Author: angela

Effective communication is the cornerstone of student support and engagement in any college setting. But how do we truly understand what students need, when they need it, and how they prefer to ask? To shed some light on these questions, we delved into historical data from an older in-app communication tool used by dozens of our partner colleges. This tool, an ancestor of more modern platforms, featured a basic in-app mechanism for students to ask questions. While not heavily promoted within the app’s UI at the time, it still garnered notable student interaction.

Our analysis primarily looks at patterns and preferences over a specific three-month period (January to March) for a direct comparison between in-app inquiries and emails. For some broader trend analysis (like general types of questions or day-of-week patterns for in-app inquiries), we also refer to a larger dataset from this older app. Let’s explore what these interactions tell us about student behavior.

1. What Themes Emerge from Student Inquiries?

---

When students utilized the in-app mechanism to ask questions, their inquiries often fell into several key themes. An analysis of a historical dataset of in-app inquiries highlights these common areas:

A significant percentage of inquiries (around 42.5%) revolved around the app’s Points & Rewards System. Students were keen to understand this feature, frequently asking:

This underscores a strong student interest in incentive-based engagement. Questions about general College Information (e.g., how to register, details about college processes, distinct from app functionality) were also very common, comprising about 25.6% of inquiries. Examples include:

Other notable themes included inquiries related to App Functionality (such as account recovery or requests for more personalization, at 11.9%), with questions like:

And App Content Requests (like wanting their specific college to be better represented, or requesting more events in the app, at 10.6%), for instance:

2. When Do Students Reach Out? Timing of Inquiries

---

Understanding when students seek information is crucial for staffing support and designing accessible resources. We analyzed the hourly distribution for both in-app inquiries (focusing on weekday activity) and emails.

How Much Communication Occurs During Office Hours?

When we examine inquiries made during typical 9:00 AM to 4:59 PM office hours on weekdays, a notable volume of in-app activity occurred. These weekday office-hour inquiries represent 42.50%ˢ¹ of the *total in-app inquiries received throughout the entire week (including weekends and all hours)*. Focusing solely on weekday activity, these office-hour inquiries account for approximately 51.9%ˢ² of all in-app inquiries made Monday through Friday. For emails (where hourly data includes all days of the week), 45.45%ˢ³ of total emails were received during 9:00 AM – 4:59 PM office hours.

This data, even when focusing on weekday patterns for in-app use, still indicates that a substantial portion of student needs are expressed outside core office hours. Students are often managing their college-related tasks late at night or early in the morning, as evidenced by inquiries like, “I accidentally deleted the app… How do I get all my points and accomplishments back?” submitted at 3:51 AM, or questions about gift cards arriving after 10 PM. This reinforces the importance of asynchronous support and readily available information.

What About Day of the Week for In-App Inquiries?

Looking at a dataset of in-app inquiries from the older app, we see the following daily distribution:

While weekdays clearly dominate, the fact that just over 18% of inquiries came in over the weekend (e.g., “I still have not gotten my gift card,” sent on a Sunday) further underscores the round-the-clock nature of student needs.

3. Do Students Prefer In-App Inquiries or Email for Communications?

---

During a specific January to March period, the volume of in-app inquiries and email communications was surprisingly comparable, especially considering the in-app feature was rudimentary and not a primary focus of the app’s UI at the time.

Looking at the rates relative to user activity during this Jan-Mar period:

• In-App Inquiries per user-day: 0.26%
• Emails per user-day: 0.24%

This suggests that, even with minimal promotion, students were nearly as likely to use the in-app mechanism as they were to send an email when seeking support or information. This implies a potential preference for or, at least, a willingness to use in-app communication channels if they are available and effective.

4. What Volume of Questions Do Students Produce?

---

Focusing again on the Jan-Mar period for a fair comparison, the rate of in-app inquiries was 0.26% per user-day, while emails occurred at a rate of 0.24% per user-day. This implies that, on average, it took slightly more user activity (user-days) to generate an email compared to an in-app inquiry during this period. While the raw volume of questions per user-day was not overwhelmingly high, the consistency across channels was notable, especially considering the in-app communication feature was not heavily emphasized. The fact that students still actively sought out and used this channel for diverse questions—from “When is the next education work shop?” to “What if I already registered?”—suggests a latent demand for convenient, app-based support.

