IS ALL RETENTION GOOD? AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

It is a commonly held assumption that all attrition within Higher Education is a negative occurrence. Records from 729 exiting students were reviewed to ascertain 1) reasons for leaving 2) GPA at exit point and major. Results indicate that students are leaving for a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons represent a positive occurrence for both the University and the student. Results also indicate that for this particular institution, a significant segment of students exiting are academically successful. This finding indicates that a stronger targeted retention intervention programming is needed to focus not only on academic but social adjustment. There has been massive attention paid to the retention of college students. Programs directed at increasing retention have taken the form of orientation courses (e.g. Boudreau & Kromrey, 1994, Robinson, 1997) freshman and seminar courses (eg. Wilkee & Kuckuck, 1989; (Scherer, 198; 1) and various other instructional programs such as mentoring, alert systems & heightened student faculty contact (eg. Heath, Skok, McLaughlin 1995; Reken, Rickinson & Rutherford, 1995). There have also been focus on specific subgroups in hopes of identifying characteristics of those populations which may be subject to higher dropout rates (e.g. Rooke, Sims & Peyrefitte, 1995; Sherman, Giles & Williams-Green, 1994). However, while retention is a critical issue, this paper challenges the assumption that 100% retention rates are achievable or even desirable. This study examines the possibility that some student attrition from higher institutions is a positive occurrence for both the student and the University. Methodology Subjects Academic student records were obtained from a small upstate New York private University. Student information gathered from these records were 1) year matriculated 2) degree sought 3) month-year student left the University 4) reason student left and 5) the students GPA at the end point from the University. To ensure confidentiality no information was obtained which identified or could be linked back to the individual student. Data Interpretation The University, by matter of standard procedure, codes the reasons why a background particular student leaves. Table 1 identifies these reasons. An issue concerning this data is the interpretation of the codes in general. For instance Table 1 Reasons For Exiting; 1. Found another school/Transferred 2. Financial problems 3. Medical problems 4. Personal reasons 5. Married 6. University dropped student 7. Academic 8. No reason given "Found another school/transferred" (Code 1) could be interpreted in a variety of ways. For the purpose of this discussion this code is being interpreted as meaning that these students were not content at their current University and therefore sought another to complete their degree at another institution. "Financial Problems" is being interpreted as a price/quality issue. Students falling in this category have determined that their education is not justifiable in terms of the returns. They, therefore, chose to exit. This assumption is supported by the high level of financial aid given to a large majority of accepted students at this particular University. Both medical and personal reasons are being interpreted at face value. These students had either a medical condition or a personal problem that made them leave the University somewhat involuntarily. Code 6, University dropped student, classifies those students who fell below the appointed grade point average and were asked to leave. Again, this group of students probably left involuntarily. It is the position of this paper, which will be discussed in depth further on, that the majority of these students represent a positive occurrence for the University and the student both. …