Your search found 62 results.

Descriptors:
Reverse Transfer Students; Student Mobility; Transfer Rates (College); Incidence; Two Year Colleges; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Proprietary Schools; Enrollment; Graduation; Part Time Students; Full Time Students; Summer Schools; Cohort Analysis

Abstract:
In its second Signature Report[TM], "Transfer and Mobility: A National View of Pre-Degree Student Movement in Postsecondary Institutions" (Hossler et al., 2012), the National Student Clearinghouse[R] Research Center[TM] found that one-third of all first-time students who began at a four-year institution transferred to or enrolled at a different institution at least once within five years after their initial enrollment and that more than half of those students went to a two-year institution. This new, third report in the series, "Reverse Transfer: A National View of Student Mobility from Four-Year to Two-Year Institutions," explores in more detail this latter group of students, those who went from four-year to two-year institutions, focusing on reverse transfer behavior among first-time-in-college students who entered four-year colleges and universities in fall 2005 and following their college enrollments for six years through the summer of 2011. Drawn from data housed at the National Student Clearinghouse, the report examines: (1) The prevalence of reverse transfer nationwide, with contextual information on summer session course taking behavior, broken out by initial enrollment intensity, control of institution of origin, and timing of first enrollment in the two-year sector; (2) Subsequent enrollment outcomes following reverse transfer by students' length of enrollment in the two-year sector, enrollment intensity during the first term at a two-year institution, and control of institution of origin; (3) Student pathways and completion at institution of origin; and (4) Six-year outcomes for all reverse transfer students by length of enrollment in the two-year sector for students who returned to their institution of origin, disaggregated by control type of institution of origin. The findings presented in this report show that within six years, 14.4 percent of the first-time students who started at a four-year institution in the fall of 2005 subsequently enrolled at a two-year institution outside of summer months or reverse transferred and an additional 5.4 percent enrolled at a two-year institution for summer courses only. The reverse transfer rate was higher among part-time students (16.4 percent) compared to students who initially enrolled full time (13.1 percent) and was also higher among those who started at a public four-year institution (15.8 percent) than among those who initially enrolled at a private nonprofit four-year institution (11.4 percent) or a private for-profit four-year institution (10.8 percent). Appended are: (1) Methodological Notes; (2) Coverage Table; and (3) Results Tables. (Contains 18 figures and 29 tables. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3483K)

Descriptors:
College Transfer Students; Student Mobility; Enrollment; Transfer Rates (College); Part Time Students; Full Time Students; Reverse Transfer Students; Proprietary Schools; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; In State Students; Out of State Students; Cohort Analysis

Abstract:
It is widely acknowledged that many postsecondary students no longer follow a traditional path from college entry to degree at a single institution. Increasingly more students attend multiple institutions, transferring once, twice, or even three times before earning a degree. Standard institution-based reporting tends to ignore these students, however, focusing only on those who enter as first-time freshmen and treating students who do not receive a degree from their first institution as dropouts. This approach is no longer adequate for informing students about their full range of educational options and policymakers about the real prospects for expanding postsecondary attainment, regardless of the institutional pathways students choose. It is also insufficient for institutional practitioners who are concerned with better understanding the origins and destinations of the students who pass through their doors. In a step towards improving this situation, the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, in partnership with the Indiana University Project on Academic Success, has analyzed student-level enrollment data to report on the transfer behaviors, over five years, of virtually all students who began postsecondary education in the U.S. in fall 2006. This analysis is unique in that it includes both full- and part-time students of all ages, in all institution types--nearly 2.8 million students. It covers changes in each student's institution of enrollment occurring at any time of year, even across sector and state lines, for up to five years. The report describes the number of students who transferred, the institutional destinations of their transfers, and the timing of the movement. And it counts students uniquely, without duplication even when the same student was enrolled in more than one institution at the same time. What emerges is a complex picture in which one-third of all students change institutions at some time before earning a degree, a rate that is consistent across all types of institutions outside of the for-profit sector (where the rate is lower). Slightly more part-time students transferred than full-time students. Of those who transfer: (1) 37 percent transfer in their second year; (2) 22 percent transfer as late as their fourth or fifth years; (3) 25 percent transfer more than once; (4) 27 percent transfer across state lines; and (5) 43 percent transfer into a public two-year college. Appended are: (1) Methodological Notes; (2) Coverage Table; and (3) Results Tables. (Contains 27 figures and 26 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3771K)

