<p>but again, Fallenchemist was referring to grad rates. I’m not really sure that a 68% retention rate can be entirely defended by students not ready for the program. Lots of difficult, academic LACs have retention rates in the 90’s.</p>
<p>I htink both rates merit careful review. Note that it is not unusual for Freshman retention rates at small, rural schools and all women schools to be unimpressive while their 4 year graduation rates are very impressive–the idea of say, 10% of kids on top of the 5% who leave almost every school deciding they want a larger, less isolated or coed environment is hardly shocking.</p>
<p>Bear in mind, too, that schools with less affluent students will lose more and transfer or dropout rates may be higher among internaitonal students as they deal with a new culture.</p>
<p>In short, it is important to both look at and investigate the numbers to see what the causes may be.</p>
<p>The caliber of the typical student at the top LAC’s is stronger in terms of academic readiness, perseverance, tenacity and financial stability. With that kind of pool to begin with, you have a population that is less likely to run into problems than a lower tier school where it is more likely that you will have students that are poorer, less academically prepared or more likely to have emotional/learning problems that could derail success. Therefore you are going to have better retention at a higher tier/higher retention rate school without the school having to do anything to ensure that students stay. Comparing average SAT/ACT scores at a given college and retention rates is interesting. I don’t have any hard data,so here goes… It is just my opinion and observation that the lower the average SAT/ ACT at a given school, the lower the retention rate. For example, our state flagship has the highest SAT averages at a 95% retention rate, the middle tier school have about an 80% retention rate and the lowest tier of the state schools, about a 65% retention rate. SAT correlates best with family income, suggesting that economics can play a role here. I do not have a study on this, correlation is not causation, etc but, in actuality, what are retention rates really telling us?</p>
<p>I’d like to see the list of the top, say 50, retention rates. hawkette? Maybe it’s already somewhere else in the CC forum.</p>
<p>“it is not unusual for Freshman retention rates … to be unimpressive while their 4 year graduation rates are very impressive”</p>
<p>Well, okay, but it’s relative; a graduation rate cannot be higher than the freshman retention rate! ;)</p>
<p>Here’s a link to LAC retention rate. I think this supports my thought. [Best</a> Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/liberal-arts-freshmen-least-most-likely-return]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/liberal-arts-freshmen-least-most-likely-return)</p>
<p>thanks for the link hornet. With the exception of a couple of the quirky schools there is a correlation between student scores and retention.</p>
<p>I don’t think there’s anything wrong with looking at the four year rate, but you should also be careful. Take Stanford, for example. I’d consider 79% pretty low, and was disappointed to see such a number. And then three very important things came into play: a) the number of student athletes who stay for a fifth year, b) the number of students who are coterming or receiving two degrees in five years, and c) the almost-necessity of taking a fifth year in order to graduate with a double major. Like with any school, there are notable exceptions. If you can look at the four year graduation rate with those unaccounted-for factors in mind, then it can be a great tool.</p>
<p>
Would that that your broad statement were true, toblin. There are, in fact, instances of a class in a required sequence filling up, prof draws a line for overrides, and an extra semester is required. </p>
<p>So, if son had a school (public or private) with a relatively low 4 year grad rate, I made it my business to learn the reasons. When you are sitting in an information session, ask about graduating in 4 years, and the students in the session unanimously state that it takes 5 to 5.5 years for “most kids,” my check book and I pay attention.</p>
<p>I agree with mafool.</p>
<p>Often a school will have frequency of offerings for many classes change from year to year. In some it is really difficult to plan one’s four years. I suspect in this economy it will be even worse.</p>
<p>applicannot - your statement seems contradictory. You seem to basically be saying “There is nothing wrong with looking at four year rates except that there are lots of reasons people don’t graduate in four years”, all of which had been mentioned in previous posts anyway. Since no school keeps statistics for public consumption on why students don’t graduate in four years, what good does it do to know that some unknown number for good reasons and unknown number for bad reasons, which as you say cannot be accounted for, contribute to it? A person still wouldn’t know if the rate was low for a good reason, like the ones you mention, or bad reasons.</p>
<p>I put a good deal of importance on the frosh retention rate, somewhat less on the 4 year graduation rate. The fact that D’s top choice univ has received awards for freshmen experience, and they have a 90+% return rate, was a important in our book.</p>
<p>Example of taking more than 4 years to graduate: relative’s son recently took 4 1/2 years to graduate from Clemson. Stated reason - he changed majors and couldn’t fit a required course into his schedule (with pre-requisites, etc) in time. Real reason, his mom joked, was that he wanted to stick around for 1 more football season. The student didn’t really deny that joke! I see on page 1 of this thread that Clemson’s 4-year rate is 50%, I wonder how many other kids fall in the “more football, please!” category, ha ha. And then there are schools that incorporate co-op and internships, such as Northeastern, where 5 years is pretty much standard.</p>
<p>Toblin: “No State U will deny registration and timely graduation due to over crowding.” From what I hear, this is not an uncommon occurrence at UMass.</p>
<p>As a parent who is faced with paying full freight to an out-of-state university, you bet I pay attention to these statistics. I want my daughter to understand how important it is that she graduates in 4 years. We simply do not have money for an additional semester so she should attend a school where the probability is high that she will graduate in a timely manner.</p>
<p>Vossron, of course, a graduation rate cannot be higher than a retention rate. However, there are many instances of schools whose retention rates are lower, but graduation rates higher than others. For example, a rural LAC which loses 10% of its freshman but has a 4 year graduation rate of 80% vs. a state flagship which loses only 5% of its freshmen but graduates only 65% in 4 years.</p>
<p>As I noted, typically more freshman will find a very small school (“too much like high school”; “those tailgate parties at state U are a blast!”) or a very rural school ("nothing to do here’) or a single sex school (“I want to meet guys some place other than a loud party or bar”) failing to match their expectations, but those who stay graduate on time. At state flagships, the issues of getting into required classes, or not getting enough guidance to pick a major on time, can result in some surprisingly low graduation rates (for example, Rutgers below 50%).</p>
<p>I pay attention to both these statistics, particularly for the higher priced (net) schools that S2 is considering. Not that a low rate is bad - it’s just that I’d like more information as to why that is so. For small LAC’s, freshman retention rate is a good indicator of the level of support students have access to.</p>
<p>Here is a link to freshman retention rates from top schools that was posted a few months ago:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/774444-college-comparison-iii-freshman-retention.html?highlight=freshman+retention[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/774444-college-comparison-iii-freshman-retention.html?highlight=freshman+retention</a></p>
<p>and 4 year graduation rates:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/774781-college-comparison-iv-four-year-graduation-rates.html?highlight=freshman+retention[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/774781-college-comparison-iv-four-year-graduation-rates.html?highlight=freshman+retention</a></p>
<p>and 6 year graduation rates:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/775599-college-comparison-v-six-year-graduation-rates.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/775599-college-comparison-v-six-year-graduation-rates.html</a></p>
<p>Dadinator, thanks.
Such gaps as Rutgers at 40% lower on graduation than freshman retention (and Rutgers is far from alone) catch your eye.</p>
<p>If your schools of interest are missing from the ^^above posted links, note that the lists are based on magazine editors’ opinions of what constitute the qualities of “top” schools; look for the “Common Data Set” for other schools (but not all schools publish this data).</p>
<p>Those two stats were included in our info sheets DD put together last year. I think it just helps to paint a picture of a school. She didn’t use it as a definitive cutoff criteria but it was useful.</p>
<p>For example, one school on her list (UA-Birmingham) had an abysmal 4 year graduation rate (I don’t have it in front of me, but I want to say 14%.) That concerned me, but they have such fantastic health science programs that it remained on the list. That red flag led us to find out that it is a commuter school (hence the low grad rate: a lot of people take longer because they’re working and commuting.) D loved her visit, but decided that she wanted more of a community since she would be living there and that she could always go there for grad school.</p>
<p>I think the freshman retention rate is very important because it’s a window into how well freshmen are adjusting and finding a positive experience at the school IMO, a freshman retention rate below 90% is a red flag: if 1 in every 10 freshman doesn’t bother to come back, something’s probably amiss. Even a retention rate in the low 90s may be cause for concern.</p>
<p>The four-year graduation rate is potentially misleading, for all the reasons already mentioned and more. At public universities especially, many students attend part-time by design; the schools shouldn’t be punished for accommodating these students. Also note that at many publics tuition is pro-rated for part-time students, so it may be no more expensive to graduate in 6 years than in 4. Some programs are designed as 5-year (or longer) programs; you don’t want to punish a school for offering an engineering coop program or a 3+2 engineering program or an integrated undergrad/medical degree program. Assuming that 4 years to degree is the norm and that every deviation is a failure is simply wrongheaded; it works for most LACS with their relatively simple, standard-issue 4-year curricula, but it just doesn’t reflect the complex realities of undergrad education at major research universities. Also, in some state university systems it’s common to begin at a local, less prestigious branch or a community college and then to transfer to the flagship for the last two years, but the way graduation rates are measured neither the institution at which the student first matriculates nor the school from which that student graduates is credited with that graduate.</p>
<p>Six-year graduation rates are a somewhat better measure, but still far from perfect.</p>