. The framework developed in the present study provides college instructors with a starting point for making such rapport-related decisions in their own classrooms.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-31">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-32">Appendices</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0171996651-33">Appendix A</hd> <p>Table 1. Participant Demographic Information.</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table&gt;&lt;thead valign="bottom"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Pseudonym&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;University&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Department&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Position&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Years Teaching&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Sheena&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Geography&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Tom&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Communication Technology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;14&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Brooklyn&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Communication Studies&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Cormac&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Sociology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Kafka&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Foreign Languages&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Marie&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Child and Family Studies&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Roger&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Child and Family Studies&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Margaret&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;History&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;28&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Brett&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Media Arts &amp; Studies&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;29&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Brook&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Business Studies&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;29&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Magda&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Foreign Languages&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;32&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Edmund&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;A&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Biological Sciences&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;45&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Gina&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Human Ecology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;7&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Allison&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Writing and Linguistics&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Lecturer&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;9&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Sherri&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Chemistry&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Assistant Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Lori&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Biology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Lecturer&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;10&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Jos&amp;#233;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Biology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Jeremy&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Foreign Languages&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Helen&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Health Sciences &amp; Kinesiology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Cynthia&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Physics &amp; Astronomy&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;20&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Becky&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;B&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Biology&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Associate Professor&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;25&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Note<emph>.</emph> The last column refers to the number of years spent teaching undergraduate classes face-to-face.</p> <hd id="AN0171996651-34">Appendix B</hd> <p>Interview Protocol</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Please describe how important you think it is to develop rapport with your students and why you feel that way.</item> <p></p> <item> Please describe how rapport develops between you and your students during a typical semester.</item> <p></p> <item> What are the factors that you think positively influence student-instructor rapport?</item> <p></p> <item> What are things students can do to positively influence rapport with instructors?</item> <p></p> <item> What are things you think instructors can do to positively influence rapport with students?</item> <p></p> <item> Please describe the strategies you use to maintain rapport with your students during the semester.</item> <p></p> <item> What are the factors that you think hinder the quality of student-instructor rapport?</item> <p></p> <item> What are things that students can do that would hinder the quality of rapport that you perceive to have with them?</item> <p></p> <item> What are things that you think you could do that would hinder the quality of rapport that students perceive to have with you?</item> <p></p> <item> What do you think are the outcomes that stem from the quality of rapport you have with students?</item> <p></p> <item> What are the positive outcomes that stem from having strong rapport with students?</item> <p></p> <item> What are the negative outcomes that stem from having poor rapport with students?</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything that I have not asked you about the rapport you have with students that you think would be important for me to know?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0171996651-35">Appendix C</hd> <p>Brief Demographic Survey</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> What university department and program are you affiliated with?</item> <p></p> <item> What is your position?</item> <p></p> <item> How many years have you been teaching face-to-face undergraduate classes?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0171996651-36">Appendix D</hd> <p>Table 2. Data Analysis Phases.</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table&gt;&lt;thead valign="bottom"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Phase&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Procedure&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Purpose&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;1&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Horizonalization&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Primary and secondary researchers independently explored interview transcripts to identify 'significant statements' or relevant to the research questions. A total of 691 significant statements were identified and extracted for further analysis.