Retention Study - Illinois State University › Retention Study Analysis...Page 5 Retention Study...

Retention Study

Executive Summary The purpose of the present study is to identify characteristics that are common among degree-seeking, undergraduate students who do not return for their second fall semester at Illinois State University compared to students who do return. Separate logistic regression analyses were run for first-time freshmen (FTF) students and new transfer (NT) students. Both analyses revealed that end-of-term GPA was the most important predictor of student retention. Specifically, the results suggested that as end-of-term GPA increased, the odds that a student would be retained increased when controlling for all other predictors. Additional findings that are less practically significant due to low odds ratios are listed below.

When controlling for all other predictors, the analysis of the FTF dataset revealed that the odds of being retained the following fall semester increased if:

the number of earned hours increased

students had at least one parent who earned a college degree

Illinois State was the students’ first choice

undergraduates pledged to a fraternity or sorority in their first semester

they declared a major by census day the first semester

students took a developmental math class their first fall or spring semester

When controlling for all other predictors, the FTF analysis also found the following:

White students were less likely to be retained compared to African American or Black students

The odds of being retained decreased as the English ACT score increased

Female students were less likely to be retained compared to male students

As high school GPA increased, the odds of being retained decreased

The odds of being retained decreased as the number of credit hours attempted the first semester increased

It should be noted that these findings may be due to multi-collinearity issues or interactions between other predictors. When controlling for all other predictors, the analysis of the NT dataset revealed that the odds of being retained the following fall semester increased if:

the number of earned hours increased

they earned an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State

students pledged to a fraternity or sorority in their first semester

undergraduates declared a major by census day their first semester When controlling for all other predictors, the NT analysis also found the following:

Male students were more likely to be retained compared to female students

As transfer GPA increased, the odds of being retained decreased It should be noted that these findings may be due to multi-collinearity issues or interactions between other predictors.

Retention Study

Although the results mentioned above were statistically significant, the results may not be very practically significant. The odds ratios were quite small for all of the predictors, with the exception of end-of-term GPA, which implies that although differences exist they are very small. Even though end-of-term GPA appeared to be the most influential predictor according to its odds ratio, its degree of influence should be kept in context with the scaling of the predictor. That is, a 1-unit increase in GPA is sizable, so it is not surprising that the odds ratio is large as well. A 1-unit increase in English ACT score is not the same as a 1-unit increase in GPA. Future studies on student retention at Illinois State are merited as several additional factors were proposed to be examined but were excluded due to limitations later discussed. Identification of these characteristics may help inform work to enhance current programs and practices designed to promote retention of at-risk students.

Methodology

Participants Participants consisted of 8,114 FTF students and 4,390 NT students enrolled at Illinois State as of census day (i.e., 10th day of class) in 2010, 2011, and 2012 fall semesters. The two samples originally consisted of 9,599 FTF and 5,538 NT students, but 1,485 FTF and 1,148 NT students were dropped from the analyses due to missing information for some of the predictors. Off campus students were also excluded from the present study.

First-Time Freshmen Demographics First-time freshmen were defined as new, first year students who had not attended any college since the summer after graduating from high school or receiving their GED. FTF included students with advanced placement credits, students who took courses for college credit while attending high school, and students who attended a college or university the summer after earning a high school diploma or GED; therefore, 0.6% of the FTF students earned enough credit hours to be classified as sophomores and 0.1% were classified as juniors, while the remaining 99.3% were actually classified as freshmen. A total of 2,623 FTF students were part of the fall 2010 cohort; 2,842 were from the fall 2011 cohort, and 2,649 were part of the fall 2012 cohort. About 60.3% of the FTF undergraduates were female students. The students ranged between the ages of 17 and 25 (M = 18.06, SD = 0.34) years. Approximately 28.8% of the FTF undergraduates declared majors in the College of Arts and Sciences, while others declared majors in the College of Applied Science and Technology (13.5%), College of Business (18.7%), Mennonite College of Nursing (2.5%), College of Education (13.7%), College of Fine Arts (5.5%) or were undeclared (17.4%). A majority (78.6%) of the FTF students identified themselves as Caucasian. The remaining FTF students identified themselves as Hispanic (8.0%), African American or Black (8.2%), Asian (2.1%), Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.1%), multiracial (2.4%), or did not respond (0.4%). If a student identified as multiracial and Hispanic was one of the responses, then he or she was coded as Hispanic instead of multiracial.

New Transfer Students Demographics New transfer students were classified as new, undergraduate Illinois State students who previously attended one or more semesters at a community or four-year college after earning a high school

Retention Study

diploma or GED. A majority of the NT students were classified as juniors (50.0%); 11.3% were freshmen; 35.6% were sophomores, and only 3.0% were seniors. A total of 1,406 NT students were part of the fall 2010 cohort; 1,492 were from the fall 2011 cohort, and 1,492 were part of the fall 2012 cohort. About 50.0% of the NT participants were female students. NT undergraduates ranged between the ages of 18 and 62 (M = 21.23, SD = 3.76) years. Approximately 24.9% of the NT undergraduates declared majors in the College of Arts and Sciences, while others declared majors in the College of Applied Science and Technology (23.3%), College of Business (8.4%), Mennonite College of Nursing (1.3%), College of Education (9.2%), College of Fine Arts (4.3%) or were undeclared (28.7%). A majority (84.2%) of the students identified themselves as Caucasian. The remaining NT students identified themselves as Hispanic (6.2%), African American or Black (5.6%), Asian (1.4%), Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.1%), multiracial (1.9%), or did not respond (0.5%). If a student identified as multiracial and Hispanic was one of the responses, then he or she was coded as Hispanic instead of multiracial.

Criterion and Predictor Variables The criterion variable for both FTF and NT analyses was retention; this discrete variable was dummy-coded as 1 for “retained” and 0 for “not retained”. A student was classified as retained if he or she was enrolled as of census day the second fall semester. Table 1 below contains the predictors used in both the FTF and NT analyses. Predictors were categorized into five groups: demographic, socioeconomic, pre-enrollment, post-enrollment, and engagement. The “Data Set” column reflects whether the predictor was examined in both analyses, FTF only, or NT only. A majority of the data used in the present study was obtained from university information systems. Additional data came from the National Student Clearinghouse.

Retention Study

Table 1

Both First-Time Freshmen and New Transfer Student Predictors

Predictors Data Set Type Definition Demographic Predictors

Gender BOTH Categorical Gender of student (male or female)

Race BOTH Categorical Race/ethnicity of the student. Variable was divided into 4 groups: White, Black/African American, Hispanic, and Other (Asian, Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, two or more races excluding Hispanic or no response)

Socioeconomic Predictors

Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) BOTH Categorical Adjusted gross income of primary contributor. Variable was ranked into 4 groups: ≤ $27,335, $27,336-$48,215, $48,216-$70,006, $70,007-$99,999, and ≥ $100,000.

Loan Amount Used BOTH Continuous All loans used for first fall semester plus outstanding subsidized and unsubsidized loans used prior to attending ISU. Loans used prior to ISU do not include PLUS (parent), Perkins, TEACH or nursing loans.

Pre-Enrollment Predictors

Illinois State First Choice BOTH Categorical Whether or not ISU was student’s first choice.

First Generation BOTH Categorical Whether or not student is a first generation student. Predictor was coded “Yes” if student is attending college before either parent or “No” if either parent has attended college.

Swirling NT Categorical Whether or not student attended two or more colleges prior to attending ISU. Information was derived from National Student Clearinghouse.

Associate Degree NT Categorical Whether or not student earned associate’s degree prior to attending ISU

Transfer GPA NT Continuous Transfer GPA of student prior to attending ISU

HS GPA FTF Continuous High School GPA

English ACT FTF Continuous ACT score for English

Math ACT FTF Continuous ACT score for Math

Reading ACT FTF Continuous ACT score for Reading

Science ACT FTF Continuous ACT score for Science

Post-Enrollment Predictors

End-of-term GPA BOTH Continuous End of spring term GPA. If a student dropped out before the end of the spring semester, then end of fall term GPA was used. A student with no GPA was left as 0.0.

