Do multi-year scholarships increase retention? Results

Similar documents
What is related to student retention in STEM for STEM majors? Abstract:

A Decision Tree Analysis of the Transfer Student Emma Gunu, MS Research Analyst Robert M Roe, PhD Executive Director of Institutional Research and

Evaluation of Teach For America:

EVALUATION PLAN

Access Center Assessment Report

Race, Class, and the Selective College Experience

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

Idaho Public Schools

Evaluation of a College Freshman Diversity Research Program

Trends in Tuition at Idaho s Public Colleges and Universities: Critical Context for the State s Education Goals

Linking the Ohio State Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Validation Requirements and Error Codes for Submitting Common Completion Metrics

New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark College of Engineering

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District

OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT. Annual Report

University-Based Induction in Low-Performing Schools: Outcomes for North Carolina New Teacher Support Program Participants in

Purdue Data Summit Communication of Big Data Analytics. New SAT Predictive Validity Case Study

Trends in Student Aid and Trends in College Pricing

Financial aid: Degree-seeking undergraduates, FY15-16 CU-Boulder Office of Data Analytics, Institutional Research March 2017

National Collegiate Retention and. Persistence-to-Degree Rates

Data Glossary. Summa Cum Laude: the top 2% of each college's distribution of cumulative GPAs for the graduating cohort. Academic Honors (Latin Honors)

NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance Academic Performance Program Access to Postseason and Penalty Waiver Directive

TRENDS IN. College Pricing

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE

2012 New England Regional Forum Boston, Massachusetts Wednesday, February 1, More Than a Test: The SAT and SAT Subject Tests

National Survey of Student Engagement at UND Highlights for Students. Sue Erickson Carmen Williams Office of Institutional Research April 19, 2012

Appendix IX. Resume of Financial Aid Director. Professional Development Training

Predicting the Performance and Success of Construction Management Graduate Students using GRE Scores

SERVICE-LEARNING Annual Report July 30, 2004 Kara Hartmann, Service-Learning Coordinator Page 1 of 5

Differential Tuition Budget Proposal FY

Financial Aid & Merit Scholarships Workshop

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

Summary: Impact Statement

MAINE 2011 For a strong economy, the skills gap must be closed.

Facts and Figures Office of Institutional Research and Planning

Personnel Administrators. Alexis Schauss. Director of School Business NC Department of Public Instruction

The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2016

Best Colleges Main Survey

The Impact of Honors Programs on Undergraduate Academic Performance, Retention, and Graduation

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center

Status of Women of Color in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Longitudinal Analysis of the Effectiveness of DCPS Teachers

2005 National Survey of Student Engagement: Freshman and Senior Students at. St. Cloud State University. Preliminary Report.

The Diversity of STEM Majors and a Strategy for Improved STEM Retention

Financing Education In Minnesota

Grade 6: Correlated to AGS Basic Math Skills

10/6/2017 UNDERGRADUATE SUCCESS SCHOLARS PROGRAM. Founded in 1969 as a graduate institution.

Institution-Set Standards: CTE Job Placement Resources. February 17, 2016 Danielle Pearson, Institutional Research

National Academies STEM Workforce Summit

Student attrition at a new generation university

STUDENT SATISFACTION IN PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION IN GWALIOR

Connecting to the Big Picture: An Orientation to GEAR UP

GRADUATE SCHOOL DOCTORAL DISSERTATION AWARD APPLICATION FORM

Elementary and Secondary Education Act ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) 1O1

A Snapshot of the Graduate School

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio

LANGUAGE DIVERSITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Paul De Grauwe. University of Leuven

Tableau Dashboards The Game Changer

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF IMPLEMENTING A 1:1 INITIATIVE ON STUDENT ACHEIVMENT BASED ON ACT SCORES JEFF ARMSTRONG. Submitted to

Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11)

Graduate Division Annual Report Key Findings

American Journal of Business Education October 2009 Volume 2, Number 7

Are You Ready? Simplify Fractions

B.S/M.A in Mathematics

Undergraduates Views of K-12 Teaching as a Career Choice

Sector Differences in Student Learning: Differences in Achievement Gains Across School Years and During the Summer

2012 ACT RESULTS BACKGROUND

BEST PRACTICES FOR PRINCIPAL SELECTION

ROA Technical Report. Jaap Dronkers ROA-TR-2014/1. Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market ROA

GDP Falls as MBA Rises?

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars

Council on Postsecondary Education Funding Model for the Public Universities (Excluding KSU) Bachelor's Degrees

PSIWORLD Keywords: self-directed learning; personality traits; academic achievement; learning strategies; learning activties.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

ReFresh: Retaining First Year Engineering Students and Retraining for Success

Florida A&M University Graduate Policies and Procedures

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution

THE LUCILLE HARRISON CHARITABLE TRUST SCHOLARSHIP APPLICATION. Name (Last) (First) (Middle) 3. County State Zip Telephone

Clock Hour Workshop. June 28, Clock Hours

Albany Technical College Overview Goals Student Success and Implementation Team Conclusion Next Steps...

