Office of Institutional Effectiveness Fall 2011 - Fall 2012 · comprehensive exam, etc.) ... CHEM 101, CHEM 111, CJC 102, CS 104, EDHI 200, FCS 103 ... Linear Regression Results Predicting

Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Fall 2011 - Fall 2012

RETENTION STUDY

VISION

We seek to become recognized for providing bright and curious students

a holistic learning experience that occurs both in and out of the classroom;

for being relentlessly focused on learning outcomes;

for embracing and solving today’s greatest educational challenges;

and for bringing fresh and pragmatic thinking to the problems

facing communities, businesses, and governments in Indiana and beyond.

OIE


February 2013

OIE No. RET-S1-2013

Fall 2011 - Fall 2012

RETENTION STUDY

William Knight

Karen Morgan

Rebecca Costomiris

(Editor)


Ball State University

February 2013

OIE No. RET-S1-2013

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Office of Institutional

Effectiveness (OIE) conducted a

comprehensive study to examine

factors related to the Fall 2011 to

Fall 2012 retention of new, full-

time, baccalaureate-seeking first-

year students.

The following research questions

guided the study:

o How did 2011-2012 retention

rates vary according to

demographic, pre-college,

and enrollment variables?

o What significant relationships

existed between 2011-2012

retention rates and


and enrollment variables and

survey results when each

predictor was examined

individually?



retention rates and course

grades?


existed and what were the

strongest predictors of the

relationship between 2011-

2012 retention rates and



survey results when

predictors were examined

simultaneously?

Retention rates were higher for

females, international and Asian

students, non-first generation-

students, in-state students, students

with a dependent financial aid status

and those whose financial aid

dependency status could not be

determined, students with greater

levels of family financial

contribution to the cost of college,

students with higher SAT and ACT

scores, and students with higher high

school grade point averages and

graduation percentiles.


students in the Teachers College

(TC), College of Fine Arts (CFA),

and those with interdisciplinary

majors. Retention was higher among

larger departments including Modern

Languages and Classics, English,

Interdepartmental College of

Architecture and Planning (CAP),

Interdepartmental TC, Special

Education, Speech Pathology and

Audiology, and Theatre and Dance.

Students were better retained if they

participated in the Honors College;

lived on campus during their first

year; lived in the Dehority Complex;

lived in living-learning communities;

and participated in Summer Bridge

groups. Retention was also higher for

students retained Fall 2011 to Spring

2012 who completed a greater

number of credit hours and achieved

higher grade point averages in the

Fall 2011 and Spring 2012

semesters.

ii

No demographic or pre-college

variables had statistically significant

relationships with retention with

medium or large effect sizes. Only

three enrollment variables had

statistically significant relationships

with retention and medium or large

effect sizes: the student’s college at

the beginning of the Spring 2012

semester (retention was highest in

CFA, TC, and for students with

interdisciplinary majors and lowest

for students in University College),

credit hours completed in the Spring

2012 semester (students with more

credit hours were better retained),

and cumulative grade point average

at the end of the Spring 2012

semester (students with higher GPAs

were better retained). (All effect

sizes were medium.)

All but 8 of the 157 items on the

Summer Orientation Survey were

significantly related to retention, but

none of these had medium or large

effect sizes. All but 10 of the 190

items in the MAP-Works Survey

were significantly related to

retention, but none of these had

medium or large effect sizes. Half

(43) of the 86 National Survey of

Student Engagement (NSSE) items


retention, but none of them had

medium or large effect sizes.

Only spring semester cumulative

grade point average, spring semester

credit hours, and fall semester credit

hours proved to be significant

predictors of retention when all

predictors were examined at the

same time. Spring semester grade

point average had 1½ times the

predictive power of spring semester

credit hours, and more than double

the predictive power of fall semester

credit hours.

Significant predictors of spring

semester cumulative GPA included

listing the Honors College as an

important reason to attend Ball State

(Summer Orientation Survey), not

coming to class unprepared (from

NSSE), being more likely to

participate in activities to enhance

spirituality (worship, meditation,

prayer, etc.) (NSSE), identifying

student blogs as an important source

of information about Ball State

(Summer Orientation Survey), and

expected family financial

contribution to college costs

(FAFSA). This analysis had only a

small effect size.

Significant predictors of spring

semester credit hours included fewer

hours per week providing care for

dependents living with them

(parents, children, spouse, etc.)

(NSSE), the opportunity for

involvement in a culminating senior

year experience (capstone course,

senior project or thesis,

comprehensive exam, etc.) (NSSE),

and flexible course scheduling as an

important factor in choosing a major

(Summer Orientation Survey). This

analysis had a very small effect size.

The relationship was examined

between retention and grades in

selected courses (where at least 100

freshmen were enrolled in Academic

Year 2011-2012). Seventy-nine of

the analyses had medium or large

effect sizes. Courses with large effect

sizes included ANTH 101, ANTH

111, ARCH 100, ASTR 100, BIO

111, BIO 112, CAP 102, CAP 162,

CHEM 100, CHEM 101, CHEM

111, CJC 102, CS 104, EDHI 200,

FCS 103, FIN 110, GEOG 150,

HONR 201, HONR 202, JOUR 101,

LA 100, MATH 112, NEWS 105,

iii

NEWS 108, NEWS 133, NREM

101, SP 201, THEA 103, THEA 104,

THEA 232, THEA 280. Courses

with medium effect sizes were AHS

100, ANAT 201, BIO 100, BIO 113,

CAP 161, CC 101, CHEM 112, CJC

101, COMM 210, DANC 100,

ECON 201, EDEL 100, EDPS 260,

EDTE 120, ENG 103, ENG 104,

ENG 114, FCS 135, FIN 101, GEOG

101, GEOL 101, HIST 150, HIST

201, HSC 160, ID 101, ISOM 125,

ISOM 135, MATH 108, MATH 111,

MATH 125, MATH 132, MATH

201, MUHI 100, NEWS 130, NEWS

131, NEWS 132, PFW 100, PFW

103, PFW 148, PLAN 100, POLS

130, PSYS 100, RELS 160, SOC

100, SP 102, SPCE 201, TCOM 101,

and THEA 100. The strongest

relationship between retention and

course grade was for THEA 103

(effect size .70). In all cases, students

with higher grades in each course

were more likely to be retained.

