2017
DOI: 10.1177/1521025117738233
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Review of Undergraduate Student Retention and Graduation Since 2010: Patterns, Predictions, and Recommendations for 2020

Abstract: A plethora of research spanning several decades has attempted to understand predictors of retention and graduation in undergraduate bachelor’s degree programs. The topic is no less important today, as larger and larger swaths of the American population attend college each year. Studies have demonstrated that key demographic variables, indicators of academic readiness, and financial challenges all appear to be important predictors of student retention and graduation. In addition to these historically i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
36
0
5

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
36
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Out of the 269 freshmen who initially volunteered a total of 83 pairs (N = 166) were created with 103 freshmen finally discarded due to the lack of an appropriate match. Pairs were sorted and matched according to two set of control variables (Ato, López, and Benavente 2013), usually associated with academic success or failure (Barbera et al 2017;Chen 2012;Fong et al 2017;Kuh et al 2006;Laskey and Hetzel 2011;Pascarella and Terenzini 2005;Richardson, Abraham, and Bond 2012;Tinto 1993Tinto , 2012Vossensteyn et al 2015): (a) academic: degree program, program year, group, subjects and number of credits registered, type of upper secondary education track, number of times that has taken the university entrance exam, place of choice of the degree program in the pre-enrolment, GPA obtained in upper secondary school, GPA obtained in university entrance exam, GPA of access to the university, dropout and change of previous studies, number of previous retakes, level of social skills, level of learning strategies and motivation, and level of commitment; and (b) demographic: age, sex, marital status, nationality, employment status, people sharing the household, socioeconomic status, and source of studies funding. The minimum required total sample size for PTP 3.0 was previously calculated (N = 102), as we report later on the statistical analysis session, which forced us to discard 32 pairs due to the limited number of student-tutors available (N = 50).…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Out of the 269 freshmen who initially volunteered a total of 83 pairs (N = 166) were created with 103 freshmen finally discarded due to the lack of an appropriate match. Pairs were sorted and matched according to two set of control variables (Ato, López, and Benavente 2013), usually associated with academic success or failure (Barbera et al 2017;Chen 2012;Fong et al 2017;Kuh et al 2006;Laskey and Hetzel 2011;Pascarella and Terenzini 2005;Richardson, Abraham, and Bond 2012;Tinto 1993Tinto , 2012Vossensteyn et al 2015): (a) academic: degree program, program year, group, subjects and number of credits registered, type of upper secondary education track, number of times that has taken the university entrance exam, place of choice of the degree program in the pre-enrolment, GPA obtained in upper secondary school, GPA obtained in university entrance exam, GPA of access to the university, dropout and change of previous studies, number of previous retakes, level of social skills, level of learning strategies and motivation, and level of commitment; and (b) demographic: age, sex, marital status, nationality, employment status, people sharing the household, socioeconomic status, and source of studies funding. The minimum required total sample size for PTP 3.0 was previously calculated (N = 102), as we report later on the statistical analysis session, which forced us to discard 32 pairs due to the limited number of student-tutors available (N = 50).…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These attributes include: previous educational input, family history and the individual's own abilities whereas the institutional factors focus on achievement while at university and faculty interactions. Since then much work has focused on student retention [4,8], largely by exploring individual elements of this model and focusing primarily on institutional factors. A number of studies have also investigated the relationships between student success and student attributes, including gender [23], pre-entry grades [27] and previous experience [29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Returning back the following fall (i.e., retention) and graduating in a timely manner (i.e., after four years) are the epitome of academic success in tertiary education (e.g., Barbera, Berkshire, Boronat, & Kennedy, 2018). Education is a long-term investment for the students and abandoning after the 1 st year is a costly decision.…”
Section: Nd Year Retention: Will They Be Back Next Fall?mentioning
confidence: 99%