Retention and Institutional Effort: A Self-Study Framework

Abstract

❖ This article describes a retention assessment framework as a way of helping practitioners use existing literature and research to assess how good their institutional retention effort is. It addresses the rationale for the framework, why some institutions graduate students at higher rates than predicted given the entry characteristics of its students, and how to use the framework.This article takes readers on a journey-the journey of a research team that wanted to obtain a deeper understanding of the ways that an institution can affect the retention rates of its students. Enhancing student persistence touches almost every realm of our profession today. By sharing our "research travelogue," we hope to give both academic colleagues and student affairs practitioners a framework from which they can plan and complete a journey of their own.Our journey, as detailed in this article, commenced in 1994. At that time, we set out to develop a greater understanding of student retention and graduation rates. We began by replicating Astin' s (1993a) 53

Campus‐based retention initiatives: Does the emperor have clothes?

“…The dearth of published empirical studies emphasizes the need to create and promote models for assessing the effectiveness of retention programs. Woodard, Mallory, and De Luca (2001) present a framework for this purpose. There are undoubtedly a number of other viable approaches, but the point is that administrators need a point of reference from which to understand the importance of establishing the groundwork for effectively and efficiently assessing a program; understanding how to identify, capture, and analyze data and communicate findings to various audiences; and understanding how to use the findings to improve the program.…”

Context-related problems and university students’ dropout intentions—the buffering effect of personal best goals

“…Empirical evidence also indicates that institutional expenditure on student services is negatively associated with student dropout (Chen 2012). Furthermore, research reveals that having a clear mission and an atmosphere in which all students are welcome enhances a university's ability to retain students (Woodard, Mallory, & De Luca, 2001). By contrast, a lack of support from faculty and insufficiently responsive faculty members are assumed to increase the likelihood that students will think of leaving the university (Lundquist et al 2002).…”

Institutional Characteristics and Student Retention in Public 4-Year Colleges and Universities

“…Institutional factors in student retention include those areas that affect the persistence of students, outside of the makeup of the students admitted, that an institution may or may not be able to change (Woodard, Mallory, & De Luca, 2001). As Goenner and Snaith (2004) suggested, it is too simplistic to look only at the characteristics and background of the student, when in fact, the likelihood of the same student persisting to graduation differs based on the institution in which he enrolls.…”

“…As Goenner and Snaith (2004) suggested, it is too simplistic to look only at the characteristics and background of the student, when in fact, the likelihood of the same student persisting to graduation differs based on the institution in which he enrolls. Approaching retention and graduation from the perspective of institutional causes can be positive for the institution, because instead of placing the blame on the students or those recruiting them, the institution is encouraged to change or improve in order to address lower than acceptable retention rates (Woodard et al, 2001).…”