Withdrawn Student Analysis
2004
Dr. Claire Carney
Widening Participation Service
12 Southpark Terrace
University of Glasgow
c.carney@admin.gla.ac.uk
1
Contents
Executive summary .......................................................................................................................................3
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................7
Withdrawal Questionnaire - First Phase ..................................................................................................8
Methodology Phase 1 ....................................................................................................................................8
Results Phase 1.............................................................................................................................................8
Quantitative Data ..........................................................................
Qualitative data ............................................................................
Follow-up Questionnaire - Second Phase ............................................................................................18
Methodology Phase 2 ..................................................................................................................................18
Results Phase 2...........................................................................................................................................19
Quantitative Data ...........................................................................
Qualitative Data ............................................................................
Observations and Recommendations .........................................................................................................30
References .................................................................................................................................................33
List of Tables
Table 1. Undergraduate Method of Withdrawal ............................................................................................8
Table 2. Year of Withdrawal ..........................................................................................................................9
Table 3. Reasons for Withdrawal ..................................................................................................................9
Table 4. Student Transfer Institutions .........................................................................................................10
Table 5. Who advised during the withdrawing process? ............................................................................12
Table 6. Details of ‘Other’ individuals who advised students during withdrawal process. .........................12
Table 7. Faculty Distributions of Students ..................................................................................................13
Table 8. Year 1 Withdrawn Students NS- SEC classification .....................................................................13
Table 9. Qualitative Reasons for Withdrawal from Withdrawal forms ........................................................14
Table 10. Contribution of common reasons for leaving University .............................................................20
Table 11. Contribution of other reasons for leaving University ...................................................................21
List of Figures
Figure 1 Month of Withdrawal –2003/2004 .............................................................................. 11
2
Withdrawn Student Analysis
Academic year 2003
Executive summary

The aim of the research was to analyse withdrawal forms to assess reasons for withdrawing from
university. A secondary aspect of the work was to make contact with students to further identify
factors associated with withdrawal and assess students’ perception of university role in withdrawal.

Registry are informed of a students withdrawal by a variety of written communication. The Widening
Participation Service volunteered to gather and assimilate this information.
Current means of
recording students withdrawing is via withdrawal forms, which come in a number of forms (Annex D,
Appendix 5, letters from dept, advisor memos etc) and are passed onto registry. Not only are there a
large number of communication means but information given is varied and inconsistent.

On some of the forms students are asked to state their reasons for withdrawal. Of those who gave
reasons (n=513), the majority of students cited personal (49%) and health reasons (25%) as grounds
for withdrawal followed by academic (10%), financial (9%), and employment (7%) reasons.

101 students said that they were transferring to another institution. On some forms students are
asked whether they intended to return to the University of Glasgow (UG), 329 students noted their
intention to return to the UG, 194 said they had no intention to return and 272 did not give an
intention either way. Forty-five students said they were temporarily withdrawing. Therefore, given
that 101 said they were transferring to another institution, 329 intended to return and 45 were only
temporarily withdrawn (total n=468) the majority of students are not stopping out but merely dropping
out due to return again to a HEI at some point in the future.

On some forms students are asked who advised them in the process of withdrawing, of those who
completed these forms (n= 569), 363 highlighted their advisor of studies, 141 said ‘other’, 41 said ‘noone’ and finally 24 said student counsellor/advisor.

Students gave further detail on those ‘other’ people who advised them during the withdrawal process.
Family (n=47) and Course convenor/coordinator (n=25) were mentioned most often. Family were also
mentioned alongside, GP, friends, teachers from school and other students.

When forms were analysed to account for date of withdrawal, October (n=106), November (n=145)
and January (n=119) appeared to be the months when students are most likely to withdraw.

Student matriculation numbers were entered on the student record system to generate data that was
not available on the withdrawal forms or letters. The aim of this exercise was to identify what faculty
3
students were registered. The student record system produced results for 632 students, of this
number the majority were from the arts faculty (n=188), Science (n=153) and Education (n=72).

Data was further extrapolated to identify students’ socio-economic background. However this could
only be done for first year students (n=381), as it only became a compulsory field on UCAS forms
from academic year 2003. This data was compared to benchmarking data for all year 1 UGFT
students for that same year. These data suggests that you are less likely to withdraw if you come
from NS- SEC 1 and 2 and more likely to drop out if you come from NS-SEC 4 and 6, which are
considered widening participation groups.

Many students provided qualitative reasons for withdrawing from university. These reasons were
imported to Nvivo (a qualitative analysis package) for analysis. The comments were thematically
coded under 5 headings: personal; health; financial; academic and; other.

Academic reasons mentioned by students included that they had either chosen the wrong course or
they were not enjoying the course they were on. Choosing the wrong course for many meant that the
course was not what they expected or they realised it was not going to lead them into a chosen
career. Other comments included lack of student support, inability to time manage and recurring
exam resits. No student mentioned academic failure.

Personal problems or challenges for many were reasons for withdrawal. Students mentioned family
crisis, bereavement, family illness, divorce, problems with childcare and change in circumstances as
reasons for withdrawal. Six students also mentioned pregnancy or the birth of a child as reasons. A
number of students noted having different ideas about the career they had chosen and changing
ambitions. Some students left to begin a new or different career for example, join the army, navy,
professional rugby, touring dance company for example. Others said they were unsure about the
career they had chosen and now had different ambitions and decided to withdraw to pursue these
paths. Four students cited homesickness and loneliness as reasons to withdraw.

Health reasons were divided into two groups: those who cited an intention to return and those who
did not. Those who cited no intention to return were more likely to have mentioned that they are or
have been suffering from mental health problems e.g. depression, eating disorders, stress. Some of
these students commented that university may have manifested problems i.e. they came to UG with
these problems and found they could not cope with university life. Those students citing ill health as a
reason for withdrawal but also wanting to return mentioned mainly physical conditions for example;
prolonged tonsillitis, glandular fever, car accident etc.

A small number of students mentioned financial reasons; primarily, personal debt, however a number
of these mentioned that they would like to resume study when they had sorted finances out.
4

The second phase of the research was a survey questionnaire that was posted to UK student
home addresses (n=499) mid February 2005. Questionnaires were posted and a freepost return
envelope was included to encourage response rates. A reminder letter was sent to those students
who had not responded end of February. A total of 107 completed questionnaires were received
(21% response rate). This response rate compares well with previous work completed in the area.

A survey questionnaire used by Yorke (1999) was selected for use because it’s usefulness and
validity has been previously demonstrated. The questionnaire was modified to take account of UG
specific terminology. In addition, some additional items were included. The questionnaire collected
both quantitative and qualitative data.

