A Comparison of Three Approaches to Tracking Undergraduate Students at Indiana University Regional...

A Comparison of Three Approaches to Tracking

Undergraduate Students at Indiana University Regional Campuses

Measurement Perspectives on Student Tracking

Purpose

To provide a range of views of student persistence • Traditional fall-to-fall retention and 150% graduation

rates, and the years in between (i.e., student flow)

• The “Adelman Model” for more inclusive cohort tracking

• The persistence index: difference among campuses and academic divisions

A conceptual warm-up for thinking about strategies for improving student success rates

Students Included in Each Method

Example: 2006-07 as the base year

CampusTraditional

CohortsAdelman

CohortsPersistence

IndexRegional Total 2,590 5,942 19,138

East 226 562 1,923Kokomo 331 681 2,368Northwest 561 1,277 4,001South Bend 750 1,839 5,713Southeast 722 1,583 5,133

2,5905,942

19,138

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

Traditional Adelman Pers. Index

Regional Total

First-time-in-college, enrolled full-time (12 + credits) during first fall semester; tracked for

one and six years

New to IU during summer, fall or spring of full academic year; enrolled

for 6 or more credits in first fall or spring semester; tracked as traditional beginner, nontraditional beginner, or

transfer; tracked for six and nine years

All undergraduate, degree-seeking students enrolled in fall semester, categorized by class level, credit

load, and need met/income status, tracked for one year

Trends in Fall-to-Fall Retention Rates and

150% Graduation Rates, and Student Flow

The Traditional Method

IU Regional Campus Retention Rates

Retention Rates Cohort Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Full-time Beginners

Began 2,584 2,746 2,656 2,609 2,623Retained 1,674 1,705 1,618 1,526 1,591Retention Rate 64.8% 62.1% 60.9% 58.5% 60.7%

Bachelor's Intended FTB

Began 2,189 2,369 2,384 2,400 2,426Retained 1,418 1,493 1,463 1,414 1,479

Retention Rate 64.8% 63.0% 61.4% 58.9% 61.0%

IU Regional Campus Graduation Rates

Graduation Rates Cohort Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Full-time Beginners

Began 2,362 2,557 2,446 2,450 2,590Received Degree 597 624 672 638 728Graduation Rate 25.3% 24.4% 27.5% 26.0% 28.1%

Bachelor's Intended FTB

Began 2,025 2,238 2,150 2,191 2,267Received Degree 515 522 584 559 625

Graduation Rate 25.4% 23.3% 27.2% 25.5% 27.6%

150% for Bachelor’s, Associate’s and Certificates

150% for Bachelor’s, Associate’s and Certificates

150% for Bachelor’s Only

150% for Bachelor’s Only

Student Flow Tables Semester-to-semester view of

retention/graduation Extension of “traditional” cohort reporting

• Full-time beginner cohorts (2001-2006)• Intercampus persistence• Intercampus degree completion

Results may differ from official reports• Updates to cohorts• Exclusions/exceptions not considered (military)• Degree completion post 150% (Cert./Assoc.)

April 10, 2023Customize footer: View menu/Header and Footer


IU Regional Campuses: Percent Enrolled or Degree Conferred among Full-time Beginners

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7

Cohort Count Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall

2001 2,598 100% 85% 67% 58% 52% 48% 46% 43% 42% 41% 40% 39% 39%

2002 2,584 100% 84% 65% 57% 52% 48% 45% 43% 42% 41% 40% . .

2003 2,747 100% 83% 62% 55% 48% 44% 40% 39% 37% . . . .

2004 2,659 100% 82% 61% 54% 47% 42% 40% . . . . . .

2005 2,608 100% 81% 58% 50% 46% . . . . . . . .

2006 2,630 100% 79% 61% . . . . . . . . . .

