STUDENT
SUCCESS
3 Big Questions
By Kathe Pelletier
S
tudent success is firmly
cemented as a priority for
colleges and universities.
The goal has occupied a
top spot in the EDUCAUSE
Top 10 IT issues list for several years. In 2019, Student
Success was #2, and Student-Centered Institution was #4.1 The shifting demographics
of college/university students, higher education institutions’ performance funding,
a volatile and rapidly changing workforce,
new generations of technologies, and
access to data about every dimension of a
student’s journey to a degree are all factors
that shape the contours of the mission to
ensure that students finish what they start.
ILLUSTRATION BY MARK ALLEN MILLER, © 2019
er.educause.edu
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
57
In states with performance funding, which offers
financial incentives based on key outcomes,2 retention
and graduation can be the North Star by which all initiatives are measured. In many institutions, no matter
the funding model, the changing population of students
entering college with more diverse needs and varying
levels of preparedness has caused leaders to shift the
focus from enrollment to completion. Vice president
positions are being created with “student success” in
the title and purview. These moves appear to be working:
the National Student Clearinghouse reports
an increase of 1.5 percent in the
overall national six-year graduation rate for both two- and
four-year colleges in the
most recent (fall 2012)
cohort—rising to 58.3
percent. 3 Promising gains have also
been seen for black
and Hispanic students, suggesting
the importance of
programs designed
to address the
achievement gap.
But we still have our
work cut out for us: a
58.3 percent graduation
rate means that more than 40
percent of students entering college don’t have a degree six years later.
Beyond completion, it’s difficult to
put a finger on a field-wide definition of student success.
At a high level, progression and graduation make sense,
representing the US attention to the completion agenda.4
Educational attainment has been linked to higher
income, more job satisfaction, and lower unemployment, with additional societal benefits such as increased
tax revenue, improved public health, and greater civic
engagement. Of course, we want our students to graduate.
Many practitioners and researchers are doing important work to unpack, better understand, and address
student success. For now, questions remain for how we
can help students finish what they start—in particular,
the following three “big questions”:
•
•
•
What does student success mean, both for the institution and for the student?
How do we measure student success?
Is student success a mission-critical philosophy for
higher education institutions, or should student
success be owned by one (or a few) functional areas?
What should the campus structures that support
student success look like?
What Does Student Success
Really Mean?
Exploring the completion agenda a bit further surfaces the
complexity lying underneath the goals of retention and
graduation. First, the path to graduation may not always
be clear cut. Confusing curricula, wasted transfer credits, limited course availability, restrictive accessibility
issues, and other structural barriers may hinder a student’s ability to efficiently navigate a degree program.5
Nonacademic barriers such as food or housing insecurity and mental health issues also impact retention and
persistence rates.6 Additionally, community college students may more often face
challenges such as a lack
of transportation and/or
child care.7 Powerful links
between a student’s sense
of belonging and successful student outcomes
In the spring of 2019, EDUCAUSE established an expert panel to help define what student success means for
EDUCAUSE, identify student success signature products, and articulate the relationship between the EDUCAUSE
have also been demonstudent success and teaching and learning programs.
strated.8 Despite the fact
• Robert Bramucci, Vice Chancellor, Technology and Learning Services, South Orange County Community College
that students spend most
District
of their time on campus in
• Jeff Grann, Credential Solutions Lead, Credential Engine
a classroom, these factors
all go well beyond tradi• Maggie Jesse, Office of Teaching, Learning and Technology, University of Iowa
tional academic support
• Deborah Keyek-Franssen, Associate Vice President for Digital Education and Engagement, University of Colorado
programs or interventions,
System
many of which assume that
• Kal Svirinas, Director for Retention, Syracuse University
a deficit in academic skills
• David Thomas, Director of Data Integrations and Architecture, Office of Information Technology, University of
is what keeps students
Colordado Denver
from being successful.
