Improving student retention and achievement - …

1 Paul MartinezLSDA reportsImproving studentretention and achievementWhat do we know and what do we need to find out ?ContentsIntroduction1 Messages from research1A description of available research 7on retention and achievementPriorities for future research10 References12 Published by the Learning and Skills Development should be sent to:Information ServicesLearning and Skills Development Agency3 Citadel Place, Tinworth Street, London SE11 7962 1066 Fax 020 7962 with the Charity CommissionersEditor: Karin FancettDesigners: Dave Shaw and Joel QuarteyPrinted in the UKISBN1 85338 718 5A1195/12/01/3000 Learning and Skills Development Agency 2001 You are welcome to copy this publication for internal use within your organisation. Otherwise, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,electronic, electrical, chemical, optical,photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright Learning and Skills Development Agency was formerly known as informationFor fur ther information on the issues discussed in this publication please contact:Anna ReisenbergerQuality Improvement Programmes ManagerLearning and Skills Development Agency3 Citadel Place, Tinworth Street, London SE11 7840 5323 Fax 020 7840 Quality and achievement ProgrammeThe Raising Quality and achievement Programme isrun by the Learning and Skills Development Agency in partnership with the Association of Colleges.

2 We aim to reach all colleges and all levels of staff. We offer extra support to colleges that are receivingStandards Fund money to improve their practice. All our activity themes are backed by a programme of research and evaluation. The Raising Quality and achievement Programme is sponsored by DfES and all activities are student retention and achievement1 IntroductionThis is a good time to take stock of the state of ourknowledge of retention and achievement issues inthe learning and skills sector. It is often useful to takea couple of steps back to review a field of knowledge:it is par ticularly impor tant now for three reasons. Improving student retention and achievementhas, first, a particularly high priority for the college,and, indeed, the new learning and skills success of the sector may well be measuredagainst improvements in these performancemeasures. It is essential, therefore, to summarisemessages from research undertaken to date. Much of this research is not in the public domain.

3 Research reviews have a limited shelf-life, but a single review of what has been done should be helpful. There is a growing recognition that, in comparison with schools, post-compulsoryeducation is relatively under-researched. Thesponsors of research (DfES, ESRC, ScottishExecutive) seem to be willing to devote moreresources to research in the learning and skillssector. It should be helpful, therefore, to identifysome priorities for future research, based on areview of what has already been structure of this report follows this rationale: messages from retention and achievement research description of available research priorities for future report is based in parts on a comparisonbetween college and school research. This willappear as Effectiveness and improvement: schooland college research compared in a forthcomingissue of Research in post-compulsor y from researchBroadly speaking, research in retention andachievement falls into two broad categories: research that investigates the perceivedproblems of drop-out or failure to achievequalification goals research that identifies possible solutions: how providers can improve or raise retention and achievement we shall see, the great majority of this researchhas been undertaken within the college part of thelearning and skills questions addressed most frequently in college research on retention and achievement are: What causes student withdrawal?

4 Which causes of withdrawal are within the influence or control of colleges? What makes the most difference to student completion and withdrawal? Where should colleges concentrate their energies to make improvements?At the beginning of the 1990s, the prevailing view,faithfully reflected in an authoritative report fromHM Inspectorate (1991), was that drop-out waslargely due to factors external to colleges. The mainthrust of research since then has been to displacethat student retention and achievementDemographic factorsIn Britain, withdrawn students do not have amarkedly different profile from completing studentsin terms of age, ethnicity or gender (Martinez 1995,1997a, Martinez and Munday 1998, Stack 1999).Unlike schools, colleges do not have entitlementto free school meals to serve as a convenient indicatorof social class. The proxy indicator used in the FEsector is therefore the relative economic and socialdeprivation of the electoral ward where a studentlives. Research has demonstrated, however, thatsocial deprivation measured in this way correlatespoorly with retention and achievement across thecollege sector as a whole (Davies and Rudden 2000 p2).

5 A relationship has been identified, butonly in the 10% of colleges which recruit the highestproportion of their students from postcodes whichscore most highly on the index of deprivation. Even inthis minority of colleges, variations in the demographiccomposition of the student intake seem to accountfor no more than 50% of the variation in collegeperformance as measured by the achievement ofqualification aims (Davies 2001). The only studywhich has asserted a significant postcode impact (Vallender 1998) did not consider any interveningvariables, notably mode of attendance, level ofprogramme or subject/curriculum motivationWhile college research has shown consistently that efforts to improve or maintain studentmotivation can lead to better retention andachievement (Martinez 1997b, 2000), it alsosuggests strongly that the initial motivations ofstudents as expressed by their reasons for enrolling,aspirations, expectations of college, etc do not varysignificantly between students who subsequentlystay and students who leave (Martinez 1995,1997a, Lamping and Ball 1996, Kenwright 1997,Davies, Mullaney and Sparkes 1998).

