University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Coaching to increase retention in online degree completion programs

(USC Thesis Other)

Coaching to increase retention in online degree completion programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 1

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION IN ONLINE DEGREE
COMPLETION PROGRAMS

by

Ruth Claire Black

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

December 2016

Copyright © 2016 Ruth Claire Black

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 2

Dedication

For my Mother, Georgia Patricia Claire Mosely Black,
Grandmother, Edith Hawley Black and
Aunt, Olive Mary Woods Edwards
who continue to guide and inspire me from the other side

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 3

Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank Inside Track for allowing me to conduct
this study and for hosting me and facilitating my research through the fall and winter of
2015. While there were many Inside Track coaches, staff members and executives
instrumental in this study, I would specifically like to thank Kai Drekmeier for supporting
this study, Laura Knauer and her coaching teams for inspiring this study and Nicole
Amend for setting up the research schedule, interviews and focus groups. I also send my
heartfelt thanks to all of the Inside Track coaches who participated in this study and who
shared their inspiring stories and their belief in the power of coaching.
A thank you also to Arthur Ruzzano of ETS for his friendship and for his guidance
with the ETS Success Navigator portions of the study and for taking the time to provide
help and guidance along the way. To all of my classmates in Cohort 3 and especially to Ali
and Kiley thank you for being a part of this journey and for your friendship, support and
guidance. And, thank you to Vicki for all of your patience and calm counsel with the
details of the documents, charts and graphics.
I would especially like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Lawrence Picus for all of
his support, guidance and help through the long and challenging dissertation process. His
positive attitude and many rounds of guidance and feedback were motivating and inspiring.
While there were many outstanding faculty members who taught classes and participated in
this wonderful program, I must specifically thank Dr. Cathy Krop for her fantastic teaching
and her warm and engaging mentorship.
To my colleagues, mentors and leadership at the CSU, thank you for supporting me
throughout this program and in my work in online education and innovation. I would
especially like to thank former Chancellor Charlie Reed for giving me the opportunity to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 4

lead the online division of the California State University system and Chancellor Tim
White for his leadership as the projects developed, grew and became part of his vision for
the system. Thank you also to President Welty and Executive Vice-Chancellor Quillian for
their leadership, mentorship, friendship and support as I grew in my roles at the CSU while
balancing the classwork, research and dissertation writing elements of this program.
To Jim Mathis, thank you for your great friendship over the last three decades and
for pushing me to enter this program. I know that I resisted mightily at times and that it
took patience and perseverance to get me to start this program. Thank you for believing in
me and for being so vocal about it. To my great friends Helen, Marie and Maria and to
my adopted sister Marilyn and adopted Mom Ellen, thank you for all of the love, support
and inspiration along the way. And to my cousin Diane for being wonderful, caring,
supportive and inspirational and for willingly taking the place of all the family members
who have left us.
One final thank you and small expression of appreciation and gratitude to all of the
many doctors, nurses, medical staff, friends and family who cared for me and helped me
through the several years that preceded this program. It was a dream to be able to start
this program and to be at the end of the journey in full health is a precious gift.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 5

Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 9
List of Figures 11
Abstract 12
Chapter One: Introduction and Overview of the Study 14
Organizational Context and Mission 14
Organizational Performance Status 15
Related Literature 16
Importance of a Promising Practice Study 19
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance 20
Organizational Stakeholders 22
Stakeholder for the Study 23
Purpose of the Project and Questions 24
Methodological Framework 25
Definitions 26
Organization of the Study 27
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 28
Introduction to Retention in Post-Secondary Education 28
Financial Impact of Low Retention 30
Financial Impact on Students 30
Financial Impact on Institutions 31
Graduation Rates by Institution Type and the Completion Divide 32
Online Versus Face-to-Face Graduation Rates 35
Online Degree Completion Programs 36
Growth of Online Learning and the Impact on Retention 36
For-Profit Educational Institutions 37
Increased Participation and Lower Completion 38
The Birth and Ascension of Online Degrees 40
Non-First-Time Students 41
The Impact of Non-First-Time Students as the New Majority 42
Learning and Motivation Challenges of Non-First-Time Students 43
Looking Beyond the Institution for Retention Solutions 45
Coaching 46
The History of Coaching 47
Emergence of Coaching as a Retention Tool in Post-Secondary Education 48
Inside Track as an Exemplary Coaching Organization 49
Conclusion 50
Chapter Three: Methodology 51
Clark and Estes KMO Framework 51
The Five Functions of a Successful Team 53
Schein’s Framework for Assessing and Understanding Organizational Culture 53
Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Assets 55
Factual, Conceptual, Procedural and Metacognitive Knowledge Assumptions 55
Factual Knowledge Assumptions 55
Conceptual Knowledge Assumptions 56
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 6

Procedural Knowledge Assumptions 56
Metacognitive Knowledge Assumptions 57
Assumed Motivation Assets 57
Assumed Organizational Assets 58
Evaluating the Coaches’ Knowledge Assets 58
Evaluation of Factual Knowledge and Skills 59
Evaluation of Conceptual Knowledge 59
Evaluation of Procedural Knowledge 60
Evaluation of Metacognitive Knowledge 60
Evaluation of the Coaches Motivation Assets 61
Evaluation of Inside Track’s Organizational Assets 62
Population of Study 63
Assessment and Identification of the Purposeful Sample 64
Purposeful Sample Size Necessary to Support Interview Groups at Two Locations 64
Data Collection Procedures 65
Interviews of Outstanding Coaches 66
Use of the Unstructured Formal Interview 67
Use of a Numerical or Letter Based Pseudonym to Protect Participant Identity 67
The Observation at the Coaching Centers 67
Focus Groups at the Nashville and Portland Coaching Centers 68
Document Review 69
Trustworthiness of Data 72
Role of the Investigator 73
Limitations and Delimitations 74
Chapter Four: Findings 76
Participating Stakeholders 77
Data Collection Methodology 78
Data Analysis 79
Findings for Knowledge Causes 80
Factual Knowledge 81
Procedural Knowledge 85
Procedural Asset of Coaches’ Development of Student Goals 85
Procedural Asset of Student Skills Assessment 87
Conceptual Knowledge Asset Findings 88
Conceptual Knowledge Asset in Non-Cognitive Skill Identification and Development 89
Conceptual Knowledge Asset: The Coaches Know About Retention and
Motivation Issues 92
Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Communication 93
Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Coaching to Individual Needs 96
Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Accountability 98
Metacognitive Knowledge 99
Metacognitive Knowledge Asset: Coach Monitoring and Adjustments to
Improve Retention 101
Synthesis of Findings for Knowledge Assets 105
Findings for Motivational Assets 108
Motivational Indicator: Persistence 109
Motivational Indicator: Mental Effort 111
Motivational Asset: Common Values and Beliefs 113
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 7

Motivational Asset: Sensitivity to Culture and Background 115
Motivational Asset: Confidence 118
Synthesis of Findings for Motivation Assets 120
Findings for Organizational Assets 121
Socio-Cultural Elements of the Organization 122
Coach Interactions 123
Atmosphere and Mood of the Workplace 125
Mentoring and Role Models 126
The Lencioni Elements of Organizational Success or Failure 128
Lencioni Element One: High Levels of Trust 129
Lencioni Element Two: No Fear of Conflict 132
Lencioni Element Three: Attention to Results 135
Lencioni Element Four and Five: Accountability and Commitment 136
Direct Alignment of Coaching Services and Organizational Supports 138
Tools, Supports and Resources that Support Coaching Excellence 140
Performance Incentives and Appropriate Feedback to Improve Coach Performance 142
Synthesis of Findings for Organizational Assets 144
Chapter Five: Recommendations, Approaches to Implementation and Evaluation 146
Validated Assets Selected for Further Discussion and Rationale for Selection 147
The Core Components of Successful Retention Coaching 149
The Importance of Non-Cognitive and Growth Mindset Skills to Retention 149
The ETS SuccessNavigator® Assessment 151
The Importance of Individually Tailored Student Support 153
Early and Consistent Incorporation of Career Coaching 154
Increasing Personalized Student Support through Counselors and Advisors 155
Increasing Student Support that is Non-Judgmental, Grounded in Empathy and Caring 157
Increasing Course Persistence through Pedagogy and Instructional Design Strategies 158
Web 2.0 Tools 158
Removing Gateway Issues 159
Open Educational Resources 160
Key Elements of Successful Coaching that are Difficult to Independently Develop 160
Trust is the Keystone of Successful Coaching Relationships and the Foundation of the
Successful Coaching Organization 161
Optimized Coaching Culture and Environment 162
Developing and Retaining Highly Effective Coaches 163
Summary of Recommendations 164
Institutional Level Implementation of Coaching Services 165
Evaluation and Selection of Outsourced Coaching Services 165
Key Implementation Considerations 166
Strategies for Unionized Institutions 166
Budget Considerations 167
Leadership Considerations 167
Outline of Operational Steps to Implementation of Coaching Services 168
Sample Timeline for the RFP and for the Implementation 169
Sample RFP for Coaching Services 170
Approval Steps and Considerations 170
Staffing the RFP Selection Committee 170
Meeting and Conferring with Union Groups 171
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 8

Leadership and Staffing of the Selection Process and the Implementation Project 171
Project Leadership at the Campus or Program Level 172
Internal Marketing and Education Campaigns to Support the Implementation 172
Scenario 2: Designing and Developing a Coaching Unit at the Institution 173
Evaluating the Quality and Impact of Coaching Services After Implementation 177
Level One: Measuring Reactions to Coaching 177
Level Two: Assessing Student Learning 178
Level Three: Assessing Transfer of Knowledge and Skills 178
Level Four: Assessing Results and Impact 179
Future Research 183
Conclusion 184
References 189
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 203
Appendix B: Observation Protocol for the Organizational Element of the Study 204
Appendix C: Focus Group Protocol for the Organizational Element of the Study 206
Appendix D: Interview Protocol for Managers 207
Appendix E: Infographic Prepared by Ruth Claire Black 208
Appendix F: The American College Test (ACT) 210
Appendix G: Pictures of the Design and Décor of the Inside Track Coaching Centers 213
Appendix H: Sample RFP for Coaching Services 217

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 9

List of Tables
Table 1: Graduation Rates by Institution Type Based on National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014 33
Table 2: The New Normal for U. S. Post-Secondary Education (NASPA Report, 2014) 43
Table 3: Recommendations for Improving Retention of Non-First-Time Students 45
Table 4: Core Coaching Competencies 47
Table 5: Data Collection Methodology for the KMO Elements of the Study 65
Table 6: Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational (KMO) Assets of
the Coaches 70
Table 7: Data Collection Schedule 78
Table 8: Knowledge Assets Validated, Not Validated and New Asset Identified 80
Table 9: Non-Cognitive Skills and Work-Life Balance 83
Table 10: Summary of Procedural Asset Findings 85
Table 11: Summary of Conceptual Asset Findings 89
Table 12: The Importance of Trust and Relationship Building in Coaching 93
Table 13: Select Quotes around Communication Strategies and Approaches 95
Table 14: Tailoring Coaching to each Student’s Specific Needs 97
Table 15: Metacognitive Knowledge Asset Findings 99
Table 16: Monitoring and Adjusting Skills 102
Table 17: Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation Skills 104
Table 18: Summary of Validated Assumed Knowledge Assets 105
Table 19: Summary of Motivational Indicators, Assets and Findings 108
Table 20: Coach Specific Frequency of Value and Belief Discussion Areas 117
Table 21: Summary of Assumed Motivation Indicators and Assets 120
Table 22: Summary of Organizational Assets and Findings by Category 122
Table 23: Summary of Socio-Cultural Organizational Assets and Findings 123
Table 24: Observed Positive Social Interactions in the Break Areas 123
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 10

