View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Instructor and Student Perceptions of Teacher Empathy in Higher Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Instructor and Student Perceptions of Teacher Empathy in Higher Education
Language: English
Authors: Ross, Jenifer (ORCID 0000-0001-5660-3431), Hicks-Roof, Kristen (ORCID 0000-0001-7713-3037), Cosby, Meghan, Arikawa, Andrea
Source: College Teaching. 2023 71(1):28-37.
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: 10
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: College Faculty, College Students, Teacher Attitudes, Student Attitudes, Empathy, Teacher Student Relationship, Enrollment, Teacher Characteristics, Public Colleges
Geographic Terms: Florida
DOI: 10.1080/87567555.2022.2049673
ISSN: 8756-7555
1930-8299
Abstract: Empathy is recognized as the ability to relate emotionally to an experience or another person's emotions. Evidence supports the notion that students learn better and have greater positive perceptions when instructors display empathetic values and seek more meaningful relationships with their students. The purpose of this study was to assess instructor self-reported empathy and students' perceptions of instructor empathy, using the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) and a newly developed Instructor Empathy Practices questionnaire (IEP7), among a convenience sample from a public university. This convergent mixed-methods study consisted of a cross-sectional survey sent to both students and instructors and focus groups conducted with students. A total of 168 students and 68 faculty members completed the survey and 19 students participated in the focus groups. Contextual factors such as race (p = 0.036), classification (p = 0.003) and GPA (p = 0.028) played significant roles in student empathy scores. Among instructors, only total student enrollment (p = 0.028) had an association with teacher empathy. Focus groups revealed themes related to recognizing empathy including understanding its definition, instructional techniques, perception in relation to class motivation, and importance. This study was the first to employ a convergent study design to assess and better characterize empathy from both instructors' and students' perspectives.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1376872
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFpNGPpmNvC9FCP_WJz7HdwAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLnPTAQWZ24M2uTe4QIBEICBm2Dvq9G4ugF5nUnC1KcKZKAAbNd2yLjAo7x4BN-yay1ezw8_9_IfbcvsxtEpiZKRhZfI5zQzH8Jo3n-68-KCAESnc5cgLeyObhD2_Luunq1dlMP1ibXebhL_tLEhngS-al1ujm9U5aLzFX1N0wddw5VidJYk0xBcUgSOmJE9hXFB_7M0bDtUJKYyE1zhjW_U8R7uY_C91Tw-bVe2
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0161545392;cte01jan.23;2023Jan31.00:58;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0161545392-1">Instructor and Student Perceptions of Teacher Empathy in Higher Education </title> <p>Empathy is recognized as the ability to relate emotionally to an experience or another person's emotions. Evidence supports the notion that students learn better and have greater positive perceptions when instructors display empathetic values and seek more meaningful relationships with their students. The purpose of this study was to assess instructor self-reported empathy and students' perceptions of instructor empathy, using the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) and a newly developed Instructor Empathy Practices questionnaire (IEP7), among a convenience sample from a public university. This convergent mixed-methods study consisted of a cross-sectional survey sent to both students and instructors and focus groups conducted with students. A total of 168 students and 68 faculty members completed the survey and 19 students participated in the focus groups. Contextual factors such as race (p = 0.036), classification (p = 0.003) and GPA (p = 0.028) played significant roles in student empathy scores. Among instructors, only total student enrollment (p = 0.028) had an association with teacher empathy. Focus groups revealed themes related to recognizing empathy including understanding its definition, instructional techniques, perception in relation to class motivation, and importance. This study was the first to employ a convergent study design to assess and better characterize empathy from both instructors' and students' perspectives.</p> <p>Keywords: Instructor empathy; higher education; student motivation</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Empathy is a cornerstone of relationships, communication, and social behavior. Yet, clearly defining empathy remains an unsolved mystery due to the complex contextual factors that play a role in empathy research. It has been well recognized that empathy may be present in two forms: cognitive and affective empathy (Teding van Berkhout and Malouff [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref1">27</reflink>]). Cognitive empathy is the ability to view the situation from another person's perspective (Gladstein [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref2">7</reflink>]). Instructors with high cognitive empathy report greater competence in classroom management and relationships with students (Wink, LaRusso, and Smith [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref3">31</reflink>]). Affective empathy refers to relating emotionally to an experience or another person's emotions (Reniers et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref4">16</reflink>]). Smith and Rose ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref5">24</reflink>]) suggest that when instructors are over-involved with their students' emotional demands, it can be problematic to the classroom environment, yet compassion and emotional empathy can be imperative in making deeper connections with students. Instructors may not be adequately prepared to handle the emotionality of students (Robertson [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref6">17</reflink>]); however, internal emotions may have downstream effects on student learning and instructor responses. This stark difference between empathy forms contributes to the confusion of the role of instructor empathy on student learning.</p> <p>Instructor empathy was characterized by psychologist Carl Rogers in the late 1960s, who stated that, "a high degree of empathy in a relationship is possibly the most potent factor, and certainly one of the most potent factors, in bringing about change and learning" (Be You Fully [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>]). He published numerous articles and books focused on humanistic psychology, highlighting that acceptance and understanding are cornerstones of being an empathetic individual (Rogers [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref8">18</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref9">19</reflink>], Rogers, Lyon, and Tausch [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref10">21</reflink>], Rogers [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref11">20</reflink>]). Being empathetic or having strong empathy can help instructors be more culturally sensitive, promote moral development in students and boost social connection (Bouton [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref12">4</reflink>]). Educators who demonstrate high levels of empathy toward their students have profound impacts on student outcomes, academic achievements, and greater respect from students (Postolache [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref13">15</reflink>]; Feshbach and Feshback [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref14">5</reflink>]). There is extensive evidence to support the notion that students learn from instructors who display humane values, friendliness, kindness and who seek more meaningful relationships with their students (Rovai, Gallien, and Wighting [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref15">22</reflink>]). Despite the important role of empathy between instructor and student, contradictions exist between self-perceptions of empathetic behaviors and real-life actions in the classroom (Warren [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref16">29</reflink>]).