First Year Retention At Utah Valley State College: A Follow-up Study

Transcription

1 First Year Retention At Utah Valley State College: A Follow-up Study Background Jeff E. Hoyt, Ph.D. Researchers have used several theoretical models to explain student persistence in college (Spady, 1970; Tinto, 1975; Pascarella, 1980; Pascarella, Duby and Iverson, 1983; Bean and Metzner, 1985; Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda, 1992; Cabrera, Castaneda, Nora, Hengstler, 1992). The model that seems to fit well with the student population at Utah Valley State College (UVSC) is the Bean and Metzner (1985) model, with minor adaptations by Henry and Smith (1993). The model accounts for non-traditional and part-time students who may be working and have various outside commitments. The model includes the effect of environmental variables such as finances, employment, family responsibilities, opportunity to transfer; along with social integration, academic variables, and other background characteristics of students. Henry and Smith (1993) provide a few comments on the model: When both academic and environmental variables are favorable, students should persist. When both variables are unfavorable, students are likely to drop out. When academic variables are positive, but environmental variables are negative, the favorable effects of academic variables on student goal attainment are suppressed or attenuated. Students may drop out of college despite strong academic performance if they perceive low levels of utility, satisfaction, or goal commitment, or if they experience high levels of stress (p. 29). An example of the model is provided below (Figure 1). However, some minor changes in wording are made to simplify the illustration. Solid lines define a direct effect with dashed lines showing an interaction or possible effects. Thicker lines indicate a stronger effect.

2 Figure 1. Conceptual model adapted from Bean & Metzner, Academic Variables Study Habits Advising Absenteeism Major Certainty Course Availability Academic Outcome GPA Intent to Persist Background Variables Age Enrollment Status Residence Educational Goals High School Performance Ethnicity Gender Environmental Variables Finances Employment Encouragement Family Responsibilities Opportunity to Transfer Psychological Outcomes Utility Satisfaction Goal Commitment Stress Goal Attainment Social Interaction This research is a follow-up study to previous retention research at UVSC that applies concepts from the Bean and Metzner model (Hoyt, 1999; Institutional Research, 1998). The current study improves upon prior work by including data collected from a survey of all nonreturning first-time freshmen in fall 2000 who started college in fall The survey was used to gather necessary information on the number of students serving a mission, transferring, joining the military/foreign aid service, and so on, to determine why so many students discontinue their studies at UVSC after the first year. Students also gave short descriptions of other personal reasons for discontinuing their studies, which was not available in the prior study. Transfer information was obtained from the Utah System of Higher Education (USHE), and

3 3 Brigham Young University (BYU) as in the prior study. However, transfer information was also purchased from the National Student Loan Clearinghouse (NSLC) to identify students transferring out of UVSC to other colleges and universities across the country. Thus, the results should be informative and give administrators and faculty a better understanding of the outcomes for students at UVSC. In the following sections, a literature review is presented first, followed by the current study methodology and findings. Literature Review The literature review for this study will summarize prior research that used student survey data to study student retention, along with recent retention studies starting in The prior retention study at UVSC includes a comprehensive literature review of past research, and can be found on the Institutional Research website under Research titled, Factors Affecting Retention At UVSC, December The literature on studies that use survey methods is taken from a similar retention study conducted by Hoyt and Baksh (1999) at the University of Utah. Recent Retention Research A national study on student retention completed by Clifford Adelman (1999) at the U.S. Department of Education is an important study to include in a review of recent retention research. This national study found that students, who require remedial education, have a lower first term GPA, or interrupt their studies for one or more terms, are less likely to complete a fouryear degree. Students, who take advanced placement courses, higher levels of math, and have better high school preparation, are more likely to attain a degree in college. The only form of financial aid that apparently had an effect was employment on campus. The latter finding

4 4 contradicts that of Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda (1992) who showed positive equalizing effects of financial aid. Other researchers continue to find that characteristics of students and academic variables affect student attrition. Liu and Liu (1999) found that minority students, native students, and older adults at a commuter campus had lower retention rates. A student s gender had no effect. Cambiano, Denny, and De Vore (2000) found that students with higher high school GPA s and ACT scores had a greater chance of being retained. Older adults were more likely to drop out. Thayer (2000) cites several studies showing that students from first generation and low-income backgrounds are less likely to enter college and graduate. The effects of intervention programs continue to be evaluated and published in the literature. For example, Wisely and Jorgensen (2000) showed the positive effects of living in campus residence halls. Hashway, Baham, Hashway, and Rogers (2000) showed that completion of remedial education programs increased first-year retention rates among academically at-risk students. Similar positive effects were found for students completing a summer transition program (Wolf-Wendel, Tuttle, Keller-Wolff, 1999), and a freshmen orientation program (Koutsoubakis, 1999). Previous Research Using Student Surveys Along with studies that use data which reside in student information systems, colleges and universities also survey non-returning students to obtain student feedback and reasons why they discontinue their studies. Several studies have used this method of data collection to describe and predict which students will persist. By way of illustration, a brief synopsis is provided for a few of these studies.

