Research shows that comprehensive programs for student supports, personalized advising and nudging have some causal effects on retention.
Hispanolistic/E+/Getty Images
Across higher education, colleges, universities and other organizations are piloting initiatives to help college students to stay enrolled and ultimately earn a credential or degree. But what does the research say works best?
A recent project from the Brookings Institution investigates two decades of research on interventions for college access and completion, finding three types of programs that can create change in institutional student success metrics: comprehensive programs, advising and low-touch information sharing.
In a new report, author and researcher Sarah Reber of Brookings highlights areas for future research or that require further analysis.
What works: Based on the research, three types of interventions emerged as demonstrating the most causal effects on student learning:
- Comprehensive programs. A comprehensive program addresses multiple potential barriers students could face while enrolled, typically providing coaching, case management, financial support, academic assistance and learning communities. The City University of New York’s Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) is one model that has demonstrated success and been replicated at other institutions around the country. ASAP supports students through priority registration, academic advising, tutoring, career counseling, last-dollar scholarships and MetroCards for transportation around the city.
These types of programs often are resource intensive, costing around $23,000 per participant for CUNY ASAP, which can make them difficult to scale.
- Advisers and navigators. Mentoring, advising and coaching interventions that provide information and support students individually or in a group have demonstrated effects on students’ persistence and achievement. These programs vary in how they look logistically—for example, some employ near-peer advisers while others utilize professional counselors or both, and their desired outcomes also vary. Some target immediate goals, such as improving study skills or exiting academic probation, whereas others are influencing access and completion starting in high school.
Costs and resources dedicated to these interventions vary depending on adviser type, caseload size, support intensity and program duration. Generally, more intensive support resulted in more substantial effects compared to lower-cost interventions.
- Low-touch interventions. Interventions in this category are primarily automated, with little direct interaction with a person, including text messaging campaigns or virtual coaching interventions. Most of these programs were designed to improve student access and utilization of services to address barriers or provide information about successful behaviors.
The report does not highlight the intended outcomes or costs associated with these interventions, which could be due to the large range of interventions that could fall within a low-touch category.
Researchers also note that many studies have small sample sizes, which make it difficult to draw strong conclusions from the data.
Thinking Outside the Box
Brookings Institute researchers featured studies that are not directly related to college success or access but could also impact change on campuses, including:
- Reforming developmental education
- Introducing college-level coursework in high schools
- Offering performance-based scholarships
- Establishing promise programs for high school students
So what? A key finding in Reber’s research, both in evaluating the literature and speaking to experts, is “that everything about college is too complex,” according to the report. “Each bit of complexity exists for a reason, but policymakers and education leaders interested in improving college access and success should strive to reduce complexity and increase transparency in addition to developing effective student services or interventions.”
Perhaps, rather than developing new interventions to navigate a complex institution, campus leaders and policymakers should simplify procedures, according to the report.
Another critical piece of this research is creating effective and sustainable interventions. While comprehensive programs demonstrate the greatest gains in student completion, not every institution has the resources to devote to a program like ASAP. For example, if a comprehensive program institutes requirements on utilization of support services, like tutoring, but doesn’t maintain resources for or invest in high-quality offerings, the effects will be limited.
Institutions should also consider incentivizing take-up of services without creating additional barriers, such as creating a registration hold. Payments on top of financial aid are less associated with negative consequences but could increase total program cost.
What’s next? Based on the analysis, researchers suggest future attention should be given to identifying best practices in support programs, including technology integration and promoting student engagement with resources.
Faculty practices and instructional approaches should also be considered, including how faculty-student relationships can influence persistence or how field of study and major choice can impact student success, because these factors affect labor market returns.
“While the existing evidence provides valuable guidance for institutions and policymakers, substantial work remains to identify sustainable approaches for helping more students access and complete college successfully,” according to the report.
Seeking stories from campus leaders, faculty members and staff for our Student Success focus. Share here.