Actionable tactics suggested by the

study results include providing a

greater emphasis upon the following

actions, since they were found to

relate to retention: emphasizing the

Honors College, working to ensure

that students come to class prepared,

recruiting students with higher levels

of family financial contribution to

college costs, providing support for

students who need to care for

dependents, emphasizing graduates’

career success and national rankings

of academic programs, providing

students with options that allow them

to remain at Ball State if they are

considering changing majors,

promoting college visits (including

Ball State Preview Day), and

following up on cues from MAP-

Works and other sources where

students may be indicating they are

experiencing attrition-prone

behaviors. Current efforts to

facilitate students’ awareness of their

success in first-year courses early in

the semester are also supported by

this study.

iv

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 1

RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

Table 1: Demographics.......................................................................................................................... 6

Table 2: Enrollment Breakouts .............................................................................................................. 9

Table 3: Logistic Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 First-Year Retention ............................. 15

Table 4: Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Spring Semester

Cumulative GPA .................................................................................................................. 15

Table 5: Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Spring Semester Credit Hours ................ 16

Table 6: Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Fall Semester Credit Hours ..................... 17

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 19

APPENDIX I: REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 21

APPENDIX II: RETENTION RATES BY GRADES IN COURSES TAKEN

BY AT LEAST 100 2001-2012 FRESHMEN ................................................................. 23

vi

1

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

The Office of Institutional

Effectiveness (OIE) conducted a

comprehensive study to examine

factors related to the Fall 2011 to

Fall 2012 retention of new, full-time,

baccalaureate-seeking first-year

students. The one-year retention rate

is critically important since the

University has a goal in its strategic

plan of 80%, yet the retention rate

has declined from 79.6% in 2009-

2010 to 79.4% in 2010-2011 to

78.0% in 2011-2012. While the

traditional OIE contribution to

understanding and improving first-

year retention has been to partner

with several other Ball State offices

on the MAP-Works project, this

study represents an additional

contribution by collecting data from

numerous sources and conducting a

comprehensive study of factors

affecting one-year retention.

The following research questions

guided the study:

o How did 2011-2012 retention

rates vary according to


and enrollment variables?



retention rates and



survey results when each

predictor was examined

individually?



retention rates and course

grades?


existed (and what were the

strongest predictors) when

the relationship between

2011-2012 retention rates and



survey results were examined

simultaneously?

Data assembled for the study

included an indication of whether or

not new, full-time, baccalaureate-

seeking first-year students from Fall

2011 re-enrolled at Ball State in Fall

2012 (dependent or outcome

variable) and the following

predictors or independent variables:

o Demographic and pre-college

variables (gender,

race/ethnicity, first-

generation status [computed

based upon financial aid

data], state residency,

domestic/international

student status, dependent/

independent financial aid

status [based upon financial

aid data], expected family

financial contribution to

college costs [from financial

aid data], SAT total score and

sub-scores, ACT composite

score, and high school grade

point average and graduation

percentile)

2

o Enrollment variables for


(college and department of

major/s at the beginning of

the Fall 2011 semester, credit

hours completed in the Fall

2011 semester, grade point

average for the Fall 2011

semester, whether students

re-enrolled for the Spring

2012 semester, college of

major at the beginning of the

Spring 2012 semester, credit

hours completed in the

Spring 2012 semester,

cumulative grade point

average at the end of the

Spring 2012 semester,

courses taken both semesters

and accompanying course

grades, and whether students

lived on- or off-campus for

the Fall 2011 semester)

o Responses to Ball State’s

157-item Summer

Orientation Survey (which

cluster into the categories of

high school background and

involvement; decision to

attend Ball State; major and

career selection; and

technology access, usage, and

competency)

o Responses to Ball State’s

190-item MAP-Works Survey

(which cluster into the

categories of commitment to

Ball State, self-rating of

communication and

analytical skills, self-

discipline, time management,

financial means, basic and

advanced academic

behaviors, academic self-

efficacy, peer connections,

homesickness/separation and

homesickness/distress,

academic and social

integration, satisfaction with

Ball State, on-campus living

[social aspects, environment,

and roommate relationships],

off-campus living

[environment], and test

anxiety)

o Responses of Fall 2011 first-

year students to the 86-item

National Survey of Student

Engagement (NSSE) (which

cluster into the categories of

level of academic challenge,

active and collaborative

learning, student-faculty

interaction, enriching

educational experiences,

supportive campus

environment, and self-

reported educational and

personal gains)

In response to the first research

question, retention rates were

computed across various

demographic groups and enrollment

variables.

For the second research question, a

series of bivariate analyses (Chi

square contingency analyses, t-tests,

and analysis of variance [ANOVA])

were used to investigate the

relationship between each predictor

variable and one-year retention. In

order to add meaning to these

analyses, the tables provided include

notations of statistical significance

(at p < .05) and effect sizes.

Comparisons that were not

statistically significant were noted

with (ns); and those that were

statistically significant have their

effect sizes noted as very small (vs),

small (s), medium (m), or large (l)

using guidelines suggested by Cohen

3

(1988). It is common in the field of

institutional effectiveness to draw

attention to differences with effect

sizes classified as medium or large;

these differences were commented

upon in this report.

In response to the third research

question, a series of Chi square

contingency analyses were used to

investigate the relationship between

grades in courses where at least 100

first-year students enrolled and one-

year retention.

For the fourth research question,

logistic regression was used to

investigate the relationship between

retention and predictors that proved

to be statistically significant in the

bivariate analyses. Linear regression

was used to investigate the

relationship between the strongest

predictors in the logistic regression

and other demographic, pre-college,

and enrollment variables. Cases were

screened for multivariate outliers,

and predictors with unacceptably

high multicolinearity levels were

omitted from the analysis.

4

5

RESULTS

Retention Rates by Demographic,

Pre-College, and Enrollment Variables

As shown in Table 1, retention rates

were higher for females,

international and Asian students,

non-first generation-students, in-state

students, students with a dependent

financial aid status and those whose

financial aid dependency status could

not be determined, students with

greater levels of family financial

contribution to the cost of college,

students with higher SAT and ACT

scores, and students with higher high

school grade point averages and

graduation percentiles.


students in the Teachers College

(TC), College of Fine Arts (CFA),

and those with interdisciplinary

majors. Retention was higher among

larger departments including Modern

Languages and Classics, English,

Interdepartmental CAP,

Interdepartmental TC, Special

Education, Speech Pathology and

Audiology, and Theatre and Dance.