5 5 Molinar (1996) used logistic regression to model student persistence at Barry University. He gathered the data from student surveys and the student demographics file. Academic outcomes were measured by academic success, previous experience, and participation in the orientation course. He found that a student s academic success was the dominating retention factor, as supported by the literature. Social and psychological outcomes, measured by satisfaction with social experiences and the on-campus social environment, were next in importance. This was followed by goal commitment, which was measured by prior expectations of graduation, previous college-level experience, and the student s perception of the impact of financial difficulties on persistence. Bonham and Luckie (1993) conducted a descriptive study to compare dropouts, stopouts and optouts to returnees at a Texas community college. They used demographic information to describe the general student body and returnees, and a combination of demographic and survey data to describe nonreturnees. They found that the reasons for not persisting had to do with financial problems and time constraints, not with the school or academics. Based solely on a student satisfaction survey, Parker and Greenlee (1997) studied the retention pattern at a suburban university in southeastern Virginia, that featured a commuter oriented student body, a high percentage of non-traditional students, and low to moderate admissions criteria. They reported that financial problems, followed by family complications, work schedule conflicts, and poor academic performance were the most significant factors why students did not persist. Similar to Bonham and Luckie (1993), the findings in this study did not include any tests of statistical significance. Grimes and Antworth (1996) used the Withdrawing/Non-returning Student Survey developed by the American College Testing Program to: (1) examine the reasons students give for withdrawing from college, (2) analyze the

6 6 relationships between student characteristics and reasons for withdrawing, and (3) compare stopout and dropout behavior. They used a 2 x 2 chi-square to analyze the effects of age, gender, ethnicity, academic preparation, enrollment status, and marital status on retention. They found that academic factors were significant; while, demographic differences were not. Using student satisfaction and demographics information gathered from surveys, Belchier (1997) conducted a study to predict first-term GPA as well as spring and next-fall re-enrollment for first-time freshmen at Boise State University. Logistic regression was used to predict reenrollment. First-term GPA was the best predictor of re-enrollment in both the spring and the next fall. Moreover, students who attempted more credits and/or were given lower academic readiness factor scores, were more likely to return in the spring. She found the negative relationship between academic readiness and persistence to be confusing, since this finding ran contrary to most published research. Other variables that increased the odds of returning one year later were: using more services, minority group membership, greater satisfaction with services used, and higher admission index scores. Grayson (1996) examined the impact of background characteristics, barriers to education, initial goals and commitments, the types of college experiences, satisfaction with these experiences, and first-year grades on retention for a second year of study at a non-traditional evening institution. The data were gathered from administrative records and information from surveys conducted prior to the first day of classes and at the end of the academic year. Logistic regression was used to predict retention. The original educational plans at the time of entry, initial goals and commitments, were most significant in predicting whether or not a student returned the next year.

7 7 Sydow and Sandel (1996) conducted a study to determine the reasons behind the student drop out rate at a Virginia community college. Data were gathered from withdrawal forms, a student satisfaction survey, and a faculty opinion survey. Descriptive statistics were used to present the results of the study. They found that females were less likely to persist than males, which contradicts the findings of other researchers (Feldman, 1993). They also found that students aged 19 or younger were more likely to persist than their older counterparts. The majority of students cited external reasons, such as work and family, rather than academic reasons for dropping out. With a few exceptions, academic variables are often the strongest predictor of student success in college. Students with better academic preparation and higher grades are more likely to persist. Researchers also have demonstrated that student satisfaction, social integration, and goal commitment have positive effects on retention. Survey data show that students report financial problems, time constraints, and family responsibilities as reasons for discontinuing their studies. Minority, low-income, first generation, and older adults are generally shown to have lower retention rates. Results for receipt of financial aid have been mixed. Methodology This study also used both survey information and data from the student information system. First-time freshmen in fall 1999 were identified using data from the student information system. Students, who reported on their admission application that they were degree seeking or planning to transfer, were initially included in the cohort. Students with transfer credit (excluding test credit) were not included in the cohort. The course data from the fall third week census was used to identify students taking courses taught by high school teachers. These high