Earned Hours BOTH Continuous Number of credit hours earned during first fall semester. It does not include credit earned prior to first semester at ISU.

Attempted Hours BOTH Continuous Number of credit hours carried as of Census Day during first fall semester

Major Declared BOTH Categorical Whether or not student declared a major as of Census Day during first fall semester

Developmental Math BOTH Categorical Whether or not student was enrolled in a Developmental Math course (MAT 102, 104, 102.1) as of census day during first fall or spring semester

First Year Seminar FTF Categorical Whether or not student was enrolled in a First Year Seminar course (IDS 108 or IDS 122) as of Census Day during first fall or spring semester

Transfer Seminar NT Categorical Whether or not student was enrolled in Transfer Seminar course (IDS 189.14) as of Census Day during first fall or spring semester

Engagement Predictor

Greek Membership BOTH Categorical Whether or not student was a member of a Greek fraternity or sorority during first fall semester

Retention Study

Hypotheses The next five subsections identify the hypotheses for the FTF and NT datasets and briefly discuss the main findings of the literature on student retention related to these predictors.

Demographic Hypotheses H1. Female students will be more likely to be retained than male students when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. The literature on gender and retention is conflicting. Studies like the one conducted by Noble, Flynn, Lee, and Hilton (2007) suggest that female students are more likely to be retained than male students. Noble et al. (2007) discovered that even when all other predictors were controlled, female students were more likely to graduate in four years; however, the influence was reduced dramatically when GPA was included in the model. In contrast, St. John, Hu, Simmons, and Musoba (2001) discovered that male students were more likely to persist than female students when controlling for factors like ethnicity, income, SAT scores, and college GPA; however, this significant finding disappeared once factors like institution, degree type, and housing were included. Traditionally, women at Illinois State have a higher retention rate than male students, and a majority of the research (Astin, 1975; Noble et al., 2007; Peltier, Laden, & Matranga, 1999; Tinto, 1987) supports the hypothesis that female students are more likely to be retained. H2. White students will be more likely to be retained than African American/Black students, Hispanic students, or students of other races or ethnicities when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. The literature on race and retention also includes some conflicting findings. Several studies indicated that White students have higher odds of being retained than other races like African Americans, Hispanics, and American Indians (Astin, 1997; Noble, Flynn, Lee, & Hilton, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 1997). However, some studies have found that when certain predictors are held constant African American students are less likely to withdraw compared to White students (Murtaugh, Burns, & Schuster, 1999; Koirala, Davis & Cid, 2010). Historically, Illinois State University has found that White students have the highest retention rates. Therefore, the first hypothesis was derived from those studies that found that White students were more likely to be retained.

Socioeconomic Hypotheses H3. FTF and NT students who are in the highest adjusted gross income bracket (≥ $100,000) will have a higher retention rate than students who are in the three lower AGI brackets (≤ $27,335, $27,336-$48,215, $48,216-$70,006, $70,007-$99,999) when all other predictors are controlled. Hypothesis 3 was derived from past studies on financial factors that suggest that students from families with higher incomes were more likely to persist (Braunstein, McGrath, & Pescatrice, 2000; Gladieux & Swail, 1998).

Retention Study

H4. Increasing the amount of loans used prior to and during the first fall semester will decrease the odds of retention when all other predictors are held constant for both FTF and NT students. Past research has found that tuition charges have an adverse impact on student persistence (St. John, Andrieu, Oescher, & Starkey, 1994). A study conducted by Wessel, Bell, McPherson, Costello and Jones (2006) found that students who had a greater financial need persisted at lower rates. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis proposes that loans will have a negative influence on retention since higher loans mean more debt.

Pre-enrollment Hypotheses H5. FTF students who chose Illinois State as their first college choice will be more likely to be retained than students who did not choose Illinois State as their first choice when all other predictors are held constant. Most literature on college choice focused on how students chose what college was their first choice rather than how retention was affected when a school was not a student’s first choice. The small amount of literature on college choice as it relates to retention suggests a positive relationship. For example, a qualitative study conducted by Koirala, Davis, and Cid (2010) found that a large portion of first-time freshmen students withdrew from their university because it was not their first college choice. Noel-Levitz (2012) found that students who attend colleges that were their first choice are often more satisfied with their overall experiences. Therefore, the fifth hypothesis proposed that choosing Illinois State as a first choice college would increase the odds of being retained for a FTF student. Since the minimal amount of literature found on college choice as it relates to retention only focused on first-time freshmen students, no hypothesis was formed on how this variable related to new transfer student retention. College choice was analyzed for exploratory purposes in the NT dataset. H6. FTF students who have at least one parent who has earned a college degree will be more likely to be retained than FTF first generation students when all other predictors are controlled; however, this trait will not affect the retention rates of NT students. Hypothesis 6 is based on past literature that found that first-year, first-generation students were less likely to persist compared to students who had at least one parent who earned a college degree (Bradbury & Mather, 2009; Nuñez, Cuccaro-Alamin, & Carroll, 1998; Warburton, Bugarin, & Nuñez, 2001). For example, Nuñez, Cuccaro-Alamin, and Carroll (1998) found that only 56% of first-generation, first-term students earned a college degree or were still enrolled upon follow-up compared to 76% of students who had at least one parent with a bachelor’s degree or higher. Warburton, Bugarin, and Nuñez (2001) also found that first-generation students were significantly less likely to be retained or persist when compared to non-first-generation students; however, the gap was somewhat diminished for first-generation students who took more rigorous high school coursework. Bradbury and Mather (2009) concluded from their qualitative study that first-generation, first-term students are not as prepared for college since their parents lack the experiences of adjusting to college life. It was hypothesized that this trait would not influence NT student retention since new transfer students already have an idea of what to expect in college since they have previously attended at least one other institution.

Retention Study

H7. NT students who attended two or more colleges prior to attending Illinois State will be less likely to be retained compared to students who did not attend multiple colleges prior to attending Illinois State, controlling for other predictors. Hypothesis 7 was based on the study conducted by Rogulkin (2009), which found that students who attended multiple institutions typically had lower average GPAs at graduation and were less likely to be retained. H8. NT students who earned an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State will be more likely to be retained compared to students who did not earn an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State, controlling for other predictors. Hypothesis 8 is supported by a national study conducted by McCormick and Carroll (1997), which found that students who completed their associate’s degree prior to transferring from a two-year institution to a four-year institution were more likely to complete their bachelor’s degrees. Specifically, 43% of those students who had obtained an associate’s degree prior to transferring earned a bachelor’s degree within 5 years compared to only 17% of those who transferred without completion of an associate’s degree. H9. An increase in transfer GPA will increase the odds of being retained for NT students when all other factors are controlled. H10. An increase in high school GPA will increase the odds of being retained for FTF students when all other factors are held constant. H11. An increase in math, reading, science, and English ACT scores will increase the odds of being retained for FTF students when all other factors are held constant. Hypotheses 9, 10, and 11 are based on studies that found that achievement predictors like GPA and ACT scores positively predict student retention and persistence (Braunstein et al., 2000; Tross, Harper, Osher, & Kneidinger, 2000).

Post-enrollment Hypotheses H12. An increase in end-of-term GPA will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. Hypothesis 12 is also based on the numerous studies that found that achievement predictors positively predict student retention and persistence (Braunstein et al., 2000; Tross et al., 2000; Murtaugh et al., 1999). In fact, Braunstein, McGrath, and Pescatrice (2000) discovered that college GPA was the most influential predictor of student persistence. That is, poor performing students were more likely to withdraw by their sophomore year. H13. An increase in credit hours earned will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant.