</p> <p>Instructor-student relationships can be enhanced when instructors exhibit caring and empathetic modeling, engagement, and pedagogy practices (Narinasamy, Hasmah, and Mamat [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref17">13</reflink>]; Hodges, Roy, and Uhing [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref18">8</reflink>]). Barr and colleagues state that a positive school culture can be made possible through a cooperative, supportive, and inclusive instructor-student relationship at the high school level (Barr and Higgins-D [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref19">1</reflink>]). This culture supports a humanistic learning theory that learning flourishes in an encouraging and supportive environment at the University level (Jama [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref20">9</reflink>]). Academic motivation in high school increases when students have positive perceptions of their school culture, one in which instructors and students share values, care for one another, and support each other (Barr and Higgins-D [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref21">1</reflink>]). While these studies were conducted in a variety of educational levels from elementary to post-secondary, the take home-messages remain the same and can be applied to our study done at the post-secondary level.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Characteristics of instructor respondents by gender, rank, and race.</p> <p>Despite the current and previous research on empathy, there is a need for a deeper understanding of the connection between faculty and student perceptions of empathy in the post-secondary classroom. The purpose of this study was to assess instructor self-reported empathy and students' perceptions of instructor empathy in a convenience sample of students and instructors from a public university in Florida.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-3">Methods</hd> <p>This convergent mixed methods study employed a cross-sectional survey administered to students and instructors and focus groups with students attending a public university in the state of Florida. Data were collected between January and February of 2021. Recruitment of participants occurred via email invitations sent to a random sample of students enrolled in the spring semester (N = 3,942) and instructors who taught full time during the same semester (N = 302). The invitations did not differentiate between those taking/teaching online versus face-to face or hybrid courses. Invitation emails to students included a link to the electronic consent form. Those who were interested in filling out the survey by providing electronic consent were redirected to a 5-minute anonymous questionnaire designed to assess students' perceptions of instructor empathy. Similarly, instructors were invited to fill out a 10-minute anonymous electronic survey to assess empathy.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-4">Online surveys</hd> <p>Two questionnaires were administered to instructors, the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) and a questionnaire developed to assess Instructor Empathy Practices (IEP). The TEQ consists of 16 statements that encompass a variety of behaviors related to empathy, including altruism, sensitivity to emotional states in others, comprehension of emotions, etc. (Spreng et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref22">26</reflink>]). Response options for each statement include Never = 0, Rarely = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3, and Always = 4. Eight of the 16 questions in the TEQ are worded negatively and thus reverse scored. The TEQ score is calculated by adding up the scores for each question. For the purpose of this research, the TEQ statements were slightly modified by replacing the word 'people' with the word 'student' to better reflect the academic environment. Test-retest reliability for the TEQ has been shown to be high (<emph>r</emph> = 0.81, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001) (Spreng et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref23">26</reflink>]) and this questionnaire has also been validated for university students in other countries (Xu et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref24">32</reflink>]; Totan and Sapmaz [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref25">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>The IEP was a new questionnaire developed for this research to assess instructor empathy practices toward students. Specific empathy practices were used from previous research (Wink, LaRusso, and Smith [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref26">31</reflink>]) with supplemental statements added by the research team. Instructors were asked to rate how frequently they carried out the different statements or practices with their students. There were nine positively worded statements with response options identical to those in the TEQ. The IEP score was calculated by summing all responses with a possible minimum score of zero and a maximum score of 28.</p> <p>The new IEP questionnaire was also administered to students with slightly modified statements to reflect instructor behaviors toward students. For example, statement 1 on the instructor questionnaire was (How frequently do you) "Validate your students' experiences", while on the student questionnaire, this statement was modified to (How frequently do you feel your instructors) "Validate my experiences."</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-5">Institutional data</hd> <p>Additional data on participants who completed the surveys were obtained from the Office of Institutional Research and included demographics, GPA, major, and first time in college status for students, and demographics, rank, teaching evaluation score, class size, course delivery format, and discipline for instructors.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-6">Focus groups</hd> <p>At the end of the student questionnaire, students were asked to indicate if they wanted to participate in voluntary focus groups; gift cards were offered to students as an incentive to participate. If yes, they were taken to a new questionnaire where they provided their contact information. Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 19 student participants. Focus groups were conducted via Zoom and participants were given the opportunity to change their screen name and use the audio only feature to protect their identity. All focus groups were recorded and transcribed for accuracy.</p> <p>Pre-determined questions designed to elicit in-depth information from students regarding their perceptions of displayed empathy from instructors and the potential impact on their academic success were used. The questions covered the following key aspects: traits and definitions of empathy, personal experiences with empathy specifically related to institution instructors, impact of empathy on coursework, importance of empathy as displayed by instructors, and the influence of instructor empathy on self-perceived success.