Key Takeaways from Historical Data

---

Even from this look at an older, less-developed in-app communication tool, several key insights emerge:

• Students Seek Answers: They will use the channels available to them, even if those channels aren’t front-and-center, for a wide range of topics including direct college support and app-specific help.
• Rewards Motivate: Inquiries about points and gift cards were prominent (e.g., “When will I get my gift card?” or “How do I earn points?”), indicating that well-designed incentive systems can drive engagement.
• Needs Don’t Keep Office Hours: A significant portion of student inquiries, whether via an in-app mechanism or email, arrive outside the traditional 9-5 workday and on weekends.
• In-App Communication is Viable: The comparable usage rates of the rudimentary in-app inquiry feature versus email suggest students are open to, and may even prefer, communicating within a dedicated college app environment.

Understanding these past behaviors provides valuable lessons as we consider how to best design future tools to meet students where they are, with the information and support they need, whenever they need it. The clear message is that students are looking for accessible, responsive, and ideally, rewarding ways to connect with their college and its resources.

---

Data Notes:

• ᶠ⁴The comparative analysis of in-app inquiries vs. email (Sections 3 & 4, Chart 5) is based on data from January 1st to March 31st of a prior year, which included 72 in-app inquiries, 66 email inquiries, and 27,313 user-days.
• ᶠ¹The thematic analysis of in-app inquiries (Chart 1) and the day-of-the-week analysis for in-app inquiries (Chart 4, and its derived weekday proportion used in the office hours calculation) are based on a historical dataset of 160 submissions from a broader period of the same prior year.
• ᶠ²The hourly distribution of in-app inquiries (Chart 2) is based on a historical dataset of 131 weekday-only submissions from the broader period.
• ˢ¹The office hours calculation for in-app inquiries (42.50%) is based on 68 weekday office-hour inquiries out of the 160 total in-app inquiries (all days/hours) from the broader historical dataset.
• ˢ²The 51.9% figure represents 68 weekday office-hour inquiries out of the 131 total weekday in-app inquiries from the broader historical dataset.
• ᶠ³The hourly distribution of email inquiries (Chart 3) and its related office hours calculation (ˢ³45.45%, based on 30 office-hour emails out of 66 total emails) are based on a historical dataset from a January to March period of the same prior year.

In the quest to enhance student success, colleges are increasingly turning to digital tools. But how do we ensure these tools truly resonate and drive meaningful engagement? Simply launching an app isn’t enough. Understanding the diverse ways students interact (or don’t interact) with these platforms is crucial for designing solutions that genuinely make a difference. We believe in a data-informed approach, and our journey has been shaped by deep analysis of past student behaviors.

Our methodology involved crunching the numbers from a historical dataset of over 21,000 students who used an earlier student engagement app (an ancestor to current solutions, utilized across dozens of colleges). This app included a brief survey upon onboarding, providing self-reported student characteristics. By combining this survey data with behavioral analytics from app usage, we identified distinct user personas. These personas aren’t just labels; they represent real patterns in how students approach digital tools, what motivates them, and where their needs lie. This understanding has been instrumental in shaping our features and philosophy for effective student engagement platforms.

Uncovering Student Engagement Personas

---

Our analysis allowed us to segment users into four primary behavioral personas based on their notification interactions and points earned. While the “Quiet Observer” group was the largest in our sample (approx. 70.7% of total users, or 12,804 students), understanding the more active segments provides crucial insights into what drives engagement. Further analysis of their self-reported motivations and characteristics from the onboarding survey reveals additional nuances.

1. The “Points Hunter”

Defining Criteria:

• No notification clicks
• Earns >50 points (a significant amount, considering typical checklist items awarded 10-20 points and the first reward tier was around 100 points)
• Views reward list >5 times

(Approx. 0.8% of users in sample, or 172 students)

Onboarding Survey Insights:

This persona aligns closely with the overall student population’s age, with 58.1% falling in the 18-24 age bracket (vs. 58.1% overall). Compared to the general student body in our dataset (66.1% of whom want to transfer), “Points Hunters” show a similar strong inclination to transfer to a 4-year institution (66.3%) and, consistent with their reward-seeking behavior, are more motivated to make more money (34.3%) compared to the overall student population (31.4%). They show a slightly higher tendency to work 20+ hours a week (20.9%) compared to the overall student average (15.2%). Their likelihood of being parents (12.2%) is very similar to the overall student average (12.15%).

Key Metrics Summary:

• Avg. Unique Days Active: 11.33
• Content Engagement Metric: 0.322

2. The “Information Seeker”

Defining Criteria:

• Earned 0 points
• Clicked at least one notification

(Approx. 24.9% of users in sample, or 6,819 students)

Onboarding Survey Insights:

“Information Seekers” skew slightly younger, with 59.5% in the 18-24 age range (vs. 58.1% overall). They exhibit the highest desire among all personas to transfer to a 4-year institution (68.7%, slightly above the 66.1% overall average). Their likelihood of working 20+ hours per week (18.8%) is also slightly above the general student population (15.2%). They are marginally less likely to be parents (11.6% vs. 12.15% overall).