8 8 school students were excluded from the cohort. Any student attending UVSC, who was still in high school, was also excluded where possible using their high school end date. Despite these measures, several students who responded to the non-returning student survey reported that they were not degree seeking, and a few indicated that they were still in high school (Table 1). Several other students stated that they were attending another college and only taking a few courses at UVSC while earning a degree at the other institution (often BYU). These students are not first-time, degree seeking freshmen at UVSC and are excluded from the calculation of retention rates for UVSC. The Department of Institutional Research contracted out with a private firm, PGM Incorporated, to call all first-time freshmen in fall 1999, who were no longer enrolled in fall The department then mailed the survey to all non-respondents to achieve a higher response rate. The student, spouse, parents, relatives and other adult listed by students on their admission application were contacted for information. Forwarding address and phone information was obtained where possible. Parents/guardians, relatives, and other adults (rather than the student) sometimes reported whether the student served a mission, joined the armed forces/foreign aid service, was attending another college, or working full-time versus attending UVSC (in that order). Reasons for transfer, dropping out, or stopping out, and suggestions for improvement were obtained only from the students. The percentage of respondents in each group are as follows: (1) student 72%, (2) parent/guardian 19%, (3) spouse 1.5%, (4) relative 6%, other adult 1.5%. The final response rate was 63% or 810 of 1,283 (counting the usable surveys). The survey data were merged with other data in the student information system, data files from the Utah System of Higher Education (USHE), Brigham Young University (BYU), and the

9 9 National Student Loan Clearinghouse (NSLC). The analysis includes the use of descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Overall Retention Rates Data in system show that the percentage of students in the fall 1999 cohort who were still enrolled in Fall 2000 was about 41% (Table 1). This percentage is very similar to other reports of UVSC s fall to fall retention rate in prior years, when students were not surveyed (Institutional Research, 1998). Less than one percent earned a degree or certificate within one year. Survey responses and the data files show that a large number of students were serving a mission or had transferred to other higher education institutions. Only a small percentage of students in the cohort joined the military or served in the foreign aid service. Despite efforts to call students and sending out a mailed survey, the outcomes for about 14% of first-time freshmen who attended UVSC in fall 1999 are unknown. Table 1. Outcomes for Initial First-time Freshmen Cohort (Fall 1999) Outcome Stude nts %Total Taking Courses for Personal Interest % High School Students % Concurrently Enrolled at Another College % Still Enrolled % Earned a Degree/Certificate % Military/Foreign Aid Service % Mission % Transferred Out % Dropout % Stopout % Work Full-Time (Stopout/Dropout) % Unable to Locate % No Response/Outcome Unknown % Total Initial Cohort (Fall 1999) 2,183

10 10 The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) allows institutions to identify students who are deceased, permanently disabled, joining the military or foreign aid service, transferring out to other institutions, and serving religious missions so that they can be accounted for when reporting retention rates. Only about 11% of students could be identified as either stopping out for one to two terms or dropping out of college. UVSC did not have an accurate address or phone number for roughly 3%, and no forwarding address or phone number was available. Another 12% failed to respond to the survey, and their educational outcome could not be determined. NCES requires institutions to count these students as non-returning, which has a negative effect on an institution s retention rate. The one-year retention rate for fall 1999 to fall 2000 is calculated by first excluding students concurrently enrolled at another institution, high school students, and those taking courses for personal interest from the initial cohort (Table 2). Students joining the military or foreign aid service, serving a religious mission, and transferring out to other institutions are also excluded from the original cohort. Students who are still enrolled, and those who earned a degree or certificate are then divided by the resulting first-time freshmen cohort. The fall to fall retention rate for all degree-seeking, first-time freshmen students, who are not serving a mission, joining the military, and transferring is about 62% (including part-time students). The retention rate for all first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen is 68%.

11 11 Table 2. Retention Rate (Fall 1999 to Fall 2000) Initial Cohort (Fall 1999) 2,183 Taking Courses for Personal Interest -56 High School Students -5 Concurrently Enrolled at Another College -52 Step 1: Revised Cohort 2,070 Military/Peace Corp -16 Mission -225 Transferred Out -377 Step 2: Revised Cohort 1,452 Still Enrolled 884 Earned a Degree/Certificate 16 Retention Rate ( )/1,452 * % Many of the students, who could not be located or failed to respond, could be serving a religious mission. Several could be non-degree seeking students, high school students, students joining the military and a few transfer-out students, in addition to stopouts and dropouts. The large majority of transfer-out students were identified using data from the system office, BYU, and NSLC. However, the NSLC only identified 64% of the transfer-out students identified with data files from the system office and BYU. The number of transfer-out students in the state is believed to be fairly accurate, but the NSLC data and survey data were the only sources for identifying students transferring out-of-state. The missionary file available from the system office is obtained through a name matching procedure that does not result in a good identification of missionaries; therefore, they were identified using only the survey results. Thus, the 62% retention rate is conservative. The total number of non-returning first-time freshmen is 2, = 1,170. Of the 1,170 non-returning first-time freshmen, the Department of Institutional Research was able to verify that about 1% (16) joined the military or peace corps, 19% (225) were serving a religious mission, 32% (377) were transfer-outs, and 20% (238) were stopouts/dropouts; but, the outcome

