Retention Plan
2008-2009
Steven Blum
May 2008
Table of Contents
Introduction and Executive Summary 3
Institutional History 6
Mission Statement 6
Situation Analysis 6
Current State of Retention at IU East 6
SWOT Exercise 10
Student Satisfaction Data 12
Student Focus Group Verbatim Suggestions for Improvement 14
Retention Goals 18
Retention Strategies 19
Retention Strategy Action Plans 20
A Final Word 32
Appendix 33
IU East Disaggregated Retention Data 33
Indiana University East
2008-09 Retention Plan
May 2008
Page 39
Retention Plan
2007-2008
Indiana University East · Richmond, Indiana
Introduction and Executive Summary
This retention plan specifies goals, strategies, and responsibilities for improving the quality of student life and learning at Indiana University East (IU East). The planning process can be conceptualized by the following evidence driven improvement model that emphasizes the critical importance of fact-based improvement planning, focuses on only the “vital few improvements during each cycle in order to increase the probability of full deployment, recognizes the continuous nature of effective improvement approaches, and emphasizes consensus building through cross-functional participation during the plan development.”
This plan was developed with the direct involvement of the personnel listed below. Most participated in a 1½ day planning retreat on March 6-7, 2008 that was facilitated by Dave Trites, Noel-Levitz senior consultant. Others contributed to the development of strategy action plans or are serving on the retention plan implementation task force.
Lee Ann Adams, Reading Specialist / Sheila Armstead, Clinical Assistant Professor of Social WorkTom Avery, Distance Education Coordinator / Lora Baldwin, Associate Librarian
Mary Blakefield, Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs / Karen Clark, Dean of Nursing
Brett Crowley, Director of Retention Services / Michele Curry, Senior Lecturer in Nursing
Todd Duke, Interim Director of Information Technology / Kathleen Felton, Assistant Professor of Psychology
Natasha Hamilton, IUE Student / Edwina Helton, Associate Professor of English
Mark Hester, Director of the Graf Rec. Center / Dennis Hicks, Registrar
Kumara Jayasuriya, Dean of Natural Science and Mathematics / Bob Lang, Academic Advisor
Mary Mahank, Director of Tutorial Services / Pam Marcum, Director of the Connersville Center
Jeff Matanich, Retention Coordinator / Missy Modesitt, Director of the Danielson Learning Center
Mary Ann Morse, Associate Vice Chancellor for Teaching and Learning / Kara Newman, Assistant Director of Admissions
Markus Pomper, Associate Professor of Mathematics / Bob Ramsey, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice
Dawna Remencus, Interim Director of Student Support Services / Larry Richards, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
TJ Rivard, Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences / Walter Scott, Lecturer in Mathematics
Jaime Shuler, Secretary for Advising / David Silberstein, Director of Advising
Julien Simon, Assistant Professor of Foreign Languages / Rebeckah Snoddy, Director of Campus Life
Cheryl Stafford, Interim Dean of Students / Molly Vanderpool, Director of Admissions
Marilyn Watkins, Dean of Education / Trudi Weyermann, Director of the Teaching and Learning Center
Neena Wilson, Math Lab Coordinator / Belinda Wyss, Director of Career Planning and Placement
Maribeth Yoder, Assistant Director of Financial Aid
The retention plan goals include an annual return rate improvement of 2.3% for all first-time, full-time baccalaureate degree-seeking freshmen entering the institution in the fall of 2008. It also targets late admitted and exploratory students. These goals, and the strategies selected, recognize the far-reaching impact focusing on first year students will have on overall persistence, retention, and graduation rates.
The seven “vital few” strategies that will be implemented to attain the retention goals include:
1. Improve the freshman year experience to include a required seminar course. This course is a foundational aspect to extend orientation and help students learn how to be successful in an academic environment. A pilot is anticipated during spring term 2009 and if successful will be available for all fall 2009 freshmen students.
