1. No category

1101 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20004
P 202.756.2971 F 866.808.6585 www.hanoverresearch.com
Best Practices in Student Retention
In the following report, Hanover examines best practices in student retention. We
begin with a discussion of a foundational model of student retention, as well as
national studies of common factors associated with attrition. This is followed by a
discussion of programs and practices institutions have developed to improve student
retention. We close the report with a series of brief case studies, examining
exemplary retention efforts at four small, private institutions.
MARKET EVALUATION SURVEYING DATA ANALYSIS BENCHMARKING INNOVATIVE PRACTICES LITERATURE REVIEW
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Overview
Student persistence has been a serious challenge for postsecondary institutions,
particularly as they rely on student enrollments to meet financial obligations. As
Flanagan notes, while the goal of retention initiatives should not be solely to keep
students at a college or university at all costs, ―a burden is created when students
choose not to remain at a particular institution when in most cases significant
amounts of time, energy, and resources had been expended in the recruiting
process.‖1 Further institutional resources are then invested in these students during
their stay at the institution, only to see them leave prematurely. With such issues in
mind, scholars and practitioners have sought to understand patterns of student
attrition in order to develop means of mitigating the problem.
In this report, we examine research focusing on the factors that influence students’
decisions to re-enroll each semester and ultimately persist to graduation, as well as
institutional programs and practices that have been developed to influence students’
decisions to remain at an institution. We begin the first section with an overview of a
foundational model of student attrition and retention. The model provides a helpful
framework for understanding why students decide to leave an institution or persist
until graduation.
The section proceeds to take a closer look at specific student and institutional factors
related to student retention in college. While the factors most related to student
persistence will likely depend on the unique situation of a given institution
and its student population, awareness of these typical factors may help colleges and
universities develop their own systems for tracking and understanding their students’
behavior. With such knowledge, institutions will be better able to identify students
particularly at-risk of dropping out, as well as develop programs and practices that
can address the issues influencing their decision to stay or leave.
The third section examines practices that have been developed to minimize student
attrition. We examine national studies of institutional programs and practices,
revealing those that have been most effective in promoting retention. This is
followed by a brief description of some of these practices.
Finally, we provide a series of case studies of small, private colleges and universities
that have developed their own practices for addressing issues of student attrition and
retention.
1
Flanagan, William J. ―Sophomore Retention: The Missing Strategy in Small College Retention Efforts.‖
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison. 1991.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
2
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Key Findings
 Many models of student retention are based on a model proposed by Vincent
Tinto which states that the degree to which a student interacts with academic
and social communities at a university is correlated to retention.
 Risk factors for student retention include enrollment intensity (full-time
students more likely to persist), gender (females more likely to persist), age
(younger students more likely to persist), race/ethnicity (Asian/Pacific
Islander and White students more likely to persist), dependency status
(dependent students more likely to persist), parents’ education (higher level of
parents’ education increases persistence), and family income level (higher
family income increases persistence).
 The most common reasons students gave for needing to leave a college or
university early include financial reasons, a need to work, a change in family
status, or conflicts at home/personal problems. On the other hand, students’
institutional commitments, social support, social involvement, and academic
performance (as measured by high school GPA and ACT scores) were most
highly related to retention.
 The most successful retention practices and programs for four-year, private
colleges include freshman seminars and orientations, integration of advising
with first-year transition programs, the use of advising interventions with
selected student populations, the use of learning assistance centers,
internships, learning communities, mentoring/tutoring programs, summer
bridge programs, programs for high-achieving students, and required oncampus housing for freshman.
 An examination of case studies of successful retention programs at small,
private, four-year institutions revealed that the use of intensive or
intervention-based advising programs, learning communities, freshmen
orientations or seminars, special programs for high-achieving students, faculty
development programs designed to improve teaching and advising, peer
mentoring/advising programs, and other programs designed to enhance the
relationship between students, the institution, and the broader community
were most successful in increasing retention and academic performance.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
3
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Common Factors Associated with Student Attrition
Sociologists have produced highly reputable theoretical models of student behavior
that are useful for understanding attrition, and extensive research has endeavored
to quantify statistically significant dropout trends across nationally
representative samples. We begin this section by examining one of the
foundational models of student retention. Following this, we review national
research on student retention and attrition. While student attrition at any
postsecondary institution is undeniably linked, at least in part, to certain institutionspecific factors, there is much to learn from national data sources.
Tinto’s Model of Student Retention
While there are numerous reasons for student attrition, sociologists have created
theoretical models to provide standard explanations for attrition trends. These
studies do not intend to identify all factors involved with drop-out decisions, but they
give sufficient clarity to many of the issues associated with retention and attrition.
The most widely publicized model, originally proposed by Vincent Tinto in 1975,
hypothesizes that the degree to which a student interacts with academic and
social communities at a university directly correlates to his or her likelihood of
finishing college. Tinto writes:
Given individual characteristics, prior experiences, and commitments ... it is
the individual’s integration into the academic and social systems of the
college that most directly relates to his continuance in that college. Given
prior levels of goal and institutional commitment, it is the person’s normative
and structural integration into the academic and social systems that lead to
new levels of commitment. Other things being equal, the higher the degree
of integration of the individual into the college systems, the greater will be his
commitment to the specific institution and to the goal of college
completion.2
The type of integration to which Tinto alludes involves a long line of interconnected
factors that help determine student satisfaction at the university. Issues like grade
performance and intellectual development balance with extracurricular activities and
friendships to determine how satisfied a student is with college life.3 When students
no longer feel connected to their faculty and student peers, they are likelier to
withdraw themselves from the academic community.4
Tinto, Vincent. "Dropout from Higher Education: A Theoretical Synthesis of Recent Research."Review of
Education Research, Vol. 45, No. 1. Winter, 1975, p. 96.
3 Ibid., p. 104, 107-8.
4 Ibid., p. 91.
2
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
4
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Thus, Tinto models departure or attrition as a multi-stage decision with associated
risk and success factors. The relationship between these stages and the associated
variables can be presented schematically in a series of steps.
1. Pre-entry attributes such as family background, skills and abilities, and prior
schooling
Combined With
2. Goals and commitments at time of entry such as intentions, institutional goals and
commitments
Interact With
3. Experiences in both the academic and social systems of the institution. These can
be both formal (e.g., academic performance, extracurricular activities) and informal
(e.g., interactions with faculty, staff, and peers)
And Together Determine
4. Personal normative integration with academic and social systems
Which Combined With
5. Student goals and commitments at break point (such as semester or year-end)
In Turn, Determines
6. Decision to stay or drop out5
Tinto’s assertions facilitated a new way of thinking about college life, and
universities started looking beyond standard evaluative measures – financial status,
educational background, race, or gender – when trying to predict the likelihood of
student attrition. Subsequent statistical studies focused on student happiness and
integration, and included research on student expectations or other subjective metrics
as criteria for persistence in college. Sociological literature continues to expand upon
Tinto’s arguments, adding other external factors into the equation, but many
academics agree that student integration is of paramount importance when evaluating
5
This explanation of Tinto’s model is partially based on a Seidman (2006) presentation. See:
http://www.cscsr.org/docs/RetentionFormulaUpdateForWeb2006.pdf
Also see: Tinto, V. (1982). ―Limits of Theory and Practice in Student Attrition.‖ Journal of Higher Education,
53. 1982. p. 687-700 and Tinto, V. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition, 2nd ed.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
5
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
attrition problems.6 As we will see in our later discussion of strategies to mitigate
attrition, many institutions have developed programs focused on improving
student integration into the college or university community.
General Risk Factors
Along with the sociological models such as Tinto’s, significant research at the
national level has attempted to highlight the best predictors of student attrition. In
2007, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released a report
providing insight into the 2004/06 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal
Study (BPS:04/06). Sponsored by the US Department of Education, the study began
as a response to ―the need for a national, comprehensive database concerning issues
students may face in enrollment, persistence, progress, and attainment in
postsecondary education and in consequent early rates of return to society.‖7
The BPS study focused on undergraduates beginning postsecondary education for the
first time during the 2003-04 academic year. First-time, beginning students were
surveyed at the end of their first year (2004) and again three years after they had
begun their studies (2006).8 The 2007 report is framed as ―a first look at the results
of the 2006 survey data to describe the patterns of enrollment and program
completion of the 2003-04 beginning students during that three-year period.‖9
The report examines students from two perspectives: student and institutional.