12 12 for about 27% (314) of non-returning students was unknown. However, the results show that the majority of non-returning students at UVSC are either serving a religious mission or have transferred out to other educational institutions. Many non-returning students plan to continue their studies at UVSC after stopping out one or two terms. The retention rate, if the outcome for all students was known, can be estimated using the survey data (Table 3). There were not large differences in the characteristics of students who responded to the survey and those who failed to respond, with the exception of minority students. The percentage of nonrespondents who were minorities was twice that of respondents, but they make up such a small percentage of the total that it would not substantially affect overall retention rates. It is believed that it is reasonable to use the sample results for respondents to estimate percentages for nonrespondents because the characteristics of both groups are similar. The survey results show that of the 809 respondents about 7% (56) were taking courses for personal interest, nearly 1% (5) were high school students, 2% (18) were concurrently enrolled at another institution, 2% (16) had joined the military/foreign aid service, 28% (225) were serving a religious mission, 31% (251) had transferred, and 29% (238) were stopouts or dropouts. These same percentages are applied to the survey, non-respondents in the following table to estimate the true retention rate for the college.

13 13 Table 3. Estimated True Retention Rate for UVSC (Fall 1999 to Fall 2000) Non-respondents 474 Initial Cohort (Fall 1999) 2,183 Taking Courses for Personal Interest (.0691*474) + 56 = High School Students (.0062*474) + 5 = Concurrently Enrolled at Another College (.0235 * 474) + 19 = Step 1 Revised Cohort 2,056 Military/Foreign Aid Service (.0198 * 474) + 16 = Mission (.2778 * 474) = Transferred Out (.3099*474) = Step 2 Revised Cohort 1,276 Still Enrolled 884 Earned a Degree/Certificate 16 Estimated True Retention Rate ( )/1,276 * 100= % Confidence level 95%, error 5%. The estimated true fall to fall retention rate for all degree-seeking first-time freshmen who did not join the military/foreign aid service, transfer, or serve a religious mission is about 71%. The estimated true retention rate for all first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen is 76%. The outcomes for non-returning first-time freshmen are also estimated using the data in Table 3: joined the military 2%, served a religious mission 31%, transferred 34%, stopped-out or dropped-out 33% (Chart 1).

14 14 Chart 1. Non-Returning First Time Freshmen 2% 33% 31% Military/Foreign Srvc Missionaries Transfer Outs Stopouts/Dropouts 34% Confidence level 95%, error 5%. It is important to note that federal guidelines require institutions to differentiate between first-time freshmen who are earning an associates versus a bachelors degree. The current student intent field on the admission application only asks whether students are degree seeking. This should be changed so that UVSC can properly comply with reporting requirements. Retention Rates by School and Major Retention rates also vary by school (Table 4). The one-year retention rate for the School of Business, Humanities/Arts and Social Sciences, and Trades are lower. The School of Science and Health has the highest retention rate, followed by Computer Science and Engineering. The retention rates for each school were calculated using the same methodology as for the institution as a whole (see Appendix B for more detail).

15 15 Table 4. Fall 1999 to Fall 2000 Retention Rates by College School Number of Students Retention Rate Estimated True Retention Rate Business Management % 69% Computer Science & Engineering % 73% Humanities/Arts & Social Science 1,169 62% 71% Science/Health % 74% Trades % 68% Note: Students undecided about their major are not included. Retention rates were broken down further by declared major (Table 5). Students majoring in pre-engineering appear to have the highest one-year retention rates; whereas, students in aviation science, behavioral science, biological science, and accounting appear to have lower retention rates. Estimated true retention rates are not presented for most majors because of small sample sizes. Table 5. Fall 1999 to Fall 2000 Retention Rates by Major Major Number of Students Retention Rate Estimated True Retention Rate Accounting 36 52% Business Management % 72% Computer Science 79 65% Pre-engineering 31 76% Art 40 57% Behavioral Science 57 50% Child Education & Family Studies % 75% Integrated Studies % 71% Music 31 60% Biological Science 38 50% Natural Science % 78% Apprentices 66 71% Aviation Science 42 45% Fire Science 44 74% Note: Statistics are shown only for majors with 30 or more first-time freshmen.