Students were better retained if they

participated in the Honors College;

lived on campus during their first

year; lived in the Dehority Complex;

lived in living-learning communities;

and participated in Summer Bridge

groups. Retention was higher for

students retained Fall 2011 to Spring

2012 who completed a greater

number of credit hours and achieved

higher grade point averages in the


semesters. (Table 2)

Statistically Significant Relationships

Between Retention and Demographic,


and Survey Results Examined

Individually

No demographic or pre-college

variables had statistically significant

relationships with retention and

medium or large effect sizes. Only

three enrollment variables had

statistically significant relationships

with retention and medium or large

effect sizes: the student’s college at

the beginning of the Spring 2012

semester (highest in CFA, TC, and

for students with interdisciplinary

majors, and lowest for students in

University College), credit hours

completed in the Spring 2012

semester (students with more credit

hours were better retained), and

cumulative grade point average at

the end of the Spring 2012 semester

(students with higher GPAs were

better retained). All effect sizes were

medium. (Tables 1 and 2)

All but 8 of the 157 items on the

Summer Orientation Survey were

significantly related to retention, but

none of these had medium or large

effect sizes. All but 10 of the 190

items on the MAP-Works Survey



medium or large effect sizes. Half

(43) of the 86 National Survey of

Student Engagement (NSSE) items



medium or large effect sizes. None

of these survey responses are shown

in the report due to space limitations.

6

TABLE 1

Demographics

% Retention

Gender (vs)

Female 79%

Male 76%

Race/Ethnicity (ns)

International (N=14) 93%

Unknown (N=37) 81%

American Indian/Alaska Native (N=8) 50%

Asian (N=33) 85%

Black/African American (N=225) 79%

Hispanic of Any Race (N=147) 70%

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (N=5) 60%

White/Caucasian (N=3,232) 78%

Two or More Races (N=108) 74%

First-Generation Status (obtained from FAFSA data) (vs)

First-Generation 73%

Non-First-Generation 80%

Residency (ns)

Indiana 78%

Out-of-State 76%

Domestic/International Status (ns)

Domestic 78%

International 93%

Dependent/Independent Financial Aid Status (obtained from FAFSA data) (vs)

Dependent 78%

Independent 62%

Unable To Determine 80%

Expected Family Contribution (obtained from FAFSA data) (vs)

Less Than $5,000 72%

$5,000-$9,999 79%

$10,000-$14,999 81%

$15,000-$19,999 81%

$20,000-$24,999 79%

$25,000-$29,999 80%

$30,000 or Greater 83%

7

TABLE 1

Demographics (cont.)

% Retention

SAT Total Score Ranges (possible range of 600-2400) (vs)

900-999 (N=1) 0%

1000-1099 (N=2) 50%

1100-1199 (N=13) 85%

1200-1299 (N=99) 65%

1300-1399 (N=510) 75%

1400-1499 (N=743) 74%

1500-1599 (N=661) 77%

1600-1699 (N=499) 80%

1700-1799 (N=363) 85%

1800-1899 (N=182) 89%

1900-1999 (N=93) 89%

2000-2099 (N=38) 92%

2100-2199 (N=15) 100%

2200-2299 (N=2) 100%

SAT Verbal Sub-Score Range (possible score range of 200-800) (vs)

200-299 (N=2) 50%

300-399 (N=55) 69%

400-499 (N=1,202) 75%

500-599 (N=1,246) 78%

600-699 (N=473) 87%

700 or Greater (N=63) 94%

SAT Mathematics Sub-Score Range (possible score range of 200-800) (vs)

300-399 (N=70) 63%

400-499 (N=1,156) 76%

500-599 (N=1,440) 78%

600-699 (N=514) 86%


SAT Writing Sub-Score Range (possible score range of 200-800) (vs)

200-299 (N=3) 33%

300-399 (N=103) 72%

400-499 (N=1,356) 74%

500-599 (N=1,371) 80%

600-699 (N=339) 88%


ACT Composite Score Range (vs)

13-17 (N=57) 75%

18-22 (N=820) 72%

23-27 (N=677) 80%

28-32 (N=196) 90%


8

TABLE 1

Demographics (cont.)

% Retention

High School Grade Point Average Range (vs)

2.00-2.49 (N=15) 60%

2.50-2.99 (N=916) 68%

3.00-3.49 (N=1,403) 74%

3.50 or Greater (N=1,392) 88%

High School Graduation Percentile Range (vs)

50%-59% (N=155) 74%

60%-69% (N=258) 71%

70%-79% (N=252) 77%

80%-89% (N=288) 81%

90% or Greater (N=285) 93%

9

TABLE 2

Enrollment Breakouts

% Retention

College of Major at Beginning of Fall 2011 Semester (vs)

College of Applied Sciences and Technology 75%

College of Architecture and Planning 82%

College of Communications, Information, and Media 78%

College of Fine Arts 85%

College of Sciences and Humanities 75%

Miller College of Business 78%

Teachers College 86%

Interdisciplinary (N=16) 88%

University College 75%

Department of Major at Beginning of Fall 2011 Semester (s)

Anthropology (N=16) 75%

Art 82%

Biology 75%

Chemistry 77%

Communication Studies (N=23) 82%

Computer Science 75%

Criminal Justice and Criminology 72%

Economics (N=2) 100%

Elementary Education 84%

English 85%

Family and Consumer Sciences 82%

Geography 83%

Geology (N=6) 100%

History (N=15) 73%

Industry and Technology 77%

Information Systems and Operations Management (N=2) 50%

Interdepartmental (not defined) (N=16) 88%

Interdepartmental Applied Science/Technology 72%

Interdepartmental College of Architecture and Planning 91%

Interdepartmental College of Business 77%

Interdepartmental Science and Humanities 75%

Interdepartmental Teachers College 89%

Journalism 78%

Mathematical Sciences 72%

Modern Languages and Classics 90%

Natural Resources and Environmental Management (N=11) 55%

Philosophy (N=2) 50%

Physics and Astronomy (N=22) 41%

Physiology and Health Science (N=12) 83%

Political Science 66%

Psychological Science 72%

School of Music 81%

Note: N is shown for student enrollment below 25.

10

TABLE 2

Enrollment Breakouts (cont.)

% Retention

Department of Major at Beginning of Fall 2011 Semester (s) (cont.)

School of Nursing (N=3) 100%

School of Physical Education 75%

Special Education 89%

Social Work 71%

Sociology (N=2) 100%

Speech Pathology and Audiology 86%

Telecommunications 76%

Theatre and Dance 89%

No Department 75%

Unknown (N=9) 89%

College of Major at Beginning of Spring 2012 Semester (m)

College of Applied Sciences and Technology 85%

College of Architecture and Planning 88%

College of Communications, Information, and Media 82%

College of Fine Arts 91%

College of Sciences and Humanities 81%

Miller College of Business 83%

Teachers College 90%

Interdisciplinary (N=20) 90%

University College 75%

Honors College Participant (s)

Honors 96%

Non-Honors 76%

Commuter Group (ns)

Commuter 73%

On-Campus Resident 78%

Residence Area (vs)

Not an On-Campus Resident 73%

West Side of Campus 79%

East Side of Campus 76%

Residence Hall (s)

Not an On-Campus Resident 73%

Baker Hall (N=8) 88%

Botsford Hall 72%

Brady Hall 66%

Brayton Hall 80%

Clevenger Hall 78%

Crosley Hall 78%

Davidson Hall 78%


11

TABLE 2


% Retention

Residence Hall (s) (cont.)