The student perspective entails the students’ enrollment history and degree
attainment at any postsecondary institution during the three-year period. The second
perspective, and the one of greatest interest for the task at hand, is the institutional
perspective. This refers to the students’ enrollment history and degree attainment at
the first institution attended. The NCES study distinguishes between the two
perspectives in the following manner: ―When beginning students leave the institution
where they first enrolled and then enroll at a different institution, they continue to
persist in postsecondary education, but from the perspective of the institution where
they started, they have no longer been retained.‖10
Glynn, Joseph G., Paul L. Sauer and Thomas E. Miller. "Signaling Student Retention With Prematriculation
Data." National Association of Student Personnel Administration Journal, Vol. 41, No. 1. Fall 2003, p. 42-3.
7 ―Persistence and Attainment of 2003-04 Beginning Postsecondary Students: After Three Years.‖ National
Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education. August 2007.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007169.pdf
8 Note that the survey was given as part of the 2003-04 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, covering a
nationally representative sample of approximately 90,000 undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional
students in the United States and Puerto Rico. Among these 90,000, approximately 19,000 respondents
were identified as first-time beginning students and were used as the sample for the BPS:04/06. The 2006
follow-up portion of the BPS study garnered approximately 15,000 respondents.
9 Ibid. p. 1.
10 Ibid., p. 2.
6
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
6
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Below, we discuss findings from the study that will be most helpful in identifying
characteristics associated with persistence or attrition.11 As a baseline, note that 28.4
percent of students enrolled in private, not-for-profit, four-year institutions had left
their first institution within three years. Of this group, 18 percent had transferred to
another institution and 10.4 percent had left and not enrolled at another institution.
This is compared to 30.9 percent of students enrolled in any four-year institution who
left their first institution within three years.
First, enrollment intensity – full-time, part-time, or mixed – appears to play a
role in whether students remain enrolled, transfer, or drop out altogether. Among all
four-year institutions included in the survey, 65.2 percent of students who were listed
as ―always part-time‖ left the institution within three years. This is compared to 27.1
percent of students listed as ―full-time‖ and 40.5 percent of students listed as
―mixed‖ (combination of full-time and part-time).
Another interesting difference that appeared in this group was the higher
percentage of males that left the institution (34.2 percent) than females (28.4
percent). Further, in terms of age, younger students were less likely to leave. For
example, 27.2 percent of students age 18 years or younger at the time of enrollment
left within three years, while 50.1 percent of individuals 30 years or older made that
decision.
Turning to race/ethnicity, the groups with the highest rates of departure (either
transferring or dropping out) were Black (39.2 percent), multiple races (38.7 percent),
American Indian (37.9 percent), and Hispanic (34.8 percent). By contrast, 29.3
percent of White students and 22.4 percent of Asian/Pacific Islander students left
their first institution within three years.
Another interesting student characteristic is dependency status. Among students
included in the survey, 28.6 percent of those who were listed as dependent in their
first year of enrollment left the institution within three years, compared to 49.1
percent of independent students. Among independent students, single parents were
the most likely to leave (52.5 percent), followed by unmarried (48.2 percent) and
married (46.2 percent) students.
Parents’ education appeared as another potentially important factor with regard to
retention. 40.7 percent of students whose parents had a high school education or less
left college within three years, while only 34.2 percent of students whose parents had
some postsecondary education and 25.3 percent of students whose parents had a
bachelor’s degree or higher left the institution.
11
Note that the information on the following two pages is drawn from the 2007 NCES Study. Within the
study, see ―Table 6: Degree attainment and retention at the first institution attended of 2003-04 beginning
postsecondary students as of June 2006, by degree plans first year, enrollment patterns, and student
characteristics: Students beginning at 4-year institutions‖ on pages 19 and 20. Ibid.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
7
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Finally, among dependent students, those with lower family incomes were more
likely to leave. 33.8 percent of students whose families had an income of less than
$32,000 left within three years, while 24.0 percent of students whose parents made
$92,000 or more did so. The following table presents these and other findings from
the BPS survey. Note that the ―retained or graduated‖ column represents the sum of
the ―attained degree‖ and ―no degree, still enrolled‖ columns, while the ―left
institution‖ column is the sum of the ―no degree, transferred,‖ and ―no degree, did
not enroll elsewhere‖ columns.
Degree Attainment and Retention at First Institution Attended, 2003-04 Beginning
Postsecondary Students as of June 2006, Students Beginning at 4-Year Institutions
No degree,
Retained or
did not enroll
Graduated
elsewhere
Total
Enrollment intensity through 2006
Always full-time
6.0
66.9
15.9
11.2
72.9
Mixed
5.2
54.4
28.0
12.5
59.6
Always part-time
0.2
34.7
7.5
57.7
34.9
Recent (2003) high school graduates enrolled full time in fall 2003
Certificate plans
6.4
53.5
26.7
13.4
59.9
Associate’s degree plans
28.4
30.5
20.5
20.6
58.9
Bachelor’s degree plans
3.7
71.8
18.4
6.1
75.5
Gender
Male
5.5
60.4
19.4
14.8
65.9
Female
5.9
65.8
17.1
11.3
71.7
Age first year enrolled
18 years or younger
4.9
67.9
18.9
8.3
72.8
19 years
6.4
64.6
19.7
9.3
71.0
20–23 years
5.9
44.6
17.3
32.2
50.5
24–29 years
10.0
41.8
5.7
42.4
51.8
30 or older
7.2
42.6
9.3
40.8
49.8
Race/ethnicity
White
5.8
64.9
18.2
11.1
70.7
Black
4.7
56.1
18.7
20.5
60.8
Hispanic
4.7
60.4
19.7
15.1
65.1
Asian/Pacific Islander
8.0
69.6
14.7
7.7
77.6
American Indian
0.7
61.3
11.6
26.3
62.0
Multiple races/other
5.1
56.2
17.2
21.5
61.3
Dependency status first year
Dependent
5.4
66.1
19.1
9.5
71.5
Independent
8.2
42.7
10.7
38.4
50.9
Unmarried, no dependents
7.7
44.1
11.0
37.2
51.8
Student
Characteristics
Attained
Degree
No degree,
still enrolled
No degree,
transferred
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
Left
Institution
Total
27.1
40.5
65.2
40.1
41.1
24.5
34.2
28.4
27.2
29.0
49.5
48.1
50.1
29.3
39.2
34.8
22.4
37.9
38.7
28.6
49.1
48.2
8
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
Student
Characteristics
Attained
Degree
Single parent
Married
9.8
6.9
High school or less
Some postsecondary
Bachelor’s degree or
higher
7.2
5.9
Less than $32,000
$32,000–59,999
$60,000–91,999
$92,000 or more
5.0
5.6
6.2
4.6
5.3
APRIL 2010
No degree,
did not enroll
elsewhere
37.6
10.9
41.6
46.9
10.1
36.1
Highest education of parents
52.1
16.5
24.2
60.0
20.7
13.5
Retained or
Graduated
Total
47.4
53.8
Left
Institution
Total
52.5
46.2
59.3
65.9
40.7
34.2
7.3
74.7
25.3
Dependent student family income
60.6
18.3
15.5
62.6
18.1
13.1
68.8
20.0
6.6
70.7
19.1
4.9
66.2
68.8
73.4
76.0
33.8
31.2
26.6
24.0
No degree,
still enrolled
69.7
No degree,
transferred
18.0
Source: NCES.12
Based on an earlier round of the BPS – 1996/98 Beginning Postsecondary Students
Longitudinal Study (BSP:96/98) – the NCES published a more comprehensive look
at the factors affecting student persistence and attrition.13 Unfortunately, this earlier
report focused on the student rather than the institutional perspective. In other
words, the study focused exclusively on students’ total departure from postsecondary
education within three years of their first enrollment (no longer enrolled and did not
enroll at another institution). From the institution’s perspective, this only explains
part of the picture, leaving out students who transfer to another institution.