Table 25: Focus Group Discussion of Social and Work Interactions and Connections 124
Table 26: Recognizing the Importance of Modeling and Mentoring to New Coaches 127
Table 27: Trust is the Key to Both Organizational and Individual Coaching Success 131
Table 28: Key Trust Concepts within Coaching and the Organization 132
Table 29: Accountability and its Nexus with Trust, Commitment and Engagement 137
Table 30: Coach Expectations of Management 139
Table 31: Summary of Validated Assumed Organizational Assets 144
Table 32: Ranking of the Key Validated Coaching Assets under Criteria 1 and 2 148
Table 33: Summary of Key Coaching Assets and Corresponding Recommendations 164
Table 34: Sample RFP and Implementation Timeline 169
Table 35: Assessing Coaching Using the Kirkpatrick Four-Level Assessment Model 180

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 11

List of Figures
Figure 1: Challenges and obstacles to course and program completion. Coaches’ responses
to interview question one: “What are the biggest challenges and obstacles to course and
program completion that your students experience?” 82
Figure 2: Approaches to goal identification and goal setting: Coaches’ responses to
interview question four: “How do you set goals with your students?” 86
Figure 3: Frequency of coach communication strategies: Coaches’ responses to interview
question five, “what strategies do you use to engage the students?” and interview question
six, “what strategies do you use to address retention challenges?” 94
Figure 4: Evaluation and analysis methods: Coaches’ responses to interview question eight,
“How do you know if you are doing a good job?” 100
Figure 5: Broad categories of coach values and beliefs: Coaches’ responses to interview
question nine asked: “What values and perspective do you have that help you improve
student retention, resilience and student success?” 113
Figure 6: Primary and Guiding Belief of the Coaches 114
Figure 7: Cumulative Mention of Sensitivity to Culture and Background: Aggregate of
coaches’ narrative 116
Figure 8: Values and Beliefs of Successful Coaches: Coaches’ responses to interview
question eight, “what makes you good at your job” and question ten, “does confidence in
your own abilities as a coach affect your success as a coach?” 118
Figure 9: Organizational Staircase: Elite Coach Modeling Behaviors and Mentoring
Expectations 128
Figure 10: Trust as Core to Conflict Resolution, Results, Accountability and Commitment 130
Figure 11: Coaching Tools, Resources and Support Services. Coaches’ responses to
interview question 12 asked: “How does Inside Track support and incentivize you to
improve as a coach?” 141
Figure 12: Incentives and Feedback to Improve Coaching Performance 143
Figure 13: Key Elements of Communication Training from Least Important (1) to Most
Important (5) 157

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 12

Abstract
This study of Inside Track, a for-profit coaching organization, examined using professional
coaching to improve retention and graduation rates among the group with the lowest
retention rate: the online student seeking degree completion. The aim of the study was to
understand and assess the knowledge, motivation and organizational assets of outstanding
coaches and how their student-focused coaching contributed to increased online course and
program completion rates. Data was collected through interviews, focus groups, observations
and a document review. Findings showed that successful retention coaching is based on high
levels of trust between student and coach and that the coaches are guided by a core set of
values and beliefs anchored by trust and empathy. Findings also showed that developing
successful coaches is an extensive and demanding process and that Inside Track has a highly
developed organizational culture within which to nurture and develop new and experienced
coaches. Chapter Five provides a range of recommendation and strategies for addressing retention
issues and also offers best practices, methods, planning options and comparison information
around two distinct institutional scenarios for the implementation and utilization of coaching
services. The paper concludes with an evaluation framework for assessing the impact and
effectiveness of coaching services once they are implemented.
KEY WORDS
Key Words: RETENTION, GRADUATION RATES, ONLINE RETENTION, ONLINE
DEGREE COMPLETION PROGRAMS, NON-FIRST TIME STUDENTS, RETENTION
COACHING, INSIDE TRACK, INTERNATIONAL COACHING FEDERATION,
INDIVIDUALIZED STUDENT SUPPORTS, NON-COGNITIVE SKILLS, SOFT SKILLS,
GROWTH MINDSET, FOR-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS, STUDENT SPECIFIC SUPPORT,
SELF-AWARENESS, SELF-REGULATION, PROGRAM ASSESSMENT, CULTURAL
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 13

MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE, MENTORING, ROLE MODELS, OPEN
EDUCATION RESOURCES.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 14

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Student retention is a persistent, difficult and frustrating problem at the vast majority of
American post-secondary institutions (Lumina Foundation, 2015; Talbert, 2012; United States
Department of Education, 2006). Since the release of the Spellings Report in 2006, post-
secondary institutions have been under pressure to become more transparent about retention and
graduation rates (United States Department of Education, 2006). Two years after the Spellings
report, the federal government amended the Higher Education Act of 1965 to regulate and
mandate disclosure and annual reporting of graduation and retention data as well as cost of
attendance (Kelly & Schneider, 2012; United States Department of Education, 2009). The intense
national focus and debate on graduation rates and student retention put low retention and
graduation rates in online degree programs under the microscope (Allen & Seaman, 2014).
Attrition rates are 20% to 25% higher for online courses than they are for traditional, face-to-face
courses (Nistor & Neubauer, 2010; Street, 2010). Another disconcerting factor in student
retention is the extremely low graduation rates of non-first time students. In the October 2014
report from NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education’s (NASPA) Research
and Policy Institute, the non-first time student graduation rate was calculated and revealed for the
first time. The report found that only 33.7% of non-first-time students complete their degree,
compared with 54.1% of first-time students (NASPA's Research and Policy Institute, 2014). From
these data, it can be deduced that retention rates for online degree completion programs focusing
on non-first time students are critically low.
Organizational Context and Mission
Inside Track, headquartered in San Francisco, California, with coaching centers in
Portland, Oregon, and Nashville, Tennessee, is a for-profit company focused on coaching
“students to help them develop the skills that lead to success” (Inside Track, 2015). The stated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 15

mission for Inside Track, as it appears on the company website, is to support “students in
overcoming obstacles and persisting through challenges” and to “keep students accountable to
themselves and support them in reaching their goals.” Inside Track currently employs
approximately 350 coaches and has an administrative, training and technology staff of about 85
full-time employees.
All Inside Track coaches hold a minimum of a bachelor’s degree, and 47% hold an
advanced degree. First-year coaches receive a minimum of 100 hours of training and extensive
ongoing professional development, evaluation, and training in subsequent years (Inside Track,
2015). The primary role of the coach is to be student centered and to focus on addressing each
student’s fears, challenges and impediments to course and program completion through 20 to 40
minute weekly or bi-monthly coaching sessions. Inside Track currently works with over 50 U.S.
post-secondary institutions to provide enrolled student coaching services that are designed to
increase retention rates and improve student success
1
.
Organizational Performance Status
On December 18, 2014, Inside Track was used as an example by the U.S. Department of
Education as a program that meets the requirement to “propose strategies focused on
individualized counseling, because emerging research suggests that certain kinds of such
counseling can improve students' academic performance or persistence” (U.S. Department of
Education, 2014). Additionally, Inside Track coaching is the only college dropout prevention
program to meet the “What Works Clearinghouse” evidence standards without reservation for
the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). In evaluating Inside Track across several studies, IES

1
While this study focuses on Inside Track’s retention and student success coaching for enrolled
students, this is not Inside Track’s main coaching service. The majority of Inside Track coaches
work as prospective student coaches and are an integrated element of an institution’s outreach
and marketing team.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 16

found that students assigned to receive Inside Track coaching were significantly more likely to
remain enrolled at their institutions than students who do not receive coaching (IES, 2014). The
IES study also concluded that Inside Track coaching was a more cost-effective approach to
improving retention than increasing levels of financial aid.
Bettinger and Baker (2013), among the main authors whose work is utilized in the IES
assessment, explain that Inside Track utilizes trained retention professionals as coaches, focused
and developed retention processes, and technology designed to harvest and display institution
specific data points “that are typically out of reach for individual colleges and universities” (p. 2).
The authors explain that “no one strategy fits everyone, and proactive coaches can carefully
customize strategies to fit the specific needs of individuals,” and that at the end of one year of
college, Inside Track coached students were five percentage points more likely to persist with
their studies and graduate than were un-coached students (Bettinger & Baker, 2013, p. 2). The
study also found that at the 18-month and two-year marks, Inside Track coached students were a
further three to four percentage points more likely to be retained to graduation than were un-
coached students (Bettinger & Baker, 2013). Based on IES’ comprehensive assessment, Inside
Track’s enrolled student coaching services are promising retention practices worthy of further
study, especially as they relate to improving retention rates among online degree completion
students.
Related Literature
Articles and studies identifying retention as the Achilles’ heel of distance education and
outlining approaches and strategies for improving retention of face-to-face and online learners
are plentiful. The 2010 report, “Strategies for Increasing Online Student Retention and
Satisfaction,” edited by Christopher Hill, examined 11 methods for tackling online retention.
Hill’s (2010) report also provides an overview of the financial impact of high attrition rates on
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 17

institutions. Using the Ruffalo Noel Levitz “Retention Revenue Estimator,” Hill estimated that a
private college with a first-year class of 2000 students and a 70% first-year retention rate would
save $1 million if it could achieve a 10% increase in its year-one retention. The Hill report also
looks at retention through the lens of the non-traditional student and the non-first time student
enrolled in online programs and reports that these students’ retention rates lag significantly
behind those of first time freshmen. Hill, in the opening and closing remarks of his report,
acknowledged that retention remains a difficult problem and that addressing it requires
comprehensive institution-wide strategies that systemically tackle extensive and pervasive
problems.
Why a student stops out of an online program is discussed frequently; however, the
reasons cited in the literature are often inconsistent, making identification of key factors difficult
to discern (Street, 2010). These findings highlight that comparing on-campus students directly to
online students is complicated and makes for difficult and awkward comparative data (Boles,
Cass, Levin, Schroeder, & Smith, 2010). Retention data and discussions about online course and
program retention are usually broken into internal and external categories. Internal retention
studies focused on student-centric attitudes and issues while external studies focused on the
pedagogical and institutional issues related to retention (Street, 2010). Common factors in a
student’s decision to drop out are a lack of motivation and self-discipline; insufficient
engagement with the course material and the instructor; difficulty mastering the technological
aspects of the online course; and a lack of communication and connectivity to students, faculty,
and the institution (Hill, 2010). Common themes from the institutional perspective that caused
students to stop-out are poor course and program design, sequencing, and scheduling,
insufficient program guidance and support, and low levels of faculty involvement (Street, 2010).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 18