16 16 Retention Rates, Student Characteristics, Financial Aid, and Academic Factors This study confirmed findings of previous research at UVSC showing that specific student populations have lower retention rates (Hoyt, 1999). See Appendix B for more detail. Again, non-traditional students (those older than 24 when starting college) were the least likely to continue their studies (Table 6). These students are often married and attend evening classes. Their average first-term GPA was 3.38, and they are less likely to need remedial education than other student groups. Only 30% of these students attended full-time. Responses to the survey indicate that conflicts with work, financial considerations, and family responsibilities appear to be reasons why these students discontinue their studies. Due to the mission of the college, UVSC serves a large number of non-traditional and part-time students, which has a negative effect on student retention. Table 6. Fall 1999 to Fall 2000 Retention Rates and Student Characteristics Student Characteristics Number of Students Retention Rate Estimated True Retention Rate Evening /Weekend % 66% Regular Hours 1,821 63% 71% Traditional 1,912 64% 73% Non-traditional % 52% Single 1,953 63% 72% Married % 56% Full-time 1,292 68% 76% Part-time % 61% Non-minority 2,070 62% 71% Minority % The estimated true retention rate for minority students is not presented because only 24 minority students responded to the survey, and the result is not reliable. Minority students, who responded to the survey, were much more likely to transfer out to other institutions. They were more likely to attend out-of state institutions, Salt Lake Community College, and the University of Utah (in rank order). These institutions have a more diverse student population. It is possible

17 17 that the low retention rate for minority students in the prior study at UVSC (Institutional Research 1998) was at least in part due to high transfer-out rates among minority students, particularly out-of-state. In the future, survey response rates may be higher for minority students if the Multicultural Center or a student contacts them. The first-term GPA of minority students was 2.68 compared with 2.95 for non-minority students. About 66% required remedial education compared with 57% for non-minority students. Minority students were twice as likely to need remedial education in all three areas (21%), compared with non-minority students (10%). Descriptive statistics from the current study also show that receipt of financial aid is also associated with higher retention rates. Students receiving scholarships, work study, and students loans have higher retention rates (Table 7). There is only a small difference for students receiving grants, and those receiving short-term deferment have lower retention rates. Other factors are also likely to influence retention rates among these groups such as academic variables. Table 7. Fall 1999 to Fall 2000 Retention Rates and Financial Aid Major Number of Students Retention Rate Estimated True Retention Rate Received Financial Aid % 72% No Financial Aid % 70% Grants % 71% Scholarship % 79% Work Study 66 74% 78% Short-Term Deferment % 65% Student Loan % 74% Academic variables affected one-year retention rates (Table 8). Students earning A s and B s had retention rates of 76% and 77% respectively. This is contrasted with the rate for C students (65%), and students earning average grades below a C (41%). Remedial education

18 18 shows smaller effects in this study when examining descriptive statistics, contrasted with larger effects in the previous retention study (Institutional Research, 1998). Remedial education is related to first term GPA, specifically for students requiring remedial education in three areas: First term GPA by remedial level is as follows: (1) Non-remedial 3.04, Remedial One Area 2.97, Remedial Two Areas 2.85, and Remedial Three Areas, Table 8. Fall 1999 to Fall 2000 Retention Rates by Academic Variables Major Number of Students Retention Rate Estimated True Retention Rate Non-Remedial % 73% Remedial Reading % 71% Remedial English % 68% Remedial Math % 68% Remedial One Area % 71% Remedial Two Areas % 65% Remedial Three Areas % 71% A Grades % 76% B Grades % 77% C Grades % 65% Below C % 41% Variables that did not appear to significantly affect retention rates in this study are gender, residency status, disability, and location (taking courses on or off-campus). The findings regarding students with disabilities contradict prior research (Institutional Research 1998). In this study, students with disabilities were identified by contacting Accessibility Services to obtain a list of students receiving assistance. In the prior study, students with disabilities were identified using the admission application; however, this information is no longer on the application.

19 19 Student Reasons for Discontinuing Their Studies Students gave several reasons for transferring out, stopping out, or dropping out of college when responding to the survey. The reasons varied depending on the group. Transfer-out students, who responded to the survey, indicated that they transferred for two primary reasons: (1) They wanted to attend a higher ranked college, and (2) Their program of interest was not offered at UVSC (Chart 2). Several students relocated to another area where it is not convenient or possible to attend UVSC. Some of these students wanted to attend college closer to home and family. Financial considerations also influenced transfer decisions. Some students received scholarships from other institutions. One student now attends where his parent currently works to receive a discount. Non-resident students also returned to their home state to pay lower instate tuition. Other less common reasons apparently influence transfer decisions. A few students left because they don t like Utah, want to participate in athletic programs not offered at UVSC, or are dissatisfied with instruction and course availability. Descriptive statistics show that a greater percentage of transfer-out students are nonresidents, and they are less likely to need remedial education (see Appendix C). They have an average first term GPA of 2.95 (about a B average). A substantially lower percentage of these students have first term GPA s below a C (10%). Continuing students have a first term GPA of 3.12.

