For Peer Review Only studies.pdf · as desertion, retention and survival rates, among others. Measurement of university dropout The dropout rate is not a simple indicator to analyze

For Peer Review O

nly

Understanding Catalan university dropout from a cross-

national approach

Journal: Studies in Higher Education

Manuscript ID: CSHE-2012-0109.R1

Manuscript Type: Article

Keywords: comparative study, retention, University dropout, university practices, university governance

Note: The following files were submitted by the author for peer review, but cannot be converted to PDF. You must view these files (e.g. movies) online.

manuscript_track.doc

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cshe

Studies in Higher Education

For Peer Review O

nly

1

Understanding Catalan university dropout from a cross-national

approach

Introduction

In the last two decades, the interest shown by Catalan politicians and university

managers in dropout/persistence has increased as a consequence of the improvements in

access to higher education and changes promoted by the Bologna Declaration of June

1999 (Bologna Declaration 1999). The dropout rate has been quantified and used as a

performance indicator (e.g. Dearing 1997; Bricall 1998; Rauret and Grifoll 2001;

OECD 2012) and a number of research studies have focused on understanding the

extent of the consequences of dropout on higher education (e.g. Van Stolk et al. 2007;

Hovdhaugen 2009; Reisel and Brekke 2010; Chen 2012).

The aim of this paper is to look in depth at how dropout is being studied and

dealt with in a variety of contexts, in order to help design actions to increase student

retention and performance in higher education institutions (HEI). In particular, it

addresses the common reasons for this phenomenon in America, Europe and, more

specifically, in Spain and Catalonia, and illustrates the difficulty of measuring dropout

due to different countries and organizations using different formulas and concepts, such

as desertion, retention and survival rates, among others.

Measurement of university dropout

The dropout rate is not a simple indicator to analyze and there is no consensus regarding

its significance, so it tends to be limited to contextual interpretations. Universities lack

systematized, univocal methods for collecting student dropout data, making

measurement problematic. For this reason, the concept of dropout and the terms related

to it are both conceived and perceived differently, and are assigned terminology whose

Page 1 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

2

connotations vary depending on the context, such as desertion, leaving, completion,

discontinuity, (non-) persistence, survival and retention (see Table 1). In consequence,

the formulas applied to analyze this phenomenon differ between countries and it is

therefore an immense challenge to perform comparative studies. According to the

EACEA (2012, 105), ‘the development of an international methodology for the

indicator on completion rates in order to provide comparable data is still in progress.

For the year 2008, data is only available for 22 countries of the EHEA. More effort

should be made to collect comparable data and define suitable indicators to enable

stronger conclusions’.

TABLE #1 ABOUT HERE

In short, we find that HEIs measure dropout and desertion as much as they

measure completion and/or survival. The first two concepts are probably easier to

calculate if they are only associated with the number of students who drop out of

courses by not enrolling for any subject or module during two consecutive academic

years. The two latter concepts represent a far more accurate exercise: on the one hand,

the calculation of the percentages of graduates involves an estimation of the expected

completion rates; on the other hand, the calculation of the probability of students

continuing and completing a degree requires a broader set of variables in order to be

able to offer significant data, as well as the consideration of part-time students or those

that are slow to complete their degree, and full-time students.

University dropout in the Americas

The huge size and diversity of the Americas, with such a variety of different university

institutions and systems, make it difficult to find common patterns in the study of

Page 2 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

3

university dropout. According to 2005 data published by the Carnegie Foundation1, in

the United States alone there are as many as thirty-two different types of organization

that offer university studies. In Latin America and the Caribbean, there has been a major

proliferation of small, private higher education institutions. However, in most countries,

access to higher education is still limited to a small portion of the population (González

2006): less than 20% of adults older than 25 years of age have attended university and

less than 10% have completed their university studies.

Most North American studies and experts in this area (e.g. Chen 2012; Montalvo

in press) use data from the Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) and the Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) published by the US Education

Department’s National Center on Educational Statistics (NCES) . One of the main

limitations of this database is that it does not consider students who change centers or

students who switch from part-time to full-time university education. However, there

are other national institutions, such as what was formerly known as the American

College Testing Program (now ACT), that use their own measurement systems, one

such example being the Institutional Data Questionnaire (IDQ), which is conducted

annually at more than 2,500 universities and colleges.

Existing North American research studies on student persistence/dropout in

higher education: (1) identified that students who drop out of university present

different characteristics and behaviors from those who stay at university (Choy 2002);

(2) detected some variations regarding persistence and achievement depending on

students’ socio-demographic characteristics (Horn and Berger 2004); and (3) confirmed

that part-time attendance at university and working more than fifteen hours a week

reduces the likelihood of persistence (Chen and Carroll 2007). Other studies

(Lotkowski, Robbins and Noeth 2004) suggest that the retention of university students 1 Distribution of institutions and registrations: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/index.asp?key=805

Page 3 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

4

is dynamic and involves a complex interaction between academic (i.e. high school

grades, ACT test grades) and non-academic factors (i.e. institutional commitment,

social support, financial aid).