• Karen Vignare, Executive Director, Personalized Learning Consortium, Association of Public & Land Grant
The complexity of facUniversities
tors related to a student’s
The EDUCAUSE Expert Panel on Student Success
58
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
Fall 2019
ability to complete a degree program represents just one
aspect of the barrier to student success. Another wicked
problem arises from the definition of success. Should we
assume that the completion of a two- or four-year degree
is—and should be—the goal for every individual? What
does success look like, in a broader sense?
The question of the impetus behind completing a
degree does not yield a simple answer. Many students
cite job outcomes as a primary motivator;
however, today’s students are also
likely to speak to the nuances
of this goal, including wanting to become a productive
member of society.9 These
aspirations of becoming an educated citizen
might well include a
“good job,” but they
also incorporate an
exploration of purpose
and engagement: connecting with ideas and
wrestling with problems
that are important to
them. Older adults, even
those seeking career mobility
through education, also seem
guided by the need to find a passion
or a purpose.10 Given the research that
shows students will likely have 10–14 jobs before
they reach 40 years old, and far more by the time they
leave the workforce,11 we must attend to students’ drive to
connect with a purpose and to institutions’ ability to help
students identify and work toward that purpose.
The rapidly changing workforce also creates a need for
alternative credentialing pathways for students. Employers are increasingly turning to skills-based hiring,12 and in
quickly changing professions like healthcare or technology, existing employees must continue to upskill. Older
students living independently or supporting families may
desire to immediately apply new knowledge and skills to
gain promotions or new jobs. Stackable digital credentials are one way to showcase those skills to prospective
employers during, after, or instead of completion of a twoor four-year degree. But as alternative credentials have
moved into the mainstream, with an estimated 334,000 in
the market today,13 the use of methods to signal the value
of these credentials is critical. Meanwhile, employers also
seem to be placing an increasing importance on college
degrees,14 and nearly half indicate they have raised the
level of the minimum degree required for the same job
roles over the last five years.
Finally, when we explore the definition of student
success, we must examine not only the purpose and
outcomes of a college education but also the student
experience. Can we say we have achieved student success when students—particularly students of color—are
increasingly graduating but also report an alienating or
upsetting experience along the way? This question combines various issues: students’ ability to find a sense of
belonging on campus; the identification and connection
of purpose to the student’s course of study, skills gained,
and post-college aspirations; and ultimately, the question of how we measure student success.
How Do We Measure Student Success?
As noted earlier, retention and graduation are often the
hallmarks of student success metrics. These metrics
are still critical to observe,
especially in the context
of the statistic that 40 percent of students do not
graduate. However, if we
are measuring only retenEDUCAUSE is committed to elevating best and emerging practices for how to maximize student success on campus.
tion and graduation, we
Here are a few suggestions for ways that higher education institutions can define, measure, and improve student
lose the opportunity to
success with an equity lens:
learn if what we are doing
• How do your students define success, both as a group and individually? How can you set up your processes and
to support student success
systems to support, celebrate, and nudge toward student goals? Consider ways to include the student in your student
success initiative. Consider the whole student and success markers like thriving when you define student success.
is working and to make any
needed course corrections.
• We value what we measure, so make sure you are measuring what you value—and can take action on what you are
measuring. Are you looking only backward, at lagging indicators such as retention and graduation, or are you looking
Retention and graduaforward, at data that informs improvement or validates that what you are doing is working?
tion are lagging indicators,
• How might your analytics and outreach be reinforcing bias? Be relentless in using an equity lens to examine your
looking back on something
systems and practices.
that has already happened.
• Just as you consider the whole student, consider also the whole institution. Technology is one powerful enabler
They fail to offer informaof student success initiatives, but so are leadership and change management, business process improvement,
tion about where and why
a continuous improvement lens, and data capabilities. These organizational capacities, working together with
a student has fallen off the
empowered functional units like academic advising, can create a system that not only supports the student but also
pathway to degree compleimproves efficiency and sustainability on your campus.
tion, and they don’t provide
A Call to Action
60
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
Fall 2019
any policy or practice guidance that could improve these
outcomes.