Retention Study

H14. An increase in credit hours attempted will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. Hypothesis 14 is based on previous findings that part-time students are less likely to be retained than full-time students (Lucas & Meltesen, 1994; Puyear, 1989). Hypothesis 13 is supported by these findings in addition to literature that suggests academic achievement is positively associated with retention (Braunstein et al., 2000; Tross et al., 2000; Murtaugh et al., 1999) since the number of credit hours earned is associated with a student’s GPA. H15. FTF and NT students who declare a major by census day their first fall semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not declare a major when all other factors are held constant. Hypothesis 15 is based on past literature that suggests that declaring a major is positively associated with academic achievement (Leppel, 2001; Wood, 1990). For example, Leppel (2001) conducted a study using national-level data and found that freshmen students who did not decide a major had the lowest persistence rates and GPAs. H16. When all other factors are held constant, FTF and NT students who enroll in a developmental math course by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a developmental math course. H17. When all other factors are held constant, FTF students who enroll in a first year seminar by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a first year seminar. H18. When all other factors are held constant, NT students who enroll in a transfer seminar by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a transfer seminar. Hypotheses 16, 17 and 18 were derived from studies that suggest preparatory courses and programs improve retention rates (Gallard, Alberitton, & Morgan, 2010; Noble et al., 2007). For example, Noble et al. (2007) examined the effectiveness of a first year enhancement program called ESSENCE (Entering Students at South Engaging in New College Experiences) on graduation rates and GPA. The ESSENCE program included a freshmen seminar that informed students about study skills, exam preparation, and academic advising, among other topics. The researchers found that the first year enhancement program improved GPA and increased the likelihood of graduating, even when controlling for other predictors. The first year seminar and transfer seminar courses offered at Illinois State focus on similar topics to that of ESSENCE. The developmental math course provided at Illinois State is also designed to assist students in acquiring the skills needed to successfully complete courses that are part of the general education curriculum that is required of all students.

Retention Study

Engagement Hypothesis H19. FTF and NT students who pledge to a fraternity or sorority by census day their first semester will be more likely to be retained than students who do not pledge to a fraternity or sorority, controlling for all other predictors. Several studies have found that campus integration and social support are important predictors of student retention (Astin, 1993; DeBard & Sacks, 2011; Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, & Gonyea, 2008). While several studies found positive associations between academic achievement and social organizations (DeBard & Sacks, 2011), Kuh et al., 2008), some studies found mixed results (Nelson, Halperin, Wasserman, Smith & Graham, 2006). For example, Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, and Gonyea (2008) discovered that involvement in co-curricular activities had a strong positive influence on student retention. DeBard and Sacks (2011) found that first year freshmen students who joined Greek fraternities or sororities in the spring earned significantly higher GPAs and were more likely to be retained compared to those who did not join Greek letter organizations. In contrast, Nelson, Halperin, Wasserman, Smith, and Graham (2006) found that fraternities were negatively associated with GPAs; however, they also found that fraternities were still positively associated with persistence.

Results The logistic regression model was used to assess a set of predictors’ ability to explain variation in student retention. Retention was treated as a binary, discrete variable. That is, a student was coded as 1 if he or she returned by census day the second fall semester or coded 0 if he or she did not return by census day the second fall semester. Separate analyses were run for first time freshmen data and new transfer student data.

First-time Freshmen Results The first logistic regression test was conducted to assess whether the 18 FTF predictor variables listed in Table 1 significantly predicted whether a first-time freshman student was retained the second year. Prior to conducting the logistic regression analysis, tolerance was computed for each predictor to determine whether the multi-collinearity assumption was violated. Violation of this assumption would indicate that at least two predictors are strongly correlated, and only one of those predictors should be used in the model. All tolerance values were above the .10 threshold, which suggested that there were not strong correlations between predictors. However, multi-collinearity issues could still be present. The full model (i.e., predictors included in equation) compared to the model with intercept-only (i.e., no predictors included in equation) was highly statistically significant in predicting whether or not a student was retained according to the Model chi-square statistic, χ2(23) = 1,685.54, p < .001. The intercept-only model was able to correctly classify 100% of those who were retained but 0% of those who were not retained, for an overall success rate of 82.9%. The full model was able to correctly classify 98.8% of those who were retained and 34.1% of those who were not retained, for an overall success rate of 87.7%. Table 2 presents the coefficients, standard error, odds ratios, p-values, and confidence intervals for each predictor. Predictors were considered statistically significant at the .05 level. The next five subsections provide a detailed review of each variable’s ability to predict FTF student retention.

Retention Study

Table 2 First Time Freshmen Predictors of Retention

Predictors B S.E. Wald Sig. Exp(B) 95% C.I.for EXP(B)