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-7">Data analysis</hd> <p>Descriptive statistics were generated by calculating frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and means and standard errors for continuous variables.</p> <p>Internal consistency of the IEP was assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha for all nine questions. Cronbach's alpha indicated that the internal consistency of the <emph>instructor</emph> IEP was acceptable (α = 0.753). Elimination of items 2 and 3 of the questionnaire increased α to 0.812. Internal consistency for the <emph>student</emph> IEP was good (α = 0.882) and elimination of items 2 and 3 increased α to 0.920.</p> <p>Construct validity was assessed by comparing the instructor IEP with the TEQ using Pearson's correlation coefficient. The 9-item instructor IEP (IEO9) showed a moderate significant correlation with the TEQ, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref27">63</reflink>)=0.555, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001, while the 7-item IEP (IEP7) showed a strong positive correlation with the TEQ, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref28">63</reflink>)=0.917, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001. In view of the greater construct validity displayed by the IEP7, we used this version of the questionnaire for all data analyses.</p> <p>General linear models were used to explore the factors associated with TEQ and IEP scores. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare mean student IEP7 across different demographic variables with adjustment for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni test. All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 27.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) and a <emph>p</emph> ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p> <p>Table 1. Characteristics of students attending a Florida university (<emph>N</emph> = 168).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Characteristic</td><td>Frequency</td><td>%</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Gender</td></tr><tr><td> Male</td><td char=".">34</td><td char=".">20.2</td></tr><tr><td> Female</td><td char=".">134</td><td char=".">79.8</td></tr><tr><td>Race</td></tr><tr><td> Asian</td><td char=".">16</td><td char=".">9.5</td></tr><tr><td> Black or African American</td><td char=".">20</td><td char=".">11.9</td></tr><tr><td> White</td><td char=".">118</td><td char=".">70.2</td></tr><tr><td> Other</td><td char=".">14</td><td char=".">8.3</td></tr><tr><td>Ethnicity</td></tr><tr><td> Hispanic</td><td char=".">28</td><td char=".">16.7</td></tr><tr><td> Non-Hispanic</td><td char=".">134</td><td char=".">79.8</td></tr><tr><td> Not Reported</td><td char=".">6</td><td char=".">3.6</td></tr><tr><td>Level</td></tr><tr><td> Undergraduate</td><td char=".">123</td><td char=".">73.2</td></tr><tr><td> Graduate</td><td char=".">45</td><td char=".">26.8</td></tr><tr><td>Discipline</td></tr><tr><td> Arts and Sciences</td><td char=".">55</td><td char=".">32.7</td></tr><tr><td> Health</td><td char=".">39</td><td char=".">23.2</td></tr><tr><td> Business</td><td char=".">25</td><td char=".">14.9</td></tr><tr><td> Computing and Engineering</td><td char=".">13</td><td char=".">7.7</td></tr><tr><td> Education and Human Services</td><td char=".">31</td><td char=".">18.5</td></tr><tr><td> Undeclared</td><td char=".">5</td><td char=".">3.0</td></tr><tr><td>First Time In College</td></tr><tr><td> Yes</td><td char=".">72</td><td char=".">42.9</td></tr><tr><td> No</td><td char=".">96</td><td char=".">57.1</td></tr><tr><td>GPA</td></tr><tr><td> 3.7-4.0</td><td char=".">79</td><td char=".">47.3</td></tr><tr><td> 3.0-3.69</td><td char=".">56</td><td char=".">33.5</td></tr><tr><td> <3.0</td><td char=".">32</td><td char=".">19.2</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The qualitative data was analyzed by two researchers using thematic content analysis. The recordings were transcribed using the built-in transcription service of Zoom and then reviewed independently by two members of the research team, including one who did not take part in the focus groups, and cross checked with the recordings for accuracy. A thematic list was generated that represented the primary concepts and recurring themes and subthemes identified from the focus groups.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-8">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0161545392-9">Student data</hd> <p>The survey was sent out to a random sample of 3,942 students attending a public Florida University, out of which 228 students started the survey with 186 finishing it. Out of the 186 students who completed the survey, 18 left blank responses, for a total of 168 valid responses (4.3% valid response rate). Table 1 shows the characteristics of the students who participated in the study.</p> <p>The mean 7-item IEP (IEP7) for students was 20.9 (<emph>SD</emph> = 5.8) with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 28. There was a positive weak association between GPA and IEP7 <emph>r<subs>s</subs>=</emph>0.212<emph>, p <</emph> 0.002.</p> <p>Table 2 shows a significant relationship between race and student empathy scores (IEP7), <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref29">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib164" id="ref30">164</reflink>)=2.92, <emph>p</emph> = 0.036. There was a trend toward significantly lower empathy scores reported by Black students compared with white students <emph>(p =</emph> 0.055) and Asian students (<emph>p</emph> = 0.054). Graduate students showed higher IEP7 compared with undergraduate students, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref31">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib166" id="ref32">166</reflink>)=9.415, <emph>p =</emph> 0.003. Similarly, students with GPA greater than 3.7 had higher IEP7 scores compared with students with GPA lower than 3.2 (<emph>p</emph> = 0.028). When the Empathy scores of students were compared between males and females (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref33">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib166" id="ref34">166</reflink>)=0.022, <emph>p</emph> = 0.884) and across colleges (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref35">5</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib162" id="ref36">162</reflink>)=1.259, <emph>p</emph> = 0.284), no significant differences were found.</p> <p>Table 2. Mean empathy scores for the 7-item instructor empathy practices questionnaire (iep7) stratified by different characteristics of students. (<emph>N</emph> = 168).