Instead of looking backward at lagging indicators,
we might consider identifying leading indicators and
integrating those into our practice.15 Some leading
indicators might be institution-specific, based on the
particular context on campus, and can be discovered
through predictive modeling. A starting point might be
to look at leading indicators that have been identified
across contexts, such as completion of gateway courses,
credit accumulation, and full-time continuous enrollment. Even more actionable indicators include behaviors
such as timely registration, early and/or frequent activity
in the learning management system, and participation in
advising appointments.
In addition, campuses must commit to disaggregating data so that differences between subgroups can be
identified and addressed accordingly with sensitivity
to cultural or other contexts. For example, differences
likely exist between transfer students, first-generation
students, and part-time students. Even more specifically, examining data for racial subgroups separately
The EDUCAUSE Student Success Program
Definition
Student success community programs promote student engagement, learning, and progress toward the student’s own goals through cross-functional leadership
and the strategic application of technology.
Areas of Focus
• Advising and Student Support
• Organizational and Culture
Change: Change the
organizational structure as
required to effect a reorientation
toward students, which might
mean a shift away from rankings,
research, or other institutionally
focused activities that have been
embedded in the institutional
culture for decades.
Systems: Elevate the role of
advisor, and empower faculty
and/or professional advising
staff with information, tools,
and professional development
opportunities.
• Data Capabilities: Set up
enterprise systems to collect,
analyze, and apply data; create
self-learning systems that are
refined through evaluation data.
• Leadership and Change
Management: Clearly define
outcomes, and align the institution
toward this shared goal; inspire
and reinforce behavior changes in
individuals and teams to get there.
• Learning Environments: Identify
and assess toward learning
outcomes; provide faculty with
development opportunities
to improve teaching and
assessment; share teaching
innovation and best practices.
• Business Process Improvement:
Create clear and efficient
processes, handoffs, and
communications between
departments, and deploy
knowledge management
systems to ensure consistency
and effective delivery—from the
perspective of the student.
62
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
• Continuous Improvement and
Fall 2019
Evaluation: Articulate intended
outcomes, define and measure
leading indicators and KPIs,
and make improvements to
systems, services, processes, and
technology based on these data;
create a data-informed culture.
Pillars
• Whole Student. A student’s
ability to progress through
a learning experience and
demonstrate learning has as
much to do with socioemotional,
physical, and financial factors
as it does with intellectual
skills. The coordination of
advising, curriculum, teaching,
and academic support services
allows the institution to serve the
individual as a whole student.
• Advising and Co-Curricular
Supports. As technology
generates increased information
about student progress and
learning, a mindful approach to
a coordinated advising function
becomes more prominent in
institutions. Successful advising
and planning reforms require
strategic collaboration across
the institution, with alignment
to mission and an openness
to transformative institutional
change rather than merely the
adoption of new technology.
Innovation practices like design
thinking place the student at the
center while testing and iterating
into scalable, feasible, impactful
interventions.
• Student Success Technologies.
Information about student
progress, learning, and potential
risk areas made available to the
student and to the institution
can increase student agency
and enable transformative
conversations with faculty,
advisors, and other support
staff. Actionable insights enable
personalized, just-in-time support
for the whole student. Student
privacy and data security are
upheld through thoughtful,
well-informed policies and
practices.
can show critical differences between Asian, Native,
Hispanic/Latinx, and black students. When data is not
disaggregated, there is the potential to reinforce bias or
to wash out differences between groups—thus missing
opportunities to improve programs, services, and support and to better understand the context and story of
those particular students.
Finally, even the indicators listed above, while
more actionable than outcomes such as retention and
graduation, represent “institutional success.” How can
we examine and measure student success from the
perspective of the individual student? Are there scalable approaches that can rate student progress against
students’ own goals, and are there systems to deliver
personalized support toward those goals?
Campus Structures for Student Success:
Philosophy or Function?
