1 / 43

Kentucky State University

Join the Office of Enrollment Management in a presentation discussing strategies to improve retention rates at Kentucky State University. Learn about retention research, comparison data, and models of student persistence.

bethj
Télécharger la présentation

Kentucky State University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Kentucky State University The Commonwealth’s Uncommon University Office of Enrollment Management

  2. Retention Retention Retention Retention ! Retention Retention

  3. Presentation Goal: To engage all stakeholders in an open dialogue regarding retention at KSU, resulting in deliberative strategies that will significantly improve our current retention rates.

  4. Overview: • Background on OEM’s Retention Research • OEM’s Retention Comparisons • Retention as a Strategic Issue

  5. Relationship Between Enrollment and Retention $ $ $ $

  6. Models of Student Persistence • Tinto’s Student Integration Model . The degree of student-institutional “fit” plays an important role in student persistence.

  7. Tinto’s Student Integration Model

  8. Models of Student Persistence • Bean’s Student Attrition Model . Students’ beliefs about their institutional experience affect persistence. Recognizes the influence of external factors on student persistence.

  9. Models of Student Persistence • Liz Thomas’ Five Spheres of Integration . • Academic • Social: peer interaction and mutual support • Economic • Support Systems (Advising, Counseling, etc.) • Democratic (student organizations and representation on various institutional bodies)

  10. Implications: Confirm, deny or integrate basic tenets of these models • Focus on particular student populations • Identify factors affecting student persistence

  11. OEM’s Retention Comparisons Cohort-to-cohort (internal) • Trends in retention and graduation through multiple cohorts • Identify changes within and between groups of students

  12. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 New Student Cohorts ØWhile the number of New Freshmen slightly decreased the number of Transfer students significantly increased.

  13. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Freshman Persistence Rates ØThe relative Persistence Rate for the Fall 2004 cohort increased by 27%.

  14. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Sophomore Cohorts ØThe number of Continuing Sophomores increased by 12.4%.

  15. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Sophomore Cohorts: ØThe average GPA for the 2004 cohort increased by 7%.

  16. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Sophomore Cohorts: ØThe percentage of Kentucky residents increased by 5%.

  17. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Sophomore Cohorts: ØThe percentage of dismissals decreased by 50%

  18. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Sophomore Cohorts: Ø The percentage with remaining Developmental Experiences decreased.

  19. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Junior Cohorts ØThe percentage of Continuing Juniors decreased by 12.0%.

  20. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Junior Cohorts: ØThe average GPA for the 2004 cohort decreased by 7%.

  21. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Junior Cohorts: ØThe percentage of Kentucky residents decreased by 4.7%.

  22. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Junior Cohorts: ØThe percentage of dismissals increased.

  23. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Junior Cohorts: Ø The Percentage with remaining Developmental Experiences increased.

  24. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Senior Cohorts ØThe number of Continuing Seniors decreased by 24.0%.

  25. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Senior Cohorts: ØThe average GPA for the 2004 cohort increased by 5%.

  26. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Senior Cohorts: ØThe percentage of Kentucky residents increased by 4%.

  27. Internal Comparison: Cohort to Cohort Analysis 2003 and 2004 Senior Cohorts: ØThe percentage of dismissals decreased by 68%

  28. OEM’s Retention Comparisons • External Comparisons • Track and compare the magnitude of retention or graduation with multiple external benchmarks.

  29. OEM’s Retention Comparisons • External Comparisons • ACT:2004 ACT Institutional Data Questionnaire (IDQ) • The Consortium of Student Retention Data Exchange(CSRDE): 2004-05 CSRDE Report on the Retention and Graduation Rates of 1997-2003 Entering Freshman Cohorts in 421 Colleges and Universities

  30. Comparative First to Second Year Retention Rates

  31. Comparative Graduation Rates

  32. Residential Status of All KSU Students Spring 2005

  33. Are More Kentuckians Graduating From KSU?

  34. Attrition in Terms of Lost Tuition Revenue • A 1st to 2nd Year Retention Rate of 67% for 04-05 • An Attrition Rate of 33% (82 Residential and 87 Non-Residential Students) • A Loss of $145,550 in Residential Tuition • A Loss of $434,652 in Non- Residential Tuition • A Total Loss of $580,202 in Tuition Revenue

  35. Attrition in Terms of Lost Tuition Revenue • Each Attrition Percentage Point Equates to $18,000 in Tuition Revenue

  36. Classification Status of All KSU Students Spring 2005

  37. Summary Trend Analysis

  38. Future Retention Comparisons • Longitudinal retention • Track the magnitude of retention or graduation of one cohort, or set of cohorts through multiple enrollment years. • Identify patterns of retention and graduation within particular cohorts or groups of students

  39. What Next/Now What? • Establish Student Retention as a Strategic Issue • Strategic issues have serious consequences for the long-term success of the institution.

  40. Challenges to All Stakeholders • Immediate Dialogue • Overcome obstacles that impede progress. • Implement desirable and undesirable change.

  41. Kentucky State University The Commonwealth’s Uncommon University Questions and Dialogue Office of Enrollment Management

More Related