
A program for college students that aims to promote academic engagement and retention through individualized mentoring delivered by coaches via phone, email, text messaging or social media.
Blueprints: Promising
What Works Clearinghouse: Meets Standards Without Reservations - Positive Effect
InsideTrack
https://www.insidetrack.org/
https://www.insidetrack.org/contact-us
Eric Bettinger (Evaluator)
Stanford Graduate School of Education
InsideTrack is a universal educational management and services provider that aims to promote academic engagement, learning, retention, and degree completion in college students. Mentoring services are delivered by trained coaches via phone, email, text message, and social media. During these interactions, the coaches work with students to encourage prioritization of studies and identify and overcome academic and "real-life" barriers to students' success.
InsideTrack coaches generally work with students over two semesters, although part-time students are occasionally allowed to enroll in a single course (i.e., one semester). Coaches call their students regularly, and in some cases have access to course syllabi, transcripts, and additional information on students' performance and participation in specific courses. InsideTrack then uses this information in a set of predictive algorithms that assess each student's daily status for the purpose of contacting them at appropriate times. Students have the option to participate or not when contacted by the coach.
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Bettinger and Baker (2014) found that, compared to participants in the uncoached control condition, participants who received InsideTrack coaching showed significantly higher rates of:
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Blueprints has reviewed one study (Bettinger & Baker, 2014), and it meets Blueprints evidentiary standards (specificity, evaluation quality, impact, dissemination readiness). The study was conducted by an independent evaluator.
Bettinger and Baker (2014) evaluated the program from academic records for all 13,555 students who were randomly assigned in 17 lotteries to receive InsideTrack coaching or a business-as-usual control during the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 school years. College retention and degree completion were examined in six-month increments from baseline through 24 months following the initiation of the 12-month program.
Study 1
Bettinger, E. P., & Baker, R. B. (2014). The effects of student coaching: An evaluation of a randomized experiment in student advising. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36, 3-19.
Subgroup differences in program effects by race, ethnicity, or gender (coded in binary terms as male/female) or program effects for a sample of a specific race, ethnic, or gender group.
Study 1 (Bettinger & Baker, 2014) tested for subgroup effects by gender and found stronger benefits for males than females.
Sample demographics including race, ethnicity, and gender for Blueprints-certified studies:
The sample for Study 1 was approximately evenly split between males (51%) and females (49%).
InsideTrack uses a custom coaching platform that was designed based upon millions of coaching interactions and which allows coaches to use multi-channel communications to fit the needs of learners. Coaches undergo intensive initial and ongoing training. In their first year, coaches receive over 100 hours of professional development and they continue to receive 30+ hours each subsequent year to provide continued growth. A member of a specially trained team virtually observes a coach/learner interaction for each InsideTrack coach once every three months.
Four competencies drive the coaching approach:
1) Individualization: Understanding each learner's specific situation in order to tailor the approach
2) Self and Situational Awareness: Recognizing differences between coaches and learners to allow for a supportive relationship
3) Adaptability: Sharpening listening and communication skills to use different approaches for different types of learners
4) Cultural Competence and Humility: Committing to learning about different cultures, backgrounds and perspectives and recognizing each individual's journey is unique
For some partnerships, InsideTrack coaches learners directly. For others, InsideTrack builds organizational capacity, teaching staff to coach learners using InsideTrack's methodology. For the greatest organizational transformation, InsideTrack can work with partner organizations to do both.
Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy
All benefit-cost ratios are the most recent estimates published by The Washington State Institute for Public Policy for Blueprint programs implemented in Washington State. These ratios are based on a) meta-analysis estimates of effect size and b) monetized benefits and calculated costs for programs as delivered in the State of Washington. Caution is recommended in applying these estimates of the benefit-cost ratio to any other state or local area. They are provided as an illustration of the benefit-cost ratio found in one specific state. When feasible, local costs and monetized benefits should be used to calculate expected local benefit-cost ratios. The formula for this calculation can be found on the WSIPP website.
For organizations interested in becoming an InsideTrack partner, see Program Information Contact listed on the Fact Sheet.
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
No information is available
Federal grants can provide funding to support sustainable learner-support programs and initiatives for higher education institutions and workforce organizations. Examples of funding from the Department of Education and Department of Labor include:
Eric Bettinger (Evaluator)Stanford Graduate School of EducationStanford, California United Statesebettinger@stanford.edu
A program for college students that aims to promote academic engagement and retention through individualized mentoring delivered by coaches via phone, email, text messaging or social media.
The program targets college students.
Subgroup differences in program effects by race, ethnicity, or gender (coded in binary terms as male/female) or program effects for a sample of a specific race, ethnic, or gender group.
Study 1 (Bettinger & Baker, 2014) tested for subgroup effects by gender and found stronger benefits for males than females.
Sample demographics including race, ethnicity, and gender for Blueprints-certified studies:
The sample for Study 1 was approximately evenly split between males (51%) and females (49%).
Academic engagement and retention
*Risk/Protective Factor was significantly impacted by the program
InsideTrack is a universal educational management and services provider that aims to promote academic engagement, learning, retention, and degree completion in college students. Mentoring services are delivered by trained coaches via phone, email, text message, and social media. During these interactions, the coaches work with students to encourage prioritization of studies and identify and overcome academic and "real-life" barriers to students' success.
InsideTrack coaches generally work with students over two semesters, although part-time students are occasionally allowed to enroll in a single course (i.e., one semester). Coaches call their students regularly, and in some cases have access to course syllabi, transcripts, and additional information on students' performance and participation in specific courses. InsideTrack then uses this information in a set of predictive algorithms that assess each student's daily status for the purpose of contacting them at appropriate times. Students have the option to participate or not when contacted by the coach.