Lower Upper

Demographic Predictors

Gender (male vs. female)a .216 .077 7.945 .005 1.241 1.068 1.443

Race 11.221 .011

Race (African American/Black vs. White) .421 .132 10.208 .001 1.524 1.177 1.974

Race (Hispanic vs. White) .200 .127 2.487 .115 1.221 .953 1.565

Race (Other vs. White) .135 .154 .765 .382 1.145 .846 1.549


Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) 6.328 .176

AGI (≤ $27,335 vs. ≥ $100,000) .065 .113 .327 .567 1.067 .854 1.332

AGI ($27,336-$48,215 vs. ≥ $100,000) -.178 .111 2.576 .108 .837 .674 1.040

AGI ($48,216-$70,006 vs. ≥ $100,000) .075 .117 .408 .523 1.077 .857 1.355

AGI ($70,007-$99,999 vs. ≥ $100,000) .108 .099 1.188 .276 1.114 .918 1.351

Loan Amount Used <.001 <.001 1.249 .264 1.000 1.000 1.000


Illinois State First Choice (yes vs. no) .241 .086 7.868 .005 1.272 1.075 1.506

First Generation (yes vs. no) .185 .078 5.671 .017 1.203 1.033 1.400

HS GPA -.226 .091 6.182 .013 .798 .668 .953

English ACT -.027 .012 5.422 .020 .973 .951 .996

Math ACT .009 .013 .468 .494 1.009 .984 1.034

Reading ACT -.007 .010 .464 .496 .993 .974 1.013

Science ACT .017 .015 1.376 .241 1.017 .988 1.047


End-of-term GPA 1.292 .064 405.574 <.001 3.640 3.210 4.127

Earned Hours .158 .018 79.253 <.001 1.171 1.131 1.212

Attempted Hours -.063 .030 4.600 .032 .939 .886 .995

Major Declared (yes vs. no) .359 .085 17.946 <.001 1.433 1.213 1.692

Developmental Math (yes vs. no) .250 .096 6.826 .009 1.284 1.064 1.549

First Year Seminar (no vs. yes) .071 .091 .610 .435 1.074 .898 1.284


Greek Membership (yes vs. no) .500 .123 16.491 <.001 1.649 1.296 2.100

Constant

-2.888 .518 31.062 <.001 .056 - -

a The second category is the reference group for each categorical predictor

Retention Study

Demographic Predictors H1. Female students will be more likely to be retained than male students when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. Gender was found to be a statistically significant demographic predictor of FTF student retention. Specifically, male FTF students were 1.24 times as likely to be retained compared to female students, controlling for all other predictors. Therefore, the first hypothesis was not supported for the FTF dataset since the direction of influence was the opposite of what was expected. A Pearson’s Chi-square test was subsequently run to investigate the unexpected finding on gender related to retention. The chi-square result for gender suggested that female students were more likely to be retained compared to male students when the other predictors were not controlled, X2(1, N = 8114) = 8.80, p = .003; however, the effect size was small, Cramér’s V=.03. By splitting end-of-term GPA into two groups, high (2.0 or greater) and low (less than 2.0), a Chi-Square analysis was able to be conducted on gender by retained by end-of-term GPA. The results revealed an interaction between gender and end-of-term GPA on retention. Specifically, female students who had an end-of-term GPA at or above 2.0 were less likely to be retained compared to male students who had an end-of term-GPA at or above 2.0, X2(1, N = 8114) = 5.23, p = .022, but the effect size was also small (Cramér’s V=-.027). In contrast, there was not a statistically significant difference between female students who had an end-of-term GPA below 2.0 compared to male students who had an end-of-term GPA below 2.0, X2(1, N = 8114) = 0.92, p = .0339. The chi-square table for gender can be seen in Appendix A. H2. White students will be more likely to be retained than African American/Black students, Hispanic students, or students of other races or ethnicities when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. Race was also found to be a statistically significant demographic predictor of FTF student retention. The race predictor was dummy-coded into four categories: White, Black/African American, Hispanic, and other race. The White dummy-coded category was chosen as reference category since it contained the largest number of students. The results suggested that first time freshmen who identified themselves as Black or African American were 1.52 times as likely to be retained compared to those who identified as White when other factors were controlled. There were not significant differences in odds for the other dummy-coded race groups, Hispanic and other race, when compared to the White group. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not supported for the FTF dataset. A chi-square test was also conducted on race. Since there was only a statistically significant difference between African American/Black and White students in the logistic regression, the chi-square analysis was conducted only between these two races. In contrast to the findings of the logistic regression, African American/Black students were less likely to be retained compared to White students (X2(1, N = 1177) = 30.62, p < .001), but the test did not control for other predictors and the effect size was small (Cramér’s V=-.066). When the nominal (high vs. low) end-of-term variable was incorporated, the results suggested that an African American/Black student with a lower end-of-term GPA was more likely to be retained compared to a White student with a lower end-of-term GPA, X2(1, N = 1177) = 7.79, p = .005; however, the effect size was small, Cramér’s V=.100. The chi-square table for race can be seen in Appendix B.

Retention Study

Socioeconomic Predictors H3. FTF and NT students who are in the highest adjusted gross income bracket (≥ $100,000) will have a higher retention rate than students who are in the three lower AGI brackets (≤ $27,335, $27,336-$48,215, $48,216-$70,006, $70,007-$99,999) when all other predictors are controlled. Adjusted gross income was not a statistically significant socioeconomic predictor of FTF student retention when controlling for other predictors. That is, none of the four ranked AGI groups were more or less likely to be retained when compared to students who were classified in the highest AGI bracket of $100,000 or more. As a result, the third hypothesis was not supported for the FTF students. H4. Increasing the amount of loans used prior to and during the first fall semester will decrease the odds of retention when all other predictors are held constant for both FTF and NT students. Similarly, loan amount used was not a statistically significant socioeconomic predictor of FTF student retention when controlling for other predictors. In other words, as the amount of loans used prior to and for the fall semester increased, the odds of being retained did not change. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis was not supported when analyzing FTF students.

Pre-Enrollment Predictors H5. FTF students who chose Illinois State as their first college choice will be more likely to be retained than students who did not choose Illinois State as their first choice when all other predictors are held constant. Illinois State as the first choice for students was found to be a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. Specifically, FTF students who chose Illinois State as their first choice were 1.27 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not choose Illinois State as their first choice when controlling for all other factors. Therefore, the fifth hypothesis was supported when examining FTF students. H6. FTF students who have at least one parent who has earned a college degree will be more likely to be retained than FTF first generation students when all other predictors are controlled; however, this trait will not affect the retention rates of NT students. First generation was also a statistically significant predictor of FTF student retention. Students who were not first-generation college students were 1.20 times as likely to be retained compared to those who were first-generation college students when controlling for all other predictors. The sixth hypothesis was also supported for the FTF dataset. H10. An increase in high school GPA will increase the odds of being retained for FTF students when all other factors are held constant. High school GPA was found to be a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. The present study found that a student was less likely to be retained for every one 1-point increase in high school GPA, when controlling for all other predictors. Therefore, the tenth hypothesis

Retention Study

was not supported. However, moderate correlations were found between high school GPA and end-of-term GPA (r=.50), between end-of-term GPA and hours earned (r=.648), and between English ACT score and reading ACT score (r=.56), which suggest possible collinearity issues. An independent samples t-test conducted for high school GPA revealed that students who were retained had a statistically significantly higher high school GPA (M=3.41, SD=0.46) than students who were not retained (M=3.21, SD=0.44), t(8112)=14.94, p < .001. The effect size for high school GPA was moderate, d = 0.44. Since the results of the logistic regression were not consistent with the high school GPA means between those who were retained and those who were not retained, an additional analysis was conducted to investigate whether there was an interaction between end-of-term GPA and HS GPA. In order to conduct a chi-square test, the nominal end-of-term GPA variable was used and HS GPA was divided into two groups. However, the present study did not find a significant interaction between nominal end-of-term GPA and nominal end-of-term GPA. H11. An increase in math, reading, science, and English ACT scores will increase the odds of being retained for FTF students when all other factors are held constant. ACT English score was found to be a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. A student was less likely to be retained for every 1-point increase in ACT English score, when controlling for all other predictors. However, the present study hypothesized that ACT scores would have the opposite direction of influence on retention; therefore, the eleventh hypothesis was not supported when examining English ACT scores. An independent samples t-test, which does not control for other factors, revealed that students who were retained had a statistically significantly higher English ACT score (M=24.13, SD=3.84) compared to those students who were not retained (M=23.66, SD=3.87), t(8112)=4.08, p < .001. However, the effect size for English ACT score was small, d = .12. Since the results of the logistic regression were not consistent with the ACT English score means between those who were retained and those who were not retained, an additional analysis was conducted to investigate whether there was an interaction between end-of-term GPA and ACT English score. In order to conduct a chi-square test, the nominal end-of-term GPA variable was used and ACT English score was divided into two groups: scores greater than 22 and scores less than or equal to 22. The chi-square analysis revealed that, in general, students who earned an ACT English score of 22 or higher were more likely to be retained; however, those students were less likely to be retained if they had a low end-of-term GPA compared to students who had both a low end-of-term GPA and low ACT English score. Math, reading, and science ACT scores were not statistically significant predictors of student retention. That is, math, reading, and science ACT scores did not affect the odds that a FTF student would be retained when controlling for other predictors. Therefore, the eleventh hypothesis was also not supported when examining math, reading, or science ACT scores.

Post-Enrollment Predictors H12. An increase in end-of-term GPA will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. End-of-term GPA was a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. End-of-term GPA had the highest predictive power out of all the predictors. As end-of-term GPA increased by one unit, the odds that a first-time freshman would be retained increased 3.64 times when

Retention Study

controlling for all other factors. For example, a student with a 3.5 GPA would have odds of persisting that are 3.64 times as high as a student with a 2.5 GPA. Hence, the twelfth hypothesis was supported for FTF student data. H13. An increase in credit hours earned will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. Credit hours earned was a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention as well. The odds of being retained increased 1.17 times for each additional credit hour earned during the first semester, controlling for all other predictors. As a result, the thirteenth hypothesis was supported for the FTF students. H14. An increase in credit hours attempted will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. Additionally, credit hours attempted was a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. The odds that a student would be retained decreased for every 1-credit hour increase in the number of attempted credits hours the first semester, controlling for other predictors. Therefore, the fourteenth hypothesis was not supported for FTF student data. However, a moderate correlation was found between attempted hours and earned hours (r=.514), which suggests there may have been some collinearity issues between earned and attempted hours, but not high enough to fail the multi-collinearity assumption. An independent samples t-test found that students who were retained actually attempted a statistically significantly higher number of credit hours in their first semester (M=14.53, SD=1.33) compared to students who were not retained (M=14.17, SD=1.39), t(1948)=8.88, p < .001. However, the effect size was small, d= 0.26. Students were then categorized into two groups based on attempted hours and earned hours: students who earned fewer credit hours than they attempted and students who earned the same amount or more credit hours than they attempted. A chi-square analysis revealed that attempting a higher number of credit hours increased a student’s likelihood of being retained unless the student did not earn all of those hours as well. Therefore, if a student attempted a higher number of hours than he or she actually earned, then having a higher number of attempted hours decreased the odds a student would be retained. The chi square of the categorical hours attempted variable by retention can be seen in Appendix C. H15. FTF and NT students who declare a major by census day their first fall semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not declare a major when all other factors are held constant. Major declared was a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. Students who declared a major by census day their first semester were 1.43 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not choose a major, controlling for other predictors. As a result, the fifteenth hypothesis was supported by the findings in the FTF student data. H16. When all other factors are held constant, FTF and NT students who enroll in a developmental math course by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a developmental math course.