Students were asked whether UG met the expectations they had about university. 58% said that
UG had met their expectations, whilst 42% said it had not met their expectations.

Students were given a list of reasons and asked to rate how influential they had been in making
their decision to leave university. Students considered wrong choice of course, course not meeting
expectations, the way course was taught and not enough academic support outside of lectures
were the most influential in deciding to withdraw from university

Students were given a further list of other reasons students have given for withdrawing and asked
again how much they contributed to their decision-making. Commitment to the course, stress
related to the course and health problems were the most influential.

Students were asked to comment if they had other reasons for leaving that were not outlined on the
list, of those students who commented the majority of statements were related to the class sizes and
the associated difficulties with forming academic and social integration. Balancing part-time work,
personal commitments and study was seen as particularly difficult and students commented that they
would have appreciated increased support in managing time, access to particular support services
particularly counselling was also called for as access was particularly restrictive with long waiting
lists. Students also commented on the teaching and learning environment calling for increased
interaction during lectures and tutorials

Forty seven per cent of students said they worked whilst at university, of this number the mean hours
worked was 17 (range 7 hours min, 40 hours max). This compares with a mean score of 14 hours
worked in a previous study (Carney and McNeish 2000).

51% said they had returned to higher education, of this number 51% of the students said they are
doing the same or similar course and 49% said they were doing a different course. Sixty five per
cent of those who had not returned (49%) said they intended to return to HE. Of this number 41%
5
said they would like to do the same or similar course 41% said they would like to do a different
course and 18% said they were unsure.

Students were asked if they currently had a job. Of those who had not returned to HE, 79% had a
job compared to 58% who had returned. (In a previous study 50% of UGFT students were shown
to have part time employment, Carney and McNeish 2000). Forty nine percent of those not in HE
but who had a job said the job was career related compared to 31% in HE who had a job.

Students were asked if they received enough support from University staff during the time they
were deciding to withdraw. 51% yes they received enough, 9% were unsure and 40% said no they
did not receive enough support.

The questionnaire asked students whether they or UG could have done anything to help them
complete their course. 57% said no UG could not have done anything to more to help them
complete, 41% said yes UG could have done more and 2% said they were unsure.

Qualitative data on whether UG could have done anything to help them complete their course were
grouped into five themes: Provide individualised academic and personal support; Reduced class
sizes; Increased Flexibility (including arranging alternative exams, transferring to part-time courses
etc.); Improved Course Descriptors (in prospectus and information provided during open days etc)
and; Accommodation (location and standard).

The questionnaire asked students whether they could have done anything to help themselves
complete their course. 37% said yes, they could have done things differently to complete their
course. Students were invited to make further commentary and their responses were grouped into
three themes that reflect their responses: More committed and balanced family, work and p/t work;
Prior Course Research and; Talked to significant others or sought help.

Students were asked how they felt about their decision to leave university. Many students
considered the withdrawing from university as being one of the most difficult, traumatic, saddest
and disappointing periods of their lives. It was very humbling to read students accounts and how it
affected them at that time. The majority of students said that it was the best decision for them, it
was a positive and for many a courageous decision and many now mentioned that they were
happier in their current places of work or study. Some students had very mixed feelings, some said
it was the only option at the time because of finance or ill health however, what was different about
this group was the uncertainty they felt about their decision