2. Provide mandatory face to face advising for all students and include training and incentives for good advising. Intrusive, seamless advising for students will be encouraged by improved Information Technology infrastructure, advising reward systems, incorporating best practices into the IUE advising model, advisor education, improved communication with advisees, and assessment of advising effectiveness.
3. Increase the technical proficiency of IU East students. Students are expected to understand a variety of technologies, which if used to their fullest capacity will work to improve learning and overall student success.
4. Expand and modify new student orientation (NSO) to include more relationship building and to be more inclusive of faculty. Quality relationships are recognized as crucial to student success and persistence. NSO is the key to building the initial relationship.
5. Expand involvement opportunities outside the classroom. Engaging students in both IU East and the community must be deliberate on a commuter campus in order to increase participation which is known to lead toward improved persistence.
6. Define admissions standards that allow for classification of students to enable IU East to target retention efforts and financial aid packaging. A combination of improvements encouraging early applications and providing additional programming for late applicants, probationary, and potential honors students is expected to improve student success and retention.
7. Expand academic support services including supplemental instruction, computer labs, summer bridge programs and online classes. Academic support services provide essential assistance to students and are a vital feature in the IU East retention efforts. A new summer bridge program is expected to be available this summer for at risk students who want to begin classes fall 2008.
Institutional History
The roots of Indiana University East began as the Eastern Indiana Center, part of Earlham College in 1946. Located in the basement of Carpenter Hall, area residents began to access public higher education. On July 1, 1971 the Indiana General Assembly voted to establish Indiana University East as a regional campus of Indiana University. Also, on that date the North Central Association accredited Indiana University East as an independent institution.
The next 35 years saw this fledgling institution grow from one original building to four state-of-the-art academic buildings located on approximately 200 acres of forested land. On July 1, 2005 Indiana University East was proud to extend its services into Ohio through a tuition reciprocity agreement. In addition to the original Richmond location, satellite campuses have been established at New Castle, Connersville, and Lawrenceburg. While Indiana University East retains its original ties to the area, serving the seven counties of East Central Indiana and now several counties in Ohio, it has moved from as associate degree mission to that of a baccalaureate university with selected master’s degrees. Additional graduate programs are under consideration.
Mission Statement
IU East is a regional campus of Indiana University, serving residents of East Central Indiana and West Central Ohio seeking baccalaureate degrees, selected associate and graduate degrees, and opportunities for life-long learning. IU East focuses on student success by challenging students to grow intellectually and interpersonally in a supportive and scholarly environment. IU East is committed to achieving the goal of full diversity among its students, faculty, and staff and to creating an environment which supports that diversity. Through its commitment to student success and the wise use of its human and other resources, IU East promotes the economic development and the educational and cultural well-being of the communities we serve.
Situation Analysis
Current State of Retention at IU East
The following quantifications define the current retention state at IU East and were helpful in the retention planning process. Additional data that disaggregates subpopulations of IU East students by persistence, retention and graduation rates is contained in the appendix to this plan.
The most common higher education benchmarks for retention rates, annual return rates and cohort graduation rates are those defined and compiled by The American College Testing Program (ACT).
Definitions: “Annual Return Rate” and “Cohort Graduation Rate”Annual Return Rate: / The percentage of first-time, full-time freshmen enrolled at the institution the following fall.
Cohort Graduation Rate: / The percentage of first-time, full-time students who are degree seeking and who graduate.
The chart below shows annual return rates of first-time, full-time degree seeking students to the second year at public institutions by admissions selectivity. IU East’s return rate for first-time, full-time, degree seeking students of 59.7% (2006 cohort) is below the average of 66.5% for liberal admissions, masters granting institutions as illustrated below.
