Both for-profit and not-for-profit institutions have retention goals. There
are often multiple goals, and it is not clear what the 87% refers to in this
case. Here are some of the types of retention statistics that are kept...
[1] First semester retention rate for freshmen... how many new freshmen
remain in school from first semester to second semester of their freshman
year. We also keep the same statistic for sophomores, juniors, and seniors,
but the first semester is the critical one. Students who leave after their
very first semester might have discovered they don't want to be in any
college (and they quit), or they don't like this particular institution (and
they transfer). Depending on the institution, the first-semester retention
rate for first-time students can range from roughly 50% to 90%. At my
institution this generally runs from 85% to 90%. Of course we would like
100%, but that doesn't happen.
We try to conduct exit interviews, but they are voluntary for the student.
If the student quits college altogether we want to know if we could have
retained the student with a better "how to survive in college" orientation,
etc. If the student transfers we want to know if the problem was a
campus-life problem, or a problem with the the student's major department,
etc.
Faculty are indeed under pressure to retain students. When we become aware
that a student I advise is planning to leave our institution, I am supposed
to interview them to find out why, and see if I can convince them to stay.
Faculty are constantly reminded that we should identify and work with "at
risk" students. Early identification is crucial. Losing 10% to 15% of the
first-year students after the first semester is obviously something we wish
wouldn't happen, but there are only 15 weeks in the semester, and students
have probably already decided to leave by the time they are halfway through
it.
[2] First-year-to-second-year retention rate... how many students come back
after the first year. This runs from 70% to 80% at my institution; that is,
we lose 10% to 15% of the entering freshman after the first semester, then
we lose another 10% to 15% of the entering freshman after the second
semester. That's fairly typical at 4-year moderately selective private
colleges. Again, faculty are pushed to see what can be done to stop these
students from leaving.
[3] Overall college retention rate (graduation rate)... how many entering
students actually graduate. This statistic is figured three ways: 4-year
graduation rate, 5-year graduation rate, and 6-year graduation rate. The
4-year graduation rate has been dropping, but this has been somewhat offset
by an increase in the 5-year graduation rate. These rates fluctuate widely
from school to school.
[4] Retention rate within the declared major... how many students who said
they were going to major in physics actually stay in physics, etc. This is
very dependent on student preparation and student understanding of what it
really means to major in a particular field.
Retention in the sciences is low. Math preparation in high school is a big
part of this. We place students into calculus, pre-calculus, college
algebra, or basic math. It used to be (approximately pre-1980) that
students took two years of algebra, a year of geometry, and a year of
trigonometry in high school. Grades of A or B in these courses pretty much
meant they were calculus ready. Today, based on ACT or SAT scores, and
high-school math courses and grades, few entering students are calculus
ready; many need pre-calculus; and we have a growing number who need college
algebra or even basic math. (Basic Math is a remedial course that does not
carry full college credit.) When entering students are not "calculus-ready"
we know from the start they are at risk in any science discipline. Students
below the pre-calculus level probably cannot major in any science discipline
and be able to graduate in 4 years. We tell them this right up front, but
it doesn't seem to sink right away. Once they truly realize they are
looking at a 5-year program, some leave science, and some leave college
altogether.
It also used to be that high schools had a college-bound academic track that
included chemistry and physics. All college-bound students were expected to
take physical science, biology, chemistry, and physics in high-school grades
9, 10, 11, and 12. I wish this were true today. In northwest Ohio only
about 10% of high school students take physics, and only 30% take chemistry,
yet most of these students will try college, and many think they are going
to be scientists or engineers or go into medicine.
Our retention rate for pre-medicine students can be as low as 10%. I place
most of the blame on parents and high-school guidance guidance counselors.
There is a a strong belief among high school students, and parents, and even
guidance counselors, that students wanting to go into medicine only need
biology courses in high school. They are not being told (or convinced) that
typical minimum requirements for med school include a minimum of two years
of lab chemistry (including organic chemistry), a full year of college
calculus, a full year of lab physics (preferably calculus based), and only
one year of college biology. They think they only need biology courses in
high school and college. As a result, way too many college
pre-med-want-to-be students did not take chemistry in high school; did not
take physics in high school; did not take trig (or pre-calculus) in in high
school.