Finally, students were asked what other assistance the University of Glasgow could have provided
whilst they were in the process of withdrawing. Responses were grouped into two main themes:
Contact and; practical help. The overwhelming majority suggested increased personal contact
6
during this time, it could be counselling or something similar to talk through issues to ensure that
decision making is appropriate to the individuals needs. Students also wanted practical help with
the actual process of withdrawing, some suggested providing a checklist of things that need doing
during this time.
Introduction
A large number of studies exist in the literature looking and student retention and withdrawal. In the UK,
two large quantitative ‘autopsy’ studies seeking to understand the reasons for student withdrawal from HE
were completed by Yorke (1999) and by Davies and Elias (2003). A number of key factors have been
drawn from the work and Yorke (2004) suggests that these can be summarised into four general
categories:
1. Flawed decision making about entering the programme
2. Students’ experience of the programme and the institution generally;
3. Failure to cope with the demand of the course
4. Events that impact on students lives outside the institution
In recent HESA statistics the University of Glasgow is shown to be performing at the top of the Russell
Group in terms of participation of under-represented groups in Higher Education (2001-02, 2002-03).
However, in comparison, for non-continuation following year of entry performance indicator, the University
of Glasgow has the poorest percentage of students not in Higher Education in their second year of study.
In comparison to the other West of Scotland Higher Education Institutions, our performance could be
improved. In order to influence why a student drops out of university it is important to understand the
reasons students give for withdrawal.
Current methods of recording students withdrawing is via withdrawal forms, which come in a number of
means (Annex D, Appendix 5, letters from dept, advisor memos etc) that are passed onto registry. The
WPS volunteered to gather and assimilate this information. The aim of this research work is to analyse
withdrawal forms to assess reasons for withdrawing from university, and to make contact with students to
assess students’ perception of university role in withdrawal. A second phase of the research involves
contacting this cohort of students to gain further insight into their reasons for withdrawal and how the
university can influence this process.
7
Withdrawal Questionnaire - First Phase
Methodology Phase 1
Withdrawal forms or written means of communicating students’ intention to withdraw during academic year
2003 were passed onto WPS from registry. All communication was entered onto excel and analysed.
Where information was provided in the form of an email, memo or letter, the relevant information was
extracted and recorded. For the purpose of this paper, only undergraduate students are considered.
Results Phase 1
Quantitative Data
Eight hundred and fifty seven withdrawal sets of withdrawal information for academic year 2003 was
passed to WPS from Registry. Of this number, 63 stated they were postgraduate students leaving a survey
sample of 794 students. However, it must be noted that this is more than likely an underestimate as there is
no indicator on forms to identify undergraduate or postgraduate study. Thirty-eight had no matriculation
number attached. Registry are informed of a students intention to withdraw or retrospectively by a variety of
written communication. See Table 1. Not only are there a large number of communication means but,
information given is also varied and inconsistent.
Table 1. Undergraduate Method of Withdrawal
Method of Withdrawal
Total
Method of Withdrawal
Total
Registry
407 Webform
7
Email
110 Faculty Memo
6
Letter
90 Faculty e-mail
4
Annex D
41 Faculty letter
3
GSA
26 Dept letter
3
Memo
19 Adviser Letter
2
Dept e-mail
18 Doctors Letter
2
DACE memo
12 e-mail: Crichton
2
Adviser e-mail
11 Crichton e-mail
1
Other
11 Crichton fax
1
Appendix 5
9 U 1 Staff Handbook
1
8
9 Grand Total
Dept memo
794
A small number of forms (n=72) provided information on the current year of withdrawing student. The
majority of these were in Year 1 and 2 (n=54).
Table 2. Year of Withdrawal
Year
Total
Year
Total
Year 1
32
Year 4
7
Year 2
22
Year 5
2
Year 3
8
Year 6
1
Grand Total
72
On some of the forms students are asked to state their reasons for withdrawal. Reasons given include:
personal; health; academic; employment and; financial. Students can choose one or all of the boxes. Of
those who gave reasons (n=513), the majority of students cited personal (n=49%) and health reasons
(25%) as grounds for withdrawal. Only 10% mentioned academic reasons. Further information regarding
reasons for withdrawal can be seen in the qualitative section.
Table 3. Reasons for Withdrawal
Reasons for withdrawal
Count
% (of total n=513)
Personal
253
49%
Health
126
25%
Academic
50
10%
Financial
46
9%
Employment
38
7%
101 students said that they were transferring to another institution. 93 indicated the HEI they were
transferring to, of this number, 9 were transferring to Glasgow College, 8 to Stirling University and 6 each
to Aberdeen and Strathclyde. Further investigation of the data showed that where students were
transferring to a college or university outside of Glasgow, it was likely that the student was from that area
or region. 14 students transferred within GU.
9
Table 4. Student Transfer Institutions
Higher Education Institution
Total Higher Education Institution
Total
Glasgow College
9 Liverpool University
1
Stirling University
8 London School of Economics
1
Aberdeen University
6 Moray House Edinburgh
1
Strathclyde University
Norges Teknisk Naturvitenskadelige
6 Universitet
1
Edinburgh University
5 North Glasgow College
1
Glasgow Caledonian University
5 Open University
1
Dundee University
4 Paisley University
1
Queens University Belfast
3 Reid Kerr
1
Cardonald College
2 Rhode Island School of Design, USA
1
GSA
2 SAC
1
RSAMD
2 Somewhere nearer home
1
Manchester University
2 South Lanarkshire College
1
SAE Technological Institute
2 St Andrews University
1
Appending
1 St Georges Hospital Medical School
1
Applying through UCAS
1 Stow College
1
Brighton University
1 Sydney Uni University
1
Brunel University
1 University of Birmingham
1
Budai Daigaku, Katsuura, Chiba Pree, Japan
1 University of Greenwich
1
CBA – Glasgow
1 University of Lancaster
1
Cumbria Institute of the Arts
1 University of Warwick
1
Durham/Newcastle/St Andrews
1 University of Western Australia
1
Greenwich University
1 USA College
1
Heriot-Watt University
1 Unkown
1
10
Lancaster University
1 Not sure yet
3
Grand Total
93
On some forms students are asked whether they intended to return to the university, 329 students noted
their intention to return to GU, 194 said they had no intention to return and 272 did not give an intention
either way (probably because it was not on the form). Forty-five students said they were temporarily
withdrawing. Therefore, given that 101 said they were transferring to another institution, 329 intended to
return and 45 were only temporarily withdrawn (total n=468) the majority of students are not stopping out
but merely dropping out to return again at some point in the future.
When forms were analysed to account for date of withdrawal, October (n=106), November (n=145) and
January (n=119) appeared to be the months when students are most likely to withdraw.
Figure 1. Month of Withdrawal –2003/2004
160
145
140
119
120
106
93
100
Count
84
80
65
62
60
43
42
40
16
20
4
3
Se
ug
us
t
A
Ju
ly
Ju
ne
ay
M
pr
il
A
O
pt
em
be
r
ct
ob
N
ov er
em
b
D
ec er
em
be
r
Ja
nu
ar
y
Fe
br
ua
ry
M
ar
ch
0
Month
On some forms students are asked who advised them in the process of withdrawing, of those who
completed these forms (n= 569), 363 highlighted their advisor of studies, 141 said ‘other’, 41 said ‘no-one’
and, finally 24 said student counsellor/advisor. See Table 5.
11
Table 5. Who advised during the withdrawing process?
Advisor
Count
Adviser
363
64%
Other
141
25%
No-one
41
7%
Student Counsellor- Adviser
24
4%
Total
569
Students gave further detail on those ‘other’ people who advised them during the withdrawal process.
Family (n=47) and Course convenor/coordinator (n=25) were mentioned most often. Family were also
mentioned alongside, GP, friends, teachers from school and other students. See Table 6. It must be noted
that the majority of students used other sources in conjunction with advisers and student counsellor,
however, 63 students used these ‘other’ sources in isolation. Students obviously rely on a large number of
support networks and perhaps this should be reflected in the withdrawal form to provide a more
comprehensive view of these mechanisms.
Table 6. Details of ‘Other’ individuals who advised students during withdrawal process.
Other
Total
Other
Total
Family
47
Department Staff, Mother, Registry,
Faculty Office
1
Course Convenor/Coordinator
25
Family And Other Students On Course
1
Family And Friends
14
Family, Accommodation Warden
1
GP
8
Family, Students, GP
1
Department Staff Member
6
Family, Wardens In Halls Of Residence
1
5
Foster Parents, Parents, Social Workers,
Doctor
1
Course Tutor
4
Graduate Adviser For PG Education
Studies
1
Family And GP
4
Hall Warden
1
Careers Service
12
Family, Friends, And Teacher From
School
4
International Student Advisor
1
Student Health Service
4
Peer Mentor For The Past Ten Years
1