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the study of university dropout and

repetition has become a matter of major interest and a highly relevant problem due to

the increase in enrollment in higher education that started in the nineties (Bruneforth,

Motivans and Zhang 2004; González 2006), mainly among underprivileged groups who

are therefore more vulnerable to this type of phenomenon.

The characteristics, factors and magnitude of dropout or desertion at public and

private universities in the region were systematized in the report by the International

Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean (IESALC 2006) on

the status of higher education between 2000 and 2005. Desertion at participant

institutions was calculated by taking into account the “adjusted desertion” concept on

three degree programs (Law, Civil Engineering in Public Works and Medicine) which

enabled representation of different knowledge areas at four institutions (two public and

two private) for each participant country. Global higher education desertion rates are

also calculated on the basis of “degree efficiency”, which is understood to mean the

proportion of students who graduate on normal schedule in a given year . According to

the study, with the exception of Cuba, only 43% of students who enter higher education

graduate in the established period.

Four factor categories related to university desertion can be identified in the

Latin American context: external factors (socioeconomic conditions), institutional

factors (i.e. increase in enrollment, lack of suitable funding mechanisms, academic

administration policies), academic factors (i.e. previous academic training, entrance

Page 4 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

5

examinations, acquired learning level) and personal factors (i.e. economic activity, aims

and personal motivations, dissonance with expectations, lack of emotional maturity).

The conducted studies (e.g. Gonzalez 2006; IESALC 2006) reveal that dropout

and repetition are two closely bound phenomena, for when a student repeats the same

course or year more than once, this often leads to dropout.

University dropout in Europe

In Europe, we detect an increasing interest in researching university dropout and an

increasing number of institutional initiatives to encourage the retention of students. For

the time being, however, it is still hard to find research that has managed to compile

data related with this phenomenon, and when this has been done, institutions have been

contacted individually and for a specific period of time, and the data has been

reconstructed. However, this data collection has traditionally not been particularly

systematic, and not all institutions have preserved the data required to calculate dropout

rates. Therefore, the selection of countries has been conditioned by the possibilities for

accessing reliable data and we are hence limited to only a few examples that can only

offer a general perspective of this phenomenon.

According to the OECD (2012, 64), ‘in every country for which comparable

data are available, tertiary-type A graduation rates increased between 1995 and 2010.

The increase was particularly steep between 1995 and 2000, and then levelled off. Over

the past three years, tertiary type-A graduation rates have remained relatively stable, at

around 39%. The most significant increases since 1995 were in Austria, the Czech

Republic, the Slovak Republic, Switzerland and Turkey, where the annual growth rate is

over 8%’.

The results of the research carried out by the Higher Education Information

System (HIS) (Klieme et al. 2008) show that university dropout in Germany is

Page 5 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

6

decreasing. This is seen as a consequence of the Bologna process, especially through the

establishment of new degrees and postgraduate courses. In particular, the HIS (Klieme

et al. 2008) indicates that university dropout decreased from 24% in 2004 to 20% in

2006. In Social Sciences, this figure has decreased from 27% to 10%, and more

precisely, there has been a decrease in language and cultural studies from 43% to 32%.

According to the German Ministry of Education, this positive development shows that

the Bologna process2 is helping to reduce university dropout, and that the introduction

of undergraduate degrees is contributing to a greater level of academic success.

However, Germany still has a low percentage of access to higher education and

therefore has a low proportion of higher education graduates (about 20%). Since the

nineties, the government has continued to establish measures to facilitate access from

vocational schools. However, the percentage in this case is only 1% (Klieme et al.

2008). The OECD (2007) also suggested that funding is made flexible in order to

improve the quality of university education (establishment of payments, refundable

loans according to income, etc.), making it especially attractive in those Länder where

these policies have been implemented.

The latest research into the short-term effects of the introduction of the Bachelor

degree to the framework of the Bologna Process on college enrollment and drop-out

rates in Germany has found no significant effect on either for most subjects

(Horstschräer and Sprietsma, 2010). In France, 41% of people aged between 25 and 34

years finish higher education (OECD 2008). However, university students face selective

and non-selective degrees, a dual system that provokes inequality in terms of access to

and success in higher education. The organization of higher education, as Beaupère et al

2 We refer to the Bologna Process as the one which launched the European Higher Education Area in 2010, by which students can choose from a wide and transparent range of high quality courses throughout Europe and benefit from smooth recognition procedures. The three main objectives of the Bologna process have been: introduction of the three cycle system (bachelor/master/doctorate), quality assurance and recognition of qualifications and periods of study among HEIs within the EHEA.