While the study of retention and stop-out rates as well as the reasons a student fails to
persist are discussed in a large range of academic publications and contexts, the opposite is true
when searching for studies specifically related to retention in online degree completion
programs. Recent scholarly research looking at retention in online degree completion programs
are rare. The most applicable studies are a 2007 dissertation by Müller that studied “Factors
Affecting Persistence of Women in Online Degree Completion Programs,” a 2014 dissertation
by Jill Synder on “Student Perceptions of Online Learning and Persistence for Course
Completion,” and a 2006 dissertation by Christine Rocher Bosworth entitled “Coaching Online
Students to Persist.” It is interesting to note that all three of these studies focused on persistence
issues and coaching interventions at for-profit colleges (Bosworth, 2006; Müller, 2007; Synder,
2014). Drawing on the research and findings of Bosworth, Müller, Synder and others, the
Ginder-Vogel (2012) blog, “Committed to Online Student Success: Providing Coaching to Help
Students Succeed,” argued that coaching was the best student centered support and intervention
for at-risk students in the online learning environment. The Ginder-Vogel (2012) blog also
highlighted the IES research and data points that lead to the conclusion that coaching was a cost-
effective intervention (Ginder-Vogel, 2012; Hill, 2010; Bettinger & Baker 2013).
In the eleventh edition of their annual report on online education, Grade Change:
Tracking Online Education in the United States, Allen and Seaman (2014) reported that 66% of
the nation’s higher education institutions list online degree programming as a core component of
their strategic plans and future vision. In addition, the report revealed that 74% of academic
leaders rated performance outcomes in online courses as equal to or superior to face-to-face
courses and that the proportion of students taking at least one online course hit an all-time high
of 33.5% in 2013 (Allen & Seaman, 2014). According to Holder (2007) retention in online
courses continued to lag face-to-face courses by 20% – 25% (as cited in Street, 2010). While
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 19

online education has clearly established itself as a core component at the majority of the nation’s
higher education institutions, the significant detraction of distance education continues to be
inferior retention and graduation rates.
The student communities served by traditional brick-and-mortar programs and online
programs are distinct and divergent. In the article, “Sustaining Students: Retention Strategies in
an Online Program,” Boles, Cass, Levin, Schroeder, and Smith (2010) identified the different and
distinct communities of students served by traditional bricks and mortar programs and online
programs:
Online students generally are older; juggling careers, families, and college; highly
focused on earning their degree; and paying most of the tuition with their own
money. On-campus students generally are younger; although many work, fewer
work full time; fewer are the breadwinner for families; and many have significant
financial aid from sources including their parents. (Closing Thoughts, para. 1)
Failure to address the retention gap between online and face-to-face-programs will lead to an
education divide where wealthier, better prepared, and traditional age college students graduate
from face-to-face-programs with solid retention rates while older students, less well-off students,
students of color, first generation and immigrant students utilize online programs with lower
graduation rates (Autor, 2014; Boles et al., 2010).
Importance of a Promising Practice Study
It is important to examine the organizational performance of Inside Track in relation to
the goal of increasing retention of students in online degree completion programs for a variety of
reasons. Retention studies of Inside Track coached students in various face-to-face, blended and
online programs indicated that these coaching strategies and individual supports play a key role
in helping students persist to completion of a baccalaureate degree. The Lumina Foundation’s
2014 report, “A Stronger Nation through Higher Education” explained and illustrated how
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 20

baccalaureate degree attainment greatly improves chances for professional wage employment, as
well as, workplace advancement. The report also detailed the greater lifetime earning power of
the baccalaureate degreed worker versus a worker with only a high school diploma. California
also seeks to increase the number of baccalaureate degreed residents because higher percentages
of college educated workers meaningfully improve the vitality of the California economy by
supporting high wage jobs and high tech growth industries (Lumina Foundation Report, 2012).
Improving the graduation rates and the individual experiences of non-first time students
in online degree completion programs will have a profoundly positive impact on the individual,
his or her workplace and overall family and community opportunities (Lumina Foundation,
2012). Post-secondary institutions will also be able to better meet their retention and graduation
rate goals. Further, improving the graduation rates of the lowest graduating student group will
have the largest positive impact on institution-wide graduation rates. Finally, identifying Inside
Track’s promising retention practices and intervention strategies will positively affect all
students because they will inform university-wide student support services as well as the
program and course level supports directed at the difficult to retain non-first time student.
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance
Since 2001, Inside Track’s goal has been to increase retention and student success by
coaching students to help them develop the skills that lead to course completion and successful
graduation. While Inside Track’s stated goal is to retain to graduation each student coached,
Inside Track sets actual course and program retention goals with each partner institution based
on current program application and student data, student demographics, program information,
state and national retention data and institutional profiles. In two published studies, Inside Track
established and met goals to improve retention by five percentage points.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 21

In a 2002 through 2006 study with a single institution, Chapman University, a five
percentage point increase in successful course completion and a five percentage point increase in
subsequent term registration was set as the long-term goal. The five percentage point increase
goal was established after several rounds of meetings with campus leadership and was
considered to be an ambitious goal by Chapman’s senior leadership team in light of the small or
trivial increases in retention attributed to multiple prior retention projects across the university
(Brahm, 2006). Chapman’s experience with poor results from prior university-wide projects
targeting increased retention are directly in line with the conclusions of Kelly and Schneider
(2012). They found that, across a diverse set of institutions, targeted retention interventions
occasionally proved successful but that the effects were generally small or so minor as to
question the investment of time and financial resources to the project (Kelly & Schneider, 2012).
Given Chapman University’s experience with costly retention projects that yielded poor
results, the goal of increasing retention by five percentage points was considered to be ambitious.
Among Chapman’s senior leadership team there was widespread doubt that the goal would be
attained within the stated timeframe. Given these doubts and low expectations, the attainment of
the goal by Inside Track within the stated timeframe was celebrated as a significant institution-
wide achievement (Brahm, 2006). The aggressiveness of Chapman University’s goal was
confirmed by the national retention consultant group, Ruffalo Noel Levitz. The Ruffalo Noel
Levitz website asserts that an improvement of three to five percent in individual institution
retention rates may be possible within several years, if the institution initiates multiple targeted
interventions and follows up with aggressive implementation strategies (Ruffalo Noel Levitz,
2015).
To track the progress towards the Chapman University goal, the Inside Track Campus
director met weekly with coaches and bi-monthly with program staff. A dashboard was
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 22

developed to provide weekly reporting of at-risk students and to detail interventions that were
active with at-risk students (Brahm, 2006). The dashboard also outlined each coach’s assessment
of the likelihood of success in the course and the likelihood of subsequent term registration for
each student. Similarly, Bettinger and Baker (2013), in a study across multiple Inside Track
client institutions, found that Inside Track coached students were approximately five percentage
points more likely to persist at the end of one year. Additionally, at the end of 18 months, there
was a further retention gain of three to four percentage points. Again, these results are noted as
both significant and well above the norm for individual institution based retention intervention
projects (Kelly & Schneider, 2012; Ruffalo Noel Levitz, 2015). Based on the above, Inside Track
coaching constitutes a promising practice for retention of the most difficult to retain students that
is worthy of further research and investigation.
Organizational Stakeholders
The three key stakeholder groups for this promising practice study are the coaches, the
students they are coaching, and the program or university administration that is the Inside Track
client. The student stakeholder is a core and important element of this study and whether each
student completes or stops out of a given program is the nucleus of this dissertation of practice.
The motivation and retention challenges of the students and how they respond to coaching
interventions and supports are also fundamental components of this analysis. However, while
this study is designed to develop an understanding of how Inside Track coaching improves
student behaviors, perspectives and results that lead to better course and program completion
rates, the stakeholder focus and lens of analysis of this study is not students.
A similar approach applies to the institutional client stakeholders. By working with Inside
Track, the institutional partner seeks to improve and, as a result, increase their retention and
graduation rates. Therefore, the Inside Track institution partner has past performance data for
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 23

course retention and graduation rates that inform baseline program retention rates and overall
institution performance. This data is both important and informative; however, retention rates
differ by institution because the reasons for attrition are often unique both to the program and the
institution (Street, 2010). These unique retention factors make studies across institutions with
variable data sets and varied reasons for failing to retain students difficult; and, it is one of the
primary reasons why online attrition studies are typically performed at a single university (Street,
2010). Each university is likely to have its own unique factors influencing attrition, such as
course structure and sequencing, program design, faculty involvement, and level of support for
students at-risk who are likely to drop out of the online course or program (Cook & Pullaro,
2010; Hill, 2010; Street, 2010). To alleviate this difficulty, this study did not focus on
institutional data sets, institutional initiatives, or institutional motivation to address online course
and program retention. Instead, this dissertation of practice studied coaching and, specifically,
the Inside Track coaches working with online degree completion programs. During the process
of compiling and describing the work of the coaches, observations and conclusions about
institutional practices emerged, though they were the not the focus of this study.
Stakeholder for the Study
Undoubtedly, the joint efforts of all stakeholders contribute to the achievement of Inside
Track’s overall organizational goal of improved retention. However, recent data and studies, as
well as a 2015 U.S. government grant standard, indicate that coaching to Inside Track’s high
standards has the most direct and significant impact on successful course and program
completions as well as on self-reported student satisfaction and student success (Bettinger &
Baker, 2013; IES, 2014; U.S. Department of Education, 2014). Therefore, this promising
practice study sought to explore and understand the knowledge, skills, motivation and
organizational resources of coaches that enable them to support “students in overcoming
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 24

obstacles and persisting through challenges” and to “keep students accountable and support them
in reaching their goals” (Inside Track, 2015).
This dissertation focused on understanding the knowledge, motivation and organizational
culture of the coaches and how coaching improves student behaviors, motivations and outcomes
by using analysis, design, research methods and observations. The study also sought to
understand, quantify and explain the value and usefulness of coaching in improving individual
student success and institutional retention, especially for non-first time students in online degree
completion programs. Therefore, the stakeholder of focus for this promising practice study were
Inside Track coaches working with non-first time, online degree completion program students.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to study Inside Track’s established performance in the
area of retention of students in online degree completion programs and to inform the larger,
related problem of online course and program retention, along with general retention issues,
regardless of the course or program delivery modality. As a further focus, this promising practice
study was designed to inform and improve retention of the most difficult community of students,
the non-first time student enrolled in an online degree completion program. Using the Inside
Track coach as the primary stakeholder this study assessed the areas of knowledge, skill,
motivation and organizational resources utilized by the coaches to support individual students in
their quest to finish their online degree completion program. While a complete study would
focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the singular stakeholder group to be focused on
in this analysis is the Inside Track coach.
This dissertation of practice utilized a knowledge, motivation and organization (KMO)
analysis with superimposed assessment overlays from Patrick Lencioni’s (2002) elements of
functional teams and Edgar Schein’s (2004) approach to defining, categorizing, and assessing
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 25

how organizational culture positively affects coaching performance. Using these three
complimentary analytical approaches, the following questions were explored and studied:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do the Inside Track coaches have
that contribute to increased online course and program completion rates?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation and
organizational resources do the Inside Track coaches have that may be appropriate for
solving this problem of practice at another academic organization or institution?
Methodological Framework
Four qualitative methods of data gathering and analysis were used to study Inside Track
coaches and their retention work with non-first time students in online degree completion
programs. The study used interviews of Inside Track’s most outstanding coaches to focus on
understanding the coaches and their work in student retention. A focus group at each coaching
center looked at the organizational culture and model. An observation designed to focus on how
the coaches and staff interact with their social surrounding and on understanding the organization
culture was also deployed at each coaching center. A content analysis through a document
review of the assessment rubric that Inside Track uses to evaluate its coaches was used to
triangulate and calibrate the other methods of data collection and to understand the factors that
Inside Track believes to be most important to coaching. Finally, two short interviews of the
coaching center manager at the Portland and Nashville sites that focus on strategies for managing
the coaches and how the coaching centers are designed and organized were conducted. Using
these four qualitative methods, the study focused on the areas of knowledge, motivation,
organizational resources, and organizational influences the coaches have that enhance student
retention, resilience and student success.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 26

Definitions
Gateway Issues: Issues that affect a student’s ability to be enrolled in a class or to have a
successful beginning to a course. Common Gateway Issues include incomplete financial aid
paperwork, improper course registration, business holds that preclude registration, not having the
course materials or having incorrect course materials, failure to provide evidence of successful
completion of required pre-requisites and inability to use or navigating the Learning
Management System.
Stopped-out Student: A student who has been absent from his or her post-secondary institution
and program of study for a least one year.
Non-First Time Student: Students who have attended another post-secondary institution, but did
not earn a degree
2
.
Online Degree Completion Program: A post-secondary undergraduate degree program that
principally serves and/or is designed for students who have many college credits (usually in
excess of 60 credits) but no degree. These degree completion programs are usually designed to
streamline students to graduation and to maximize the use of transfer credits.
Online Program: For the purpose of this study an online program is defined as a program that
offers 100% of course work and all student services and student support functions online or via
electronic or remote delivery
3
. There are no campus residency elements to the program.