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>IEP7</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Characteristics</td><td /><td>Mean</td><td>SE</td><td><italic>P</italic>-trend</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Sex</td><td /><td /><td /><td char=".">0.884</td></tr><tr><td> Female</td><td char=".">134</td><td char=".">20.8</td><td char=".">0.5</td><td /></tr><tr><td> Male</td><td char=".">34</td><td char=".">21.0</td><td char=".">1.0</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Race</td><td /><td /><td /><td char=".">0.036</td></tr><tr><td> Asian</td><td char=".">16</td><td char=".">22.6<sup>a</sup></td><td char=".">1.4</td><td /></tr><tr><td> Black or African American</td><td char=".">20</td><td char=".">17.5<sup>b</sup></td><td char=".">1.3</td><td /></tr><tr><td> White</td><td char=".">118</td><td char=".">21.1</td><td char=".">0.5</td><td /></tr><tr><td> Other</td><td char=".">14</td><td char=".">21.4</td><td char=".">1.5</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Student Level</td><td /><td /><td /><td char=".">0.003</td></tr><tr><td> Undergraduate</td><td char=".">123</td><td char=".">20.1</td><td char=".">0.5</td><td /></tr><tr><td> Graduate</td><td char=".">45</td><td char=".">23.1</td><td char=".">0.8</td><td /></tr><tr><td>First Time In College</td><td /><td /><td /><td char=".">0.032</td></tr><tr><td> Yes</td><td char=".">72</td><td char=".">19.8</td><td char=".">0.7</td><td /></tr><tr><td> No</td><td char=".">96</td><td char=".">21.7</td><td char=".">0.6</td><td /></tr><tr><td>GPA</td><td /><td /><td /><td char=".">0.018</td></tr><tr><td> 3.70 − 4.00</td><td char=".">79</td><td char=".">22.1<sup>c</sup></td><td char=".">0.6</td><td /></tr><tr><td> 3.20 − 3.69</td><td char=".">56</td><td char=".">20.1</td><td char=".">0.8</td><td /></tr><tr><td> < 3.20</td><td char=".">32</td><td char=".">19.0</td><td char=".">1.0</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>P</emph> = 0.054 for comparison with Black or African American students.</p> <ulist> <item>2 <emph>P</emph> = 0.055 for comparison with white students.</item> <item>3 <emph>P</emph> = 0.028 for comparison with GPA < 3.20.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0161545392-10">Instructor data</hd> <p>The instructor survey was started by 75 people and completed by 63. The survey went out to 302 instructors, resulting in a 20.9% completed response rate (Figure 1).</p> <p>There was a significant inverse correlation between instructor age and teaching evaluation score, but no associations were found between TEQ and age (Table 3). In addition, there was a significant positive correlation between the TEQ and the IEP7, <emph>r</emph> = 0.568, <emph>p</emph> < 0.0001. Interestingly, we also found a significant inverse association between IEP7 and total student enrollment (<emph>r</emph>= −0.28, <emph>p</emph> = 0.028), suggesting that student enrollment may be an important factor to consider, when assessing instructor empathy.</p> <p>There were no associations between instructor rank (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref37">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref38">59</reflink>)=0.384, <emph>p</emph> = 0.786), sex (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref40">61</reflink>)=2.8, <emph>p</emph> = 0.099), number of online courses taught (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref41">2</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref42">60</reflink>)=1.270, <emph>p</emph> = 0.498) or race (<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref43">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref44">61</reflink>)=0.464, <emph>p</emph> = 0.498) and TEQ scores (Table 4). When we looked at the associations between instructor characteristics and IEP7 scores, no significant associations were found.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-11">Focus groups</hd> <p>A total of six focus groups were conducted via Zoom over the course of one week in spring of 2021; a total of 19 undergraduate and graduate students participated. The students represented a variety of majors including Public Health, Business Management, Clinical Mental Health Counseling, Exceptional Students Education, History, and Spanish.</p> <p>Table 3. Pearson's correlations between instructor questionnaire scores and institutional data.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>TEQ</td><td>IEP7</td><td>Age</td><td>Teaching evaluation score</td><td>N Courses Taught</td><td>Student Enrollment</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>TEQ </td><td>–</td><td char=".">0.568<sup>a</sup></td><td char=".">−0.007</td><td char=".">−0.011</td><td char=".">−0.140</td><td char=".">−0.191</td></tr><tr><td>IEP7 </td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td char=".">−0.027</td><td char=".">0.124</td><td char=".">−0.151</td><td char=".">−0.276<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Instructor age </td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td char=".">−0.354<sup>a</sup></td><td char=".">0.031</td><td char=".">0.037</td></tr><tr><td>Teaching evaluation score </td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td char=".">−0.273<sup>b</sup></td><td char=".">−0.241</td></tr><tr><td>N Courses Taught </td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td char=".">0.531<sup>a</sup></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>4 Significant correlation, <emph>p =</emph> 0.01.</item> <item>5 Significant correlation, <emph>p =</emph> 0.05.</item> </ulist> <p>Table 4. Mean instructor questionnaire scores stratified by demographic and institutional factors.<sups>a</sups></p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>N</td><td>IEP7</td><td>TEQ</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Rank</td></tr><tr><td> Instructor</td><td char=".">25</td><td char=".">25.3 (0.5)</td><td char=".">51.5 (1.2)</td></tr><tr><td> Assistant Professor</td><td char=".">9</td><td char=".">25.8 (0.8)</td><td char=".">52.7 (2.0)</td></tr><tr><td> Associate Professor</td><td char=".">16</td><td char=".">24.9 (0.6)</td><td char=".">52.0 (1.5)</td></tr><tr><td> Professor</td><td char=".">13</td><td char=".">25.4 (0.7)</td><td char=".">53.5 (1.7)</td></tr><tr><td><italic>p</italic>-trend</td><td /><td char=".">0.855</td><td char=".">0.786</td></tr><tr><td>Sex</td></tr><tr><td> Female</td><td char=".">37</td><td char=".">25.4 (0.4)</td><td char=".">53.2 (1.0)</td></tr><tr><td> Male</td><td char=".">26</td><td char=".">25.1 (0.5)</td><td char=".">50.7 (.1)</td></tr><tr><td><italic>p</italic>-trend</td><td /><td char=".">0.610</td><td char=".">0.099</td></tr><tr><td>Race</td></tr><tr><td> White</td><td char=".">52</td><td char=".">25.3 (0.3)</td><td char=".">52.4 (0.8)</td></tr><tr><td> Other</td><td char=".">11</td><td char=".">25.2 (0.8)</td><td char=".">51.1 (1.8)</td></tr><tr><td><italic>p</italic>-trend</td><td /><td char=".">0.899</td><td char=".">0.498</td></tr><tr><td>Online courses taught</td></tr><tr><td> 0</td><td char=".">27</td><td char=".">26.1 (0.5)</td><td char=".">52.6</td></tr><tr><td> 1</td><td char=".">16</td><td char=".">24.6 (0.6)</td><td char=".">53.6</td></tr><tr><td> 2+</td><td char=".">20</td><td char=".">24.7 (0.5)</td><td char=".">50.5</td></tr><tr><td><italic>p</italic>-trend</td><td /><td char=".">0.081</td><td char=".">0.288</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>6 Abbreviations: IEP7: 7-item Instructor Empathy Practices questionnaire; TEQ: Toronto Empathy Questionnaire.</item> <item>7 Values are shown as mean (standard error).</item> <item>8 <emph>P</emph> = 0.045 for comparison with 0 courses taught online.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0161545392-12">Thematic analysis</hd> <p>The qualitative analysis of responses to the questions asked during the focus groups revealed several themes and corresponding subthemes. When asked to define empathy, students frequently cited that it is 'more than compassion', connection, relating to others, and flexibility. One student defined empathy as "...going the extra mile and caring, being compassionate, and having more of a personal connection with caring about someone and how they're doing."