PACT FACTS FOR STUDENT SUCCESS NOVEMBER 6, 2012 Teaching & Learning Presentations George Hollich (PSY120) and Marcy Towns (CHEM115) will talk about their.

PACT FACTS FORSTUDENT SUCCESS

NOVEMBER 6, 2012

Teaching & Learning PresentationsGeorge Hollich (PSY120) and Marcy Towns (CHEM115) will talk about their IMPACT course redesign experiences

Factors Affecting Student Success & RetentionA Series of TED(like) Talks on:• Grouped Data to Predict & Compare

Academic Success Rates• At-Risk Students • CODO and Student Success• Co-curricular Effects on Student

Success• Effect of Residence Hall Living on

Student Success• What Predicts Grad Student Success?

Brent Drake,

EMAR

Brenda

Schroeder,

Advising

Andy Zehner,

Student Affairs

Kevin Maurer,

Housing & Food

Services

Phil Pope,

Graduate School

November 6, 2012

FACTORS AFFECTING STUDENT SUCCESS & RETENTION AT PURDUE

GROUPED DATABRENT DRAKE, ASSISTANT VICE PROVOST & DIRECTORENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS & REPORTING

GROUPED DATA PREDICTIONS

MULTIPLE CORRELATIONS AT SINGLE INSTITUTION

Multiple correlations between measures of academic success and unit level student entering academic profiles at one institution tend to lead to correlations of low to moderate effect sizes (Bridgeman, McCamley-Jenkins, & Ervin, 2000)

Some reasons identified in the literature (Stumpf & Stanley, 2002)• Restriction of range inherent in any one institutions academic profile• The interdependence of academic profile variables from high school transcripts

and standardized tests• The disparate academic experience of students in one institution

GROUPED DATA PREDICTIONS

SOLUTION BASED ON NATIONAL SAMPLE

Based on Stumpf and Stanley’s 2002 article use grouped data items readily available in two national data sets

• Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS)– 25th and 75th percentile of SAT Scores

• US News and World Report National Colleges data set– Percentage of students in top ten percent of high school class

Criterion variable was six-year graduation rates pulled from IPEDS

Final data set consisted of 199 institutions

Multiple correlation for model R2 = 0.8025 distinguishing between graduation rates at different institutions

GROUPED DATA PREDICTIONS

PURDUE RESULTS

Use national model at university level to predict success among different subgroups

• how well are individual colleges performing versus their predicted performance

Overall, Purdue outperforms its predicted rate• Most recent US News Report showed Purdue as a four percentage point

over performance as well

The majority of the colleges on the campus over perform as well• Wide range in performance (-6.75 to +38.88)

SECTION TITLE

AT RISK STUDENTSBRENT DRAKE,

ASSISTANT VICE PROVOST & DIRECTORENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS & REPORTING

AT RISK STUDENTS

SURVEY RESULTS

Freshmen students surveyed at end of their first year• Questions asked about likelihood of persistence, graduation, and commitment

to determine students risk of returning• Purdue has administered last 6 years

Advisement/support services

Campus environment

Financial factors

Academic factors

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5.4%

29.2%

20.8%

44.6%

2.4%

20.2%

26.2%

51.2%

3.9%

20.4%

23.7%

52.0%

2012 2010 2008

AT RISK STUDENTS

ACADEMIC FACTORS

I’m having trouble getting the major I want

The academic program does not match up with my career goals

I am interested in an academic program at another institution

The academic work load is more than I want

I am not challenged enough academically

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

17.2%

20.7%

32.8%

56.9%

12.1%

17.9%

25.0%

28.6%

39.3%

46.4%

14.9%

40.3%

34.3%

64.2%

10.4%

2012 2010 2008

AT RISK STUDENTS

FINANCIAL FACTORS

I think I can get a better education for the same price elsewhere

I feel that I cannot afford the cost of attending any school at this time

I need to go to an institution that is significantly less expensive than Purdue even if it means getting a lesser education

I think I can get the same level of education for a better price elsewhere

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

4.4%

26.7%

24.4%

44.4%

7.1%

28.6%

25.0%

39.3%

12.5%

18.8%

25.0%

43.8%

2012 2010 2008

AT RISK STUDENTS

CAMPUS ENVIRONMENT

I would prefer a school with more students

I don’t like living in the city

I would prefer more racial and ethnic diversity

I would prefer more economic diversity

I would prefer a school with fewer students

I would prefer to have more social opportunities

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

13.2%

10.5%

21.1%

21.1%

55.3%

50.0%

16.7%

16.7%

33.3%

33.3%

50.0%

50.0%

16.0%

24.0%

16.0%

28.0%

40.0%

68.0%

2012 2010 2008

SECTION TITLECODO-IN

SURVEYBRENDA SCHROEDER,ACADEMIC ADVISING ASSESSMENT TEAM

CODO-IN SURVEY

ACADEMIC ADVISINGASSESSMENT TEAM

The Goal of the Academic Advising Assessment Team

is to gain a better awareness and understanding of

the strengths and weaknesses of advising at Purdue. Ultimately, it is the team's hope that this process

will help improve advising on campus.