2
The Report and Suggestions from IPEDS Technical Review Panel #40, “Additional Selected
Outcomes of the Advisory Committee on Measures of Student Success”, indicated that in fall 2010
non-first-time students accounted for about 33 percent of all entering degree-seeking students at
degree-granting institutions (RTI International, 2013).

3
This definition is inconsistent with the IPEDS definition of an online program. IPEDS defines
online programs as a program offering in access of 80% of course and program content via electronic
delivery.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 27

Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about online student retention,
with a specific focus on as a promising practice to improve retention rates in post-secondary
programs generally and, online degree completion programs specifically. It further introduced
the mission of Inside Track, the organization’s goals and stakeholders as well as initial concepts
around coaching as a promising practice to improve retention.
Chapter Two provides a review of current literature related to the scope of the study.
Online program and face-to-face program retention strategies and comparisons, online retention
rates, retaining and supporting face-to-face, online students and non-first time students as well as
coaching as a retention device and individualized student success support are discussed. Chapter
Three details the assumed stakeholder assets that have enabled successful performance as well as
methodology as it relates to choice of participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four,
the data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data
and literature as well as recommendations for developing coaching services, coaching expertise
and dedicated coaching departments within post-secondary institutions offering online degree
completion programs.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 28

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter reviews data, trends and issues concerning retention and graduation rates in
post-secondary education at the undergraduate level across all program delivery modalities. This
chapter also reviews issues and strategies associated with retention of online students generally,
while paying special attention to retention of non-first time students striving to complete their
degree in an online degree completion program. Coaching as a promising intervention to support
student success and improved course and program completion is explored generally and through
the lens of Inside Track, a for-profit coaching company. Finally, the knowledge, skills and
organizational culture of the Inside Track coaches are explored and reviewed.
Introduction to Retention in Post-Secondary Education
Post-secondary education anchors social mobility and the attainment of high standards of
living associated with success and quality of life (Lumina Foundation, 2015; United States
Department of Education, 2006). With this goal firmly in mind, participation rates in American
post-secondary education have been steadily rising since the end of World War II and hit an all-
time high in 2012 (Pfeffer & Hertel, 2014). However, as the 2015 American College Test
summary tables on retention and completion
4
illustrate, higher education completion rates have
remained relatively unchanged for the last 15 years, and it is a consistent fact that half of all
undergraduate students do not earn a baccalaureate degree within five years of initial enrollment
(ACT, 2016).
Retention and graduation rates vary greatly based on factors such as age, race, ethnicity,
affluence, parental education levels, location, whether or not the student is enrolled for the first
time or returning after a hiatus, and the program delivery modality (Lumina Foundation, 2015;
National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). The April 2015 Lumina Foundation report found

4
Appendix E contains the complete set of 2015 ACT Retention/Completion Summary Tables.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 29

that the national overall six-year degree attainment rate is 40%, and Native American and
Hispanic students show six-year degree attainment rates of 24% and 20% (Lumina Foundation,
2015). This data was confirmed by the statewide California race and gender IPEDS data which
was broken down by institution type, private non-profit, for-profit, University of California and
California State University in Appendix D. Like the overall graduation rates, these race-based
graduation rate gaps have remained relatively constant over the last ten-year period (Lumina
Foundation, 2015). The most recent Lumina Foundation report observes that “these persistent
gaps in attainment are arguably the most serious threat to the nation’s ability to reach” its 2025
undergraduate degree attainment goal and that markedly increased retention rates for these
communities of students are vital to improving social and economic inequality indicators
(Lumina Foundation, 2015, p. 2).
Both the Lumina Foundation graduation rate statistics and the data from the National
Center for Education illustrate and emphasize the importance of improving persistence and
retention rates generally and online program rates specifically. The other key to increasing
degree attainment is developing degree completion pathways for the 21.76% of the population
that have some college but no degree (Lumina Foundation, 2015; National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014). It is important to note that, while 21.76% of the population has some college
credits but no degree, only 19.83% holds a bachelor’s degree and a further 11.27% holds both a
baccalaureate degree and some type of graduate degree (Lumina Foundation, 2015). Therefore,
converting the 21.76% of the population who are college stop-outs with some college credits and
no degree to college graduates is crucial if the national and statewide goals of greater
baccalaureate attainment are going to be achieved by the 2025 timeframe outlined in the 2015
Lumina Foundation report. According to multiple sources, the single largest challenge for
American post-secondary education over the next several decades is to get these individuals with
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 30

some college credits but no degree into vocationally relevant undergraduate degree programs that
have the right levels of academic and student support (Complete College America, 2011; Lumina
Foundation, 2015; National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). Given the extremely low
graduation rates of these non-first time students, institutions must promptly address low retention
and graduation rates by developing an understanding of the techniques, methods and support
structures that are needed to improve online student retention.
Financial Impact of Low Retention
The positive, lifelong financial impact of a baccalaureate degree is significant (Lumina
Foundation, 2015; Kantrowitz, 2015; Martin & Lehren, 2012). Individuals who attain a
baccalaureate degree will earn significantly more over the course of their career than workers
who fail to attain an undergraduate degree (Hill, 2010; Lumina Foundation, 2015; Martin &
Lehren, 2012; Ruffalo Noel Levitz, 2015). A recent study from the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco found that the “economic benefits of a college degree continue to outweigh the costs
of obtaining a degree” (Daly & Cao, 2014). The report illustrates that the “boost to earnings from
a college degree is large and persistent” and “leads to greater economic opportunities over a
lifetime” (Daly & Cao, 2014, p. 5). Like the Lumina Foundation report, the report from the
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco found that a baccalaureate degree is the mainstay of
long-term earning power, when compared with having some college credits but no degree (Daly
& Cao, 2014; Hill, 2010; Lumina Foundation, 2015; Martin & Lehren, 2012; Ruffalo Noel
Levitz, 2015).
Financial Impact on Students
Further, the transition from a manufacturing to a service and technology driven economy
that took place between the end of World War II and the start of the 21st century greatly
increased the economic divide between high school graduates and college graduates (Carnevale
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 31

& Rose, 2015). Demand continues to grow for the elevated skill sets that are associated with
post-secondary degree attainment (Carnevale & Rose, 2015). The “college wage premium, the
difference between the average wage of college and high school educated” males grew from 38%
in 1973 to 82% in 2007 (Carnevale & Rose, 2015). Similarly, the college wage premium for
females grew from 50% in 1973 to 75% in 2007 (Carnevale & Rose, 2015). This significant
distinction in earning power was also evident during the recent recession. “College graduates
fared better in both employment and pay during the recession, with less severe pay cuts and
unemployment rates about half as high as those for high school graduates” (Daly & Cao, 2014, p.
6).
The Carnevale and Rose (2015) study and the Lumina Foundation (2015) report have
established and quantified the severe financial impact of failing to graduate. However, in
addition to the documented wage gaps, it is also important to note that, because earning power
for students with some college but no degree is limited, they are four times more likely to default
on their student loans, have bankruptcy rates of three times the norm, and are subject to
unemployment rates that are more than double that of college graduates (Hill, 2010; Lumina
Foundation, 2015; Martin & Lehren, 2012). Non-whites are significantly less likely to graduate;
the large race based attainment gaps underlie broad social and financial inequality metrics as
well as individual statistics on health, wellness, lifespan, satisfaction and happiness (Autor, 2014;
Carnevale & Rose, 2015: Farkas, 2014; Hill, 2010; Martin & Lehren, 2012). Meaningful
progress on social inequality mandates that the nation significantly improve degree attainment
among minority and under-represented student communities.
Financial Impact on Institutions
Low retention rates also have a broad and deep impact on the vast majority of American
post-secondary institutions. Most public regional comprehensive universities, for-profit
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 32

institutions and many non-selective private non-profit institutions are struggling with eroding
levels of public trust due to low retention and graduation rates, especially in light of steep student
tuition increases (Complete College America, 2011; Kelly & Schneider, 2012; Tierney &
Hentschke, 2007). Only the Ivy League, a small cadre of highly selective private non-profits and
a few large public institutions routinely attain graduate rates in excess of 80% (National Center
for Education Statistics, 2014). The balance of American post-secondary institutions experience
low retention rates, revenue reductions due to decreased enrollments as well as challenges with
class scheduling of low enrolled courses, changing and diminished class sizes, and reductions in
teaching loads for full time faculty.
Understanding the financial impact of low retention on post-secondary institutions can be
difficult. Few recent studies have attempted to quantify costs and the financial impact related to
poor retention. However, the national retention consultant group, Ruffalo Noel Levitz,
developed several web-based tools to assist institutions in calculating actual costs and financial
impact based on year-over-year retention and graduation rates (Ruffalo Noel Levitz, 2015).
These online tools demonstrate that the cost of failing to retain even small numbers of students is
extremely high. In addition, several of the Ruffalo Noel Levitz (2015) reports including “Fall
2014 New Student Enrollment Retention Outcomes Report,” “2015 Student Retention Indicators
Benchmark Report,” and “2014-15 National Online Learner’s Priorities Report” emphasize that
it is always more cost-effective to retain admitted students than it is to generate new enrollments,
especially at institutions with high attrition rates (Ruffalo Noel Levitz, 2015).
Graduation Rates by Institution Type and the Completion Divide
Graduation rates vary greatly by institution type. An overview of graduation rates from
different categories of institutions illustrates a significant completion divide (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2014). The data in Table 1 illustrates which types of institutions retain
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 33

students to graduation and which types of institutions are struggling to get the majority of their
students to the finish line.
Table 1
Graduation Rates by Institution Type Based on National Center for Education Statistics, 2014

Type of Institution
Acceptance Rates and
Selectivity of
Admission
First Time
Student Graduation
Rates
Non-First Time
Student
Graduation
Rates
Elite Private Less than 25%
acceptance rates
92 – 96% NA
Flagship Public 25 – 50% acceptance
rates
80% 50%
Regional Comprehensive Open admission or State
guideline
60% 33.7 %
Elite Private Non-Profit 25% or lower
acceptance rates
80% 40%
Private Non-Profit Open admission 64% 33%
Private For-Profit Open admission 52% 29%

