University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 1

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION: A GAP ANALYSIS

By

Jason P Lafferty

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2018

Copyright 2018 Jason P Lafferty
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 2
DEDICATION
To my wife, Lindsey Rae, your love and support was needed, every step of the way, and you
happily provided it, without question, I adore you
To my parents, Bob and Vicki, wow what a journey, and yes this really happened
To my children Amelia and Porter, while you didn’t know this happened, hopefully my
educational success sets a pathway for you both to strive for your dreams, whatever they may be

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi, my chair, for your support, guidance, honesty and
direction.
Thank you to committee member, Dr. Melora Sundt, for all you did for me during my
time at USC.
Thank you to Dr. Helena Seli for helping me complete this process, it was greatly
appreciated.
Thank you Amber, Lauren, Bobby, Kyle, Brett, and Susan for keeping me on track, being
my colleague, and most importantly my friend.
Fight On! Cohort One and all of the others I shared wonderful memories with!!

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables and Figures 7
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Introduction 10
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 10
Organizational Context and Mission 11
Organizational Performance Status 12
Related Literature 12
Importance of Addressing the Problem 15
Description of Stakeholder Groups 15
Organizational Performance Goal 16
Group for the Interview Data in This Study 17
Purpose of the Project and Questions 17
Methodological Framework 18
Organization of the Dissertation 18
Chapter Two: Literature Review 21
Risk Factors of Community College Students and Their Relation to Retention 21
Student Success Initiatives of Community College and its Relation to Retention 23
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 25
Knowledge and Skills 25
Knowledge Types 25
Declarative knowledge influences 27
Procedural knowledge influences 28
Metacognitive knowledge influences 29
Motivation 30
Expectancy Value Theory 30
Self-Efficacy Theory 31
Organizational Influences 34
Cultural Model 35
Cultural Setting 36
Summary 37
Chapter Three: Methodology 40
Purpose of the Project and Questions 40
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 40
Participating Stakeholders 43
Interview Sampling and Criterion Rationale 43
Criterion One 43
Criterion Two 43
Interview (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 43
Data Collection 44
Data Analysis 48
Credibility and Trustworthiness 48
Ethics 49
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 5
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 53
Findings 53
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Gaps 58
Declarative Knowledge 59
Procedural Knowledge 61
Metacognitive Knowledge 63
Motivation Influences 65
Expectancy Value 66
Self-Efficacy 67
Motivation and Culture Influence 68
Organizational Influences 71
Cultural Model 71
Cultural Setting 73
Summary of Findings 76
Chapter Five: Recommendations 79
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 79
Knowledge Recommendations 79
Declarative Knowledge Solutions 81
Procedural Knowledge Solutions 82
Metacognitive Knowledge Solutions 82
Motivation Recommendations 83
Expectancy Value Theory Solutions 85
Self-Efficacy Theory Solutions 86
Organization Recommendations 87
Cultural Model Solutions 89
Cultural Setting Solutions 91
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 92
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 92
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 93
Level Four: Results and Leading Indicators 95
Level Three: Behavior 95
Level Two: Learning 98
Learning goals 98
Program 99
Components of learning 99
Level One: Reaction 101
Immediately following the program implementation 102
Delayed for a period after the program implementation 103
Data Analysis and Reporting 103
Implementation and Evaluation Plan Summary
103
Limitations 104
Future Research 104
Conclusion 105
References 107
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 111
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 6
Appendix B: Artifact Analysis 113
Appendix C: Informed Consent 114
Appendix D: Participant Recruitment Letter 120

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 7
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1. Assumed Knowledge Influences 30
Table 2. Assumed Motivation Influences 34
Table 3. Assumed Organizational Influences 37
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework 42
Table 4. Participant Background Questions 45
Table 5. Knowledge Influence Assessment 46
Table 6. Motivation Influence Assessment 47
Table 7. Organizational Influence Assessment 48
Table 8. Retention for Last Three Years 55
Table 9. Strategies Created Last Three Years 57
Table 10. Declarative Knowledge Gaps 61
Table 11. Procedural Knowledge Gaps 63
Table 12. Metacognitive Knowledge Gaps 65
Table 13. Motivation Gaps 70
Table 14. Organizational Influences Gaps 75
Table 15. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 80
Table 16. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 84

Table 17. Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations 88
Table 18. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 95
Table 19. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 96
Table 20. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 97
Table 21. Components of Learning for the Program 100
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 8
Table 22. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 102

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 9
ABSTRACT
The educational problem addressed in this dissertation was the declining institutional retention
rates of students in the community college setting and the ability of academic affairs to have
identified and solved retention issues. Withdrawals in community colleges were climbing to the
highest levels that have been documented. Research showed, that the attrition rate of students
who attend community colleges is approximately 41% in the first two years, and regresses to
34% when utilizing the persistence-to-degree formulation (Fike & Fike, 2008). This dissertation
focused on retention in community colleges and how the academic affairs unit identified their
gaps in knowledge and motivation of the creation and implementation of successful strategies to
solve retention problems, as well the institutional influences, which contributed to low retention
of the individual college and national community college system. The purpose of the project was
to conduct a gap analysis to consider the knowledge, motivation and organizational elements that
influenced with the organizational performance goal of achieving a yearly student retention rate
of 70% by May 2018. Members of the academic affairs unit were interviewed to accrue data that
sought to examine two research questions, which fell under the KMO framework of Clark and
Estes. Finally, influences validated in Chapter Four through qualitative research are addressed
with solutions and recommendations in support of the research questions.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Community colleges have provided access to many students who were unable to attend
traditional universities for a myriad of reasons. These students often had factors which
contributed to their need for an educational facility that had open access or enrollment, increased
access to remedial classes and tutoring, associate degrees in non-traditional fields such as those
needed for jobs in the career and technical industry, and locations in proximity to their work,
home or community (Roman, 2007). The opportunity to provide additional income for their
family and communities, access to higher paying jobs, and the gratification of completing their
education were some of the factors that lured students to community college campuses
nationwide. While all of the potential positives that came from attaining a degree were presented
to the students in orientation and during class periods, impediments prevented community
college students from completing their degree programs. When a student failed to complete their
degree it often led to unemployment, financial hardships, or even created problems that were not
otherwise present prior to the students attempt to complete their degree.
The educational problem being addressed in this dissertation was the declining
institutional retention rates of students in the community college setting and the ability of
academic affairs to have identified and solved retention issues. This was a problem, given the
fact that research showed that colleges must understand escalating government and public
scrutiny, and facilitate action regarding student persistence, which would determine failure or
success of the state system and specific college (Wild & Ebbers, 2002).
Withdrawals in community colleges were climbing to the highest levels that have been
documented. Research showed, that the attrition rate of students who attended community
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 11
colleges was approximately 41% in the first two years, and regressed to 34% when utilizing the
persistence-to-degree formulation (Fike & Fike, 2008). Furthermore, research showed that
students who completed their degree contributed significantly to their family, community and the
workforce, produced better paying jobs and increased their likelihood of success.
This dissertation focused on retention in community colleges and how the academic
affairs unit identified their gaps in knowledge and motivation of the creation and implementation
of successful strategies to solve retention problems, as well the institutional influences, which
contributed to low retention of the individual college and national community college system.
Organizational Context and Mission
The college discussed in this dissertation was the (Career College Institute), CCI, a
member of the (Career College System), CCS. CCI was defined as a technical community
college that trained students for career opportunities in multiple fields utilizing exceptional
facilities and dynamic faculty and curriculum (CCI, 2016). The mission of CCI asserted they
were to provide education that built careers and transformed the lives of those who teach, learn
and work there (CCI, 2016). CCI of Indianapolis, IN, began in July of 2007 and was a partner
school of the state system. The student enrollment was 770 students, and the student population
comprised of 56% females and 44% males (CCI, 2016). The population of the college was
primarily minorities and the average student age was 28 (CCI, 2016). CCI employed 65 faculty
members, and 11 key administrators in academic affairs, which were the president, academic
dean, director of student affairs, 6 program chairs, the registrar, and the librarian. Also there were
15 admissions representatives, 10 financial aid and accounting representatives, and 3 student
placement and services representatives (CCI, 2016). All members of the staff were tasked with
monitoring their divisions and contributed to student outcomes and student satisfaction.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 12
Organizational Performance Status
The organizational performance problem that this dissertation discussed was retention
and the subsequent knowledge, motivation and organizational influences, which contributed to
the academic affairs unit, listed above as the 11 key administrators, and their ability to have
identified and solved retention problems. During the past year, CCI’s retention rates fell to an
unprecedented low of 60.3%. In comparison, CCS campuses average 72.4% (CCI, 2016)
nationally, while CCI’s peer institutions were similar at 64.8% (U.S. Department of Education,
1996). To ensure funding of the campus, and to meet the proposed budget for the fiscal year, CCI
must increase their retention rate to 70%. If CCI failed to meet the yearly 70% requirement, the
college would lose state allocated funding which has already been earmarked for campus use.
Related Literature
There were numerous factors, which contributed to students withdrawing from the
college prior to completion of their degree. Studies concluded that the primary reason that
students failed to persist varied between personal problems and institutional problems. Some of
the major factors that led to students failing to persist were a lack of preparedness for the
academic rigor of college, lack of support from the community and family of the student, and the
economic status of the student (Engle & Tinto, 2008). Recently, literature suggested that
institutions created barriers that students had to overcome to persist and complete their degree.
Each of those factors presented unique challenges for not only the student to overcome, but also
for the academic affairs team to identify and address properly. If I looked directly at the
academic unit who had the most visibility to the students, the academic affairs unit, I saw that
these highly educated individuals were knowledgeable in their field of study, but often lacked the
knowledge to address the personal issues of a student, the ability to identify the institutional
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 13
barriers that led to students withdrawing from their program or institution, and the culture to
collaborate departmentally on the sharing of successful strategies or creation and implementation
of successful strategies. As the primary role of the academic affairs unit was to address the
student’s academic deficiencies, the academic affairs unit needed to understand all of the factors,
which contributed to student’s failure to complete their degree. Literature provided insight that
helped the academic affairs team with their knowledge of retention issues as they related to the
student’s risk factors and institutional influences.
High School students graduated with different degrees of preparedness for college level
work. Some students excelled in college preparatory classes and made the adjustment to college
rather seamlessly, while other high school students struggled to complete their high school
degree and lacked the skill set to approach the rigor of college. Due to the student not
understanding the rigor of education at their previous school, they were unaware of that
academia was challenging and rigorous. First year college students who were underprepared for
academic rigor represented 41% of incoming college freshmen, and included those students who
registered for remedial classes (United States Department of Education, 1996). Furthermore,
Fike and Fike (2008) proposed that some colleges admitted students with less than adequate test
scores, and as a result of that policy, students who enrolled in those colleges were required to
take remedial courses and often failed to complete their degrees. The literature also discussed
organizational influences including the cultural model of community colleges having open
admissions policies. By identifying this influence, the academic affairs unit looked at how the
institution addressed preparedness and the academic resources and strategies that were utilized to
offset this deficiency. This influence had a direct effect on retention and was analyzed for further
improvement models to be developed.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 14
Most students’ likelihood to persist with their degree pursuit and eventually graduate
began with the support they received from their family and their community. Kinzie (2007)
asserted that parents of college students, who frequently talked with their children about the
college experience and were able to advise them regarding specific college expectations,
contributed to the success of their children and elevated their satisfaction with the college
experience, which led to higher persistence. Further research suggested, that low income and
minority students were more likely to lack parental guidance and support other students received,
which led to problems with persistence (Kinzie, 2007). Academic affairs knowledge of the level
of support that a student’s family or the community they came from determined potential courses
of action, and aided the student’s transition to college level coursework and social interaction.
Academic affairs determined strategies that worked for first-generation students based on
successful strategies instituted institutionally or nationally.
Students who showed signs of unpreparedness and low family and community support
often also came from low socioeconomic backgrounds and poverty. Research suggested that
low-income students tended to attend community colleges. A study by Cohen and Brawer (1996)
stated that the community college system often allowed easier access and lower tuition, which
contributed to higher minority and low-income student enrollments. Therefore, the academic
affairs unit anticipated that most community colleges had a larger population of low-income
students than other colleges. This factor presented a problem in that Engle and Tinto (2008)
concluded low-income students were more likely than their peers from higher SES communities
to encounter six risk factors, which led to students withdrawing from college. The influences
that were most likely to prevent students from completing their degree were identified through
research. For CCI to achieve their goal of improving retention, an evaluation in knowledge,
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 15
motivation, and the understanding of organizational influences had to occur. In addition to those
evaluations, the academic affairs unit sought to develop successful strategies, saw value and
prioritized the creation of successful strategies confidently, and finally created a culture that
worked collaboratively and provided adequate time and resources to address the goal of
improved yearly institutional retention at CCI.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of persistence and retention of community college students was important to
address for a variety of reasons. As persistence and retention had an effect on most colleges’
ability to receive federal funding, access tuition past the first year, and comply with the
Department of Education’s national standards, administrators were tasked with creating action
plans to prevent students from failing to persist at their schools.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The primary stakeholders in this dissertation were the academic affairs team of CCI. The
academic affairs team included the campus president, academic dean, program chairs, program
coordinators, registrar and librarian. Each member influenced different aspects of the student
experience and directly influenced student retention. The president determined the direction of
the institutional vision. The dean dictated faculty resources and determined how many classes
were available to be offered per program. The program chairs assigned the faculty and
classrooms, which dictated class size and availability of sections, and the program coordinators
evaluate educational deficiencies, student satisfaction, and student resource needs. The registrar
influenced the scheduling and whether the institution provided students with classes at
appropriate times that were conducive to their work life balance and economic needs. The
librarian often counseled students on available resources, computer competencies, and project
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 16
questions, and was likely to hear of student needs that had not been unearthed by the other
leaders. Each of these stakeholders directly assessed or influenced a student’s likelihood to
persist or withdraw from the college, and was directly involved in the achievement of the
organizational performance goal.
Organizational Performance Goal
CCS must increase institutional retention across its system of schools. The goal of CCS
was to increase retention over a three-year period. CCI was instructed to increase retention for
the current fiscal year or risk losing budgeted dollars (CCI, 2016). By May 2018, CCI’s
organizational performance goal was that retention rates would increase from the current 60.3%
to 70%. Furthermore, the organizational performance goal was that the retention of students
would improve to 70% at CCI by ensuring that the improvement of retention was the highest
priority of the academic affairs unit. As the organizational performance goal was a campus wide
initiative, there was not a stakeholder goal specifically, it was an organizational goal. The
academic affairs unit, the highest level of administrators in the organization, determined their
gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational culture and resources that prevented them
from effectively creating successful strategies that would solve the retention issues at CCI. The
goal of 70% retention was established as a requirement by CCS, and accepted as the minimum
requirement for each campus. All senior management leaders had been instructed to make this
metric a key priority. The organizational performance goal was measured by data accrued for the
campus effectiveness plan and accreditation reporting for the year period prior May of 2018.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 17
Group for the Interview Data in This Study
All members of CCI, including students, were directly involved in the organizational
performance goal of retention and achieving 70% yearly retention as an organization. Not all of
the campus directly managed retention initiatives, therefore, the primary stakeholders utilized for
this study were the academic affairs team. To achieve the organizational performance goal by
May 2018, the academic affairs unit needed to meet regularly to discuss new knowledge related
to the student’s needs, work together as a team, promote effective communication, support the
team, and assume accountability for the failure or success with regard to the goal of improving
the institutional retention rate at CCI.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the project was to conduct a gap analysis to consider the knowledge,
motivation and organizational elements that influenced with the organizational performance goal
of achieving a yearly student retention rate of 70% by May 2018. The analysis began by
generating a list of possible or assumed influences and then examined these influences
systematically to focus on actual or validated influences. While a complete gap analysis focused
on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders focused on in this analysis were the
academic affairs team at CCI. Their knowledge of institutional retention issues and the creation
and implementation of successful strategies to improve yearly retention, their motivation to value
successful strategy implementation and the prioritization of improving retention as a primary
goal, and finally their addressing the organizational influences by creating a collaborative
culture, devoting more time to sharing best practices, and providing adequate resources to
implement successful strategies, were evaluated.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 18
As such, the questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What are the influences in knowledge, motivation and organizational culture and resources of the
academic affairs team that prevents it from effectively identifying and solving retention at issues
at CCI?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions?
Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis, a systematic, analytical method that helps to clarify
organizational goals and identify gaps between the actual performance level and the preferred
performance level within an organization was utilized for this dissertation. Assumed influences
were generated based on personal knowledge and related literature. The knowledge, motivation
and organizational influences, which contributed to organizational gaps, were identified through
a qualitative based approach. Research-based solutions were identified and recommended in a
comprehensive manner.
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters were used to organize this study. Provided in this chapter were the key
concepts and terminology found in a discussion about retention and persistence and the
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences of academic affairs at CCI, which
contributed to the creation of successful strategies to address retention problems. The
organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders as well as the initial concepts of gap analysis,
were introduced. Chapter Two provided a review of current literature surrounding the scope of
the study. Topics of academic affairs knowledge of retention issues which prevented them from
creating successful strategies, motivation of academic affairs to value successful strategies and
prioritize improving retention, and the organizational influences that focused on creating a
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 19
collaborative culture, and devoting more time and resources to create successful strategies were
addressed. Chapter Three detailed the assumed influences, as well as methodology, when it came
to choice participants, data collection and analysis. Chapter Four analyzed the findings and
results from interviews of the participants. Finally, Chapter Five proposed recommendations and
solutions for the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, determined by
the findings in Chapter Four.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 20