Key Metrics Summary:

• Avg. Unique Days Active: 33.60
• Content Engagement Metric: 0.233

3. The “Fully Engaged” User

Defining Criteria:

• Clicked at least one notification
• Earned >20 points

(Approx. 4.1% of users in sample, or 920 students)

Onboarding Survey Insights:

“Fully Engaged” users tend to be slightly older than average, with 52.0% in the 18-24 age bracket (compared to 58.1% overall). They are notably more likely to be parents (16.2%) than the overall student population (12.15%) and also show a higher percentage working 20+ hours a week (21.3% vs. 15.2% overall). This group also has the highest percentage of students enrolled full-time (40.4% compared to 20.0% overall). Their desire to transfer to a 4-year institution (66.2%) aligns closely with the overall average, and they show a slightly higher motivation to make more money (35.5% vs. 31.4% overall).

Key Metrics Summary:

• Avg. Unique Days Active: 48.86
• Content Engagement Metric: 0.273

4. The “Quiet Observer”

Defining Criteria:

• No notification clicks
• No points earned

(Approx. 70.7% of users in sample, or 12,804 students)

Onboarding Survey Insights:

“Quiet Observers” align closely with the overall student age distribution (58.2% are 18-24 vs. 58.1% overall). Their desire to transfer (64.9%) remains high, only slightly below the overall average. Their likelihood of being parents (12.1%) is also very close to the overall student average (12.15%). Notably, their rate of working 20+ hours (12.1%) is lower than other engaged personas and below the overall student average (15.2%).

Key Metrics Summary:

• Avg. Unique Days Active: 16.56
• Content Engagement Metric: 0.174

Comparing Persona Behaviors Across Key Metrics

---

Visualizing how these personas compare on specific engagement metrics further highlights their distinct behaviors:

Key Learnings & Our Approach to Solutions

---

These personas and their characteristics provide critical insights that directly influence our platform’s development and feature emphasis:

1. Make Rewards Discoverable & Diverse

The “Points Hunter” demonstrated immense dedication once they found point-earning opportunities (which were solely within certain specialized checklists in the old app, with typical items awarding 10-20 points and first rewards at ~100 points). Their high Content Engagement Metric suggests they were actively searching for more ways to earn, or that the checklist tasks effectively guided them to interact with related detailed content. However, the relatively small size of this group and the fact that “Information Seekers” (a much larger group) earned no points indicated that reward pathways were too narrow or hard to find for the average student.

Our Solution Emphasis: We’ve made earning small rewards a more intuitive and widespread part of the engagement experience. Instead of confining points to complex specialized checklists, students are guided to earn points for a variety of simpler, foundational actions right from the start—like choosing a screen name, inviting a friend, or exploring basic app features. This introduces the value of engagement early and aims to draw more students, including “Information Seekers” and “Quiet Observers,” into a positive feedback loop, guiding them toward becoming “Fully Engaged.”

2. Rewards Must Be Timely & Relevant

In the predecessor app, while specialized checklists with points could be scheduled to appear at certain dates, the overall system of such opportunities was often established annually. This meant content could become stale, and there were fewer chances to tie rewards to the day-to-day pulse of campus life. “Points Hunters” still engaged, but this approach missed opportunities to connect rewards with a wider array of current campus happenings and maintain broader student interest.

Our Solution Emphasis: Modern engagement platforms should facilitate dynamic, schedulable “bounties” with optional “ticking clocks” for completion. These bounties can be inherently tied to common and timely actions as they arise—such as attending specific campus events as they are created by college staff, completing pre-registration steps, or providing feedback after a workshop. This creates a natural sense of relevance and urgency, making the rewards system a living part of the campus calendar. It encourages ongoing interaction with diverse and interesting opportunities, making rewards appealing even to students who might not typically seek out static checklist tasks.

3. Financial Incentives Resonate Broadly and Can Be a Gateway to Deeper Engagement

Onboarding survey insights reveal that the desire to “make more money” is a significant motivator across multiple personas (overall 31.4%, “Fully Engaged” 35.5%, “Points Hunters” 34.3%). Furthermore, our general student surveys show over 90% of students would welcome an app offering such opportunities. This strongly supports StudentSquad’s planned feature of extending the points system for small bits of student work (like content creation), transforming points into tangible financial value and potentially increasing engagement significantly.

Our Solution Emphasis: Make these “work for points” opportunities highly visible, easy to understand, and the redemption process clear. This can convert many “Information Seekers” or even “Quiet Observers” if the value proposition is compelling, while also reducing administrative burdens for the college and deepening student connection to their institution.