Guide for Test Takers with Disabilities

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices. April 2017

Session 2B From understanding perspectives to informing public policy the potential and challenges for Q findings to inform survey design

2015 High School Results: Summary Data (Part I)

Financial Education and the Credit Behavior of Young Adults

Third Misconceptions Seminar Proceedings (1993)

U VA THE CHANGING FACE OF UVA STUDENTS: SSESSMENT. About The Study

Program Change Proposal:

THE IMPACT OF YOUR GIVING 2015 ENDOWMENT REPORT

This Access Agreement is for only, to align with the WPSA and in light of the Browne Review.

Proficiency Illusion

VOL. 3, NO. 5, May 2012 ISSN Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences CIS Journal. All rights reserved.

Higher Education. Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. November 3, 2017

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

NCEO Technical Report 27

Moving the Needle: Creating Better Career Opportunities and Workforce Readiness. Austin ISD Progress Report

6 Financial Aid Information

1.11 I Know What Do You Know?

Annual Report to the Public. Dr. Greg Murry, Superintendent

UW-Stout--Student Research Fund Grant Application Cover Sheet. This is a Research Grant Proposal This is a Dissemination Grant Proposal

Transcription:

Do multi-year scholarships increase retention? In the past, Boise State has mainly offered one-year scholarships to new freshmen. Recently, however, the institution moved toward offering more two and four-year scholarships, based on the thinking that these types of scholarships might further improve the retention of well-prepared students. The purpose of this study is to see if students with multi-year scholarships (or waivers for non-residents) were more likely to return compared to students with one-year scholarships and students with no scholarships. The fall 2012 term was the first year that a substantial group of scholarship recipients were offered multi-year scholarships. This study was limited to fall 2012 first-time full-time bachelor s degree-seeking students with admissions index scores and residency information. Residency information was important because prior studies have shown that non-resident and resident students receive different financial aid packages and that the effects of financial aid on retention are different for the two groups. 1 Admissions index scores provided an important control because scholarship recipients are typically more academically prepared and are more likely to be retained even without scholarships. Other factors which can also affect retention are the of money that the student received and the unmet financial need remaining after the total financial aid package had been offered. The basic question of the study is this: Are students who receive multi-year scholarships (or waivers) more likely to be retained after accounting for differences in admissions index scores, scholarship or waiver dollars received, and unmet financial need compared to students who get a one-year scholarship and students without scholarships? Results Table 1 below shows the average admissions index scores, scholarship and waiver dollars awarded, and unmet financial need for each of three groups: (1) those with no scholarships, (2) those with one-year scholarships, and (3) those with multi-year scholarships or waivers. The Idaho Promise scholarship was not considered when assigning students to the three scholarship groups due to the low dollar awarded ($450) and the fact that 84% of the Idaho residents in the cohort received this scholarship. However, Promise scholarship dollars were accounted for as part of the model (see next section). All waivers for non-resident students covered four years so were considered as part of the multi-year scholarship category. 1 See Belcheir, M. (2012). A description of financial aid offered to new fall 2010 students and the relationship to retention. Boise, ID: Boise State University Office of Institutional Research. The report can be found at http://ir.boisestate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/rr-2012-8-financial-aid-and-retention.pdf April 2014 Page 1

Table 1. Admissions index and financial aid information for fall 2012 first-time-in-college full-time bachelor s degree-seeking students Residency Non group Admissions Index score (0-100) Waiver Promise Amount Federal Unmet Need (n=183) 43.8 $0 $0 $0 $6910 1-yr scholarship (n=44) 45.8 $0 $2101 $0 $9371 Multi-year scholarship or waiver (n=440) 65.7 $10,334 $870 $0 $5522 Total (n=667) 58.4 $6817 $712 $0 $6157 (n=696) 50.3 $0 $0 $405 $6899 1-yr scholarship (n=303) 59.4 $0 $2549 $431 $5386 Multi-year scholarship (n=214) 79.6 $0 $5371 $438 $3381 Total (n=1213) 57.8 $0 $3717 $418 $5900 The average admissions index score increased from the no scholarship group to the one-year scholarship group to the multi-year scholarship group. This finding confirmed the need to control for entering academic preparation by using admissions index scores. Note, too, that multi-year scholarships and waivers had a higher award compared to one-year scholarships, indicating a need to control for dollar of the scholarship and waiver. Generally, too, the of unmet financial need declined so that those with no scholarships had the greatest of remaining need, and those with multi-year scholarships had the least remaining need. See Table 1 for details. Table 2 displays the correlations among the variables. As expected, both the of the scholarship and the of the waiver were related to admissions index scores. Unmet need was also negatively related to admissions index scores but the relationship was decidedly weaker compared to scholarship and waiver s. Table 2. Correlations among variables used in the study Unmet need Admissions Index Score Waiver Pearson Correlation -.06 * -.05 *.30 ** N 2,222 2,222 1,908 Pearson Correlation 1 -.18 **.46 ** N 2,222 1,908 Unmet need Pearson Correlation 1 -.16 ** N 1,908 Figure 1 displays the retention rates by residency and scholarship group. For Idaho residents, the retention rates improved markedly from the non-scholarship group to one-year scholarship group to multi-year scholarship group. For non-residents, however, the group without any scholarships or waivers had a higher retention rate compared to the one-year group who obtained a scholarship but no waiver (because all waivers cover multiple years). The non-resident group with the multi-year scholarships or waivers had the highest retention rates. April 2014 Page 2