Page 6 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

7

(2007) maintain in the French study titled ‘L’abandon des études supérieurs’, induces

inequalities among students through a university selection process that involves

elimination or self-elimination. Felouzis (1997) differentiates between visible selection,

which functions through examinations, and invisible selection, which produces dropout

because it tests the students’ capacities for adaptation.

Beaupère et al. (2007) sustains that dropout students are mostly male, and have

obtained a mainly professional or technological high school diploma with one year or

more of delay. The type of center and studies chosen have strong predictive value for

dropout probability. Two key dropout periods can be identified: (1) the beginning of the

course, for those who are not able to adapt and (2) after the first holidays or in the

January examination period.

This dropout from A type education is not always seen as a failure, since most

students who drop out readdress their studies towards vocational education and obtain

an intermediate degree as provided by French institutions, such as the Cap-Bep level

(28%), the Bac level (16%), the Bac + 2 (18%) and third cycles and large schools (9%).

Only 8% do not obtain any type of degree.

According to the available OECD data (2008), Italy had one of the highest

university dropout rates (its 45% completion rates of tertiary-type A programs was

substantially below the OECD average of 69%). However, the latest OECD report

(2012) indicates a significant improvement in Italian completion rates. A study

promoted by the European Commission (D'Hombres 2007) confirms that the EHEA

reforms increased persistence: the likelihood of dropout in the period after the reforms

were introduced was 5.4% lower than before. This indication, which was also obtained

in Germany and Portugal (Cardoso et al. 2006), has recently been corroborated by

OECD (2012, 64): ‘because of increasing harmonisation among the systems of higher

Page 7 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

8

education in European countries and a general shift away from longer programmes in

favour of three-year programmes, some countries have seen rapid rises in their

graduation rates. Graduation rates rose sharply in the Czech Republic between 2004 and

2007 within the framework of the Bologna process reforms, and also rose in Finland

and the Slovak Republic between 2007 and 2008 for the same reason’.

Along the lines of the previous study, Cingano and Cipollone (2007) analyzed

the data from a survey carried out in 2001 by the National Statistics Institute of Italy

(ISTAT) on 23,000 individuals. On the basis of a representative sample (approximately

5% of the population), it was found that 23% of Italians who graduated from high

school in 1998 had changed university or dropped out by the summer of 2001. If we

measure dropout from the perspective of success rates (comparison between the number

of university graduates in a specific year with the number of students enrolled at the

start of the course), the dropout rate in 1997 was 58.5%.

The United Kingdom is favorably compared with other OECD countries in

terms of estimated graduation and survival rates. In 2004, the UK was ranked fifth

behind Japan, Ireland, Korea and Greece. According to an NAO report in 2007, dropout

has decreased in recent years and the number of applicants accepted by higher education

institutions has increased, with some differences with respect to different degrees. The

main increases in accepted applicants were in Medicine and the Arts, while the biggest

decreases were in Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering.

Regarding retention, in the 2004-2005 academic year and out of 256,000 full-

time students, 91.6% were enrolled for their first degree and continued to the second

year. 78.1% of these students are expected to finish their degrees, 2.2% to obtain an

inferior degree and 5.8% to continue their studies at another institution. As for part-time

first degree students in that same year, 76.9% continued to the second year. The NAO

Page 8 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

9

(2007) suggests the main reasons why students drop out of university programs in the

United Kingdom, and claims that these vary greatly and are closely related to current

explanatory models: personal issues, dissatisfaction with the course or the institution,

lack of preparation, wrong choice of subject, economic reasons and choosing a more

attractive opportunity.

University dropout in Spain

The OECD (2008) calculates that 39% of the Spanish population aged between 25 and

34 has a university degree. This figure is higher than the European average (33%), and

also that of the 19 OECD countries considered (33%), but the Spanish graduation and

completion rates are lower. It is estimated that, since 2004, 32.9% of Spanish students

have completed their university education, unlike the 37.3% of the population in the

OECD countries and 35.2% in Europe. In 2006, the figure in Spain was 25.5% for men

and 40.8% for women, while the averages for the OECD were 29.8% and 45.2%,

respectively.

As regards dropout, the latest report by the Conferencia de Rectores de las

Universidades Españolas (CRUE) reveals that during the 2006-2007 academic year,

127,396 dropouts were registered at public universities, corresponding to students who

had enrolled in 2004-2005 and who did not re-enroll for the next two years. Cancelled

enrollments have been excluded from this figure (Hernández 2008).