Nevertheless, as a part of the study, the NCES asked students to indicate their
reasons for leaving, providing helpful insight into the potential explanations of
student departure.
The following table presents students’ most common reasons for leaving. It only
includes students who originally enrolled in a private, not-for-profit, four-year
institution. Note that students could provide up to three reasons for leaving,
including reasons not listed below.
Percentage of 1995-96 Beginning Postsecondary Students Leaving
by Spring 1998, Private, Not-for-Profit, Four-Year Institutions
Reason for Early Departure
Other financial reasons
Needed to work
Change in family status
12
13
Percent of Students
24.5
16.5
14.9
Ibid. p. 19-20.
―Short-Term Enrollment in Postsecondary Education: Student Background and Institutional Differences in
Reasons for Early Departure, 1996–98.‖ National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of
Education. November 21, 2002. p. 52. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003153.pdf
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
9
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Reason for Early Departure
Conflicts at home/personal problems
Not satisfied
Taking time off
Academic problems
Done taking desired classes
Conflicts with job/ military
Percent of Students
14.4
10.9
6.6
4.7
4.4
4.3
Source: NCES.14
ACT Study of Academic and Non-Academic Factors
In addition to the NCES studies, ACT, Inc. released a report in 2004 that attempted
to quantify national trends in attrition and retention. Examining broad categories of
academic and non-academic factors, the report represents a compilation of
information from several national studies—three on retention practices and six on
academic advising— as well as twenty years worth of data collected through ACT’s
Institutional Data Questionnaire.15 The following table, provided in the ACT report,
explores the correlation between retention rates and both academic and nonacademic factors. The numeric value assigned to each factor is a population
estimate of correlation as provided by a 2004 study on student success presented in
the Psychological Bulletin entitled ― “Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict
college outcomes?‖16
Strength of Relationship between Individual Factors and Retention
Factor
Academic-Related Skills
Academic Self-Confidence
Academic Goals
Institutional Commitment
Description
Time management skills, study
skills, and study habits, e.g.
note-taking
Level of academic selfconfidence (of being successful
in the academic environment)
Level of commitment to obtain
a college degree
Level of confidence in and
satisfaction with institutional
choice
Practical
Strength
Numeric
Value
Strong
.366
Strong
.359
Strong
.340
Moderate
.262
Ibid., p. 52.
Lotkowski, Veronica A. et al. ―The Role of Academic and Non-Academic Factors in Improving College
Retention.‖ ACT Policy Report. ACT 2004.
http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/college_retention.pdf
16 Robbins, Steven B., Lauver, Kristy, et. al. ―Do Psychosocial and Study Skill Factors Predict College
Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis.‖ Psychological Bulletin Vol. 130, No. 2, 2004. 261-288
14
15
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
10
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
Factor
Social Support
High School GPA
Contextual Influences
Socioeconomic Status
Social Involvement
ACT Assessment Score
Achievement Motivation
General Self-Concept
APRIL 2010
Description
Level of social support a
student feels the institution
provides
Cumulative grade point average
student earned from all high
school courses
The extent to which students
receive financial aid, institution
size and selectivity
Parents’ educational attainment
and family income
Extent to which a student feels
connected to the college
environment, peers, faculty, and
others in college, as well as
student’s overall involvement in
campus activities
College preparedness measure
in
English,
Mathematics,
Reading, and Science
Level of motivation to achieve
success
Overall level of self-confidence
and self-esteem
Practical
Strength
Numeric
Value
Moderate
.257
Moderate
.246
Moderate
.238
Moderate
.228
Moderate
.216
Moderate
.124
Weak
.066
Weak
.050
Source: ACT, Inc., 2004.17
The ACT model indicates a correlation between academic performance (as
measured by high school GPA and ACT scores) and the decision to stay
enrolled in college, though socioeconomic status and other social factors appear to
play notable parts in student retention as well. However, the study’s crucial point is –
echoing Tinto – that students’ institutional commitments, social support, and
social involvement are fundamentally connected to attrition rates. Achievement
motivation appears as a relatively unimportant criterion, while general self-concept
matters little because students may be quite happy with themselves but discontent
with their universities or colleges. The study’s bottom line is that students who
cannot connect with the academic and/or social communities at postsecondary
institutions are statistically likelier to drop out.
Examining the NCES and ACT reports, we see that a variety of background
characteristics, such as age, race/ethnicity, enrollment intensity, and parents’ level of
education, as well as academic-related skills, academic self-confidence, and academic
goals likely play a role in whether a student persists or drops out of an institution.
17
Lotkowski, Op. cit.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
11
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
While these findings are useful for identifying at-risk students, the task of designing
effective retention programs around these data is also important. Improving student
involvement and fostering a sense of belonging on campus are difficult undertakings
and should be of primary concern to colleges and universities. In the next section,
we examine programs and practices that have been developed to improve student
retention.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
12
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Student Retention Programs and Practices
Understanding the reasons for attrition is only one part of the retention equation.
Proactively identifying at-risk students and extending appropriate support
mechanisms is critically important for helping those students persist through college.
In short, colleges and universities must preempt attrition by targeting retentionoriented programs and support services to students from the start of their college
careers. Retention activities can – and often do – take multiple forms, some of which
are described below.
National Studies of Retention Practices
In 2004, another ACT report detailed the results of a large-scale survey of retention
practices at colleges and universities across the United States. The survey asked
respondents to identify all approaches that their institution has pursued from a list of
common retention practices. The resulting report – entitled ―What Works in Student
Retention?‖18 – draws data from 1,061 two- and four-year institutions and serves as
one of the most comprehensive resources on the topic. Of the 1,061 responding
institutions, 401 were four-year private colleges or universities.19
Survey participants were prompted to identify implemented efforts and rate
programs, services, curricular offerings, and interventions based on how much each
contributes to student retention efforts on a scale of 1 to 5 (1=no contribution to
retention; 5=major contribution to retention).20 The tables below display the
highlights of the survey with regard to private, four-year institutions. The survey
results provide an excellent foundation for ways in which institutions can act to
improve student retention rates. A full listing of programs and practices
contributing to retention are provided in the appendix.
The first table displays practices that received the highest ratings in terms of
contribution to student retention at four-year private colleges.
Practices with Highest Mean Contributions to Retention,
Four-Year Private Colleges
Programs, Services, Curricular Offerings, Interventions
Freshman Seminar/University 101 (credit)
Integration of Advising with First Year Transition Programs
Advising Interventions with Selected Student Populations
Increased Advising Staff
Mean Contribution
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
Habley, Wesley R. & McClanahan, Randy. ―What Works in Student Retention All Survey Colleges?‖ ACT
2004. http://www.act.org/path/postsec/droptables/pdf/AllColleges.pdf
19 Please note that the results of a 2009 administration of the ACT survey will be available later this month.
See: http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/reports/retain.html
20 Habley and McClanahan. Op. cit. p. 14-16.
18
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
13
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
Programs, Services, Curricular Offerings, Interventions
Comprehensive Learning Assistance Center/Lab
Internships
Learning Communities
Reading Center/Lab
Tutoring Program
Faculty Mentoring
Extended Freshman Orientation (non-credit)
Extended Freshman Orientation (credit)
Freshman Seminar/University 101 (non-credit)
Summer Bridge Program
Program for Honors Students
Required On-Campus Housing for Freshmen
APRIL 2010
Mean Contribution
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
Source: ACT.
By contrast, respondents indicated that the following practices made the lowest
levels of contribution to student retention.