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;2&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Initial Coding&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Primary and secondary researchers independently coded each significant statement. This initial coding resulted in 58 initial codes.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;3&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Focused Coding&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;The primary and secondary investigators independently analyzed the initial codes to reduce overlap, reducing the number of codes to 39 agreed upon focused codes.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;4&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Category Generation&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Focused codes were combined into categories based on similarity until the point of saturation was reached, resulting in the emergence of seven categories of rapport-initiators and five categories of rapport-maintainers&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;5&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Member Checking&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Follow-up emails were sent to each participant to allow them to review the emergent categories and provide feedback to validate or correct the categories. Participant responses confirmed the categories and did not result in the creation of new categories or the removal of any existing categories.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0171996651-37">Appendix E</hd> <p>Table 3. Rapport Initiation Categories.</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table&gt;&lt;thead valign="bottom"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Category&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Description&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;%&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Exemplars&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Connecting Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Behaving in ways that communicate to students that the instructor is open, approachable, and willing to form rapport.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;21&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;100&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'You have to let them know that you are human, that you make mistakes, that you are not perfect. Humanity is key.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Common Grounding Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Identifying similarities, shared interests, and common goals between students and instructors.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;85.7&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'Spending the first class period sharing who we are and finding out what we have in common helps break some of that ice.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Information-Sharing Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Instructor builds course with an organized structure and clearly communicates policies and expectations.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;85.7&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'I try to give them a roadmap of where we're going.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Class Size&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Easier to initiate rapport in classes with smaller enrollment sizes.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;16&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;76.2&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'It's tough to make connections with individual students in large classes.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Baked-In Rapport&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Rapport initiation can be influenced by instructor reputation and the perception of the instructor students bring with them into the class.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;61.9&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'Maybe they had a friend who had you previously and that friend said nice things about you.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Facilitate Student-Student Rapport&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Helping students feel comfortable with each other can make them more receptive to the instructor's rapport-initiating overtures.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;12&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;51.1&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'I encourage students to talk to each other. They become more conversational amongst themselves. I think they develop a rapport with each other and are more willing to do so with me. We become a community.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0171996651-38">Appendix F</hd> <p>Table 4. Rapport Maintenance Categories.</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table&gt;&lt;thead valign="bottom"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Category&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Description&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;&lt;italic&gt;N&lt;/italic&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;%&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Exemplars&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Attentive Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Being attentive and responsive to student needs.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;90.5&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'I try to reach out to those struggling students and give them individual encouragement.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Courteous Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Being considerate and fair towards students.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;19&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;90.5&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'Especially during the busy times, I'll make sure to send email reminders about what's coming up and when.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Connecting Behaviors&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Continuing to behave in ways that communicate to students that the instructor is open and approachable.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;15&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;71.4&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'I always get to class a bit early and use that time to chat, make small talk, and ask how their weeks are going.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Provide Personalized Instruction&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Providing a variety of learning experiences to tap into student needs; Embedding what instructor knows about students into instruction.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;13&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;61.9&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'In my research class, I try to find studies that are meaningful to the students I teach based on what I know they are personally interested in.