Despite this data, we do not have a global dropout rate for the Spanish university

system. However, we can estimate that, excluding the Universidad Nacional de

Educación a Distancia (UNED), the Spanish distance-learning university, whose

dropout rate is 55.2%, desertion from the different Spanish universities stands between

25% and 29%.

Page 9 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

10

The data from the CRUE 2008 report (Hernández 2008) suggests that the

dropout rates by subject areas in Spain are: 14.4% for the Arts; 17.7% for short cycles

of Social and Juridical Sciences and 30.8% for long cycles; 7.5% in Research Sciences;

0.9% for short cycles and 1.7 % for long cycles of Health Sciences; and finally 16.3%

for short cycles and 10.7% for long cycles of Technical areas. Spanish university

degrees are generally long cycle, which before the Bologna Reform meant four or five

year-degrees, while short cycle degrees take three years.

Of the total number of registered dropouts:

• in 35.5% of cases, students were enrolled for short cycle degrees and the other

64.5% for long cycle degrees;

• 48.03% corresponds to women and 51.97% to men, although we should note

that, excluding degrees in Experimental Sciences and Technical areas, the

dropout rate is higher among women in all other fields (i.e., Arts, Social and

Juridical Sciences and Health Sciences).

All reports indicate that the decrease in new university enrollments, together

with the fact that students can now access their chosen degree as a first option, should

help to reduce dropout rates and, consequently, lead to an increase in graduation figures.

This should have a rebound effect by reducing the average time required to graduate.

It is important to note that most HEI in Spain started implementing the Bologna

process in 2010, while some universities started one or two years earlier. The

organization of the new reform tackles most of the previous shortcomings of HEI;

therefore, positive development and decreased university dropout are expected as a

consequence of the establishment of the new degrees and quality measures.

Page 10 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

11

The case of university dropout in Catalonia

The information on university dropout in Catalonia was obtained from the AQU

Catalonia database (years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002; n= 21,620) and cannot be

compared with the data from the CRUE report on Spanish universities since there is no

available data for the studied years. What we do know is that in 2006, of the total

dropouts registered at Spanish public universities, 35.5% corresponded to students

enrolled for short cycle degrees and the remaining 64.5% corresponded to long cycle

degrees. In the same year in Catalonia, the figures were 34.1% and 65.9%, respectively.

The average dropout rate among Catalan universities is 33.6%, ranging from

28.3% for the UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) to 37.2% for the UPC (Universitat

Politècnica de Catalunya).

Regarding the fields of study, the data shows 40% of dropouts in Social

Sciences, followed by Technical degrees (29.6%) and Arts (17.2%). There are no clear

differentiating features as regards age, gender, parents’ studies or employment.

Regarding academic variables, most students that dropped out had come from post-

compulsory secondary education (Batxillerat) and vocational training. Not surprisingly,

most of the students had entered HEI from Batxillerat. The data shows that among the

total number of students who dropped out of university, there are two prominent groups:

students who took university entrance examinations outside of Catalonia (with an

18.4% dropout rate) and students about whom we have no information because

they had transferred from other HEI (29%).

The results from the analysis of the UNEIX database, from the Catalan

government (Generalitat de Catalunya), yields additional information on the

accumulated dropout rate over seven academic years, showing a continuous increase in

dropout from Catalan public universities (see table 2). This trend shows that the

Page 11 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

12

institutions responsible for university policies have not managed to implement a policy

to promote student retention or reduce dropout any further than what is considered

“natural”.

TABLE #2 ABOUT HERE

One of the main factors that explain university dropout is related to access by

secondary students to the courses they wish to take after passing the university entrance

exam. Some students do not get onto the ”right” course due to failing to achieve the

minimum grade or choosing the wrong option due to a lack of information, guidance or

other contextual variables. Dropouts in the first year can be attributed to students

switching between degrees before eventually gaining access to the one they really want

to take.

Academic factors (Álvarez et al. 2006) also play a part and notable among these

is previous academic training. In Catalonia and Spain, recent PISA examinations (Ferrer

2009) reveal that, although there have been some improvements, the performance of

high school students is still below the European average in some aspects, which may

justify part of the current dropout rates.

The excess of theoretical orientation and poor links with the job market are other

academic factors that help to explain the differences between the dropout rates of

Catalan universities and those of other surrounding countries. Traditionally, the Spanish

university system has had little or no link with the productive network, either in terms

of the design of study plans, or the transfer of knowledge (CYD 2010). The latest report

by the CYD Foundation (2010), which analyzed more than 180 companies, indicates

that 38% of these feel that universities play an ineffective role in boosting economic

development, and 55% believe that this is because universities are not sufficiently

organized to perform such a role.