Family, Friends, People Already In My
Position
3
Registry
1
Family And Past School Teacher
2
Strathclyde Police Department
1
Admissions Officer Of Law Faculty
1
Counsellor
1
Careers Adviser, Parents
1
Grand Total
141
Student matric numbers were entered on the student Record system to generate data that was not
available on the withdrawal forms or letters. The student record system produced results for 632 students,
of this number the majority were from the arts faculty (n=188), Science (n=153) and Education (n=72).
Table 7. Faculty Distributions of Students
Faculty
Total
Arts
188
Law
37
Science
153
Medicine
21
Education
72
Crichton
20
Social Science
69
Veterinary
3
Engineering
67
C DACE
2
Grand Total
632
Data was further extrapolated to identify students’ socio-economic background. However this could only
be done for first year students (n=381), as it only became a compulsory field on UCAS forms from
academic year 2003. This data was compared to benchmarking data for all year 1 UGFT
students for that same year. See Table 8.
Table 8. Year 1 Withdrawn Students NS- SEC classification
NS-SEC Major groups
Withdrawn group % 2003 Yr 1 UGFT (%)
1. Higher managerial and professional occupations 23% =
23%
13
2. Lower managerial and professional occupations
24.3% -
27%
3. Intermediate occupations
10.3%-
11%
4. Small employers and own account workers
7%+
5%
5. Lower supervisory and technical workers
3.4%
3%
6. Semi-routine occupations
12%+
9%
7. Routine occupations
2%=
2%
9. Not Classified
18%
16%
These data suggests that you are less likely to withdraw if you come from NS- SEC 1 and 2 and more
likely to drop out if you come from NS-SEC 4 and 6, which are considered widening participation groups.
Qualitative data
Many students provided qualitative reasons for withdrawing from university.
These reasons were
imported to Nvivo (a qualitative analysis package) for analysis. The comments were thematically coded
under 5 headings: personal; health; financial; academic and; other. Each theme was further categorised
into sub- themes please see table 6.
Table 9. Qualitative Reasons for Withdrawal from Withdrawal forms
Theme
Sub-theme
Count
Academic
Wrong Course
35
Not enjoying Course
22
Other Academic
12
Personal problems
39
Personal problems and return
8
Changed ambition
15
Homesick / lonely
5
Ill health
20
Ill health and return
14
Personal
Health
69
67
34
14
Financial
Other
Debt
5
Debt and return
5
Intend to return
18
Transfer / repeat
32
Other
11
10
61
Academic reasons
When giving reasons for withdrawing from GU, many students commented that they had either chosen
the wrong course (n=35) or were not enjoying the course they were on (n=22). Choosing the wrong
course for many meant that the course was not what they expected or they realised it was not going to
lead them into a chosen career. For many they noted that they intended to do another course next
academic year either at GU or another HEI.
dissatisfaction with the course - namely lack of interest in the subject matter
Many students commented that they did not enjoy the course they had chosen and did not make any
further comment or reasoning. Other comments included lack of students support, inability to time
manage for assignments, recurring resits and course applied for being unavailable. No student
mentioned academic failure.
difficulty with course material, academic team unhelpful in overcoming these difficulties. Not
interested in any other course offered by GU
I applied for physics and music, but when I arrived I was told the course was no longer available
Personal reasons
Personal problems or challenges for many were reasons for withdrawal (n=39). Students mentioned
family crisis, bereavement, family illness, divorce, problems with childcare and change in circumstances
as reasons for withdrawal. Six students also mentioned pregnancy or the birth of a child as reasons.
I had just started late - then my daughter needed support and was off school for 2weeks. I had to
be at home and decided I had missed too much
15
Many students mentioning personal problems also mentioned wanting to return to university at a later
date when circumstances had changed (n=8), however, it is unreasonable to suggest that this latter
group are more likely to return to university than the former
I want to complete my degree, but for various personal reasons I wish to take a year out, before
undertaking 3rd year
A number of students noted having different ideas about the career they had chosen and changing
ambitions (n=15). Some students left to join the army, navy, professional rugby, touring dance company.
Others said they were unsure about the career they had chosen and now had different ambitions and
decided to withdraw to pursue these paths.
I am considering a career in nursing and would like a year-out to work and make a decision
Four students cited homesickness and loneliness as reasons to withdraw.
Unhappy because has not settled or made new friends - wants to start Open Uni course next
year
As I am from Aberdeen, I was missing home too much
Health reasons
Health reasons like personal reasons were divided into two groups: those who cited an intention to return
(n=14) and; those who did not (n=20). Those who cited no intention to return were more likely to have
mentioned that they are or have been suffering from mental health problems e.g. depression (in one
case diagnosis of manic depression), eating disorders and stress. Some of these students commented
that university may have manifested problems i.e. they came to GU with these problems and found they
could not cope with university life.
I am being treated for depression by medication and have been referred to a psychologist
suffered from eating disorders for many years and uni stress made it worse
Those students citing ill health as a reason for withdrawal but also wanting to return mentioned mainly
physical conditions for example; prolonged tonsillitis, glandular fever, car accident etc. All conditions for
which they needed recovery time before resuming university career.
want to recover from surgery and start again to give it my all
involved in serious car accident and anable to attend, intends to return as soon as health returns
16
Financial reasons
Ten students mentioned personal debt as reasons for withdrawal, however 5 of these mentioned that
they would like to resume study when they had sorted finances out. Students mentioned debt being
accrued from travelling, one had been evicted and been unable to pay tuition fees, and others just
mentioned ‘financial difficulty’ which they hoped to resolve by finding employment.
withdrew due to being evicted by landlord and unable to pay tuition fees
accumulated large debts from travelling last year and I an unable to give the course my full
attention while working to pay off my debts
Other reasons
Many students simply stated on forms that they intended to return at a given date without further
reasoning, they mentioned a year out, gap year etc (n=18). One student mentioned that they were only
17 and would benefit from year out. It is impossible to surmise whether these students have personal,
health, and financial or academic reasons for withdrawal or whether they just ‘want time out’. However, it
is important to state that this is a positive finding that a student wants to return to education and has not
been put off Higher Education.
Transferring to another course or institution was cited as a reason for withdrawal as was the anticipation
to return at a later date to repeat year (n=32). No other reasons are given for potential transfer or
repeating and like above it is impossible to surmise further reasoning.
changing course next year and does not wish to complete first year of course currently on
transferral to diagnostic radiotherapy in London
Eleven students provided distinctive reasons for withdrawal. These include emigrating to Canada,
moving to America with husband, not liking city of Glasgow and not feeling that university was the right
thing for them.
I don't like university/student life
returning to USA with husband who was offered job there
It is difficult to look at these reasons in isolation as it is quite reasonable to suggest that they are all
interlinked and many factors coincide to lead a student to withdraw from university
17
Follow-up Questionnaire - Second Phase
Aim: To follow-up student cohort who had withdrawn from the university in the previous academic year
2003/2004, to gain further understanding of reasons for withdrawal and how the university can influence
this process.
Methodology Phase 2
A survey questionnaire used by Yorke (1999) was selected for use because it’s usefulness and validity
has been previously demonstrated. The questionnaire was modified to take account of UG specific
terminology. In addition, some additional items were included. The questionnaire collected both
quantitative and qualitative data. All data were entered onto excel initially. The qualitative data was
exported into Nvivo (qualitative data management software) and the quantitative data was analysed
using Minitab. The questionnaire was posted to UK student home addresses (n=499) mid February
2005. Home addresses were extracted from the Student Record System for those students who
provided matriculation numbers. Questionnaires were posted and a freepost return envelope was
included to encourage response rates. A reminder letter was sent to those students who had not
responded end of February.
The questionnaire recorded information about the following variables:

Did the University of Glasgow meet expectations;

Contribution of influence of a list of common reasons students give for leaving university;

Have they returned to or do they intend to return to HE;

Have they got a job, is it full, part-time and career related;

Was there anything the University of Glasgow could have done to help them complete their
course;

Is there anything they could have done differently to help themselves complete their course;

How they felt about their decision to leave University;

Do they think they received enough support from University staff during the time they were
deciding to withdraw and;

What other assistance could the University of Glasgow have provided whilst they were in the
process of withdrawing?
18
Results Phase 2
Quantitative Data
Of the 499 questionnaires sent out, 9 were returned unopened with Royal Mail stamp indicating either
addressee unknown or addressee moved out. A number of students (n=15) returned questionnaires or
emailed saying that they are either having a year out (n=5), had returned to university (n=9) and one
responded saying that she was too ill to complete the questionnaire. In the end, a total of 107 completed
questionnaires were received (21% response rate). This response rate compares well with previous work
completed in the area.
Student expectations and withdrawal
Students were asked whether the University of Glasgow met the expectations they had about university.
58% said that GU had met their expectations, whilst 42% said it had not met their expectations.
55 students commented on their expectations of GU. On the whole students expressed opinions about
their courses (uninspiring course, course content not as expected) lecturing staff (unhelpful, hard to find),
student support (lack of particularly for mature students) and the social atmosphere (hard to make
friends). Equally a large number of students were positive about their expectations and experience of GU
and said that GU had met all their expectations.
I applied to do sport science but ended up studying 'pure' science (chemistry, biology &physics)
due to the course structure. Therefore felt there was no course identity or no peer group identity.
Unfriendly, clique, isolated, fixed in it's attitudes
The university in general did (meet expectations),I felt welcome however the course structure
was poor, no guidance etc causing my withdrawal. The course wasn't made appealing
I enjoyed my first year very much although the subject I was studying failed to interest me (a
wrong decision on my part) I don't believe I would have had as good an experience at another
university
Found staff and lecturers very considerate and helpful through course and in particular my
decision to withdraw
Withdrawal from University: Why students leave
Students were given a list of reasons and asked to rate how influential (scale 1-4, 1 no influence, 2 a little
influence, 3 moderate influence and, 4 considerable influence) they had been in making their decision to leave
university. See Table 10. It can be seen from the table that students who participated in the study
considered wrong choice of course, course not meeting expectations, the way course was taught and
19
not enough academic support outside of lectures were the most influential in deciding to withdraw from
university. This is interesting as it is similar to qualitative reasoning on original withdrawal forms.
However, on original forms the quantitative data suggested that health and personal reasons were
dominant
Table 10. Contribution of common reasons for leaving University
Mean
1
2
3
4
2.4
41% 10%
14%
35%
The course didn’t meet my expectations.
2.1
40% 23%
16%
21%
The way the course was taught didn’t suit me.
2
51% 16%
11%
22%
There wasn’t enough academic support outside of
2
47% 27%
8%
18%
The classes were too large.
1.8
63% 15%
7%
15%
I had trouble balancing work and study.
1.7
66% 10%
8%
16%
The course seemed irrelevant to my chosen career.
1.6
67% 16%
6%
11%
The timetable didn’t suit me/my needs.
1.6
70% 10%
8%
12%
The workload was too heavy.
1.6
68% 13%
12%
7%
I got behind in assignments
1.6
66% 14%
11%
9%
The lecturers were not approachable.
1.6
67% 13%
10%
9%
The course was too difficult.
1.5
72% 13%
9%
6%
The overall quality of the course was poor.
1.5
66% 16%
12%
6%
The course wasn’t organised properly.
1.5
72% 12%
8%
8%
A better opportunity came along
1.5
78% 5%
4%
13%
I didn’t attend the lectures
1.4
74% 14%
9%
4%
score
I realised that I had chosen the wrong course of
study.
lectures and tutorials.
(1 no influence 2 a little influence 3 moderate influence 4 considerable influence)
20
Students were then given a further list of other reasons students have given for withdrawing and asked
again how much they contributed to their decision making. Commitment to the course, stress related to
the course and health problems were the most influential.
Table 11. Contribution of other reasons for leaving University
Mean
1
2
3
4
score
I wasn’t committed to the course.
2.1
41%
22%
16%
21%
I experienced stress related to the course.
2.1
48%
16%
13%
23%
I had a health problem(s).
2
60%
6%
6%
28%
I felt I was making insufficient academic progress.
1.9
48%
22%
18%
12%
I wanted to take a break from education.
1.8
63%
9%
12%
16%
I felt a lack of personal support from other students.
1.8
62%
11%
10%
17%
I didn’t have the right kind of study skills.
1.5
66%
20%
8%
6%
I had financial difficulties.
1.6
69%
9%
9%
13%
I found it difficult to make friends.
1.6
68%
12%
8%
12%
I don’t like the social atmosphere of the University of
1.6
69%
11%
10%
9%
1.4
78%
8%
7%
7%
The commute was too long/expensive.
1.4
74%
11%
9%
6%
The needs of people who depend on me took priority.
1.3
83%
5%
4%
8%
Glasgow.
I felt a lack of personal support from friends, family,
partner, etc.
21
My job placed too many demands on me.
1.3
84%
6%
6%
4%
I had accommodation problems.
1.3
81%
8%
4%
7%
I was homesick.
1.3
82%
7%
7%
4%
I didn’t like Glasgow city.
1.2
87%
4%
4%
5%
I was afraid of being a victim of a crime.
1
95%
3%
1%
1%
I had a problem with alcohol/drugs.
1
96%
4%
*1 no influence 2 a little influence 3 moderate influence 4 considerable influence
Forty seven per cent of students said they worked whilst at university of this number the mean hours
worked was 17 (range 7 hours min, 40 hours max). This compares with a mean score of 14 hours
worked in a previous study (Carney and McNeish 2000).
Students were asked if they had other reasons for leaving, of those students who commented the
majority of statements were related to the class sizes and the associated difficulties with forming
academic and social integration. Balancing part-time work, personal commitments and study was seen
as particularly difficult and students commented that they would have appreciated increased support in
managing time, access to particular support services particularly counselling was also called for as
access was particularly restrictive with long waiting lists. Students also commented on the teaching and
learning environment calling for increased interaction during lectures and tutorials
It is a shame because I feel that if the course was structured and taught differently I would have stayed
I tried to seek counselling for depression but was told that I'd have to wait 3 weeks - I needed it then, as I
was desperate. My halls of residence (Wolfson) was too far away so were very isolating. They were also
in a very rough area which was dangerous and stopped me from doing activities when it go dark
I took on too great a workload between employment, study and caring for my gran
The only main factor in my decision to leave the university was the amount of people in the class. The
course had far too many students enrolled in it and many students have had to leave or choose another
course of study due to the excessive numbers.
Students were asked if they received enough support from University staff during the time they were
deciding to withdraw. 51% yes they received enough 9% were unsure and 40% said no they did not
receive enough support.
Where are they now? Where do they want to be?
51% said they had returned to higher education and of those who had not returned 65% said they
intended to return to HE. Of this number 41% said they would like to do the same or similar course 41%
said they would like to do a different course and 18% said they were unsure. Fifty one per cent of the
22
students who had returned to university said they are doing the same or similar course and 49% said
they were doing a different course.
Students were asked if they currently had a job. Of those who did not return to HE, 79% had a job
compared to 58% who had returned. Forty nine percent of those not in HE but who had a job said the job
was career related compared to 31% in HE who had a job.
Qualitative Data
It must be noted at this point that of all the student surveys completed by the author, this particular
project was notable for the amount of qualitative information offered by respondents. Nearly al students
provided anecdotal information and equally nearly all commented on every opportunity.