Retention Study

Developmental math was also a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. FTF students who were enrolled in a developmental math course by census day their first or second semester were 1.28 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not enroll in a developmental math course, controlling for other predictors. Therefore, the sixteenth hypothesis was supported for the FTF students. H17. When all other factors are held constant, FTF students who enroll in a first year seminar by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a first year seminar. First-year seminar was not a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of FTF student retention. In other words, taking a first-year seminar course the first or second semester did not influence the odds that a FTF student would be retained, when controlling for all other factors. Consequently, the seventeenth hypothesis was not supported.

Engagement Predictor H19. FTF and NT students who pledge to a fraternity or sorority by census day their first semester will be more likely to be retained than students who do not pledge to a fraternity or sorority, controlling for all other predictors. Greek membership was a statistically significant engagement predictor of FTF student retention. That is, FTF students who pledged to a fraternity or sorority in the first semester were 1.65 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not pledge to a fraternity or sorority, controlling for all other predictors. Hence, the nineteenth hypothesis was supported for the FTF student data.

New Transfer Student Results A second logistic regression test was conducted to assess whether the 16 NT predictor variables listed in Table 1 significantly predicted whether a new transfer student was retained the second year. Prior to conducting the logistic regression analysis, tolerance was computed for each predictor to verify that the multi-collinearity assumption was not violated. All tolerance values were above the .10 threshold. The full model compared to the model with intercept only was highly statistically significant in predicting whether or not a new transfer student was retained according to the Model chi-square statistic, χ2(21) = 1,245.57, p < .001. The model that did not include the predictors in the equation was able to correctly classify 100% of those who were retained but 0% of those who were not retained, for an overall success rate of 84.1%. The full model was able to correctly classify 98.5% of those who were retained and 42.6% of those who were not retained, for an overall success rate of 89.6%. Table 3 presents the coefficients, standard error, odds ratios, p-values, and confidence intervals for each predictor. Predictors were considered statistically significant at the .05 level. The next five subsections provide a detailed review of each variable’s ability to predict FTF student retention.

Retention Study

Table 3 New Transfer Student Predictors of Retention

Predictor Name B S.E. Wald Sig. Exp(B) 95% C.I.for EXP(B)

Lower Upper

Demographic Predictors

Gender (male vs. female)b .401 .107 13.957 <.001 1.493 1.210 1.843

Race 3.669 .299

Race (African American/Black vs. White) .365 .205 3.166 .075 1.440 .964 2.152

Race (Hispanic vs. White) -.026 .204 .016 .899 .974 .653 1.455

Race (Other vs. White) -.119 .250 .227 .634 .888 .543 1.450


Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) 5.554 .235

AGI (≤ $27,335 vs. ≥ $100,000) -.175 .157 1.250 .263 .839 .617 1.141

AGI ($27,336-$48,215 vs. ≥ $100,000) -.266 .168 2.504 .114 .766 .551 1.066

AGI ($48,216-$70,006 vs. ≥ $100,000) -.348 .166 4.381 .036 .706 .510 .978

AGI ($70,007-$99,999 vs. ≥ $100,000) -.243 .152 2.557 .110 .784 .582 1.056

Loan Amount Used <.001 <.001 1.676 .196 1.000 1.000 1.000


Illinois State First Choice (yes vs. no) .065 .137 .225 .635 1.067 .816 1.396

First Generation (yes vs. no) .027 .109 .059 .809 1.027 .829 1.272

Associate Degree (yes vs. no) .328 .114 8.319 .004 1.388 1.111 1.735

Swirling -.033 .117 .079 .778 .968 .770 1.216

Transfer GPA -.707 .140 25.693 <.001 .493 .375 .648


End-of-term GPA 1.557 .091 291.614 <.001 4.742 3.967 5.670

Earned Hours .134 .022 37.780 . <.001 1.144 1.096 1.194

Attempted Hours .010 .032 .096 .756 1.010 .949 1.074

Major Declared (yes vs. no) .300 .110 7.443 .006 1.350 1.088 1.675

Developmental Math (yes vs. no) .334 .240 1.948 .163 1.397 .874 2.234

Transfer Seminar (no vs. yes) .036 .351 .010 .918 1.037 .521 2.061


Greek Membership (yes vs. no) .598 .291 4.214 .040 1.819 1.027 3.219

Constant

-2.191 .544 16.214 <.001 .112

b The second category is the reference group for each categorical predictor

Retention Study

Demographic Predictors H1. Female students will be more likely to be retained than male students when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. Gender was found to be a statistically significant demographic predictor of NT student retention. Specifically, male NT students were 1.49 times as likely to be retained compared to female students when controlling for all other predictors. Since the predicted direction was incorrect, the first hypothesis was not supported for the NT student data. Further analysis was conducted on this unexpected finding. The results from a Pearson’s Chi-square analysis suggested that there was not a statistically significant difference between males and females in relation to retention when other predictors were not controlled, X2(1, N = 4390) = 0.30, p = .581. On the contrary, when nominal end-of-term GPA was incorporated into the chi-square test, female students who had a higher end-of-term GPA were less likely to be retained compared to male students who had a higher end-of-term GPA, X2(1, N = 4390) = 9.64, p = .002, but the effect size was trivial (Cramér’s V=-.05). The chi square table for NT students can be seen in Appendix D. H2. White students will be more likely to be retained than African American/Black students, Hispanic students, or students of other races or ethnicities when all other predictors are held constant in both the FTF and NT datasets. Race was not a statistically significant demographic predictor of student retention when examining NT student data. That is, none of the three racial groups were more or less likely to be retained when compared to White students. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not supported in the NT student data.

Socioeconomic Predictors H3. FTF and NT students who are in the highest adjusted gross income bracket (≥ $100,000) will have a higher retention rate than students who are in the three lower AGI brackets (≤ $27,335, $27,336-$48,215, $48,216-$70,006, $70,007-$99,999) when all other predictors are controlled. Adjusted gross income was not a statistically significant socioeconomic predictor of NT student retention when controlling for other predictors. That is, none of the four ranked AGI groups were more or less likely to be retained when compared to students who were classified in the highest AGI bracket of $100,000 or more. Consequently, the third hypothesis was not supported for NT student data. H4. Increasing the amount of loans used prior to and during the first fall semester will decrease the odds of retention when all other predictors are held constant for both FTF and NT students. Similarly, loan amount used was not a statistically significant socioeconomic predictor of NT student retention when controlling for other predictors. In other words, as the amount of loans used prior to and for the fall semester increased, the odds of being retained did not change. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis was not supported when examining NT student data.