Notes: FT - Students are first-time and full-time; NFT – Students are non-first-time, part-time often with full-
time jobs and family obligations; Graduation rates are IPEDS Reported 6-year rates; All institutions are four-
year.
The Ivy League and America’s most elite private universities, with the most competitive
admission standards, have student six-year graduation rates of 92% to 96% (Grove, 2015).
Similar to the Ivy League and America’s most elite private universities, America’s premiere
public universities are graduating upwards of 80% of their first-time students within the six-year
IPEDS data collection timeframe (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014; NASPA,
2014). Although the IPEDS graduation rate data of part-time students at America’s premiere
public universities is about 50%, this statistic is negatively affected by the six-year IPEDS data
collection timeframe. Using a ten-year horizon rather than the six-year IPEDS standard yields a
part-time student graduation rate of approximately 70%. Beyond the storied Ivy League, a small
set of America’s most elite private institutions, and a small, select group of premiere public
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 34

research institutions, graduation rates drop off precipitously (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014).
Nationwide, public regional comprehensive universities graduate 60% of first-time and
full-time students within six years. In contrast, only 33.7% of part-time and non-first-time
students graduate within four years of returning to school (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014). The impact of low graduation rates at public regional comprehensive
institutions is compounded by the fact that these institutions account for the vast majority of
post-secondary students. In California for example, the University of California and the
California State University System together account for 81.5% of all undergraduate degrees
statewide (Appendix D, California Higher Education Infographic, 2015). Achieving a five
percentage point improvement in the overall graduation rates of public regional comprehensive
nationwide would yield 130,000 additional baccalaureate degrees annually (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2014).
While there is more range and diversity among the six-year graduation rates of America’s
private, non-profit colleges, the overall rates for this group are unimpressive with 64% of first-
time students graduating within six years and only 33% of part-time and non-first-time students
graduating within four years of readmission (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014).
However, while the six-year graduation rates of America’s public regional comprehensive
universities and private non-profit institutions are unimpressive, for-profit institutions have the
lowest overall graduation rate data (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). National
graduation rate data indicate that 52% of first-time freshman at for-profit colleges graduate
within six years and that 29% of non-first time students graduate within four years of
readmission. National data for part-time students at for-profit institutions shows an overall
graduate rate of 24.5% (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 35

Online Versus Face-to-Face Graduation Rates
The graduation divide between America’s elite universities and other university
classifications becomes more distinct when the graduation rates of online versus face-to-face
programing are superimposed (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). Retention in
online courses continues to lag face-to-face courses by a 20% to 25%. This gap is consistent
even at for-profit and open admission institutions that have low overall graduation rates (Street,
2012). Further, online programming and online degree completion programs are most
widespread at for-profit and public regional comprehensive institutions, which indicates that the
widespread adoption of online programming at these institutions has widened the retention
divide. This wide retention divide has sparked contentious debate among post-secondary leaders
and policy makers about what should be done to quickly improve the situation.
While online education grew to be a core component at the majority of the nation’s for-
profit and regional comprehensive universities, the significant detraction of distance education
continues to be retention and graduation rates that are 20% to 25% lower than graduation rates
for first-time freshmen (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). When the data on first-
time freshmen and non-first-time students was analyzed in conjunction with program (online or
face-to-face) and institution type, the difference in graduation rates gained national focus
(NASPA, 2014). From the above data, it can be deduced that retention rates for online degree
completion programs focusing on non-first-time students are critically low. However, there are
no standardized national retention and graduation rate data for non-first-time students attempting
to complete their degree via an online degree completion program. Because retention rates in
online courses lag face-to-face courses, it is likely that the national graduation rates of online
degree completion programs are well below the 33.7% overall graduation rate for non-first time
students (Street, 2012). Graduation rates under 50% are unacceptably low and institutions with
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 36

these types of program offerings and student communities must undertake significant efforts to
address and systematically improve their graduation rates (Complete College America, 2011;
Kelly & Schneider, 2012; Lumina Foundation, 2015; Tierney & Hentschke, 2007).
Online Degree Completion Programs
Like the data about non-first-time student graduation rates, the online degree completion
program is a relatively recent phenomenon that began appearing at for-profit colleges and a select
group of private institutions in the late 1990s. Degree completion programs, which, through
improved technology, frequently evolved into online degree completion programs, were central to
the rise of for-profit colleges and universities. Online degree completion programs were the key to
accessing a large and untapped student market that was woefully underserved by non-profit and
public post-secondary institutions (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007). This large and untapped student
market later became known as the “other three fourths” (NASPA, 2014; Tierney & Hentschke,
2007). The “other three fourths” refers to the “fraction of the adult population in society that may
have participated in higher education but do not hold a bachelor’s degree” (Tierney & Hentschke,
2007, p. 53). Students from the “other three fourths” tend to be on their own rather than dependents
supported by their parents, are generally older, and are more likely to be African American and
Hispanic American” (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007, p. 53). Given the type of student population
served by these degree completion and online degree completion programs at the fast growing, for-
profit institutions of the 1990s and early 2000s, it is not surprising that graduation rates for these
programs have remained consistently low over the last 30 years (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007).
Growth of Online Learning and the Impact on Retention
While the baseline graduation rates with overlays of data from online, face-to-face, first-time
and non-first-time students paint an interesting, though complex, picture of graduation rates, it is
important to augment the data with a closer look at the philosophy and practices of the for-profit
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 37

institutions that powered the growth of online education over the last 25 years (Tierney &
Hentschke, 2007). The sheer volume of students from the “other three fourths” available to fill seats
in these programs enabled the expansive growth of both the degree completion programs and for-
profit institutions despite the consistent low retention and graduation rates. The other key factor was
the ceding of this market to the for-profits by public and non-profit institutions that failed to consider
this population as part of their service mission (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007). As for-profit
institutions grew throughout the 1990s and the first decade of the second millennium, the impact on
national graduation and retention rates also grew. However, while much of the blame for low
retention in online programs is regularly leveled at the for-profit college sector, it is important to
note that this sector has been a leader in educating adults, military students and minorities. The for-
profit colleges were also the first to provide widespread opportunities and innovative means of
convenience for NFT students to return to higher education and to complete unfinished
baccalaureate degrees (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007).
For-Profit Educational Institutions
During the 1980s and 1990s, for-profit education institutions grew from small, start-up, and
fringe institutions that often served niche student communities into large powerful corporations. In
1994, the University of Phoenix became a publicly traded company and, over the next 20 years, it
grew into the Apollo Group, a Standard and Poor (S&P) 400 corporation, with over $3 billion in
assets and 44,000 employees (Securities and Exchange Commission, 2013). As of January 2015, the
company’s website listed the enrollment of all Apollo Group campuses at 227,400 students (Apollo
Group, 2015). Today, the Apollo Group owns 13 educational brands worldwide and, since 2004, the
University of Phoenix is the largest regionally accredited private university in the United States
(Apollo Group, 2015). The University of Phoenix is also the largest enroller of online students. As of
2015, the Apollo Group served just under 100,000 fully online students, and over half of the students
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 38

at the company’s almost 300 learning centers worldwide take a least one online course per year
(Securities and Exchange Commission, 2013). The University of Phoenix, under the parent
organization of the Apollo Group, changed the education playing field, significantly revolutionizing
online learning and education worldwide over the last 20 years (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007)
5
.
The Laureate Education Group, formerly known as Sylvan Learning Systems, has a similar
story. Laureate grew from its roots in K-12 tutoring by acquiring post-secondary institutions
worldwide during the late 1990s and early 2000s. In 2003, Sylvan sold its K-12 education operations
to a division of the Apollo Group and began focusing exclusively on post-secondary education
(Securities and Exchange Commission, 2013). In 2007, the company was acquired by a venture
capital group and rapidly expanded via acquisitions worldwide (Securities and Exchange
Commission, 2013). By 2010 the Laureate Group owned over 50 brands worldwide. As testament to
the high profile nature of the company, in 2010, President Clinton became the “honorary chancellor”
of all Laureate Education Group institutions (Laureate International Universities, 2015). Among the
holdings of the Laureate Group is Walden University, a fully online institution that, as of 2015, had
approximately 40,000 students (Walden University, 2015). While the Apollo Group and the Laureate
Group are the two largest for-profit institutions, there are hundreds of for-profit institutions operating
worldwide (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007). The post-secondary for-profit education industry is
crowded and highly competitive, especially in the United States.
Increased Participation and Lower Completion
Higher education participation rates increased significantly beginning in the 1990’s,
especially among under-represented student sectors or the “other three fourths.” Online education

5
Due to increased regulatory oversight, especially around Federal Financial Aid, that began to
take effect in 2014, the University of Phoenix and most of the large for-profit education
providers are experiencing significant enrollment reductions. As a result of the new and difficult
regulatory environment aimed at for-profit education providers, the Apollo group was taken
private by a group of venture capitalists in 2016 (Securities and Exchange Commission, 2016).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 39

programs also began to fall behind brick-and-mortar programing in retention and student success
(Allen & Seaman, 2014; Boles et al., 2010; Bosworth, 2006; Hill, 2010; Lumina Foundation, 2015;
NASPA, 2014; National Center for Education Statistics, 2014; Tierney & Hentschke, 2007; United
States Department of Education, 2012). By the first edition of the report by Allen and Seaman
(2004), the retention gap between online and face-to-face programming was already established and
has remained a significant and consistent gap in the ten years since (Allen & Seaman, 2015).
“While the rapid pace of online learning growth has moderated, it still accounted for nearly
three-quarters of all U.S. higher education’s enrollment increases last year” (Allen & Seaman, 2014, p.
15). The number of students taking online courses hit a new record of over 7.1 million students or
33.5% of all post-secondary institution students in 2014 (Allen & Seaman, 2014). With the rapid
growth in online education and the differences in online course and program definitions, it has been
difficult for researchers to obtain consistent and reliable data on total online enrollment and program
offerings. Because online programming is innovative and distinct from the traditional campus face-to-
face delivery, organizations that conduct national research and data collection, such as IPEDS and the
Babson Research Group have, over time, developed different data collection and reporting methods
(Allen & Seaman, 2015). Because reliable and consistent data for online course and program
enrollment and retention rates has been elusive, understanding the effects of online education retention
on the national post-secondary education industry is an active topic of academic research and debate. In
the midst of these recent research efforts and national debates, recent data points indicate that online
course and program growth is slowing dramatically. The 2014 enrollment data likely represents the
high point and saturation point for online enrollment growth domestically (Allen & Seaman, 2015). In
their report, “Grade Level: Tracking Online Education in the United States,” Allen and Seaman (2015)
reported that students enrolled in fully online degree programs numbered either 5,257,379 or 7,126,549
depending on the definition of online program utilized and the different data collection agency. Given
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 40

the expanded regulatory environment around for-profit education and federal financial aid explained
above it is likely that these enrollment numbers will contract significantly going forward and that
competition for these dwindling enrollments will continue to increase.
The Birth and Ascension of Online Degrees
As the 2012 Department of Education seminal report, “Pathways to Success, Integrating
Learning with Life and Work to Increase National College Completion,” explains, online programs
are usually offered as alternative higher education access pathways for non-traditional students
who must find a program that allows them to balance work and life priorities with their educational
goals (United States Department of Education, 2012). Therefore, online and face-to-face programs
serve different and distinct student communities (Boles et al., 2010). As the large and powerful
educational foundations, such as the Lumina and Kellogg Foundations, began to focus on access to
higher education as a social mobility issue and to define the non-traditional adult student in the late
1990’s and early 2000’s, for-profit institutions were ready to engage, quickly developing and
rolling out the types of undergraduate degree completion programs that the educational policy
debate was defining (Lumina Foundation, 2015; Tierney & Hentschke, 2007).
The birth of the online degree completion program transpired at the beginning of the rapid
expansion of for-profit institutions. Tierney and Hentschke (2007) observed that developing
programs for students with some college credits but no degree became the hallmark of the for-
profit sector’s quest to grow revenue and enrollments. The well-received market message was that
the for-profit post-secondary institutions had stepped in to serve and to value this new and
important student community (Tierney & Hentschke, 2007). With some notable exceptions, such
as the University of Maryland’s University College and Chapman University College
6
, which are

