<p>We paid alot of attention to retention rates and 4-year graduation rates (except for schools with co-op programs, in which case we looked at 6 year graduation rates).</p>
<p>We figured it didn’t make sense to consider a school where a large percantage of students didn’t even return for the second year - either due to just disliking it there, no academic support from the administration, a poor academic environment, etc.</p>
<p>We did find that most of the schools that my S was considering did have high retention rates and good graduation rates, though.</p>
<p>Hawkette, those are things that I would (and did) investigate anyway, but not because I looked at published retention and 4-6 year grad rates.</p>
<p>It just doesn’t tell me anything relevant because it’s not as though if my D’s college, for example, had very high 4-6 grad rates and high freshman retention that I wouldn’t still investigate the particulars of her specific major, programs, outside activities, the reputation of the profs, the pluses and minuses of the location, and on and on. The research is the same… at least to me, it is.</p>
<p>If all those things checked out well, but teh school had lower retention/grad rates then I wouldn’t not support her choice of that school just because of the patterns of other people.</p>
<p>So, for me, it’s just not very useful information because it’s too generalized. Others’ mileage may vary. I am a compulsive researcher. ;)</p>
<p>A friend’s son took five years due to required classes filling up, so I asked about the difficulty of getting into classes during campus visits if the 4-year grad rate was low.</p>
<p>My son looked at the sophomore retention rate. I agreed that it could be a big red flag for a variety of reasons.</p>
<p>I looked at those a bit when researching schools. One school had a low retention rate, confirming negative reviews I’d read about it, so they left my list.</p>
<p>On the spreadsheet where I gathered data on all of the colleges for my S to consider, I included both the 4-yr and 6-yr graduation rates. In general there was a lot of correlation with selectivity, with the more selective schools have higher 4-yr and 6-yr graduation rates. I flagged schools whose graduation rates were outliers, and considered them extremely negatively. </p>
<p>When choosing an in-state safety to apply to (in NJ), Rutger’s 4-yr graduation rate of 48% vs. TCNJ’s rate of 68% was definitely a factor.</p>
<p>I looked carefully at the 4-yr grad rate and asked about it at visits. Some schools will tell you that their students or a certain major will typically take 5 or more years. I think this often has to do with counseling, class availability, and related schedule constraints. Finances were a significant consideration for us, so we needed to consider the overall cost of a degree, not just the cost per year.</p>
<p>We did! We wanted a college with a high freshmen retention rate AND a high 4-5 year graduation rate. DD and DS only applied to schools that met these two criteria. </p>
<p>We signed on for the FOUR year plan of college costs. In addition, we really didn’t want to deal with transfer applications (yes…we would have but we figured schools with high freshman retention rates were a safer bet).</p>
<p>Some of the technical schools will have lower retention. If you don’t have the aptitude, study skills, and personality skill to do collaborative work, the student can be doomed from the beginning.</p>
<p>If you think about, if nearly 70% of juniors study abroad or something similar, I think you can expect that the 4-yr grad rate would take a hit. Or when people change majors, double majors etc… all those things affect length of time to earn college degree which may or may not apply to you/your student. However, I see the freshman retention rate to be most telling of the educational experience. If the attrition is low, you can assume most people are really happy at the school. Once you know that, as a family you can determine the likelihood of graduating in four years and how important that is (necessitates no study abroad or less internships, not dilly dallying on major selection, etc) if a student is to attend. I just figure that if the retention of freshman is really high, MOST students who feel this is a good fit will find it as they imagine. If people leave in droves at the end of the year, that says something else entirely.</p>
<p>A friend’s son took five years due to required classes filling up, so I asked about the difficulty of getting into classes during campus visits if the 4-year grad rate was low.</p>
<p>I call Shanagins on this. Its always the student that did not take a required course in the semester it was offered and in the stated sequence within the published curriculum. No State U will deny registration and timely graduation due to over crowding. But they will ask Why did you not take the course last semester when you know this course is only offered one semester per year?</p>
<p>Paid absolutely zero consideration. Told the kids that they WILL get out in four years, period. It may mean that they take a class at Friday at 8:00 am, but so be it.</p>
<p>btw: like anything, it’s important to parse the numbers. Dartmouth for example, has an small engineering program, but it’s a typically a 5-year deal, kinda like a 4+1 (for which D will provide a 5th year of need-based aid).</p>
<p>Sometimes there is really desirable program associated with a school with a lower retention rate. This happened with my daughter last year and it did concern me but I had also leaned that a part of this particular public university’s mission was to serve an underserved population who for a variety of reasons ranging from family to finances were more likely to follow a path that may be interrupted between matriculation and graduation. </p>