CODO-IN SURVEY

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

• Given to all students who CODO• Designed to collect information on:

–how students are CODOing, –why they are CODOing, –how they are selecting their majors

CODO-IN SURVEY

RESOURCES

Admissions w

ebsit

e

Advisor in

majo

r of in

terest

Advisor li

st/CODO re

quiremen

ts pag

e

CODO broch

ure/flye

r

Frien

d

CODO inform

ation m

eeting

College

/School w

ebsit

e

Course

Current a

dvisor

Other0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Resources for Learning CODO-IN Requirements(CODO- Change of Degree Objective/Change of Curricula)

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

ExamplesOther: Advisors, Ivy Tech Community College, Krannert, Laying Tracks, Own Research, Walk-InsCourses: AGEC 20300, AGEC 33100, CDFS 21000, COM 11400, COM 25000, EDPS 10500, EDPS 20000, GS 11900, HIST 15100, MGMT 10000, OLS 25200, OLS 27400, PHPR 10000, PSY 22200, SOC 10000

CODO-IN SURVEY

INFLUENCERS

Center

for C

areer

Opportunities

(CCO)

College

web

site

Course

Current a

dvisor

Family

mem

ber

Frien

d

Not elig

ible to co

ntinue in m

y curre

nt pro

gram

Results

from ca

reer a

ssessm

ent/i

nventory

Shad

owing/voluntee

r/work

experi

ence

The m

ajor b

est fits

my inter

ests

The m

ajor b

est fits

my abiliti

es

The m

ajor is

congru

ent w

ith m

y care

er go

als

Wan

ted to

explore

possible

majors

Other0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Factors Influencing CODO Decision(CODO – Change of Degree Objective/Change of Curricula)

Spring 2008 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

CODO-IN SURVEY

GPA OF CODO STUDENTS

4.00 3.50 - 3.99 3.00 - 3.49 2.50 - 2.99 2.00 - 2.49 1.50 - 1.99 1.49 or less0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Current Overall GPA

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

CODO-IN SURVEY

DEMOGRAPHICS OFCODO STUDENTS

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Gender

Female Male

African American American Indian Asian American Caucasian American Hispanic American Other0

100200300400500600700800900

1000

Ethnicity

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

CODO-IN SURVEY

WHERE DO THEY CODO TO?

Agricu

lture

Consumer

and Fa

mily Sc

iences

Educati

on

Engin

eerin

g

Health

and Human

Scien

ces

Health

Scien

ces

Libera

l Arts

Manag

emen

t

Nursing

Pharmacy

Scien

ce

Tech

nology

Undergrad

uate St

udies Pro

gram (U

SP)

Veterin

ary M

edicin

e 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

CODO-IN College/Program/School

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

CODO-IN SURVEY

WHERE DO THEY CODO FROM?

Agricu

lture

Consumer

and Fa

mily Sc

iences

Educati

on

Engin

eerin

g

Health

and Human

Scien

ces

Health

Scien

ces

Libera

l Arts

Manag

emen

t

Nursing

Pharmacy

Scien

ce

Tech

nology

Undergrad

uate St

udies Pro

gram (U

SP)

Veterin

ary M

edicin

e 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

CODO-OUT College/Program/School

2008 - Spring 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

CODO-IN SURVEY

THREE EXPECTATIONS OFACADEMIC ADVISOR

SECTION TITLE

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES & ACADEMIC SUCCESSANDY ZEHNER,ASSESSMENT & DATA ANALYSTSTUDENT AFFAIRS

Students who do both, do best

PURDUE STUDENTSALL GRADE CLASSIFICATIONS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 82.60

2.70

2.80

2.90

3.00

3.10

3.20

3.30

3.40

EngagedPurdue

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

Semester

STUDENT PERFORMANCE BY COLLEGE

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

College or SchoolAverage GPA Average Credits Earned Pct. 3/15

Engaged Purdue Engaged Purdue Engaged Purdue

College of Liberal Arts 2.99 2.80 15 14 41.5% 34.1%

First Year Engineering 3.09 2.89 18 16 55.1% 42.8%

College of Science 3.10 2.92 16 14 50.0% 36.2%

College of Health & Human Sci 3.25 3.08 16 15 55.0% 42.4%

College of Technology 3.15 2.85 16 14 53.4% 36.4%

College of Agriculture 3.09 2.83 16 15 48.6% 38.6%

School of Aero and Astro Engr 3.05 2.79 16 13 43.9% 31.3%

School of Management 3.18 2.99 16 15 51.4% 45.2%

WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP?