6
Which became Brandman University, a member of the Chapman University System, in 2009.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 41

two long serving military student institutions, private non-profit and public regional
comprehensive institutions ceded this new adult learner market to the for-profit institutions.
In the Allen and Seaman (2008) annual report of distance education in the United States,
undergraduate online education programs for all types of students, and online degree completion
programs specifically, were defined and established as specific market sub-sectors within post-
secondary education. This 2008 edition of the annual online education report also introduced the
non-first-time student as a special student category. Further, the 2008 Allen and Seaman Report
defined the non-first-time student and also identified them as having learning and student support
needs that are distinct from the traditional student population.
Non-First-Time Students
With the exception of the NASPA report, there is “little to no measurement or
accountability when it comes to NFT student outcomes.” Additional study and metrics for
understanding NFT students are needed in order to understand and address the various obstacles
and challenges to degree completion that this large student community faces (Parkay & Kilgore,
2014). The NASPA report revealed that only about one-third of non-first-time students earn a
degree within six years of readmission and that this is 27% lower than the graduation rate of
traditional age first-time students (NASPA, 2014). The magnitude of the difference in
completion rates between NFT students and traditional students as reported in the 2014 NASPA
study surprised many higher education executives and senior institution administrators (Farkas,
2014). However, based on data from the report, the retention gap escalates to more than the 33%
for NFT students attempting to complete their degree in an online degree completion program
(NASPA, 2014).
Despite the gap in retention, a strong national agenda to increase college degree
completion among the population that has some college credits but no degree continues to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 42

develop and mature (Lumina Foundation Report, 2015). In the Los Angeles area, the list of
institutions claiming a service mission to the adult returning student includes Mount St. Mary’s,
Antioch, Brandman, Pepperdine, Redlands, Asuza Pacific, and Cal Lutheran. The combination of
emerging state-by-state adult completion initiatives, the inability of institutions to meaningfully
increase overall retention and graduation rates, and the growing political and policy pressure to
improve the outcomes for these student is increasing attention and debate around NFT students
(NASPA, 2014; Parkay & Kilgore, 2014). If the significant retention problems for NFT students
are not addressed, continuing to increase the number of NFT students will not help the national
education completion agenda nor will it help the students who will again fail to complete their
undergraduate studies.
The Impact of Non-First-Time Students as the New Majority
The impact of these low retention and graduation rates for non-first-time students has
become more prominent nationally based on the 2014 NASPA report’s finding that as many as
75% of U. S. college students are non-traditional or adult learners and that over half of all post-
secondary enrollments are NFT students. The 2014 NASPA report outlined that the new normal
for U.S. post-secondary education is not the traditional age students attending traditional brick-
and-mortar programs. Table 2 demonstrates how the 18 to 22 year-old traditional student living
dorm on a residential college campus has become the minority and how the adult learner and the
non-traditional student represent the new majority at the vast majority of U.S. post-secondary
education institutions.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 43

Table 2
The New Normal for U. S. Post-Secondary Education (NASPA Report, 2014)
In 2014, 75% of U.S. college or university students are non-first time students or adult learners
and they outnumber traditional students three to one

In 2014, the growth of online learning accounted for nearly 75% of all of US higher
education’s enrollment increases

In 2013, over 7.1 million students or 33.5% of all post-secondary students took at least one
online course

Compared to first time students in face-to-face programs, completion rates for non-first time
students attempting to complete their degree in an online degree completion program are more
than 33% lower

The NASPA and Lumina Foundation reports directly challenge post-secondary education
to quickly find meaningful and effective student supports and interventions that can measurably
improve retention rates among NFT students generally and for these students in online degree
completion programs specifically.
Learning and Motivation Challenges of Non-First-Time Students
The large retention gap between first-time freshmen and non-first-time students indicates
that NFT students face significant additional and distinct challenges in learning and motivation. In
addition, they also lack the necessary study skills and other baseline success factors that enable
first-time freshmen to graduate at demonstrably higher rates (Boles et al., 2010; Holder, 2007;
Tierney & Hentschke, 2007). Because NFT students have stopped-out of a program or university
they often lack confidence, are unable to anticipate difficulties or challenges in the coursework or
their own schedules, have few or no role models, and might be unable or unwilling to seek help
from within the institution either due to lack of knowledge or to feelings of isolation or
disconnection (Parkay & Kilgore, 2014; Wlodkowski, 2008). Because online degree completion
students are heavily minority or non-white, there are often cultural factors relating to acquiring
self-efficacy, effective learning skills, resilience, and class and program participation skills
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 44

(Lumina Foundation, 2015; Rueda, 2011; Wlodkowski, 2008). Additional documented challenges
to long-term success for NFT students include juggling work and family obligations, goal setting,
time and goal management, managing finances, learning how to negotiate the details and
requirements of financial aid, navigating the myriad administrative and academic requirements of
the institution, how to access and advocate for basic or additional student support services, and
contingency planning (Bettinger & Baker, 2013; Wlodkowski, 2008). The list of the barriers and
potential barriers is so long that the key takeaway to working with NFT students is that each
individual student faces a unique and potentially long list of challenges to retention and graduation
(Bettinger & Baker, 2013). It is possible for these students to lose momentum at all stages of their
program; and, in order for intervention to be effective it should be tailored to address the particular
challenge or set of challenges that the student is facing at that particular moment in time (Bettinger
& Baker, 2013).
While efforts to improve retention of non-first-time and online students have taken many
forms over the last 20 years, the majority of retention improvement efforts have yielded minimal
or no improvement to the institutions overall retention rate (Kelly & Schneider, 2012). Although
it is difficult to generalize the reasons for failure, one of the main challenges to institutional
retention programs is their ability to provide individualized support across a wide range of topics
(Bettinger & Baker, 2013; Bosworth, 2006; Holder, 2007; Parsloe & Leedham, 2009; Street,
2010).
Recommendations for Improving Retention of Non-First-Time Students
Although there are few studies focused on non-first-time students, some of the
recommendations for improving retention of these students that appear in the literature are listed
in Table 3. Individualizing student supports and focusing on providing the individualized and
targeted support when needed is a consistent theme throughout the recommendations.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 45

Table 3
Recommendations for Improving Retention of Non-First-Time Students
Develop national standards for tracking and measuring the progress of NFT students.

Develop technology and easy to use self-service tools for course equivalency, showing direct
pathways to degrees and course transfer options.

Develop and deploy student services and support specific to the needs of non-first time
students.

Develop evening and late night individualized student supports and services or have
individualized and personalized supports available when non-first time students are focusing
on school.

Provide tailored supports from recruitment through to enrollment and on to graduation.

Improve and increase communication about the various supports available on campus and
helping students to access the services that they need when they need it.

Focus on getting students only the information that they need. Avoid overwhelming students
with copious information that is not relevant to immediate challenges and barriers to course
and program completion.

Further studies of non-first time students and their retention challenges.
Bettinger & Baker, 2013; NASPA, 2014; Parkay & Kilgore, 2014; Street, 2010

Looking Beyond the Institution for Retention Solutions
Given the ineffectiveness of retention efforts over the last 20 years and the new focus on
individualized student support, online educators and administrators began to conclude that
retention solutions were more likely to come from comprehensive re-examination of the status
quo and by looking outside the institution for new approaches (Bettinger & Baker, 2013;
Bosworth, 2006; Kelly & Schneider, 2012). This led some institutions to consider and begin
utilizing individualized professional coaching services for certain segments of students or to
consider developing dedicated executive coaching departments.
Professional coaching as delivered by Inside Track is considered to be a promising
practice for improving the retention status quo that had been difficult to change, especially
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 46

among non-first-time students. Recently, the U.S. Government acknowledged that Inside Track
coaching shows the most promise for making meaningful improvement in the retention rates of
the most difficult to retain students, online degree completion students (IES, 2014). In December
of 2014, the U. S. Department of Education named Inside Track as an example of a program that
meets the requirement to “propose strategies focused on individualized counseling, because
emerging research suggests that certain kinds of such counseling can improve students' academic
performance or persistence” (IES, 2014). Additionally, Inside Track coaching is the only college
stopped-out prevention program to meet the “What Works Clearinghouse” evidence standards
without reservation (IES, 2014). Given these indicators that professional coaching and
specifically Inside Track delivered coaching is a meaningful way to engage and improve
retention issues, this promising practice study was undertaken to improve the understanding of
how coaching can impact retention generally and retention of online degree completion students
specifically.
Coaching
Coaching practices concentrate on moving an individual forward through motivation and
targeted support to enhance skills, resources, and creativity in a highly personalized format
(International Coach Federation, 2015). The International Coach Federation defines coaching as
“partnering with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to
maximize their personal and professional potential” (International Coach Federation, 2015). The
International Coach Federation identifies 11 core competencies to coaching that are divided into
four categories as shown in Table 4.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 47

Table 4
Core Coaching Competencies
Category One
Founding the Coaching Relationship
Determine and Meet Established Ethical Guidelines and Professional Standards
Establish a Coaching Agreement with Each Client
Category Two
Creating the Coaching Relationship
Establish Trust and an Intimate and Confidential Relationship with the Client
Establish a Coaching Presence
Category Three
Effective Communication Skills
Active Listening
Powerful Questioning
Direct Communication
Category Four
Facilitating Learning, Goal Setting and Accountability
Create Awareness of Needed Skills and Competencies
Design Actions that will move the client forward
Goal Setting
Managing Progress towards Goals and Individual Accountability to Goals
International Coach Federation, 2015

Coaching focuses on the individual needs and challenges of the client and works to build
deep and meaningful connections with the client. According to Phil Regier, the Dean of ASU
Online and David Hawthorne, the Senior Vice President of Learning Environments at
NYUonline, the most important influence in raising online program completion rates is to find
ways to establish strong and personalized connections to the programs and the program
outcomes for students (Bosworth, 2006; Regier, 2014). And it is for these reasons that coaching
is a promising practice to improve retention.
The History of Coaching
The term “executive coaching” can be traced back to the late 1980’s when it began to
appear in reference to the repackaging of certain forms of counseling and therapy into a highly
personalized process designed to transport individuals from a current state to a highly desired
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 48

outcome (Bosworth, 2006; Witherspoon, Goldsmith, Lyons, & Freas, 2000). Witherspoon,
Goldsmith, Lyons, and Freas (2000) explain that a coach
helps people see beyond what they are today to what they can become tomorrow. A great
coach helps ordinary people do extraordinary things. In short a great coach provides a
sturdy shoulder to stand on, so one can see further than they might see on their own (p.
12).
The oldest reference to the type of educational coaching contemplated in this dissertation appears
to be an 1880’s reference to tutors helping students prepare for examinations at Oxford
University (Bosworth, 2006). The terms “executive coaching” and “life coaching” are much
more recent and can be traced back to the late 1980s, when they first appeared as new and more
personalized applications of general counseling techniques (Bosworth, 2006).
Emergence of Coaching as a Retention Tool in Post-Secondary Education
In 2001, Inside Track became the first corporate coaching organization to develop
specific coaching programs and services targeted to higher education institutions for retention
and student success issues (Inside Track, 2015). Over the next decade several other educational
coaching and academic mentorships organizations such as Aviso and ESM (a wholly owned
subsidiary of Xerox) began to develop services for supporting and assisting university level
students. As of 2015 there are still only a few large independent educational coaching
organizations, although Brandman University announced the formation of a dedicated executive
coaching department in April of 2015, and several other institutions such as the California State
University system and Arizona State University Online are considering similar options
(Brandman University, 2015).

