Predicting Student Retention: Last Students in are Likely to be the

First Students Out

Jo Ann Hallawell, PhD

November 19, 201564th Annual ConferenceRenaissance Oklahoma City Convention Center/HotelOklahoma City, OK

Discussion

• Audience Survey• How this Study Emerged• Methodology

– Stratified Random Sample– Population

• Research Questions and Findings– Primary Research Question– Sub Questions 1-6

• Research Conclusions• Institutional Recommendations• Recommendations for Future Studies

Are institutional course registration policies and practices that permit students to register for courses late doing more harm than good?

Audience Survey

Who should care when students register, and why should they care?

Students’ late course registration can be disruptive for institutions, instructors

and other students

• Late registrants can be a drain on institutional resources

• Late registrants are often those who are least prepared and/or least ready to begin a course

• Late start students may require additional assistance from the instructor or other students to get caught up

How this Study Emerged

• Observing Student Behaviors• Collecting and Analyzing Observational Data• Increasing Student Retention/Completion• Emerging Dissertation Research

Definitions

• Academic Success• Course Completion• Early Course Registration Date• Late Course Registration Date• Non-Traditional Couse• Traditional Course

Methodology

• Quantitative • Non-experimental (Descriptive)• Correlational• Ex post facto

Stratified Random Sample

• The stratified random sample resulted in 751 student records (.056% of the population of 13,437 student records) – 375 records of students enrolled in a traditional

course section (.035% of the population’s 10,800 traditional student enrollments)

– 376 records of students enrolled in a non-traditional course section (14% of the population’s 2637 non-traditional student enrollments)

PopulationParticipants for this study were students enrolled in a first-year English composition course. The following information was collected: course delivery method (traditional/non-traditional); courses registration date; course grade earned or indication of course withdrawal; and students’ gender, age, and status.

• Population was 13,437 student enrollment records: – 10,800 (80%) were enrolled in a traditional course section– 2637 (20%) were enrolled in a non-traditional course section

• 807 sections of English composition were available during the fall 2012 term: – 645 (80%) were traditional course sections – 162 (20%) were non-traditional course sections

The non-traditional course sections were oversampled to optimize the population allocation of each stratum. The stratified random sample represents 294 of the 645 traditional course sections, or 46% and143 of the 162 non-traditional course sections, or 88%.

Primary Research Question

What is the relationship between community college students’ gatekeeper late course registration date and their course persistence and level of academic success?

Findings:

• 150 students registered late (on or after August 5, 2012). Of the 150 late registrants, 71 (47%) were successful course completers and 79 (53%) were not successful course completers.

• Comparatively, 601 (80%) students registered early (before August 5, 2012). Of the 601 early registrants, 353 (59%) were successful course completers and 248 (41%) were not successful course completers.

• 424 (56%) students successfully completed the course and 327 (44%) did not successfully complete the course. Data further revealed 184 (25%) earned an A; 138 (18%) earned a B; 77 (10%) earned a C; 25 (3%) earned a D; 53 (7%) earned an F; 137 (18%) earned an FW; and 137 (18%) withdrew from the course.

To what degree does a student’s gatekeeper early course registration date have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

• 601 (80%) students registered early (before August 5, 2012). Of the 601 early registrants, 353 (59%) were successful course completers and 248 (41%) were not successful course completers.

• Comparatively, 150 students registered late (on or after August 5, 2012). Of the 150 late registrants, 71 (47%) were successful course completers and 79 (53%) were not successful course completers.

• 424 (56%) students successfully completed the course and 327 (44%) did not successfully complete the course. Data further revealed 184 (25%) earned an A; 138 (18%) earned a B; 77 (10%) earned a C; 25 (3%) earned a D; 53 (7%) earned an F; 137 (18%) earned an FW; and 137 (18%) withdrew from the course.

Sub Question 1

Sub Question 2

To what degree do a student’s early course registration date and the course delivery method have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

• Of the 601 students who registered early (before August 5, 2012) 322 (54%) enrolled in a traditional course and 279 (46%) enrolled in a non-traditional course section. – Of the 322 students who registered early in a traditional course section,

204 (63%) successfully completed the course and 118 (37%) did not successfully complete the course.

– Of the 279 students who enrolled early in a non-traditional course, 149 (53%) successfully completed the course and 130 (47%) were not successful course completers.

Sub Question 3

To what degree do a student’s late course registration date and the course delivery method have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

• 65% (97 of the 150) of the students who registered late (on or after August 5, 2012) enrolled in a non-traditional course and 53 (35%) enrolled in a traditional course section. – 24 (45%) successfully completed the course and 29 (55%) students did not

successfully complete the course. – 47 (48%) students who registered late in a non-traditional course section

successfully completed the course and 50 (52%) did not successfully complete the course.