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 21
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter two focused on the evolution of literature involving institutional retention and
the identification of risk factors at community colleges, as well as literature that related to the
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences of the academic affairs unit, and its relation
to the organizational performance goal of increasing institutional retention by identifying and
addressing retention issues. The first section discussed the risk factors and historical reasoning
that prevent students from graduating from community college, followed by literature addressing
the environmental and institutional influences and student success, which also affected retention.
The chapter then concluded with an analysis of the literature pertaining to the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences that the academic affairs must address to identify
retention problems and create successful strategies to achieve the goal of 70% retention for the
year at CCI.
Risk Factors of Community College Students and Their Relation to Retention
Literature suggested that there were many factors that prevented students from graduating
from community college. In this section, I looked at literature that details risk factors that were
common to community colleges, including academic preparedness for college level rigor,
community and family support systems for the student, and economic factors that prevented
community college students from graduating.
The first risk factor for low retention rates this dissertation addressed was the academic
preparedness for rigor of community college students. The academic unit at the community
college level, in multiple ways, constantly addressed this risk factor. One solution presented, was
that community colleges offer remedial classes, which Claggett (1996) asserted attracts
underprepared students to community colleges with the prospect of being able to take remedial
courses, at the college level, that further prepared them for future academic rigor. Lau (2003)
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 22
stated that unfortunately, remedial courses and those students who enrolled in remedial courses
were unable to fundamentally understand math and reading, and often struggled with their initial
course loads. This led to eventual withdrawals form their programs and eventually college.
The second risk factor presented, involved students who had limited support from their
family or their community to persistence and graduate from college. This limitation included
many first-generation college students, who did not have the prior understanding of the value of
college, without parental guidance. Research suggested that this factor was prevalent in retention
issues at community colleges. Nunez and Cuccaro-Alamin (1998) gathered samples representing
diverse community college populations, and determined that first-generation students had lower
persistence rates than those students whose parents had completed college or partially attended.
Furthermore, Lee, Sax, Kim & Hagedorn (2004) asserted that students whose parents previously
attended college, also understood the financial implications, amount of time required for studies,
and pertinent information that would help their child adjust to the college environment and
succeed.
Finally, the last risk factor literature suggested involved the socioeconomics of the
community college student. Low-income students attributed to more than half of all students who
failed to persist in college. After six years of college, 43% of low-income students failed to
persist, and 60% of those students withdrew from their program in the first year (Engle & Tinto,
2008). Engle and Tinto (2008) continued by asserting that seven factors were related to low
income students and their likelihood to persist in college. Those factors included: delayed entry
into college after high school, part-time student status, having a full time job, financial
independence from parents or guardians, dependent children, being a single parent and
graduating high school with a general equivalency degree. As for the seven risk factors, 14% of
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 23
low-income students had all seven of the risk factors that led to attrition while 50% of their
advantaged peers had zero risk factors, asserting that low-income students had greater
disadvantages versus their peers (Engle & Tinto, 2008). Literature suggested that the seven risk
factors were among the most influences that the academic affairs unit needed to identify and
provide support for their students. Once an understanding of these influences occurred, the
academic affairs unit addressed the institutional influences, which included their lack of
knowledge on how to have created successful strategies to address student deficiencies.
Furthermore their inability to have determined the value in creating successful strategies or
prioritization of the creation of strategies, contributed to the failure of reaching the goal of
improving yearly retention. Finally, there was a failure to create a collaborative culture, while
devoting the necessary time and resources in the development and implementation of successful
strategies, which contributed to the improvement of yearly retention.
Student Success Initiatives of Community College and its Relation to Retention
New literature suggested that student success and persistence was often affected by
influences at the administrative and faculty level at community colleges. Student success
initiatives were examined at two-year institutions and empirical evidence posited that students
were more likely to persist if they were educated on the resources provided by their college
(Tinto, 2004). Furthermore, when colleges offered courses in student success, covering topics
such as time management skills, note taking, and career services, student’s persistence improved
over the two-year period (Gardner & Jeweler, 1995). Other research concluded that student
success courses provided to underrepresented students created a culture of belonging and
increased the likelihood of persistence (Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). There were direct links to
improvement from increased student initiatives created by faculty and the administration, which
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 24
showed positive results with reference to students completing their degree. Often community
colleges failed to provide adequate resources for adult learners and other students who had
challenges beyond the traditional students. Studies showed that if the college developed
strategies to offset the challenges faced by these students, they were more likely to persist. Lewis
and Middleton (2003) provided this example of an institution creating an initiative to support
single parents, whereby the college provided on campus day care to single parents. The results
provided by Kappner (2002) concluded that students who were provided childcare options often
continued their degree path, graduated, and had higher grade point averages than their peers.
Furthermore, if the college provided support and strategies specifically designed for adult
learners, persistence increased (Kappner, 2002).
Research also determined that the student’s cultural needs further evaluated and the
institution accommodated the cultural differences, which led to a supportive academic culture
(Tierney, 1999). By enabling students to assimilate into the culture of academia on their own
terms, it was asserted that the students would have felt a stronger sense of being a part of the
campus community. Tierney (1999) posited that by using a cultural view, with regard to
evaluating retention, typical variables for a student failing to persist such as financial aid,
academic preparedness and family support did not predict such failures. He then concluded that
organizations to have researched and accommodated the cultural needs of their students and turn
them from a negative to positive. If the academic affairs unit was to create successful strategies
to improve retention, they must have acknowledged both student and institutional factors, which
led to declining yearly retention and the necessity for improvement.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 25
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Knowledge and Skills
This section of the literature review focused on the importance of knowledge-related
influences that enabled the academic affairs unit to have achieved the prescribed organizational
performance goal that the retention of students would improve to 70% by May 2018 at Career
College Institute (CCI) by studying the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that
affected the identification and solving of retention issues by CCI’s academic affairs team. Here
the literature analyzed various knowledge types and their influences on the attainment of the
organizational performance goal. When looking at knowledge and the skills required in solving
performance problems, Rueda (2011) noted that the cognitive process had six levels, included
were: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create, as developed by Anderson and
Krathwol (2001). For the academic affairs unit to successfully solve their performance problem,
each of these cognitive processes and skills were utilized effectively to identify the gaps in the
understanding of retention pertaining to a lack of declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge
and metacognitive knowledge (Anderson & Krathwol, 2001).
Knowledge types. Various types of knowledge and the fundamental understanding of
their influences by an organization’s performance goal were integral to continuous improvement
with regard to outcomes and measurable performance. Rueda (2011) asserted that there was a
commonality amongst educational problems involving issues of learning and knowledge gaps,
and their relation to what people required to function in an effective manner. The academic
affairs unit identified these learning and knowledge gaps and how they related to improving
retention on the campus. Furthermore, Rueda (2011) stated that school administration must have
had knowledge in understanding how to consistently run effective, orderly campuses that satisfy
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 26
differing constituents, which also affected retention. By identifying the knowledge influence of a
lack of successful strategies created and implemented, the campus was not seen as effectively
run nor were the needs of the constituents addressed. As previously stated, we analyzed three
types of knowledge: declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive
knowledge (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) defined declarative
knowledge concepts in two parts, factual knowledge which were basic to specified arenas,
situations and spheres, and then defined conceptual knowledge as an understanding of structures,
models, theories and principles germane to a specific range. Whereas, procedural knowledge was
the understanding of the methods by which a task was completed, they also were described as
complex and dynamic methodologies appropriate to the completion of activity (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001). The last type of knowledge reviewed was metacognitive knowledge. Mayer
(2011) delineated metacognitive knowledge as a reference to the consciousness of an
individual’s cognitive process and the mastery of an individual’s cognitive processing.
Furthermore, with regard to learning, metacognition imputed the individual’s knowledge of how
they learned and managed the learning process. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) contended that
metacognitive knowledge also was a vital condition of strategic behavior in problem solving
which permitted an individual to have contemplated dependent and provisional approaches to a
specific activity or problem.
Having an understanding of the knowledge types and their relation to learning was
integral to the attainment of the organizational performance goal. Rueda (2011) concluded by
asserting that consideration of cognitive processes associated with how an individual utilizes
knowledge provided a more accurate depiction of learning, which led to an assessment of where
gaps may occur, and whether leadership determined gaps in knowledge, and learning.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 27
This section provided a review of literature that related to the organizational performance
goal that by May 2018, that the retention of students would improve to 70% at Career College
Institute (CCI) by studying the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that effected
the identification and solving of retention issues by CCI’s academic affairs team. Specifically,
declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge influences, which
effected the organizational performance goal, were included in this section.
Declarative knowledge influence. Academic affairs at CCI identified declarative
knowledge as an influence that contributed to low retention at CCI. Often administrators at
educational institutions had a limited understanding of why students fail to succeed during the
first year of college, due to a lack of knowledge of the literature and research surrounding
retention. Due to this lack of declarative knowledge, the academic affairs unit needed knowledge
of what strategies had been utilized, with success, regarding retention. Rueda (2011) explained
that declarative knowledge looked at the facts, and examples in the simplest form in regard to the
context or domain. Furthermore, Rueda (2011) stated that declarative knowledge also included
details, elements, and terminology that individuals must comprehend or have a familiarity of, if
they were to understand, make appropriate determinations, and eventually solve problems in
their environment.
For the academic affairs unit to improve retention, they must first have determined if they
had declarative knowledge regarding the influences behind why students fail to persist, and that
there were factors that contributed to a student’s failure to persist past their first year.
Furthermore, they then must have the knowledge to have determined what successful strategies
had been utilized to improve retention based on those influences. Tinto (2005) argued that if
colleges were serious about student success, they would have analyzed both the students and
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 28
their situations, as well as the institution’s educational setting, and whether the environment and
resources provided were conducive to learning. Once the academic affairs unit had an
understanding of influences that caused students failure to persist, and improved their declarative
knowledge of retention influences, they would have been able to identify successful strategies
that have been used by other departments to address retention issues.
Procedural knowledge influences. When the academic affairs unit at CCI developed an
understanding of the factors that contributed to students failing to persist, they then analyzed
successful strategies of other departments and how those strategies showed improved retention.
At this point, the academic affairs unit analyzed their procedural knowledge of how to
implement successful strategies in their program. Successful departments, accrued data, which
analyzed the student’s influences, with regard to the factors identified as causes for students to
withdraw from college. By determining the influences, which contributed to student’s failure to
complete their degrees, advanced, successful strategies were created and implemented across the
institution. Administrators selected a point of reference, a successful strategy, and were then able
to determine if the accrued data from that strategy represented the needs of the students. They
then decided how to best utilize the findings from that strategy to achieve the desired outcome of
improved retention, furthermore by implementing that strategy institutionally (Patton, Morelon,
Whitehead & Hossler, 2009). Clark and Estes (2008) defined education as a situation where
people developed strategic, conceptual, and theoretical knowledge and skills that aided their
ability to manage unique and unforeseen problems, which presented themselves in the future.
Furthermore, by utilizing the principles of education and current research-based knowledge,
administrators comprehended why things occurred, and what drove those occurrences (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Once administrators were able to understand what caused retention issues and how
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 29
the institution facilitated influences to student success, they collected data that was supportive
and used it to improve their decisions. An example, from literature, of procedural knowledge
utilized to predict an academic strategies success, was seen in the academic achievement
predictor model, whereby administrators could assess predictors, which aided in the
identification of at risk students in their first year of college and contributed to the creation of
strategies to combat those risks (DeBerard, Spielmans, & Julka, 2004).
Metacognitive knowledge influences. Finally, the academic affairs unit evaluated their
personal biases that prevented them from properly identifying the factors that led to students
withdrawing from college and contributed to the formation of preconceived notions. Mayer
(2011) described metacognition as both the control of one’s cognitive processing, and one’s self-
awareness of the cognitive process. As most administrators lacked declarative and procedural
knowledge due to a lack of prior knowledge of the literature, Schraw (1998) contended that
metacognitive knowledge negated that low ability or lack of prior understanding of certain
subject matter, and perhaps aided in solving complex problems through the use of limited
strategies and reliance on regulatory knowledge. The academic affairs unit had to be aware of
why the students were withdrawing from school, and understand that there were factors that were
typically involved in students failing to complete their degree. Concurrently, there were also
institutional factors, which could have been examined and addressed by the creation and
implementation of successful strategies. If properly understood, Rueda (2011) stated that
metacognitive knowledge could become a factor of one’s behavior in developing solutions to a
problem, as metacognition allowed the individual to determine conditional and contextual
aspects of that problem. When combining all of the knowledge influencers, the academic affairs
unit increased their likelihood of determining what previously implemented strategies were
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 30
successful, how to have implemented those strategies and new strategies, and what biases and
preconceived notions were evaluated and eliminated so that improvement of retention at CCI
could occur. Table 1 looked at the assumed knowledge influences and their assessments
Table 1
Assumed Knowledge Influences Knowledge Influence Assessments
The academic affairs unit needs declarative
knowledge of what strategies have been
utilized by the academic affairs unit with
success regarding retention improvement. (D)
Participants were asked what retention
strategies have you implemented in the past
several years and how have they worked for
your program?
The academic affairs unit needs procedural
knowledge of how to implement successful
strategies that were identified by data to
improve retention. (P)
Participants were asked how did you learn
about the strategies and how did you
implement them within your program?
The academic affairs unit must evaluate their
personal biases that prevent them from
properly identifying the factors that lead to
students withdrawing from college. (M)
Participants were asked whether their biases
created by the company culture contributed to
their failure in properly addressing the student
retention issues at CCI.