20 20 Chart 2. Primary Reasons for Transferring Attend Higher Ranked College 42 Academic Program Not Offered 30 Relocation 9 Financial Concerns Financial Aid Dislike Campus Environment Participate in Althletic Programs Disatisfaction With Instruction Course Availability Other Number of Students Transfer-out students attended several colleges and universities in the state and across the country (Chart 3). The largest number of students chose to attend BYU, Salt Lake Community College, and various out-of-state institutions. A more modest number of students selected the University of Utah, Utah State University, and Dixie State College as their transfer institution.

21 21 Brigham Young University Salt Lake Community College Chart 3. Receiving Institutions for UVSC Students Out-of-State Institutions University of Utah Utah State University Dixie State College Weber State University Vocational Institutions Ricks College Snow College Southern Utah University College of Eastern Utah Provo College Foreign University of Phoenix Not Specified Number of Students By far the most common reason students gave for stopping-out is financial concerns (Chart 4). Students need to pay debts, bills, car payments, support a spouse in their education, and at times just run out of money. Students also reported financial difficulties when parents stopped paying for their education. Surgery and sickness incur financial obligations. Expenses for children apparently increase student need to stop out. The new federal regulations requiring students to pay back tuition when they withdraw from classes apparently caused one student to stopout.

22 22 Several students reported conflicts with their job and the need to work full-time. Others take time off when getting married or having a child. A few students just wanted to travel or wanted a break. A few are unsure about their educational goals, or the courses they wanted to take were not available or full. Students who stop out are more likely to be residents, married, older, part-time, and attending evening classes (see Appendix C). Chart 4. Primary Reasons for Stopping-Out Financial Concerns 55 Marriage/Child Birth 16 Working Full-Time/Job Conflict 11 Travel/Take a Break 6 Health Concerns Unsure About Educational Goals Course Availability Other Number of Students Student dropouts also gave several major reasons for discontinuing their studies. Financial concerns appear at the top of the list (Chart 5). Other reasons include an inability to find a job, the need to make mortgage payments, support a spouse in their education, and having

23 23 too much debt. Other major reasons are conflicts with work, family/child care, and marriage. These are similar reasons that stopouts gave for discontinuing their studies. Another major reason for dropping out is students have moved and are no longer close enough to attend UVSC. They have not transferred to another institution to continue their education. Marriage and a new job are often a part of the need for relocation. A lack of course or program availability is another more common reason given for dropping out. A few students were unsure about their educational goals, dissatisfied with instruction, or disliked the campus environment. The only explanations given by two students for the environment is that the college had a high school atmosphere. Other less common reasons are presented in the chart below. Dropouts are similar in terms of their characteristics to stopouts such as being more parttime (51%), needing more remedial education, and so on (Appendix C). However, they are much more likely to have a disability (12%) and have first term GPA s below a C (20%). About 31% are married, which is also much larger than any other group. Despite the fact that many dropouts had a greater need for remedial education and experienced greater academic difficulty or GPA s below a C, former students infrequently cited academic difficulty as a primary reason for discontinuing their studies. Of the 59 students who identified themselves as dropouts, only 9% (5) cited low grades or poor academic performance as a major reason for leaving college, when 24% (14) had first term GPAs below a C. Thus, students may be in denial or fail to report poor academic performance as a major reason for dropping out when it likely has a major effect for these students.

24 24 Chart 5. Major Reasons for Dropping Out Financial Concerns Conflict Job Marriage Family/Child Care Relocation Course/Program Availability Low Grades Environment Disatisfaction with Instruction Unsure Educational Goals Felt Socially Isolated 3 4 Time Contraints Unfriendly Staff Housing Health Reasons Dissatisfied With Services Discrimination 1 1 Other Number of Students Students suggest several areas of improvement that might help them stay at UVSC, return to college, or decrease their need to stop out (Chart 6). The most frequent suggestions are to help students receive financial aid, keep tuition low, offer courses at convenient times and locations, and expand the number of majors/programs. Some students lack information about financial aid and want scholarships and grants. The desire to keep tuition low (at least in part) is likely in response to current proposals to substantially raise tuition. Several students want more evening classes. Others recommend more choices for taking classes on-line or at extension sites. Students desire a wider choice of majors and more computer certifications. Students also