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td&gt;Tactful Responses to Delicate Situations&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;Responding to student misbehaviors in ways that do not deteriorate the quality of student-instructor rapport.&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;11&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td char="."&gt;52.4&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td&gt;'I'll just come by and gently try to pull them back in ... I think punishment messes with the ecosystem.'&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <ref id="AN0171996651-39"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref5" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Catt, S., D. Miller, and K. Schallenkamp. 2007. " You are the key: Communicate for Learning Effectiveness." Education 127 : 369 – 377.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref55" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Creswell, J. W., and C. N. Poth. 2018. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches 4th ed. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref10" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Demir, M., S. Burton, and N. Dunbar. 2019. " Professor-student Rapport and Perceived Autonomy Support as Predictors of Course and Student Outcomes." Teaching of Psychology 46 (1): 22 – 33.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref78" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Docan-Morgan, T., and V. Manusov. 2009. " Relational Turning Point Events and Their Outcomes in College Teacher—Student Relationships from Students' Perspectives." Communication Education 58 (2): 155 – 188.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref21" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Efklides, A. 2011. " Interactions of Metacognition with Motivation and Affect in Self-Regulated Learning: The MASRL Model." Educational Psychologist 46 (1): 6 – 25.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref22" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Erez, A., and A. M. Isen. 2002. " The Influence of Positive Affect on the Components of Expectancy Motivation." Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (6): 1055 – 1067.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref28" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Estepp, C. M., and T. G. Roberts. 2013. " Exploring the Relationship Between Professor/Student Rapport and Students' Expectancy for Success and Values/Goals in College of Agriculture Classrooms." Journal of Agricultural Education 54 (4): 180 – 194.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref45" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Flanigan, A. E., and W. A. Babchuk. 2020. "Digital Distraction in the Classroom: Exploring Instructor Perceptions and Reactions." Teaching in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2020.1724937.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref81" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Flanigan, A. E., and K. A. Kiewra. 2018. " What College Instructors Can do About Student Cyber-Slacking." Educational Psychology Review 30 (2): 585 – 597.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frisby, B. N., E. Berger, M. Burchett, E. Herovic, and M. G. Strawser. 2014. " Participation Apprehensive Students: The Influence of Face Support and Instructor-Student Rapport on Classroom Participation." Communication Education 63 (2): 105 – 123.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frisby, B. N., and M. M. Buckner. 2018. " Rapport in the Instructional Context." In Handbook of Instructional Communication: Rhetorical and Relational Perspectives, edited by M. L. Houser and A. M. Hosek, 2nd ed. 126 – 137. New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frisby, B. N., and M. M. Martin. 2010. " Instructor-student and Student-Student Rapport in the Classroom." Communication Education 59 (2): 146 – 164.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Frisby, B. N., and S. A. Myers. 2008. " The Relationships among Perceived Instructor Rapport, Student Participation, and Student Learning Outcomes." Texas Speech Communication Journal 33 (1): 27 – 34.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glazier, R. A. 2016. " Building Rapport to Improve Retention and Success in Online Classes." Journal of Political Science Education 12 (4): 437 – 456.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gorham, J., and D. M. Christophel. 1992. " Students' Perceptions of Teacher Behaviors as Motivating and Demotivating Factors in College Classes." Communication Quarterly 40 (3): 239 – 252.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Granitz, N. A., S. K. Koernig, and K. R. Harich. 2009. " Now It's Personal: Antecedents and Outcomes of Rapport Between Business Faculty and Their Students." Journal of Marketing Education 31 (1): 52 – 65.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoffman, E. M. 2014. " Faculty and Student Relationships: Context Matters." College Teaching 62 (1): 13 – 19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hong, B. S., and P. Shull. 2010. " A Retrospective Study of the Impact Faculty Dispositions Have on Undergraduate Engineering Students." College Student Journal 44 (2): 266 – 278.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kiuru, N., B. Spinath, A. L. Clem, K. Eklund, T. Ahonen, and R. Hirvonen. 2020. " The Dynamics of Motivation, Emotion, and Task Performance in Simulated Achievement Situations." Learning and Individual Differences 80. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101873.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lammers, W. J., J. A. Gillaspy, Jr., and F. Hancock. 2017. " Predicting Academic Success with Early, Middle, and Late Semester Assessment of Student-Instructor Rapport." Teaching of Psychology 44 (2): 145 – 149.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lammers, W.J, and Gillaspy Jr J.A. 2013. " Brief Measure of Student-Instructor Rapport Predicts Student Success in Online Courses." International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 7 (2). doi: 10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070216.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Legg, A. M., and J. H. Wilson. 2009. " E-mail from Professor Enhances Student Motivation and Attitudes." Teaching of Psychology 36 : 205 – 211.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh, H. W., J. U. Overall, and S. P. Kesler. 1979. " Class Size, Students' Evaluations, and Instructional Effectiveness." American Educational Research Journal 16 (1): 57 – 69.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh, H. W., and L. A. Roche. 1997. " Making Students' Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness Effective." American Psychologist 52 (11): 1187 – 1197.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mega, C., L. Ronconi, and R. De Beni. 2014. " What Makes a Good Student? How Emotions, Self-Regulated Learning, and Motivation Contribute to Academic Achievement." Journal of Educational Psychology 106 (1): 121 – 131.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merriam, S. B., and E. J. Tisdell. 2016. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moustakas, C. 1994. Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Myers, S. A. 2006. " Using Leader-Member Exchange Theory to Explain Students' Motives to Communicate." Communication Quarterly 54 (3): 293 – 304.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pekrun, R. 1992. " Cognition and Emotion in Academic Situations of Learning and Achievement: Exploratory Analyses." Unterrichtswissenschaft 20 : 308 – 324.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pekrun, R. 2006. " The Control-Value Theory of Achievement Emotions: Assumptions, Corollaries, and Implications for Educational Research and Practice." Educational Psychology Review 18 (4): 315 – 341.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pekrun, R., A. J. Elliot, and M. A. Maier. 2009. " Achievement Goals and Achievement Emotions: Testing a Model of Their Joint Relations with Academic Performance." Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (1): 115 – 135.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richmond, A. S., J. M. Slattery, N. Mitchell, R. K. Morgan, and J. Becknell. 2016. " Can a Learner-Centered Syllabus Change Students' Perceptions of Student-Professor Rapport and Master Teacher Behaviors? " Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology 2 (3): 159 – 168.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shaw, J., S. Kominko, and J. Lennox Terrion. 2015. " Using LectureTools to Enhance Student-Instructor Relations and Student Engagement in the Large Class." Research in Learning Technology 23. doi: 10.3402/rlt.v23.27197.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solis, O. J., and W. D. Turner. 2017. " Building Positive Student-Instructor Interactions: Engaging Students Through Caring Leadership in the Classroom." Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence 1 (1). doi: 10.15142/T37P72.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stowell, J. R., W. E. Addison, and S. L. Clay. 2018. " Effects of Classroom Technology Policies on Students' Perceptions of Instructors: What is Your Syllabus Saying About you? " College Teaching 66 (2): 98 – 103.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Trammell, B. A., and R. S. Aldrich. 2016. " Undergraduate Students' Perspectives of Essential Instructor Qualities." Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 16 (1): 15 – 30.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turner, J. C., P. K. Thorpe, and D. K. Meyer. 1998. " Students' Reports of Motivation and Negative Affect: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis." Journal of Educational Psychology 90 (4): 758 – 771.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Webb, N. G., and L. O. Barrett. 2014. " Student Views of Instructor-Student Rapport in the College Classroom." Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 14 (2): 15 – 28.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Worley, D., S. Titsworth, D. W. Worley, and M. Cornett-DeVito. 2007. " Instructional Communication Competence: Lessons Learned from Award-Winning Teachers." Communication Studies 58 (2): 207 – 222.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Abraham E. Flanigan; Emily Ray; Scott Titsworth; Angela M. Hosek and Jackie Hee Young Kim</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref83"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1398678 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Initiating and Maintaining Student-Instructor Rapport in Face-to-Face Classes – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Flanigan%2C+Abraham+E%2E%22">Flanigan, Abraham E.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8480-211X">0000-0002-8480-211X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ray%2C+Emily%22">Ray, Emily</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Titsworth%2C+Scott%22">Titsworth, Scott</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hosek%2C+Angela+M%2E%22">Hosek, Angela M.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kim%2C+Jackie+Hee+Young%22">Kim, Jackie Hee Young</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Teaching+in+Higher+Education%22"><i>Teaching in Higher Education</i></searchLink>. 2023 28(7):1620-1639. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 20 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2023 – Name: Audience Label: Intended Audience Group: Audnce Data: Teachers – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Student+Relationship%22">Teacher Student Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22In+Person+Learning%22">In Person Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Behavior%22">Teacher Behavior</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/13562517.2021.1918662 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1356-2517<br />1470-1294 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: We examined college instructors' perceptions of the behaviors and contextual factors that allow them to initiate and maintain rapport with their students. Phenomenological interviews with 21 college instructors indicated that instructors rely on different strategies and contextual factors to initiate and to maintain rapport with students across the semester. At the beginning of the semester, these instructors rely on a variety of connecting, common grounding, and information sharing behaviors and leverage baked-in rapport to cultivate a sense of rapport from their students. After rapport has been initiated, these instructors place more emphasis on attentive and courteous behaviors, while continuing to engage in connecting behaviors. Furthermore, these instructors identified personalized instruction and tactful responses to delicate situations as essential for maintaining a strong sense of rapport across the semester. Findings from the present study provide college instructors with a framework for initiating and maintaining rapport with students in their classrooms. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2023 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1398678 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1398678 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/13562517.2021.1918662 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 20 StartPage: 1620 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Teacher Student Relationship Type: general – SubjectFull: In Person Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: College Faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Behavior Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Initiating and Maintaining Student-Instructor Rapport in Face-to-Face Classes Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Flanigan, Abraham E. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ray, Emily – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Titsworth, Scott – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hosek, Angela M. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Kim, Jackie Hee Young IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2023 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1356-2517 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1470-1294 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 28 – Type: issue Value: 7 Titles: – TitleFull: Teaching in Higher Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