Motivation
This section of the literature focused on motivation-related influences pertaining to the
achievement of the prescribed organizational goal that by May 2018, the yearly retention of
students will improve to 70% at CCI by studying the knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences that effected the identification and solving of retention issues by CCI’s academic
affairs unit. Motivation was defined as the means by which an activity with a measurable goal
was activated and maintained (Rueda, 2011). Activation and maintaining of a group or
individual’s motivation was affected by two factors: internal, which consisted of cognitive and
affective influences, and external, which included social and culture influences (Rueda, 2011).
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 31
For the academic affairs unit to successfully improve retention, they analyzed their motivations
for reaching the prescribed goal. Mayer (2011) continued by stating that motivation occurred
internally and directed goal behavior by analyzing the following four components that described
motivation: that motivation was personal in nature, facilitated activation of a behavior, created
energy through persistence and intensity, and was directed as to accomplish the goal. Similarly,
Clark and Estes (2008) stated that motivation had three processes that occurred in an
environment, active choice, persistence and mental effort. This literature review analyzed two
specific motivational theories and what influence they had on the achievement of the
organizational performance goal of by May 2018 that the yearly retention of students will
improve to 70% at CCI by studying the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that
effected the identification and solving of retention issues by CCI’s academic affairs unit.
Expectancy Value Theory
Value was the first assumed motivational influence discussed for the purpose of
achievement of the organizational performance goal. Clark and Estes (2008) established that if
goals were to be met and commitment to the goal increased, individuals then connected their
understanding of value and its benefit in attaining the prescribed goal. Eccles (2006) looked at
perceived value by analyzing four constructs: intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value and
the cost of facilitating the initiative. Intrinsic value related to the feeling one had when engaging
a task. The academic affairs team needed either situational interest derived from characteristics
inherent to the task, or personal interest, which involved characteristics of a personal nature to
the individual performing the task, if they were to improve retention (Eccles, 2006). Once those
interests aligned, the unit had intrinsic value in improving retention. Rueda (2011) continued, in
that the higher an individual placed value on a specific activity, the individual shifted from
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 32
choosing to improve, to persisting in developing the improvement, to finally engaging in the
improvement effort.
Attainment value linked both tasks and individual ideals and preferences, and included
many parts. Eccles (2006) stated that there were eight images of attainment value including:
understanding one’s personality, setting long range goals, understanding cultural schema,
terminal value, motivation, preconditioned pictures of life, congruent personal interests, and
behavior in various situations. For the academic affairs unit to properly understand the
attainment value, each of these images was evaluated for motivational influences. Finally, utility
value and perceived costs of the motivation of the academic affairs unit aligned with the
organizational performance goal of improvement of the college’s retention, based on the beliefs
of both the team and the psychological needs of the students (Eccles, 2006). If students plan on
completing their degree, they placed a high utility value on successful strategies that helped them
succeed and reach their goal of degree completion. If the value of creating and implementing
successful strategies were positive and the consequences and potential for failure low, the
academic affairs unit succeeded in creating value by developing and implementing successful
strategies to improve retention at CCI.
Self-Efficacy Theory
The second assumed motivational influence discussed was self-efficacy theory. Bandura
(1997) developed a correlation between his prior work on social cognitive theory and self-
efficacy, in that motivation and behavior possessed the critical element of self-belief. Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon (2014) asserted that social cognitive theory was based on three closely
related assumptions in reference to learning and behavior. The first was triadic reciprocity, which
was where an individual’s personal, behavioral, and environmental determinants influenced the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 33
others in a bidirectional, reciprocal manner. The second assumption declared that individuals had
the ability to determine their own behavior and environment, in a way that was directive and goal
oriented (Denler et al., 2014, Bandura, 2001). Finally, social cognitive theory promoted that
learning occurred without instantaneous change of behavior, or that the there was another distinct
process whereby demonstrations facilitated learning and the construction of schemas (Denler et
al., 2014). For the academic affairs unit to successfully improve retention, they modeled
successful strategies that were observed or researched, whereby they improved their self-
efficacy, group learning, and campus performance.
Furthermore, Bandura (1997) determined that self-efficacy was vital to social cognitive
theory and defined self-efficacy as determinants that individuals developed regarding their own
capabilities to perform or learn at differing levels of action. Pajares (2006) explained that if
individuals did not believe they were able to achieve a desired outcome, if difficulties arose, they
were likely to cease to persist. If the academic affairs unit determined that improving retention
had become either too difficult or the goal of improvement was unattainable, then they would
have ceased to persist in efforts to pursue the goal. Since the prior year’s retention was at a low
of 60.3%, the academic affairs unit recently failed to meet the prescribed goal. Rueda (2011)
explained that beliefs were influenced by multiple factors that were discussed in this section,
including lack of prior knowledge, lack of feedback or discussion within the group, and success
or failures. While the academic affairs unit exhibited all of these traits, they could still achieve
the goal of improved retention if they improved self-efficacy, increased their confidence, and
expected positive outcomes, as they would be more engaged, likely to persist, and work harder to
attain the goal (Rueda, 2011). Table 2 looks at the assumed influences of motivation and how
they were assessed.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 34
Table 2
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivation Influence Assessments
Expectancy Value Theory: Academic affairs
needed to see the value in implementing
different strategies that improved retention.
Participants were asked how well you thought
your program will do in achieving the goal of
improving retention.
Self-Efficacy: The academic affairs unit was
unable to improve yearly retention due to
their lack of self-efficacy, and its relation to
their confidence and positivity, which if
improved, would lead to increased student
persistence
Participants were asked how you felt about
your ability to improve retention through
implementation of strategies.

Organizational Influences
Knowledge and motivation each had direct impacts on whether the academic affairs unit
achieved the organizational performance goal of improving retention, but organizational
influences also affected the academic affairs unit’s ability to improve retention as well. Rueda
(2011) explained that the challenge in defining organizational culture and processes were that
they were often not visible to the individual, automated, and their value was relative. Cultural
models and cultural settings were noted terms that defined the distinct problems that the
academic affairs unit encountered while trying to improve retention. Cultural models examined
how the college’s culture and lack of collaboration in creating successful strategies, as well as
the practice of shaming departments that failed to meet the retention requirement, contributed to
the academic affairs unit failing to improve retention. Cultural settings examined the lack of time
devoted to the sharing of best practices by the academic affairs unit and the lack of resources
allotted for training on the development of successful strategies to improve retention.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 35
Cultural Model
Cultural models were defined by Rueda (2011) and utilized at CCI as, rules inherent to
the institution’s culture or climate. The inability of departments to collaborate at CCI was a
cultural problem that led to fewer successful strategies being created to improve retention. One
example of the culture of CCI, was that CCI had open enrollment, a cultural model that was
consistent across the country. Furthermore, in this context, Rueda (2011) noted within a school
setting cultural models determined policies, structures, and practices. As open enrollment
constituted a cultural model, it also was defined as an organizational influence, which were
organizational processes that are not successful based upon inadequate resources (Clark & Estes,
2008). Furthermore, the cultural model was misaligned with the college’s strategic goal of
improving retention. When determining if the college’s goal of 70% retention was attainable
operating under its current cultural model, one saw that there was a discrepancy. For the
academic affairs unit to improve retention and it would have to change the culture of the
institution. Engle and Tinto (2008) maintained that if students were to choose four-year
institutions and were adequately prepared for the academic rigor required of them, persistence
rates would increase significantly. If a collaborative culture was created where strategies could
be developed, new institutional plans would materialize and the culture of the institution would
shift from an institutional focus to a student centered focus. The number of students choosing
community college was constantly increasing, and while community colleges have been
committed to improving resources and have made strides in promoting access, those factors do
not always ensure success of the student or completion of their degree (Roman, 2007). Creating a
collaborative culture and sharing best practices was necessary for the academic affairs unit to
develop institutional plans that addressed retention.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 36
Cultural Setting
Cultural settings can be defined as specific places where the cultural models were
developed and then acted upon, thus the cultural settings were where the visible aspects are noted
(Rueda, 2011). For CCI’s students to be more successful, time was allotted for the departments
to share best practices, as well as additional resources provided to the departments, such as
training. The adjustments to the cultural settings would improve retention at CCI. Tinto (1990)
noted that if colleges would focus less on their own institutional interests and met regularly to
discuss what was done to increase student’s success, retention would improve. Similarly, if CCI
and the academic affairs unit spent more time focusing on where they improved and offered
additional support for students by creating successful strategies, the possibility for improvement
in retention increased. Furthermore, Tinto (1990) concluded that it is the responsibility of the
college to remain committed to improving student results and that student-centered institutions
were tangibly different than other colleges who put student success and their welfare behind
other goals. Finally, for CCI and the academic affairs unit to be successful in their goal to
improve retention, they established a cultural setting of commitment to the student and their
education by devoting more time to creating successful strategies and training the departments
on how to implement the strategies. Tinto (1990) states that for a college to be successful, they
established a mission that was congruent with their expectations, and created an atmosphere
where the student was educated, provided the resources needed to succeed, and to finish their
degree, not just are retained. Table 3 looked at the assumed organizational influences and the
organizational influence assessment.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 37
Table 3
Assumed Organizational Influences Organizational Influence Assessments
Cultural Model Influence 1: The academic
affairs need to develop a collaborative culture
where strategies can be shared and analyzed,
further developing collective institutional
plans with a focus on the value of retention
Participants were asked during retention
meetings how departments collaborated with
each other to develop successful strategies to
improve retention.
Cultural Model Influence 2: The academic
affairs unit needs to address the culture of the
institution, which promotes the shaming of
specific programs when they fail to meet
retention metrics on a weekly basis.
Participants were asked how the culture of the
institution affected retention strategies and
efforts.
Cultural Setting Influence 1: The academic
affairs unit needs to devote more time to share
best practices and strategies, which would
lead to improved retention.
Participates were asked what activities or
discussions took place during assigned
meetings regarding retention, and was there
adequate time provided for these meetings.
Cultural Setting Influence 2: The academic
affairs unit needs to assign more resources,
such as training on developing strategies and
implementing them, to improve retention.
Participants were asked what additional
training regarding strategies and retention
would be advantageous to your program if the
institution provided additional resources.

Summary
This chapter sought to identify the gaps in knowledge and motivation, and the
organizational influences that prevented the academic affairs unit at CCI from reaching the
organizational performance goal to improve retention. The research attempted to identify factors
that caused students to fail to complete their degrees, which is common in community colleges.
Looking at literature regarding retention and researching the factors that related to low
persistence, contributed to developing successful strategies that led to increased retention and
students completing their degrees and graduating from college. The academic affairs unit at CCI
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 38
has been tasked with the organizational performance goal of improving yearly retention to 70%.
The validation of the elements of the KMO framework will be described in Chapter Three.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 39

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 40
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of the project was to conduct a modified gap analysis to consider the
knowledge, motivation and organizational elements that influenced the organizational
performance goal of achieving a yearly student retention rate of 70% by May 2018. The analysis
began by generating a list of possible or assumed influences and then I examined those elements
systematically to focus on actual or validated interfering elements. While a complete gap
analysis would have focused on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders to be
focused on in this analysis were the academic affairs team at CCI and their knowledge of
institutional retention issues, their motivation to identify and improve retention, and the
organizational influences and their relation to institutional retention improvement.
As such, the questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What are the influences in knowledge, motivation and organizational culture and resources of the
academic affairs team that prevents it from effectively identifying and solving retention at issues
at CCI?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual framework provided asserts that there were factors, which contributed to
student’s failure to complete their degree program, and that the academic affairs unit must have
had the knowledge and motivation to understand why students failed to persist, assessed the
needs of the students, and then to created and implemented successful strategies to improve
retention. Aside from knowledge and motivation, organizational influences such as a lack of a
collaborative culture, shaming of low-performing departments, a lack of time allotted for the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 41
creation of successful strategies, and a lack of budgeted resources for training, occurred
frequently at CCI. The following figure, Table 2, represented the a yearly retention cycle if the
academic affairs unit were to create and implement successful strategies, followed by placing a
value on improving retention and improving self-efficacy, and finally working to provide more
time and resources, while adapting a culture of collaboration, which would yield retention
improvement.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 42

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

Improved Yearly Retention at CCI
Understanding, creation, and
implementation of successful
strategies across the academic affairs
unit
Determining value in implementing
successful strategies and prioritizing
the improvement of retention by
increasing self-efficacy and
persistence to attain the goal of
retention improvment
Creating a collaborative culture to
share successful strategies and
prevent shaming of low-performing
departments
Devote time and resources to training
and meetings to develop successful
strategies and institutional plans to
improve yearly retention
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 43
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population that I chose to interview were the members of the academic
affairs team at CCI. I interviewed the eight members of the academic affairs unit to research two
questions that fell under the KMO framework of Clark and Estes (2006). Merriam and Tisdale
(2009) stated that interviews were when participants and the interviewer engage in a dialogue
focused around specific research. Merriam and Tisdale (2009) defined interviews as a
conversation that fulfilled a purpose. Furthermore, interviewing would collect data from large
groups of peers and the choice to interview was based on whether the data was best developed
through discussions and non-observable behavior. I chose interviews, as it represented the best
opportunity for me to collect the data I needed.
Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants in this study were currently employed at CCI and had the title
and rank identifying them as a member of the academic affairs unit, as this research sought to
understand specifically, the gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational influences of this
group.
Criterion 2. Participants must have also participated in meetings, discussions, and had
analyzed data pertaining to retention issues at CCI. This included receiving current dashboard
information from national conference calls, where retention issues were also detailed and
discussed. Looking at retention from this lens provided insight into the framework involving
cultural models and settings.
Interview (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
Participants were selected for this study based on purposeful sampling. Merriam
and Tisdell (2009) defined purposeful sampling as an assumption that the researcher sought to
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 44
uncover and comprehend the participant’s insights, thus they wanted to sample those who they
learned from best. The interviewees were asked to participate as an opportunity for professional
development and training regarding retention improvement model. As the campus goal was to
improve yearly retention, participants were told they would receive valuable feedback, new
strategies for programmatic usage and future training. They were also assured that their answers
would be kept confidential. I sent emails to twenty eligible participants and requested their
participation for interviews over a five week period. There eight respondents to the email request
for participants, which included 6 female and 2 male participants. Their experience ranged from
two to fifteen years at CCI. The participants all had received their master’s degree prior to the
interview. The participants managed at least five faculty members and taught at least one class.
The participants also had received training from the organization on their job duties, attended
programmatic conference calls monthly with the organization’s leaders and directors from other
campuses, and had travelled either regionally or nationally for program summits and
conferences. The participants had met with regional and local administrators on many occasions
form the organizations main set of leaders. A recruitment letter, seen in Appendix D, was
delivered prior to the interviews outlining the study.
Data Collection
Members of the academic affairs unit were interviewed to accrue data that sought to
examine two research questions, which fell under the KMO framework of Clark and Estes.
Merriam and Tisdale (2009) stated that interviews were when participants and the interviewer
engaged in a dialogue focused around specific research. Merriam and Tisdale (2009) defined
interviews as a conversation that fulfilled a purpose. Furthermore, interviewing collected data
from large groups of peers and the choice to interview was based on whether the data was best
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 45
developed through discussions and non-observable behavior. Interviews were chosen, as they
represented the best opportunity for the collection of data needed.
Participants were interviewed individually over a 5-week period for one hour, thus
allowing time for me to code and reflect on the data in more depth. Some participants were asked
to interview a second time, which allowed me to ask follow-up questions and to gather more
data. Participants were recorded in a conference room off campus, so that the participants were
comfortable.
The interview questions were based on a semi-structured protocol and seen in Appendix
A. Merriam and Tisdell (2009) defined semi-structured questions as those explored and were not
developed ahead of time or in any particular order. Furthermore, I developed responses and
determined if there is a need for additional questions when certain answers were given. First, the
participants where asked questions regarding their positions and years of employment at CCI.
Table 4 looked at those questions from the interview protocol.
Table 4
Participant Background Questions
Can you tell me your name and what department or departments you oversee?
How long have you been with CCI?
How long have you been in education and are there other types of institutions you worked for?
What is your current retention rate?
Has that rate changed over the last 3 years?

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 46
The participants were then asked questions that asserted the participant’s knowledge regarding
student factors that led to low attendance and retention. Table 5 references those influences and
the interview questions.
Table 5
Knowledge Influence Assessment Knowledge Influence Interview Questions
The academic affairs unit needed declarative
knowledge of what strategies have been
utilized by the academic affairs unit with
success regarding retention improvement. (D)
Participants were asked what retention
strategies were implemented in the past
several years and how did they work for your
program?
The academic affairs unit needed procedural
knowledge of how to implement successful
strategies that were identified by data to
improve retention. (P)
Participants were asked how did you learn
about the strategies and how did you
implement them within your program?
The academic affairs unit must have
evaluated their personal biases that prevented
them from properly identifying the factors
that lead to students withdrawing from
college. (M)
Participants were asked whether their biases
created by the company culture contributed to
their failure in properly addressing the student
retention issues at CCI.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 47
Table 6 provided the motivational influences and the questions which aimed to address the
motivational influences.
Table 6
Motivation Influence Assessment Motivation Influence Interview Questions
Expectancy Value Theory: Academic affairs
needed to see the value in implementing
different strategies that improved retention.
Participants were asked how well you thought
your program will do in achieving the goal of
improving retention.
Self-Efficacy: The academic affairs unit was
unable to improve yearly retention due to
their lack of self-efficacy, and its relation to
their confidence and positivity, which if
improved, would lead to increased student
persistence
How do you feel about your ability to
improve retention through implementation of
strategies?

