Pedagogy and Stress: How Wake Forest Students Respond to Different Teaching Methods

Introduction

As we welcome a new semester, our students are likely feeling a mix of emotions – excitement, anticipation, and (yes, you guessed it!) stress. As faculty members, we have the power to impact their academic experience and increase or mitigate stress. Our recent study reveals valuable insights into the academic practices that may increase and decrease student stress at Wake Forest, highlighting the importance of equitable and effective teaching.

The Study

Throughout the 2023-2024 academic year, we surveyed students in HES 100 to assess their perceptions of the relationship between various pedagogical practices and perceived stress. Not only were we interested in stressors but also stress reducers—a very under-explored topic. Students used a sliding scale to indicate the extent to which they thought each of the 19 listed pedagogical practices increased or decreased their level of stress. The scale ranged from +99 indicating that a factor increases the student’s stress a great deal to -99 indicating that it reduces the student’s stress a great deal. Students were instructed to leave the slider at 0 to indicate that an item neither increased nor decreased their stress. At the end of the survey students were asked to consent to participate in the current study. Students who consented also provided demographic information. We invited ~1300 students to participate.  A total of 743 students completed the survey and 600 consented to participate in the study. We looked at the group as a whole and also investigated whether students responded differently based on gender, underrepresented ethnic minority status, and achievement status (we compared students with merit scholarships to those without).  The table below reports the average score for each of the pedagogical practices assessed:

Stressors	Mean Score
Work Clumped Together	+63.65
Unclear Instructionsa	+58.77
Pop Quizzesb	+54.84
Cold Callingb	+45.80
High Stakes Assignmentsb	+43.34
Strict Deadlinesc	+35.34
Pressure to Participatec, d	+33.02
Strict Attendance Policiesc, d	+30.64
Delayed Receipt of Gradesd	+26.55
Stress Reducers	Mean Score
Policies that Allow Recovery After Poor Grade	-62.48
Clear Instructionsa	-54.33
Feeling Known By Your Professora,b	-42.68
Flexible Deadlinesb,c	-40.75
Flexible Attendance Policiesc	-36.22
Holds Office Hoursc, d	-31.15
Feedback on Graded Workd	-25.93
Opportunities for Students to Interact During Class	-16.36
Frequent Low Stakes Assignmentse	-5.93
Group Worke	-3.54

Note: Variables that do not differ significantly are indicated by a common letter in superscript.

Key Findings

• Students rated “work clumped together” as the most significant stressor, with a mean score of +63.65. This suggests that heavy workloads overwhelm most students.
• “Policies that allow for grade recovery” was the top stress reducer, with a mean score of -62.48. This highlights the importance of offering flexibility and support in our grading policies.
• Women reported higher stress levels than men in response to “unclear instructions,” “pop quizzes,” “cold calling,” and “pressure to participate.” This suggests that teacher control, intimidating classroom environments, and lack of autonomy may disproportionately disadvantage women.
• “Feeling known by your professor” reduced the stress of women more than men. However, having “opportunities to talk to other students in class” decreased stress for men more than women. This complicated pattern of results suggests that both men and women reduce stress through relationships, but the nature of the relationships that reduce stress varies. Perhaps men receive more benefits from peer-to-peer learning whereas women benefit more from professor-student relationships. 
• Underrepresented ethnic minority students reported more stress from “work clumped together” and “strict deadlines” but reported less stress from “flexible attendance policies” and “office hours.” This suggests that finding ways to evenly distribute work within a class, adopting flexible course policies, and instructor availability through set office hours may be important elements of supporting URM students.
• Students with merit scholarships  reported greater stress reduction from “clear instructions,” “low-stakes assignments,” and “flexible deadlines.” These results align with findings that high achieving students have perfectionistic tendencies and feel overwhelmed when things are out of their control. Clear instructions may provide a sense of control. High achievers also tend to use more self-regulation strategies and flexible deadlines may enable them to effectively work at their own pace.
• Interestingly, “group work” was a stress reducer overall but increased stress for women and high-achieving students. This suggests that group work may need to be structured and managed carefully to ensure equity and inclusivity.

Implications for Faculty

Our study highlights the importance of considering diverse student needs when designing course structures and policies. By implementing flexible and supportive practices, we can foster an inclusive and supportive academic environment. As you prepare your classes consider whether you could:

1. Prioritize workload management, clear instructions, and flexible policies.
2. Offer recovery options after poor grades.
3. Provide structure and role delineation for group work.
4. Support underrepresented minority students with flexible attendance policies and office hours.
5. Provide opportunities for students to interact during class.

Conclusion

By understanding the academic practices that affect student stress, we can empower our students to succeed and thrive. As faculty members, we have the power to create a supportive and inclusive learning environment. Let’s work together to make this semester a success for all our students.