Retention Rates

The initial cohort of UniSA-PAL students who undertook the course at Para West Adult Campus in 2002 had a retention rate of 65 per cent, higher by a very great margin than the retention rates of the school’s usual cohort of adult students undertaking studies for years 11 and 12 to complete their secondary education by means of the South Australian Certificate of Education or SACE. The school’s understanding of the reasons for this are included below in section 5.3 which discusses the qualitative data collected.

In considering this outcome, and the other retention data presented below, it should be noted that in common with the Diploma in University Studies and other university programs which target disadvantaged adults, in both years of the UniSA-PAL course being offered in the adult re-entry schools, a small number of enrolling students actually never commenced or left the course so soon after commencing that they could be considered never to have done so. This common pattern in the education of disadvantaged adults caused an almost immediate attrition of 8.7% between enrolment and what might be considered real commencement across the four schools in 2003. If these very early leaver students had been enrolled in a university, they would not be counted in statistics on retention, progression, success or completion since they left the course before the first DEST census date for HECS purposes. It is appropriate therefore, in terms of accuracy, consistency and comparability of data, that the initial enrolment be considered as “apparent enrolment” and those remaining after the departure of the immediate or very early leavers as “actual commencers”. Using the actual commencers, the retention rate for the 2002 PAL cohort increases to 68 per cent.

Of those [who enrolled] one didn’t really ever start because she was full term pregnant, and felt, beyond everybody’s expectations but her own, that she would be able to cope [with the course and] her newborn and her small children. But then [she] became involved in a domestic violence situation.

We did allow a few students in who we knew were very borderline, that PAL was probably not the correct choice for them, but we viewed it as a way into education for them…they were struggling but they were here, and then we knew that we could counsel them and redirect them, and we’ve done that with a couple of students. So they have moved from [the PAL course] into other studies within the school.

But [even so] just from the way adult re-entry works, some of them [who have changed courses] have found that [initial learning from the PAL course] very valuable.

The retention rates for the four 2003 UniSA-PAL cohorts were higher than for the one cohort in 2002, by an average of 15 per cent for the cohort as a whole, and higher than had been estimated by each of the schools at the mid year point. On the basis of their knowledge of their UniSA-PAL cohort and experience with adult re-entry students, particularly their reasons for attrition, in mid 2003 each of the schools gave an estimate of how many of its 2003 PAL students would continue to the end of the year and complete the program. Using actual commencement data (as explained above), in rounded figures the final expected retention rates were 60–70 per cent overall, with 70–80 per cent at Para West, 70–75 per cent at Marden, 60–70 per cent at Hamilton, and 40 per cent at Thebarton, all but the conservatively calculated rate at Thebarton being considerably higher than these schools usually achieve with adult re-entry students undertaking senior secondary studies. The four schools’ final 2003 UniSA-PAL retention rates exceeded these estimates with 83 per cent overall, 81 per cent at Para West, 79 per cent at Marden and Thebarton, and 92 per cent at Hamilton, based on actual commencing students, or 74 per cent overall, 77 per cent at Para West, 79 per cent at Marden, 76 per cent at Hamilton and 65 per cent at Thebarton based on initial enrolments.

As the analysis below of the qualitative data makes clear, withdrawals by UniSA-PAL students after they have commenced the course were caused by serious issues and usually crises in students’ lives and were not due to difficulties with the course or students’ motivation to undertake it. The staff interviewed at each of the schools, and in the case of Para West over two years, were unanimous on this conclusion. In each instance they knew the precise circumstances causing a student’s withdrawal, this often having been preceded by counselling and other support to assist the student to work through the issues confronting them in order to decide whether these made withdrawal unavoidable. In most cases the students found this decision an extremely difficult one, not wanting to leave the course or abandon their study goals yet faced with demands which made continuing in their studies impossible or extraordinarily difficult. In many cases the other students as well as the staff added their support in order to keep a student in danger of leaving from doing so. The nature of this support and their motivation for offering it is also discussed below.