<p>However, at an LAC a lower retention rate would be more of a red flag to me than at a public U.</p>
<p>Retention rate was the stat we focused on. I’ll acknowledge that some fine LACs have lower retention rates because they offer an unusual program or appeal to a very particular kind of kid (Hampshire comes to mind), but even so, for us that was a big red flag. With so many unknowns, a retention rate comfortably in the 90’s is a reasonable assurance that students are pretty happy with their school.</p>
<p>I thought that if a student took a leave of absence, say to work or travel, or for illness, and then returned and finished, with no other lost time, that student would still be considered to have graduated in 4 years. In other words, I thought time spend on a leave of absence was not counted in the time to graduate stat.</p>
<p>In the end, it seems clear there are too many variables to use 4 year graduation rates as a useful measure. As has been pointed out here, just some of them are A) schools with 5 year programs (more schools are offering 5 year architecture and engineering programs that result in master’s degrees or dual degrees. Tulane, for example, has both); B) schools that would be skewed with students that choose to study abroad or do co-ops that would often result in extra time to graduate; C) Schools that have a large proportion of students with a socio-economic profile that might require them to work and go to school to survive, and thus take 12 hours per semester for example. They would still be considered full-time, but they would only get the required 120 hours in 5 years. Obviously a family not in that socio-economic classification would not have this as an issue, and thus the data is irrelevant to the question at hand. IMHO, I find the overcrowding “I couldn’t get the required classes” excuse rather lame, but to the extent it is true I suppose that is a red flag regarding that university for sure. Unfortunately, other than sparse anecdotal evidence, how would one really ever know?</p>
<p>I can think of a few other possible reasons that might skew the data for some schools, but it does seem to make it clear why it is the 6 year graduation rate that is often reported. Most schools put that kind of time limit on students, and I think we can all agree that the vast majority of students would finish in that time frame if they are going to finish at all at that school.</p>
<p>Finally, I have heard stories that not all schools count the same, using different criteria for students that transfer, flunk out, etc. I appreciate vossron’s post (#10), but I have heard that many schools ignore these guidelines. True, not true, who knows?</p>
<p>For the UC’s, it’s bcos: 1) they admit a lot of unprepared students; 2) many students are extremely poor (Pell Grantees = ~30%); 3) finaid is lousy, so the poor have to take a minimum load so they can work to pay the bills.</p>
<p>If you are not 1-3, i.e., you are well-prepared and full pay, then graduating in four years is easy – even engineers can do it (as long as they don’t dawdle in electives) – particularly since the UCs are extremely generous with AP credits.</p>
<p>I have a kid at Colorado College, a LAC with an unusual program (their one-course-at-a-time “block plan”) and a relatively low 4-year graduation rate. The rate probably is attributable, to some degree, to the block plan. Another factor may be the number of kids taking time off to enjoy the distractions of mountain recreation. Mine is actually trying to graduate in less time (3 years). The school does have policies that support this (allowing students to take one summer block free-of-charge; generous AP/IB credit). </p>
<p>If you are interested in a school, I’d say don’t dismiss it out-of-hand due to low graduation or retention rates, but investigate the likely reasons behind the numbers. Think about how they are likely to affect a kid like your own. Reed College, Bard, and Colorado College probably all have different reasons for their lower rates. Bring it up with admissions on your visits; see if they are defensive or forthcoming in their responses.</p>
<p>yes but that’s my point. we focused more on the RETENTION rates. You’re talking about graduation rates and i agree that there are more mitigating factors with that stat. Take your son’s school for instance–Colorado College does have a lower grad rate, but a 94% retention rate.</p>
<p>Fallenchemist makes a good point about mitigating factors contributing to retention rates (SES, prep for college). I visited a small LAC (a college that changes lives) with my son this past fall with a 67% first year retention rate. At first glance, one would think this is a terrible school. However, the school admits many kids who are probably not really ready to even be in college! I don’t fault the school on this. Readiness is an issue the student and family should sort out before the student heads off to college. This college was quite upfront about the curriculum not being an extension of high school. They also had lots of tutoring and advising support but were clear that they can not force a failing 18 year old to get help. Some schools are “easy to get in, hard to stay in”, not because they have a shortcoming but because they are not willing to “dumb down” their curriculum in order to retain students. This school I visited had lecture classes and professors very much on par with more selective colleges. For the mature young person, it would be an excellent education.</p>