</p> <p>When it comes to specific traits of empathy displayed by instructors, common themes that emerged active listening (nodding, eye contact, etc.), checking in on students in and outside of the classroom, flexibility, and patience as key traits of empathy displayed by instructors. One student noted, "Especially since COVID and everything, I have seen more empathy from my instructors. Like just checking up on us making sure that everything's going good and they keep it anonymous as well unless you do want to put your name out there so that they can reach out to you."</p> <p>Students were also asked whether the level of empathy displayed by an instructor empowers them to work harder or influences their success. Most responded that they work harder if the instructor displays empathy. For example, one student remarked "I think it motivates me to do better and I enjoy the class more." However, one student replied that they generally work harder if an instructor displays a lower level of empathy. Noting "...it makes me want to work that much harder once I feel that a professor might have a lower opinion of me, it makes me want to prove that much more that I am better and more than they see." Students also noted that when instructors display empathy, they felt less overall stress, better retention of course material, and higher levels of motivation. Table 5 lists the major themes, subthemes, and corresponding student quotes revealed from the focus groups.</p> <p>Table 5. Major themes, subthemes, and corresponding revealed from the focus groups. <emph>N</emph> = 19.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Major Theme</td><td>Subthemes</td><td>Corresponding Quotes</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Students can define empathy</td><td><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>More than compassion</p></list-item><list-item><p>Connections</p></list-item><list-item><p>Understanding situations and emotions</p></list-item><list-item><p>Respect</p></list-item><list-item><p>Flexibility</p></list-item><list-item><p>Neutrality/no judgment</p></list-item><list-item><p>Open to others</p></list-item><list-item><p>Listening</p></list-item><list-item><p>Willingness to help</p></list-item></list></td><td>"...going the extra mile and caring, being compassionate, and having more of a personal connection with caring about someone and how they're doing." "...flexibility and just letting people know that you're there for them." "connection with caring about someone" "able to understand the situation that a person is in" "being open to others' experiences" "listening to them while also remaining neutral" "you can't really judge them so fast"</td></tr><tr><td>Students identify different methods that instructors employ they perceive as empathetic</td><td><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Building relationships</p></list-item><list-item><p>Acknowledgement of current events</p></list-item><list-item><p>Checking in on students</p></list-item><list-item><p>Active listening</p></list-item><list-item><p>Understanding circumstances</p></list-item><list-item><p>Flexibility</p></list-item></list></td><td>"get to know you by name and do activities" "whenever there's a traumatic event...one of our professor's would do a debriefing of that even afterwards." "checking up on us" "nonverbal body language, facial expressions and nodding...when we're speaking" "understanding and leeway if not able to do things because of my health" "flexibility with technology and communication"</td></tr><tr><td>There are many ways instructors demonstrate empathy</td><td><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Anonymous class polls</p></list-item><list-item><p>Assignment due date changes</p></list-item><list-item><p>Patience and concern during COVID-19</p></list-item><list-item><p>Situational understanding</p></list-item><list-item><p>Frequent communication</p></list-item><list-item><p>Meeting outside of class times</p></list-item></list></td><td>"They reach out to us by putting out a poll and they ask some questions like, how are we doing, how are we feeling, is there anything that's restricting us from learning more in the class, is there anything that has made us to feel uncomfortable" "She allowed us to turn in the assignment the next day" "To have patience...especially now" (in reference to COVID-19) "I explained the situation to her, and she was completely understanding" "In my case, I would have to say that being an international student was quite an experience here and the university [has] very supportive people, are very knowledgeable people, but also very interested in the person I was" "She would allow me to come in ...when it was really her personal time"</td></tr><tr><td>Perceived empathy impacts motivation</td><td><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Enjoy course more</p></list-item><list-item><p>Higher quality work</p></list-item><list-item><p>Better retention of course material</p></list-item></list></td><td>"It does make me want to work harder in that class because it's this feeling of, you've been kind and understanding of me in some of my lowest situations and situations where I've been confused or just stressed or anxious" "When a professor is understanding...it does make the course more enjoyable" "Anything that goes beyond that, I think it motivates me to do better and I enjoy the class more" "Sometimes I feel like if the instructor doesn't care about the course or the students in the course, it's almost like, why should I?" "Now I want to prove to you that I recognized this, that you've done for me, and I want to work hard to complete the assignments and complete the course or interact with the rest of the class. Anything I could do to repay you for that" "Empathy is like fuel for students" "I've had instances where the professor didn't really show empathy and after not really seeing that empathy, it made me feel like I shouldn't even speak out in class at all. It made me feel almost like I didn't even want to go to that class anymore at that point" "I retain more of the information he's talking about so I'm better understanding of the course material"</td></tr><tr><td>It is important for instructors to display empathy</td><td><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Especially important for future careers where you connect with others</p></list-item></list></td><td>"it's a vital part of the learning process" "it's extremely important for the professors to be empathetic toward us as students" "I think it's pretty important just because if professors are just sitting there, not engaging with the students and stuff, it makes it harder for people to speak out, especially via Zoom" "it's also going to impact how you feel about the career that you're going into"</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>At the end of each focus group, the participants were asked if they had any additional information related to instructor empathy to share. Students stressed the importance of empathy in the classroom, especially given the COVID-19 pandemic, and provided specific strategies displayed by instructors that they found helpful such as being available, patients, and creating a personal connection with students.