Dehority Complex 95%

Edwards Hall 80%

Elliott Hall 69%

Howick Hall 78%

Hurst Hall 76%

Kinghorn Hall (N=24) 75%

Klipple Hall (N=13) 46%

Knotts Hall 74%

Mysch Hall 77%

Painter Hall 74%

Palmer Hall 77%

Park Hall 78%

Rogers Hall 78%

Schmidt Hall 70%

Shales Hall 76%

Shively Hall (N=17) 65%

Swinford Hall 75%

Whitcraft Hall 79%

Williams Hall 76%

Wilson Hall 80%

Wood Hall 83%

Woody Hall 82%

Living-Learning Community Status (ns)

Living-Learning Community Member 79%

Non-Living-Learning Community Member 76%


12

TABLE 2


% Retention

Summer Bridge Group (vs)

Summer Bridge Group Member 82%

Non-Summer Bridge Group Member 77%

Re-Enrolled for Spring 2012 (m)

Re-Enrolled for Spring 2012 83%

Did Not Re-Enroll for Spring 2012 5%

Credit Hours Completed in the Fall 2011 Semester (s)

Fewer Than 12* 36%

12-14 77%

15-17 89%

18 or Greater 95%

Grade Point Average for the Fall 2011 Semester (s)

Less Than 2.00 39%

2.00-2.49 80%

2.50-2.99 85%

3.00-3.49 89%

3.50 or Greater 92%

Credit Hours Completed in the Spring 2012 Semester (m)

Fewer Than 12 33%

12-14 86%

15-17 93%

18 or Greater 97%

Cumulative Grade Point Average at the End of the Spring 2012 Semester (m)

Less Than 2.00 39%

2.00-2.49 87%

2.50-2.99 90%

3.00-3.49 92%

3.50 or Greater 94%


*All students in this population were registered for at least 12 credit hours at the start of Fall 2011,

but some dropped their load to fewer than 12 hours.


Between Retention and Demographic,


and Survey Results Examined

After statistically significant

predictors in the bivariate analyses

were entered into a logistic

regression and predictors with

unacceptably high levels of

multicolinearity were removed, only

spring semester cumulative grade

point average, spring semester credit

hours, and fall semester credit hours

proved to be significant predictors of

retention. Since the Wald statistic is

standardized, it shows the relative

strength of the predictors; spring

semester GPA had 1½ times the

predictive power of spring semester

credit hours and more than double

13

the predictive power of fall semester

credit hours. (Table 3)

Since only three predictors were

significant in the multivariate

analysis and since they do not occur

until the conclusion of the spring

semester, three additional linear

regression analyses were carried out

to investigate what other variables

relate to them.

As shown in Table 4, significant

predictors of spring semester

cumulative GPA (in order of

predictive power) were Honors

College as an important reason to

attend Ball State, not coming to

class unprepared (from NSSE),

being more likely to participate in

activities to enhance spirituality

(worship, meditation, prayer, etc.)

(NSSE), student blogs as an

important source of information

about Ball State (Summer

Orientation Survey), and expected

family financial contribution to

college costs (FAFSA). This

analysis had a medium effect size.

Table 5 shows that significant

predictors of spring semester credit

hours included (in order of predictive

power) fewer hours per week

providing care for dependents living

with them (parents, children, spouse,

etc.) (NSSE), the opportunity for

involvement in a culminating senior

year experience (capstone course,


comprehensive exam, etc.) (NSSE),

and flexible course scheduling as an

important factor in choosing a major

(Summer Orientation Survey). This

analysis had only a very small effect

size.

Table 6 highlights the 17 significant

predictors of fall semester credit

hours. These predictors included

high school GPA, the degree to

which students are motivated to

complete their academic work

(MAP-Works Survey), the

knowledge that Ball State graduates

get good jobs in deciding to attend

(Summer Orientation Survey), the

ranking of their department in a

national magazine in deciding to

attend (Summer Orientation Survey),

that they visited Ball State before

applying (Summer Orientation

Survey), the degree to which they

regret leaving home to go to school

(MAP-Works Survey), the likelihood

of changing majors (Summer

Orientation Survey), the degree to

which they are the kind of person

who shows up on time (MAP-Works

Survey), how much of the freshman

common reader they read (MAP-

Works Survey), jobs being located

where students want to live as a

factor in choosing their major


Honors College in deciding to attend


degree to which they are the kind of

person who takes good notes in class


availability of job opportunities in

choosing their major (Summer

Orientation Survey), how important

it is to them that their family

supports the career they select


importance of the Ball State Preview

Day in deciding to attend (Summer

Orientation Survey), Ball State as

their first choice in deciding to attend

(Summer Orientation Survey), and

receiving literature from Ball State

before applying (Summer

Orientation Survey). This analysis

had a medium effect size.

14


Between Retention and Course Grades

The relationship between retention

and grades in courses in which at

least 100 freshmen enrolled in 2011-

2012 was studied in a series of 80

analyses that are shown in Appendix

II. Seventy-nine of these analyses

had medium or large effect sizes.

Those with large effect sizes

include: ANTH 101, ANTH 111,

ARCH 100, ASTR 100, BIO 111,

BIO 112, CAP 102, CAP 162,

CHEM 100, CHEM 101, CHEM

111, CJC 102, CS 104, EDHI 200,

FCS 103, FIN 110, GEOG 150,

HONR 201, HONR 202, JOUR 101,

LA 100, MATH 112, NEWS 105,

NEWS 108, NEWS 133, NREM

101, SP 201, THEA 103, THEA 104,

THEA 232, THEA 280.

Those with medium effect sizes

include: AHS 100, ANAT 201, BIO

100, BIO 113, CAP 161, CC 101,

CHEM 112, CJC 101, COMM 210,

DANC 100, ECON 201, EDEL 100,

EDPS 260, EDTE 120, ENG 103,

ENG 104, ENG 114, FCS 135, FIN

101, GEOG 101, GEOL 101, HIST

150, HIST 201, HSC 160, ID 101,

ISOM 125, ISOM 135, MATH 108,

MATH 111, MATH 125, MATH

132, MATH 201, MUHI 100, NEWS

130, NEWS 131, NEWS 132, PFW

100, PFW 103, PFW 148, PLAN

100, POLS 130, PSYS 100, RELS

160, SOC 100, SP 102, SPCE 201,

TCOM 101, and THEA 100.