Retention Study

Pre-Enrollment Predictors H6. FTF students who have at least one parent who has earned a college degree will be more likely to be retained than FTF first generation students when all other predictors are controlled; however, this trait will not affect the retention rates of NT students. First generation was not a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of NT student retention when other factors were held constant. Having at least one parent who earned a college degree did not influence the odds of a NT student being retained; therefore, the sixth hypothesis was supported when analyzing NT student data. H7. NT students who attended two or more colleges prior to attending Illinois State will be less likely to be retained compared to students who did not attend multiple colleges prior to attending Illinois State, controlling for other predictors. Swirling, which refers to enrolling in two or more institutions prior to transferring to Illinois State, was not a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of NT student retention when other factors were held constant. Therefore, the seventh hypothesis was not supported. H8. NT students who earned an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State will be more likely to be retained compared to students who did not earn an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State, controlling for other predictors. Associate’s degree completion was found to be a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of NT student retention. Specifically, undergraduates who earned an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State were 1.39 times as likely to be retained compared to students who did not earn an associate’s degree, controlling for all other predictors. As a result, the eighth hypothesis was supported for the NT dataset. H9. An increase in transfer GPA will increase the odds of being retained for NT students when all other factors are controlled. Transfer GPA was also found to be a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of NT student retention. A student was less likely to be retained for every 1-point increase in transfer GPA. The ninth hypothesis was not supported since the predicted direction of influence was incorrect; however, there was a moderate correlation between end-of-term GPA and transfer GPA, which suggests there may have been a collinearity issue even though the multi-collinearity assumption was not violated. An independent samples t-test was conducted on transfer GPA between retained and not retained students. The test revealed that when other predictors were not held constant, students who were retained had a statistically significantly higher transfer GPA (M= 3.14, SD=.45) compared to students who were not retained (M= 2.93, SD=.47), t(4388)=11.24, p < .001. The effect size of transfer GPA on retention was moderate, d=.46. Transfer GPA was transformed into a nominal variable (≥ 3.0 vs. < 3.0) in order to run a chi-square test. The results were similar to the t-test. However, an interaction was found when the nominal end-of-term GPA was incorporated. Specifically, students who had a low end-of-term GPA and a high transfer GPA were less likely to be retained compared to students who had a low end-of-term GPA and a low transfer GPA, χ2(1, N =4,390) =7.34, p < .007. However, the effect size of

Retention Study

the finding was small (Cramer’s V=.109). There was not a significant difference between transfer GPA groups when the student had an end-of-term GPA greater or equal to 2.0. The chi-square table of nominal transfer GPA can be seen in Appendix E. College choice, which was an exploratory variable in the NT dataset, was not a statistically significant pre-enrollment predictor of student retention when other factors were held constant. That is, choosing Illinois State as first choice did not seem to influence retention rates for NT students.

Post-Enrollment Predictors H12. An increase in end-of-term GPA will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. End-of-Term GPA was found to be a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of NT student retention. As end of term GPA increased by one unit, the odds that a new transfer student would be retained increased 4.74 times, controlling for other predictors. Hence, the twelfth hypothesis was supported when analyzing NT student data. H13. An increase in credit hours earned will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. Credit hours earned was found to be a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of NT student retention as well. The odds of being retained increased 1.14 times as the number of credit hours earned during the first fall semester increased by 1, controlling for other factors. As a result, the thirteenth hypothesis was supported by the NT findings on credit hours earned. H14. An increase in credit hours attempted will increase the odds of being retained for FTF and NT students when all other factors are held constant. In contrast, credit hours attempted was not a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of NT student retention. The number of hours the student attempted during the first semester did not affect the odds a student would be retained when controlling for other factors. Therefore, the fourteenth hypothesis was not supported for NT student data. H15. FTF and NT students who declare a major by census day their first fall semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not declare a major when all other factors are held constant. Major declared was found to be a statistically significant post-enrollment predictor of NT student retention. Undergraduates who declared a major by census day their first semester were 1.35 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not choose a major, controlling for other predictors. Consequently, the fifteenth hypothesis was supported by the NT dataset findings. H16. When all other factors are held constant, FTF and NT students who enroll in a developmental math course by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a developmental math course.

Retention Study

H18. When all other factors are held constant, NT students who enroll in a transfer seminar by census day their first fall or spring semester will have higher odds of being retained than students who do not enroll in a transfer seminar. Transfer seminar and developmental math were not statistically significant post-enrollment predictors of NT student retention. That is, enrolling in a transfer seminar course or developmental math course the first or second semester did not affect the odds of a student being retained compared to students who did not enroll in these courses. Therefore, the hypotheses 16 and 18 were not supported when examining NT students.

Engagement Predictor H19. FTF and NT students who pledge to a fraternity or sorority by census day their first semester will be more likely to be retained than students who do not pledge to a fraternity or sorority, controlling for all other predictors. Greek membership was a statistically significant engagement predictor of NT student retention. NT students who pledged to a fraternity or sorority in the first semester were 1.82 times as likely to be retained compared to those who did not pledge to a fraternity or sorority. As a result, the nineteenth hypothesis was supported when analyzing NT students.

Discussion

Findings The results of the present study suggest that when all other factors were held constant, end-of-term GPA was the most powerful predictor of student retention for both FTF and NT students. Although end-of-term GPA appeared to be the most influential predictor according to its odds ratio, its degree of influence should be kept in context with the scaling of the predictor. That is, a 1-unit increase in GPA is sizable, so it is not surprising that the odds ratio is large as well. A 1-unit increase in English ACT score is not the same as a 1-unit increase in GPA. Additional findings that are less practically significant due to low odds ratios are listed below. When controlling for all other predictors, the analysis of the FTF dataset revealed that the odds of being retained the following fall semester increased if: the number of earned hours increased; students had at least one parent who earned a college degree; Illinois State was the students’ first choice; undergraduates pledged to a fraternity or sorority in their first semester; they declared a major by census day the first semester; or students took a developmental math class their first fall or spring semester. When controlling for all other predictors, the FTF analysis also found: white students were less likely to be retained compared to African American or Black students; the odds of being retained decreased as the English ACT score increased; female students were less likely to be retained compared to male students; as high school GPA increased, the odds of being retained decreased; and the odds of being retained decreased as the number of credit hours attempted the first semester increased. It should be noted that these findings may be due to multi-collinearity issues or interactions between other

Retention Study

predictors. For example, additional analyses revealed that, in general, female students were more likely to be retained than male students, unless the comparison was between female and male students who had a GPA at or above 2.0; then male students were more likely to be retained. When controlling for all other predictors, the analysis of the NT dataset revealed that the odds of being retained the following fall semester increased if: the number of earned hours increased; they earned an associate’s degree prior to attending Illinois State; students pledged to a fraternity or sorority in their first semester; or undergraduates declared a major by census day their first semester. When controlling for all other predictors, the NT analysis also found the following: male students were more likely to be retained compared to female students; and as transfer GPA increased, the odds of being retained decreased. It should be noted that these findings may be due to multi-collinearity issues or interactions between other predictors.

Implications The findings of the present study suggest that student retention is complex. Students do not behave the same at every university and are affected differently under various circumstances. Their characteristics cannot be studied independently from one another as the traits interact differently, correlating with disparate outcomes. For example, students who earned high transfer GPAs were found to have higher retention rates than students who had lower transfer GPAs when no other factors were controlled; however, the opposite was found when both groups had low end-of-term GPAs. Similar results were found when analyzing English ACT scores. A possible explanation may be that students who do not meet expectations based on past performances are more likely to drop out. High school GPA was another predictor that produced unexpected findings. Since the logistic regression controls for all other predictors, the negative odds ratio for high school GPA may be reflecting the difficulty of the student’s high school. This is not to say that all students who had a high high school GPA came from an easy high school or that all students who had a low GPA came from a tough high school, but rather that those who did poorly in college but had a higher high school GPA may have come from schools that were easier and did not prepare the students as well. Although the results mentioned in the present study were statistically significant, it is important to reiterate that the results may not be very practically significant. Statistically significant differences can be found even with very small differences if the sample size is large. In general, the increases or decreases in likelihood of retention for each of the characteristics were not extremely large. Some limitations to the study that should be taken into consideration when determining the validity of the results are discussed in the next section.