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 48
Finally, they were asked whether the organizational model and setting allowed for retention
improvement. Each interview lasted approximately one hour. I disclosed that I was recording the
interview to assure accuracy in the participant’s answers. Table 7 below provided the
organizational influence interview questions. Appendix A included all 15 interview questions for
this study.
Table 7
Organizational Influence Assessment Organizational Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1: The academic
affairs need to develop a collaborative culture
where strategies can be shared and analyzed,
further developing collective institutional
plans with a focus on the value of retention
Participants were asked during retention
meetings how departments collaborated with
each other to develop successful strategies to
improve retention.
Cultural Model Influence 2: The academic
affairs unit needs to address the culture of the
institution, which promotes the shaming of
specific programs when they fail to meet
retention metrics on a weekly basis.
Participants were asked how the culture of the
institution affected retention strategies and
efforts.
Cultural Setting Influence 1: The academic
affairs unit needs to devote more time to share
best practices and strategies, which would
lead to improved retention.
Participates were asked what activities or
discussions took place during assigned
meetings regarding retention, and was there
adequate time provided for these meetings.
Cultural Setting Influence 2: The academic
affairs unit needs to assign more resources,
such as training on developing strategies and
implementing them, to improve retention.
Participants were asked what additional
training regarding strategies and retention
would be advantageous to your program if the
institution provided additional resources.

Data Analysis
For interviews, the data analysis began during data collection. I wrote analytic memos
after each interview. I documented my thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data
in relation to my conceptual framework and research questions. Once I left the field, interviews
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 49
were transcribed and coded. In the first phase of analysis, I used open coding, where I looked for
empirical codes and applied the a priori codes determined from the conceptual framework.
Included were coded responses that identified a lack of understanding with regard to creation and
implementation of strategies, discussed value and self-efficacy, and institutional influences such
as collaborative culture, training, time and resources. A second phase of analysis was then
conducted where empirical and a priori codes were aggregated into analytic/axial codes. Here I
determined underlying themes, which were determined through further probing questions and
analyzed them as secondary codes. Examples included prior knowledge of successful strategies,
goal setting and persistence in goal achievement, and finally training and resource allocation. My
last step in my coding process was that I identified pattern codes and themes that emerged in
relation to the conceptual framework and study questions. The patterns, which were identified
during the coding process, included lack of knowledge of successful strategies, lack of goal
setting by administration that determined programmatic goal settings, and the administration’s
budget process, which determined training and resources. By coding the interviews at three
separate intervals, I aggregated more assertions that would develop this study further.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To gain credibility, researchers seek credibility and trustworthiness. There were many
tools and pathways researchers take that were accepted protocols that ensured both credibility
and trustworthiness. Merriam and Tisdell (2009) asserted that trustworthiness in qualitative
research was aligned with credibility and that both were conducted in ethical manners. Merriam
and Tisdell (2009) concluded that validity and reliability were assured if the study’s concept was
sound, data was collected correctly, properly analyzed and interpreted, and eventually how the
researchers presented the findings. I collected data that was verifiable through recordings and
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 50
written notes. As I interviewed the participants over a longer period of time, and evaluated their
comments in comparison to my literature review, I was able to utilize triangulation to ensure
credibility of my study. Furthermore, I interviewed different participants with different
perspectives and had follow up interviews when needed, which also increased trustworthiness by
increasing validity and reliability. In qualitative research, the researcher collected data and then
disseminated the data, ethically and any relationship with the participants that was assumed as
directly affecting the outcome of the study raised ethical questions. If at any time my relationship
caused an ethical dilemma, I utilized a researcher from outside of my organization to collect the
data.
Ethics
I sought to create a qualitative study in regard to retention and how it related to academic
affairs. By using qualitative research Merriam and Tisdell (2009) asserted that these researchers
seek an understanding of how people viewed their experience, how they fit in society, and how
they developed meaning of their experiences. Furthermore, Merriam and Tisdell (2009) posited
that research concerned itself with the production of valid and reliable knowledge and did so in
an ethical frame. To ensure the safety of the participants I submitted my study to the University
of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) and followed their rules and guidelines
regarding the protection of the rights and welfare of the participants in this study. All the
participants signed consent forms, seen in Appendix C, and I always reminded them that this
study was voluntary, and their identity kept confidential. Due to the legal status of my
participants, confidentiality was extremely important for my particular study and I did respect the
participants’ wishes if at any time they determined the need to withdraw from the study. Prior to
the interviews I received permission to audio record the interviews, and provided the participants
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 51
with transcripts of the interviews to allow them the opportunity to ensure I did not change their
words. I reiterated to the participants I would not provide any incentives so as not to coerce.
For ethical purposes, I must disclose that I was an employee of this organization during
this study. Furthermore, I have since left the organization but provided senior leaders my
findings from this study. I was a member of the academic affairs team for four years and had
worked with most of the participants for over one year. The participants knew of my biases and I
also knew of many of their biases. My goal was to look at many other influences, but did assert
that one influence could be directly attributed to biases developed by team members over time.
Merriam and Tisdell (2009) concluded that the researcher-participant relationship must be
evaluated and studied and whether there is an effect on the research process. Furthermore,
positionality has been noted to provide researchers with greater access to participants.
Developing trust with participants was seen as easier when the participants viewed one’s
positionality as similar to theirs (Merriam & Tisdell, 2009). I also believed that my positionality
determined the interview questions based on my influences. I felt that certain influences needed
to be studied to assert that change was needed in our organization. Reflexivity, as defined as an
understanding and awareness the researcher has with their participants and the study, also needs
to be noted (Merriam & Tisdell, 2009). Concurrently, Meriam and Tisdell (2009) further asserted
that my qualitative process was dialectical, which affected both my perception of the influences
and the participants responses.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 52

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 53
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS

In this chapter, I presented an overview of the findings of this study, and the validation
and conclusion for each assumed cause. Qualitative data was collected, and was also used to
determine success of strategies suggested by the academic affairs unit. The purpose of this study
was to determine the gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that have
prevented improvement in CCI’s yearly retention rate. With the organizational performance goal
of 70% retention, this study aimed to determine what influences have prevented some programs
from achieving the goal of 70%, and recommend solutions to improve yearly retention. By
interviewing members of the academic affairs team, and looking specifically at questions
evaluating gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational influences which prevented the
improvement of retention, the study sought to validate the assumed causes of poor retention
based on fifteen questions that evaluated best practices and successful strategies, motivation for
the academic affairs unit to persist and succeed at raising retention rates programmatically, and
organizational influences that prevented the academic affairs unit from improving retention.
The data collection process included interviews and follow-up discussions, as well as
document analysis. Each participant was asked the same questions, but was allowed to elaborate
on their program’s positive outcomes with regard to retention. They were also allowed to meet as
a group to further analyze answers to each question and participate in additional discussions to
share ideas and solutions.
Findings
The findings section looked at the assumed causes of the failure to improve yearly
retention by determining gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, and
through the coding of data from each individual interview, I was able to develop themes that
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 54
were created from the participant’s answers. Each section looked at a research questions that
represented, a knowledge gap, motivation gap, or an organizational influence that created the
gap, and then I analyzed emergent themes and the answers to each question that determined
those themes. To assess whether an assertion was validated, I evaluated the assertion and then
determined if there was a gap. For the influence to be termed as validated, the responses had to
prove that a gap existed and needed to have recommendations developed.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 55
First, I looked at the retention data, and then I asked those programs that showed
improvement to share their specific numbers of successful strategies their department had over a
three-year period. The first table, Table 8, looked at yearly programmatic retention over a three-
year period.
Table 8
Retention for Last Three Years
Program Retention 2014 Retention 2015 Retention 2016 Yearly Avg.
Increase
Department 1
Participant 1
72% 71% 76% +4%
Department 2
Participant 2&3
66% 68% 67% 0%
Department 3
Participant 4&5
71% 69% 67% -4%
Department 4
Participant 6
73% 68% 70% -4%
Department 5
Participant 7&8
71% 69% 69% -2%

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 56
When looking at the data provided regarding retention rates per department, I
immediately noticed a gradual declining in a majority of the programs, but upon further
examination of the yearly programmatic numbers, one actually saw improvement, at some point,
in every department. Unfortunately, as the overall campus retention was below the 70%
benchmark in the prior year 2016, the programmatic percentages were examined more intensely
than the prior years. While there was an emphasis on improving current numbers, prior year’s
successes were taken into account and those successful strategies identified and discussed.
Table 9 represented strategies created departmentally per year, which were identified in
the yearly programmatic retention plans for accreditation that were submitted in the annual
campus effectiveness plan (CEP), and whether the strategy was validated through the concluding
year’s analysis, as successful. To assess whether the strategy was successful, departmental
strategies were identified from the CEP, and then data from the student’s Noel Levitz surveys
were utilized to determine successes campus wide. A second survey, delivered quarterly as part
of each program’s independent programmatic effectiveness plan, also determined whether
student retention was positively or negatively affected by strategies created in the prior term. For
a strategy to be determined successful, it must have received a positive percentage in student
satisfaction in one of the student surveys.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 57
Strategies Created Last Three Years
Table 9
Program Strategies 2014
Successful/Total
Strategies 2015
Successful/Total
Strategies 2016
Successful/Total
Success
Percentage
Department 1 6/8 4/5 4/5 78%
Department 2 1/4 0/3 0/2 11%
Department 3 2/5 4/5 3/5 60%
Department 4 0/0 0/1 1/3 25%
Department 5 2/3 2/4 2/4 55%

Examples of successful strategies of Department 1 included, “created touch points with
the students early on in the first semester, had follow-up meetings prior to mid-term, and advised
students prior to scheduling so that any current problems were addressed earlier in the term.
Department 2, having 80% successful strategies for the 2015 year declared, “ I was able to work
with Departments 1 and 5 the prior year and created an advising template that sought to
predetermine indicators of potential retention problems my students would have. It showed great
success that year. ” Examples of unsuccessful strategies provided included Department 4 stating,
“ having instructors call students who were constantly absent or with grades below 50% at mid-
term, and emailing support service information to struggling students, really didn’t help identify
specific students or save them from withdrawals.” Department 2 noted, “I implemented an
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 58
extension policy for mid-terms, and while some students took advantage of it, those who were
behind were already going to drop the class.”
Knowledge, Motivation and Organization Gaps
By looking at the gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational influences, one could
gather from the data that there were both successful and unsuccessful strategies implemented
over the three-year period of programmatic retention listed above. With the overall percentage
being below 70%, the academic affairs unit must identify the reasons for the declining numbers
in 2016. Knowledge gaps of declarative and procedural knowledge, as well as metacognition,
were all influences that contributed to the yearly retention rates of CCI declining. In 2016 these
included a lack of knowledge with regard to identifying and determining successful strategies
that were developed, a failure to properly implement new strategies, and finally, as discussed in
the literature review and present in the interview data, a lack of ability to evaluate personal bias
when determining the reason for student’s failures to persist.
Another influence involved motivations of the academic affairs unit and expectancy
value theory and their self-efficacy. These influences affected whether faculty members were
able to see the value in successful strategies and different modes of implementation, as well as
setting retention improvement as a primary goal. Furthermore, impacting the successful
achievement of the goal of improving their self-efficacy, increasing their confidence, and
eventually achieving a positive outcome based on higher engagement, likelihood to persist, and
stronger efforts to attain the goal. Finally, organizational influences contributed to declining
yearly retention rates in multiple departments, and were seen as deterrents from a cultural model
and cultural setting lens. Cultural model influences included developing a collaborative culture
where institutional plans were analyzed and developed, as well as evaluating the company
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 59
culture which promotes shaming of unsuccessful programs rather than supporting them. Cultural
settings looked at the need for the academic affairs unit to meet regularly and devote more time
to developing and implementing successful strategies, and budgeting more resources for impact
items such as training.
I utilized the research questions and subsequent data collection from a series of interview
questions to validate influences in knowledge, motivation and the organization. The research
questions were as follows:
1. What are the influences in knowledge, motivation and organizational culture and resources of the
academic affairs team that prevents it from effectively identifying and solving retention at issues
at CCI?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions?
Declarative Knowledge
The first knowledge influence I discussed in this dissertation was the declarative
knowledge influence, which stated that many programs had no prior knowledge of successful
strategies that had been created for the CEP and then validated as a successful strategy from the
student satisfaction surveys. The assertion, noted by this influence, posited that the academic
affairs unit had not discussed successful strategies, nor were aware that some departments had
created strategies that had shown a positive increase in yearly retention. As such, the following
interview question was asked about the academic affairs unit’s knowledge of any successful
strategy implementations from other programs, “How did you learn about the successful
strategies of other programs, and how did you then implement them within your program?”
Participant One stated, “That a strategy created by Department One, which addressed make-up
work, either for tests or papers, was seen to have shown an increase in students completing the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 60
semester. My program then implemented a similar strategy which also showed promise”
Furthermore Participant Six concluded, “If a student were to be allowed to turn in work, with
minimal penalty, they would often choose to continue with their class work rather than
withdrawing.” Multiple participants stated that had they known this strategy was utilized
successfully, they too would have evaluated its potential use. A secondary question was asked to
those who responded that they had not learned of many successful strategies that stated, “Can
you offer suggestions to how to better communicate the strategies?” Participant three responded,
“We could look at creating a document to track these initiatives.” Participant Seven’s response
stated,” We could also create a committee to determine what strategies would be best shared with
the academic affairs unit at quarterly trainings.” Participant One recommended “The academic
affairs unit should discuss the results of the surveys as a group, whereby they could collaborate
on the creation of the strategies, rather than being reactionary.” Finally, Participant Five and
Seven responded similarly, in that they suggested, “Best practices, which came from the
successful should be documented for future use.” Table 10 looked at the declarative knowledge
interview questions and participant responses.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 61
Table 10
Declarative Knowledge Gaps
Interview Question Participant Responses
6. Participants were asked what retention
strategies were implemented in the past
several years and how did they work for your
program?
“That a strategy created by Department One,
which addressed make-up work, either for
tests or papers, was seen to have shown an
increase in students completing the semester.
My program then implemented a similar
strategy which also showed promise”
“If a student were to be allowed to turn in
work, with minimal penalty, they would often
choose to continue with their class work
rather than withdrawing.”
“We could look at creating a document to
track these initiatives.”
“Best practices, which came from the
successful should be documented for future
use.”

Procedural Knowledge
The second interview question I used looked at the procedural knowledge influence was
the participant’s knowledge of how to implement strategies to improve retention. A possible
relationship could be drawn when looking at the responses and data that the academic affairs unit
has been unsuccessful when tasked to elaborate on how to implement successful strategies based
on the results of the student satisfaction surveys, which measure whether the strategies were
implemented successfully. To validate this influence and assertion, the participants were asked,
“What retention strategies have you implemented in the past several years and how have they
worked for your program? Participant Two stated, “I had heard of that other programs concluded
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 62
that successful strategies were limited to one or two per year, and were limited in their impact.”
This emergent theme asserted that many of the academic affairs unit felt that successful
implementation was limited and that only certain programs had the procedural knowledge of
how to implement strategies. Furthermore, Participant Six noted that, “Some strategies, which
were successful at one point, have not worked for my program like they did in the past. We used
to be able to rely on these strategies, but they now have the opposite effect, thus we limit our
implementations based on not knowing how to implement current or updated strategies.” When
asked if additional training or meetings would help determine best practices related to the
understanding of how to implement successful strategies, Participant One stated, “We used to
meet and discuss retention strategies in a key management meeting, but with limited success
departmentally over the last few years, the discussion has shifted from best practices, to Band-
Aid type suggestions. With a lack of knowledge regarding how to implement successful
strategies, one can determine that implementing strategies is a gap, which needs to be addressed.
Data shows that when asked the how often a strategy is implemented successfully, and then
evaluated for its success rate, each program had limited implementations over the three-year
period. Table 11 looked at the procedural knowledge interview questions and participant
responses.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 63
Table 11
Procedural Knowledge Gaps
Interview Question Participant Responses
Participants were asked how did you learn
about the strategies and how did you
implement them within your program?
“I had heard of that other programs concluded
that successful strategies were limited to one
or two per year, and were limited in their
impact.”
“Some strategies, which were successful at
one point, have not worked for my program
like they did in the past. We used to be able to
rely on these strategies, but they now have the
opposite effect, thus we limit our
implementations based on not knowing how
to implement current or updated strategies.”