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 49

Inside Track as an Exemplary Coaching Organization
Among established coaching organizations Inside Track has been singled out by the U. S.
Department of Education as a promising organization for improving academic persistence (IES,
2014). As mentioned earlier, on December 18, 2014, the U. S. Department of Education listed
Inside Track as meeting the requirement to “propose strategies focused on individualized
counseling, because emerging research suggests that certain kinds of such counseling can
improve students' academic performance or persistence” (IES, 2014). Additionally, Inside Track
coaching is the only college dropout prevention program to meet the “What Works
Clearinghouse” evidence standards without reservation (IES, 2014).
In evaluating Inside Track across several studies, the IES found that students assigned to
receive Inside Track coaching were significantly more likely to remain enrolled at their
institutions than students who do not receive coaching. Bettinger and Baker (2011), studying of
Inside Track coaching across multiple post-secondary institutions, found that students
who were randomly assigned to a coach were more likely to persist during the treatment
period, and were more likely to be attending the university one year after the coaching
had ended. Coaching also proved a more cost-effective method of achieving retention and
completion gains when compared to previously studied interventions such as increased
financial aid. (p. 1)
Similar findings were made in the 2006 study of Inside Track coaching at Chapman University
(Brahm, 2006); however, neither study focused on online or non-first-time students. This
promising practice study sought to understand and measure the success of Inside Track coaching
for non-first time students seeking to complete their degree in an online degree completion
program.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 50

Conclusion
Failure to address poor retention rates in post-secondary education generally and in
online degree completion programs specifically will ensure continuation of social inequality and
a widening educational divide between traditional and non-traditional students. To date, most
retention improvement programs have produced only small or minor improvements in retention
and persistence rates while requiring significant investment of time and financial resources.
Given the poor results from institutional efforts to improve retention it is logical to conclude that
retention solutions are more likely to come from comprehensive re-examination of the status quo
that encourage institutions to look outside the institution for new approaches to retention.
Coaching as delivered by Inside Track, a private, for-profit company that serves educational
institutions but retains an independent and business based culture, is a relatively new and
promising approach to longstanding retention and persistence problems in undergraduate post-
secondary education. As such, the Inside Track coaching model deserves comprehensive study to
determine its potential to address the vexing and systematic retention problems the majority of
American post-secondary institutions face. The other component of this promising practice study
is to understand Inside Track’s effectiveness in increasing retention rates among the most
difficult to retain student group, the non-first-time student, seeking to complete a baccalaureate
degree in an online degree completion program.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 51

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this project was to study Inside Track’s established performance in the
retention of students in online degree completion programs and to inform the larger, related
problem of online course and program retention. As a further focus, this promising practice study
was designed to inform and improve retention of the most difficult community of students, the
non-first-time student enrolled in an online degree completion program. Using the Inside Track
coach as the primary stakeholder this study assessed the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources of the coaches in support of individual students in their quest to finish
their online degree completion program.
This dissertation of practice utilized the KMO framework from Clark and Estes (2008) as
adapted by Rueda (2011) to analyze educational organizations. In conjunction with these
frameworks, this study incorporated assessment overlays from Lencioni’s (2002) elements of
functional teams and Schein’s (2004) approach to defining, categorizing, and assessing how
organizational culture affects coaching performance. Using these three complimentary analytical
approaches, the following questions were explored and studied:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do the Inside Track coaches have
that contribute to increased online course and program completion rates?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation and
organizational resources do the Inside Track coaches have that may be appropriate for
solving this problem of practice at another academic organization or institution?
Clark and Estes KMO Framework
This promising practice study of Inside Track coaches was designed to examine,
understand and explain why students assigned to receive Inside Track coaching are significantly
more likely to remain enrolled at their institutions than students who do not receive coaching. It
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 52

employed the knowledge, motivation and organization (KMO) inquiry framework from Clark
and Estes (2008) as a method for investigating, validating and understanding the excellent
retention results of Inside Track. Although the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis is closely
associated with identifying and solving performance problems for organizations, the KMO
framework is an equally effective methodology for examining and understanding excellent
organizations and promising practices. The KMO framework was used to guide and organize the
study of the various layers and depth of the coaches’ knowledge, along with their strong
motivation to succeed.
Because the Clark and Estes (2008) framework was principally developed for use in
business settings, this study incorporated the Rueda (2011) interpretation of Clark and Estes’
(2008) KMO framework that adapts the research framework and methods for educational
settings. Rueda’s (2011) work also contextualizes the KMO analysis with behavioral and
motivational theories. Combining the Clark and Estes (2008) framework with Rueda’s (2011)
modifications resulted in a powerful research standard for understanding and assessing the
knowledge, motivation and performance of the Inside Track coaches working with online degree
completion students.
The Clark and Estes (2008) framework was used to organize, articulate and build the
information necessary to understand, evaluate and explain coaching as a promising practice. The
first two elements of the KMO analysis, knowledge and motivation, provided a method to
understand and evaluate the coaches. The knowledge element of the Clark and Estes (2008)
approach explored the what, why, how, and when of the coaches’ knowledge.
The methodology for categorizing knowledge elements using a four-part hierarchy of
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge was based on the work of
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001). The motivation aspects of the study explored the choice,
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 53

persistence and mental effort of the coaches. The motivation component of the study was also
designed to develop an understanding of the values, self-efficacy, mood and perspective of the
coaches that enhance student retention, resilience, and student success (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The study evaluated the impact of these motivation components on positive retention outcomes
for the client institutions, successful student relationships for the coaches, and positive outcomes
for the students. Finally, it examined the organizational cultures and models of Inside Track. The
organizational element of the study looked at the structures and supports within and around
Inside Track that enhance the coaches’ knowledge and motivation to succeed (Clark & Estes,
2008; Lencioni, 2002; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004).
The Five Functions of a Successful Team
The organizational section of the study utilized Patrick Lencioni’s (2002) Five
Dysfunctions of a Team to look at the organizational dynamics within Inside Track. However,
instead of using Lencioni’s five dysfunctions pyramid to identify and categorize organizational
problems, it examined the functional elements of Inside Track’s teamwork and organizational
philosophy that contribute to its success. Lencioni’s five key teamwork attributes helped to guide
the inquiries around the team-based aspects of coaching as well as the individual attributes of a
good coach and how these team and individual attributes and behaviors are developed and
managed within the organization.
Schein’s Framework for Assessing and Understanding Organizational Culture
The organizational element of the Clark and Estes (2008) framework was also overlaid
with Schein’s (2004) methodology for defining, categorizing, and assessing organizational
culture to help identify the nuances and the impact of the cultural settings that create and support
a successful organization. Lencioni’s (2002) treatise on team functions was also used for the
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 54

organizational aspect of the study as well as Rueda (2011) for a method to understand and assess
the external environmental factors that affect and shape Inside Track as a company.
The definition of culture as described by Schein (2004) was used to guide the
organizational aspect of the study. He defined culture as a “pattern of shared basic assumptions
learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration”
(Schein, 2004, p. 17). This definition aligned with the internal and external adaptations that
Inside Track regularly undertakes in order to integrate its coaching services with the student
supports of its institutional partners. In addition, the Schein definition of culture was suited to
the study’s assumption that a strong alignment between the services that the coaches provide
and the services and supports provided by the institutional clients must take place in order to
positively impact retention rates and student success.
Schein (2004) wrote that all organizations are critically affected by the interaction of the
three different and sometimes oppositional subcultures: operator, engineer, and executive. These
subcultures are defined as (a) operator subculture is based on human interaction, high levels of
communication, trust and teamwork (Schein, 2004, p. 58); (b) the engineer subculture is the
technology and systems that are directed and systematized but that do not value human operators
and human interactions (Schein, 2004, p.61); and (c) the executive subculture is the administrator
of the finances as the core focus and is described by the analogy of a “lonely hero” who maintains
his integrity with deep insight into the organization (Schein, 2004, pp. 63-65). Similar to Lencioni
(2002), Schein maintained that a great deal of organizational dysfunction stems from a lack of
alignment between the three subcultures and that most often it is the executive culture that is
uninformed about the working culture of the organization. Conversely, Schein suggests that an
organization that exhibits strong alignment of goals, values, and mission among the three
subcultures is a model organization worthy of study.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 55

Lencioni (2002) and Schein (2004) explain that high levels of trust and open
communication within an organization are key indicators of high functioning organizations. As
such, these elements are central to this promising practice study of professional coaching services
focused on improved course and program retention rates and improved student success. While this
study did not focus on the engineer (information technology) or executive subcultures and
stakeholders within Inside Track, it did attempt to assess the organization as a whole through
observations and focus groups at both coaching centers and by analyzing a guiding organizational
document that described some key elements of the engineer and executive cultures within Inside
Track. Therefore, data from the observations and the focus groups was organized around Schein’s
(2004) three-part subculture framework with special emphasis given to the operator subcultures
well as around Lencioni’s (2002) five elements of functional teams.
Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Assets
This promising practice study assumed that the Inside Track coaches possessed a strong
and broad set of KMO assets that enabled and supported them in effectively coaching online
degree completion students in a manner that improved student success and student retention
rates.
Factual, Conceptual, Procedural and Metacognitive Knowledge Assumptions
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) and Rueda (2011) describe factual knowledge as facts and
knowledge that are basic, foundational and contextual to the discipline. As this study examined the
“what, why, how and when” elements of the coaches’ factual knowledge, the following general
knowledge principles framed the starting point of the factual inquiry:
Factual Knowledge Assumptions
The coaches know the individual challenges and obstacles to course and program
completion that the students face, and they know what skills the students are lacking. This was
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 56

consistent with descriptions by Parsloe and Leedham (2009) of effective mentoring and coaching
as an individualized and tailored approach to the issues that carefully determines and selects the
skills and competencies that must be developed within the individual learner in order to maximize
specific learning outcomes.
Conceptual Knowledge Assumptions
Conceptual knowledge is characterized as the “classifications, principles, generalizations,
theories” and models that are pertinent to a particular area of study or a specific discipline
(Rueda, 2011, p. 28). Initial assumptions about the conceptual knowledge of the coaches focused
on expectations that the coaches know about effective counseling and motivation methods.
Selecting motivational strategies germane to the learner and rooted in established knowledge
principles creates an effective motivational framework for culturally centered and self-directed
learning (Rueda, 2011; Wlodkowski, 2008).
Procedural Knowledge Assumptions
Procedural knowledge is the knowledge that enables doing; it is the how to component of
knowledge (Rueda, 2011). In the area of procedural knowledge, it was expected that the coaches
are knowledgeable about the process for setting goals, monitoring progress towards these goals,
and holding students accountable to these goals. There was a consensus in the literature that
defining and setting current, concrete and challenging goals encourages achievement and “leads
one to approach a task in order to learn, gain new competence [and] accomplish a challenging
activity” (Rueda, 2011, p. 44). Further assumptions about the coaches’ procedural knowledge
included that they know about appropriate techniques and processes for tailoring and applying
coaching and motivation methods to individual students as well as the ability to explain concepts
and processes clearly. These processes are grounded in social cognitive theory and the
importance of anchoring, personalizing and concretizing knowledge by tying new learning to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 57

prior knowledge and increasing the value of the goal or learning to be achieved (Bandura, 2001;
Rueda, 2011).
Metacognitive Knowledge Assumptions
Metacognitive knowledge is centered on strategic behaviors and problem solving and is
characterized by self-awareness. It allows individuals to “know when and why to do something”
(Rueda, 2011, p. 28). In the area of metacognitive knowledge, assumptions focused on the coaches
knowing how to evaluate, reflect on, and analyze the causes of individual student success or failure.
In the area of metacognitive knowledge, the study also explored the assumption central to Rueda’s
(2011) work, “that motivation is inherently cultural” (p. 39). Other key assumed metacognitive
knowledge assumptions included (a) that the coaches self-monitor and self-regulate their student
interventions and coaching approaches based on a variety of student-centric and cultural factors; (b)
that the coaches demonstrate self-awareness in the strategies used for learning, thinking, and
problem solving both internally and with their students; (c) that the coaches are aware of their own
biases, judgements, and goals; and (d) that the coaches demonstrate some level of self-awareness of
these internal attributes as well as some level of understanding of how their own internal factors can
affect the individual outcomes of their students.
Assumed Motivation Assets
In the area of motivation, the analysis framework was based on assumptions surrounding
the values, self-efficacy, mood and perspective of the coaches that enhance student retention,
resilience and student success (Clark & Estes, 2008). It was assumed that the coaches valued
their students and were confident about their ability to retain them, which creates a positive and
productive motivational cycle for the students and the coaches (Senge, 2006). In the area of
choice, the assumption was that the coaches actively engaged with all of their students and
worked through individual retention challenges on a regular and consistent basis while persisting
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 58