Related to the definition of student success is the question of who “owns” the responsibility for ensuring
improvements to student success. On the one hand,
an institution might approach student success from an
institution-wide, philosophical perspective: “Student
success is everyone’s responsibility.” This commitment
to keeping the student first in strategic and tactical decisions can encourage all departments to be laser-focused
on one priority. On the other hand is the response: “If
everyone owns it, no one owns it.” The laser focus can
become diffused when there is no single responsible
department or leader.
Obviously, the answer to the question of philosophy
vs. function can be “both.” Institutions can be studentfocused and create a culture in which every decision is
mediated by a reflection about what’s best for the student. Academic advising staff and technologies can serve
as a key lever for outreach and resource delivery. In fact,
cross-institutional collaboration is critical to moving
student success efforts forward, and one department
alone cannot carry the full weight. In iPass: Lessons from
the Field, institutions participating in a transformative,
technology-based planning and advising project found
that positioning student success work to align with
institutional mission created momentum. Executive
champions were critical, but it was the repositioning of
er.educause.edu
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
63
Student success is a complex
endeavor. Colleges and
universities embrace the
aspiration, yet we are still
grappling with big questions
about how to define, measure,
and structure student success,
all while keeping the student
at the center.
64
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
Fall 2019
advising structures and functions that allowed
the nature of advising to move from transactional to holistic. Ultimately, the iPASS
institutions saw measurably improved student
experiences and outcomes.16
Keeping Students at the Center
While transforming advising processes and
systems constitutes an important part of this
work, other institutional capacities are also
leverage points. Some fundamental organizational capacities must be high-functioning
and capable of the transformational change
required to shift toward a student-centered
mindset. The “what” that students might experience could be reflected in their just-in-time
interactions with advisors, access to student
success tools like degree-planning tools, or
nudges they receive to complete critical tasks
such as registering for courses or turning in
a homework assignment. But without the
“how”—for example, organizational capacities like leadership and change management,
business process improvement, continuous
improvement, and data capabilities—institutional leaders may not be able to have a clear
view into opportunities for improvement or
the mechanisms that will effect cultural and
structural change, thus limiting the ultimate
results.
Taking an enterprise, student-focused
view requires strategy and coordination. The
capacities needed to successfully plan for
and sustain student success initiatives span
the entire organization, including advising,
institutional research, a business intelligence
function, and of course, information
technology. 17 Technology is one part of
student success initiatives, but it’s not as
simple as just plugging in a degree-planning
tool. A strategically designed data ecosystem
that includes a data warehouse to capture
information from a variety of systems inside
and outside the classroom—CRM, SIS, LMS,
and even SSMS (student success management
system)—and across the lifecycle, from
recruitment to alumni, will enable a more
complete view.18 These data points can be tied
together to create one cohesive story about the
student.
In addition to data systems, a strategic
approach to student-facing staff, supported
by back-end processes, creates a streamlined
student experience. Processes should be
designed to map the student experience.19
Process mapping can illuminate gaps in
the student experience or, in many cases,
redundant communications or extra steps.
Designing technology and human systems for
a seamless student experience helps students
to feel known and eliminates the need to retell
their stories to different staff.
At the same time, data privacy and ethics
come into play here. Predictive analytics
algorithms invite unintended consequences
and the potential for bias, both in the
algorithms and in the implementation of the
results by humans. Institutional leaders need
to make important decisions about who gets
access to certain types of data, particularly
sensitive information like mental health
history. This issue can be somewhat mitigated
by providing only “need to know” data to
individual functions but convening a crossfunctional meeting when issues of student
conduct or other interventions need to be
discussed. When setting up analytics systems,
either in-house or with a partner, important
decisions need to be made about the kind of
information that is included – or intentionally
excluded – from the algorithms. For example,
even if demographic data can be predictive of
success, some institutions are choosing not
to include it in early-alert systems because it
is not actionable and can reinforce racial and
other biases.
Student success is a complex endeavor.
Colleges and universities embrace the
aspiration, yet we are still grappling with big
questions about how to define, measure, and
er.educause.edu
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
65
structure student success, all while keeping the student
at the center. •
Notes
1. Susan Grajek and the 2018–2019 EDUCAUSE IT Issues
Panel, “Top 10 IT Issues, 2019: The Student Genome Project,”
EDUCAUSE Review Special Report (January 28, 2019).