Students’ comments about what would have helped them complete their course
Is there anything the university of Glasgow could have done differently to help you complete your
course?
In order to gain further insight into the withdrawal process, the questionnaire asked students whether
they or GU could have done anything to help them complete their course. 57% said no, GU could have
done nothing to influence them, 41% said yes GU could have done more and 2% said they were unsure.
Students were invited to make further commentary. Their responses were grouped into five themes that
reflect their responses. The five themes are set out below in order of priority.
1. Provide individualised academic and personal support
Students commented equally on the need for increased academic and personal support. Comments
were made regarding lack of contact, empathy and general support from lecturing staff. Students
also suggested that further explanation on coursework, assessment and course expectations would
have been helpful.
I felt that apart from the initial contact with ***I had no contact with anyone who would have been
able to help me. I am in the 'fortunate'? Position that it doesn't matter whether I have a degree or
not, but for some young people the lack of support was a big issue. None of us wanted to be
molly-coddled and the academic staff are very busy, surely someone could be appointed to deal
with student difficulties
there could have been more support from the teaching staff. I felt as if I was unable to talk to
anyone. The lecturers seemed unapproachable
The lecturers could have been more sportive and shown more interest in me as a person
There could have been more support from the teaching staff. I felt as if I was unable to talk to
anyone. The lecturers seemed unapproachable
23
More general support was also regarded as an area that the university could improve. Specifically,
closer student contact providing support, advice and encouragement. This was seen as particularly
important during the withdrawal decision time. Students suggested an intervention mechanism to
question decision, offer alternatives and generally support students during this time. Lack of support
for mature students was also noted.
There should have been closer student counsellor contact. I just felt so alone! I knew a lot of
people who feel the same way about GU. Counsellors should monitor your progress - there
should be more assignments to complete by a certain date.
Questioned my decision instead of simply requesting matriculation card back via a letter, then
sending me a questionnaire about my decisions close to a year later
More support for mature students and more classes arranged around times to suit those at work
2. Reduced class sizes
Reducing class sizes was suggested as a way UG could help students complete their courses
as they were reported being unfavourable to learning and forming social relationships.
Made class sizes a little smaller
The whole atmosphere at Glasgow is wrong. Freshers week is geared to people living in halls
and I didn't meet anyone. The class I was in was too big and it is impossible to meet anyone.
There should be smaller class bases
The classes should have been smaller to make forming close friendships easier.
3. Increased Flexibility
Students suggested that increased flexibility including arranging alternative exams, transferring to
part-time courses etc would have aided students in completing their courses.
Allowing to complete my final year part time over 2 years would have been the only way I could
have not withdrawn, but I was told this was not possible due to the course structure
allowed modules to be taken with a single honours degree from other dept's, allowed students
with a levels to skip preliminary year
The department could have arranged alternative exams later in the year for those with medical
problems instead of having to repeat the year
4. Improved Course Descriptors
Course descriptors and explanations of course content were commented on and perceived as an
area that could be improved. In many instances it contributed to wrong course choice.
24
Put a better description of the course structure and course content in the prospectus
Allow students to study their chosen subject to an extent in their first year, for example I applied
to do neuroscience but would not have been able to study any modules relevant to this topic until
2nd year at the earliest.
I feel the content of the course could have been explained in more detail.
5. Accommodation
Accommodation was seen as an important factor in contributing to withdrawal and one, which the
university could do something about. Wolfson halls was noted as being too far away for first year
students adding to increased lonliness and lack of self confidence in early days about travelling to
and from university. Students also called for increased standards in type of accommodation offered
and increased flexibility in being able to change accommodation if necessary
Ensure telephone and Internet access in all student accommodation (meaning in every separate
room)
more comfortable, decent and clean accommodation
I found it difficult to settle in and felt the accommodation was too far from the university
Nicer accommodation in first year
Is there anything you could have done differently to help you complete your course?
The questionnaire then asked students whether they could have done anything to help themselves
complete their course. 63% said no they could have done nothing more and 37% said yes they could
have done things differently to complete their course. As above students were invited to make further
commentary. Their responses were grouped into three themes that reflect their responses. The three
themes are set out below in order of priority.
1. More committed/balancing family and academic work and p/t work
Many students on the whole felt that they could have been more focussed and committed to the
course, however this was seen as difficult as many said they did not enjoy the course. Many also
mentioned that they should have prioritised academic work and balanced home, university and parttime work lives. Some commented on perhaps taking a gap year from studying which may have
eased pressure at that time.
I could have been more committed
I should have taken a year out and taken on FT HE when I was able to commit fully
25
Although I worked hard during my time at the university of Glasgow, I feel that I perhaps spent
too much time on my extra subjects (I.e. chemistry) which I found more difficulty with and could
have done much better in my subject area had I not had such a heavy timetable due to chemistry
I spoke to the accom. Officer, my personal tutor and a welfare officer, my seminar tutor and
family and friends but I felt quite ignored by the university. It was almost as if it was quite
expected that and normal that people would leave and that this fact was accepted and OK. I was
never encouraged to stay in fact the welfare officer told me I would probably be best leaving.
When I asked if she had any advice that might help me stay she was very vague and noncommittal
2. Prior Course Research
Students commented that if they had spent more time researching the course for which they applied
to and looked at possible employment areas they perhaps would have made better course choices.
Researching accommodation was also mentioned.
Researched accom. More thoroughly, researched course, ignored others and concentrated on
succeeding
If I had checked the course and course content I would have discovered the course at GU would
not be suitable for me
Thought about why I was doing the course and how I was going to use it in a future career. Not
relied on friends I already knew from school
3. Talk to significant others/sought help
Sought help from friends, university support services or lecturers may have helped some students
stay on their course, and indeed for some to have sought this help a lot earlier would have been
beneficial. Some students commented on not knowing who to turn to for advice during this time.
Perhaps if I had made my family and close friends aware of how I was feeling a lot sooner they
could have provided me with the support and advice I obviously required. In fairness to UG - I
never made anyone there aware of my problems either, simply didn't know who to turn to.
Sought counselling, medication, support, different accommodation
Discussed lack of self confidence with lecturers before making decision to leave
It must be noted that for many students they felt they could have done little more as they did not
regret their decision and for many they perceived it as being the best decision for them.
26
Study harder perhaps? I'm glad I didn't complete my course! Leaving GU was the best and
bravest decision I'd ever made. I could have plodded on and tried to pass my exams but I knew I
wasn't happy there. I just didn't have the motivation to work as hard as I should have cos I didn't
know what I was going to do after Uni.
It was the right decision to make as I'm secure financially, emotionally and physically now
Impact of Decision to withdraw