Admissions Selectivity / AA / BA / MA / PhDHighly Selective / 89.5 / 90.0 / 92.2
Selective / 92.0 / 87.7 / 79.4 / 82.4
Traditional / 63.5 / 72.7 / 70.2 / 73.0
Liberal / 60.3 / 52.3 / 66.5 / 58.8
Open / 51.0 / 54.0 / 65.7 / 70.6
First-time, full-time, degree seeking
Source: Compiled from ACT Institutional Data File, 2007
The chart below shows average cohort graduation rates for public institutions by admissions selectivity. IU East’s graduation rate of 18% is below the national average of 37.1% for liberal admissions, masters granting institutions as illustrated below.
Admissions Selectivity / AA / BA / MA / PhDHighly Selective / 70.5 / 72.5 / 75.8
Selective / 71.5 / 51.0 / 54.1
Traditional / 23.5 / 41.1 / 35.8 / 41.0
Liberal / 33.8 / 40.0 / 37.1 / 28.0
Open / 24.8 / 17.8 / 31.9 / 39.7
Graduation in three years for associate degree; five years for BA/BS
Source: Compiled from ACT Institutional Data File, 2007
Persistence and annual return rates have been essentially unresponsive to past efforts to develop and deploy improvements. The table below illustrates the rates beginning with the fall 2003 cohort.
Persistence and Annual Return Rate Fall 2003-2007First-time, full-time, degree-seeking cohort or some other defined cohort / Base / Persistence # / Persistence % / Annual Return # / Annual Return %
Number entering / Of the number entering, number returned spring term / % enrolled (not necessarily full-time) spring term) / Of the number entered number returning the following fall / % enrolled (not necessarily full time) the following fall
Fall 2003-04 / 319 / 261 / 81.8% / 177 / 55.5%
Fall 2004-05 / 274 / 214 / 78.1% / 148 / 54.0%
Fall 2005-06 / 284 / 241 / 84.9% / 158 / 55.6%
Fall 2006-07 / 226 / 191 / 84.5% / 135 / 59.7%
Fall 2007-08 / 266 / 221 / 83.1%
Fall 2008-09
The following table illustrates public retention and graduation data from the US Department of Educations college online opportunity locator (COOL) http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/. It compares IU East with three competitors that were reported to the consultant in the retention self-study. It may be important to note that this information is available to all potential IU East students.
US Department of Education Web Site Retention and Graduation RatesBall State University / Indiana University-Bloomington / Indiana University-East / Purdue University-Main Campus
First-time Retention:
Full-Time / 75% / 88% / 55% / 84%
Part-Time / 42% / 57% / 41% / 64%
Graduation Rates: First-time, full-time undergraduates who began the program in 2000
Overall graduation rate / 59% / 71% / 19% / 71%
Bachelor's degree rate, 4-year / 29% / 50% / 6% / 37%
Bachelor's degree rate, 5-year / 52% / 68% / 12% / 66%
Bachelor's degree rate, 6-year / 57% / 72% / 18% / 70%
Six-year graduation rates for selected institutions compared to Indiana University East are provided in the table below. IU East five-year average rates exceed Purdue University – North Central and Louisiana State Shreveport.
Six Year Graduation Rates for Selected Institutions 1996-2000 CohortsBachelor’s Degree-seeking Students Receiving Bachelor’s Degrees
1996 / 1997 / 1998 / 1999 / 2000 / 5 Year Avg.