Percent retained 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 73.2% Figure 1. Percent retained after one year based on residency and scholarship group 59.1% 81.6% 58.6% 73.3% 83.2% 0.0% or waiver 1-year scholarship Multi-year scholarship or waiver or waiver 1-year scholarship Multi-year scholarship or waiver Non-resident Prediction of retention for Idaho residents The analysis was conducted separately for Idaho residents and non-residents. The question of interest in both cases was the prediction of retention based on the length of the scholarship or waiver (no scholarship, one-year scholarship, multi-year scholarship or waiver). However, before testing for these differences, the effects of admissions index scores (a combination of test scores and high school GPA), of scholarship awards and waivers, and unmet financial need were considered. The results of the analysis for Idaho residents can be found in Table 3. The length of the scholarship was not significant factor in retention for Idaho residents after the effects of all of the other variables were included. Note that scholarship dollars from both the Promise s and other scholarship awards had a positive impact on retention. Unmet financial need had a significantly negative impact on retention. Admissions index scores did not have a significant impact on retention after the financial aid variables were included. April 2014 Page 3

Table 3. Model to predict retention of Idaho residents B S.E. Wald df Sig. Odds ratio Admissions Index Score.009.005 2.802 1.094 1.009 dollars (in $1000s).166.056 8.903 1.003 1.181 Idaho Promise dollars.003.000 43.479 1.000 1.003 Federal unmet need (in $1000s) -.023.011 4.792 1.029.977 Group.131 2.937 vs. multi-year.053.336.025 1.874 1.055 1-year scholarship vs. multiyear.089.277.103 1.749 1.093 Constant -1.058.523 4.093 1.043.347 Note: Significant effects are in bold and shaded Prediction of retention for non-residents Table 4 shows the model for predicting retention for non-residents. Note that the of waiver dollars the student received has been added to the model and Promise scholarship dollars have been removed since non-residents cannot receive this scholarship. Table 4. Model to predict retention for non-residents B S.E. Wald df Sig. Odds ratio Admissions Index Score -.004.010.160 1.689.996 dollars (in $1000s) -.062.053 1.370 1.242.940 Federal unmet need (in $1000s) -.026.011 5.766 1.016.974 Waiver (in $1000s).301.073 17.135 1.000 1.351 Non-resident scholarship group 13.315 2.001 / waiver 2.440.686 12.651 1.000 11.469 vs. multi-year 1-year scholarship/ 1.997.744 7.203 1.007 7.366 waiver vs. multi-year Constant -1.070.738 2.102 1.147.343 Note: Significant effects are in bold and shaded Unlike the results for residents, the length of the award continued to have an impact on retention, even after accounting for the effects of the other variables. The results, however, were counter to expectations. The findings indicated that after accounting for the effects of unmet need and the size of the waiver, students who did not receive either a scholarship or a waiver were more likely to be retained compared to students who received multi-year scholarships or waivers. The same result was found when comparing one-year scholarship students to multi-year scholarship recipients the one-year group had a higher probability of being retained after the effects of unmet need and waiver s were considered. The results also show that the of unmet need continued to negatively impact retention after accounting for the effects of the other variables, and the of the waiver positively impacted retention. Neither admissions index scores nor scholarship dollars were significant in this model after accounting for the effects of the other variables. April 2014 Page 4

Summary and conclusions The purpose of this study was to discover if multi-year scholarships and waivers were related to higher retention after the effects of admissions index scores, award s, and remaining unmet financial need were considered. A simple look at the retention rates for three groups of new students no scholarship or waiver, one-year scholarship, and multi-year scholarship or waiver showed that those with longer awards had higher retention rates. However, that was no longer the case when of scholarship or waiver dollars awarded, unmet financial need remaining after the award, and admissions index scores were included in the analysis. For Idaho residents, the of scholarship dollars and remaining unmet need were related to retention, but the length of the scholarship was not. For non-residents, unmet need and the of the waiver awarded were significant predictors of retention. However, after accounting for the effects of the other variables, students who received less than a multi-year scholarship had higher predicted retention rates compared to students in the multi-year group. It appears, therefore, that the of the award and the reduction in unmet financial need were more important factors than the length of the award in retaining students. Admissions index scores, which are used to award scholarship and waiver s and lengths, were not a significant predictor of retention after the effects of remaining financial need and award s were considered. Recall, however, that many factors remain outside the control of statistical analysis so decision-makers are urged to move with caution. Readers are reminded that this analysis was based on only a single cohort year so further study is warranted. Steps will be taken to re-visit the fall 2012 group in the fall of 2014 to look at two-year retention rates. Adding other fall cohorts to the analysis may also provide a clearer picture. April 2014 Prepared by: Marcia Belcheir, Ph.D. Office of Institutional Research April 2014 Page 5