• Academic success co-varies with engagement

• Academic success is subsequent to engagement

• Engagement promotes academic success

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

HOW DOES ENGAGEMENTPROMOTE ACADEMIC SUCCESS?

• Most engaged students are excellent to begin with

• Engagement imposes order & discipline• Getting involved caps out-of-class activity• Expectations are high• Special tutoring is provided• Mens sana in corpore sano• Some course credits are relatively easy

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

ACADEMICS IS PRIMARY FOCUS31% OF SAO’S 900+ CLUBS/ORGANIZATIONS

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

Academic; 390

Mixed/uncertain; 415

Non-academic; 450

3 OUT OF 5 STUDENTS DEVOTE LESS THAN5 HRS/WK TO CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

None 1-5hrs

6-10hrs

11-15 hrs

16-20hrs

21-25hrs

Over25 hrs

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

FreshmenSeniors

Perc

ent o

f res

pond

ents

SECTION TITLE

RESIDENCE HALLS AND STUDENT SUCCESS

KEVIN MAURERDIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC INITIATIVES & ASSESSMENTHOUSING AND FOOD SERVICES

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCESUniversity Residences is one of the largest collegiate housing operations in the nation• Capacity of 11,779• No live-in requirement for students

POPULATIONS LIVING ON CAMPUS

92.2% of beginning students chose to live

in UR for Fall 2012

35.6% of all undergrads chose to live in UR – Fall 2012

Fall 2012 Occupancy

Single Undergrads 10,696Single Grads

265Families 622Total 11,583

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

POPULATIONS LIVING ON CAMPUS

13%

38%

63%

88%

West Lafayette Undergraduate Students Living in University Res-idences

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

FIRST YEAR TO SECONDYEAR RETENTION

2000 - 2001 2001 - 2002 2002- 2003 2003 - 2004 2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 201260%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

87%86%

87%86% 86%

85% 85%

90%89%

91% 91%

80%

83% 83%82%

80%79% 80%

66%

88%

84%85%

Residing in University Residences Not Residing in University Residences

Beginning Student First Year to Second Year Retention Rates

The 2008-09 cohort data is accurate, but represents an anomaly.

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

STUDENT SUCCESSFRESHMEN GRADE POINT AVERAGE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20122.40

2.45

2.50

2.55

2.60

2.65

2.70

2.75

2.80

2.85

2.90

Freshmen Resident Freshmen Not Residing in UR

Freshman UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

STUDENT SUCCESSSOPHOMORE GRADE POINT AVERAGE

Sophomore UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20122.60

2.65

2.70

2.75

2.80

2.85

2.90

2.95

3.00

3.05

3.10

Sophomore Resident Sophomore Not Residing in UR

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

STUDENT SUCCESSJUNIOR GRADE POINT AVERAGE

Junior UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20122.80

2.85

2.90

2.95

3.00

3.05

3.10

3.15

3.20

3.25

3.30

Junior Resident Junior Not Residing in UR

UNIVERSITY RESIDENCES

STUDENT SUCCESSSENIOR GRADE POINT AVERAGE

Senior UR Resident vs. Non-Resident Cumulative Spring Semester GPA

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20122.90

2.95

3.00

3.05

3.10

3.15

3.20

3.25

Senior Resident Senior Not Residing in UR

2010 NSSE DATA

DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMENRESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTSOn-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:

• Included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments• Worked with other students on projects during class • Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments • Had serious conversations w/ students of a different race/ethnicity than your own• Had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of

their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values• Had coursework that emphasized:

– Analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its components

– Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships

– Making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions

• Have done or plan to do: Community service or volunteer work• Have done or plan to do: Work on a research project with a faculty member outside

of course or program requirements

2010 NSSE DATA

DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMENRESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTSOn-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:

• Have supportive relationships with other students• Spend more time preparing for class• Feel the institution encourages contact among students from different economic,

social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds• Feel the institution provides the support you need to thrive socially• Had experiences that contributed to:

– Acquiring a broad general education– Speaking clearly and effectively– Thinking critically and analytically– Analyzing quantitative problems– Working effectively with others– Learning effectively on your own– Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds– Solving complex real-world problems

• Rate their entire educational experience at Purdue as good or excellent• Say they would attend Purdue again if they could start over

2010 NSSE DATA

DIFFERENCES AMONG FRESHMENRESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTS

Off-Campus Freshmen were significantly more likely to:• Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions • Used e-mail to communicate with an instructor• Discussed grades or assignments with an instructor• Have done or plan to do: Independent study or self-designed major• Spend more time working for pay off campus• Spend more time providing care for dependents living with you (parents, children,

spouse, etc.)