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-13">Discussion</hd> <p>This study provided a deeper dive into both the instructor and the student perceptions of classroom empathy. Using two empathy questionnaires, instructors consistently rated themselves with relatively high teaching empathy scores, with no demographic or institutional factors playing a role except for class size. On the contrary, students' perception of teacher empathy were greatly related to GPA, classification, and race. Students further noted that empathy is personal and were able to define empathy and relate it to their university experience. These findings support the literature that contextual factors among students can play a significant role in how instructor empathy is being perceived (Bertram et al. [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref45">3</reflink>]). Moreover, they highlight how instructor empathy can have significant downstream effects on students including a more positive university experience and success both in and outside of the classroom (Meyers et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref46">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>Our results yielded a trend toward significantly lower empathy scores reported by Black students compared with white students <emph>(p =</emph> 0.055) and Asian students (<emph>p</emph> = 0.054); race or ethnicity data was not collected for the focus groups. However, it is necessary to explore these findings related to race further as the minority achievement gap remains a critical issue in American education (Rovai, Gallien, and Wighting [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref47">22</reflink>]). Warren ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref48">29</reflink>]) proposed that empathy, particularly in the form of perspective taking is an important component in demonstrating culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP).</p> <p>Students in this study were able to identify a wide variety of empathy-related traits in their instructors and report that empathy is critical during stressful times, such as the transition to remote learning in 2020 and throughout the pandemic. Students noted that instructors can demonstrate empathy in both online and face-to-face courses by regularly communicating with students, demonstrating an understanding of unique student situations, being available outside of class time, and being flexible within reason. Several students stated that they value and appreciate when an instructor simply "checks-in" with students either through individual emails, anonymous class polls, or through the use of announcements in the Learning Management System. Some students reported that active listening and the use of nonverbal language such as head nodding, and empathetic facial expressions were important. Other strategies include getting to know the students' names, providing opportunities for students to improve through constructive feedback, and recognizing how events (including technology glitches) can potentially impact student learning and being willing to adjust accordingly. The theme of 'flexibility in the classroom' has emerged here and has been documented widely during the COVID-19 pandemic (Gelles et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref49">6</reflink>]; Joseph, Nethsinghe, and Cabedo-Mas [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref50">10</reflink>]; Nerantzi [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref51">14</reflink>]). Yet, there is often a misunderstanding of a perceived 'lack of empathy' between instructors and students as described in terms of class pace, instructor expectations and communication styles (Schalge and Soga [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref52">23</reflink>]). Instructor empathy can be attributed to the instructors themselves, but also there are data to support that course design and creativity of design can play a powerful role in how instructors' express empathy to students (Sosa [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref53">25</reflink>]). Future studies may examine how course design and creativity impact student perceptions of instructor empathy. The highly complex definition of empathy makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions on overall perceptions of teaching empathy from students.</p> <p>Across the higher education landscape, instructors often have been taught to repress affections and focus solely on intellect or thoughts in favor of intellect (Robertson [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref54">17</reflink>]). However, the results of our study are similar to previous research that demonstrates the importance and need for empathy in the classroom and the impact it has on student learning outcomes (Meyers et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref55">12</reflink>]; Waxman [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref56">30</reflink>]). There have been multiple calls to increase training on empathy to help boost educators' empathetic techniques in the classroom (McAllister and Irvine [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref57">11</reflink>]; Teding van Berkhout and Malouff [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref58">27</reflink>]) and the present study further highlights the need to assess students' perceptions of instructor empathy to ultimately promote a more positive experience for both instructors and students.</p> <p>One major strength of this study was the use of a convergent study design to assess and better characterize empathy from both instructors' and students' perspectives. Some of the limitations of this study were: instructors who filled out the survey may not have taught the courses taken by the students who filled out the survey, as adjunct and part-time instructors were not included in the sample. Therefore, it is not known whether adjuncts and part-time instructors would have similar self-reported empathy scores compared with full time instructors. Additionally, this study was conducted earlier in the semester and it is possible that instructor empathy and students' perceptions of instructor empathy may have been highest. Lastly, the surveys and focus groups were administered during the Spring semester of 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic and it is possible that the unique circumstances of the pandemic may have influenced both the instructors' and students' responses.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-14">Conclusion</hd> <p>This mixed-methods study found that empathy displayed by instructors and students' perceptions of instructor empathy may be characterized differently. The present results suggest that exhibiting and experiencing empathy takes on many forms and can be viewed differently based on contextual external factors (e.g., race, GPA and class size). To appropriately address and measure instructor empathy, a universal definition of teaching empathy should be established.</p> <p>Instructor empathy has been defined as "an integral part of the role of the teaching" (Meyers et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref59">12</reflink>]). Our results from the instructor survey, student survey, and the student focus groups support this notion that empathy is vital to teaching. Students frequently cited the importance of displaying empathy in the focus groups and provided specific suggestions on ways to enhance empathy in the classroom. Some of these suggestions include being flexible, but maintaining boundaries, showing respect, being available for students, constructive feedback, checking in on students, and acknowledging current events and their impact on students' lives.