Journal | References | Discussion Group | Slide Shows | Issues | Consulting | Companies | Jobs/Conferences | Affiliates | Home
Center for the Study of College Student Retention
  

About the Center
Contact Us

 Recruitment begins with retention: Retention begins with recruitment
A Publication by Alan Seidman

Seidman, A. (1989). Recruitment begins with retention: Retention begins with recruitment. Colleague. State University of New York, 40-45.

The ability of a student to become integrated into institutional life has been shown to be a key to retention. Institutions therefore plan activities around this notion to attempt to integrate or "fit" students socially and academically into the institution with varying degrees of success. The greater the congruence between the student's values, goals, and attitudes and those of the college, the more likely that the student will persist at the college (Tinto, 1975, 1987; Pantages & Creedon, 1978; Lenning, et al., 1980; Pascarella, 1982; Pascarella, et al., 1986; Forest, 1984; Crockett, 1984; Creamer & Atwell, 1984).

Retention begins with the admissions process. Admissions materials and personal contacts, and the expectations they build, can play a major role in a student's adjustment to the institution. Information provided to students must be realistic or students are going to be frustrated by the lack of congruence between themselves and the institution (Noel, 1976). Noel also states:
... that it is critically important to achieve a good student/institutional "match-up" early. Specifically for the student it means the right institution, the right program, the right course-entry level... (p. 34).
Cope and Hannah (1974) argue that lower attrition rates reported by prestigious private universities and state-supported universities with national reputations are attributed to student self-selection. This self-selection increases the compatibility or "fit" between the student's interests and needs with those of the institution's environment.

Litten and Brodigan (1992), in a study in conjunction with The College Board and Carleton College, sent a questionnaire to students and parents in six metropolitan areas. The purpose was to ascertain parent and student perceptions of colleges ad information desired during the college selection process. They found that although students and parents differed somewhat on item importance, they desired information regarding cost, program offerings, and transferability among others. They received this information from high school counselors, college literature, and campus personnel during college visits.

Chapman (1981) points out that due to the expected decrease in college enrollments, colleges, in their zeal to recruit students persist in the belief that they can affect students' choices by merely modifying their institutional descriptions or the targeting of their recruiting. He implies that colleges should improve the information they make available to prospective students to help improve student choice. Chapman says that students select colleges in which they believe they can get courses they need to enter graduate school or to get jobs. Also, many students enter college with unrealistic expectations of the college environment. Hence, it is important to supply the prospective student with accurate information.

This is also supported by Bean (1982) who feels that colleges should have outreach programs for parents and students. These programs should make parents and students aware of college programs and services. They should also serve to provide a supportive environment for students who are concerned about whether or not they made the right choice in coming to the college in the first place.

Lenning and Cooper (1978) also point out the need to provide adequate information regarding institutions of higher education to prospective students. They refer to a number of studies that showed that students would not have attended or did not attend certain institutions due to the lack or clarity of information they received. Not providing accurate nor comprehensive information to students:
... can result in an unwise choice of institution or programs of study and, consequently, low student morale, high attrition rates, and future recruiting problems. Conversely adequate information can enhance morale and recruiting and retention... (p. 3).
Therefore, information provided and communicated to the student by the institution is of the utmost importance. Institutions, through their literature and communication by admissions officers can help students make an informed college choice.

Tinto and Wallace (1986) and Grites (1979) argue that student institutional "fit" can be accomplished at the time of college selection and therefore minimize incorrect college choice on the part of the student and increase retention. Tinto and Wallace say:
... involving admissions officers in retention efforts requires that institutions adopt a new view of admissions, one that emphasizes the educative function of the admissions process in the undergraduate experience and restores the once traditional role of admissions officers in counseling and advising prospective students (p. 291).
Tinto and Wallace go on to say that admissions officers can help individuals develop reasonable expectations about their education, thereby sparing student disappointment with the institution later. The admissions officer can also help students select the college that best suits individual needs, thus reducing incorrect choices. By doing these things admissions officers:
... can help engender among those students who enroll a growing commitment to the institution. Individual commitment to the institution...is the key to institutional retention (Tinto & Wallace, p. 292)
This is supported by Grites. He states that not only does the advising of the student begin with the student's initial experience with the institution, the admission process, but so also does the retention of the students. A potential student needs to be recruited through the "best fit" approach. That is, the potential student needs to be appraised of institutional values and ethos.

Alfred (1973) believes that the direct communication of college characteristics to prospective students is essential if they are to have realistic expectations of the college. It is the responsibility of the college to disseminate information to prospective students through appropriate personnel.

Also, Maguire and Lay (1981) feel that institutions should determine how accepted applicants view the institution. If perceptions are inaccurate, ways should be found to clarify what the institution has to offer. This can be accomplished by providing accurate information regarding the institutional services and program offerings at the time of application.

