DOCUMENT RESUME ED 433 779 HE 032 329 AUTHOR Li, Guihua; Killian, Tim TITLE Students Who Left College: An Examination of Their Characteristics and Reasons for Leaving. AIR 1999 Annual Forum Paper. PUB DATE 1999-05-31 NOTE 27p.; Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research (39th, Seattle, WA, May 30-June 3, 1999). PUB TYPE Reports Research (143) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Persistence; *College Students; Dropout Prevention; *Dropout Research; *Dropouts; Higher Education; Research Universities; *School Holding Power; *Student Attitudes; Surveys IDENTIFIERS *AIR Forum ABSTRACT Patterns of attrition at a midwestern research university were examined through telephone interviews of 622 students who had left the institution prematurely and through analysis of institutional data to compare school leavers with those who stayed. This comparison found that school leavers were more likely to have lower college admission test scores, be Hispanic (but less likely to be African American), and more likely to have an educational loan. Reasons given by students for leaving the university were diverse, and included (in order of frequency mentioned): family or personal problems, financial difficulties, felt faculty didn't care about students, unable to get needed academic advice, believed that program in preferred academic area was poor, and felt that classes were poorly taught. Results suggest that student/institutional mismatch is a major reason for students leaving. The following recommendations are offered: (1) establish an early alert system; (2) fully utilize the campus learning center; (3) enhance financial resources and strengthen financial advising; and (4) strengthen professional and peer advising efforts. Five tables detail the study's findings. (Contains 16 references.) (DB) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ********************************************************************************
28
Embed
DOCUMENT RESUME AUTHOR Li, Guihua; Killian, Tim · 2013-08-02 · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 433 779 HE 032 329. AUTHOR Li, Guihua; Killian, Tim TITLE Students Who Left College: An Examination
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 433 779 HE 032 329
AUTHOR Li, Guihua; Killian, TimTITLE Students Who Left College: An Examination of Their
Characteristics and Reasons for Leaving. AIR 1999 AnnualForum Paper.
PUB DATE 1999-05-31NOTE 27p.; Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association
for Institutional Research (39th, Seattle, WA, May 30-June3, 1999).
PUB TYPE Reports Research (143) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150)EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Academic Persistence; *College Students; Dropout
ABSTRACTPatterns of attrition at a midwestern research university
were examined through telephone interviews of 622 students who had left theinstitution prematurely and through analysis of institutional data to compareschool leavers with those who stayed. This comparison found that schoolleavers were more likely to have lower college admission test scores, beHispanic (but less likely to be African American), and more likely to have aneducational loan. Reasons given by students for leaving the university werediverse, and included (in order of frequency mentioned): family or personalproblems, financial difficulties, felt faculty didn't care about students,unable to get needed academic advice, believed that program in preferredacademic area was poor, and felt that classes were poorly taught. Resultssuggest that student/institutional mismatch is a major reason for studentsleaving. The following recommendations are offered: (1) establish an earlyalert system; (2) fully utilize the campus learning center; (3) enhancefinancial resources and strengthen financial advising; and (4) strengthenprofessional and peer advising efforts. Five tables detail the study'sfindings. (Contains 16 references.) (DB)
Paper presented at AIR annual conference at Seattle, WA, May 31, 1999.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
tleThis document has been 'reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.
Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.
rkf.?
Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily represent
1) official OERI position cr policy.
BESTCOPYAVAILABLE
2
1
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
BEEN GRANTED BY
D. Vura
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
ARfor Management Research, Policy Analysis, and Planning
This paper was presented at the Thirty-Ninth Annual Forumof the. Association for Institutional Research held in Seattle,Washington, May 30-June 3, 1999.This paper was reviewed by the AIR Forum PublicationsCommittee and was judged to be of high quality and ofinterest to others concerned with the research of highereducation. It has therefore been selected to be included inthe ERIC Collection of AIR Forum Papers.
Dolores VuraEditorAir Forum Publications
Students Who Left College:
An Examination of Their Characteristics and Reasons for Leaving
Abstract
Personal, financial, and academic circumstances often interfere with students' retention. It isessential to understand these circumstances to help students succeed in higher education. Thepurpose of this study is to examine reasons for attrition at a Mid-western research universityhoping to improve the retention rate and ultimately students' success rate in achieving abachelor's degree. A telephone survey was conducted with 622 students who left the institution.Results of the survey and institutional data are analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively.Discussions of implications and suggestions for improving campus retention rates will also be animportant part of the presentation.
4
Students Who Left College 1
Students Who Left College:
An Examination of Their Characteristics and Reasons for Leaving
Attrition is costly in at least two ways for institutions of higher education. First, when a student
leaves an institution, it is a loss for the student regarding the student's development the institution could
help enhance (Li, Long, & Simpson, 1999; Rendon, Terenzini, & Gardner, March 18, 1999). Based on an
extensive review of more than 20 years' literature regarding college impact, Pascarella and Terenzini
(1991) observed, "Students not only make statistically significant gains in factual knowledge and in a
range of general cognitive and intellectual skills, they also change on a broad array of value, attitudinal,
psychosocial, and moral dimensions" (p. 557). Second, when a student leaves an institution, it is a loss of
revenue for the institution, especially for the tuition driven institutions (Tinto, 1993). Thus, retaining as
many students as possible has become a priority for many institutions of higher education. The emphasis
on retention has been evidenced in the establishment of numerous retention committees and task forces on
many campuses across the nation. The difficulty, however, in understanding the variable nature of
student attrition makes mounting successful retention strategies difficult.