Metacognitive Knowledge
The metacognitive knowledge influence asserted that the academic affairs unit must
evaluate their preconceived notions and biases that led to assumptions regarding the reasons
students chose to withdraw, which then created a perception of why students failed to persist in
their programs. In fact, seven out of eight participants alluded to factors such as financial
difficulty, personal problems, or lack of preparedness for academic rigor as the predominant
reasons for students withdrawing from their programs. Participant Two stated, “We know that
students who fail to persist because of work related problems should have never started school in
the first place. Class has to be a priority.” This response clearly represented a bias from the
participant with regard to a student’s priorities.
When asked if the institution could provide assistance or remedies for that student’s
situation, the participant asserted, “Is that my goal now? Am I to address each student’s
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 64
individual needs?” Furthermore other examples of unsubstantiated conclusions further supported
their theory, and deepened biases that the students, not the institution or program, was
responsible for lower retention. Participant Seven similarly concluded, “The likelihood the
institution can provide us with enough tools or strategies to combat our student’s issues are slim.
We already lack in resources, thus adding this responsibility would further disadvantage the
students who are doing well.” Moreover, all of the participants asserted that they were unable to
address the personal problems that community college students face, which factored into the
decision on whether they to persist or withdraw. When I asked on participant, “Can you look
beyond the student’s obstacles and seek to create strategies that are address institutional
shortcomings, their response was, “I could try, but we all are in agreement that it starts and ends
with the student, not me.” Furthermore, the response strengthened my assertion of bias with
regard to student factors and a lack of responsibility taken by this participant. The data accrued
from this question posited that the academic affairs unit did possess biases that dictated their
strategies with regard to improving retention. The following table, Table 12 looked at the
interview questions and participant responses to the metacognitive findings.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 65
Table 12
Metacognitive Knowledge Gaps
Interview Question Participant Responses
Participants were asked whether their biases
created by the company culture contributed to
their failure in properly addressing the student
retention issues at CCI.
“We know that students who fail to persist
because of work related problems should have
never started school in the first place. Class
has to be a priority.”
“The likelihood the institution can provide us
with enough tools or strategies to combat our
student’s issues are slim. We already lack in
resources, thus adding this responsibility
would further disadvantage the students who
are doing well.”
“Is that my goal now? Am I to address each
student’s individual needs?”
“I could try, but we all are in agreement that it
starts and ends with the student, not me.”

Motivation Influences
The motivation influences I examined through data collection included expectancy value
theory and self-efficacy. I asked the participants questions which determined whether the
members of the academic affairs unit were able to see the value in the implementing successful
strategies, as well as whether they personally felt they would be able to improve retention by
utilizing successful strategies, and whether retention was a priority, thus assuring persistence to
achieve the goal of improving retention was achieved. I looked at the influences associated with
both value and self-efficacy and the data and questions pertaining to each influencer.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 66
Expectancy Value
The motivation influence pertaining to the expectancy value theory asserted that for the
academic affairs unit to attain the goal of improving retention each member of the academic
affairs unit must understand the expected value of implementing successful strategies and how
they each are interrelated to the achievement of improved retention.
When asked specifically, “How well do you think your program will do in achieving the
goal of improving retention?” Participant Three responded, “I do not believe our program’s
retention will increase this year because we have had an abundance of student related issues
which led to their withdrawals.” Participant Six stated, “I knew our yearly retention was doomed
when we admitted many students who had already failed at one institution.” When asked if the
institution could provide successful strategies to support the student, Participant Four responded,
“Only if you opened a day care on campus.” The academic affairs unit not only felt that
improving the goal of retention improvement was unlikely, but also asserted that there was no
perceived value in implementing successful strategies. Furthermore, when pressed whether the
administration had set a specific retention goal and outlined that goal by providing value reasons
for improvement of the retention rate, Participant Seven noted, “I believe if we looked
specifically at the economic and intrinsic value of retaining students, were provided examples of
the value of implementing strategies and where they showed success, perhaps we would more
likely attain the yearly goal.”
One could infer that there was a willingness to evaluate goal setting, successful strategy
implementation, and what the expectations going forward are, if the administration would
provide data and information they accrued through the many instruments they use to evaluate
student satisfaction. This was viewed as a positive by most all participants and each felt that this
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 67
influence could be mitigated with proper discussion. Conversely, there was also the assertion that
other priorities often outweighed the value of this specific goal. When then asked,” Is it due to it
not being your top priority?” the respondent replied,” We have so many other impact priorities,
that I do not put it at the top of my daily list.” When asked if retention was the top priority of
their department, 6 out of 8 participants said, “No, it was not a priority”. The two participants
that said, “Yes, it was my top”, both had improved retention over the three-year period.
Participant Seven went on to say, “My priority is managing the faculty and curriculum. I do not
have time to address retention issues, both as a program and as a school.” While there has been a
benchmark or goal for retention set, many of the participants believe there are other goals, which
are more important, likely to be met, and have equally important outcomes, like the retention
issue.
Self-Efficacy
This influence asserted the academic affairs unit was unable to improve yearly retention
due to their lack of self-efficacy, and its relation to their confidence and positivity, which if
improved, would lead to increased student persistence. By promoting increased engagement in
creating successful strategies, there would be increased effort of the academic affairs unit to
attain the goal of improving retention.
When asked, “How do you feel about your ability to improve retention through
implementation of strategies?” Participant Six responded, “I lack the confidence in using
successful strategies to improve retention, honestly, because I have never been successful
improving retention since I joined CCI.” Participant Four asserted that, “The students would
withdraw regardless of processes and strategies created by their department.” When pressed for
examples of strategies they had implemented and failed, Participant Four was unable to give
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 68
specific examples of successful or unsuccessful strategies and their relation to retention, further
strengthening both this influence as well as the knowledge influencers. Furthermore, the
responses strengthened my assertion that the academic affairs unit lacked confidence and
positivity when asked if successful strategies could help them achieve the goal of retention
improvement. The data accrued from this question posited that the academic affairs unit did
possess biases that dictated their strategies with regard to improving retention.
Motivation and Culture Influence
The following findings asserted that the academic affairs unit lacked motivation to
improve yearly retention based on the culture of the organization, which attributed low-
performing results to the efforts and abilities of the academic affairs unit. There was a correlation
between the motivations, value theory and self-efficacy of the academic affairs unit, and the
organizational influence detailed in the next section which addressed the culture of shaming in
the organization. It was determined that further analysis regarding this additional influence be
assessed. CCI through the years developed an organizational culture of pessimism with regard to
the attainment of goals. The administration of the college often attributed low-performing results
to the efforts and abilities of the academic affairs unit. Furthermore, the college administration
often chastised members of the academic affairs unit in an effort to motivate them accordingly.
Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that culture influenced motivation and performance by
eliminating the attitude of “demotivation”, and applying motivational support, which is positive
and aligned with closing a gap in performance. Those members of the academic affairs unit who
had been with the college the longest, had over time, began to assign the blame of programmatic
failures to the students, lack of resources, and other unproven influences due to the lack of
support and motivation for them to succeed. Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 69
cultural and personal differences influenced individual’s assumptions of their effectiveness. The
organization influenced the academic affairs units perception of themselves, demotivated them
by attributing failing results individually, and created an attitude of demoralization that led to the
academic affairs to devalue the goal of improving retention and assume an attitude of mistrust.
The attitude created by the organizational culture prevented the academic affairs unit
form persisting in any effort to improve retention. Lastly, when asked the question, “How
confident are you regarding your ability to prioritize retention improvement, so that you persist
and work towards developing and implementing strategies to improve retention?” Participant
One said, “I would be more confident, if I had the resources and additional assistance to make
this issue a top priority, and if we improved, it would give me more reason to persist in creating
successful strategies.” Most of the participants did admit that if they had more support, guidance,
and positivity, they would likely persist towards the goal of prioritizing the improvement of
retention. Participant Seven stated, “As I said earlier, I have so many issues and priorities that are
both continual and new, that if I were to spend significant time on an endeavor that was
unsuccessful, it would cause a ripple effect that would hurt the whole program, not just
retention.” Table 13 looked at the motivation questions involving expectancy value, self-efficacy
and the motivation and culture influence followed by the participant responses.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 70
Table 13
Motivation Gaps
Interview Question Participant Responses
EVT: Participants were asked how well you
thought your program will do in achieving the
goal of improving retention.
“I do not believe our program’s retention will
increase this year because we have had an
abundance of student related issues which led
to their withdrawals.”
“I knew our yearly retention was doomed
when we admitted many students who had
already failed at one institution.”
“I believe if we looked specifically at the
economic and intrinsic value of retaining
students, were provided examples of the value
of implementing strategies and where they
showed success, perhaps we would more
likely attain the yearly goal.”
How do you feel about your ability to
improve retention through implementation of
strategies?

“I lack the confidence in using successful
strategies to improve retention, honestly,
because I have never been successful
improving retention since I joined CCI.”
“The students would withdraw regardless of
processes and strategies created by their
department.”
Participants were asked how confident were
you regarding your ability to assure that
retention was a priority so that you persisted
in developing strategies to improve retention?
“I would be more confident, if I had the
resources and additional assistance to make
this issue a top priority, and if we improved, it
would give me more reason to persist in
creating successful strategies.”
“My priority is managing the faculty and
curriculum. I do not have time to address
retention issues, both as a program and as a
school.”

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 71
Organizational Influences
The organizational influences involved both the cultural model and cultural settings of
CCI. The academic affairs unit needed to develop a more collaborative culture when it came to
developing successful strategies and institutional plans, and address the culture of the
institutional shaming of departments who fail to meet goals, including the improvement of
retention. The academic affairs unit also needed to devote more time to meeting as a group, to
share how to implement successful strategies and best practices, and determine how to assign
more resources, such as training on the development of successful strategies and how to
implement them. The following data from the participants provided insight into both the cultural
model and cultural setting influences.
Cultural Model
The academic affairs unit was asked questions, which looked at two influences that affect
their institution’s cultural model at CCI. When looking at the first cultural model influence, I
asserted that there was a need for the academic affairs unit to develop a collaborative culture.
With a culture of sharing and working together, the academic affairs unit could then create
successful strategies collectively with a focus on improving retention. The first question
pertaining to this asserted cultural model influence was,” How do departments collaborate with
each other to develop successful strategies?’ The programs with the lowest percentages of
improvement in retention over the three-year period similarly responded, “There was a lack of
collaboration on many issues that effected the retention numbers.” Participant Four further
stated:
“Most meetings lacked the depth of engagement required to bring about change and new
discussions. It seems the agenda never changed and we discussed the same things week
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 72
in and week out. For once, I would like to see all of the academic affairs unit, with the
faculty come together in training and discuss problems.”
Participant Two asserted that, “Looking to collaborate takes pressure off of those who were not
lucky to have improved or improving numbers, and allows an open forum to share best
practices.” Five out of eight participants felt that if meetings and training involved more
collaborative sessions, they would be able to create new strategies that everyone would support.
When participants were asked,” How do you propose new strategies and then form a group that
will collaborate on developing successful strategies?” Participant Three stated,
“Culture, culture, culture, it all starts with everyone on the same page, supporting each
other and making a collective effort, to be our strongest effort. It also shows the students
we are united in the effort to help them persist, not just every department for themselves.
If we have departmental collaboration, it would only be a positive for the institution.”
That being said, the culture of the institution has not been supportive of the collective, but rather
singles out programs for a lack of success.
The second influence pertaining to the cultural model at CCI concluded that the academic
affairs unit needed to address the culture of the institution, which promoted the shaming of low
performing programs who failed to meet the yearly retention goal. Finally, when the question
was asked, “ How does the culture of the institution affect retention strategies?”, Participant one
stated, “You hate when the your email dings while you are working, only to stop to see that it is
the administration admonishing you for poor attendance of your students that week, or that your
quarterly retention is continuing to decline.” Participant Seven went on to say, “They think
shaming you to your peers motivates you to try harder, when it actually is the complete opposite
effect.” I did receive an interesting comment from Participant Two regarding the culture of the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 73
administration and its practices were they stated, “While I don’t agree with shaming of my peers,
I did find it interesting that those who were singled out, often did not ask for assistance.” Overall
the cultural model influences and the assertions that they were a hindrance to improving
retention were validated by 75% of the participants.
Cultural Setting
Cultural setting influences at CCI identified were a lack of time to discuss successful
strategies within the meetings of the academic affairs unit, and whether there were adequate
resources allotted for training and meetings where successful strategies could be developed and
discussed. The following question was asked to all participants, “What discussions take place at
the academic affairs unit meetings and is their adequate time devoted to discussing successful
strategies at these meetings?” Participant Six stated, “We spend 30 minutes a week discussing
retention, retention improvement, retention strategies, and four hours discussing what food we
are going to have for student appreciation week. If we prioritized correctly, we would not have a
retention problem.” Participant Three also said, “The agenda for our meetings have not changed
in 6 years. We are constantly avoiding our problems and negatives, and just discussing our
positives and initiatives we think will help the students in every facet of their schooling, but
actually coming to class and graduating.” The participants all agreed that not devoting time to the
true problem, which was retention had led to a reprioritization of time and effort to adding
additional student support initiatives and activities. Participant Two mentioned,” I assumed when
I joined CCI that there would be regular meetings regarding student attendance and retention like
my prior institution had developed, but to my surprise, it was just not a priority.” Six out of eight
participants stated that there was not sufficient time allotted to discuss retention in meetings, or
time devoted to a meeting, which was retention and successful strategies specific.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 74
Resources and the budgeting of impact items such as training and faculty development
meetings were drastically cut over the past five years at CCI. When the participants were asked,”
Would additional training or resources help departments develop and implement successful
strategies?” Participant Eight stated,
“We have had experts provide us with 4 hour training sessions that helped improve many
facets of student life here at CCI. Unfortunately, we rarely have sessions where we
discussed how we could improve attendance and retention, but more often on pedagogy,
which was frankly offensive to a professor. I would much rather discuss tangible ways to
help the student, like creating strategies to support their persistence.”
Also, Participant Four stated, “With regard to resource allocation, money is rarely used to fund
strategies that would help student’s grades or financial needs, but on frivolous activities like a
popcorn machine or coffee bar.” Participant one noted,
“We constantly blame financial issues for why students leave, but rather than help fund
their education, we give them ice cream. When faculty are asked what would provide
more impact on student retention, food or the training of the academic unit, they
overwhelming choose training, our administration does not, though.”
Six out of eight participants stated that additional resources, specifically training, would help
departments create successful strategies to implement, which could improve retention.
Looking at the data, the cultural model and setting, directly influenced the retention at
CCI. 75% of the responses supported the assertions made that CCI needs to establish a
collaborative culture, address the shaming of underperforming departments, devote additional
time to discussing best practices amongst the academic affairs unit, and allocating additional
resources that would lead to training and the development of successful strategies and
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 75
improvement in yearly retention. Table 14 looked at the interview questions and participant
responses to the organizational influences.
Table 14
Organizational Influences Gaps
Interview Question Participant Responses
Participants were asked during retention
meetings how departments collaborated with
each other to develop successful strategies to
improve retention.
“There was a lack of collaboration on many
issues that effected the retention numbers.”
“Looking to collaborate takes pressure off of
those who were not lucky to have improved
or improving numbers, and allows an open
forum to share best practices.”
Participants were asked how the culture of the
institution affected retention strategies and
efforts.
“You hate when the your email dings while
you are working, only to stop to see that it is
the administration admonishing you for poor
attendance of your students that week, or that
your quarterly retention is continuing to
decline.”
“They think shaming you to your peers
motivates you to try harder, when it actually
is the complete opposite effect.”
Participates were asked what activities or
discussions took place during assigned
meetings regarding retention, and was there
adequate time provided for these meetings.
“We spend 30 minutes a week discussing
retention, retention improvement, retention
strategies, and four hours discussing what
food we are going to have for student
appreciation week. If we prioritized correctly,
we would not have a retention problem.”
“The agenda for our meetings have not
changed in 6 years. We are constantly
avoiding our problems and negatives, and just
discussing our positives and initiatives we
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 76
think will help the students in every facet of
their schooling, but actually coming to class
and graduating.”
Participants were asked what additional
training regarding strategies and retention
would be advantageous to your program if the
institution provided additional resources.
“We have had experts provide us with 4 hour
training sessions that helped improve many
facets of student life here at CCI.
Unfortunately, we rarely have sessions where
we discussed how we could improve
attendance and retention, but more often on
pedagogy, which was frankly offensive to a
professor. I would much rather discuss
tangible ways to help the student, like
creating strategies to support their
persistence.”
“With regard to resource allocation, money is
rarely used to fund strategies that would help
student’s grades or financial needs, but on
frivolous activities like a popcorn machine or
coffee bar.”