Limitations and Future Analyses Like any study, the current study has its strengths as well as its limitations. For example, the FTF and NT sample populations were limited to only students who applied for financial aid, which may reduce the generalizability of the results. In order for a record to be used in the logistic regression analysis, no information could be missing from any of the predictors. Since three of the predictors (first generation, AGI, and Illinois State first choice) were derived from financial aid, and not all students apply for

Retention Study

financial aid, a large number of students were removed from both samples. Several students were missing responses to other predictors as well such as high school GPA, transfer GPA, and ACT scores, which required additional records to be excluded. The method used in reporting no end-of-term GPA may also reduce the internal validity of the present study. Several students in both populations had no GPA at the end of the term due to withdrawing from classes without penalty. A student with no GPA was reported the same way as a student who earned a 0.0 GPA. Almost all students who had no GPA at the end of the term were not retained. Since the sample of students who were not retained was already so small, the decision was made to keep those students in the data rather than to remove them from the study. Additionally, some students who did not respond to race were included in the “Other Race” group. A quick re-run of the analysis reflected that removing these students did not affect the main findings for either dataset; however, future studies should exclude these students to increase validity of the study. The present study initially planned to include predictors pertaining to students’ residence such as whether or not the student lived on campus and whether or not the student was an Illinois resident. However, preliminary analyses of FTF and NT datasets revealed that almost all students were Illinois residents; and the student housing table was not static, making it difficult to identify whether a student was living on-campus at a specific time. Predictors such as student aspirations, high school coursework, and other factors related to student engagement were also planned to be included in the first-time freshmen data set. However, the Beginning College Survey of Student Engagement (BCSSE), which captures information on student aspirations, expectations, engagement, and high school courses taken, is only conducted every three years. The 2010 and 2011 cohorts did not complete the BCSSE survey and only a portion of the 2012 cohort had usable data; therefore predictors pertaining to student aspirations and high school courses taken were not included. Other extra-curricular activities in college like student government and Leadership Initiative were planned to be included in the retention analyses. However, Illinois State currently does not collect student identification numbers on these activities, which are necessary to link back to the main datasets. Therefore, college engagement was limited to Greek affiliation. Future studies on student retention at Illinois State should include information on student aspirations, expectations, high school engagement, and other college engagement as past studies have suggested they are important indicators of student retention (Nes, Evans & Segerstrom, 2009). Identification of these predictors may help inform work to enhance current programs and practices designed to promote retention of at-risk students.

Retention Study

References Astin, A. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W. (1997). How 'good' is your institution's retention rate? Research in Higher Education, 38,

647-658. Bradbury, B. L., & Mather, P.C. (2009). The integration of first-year, first-generation college students

from Ohio Appalachia. NASPA Journal, 46, 258-281. Braunstein, A., McGrath, M.,& Pescatrice, D.(2000). Measuring the impact of financial factors on college

persistence. Journal of College Student Retention, 2(30), 191-203. DeBard, R., & Sacks, C. (2011). Greek membership: The relationship with first-year academic

performance. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 13(1), 109-126.

Gallard, A. J., Albritton, F., & Morgan, M. W. (2010). A comprehensive cost/benefit model:

Developmental student success impact. Journal of Developmental Education. 34(1) 10-25. Gladieux, L. E., & Swail, W. S. (1998). Financial aid is not enough: Improving the odds of college success.

College Board Review, (185), 16-21, 30-32.

Koirala, H. P., Davis, Marsha J. & Cid, C. R. (2010). Retention of most-at-risk entering students at a four year college. NERA Conference Proceedings, Rocky Hill, Connecticut. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/nera_2010/30.

Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student

engagement on college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 540–563. Leppel, K. (2001). The impact of major on college persistence among freshmen. Higher Education, 41(3),

327-342. Lucas, J. A. & Meltesen, C. (1994). Longitudinal study of Harper College students, 1982-1992. William

Rainey Harper College, Palatine, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 373 826) McCormick, A. & Carroll, C. D. (1997). Transfer behavior among beginning postsecondary students:

1989-1994. Statistical Analysis Report. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. NCES 97-266

Murtaugh, P. A., Burns, L. D., Schuster, J. (1999). Predicting the retention of university students.

Research in Higher Education, 40, 355-371.

Retention Study

Nelson, S. M., Halperin, S., Wasserman, T. H., Smith, C., & Graham, P. (2006). Effects of fraternity/sorority membership and recruitment semester on GPA and retention. The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, 2(1), 61-73.

Nes., L.S., Evans, D.R., & Segerstrom, S.C. (2009). Optimism and college retention: Mediation by motivations, performance, and adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 39(8), 1887-1912.

Noble, K., Flynn, N. T., Lee, J. D., & Hilton, D. (2007) Predicting successful college experiences: Evidence

from a first-year retention program. Journal of College Student Retention, 9, 39-60. Noel-Levitz (2012). The factors influencing college choice among nontraditional students. Coralville,

Iowa. Retrieved from www.noellevitz.com/Factors2012. Nunez, A., Cuccaro-Alamin, S. & Carroll, C. D. (1998). First-generation students: Undergraduates whose

parents never enrolled in postsecondary education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).

Peltier, G., Laden, R., & Matranga, M. (1999). Student persistence in college: A review of research.

Journal of College Student Retention, 1, 357-376. Puyear, D. E. (1989). Retention of part-time degree students in the Virginia Community College system,

1985-86 through 1987-88. Virginia State Dept. of Community Colleges, Richmond, VA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 304199)

St. John, E. P., Andrieu, S., Oescher, J., & Starkey, J. B. (1994). The influence of student aid on within-year

persistence by traditional college-age students in four-year colleges. Research in Higher Education, 35(4), 455-480.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press. Tross, S. A., Harper, J. P., Osher, L. W., & Kneidinger, L. M. (2000). Not just the usual cast of

characteristics: Using personality to predict college performance and retention. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 323-3334.

U.S. Department of Education. (1997). Findings from the condition of education 1996: Minorities in

higher education (NCES 97-372). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Warburton, E. C., Bugarin, R., & Nuñez, A. (2001). Bridging the gap: Academic preparation and postsecondary success of first-generation students. Education Statistics Quarterly, 3(3) 73-77.

Wellman, J. V. (2002). State policy and community college-baccalaureate transfer. National Center for

Public Policy and Higher Education, C.A.; Institute for Higher Education Policy, Washington, DC. (Report #02-6). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 468890)

Retention Study

Wessel, R.D., Bell, C., McPherson, J.D., Costello, M.T., & Jones, J.A. (2006). Academic disqualification and persistence to graduation by financial aid category and academic ability. Journal of College Student Retention, 8(2), 185-198.

Wood, P. H. (1990). The comparative academic abilities of students in education and other areas of a

multi-focus university (Report No. SP032663). Bowling Green State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED327480)

Retention Study

APPENDIX A

Gender by Nominal End-of-Term GPA by FTF Retained

Nominal End-of-Term GPA Retained

Cramer’s V P-Value

No Yes Total

GPA < 2.0

Gender

Male Observed 344 (67.5%) 166 (32.5%)

510 (53.1%)

.031 .339 Expected 337.0 (66.1%) 173.0 (33.9%)

Female Observed 291 (64.5%) 160 (35.5%)

451 (46.9%) Expected 298.0 (66.1%) 153.0 (33.9%)

GPA ≥ 2.0

Gender

Male Observed 258 (9.5%) 2456 (90.5%)

2,714 (37.9%)

.022 Expected 286.8 (10.6%) 2427.2 (89.4%)

.027

Female Observed 498 (11.2%) 3941 (88.8%)

4439 (62.1%) Expected 469.2 (10.6%) 3969.8 (89.4%)

Total

Gender

Male Observed 602 (18.7%) 2622 (81.3%)

3224 (39.7%) .033 .003 Expected 552.7 (17.1%) 2671.3 (82.9%)

Female Observed 789 (16.1%) 4101 (83.9%)

4890 (60.3%) Expected 838.3 (17.1%) 4051.7 (82.9%)

This table reflects that, in general, female students are more likely to be retained than male

students when other factors are not held constant. However, the observed number of students

who were retained was statistically significantly lower than what was expected for females with

a GPA ≥ 2.0 and was higher than expected for males with a GPA ≥ 2.0, suggesting that male

students are more likely to be retained when the sample is filtered to only students who earned a

GPA of 2.0 or higher.

