In this article, elements of rational choice theory and integration theory are compared on the basis of their explanatory power to explain variance in academic progress. It is argued that both theoretical concepts could be combined. Furthermore the distinction between social and academic integration which integration theory makes is abandoned. Empirical tests, using AMOS (Analysis of Moment Structures), show that an extended model, comprising both integration and rational choice theory, provides the best explanation of academic progress.

Why do some students drop out while others do not? The role of participation and identification in the process of early school leaving is studied. In addition, the contributions of socioeconomic background and available resources are assessed. Boys in the lower vocational track of education, which traditionally has a large number of early school leavers, were studied using the variables from a national cohort study and the responses to some additional questionnaires. The participation-identification model is not found to have much explanatory power. The determinants of early school leaving appear to be the cultural and social resources provided by the parents rather than participation, achievement or identification.

Students in different living situations are the central issue of this study. Large groups of first-year students not only transfer to a new educational system, but also start to live independently in rooms. The questions we answer, in this paper, are whether the students' living situations affect the integration process and how it is related to study progress. A total 782 first-year full-time students responded to questionnaires. A remarkable conclusion was that a positive effect of living independently on integration was not found. The students living in rooms experienced more personal problems than students who stayed at home. Students living in rooms spent several hours less on their studies, which negatively affected study progress.

An important issue in higher education research is how to keep study progress at a good pace. In this article we will deal with the study progress of first-year students in various courses in Dutch higher education. Why are some courses more effective than others? Do such aspects as the composition of student population and different curricula influence variation in study progress, after controlling for individual factors? Multilevel analysis shows that there is in fact such variation between courses and this variation is only partially explained by individual characteristics and course characteristics. At the individual level, sex, initial ability, academic fit, expectation and commitment are important factors. After controlling for these individual factors, some courses still turn out to be more effective than others in getting their students to earn credits. Students in courses with a high proportion of women make more progress than students in courses with a high proportion of men. Furthermore, courses with a high average number of student study hours per week do better. Courses are ranked in an 'order of effectiveness' before and after important factors in the models are taken into account. Comparing courses before and after controlling for any characteristics clearly provides a different picture of effective courses.

No abstract