In a recent blog post, I wrote about Aaron Basko’s Chronicle of Higher Education article in which he suggested that colleges might be overthinking how to improve student retention.
Thinking about Mr. Basko’s observations and recommendations reminded me of a Straighterline and UPCEA study released in November titled Today’s Disengaged Learner is Tomorrow’s Adult Learner.
It’s no secret that college enrollments have declined for the past few years. In the fall of 2020, those declines accelerated with most explanations blaming the COVID pandemic uncertainty as the primary reason for students not reenrolling. Straighterline and UPCEA targeted individuals between the ages of 20 and 34 who had earned college credits but were no longer enrolled. Survey participants were asked about their level of engagement with their institution, satisfaction with engagement, and likelihood of reengaging and reenrolling. The survey was conducted in the first two weeks of May of 2021.
The most common reasons given by the survey respondents for leaving college were personal/family issues (32%), money (24%), and work (11%). None of these are surprising or new to the retention field. The youngest respondents were most likely to say they left because they were disinterested or dissatisfied. Respondents who left most recently were less likely to cite money (18%) as the reason versus those who had left college behind years ago (29%).
Respondents less satisfied with their institution were the ones most likely to give multiple reasons for leaving such as money, not a good fit, or a change in program delivery (going online). Those more satisfied with their institution were more likely to cite family commitments as the reason they left.
As their time away from their institution increased, respondents were more likely to report that their institution was not very engaged with them as a student. Overall, 48 percent of newly disengaged learners were satisfied with their institution compared to 39 percent of intermediately disengaged learners and 28 percent of long-term disengaged learners.
One finding in the survey confirmed a recommendation from Mr. Basko. Survey respondents who reported that their institution was more engaged with them when they were a student were more likely to report that they have reengaged with the institution. As institutional engagement decreased, the percentage of respondents who were not interested in reengaging increased.
When the respondents were asked what their institution could have done to keep them enrolled, 46 percent said there was nothing the institution could have done. Only 20 percent of respondents acknowledged that there was something that the institution could have done to keep them enrolled. These respondents were generally the ones who reported that their institution was less engaged.
Survey respondents who reported that there was something that their institution could have done to keep them enrolled were asked about the effectiveness of potential strategies and tactics. The tactic rated as the most effective was if the institution provided a certificate for credits earned (43 percent rated this as extremely effective). Other tactics with high percentages of extremely effective ratings were providing a subsection of courses at a lower price (40 percent) and providing workshops that address the struggles of being a student (32 percent).
Less than half of the respondents indicated that they were extremely likely (21%) or very likely (22%) to continue their education. Slightly more than half of those respondents were extremely likely (12% of all respondents) or very likely (14% of all respondents) to reenroll at the institution that they most recently left.
The Straighterline UPCEA report includes responses sorted by six different student personas, sorted by age, sorted by degree program, and sorted by length of time since they left their institution. There are 57 different figures used to display the data. The report notes that “understanding the generational and behavioral differences that lead to a student’s reason behind unenrolling from their institution is a key variable for how institutions can reengage those disengaged.”
Among my key takeaways from this report’s information include:
- It’s better to find ways to keep students engaged and enrolled than it is to try to reenroll them.
- The best time to reenroll a student is within the first two years after they drop out.
- Traditionally aged students (18-20 and 21-22) are the least likely to cite money as a reason for dropping out.
- Providing students with a certificate for credits earned was selected by respondents as their favorite tactic for institutions to have kept them enrolled. Every institution should consider this tactic as the cost to implement it is miniscule compared to the cost of losing a student.
- Slightly more than half of all respondents indicated that there was nothing that their institution could have done to keep them enrolled. Know your students and focus on meeting the needs of the persona most likely to re-enroll.
I like this report. For individuals responsible for student retention, I’d add it to my future reading list and focus on portions of the data that align more closely to my institution’s students’ profiles.
At the same time, I’d like to understand more about the methodology used to select the pool of potential respondents. Straighterline has marketed affordable online college courses for years and has many partnerships with colleges and universities who forward Straighterline leads for potential students (which may include students who have disenrolled from that college). I would like to know if the pool of survey respondents was randomly selected from the 20–34-year-old population of former college students at large or if it was selected from the database of students maintained by Straighterline.
While I suspect that these outcomes are directionally correct, I might weight the extremes higher or lower depending on which population was used to select the pool of potential respondents. One item in the report that triggered a concern about potential biases in the pool of respondents was the statement that 62 percent of the respondents said that their reason for enrolling in their program was a personal goal while only 44 percent cited career advancement. Those results are different than the much larger CIRP survey (50+ years and more than 1 million first-time, full-time college freshmen participating).
Nonetheless, I like the concept of this survey and hope that it might be conducted at some future date with refinements triggered by others interested in college student engagement and retention.
