My final thoughts on the topics of retention and persistence to gradation appear below.  (Click here for part 1 or part 2 of this blog series.)

·         I find that the general public is almost always surprised, saddened and sometimes shocked by the fact that roughly 1 in 2 students who start college don't graduate.  For the most part, higher education, as an industry, keeps this number relatively quiet.  There are a myriad of reasons why students don't "get what they come after," i.e. a degree.  Many of these reasons are legitimate and justifiable from an institutional perspective.  Nevertheless it is almost always a "lose-lose" situation for both student and school when no degree is earned nor awarded.

·         The metrics outlined in my book and blog entries are more common-law than edict.  Happily, there is a great deal more interest and information about retention today than a generation ago.  Colleges are paying attention.  It costs more to replace a student than to keep one so the bottom-line suggests that retention is a good thing.  As student costs continue to accelerate and scrutiny correctly mounts, colleges increasingly recognize their reputations and integrity depend on transparency and accountability with regard to results.  Graduation is certainly one significant value-added outcome criterion.

·         As access to college happily becomes more customer friendly, student paths become more diverse (i.e. part-time, on-line, re-entry, transfer), and it becomes harder and harder to measure things like retention and persistence.  Colleges are getting better at tracking these "non-traditional" student careers but there are few standards by which to benchmark those experiences compared with those of the more conventional full-time 18-22 year old undergraduate.

I would love to hear your thoughts on my entries.  Or, do you have any best practices from your institution that you think others would benefit from hearing?

-- Jerry Israel