How do you feel about your decision to leave University?
Commentary regarding how withdrawn students felt about their decision to leave university were
grouped into three main outcomes: happy; sadness; mixed feelings.
1. Happy
The majority of students said that it was the best decision for them, it was a positive and for many a
courageous decision and many now mentioned that they were happier in their current places of work
or study. One student who is now at Strathcldyde attempted to explain the reason for her
unhappiness at UG and unwittingly offers examples of good practice within the retention literature
including increased academic contact.
I am glad I had the courage to leave and feel that the decision was best. I am enjoying a new track
and feel that I will achieve a lot more in life having chosen something that I will enjoy more
It is so much better at Strathclyde. I'm so glad I left. My class is a lot smaller (120) so there is a nice
friendly class atmosphere and you don't feel so scared and alone like you do at GU. It was quite hard
to get to know people at GU because the classes were so big and you never seemed to see the
same people twice! I know a few people who go to GU and they all seem to have the same problem
there. I feel well supported at Strathclyde- both from friends in my class and from staff. I don't know
why but the lectures/counsellors at Strathclyde are a lot more approachable than at GU. They send
you regular emails and make sure you are keeping up with the workload. There are more
assignments and wee class tests and online quizzes that you have to complete by a certain deadline
2. Sad
Many students considered the withdrawing from university as being one of the most difficult,
traumatic, saddest and disappointing periods of their lives. It was very humbling to read students
accounts and how it affected them at that time.
Very disappointed. I still feel that had myself and others done things differently I could perhaps still
be a Glasgow university student. It is upsetting that what should be some of the best years of your
life could turn into the most miserable.
27
I was absolutely hesitant and distraught. I really didn't want to leave and felt I'd let myself and my
career down - it was the worst decision I ever made
Very sad. Had worked hard to summer school and was wanting to make big change in my life, for me
and my family's future
3. Mixed
Some students had very mixed feelings, some said it was the only option at the time because of
finance or ill health however, what was different about this group was the uncertainty they felt about
their decision
Very mixed feelings decision was borne of financial necessity. Enjoyed the course very much,
especially interaction between myself, other students and academic staff
I felt very uneasy about leaving the university as it gave me an enjoyable experience but I also felt
rewarded in that I have managed to transfer to the University of Paisley and would be able to
continue my studies. I also felt very sad to be leaving my friends and to be leaving such an
established well-organised university
Other assistance that University of Glasgow could have provided
One important question asked of withdrawn students is what other assistance the University of Glasgow
could have provided whilst they were in the process of withdrawing. Responses were grouped into two
main themes, contact and practical help.
1. Contact
The overwhelming majority suggested increased personal contact during this time, it could be
counselling or something similar to talk through issues to ensure that decision making is
appropriate to the individuals needs. Students talked about wanting help to resolve issues that
were underpinning decision making. Students suggested that they would have appreciated this
time and that perhaps withdrawal may not always inevitable and indeed if it is, to ensure that the
student has the knowledge of choices open to them. A number of students noted that the
questionnaire was the first or only contact they had regarding their withdrawal from the university
A phone call to see if I was coping or even an email would have been something but once
I left I had no further contact, it was as if they wanted me out ASAP and no other help was
given. It was a difficult decision to leave and this should have been understood, they
could have treated me as a person and not a statistic.
28
I would like to have had the opportunity to sit down with somebody and discuss the whole
situation. Working too many hours, studying too many subjects, wrong course, financial
situation, find out if there was other people my age, low grades
Felt process all clinical one phone call & told to write letter and then nothing one big void.
Phone or fax contact from someone independent of course
They possibly could have provided alternatives. I would have been grateful for any advice
as to what I could do to change my course or to improve it or even to help with changing
university. I really had no process of withdrawing. I literally walked into an office, filled in a
form and walked out. I would have been very grateful for a member of staff's advice
Circumstances of leaving should be asked for and counsellors appointed to contact
students before final decision is made. It was a gut decision for me and my family.
Possibility I might have battled on to finish my second year with some support over phone
or face-to-face contact.
My final point would be that I dropped out of University nearly one year ago, I am now
back. It has taken until now to receive your letter, it has brought back memories I did not
want to have to think about again. I think this process has been a very selfish one on your
part and although I admire your idea, this should be something done at the time of
withdrawal as a standard part of the process – not something one year on when I’m trying
to get my life back together.
In relation to this need for increased contact many students had indifferent experiences with
advisors of studies and one student gave a suggestion that summarised many other comments
My suggestion is this : Advisers should have a comprehensive file of their students, i.e.
home situation, travelling expenses, employment, loan status, fees!!!! Status and many
more that I’m sure individuals such as the intelligent staff at the university could think of.
(You would of course give the students the choice to give this information, I myself would
not, as my faith in Glasgow University has been shattered). This information would give
advisers something to work from and the chance to ask more questions. Also, for some, it
may be beneficial for more contact with their advisers, emails every so often for example.
Take it from me, this does not happen.
2. Practical Help
Students wanted practical help with the actual process of withdrawing, some suggested providing
a checklist of things that need doing during this time. Others wanted information on general
29
aspects of student administration i.e. finance, SAAS etc. Some students noted that it was a very
stressful and drawn out experience. What seems to be coming out of students comments is that
once a student has made a decision with advice and support and withdrawal is considered the
best option for the student then the process should be as straightforward as possible. This is not
to make the withdrawal easier but a more rounded ‘closing the loop’ level of service that should
be offered to students at this stage of their student life cycle.
Information on how to reapply (info about what to do with bank accounts contacting
SAAS, tax, work)
Possibly design a check-list of things that need doing and forms that need filling out so
that once a withdrawing student has done them they can check it off
the whole withdrawal process was horrible, I was told that I had to return my papers within
24hrs, so as not to lose the Uni money by having to return my fees to SAAS. As
previously stated it was made clear that HL had taken a 'personal interest' in me adhering
to this timescale despite her not being my advisor. I felt rushed, under pressure and very
angry which did not help my mental state of mind. If a bit of understanding had been
shown to me I might have been graduating this summer
I found withdrawing a very convoluted and stressful experience because of the medical
reasons. I had to pursue letters from doctors and find someone from my department to
maintain contact with my doctor and the SAAS. Considering the fact I had trouble seeing
and was recovering from an eye operation, the stress involved in arranging to repeat the
year was unnecessary and could have been avoided if the university was more organised.
Finally, some students commented that return to university after withdrawal was a problematic
time again due to administration issues and lack of support.
The return to university proved almost impossible. Surely there must be an easier manner
in which to return to uni! The same! There is enough support fro those withdrawing just.
There is nowhere near enough support for those returning.
Observations and Recommendations