2001-2006 15,826 100% 83% 62% 55% 49% 46% 43% 41% 40% 41% 40% 39% 39%

Full-time BeginnersFull-time Beginners

Year NumbersCoordinate with Cohort

Year NumbersCoordinate with CohortFor 2002 Cohort

Year 3 is 2004-05For 2002 Cohort Year 3 is 2004-05

For 2003 Cohort Year 3 is 2005-06For 2003 Cohort Year 3 is 2005-06

No Information for Spring 08 and Fall 08

No Information for Spring 08 and Fall 08

6-Cohort Aggregate6-Cohort Aggregate

1 CohortLess Stable?

1 CohortLess Stable?

Fall, Year 1Is Enrollment at First Semester

Fall, Year 1Is Enrollment at First Semester

Spring, Year 1Is Retention to

Second Semester

Spring, Year 1Is Retention to

Second Semester

Fall, Year 2Is Retention to

Second Year

Fall, Year 2Is Retention to

Second Year


Semester, Year NumberSemester, Year NumberFall Semester, Year 1Fall Semester, Year 1 Spring Semester, Year 6Spring Semester, Year 6

Includes Certificates and Associate’s Degrees

Beyond 150%

Includes Certificates and Associate’s Degrees

Beyond 150%

Step Pattern?Step Pattern?

100% for First Fall100% for First Fall

Does trend line level off?

Does trend line level off?


Total Year 1 Year 2

Cohort Count Fall Spring Fall Spring

2001 2,598 100% 85% 67% 58%

2002 2,584 100% 84% 65% 57%

2003 2,747 100% 83% 62% 55%

2004 2,659 100% 82% 61% 54%

2005 2,608 100% 81% 58% 50%

2006 2,630 100% 79% 61% .

Total Year 1 Year 2

Cohort Count Fall Spring Fall Spring

2001 2,598 100% 85% 67% 58%

2002 2,584 100% 84% 65% 57%

2003 2,747 100% 83% 62% 55%

2004 2,659 100% 82% 61% 54%

2005 2,608 100% 81% 58% 50%

2006 2,630 100% 79% 61% .

Retention to theSecond SemesterRetention to theSecond Semester

Retention to the Second Year

Retention to the Second Year

Subgroup Tables Gender Race

• White, Other (African American, Hispanic)

Age• < 20, 20-24, 25+

Geographic Origin• Home County, Other (Res/Non-res)

Financial Need• Filed FAFSA and Need > $0



IU Regional Campuses: Percent Enrolled or Degree Conferred among Full-time Beginners

YearSubgroup Tables 1 2 5 7

Cohort Count Spring Fall Fall FallGender Female 2001 1,638 86% 68% 43% 42%

2002 1,601 86% 68% 45% .2003 1,702 85% 65% 39% .2004 1,653 84% 64% . .2005 1,585 82% 59% . .2006 1,560 81% 62% . .

Male 2001 960 83% 64% 41% 35%2002 983 82% 59% 36% .2003 1,045 81% 57% 35% .2004 1,006 79% 56% . .2005 1,023 80% 57% . .

2006 1,070 77% 59% . .

Important Indicators of First Year Experience

Important Indicators of First Year Experience

Degree Completion through Years 4 and 6

Degree Completion through Years 4 and 6

A More Inclusive Method for Cohort Tracking

The Adelman Model

Beyond the Traditional Cohort

Traditional Cohort Adelman Cohort• Fall semester as starting point • Any term of an academic year

(July 1 – June 30)• Full-time (12+ credits) only • 6 or more first term credits• One cohort • Three subgroups:

– Traditional beginner (<24 yrs)– Nontraditional beginner (24+)– Transfer

• Six-year terminal point - graduation only

• Six & Nine year terminal points, graduated or still enrolled

• Track nationally using NSC (optional)

• Track nationally using NSC (optional)

Application 1: The Early Years Going back to 1997-98 thru 2001-02

• Nine year tracking for first two cohorts

• Six Year tracking for all

Traditional/nontraditional distinction among beginners based solely on age (<24, 24+)

First examine size and distribution of cohorts

Then look at status after six and nine years

The Early Cohorts

Annual

Traditional Non-Trad. Transfers Total

East 1,732 639 673 3,044

Kokomo 2,189 286 964 3,439

Northwest 3,081 560 1,351 4,992

South Bend 4,068 679 2,280 7,027Southeast 4,132 539 1,525 6,196

The Adelman Entry Groups, AY 1997-98 through AY 2001-02, Combined

Beginners

The Early Cohorts

Trend in Six- and Nine-Year Adelman Persistence Rates by Entry ModeAll Campuses Combined