Summary of Findings
Chapter Four’s findings validated a majority the assumed influences previously
discussed. An influence was determined as validated, if the responses addressed whether there
was a gap created by the influence, and whether they were determined as affecting the
knowledge, motivation or organization for achieving the goal of improving retention. When
looking at the knowledge influences, it was asserted that the academic affairs unit needed
knowledge of programmatic strategies, which were implemented successfully and improved
retention, needed procedural knowledge of how to implement successful strategies, and perform
a successful evaluation of their own biases regarding retention. Data concluded through the
responses of the participants that all members of the academic affairs unit struggled with these
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 77
influences. The motivation influences asserted also were validated from responses that concluded
the academic affairs unit were unable to see the value in implementing successful strategies,
while also failing to increase their self-efficacy leading to lack of persistence and failure to attain
the goal of improved yearly retention. I also concluded that there was an attitude amongst the
administrators that prevented them from being motivated, due to the culture of shaming the
organization had created. The findings also determined that the failure of the academic affairs
unit to collaborate and allot the proper resources and time to discuss and develop successful
strategies, led to lower retention. The responses asserted that this influence was valid and
provided guidance on recommendations for the next chapter.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 78

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 79
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
In this chapter, the influences validated in Chapter Four through qualitative research were
addressed with solutions and recommendations in support of the research questions.
Recommendations were provided to further strengthen or improve upon the organization’s goal
of improving yearly retention at CCI. The recommendations were broken down into categories
that reflected the knowledge motivation and organizational influences discussed in Chapter Four.
Recommendations were then discussed and evaluated using Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016)
model.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge influences in Table 15 represented the complete list of assumed
knowledge influences and that were validated based on formal interviews and supported by the
literature review, including academic affairs at CCI had declarative, procedural, and
metacognitive knowledge of the influences that contributed to low retention at CCI. Furthermore,
recommendations were made to address each influence. Rueda (2011) explained that declarative
knowledge looks at the facts, and examples in the simplest form in regard to the context or
domain. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that knowledge enhancement was needed on two
conditions, one, when leadership did not know how to attain the goal, and two, when goals
needed to be solved in the future. As such, Table 15, included the influences validated for
achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 15 also showed the research-based recommendations for
these influences based on theoretical principles.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 80
Table 15
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Research-Based
Recommendation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
The academic affairs
unit needs declarative
knowledge of what
strategies have been
utilized by the
academic affairs unit
with success
regarding retention
improvement. (D)
Rueda (2011) states that
declarative knowledge also
includes details, elements, and
terminology that individuals
must comprehend or have a
familiarity of, if they are to
understand, make appropriate
determinations, and eventually
solve problems in their
environment.
Provide training during both the
evaluation of the Noel Levitz
Survey and during the independent
program effectiveness assessment.
The strategies that were utilized
and validated as successful through
the survey results are then shared
with each program to provide new
knowledge of successful strategies.
The academic affairs
unit needs procedural
knowledge of how to
implement successful
strategies that were
identified by data to
improve retention. (P)
To develop mastery,
individuals must acquire
component skills, practice
integrating them, and know
when to apply what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Accrue data from current students
from the Noel Levitz and quarterly
survey that identify successful
strategies. The academic affairs
unit must then know how to export
data to the academic achievement
predictor model were it would
produce recommendations on how
to improve the campus retention
based on prior successful
strategies. The academic affairs
unit would then attend training on
how to implement the strategies.
The academic affairs
unit must evaluate
their personal biases
that prevent them
from properly
identifying the factors
Manipulations of seemingly
irrelevant variables created
common group identity
sufficient to eliminate negative
bias arising from diversity in
Discuss diversity in group
meetings and determine levels of
biases towards non similar
cultures, and eliminate the
variables creating the negative
biases and produce new successful
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 81
that lead to students
withdrawing from
college. (M)
other social category factors
(Eckel & Grossman, 2005).

strategies free from cultural bias
and developed through data.

Declarative Knowledge Solutions
The declarative knowledge influence that was asserted and then validated through
qualitative data looked at the academic affairs unit and their lack of knowledge of what
successful strategies had been utilized to improve yearly retention. The data assembled
concluded that the academic affairs unit needed additional education and training to increase
their knowledge of successful strategies that were implemented, further supported Clark and
Estes (2008) assertion regarding knowledge enhancement. Rueda (2011) stated that declarative
knowledge also included details, elements, and terminology that individuals comprehended or
had a familiarity of, if they were to understand, made appropriate determinations, and eventually
solved problems in their environment. The data from Chapter Four purported that the participants
failed to discuss successful strategies and had little or no prior knowledge of their successes.
Literature detailing a recommendation that successful strategies were necessary for student
retention was seen in Kappner’s (2002) conclusion that if the college provided support and
strategies specifically designed for all learners, persistence increased.
The proposed solution for this influence was to provide training during both the
evaluation of the Noel Levitz Survey and during the independent program effectiveness
assessment, the strategies that were utilized and validated as successful through the survey
results were then shared with each program to provide new knowledge of successful strategies.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 82
Procedural Knowledge Solutions
The academic affairs unit at CCI did not possess the procedural knowledge to implement
successful strategies, or how to have used that data to achieve the goal of improving retention by
evaluating successful strategies. Clark and Estes (2008) defined education as a situation where
people developed strategic, conceptual, and theoretical knowledge and skills that aided their
ability to manage unique and unforeseen problems, which were presented in the future.
Furthermore, by utilizing the principles of education and current research-based knowledge,
administrators comprehended why things occurred, and what drove those occurrences (Clark &
Estes, 2008). By not having the education or training to identify successful strategies, accrue the
data, and then use the data to develop a solution, the academic affairs unit had a gap in
knowledge pertaining to procedural knowledge. To develop mastery, individuals acquired
component skills, practiced integrating them, and knew when to apply what they had learned
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
The recommendation to address this influence would be to accrue data from current
students from the Noel Levitz and quarterly survey that identified successful strategies, and then
trained on how to export the data to the academic achievement predictor model. There the data
produced recommendations on how to improve the campus retention based on prior successful
strategies. The academic affairs unit attended a second training on how to implement the
strategies.
Metacognitive Knowledge Solutions
The metacognitive knowledge influence asserted that the academic affairs unit evaluated
their preconceived notions and biases that led to assumptions regarding the reasons students
chose to withdraw, which then created a perception of why students failed to persist in their
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 83
programs. Manipulations of seemingly irrelevant variables created common group identity
sufficient to eliminate negative bias, which arose from diversity in other social category factors
(Eckel & Grossman, 2005). By evaluating the members of the academic affairs unit from a
personal perspective, the use of metacognitive strategies facilitated a sense of understanding.
Schraw (1998) also contended that metacognitive knowledge negated that low ability or lack of
prior understanding of certain subject matter, and perhaps aided in solving complex problems
through use of limited strategies and reliance on regulatory knowledge
To address the metacognitive knowledge influence, academic affairs shared their biases
in a group setting, meetings, or development opportunities, and developed new successful
strategies to improve retention. Continued practice promoted automaticity and takes less
capacity in working memory (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). The recommendation was that the
academic affairs discussed diversity in group meetings and determine levels of biases towards
non similar cultures, and eliminated the variables creating the negative biases and produce new
successful strategies free from cultural bias and developed through data. Future problems were
identified and solve with regular meetings where the academic affairs unit continued to utilize
new knowledge and created new schemas to be developed in the future.
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation influences in Table 16 represented the complete list of assumed
motivation influences, which were validated based on the most frequently mentioned motivation
influences to achieving the stakeholders’ goal during formal interviews, supported by the
literature review, as well as the review of motivation theory. Motivation was defined as the
means by which an activity with a measurable goal was activated and maintained (Rueda, 2011).
Activation and maintaining of a group or individual’s motivation was affected by two factors:
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 84
internal, which consisted of cognitive and affective influences, and external, which included
social and cultural influences (Rueda, 2011). Similarly, Clark and Estes (2008) stated that
motivation has three processes that occur in an environment, active choice, persistence and
mental effort. This section analyzed the motivational influences expectancy value theory and
self-efficacy. As such, Table 16, included the influences validated for achieving the
stakeholders’ goal. Table1 6 also shows the research-based recommendations for these
influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 16
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence: Cause, Need, or
As
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific Recommendation
Expectancy Value Theory:
Academic affairs need to
see the value in
implementing different
strategies that will improve
retention.
Rationales that
include a discussion
of the importance and
utility value of the
work or learning can
help learners develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006
; Pintrich, 2003).

During quarterly meetings, by having
CCI’s administration communicate the
value of improving retention by
utilizing successful strategies, the
academic affairs unit will visualize the
value of successful strategies as being
necessary for the success of their
program and the institution.

Self-Efficacy: The
academic affairs unit was
unable to improve yearly
retention due to their lack
of self-efficacy, and its
relation to their confidence
and positivity, which if
improved, would lead to
increased student
persistence
Modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy,
learning, and
performance (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).

During quarterly meetings, support the
academic affairs unit in their
acquisition of new behaviors through
demonstration and modeling, so that
the higher an individual can place
value on a specific activity, the
individual will shift from choosing to
improve, to persisting in developing
the improvement, to finally engaging in
the improvement effort.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 85
Expectancy Value Theory Solutions
The motivation influence pertaining to the expectancy value theory asserted that for the
academic affairs unit to attain the goal of improving retention each member of the academic
affairs unit must understand the expected value of implementing successful strategies and how
they each were interrelated to the achievement of improved retention. Clark and Estes (2008)
suggested that if there was a connection between the performance goal and self-interest,
mastering the new skill provides value, furthermore determining prior strategies that were
successful and develop new strategies based on each team member’s ability and prior successes
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Eccles (2006) looked at perceived value by analyzing four constructs:
intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value and the cost of facilitating the initiative. Intrinsic
value relates to the feeling one gets when engaging a task. Materials and activities were relevant
and useful to the learners, connected to their interests, and based on real-world tasks (Pintrich,
2003). The academic affairs team possessed either situational interest derived from
characteristics inherent to the task, or personal interest, which involved characteristics of a
personal nature to the individual performing the task (Eccles, 2006). Once those interests
aligned, the unit saw intrinsic value in improving retention. Rueda (2011) continued, in that the
higher an individual placed value on a specific activity, the individual shifted from choosing to
improve, to persisting in developing the improvement, to finally engaging in the improvement
effort.
Literature also stated rationales that included a discussion of the importance and utility
value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003). The data, from this study, suggested that most departments failed to see the value in
implementing successful strategies to improve retention. The recommendation asserted that
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 86
during quarterly meetings, CCI’s administration communicated the value of improving retention
by utilizing successful strategies. The academic affairs unit will then visualize the value of
successful strategies as being necessary for the success of their program and the institution, and
work to implement new strategies to improve yearly retention.
Self-Efficacy Theory Solutions
The academic affairs unit was unable to improve yearly retention due to their lack of self-
efficacy, and its relation to their confidence and positivity, which if improved, led to increased
student persistence. Clark and Estes (2008) state that people’s belief about their skills and ability
factors heavily in persistence and task completion. Assign specific and short-term goals that were
achieved by the unit. Then assign specific components that were current, challenging and were
achieved as a team (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) explained that beliefs were influenced
by multiple factors that had been discussed in this section, included were a lack of prior
knowledge, lack of feedback or discussion within the group, and success or failures. While the
academic affairs unit exhibited all of these traits, they could still achieve the goal of improving
retention if they improved self-efficacy, increased their confidence, and expected positive
outcomes, as they will be more engaged, likely to persist, and work harder to attain the goal
(Rueda, 2011). Finally, literature stated that encouraging learners to set productive goals for
themselves that were challenging but achievable, and encouraged self-evaluation, which led to
enhanced problem solving (Denler et al., 2009).
The recommendation for this influence was during quarterly meetings, instruct the
academic affairs unit to acquire new behaviors through demonstration and modeling, so that the
higher an individual placed value on a specific activity, the individual shifted from choosing to
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 87
improve, to persisting in developing the improvement, to finally engaging in the improvement
effort.
Organization Recommendations
The organization influences in Table 17 represented the complete list of validated
organizational influences asserted to achieving the stakeholders’ goal during formal interviews,
supported by the literature review, and the review of organization and culture theory. Clark and
Estes (2008) suggested that organization and stakeholder goals were often not achieved due to a
lack of resources, most often time and money, and stakeholder goals that were not aligned with
the organization’s mission and goals. Rueda (2011) explained that the challenge in defining
organizational culture and processes was that they were often not visible to the individual,
automated, and their value was relative. The section analyzed the resources, policies and
procedures, and culture, which looked at the organization’s models and settings. As such, Table
17, included the influences validated for achieving the stakeholders’ goal. Table 17 also showed
the research-based recommendations for these influences based on theoretical principles.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 88
Table 17
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Research-Based
Recommendation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Cultural Model
Influence 1: Academic
affairs need to develop a
collaborative culture
where strategies can be
shared and analyzed,
further developing
collective institutional
plans with a focus on
the value of retention.
The more that team members
identify with one another, the
more likely they are to
believe they hold similar
goals, values, and norms, and
the more willing they will be
to cooperate and work
together as a team (Eckel &
Grossman, 2005)

Meet as a team and discuss the
culture of the academic affairs
unit. Communicate to each other
what beliefs, values and goals they
have and compare and contrast.
Lastly, the organization needs to
determine what a collaborative
culture looks like and work
towards developing a collective
institutional plan going forward to
address retention.
Cultural Model
Influence 2: The
academic affairs unit
needs to address the
culture of the institution,
which promotes the
shaming of specific
programs when they fail
to meet retention
metrics on a weekly
basis.
Feedback as well as actual
success on challenging tasks
positively influences people’s
perceptions of competence
(Borgogni et al., 2011).

The organization needs to provide
the academic affairs unit the
opportunity to determine the
culture of their department. The
organization also needs to
reevaluate their attitude towards
their employees, which would
enable the motivation component
of reaching the goal by the
academic affairs unit to be
dictated based on the culture of the
company being positive regarding
achieving the goals.
Cultural Setting
Influence 1: The
academic affairs unit
needs to devote more
time to share best
Tinto (1990) notes that if
colleges would focus less on
their own institutional
interests and meet regularly to
discuss what can be done to
Time is resource, so academic
affairs should monitor new
strategies for effectiveness and
make changes as needed to ensure
improvement is occurring. The
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 89
practices and strategies,
which would lead to
improved retention.
increase student’s success,
retention would improve.
institutional influences will then
shift to evaluating and
implementing new strategies every
quarter upon the conclusion of the
survey assessments.