</p> <p>Students and instructors in higher education value empathy and its importance in the classroom. Colleges and universities, both in-person and online, need to recognize the value of teaching with empathy to help facilitate student success. Future studies should examine strategies to promote empathy in instructors, especially in the context of remote learning as well as assess whether increased instructor empathy results in positive student outcomes, such as positive experience, higher performance in courses, and satisfaction with their learning experience. As empathy may ebb and flow during the semester, it would be advisable for future studies to assess empathy at the beginning, midpoint, and end of the semester. Additionally, future research should also investigate the impact that race and/or ethnicity may have on both student and teacher self-perceived empathy.</p> <hd id="AN0161545392-15">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.</p> <ref id="AN0161545392-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref19" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Barr, Jason J., and Ann Higgins-D. 2014. " How Adolescent Empathy and Prosocial Behavior Change in the Context of School Culture: A Two-Year Longitudinal Study." Adolescence 44 (176): 751 – 72.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref7" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Be You Fully. 2016. "Empathic Listening, Carl Rogers." https://<ulink href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dLsgpHw5x0">www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dLsgpHw5x0</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref29" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bertram, Kurtis, John Randazzo, Nathaniel Alabi, Jack Levenson, John T. Doucette, and Peter Barbosa. 2016. " Strong Correlations between Empathy, Emotional Intelligence, and Personality Traits among Podiatric Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Study." Education for Health: Change in Learning and Practice 29 (3): 186 – 94. doi: 10.4103/1357-6283.204224.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref12" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bouton, Bobette. 2016. " Empathy Research and Teacher Preparation: Benefits and Obstacles." SRATE Journal 25 (2): 16 – 25.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref14" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Feshbach, N. D., and S. Feshback. 2009. " Empathy and Education." In The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes, 85 – 97. Cambridge : MIT Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref49" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Gelles, Laura A., Susan M. Lord, Gordon D. Hoople, Diana A. Chen, and Joel Alejandro Mejia. 2020. " Compassionate Flexibility and Self-Discipline: Student Adaptation to Emergency Remote Teaching in an Integrated Engineering Energy Course during Covid-19." Education Sciences 10 (11): 304 – 23. doi: 10.3390/educsci10110304.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref2" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Gladstein, Gerald A. 1983. " Understanding Empathy: Integrating Counseling, Developmental, and Social Psychology Perspectives." Journal of Counseling Psychology 30 (4): 467 – 82. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.30.4.467.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref18" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Hodges, T. E., G. Roy, and Karina Uhing. 2018. Exploring the Phenomenon of Pedagogical Empathy." Greenville, SC : University of South Carolina & Clemson University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref20" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Jama, M. P. 2017. " Applying a Humanistic Pedagogy to Advance and Integrate Humane Values in a Medical School Environment." Perspectives in Education 35 (1): 28 – 39. doi: 10.18820/2519593X/pie.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Joseph, Dawn, Rohan Nethsinghe, and Alberto Cabedo-Mas. 2021. Online Teaching and Learning during Covid-19: Flexible Harmonies in Higher Education. New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McAllister, G., and J. J. Irvine. 2002. " The Role of Empathy in Teaching Culturally Diverse Students: A Qualitative Study of Teachers' Beliefs." Journal of Teacher Education 53 (5): 433 – 43. doi: 10.1177/002248702237397.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meyers, Sal, Katherine Rowell, Mary Wells, and Brian C. Smith. 2019. " Teacher Empathy: A Model of Empathy for Teaching for Student Success." College Teaching 67 (3): 160 – 8. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2019.1579699.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Narinasamy, Ilhavenil, Wan Hasmah, and Wan Mamat. 2013. " Caring Teacher in Developing Empathy in Moral Education." The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science 1 (1): 1 – 19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nerantzi, Chrissi. 2020. " The Use of Peer Instruction and Flipped Learning to Support Flexible Blended Learning during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic." International Journal of Management and Applied Research 7 (2): 184 – 95. doi: 10.18646/2056.72.20-013.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Postolache, Iulia. 2020. " 12. The Purpose of Empathy Formation and Its Role in the Development of Modern Teachers from Primary Classes." Review of Artistic Education 20 (1): 361 – 6. doi: 10.2478/rae-2020-0040.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reniers, R. L. E. P., R. Corcoran, R. Drake, N. M. Shryane, and B. A. Völlm. 2011. " The QCAE: A Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy." Journal of Personality Assessment 93 (1): 84 – 95. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2010.528484.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robertson, Douglas L. 2018. " Emotion and Professors' Developmental Perspectives on Their Teaching." New Directions for Teaching and Learning 2018 (153): 13 – 23. doi: 10.1002/tl.20277.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, C. R. 1973. " My Philosophy of Interpersonal Relationships and How It Grew." Journal of Humanistic Psychology 13 (2): 3 – 15. doi: 10.1177/002216787301300202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, C. R. 1995. " What Understanding and Acceptance Mean to Me." Journal of Humanistic Psychology 35 (4): 7 – 22. doi: 10.1177/00221678950354002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, Carl R. 1958. " The Characteristics of a Helping Relationship." The Personnel and Guidance Journal 37 (1): 6 – 16. doi: 10.1002/j.2164-4918.1958.tb01147.x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, Carl, Harold C. Lyon, and Reinhard Tausch. 2013. On Becoming an Effective Teacher: Person-Centered Teaching, Psychology, Philosophy, and Dialogues with Carl R. Rogers and Harold Lyon. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203725672.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rovai, Alfred P., Louis B. Gallien, and Mervyn J. Wighting. 2005. " Cultural and Interpersonal Factors Affecting African American Academic Performance in Higher Education: A Review and Synthesis of the Research Literature." The Journal of Negro Education 74 (4): 359 – 70.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schalge, S. L., and K. Soga. 2008. " Then I Stop Coming to School": Understanding Absenteeism in an Adult English as a Second Language Program." Adult Basic Education & Literacy Journal 2 (3): 151 – 61.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, R. L., and A. J. Rose. 2011. "The "Cost of Caring" In Youths' Friendships: Considering Associations Among Social Perspective Taking, Co-Rumination, And Empathetic Distress." Developmental Psychology 47 (6): 1792 – 803. doi: 10.1037/a0025309.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sosa, Ricardo. 2019. " Teaching (with) Empathy and Creativity in Design." In Insider Knowledge – Proceedings of the Design Research Society Learn X Design Conference, 2019. Design Research Society. doi: 10.21606/learnxdesign.2019.08006.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spreng, R. Nathan, Margaret C. McKinnon, Raymond A. Mar, and Brian Levine. 2009. " The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Scale Development and Initial Validation of a Factor-Analytic Solution to Multiple Empathy Measures." Journal of Personality Assessment 91 (1): 62 – 71. doi: 10.1080/00223890802484381.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teding van Berkhout, Emily, and John M. Malouff. 2016. " The Efficacy of Empathy Training: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials." Journal of Counseling Psychology 63 (1): 32 – 41. doi: 10.1037/cou0000093.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Totan, Tarık, and Fatma Sapmaz. 2012. " The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Evaluation of Psychometric Properties among Turkish University Students." Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 46 : 179 – 98.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Warren, Chezare A. 2015. " Conflicts and Contradictions: Conceptions of Empathy and the Work of Good-Intentioned Early Career White Female Teachers." Urban Education 50 (5): 572 – 600. doi: 10.1177/0042085914525790.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Waxman, Hersholt C. 1983. " Effect of Teachers' Empathy on Students' Motivation." Psychological Reports 53 (2): 489 – 90. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1983.53.2.489.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wink, Mackenzie N., Maria D. LaRusso, and Rhiannon L. Smith. 2021. " Teacher Empathy and Students with Problem Behaviors: Examining Teachers' Perceptions, Responses, Relationships, and Burnout." Psychology in the Schools 58 (8): 1575 – 96. doi: 10.1002/pits.22516.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xu, Richard Huan, Eliza Lai Yi Wong, Sabrina Yu Jun Lu, Ling Ming Zhou, Jing Hui Chang, and Dong Wang. 2020. " Validation of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) among Medical Students in China: Analyses Using Three Psychometric Methods." Frontiers in Psychology 11 : 1 – 11. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00810.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jenifer Ross; Kristen Hicks-Roof; Meghan Cosby and Andrea Arikawa</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib164" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib166" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib162" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref57"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1376872
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Instructor and Student Perceptions of Teacher Empathy in Higher Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ross%2C+Jenifer%22">Ross, Jenifer</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5660-3431">0000-0001-5660-3431</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hicks-Roof%2C+Kristen%22">Hicks-Roof, Kristen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7713-3037">0000-0001-7713-3037</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cosby%2C+Meghan%22">Cosby, Meghan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Arikawa%2C+Andrea%22">Arikawa, Andrea</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22College+Teaching%22"><i>College Teaching</i></searchLink>. 2023 71(1):28-37.
– 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: 10
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– 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="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Students%22">College Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Empathy%22">Empathy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Student+Relationship%22">Teacher Student Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Enrollment%22">Enrollment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Characteristics%22">Teacher Characteristics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+Colleges%22">Public Colleges</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Florida%22">Florida</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/87567555.2022.2049673
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 8756-7555<br />1930-8299
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Empathy is recognized as the ability to relate emotionally to an experience or another person's emotions. Evidence supports the notion that students learn better and have greater positive perceptions when instructors display empathetic values and seek more meaningful relationships with their students. The purpose of this study was to assess instructor self-reported empathy and students' perceptions of instructor empathy, using the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) and a newly developed Instructor Empathy Practices questionnaire (IEP7), among a convenience sample from a public university. This convergent mixed-methods study consisted of a cross-sectional survey sent to both students and instructors and focus groups conducted with students. A total of 168 students and 68 faculty members completed the survey and 19 students participated in the focus groups. Contextual factors such as race (p = 0.036), classification (p = 0.003) and GPA (p = 0.028) played significant roles in student empathy scores. Among instructors, only total student enrollment (p = 0.028) had an association with teacher empathy. Focus groups revealed themes related to recognizing empathy including understanding its definition, instructional techniques, perception in relation to class motivation, and importance. This study was the first to employ a convergent study design to assess and better characterize empathy from both instructors' and students' perspectives.
– 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: EJ1376872
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1376872
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/87567555.2022.2049673
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 28
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Empathy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Student Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Enrollment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Characteristics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Public Colleges
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Florida
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Instructor and Student Perceptions of Teacher Empathy in Higher Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ross, Jenifer
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hicks-Roof, Kristen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cosby, Meghan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Arikawa, Andrea
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 8756-7555
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1930-8299
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 71
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: College Teaching
              Type: main
ResultId 1