Practices with Lowest Mean Contributions to Retention,
Four-Year Private Colleges
Programs, Services, Curricular Offerings, Interventions
Advisor Manual/Handbook
Vocational Aptitude Tests
Personality Tests
Computer-Assisted Career Guidance
Parent Newsletter
Library Orientation, Workshop, and/or Course
Health and Wellness Course/Program
Application of Technology to Advising
Learning Styles Inventories
Values Inventories
Interest Inventories
Foreign Language Center/Lab
Diversity Information/Training
Mean Contribution
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
Source: ACT.
In addition to such information from all private four-year institutions, the ACT study
provided information regarding the practices of “High-Performing Campuses.”
These institutions include those performing in the top quartile in both retention (as
measured by first to second year attrition rates) and degree completion (five-year
degree completion rates for all bachelor’s degree seeking students). This information
is based on data drawn from ACT’s 2003 Institutional Data Questionnaire (IDQ), a
survey of 2,530 colleges and universities (1,154 private four-year institutions).21
21
Ibid. p. 16.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
14
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
The survey found a number of retention practices that appear to differentiate highperforming four-year private colleges from low-performing (bottom quartile in terms
of retention and degree completion) colleges. These include:










Integration of academic advising with first-year transition programs
Increased advising staff
Academic advising center
Learning communities
Faculty mentoring
Non-credit extended freshman orientation
Summer bridge program
Program for honors students
Peer mentoring
Writing center/lab22
Many of these findings were reinforced by a more recent – though smaller scale –
study conducted by Noel Levitz. In its ―2009 Student Retention Practices and
Strategies at Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions,‖ Noel Levitz reported the results
of a 76-item online poll, conducted in April and May of 2009.23 The survey had been
sent to 3,033 degree-granting institutions in the United States. A total of 316 colleges
and universities responded, of which 168 were four-year private institutions.24
One of the main components of the poll focused on the effectiveness of student
retention programs. Presented with a list of 60 retention practices, respondents could
indicate whether the practice was ―very effective,‖ ―somewhat effective,‖ ―minimally
effective,‖ or ―method not used.‖ The report found the following practices to be
the most effective in supporting student retention at four-year private
institutions.
Most Effective Practices and Strategies Contributing to Student Retention at
Four-Year Private Colleges and Universities
Practices and Strategies
Orientation program for first-year students
Institution-wide emphasis on the teaching of undergraduates and undergraduate learning
Academic support program or services
Surveys or interviews to determine students’ levels of satisfaction
Academic advising program
Programs designed specifically for first-year students
First-year experience program
Ibid.
―2009 Student Retention Practices and Strategies at Four-Year and Two-Year Institutions.‖ Noel Levitz.
2009. https://www.noellevitz.com/NR/rdonlyres/5861D100-6FB0-4DB9-B211626984EC13CC/0/StudentRetentionPracticesandStrategies09.pdf
24 The names of the participating institutions are available in the report. Ibid., p. 18-19.
22
23
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
15
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Practices and Strategies
Early-alert and intervention system
Tracking of persistence and progression patterns among all students who matriculate
Use of satisfaction assessments to make changes
Source: Noel Levitz.25
Descriptions of Selected Strategies for Improvement
As demonstrated in the 2004 ACT and 2009 Noel Levitz reports, postsecondary
institutions use a variety of individual and combined methods to encourage students
to re-enroll each year and persist until graduation. In the following subsection, we
discuss in detail some of the most common practices, as indicated by the ACT
and Noel Levitz surveys, used to improve student retention and graduation
rates at both small and large institutions. As three of the five practices with the
highest mean contributions to retention in the ACT survey and one of the top ten
practices highlighted in the Noel Levitz report were related to advising, we begin with
a brief overview of two promising advising practices: peer advising and intrusive advising
(advising interventions with selected student populations). This is followed by a
description of four additional practices identified by the ACT and/or Noel Levitz
surveys as having an impact on student retention. These include:




Orientation programs and first-year seminars
Learning communities
Summer bridge programs
Early warning systems
Peer Advising
In a peer advising program, upperclassmen act as both an additional resource and
intermediary between first-year students and faculty or professional academic
advisors. Most often, the peer advisors receive training to ensure that they accurately
convey information and make appropriate referrals to administrative offices and
student services. As retention rates remain a top priority for institutions, the peer
advising structure is becoming increasingly popular among both small and
large institutions. In her article ―Peer Advising: A Win-Win Initiative,‖ Heidi
Koring, then Chair of the Peer Advising and Advising Interest Groups at Lynchburg
College, notes several characteristics of the peer advising structure, highlighting the
versatility of the model:
 Contact might range from informal, friendly conversations to more intensive
programs in which peer advisors remain on-call for student assistance and/or
make formal meeting arrangements in residence halls.
25
Ibid., p. 4.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
16
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
 The program might be a campus-wide initiative or specific to a certain
academic department or sub-set of students, such as freshman students,
transfer students, ethnic minorities, or probationary students.
 The programs often take advantage of new communications media attractive
to younger students, such as instant messaging and blogging. Peer advisors
are often available to answer student questions on weekends and after typical
office hours via email.
 Peer advisors benefit from the program as they develop leadership skills and
establish mentoring relationships with supervisors. Peer advisors often receive
credit for the required training and related courses on topics such as
psychology and educational theory.26
Intrusive Advising
Intrusive advising is a proactive method of academic advising that incorporates
intervention strategies for historically at-risk groups of students, such as academically
disadvantaged or underprepared students, disabled students, probationary students,
ethnic minority students, and students of low socioeconomic status. In a 2002 article
in the College Student Journal entitled ―Advising At-Risk Students in College and
University Settings,‖ Heisserer and Parette define intrusive advising as:
An intensive advising intervention with an at-risk student that is
designed to (a) facilitate informed, responsible decision-making, (b)
increase student motivation toward activities in his/her
social/academic community, and (c) ensure the probability of the
student’s academic success.27
An intrusive advising program might include a system to monitor academic
performance and progress, periodic phone calls to the student, distribution of
informative newsletters, and a signed contract or study plan that outlines the
student’s goals and commitment to achieve those goals.
Orientation Programs and First-Year Seminars
In an effort to address both academic and non-academic factors that affect retention
rates, many institutions have implemented orientation programs and first-year
seminars to help make students’ transition from high school to college as
seamless as possible. Ideally, an orientation program will introduce newly enrolled
students to their peers and members of the faculty and staff. It also should familiarize
Koring, H. ―Peer Advising: A Win-Win Initiative,‖ Academic Advising Today, vol. 28, no. 2, June 2005.
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/AAT/NW28_2.htm#5
27 Heisserer, D. and Parette, P. ―Advising At-Risk Students in College and University Settings,‖ College Student
Journal, 36(1), March 2002.
26
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
17
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
them with extracurricular opportunities available on campus and the institution’s
academic policies, as well as library, academic support, and career services. First-year
seminars often serve as an extension of the orientation program and aim to assist
students in the development of both academic skills and college survival tactics, such
as time and stress management.28
Learning Communities
The establishment of learning communities has been shown to successfully
engage students in their course of study and to promote relationships with
fellow students in the classroom and in residence life, both of which are significant
factors in student retention and persistence to graduation. The Pathways to College
Network, a partnership of national organizations committed to improving college
readiness and success for underserved students,29 categorizes learning communities
into five groups:
 Linked Courses: A cohort of students participates in two complementary
courses, one content-based and one application-based, with coordinated
syllabi and assignments and a unifying theme.
 Freshman Interest Groups (FIGs): A theme oriented around a particular academic
major links together three to four freshman courses and a weekly, peer
advisor-led seminar.
 Coordinated Studies: Faculty and students participate in a full-time,
interdisciplinary theme-based curriculum for one quarter, semester, or year.
 Learning Clusters: One student group participates together in three to four
courses, generally based on a theme, historical period, or topic of interest.