Cultural Setting
Influence 2: The
academic affairs unit
needs to assign more
resources, such as
training on developing
strategies and
implementing them, to
improve retention.
Cultural settings can be
defined as specific places
where the cultural models are
developed and then acted
upon, thus the cultural
settings are where the visible
aspects are noted (Rueda,
2011).
Administration must budget more
resources to address the goal of
improving retention. Providing
more structured training during
quarterly meetings, utilizing guest
speakers and mentors, and
creating a position that serves as
the administrator tasked with
disaggregating the data from
surveys, would provide the
academic affairs unit more
resources to assess, create and
implement successful strategies.

Cultural Models Solutions
Cultural model influences represented the lack of training and professional development
needed to address retention issues, and identify useful strategies or, created new strategies to
implement. Rueda (2011) noted within a school setting cultural models determined policies,
structures, and practices. With the development of a collaborative culture, future meetings and
trainings would have brought together the departments to share best practices, thus having a
cohesive and supportive culture.
Cultural Model Influence 1 asserted that the academic affairs unit needed to develop a
collaborative culture where strategies were shared and analyzed, further developing collective
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 90
institutional plans with a focus on the value of retention. Literature suggested that the more that
team members identified with one another, the more likely they were to believe they held similar
goals, values, and norms, and the more willing they were to cooperate and work together as a
team (Eckel & Grossman, 2005). The findings in Chapter 4 asserted that the academic affairs
unit lacked motivation to improve yearly retention based on the culture of the organization,
which attributed low-performing results to the efforts and abilities of the academic affairs unit.
There was a possible correlation between the motivations, value theory and self-efficacy of the
academic affairs unit, and the organizational influence. The recommendation for addressing this
influence was to meet as a team and discuss the culture of the academic affairs unit.
Communicate to each other what beliefs, values and goals they have and compare and contrast.
Lastly, determine what a collaborative culture looked like and worked towards developing a
collective institutional plan going forward to address retention.
As the development of a collaborative culture was a cultural model, it also was defined as
an organizational influence, which were organizational processes that were not successful based
upon inadequate resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) explained that the challenge in
defining organizational culture and processes was that they were often not visible to the
individual, automated, and their value was relative. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that culture
influenced motivation and performance by eliminating the attitude of “demotivation”, and
applying motivational support, which was positive and aligned with closing a gap in
performance. Furthermore, cultural models as defined by Rueda (2011) and utilized in the
context of community colleges, was rules that were inherent to the culture or climate.
Cultural Model Influence 2 asserted that the academic affairs unit needed to address the culture
of the institution, which promoted the shaming of specific programs when they failed to meet
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 91
retention metrics on a weekly basis. Literature suggested that feedback, as well as actual success
on challenging tasks, positively influenced people’s perceptions of competence (Borgogni et al.,
2011). The organization influence was the academic affairs units’ perception of themselves,
demotivated them by attributing failing results individually, and created an attitude of
demoralization that led to the academic affairs to devalue the goal of improving retention and
assume an attitude of mistrust.
The recommended solution for this influence was the administration needed to allow the
academic affairs unit the opportunity to determine the culture of their department. Once the new
culture had been determined, the administration provided feedback addressing the challenge of
improving yearly retention, and positively influenced the unit’s perception of their success or
failure.
Cultural Settings Solutions
Cultural settings were defined as specific places where the cultural models were
developed and then acted upon, thus the cultural settings were where the visible aspects was
noted (Rueda, 2011). If the academic affairs unit focused less on their own institutional interests
and met regularly to share best practices and collaborated on strategies, retention would improve.
For CCI and the academic affairs unit to be successful in their goal to improve retention, they
needed to devote more time to addressing the problem, evaluating past successful strategies, and
creating new strategies. Tinto (1990) noted that if colleges would focus less on their own
institutional interests and met regularly to discuss what was done to increase student’s success,
retention improved. Similarly, if CCI and the academic affairs unit spent more time focusing on
where they could improve and offer additional support for students, the possibility for
improvement in retention increased. Furthermore, Tinto (1990) concluded that it was the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 92
responsibility of the college to remain committed to improving student results and that student-
centered institutions are tangibly different than other colleges who put student success and their
welfare behind other goals.
The recommended solution for this influence was to provide time as a resource, so
academic affairs monitored new strategies for effectiveness and made changes as needed to
ensure improvement was occurring. The institutional influences shifted to evaluating and
implementing new strategies every quarter upon the conclusion of the survey assessments.
Cultural settings were defined as specific places where the cultural models were
developed and then acted upon, thus the cultural settings were where the visible aspects were
noted (Rueda, 2011). Cultural Setting Influence 2 asserted that the academic affairs unit needed
to assign more resources, such as training on developing strategies and implementing them, to
improve retention. The recommended solution for this influence was to budget more resources to
address the goal of improving retention. Providing more structured training during quarterly
meetings, utilizing guest speakers and mentors, and creating a position that served as the
administrator tasked with disaggregating the data from surveys, provided the academic affairs
unit more resources to assess, create and implement successful strategies.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that informed this implementation and evaluation plan was the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model suggested evaluation become
the leading driver to successfully implement change through the evaluation of training at an
organization. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) looked at four differing levels, which
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 93
descended in order, that were essential to this evaluation. First were level four results, where
targeted outcomes were determined and proposed (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level three
looked at behavior, whereas levels two and one were the learning and reaction stage. If properly
utilized, this model developed both suggestions and the proper alignment of goals, prior to
training, which allowed for more successful initiatives and results.
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The goal of CCI was to increase retention over a three-year period. CCI was instructed to
increase retention for the current fiscal year or risk losing budgeted dollars. By May 2018, CCI’s
goal was that retention rates increased from the current 60.3% to 70%. Furthermore, the
organizational performance goal was the retention of students improved to 70% at CCI by
studying the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that affected the identification
and solving of retention issues by CCI’s academic affairs team. First, I recommended the
organization evaluate the motivation of their employees with regard to a developed attitude,
which stemmed from the organizations culture. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that culture
influenced motivation and performance by eliminating the attitude of “demotivation”, and
applying motivational support, which is positive and aligned with closing a gap in performance.
Those members of the academic affairs unit who had been with the college the longest, had over
time, began to assign the blame of programmatic failures to the students, lack of resources, and
other unproven influences due to the lack of support and motivation for them to succeed. The
recommended solution for this influence was for the organization to have met and discussed the
attitude, and lack of motivation that was created over time. Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008)
surmised that a motivational goal that promoted self-confidence led to improved results and goal
achievement. The recommended solution to address the team’s motivation and how it defines
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 94
their attitude and culture should be addressed first. I proposed the organization evaluate past
successes, define the organizations attitude, and to determine channels for employees to discuss
their concerns. The proposed solutions for addressing this problem, included providing training
during both the evaluation of the Noel Levitz Survey and during the independent program
effectiveness assessment, produced recommendations on how to improve the campus retention
based on prior successful strategies, discussed diversity in group meetings and determined levels
of biases towards non similar cultures, and eliminated the variables creating the negative biases.
Solutions proposed were for academic affairs unit to have had quarterly meetings, where CCI’s
administration communicated the value of improving retention by utilizing successful strategies.
Next, the academic affairs unit visualized the value of successful strategies as being necessary
for the success of their program and the institution, and during quarterly meetings, instructed the
academic affairs unit to acquire new behaviors through demonstration and modeling. By
emulating the modeled behavior, an individual placed value on a specific activity, the individual
shifted from choosing to improve, to persisting in developing the improvement, and finally
engaged in the improvement effort. Finally, it was also recommended for the team to discuss the
culture of the academic affairs unit. There they communicated to each other what beliefs, values,
and goals they had and compared and contrasted, allowing the academic affairs unit the
opportunity to determine the culture of their department, monitor new strategies for effectiveness
and make changes as needed to ensure improvement was occurring. The institutional influences
then shifted to evaluating and implementing new strategies every quarter upon the conclusion of
the survey assessments, all of which aided in achieving the goal of improving yearly institutional
retention rates at CCI.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 95
Level Four: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 18 showed the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators in the form of
outcomes, metrics and methods for both external and internal outcomes for CCI. Internal and
external outcomes were determined and if the metrics and methods were aligned and correct, the
outcomes were favorable.
Table 18
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Method(s) Metrics(s)
Internal Outcomes
Increase programmatic retention rate to
70%
Weekly drop report
from the registrar
Monthly programmatic
dean’s meeting with
programmatic
stakeholders
Development of strategies to improve
retention
Strategic collaboration
sessions weekly with
faculty and program
chair, at least one
Monthly task force
meeting to discuss
retention initiatives
success and failures
Develop departmental budgets that
account for resources that will aid in
improving retention
Department meetings
and collaboration
sessions weekly
Quarterly retention

Level Three: Behavior
Critical behaviors were as follows: critical behavior one was the proper implementation
of successful strategies to improve programmatic retention, while critical behavior two was to
monitor resource allocation with regard to the development of new initiatives and strategies, so
they were funded properly (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2016). The specific metrics, methods,
and timing for each of these outcome behaviors appeared in Table 19.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 96
Table 19
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1.Proper implementation
of successful strategies to
improve programmatic
retention
Improvement of
programmatic retention
through the
development of 10
strategies per quarter
Program chair will
evaluate new and
successful strategies and
ensure their continued
success or declare them a
failure to be discontinued
immediately
Every
quarter
2. Monitor resource
allocation with regard to
the development of new
initiatives and strategies,
so they are funded
properly.
Monthly evaluation of
budget and costs
associated with
improving retention
versus monthly
budgeted dollars
Program chair develops
annual budget to include
additional resources
develop new strategies and
improve retention
Yearly

The required drivers for the successful implementation of the new training, creation of job aides
and resource allocation and budgeting meetings was the academic development meetings and
academic administration. Table 20 showed the recommended drivers for improving retention at
CCI.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 97
Table 20
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Production of job aides that help explain successful strategies
that have worked for improvement of student retention
Ongoing 1,2
Job aide that describes scenarios that may affect retention Ongoing 1,2
Team meetings that discuss whether the aforementioned job aide
of strategies was useful
Quarterly 1
Team meetings to determine if current budget aligns with the
goals of improved retention or if there is a need for more money
Quarterly 2
Encouraging
Team building exercises that include both team development
meetings and also team discussions on budget and resource needs
for future initiatives during training
Quarterly 2
Collaborative discussion and breakout sessions to discuss best
practices and share ideas
Quarterly 1
Rewarding
Provide honors and certificates of achievements at quarterly
meetings to recognize faculty members and administrators that
participated in collaborative meetings and successfully launched
initiatives that showed improvement
Quarterly 1,2
Provide lunches and other small parties to recognize those
departments that are meeting their budget and that helped
develop new initiatives that improved resource allocation
Weekly 2

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 98
Monitoring of the required drivers and the assurance they occurred was, a) group
discussions determining if the new job aides were adequately addressing the problem and
providing additional support after the training, b) within a month after the training, there were
pulse checks with key administrators, c) specific awards lunches where best practices were
shared and high performing employees were honored.
Level Two: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, the stakeholders
were able to:
1. Identify factors that led to students failing to complete their degree, leading to low
retention. (D)
2. Understood accrued data representing the needs of the students. (P)
3. Decided how best to utilize the findings to achieve the desired outcome of
improving retention. (P)
4. Evaluated their personal biases that prevented them from properly identifying the
factors that led to students withdrawing from college. (M)
5. Determined the value in implementing different strategies that improved
retention. (Value)
6. Detailed the successes in improving retention, if they improved their self-
efficacy. (Confidence)
7. Developed a collaborative culture to share and analyze strategies to develop
collective institutional plans focused on retention. (Cultural Model 1)
8. Addressed the culture of the institution including how to avoid shaming of low
performing programs. (Cultural Model 2)
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 99
9. Had administration provide more time to addressing the problem, evaluating past
successful strategies, and creating new strategies. (Cultural Setting 1)
10. Identified what resources they had to address retention issues and the resources
they needed to create strategies to improve retention. (Cultural Setting 2)
Program. The program included training and quarterly faculty development, both of
which happened throughout the year. First, the academic affairs unit modeled the team building
and collaborative exercises, which occurred at all meetings going forward. Each group was
expected to create new strategies, share best practices, and then report out to the whole group,
what they learned or created regarding retention strategies to improve retention.
Following those sessions, the administration developed training aides and support
mechanisms that furthered the training and implementation of strategies, while periodically
checking the faculty for understanding of the job aides and proper use of the material. If it was
determined the aides were inaccurate or not useful, the administration called key stakeholders
together to reassess the initiative and modified or created a new one.
Lastly, the administration held key budget meetings with other departments prior to the
finalization of the budget to ensure that all resources needed to improve retention were accounted
for and had the proper funding for their execution.
Components of learning. Demonstrating declarative knowledge was often necessary as
a precursor to applying the knowledge to solve problems. Thus, it was important to evaluate
learning for both declarative, procedural and metacognitive knowledge being taught. It was also
important that learners valued the training as a prerequisite to using their newly learned
knowledge and skills on the job. However, they must also have been confident that they
succeeded in applying their knowledge and skills and were committed to using them on the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 100
job. As such, Table 21 listed the evaluation methods and timing for these components of
learning.
Table 21
Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Pre-test assessment that establishes the participant’s
knowledge and their current level of understanding of
past successful strategies implemented at CCI.
This will occur prior to quarterly
training through a summative
method of a knowledge quiz
Group discussion during the development meeting in a
table group format where they then can share the results
of their pre-test assessment in the large group format
Periodically in both monthly
faculty development meeting and
during large format quarterly
meeting
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Have a scenario from a participating group where a
strategy was analyzed, and a solution recommended and
then provide feedback until the group said and created
what they were supposed to do
During and at the end of the
quarterly training
Have the group analyze a past budget and then
reassemble the individual line items so that there is
money left for new initiatives
During both the monthly and
quarterly training
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion of the value of improving retention and
implementing new strategies
During the quarterly training
Create a post-program evaluation to determine if the
participants have or have not implemented the new
strategies
Post quarterly meeting within the
first month of a new initiative
being implemented
Have a discussion on the positives and negatives of the
new strategy

Post quarterly meeting within the
first month of a new initiative
being implemented
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 101
Discussions on whether there are barriers to
implementing the new strategies
During the quarterly training
A retrospective analysis of the new strategy and
suggesting how to funnel additional resources to help the
strategy succeed
One month after the quarterly
training
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Establish and additional task force to develop an action
plan consisting of multiple units and participants
During the quarterly training
Have the task force present their findings, retool the
strategies, and correct them
One month after the quarterly
training

Level One: Reaction
Table 22 looked at the reactions to the implemented program including, a) the
engagement of the administrative team in observing the training sessions, task force meetings
and the budget process, b) the creation of pulse checks and other measures to assess the
relevance of the training, and c) through assessments, whether the trainees were satisfied with
their learning and involvement regarding the initiatives to improve retention at CCI.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 102
Table 22
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Observation of the quarterly training sessions by the
academic affairs unit
During the quarterly training
meeting with follow up prior
to the next meeting
Observation of the TASK force meetings by the academic
affairs unit
During the quarterly training
meeting with follow up prior
to the next meeting
Observation of the budget process by the academic affairs
unit
During the quarterly training
meeting with follow up prior
to the next meeting
Note the attendance and participation at each event After the meeting and within
one month
Relevance
Pulse-check during the initial training and breakout sessions
to ensure that all materials are being understood.
During the quarterly training
meeting with follow up prior
to the next meeting
Meet in a group every two hours during the eight hour
budgeting session to make sure everyone’s priorities are still
aligned
During the yearly budgeting
session with follow up prior
to the next meeting
Customer Satisfaction
Survey the participants to assess whether they retained any of
the training and to what extent are they using the material
Two weeks after the training
concludes
Meet with the task force and assess whether they feel that the
training was useful and discuss what they have observed from
other participants and feedback they have received.
Two weeks, six weeks and ten
weeks after each training