EXPLANATIONS?Committed to Student Success• Learning Communities

39 communities with 1,129 residents• Resident Assistants

254 student role models & peer mentors living in the halls• UR Global & BGRi

Initially a UR international mentor program; now collaborating on an early orientation program with ISS and SATS along with 3 iRAs • Co-Curricular Activities

Over 5,100 programs resulting in almost 190,000 meaningful contact hours; Faculty Fellow program• Simply Community

Inherent benefits of living with peers

POSSIBLE FACTORS

SECTION TITLE

FACTORS AFFECTING GRAD STUDENT RETENTION & SUCCESS

PHIL POPESENIOR ASSOCIATE DEANTHE GRADUATE SCHOOL

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

MASTER’S COMPLETIONAND ATTRITION

Master’s Completion and Attrition DataStudent Cohorts from Fall 2002 – Spring 2007

Fall 2012 Assessment

Years of Completion/AttritionCompletion/

Attrition count % Cum%

Total

Years of completio

n

Less than 1 year 679 12.48% 12.48%

2-3 years 4048 74.43% 86.91%

4-5 years 593 10.90% 97.81%

more than 6 years 119 2.19% 100.00%

Total Completion 5439

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 867 63.70% 63.70%

2 year 340 24.98% 88.68%

3 year 114 8.38% 97.06%

More than 4 years 40 2.94% 100.00%Total Attrition 1361

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

PHD COMPLETIONAND ATTRITION

Ph.D. Completion and Attrition DataStudent cohorts from Fall 1997 – Spring 2002

Fall 2012 Assessment

Years of Completion/

AttritionCompletion/

Attrition count % Cum%

Total

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 415 21.73% 21.73%

5-6 years 962 50.37% 72.09%

7-8 years 376 19.69% 91.78%

more than 9 years 157 8.22% 100.00%

Total Completion 1910

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 30 5.30% 5.30%

2-3 years 341 60.25% 65.55%

4-5 years 114 20.14% 85.69%

More than 6 years 81 14.31% 100.00%

Total Attrition566

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

FACTORS INFLUENCING COMPLETIONAND TIME TO DEGREE

• Relationships With Major Professors/Mentors• Qualifying/Preliminary Exams• Defined Research Project• Academic/ Professional Environment• Personal/Family Related Stresses• Financial Stresses• Social Stresses

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

INITIATIVES

- Mentoring Workshops for Faculty- Purdue Graduate Student Government (PGSG) – Mentoring Workshops- Peer Mentoring- E-Mentoring Program- Dean’s Annual E-Discussions- Appointment and Re-appointment of Graduate Faculty- Graduate Program Assessment- Graduate School Ombudsman

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

RETENTION ATTRITIONBY COLLEGE

Retention Attrition Data by Academic College

College Years of Completion/Attrition Completion/Attrition count % Cum%

College of Agriculture

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 72 37.89% 37.89%5-6 years 90 47.37% 85.26%7-8 years 19 10.00% 95.26%

more than 9 years 9 4.74% 100.00%Total Completion 190

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 3 7.69% 7.69%2-3 years 26 66.67% 74.36%4-5 years 6 15.38% 89.74%

More than 6 years 4 10.26% 100.00%Total Attrition 39

College of Education

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 27 26.21% 26.21%5-6 years 40 38.83% 65.05%7-8 years 20 19.42% 84.47%

more than 9 years 16 15.53% 100.00%Total Completion 103

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 4 33.33% 33.33%2-3 years 6 50.00% 83.33%4-5 years 0 0.00% 83.33%

More than 6 years 2 16.67% 100.00%Total Attrition 12

Colege of Engineering

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 148 30.02% 30.02%5-6 years 238 48.28% 78.30%7-8 years 75 15.21% 93.51%

more than 9 years 32 6.49% 100.00%Total Completion 493

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 12 8.89% 8.89%2-3 years 82 60.74% 69.63%4-5 years 16 11.85% 81.48%