25 25 requested that the college send information to help them re-enroll, provide brochures and information about programs, and additional advising to help them decide on a career and major. Although it is not common, a few students cite instances where faculty and staff did not demonstrate a real concern for students or offended them. Chart 6. Areas of Improvement Financial Aid Course/Program Availability Keep Tuition Low Communication Other Student Services Caring for Students Housing Issues Parking Quality of Instruction Facilities Number of Students As a part of the survey, students were asked if they would like to be personally contacted by a staff member, counselor, or advisor to help them get back into college. The names and phone numbers of these students were passed on to the financial aid office, career services, advising, international student services, and the multicultural center where appropriate. Several students have been contacted with some now returning to complete their studies at UVSC due to these efforts.

26 26 Logistic Regression Descriptive statistics are limited because they do not account for the effect of several factors simultaneously. Logistic regression equations were estimated to identify factors that significantly affect: (1) whether students discontinue their studies or transfer, (2) whether students discontinue their studies or remain enrolled at the college, and (3) whether students discontinue their studies or succeed (transfer, stay enrolled, or earn a degree). Table 9. Logistic Regression Analysis Variables Transfer Enrolled Success Student Characteristics N 945 1,452 1,829 Non-traditional -.661** -.783** -.729** Students of Color Disabled First Generation Married Full-Time.336*.566**.492** Academic Variables Remedial 2 or More Areas -.423** * GPA B Range GPA C Range -.502* -.821** -.757** GPA Below C ** ** ** Financial Aid Received Aid -.343* Constant ** 1.253** R Square **p<.001, *p<.05 The variables in the regression equations are generally in the expected direction (Table 10). Variables that are statistically significant include academic variables, non-traditional students, full-time status, and receipt of financial aid. Students who require remedial education or receive financial aid are less likely to transfer. The Nagelkerke R Square shows that the

27 27 variables included in the regression equations explain only a small percentage of the variance in college success. Other factors need to be considered. Summary and Policy Implications Several major issues regarding student retention specific to UVSC emerge from the data. First, over half of the non-returning students at UVSC serve a religious mission or transfer. This underscores the importance of tracking these students so that our reported retention rates fairly reflect the success of students at UVSC. The best way for UVSC to keep these students is to: (1) continue expanding the number of bachelor degree programs, and (2) build the reputation of our academic programs. Although students are not always willing to admit on surveys that academic difficulty reduces their chances for success, it plays a major role in student retention. About 57% (over half of first-time freshmen at UVSC in the fall 1999 cohort) required remedial education, and many earned grades below a C. Students with low first-term GPA s at UVSC are more likely to drop out. Existing programs that meet the needs of these students should be maintained. The third major issue for retention at UVSC is to recognize that the college serves a large population of older and part-time students (54%), who are often working full-time, have job conflicts, family responsibilities, and take time off for the birth of a child and other family responsibilities. All these activities place restrictions on their time. This population will continue to grow with the aging of the population and continuing need to upgrade job skills or change careers. Meeting the needs of these students could improve their college success. Non-continuing students overwhelmingly state that many discontinue their studies or stop out because of financial concerns. Statistical data also demonstrates a relationship between

28 28 retention and receipt of financial aid at UVSC. Tuition and fees are already low compared with other institutions in the state and nation. It is believed that one way to meet the financial needs of students at UVSC is to have the best financial aid services in the country a model program that is easily accessible and customer friendly. One of the ways that UVSC improves its retention rate is by helping at-risk groups through programs such as TRIO Student Support Services, The Women s Resource Center, Accessibility Services, Student Success Classes, and so on. The research conducted at UVSC indicates a possible need to provide more resources for the Multicultural Center to improve the retention rates of minority students on campus, or to encourage them to stay here rather than transferring out to other institutions. Finally, UVSC needs to do a better job in communicating with students. The nonreturning student survey is one way to contact students with follow-up phone calls to help them get back into college and succeed. Additional mailings could be sent to inform students about financial aid, new programs, and services; and to let them know that we noticed they stopped out or dropped out. Suggestions for Improving Student Success and Reported Retention Rates at UVSC Continue to conduct an annual non-returning student survey and refer students to departments for assistance. Maintain a longitudinal database for tracking missionaries and transfer-out students to improve reported retention rates in the future. Expand educational intent on the admission application to specifically identify whether students are pursing: (1) a certificate, (2) associates, or (3) bachelors degree at UVSC versus (4) transferring out. Expand educational intent to identify students concurrently enrolled at other higher education institutions and high school students. Enter the data into the SIS system so that it can be accounted for in retention rates.