Page 12 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

13

The usual attraction and induction policies (open days, welcome programs, etc)

have enabled universities to maintain students for the first academic year, but many

students still seem to be finding the experience of this first year to be unsatisfactory, for

this is when most dropouts occur. Although Catalan universities have been developing

retention actions and policies (e.g., tutorials, guidance services, psycho-pedagogical

offices, student-mentor programs) in recent years, such a high first-year dropout rate

still evinces how inefficacious these are for promoting student engagement.

In line with the global trend to promote research, common policies in the

Spanish and Catalan university systems are prioritizing the same to the detriment of the

quality of teaching and student satisfaction. University lecturing is becoming a less

attractive profession, there is a lack of tools to facilitate the generational change in staff

by fostering the recruitment of young talented individuals or a more balanced

distribution of the teaching body throughout different knowledge areas.

There are not enough grants or scholarships to meet student needs, and it has

become essential for more effort to go into promoting grants, increasing loan programs

and establishing incentives that prioritize students’ academic performance and, in short,

the efficiency of the university system.

Lastly, as regards the Catalan public university system in general, the late

implementation of new curricula in accordance with the principles of the Bologna

process has prevented its real impact on the dropout and retention of university students

from being comprehensively assessed, something which has, however, occurred in

Germany (Klieme et al. 2008).

To complete the above analyses, if we break down the UNEIX data per

university, slight differences can be observed in the dropout rates of different university

institutions and in their evolution over these 7 academic years (see table 3). In

Page 13 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

14

agreement with other studies (Slate and Jones 2005; Werblow and Duesbery 2009) that

relate the size of educational institutions with performance and dropout, it can be

observed that the smaller universities (UPF, UdL and URV, but not the UdG) have

managed to reduce their dropout rates. In this regard, a noteworthy case is the UPF,

where the implementation of professional development policies for teachers, along with

a greater focus on student care in the form of guidance strategies, tutorials and smaller

learning groups, has brought about not only a decrease in the dropout rate, but also an

increase in the number of new enrollments. In the case of larger universities, which are

all located in the Barcelona area, the number of dropouts has increased, especially at the

UAB and UPC. This increase in dropout is accompanied by a notable decrease in the

number of new enrollments.

TABLE #3 ABOUT HERE

Nevertheless, the Catalan university system is notably homogeneous, with little

variety in terms of the strengths of each individual institution. None of them have

managed to develop any policies of their own that differentiate them from the others in

terms of the type and quality of the training they provide. The only exception is the

UPC, which specializes in technical studies and evidently has different entrance and

permanence policies, which explains its high percentage of dropouts. More specifically,

the UPC states that students who start any course must pass a minimum of 15

compulsory credits in their first academic year. There are only special considerations for

students that start a course after previously taking another one.

Conclusions

This paper demonstrates that dropout is a multi-factor phenomenon, in the sense that the

reasons behind it stem from the interaction between a wide range of personal and

Page 14 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

15

contextual factors. This interaction explains the importance of validating integrating

models that facilitate the creation of early diagnostic tools, the identification of risk

groups and the design of intervention proposals suitable for different situations. The

literature reviewed has highlighted the lack of a standardized system for the

measurement of dropout and determination of the causes that lead a student at a certain

moment to decide not to continue with a university course. Although specific

experiences have certainly taken place many countries, desertion or dropout is a clear

indicator of a worrying institutional failure.

Statistics and international analyses of different research studies have

demonstrated that nowadays a significant percentage of the population attends

university, but that, at the same time, the number of people who give up their studies

early is also increasing (about 29%), often influenced by work-related factors. Different

reports by the OECD and other organizations have warned about these high dropout

rates and their unavoidable consequences, both on a social and individual level.

From the European perspective, access to university and the interest in obtaining

university degrees has significantly increased, with a wider range of programs that

guarantee progress in the knowledge society, better and greater transition from high

school to university and an acceptable increase in the success rates of higher degrees.

Nevertheless, we can deduce from the aforesaid reports that although the number of

European students in higher education has increased, more than 30% of the enrolled

students decide not to complete their studies, with the survival rate currently being

around 71% (21008 data). The implementation of the EHEA augurs higher retention

and completion levels in European HEI.

From the North American (USA and Canada) perspective, the data on

persistence and performance, dropout by specific groups and the academic as well as

Page 15 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

16

non-academic factors are analyzed. In the former case, there is a significant number of

students who change center or give up their studies; in the latter, a large number of

students combine studies and work (between 52% and 62%) and only dedicate half their

time to each. The academic and non-academic factors are carefully analyzed because of

their relation with retention rates. Research in Latin America, although limited in terms

of institutional data, demonstrates how severe the dropout problem is: only 43% of

students admitted to higher education programs graduate in the established period

(except in Cuba).