1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02

Cohort N 2880 3111 2958 3066 3187Six-Year Rate 36% 34% 36% 35% 36%

Graduated 24% 22% 24% 24% 26%Still Enrolled 12% 12% 11% 10% 11%

Nine-Year Rate 33% 33%Graduated 29% 28%Still Enrolled 4% 5%







Transfers

Traditional Beginners

Non-Traditional Beginners

Composite Rate

Trends in Six-Year StatusPercent Graduated or Still Enrolled

Trends in Nine-Year StatusPercent Graduated or Still Enrolled

Comparison to Regional Composite

Application 2: More Recent Years AY 2004-05 thru 2006-07 Refine the traditional/nontraditional distinction

• Nontraditional as either financially independent or dependent/no FAFSA and age 24+

First look at cohort size and group distribution Then examine the first few years of

persistence• Through the fourth year for 2004-05 cohorts• Through the third year for 2005-06 cohorts• Through the second year for 2006-07 cohorts

More Recent Cohorts

Annual

Traditional Non-Trad. Transfers Total

East 835 456 669 1,960

Kokomo 1,198 287 766 2,251

Northwest 1,757 645 1,292 3,694

South Bend 2,571 557 2,137 5,265Southeast 2,321 337 1,759 4,417

The Adelman Entry Groups, AY 2004-05 through AY 2006-07, Combined

Beginners

More Recent Cohorts

The Early Cohorts

Yearly Persistence Status Cohort N 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year

Traditional Beginners2004-05 2,820 62% 47% 39%2005-06 2,909 60% 45%2006-07 2,953 62%Combined 8,682 61% 46% 39%

Non-Traditional Beginners2004-05 795 58% 37% 30%2005-06 785 59% 39%2006-07 702 59%Combined 2,282 59% 38% 30%

Transfers2004-05 2,095 66% 52% 46%2005-06 2,241 67% 54%2006-07 2,287 66%Combined 6,623 66% 53% 46%

Comparison to Regional Composite

Accounting for All Students and Examining

Differences in Patterns among Campuses and Academic Groupings

The Persistence Index

Methodology Considers all undergraduate, degree-seeking

students in a given fall semester• Fall 2006 for the present analysis

Tracks them to the next fall semester• Enrolled fall 2007 or received degree 2006-07

Divides them into three sets of categories• Class level: 1st year; beyond 1st year• Credit load: 6 or fewer credits; 7-12.5 credits; 13+

credits• Need met/Income status

Methodology (2) Categories derived from analysis of cut-points

that optimize group differences in retention• Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID)

Need met/Income indicator more complicated• Percent of need met positively associated with

persistence among those of known income• Income positively associated with persistence among

those who did not have need assessed• Strange relationship among those with need assessed

but no known income• Many students missing both (no FAFSA at all)

The Need Met/Income Indicator

Percent Need Met Q1. < $30k Q2. $30k-<$55k Q3,4. $55k+ Missing<=31% 968 599 390 5>31%-<=55% 1611 912 415 17>55%+ 2569 1341 1201 23Missing 368 344 2426 5949

Percent Need Met Q1. < $30k Q2. $30k-<$55k Q3,4. $55k+ Missing<=31% 46% 52% 52% 80%>31%-<=55% 68% 74% 75% 76%>55%+ 80% 83% 83% 83%Missing 36% 60% 72% 66%

LowMedium

High

Number of Students

Persistence to Fall 2007 (Enrolled or Graduated)Income (Based on State Quartiles, Family Income 2005)

Income (State Quartiles, Family Income 2005)

The Persistence Index CategoriesPercentage of Students in Each Category (all campuses combined)

Persistence Rate by Category (all campuses combined)

1st Year, 34%>1st

Yr., 66%

Class LevelLow, 14%

Med, 59%

Hi, 27%

Need Met/Income

6 or less, 21%

7-12.5, 60%

13 +, 20%

Course Load

56%

76%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1st Year >1st Yr.