29 29 Expand the number of questions on the admission application to include a general statement of student intent to interrupt their studies at UVSC, with an open-ended response for the reason. Enter the data into the SIS system so that these students can be identified for reported retention rates. Send a mailing to non-returning students each term to invite them back, provide referral to services, determine their status, and maintain their ability to register for classes when information is sent back to the college. This includes inviting missionaries back to UVSC at the time they return two years later. Continue to provide remedial education services for students. Effectively implement an early warning system (campus-wide) requiring instructors to refer students experiencing academic difficulty, six weeks after classes begin, for advising, tutoring, and other existing services based on an early exam, quizzes, and assignments. This may require hiring a few more academic advisors, and reports showing which instructors refer students. Require academically at-risk students (those who need remedial education in more than one area or those who have low high school GPAs), to take College Success classes. Allocate additional resources to the math labs to provide more individualized assistance and tutoring for students. Establish a committee to work with the local high schools to improve the math preparation of students and articulate standards for the curriculum. Using the New Student Survey and data in the SIS system, identify students from low income backgrounds to evaluate whether they have applied for financial aid early in the semester and send them financial information or contact them where needed. This may require a few more financial assistance advisors. Establish a task force on student retention to: (1) Study services for non-traditional and part-time students offered at other institutions for possible implementation at UVSC, (2) Study financial aid offices at other institutions and implement model financial aid services at UVSC, (3) Strengthen the Multicultural Center, and (4) Address other retention issues on campus. Study the need to expand course and program availability in the evenings and on weekends. Evaluate the effect of intervention programs on student retention. Continue to expand the number of bachelor degree programs at UVSC, and build the reputation of existing programs.

30 30 Works Cited Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor s degree attainment. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Belchier, M. J. (1997). Freshmen Retention at Boise State University, Office of Institutional Assessment, ED Bean, J. P., and Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research. 55: Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., and Castaneda, M. B. (1992). The role of finances in the persistence process. Research in Higher Education. 33: Cabrera, A. F., Castaneda, M. B., Nora, A., Hengstler, D. (1992). The convergence between two theories of college persistence. Journal of Higher Education. 63: Cambiano, R. L, Denny, G. S., and De Vore, J. B. (2000). College student retention at a midwestern university: A six-year study. Journal of College Admission. 166: 1-5. Feldman, M. J. (1993). Factors associated with on-year retention in a community college. Research in Higher Education. 34: Grayson, J. P. (1996). The Retention of First Year Students in Atkinson College: Institutional Failure or Student Choice? Institute for Social Research, York University. ED Grimes, S. K. & Anthworth. (1996). Community college withdrawal decisions: Student characteristics and subsequent reenrollment patterns. Community College Journal of Research and Practice. 20 (4): Hashway, R. M., Baham, C., Hashway, S. E., and Rogers, R. M. (2000). Retaining students in college. Educational Research Quarterly. 23: Hoyt, J. E. (1999). Remedial education and student retention. Community College Review. 27: Henry, T. C. and Smith, G. P. (1993). Planning student success and persistence: Implementing a state system strategy. 22: Institutional Research. (1998). Factors Affecting Student Retention at UVSC. Koutsoubakis, D. (1999). A test of the effectiveness of a one-term freshmen orientation program at the foreign campus of an accredited private American university. Journal of the First-Year Experience. 11:

31 31 Liu, E., and Liu, R. (1999). An application of Tinto s models at a commuter campus. Education, 119: Molinar, D. (1996). The Impact of Institutional Effectiveness on Student Retention. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Albuquerque, NM. ED Parker, S., and Greenlee, H. (1997). From Numbers to Action: A Preliminary Study of Retention. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Albuquerque, NM. ED Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and student outcomes. Review of Educational Research. 50: Pascarella, E. T., Duby, E. T., and Iverson, P. B. (1983). A test and reconceptualization of a theoretical model of college withdrawal in a commuter institution setting. Sociology of Education. 56: Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and synthesis. Interchange. 1: Sydow, D. L., and Sandel, R. H. (1996). Making student retention an institutional priority. Community College Journal. 22(7): Thayer, P. B. (2000). Retention of students from first generation backgrounds and low income students. The Council Journal. May: 2-8. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Higher Education. 45: Wisely, N. and Jorgensen, M. (2000). Retaining students through social interaction: Special assignment residence halls. Journal of College Admission 167: Wolf-Wendel, L. E., Tuttle, K., and Keller-Wolff, C. M. (1999). Assessment of a freshman summer transition program in an open-admissions institution. Journal of the First-Year Experience. 11: 7-32.