Focusing on Europe, and more specifically on Spain, the university dropout rate

is approaching 30% in this country, which is mostly explained by unsatisfactory first

year experiences and students who did not enroll for their first choice option. Economic

factors have an additional impact. Although enrollment fees are low, a large section of

the population do not receive public grants or scholarships and are forced to work as

well as study, which does not always favor retention.

In this regard, the Spanish Ministry of Education, within the framework of the

2010-2020 goals for education, aims to guarantee, among other aspects, that the lack of

economic resources does not prevent any student from accessing or continuing their

university studies; grants for higher education students with a view to avoiding dropout

for financial reasons; equity and the application of the principles of equal opportunities,

that there is no discrimination (including gender-based discrimination); and universal

inclusion in access to higher education. In fact, these aspects are in line with the goals

set by the European Council to improve educational levels by 2020, the most notable of

which is an increase in the percentage of the population aged between 30 and 34 years

who have completed higher education to at least 44%.

Page 16 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

17

Furthermore, with a view to overcoming the inefficiencies of the Spanish

university system, improved financing of universities will be sought in order to promote

academic excellence and increase their socioeconomic impact. This has suffered greatly

as a result of the budget cuts stemming from the current economic crisis, which have

affected both higher education and university institutions.

The case of the Catalan higher education system does not differ too much from

that of Spain (the 30% dropout rate is also on the Catalan political agenda) although

regional differences can be observed. Our findings suggest the importance of

contextualizing retention strategies to meet the particular needs of degrees, schools and

universities and understand the potential influence of national policies, managerial

priorities, learning traditions and organizational cultures. The data and research

evidence presented in this article justify the need to improve vocational counseling

practices and to rethink particular policies, such as university access, induction,

tutorship and fellowship programs in order to counterbalance the main causes of

university dropout.

In this international review, there is sufficient evidence to indicate that despite

the diversity of research methodologies, which enormously hinders any general

treatment or unified approach to the phenomenon, dropout itself has a severe impact on

students’ lives and those of their families and, in turn, on the skills of each country’s

workforce. According to the OECD (2010, 20), ‘tertiary education serves as an indicator

of the rate at which countries produce advanced knowledge. Countries with high

graduation rates at tertiary level are also those most likely to be developing or

maintaining a highly skilled labour force’.

Retention is, therefore, considered a determining factor of the prestige,

credibility and economic stability of universities and, consequently, of the university

Page 17 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

18

system. Retention policies not only contribute to the successful completion of studies by

promoting student satisfaction and engagement, but also provide major benefits to the

university and to society through keeping enrollments stable in order to guarantee the

university budget.

However, retention is a necessary but non-sufficient condition. As Tinto (1987,

15) states, ‘the secret of successful retention programs is no secret at all, but a

reaffirmation of some of the important foundations of higher education. […] with the

notion that successful retention is no more than, but certainly no less than, successful

education’. Retention policies must necessarily entail not only some skills and

institutional support, but also improvements in the quality of educational processes and

contexts.

Acknowledgements

This work was developed within the framework of the research project (“Estudi per analitzar

dades i causes de l’abandonament dels estudiants a la universitat” – ref. IUE/3012/2007)

funded by the Catalan University Quality Assurance Agency.

References

Álvarez, Pedro R.; Cabrera, Lidia.; González, Miriam C.; Bethencourt, José T. 2006. Causas del

abandono y prolongación de los estudios universitarios. Paradigma 27, no. 1: 349-363.

Beaupere, Nathalie, Lucie Chalumeau, Nicolas Gury, and Cedric Hugree. 2007. L’abandon des

études supérieures. Rapport réalisé pour l’Observatoire national de la vie étudiante. Paris: La

Documentation Française.

Page 18 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

19

Bologna Declaration. (1999). The Bologna declaration of 19 June 1999. http://www.bologna-

berlin2003.de/pdf/bologna_declaration.pdf (accessed March 5, 2013).

Bricall, Josep M., ed. 1998. Informe Universidad 2000. Organización de Estados

Iberoamericanos. http://www.oei.es/oeivirt/bricall.htm (accessed March 14, 2012).

Bruneforth, Michale, Albert Motivans, and Yanhong Zhang. 2004. Investing in the future :

financing the expansion of educational opportunity in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

Cardoso, Ana Rute. Miguel Portela, Carla Sá and Fernando Alexandre. 2006. Demand for

Higher Education Programs: The Impact of the Bologna Process. Institute for the Study of

Labor. Bonn: IZA http://www.ihep.org/assets/files/gcfp-

files/demand_for_higher_ed_programs__the_impact_of_the_bologna_process.pdf (accessed

March 14, 2012).