For years, researchers have been studying different factors that may potentially contribute to
individual decisions to stay in or leave higher education. For example, Tinto (1975, 1993), building upon
the work of Spady (1970), used the academic and social integration model to examine student retention.
He argued that the more a student became integrated into the academic and social systems of a university,
the more committed the student would be to the goal of college completion. Similarly, Astin (1984)
examined retention from students' involvement perspective. He contended that students' involvement on
campus contributed to persistence whereas lack of involvement was related to student attrition.
According to Astin (1984), involvement refers to the amount of physical and psychological energy that
the student devotes to the academic experience. While evidence suggests that both students' integration
and involvement are related to retention, researchers have found that a wide range of factors that
5
Students Who Left College 2
influence students' decisions to stay in or leave higher education (Arnold, Mares, & Calkins, 1986; Astin,
Table 4. Students Agreement or Disagreement with Reasons for Leaving the Institution
I left because . . . . % agree % neutral % disagree
I had family or personal problems 37.5 2.4 60.1
I had unexpected financial difficulties 32.2 3.4 64.5
The faculty did not care about students 30.1 5.3 64.1
I could not get the advice needed about
course and programs 26.2 3.5 70.2
I didn't like the academic program in
my area of interest 26.0 3.2 70.1
I found classes to be poorly taught 21.7 6.1 72.0
I could not get into wanted classes 17.7 2.7 79.5
I didn't like living arrangements 15.4 0.5 83.6
I disliked the social atmosphere 15.2 2.1 82.8
I didn't like living in this city 14.3 3.7 81.2
I was not admitted to the academic
program in my area of interest 13.4 1.8 83.7
I found the academic program too difficult 12.2 3.5 83.9
I found the academic program was not
challenging 7.2 3.2 89.6
25
Students Who Left College
Table 5. Main Reasons Given by Students for Leaving the University
Reasons for Leaving Number Percent
1. ACADEMIC 376 61.44%
A. Institution programs and student mismatch 168 27.45%
(a) The university doesn't have program interested in 23 3.76%
(b) Didn't like program in major 17 2.78%
(c) Didn't like course requirements outside major 4 0.65%
(d) Transferred 117 19.12%
1) Program the university doesn't offer 22 3.59%2) Closer to home 20 3.27%3) "Stronger" program than the university 17 2.78%4) Smaller school 7 1.14%5) Accepted into program (at another school) 30 4.90%6) Cheaper 8 1.31%7) Graduate faster 6 0.98%8) Sports 5 0.82%9) No reason given 2 0.33%
(e) Undecided major 7 1.14%
B. Classes 26 4.25%
(a) Too big 17 2.78%
(b) Class availability 5 0.82%
(c) Too many TAs 4 0.65%
C. Instructors and advisors 67 10.95%
(a) Lack of personal attention or unfriendly faculty members 35 5.72%
(b) Lack of advising or poor advising 15 2.45%
(c) English language ability of TAs 6 0.98%
(d) "Not happy with classes" 11 1.80%
D. Student performance 105 17.16%
(a) Couldn't get into program interested in 31 5.07%
(b) Poor grades 61 9.97%
(c) Dismissed 11 1.80%
(d) Not academically prepared 2 0.33%
E. General academic reasons 10 1.63%
(To be continued)
26
22
(Table 5 continued)
Students Who Left College
2. FINANCIAL
3. CAMPUS SERVICES
Number
100
20
Percent
16.34%
3.27%
A. Housing/roommate problem 11 1.80%
B. Financial Aid Office 3 0.49%
C. Passed from office to office and/or red tape 2 0.33%
D. Other university services 4 0.65%
4. PERSONAL 210 34.31%
A. Personal problems/issues 79 12.91%
B. Illness personal or family 25 4.08%
C. Accepted job offer in career field 18 2.94%
D. Didn't like the university or the city 25 4.08%
E. Girl/boy friend problem 1 0.16%
F. Not "ready" for college (not "mature" enough) 4 0.65%
G. Moved closer to home 22 3.59%
H. Socialized too much 7 1.14%
I. Burned out on school 8 1.31%
J. Social reasons 16 2.61%
K. Too hard to be non-traditional/part-time at MU 5 0.82%
5. DIDN'T REALLY DROP OUT-WILL FINISH 34 5.56%
A. Stopped-out 13 2.12%
B. Graduated 9 1.47%
C. Finishing last hours by correspondence 6 0.98%
D. Off campus internship returning to the university 4 0.65%
E. Accepted into professional school without degree 2 0.33%
23
Note. The total number is 740 due to some students' multiple reasons for leaving.
27
U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)
National Library of Education (NLE)Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)
NOTICE
REPRODUCTION BASIS
E IC
This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket) form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.
This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form(either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").