The strongest relationship between

retention and course grade was for

THEA 103 (effect size .70). In all

cases, students with higher grades in

each course were more likely to be

retained.

15

TABLE 3

Logistic Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 First-Year Retention

Variable B SE Odds Ratio Wald Statistic

Spring Semester Cumulative

GPA

0.84 0.20 2.32 18.06 ***

Spring Semester Credit Hours 0.14 0.04 1.15 12.71 ***

Fall Semester Credit Hours 0.15 0.05 1.16 8.91 **

Note: Significant predictors only are shown.

*p < .05

**p < .01

***p < .001

TABLE 4

Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Spring Semester Cumulative GPA

Variable B SE ß

Honors College as an important

reason to attend Ball State

(Summer Orientation Survey)

.096 .020 .195 ***

Came to class unprepared

(NSSE)

-.177 .035 -.191 ***

Being more likely to participate

in activities to enhance

spirituality (worship, meditation,

prayer, etc.) (NSSE)

.078 .027 .118 **

Student blogs as an important

source of information about Ball

State (Summer Orientation

Survey)

-.080 .032 -.103 *

Expected family financial

contribution to college costs

(FAFSA)

.000 .000 .077 *

Note: Significant predictors only are shown. This analysis had a medium effect size.

R2 = .253

*p < .05

**p < .01

***p < .001

16

TABLE 5

Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Spring Semester Credit Hours

Variable B SE ß

Hours per week providing

care for dependents living

with you (parents, children,

spouse, etc.) (NSSE)

-.549 .188 -.114 **

Opportunity for involvement

in a culminating senior year

experience (capstone course,


comprehensive exam, etc.)

(NSSE)

-.428 .126 -.114 ***

Flexible course scheduling as

an important factor in

choosing a major

(Summer Orientation

Survey)

-.342 .131 -.107 **

Note: Significant predictors only are shown. This analysis had only a very small effect size.

R2 = .089

*p < .05

**p < .01

***p < .001

17

TABLE 6

Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Fall Semester Credit Hours

Variable B SE ß

High school GPA 2.191 .959 .230 *

To what degree are you

motivated to complete your

academic work? (MAP-Works

Survey)

.743 .301 .228 *

Knowledge that Ball State

graduates get good jobs

in deciding to attend


.776 .258 .227 **

Ranking of my department

in a national magazine



.539 .198 .210 **

Visited Ball State before

applying (Summer Orientation

Survey)

1.702 .551 .191 **

To what degree do you regret

leaving home to go to school?

(MAP-Works Survey)

.392 .178 .186 *

Likelihood of changing major


-.668 .252 -.185 **

To what degree are you the kind

of person who shows up on time?

(MAP-Works Survey)

.093 .305 .184 *

How much of the freshman

common reader did you read?

(MAP-Works Survey)

.565 .176 .183 **

Jobs being located where

students want to live as a

factor in choosing major


-.495 .215 -.168 *

Honors College in deciding

to attend


.473 .198 .166 *


R2 = .596

*p < .05

**p < .01

***p < .001

18

TABLE 6

Linear Regression Results Predicting 2011-2012 Fall Semester Credit Hours (cont.)

Variable B SE ß

To what degree are you the kind

of person who takes good notes

in class?

(MAP-Works Survey)

.590 .261 .154 *

Availability of job opportunities

in choosing major


.498 .245 .153 *

How important is it to you that

your family supports the career

you select?

(MAP-Works Survey)

-.313 .130 -.153 *

Importance of the Ball State

Preview Day in deciding to

attend (Summer Orientation

Survey)

-.313 .150 -.145 *

Ball State as first choice



.388 .189 .142 *

Received literature from

Ball State before applying


-.795 .398 -.116 *


R2 = .596

*p < .05

**p < .01

***p < .001

19

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Braxton (2000) and Tinto (1987),

perhaps the most often-cited

sourcebooks on college student

retention, note that understanding factors

affecting college student retention and

how it can be improved is a difficult

proposition. A complex array of factors

affects retention, many of which are not

easily amenable to institutional action.

This study has answered some questions,

but raised more. While retention rates

differed across numerous demographic,

pre-college, and enrollment variables,

only a handful of these relationships

with retention were statistically

significant; and only three were

significant when examined concurrently:

number of fall and spring semester credit

hours and spring semester cumulative

grade point average. When predictors of

these three variables were examined in

turn, results were only moderately

successful. The strongest predictors of

fall semester credit hours were some of

the results of the Summer Orientation

Survey and the MAP-Works Survey. The

strongest predictors of spring semester

credit hours were some of the results of

the Summer Orientation Survey and

NSSE. Strong relationships exist

between retention and many of the

courses freshmen took.

While it is logical that the grade point

average and credit hours earned during

the freshman year are the most salient

predictors of retention, this finding does

not of itself lead to institutional action.

This study hints at some actionable

results. Emphasizing the Honors

College, working to ensure that students

come to class prepared, recruiting

students with higher levels of family

financial contribution to college costs,

providing support for students who need

to care for dependents, emphasizing

graduates’ career success and national

rankings of academic programs,

providing students with options that

allow them to remain at Ball State if they

are considering changing majors,

promoting college visits (including Ball

State Preview Day), and following up on

cues from MAP-Works and other sources

where students may be indicating they

are experiencing attrition-prone

behaviors are all actionable tactics

suggested by the study results. Current

efforts to facilitate students’ awareness

of their success in first-year courses

early in the semester are also supported

by this study.

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness

will continue to provide increasingly

comprehensive decision support for

student success efforts.

20

21

APPENDIX I

References

Braxton, J. M. (2000). Reworking the college student departure puzzle. Nashville, TN:

Vanderbilt University Press.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed).

US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition.

Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

22

23

APPENDIX II

Retention Rates by Grades in Courses Taken

by at Least 100 2011-2012 Freshmen

24

AHS 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- D+ F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

10 5 4 12 9 10 10 9 8 1 4 21 1 21 125

Retained

(1.00)

127 77 63 49 67 41 15 26 7 2 7 13 6 19 519

Total 137 82 67 61 76 51 25 35 15 3 11 34 7 40 644

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 120.861a 13 .000

Likelihood Ratio 109.164 13 .000

N of Valid Cases 644

a. 20 cells (47.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .02.