Ramist (1981) also supports the notion that early awareness of college characteristics is important. A student's dissatisfaction discovered after enrollment can lead to student displeasure with the institution. Therefore:
... colleges should consider providing all information deemed relevant for an informed decision...including accurate cost projections, expected student performance, current student and faculty perceptions, an complete description of student service, a description of student life, a description of all academic options...and the assessment by graduates of the relationship between their education and job requirements (p. 27).
If a prospective student's characteristics (aptitude, interests, expectations, etc.) are recognized by the institution of interest, the greater satisfaction the student will have with the institution. Admissions officers should be educators in providing institutional information to prospective students to help insure "best fit" (Grites, 1979).

Creamer (1980) also believes that retention begins with recruitment. He says that if the wrong students are admitted, it may be impossible to hold them. He goes as far as to say that:

It may be unethical to recruit students with characteristics dissimilar to those of students who persist in an environment or whose attitudes and goals do not "fit" the institution (p. 12).
Attrition studies at commuter institutions, according to Bean and Metzner (1985), found that a student's perception of the relevancy of a college education was related positively to persistence. Rootman (1972), in his study of the United States Coast Guard Academy, found that the lack of "fit" between the individual and his socializing environment were the major determinants in withdrawal from the Academy. Lack of knowledge about the Coast Guard Academy in relationship to the information regarding other service academies (West Point, etc.) may cause the individual to be less aware of the academic and social experiences they will encounter.

This is supported by Bean (1985) who found that for freshmen the institutional fit had the greatest influence on dropout syndrome. He says:
Regardless of its source, a feeling of belonging or fitting in at the institution was most important during the freshman year, but also remained important during the sophomore and junior year (p. 55).
It is evident from the preceding that admissions officers can play an important role in the recruitment and retention of students. The process of recruitment is not exclusive of retention. Rather, they are interrelated. A good recruitment program is in essence a good retention process, while a good retention process is a good recruitment program. In other words, matching student attributes with institutional attributes will contribute to student satisfaction with the institution. This in turn will reflect positively on the institution as satisfied customers relate their positive experiences to others.

References

Alfred, R.L. (1983). Student attrition: Strategies for action. Kansas City, MO: Metropolitan Junior College District. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 085 064).

Bean, J.P. (1982). Student attrition, intentions, and confidence: Interaction effects in a path model. Research in Higher Education, 17, No. 4, 291-320.

Bean, J.P. (1985), Spring). Interaction effects based on class level in an explanatory model of college student dropout syndrome. American Educational Research Journal, 22, No. 1, 35-64.

Bean, J.P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985, Winter). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 52, No. 5, 490-505.

Cope, R. G., & Hannah, W. (1974). Revolving college doors. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Creamer, D.G. (1980, Spring). Educational advising for student retention: An institutional perspective. Community College Review, 7, No. 4, 11-18.

Creamer, D.G., & Atwell, C.A. (1984). The great debate: Academic advising. Community and Junior College Journal, 54 (8), 18-20.

Crockett, D.S. (1984). Advising skills, techniques, and resources. Iowa City, Iowa: The ACT National Center for the Advancement of Educational Practices.

Forest, A. (1982). Increasing student competence & persistence: The best case for general education. Iowa City, Iowa: The ACT National Center for the Advancement of Educational Practices.

Grites, T.J. (1979). Academic advising: Getting us through the eighties. AAHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report No. 7, Washington, D.C.: American Association of Higher Education.

Lenning, O.T., Beal, P.E., & Sauer, K. (1980). Retention and attrition: Evidence for action and research. Boulder, Colorado: The National Institute for Higher Education Management Systems.

Lenning, O.T., & Cooper, E.M. (1978). Guidebook for colleges and universities: Presenting information to prospective students. Boulder, Colorado: The National Institute for Higher Education Management Systems.

Litten, L.H. & Brodigan, D.L. (1982, Spring). On being heard in a noisy world: Matching messages and media in college marketing. College and University, 242-264.

Maguire, J. & Lay, R. (1981, Winter). Modeling the college choice process: Images and decision. Colleges and University, 123-139.

Noel, L. (1976). College student retention- a campus-wide responsibility. The NACAC Journal, 21, No. 1, 33-36.

Pantages, T.J., & Creedon, C.F. (1978, Winter). Studies of college attrition: 1950-1975. Review of Educational Research, 48, No.1, 49-101.

Pascarella, E.T. (ed.) (1982). Studying student attrition. New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 36, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E.T., Smart, J.C. & Ethington, D.A. (1986). Long-term persistence of two-year college students. Research in Higher Education, 24, No. 1, 47-71.

Ramist, L. (1981). College student attrition and retention (College Board Report No. 81-1). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

Rootman, I. (1972). Voluntary withdrawal from a total adult socializing organization: A model. Sociology of Education, 45, 258-270.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropouts from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of the recent literature. A Review of Educational Research, 45, 89-125.

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

Tinto, V., & Wallace, D. (1986, Summer). Retention: An admission concern. College and University., 290-293.
                                                                                                                     back to top