6 A detailed study that explored student self-esteem and beliefs about their ability to manage andcontrol their learning within a relatively small sampleof successful and unsuccessful students did not findany marked differences between them (Stack 1999). student decision makingMedway and Penney (1994) were among the first tosuggest that the student decision-making processcould be characterised as a continuous weighing of the costs of continuing with, or abandoning, a programme of study and that decisions to leaveresulted from rational decisions to respond to thedifficulties [ students ] faced (ibid p38). These earlyconclusions have been borne out by subsequentresearch. Using a variety of methods, and withsamples of up to 9000 students , college researchhas shown that students have complex and multiplereasons for withdrawing from programmes of studyand that decisions to withdraw can be seen asrational and positive from the point of view ofstudents (Martinez 1995, Crossan 1996, Adamsonet al1998, Davies, Mullaney and Sparkes 1998,Martinez and Munday 1998, Searle 1998, Bloomerand Hodkinson 1999, Adamson and McAleavy 2000,Freeman 2000).

7 Several studies show that students usually leave courses for a mixture of reasons (Medway and Penney 1994, Martinez 1995, Kenwright 1997,Vick 1997). One implication of this finding is that the widespread practice of recording only one or the main reason for student withdrawal by colleges,officially sanctioned by FEFC (FEFC 1996 p4),misrepresents the student decision-making processand gives a false picture of reasons for withdrawing(Martinez 1995, Kenwright 1996, Hooper et al1999).In terms of the reasons given by students forwithdrawing, the conclusions of a number of different studies are remarkably consistent. Causes of drop-out fall into three broad categories:college-, work- and personal/family-related (Bale1990, BTEC 1993, CSET Lancaster University 1994,Martinez 1995, Kenwright 1996, Davies, Mullaneyand Sparkes 1998, Strefford 1999, Adamson andMcAleavy 2000, Davies et al2000). Improving student retention and achievement3 College-related issuesStudies which limit themselves to surveys of withdrawnstudents can indicate the range of causative factorsand can identify those factors that are collegerelated (Bannister 1996, Barrett 1996, NorthTy neside College 1997, Adamson et al1998, Gill1998, Hall and Marsh 1998, Longhurst 1999,Strefford 1999, Adamson and McAleavey 2000,Davies et al2000, Freeman 2000).

8 Depending onthe sample size and the degree of sophistication of the research design, this can produce valuableinformation and insights. However, the absence of control groups of completing and successfulstudents can make it difficult to: control and interpret attitudinal data derived from samples of withdrawn students understand why the great majority of students complete their programmes identify what is making the most difference to completion and issues have been addressed in a number of larger scale studies (Medway and Penney 1994,Kenwright 1997, Martinez 1997a, Davies, Mullaneyand Sparkes 1998, Martinez and Munday 1998,Responsive College Unit 1998, Davies 1999). These studies show that withdrawn students are most strongly differentiated from completing students by: their evaluations of and attitudes towards college-related issues lower levels of satisfaction with certain aspects of their experience of , withdrawn students tend to be less satisfied than completing students with: the suitability of their programme of study the intrinsic interest of their course timetabling issues the overall quality of teaching help and support received from teachers help in preparing to move on to a job or higher students are, moreover, less willing thancompleting students , to recommend the college toothers (Medway and Penney 1994, Kenwright 1997,Martinez 1997a, Davies, Mullaney and Sparkes1998, Martinez and Munday 1998, Davies 1999).

9 The same studies demonstrate that withdrawnstudents are not strongly differentiated fromcompleting students by: the extent of their satisfaction with collegefacilities (canteen, toilets, classroom accom-modation, equipment, library, workshopaccommodation, etc) their personal circumstances (the incidence of personal, family or financial difficulties, theirtravel costs, and ease of their journey to college).Fur ther, the incidence of financial hardship does notseem to be strongly associated with decisions todrop out in order to gain employment (Martinez andMunday 1998 p29). The Responsive College Unit,with a sample of almost 6000 students , came tovirtually identical conclusions using a longitudinalresearch design (1998). It found, in addition, thatneither par t-time work nor external timecommitments correlated strongly with in the Isle of Wight College (Medwayand Penney 1994) and research conducted byDavies and colleagues with a large sample ofcolleges and school sixth forms (Davies, Mullaneyand Sparkes 1998) suggests that the same sorts offactors which are closely associated with withdrawalare also associated with unsuccessful completion(where students complete their programme but failto gain the intended qualification).

10 The earlier study concluded that:the factors affecting non-completion were the same factors which led to unsuccessfulcompletion. Half of unsuccessful completerswould have left before completion if anacceptable alternative oppor tunity had arisen(Medway and Penney 1994 p36)Most college researchers have found significantdifferences between the views of students and some notable exceptions, staff tend to emphasisethose factors associated with student withdrawalover which they feel they have little or no control,including the nature of the student intake, resourcesand college policies (CSET Lancaster University 1994,Martinez 1995, Kenwright 1996, Davies, Mullaneyand Sparkes 1998, Gill 1998, Davies et al2000).4 Improving student retention and achievementAdvice and guidanceThe more quantitative and larger scale researchtends to emphasise the importance of teaching,learning and support processes. The smaller scale,often more qualitative research provides some moredetailed findings about these processes.