ANAT 201 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D+ F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

0 2 3 6 6 10 5 5 6 7 7 0 21 78

Retained

(1.00)

41 37 41 24 34 27 8 18 8 5 3 1 38 285

Total 41 39 44 30 40 37 13 23 14 12 10 1 59 363

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ANTH 101 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 1 3 5 5 6 4 7 1 8 0 6 48

Retained

(1.00)

21 16 32 24 13 7 5 12 0 0 1 4 135

Total 23 17 35 29 18 13 9 19 1 8 1 10 183

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ANTH 111 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

3 0 2 3 0 5 0 3 1 2 0 7 1 6 33

Retained

(1.00)

22 9 25 14 11 21 3 11 3 1 1 1 1 9 132

Total 25 9 27 17 11 26 3 14 4 3 1 8 2 15 165

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ARCH 100 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 1 3 1 0 4 0 1 0 5 2 18

Retained

(1.00)

8 24 24 12 16 9 8 12 3 1 7 124

Total 9 25 27 13 16 13 8 13 3 6 9 142

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ASTR 100 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

7 3 4 3 2 3 2 5 7 2 1 28 15 82

Retained

(1.00)

56 20 52 28 26 30 10 26 5 3 5 4 18 283

Total 63 23 56 31 28 33 12 31 12 5 6 32 33 365

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)




a. 6 cells (23.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.12.

BIO 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

4 1 8 1 0 5 2 2 5 1 1 6 4 40

Retained

(1.00)

37 16 32 13 15 24 10 13 8 1 2 3 1 175

Total 41 17 40 14 15 29 12 15 13 2 3 9 5 215

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





BIO 111 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

2 3 1 3 0 7 0 1 2 1 0 10 17 47

Retained

(1.00)

29 12 22 20 18 23 6 18 5 0 5 7 10 175

Total 31 15 23 23 18 30 6 19 7 1 5 17 27 222

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





BIO 112 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 7 1 2 17 1 3 39

Retained

(1.00)

17 8 25 16 10 27 11 5 12 2 5 5 0 4 147

Total 17 9 26 16 11 27 13 8 19 3 7 22 1 7 186

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





BIO 113 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 2 2 2 4 5 2 2 3 0 1 6 29

Retained

(1.00)

15 33 38 23 16 13 7 15 8 4 1 4 3 180

Total 15 33 40 25 18 17 12 17 10 7 1 5 9 209

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CAP 102 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ D+ W

Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 0 2 2 2 0 1 1 8

Retained

(1.00)

24 22 22 11 21 5 3 0 0 108

Total 24 22 22 13 23 7 3 1 1 116

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CAP 161 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ D F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 2 1 3 2 2 0 0 2 1 14

Retained

(1.00)

21 25 35 7 21 5 3 2 1 1 121

Total 22 27 36 10 23 7 3 2 3 2 135

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CAP 162 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 7

Retained

(1.00)

19 24 22 16 16 6 1 7 0 1 112

Total 20 25 22 17 17 6 3 7 1 1 119

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CC 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

4 1 2 4 5 8 5 2 1 2 2 8 1 3 48

Retained

(1.00)

16 15 23 17 22 14 4 11 1 2 6 2 0 9 142

Total 20 16 25 21 27 22 9 13 2 4 8 10 1 12 190

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CHEM 100 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 5 1 0 5 1 1 2 3 1 7 5 31

Retained

(1.00)

3 17 31 19 4 17 9 11 10 0 4 2 4 131

Total 3 17 36 20 4 22 10 12 12 3 5 9 9 162

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CHEM 101 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

3 2 9 8 6 16 6 7 10 0 2 17 13 99

Retained

(1.00)

40 34 41 33 23 22 14 22 5 4 11 5 2 256

Total 43 36 50 41 29 38 20 29 15 4 13 22 15 355

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CHEM 111 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

13 1 5 0 0 12 2 5 5 2 7 28 14 94

Retained

(1.00)

89 4 70 1 30 41 0 25 21 2 8 9 20 320

Total 102 5 75 1 30 53 2 30 26 4 15 37 34 414

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CHEM 112 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ D D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

4 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 6 5 21

Retained

(1.00)

51 4 27 3 18 23 9 7 2 2 7 8 161

Total 55 4 28 3 20 24 9 8 2 3 13 13 182

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CJC 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

9 2 7 1 0 4 4 0 6 3 5 18 12 71

Retained

(1.00)

56 3 59 14 9 19 9 10 6 5 6 8 11 215

Total 65 5 66 15 9 23 13 10 12 8 11 26 23 286

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CJC 102 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

4 1 3 0 1 5 0 2 4 2 22 1 7 52

Retained

(1.00)

22 4 34 9 2 42 2 10 16 4 4 3 9 161

Total 26 5 37 9 3 47 2 12 20 6 26 4 16 213

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





COMM 210 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

7 22 54 43 30 40 13 24 14 8 11 46 5 40 357

Retained

(1.00)

136 259 418 173 251 92 27 140 6 5 12 9 4 33 1565

Total 143 281 472 216 281 132 40 164 20 13 23 55 9 73 1922

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





CS 104 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A B B- B+ C C- C+ D D+ F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 6 3 0 6 2 2 2 1 8 0 2 34

Retained

(1.00)

31 28 21 12 8 4 9 1 3 0 2 0 119

Total 33 34 24 12 14 6 11 3 4 8 2 2 153

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





DANC 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

9 6 5 9 11 6 4 2 3 4 3 15 3 12 92

Retained

(1.00)

107 70 48 31 37 11 5 15 2 2 3 5 6 7 349

Total 116 76 53 40 48 17 9 17 5 6 6 20 9 19 441

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ECON 201 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 1 5 4 1 8 2 1 5 2 3 19 1 14 67

Retained

(1.00)

43 10 58 28 17 77 28 18 28 7 13 26 2 33 388

Total 44 11 63 32 18 85 30 19 33 9 16 45 3 47 455

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





EDEL 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

8 1 3 1 4 1 3 1 22

Retained

(1.00)

99 13 11 4 13 1 0 2 143

Total 107 14 14 5 17 2 3 3 165

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





EDHI 200 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ CR D W

Not

Retained

(.00)

3 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 1 3 13

Retained

(1.00)

112 15 18 1 8 1 0 2 1 1 14 173

Total 115 16 18 3 9 1 2 2 1 2 17 186

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





EDPS 260 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

6 2 6 3 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 4 2 28

Retained

(1.00)

67 27 30 8 15 8 3 11 0 0 2 1 1 173

Total 73 29 36 11 15 10 4 11 1 1 2 5 3 201

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





EDTE 120 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B+ C C- C+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

