Degree map, registration, and balance alerts routed to a named adviser
Fixed alerts that fire when a student registers off their degree map, earns a low grade in a course that predicts success in their major, has not registered for next term, or is about to be dropped over a small balance, each sent to the student's own adviser to act on within a set time.
Part of the recommended approachTechnique: Rules Engine
This solution checks every registered student against their programme’s degree map and a short list of conditions known to precede leaving, and sends each alert to the student’s own adviser.
Typical triggers are registering for a course that does not count towards the declared major, a low grade in a prerequisite that predicts success in that major, no registration for the next term by the deadline, and a small unpaid balance that is about to drop the student from their classes.
Georgia State’s GPS Advising holds more than 800 such alerts, which its analysts derived from years of the university’s own grade data, and it was introduced together with a consolidation of advising that more than doubled the number of advisers.
Because each alert names a cause, a record of alerts also shows the institution which of its own rules push students out, the kind of finding that led Georgia State, a year before GPS, to fund small grants with financial counselling for on-track students being dropped over balances.
This is the right starting point for almost every institution, and the wrong choice only where degree requirements are so open that no map can be drawn, or where nobody will be given the time to answer the alerts.
Strengths for this problem
- Each alert names a specific, fixable problem, such as a course that will not count towards the declared major, so the adviser knows what to talk about before the student arrives.
- Shown to advisers as a named problem rather than a score, and uses only what students have registered for, earned, and owe, so it never labels a student by race or income, although balance alerts will fall mostly on students with less money.
- Catches the students in the middle of the grade distribution, who are neither failing nor asking for help, as soon as they take a wrong turn.
- Points at administrative causes of leaving that can be fixed, such as students on track to graduate being dropped over small balances, which Georgia State answered with retention grants.
Limitations for this problem
- Needs a degree map for every programme, kept current as requirements change, which is slow and laborious to build.
- Only sees what the registrar, the gradebook, and student accounts record, so it misses students struggling with money, work, family, or health until their grades or registration show it.
- Alerts are only as useful as the adviser capacity behind them, and where caseloads climb well beyond the 300 students per adviser that advising bodies treat as a benchmark, they pile up unread.
- Faculty-raised alerts depend on faculty taking part and on someone closing the loop with the faculty member who raised them.
Data needed
- Degree map per programme with required courses, their recommended term, and the courses whose grades predict success in the major.
- Registration per term against the map, midterm and final grades, credits earned, and whether the student has registered for the next term by the deadline.
- Balances owed, holds, and the date a balance would drop the student from classes, from student accounts.
- Each alert with its trigger, the adviser it was routed to, whether and when the student was contacted, and the outcome.
How it is measured
- Share of alerts that led to contact within the agreed time, by alert type and by adviser caseload.
- Credits taken that did not count towards the degree, and time to degree.
- Students who had not registered for the next term at the deadline, and how many of them enrolled after contact.
- Students dropped over a balance, and how many re-enrolled after a grant or a payment plan.
Pitfalls
- Writing hundreds of alerts at once, so advisers face a flood of low-value notices and stop opening them.
- Routing alerts to a shared inbox rather than the student's own adviser, so nobody owns the follow-up.
- Placing a registration hold until the student meets their adviser without weighing the students who will not come back because of the hold.
- Never retiring an alert whose trigger no longer predicts anything, such as a course grade in a programme whose requirements changed.
Human oversight
The student's academic adviser decides whether to contact the student, what to recommend, and whether the alert was a real problem, and records the outcome. Programme directors own each programme's degree map and the courses that trigger alerts. The student accounts and financial aid teams decide on any grant or payment plan, and the student success leadership reviews each year which alerts led to action and which to retire.