College Persistence and Completion Strategies: Opportunities for Scaling Up

Terry E. SpradlinDavid J. Rutkowski

Nathan A. BurroughsJustin R. Lang

October 29, 2010

Setting the Stage

2

Austra

lia

Poland

Portug

al

Icelan

d

Slovak

Rep

ublic

New Zea

land

Norway

Korea

Finlan

d

Russia

n Fed

eratio

n

Sweden

United

Stat

es1

Netherl

ands

Israe

l

Denmark

United

King

dom

Hunga

ry

Czech

Rep

ublic

OECD avera

ge

Sloven

ia

EU19 av

erage Ita

ly

Austria

Japa

n

Irelan

dChil

e

Greece

Estonia

Spain

Switzerl

and

German

y

Mexico

Belgium

Turkey

Luxe

mbourg

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Entry rates into Type A tertiary education (1995, 2000 and 2008)2008 1995 2000

1. The entry rates for tertiary-type A programmes include the entry rates for tertiary-type B programmes. Countries are ranked in descending order of entry rates for tertiary-type A education in 2008.Source: OECD. Table A2.4. See Annex 3 for notes (www.oecd.org/edu/eag2010).

College Access

College access has improved dramatically nationwide, and in Indiana alone the college-access rate has

increased from 33% in 1986 to 63% today.

3

An Example!Indiana’s 21st Century Scholars

Began in 1990 as Indiana's way of raising the educational aspirations of low and moderate-income families

At 6th-8th Grade the Scholars make a pledge to:• Graduate with an Indiana High School Diploma • Achieve a cumulative high school GPA of at least 2.0 on a 4.0 scale.• Not use illegal drugs or alcohol, or commit a crime.• Apply for admission to an eligible Indiana college, university or proprietary school as• a high school senior.• Apply on time for state and federal financial aid. The Program Provides:• Undergraduate tuition scholarship to an eligible college or university;• 14 Twenty-first Century Scholars Regional Support Programs throughout the state that offer activities such

as tutoring, mentoring, and college visits.• Annual statewide and regional parent conferences.• Monthly regional parent meetings.

4

A little more…

– Over 60% are first-generation students

– 40% of Scholars are minority students

– Average family income is 58% less than the average FAFSA filer

– Scholars are much more likely to attend college than other Pell Grant-

eligible students (the most appropriate comparison group)

– However, persistence and completion rates for Scholars are statistically

indistinguishable from the Pell Grant-eligible group

5

Policy Shifts

• Access remains a concern

• But what happens once access improves?

– In other words is it enough to simply get a student’s foot in the door?

6

Turning Towards Persistence

• Many strategies to improve college persistence and completion remain problematic.

– Graduate with four year degree within 6 years• Indiana=55% U.S.= 56%

– Graduate with two year degree within 3 years • Indiana=27% U.S.=28%

– Degree attainment varies greatly by race/ethnicity

7

Objectives of Report

• Examine existing research on outcomes of programs designed to increase higher education success of underrepresented student populations

• Identify effective programs and/or strategies for replication or scaling up

• Take an inventory of existing retention and persistence initiatives currently in use at Indiana institutions

8

So…

What did we learn?

9

Literature

• Academic literature is helpful and plentiful on this topic. – Perhaps the most highly researched topic in American

higher education (Seidman, 2005). • Fortunately for us we have one of the foremost experts

in the field on our panel today!

– There exist a number of models…• But they largely suggest that the decision to remain in

college is the product of a number of different influences. How these influences operate is a more difficult topic.

10

Literature

• Academic preparation is a largely agreed-upon variable

– Important to achieve a “match” between the level of commitment, ability and institutional rigor

– High School GPA appears to be strongest predictor of degree completion

– First semester freshman GPA appears to be strongest factor in persistence to sophomore year

11

Literature

• However, some researchers posit that 75% of all dropout decisions are non-academic in nature, and three “lenses” have appeared through which persistence can be viewed

• Financial factors

• Psychological factors

• Institutional factors

12

Financial

• When controlling for various factors, aid awards appear to increase persistence for wealthier students but the effects can be less clear for lower-income students.

• Financial issues go well beyond tuition.

• Students indicate that employment is a major academic impediment, and several studies have reported a negative retention effect associated with a part-time job

13

Psychological

• Multiple studies identify a need for underrepresented students to feel a sense of “fit” on campus

• This need is difficult to measure objectively– Attendance with existing friends– Customized orientation or interaction programs– Noticeable minority population

• Family support or “cultural capital” is important• Family responsibilities, such as dependents or siblings,

interfere with academic success

14

Institutional

• Mentoring Programs– The efficacy of these programs appears weak, but there

are successful successes like Purdue’s HORIZONS program– The existing research is fairly thin

• Learning Communities– Consists of groups of students who attend scheduled

classes and structured social events together– Includes both residential and non-residential communities– Results are equivocal

15

Institutional

• Faculty-Student Interaction– Studies have noted a possible positive effect– More research is needed on this level

• Transition and Orientation Programs– This category has a large amount of research

demonstrating a positive effect.– Students indicate programs are critical to their success.

• Advising– Targeted advising for at-risk groups and freshmen is

frequently reported as desirable by all students.

16

Interventions Among Selected High Persistence Institutions

17

In a review of 45 institutions with evidence of retention improvements, several common program types emerged:

Campus-Based Retention Programs

Some observations:

– Counseling and mentoring programs (71% of programs)– Freshman-specific programming (38%)– Transition/orientation programs and early-warning

tracking systems (29%)– Learning communities (27%)– Student-faculty interaction programs and additional

academic support (24%)

18

Indiana Retention Programs

• Within Indiana, a survey of 28 public and private institutions provided some enlightening findings:

– All of the previously-noted methods are in use

– No two campuses use the same mix

– The institutions with the largest persistence issues have the most

extensive programs (IUPUI, Ivy Tech)

– Additional academic support is the most common method utilized

– Learning communities are the least common approach

19

Overview of Retention Interventions at Indiana Institutions

20Includes data from 28 of approximately 51 institutions

Recommendations

Access Is Not EnoughExpand Financial Assistance

• Should address the hidden costs of attending college

Indiana can build upon Twenty-First Century Scholars Program

• IU has expanded the program to cover all costs• Funding for this program will need to be expanded and

alumni may be a good source

21

Recommendations

More Information Is Needed• Improve data collection systems

– Similar and comparable data across systems and states.– Policy sharing (Complete College America)– Better support for research

22

Recommendations

Tailor Programs to Specific Needs

• Target At-Risk Student• Target Non-residential and 2-year Colleges

– These students face different challenges than traditional Universities

• Adopt a Comprehensive Strategy – College retention programs should be as unique as the

students.

23

24

Thank You