Retention Study

APPENDIX B

Race by Nominal End-of-Term GPA by FTF Retained



No Yes Total

GPA < 2.0

Race

White Observed 407 (68.5%) 187 (31.5%)

594 (76.0%)

.100 .005 Expected 391.2 (65.9%) 202.8 (34.1%)

Black/African

American

Observed 108 (57.4%) 80 (42.6%) 188 (24.0%)

Expected 123.8 (65.9%) 64.2 (34.1%)

GPA ≥ 2.0

Race

White Observed 608 (10.5%) 5175 (89.5%)

5783 (92.4%)

.592

Expected 611.5 (10.6%) 5171.5 (89.4%) .007

Black/African

American

Observed 54 (11.3%) 424 (88.7%) 478 (7.6%)

Expected 50.5 (10.6%) 427.5 (89.4%)

Total

Race

White Observed 1015 (15.9%) 5362 (84.1%)

6377 (90.5%) .066 <.001 Expected 1065.7 (16.7%) 5311.3 (83.3%)

Black/African

American

Observed 162 (24.3%) 504 (75.7%) 666 (9.5%)

Expected 111.3 (16.7%) 554.7 (83.3%)

This table reflects that, in general, White students are more likely to be retained than Black or

African American students when other factors are not held constant. However, the observed

number of students who were retained was statistically significantly lower than what was

expected for White students with a GPA < 2.0 and was higher than expected for Black or African

American students with a GPA < 2.0, suggesting that Black or African American students are

more likely to be retained when the students’ earned a GPA less than 2.0 in the fall. There was

not a statistically significant difference in retention rates between White students and Black or

African American students when their GPA was greater than or equal to 2.0.

Retention Study

APPENDIX C

Nominal English ACT by Nominal End-of-Term GPA by FTF Retained



No Yes

GPA < 2.0

Nominal

English ACT

< 22 Observed 219 (60.3%) 144 (39.7%)

363 (37.8%)

.095 .003 Expected 239.9 (66.1%) 123.1 (33.9%)

≥ 22 Observed 416 (69.6%) 182 (30.4%)

598 (62.2%) Expected 395.1 (66.1%) 202.9 (33.9%)

GPA ≥ 2.0

Nominal

English ACT

< 22 Observed 202 (11.3%) 1584 (88.7%)

1786 (25.0%)

.240 Expected 188.8 (10.6%) 1597.2 (89.4%)

.014

≥ 22 Observed 554 (10.3%) 4813 (89.7%)

5367 (75.0%) Expected 567.2 (10.6%) 4799.8 (89.4%)

Total

Nominal

English ACT

< 22 Observed 421 (19.6%) 1728 (80.4%)

2149 (26.5%) .039 <.001 Expected 368.4 (17.1%) 1780.6 (82.9%)

≥ 22 Observed 970 (16.3%) 4995 (83.7%)

5965 (73.5%) Expected 1022.6 (17.1%) 4942.4 (82.9%)

This table reflects that, in general, students who have a higher English ACT score are more likely

to be retained than students who have a lower English ACT score when other factors are not held

constant. However, the observed number of students who were retained was statistically

significantly lower than what was expected for students with a higher English ACT score but a

lower end-of-term GPA and was higher than expected for students with both a lower English

ACT score and end-of-term GPA. This finding suggests that students who receive a higher

English ACT score are more likely to drop out if they earn a low end-of-term GPA.

Retention Study

APPENDIX D

Difference between Attempted and Earned Credit Hours by FTF Retained

Retained

No Yes Total

Attempted > Earned Observed 609 (45.8%) 721 (54.2%) 1330 (14.1%)

Expected 228.0 (7.1%) 1102.0 (82.9%)

Attempted ≤ Earned Observed 782 (11.5%) 6002 (88.5%) 6784 (85.9%)

Expected 1163.0 (7.1%) 5621.0 (82.9%)

This table reflects that a student is less likely to be retained if they earned fewer credit hours than they

attempted.

Retention Study

APPENDIX E

Gender by Nominal End-of-Term GPA by NT Retained



No Yes Total

GPA < 2.0

Gender

Male Observed 240 (63.0%) 141 (37.0%)

381 (61.7%)

.063 .115 Expected 249.1 (65.4%) 131.9 (34.6%)

Female Observed 164 (69.2%) 73 (30.8%)

237 (38.3%) Expected 154.9 (65.4%) 82.1 (34.6%)

GPA ≥ 2.0

Gender

Male Observed 116 (6.4%) 1700 (93.6%)

1816 (48.1%)

.002 Expected 141.5 (7.8%) 1674.5 (92.2%)

.051

Female Observed 178 (9.1%) 1778 (90.9%)

1956 (51.9%) Expected 152.5 (7.8%) 1803.5 (92.2%)

Total

Gender

Male Observed 356 (16.2%) 1841 (83.8%)

2197 (50.0%) .008 .581 Expected 349.3 (15.9%) 1847.7 (84.1%)

Female Observed 342 (15.6%) 1851 (84.4%)

2193 (50.0%) Expected 348.7 (15.9%) 1844.3 (84.1%)

This table reflects that, in general, there is not a statistically significant difference in retention rates

between male and female NT students when other factors are not held constant. However, the observed

number of students who were retained was statistically significantly lower than what was expected for

females with a GPA ≥ 2.0 and was higher than expected for males with a GPA ≥ 2.0, suggesting that

male students are more likely to be retained when the sample is filtered to only students who earned a

GPA of 2.0 or higher.

Retention Study

APPENDIX F

Nominal Transfer GPA by Nominal End-of-Term GPA by NT Retained



No Yes

GPA < 2.0

Transfer

GPA

< 3.0 Observed 284 (62.3%) 172 (37.7%)

456 (73.8%)

.109 .007 Expected 298.1 (65.4%) 157.9 (34.6%)

≥ 3.0 Observed 120 (74.1%) 42 (25.9%)

162 (26.2%) Expected 105.9 (65.4%) 56.1 (34.6%)

GPA ≥ 2.0

Transfer

GPA

< 3.0 Observed 102 (7.6%) 1248 (92.4%)

1350 (35.8%)

.683 Expected 105.2 (7.8%) 1244.8 (92.2%)

.007

≥ 3.0 Observed 192 (7.9%) 2230 (92.1%)

2422 (64.2%) Expected 188.8 (7.8%) 2233.2 (92.2%)

Total

Transfer

GPA

< 3.0 Observed 386 (21.4%) 1420 (78.6%)

1806 (41.1%) .125 < .001 Expected 287.1 (15.9%) 1518.9 (84.1%)

≥ 3.0 Observed 312 (12.1%) 2272 (87.9%)

2584 (58.9%) Expected 410.9 (15.9%) 2173.1 (84.1%)

This table reflects that, in general, students who have a high transfer GPA (i.e., 3.0 or higher) are more

likely to be retained than students who have a lower transfer GPA (GPA less than 3.0) when other

factors are not held constant. However, the observed number of students who were retained was

statistically significantly lower than what was expected when a student had a high transfer GPA and a

low end-of-term GPA and was higher than expected for students with a high transfer GPA and end-of-

term GPA. Therefore, when a student has a low end-of-term GPA, he or she is more likely to drop out if

he or she has a high transfer GPA.

Retention Study - Illinois State University › Retention Study Analysis...Page 5 Retention Study...

Documents

Transcript of Retention Study - Illinois State University › Retention Study Analysis...Page 5 Retention Study...