2. See Kevin Dougherty, Sosanya Jones, Hana Lahr, Rebecca
Natow, Lara Pheatt, and Vikash Reddy, Performance
Funding for Higher Education (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 2016).
3. D. Shapiro, A. Dundar, F. Huie, P. K. Wakhungu, A.
Bhimdiwala, and S. E. Wilson, “Completing College: A
National View of Student Completion Rates—Fall 2012
Cohort,” Signature Report No. 16, National Student
Clearinghouse Research Center, December 2018.
4. See Andrew P. Kelly and Mark Schneider, Getting to
Graduation: The Completion Agenda in Higher Education
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012).
5. Jonathan Turk, “Reducing Barriers to Transfer for Community
College Students,” Higher Education Today (blog), May 1,
2017; Elizabeth Mann Levesque, “Improving Community
College Completion Rates by Addressing Structural and
Motivational Barriers,” Brown Center on Education Policy,
The Brookings Institution, October 8, 2018.
6. Sara Goldrick-Rab, Jed Richardson, and Anthony
Hernandez, “Hungry and Homeless in College: Results
from a National Study of Basic Needs Insecurity in Higher
Education,” Wisconsin Hope Lab and Association of
Community College Trustees, March 2017; “Student Mental
Health and Holistic Well-Being: New Approaches for a
Higher Level of Care,” Leadership Exchange 16, no. 4 (Winter
2019).
7. Katy Troester-Trate, “Breaking Down Nonacademic Barriers:
Outcomes from the First Two Years of a Community School
Approach,” Innovation 13, no. 10 (October 2018).
8. Terrell L. Strayhorn, College Students’ Sense of Belonging:
A Key to Educational Success for All Students (New York:
Routledge, 2012).
9. Strada Education Network and Gallup, “Why Higher Ed?
Top Reasons U.S. Consumers Choose Their Educational
Pathways,” January 2018; Magdalena Slapik, “The Purpose
of Education—According to Students,” The Atlantic, October
1, 2017.
10. Angel B. Pérez, “It’s Not Just about Jobs: Colleges Must
66
EDUCAUSEREVIEW
Fall 2019
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Help Students Find Their Passions,” Washington Post, March
10, 2017.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, cited in Debra Humphreys
and Anthony Carnevale, “The Economic Value of Liberal
Education,” LEAP and the Association of American College
& Universities, revised 2016 edition.
Sean R. Gallagher, “Educational Credentials Come of Age:
A Survey on the Use and Value of Educational Credentials
in Hiring,” Northeastern University Center for the Future of
Higher Education and Talent Strategy,” December 2018.
Furqan Nazeeri, “Alternative Credentials and the Fight for
Talent,” Forbes, April 9, 2019.
Gallagher, “Educational Credentials Come of Age.”
Lorenzo Esters and Devan Andrzejewski, “Five Key
Measures of Success in the First Year of College,” Strada
Education Network, August 19, 2016.
Susan Metros and Holly Morris, “iPASS: Lessons from the
Field,” EDUCAUSE, August 2018.
Amelia Parnell, Darlena Jones, Alexis Wesaw, and D.
Christopher Brooks, “Institutions’ Use of Data and Analytics
for Student Success: Results from a Landscape Analysis,”
NASPA–Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education,
the Association for Institutional Research, and EDUCAUSE,
2018.
Cecilia Earls, “Big Data Science: Establishing Data-Driven
Institutions through Advanced Analytics,” EDUCAUSE
Review, May 6, 2019.
Bridget Burns and Alex Aljets, “Using Process Mapping to
Redesign the Student Experience,” EDUCAUSE Review,
March 26, 2018.
© 2019 Kathe Pelletier. The text of this article is licensed under
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
4.0 International License.
Kathe Pelletier (kpelletier@educause.edu)
is Director of Student Success Community
Programs for EDUCAUSE.