 Federated Learning Communities: A group of students enroll in three themebased courses, as well as a for-credit seminar taught by the ―Master Learner,‖
a professor from a different discipline who participates in the classes and
fulfills course requirements alongside the students. 30
Summer Bridge Programs
Typically designed for at-risk students, summer bridge programs aim to facilitate
smooth transitions from the high school setting to the college campus
environment. The programs target historically high-risk groups of students who
might encounter more obstacles than the average student during the transition
period. In the summer program, students take courses on basic academic skills,
Myers, Denise R. ―College Success Programs,‖ Pathways to College Network. 2003. p. 14-17. See
http://www.pathwaystocollege.net/pdf/CollegeSuccessPrograms.pdf
29 Pathways to College Network. http://www.pathwaystocollege.net/
30 Myers, Op. cit., p. 10-14.
28
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
18
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
primarily English and math, and become acquainted with the campus, faculty
members and available resources before the fall semester commences. An oncampus residence program encourages participants to integrate their academic and
social lives while the campus is still relatively quiet in the summer months.31
Early Warning Systems
The ability to identify at-risk students and connect them with advisors, counselors, or
mentors in a timely matter is a crucial component of any student retention program.
While students in historically at-risk groups may be identified as early as enrollment
or freshman orientation and placed in an early intervention or intensive academic
advising program, a student who does not initially fit the bill for an at-risk student but
later encounters detrimental academic, financial or personal obstacles might slip
through the cracks unnoticed. In an effort to raise the institution’s awareness of
the entire student body’s academic progress and well-being and to identify
students whose habits or personal situations may elevate their risk of drop-out,
several institutions have implemented an ―Early Warning System‖ or ―Academic
Alert System.‖32
Early warning systems may include a submission form restricted to use by faculty
members or, in some cases, open to peer and residence advisors as well. Reasons for
the submission of an academic alert include a student’s difficulties with course
material, perceived lack of motivation, failure to complete assignments or attend
classes, medical conditions, financial problems, family or personal life problems, and
suspected substance abuse. The form is generally submitted to a small committee
that proactively intervenes to help the student regain a positive foothold in the
university or college community and succeed in his/her degree program.
31
32
Ibid. p. 17-18.
Note that a helpful discussion of early alert systems is included in the ―Cuseo Collection,‖ a collection of
scholarship regarding the first-year experience, maintained on the University of Wisconsin Colleges’
Engaging Students in the First Year web site. See: Joe Cuseo. ―Red Flags: Behavioral Indicators of
Potential Student Attrition.‖ http://www.uwc.edu/administration/academicaffairs/esfy/cuseo/Red%20Flags-Behavioral%20Indicators%20of%20Potential%20Student%20Attrition.doc
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
19
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Case Studies of Peer Universities
In the final section of this report, we provide a series of brief case studies of
institutions that have been commended for their exemplary retention practices
and programs. First, we have selected three institutions that have been honored by
the Lee Noel and Randi Levitz Retention Excellence Awards.
Annually,
postsecondary institutions in the United States and Canada are selected for
commendation based on their retention programs. Programs are judged on
―identifiable and measurable institutional outcomes, originality and creativity, use of
resources, and adaptability for use at other institutions.‖33 Further, with one member
in mind, we reviewed recent winners of these awards and identified small, private,
four-year institutions for inclusion in our report. These include: Albion College
(2009), Grand View University (2008), and Stevenson University (2001).
In addition to the three winners of Retention Excellence Awards, we have selected a
fourth institution that has been recognized by the National Academic Advisors
Association for Outstanding Advising Programs. The annual awards recognize
―programs that document innovative and/or exemplary practices resulting in
improvement of academic advising services.‖34 Since advising appeared as a common
feature among successful retention programs earlier in this report, we have selected
the Connections Program at Lynchburg College for our review.
Albion College
Albion College, located in Albion, Michigan, was a 2009 recipient of a Retention
Excellence Award. With a student population of 1,860 undergraduates,35 the
private institution’s Academic Success Course (ASC) provides a strong example of
successful retention practice.36 The ASC is designed to offer additional support to
academically underperforming students, stemming from difficulties adjusting to the
demands of college.
Albion College maintains three levels of academic probation, with Terminal
Probation as the most serious. Before 2006, college support staff would allocate
significant resources to providing individual support to students who were on
Terminal Probation, though much of their efforts were unsuccessful. In response to
―Retention Excellence Awards Overview.‖ Noel Levitz.
https://www.noellevitz.com/Papers+and+Research/Retention+Excellence+Awards/
34 ―Outstanding Advising Program Awards.‖ National Academic Advising Association.
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/programs/Awards/OutstandingProgram.htm
35 ―College Navigator.‖ National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
36 ―Retention Excellence Awards – Albion College.‖ Noel Levitz.
https://www.noellevitz.com/Papers+and+Research/Retention+Excellence+Awards/4+year+private+coll
eges+and+universities/Albion+College+(MI).htm
33
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
20
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
this situation, Dr. Barry Wolf, a staff member of Academic Affairs and a clinical
psychologist, devised the ASC as a means of providing an effective support service
that more directly addresses issues related to academic performance. In turn, the
program would seek to improve retention and achievement of students on Terminal
Probation. The course was instituted in fall 2006, with ―TP‖ students required to
complete the course. By fall 2007, Albion converted the course to a half unit (2
semester hour) course for credit.
According to Noel Levitz, traditionally, retention-based courses such as study skills
and ―learning to learn‖ courses have mainly aimed to improve struggling students’
academic strategies. While study skills are certainly important, the ASC seeks to
address the “psycho-academic” issues that are affecting student performance.
At Albion, students flagged as TP are usually intelligent and have the ability to do
well in college. However, as the description of the program notes, these students
often have:
…poor work ethic and low frustration tolerance related to effort. Their
study strategies were relatively effective in high school, but they are reluctant
to adopt new strategies that are more appropriate for the increased demands
of college. When encouraged to confront their academic problems, many
underperforming students are ambivalent about receiving help, changing
their academic behavior, and increasing effort.37
The ASC is designed as a means of integrating interventions focusing on ―strategy,
readiness to change, and effort in an attempt to address the specific issues that TP
students experience.‖38 The course is composed of discussion/activity-based
class meetings, readings, study sessions, and peer mentoring (former ASC
students) to aid TP students in overcoming their academic issues. The instructor is
tasked not only with teaching responsibilities, but must act as a mentor, advisor, and
academic coach. Albion views the student-instructor relationship as one that
―facilitates students’ willingness to address academic issues, provides the opportunity
for students to build a meaningful connection with a supportive campus figure, and
promotes connection with other faculty and staff.‖39
In terms of results, the ASC has already improved the retention and academic
achievement of TP students. Evidence of this success includes the following:
 ASC students were retained at significantly higher rates than non-ASC
students (TP students before ASC was instituted) for multiple time points
(one semester, one year, and two years).
Ibid.
Ibid.
39 Ibid.
37
38
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
21
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
o The one-semester retention rate has increased from 40 percent for
non-ASC students to 76.7 percent for ASC students
o The one-year retention rate has increased from 31.4 percent for nonASC students to 55.6 percent for ASC students
o The two-year retention rate has increased from 25.7 percent for nonASC students to 50.0 percent for ASC students.
 The average semester GPA of ASC students beginning their TP semester
increased from 1.08 (pre-ASC) to an average semester GPA of 2.47 for the
semester in which they were enrolled in ASC.
 During their TP semester, non-ASC students (TP students prior to ASC’s
inception) had an average semester GPA of 1.72 during their TP semester. As
noted above, ASC students had a significantly higher GPA of 2.47 during their
TP semester.40
Grand View University
Grand View University (formerly Grand View College) received a Retention
Excellence Award in 2008 for its Student Success Program.41 Located in Des
Moines, Iowa, the private university has an all-undergraduate population of 1,936
students.42 The Student Success Program integrates various practices aimed at
improving retention and achievement of the student population. The four primary
components of the program are described below.
First Year Connections
Nearly all first-time, full-time students enroll in a “curricular-linked learning
community” (LC) or a “living-learning community.”
These learning
communities seek to facilitate strong relationships between LC classmates, increase
understanding of content and ―the interdisciplinary nature of learning,‖ and promote
a high quality student-instructor/advisor relationship.