Summary of Sub Questions 2 and 3

% Successful/Non-Successful Completions by Course Delivery Method% Successful Early Registrants Traditional Course

% Successful Late Registrants Traditional Course

% Successful Early Registrants Non-Traditional Course

% Successful Late Registrants Non-Traditional Course

63% 45% 53% 48%

% Non-Successful Early Registrants Traditional Course

% Non-Successful Late Registrants Traditional Course

% Non-Successful Early Registrants Non-Traditional Course

% Non-Successful Late Registrants Non-Traditional Course

37% 55% 47% 52%

Sub Question 4

To what degree do a student’s late course registration date and gender have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

Data indicated 473 (63%) female gender students; 274 (36%) male gender students; and four (.5%) students who did not indicate gender (.5%).

Traditional Course• 212 female gender students enrolled in a traditional course section

– 65% (137) were successful course completers and 35% (75) were not successful course completers • 160 male gender students enrolled in a traditional course section

– 55% (88) were successful course completers and 45% (72) were not successful course completers

Non-Traditional Course• 261 female gender students enrolled in a non-traditional course section

– 57% (150) were successful course completers; 43% (111) were not successful course completers • 114 male gender students enrolled in a non-traditional course section

– 40% (46) were successful course completers and 60% (68) were not successful course completers

Sub Question 5

To what degree do a student’s late course registration date and age have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

• age category of 20-24: 65% of students age 20-24 who registered late in a traditional course section were successful course completers while 59% of students in this age category who registered early were successful course completers.

• age category of 35-39: 56% of students age 35-39 who registered late were successful course completers while 30% of students in this age category who registered early were successful course completers.

Sub Question 6To what degree do a student’s late course registration date and status have on his/her course persistence and academic success?

Findings:

Grade Distribution by Enrollment Status and by Date of Registration for Traditional and Non-Traditional Course Enrollment Combined

Date of Course RegistrationEnrollment

Status A B C D F FW W TotalBefore August 5, 2012 Full Time 83 54 29 12 25 47 3 253

Half Time 66 59 29 7 18 48 40 267Less Than Half Time 7 5 2 0 0 7 33 54Not Enrolled 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 27Total 156 118 60 19 43 102 103 601

On or after August 5, 2012 Full Time 10 9 10 4 4 15 0 52Half Time 13 8 7 2 4 19 15 68Less Than Half Time 5 3 0 0 2 1 13 24Not Enrolled 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6Total 28 20 17 6 10 35 34 150

Totals 184 138 77 25 53 137 137 751

Research Conclusions• Generally, students who registered late were less successful than students who

registered early. Students who registered late were more likely not to persist or not to successfully complete the course compared to those who registered early.

• Course delivery method also was found to be a factor related to students’ course persistence, course completion and success when correlated to students’ date of course registration.

• Gender also presented to correlate as an indicator of students’ tendency to complete a course and to achieve high academic success.

• Initially, age did not appear to be a statistically significant factor for community college students in correlation to their gatekeeper early course registration date, and their course persistence and academic achievement. However, a closer examination found age to be a factor for two age categories.

Institutional Recommendations• Institutional policymakers should closely examine course registration policies

to ensure policies are not detrimental to students’ course persistence and academic achievement.

• Institutions that have policies prohibiting students’ late course registration should ensure those policies are strictly enforced.

• Institutions should promote early course registration and encourage students to enroll early rather than late.

• Intrusive academic advising should be in place targeting students who are late course registrants in an effort to change behaviors.

• Mandatory interventions should be in place to support students who register late.

• Institutions should offer late start courses within a term that would allow students to begin a course on time rather than after a course has already started.

• Institutions should implement data collection and analysis strategies to better understand the characteristics and behaviors of students and how those characteristics and behaviors contribute to when they register for a course and their completion of that course

Recommendations for Future Research

• Additional research should be conducted to confirm or refute this study’s findings to better understand the phenomenon of students’ late course registration and the correlation to their course persistence and academic achievement.

• Longitudinal studies should be conducted to determine if the correlation of students’ early course registration and their academic persistence and success is an occurrence of more than one semester and for more than one course.

• Qualitative research should be conducted to learn more about students’ registration behaviors. Additional research should explore factors that impact when a student registers for a course.

Recommendations for Future Research

• Qualitative research should be conducted to learn more about students’ behaviors, characteristics and demographic that might be predictors of their academic persistence, including their tendency to withdraw from a course or to not achieve academic success in a course.

• Research should be conducted of a population where interventions are in place to support students who register late to determine if these interventions have a positive, negative or neutral impact on students’ course completion and academic success, despite the late course enrollment date.

Are institutional course registration policies and practices that permit students to register for courses late doing more harm than good?

Audience Survey

Additional institutional recommendations?

Additional recommendations for future research?

Questions?

Contact Information

Jo Ann Hallawell, PhDAssociate Professor of English

Dean, School of Liberal Arts & Sciences and Education

University Transfer Division-Columbus Campus

Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana

4475 Central Avenue

Columbus, IN 47203

(812) 374-5260

jhallawe@ivytech.edu