"In actuality, the most cost-effective time to intervene is before a student is even identified as being at risk of attrition, meaning that all students should be entered in to what is essentially a retention program from the day they officially enroll."
Steve Isaac

Has e-mail peaked?

Archived Articles

• Online International Learning
• The BlogAbroad.com experience
• Heuristics and Discovery Learning
• Will the Admissions packet ever die?
• Underserved Students
• International Online Learning
• How Students are Learning
• COMPLETE ARTICLE LIST

Steve Isaac

What's your view?
Post a comment

PEOPLE WITH IMPACT INTERVIEW - Steve Isaac, CEO EducationDynamics

As the CEO of EducationDynamics and the driving force behind the upcoming National Dialog on Student Retention Conference, Steve Isaac recognizes the importance of working toward improving student attrition rates at institutions of all types. In the following interview, he shares his insights on rising student attrition rates and what can be done to encourage persistence to degree completion.

Q: Do you believe the reported data on student attrition is reliable?
Steve Isaac:

While there is a lot of data out there regarding student attrition rates, I think that, for the most part, the numbers are reasonably accurate. There is, however, a wide range of data that goes into making up those averages. I believe there is a certain amount of statistical variation because, in general, schools of both types—for-profit and not-for-profit—are reluctant to report their actual retention or attrition rates, depending on which side of the coin we are looking at. Basically, the reported data that is out there is all extrapolated data. For example, if a school reports a graduation rate of 50 %, one could infer an attrition rate of 50%, but in actuality, there might have been a rate of 70% in the first year and 10% in the third and fourth years.

Q: How can universities find reliable retention numbers? What, if any, reporting systems should be implemented?
Steve Isaac:

The creation of a central database to which schools could report their retention numbers anonymously would increase the validity of student attrition averages. If higher education professionals had access to more accurate attrition data, the task of improving student retention would be markedly easier to address. Currently, the process of reporting attrition numbers is not anonymous, and individual institutions are often hesitant to report their figures for fear of an unfavorable appraisal by prospective students or competitors. However, the creation of a blind reporting database would likely encourage schools to be more forthcoming with their information as it eradicates the fear of any negative repercussions. Ideally, schools would be willing to report attrition numbers to this blind database on a term-by-term basis—for example, if an institution starts the year with 3,000 students today, how many did they lose by the end of the first term, by the second term, etc. In order to yield the most meaningful numbers, the database would also need to track retention rates of individual classes from the first day of freshman year until they leave the institution—either through graduation or stopping out. To further promote reliable outcomes, the submitted retention data could then be evaluated by institution type—four-year, two-year, not-for-profit, for-profit, online, campus-based, graduate and undergraduate programs. While the aforementioned reporting system would be ideal, it would take some time to establish. In theory, the creation and monitoring of this database would require some sort of central data collection effort by an association or an independent research organization. Therefore, schools would likely face increased difficulty in obtaining permission to participate in retention studies of this magnitude and in releasing the requested data.

Q: In regards to intervention costs, when is it most cost-efficient to intervene with a student identified as being at risk of attrition?
Steve Isaac:

In actuality, the most cost-effective time to intervene is before a student is even identified as being at risk of attrition, meaning that all students should be entered in to what is essentially a retention program from the day they officially enroll. Generally speaking, most deterioration in student relationships begins earlier in a student’s tenure at an institution rather than later, but by the time an intervention takes place, it is often too late and far less effectual than early intervention. The next best thing, however, is intervening at the very first sign of attrition risk. Institutions should attempt to expose all new students to web-based programs that will increase their likelihood of success and therefore increase retention. As they interact with those programs over time, schools can track student participation and engagement and get a clearer sense of those among the population that might be at greater risk of attrition than others. If students get in the habit of engaging in this kind of program early on, the chances of retaining students is higher. As far as intervention is concerned, the actions we take at the very beginning of a student’s relationship with a university and the actions we take at the first sign of risk are the most crucial. This is true in any student population—adults studying online part-time, full-time on-campus undergraduate students, adult learners attending graduate school part-time—the dynamic is the same across the board.

Q: Can you explain the basic premise of the ‘Lifetime Value of a Student,’ a theme you will be expanding upon during your presentation at the upcoming National Dialog on Student Retention Conference?
Steve Isaac:

My presentation will focus on 1) why it is an important metric to track and 2) an understanding of what it actually is. A lot of people think the ‘lifetime value of a student’ means whether or not students join alumni associations and recommend students to certain institutions after graduation, but it’s not. It is actually a number, generally expressed in dollars, representing the discounted or net-present value in a student relationship over the average length of time an institution has them. This metric can help schools to determine how much they can spend to acquire a student and how much they can spend to keep a student, and it becomes an important part of understanding a feasible expenditure for retention initiatives.

Q: Why National Dialog on Student Retention, and why now?
Steve Isaac:

Retention is probably the single most important issue facing education professionals at the post-secondary level, regardless of the type of school they are in. Traditional four-year undergraduate not-for-profits, community colleges, graduate programs, online education delivery systems or for-profits with traditional campuses and/or online offerings all feel the sting of increased rates of student attrition. Wherever you are on the education spectrum, retention is an issue. And it is not just an issue for individual schools—it is an issue for society as a whole as well. Only about 36% of people over the age of 25 have a Bachelor’s degree, a percentage that indicates that the United States is falling woefully behind the rest of the world in terms of higher-educated populace, particularly in the areas of science, math and engineering. If we don’t get our students to enroll in and finish degree programs, then we will continue to fall behind. Not only is it good for the students to complete what they start, it is also beneficial to schools when students complete the programs they start. It is a critical problem that needs to be addressed now, which is why EducationDynamics undertook the National Dialog on Student Retention.

Steve Isaac, CEO EducationDynamics
Mr. Isaac brings more than 25 years of executive level business leadership in marketing services and advertising businesses to his role as CEO of EducationDynamics. In addition, Mr. Isaac has served on the faculty of the executive MBA program in Virginia Commonwealth University's School of Business and as managing director of The Interactive Marketing Institute in VCU's School of Mass Communications. Mr. Isaac will be featured as a plenary speaker at the upcoming National Dialog on Student Retention Conference, June 2-3, 2008 in Atlanta. To register for the conference, please visit www.educationdynamics.com/retention_conference.

See an index of all the "People with Impact" Interviews

Additional sections of this journal address student recruiting and student retention. We have also placed all articles with a common theme of online education and distance education programs in a separate portal. New articles will be posted each Monday, please check back by bookmarking this site or placing a link to this Innovative Practices in Communicating with Students portal.