There is also the high-school student and parent belief that getting A
grades in high school is more important than taking the right courses,
because they think they need A grades to get into the college of choice, and
particularly to get a good scholarship. They take physical science then
only biology courses or other watered-down science courses in high school.
They also take simpler math courses. These students have little chance as
science majors (even as biology majors) in college, and no chance as pre-med
students in college. Students with poor high-school math and without
high-school chemistry and physics generally don't pass the first-semester of
our "first-year chemistry" course. 1st-semester to 2nd-semester retention
in that course generally runs about 50%. All science majors (biology,
chemistry, physics, dietetics, pre-medicine) begin with this 1st-year
chemistry course. Students who don't survive the first semester of
chemistry, and don't have a "back-up major" in mind, will probably drop
completely out of college.
The science department at my institution has sometimes taken a real beating
from some administrators because of our low retention in the various science
programs... particularly retention for pre-med students. (That's because we
enroll a lot of pre-med-want-to-be students and the university would like to
retain all these students.) Fortunately, the current administration
understands the problem occurs in high school. Therefore, in order to try
to retain some of the pre-med drop-outs in some other program at our
institution, the university is initiating new programs in "health care"
areas such as "public health" and "management of healthcare facilities" and
"athletic training" and things like that.
The science division is not sure how to view this because the "public
health" program is housed in the social science division (not science), and
the "management of healthcare facilities" is obviously in the business
division, and the "athletic training" program is housed in the
physical-education division. There is also a "recreation" major in the
physical-education division that ends up with a reasonable portion of
students who enter here as biology students, don't make the grade, and
decide to go into "outdoor recreation." On one hand these alternative
programs are good because it indicates the administration is not blaming
science for 10% retention of pre-med students, and is trying ways to hold
onto the 90% who don't make it in straight medicine, but still might have a
career in health or recreation fields. On the other hand, some students who
could have made it as pre-med students will probably choose one of these
other programs because these are easier programs. Therefore, these
health-related programs will likely draw some capable students away from
majors in science. These new programs have both an upside and a downside
from the viewpoint of the science professors.
Anyway, retention within the sciences is something we have been struggling
with. Administrators who don't understand what's going on can be really
nasty to science professors. Enlightened administrators don't blame us, but
they do worry about being able to support traditional science programs.
[5] Retention in a particular course... how many students who register for a
course complete that course. It would seem to me that even an 87% retention
rate is pretty low. My retention rate in calculus-based physics is nearly
100% if we mean the percentage of students who don't drop the course or
withdraw from the course. It's also nearly 100% if we don't count those
who get a failing grade, because those who totally fail (lower than D)
usually would be zero or one student. Only if the D students are considered
as "non-retained" would my retention rate go below 90%.
[Bottom Line] Retention is a big thing. Faculty at my institution feel the
pressure to help retain students in any way we can. There is no doubt about
this. Indeed, for a few years we had an academic dean who felt low
retention in a particular program was the fault of poor teaching by
professors in that program. That dean did not last long (although it was
longer than it should have been). Good administrators know that retention
is a very complicated issue. I don't mind an administration that wants me
(as a faculty member) to own part of the retention problem. I believe
grappling with retention is part of advising, and I believe advising is part
of a faculty member's duties. At the same time, I expect the administration
to realize there is only so much that advising can accomplish, and that good
advising sometimes means steering a student into a different major or even a
different college or even dropping out of college. I also expect the
administration to support faculty who fight grade inflation even when we all
know that students who are not doing the expected work, and are graded
appropriately, are likely to withdraw if they lose a scholarship.
If an administrator seems to throw the whole retention problem onto the
faculty, and threatens dismissal for poor retention (whatever that means),
then I believe the administrator doesn't understand the retention problem,
or is passing the buck, or both.
Also please note that I am not blaming high school science teachers for the
lack of science preparation of students coming to college. I am blaming the
students, their parents, and guidance counselors. The high school physics
teacher cannot be blamed for the 90% of students entering my institution who
did not take high school physics.
Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics
Chair, Division of Natural and Applied Sciences
Bluffton University
1 University Drive
Bluffton, OH 45817