Completion rates at colleges and universities — Don’t believe what you hear or read!
I spend a lot of time with colleagues from traditional, face-to-face colleges and universities and often hear them dismiss schools that have been reported to have very low completion rates. It is obvious that these folks, despite working in higher education, do not understand the national problem we have with data on completion rates. And, if these folks don’t understand the problem, just imagine how confusing it is for people from outside higher education to understand that the way completion rates are calculated is just plain dumb—and misleading.
The institutions most often cited as having low completion rates are community colleges, for-profit colleges, and colleges that serve adult students. The reported completion rates can be incredibly low, even zero, and invariably, when reported, set off a flurry of self-righteous condemnation of these schools. But the indignation may be misplaced. I say “may” because the way the data is collected, we really have no idea what the real completion rates are. That is because federal data (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System—IPEDS) on completion rates counts only a very limited and specific set of students. It only counts those students who start college for the first time and remain enrolled at the same institution on a full-time basis throughout their college career. The way this is described is “first-time, full-time.”
If you have read this blog before and understand my main premise, then you will realize immediately that only a few students in today’s world actually go to college and remain as full-time students through to completion at the same institution. That is just not the way students act anymore. Add to this that the calculation of completion rates also assumes that the student will finish within six years of when they start. That is something else I have written about—when many students are attending part-time, six years may not be an appropriate timeframe.
The idea of “first-time, full-time” is only relevant to the minority of students who go to college full-time after high school. It is only relevant to that romanticized view of what college is like and that view is not at all accurate in today’s world where students are older, mixing work with study and enrolled part-time. The latter type of student attends community colleges, for-profit online schools and schools that serve adults. Take Capella as an example. Virtually every one of our students is older. They have very likely attended other schools before coming to us. And, they are studying part time. The fact is that if you have almost no students who meet the “first-time, full-time” criterion (Capella had a whopping 3 students who fit this criteria in 2008), you will have almost no completions.
In addition, the Department of Education has identified several variables that predict low completion rates. Those include being older (delayed enrollment), studying part-time, working full-time, having children or being financially independent of parents. Four of more of these factors predict completion rates of only 10 percent. Those variables literally define the students who attend the schools that have relatively low completion rates. So, the “first-time, full-time” definition and the audience served both work against colleges serving these audiences.
Fortunately, influential public-policy organizations recognize the problem with use of “first-time, full-time” and are calling for changes. For example, the National Governor’s Association has published an “issue brief” that cites this problem and others and calls for states to take steps to measure more effectively. The report cites the fact that federal data excludes too many students, and that about half the students in public colleges and universities are not counted. The report specifically states that “many long-held stereotypes about college students—that they live on campus, enroll full-time, and graduate in four years—fail to describe the U.S. college student population.” The report goes on to say “meaningful data on postsecondary students should track part-time students, full-time students, first-time students, transfer students, and students pursuing education for non-credential purposes.” I agree with that statement and the implied fact that the federal data is not meaningful.
So, the next time someone gets bent out of shape over supposed low completion rates based on federal data, remember that the data are biased to an outdated, romanticized view of college and fail to count many, many students—the very students who attend the types of schools that receive the criticism.
Please feel free to leave a comment.
Mike
Share This6 Responses to “Completion rates at colleges and universities — Don’t believe what you hear or read!”
Mike Offerman Says:
Michael
Thanks for such an assertive post. I began writing this blog to stimulate dialog, and appreciate your contribution to the discussion. Here is my response to your point of view on this subject.
You don’t mention whether or not you work for a college or university. Let me guess: you work for a campus-based institution.
I have no doubt that traditional students can get a good education in a face-to-face, institution. It is great that those “select few” that you cite will have acquired improved socialization skills. Will develop lifetime friendships and professional connections. Are you seriously suggesting, however, that online students will not and cannot develop friendships and professional connections through engagement with other online students? I don’t buy that. And, older students don’t require the socialization that may be provided face-to-face.
My complaint is that public policy is driven by the romanticized notion of college even though only a distinct minority of students fit that notion. I am not dismissing traditional campus-based schools but rather am saying that the way various data are collected and the way public policy decisions are made need to change. I am certainly not condemning the type of institution you are defending (employed by?) as you have criticized both online and for-profit institutions. I am also not demeaning the students at institutions like the ones you are defending as you have done for students at online or for-profit institutions when you say that they are “merely seeking the credential.” Excuse me! The Students enrolled in online and/or for-profit institutions face and overcome extraordinary challenges to achieve their educational dreams.
You seem to be demeaning the faculty who teach these students by questioning their credentials and publication track records. Let me assure you that their credentials are at a comparable level to any other university.
And, regarding the for-profit status of some adult-serving institutions. Are you saying that traditional schools don’t generate revenues that exceed costs? . The fact is that a huge population of Americans desired a higher education, and traditional colleges and universities were not serving them. New schools were needed. States don’t build new universities anymore. Neither do many churches. Not many philanthropists. So, where do new universities come from? Investors. And, the fact that investors want return on their investment does not necessarily mean that quality suffers.
How do you define and measure a quality education? We do it by measuring whether learning has actually occurred. See some of my other posts on Transparency by Design.
One last comment. if my logic undermines the credibility of the first-time, full-time data, then any numbers using that method, including those that report a higher graduation rate at one type of institution versus another are invalid. If you are arguing that selective schools where traditional-aged students study full-time and are financially dependent on their parents have higher graduation rates than schools with older, part-time students who work full-time and have families, you are absolutely correct. And it is abundantly obvious why.
Mike
Dalmar Says:
I came across this posting while surfing the Capella University website to learn more about this organization because I am interviewing for a job very soon. That being said, here is my contribution to this topic.