Cingano, Federico and Piero Cipollone. 2007. University Drop-Out: The Case of Italy. Temi di

Discussione del Servizio Studi 626 (April).

http://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/econo/temidi/td07/td626_07/td626/en_tema_626.pdf

(accessed March 14, 2012).

Chen, Rong. 2012. Institutional characteristics and college student dropout risks: a multilevel

event history analysis. Research in Higher Education 53, no. 5: 487-505.

Chen, Xianglei, C. Dennis Carroll. 2007. Part-time Undergraduates in Postsecondary Education.

2003-04. US Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for

Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007165 (accessed

March 14, 2012).

Choy, Susan P. 2002. Access and Persistence: Findings from 10 Years of Longitudinal Research

on Students. Washington: American Council on Education.

http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2002_access&persistence.pdf (accessed March 14, 2012).

Page 19 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

20

CYD. 2010. La universidad y la empresa española. Colección Documentos Conocimiento y

Desarrollo 14/2010.

http://www.catedraunesco.es/archivos/seminario-bienal/cyd1.pdf (accessed March 14, 2012).

Dearing, Ron. 1997. Dearing Report. British Education Index.

https://bei.leeds.ac.uk/Partners/NCIHE/ (accessed March 14, 2012).

D’Hombres, Béatrice. 2007. The Impact of University Reforms on Dropout Rates and Students’

Status: Evidence from Italy. CRELL, Centre for Research on Lifelong Learning. European

Commission, Joint Research Centre. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the

European Communities. http://www.aiel.it/bacheca/NAPOLI/D/dhombres.pdf (accessed March

14, 2012).

EACEA. 2012. The European higher education area in 2012: Bologna process implementation

report. Brussels: Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.

Ferrer, Ferran. 2009. L’estat de l’educació a Catalunya. Anuari 2008. Barcelona: Fundació

Jaume Bofill.

Felouzis, Geroges.1997. Les étudiants et la sélection universitaire. Revue Française de

Pédagogie 119: 91-106.

Gonzalez, Eduardo L. 2006. Repitencia y deserción en América Latina. Caracas: IESALC-

UNESCO.

Hernández, Juan, eds. 2008. La universidad española en cifras. Madrid: Conferencia de

Rectores de las Universidades Españolas.

http://www.crue.org/export/sites/Crue/Publicaciones/Documentos/UEC/UEC_2008.pdf


Page 20 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

21

Horn, Laura and Rachel Berger. 2004. College Persistence on the Rise? Changes in 5-Year

Degree Completion and Postsecondary Persistence Rates Between 1994 and 2000. Washington,

DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Horstschräer, Julia and Maresma Sprietsma. 2010. The Effects of the Bologna Process on

College Enrollment and Drop-out Rates. ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research

Discussion Paper, 10-018. http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/30204/1/623319276.pdf

(accessed March 6, 2013).Hovdhaugen, Elisabeth. 2009. Transfer and dropout: different forms

of student departure in Norway. Studies in Higher Education 34, no. 1: 1-17.

IESALC. 2006. Informe sobre la Educación Superior en América Latina y el Caribe 2000-2005.

Caracas: Metrópolis.

http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/dmdocuments/biblioteca/libros/InformeES-2000-2005.pdf


Klieme, Eckhard, Hans Döbert, Martin Baethge, Hans-Peter Füssel, Heinz-Werner Hetmeier,

Thomas Rauschenbach, Ulrike Rockmann, Andrä Wolter and Klaus Klemm. 2008. Education

in Germany 2008. An indicator-based report including an analysis of transitions subsequent to

lower secondary education. Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag

http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2008/summary08.pdf (accessed March 14, 2012).

Lotkowski, Veronia A., Steven B. Robbins and Richard J. Noeth. 2004. The Role of Academic

and Non-Academic Factors in Improving College Retention. ACT Policy Report.

http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/college_retention.pdf (accessed March 14,

2012).

Montalvo, Edris J. In press. The Recruitment and Retention of Hispanic Undergraduate Students

in Public Universities in the United States, 2000-2006. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education.

DOI:10.1177/1538192712470692.

Page 21 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

22

National Audit Office (NAO). 2007. Staying the Course: The Retention of Students in Higher

Education. London: NAO http://www.nao.org.uk/idoc.ashx?docId=f2e92c15-d7cb-4d88-b5e4-

03fb8419a0d2&version=-1 (accessed March 14, 2012).

OCDE. 2007. Education at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.

http://www.oecd.org/edu/eag2007 (March 14, 2012).

OCDE. 2008. Education at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.

http://www.oecd.org/edu/eag2008 (accessed March 14, 2012).

OECD. 2010. Education at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.


OECD. 2012. Education at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.


Rauret, Gemma and Josep Grifoll. 2001. Estrategias presentes y futuras para la captación y

acogida de estudiantes universitarios. Paper presented at the meeting “La demanda y la

captación de estudiantes en las universidades”, February 16, in Barcelona, Spain.

Reisel, Liza and Idunn Brekke. 2010. Minority dropout in Higher Education: a comparison of

the United States and Norway using competing risk event history analysis. European

Sociological Review 26, no. 6: 691-712.

Slate, J.R. and Jones, C.H. 2005. Effects of School Size: A Review of the Literature with

Recommendations Essays in Education, 13: http://www.usca.edu/essays/vol132005/slate.pdf


Tinto, Vicent. 1987. Principles of effective retention. Paper presented at the fall conference of

the Maryland College Personnel Association, November 20, Maryland, US.

Page 22 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

23

Van Stolk Christian, Jan Tiessen, Jack Clift, and Ruth Levitt. 2007. Student Retention in Higher

Education. International Comparison. Cambridge: Rand Europe.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2007/RAND_TR482.pdf (accessed March 14,

2012).

Werblow, Jacob and Duesbery, Luke. 2009. The Impact of High School Size on Math

Achievement and Dropout Rate. The High School Journal 92, no. 3: 14-23.

Total number of words (including abstract, tables and references): 6578 words

Page 23 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

Table 1. Terminology related to dropout in Higher Education.

Dropout rate Number of students who leave their university studies after the first

year (in Australia). In Spain, it refers to the number of students who

registered for a course and did not formally enroll again for the next

two course periods (Hernández 2008).

Desertion In South America: ‘voluntary or obligatory dropout from the degree for

which a student is enrolled, brought about by the positive or negative

influence of internal or external circumstances’ (González 2006, 157).

Inactive students Students who are enrolled at a university for at least three years but

have not attended any lectures for the last year (in Italy).

Progress or

continuation rate

Number of students who stay on a course and progress on schedule (in

the Netherlands).

Completion rate Number of students who graduate within 150% of a regular course

period (six years). In Ireland, students who complete their studies on

time are differentiated from those who graduate late.

Retention rate The UK mainly uses two measurements (NAO 2007):

-The completion rate: the proportion of students who start their studies

in a given year and who continue until they obtain the degree, and

spend no more than one consecutive year out of university education.

-The continuation rate: a more immediate measure that consists of the

percentage number of students per institution that are enrolled the

Page 24 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

year after that of initial entrance in university.

Survival rate Indicator that indirectly measures the internal efficiency of higher

education systems: those who enroll for a type A university study

program, and obtain a degree with a type A or B qualification, or those

who enroll for a type B program and obtain a degree with a type A or B1

qualification (OECD 2009).

1 The traditional university degree is associated with type A, while type B generally refers to shorter courses lasting for three years,

often aimed at vocational training (second term training cycles) so as to provide direct access to employment. However, the shorter

type A university programs are (which are considered to be of medium duration, from three to four years), the higher the

participation rates.

Page 25 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

Table 2. Accumulated dropout rate in courses in the Catalan public university system.

Initial academic

year

Accumulated dropout rate

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07

00-01 19.02% 26.08% 30.43% 33.64% 35.98% 38.32% 40.06%

01-02 17.94% 25.79% 30.43% 33.53% 36.75% 38.99%

02-03 19.34% 27.21% 31.85% 35.92% 38.83%

03-04 19.42% 27.02% 32.82% 36.39%

04-05 19.51% 28.85% 33.66%

05-06 21.37% 29.50%

06-07 20.33%

Source: UNEIX database, Government of Catalonia.

Page 26 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

Table 3. Accumulated dropout rate in courses in the Catalan public university system.

University

Accumulated dropout rate

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07

Universitat de Barcelona (UB) 18.82% 17.19% 18.87% 19.06% 18.22% 18.58% 19.66%

Universitat Autònoma de

Barcelona (UAB) 15.89% 16.10% 17.18% 17.50% 18.36% 24.18% 24.18%

Universitat Politècnica de

Catalunya (UPC) 22.30% 20.68% 22.20% 23.19% 24.55% 26.89% 26.35%

Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF) 16.06% 17.26% 20.04% 18.68% 17.79% 18.13% 15.71%

Universitat de Girona (UdG) 20.63% 21.24% 21.10% 21.95% 22.15% 23.13% 24.57%

Universitat de Lleida (UdL) 17.69% 14.42% 16.33% 15.51% 16.13% 17.22% 16.94%

Universitat Rovira i Virgili

(URV) 22.32% 19.85% 19.84% 18.53% 17.86% 18.04% 17.82%

Source: UNEIX database, Government of Catalonia.

Page 27 of 27



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

Documents

For Peer Review Only studies.pdf · as desertion, retention and survival rates, among others. Measurement of university dropout The dropout rate is not a simple indicator to analyze