Within the Learning Communities, students take two or three courses together. The
following table provides a discussion of specific curricular-linked learning
communities.
Ibid.
―Retention Excellence Awards – Grand View College (IA).‖ Noel Levitz.
https://www.noellevitz.com/Papers+and+Research/Retention+Excellence+Awards/4+year+private+coll
eges+and+universities/Grand+View+College.htm
42 ―College Navigator.‖ National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
40
41
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
22
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Grand View University Learning Communities
Learning Community
Dissent in American
History
Finding Our Voices:
Literacy in College
Economics and Politics:
Making Sense of
Everyday Life
Mind Matters
Serenity 101: BrainBased Bliss
Speaking Your Mind
Let’s Talk Teaching
Mass Media in
Contemporary Society
Drawing and Design
Beginnings and Beliefs
Description
Links US History and English composition classes, explores
dissenting groups, their beliefs and their rhetoric in US history to
1877. Through group writing, document analysis, and critical
thinking activities, students learn strategies for success in research
and academic writing.
Links English composition and college-level reading classes,
focuses on ways that activities of academic reading and writing
are connected. Through practice and discussion of texts,
students acquire and improve summary, explanation, critical
thinking, vocabulary development, and comprehension skills.
Links macroeconomics and national government classes, focuses
on the interrelationships between politics and economics. Places
emphasis on understanding the political process in the US and its
impact on the US economy. Also covers monetary and fiscal
policies and the role of the US in the world economy.
Links biology and psychology classes, exploring mind and body
connections, the biology of personality and behavior, the biology
of organs associated with psychology (brain), hormones, and
other chemicals that affect behavior.
Links psychology 101 and nursing 110 to help students become
familiar with brain research on health and happiness. Students
learn skills and techniques derived from this research to
incorporate into their lives.
Links psychology and speech classes to help students answer
questions about how communication and psychology fit together.
Why do we think what we think? Why do we say what we say?
Links introduction to education and speech classes to introduce
students to the teacher education program, theories of education,
and how these relate to speech and communication skills.
Explores the history, theory, functions, and problems of mass
media in contemporary society, including radio, television,
newspapers, magazines, photography, movies, and advertising.
Links introductory design and drawing courses, introducing
students to basic theories, practices, and principles in these fields.
Links Western Civilization and Christian Faith and Life courses
to explore the history of civilization, with a special emphasis on
the origins of beliefs of the Christian faith and how these
beginnings connect to contemporary life.
Source: Grand View University.43
In addition to the above curricular-linked learning communities, Grand View offers a
living-learning community titled ―LPOD.‖ The acronym stands for Leadership43
―Learning Communities.‖ Grand View University.
http://www.admissions.grandview.edu/tabid/4148/Default.aspx
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
23
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Place of Discovery. The program is designed for 24 students who are academically
motivated and ambitious. These students enroll in a one-credit leadership seminar
which explores the characteristics of effective leadership, service, and integrity.
Students must apply separately to participate in LPOD.44
Early Alert and Student Support
The university monitors student academic progress and engagement through its
Council of Success and Council of Engagement.45 While little information is
available on the details of this program, the institution notes that it seeks to intervene
with students identified as at-risk through a case management and strengths-based
approach.
Viking Edge
After reviewing its results on the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE),
the university developed the Viking EDGE as a means of increasing student
engagement. The Viking EDGE is described as “a web of people, services, and
opportunities that connects students to the campus community, to the broader
community, and to their life ahead.”46 Rather than a program, the Viking EDGE
appears to be more of a philosophy underpinning the university’s support for its
students. The university notes that EDGE stands for ―Engaging,‖ ―Discerning,‖
―Growing,‖ and ―Educating.‖ The university provides the following explanation of
each aspect of the EDGE.
 Engaging in community – You’ll get connected right from the start, with faculty,
staff, and fellow students. Your personal growth and well-being matter to the
whole campus community, and you’ll be encouraged to support others in their
growth. That’s what the community is all about.
 Discerning your life purpose – We call it vocation, a ―calling‖ that will help guide you
through your college experiences and beyond, as you decide on a major and
craft an educational plan. We’ll help you get in touch with what really matters
to you, with what makes you come alive.
 Growing in leadership – You’ll have unique opportunities to develop and
demonstrate your leadership skills, experience, and abilities. You’ll be able to
describe how you developed as a leader…how you made a difference through
leadership at Grand View…and how your skills can benefit the community
and the workplace.
Ibid.
―Noel Levitz Retention Award.‖ Grand View University.
http://www.gvc.edu/aspx/audience/audience.aspx?pageid=1219&aid=4
46 Quoted verbatim from: ―Experience the Viking Edge!‖ Grand View University.
http://www.grandview.edu/aspx/audience/audience.aspx?pageid=881&aid=1
44
45
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
24
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
 Educating with integrity – We appreciate and respect the dignity and worth of
each individual, honoring and promoting a community of open interaction,
personal integrity, active intellectual engagement, and academic honesty
among students, faculty, and staff.47
Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL)
The CETL is a faculty development program designed to improve teaching and
advising with the ultimate goal of enhancing student learning. The Center’s website
lists eight strategic goals:
 Provide a physical and intellectual space devoted to excellent and
innovative teaching among Grand View instructors and Grand View students
preparing for a teaching career
 Create a community of peers to deepen understanding of the teaching and
learning processes by helping instructors gather, assess, and reflect on
information about teaching and student learning
 Cultivate dialogue about teaching and learning through workshops,
consultations, and other programs
 Support experimentation with innovative and emerging uses of instructional
technology and methods, expand usage of current technologies
 Disseminate research and facilitate access to resources that support
teaching and learning
 Support members of the academic community in research endeavors
including grant seeking or scholarly writing
 Direct and coordinate successful learning community programs that
invigorate instructors and support students academically and socially
 Provide an interface between Grand View and local schools to support
efforts that improve education48
Among its other services, the Noel Levitz Retention Excellence Award description
highlights the Center’s Summer Institute, noting that experts are brought to the
campus to discuss active learning strategies, learning community pedagogy, course
47
48
Ibid.
―About the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.‖ Grand View University.
http://www.grandview.edu/aspx/audience/audience.aspx?pageid=1287&aid=5
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
25
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
design, assessment, and student engagement.49 The 2009 Summer Institute focused
primarily on ―topics related to reducing student apathy and increasing motivation.‖ 50
According to the Noel Levitz award description, the GPA and percentage of
students receiving a grade of C or higher in learning community classes are
higher than students enrolling in non-learning community sections. In terms of
student engagement, NSSE results indicate that student-faculty interactions at the
university have improved, with NSSE scores in this area increasing from 33.7 to
36.2 for freshmen and from 41.6 to 42.9 for seniors since 2004. 51 The five-year
average freshman to sophomore retention rate improved from 61 percent to 68.3
percent, while the freshman to junior retention rate increased from 47 percent to 54
percent. Finally, the five-year graduation rate at the university jumped from 33
percent to 37.9 percent.52
Stevenson University
Stevenson University, a private college located in Maryland with a primarily
undergraduate population of 3,409 students,53 received an award from Noel Levitz
in 2001. Note that the institution changed its name from Villa Julie College to
Stevenson University in 2008.54
The program that earned the institution the retention award was its Partnerships
and Student Success (PASS) program, a mentoring program that is still in
operation today.55 The program is designed to increase the success of conditionally
admitted freshmen.56
In the fall of 1996, the institution established its mentoring program with the
philosophy that ―students’ persistence at Villa Julie College [now Stevenson] reflects
our involvement and commitment to them.‖57 The program targeted students ranked
in the lower 20 percent of graduating high school classes, a population that needed
more personalized attention than other incoming students. Students are informed of
their mandatory participation in the PASS program when they receive their
―Retention Excellence Awards – Grand View College (IA).‖ Op. cit.
―CETL: Workshops and Conferences.‖ Grand View University.
http://www.grandview.edu/aspx/audience/audience.aspx?pageid=1289&aid=5
51 Note that the institution does not indicate in which year the post-implementation NSSE scores were
measured. However, the award was granted in 2008, suggesting that this data is accurate as of that year.