Descriptors:
Enrollment Trends; Change; Economic Climate; College Students; Higher Education; Public Colleges; Private Colleges; Two Year Colleges; Full Time Students; Part Time Students; School Holding Power; Academic Persistence; Geographic Regions; Regional Characteristics; Differences; Cohort Analysis

Abstract:
This report, "National Postsecondary Enrollment Trends: Before, During, and After the Great Recession," brings to light emerging national and regional patterns among traditional-age, first-time students enrolling in colleges and universities during the fall term each year from 2006 through 2010--before, during, and after the recession. Drawn from data housed at the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, this report explores: (1) Total enrollment and changes across years, by institution sector and control; (2) Enrollment totals and changes across years, nationally and by geographic region; (3) Full-time and part-time enrollment by institution type and geographic region; and (4) First-year retention. The results of these analyses show that changes in college enrollment accompanying the recent recession--thus far, and among traditional-age student--have not been as pronounced as many had previously feared. Nevertheless, findings point to distinct shifts in the college-going patterns of traditional-age, first-time students. Based on drops in real incomes, industrial activity, wholesale/retail sales, and employment, as well as GDP, analyses by the National Bureau of Economic Research (2008; 2010) dated the onset of the United States' recent economic recession at December 2007 and the end at June 2009. During this same period, the challenges facing higher education institutions included shifts in enrollment patterns, uncertainties regarding financial aid practices, and cuts in state support of public institutions--with all of these changes occurring amid increased federal and state pressures to meet national goals for increasing college degree attainment by 2020. Even in 2011, two years after the recession's end, the economy is, of course, not fully recovered. Unemployment remains high, state budgets continue to shrink, and family financial struggles have not subsided. Much uncertainty about how to plan for and respond to shifts in college enrollment remain. This report presents an effort to help federal, state, and institutional policy makers better understand recent events, to facilitate institutions' efforts to anticipate changing student enrollments, and finally, to inform appropriate responses from policy makers at multiple levels. Appended are: (1) Notes on the Data; (2) Coverage Tables; (3) Regions; and (4) Results Tables. (Contains 38 figures, 45 tables and 1 footnote.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3185K)

Descriptors:
Grade Point Average; College Admission; Admission Criteria; Predictor Variables; Educational Indicators; Enrollment Management; College Choice; Institutional Characteristics; Student Characteristics; Graduation Rate; Academic Persistence; College Outcomes Assessment; Educational Policy; School Holding Power

Abstract:
Admissions committee members often speak of "it" as an important consideration during the admissions process; however, empirical evidence documenting the efficacy of "it" as a basis for admission is scarce. The purpose of this research was to test the validity of student-institution it as a significant predictor of college success--specifically, first-year GPA, cumulative GPA, and college graduation. Using data from two large national samples, the congruence between a student's preferred college characteristics and the characteristics of his or her attending institution was calculated across six dimensions (i.e., year, sector, campus, distance, gender, and size). No dimensions of it were of practical significance. Implications are discussed. (Contains 5 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Institutional Role; School Holding Power; Academic Persistence; Cultural Capital

Abstract:
Using literature and illustrations drawn from a pilot study, this article explores the theoretical and methodological challenges entailed in the study of student retention. We center the discussion around two important efforts to expand the theoretical base and scope for research in this area: Berger's (2000) concept of colleges and universities as optimizers of cultural capital and Bensimon's (2007) recent critique of the narrowness of the frames that predominate student retention research. By way of exploring these issues through a concrete example, the article presents an overview of processes and findings from a funded pilot study of institutional policies and practices surrounding student retention. This exploration--part essay, part research report--leads us ultimately to pose two central questions on which, we suggest, future research should build: "What are institutions doing to improve student retention?" and "How do institutions intervene in the workings of cultural capital in higher education?" (Contains 2 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Loan Programs; Family Income; Loan Default; Literature Reviews; Loan Repayment; Student Characteristics; Institutional Characteristics; Racial Differences; Gender Differences; Age Differences; Socioeconomic Influences; Family Structure; Parents; Educational Attainment; Debt (Financial); Enrollment; Predictor Variables; Time to Degree; College Credits; College Transfer Students; Grades (Scholastic); College Preparation; Majors (Students)

