David B. Spight, NACADA Past President
The end of the 2019 calendar year fast approaches, and many of our institutions have students graduating this December. It is important, however, to consider the many students who did not persist to degree completion. On my campus, for every five students who walk across that stage, one member of the class is missing. This is the non-persister, the student who even six years later does not receive a degree with the entering members of their class. Across the country, for decades, institutions have been pondering how to improve retention and degree completion rates. And yet, in spite of all kinds of programs and centers and initiatives, few of us have really moved the needle much in the right direction.
In our search for the easy answer to a complex question: How can we help our students persist?, our institutions have overlooked the fact that we have been asking the wrong question all along. The revision should read: How can we help our student persist? And we need to ask it thousands of times.
Reliably, our campus’ strategies for moving this needle have centered on improving retention for a particular group of students. Attention has often been placed on improving the retention rates of this group, or that group, because that group is at greater risk of leaving than the other groups of students. In fact, centers designed for a particular group of students have tremendous value on a campus. They provide places where students can feel they belong, connect to others with similar experiences, and collectively address institutional barriers to their success.
Yet centers, initiatives, and even analytics software aimed at retaining groups of students miss the mark when it comes to getting more students to graduation day. This is because no group is at greater risk than any other group. The group does not progress towards a degree. The group does not take calculus, or chemistry, or fail to find a tutor at a critical moment late in the semester. And the group does not leave. These experiences fall to individual students who are infinitely varied and unique, regardless of particular characteristics they may have that place part of who they are within a URM or low-income or first-gen group.
Our fixation, whether as institutions or as advisors, on single characteristic retention strategies prevents us from addressing the holistic individual needs of each student. Everything that each and every one of our theories about student retention or attrition assert, suggests that for each student, the reason(s) for staying or leaving are unique. The needs they have, for support and challenge, from the institution are unique. The response to retaining each student, on some level, must also be individualized and unique. Thus, if we focus on each individual, who they are and who they want to be, then we can move the retention needle for that student. These students add up, and suddenly the needle for the group moves.
This is the work, most critically, of academic advisors. Yet all of us, whether faculty, staff, students, even legislators can assist by picking up some of the following techniques.
When campuses have an advising requirement for all students, and advisors who are well trained to work with students to identify their strengths, articulate and address challenges, and seek support from campus resources, they have two to three retention interventions a year. Multiply that times two or three for programs that require more than once a term advising. These one-on-one sessions can be conversations about who the whole student is, and who that student wants to be. It becomes a relationship that is about helping the student learn that which will help them succeed at our institutions and beyond.
“If we take man as he really is, we make him worse. But, if we overestimate him . . . we promote him to what he really can be.” – Viktor Frankl
To make the above quote more inclusive in today’s context, if we take a person, an individual, as they really are, we make them worse. But if we overestimate them, we promote them to what they really can be. If we approach advising a student with the goal of getting them a class schedule, then we make the interaction about getting a class schedule, and as such, make the student less than who they are as a whole individual. We make the student just someone who needs a class schedule. But, if we approach advising with the belief that the student is someone who can, and will, profoundly change the world, then the advising discussion becomes about more than classes. And, the student not only persists, they learn, they grow, they graduate. Then, the retention needle moves.
And how do academic advisors do this work?
See the whole student for who they are and help them get themselves to where they want to go. Do this, and move the retention needle for that student by helping them to persist. Doing that for each student will help move the retention needle for the group. And it will be done without actually thinking about the group, or retention.
David B. Spight NACADA Past President, 2015-2016 [email protected]
Cite this article using APA style as: Spight, D. (2019, December). Moving the retention needle one individual at a time. Academic Advising Today, 42(4). [insert url here]