Immediately following the program implementation. The administration followed up
with key directors to receive immediate feedback on all training exercises. If changes to the
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 103
quarterly training were needed, the agenda was adjusted at that time. If the job aides were not
produced quickly and correctly after the program, the department addressed their completion
immediately, followed by periodic checks in month one to assess their usefulness. Finally, the
budget process was reevaluated and a new process delivered within one month of the training
session. The administration sent a revised agenda and meeting schedule to accommodate the new
process in time for the yearly meeting where the learning goals and the reaction to those goals
was addressed.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Following the training
session, but delayed for a period of two months were the following, a) the creation of new
strategies based on the analysis of predetermined best practices and the new strategies successes,
b) the redevelopment of job aides based on the success of the new strategies, c) the budget
process final plans, d) round table discussions on the barriers to implementing the new strategies,
and e) the delivery of the post training assessments.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The level three critical behaviors looked at the amount of successful strategies, which were
implemented, post-training. The strategies were evaluated three months after the initial
collaboration period and were created during the quarterly training meeting. Over the three-month
period, ten strategies were suggested for implementation by the academic affairs unit.
Implementation and Evaluation Plan Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was utilized to plan new strategies and utilization of
resource allocation to improve retention at CCI. Academic affairs, through training, then
implemented new initiatives that utilized quarterly training sessions to create new strategies to
improve retention, and also new processes for the yearly budget meetings. Finally, the academic
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 104
affairs unit was able to evaluate the success or failures of the initiatives through post assessments
and pulse checks. Each group met quarterly and made changes if needed to the processes to
ensure continued success towards the goal of improving retention at CCI.
Limitations
The dissertation had several limitations to the scope of the study and was not
generalizable. First the participants all had similar attitudes and perceived biases with regard to
the organizational culture. While those biases were accounted for, they did provide for some
rather provocative responses and frankness to the interview questions as the participants felt a
comfort speaking to me. Second, the participants only represented 40% of the academic affairs
unit at the college. A larger sample set would have provided more responses, which would have
furthered the validation of my assertions. Finally, the responses represented a deficit mentality.
Very few positives or assets were elaborated upon or even brought to my attention. The lack of
positive responses greatly misrepresents the positives of the college, and portrays the
organization as having a cultural crisis that needs to be addressed prior to the retention issue.
Future Research
In the prior section it was noted that the sample set utilized in this study was small and
specific to my organization. I have asserted that further research was needed, and would benefit
from adding a quantitative assessment from multiple campuses where other administrators who
evaluated retention daily provided responses. Once that analysis was complete, a more structured
and specific qualitative design should be created to address the problem of culture and attitudes
associated with the organization, prior to addressing the retention issue. Future research would
benefit from analyzing retention from the institutional influence lens as well. Literature provided
many assertions from seminal pieces that evaluated retention as cultural to the student, a student
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 105
and parent issue, and a community issue. New research has determined that the colleges were
responsible for developing programs that integrated the students to the collegial culture by
providing additional, institutional resources. Research should address the successful initiatives
that were created and implemented at colleges across the country to address whether the
institutional influences were the major factor leading to student withdrawals.
Conclusion
This dissertation sought to evaluate the influences that prevented CCI from attaining a
yearly retention rate of 70%. Literature was researched to determine influences created by the
student and influences created by the institution. These influences supported the assertion that
there were many barriers to a student completing their degree at a community college. The
research questions concluded that there were gaps in knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences that led to the academic affairs unit’s failure to attain the organizational performance
goal of 70% yearly retention. Assumed influences were then determined, which led to the
creation of interview questions that were then utilized to accrue data for this study, and to assess
the gaps in KMO of the unit. Once the data was coded, assertions were made and influences
were validated by interview responses from the academic affairs unit. Finally, a detailed analysis
and recommendations were made utilizing the Kirkpatrick (2016) model. Further research on this
subject is highly advised as many community colleges have differing influences to evaluate, as
well as different levels of knowledgeable and motivated academic affairs units.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 106

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 107
References
Anderson, L.W., Krathwol, D.R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA
(Pearson Education Group).
Bandura. A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 1-26.
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G.P. (2011). The relationship of employee
perceptions of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective
efficacy. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5-13
Claggett, C.A. (1996). Correlates of success in the community college: Using research to
inform campus retention efforts. Journal of Applied Research in the Community
College, 4(l), 49-68
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American community college (3rd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Deberard, M.S., Spielmans, G.I., & Julka, D.C. (2004). Predictors of academic achievement
and retention among college freshman: A longitudinal study. College Student Journal,
38(1), 68-80.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from http://
www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.
EDMC. (2016). Strategic focus, mission statement. Retrieved from http://
www.edmc.edu/StrategicFocus/
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 108
www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Eckel, C.C., & Grossman, P.J. (2005). Managing diversity by creating team
identity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 58(3), 371-392.
Engle, J., & Tinto, V. (2008). Moving Beyond Access: College Success for Low-Income,
First-Generation Students. Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher
Education.
Fike, D. S., & Fike, R. (2008). Predictors of first-year student retention in the community
college. Community College Review, 36(2), 68-88. Retrieved from
http://www.search.proquest.com/docview/213290732?accountid=14749
Gardner, J.N., Jewler, A.J., Robb, A., & Bourne, L.A. (1995). Your first-year
experience.
Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the campus
climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 235-251.
Kappner, A.S. (2002). Across the education continuum: Child care on the college
campus. National Coalition for Campus Children’s Centers.
Kinzie, J. (2007). High-impact practices boost learning, involved parents no problem.
Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.
Kirkpatrick, J.D., & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training
evaluation. Association for Talent Development.
Lau, L.K. (2003). Institutional factors affecting student retention. Education, 124(1), 126-136.
Lee, J.J., Sax, L.J., Kim, K.A., Hagedorn, L.S. (2004). Understanding students’ parental
education beyond first-generation status. Community College Review, 32(1), 1-20.
Lewis, C.W., & Middleton, V. (2003). African Americans in community college: A
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 109
review of research reported in the community college journal of research and practice:
1990-2000. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 27(9-10), 787-798.
Mayer, R.E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McCrudden, M.T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, k. (2006). The effect of general relevance
instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of
experimental education, 74(4), 291-310.
Merriam, S.B., & Tisdell, E.J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Nunez, A.M., & Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (1998). First generation students: Undergraduates whose
parents never enrolled in postsecondary education (NCES 98-082). Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from http://
www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Patton, L.D., Morelon, C., Whitehead, D.M., & Hossler, D. (2006). Campus-based retention
Initiatives: Does the emperor have clothes?. New Directions for Institutional Research,
2006(130), 9-24.
Pintrich, P.R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student
motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of educational Psychology, 95(4),
667.
Roman, M.A. (2007) Community College Admission and Student Retention. Journal of College
Admission, 194, 18-23.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 110
New York, NY10027.
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional science, 26(1-2),
113-125.
Tierney, W.G. (1999). Models of minority college-going and retention: Cultural integrity
versus cultural suicide. Journal of Negro Education, 80-91.
Tinto, V. (1990). Principles of effective retention. Journal of The First-Year Experience &
Students in Transition. 2(1), 35-48.
Tinto, V. (1997) Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student
persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 599-623.
Tinto, V. (2004). Student Retention and Graduation: Facing the Truth, Living with the
Consequences. Occasional Paper 1. Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher
Education.
Tinto, V. (2005, January). Taking student success seriously: Rethinking the first year of college.
In Ninth Annual Intersession Academic Affairs Forum, California State University,
Fullerton (pp.05-01).
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Remedial
education at higher education institutions in fall 1995. Washington DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
Wild, L., & Ebbers, L. (2002). Rethinking student retention in community colleges. Community
College Journal of Research & Practice, 26(6), 503-519.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 111
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
Interview Questions

1. Can you tell me your name and what department or departments you oversee?
2. How long have you been with CCI?
3. How long have you been in education and are there other types of institutions you
worked for?
4. What is your current retention rate?
5. Has that rate changed over the last 3 years?
6. What retention strategies have you implemented in the past several years and how have
they worked for your program? (K)
7. How did you learn about the strategies and how did you implement them within your
program? (K)
8. How well do you think your program will do in achieving the goal of improving
retention? (M)
9. How do you feel about your ability to improve retention through implementation of
strategies? (M)
10. How confident are you regarding your ability to assure that retention is a priority so that
you persist in developing strategies to improve retention? (M)
11. During retention meetings, how do departments collaborate with each other to develop
successful strategies to improve retention? (O)
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 112
12. How do you propose new strategies and select participants for the group that would
develop, collaboratively, new strategies? (O)
13. How does the culture of the institution affect retention strategies and efforts? (O)
14. What activities or discussions take place during assigned meetings regarding retention,
and is there adequate time for these meetings? (O)
15. What additional training regarding strategies and retention would be advantageous to
your program if the institution provided the additional resource? (O)

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 113
APPENDIX B
Artifact Analysis
I will also collect specific artifacts regarding best practices and strategies, which have been
implemented. These artifacts may have been successful in some programs, but not in others.
They are as follows: Included but not limited to:
Are there additional useful documents that you have used and implemented, will you share?
1. Yearly retention rates chart
A. Published on a weekly basis and available through the institution’s record system.
B. These charts aid in the creation and implementation of new strategies.
C. The charts provide a glimpse into the culture of fear by determining poorly performing
departments and faculty.
2. Department plans
A. Specific parts of the plan and whether they address retention strategies.
B. Outlining of new strategies, which have been developed since last years plan.
C. Whether the plan aligns with the institutions yearly plan.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 114
APPENDIX C
Informed Consent
University of Southern California
(Rossier School of Education)

INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

(Persistence: A Study of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences of
Academic Affairs and its Relation to Increased Retention)

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Jason Lafferty and Dr. Kim
Hirabayashi at the University of Southern California, because you are a member of the
academic affairs group at CCI. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the
information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding
whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. You
may also decide to discuss participation with your family or friends. If you decide to
participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

I will interview individuals and also utilize them as a focus group to study two questions,
which fall under the KMO framework of Clark and Estes. Question one will assess the
knowledge of the members of the academic affairs team in relation to their understanding
of causation of issues relating to low retention at CCI. The second question will involve
the motivation of the academic affairs team to address the retention issue at CCI, as well
as look at organizational influences, which may positively or negatively effect retention
at CCI.

STUDY PROCEDURES
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 115
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to participate in personal
interviews, as well as a focus group. The duration of the study will be over one term so we
are able to thoroughly discuss the topic during peak student enrollment and activity.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
(Describe any reasonable foreseeable risks, discomforts, and inconveniences,
including physiological risks/discomforts; describe any psychological, social, legal or
financial risks to the participant, and how these will be minimized. If there are no
anticipated risks, state so.)

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
(Describe direct benefits from participating in the study. Also, state the anticipated
benefit to society. If there are no anticipated benefits to the participant, state so. Note
that as this is a research study, the benefits are contingent upon the results. The
investigator can state only that benefits are anticipated, not that they will occur. If
there are no direct benefits to participants, there should be anticipated benefits to
society.)

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There will be no compensation for participation in this study.

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OF THE INVESTIGATOR
(A "Conflict of Interest (COI)" is a situation in which financial or other personal
considerations compromise, or has the appearance of compromising, an individual's
professional judgment in proposing, conducting, supervising or reporting research.
If there appears to be a conflict of interest (COI) or there is a COI, include this section.
Delete this section if there are no conflicts of interest.)
1. The investigator must disclose all financial or other personal considerations
that compromise, or have the appearance of compromising, the investigator’s
professional judgment in proposing, conducting, supervising, or reporting
research. Conflicts include financial as well as non-financial interests.
Conflicts include financial interests (stocks, stock options, or other ownership
interests, whether traded publicly or not) in a research sponsor or licensee;
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 116
management roles in a research sponsor, licensee, or other company having
an economic interest in the outcome of the research; and using students to
perform services in which an investigator maintains an ownership interest or
management role.
2. In disclosing your proprietary interest and research interest in the informed
consent, you may do so in general terms, in a manner consistent with IRB
requirements. At a minimum, you must disclose the nature of the interest,
such as a paid consultant, a lecturer, a board member, an equity ownership, or
a management or supervisory role in the sponsoring company. Such conflicts
should also be disclosed to the Vice President of Research for resolution. The
proposed informed consent language must be reviewed by the IRB, and if
necessary, by the USC Conflict of Interest Review Committee (CIRC).
3. For more information go to: USC Office of Compliance Step by Step Guide to
Conflict of Interest Disclosure: http://ooc.usc.edu/step-step-guide-disclosure

CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if
we are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The
members of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP
reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

The data will be stored by Jason Lafferty and held for three years.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFIDENTIALITY

Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential,
except if necessary to protect your rights or welfare (for example, if you are injured and need
emergency care). A Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained from the Federal
Government for this study to help protect your privacy. This certificate means that the
researchers can resist the release of information about your participation to people who are
not connected with the study, including courts. The Certificate of Confidentiality will not be
used to prevent disclosure to local authorities of child abuse and neglect, or harm to self or
others.
INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 117

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time
and discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights
or remedies because of your participation in this research study.

EMERGENCY CARE AND COMPENSATION FOR INJURY (For greater than minimal risk
studies, include the “Emergency Care and Compensation” section which provides
evening/emergency phone numbers.)
If you are injured as a direct result of research procedures you will receive medical
treatment; however, you or your insurance will be responsible for the cost. The University
of Southern California does not provide any monetary compensation for injury.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact (identify
research personnel: Principal Investigator, Faculty Sponsor (if student is the Co-P.I.),
and Co-Investigator(s). Include day phone numbers, email addresses, and
school/business addresses for all listed individuals. (DO NOT INCLUDE HOME
ADDRESSES FOR YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY).

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant
or the research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to
talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park
Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles,
CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 118
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I
have been given a copy of this form.

AUDIO/VIDEO/PHOTOGRAPHS (If this is not applicable to your study and/or if
participants do not have a choice of being audio/video-recorded or photographed,
delete this section.)

□ I agree to be audio/video-recorded /photographed (remove the media not being
used)

□ I do not want to be audio/video-recorded /photographed (remove the media not
being used)

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 119

Name of Person Obtaining Consent

Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

INCREASING INSTITUTIONAL RETENTION 120
APPENDIX D
Participant Recruitment Letter
Good Afternoon,

As a student in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California, I would
like to invite you to participate in gathering data about your knowledge of the causation of
retention problems at CCI, and the motivation and organizational influences that relate to
improving retention at CCI. You will be asked to participate in personal interviews and then be a
part of a focus group. The study is to help administrators understand the causes of retention
issues of our students, so that we are able to improve retention as an organization. You are
eligible to participate, as you are a member of the academic affairs group of CCI.

Your participation is voluntary and the other option is to not participate. If you do decide to
participate, I will meet with you for one hour to answer 15 questions.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Developing the next generation of organization leaders: a gap analysis

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Cultural competency for academic counselors in the California community college systems to increase African-American male students' success: a gap analysis

PDF

Evaluating cross-cultural acculturation experiences influencing international black African students' academic success in a United States university

PDF

The barriers and facilitators of academic success for Black male students at a community college: a gap analysis

PDF

Improving instructor skills (IIS): a Needs analysis

PDF

Increasing collaborative practices in the military: an improvement study

PDF

Factors that facilitate or hinder staff performance during management turnover

PDF

First-year retention: Community college students -- a gap analysis

PDF

Examining the relationship between doctoral attrition and a redefined fatherhood: a gap analysis

PDF

Violence experienced by registered nurses working in hospitals: an evaluation study

PDF

Preventing excessive force incidents by improving police training: an evaluation study of a use-of-force training program

PDF

The use of differentiation in English medium instruction in Middle Eastern primary schools: a gap analysis

PDF

Increasing strategic investments of philanthropic funding in nonprofit organizations

PDF

Stop the revolving door: the influence of emotionally intelligent leadership practices on employee retention in non‐profit human service organizations

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Leadership engagement to promote employee retention and career paths within the senior assisted living industry

PDF

First-generation college students and persistence to a degree: an evaluation study

PDF

Improving pilot training by learning about learning: an innovation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Lafferty, Jason Porter (author)

Core Title Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/26/2018

Defense Date 03/22/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Community Colleges,knowledge influences,motivation influences,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational influences,retention successful strategies

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Seli, Helena (committee member), Sundt, Melora (committee member)

Creator Email jplaffer@usc.edu,lafferty1@live.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-494590

Unique identifier UC11267106

Identifier etd-LaffertyJa-6272.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-494590 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LaffertyJa-6272.pdf

Dmrecord 494590

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Lafferty, Jason Porter

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA