<p>I don't get the significance of these numbers, students supposed to stay in their schools for four full years right? then why do they post the percentage of the freshmen coming back to their sophomore year?</p>
<p>Because, if students are not happy, they will leave. That percentage shows how much students are happy and decide to stay.</p>
<p>Because it shows a level of contentment of students…and a level of competence in admissions for admitting students who fit academically, socially etc. True, there are transfers at most schools. Yes it even happens in the Ivy League. And some leave for health reasons or financial reasons. But its another ‘general’ statistic to observe and consider, without too much emphasis. Unless its an alarming number of students leaving after one year. Prestige plays a role as well. Students might be perfectly happy at school X, but if they can transfer up the ladder some will do that for prestige. Especially if they were waitlisted the first time around. So just take a look at it, but don’t be overly concerned with it unless its awful.</p>
<p>Frankly, a good number or a low number can suggest a few things…</p>
<p>1) happiness</p>
<p>2) affordability</p>
<p>3) too many kids were accepted that may not have been up to the academic challenge.</p>
<p>Is there a list of colleges ranked by this percentage?</p>
<p>It’s called “retention rate”. There is a statistic actually available on USNWR. The higher this percentage, generally, the more students are satisfied with their experiences. I’m too lazy to go find the link for you, but just Google or Bing it and you should be able to find it.</p>
<p>Alex, you can also search this forum for ‘college comparison’. I’m pretty sure one of the threats started by ‘hawkette?’ has been freshman returning for sophomore year.</p>
<p>A low retention rate is probably worth looking into. Buy hey, it’s a soft number. Over the years on CC I’ve read of kids who left school due to illness or a death in the family (or occasionally academic dismissal). And I’ve read of kids who transferred due to affordability or social environment or distance from home or dissatisfaction with strength of major or to transfer to a much better school, etc.</p>
<p>Could mean lots of kids were unhappy and wanted to transfer. Or maybe financial aid is terrible and a lot of kids realized they couldn’t afford it. Lots of students dont spend the whole four years in one place.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Kids like that will be reflected in the retention rate of any school. Bad stuff happens to N% even at top schools. What you’re looking for is a number that is significantly lower than peer colleges. </p>
<p>Chicago’s retention rate historically has been a little lower (but not too much lower lately) than the Ivies. Here’s an article describing its efforts to improve retention rate:
[The</a> University of Chicago Magazine: October 2001, Campus News](<a href=“http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0110/campus-news/report-keep.html]The”>The University of Chicago Magazine: October 2001, Campus News)
8 years after, Chicago’s rate is now into the 90s as I recall.</p>
<p>Reed’s retention rate has been significantly lower than peer LACs in the Northeast. High 70s v. low to mid 90s? Might be the tough curriculum, or the weather, or the financial aid - the reasons behind low numbers are not always clear. Public universities tend to have much lower retention than top private schools.</p>