It was observed from the data that first year students are more likely to withdraw if they come
from NS-SEC groups 4 and 6, which are considered widening participation groups. Induction
and on course support is fundamental to this group to ease transition and enhance retention.
This may be consumed within a larger targeted support culture that addresses: academic;
social; personal; geographic and; administrative challenges faced by all students entering
higher education.
30

When students withdraw to a university some distance away e.g. they usually live within that
area.

Average number of hours worked was 17, this compares to 14 from previous work. The
student experience questionnaire will allow the university to track such information.

Forms: Registry are informed of students withdrawals in a number of ways and information
supplied is patchy and inconsistent. A standardised form with a number of compulsory items
should be considered to allow easier analysis of data and subsequent changing trends in
withdrawal.

Reasons for withdrawal: Most students commented on the follow-up questionnaire that the
main reason for withdrawal was wrong course choice or course not meeting expectations. Both
of these are recognised within the student experience literature and are best addressed at preentry level through prospectus information and departmental open days being accurate, up to
date and, reflective of prospective careers.

Students also cited personal and health reasons in the original withdrawal forms as reasons for
withdrawal. It is known from previous student survey work (Carney and McNeish 2001) that
when the current state of students’ health was compared to the sex and age related norms for
the general population, it showed that except for physical functioning, the other seven areas of
health (Role limitation due to physical problems, Role limitation due to emotional problems,
Social functioning, Mental health, Energy/vitality, Pain, General health Perception), were
significantly poorer than that of the general population. This has implications for future survey
work because if we want to influence the dropout rate we need to gain student feedback on the
student experience and the challenges they face. This in turn will provide feedback for support
services on where resources or efforts would be best placed in the targeting of interventions.

On course support: Lack of academic and personal support were clearly and proficiently
vocalised by withdrawn students. However, it was apparent from the questionnaires that there
were also elements of good practice from particular individuals within departments, the
challenge is to make this support more consistent across the institution. This is best dealt with
through the vision of a retention strategy that deals with and addresses the many integrated
influences that students face and how best to deal with them. The aim of the retention strategy
would in effect be to enhance the student experience and reduce withdrawal rates. Many of the
student suggestions about reasons for withdrawal should be considered, for example,
i. Students want someone to talk to about their issues, challenges and ultimate
decision making, they want it quick and they do not want run around – service
31
model. They may not necessarily need counselling but they need a listening ear.
Advisors currently have responsibility for this, however it must be noted from the
qualitative data that whilst this provision is in some cases excellent it is not
consistent across all departments.
ii. Students also want to know that ‘someone cares’, this came about in many forms
particularly with regard to absence management. Glasgow Caledonian has a very
successful retention project where all students complete an at risk profile at the
beginning of academic year and an associated ‘traffic light’ system where
attendance is closely monitored and students are contacted to let them know of
progress.
(http://www.napier.ac.uk/qes/studentretentionproject/Documents/SRHEpaper.pdf)
iii. Look at first year learning –large classes sizes repeatedly arise in student surveys
the problem seems to be minimised if the student has a small tutorial group. The
Peer Assisted Learning scheme addresses these issues and is being rolled out in
a number of departments.
iv. October, November and January are the months when students are most likely to
withdraw. Therefore, perhaps support service campaigns or interventions aimed at
reducing dropout or highlighting awareness of issues are best programmed for this
period.
v. Some students will always drop out – this is inevitable, many say it was the best
thing they did, this is natural wastage, and for these students the process needs to
be as straightforward as possible.
vi. The majority of students are not stopping out but merely dropping out due to return
again to a HEI at some point in the future. Therefore, for those returning students
support mechanisms are necessary to ensure that previous issues have been
recognised and managed.
Finally, reducing drop-out will very much depend on treating the underlying causes rather than the
“disease”. It is ineffective to address one aspect of retention for example, poor attendance or financial
worries, whilst ignoring the underlying reasons or associated factors. This should be the function of a
coordinated support structure that deals with the whole student life cycle. Best practice can be observed
from much of the work conducted in Australasian Higher Education Institutes where three core strategies
have been identified to enhance the student experience (Krause, 2003). Primarily, Coordination of
student support efforts is necessary. For maximum impact and effectiveness, the initiatives developed to
32
support undergraduate students need to be developed, implemented and evaluated within a coherent
framework, in consultation with academics, support staff and administrators. Secondly, Communication
with relevant stakeholders regarding the success of initiatives and future plans needs to be embedded.
To communicate effectively, evidence is required based on regular monitoring and evaluation of
transition programs and initiatives. Thirdly, Connect with students and the issues they face. Conversely,
students need to be connected to the university learning community through proactive and consistent
communication of what is expected of them as students in higher education e.g. class attendance, class
preparation and participation, time allocation for study etc. This, too, requires strategic planning and
united efforts at the department/faculty and institutional level if students are to have clear understandings
of expectations.
Consequently it seems pointless to try and deal with withdrawal factors in isolation as they influence and
are influenced by each other. It is conceivable that the same reasons that make a student want to stay in
higher education are the same ones that will make them want to leave. Therefore, it makes good
strategic, economic and moral sense to focus on the enhancement of the student experience to
positively influence withdrawal rates.
References
Carney, C., And McNeish, S. (under review) The Impact Of Part-Time Employment On Scottish
Students’ Health And Well-Being. Journal of Further and Higher Education
Davies, R. and Elias, P. (2003). Dropping out: A study of early leavers from Higher Education. London:
Department for Education and Skills.
Krause, KL. (2003). Which Way From Here? Passion, Policy and Practice in First Year Higher
Education, Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, 7th Pacific Rim, First Year
in Higher Education Conference.
Yorke, M. (1999). leaving Early: Undergraduate non-completion in Higher Education. London: Falmer
Press.
Yorke, M and Longden, B. (2004). Retention and Student Success in Higher Education. Society for
research into Higher Education. Open University Press, England
33