52 ―Retention Excellence Awards – Grand View College.‖ Noel Levitz. Op. cit.
53 ―College Navigator.‖ National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
54 ―History of the University.‖ Stevenson University. http://www.stevenson.edu/explore/history_main.asp
55 ―PASS Program.‖ Stevenson University. http://academiclink.stevensonuniversity.org/programs/pass/
56 ―Retention Excellence Awards – Villa Julie College.‖ Noel Levitz.
https://www.noellevitz.com/Papers+and+Research/Retention+Excellence+Awards/2+year+colleges/Vil
la+Julie+College+(MD).htm
57 Ibid.
49
50
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
26
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
conditional acceptance letters. These individuals are invited to an informal event
over the summer, hosted by their mentors, drawn from faculty, staff, and
administrators at the institution. The initial orientation provides details of the goals
of the program to the students. These include:
 To create an immediate partnership between student and mentor in
which both share a commitment to a common goal – the student’s success.
 To unify the efforts of faculty and student services in supporting
students.
 To influence students’ social interaction so they feel connected and inspired
to get involved in campus life.
 To integrate “at-risk” students, not isolate them.58
The program is composed of the following elements:
 Mandatory student-mentor meetings on a weekly basis
 A manual for mentors which outlines early intervention and the importance
of communication in ensuring student persistence
 Reinforcement of the college’s Freshman Seminar
 Referral of students to additional support services
 Encouragement from mentors to participate in campus organizations and
activities
 Facilitation of networking between student participants, faculty, academic
advisors, personal counselors, and other student services staff 59
At the time of the award, the program had already seen impressive results. For
example, before the program began, 50 percent of conditionally accepted students
earned final GPAs over 2.0. The freshman to sophomore retention rate for these
students rested around 65 percent. After PASS was implemented, over 70 percent
of such students earned final GPAs over 2.0 (with a concurrent drop in the
number of students on academic probation). At the same time, the freshman to
sophomore retention rate increased to almost 73 percent.60
Quoted verbatim from Noel Levitz award description. Ibid.
Ibid.
60 Ibid.
58
59
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
27
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Lynchburg College
Lynchburg College is a small, four-year private institution located in Virginia, with
2,572 students (of which 2,183 are undergraduates).61 Though not a recipient of a
Noel Levitz award, the Lynchburg College Connections Program provides
another promising example of institutional retention efforts. Receiving a Certificate
of Merit from the National Academic Advisors Association for Outstanding
Institutional Advising Program (2003), the program offers services designed to equip
students with the tools they need to successfully transition to campus life.62
The program is described as a focal point of the college’s freshman programs,
designed to facilitate the building of relationships between classmates and the
Lynchburg College community. The program is led by Connection Leaders who
act as peer educators and mentors. These individuals are current Lynchburg College
students who have completed at least one year at the college, have a GPA of 2.5 or
above, and a clean disciplinary record. According to the college, these individuals
should be ―articulate, responsible, compassionate, full of energy and enthusiasm,
involved on campus, as well as a good role model for other students.‖ 63 Further,
freshmen with the same academic advisor are placed in the same Connection
Group. This is to facilitate a close relationship between the student, advisor, and
Connection Leader.64
The Connections Program is comprised of Student Orientation and Registration
(SOAR), Welcome Week, and a Freshman Success Seminar.
SOAR
At SOAR, students are introduced to their Connection Leader (the
upperclassman who will work with them throughout the fall semester), their
advisor, and a number of their fellow students. Students receive their class
schedule and are provided with an opportunity to make changes if necessary. The
SOAR session also offers programming for parents and guests, providing them
with the opportunity to meet with college officials and learn about campus services
and the Lynchburg College community. The college notes that parents will ―find
interactions with Connection Leaders most helpful in understanding how best to help
their students be successful at [Lynchburg College].‖65 The following is a list of
student and parent events offered during the SOAR session.
―College Navigator.‖ National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
62 ―Program Winners: The Connections Program.‖ National Academic Advising Association.
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/programs/Awards/archive/mentors.htm#lynchburg
63 ―Connections Program.‖ Lynchburg College. http://www.lynchburg.edu/connections.xml
64 ―Freshmen Advising.‖ Lynchburg College. http://www.lynchburg.edu/x587.xml
65 ―Student Orientation and Registration (SOAR).‖ Lynchburg College. http://www.lynchburg.edu/soar
61
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
28
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Parent and Student SOAR Events at Lynchburg College
Student Events
Registration
Student Information Fair
Services for Students with Special Needs
Welcome to Lynchburg College
Student Connection Group Meetings (with
Connection Leader)
Connection Group Meeting with Academic
Advisor
Student Success at LC
Transitions Play
Luau – LC Style
What’s Next (things you need to know about
settling in on campus in August)
Academic Advising Appointments, College
Student Inventory and Placement Testing
Open Houses (campus tours)
College Expenses (discussion of payment
options, meal plans, banking, etc.)
Student Loans (Q&A regarding financial aid)
-
Parent/Guest Events
Registration
Student Information Fair
Services for Students with Special Needs
Welcome to Lynchburg College
Town Meeting (with deans and other college
officials for discussions of student life and
services at Lynchburg College)
Partnership for Student Success at LC
The Freshmen Academic Experience (with
student’s academic advisor)
Transitions Play
Transitions for Parents (Connection leaders
provide their perspective on leaving for college
and their first semester away from home)
Open Houses (campus tours)
College Expenses (discussion of payment
options, meal plans, banking, etc.)
Student Loans (Q&A regarding financial aid)
Success for Student-Athletes (success strategies
for parents of student-athletes)
Source: Lynchburg College.66
Welcome Week
Following SOAR, students attend Welcome Week, beginning the Thursday evening
before the start of classes. The week consists of a variety of events and information
sessions ―designed specifically to assist new students in making a successful transition
to Lynchburg College.‖67 Participation in Welcome Week is mandatory for all
new full-time students.
Welcome Week gives students the opportunity to:




Re-establish contact with their Connections Group and Connections Leader
Understand Lynchburg College standards of behavior and policies
Meet with their advisor to review class schedule and discuss common reading
Meet with Residence Assistants and other students in their residence halls
―Student Orientation and Registration – June 2010 Schedule of Events.‖ Lynchburg College.
http://www.lynchburg.edu/documents/ProspectiveStudents/GettingStarted/junesoarschedule.pdf
67 ―Welcome Week.‖ Lynchburg College. http://www.lynchburg.edu/x2062.xml
66
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
29
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
 Discuss alcohol, substance abuse, and other health/safety issues
 Learn more about the Lynchburg College community and available resources
 Become familiar with community service opportunities68
Freshman Success Seminar
Lynchburg College offers an elective, one-credit course titled GS 100: Freshman
Success Seminar. The course integrates theory and direct student experience in
order to address issues related to ―decision making, goal setting, academic strategies,
policies and procedures, healthy choices, and adjustments to college life.‖69 The
Connection Leaders are responsible for facilitating the seminars using guidelines
provided by the college during ongoing training sessions.
In terms of the success of the Connections Program, the National Academic
Advising Association comments,
While no single part of the program is distinctive, the synergistic connections
between the parts have resulted in increased faculty satisfaction with advising
support services, increased satisfaction with advising and improved academic
performance on the part of freshmen as measured by average freshman year
grade-point average and academic hours completed, additional leadership
opportunities for upper class students, and efficient management of space
and personnel…with significant savings for the institution.70
Ibid.
―Freshman Success Seminar.‖ Lynchburg College. http://www.lynchburg.edu/x4386.xml
70 ―Program Winners: The Connections Program.‖ Op. cit.
68
69
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
30
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Appendix
The following table provides the complete results regarding retention practices at
four-year private colleges, from the 2004 ACT study titled, ―What Works in Student
Retention?‖ Respondents were presented with the following prompt:
Of the programs, services, curricular offerings, and interventions that may
make a contribution to retention on your campus, indicate if the feature is or
is not offered on your campus. Then if the feature is offered, indicate the
degree to which you think it contributes to retention on your campus.