For the students undertaking stage one of the University of South Australia’s Diploma in University Studies, the average retention rate between 1996 and 2002 is 50 per cent, considerably lower135 than for all of the 2002-2003 PAL cohorts, and also lower than the average retention rate for the wider student body at the University of South Australia. In terms of this outcome it should be noted that the majority of Diploma in University Studies students undertake the program by distance mode, and that retention rates for distance students are generally lower than for students studying in the face to face mode like the UniSA-PAL students at the adult re-entry school. This is a significant difference between these two cohorts of otherwise relatively similar students in terms of their previous educational experiences and attainments and their demographic characteristics and who, except for this difference in mode of delivery, are studying the same course. As with other students at the University of South Australia, commencing Diploma students (that is, students in stage one) have lower retention rates than continuing (stage two) students: 50 per cent for commencing students compared with 61.7 per cent for continuing students.

A case study was conducted into the reasons students withdrew from the Diploma after the first year it was offered (1995).136 It reported that the initial group of students found combining study with paid work and family and other responsibilities particularly difficult, and that their withdrawal from their course was a result of these life difficulties rather than anything to do with the course itself or other factors internal to the University. The demands of everyday life of Associate Diploma137 respondents had a significant impact on their capacity to commit themselves to university study. Most of these students were employed full-time, all were mature and many had family responsibilities. For over 80 per cent of respondents the major reason for withdrawal was connected with the pressures of their wider lives; that is, employment, family, or financial issues, rather than issues internal to the University. Only two respondents cited induction and transition as the major reason and course related issues, including academic preparation and course experience, were not considered a major reason for withdrawal by any Associate Diploma respondent.138

The averaged national data used throughout this report on the Enabling Program provides no data on retention rates for comparison with the UniSA-PAL retention rates after two years of its operation, nor with those for the Diploma in University Studies rates, in its ninth year in 2004. In order to gain some basis for comparison, data was extracted from DEST’s current statistical collection relating to retention in Enabling Program funded courses.139 However this retention data relates to students enrolled in both types of courses funded by the Program, supplementary as well as bridging as these are not separated by DEST in its reporting. The retention rates for both types of courses range between 50.5 percent in 2000, very similar to those for students in the Diploma, to 42 percent in 2002.

 Email this page
 Print this page
 
IN THIS SECTION
Collaboration between the Institutions

Introduction

Students’ Levels of Disadvantage – Summary

Data Collection

Relationships between the Pilot Institutions

Qualitative Data

Quantitative Data Collection

A New Pathway for Adult Learners: Evaluation of a School-University Access Pilot

Socio-economic Backgrounds of Students

Conclusions

Reasons for Participating in the Pilot

The Students

Bibliography: UniSA PAL

Recognition as Completion of Secondary Education

Quantitative Data – Educational Outcomes

Executive Summary

Notes

The School-University Access Pilot 2002-2004

Teaching in the Pilot Course

Quantitative Data – Students’ Characteristics

Defining Success

2002 Pilot: The 2002 Agreement

Expansion and Innovation

Appendices

Teaching, Learning, Assessment and Curriculum Matters

Barriers to study

Management and Administration of the Pilot

Retention, Success, Transition to and Success Rates in Higher Education

Students’ Level of Disadvantage

Para West Adult Campus

Diploma in University Studies

Students with a Disability

Age, Marital Status, Number of Dependants and Gender

The South Australian Adult Re-entry Schools

Motivation

Expanded Pilot

Students’ Motivation

Relevance of the Research

Students from Non English Speaking Backgrounds

2002 Pilot: Implementation of the 2002 Agreement

Scalability of the Pilot

The Full Report: New Pathway for Adult Learners

Retention Rates

National Policy Context

Transition Rates to University Study

Professional Engagement, Development and Satisfaction

Research Questions

Recommendations

Indigenous Students

Relationship between UniSA-PAL and the Diploma in University Studies

2004 and Beyond

Scalability

Expectations and Experience of the Course

Implementation of the 2003 Expanded Pilot

Research Methodology

Qualitative Data Collection

The 2003 Agreement

Rural and Isolated Students

Success Rates

The University of South Australia

The Pilot Institutions