InsideTrack was developed from empirical research suggesting that student coaching in students' educational careers can lead to engagement, learning, retention, and an increased probability of completing a degree.
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Blueprints has reviewed one study (Bettinger & Baker, 2014), and it meets Blueprints evidentiary standards (specificity, evaluation quality, impact, dissemination readiness). The study was conducted by an independent evaluator.
Bettinger and Baker (2014) evaluated the program from academic records for all 13,555 students who were randomly assigned in 17 lotteries to receive InsideTrack coaching or a business-as-usual control during the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 school years. College retention and degree completion were examined in six-month increments from baseline through 24 months following the initiation of the 12-month program.
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Bettinger and Baker (2014) found that compared to participants in the uncoached control condition, participants who received InsideTrack coaching showed significantly higher rates of college retention during the program implementation period (at six- and 12-month assessments) and at the two posttest assessments (six and 12 months after coaching ended). In addition, for a subsample of students with available graduation data (3 cohorts), participants receiving InsideTrack coaching services also showed significantly higher rates of degree completion, relative to uncoached control participants.
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Bettinger and Baker (2014) found that, compared to participants in the uncoached control condition, participants who received InsideTrack coaching showed significantly higher rates of:
Study 1 (Bettinger & Baker, 2014) did not examine mediating effects.
In Study 1, at the six- and 12-month assessments (which occurred during the program implementation period), Bettinger and Baker (2014) reported 9% and 12% increases in college retention for InsideTrack students compared to uncoached students. At the 18- and 24-month assessments (six and 12 months after coaching ended, respectively) there were 15% increases in college retention for InsideTrack students compared to uncoached students.
One study meets Blueprints standards for high quality methods with strong evidence of program impact (i.e., "certified" by Blueprints): Study 1 (Bettinger & Baker, 2014). The sample included college students from a variety of institutional types (e.g., two- and four-year schools, private and public colleges).
Blueprints: Promising
What Works Clearinghouse: Meets Standards Without Reservations - Positive Effect
InsideTrack
https://www.insidetrack.org/
https://www.insidetrack.org/contact-us
Certified
Bettinger, E. P., & Baker, R. B. (2014). The effects of student coaching: An evaluation of a randomized experiment in student advising. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36, 3-19.
Summary
Bettinger and Baker (2014) evaluated the program from academic records for all 13,555 students who were randomly assigned in 17 lotteries to receive InsideTrack coaching or a business-as-usual control during the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 school years. College retention and degree completion were examined in six-month increments from baseline through 24 months following the initiation of the 12-month program.
Bettinger and Baker (2014) found that, compared to participants in the uncoached control condition, participants who received InsideTrack coaching showed significantly higher rates of:
Evaluation Methodology
Design:
Recruitment: The researchers requested academic records for all students who were invited to work with InsideTrack during the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 school years. During those two academic years, InsideTrack measured the performance of 13,555 students across eight different higher education institutions, including two- and four-year schools, and public, private, not-for-profit, and proprietary colleges.
Assignment: Randomization occurred by group within each school during each of the two time periods (the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 academic years). Several universities, each of which determined the criteria for inclusion and the size of the sample and selected students according to their own principles, provided InsideTrack with a list of potential students. InsideTrack then randomly divided students from these lists into two groups and "then 'rebalanced' the groups, moving students from one group to the other to ensure that the groups were balanced on observable characteristics." After balancing the groups, a coin flip was used to determine which of the two groups would receive the program. As such, students from 17 cohorts (five during the 2003-2004 academic year and 12 during the 2007-2008 academic year) were randomly assigned to InsideTrack coaching services or an uncoached control. Across these 17 cohorts, n=8049 students received InsideTrack Services and n=5506 did not receive coaching.
Assessments/Attrition: No attrition due to use of retrospective academic records.
Sample: The mean age of participants receiving InsideTrack coaching was 30.62 years (SD = .21) and in the uncoached control was 30.5 years. Approximately 25% of students were under the age of 23. The sample was 51% male and the mean SAT score was 886.3 points.
Measures: The dependent variables were college retention and degree completion, which were provided to the researchers directly from the program developers. Academic records were obtained for all students who were invited to work with InsideTrack during the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 academic years, though degree completion information was only available for a subsample of students (three lottery cohorts).
Analysis: The researchers used simple comparisons of participants receiving either InsideTrack services or uncoached control participants to test for intervention effects. The specific cohort that a particular student was part of was included as a fixed effect. Gender, age, high school GPA, and school type were included as covariates in some of the models.
Intent-to-Treat: All available data from students assigned to conditions were used in analyses. Dosage was self-selected by students (i.e., once assigned, students determined how many meetings took place).
Outcomes
Implementation Fidelity: No quantitative measures of implementation fidelity were reported.
Baseline Equivalence: Groups were "rebalanced" on "observable characteristics" prior to assignment to treatment or control conditions. No significant differences between conditions were detected in seven baseline characteristics for the assigned sample after rebalancing.
Differential Attrition: No attrition due to use of retrospective academic records.
Posttest: During the program implementation period (six and 12 months after coaching began), relative to uncoached control participants, students receiving InsideTrack coaching services showed significantly higher rates of college retention. These effects persisted at 18-month follow-up (i.e., six months after coaching ended) and were generally consistent across lotteries and cohorts.
Long-Term: Posttest effects on college retention were maintained twelve months after coaching ended and were generally consistent across lotteries and cohorts. In addition, for a subsample of students with available graduation data (three cohorts), participants receiving InsideTrack coaching services showed significantly higher rates of degree completion, relative to uncoached control participants. Degree completion includes completion of a certificate, an associate's degree, or a bachelor's degree.