Abstract:
Federal higher education policy has shifted over the past few decades from grants to loans as the primary means for providing access to postsecondary education for low- and moderate-income families. With this shift, policy makers have begun tracking student loan default rates as a key indicator of the efficacy of student loan programs. This effort requires a closer examination of how to define default and what default signifies: What is an acceptable rate of default? What factors contribute to default? Should default rates be used as indicators of institutional quality or loan program efficacy. These questions lead to further investigation of factors influencing default, such as whether default is a function of the characteristics of students or of the institutions they attend, and whether the types of loans borrowed influence the probabilities of default. To help answer these and related questions, this study reviewed the literature of research on student loan default conducted between 1978 and 2007, and identified 41 of the higher quality studies, the findings of which are summarized here. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (93K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Enrollment Trends; Enrollment Management; Educational Change; Private Sector; Privatization; Student Loan Programs; Industry; Cost Effectiveness

Abstract:
In this article, the author begins to examine the connections between institutional enrollment management efforts and the various external for-profit, and not-for-profit, businesses that have become part of the enrollment management industry. This essay is an effort to map the relationships between institutions, the enrollment industry, and more indirectly, students, parents, and society. The goal of this essay is to point out both the benefits and the problems associated with the emergence of the enrollment management industry. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Academic Persistence; Testing; Enrollment Management; Affirmative Action; College Admission; Admission (School); Selective Admission; College Students; Enrollment; Models; Open Enrollment; Foreign Countries; Standardized Tests; Community Colleges; Accountability; Higher Education; Academic Achievement; At Risk Students; Scores

Abstract:
The array of admissions models and the underlying, and sometimes conflicting goals people have for college admissions, create the dynamics and the tensions that define the contemporary context for enrollment management. The senior enrollment officer must ask, for example, how does an institution try to assure transparency, equality of access, develop talent, and reward hard work? How do institutions employ affirmative action policies to redress past injustices and student capacity, while also emphasizing transparency and reward past performance? Can open-admission colleges effectively employ an eligibility model to assure access to all while also increasing student persistence and the ability of all students to contribute? These are the kinds of questions that the thoughtful enrollment management officer brings to the arena of admissions policy and planning. In this essay, the authors focus primarily on the policy issues associated with the admissions process at four-year non-profit institutions. Issues such as admissions testing, affirmative action, and the admission practices of elite institutions are particularly pressing for four-year colleges and universities. The important concerns for community colleges and for-profit institutions are beyond the scope of this one essay. (Contains 1 footnote.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Graduation Rate; Academic Persistence; Graduation; Program Effectiveness; School Holding Power; Academic Achievement; Evaluation; Enrollment; Educational Improvement; Intervention; Administrators; Benchmarking

Abstract:
In this article, the authors share what they have learned in two distinct but complementary research projects that focus on institutional efforts to enhance student persistence and graduation--one funded by the Lumina Foundation for Education and the second by the College Board. Together, these projects have helped them develop a fuller picture of how institutions organize themselves to enhance student persistence and the extent and effectiveness of those efforts. While the Lumina-funded project has been completed, the College Board project is a continuing effort to better understand the policy levers that institutions use to influence student persistence and graduation rates. By sharing their growing understanding of institutional practices and of which practices work, this article can contribute to the ongoing discussion among scholars and practitioners around the country about how to increase persistence and graduation and, by extension, improve student learning. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
State Aid; Enrollment Management; Student Financial Aid; Public Policy; Higher Education; Federal Aid

Abstract:
In our previous essay, we considered the role of institutional financial aid and the practice of enrollment management. In that essay we explored the use of financial aid as a tool to enhance equity increase prestige, as a revenue enhancement tool and as a means to shape institutional image in the various markets that comprise our diverse system of postsecondary education. In this second essay on the topic of financial aid, we examine current federal and state financial aid public policy issues and their relationship with the enrollment management strategies and practices on individual campuses. [For Part I, see EJ810049.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website