59%70%

78%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

6 or less 7-12.5 13 +

49%

69%82%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Low Med Hi

Methodology (3) Array students in matrix according to the

combination of all three factors (2x3x3) Determine percent of students in each cell Calculate persistence rates for each cell Results

• Examine pattern of campus cell rates to composite matrix rates

• Calculate the persistence index by multiplying cell rates by composite percentages (common weights)

Can group students by academic division, across campuses, to compare rates by division

The Persistence Index Matrix: Counts

All Regional Campuses, Combined (N=19,138)

Total Number of Students

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 257 823 907 - 12.5 hours 808 2,545 90713 + hours 145 629 2736 hours or fewer 481 1,948 3897 - 12.5 hours 780 3,928 2,44113 + hours 198 1,457 1,039

Need Met/Income Indicator

Class Level Credit Load

First-Year

Beyond 1st Yr.

The Persistence Index Matrix: Percentages

All Regional Campuses, Combined

Percent of Students

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 1.3% 4.3% 0.5%7 - 12.5 hours 4.2% 13.3% 4.7%13 + hours 0.8% 3.3% 1.4%6 hours or fewer 2.5% 10.2% 2.0%7 - 12.5 hours 4.1% 20.5% 12.8%13 + hours 1.0% 7.6% 5.4%

First-Year

Beyond 1st Yr.



The Persistence Index Matrix: Persistence Rates

All Regional Campuses, Combined

Persistence Rates

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 36% 48% 71%7 - 12.5 hours 32% 59% 70%13 + hours 31% 65% 83%6 hours or fewer 56% 62% 81%7 - 12.5 hours 63% 79% 84%13 + hours 72% 81% 87%

Beyond 1st Yr.



First-Year

A Campus Example

Cell Persistence Rates in Comparison To Composite Matrix

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 42% 45% 75%7 - 12.5 hours 26% 56% 59%13 + hours 42% 62% 77%6 hours or fewer 61% 61% 88%7 - 12.5 hours 71% 82% 86%13 + hours 80% 86% 91%More than 3 percentage points below the composite rateWithin 3 percentage points of composite rateMore than 3 percentage points above the composite rate

Beyond 1st Yr.



First-Year

The Rate and “Cell Summary” Table

Academic Division ComparisonsBusiness, All Campuses Combined

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 49% 48% 83%7 - 12.5 hours 30% 58% 78%13 + hours 45% 66% 90%6 hours or fewer 63% 67% 80%7 - 12.5 hours 62% 80% 84%13 + hours 74% 78% 89%


% Need Met/Income Indicator

First-Year

Beyond 1st Yr.

IU Northwest

Low Medium High6 hours or fewer 60% 58%7 - 12.5 hours 44% 55% 80%13 + hours 72% 93%6 hours or fewer 90% 74% 57%7 - 12.5 hours 67% 84% 89%13 + hours 79% 93%

Class Level Credit Load% Need Met/Income Indicator

First-Year

Beyond 1st Yr.

Division Summary Table

b. BusinessUnadjusted Adjusted

Campus Rate Rate N of Cells Below Neutral AboveEast 72% 69% 12 42% 42% 17%Kokomo 70% 72% 15 40% 27% 33%Northwest 75% 75% 15 13% 13% 73%South Bend 67% 69% 18 44% 33% 22%Southeast 78% 74% 11 27% 36% 36%

"Cell Performance"

a. IU EastSummary of Persistence Matrix Comparisons

Unadjusted AdjustedDivision Rate Rate N of Cells Below Neutral AboveArts & Sciences 71% 68% 8 50% 13% 38%Business 72% 69% 12 42% 42% 17%Continuing Studies 71% 69% 9 33% 11% 56%Education 79% 80% 12 25% 8% 67%Health & Human Services 79% 69% 5 40% 0% 60%Nursing 86% 76% 5 60% 20% 20%Public & Env. Affairs 63% 64% 8 63% 0% 38%University Division 55% 56% 17 41% 35% 24%

Arts & Sciences

Business

Continuing Studies

Education

Health & Human Services

Nursing

Public & Env. Affairs

University Division

"Cell Performance"

Percent of Cells Below, Similar, and Above Overall-100% -75% -50% -25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Campus Summary by Division

A Comparison of Three Approaches to Tracking Undergraduate Students at Indiana University Regional...

Documents

Transcript of A Comparison of Three Approaches to Tracking Undergraduate Students at Indiana University Regional...