4. Activating the “Quiet Observer” Requires Low-Barrier Entry Points

This largest persona group (over 60% of defined personas) shows minimal active engagement with traditional app drivers. They open the app but don’t interact deeply. Onboarding survey data shows their rate of working 20+ hours (12.1%) is notably lower than other engaged personas and below the overall student average (15.2%), which might suggest different time availability or priorities for app-based tasks versus direct academic or work commitments.

Our Solution Emphasis: For “Quiet Observers,” the initial experience must be immediately useful with minimal effort. StudentSquad’s easy college onboarding, intuitive app-first design, and planned AI-driven seamless content integration (from existing college web content) aim to provide a rich, valuable, and easily navigable information base from day one. Well-maintained feeds and calendars that are actively useful upon app launch, rather than just default screens, are paramount.

5. Supporting the Transfer Journey is a Key Lever for Engagement

A high percentage across all personas (overall 66.1% according to onboarding surveys) aims to transfer to a 4-year institution. This motivation is consistently strong across “Information Seekers” (68.7%), “Points Hunters” (66.3%), and “Fully Engaged” (66.2%).

Our Solution Emphasis: Features directly supporting the transfer journey are highly valued. StudentSquad’s “Resources” section can be rich with transfer guides and articulation information. “How-to Checklists” can map out the transfer process. “Groups” can facilitate peer support for transfer students. The co-curricular transcript aspect (built from bounties/points for event attendance, etc.) and planned LMS integration further enhance this support, making academic progress and transfer requirements clearer.

6. Efficiency and Accessibility for Busy, Engaged Students

The “Fully Engaged” persona, according to onboarding survey data, often juggles full-time enrollment (40.4% vs. 20% overall), significant work hours (21.3% work 20+ hours vs. 15.2% overall), and higher rates of parenthood (16.2% vs. 12.15% overall). This indicates that even the busiest students will engage if the platform is efficient and valuable.

Our Solution Emphasis: Prioritize features that save time and provide quick, actionable information. StudentSquad’s app-first design, customizable push notifications, organized calendar/feed, and planned AI chat for after-hours support (when many busy students are active) cater to these needs. Ensuring a smooth mobile experience is crucial.

Moving Forward: Building for All Students

---

Understanding these behavioral personas isn’t just an academic exercise; it’s a roadmap for creating more effective student engagement tools. By recognizing that students have diverse motivations and interaction styles, we can design platforms that cater to a wider range of needs. The “Points Hunter” shows the power of direct incentives, the “Information Seeker” highlights the value of clear, accessible information, the “Fully Engaged” user demonstrates the synergy of both, and the “Quiet Observer” represents the vast potential for deeper connection.

Our goal is to build upon these learnings, creating environments where more students naturally find their path to becoming “Fully Engaged,” leveraging app-based tools not just for rewards or information, but as comprehensive companions that support their entire college journey and foster a stronger sense of belonging and success.

---

Behavioral persona rule definitions (notification clicks, points earned) and core engagement metrics (Content Engagement Metric, Average Total Detailed Content Interactions) are derived from an anonymized historical usage dataset (N=18,102 users for the original persona definitions) of a previous student engagement app (a predecessor to current solutions) used by multiple colleges. The “Content Engagement Metric” refers to the average combined interactions with detailed information (on topics like deadlines or how-to guides) per day a student was active on the app. “Average Total Detailed Content Interactions” refers to the sum of average deadline detail views and tip detail views across the observation period for users within that persona from that historical dataset. Self-reported onboarding survey data (motivations, parental status, age demographics, work hours, enrollment status), as well as the “Average Unique Days Active” values used in Chart 1 and overall persona user counts (e.g., 172 for Points Hunters), are from the `persona-with-motivation.csv` analysis of 21,448 users who completed the onboarding survey in the predecessor app. Data related to specific student levels (new, continuing, prospective) and “new student”/”returning student” motivations were excluded from this iteration due to identified data quality concerns.

One of the persistent challenges colleges face is effectively motivating students to take necessary actions—whether it’s completing important administrative tasks, engaging with support services, or participating in campus life. How can institutions cut through the noise and encourage students to actively participate in their own success? Our historical data suggests a compelling answer lies in a well-designed rewards system.

We delved into historical data from an older in-app student communication tool, which featured a basic mechanism for students to ask questions. Despite its rudimentary nature and lack of prominent placement, the insights gleaned are powerful. Students didn’t just use it for problems; they used it to inquire about rewards, signaling a clear interest in incentive-based systems.