More than 6 years 25 18.52% 100.00%Total Attrition 135

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

RETENTION ATTRITIONBY COLLEGE

Retention Attrition Data by Academic College College Years of Completion/Attrition Completion/Attrition count % Cum%

College of Health and Human Science

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 29 20.00% 20.00%5-6 years 72 49.66% 69.66%7-8 years 32 22.07% 91.72%

more than 9 years 12 8.28% 100.00%Total Completion 145

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 0 0.00% 0.00%2-3 years 18 50.00% 50.00%4-5 years 12 33.33% 83.33%

More than 6 years 6 16.67% 100.00%Total Attrition 36

College of Liberal Arts

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 30 16.67% 16.67%5-6 years 77 42.78% 59.44%7-8 years 38 21.11% 80.56%

more than 9 years 35 19.44% 100.00%Total Completion 180

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 0 0.00% 0.00%2-3 years 20 50.00% 50.00%4-5 years 13 32.50% 82.50%

More than 6 years 7 17.50% 100.00%Total Attrition 40

College of Pharmacy

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 22 25.58% 25.58%5-6 years 51 59.30% 84.88%7-8 years 12 13.95% 98.84%

more than 9 years 1 1.16% 100.00%Total Completion 86

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 1 5.56% 5.56%2-3 years 10 55.56% 61.11%4-5 years 6 33.33% 94.44%

More than 6 years 1 5.56% 100.00%Total Attrition 18

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

RETENTION ATTRITIONBY COLLEGE

Retention Attrition Data by Academic College College Years of Completion/Attrition Completion/Attrition count % Cum%

College of Science

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 55 10.78% 10.78%5-6 years 282 55.29% 66.08%7-8 years 135 26.47% 92.55%

more than 9 years 38 7.45% 100.00%Total Completion 510

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 5 2.22% 2.22%2-3 years 147 65.33% 67.56%4-5 years 45 20.00% 87.56%

More than 6 years 28 12.44% 100.00%Total Attrition 225

College of Technology

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 0 0.00% 0.00%5-6 years 0 0.00% 0.00%7-8 years 0 0.00% 0.00%

more than 9 years 5 100.00% 100.00%Total Completion 5

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 0 0.00% 0.00%2-3 years 1 33.33% 33.33%4-5 years 0 0.00% 33.33%

More than 6 years 2 66.67% 100.00%Total Attrition 3

Interdisciplinary and Special Programs

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 4 4.71% 4.71%5-6 years 50 58.82% 63.53%7-8 years 26 30.59% 94.12%

more than 9 years 5 5.88% 100.00%Total Completion 85

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 1 4.55% 4.55%2-3 years 9 40.91% 45.45%4-5 years 8 36.36% 81.82%

More than 6 years 4 18.18% 100.00%Total Attrition 22

GRAD STUDENT SUCCESS

RETENTION ATTRITIONBY COLLEGE

Retention Attrition Data by Academic College

College Years of Completion/Attrition Completion/Attrition count % Cum%

Krannert School of Management

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 19 22.35% 22.35%5-6 years 50 58.82% 81.18%7-8 years 13 15.29% 96.47%

more than 9 years 3 3.53% 100.00%Total Completion 85

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 3 10.71% 10.71%2-3 years 17 60.71% 71.43%4-5 years 7 25.00% 96.43%

More than 6 years 1 3.57% 100.00%Total Attrition 28

School of Veterinary Medicine

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 9 32.14% 32.14%5-6 years 12 42.86% 75.00%7-8 years 6 21.43% 96.43%

more than 9 years 1 3.57% 100.00%Total Completion 28

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 1 12.50% 12.50%2-3 years 5 62.50% 75.00%4-5 years 1 12.50% 87.50%

More than 6 years 1 12.50% 100.00%Total Attrition 8

Total

Years of completion

Less than 4 years 415 21.73% 21.73%5-6 years 962 50.37% 72.09%7-8 years 376 19.69% 91.78%

more than 9 years 157 8.22% 100.00%Total Completion 1910

Years of Attrition

Less than 1 year 30 5.30% 5.30%2-3 years 341 60.25% 65.55%4-5 years 114 20.14% 85.69%

More than 6 years 81 14.31% 100.00%Total Attrition 566

Brent Drake,

EMAR

Brenda

Schroeder,

Advising

Andy Zehner,

Student Affairs

Kevin Maurer,

Housing & Food

Services

Phil Pope,

Graduate School

November 6, 2012

www.purdue.edu/assessment

QUESTIONS