(Response scale: 5=major contribution to 1=no contribution).71
Retention Practices, Four-Year Private Colleges
All Survey
Colleges
%
Mean
Report
First-Year Programs
1. Pre-enrollment orientation
2. Extended freshman orientation (noncredit)
3. Extended freshman orientation (credit)
4. Freshman seminar/university 101 (noncredit)
5. Freshman seminar/university 101 (credit)
Academic Advising Program
6. Advising interventions with selected
student populations
7. Advisor training
8. Increased advising staff
9. Integration of advising with first-year
transition programs
10. Academic advising centers
11. Centers that combine advisement and
counseling with career planning and placement
12. Advisor manual/handbook
13. Application of technology to advising
Assessment Programs
14. Classroom assessment
15. Course placement testing (mandated)
16. Course placement testing (recommended)
17. Outcomes assessment
18. Diagnostic academic skills test(s)
71
4-Year Private Colleges
%
Mean
% High% LowReport Contribution Performing Performing
82
3.5
79
3.5
81
81
27
3.6
38
3.6
40
28
26
3.6
24
3.6
10
36
8
3.5
8
3.6
8
13
51
3.8
55
3.9
58
58
75
3.8
74
3.8
89
84
70
30
3.4
3.8
69
24
3.3
3.8
87
36
56
20
41
3.8
48
3.9
65
46
47
3.8
29
3.8
39
16
33
3.7
21
3.6
18
22
56
58
2.9
3.2
54
49
2.7
2.9
72
66
42
38
77
76
30
66
46
3.1
3.6
3.3
3
3.2
78
64
32
68
42
3
3.2
2.9
3
3.1
74
64
46
71
42
86
73
35
67
52
Habley and McClanahan. Op. cit. p. 18-20.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
31
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
19. Learning styles inventory(ies)
20. Motivation assessment(s)
21. Values inventory(ies)
22. Interest inventory(ies)
23. Vocational aptitude test(s)
24. Personality test(s)
Career Planning and Placement Programs
25. Career development workshops or
courses
26. Internships
27. Cooperative education
28. Individual career counseling services
29. Computer-assisted career guidance
30. Job shadowing
Learning Assistance/Academic
31. Learning communities
32. Supplemental instruction
33. Summer bridge program
34. Remedial/developmental coursework
(required)
35. Remedial/developmental coursework
(recommended)
36. Comprehensive learning assistance
center/lab
37. Mathematics center/lab
38. Writing center/lab
39. Reading center/lab
40. Foreign language center/lab
41. Tutoring program
42. Study skills course, program, or center
43. Early warning system
44. Mid-term progress reports
45. Performance contracts for students in
academic difficulty
46. Degree guarantee program
47. Organized student study groups
48. Service learning programs
Mentoring Programs
49. Peer mentoring
50. Faculty mentoring
APRIL 2010
All Survey
Colleges
%
Mean
Report
37
2.9
12
3
24
2.9
50
2.9
34
2.9
32
2.8
4-Year Private Colleges
%
Mean
% High% LowReport Contribution Performing Performing
34
2.9
35
42
12
3
16
6
24
2.9
31
14
42
2.9
41
41
26
2.8
34
23
31
2.8
39
26
76
3.1
73
3
94
70
82
43
83
67
32
3.6
3.5
3.3
3
3.1
90
24
81
57
34
3.7
3.5
3.2
2.8
3.1
94
30
94
74
48
94
21
71
43
16
34
51
27
3.7
3.7
3.6
23
46
18
3.7
3.5
3.6
45
48
36
14
58
8
69
3.7
52
3.5
26
61
35
3.5
29
3.3
33
32
57
3.9
47
3.8
48
56
54
68
31
30
87
70
61
64
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.1
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.3
39
64
21
30
84
66
67
79
3.4
3.5
3.7
2.9
3.7
3.5
3.5
3.4
52
89
23
63
87
73
69
87
39
54
29
12
85
71
71
84
38
3.4
43
3.3
42
47
10
13
41
2.7
3.5
3.2
5
28
46
2.7
3.4
3.1
5
34
68
4
27
44
42
43
3.5
3.6
49
44
3.5
3.7
56
70
42
33
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
32
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
51. Staff mentoring
52. Community member mentoring
Faculty Development Programs
53. Teaching techniques
54. Assessing student performance
55. Instructional use of technology
56. Writing across the curriculum
57. Interdisciplinary courses
58. Enhanced/modified faculty reward
system
Parent Programs
59. Parent newsletter
60. Parent orientation
61. Advisory group
Campus Programs
62. Freshman interest groups (FIGS)
63. Diversity information/training
64. Residence hall programs
65. Fraternities/sororities
66. Recreation/intramurals
67. Academic clubs
68. Cultural activities program
69. Leadership development
Programs for Sub-populations
70. Adult students
71. Commuter students
72. Gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender
students
73. Women
74. Racial/ethnic minorities
75. Honor students
Additional Activities
76. Time management course/program
77. Health and wellness course/program
78. Personal coping skills course/program
79. Social skills course/program
80. Required on-campus housing for
freshmen
81. Library orientation, workshop, and/or
course
APRIL 2010
All Survey
Colleges
%
Mean
Report
22
3.5
8
3.3
4-Year Private Colleges
%
Mean
% High% LowReport Contribution Performing Performing
26
3.5
31
26
9
3.3
11
13
62
30
83
50
48
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.2
3.1
57
29
79
53
67
3.3
3.3
3.1
3.2
3
78
71
90
70
82
56
58
80
44
61
31
3
19
3
37
10
20
52
22
2.8
3.1
2.9
31
66
25
2.8
3.1
2.5
46
79
45
28
61
8
11
50
59
31
78
84
78
72
3.6
3
3.4
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.4
10
46
82
34
84
78
75
74
3.5
2.9
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.4
20
79
94
56
98
87
92
87
14
28
76
39
96
71
70
68
38
28
3.3
3.2
40
36
3.3
3.1
38
35
46
32
29
3
30
3
62
12
39
56
64
3.2
3.4
3.7
40
58
57
3.2
3.3
3.6
68
87
61
26
38
43
46
58
33
17
3.2
2.9
3.1
3.1
45
58
32
16
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.1
65
74
52
23
34
44
33
15
35
3.6
63
3.6
85
78
73
2.9
78
2.8
92
76
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
33
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
All Survey
Colleges
%
Mean
Report
82. Motivation and goal setting
workshop/program
29
3.2
4-Year Private Colleges
%
Mean
% High% LowReport Contribution Performing Performing
26
3.2
31
26
Source: ACT.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
34
ACADEMY ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE
APRIL 2010
Project Evaluation Form
The Hanover Research Council is committed to providing a work product that meets
or exceeds member expectations. In keeping with that goal, we would like to hear
your opinions regarding our reports. Feedback is critically important and serves as the
strongest mechanism by which we tailor our research to your organization. When you
have had a chance to evaluate this report, please take a moment to fill out the
following questionnaire.
http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php
Note
This brief was written to fulfill the specific request of an individual member of The
Hanover Research Council. As such, it may not satisfy the needs of all members. We
encourage any and all members who have additional questions about this topic – or
any other – to contact us.
Caveat
The publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this brief. The
publisher and authors make no representations or warranties with respect to the
accuracy or completeness of the contents of this brief and specifically disclaim any
implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. There are no warranties which
extend beyond the descriptions contained in this paragraph. No warranty may be
created or extended by representatives of The Hanover Research Council or its
marketing materials. The accuracy and completeness of the information provided
herein and the opinions stated herein are not guaranteed or warranted to produce any
particular results, and the advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable
for every member. Neither the publisher nor the authors shall be liable for any loss
of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special,
incidental, consequential, or other damages. Moreover, The Hanover Research
Council is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services.
Members requiring such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional.
© 2010 The Hanover Research Council – Academy Administration Practice
35