4 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 9 19

Retained

(1.00)

46 23 1 4 2 2 5 1 10 94

Total 50 24 1 6 2 3 5 3 19 113

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ENG 103 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

29 54 87 41 68 65 15 40 18 7 4 98 1 68 595

Retained

(1.00)

327 308 418 134 266 106 13 60 8 3 1 16 1 14 1675

Total 356 362 505 175 334 171 28 100 26 10 5 114 2 82 2270

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ENG 104 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- D+ EC F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

24 25 42 23 13 23 3 6 4 0 1 0 29 2 57 252

Retained

(1.00)

375 292 316 126 216 49 13 52 8 4 10 1 25 18 82 1587

Total 399 317 358 149 229 72 16 58 12 4 11 1 54 20 139 1839

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ENG 114 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ W

Not

Retained

(.00)

0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 4

Retained

(1.00)

23 32 7 7 27 3 1 3 103

Total 23 33 8 7 27 4 2 3 107

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





FCS 103 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D- F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

5 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 3 18

Retained

(1.00)

79 15 3 1 5 2 3 3 0 1 4 116

Total 84 17 4 3 5 2 4 3 1 4 7 134

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





FCS 135 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A B C D F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

39 33 9 8 9 11 109

Retained

(1.00)

224 114 17 10 8 5 378

Total 263 147 26 18 17 16 487

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





FIN 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A B C D F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

37 78 78 14 58 43 308

Retained

(1.00)

437 583 276 41 20 38 1395

Total 474 661 354 55 78 81 1703

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)




a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 9.95.

FIN 110 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 8 1 14 1 5 40

Retained

(1.00)

35 3 50 1 8 57 1 17 10 0 3 8 15 208

Total 37 3 53 1 8 60 1 20 18 1 17 9 20 248

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





GEOG 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 4 4 3 1 3 2 2 3 7 1 2 0 6 39

Retained

(1.00)

21 17 34 32 16 23 2 10 6 5 2 8 1 8 185

Total 22 21 38 35 17 26 4 12 9 12 3 10 1 14 224

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





GEOG 150 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 2 2 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 3 4 3 21

Retained

(1.00)

5 9 25 10 11 6 2 14 1 0 2 0 3 88

Total 6 11 27 11 11 7 4 15 1 1 5 4 6 109

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





GEOL 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 2 3 0 5 2 1 1 1 0 6 1 6 28

Retained

(1.00)

16 12 31 8 13 14 3 18 4 0 6 4 4 13 146

Total 16 12 33 11 13 19 5 19 5 1 6 10 5 19 174

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





HIST 150 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

28 29 54 33 32 75 33 38 41 21 29 118 1 60 592

Retained

(1.00)

421 263 403 203 221 269 79 192 57 15 38 42 13 78 2294

Total 449 292 457 236 253 344 112 230 98 36 67 160 14 138 2886

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)




a. 1 cell (3.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.87.

HIST 201 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

4 0 6 4 1 3 0 5 3 1 0 9 0 3 39

Retained

(1.00)

39 21 27 16 16 8 4 11 2 1 4 2 2 9 162

Total 43 21 33 20 17 11 4 16 5 2 4 11 2 12 201

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





HONR 199 (s)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B+ C C- C+ I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 7

Retained

(1.00)

157 12 7 12 1 1 2 1 3 196

Total 159 13 8 14 1 1 2 1 4 203

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





HONR 201 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 7

Retained

(1.00)

87 26 4 2 12 0 0 4 135

Total 88 27 5 2 14 1 1 4 142

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





HONR 202 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 0 1 0 1 3

Retained

(1.00)

72 29 4 1 9 0 115

Total 73 29 4 2 9 1 118

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





HSC 160 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

13 7 5 9 7 11 6 4 3 1 6 12 1 9 94

Retained

(1.00)

65 52 64 41 44 21 8 26 5 0 3 4 4 5 342

Total 78 59 69 50 51 32 14 30 8 1 9 16 5 14 436

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ID 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ CR D D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

16 4 7 1 1 5 1 2 35 1 0 3 6 12 94

Retained

(1.00)

70 9 11 1 1 1 0 2 150 0 1 0 0 6 252

Total 86 13 18 2 2 6 1 4 185 1 1 3 6 18 346

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ISOM 125 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

14 3 8 5 8 7 6 3 5 4 5 15 1 10 94

Retained

(1.00)

83 32 69 50 52 26 10 21 5 1 7 3 1 7 367

Total 97 35 77 55 60 33 16 24 10 5 12 18 2 17 461

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





ISOM 135 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 8 1 0 3 3 1 1 0 1 8 0 2 29

Retained

(1.00)

42 9 56 18 12 34 4 17 2 1 4 4 2 4 209

Total 43 9 64 19 12 37 7 18 3 1 5 12 2 6 238

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





JOUR 101 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

2 2 7 1 2 3 0 3 1 1 1 13 0 2 38

Retained

(1.00)

35 45 47 23 29 6 2 12 2 0 1 3 4 7 216

Total 37 47 54 24 31 9 2 15 3 1 2 16 4 9 254

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





LA 100 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 1 2 2 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 16

Retained

(1.00)

16 18 31 25 17 6 2 5 3 0 3 0 1 127

Total 16 19 33 27 18 8 3 5 4 2 4 1 3 143

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MATH 108 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total CR NC W

Not

Retained

(.00)

15 39 9 63

Retained

(1.00)

129 57 14 200

Total 144 96 23 263

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)




a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.51.

MATH 111 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- D+ F NC W

Not

Retained

(.00)

3 3 9 1 4 16 2 5 11 6 5 29 0 11 105

Retained

(1.00)

32 10 47 23 10 81 15 18 21 6 16 14 1 11 305

Total 35 13 56 24 14 97 17 23 32 12 21 43 1 22 410

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MATH 112 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 12 6 24

Retained

(1.00)

9 7 12 12 3 14 6 6 4 1 2 3 7 86

Total 10 7 13 14 3 16 6 6 4 1 2 15 13 110

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MATH 125 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

10 12 21 10 5 36 15 4 21 9 6 67 4 51 271

Retained

(1.00)

139 63 233 92 60 190 65 89 88 23 38 37 18 64 1199

Total 149 75 254 102 65 226 80 93 109 32 44 104 22 115 1470

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MATH 132 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 1 4 3 2 4 0 4 2 0 2 11 0 13 47

Retained

(1.00)

35 9 48 21 10 42 3 5 17 4 8 9 1 21 233

Total 36 10 52 24 12 46 3 9 19 4 10 20 1 34 280

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MATH 201 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 6 0 0 3 2 0 1 2 1 4 1 21