We have moved from the agricultural to the industrial and now to the information age. I believe in this information age, the world economy will be built on intangibles: information, ideas and relationships. World class enterprises will have to be managed differently – our 21st century organizations are staffed by people with 17th century thinking skills: plan, organize, direct and control mentality. But the demand today, however, is for the enterprise to be different – to be creative at all times, in all areas and in all activities.
The biggest advantage for online education universities is to compete by developing experiential education programs that embrace systematic creativity and innovation in the curriculum and prepare students for this new information economy rather than provide the same traditional education programs (received, subjective and procedural thinking) face-to-face universities provide by just using different delivery vehicle (the Internet).
The future is about integrating information technology and experiential education programs very efficiently and effectively. “Socialization, face-to-face presentation skills, and lifetime friendships and professional connections” can all be achieved today by using collaborative technologies. See the new Cisco technology “TelePresence”.
Today’s student body is so fluid and dynamic that only comprehensive data collection system must be put in place to make any relevant conclusion regarding graduation rates.
I know I didn’t directly address the issue at hand but there are too many online degree programs that it’s really hard to distinguish the difference.
And from business strategy perspective, what would happen to Capella and other online universities if Harvard, Stanford or other high ranking university decides to provide similar online degree programs that are cost comparable?
Online universities must have superior execution capability that face-to-face universities can’t match or wait to die.
Don Philabaum Says:
Enjoying the discussion.
The thing everyone needs to understand is that the customer is the one who makes the decision in the end. Right now a number of forces are at play that are reducing the ROI of traditional brick and mortar shops.
Social media is and the changing behaviors of consumers along with the incredible cost increases of education are making online education acceptable. Additionally we are coming into a time where people are starting to understand they’d rather take an online course from a world class professor than one that is not.
Consumers are going to start to FLOCK to online education providers like Capella as long as they can help drive down the cost of education. Like WalMart, someone is going to build a world class course structure with Rock star professors and offer it at at penny’s on the dollar.
One of the big reasons people don’t finish brick and mortar colleges is economics. Drive costs out, make it available 24/7/365, add a dash of social media tools to expand my support network and viola, you’ve got a model that has higher retention rates.
Wish all of you luck in driving out costs!
Mike Offerman Says:
Dalmar and Don, thanks for weighing in. Dalmar, I hope the interview goes well for you. Don, I understand the economics issue you present and agree that we in the online world need to become more productive in order to drive out cost. Dalmar, in regard to the question about what would happen if brand name institutions offered online programs at comparable costs, some might argue that hell would freeze over. Regardless, you reach the correct conclusion: we in the online world must have superior execution, must deliver a superior learning experience.
Thanks again,
Mike
Robert Wainscott Says:
Mike,
Thanks for this post. Just read some rubbish on the abysmal completion rates in for-profit schools and how that translates to for-profit schools only being concerned with money and not education.
Leave a Reply
Let us know what you think. All comments will be reviewed prior to going live. Comments that are profane or obscene, or unrelated to the topic of the post will not be published.
Welcome to The Other 85 Percent. So what does "the other 85 percent" refer to? Research has shown that only about 15 percent of higher education students still fit the traditional definition of young adults age 18 to 22 who live on campus and go to school full time. more
- July 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
-
Capella University
Changing Higher Education
eLearning Roadtrip
The Presidents’ Forum
Transparency By Design
Michael Says:
Dear Mike,
You make excellent points regarding the problems of completion rate statistics. However, the proof is in the pudding — how many executive-level managers at Capella or any similar for-profit university received their degrees through the kind of online university for whom they work? Your points regarding the gradually-disappearing “first-time, full-time” model are well made; however, I foresee a growing cleft between those that follow the traditional higher education model and those setting out with the online/part-time model. The select few who continue to utilize the face-to-face, brick-and-mortar, full-time 18-22 year old higher education model will benefit from the improved student outcomes that come from focusing on coursework and student life on a college campus. Chief among these improved outcomes are improved socialization, face-to-face presentation skills, and lifetime friendships and professional connections. Admittedly, these are not “skills” or objectives within the bounds of a college course, but they offer significant advantages to the traditional higher ed student. These graduates will be the “advantaged,” while the part-time, online, non-traditional graduate will be “disadvantaged,” though both will have the same degree, whether it is a Bachelor’s, EdD, or MBA.
The increased accessibility of higher education indicates the increasing emphasis on credentialization in American society, but the growth that comes from the ability of institutions like Capella to adjust to the needs of the market should not be confused with quality. Plato and Aristotle’s students didn’t take correspondence courses (although “online” has replaced that word). People that want education will follow the traditional path; those merely seeking the credential will fuel the for-profit education sector’s continued growth. Furthermore, the fact that for-profits like Capella are legally bound by their corporate charters to make money for shareholders will necessarily cause vast differences in quality between the traditional institutions and the for-profit/online institutions. The dirty little secret is that low-pay, no-benefits adjunct instructors are unreliable, unhappy, frazzled, and oftentimes unfamiliar with the current scholarship in their own discipline. For-profit institutions’ profit margins depends on contingent, no-benefits labor from adjuncts. *Who* are the 1,200 faculty teaching the courses at Capella? Your website does not share with me their names, let alone their scholarly publications or research interests. For-profit institutions will be forced — by the logic of the market — to imitate the University of Phoenix and its policy of no classes taught by a full-timer. But marketing campaigns cannot build a reputation.
You write, “The data are biased to an outdated, romanticized view of college and fail to count many, many students.” While your post effectively undermines the applicability of the first-time, full-time-based graduation rate statistics, the numbers still indicate that the graduation rate for the “romanticized” version of college is still quantitatively better than graduations rates for online/for-profit institutions.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:20 am