Student Behavior: Actively Seeking Rewards

---

In an analysis of historical in-app inquiriesᶠ¹, questions and comments related to the app’s points and rewards system were remarkably prominent. Grouping inquiries like “Where is my gift card?”, “Where are my points?”, “How do I earn points?”, and “How do I redeem my points?”, they collectively accounted for approximately 42.5% of all student-initiated communications through this particular channel.

The types of questions showed genuine curiosity and a desire to understand how to engage with the rewards program:

This active seeking behavior clearly indicates that rewards weren’t just an afterthought for students; they were a feature they noticed, valued, and proactively wanted to engage with. The volume of these questions suggests that a well-implemented rewards system can be a significant draw for student attention and a powerful tool for encouraging specific actions.

Survey Confirms: Students Want Rewards and Will Act

---

This observed behavior from our historical data is strongly validated by more recent student sentiment. In a survey conducted with over 120 current college studentsˢ¹, the appeal of an app incorporating small rewards was undeniable:

• An overwhelming majority (over 90%) of currently attending students stated they would install an app that lets them earn money or small rewards for college-related tasks.
• Similarly, over 90% of these students indicated they would prefer to attend a college that offers such an app compared to one that does not.
• When asked if such an app would make them less likely to drop out, nearly 70% of current students felt it would make them somewhat or much less likely to do so.

These survey responses paint a clear picture: students see tangible value in platforms that offer incentives. This isn’t just about the reward itself; it’s about the motivation to take action, engage with the college, and persist in their studies.

Why Rewards Catalyze Action: The Psychology of Small Wins

---

The strong interest in rewards isn’t just about “free stuff.” It taps into basic human psychology that drives action:

• Clear Incentive for Tasks: Students often juggle multiple priorities. A direct incentive can make a college-related task (like attending a workshop or completing a survey) rise higher on their to-do list.
• Sense of Achievement & Progress: Earning points and redeeming them provides a sense of accomplishment and clear feedback that their efforts are being recognized. This can be especially powerful for new or struggling students.
• Motivation & Gamification: Rewards can gamify otherwise mundane but important tasks, making them more engaging and encouraging timely completion. This can be particularly effective for administrative processes or resource discovery.
• Financial Alleviation for Everyday Items: As many survey respondents noted, even small financial rewards can make a difference for day-to-day expenses. One student envisioned, “Earning money by completing small tasks would be a huge help financially. I could use that extra cash to pay for textbooks… or even just a coffee (let’s be real, caffeine is essential for studying!).”

Strategically Channeling Motivation: Rewards for Meaningful Actions

---

The true potential of an in-app rewards system is realized when it’s used to strategically guide students toward actions that directly contribute to their success and the college’s retention goals. Instead of arbitrary rewards, incentives can be linked to:

• Proactive Resource Utilization: Award points for visiting the tutoring center, engaging with career services, or attending academic success workshops.
• Timely Completion of Critical Steps: Incentivize on-time FAFSA submission, course registration, or meetings with academic advisors.
• Campus & Community Engagement: Encourage participation in student clubs, campus events, or even providing feedback on college services.
• Skill Development: Offer points for completing micro-learning modules related to study skills, financial literacy, or leadership.

By aligning rewards with these types of constructive activities, colleges can transform a simple incentive system into a powerful tool for student development. It becomes a mechanism where students are actively encouraged and recognized for taking the very steps that lead to better outcomes. As another student commented in our survey, “Earning money by helping fellow students and the college would be amazing. Having all deadlines, events, and groups in one place would keep me organized… It would save me time, reduce stress, and increase my sense of community.”

Conclusion: Incentives as a Solution for Student Action

---

The challenge of getting students to take specific, beneficial actions is ongoing. However, our historical data, combined with current student preferences, strongly suggests that rewards and incentives, particularly within an accessible app, offer a compelling solution. Students are demonstrably interested in such systems and are willing to engage when they see clear value and a pathway to tangible benefits.

For colleges seeking to boost student engagement, improve the completion of essential tasks, and ultimately support student success, a thoughtfully designed rewards program isn’t just a novelty. It’s a strategic lever that can catalyze student action, foster a more interactive campus environment, and make the college journey more rewarding in every sense of the word.

---

Data Notes:

• ᶠ¹The analysis of in-app inquiry themes (Chart 1) is based on a historical dataset of 160 submissions from an older in-app communication tool used by our partner colleges during a prior year.
• ˢ¹Student survey data cited regarding app preferences and impact was collected in 2024 from over 120 currently attending college students.
• The example student quotes regarding rewards are illustrative of the types of inquiries received in the historical dataset or themes expressed in the survey, anonymized for privacy.