Retained

(1.00)

21 5 37 16 13 26 6 8 6 2 4 5 14 163

Total 22 5 43 16 13 29 8 8 7 4 5 9 15 184

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





MUHI 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

19 9 11 5 7 9 2 4 9 3 1 30 2 34 145

Retained

(1.00)

237 54 40 25 39 24 16 20 10 8 12 13 4 46 548

Total 256 63 51 30 46 33 18 24 19 11 13 43 6 80 693

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 105 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 2 5 2 3 1 1 3 1 7 0 3 29

Retained

(1.00)

24 27 33 14 18 8 3 5 1 1 1 3 138

Total 25 29 38 16 21 9 4 8 2 8 1 6 167

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 108 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D- F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 3 5 5 3 0 1 1 1 0 10 2 33

Retained

(1.00)

42 37 27 9 13 1 4 2 0 1 4 4 144

Total 44 40 32 14 16 1 5 3 1 1 14 6 177

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 130 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

3 1 1 2 3 3 2 0 0 0 6 4 25

Retained

(1.00)

21 18 12 13 14 9 9 1 3 2 2 6 110

Total 24 19 13 15 17 12 11 1 3 2 8 10 135

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 131 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

0 7 5 0 4 1 0 2 2 21

Retained

(1.00)

15 43 9 5 20 4 1 2 1 100

Total 15 50 14 5 24 5 1 4 3 121

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 132 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

5 5 1 2 2 0 0 4 1 20

Retained

(1.00)

62 19 6 4 9 3 1 1 2 107

Total 67 24 7 6 11 3 1 5 3 127

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NEWS 133 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 6 3 16

Retained

(1.00)

10 10 16 12 18 6 1 8 2 2 3 10 98

Total 11 10 17 13 20 6 1 8 4 2 9 13 114

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





NREM 101 (l)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 3 7 2 3 5 1 3 5 0 13 7 49

Retained

(1.00)

27 23 31 17 14 13 8 7 5 1 1 4 7 158

Total 27 23 34 24 16 16 13 8 8 6 1 17 14 207

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





PFW 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

4 5 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 7 6 26

Retained

(1.00)

41 54 14 11 27 3 2 1 1 1 8 5 168

Total 45 59 14 12 27 3 4 2 1 1 15 11 194

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





PFW 103 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

17 20 9 4 8 2 4 2 0 1 2 18 22 109

Retained

(1.00)

101 153 51 21 87 5 5 17 2 2 1 10 11 466

Total 118 173 60 25 95 7 9 19 2 3 3 28 33 575

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





PFW 148 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C- C+ D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 6 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 2 15

Retained

(1.00)

87 61 5 4 11 1 2 0 1 2 2 176

Total 88 67 7 5 13 1 2 1 1 2 4 191

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





PLAN 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

2 1 2 3 2 3 0 1 1 0 4 3 22

Retained

(1.00)

40 18 16 14 26 8 5 1 1 1 2 2 134

Total 42 19 18 17 28 11 5 2 2 1 6 5 156

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





POLS 130 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

0 2 10 1 0 8 3 3 2 0 2 7 0 2 40

Retained

(1.00)

24 13 27 6 8 32 6 8 11 2 3 4 2 4 150

Total 24 15 37 7 8 40 9 11 13 2 5 11 2 6 190

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





PSYS 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

15 14 42 24 10 51 4 17 11 8 13 79 8 53 349

Retained

(1.00)

136 86 259 105 86 132 27 69 29 5 17 21 13 44 1029

Total 151 100 301 129 96 183 31 86 40 13 30 100 21 97 1378

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





RELS 160 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

2 1 7 2 2 12 1 3 6 1 4 13 2 12 68

Retained

(1.00)

12 14 35 19 13 32 13 19 3 5 7 6 0 13 191

Total 14 15 42 21 15 44 14 22 9 6 11 19 2 25 259

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





SOC 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

18 21 29 14 22 16 11 17 5 4 11 40 0 18 226

Retained

(1.00)

177 117 141 58 95 28 22 45 9 7 8 4 2 13 726

Total 195 138 170 72 117 44 33 62 14 11 19 44 2 31 952

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





SP 102 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

2 2 4 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 5 5 24

Retained

(1.00)

28 22 36 7 15 14 11 7 2 0 2 2 8 154

Total 30 24 40 9 16 15 12 7 2 1 2 7 13 178

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





SP 201 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

2 1 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 1 3 5 19

Retained

(1.00)

23 20 27 9 12 8 2 3 3 0 0 3 110

Total 25 21 28 11 12 10 3 4 3 1 3 8 129

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





SPCE 201 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C+ D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

3 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 12

Retained

(1.00)

54 9 10 8 11 1 2 1 2 0 2 100

Total 57 11 12 9 11 2 2 1 2 2 3 112

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





TCOM 101 (m)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 5 6 7 4 5 1 2 5 3 39

Retained

(1.00)

35 28 25 25 31 12 1 19 0 5 181

Total 36 33 31 32 35 17 2 21 5 8 220

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





THEA 100 (m)

Count

Course Grade


Not

Retained

(.00)

21 1 18 1 2 15 10 2 4 3 2 10 2 14 105

Retained

(1.00)

159 18 80 17 23 34 12 18 4 0 2 4 0 9 380

Total 180 19 98 18 25 49 22 20 8 3 4 14 2 23 485

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





THEA 103 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D- D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

1 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 1 1 3 3 15

Retained

(1.00)

28 11 32 10 4 17 0 6 1 0 0 1 110

Total 29 11 33 11 4 20 1 6 2 1 3 4 125

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





THEA 104 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D+ F W

Not

Retained

(.00)

0 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 7

Retained

(1.00)

5 3 30 17 4 24 1 10 1 0 1 96

Total 5 3 33 17 4 25 2 10 1 2 1 103

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





THEA 232 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B- B+ C C- C+ D- F I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

3 2 3 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 4 18

Retained

(1.00)

60 26 15 3 15 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 124

Total 63 28 18 4 15 1 2 3 1 2 1 4 142

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





THEA 280 (l)

Count

Course Grade

Total A A- B B+ C C+ CR I W

Not

Retained

(.00)

12 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 21

Retained

(1.00)

90 4 5 1 0 1 38 3 1 143

Total 102 5 6 1 1 1 38 3 7 164

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)





Documents

Office of Institutional Effectiveness Fall 2011 - Fall 2012 · comprehensive exam, etc.) ... CHEM 101, CHEM 111, CJC 102, CS 104, EDHI 200, FCS 103 ... Linear Regression Results Predicting