Leaving College: Why Students Withdrew from a University

The purpose of this study was to determine the reasons why students withdrew during a semester from a mid-sized, comprehensive university located in the Midwest. Six hundred forty-five students were asked to complete the ACT "Withdrawing/Non-returning Student Survey" during the 1992-93 academic year and summer semester. Three hundred sixty-five completed surveys were returned for a 57% response rate. Respondents indicated many different reasons for leaving which varied by year in school and whether or not the respondent was a graduate or undergraduate student. There was no typical withdrawing student and there were many reasons students withdrew over which the university has little or no control. The report concludes with a discussion of Vincent Tinto's (1993) ideas concerning institutional departure. The retention and persistence of students in higher education has been the focus of serious intellectual inquiry for many years. Various concepts of institutional departure, persistence and models for programmatic interventions to reduce departure have been developed. (For example, see Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Stage & Rushin, 1993; Steele, Kennedy, & Gordon, 1993; Tinto, 1993; Wolfe, 1993.) The purpose of this study was to focus on one aspect of student attrition, and. to investigate the reasons and general trends as . to why students withdrew during a semester from a midsized comprehensive university located in the Midwest. This information could then be used to guide institutional action~ . METHOD . · . The ACT 'Withdrawing/Non-returning. Student Survey" {The American College Testing Program, 1993) was used as the data collection· instrument. It is divided into five sections: (a) background information,< (b) reasons for leaving this college, (c) satisfaction with 'college services and characteristics, (d) institution-specific optional Ross J. Rapaport is a prof~ssor at the Counseling Ce~ter at Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant, MI. · Sharon L: George is the director for the Office of Student Life, and Susan E. Clarkson is the associate dean in the Office of the Dean of Students at Central Michigan University. Gary A. Adams is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh in Oshkosh, WI. questions (none were used in this study), and (e) space for written comments and suggestions. The Office of Student Life distributed the survey to all students who withdrew during the 1992-93 academic year and the 1993 summer semester. According to university policy, students were required to contact the Office of Student Life to withdraw from the university. Students who visited the office to withdraw were asked to complete the survey there. Students who informed the office by phone of their intent to withdraw were mailed the survey and were asked to return it to the office. All students were told that completing the questionnaire was part of the usual withdrawal process. The sample of students surveyed did not include students who completed a semester and then did not return for the next semester. The students surveyed were those students who withdrew from the university during the semesters indicated. During the 1992-93 academic year, approximately 16,000 students were enrolled at the university. A total of 645 students contacted the Office of Student Life and withdrew from the university during the semesters studied. Two hundred eighty-nine students withdrew during fall semester, 239 students withdrew during spring semester, and 117 students withdrew during the summer semester. Of these, 365 completed surveys were returned for a 57% response rate. Although statistics were not recorded, staff observed that students who were mailed the survey were less likely to complete and return it than those students who were asked to complete the survey while they were at the office. RESULTS Respondents were 52% female and 48% male. Most respondents were enrolled full-time {77%}, white {85%), single {84%), and classified themselves as an in-state student (96%). Respondents were 19% freshman, 17% sophomores, 23% juniors, 22% seniors, 13% graduate students, and 7% were either special students, other, or chose not to respond to the question. Students lived in various locations while attending the university: 32% in a residence hall, 31% in a room or apartment, 17% in their own home, 12% in a parent's home, 4% in married housing, 3% in other accommodations, and 1% in a fraternity or sorority house.