Indiana University-East / 23.9% / 25.6% / 18.9% / 19.8% / 18.0% / 21.4%
Indiana University-Kokomo / 18.1% / 24.0% / 22.8% / 27.8% / 24.7% / 23.4%
Indiana University-Southeast / 30.6% / 28.4% / 26.1% / 30.0% / 28.8% / 28.7%
Purdue University-North Central / 10.1% / 9.8% / 10.7% / 11.8% / 13.4% / 11.3%
Louisiana State University-Shreveport / 23.8% / 21.1% / 13.3% / 17.2% / 21.8% / 19.1%
University of Michigan-Flint / 38.1% / 39.7% / 37.4% / 37.0% / 35.1% / 37.4%
Missouri Southern State University / 32.3% / 30.1% / 30.3% / 32.2% / 35.0% / 32.0%
Montana State University-Billings / 18.7% / 38.5% / 23.7% / 22.3% / 27.6% / 26.0%
Minot State University / 32.5% / 33.8% / 31.8% / 29.2% / 27.2% / 30.7%
Eastern Oregon University / 24.6% / 27.4% / 32.5% / 29.4% / 33.0% / 29.1%
University of South Carolina-Aiken / 34.4% / 44.1% / 40.7% / 43.4% / 41.0% / 40.6%
University of Wisconsin-Parkside / 25.4% / 31.4% / 29.4% / 28.0% / 30.4% / 29.1%
SWOT Exercise
Prior to consensus building for goals and strategy selection the group completed the assessment of current retention strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). The SWOT definitions used with the planning participants are illustrated in the following table.
Strengths: / Existing characteristics including physical, human, and campus traditions that clearly contribute to institutional success and the achievement of the retention goalsWeaknesses: / Existing characteristics that detract from institutional success and the achievement of retention goals
Opportunities: / Factors that have the potential to be developed into strengths for the institution
Threats: / Conditions that are obstacles to institutional success and achievement of retention goals
The lists below documents the SWOT items as they were recorded on the flip charts by the planning participants.
StrengthsSupport services are free including academic (Tutorial Services, Student Support Services, wellness and other non-academic) / Small classes (some are getting larger)
Physical facilities (parking, Internet, accessibility) / Distance education
Caring personnel (overall) / Leadership – image improved
Opportunity growth – physically, academically, partnerships with area schools / Masters programs
Cost / Location close to home
Admissions/recruitment / 70% of students receive some form of financial aid
Availability of technology on campus / Safety
Ease of transfer / Community connections
Weaknesses /
Lack of campus wide communication / Financial aid information, processes, and timing
Advising processes and procedures / Campus life – what do students really want and how do they define campus life (clubs, teams, social)
Registration processes – one stop / Alumni connections
We lack sense of tradition – mascot/song/i.e., Little 500 academic branding / Expectation to do more with less
Lack of follow through with initiatives / Structure does not facilitate communication/teamwork
Lack of on campus housing / Right course/right time (courses cancel)
Technology access – on and off campus / Lack of a sense of community for students and staff/faculty
Lack of student-faculty collaboration
Threats
Money for tuition, books, and travel / Budget cuts may limit good programs and services
Student debt / Financial aid
Limited personnel (staff and faculty) / Lack of support
Turnover of administration – change the “bandwagon” / Loss of reciprocity
Community College – Ivy Tech / Limit on credit transfer
Low priority of education / High school math leaving students unprepared
Government interference (FA regulations and community college / Community economics
Lost focus on non-traditional students who feel unwelcome
Opportunities
Academic advising / Academic programs (class scheduling including Friday and weekend college including Friday)
Campus life / Student traditions (Welcome Back and Exam Jam)
Financial aid (more scholarship and renewable/staffing) / Freshman seminar
Ivy Tech relationship / Increase student employment (on campus)
Services to distance students (offsite and online) / Director of Retention, new position
Focus on traditional age students
Student Satisfaction Data
Student satisfaction at Indiana University East (IU East) as reflected in the survey results of 713 fall term 2007 students is above the national average on all but two of the eleven SSI scales. While this reflects favorably on the past efforts of many dedicated faculty and staff there remain substantial opportunities for improvement (OFI). This excellent level of satisfaction should be a legitimate source of pride but is mitigated somewhat by the overall retention and graduation rate outcomes that are generally well below national averages, competitors, and aspirant organizations. It also should be noted that the demographic profile of the students who completed the IU East surveys included about 10% more females than the Noel-Levitz database. Since females tend to be more satisfied than males this should be considered as a limitation to the accuracy of the national comparison.