The Crisis of Visibility: Why "Mattering" is the New Frontier in Student Success
In the modern landscape of higher education, the traditional metrics of success—GPA, retention rates, and post-graduation employment—are increasingly being viewed as incomplete. A transformative shift is occurring, one that moves beyond the concept of "belonging" toward a more profound, psychologically grounded metric: mattering.
A recent "Student Voice" flash survey, conducted by Inside Higher Ed in partnership with Generation Lab, reveals a stark reality. While a majority of the 1,038 students surveyed across 203 institutions feel known by at least one person on campus, a significant segment of the student body feels entirely unseen. As institutions grapple with declining student well-being and rising mental health concerns, this data suggests that the "invisible" student is not just an outlier, but a systemic failure that colleges must urgently address.
The Data: A Landscape of Partial Connection
The survey findings, which capture the experiences of students at both two- and four-year institutions, paint a complex picture of modern campus life.
When asked if they felt known in a meaningful way—defined as having peers who rely on them or faculty who would notice if they were struggling—only 36 percent of students felt that several people on campus truly knew them. Another 33 percent reported that only one or two people held that role. Perhaps most alarmingly, nearly one in 10 students reported feeling entirely invisible, stating that no one on campus knows them as an individual.
The disparity between institutional types is significant. Four-year students are twice as likely as their two-year counterparts to report that they are known by several people (40 percent vs. 19 percent). Furthermore, 14 percent of community college students reported feeling invisible, compared to just 5 percent at four-year universities. Age is also a critical variable; students over the age of 25 are half as likely as their 19-to-24-year-old peers to feel they have a meaningful connection to multiple people on campus.
Defining "Mattering" vs. "Belonging"
The academic discourse surrounding these results centers on the distinction between belonging and mattering. Peter Felten, executive director of the Center for Engaged Learning at Elon University, argues that while belonging is often contingent on feeling like one fits into a pre-existing social mold, mattering is an active, universal need.
"Every student can and should feel like they matter in college," Felten notes. "Mattering is rooted in feeling valued and known, and having something to contribute within a given context. It is theoretically attainable for all students, regardless of age, background, or social circumstances."
Felten warns that when a student’s sense of mattering is tethered to only one individual—such as a single professor or a lone peer—it becomes "precarious." If that professor leaves or that peer graduates, the student’s entire foundation of institutional support evaporates. The goal for higher education, he argues, is to cultivate a network of "deeper life interactions" that anchor a student to the campus community through multiple points of connection.
The Search for Meaning and Purpose
Despite the challenges in interpersonal connection, the survey indicates that colleges are succeeding in one critical domain: the cultivation of purpose. Nearly two-thirds of students report that their institution has helped them explore questions of meaning, such as what kind of person they want to be or how they wish to contribute to the world.
This reflects the growing "academic flourishing" movement, which posits that higher education must deliver on the promise of transformation—preparing students not just for a career, but for a life. However, this is not a universal experience. Ten percent of students reported that their institution offered no help in this regard, forcing them to pursue these philosophical inquiries entirely on their own. Notably, students at private nonprofit institutions were significantly more likely (44 percent) than public institution students (29 percent) to report receiving strong support for these explorations, a trend likely linked to smaller student-faculty ratios.
Chronology of the Well-Being Movement
To understand why these findings are so critical, one must look at the recent evolution of student support services:
- Pre-2020: Student success was largely viewed through the lens of academic performance and administrative efficiency.
- 2020–2022: The COVID-19 pandemic acted as a catalyst, forcing a national conversation about the mental health crisis and the inadequacy of transactional support models.
- 2023–2024: The rise of the "flourishing" movement saw colleges shift toward holistic models, emphasizing social-emotional learning and purposeful engagement.
- 2025–2026: The current "Student Voice: Amplified" survey series highlights that while awareness has increased, the practical application of these support structures remains inconsistent across public, private, and community college sectors.
Official Responses and Institutional Accountability
The survey results have prompted reflection from leaders across the education sector. Levi Shanks, assistant vice president for academic and student affairs at the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU), finds the results "encouraging" while acknowledging the work ahead.
"Public and land-grant universities have worked over the last decade to expand their focus beyond academic achievement to include well-being, engagement, and career development," Shanks said. "These are mutually reinforcing dimensions of success."
However, others are more critical of the status quo. Rachel Forsyth, a senior educational developer at Lund University, emphasizes that institutional change requires more than just adding more counseling services. It requires structural changes that grant students greater agency and autonomy. "The findings underscore the importance of involving students directly in shaping their educational experiences," she noted.
The "Red Herring" of Technology
One of the most debated aspects of the study is the impact of technology on social connection. Students are deeply divided on whether their phones, social media, and AI tools facilitate connection or isolation.
While 28 percent of students feel that technology makes them more connected, 24 percent feel it increases their isolation. Philip N. Cohen, a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, cautions against blaming smartphones as the root cause of the crisis. "Phones don’t directly make people lonely or depressed," Cohen argues. "The more important question is what activities technology may be supplanting."
Cohen suggests that colleges should focus on promoting "prosocial" behaviors—like communal dining or physical sports—that have been displaced by screen time. Forsyth agrees, noting that for online and commuter students, technology is often a lifeline rather than a detriment. The challenge is not to ban technology, but to foster "informed decision-making" regarding how and when to use it to build genuine relationships.
Implications: The Path Forward
The "Student Voice" findings offer a roadmap for the future of student support. When asked what their institutions could do better, students consistently pointed to three areas:
- Increased Mental Health Counseling: Representing one in every five suggestions.
- Resource Awareness: Many students are unaware of existing support structures, suggesting a failure in communication.
- Community Building: A desire for structured, low-stakes opportunities to connect with peers and faculty.
The survey concludes with a sobering takeaway: the "passing grade" of a B that most students give their institutions for well-being support is not enough to stave off the feeling of invisibility. As institutions move forward, the focus must shift from merely "providing services" to "building relationships."
By intentionally fostering deeper life interactions—where faculty and staff are trained to look for signs of struggle and students are encouraged to engage with their own sense of purpose—colleges can ensure that every student feels they truly matter. As Peter Felten emphasizes, "those of us who teach and work in higher education need to create conditions where all students feel they matter. That is crucial for student well-being, learning, and persistence."
Ultimately, the transformation of higher education depends on the ability to make the invisible visible. The future of the university rests on its capacity to see the student as a whole person, rather than a mere data point in an enrollment report.
This report is part of an ongoing independent editorial project produced with Generation Lab and supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