throughout the term. In the area of effort, the assumption was that the coaches invested a great
deal of mental effort engaging and helping their students actively address individual retention
and success challenges.
Assumed Organizational Assets
This promising practice study utilized a layered combination framework to apply the work
of Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001), Lencioni (2002) and Schein (2004) to explore the cultural
models and cultural settings of Inside Track. Key organization assumptions included that there is
an effective socialization process that optimizes the cultural structures and supports of the
organization and that Inside Track actively uses role models, peer-to-peer models, and best
practices to create positive and supportive cultural settings. These elements contribute to a
“climate of respect” where an optimized learning atmosphere and intrinsic motivation are likely to
emerge (Wlodkowski, 2008, p. 161). Another assumption was that there were effective incentives
used to achieve high performance. Finally, it was assumed that evidence of a clear organizational
alignment between priorities, procedures, and rewards achieved could be observed (Gallimore &
Goldberg, 2001; Lencioni, 2002; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004; Wlodkowski, 2008). It is generally
assumed that “when multiple goals are aligned and not in conflict, they are likely to lead to more
adaptive behavior” (Rueda, 2011, p. 44).
Evaluating the Coaches’ Knowledge Assets
This promising practice study assumed that the Inside Track coaches attain and maintain
a high level of performance. There are a wide range of factors and influences that sustain and
support strong organizational performance. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) provided the
method for categorizing knowledge elements using their four-part hierarchy of factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. While the Anderson and Krathwohl
(2001) rubric is more often associated with organizing and understanding issues related to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 59

knowledge deficiencies, the rubric is equally effective in helping to recognize and appreciate
high levels of factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge; therefore, their
rubric was used to organize and discuss the learning and motivation theories that lie beneath each
type of knowledge possessed by the Inside Track coaches.
Evaluation of Factual Knowledge and Skills
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) define factual knowledge as the “terminology, details or
elements that one must know or be familiar with in order to understand and function effectively or
solve a problem in a given area” (Rueda, 2011, p. 28). Assumed factual knowledge of the coaches
included that they know the individual challenges and obstacles to course and program completion
that the students face and that the coaches know what skills the students are lacking. In making
these determinations, the coaches exhibit high levels of self-efficacy, strong task values and
appropriate goal orientations.
Evaluation of Conceptual Knowledge
Conceptual knowledge focuses on how to classify, categorize and organize information
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Initial assumptions about the conceptual knowledge of the
coaches’ focused on expectations that the coaches know how to set specific, measurable,
attainable, realistic and timely goals that are properly aligned, monitor progress towards these
goals, and hold students accountable to them. To do this effectively, the coaches must be highly
motivated and have high levels of self-efficacy and competency beliefs that they can accomplish
the goal setting and monitoring work (Rueda, 2011). Another equally important assumption for
this study was that the coaches actively choose to engage with all of their students, persist
throughout the term with all of the students on their coaching rosters, and expend significant
amounts of mental effort in the process (Clark & Estes, 2008).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 60

Strong goal orientation abilities are grounded in social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001)
because beliefs and perceptions control ability (Rueda, 2011). “If people are persuaded that they
have what it takes to succeed, they exert more effort and avoid focusing on their doubts when
problems arise” (Bandura, 2001). Building on the seminal work of Bandura (2001), Rueda
(2011) and other social cognitive theorists established that belief in one’s own capability creates
a positive and productive motivational cycle for the students and the coaches (Rueda, 2011;
Senge, 2006).
Evaluation of Procedural Knowledge
“Procedural knowledge refers to knowing how to do something” (Rueda, 2011, p. 28).
The procedural knowledge assets of the coaches included knowledge of techniques to tailor and
apply coaching and motivation methods to the individual students, and the ability to explain
concepts clearly, efficiently and effectively. The learning theory that described these activities is
“Information Processing” (Bandura, 2001; Rueda, 2011), which is especially helpful in
understanding how to “adjust performance for improved learning” and how to connect new
knowledge with previously learned material in such a way as to construct individual meaning
(Rueda, 2011, p, 35). Tailoring coaching techniques to the individual student enhances
personalization and also allows the coaches to anchor information to situations that are familiar
to the students, which effectively activates the key role that prior knowledge plays in learning
(Bandura, 2001; Rueda, 2011).
Evaluation of Metacognitive Knowledge
Metacognitive knowledge is a self-awareness of one’s own cognition and cognitive
processes. It informs when and why to do something, and is a key element in problem solving
(Rueda, 2011). The metacognitive knowledge assumptions of the coaches included knowing how to
evaluate, reflect on, and analyze the causes of individual student success or failure; the ability to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 61

self-monitor and self-regulate their student interventions and coaching approaches based on a
variety of student-centric and cultural factors; and self-awareness of the strategies used for learning,
thinking, and problem solving. A further assumption was that the coaches were aware of their own
biases, judgements and goals, and how their own internal factors affect the individual outcomes of
their students.
Metacognitive knowledge is grounded in socio-cultural theory, which focuses on the
cultural and social basis of learning and how social interaction improves learning (Rueda, 2011, p.
35). Other important learning theory facets of the coaches’ metacognitive knowledge are self-
regulation, modeling and self-efficacy. To the extent that the coaches’ own values, moods and
perspectives affect the students by enhancing positive emotions and reducing negative emotions for
the students supports and enhances learning, motivation and performance (Wlodkowski, 2008).
Evaluation of the Coaches Motivation Assets
Analogous to the extensive array of factual knowledge factors and influences, there is a
diverse set of motivation elements that support the strong performance outcomes of the coaches
(Dembo & Seli, 2013; Rueda, 2011; Senge, 2006; Wlodkowski, 2008). The working assumption
was that the coaches’ help the students feel a sense of control over the challenges and obstacles
to course and program completion by breaking the problems down into small, manageable issues
and setting small, but meaningful and incremental, goals. Most learning theorists agree that
learning, motivation and performance are enhanced if students have clear, current and
challenging goals (Dembo & Seli, 2013; Rueda, 2011; Wlodkowski, 2008). Additionally, when
students feel a sense of control, they are more likely to engage. Control coupled with belief about
ability is highly predictive of success (Rueda, 2011). Vygotsky (1978), a social cognitive
theorist, discussed that goal orientation based motivational supports are grounded in social
cognitive theory and provided the framework for later theorists (Bandura, 2001; Rueda, 2011).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 62

Vygotsky’s (1978) work focused on understanding what learners can achieve
independently and what they can achieve with the “support of the more knowing other.”
Coaching is a direct application of Vygotsky’s theory that individuals learn more when
supported and that, if properly supported, they will develop into self-directed learners who will
set and achieve higher goals for themselves (Miller, 2011). Assumptions for this study were (a)
that the coaches are actively working to keep the students in this “motivation zone” by making
sure that goals are meaningful and challenging yet achievable and (b) that the coaches could also
assess and change their approaches each week to keep students in the Vygotsky zone.
The coaches are also working to build motivation principles around the individual
interests and prior knowledge base of the students because grounding new learning and
knowledge principles in existing knowledge is a powerful learning tool (Rueda, 2011). The
coaches are also investing effort in increasing task value and they use intrinsic and extrinsic
motivational elements as well as attainment and cost value concepts as appropriate to increase an
individual’s motivation to succeed (Sansone & Harackiewicz, 2000). Finally, from the student
perspective, knowing that the coach is authentically, actively and deeply engaged in helping the
student succeed, that the coach is confident in the student’s ability to succeed and that the coach
will be there for the student every step of the way is an important student support that is
inherently motivating and that leads to goal orientation and, eventually, to mastery level skill sets
in learning and self-efficacy (Rueda, 2011; Wlodkowski, 2008).
Evaluation of Inside Track’s Organizational Assets
Consistent with the approach to evaluation of the motivational assets, the evaluation of the
organizational factors that support the coaches in achieving and maintaining high performance was
based on the socio-cultural theory concept that learning is social and can be encouraged and
supported by specific social context and meaningful social interactions (Dembo & Seli, 2013;
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 63

Rueda, 2011; Wlodkowski, 2008). The study assumed that the Inside Track coaching centers
develop and maintain appropriate settings for the type of learning and teaching that the coaches
need to excel in their work. This assumption was based on Rueda’s (2011) theory that culture,
context and environment are key to learning and motivation.
The study further assumed that Inside Track’s culture incorporates a high status model,
where principles of modeling and socialization overlap with desired status and opportunity to
advance in the organization. These modeling concepts are also based on social cognitive theory,
which finds that modeling and socialization create expectations and are predictors for student
success (Rueda, 2011; Sansone & Harackiewicz, 2000). Finally, the evaluation of the organizational
supports within Inside Track was based on the work of Lencioni (2002) and Schein (2004), as
related to cultural models and the proper and consistent alignment of goals and priorities.
Population of Study
Inside Track, headquartered in San Francisco, California, with coaching centers in
Portland, Oregon, and Nashville, Tennessee, is a for-profit company focused on coaching
“students to help them develop the skills that lead to success” (Inside Track, 2015). Inside Track
currently employs approximately 350 coaches; however, most Inside Track coaches focus on
student recruitment while guiding and helping applicants as they move through client institution
application process. Only about 100 coaches work as enrolled student coaches, and, of this
group, about 50 work predominately with students in online programs. This study was conducted
principally using Inside Track’s most effective coaches, who are called “elite coaches” or “Ninja
coaches.” These elite coaches account for less than 15% of the Inside Track coaching corps.
Rationale for a Purposeful Sample
This promising practice study sought to determine and understand the promising and
favorable KMO assets Inside Track coaches have that contribute to increased online course and
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 64

program completion rates (Clark & Estes, 2008). It focused on examining, exploring and
understanding Inside Track coaching at its finest, and, then, decoding and translating the most
beneficial and effective aspects of the coaching for a broad post-secondary education institution
and professional audience. Therefore, the strategy to discover these aspects was to identify and
study a purposeful sample of Inside Track’s most effective coaches working with online degree
completion program students.
Assessment and Identification of the Purposeful Sample
Identification of the purposeful sample was accomplished by utilizing Inside Track’s
standard internal coach assessment rubric. Inside Track developed a multifactorial assessment
rubric that evaluates coaches based on student feedback, retention and conversion metrics,
consistency of connection with the student throughout the term and qualitative feedback through
manager and team leader observations of the coaches. Using this internal rubric, called the Coach
Leveling Criteria, Inside Track identified its very best coaches who work with online degree
completion students across all of its locations. These elite coaches comprised the purposeful
sample study population.
Purposeful Sample Size Necessary to Support Interview Groups at Two Locations
While the primary focus of this study was to examine and understand Inside Track’s elite
coaches working with online degree completion program students, this study was also designed
to study and assess the cultural models and cultural settings at the two coaching locations in
Portland, Oregon, and Nashville, Tennessee, that support and enhance the coaches’ effectiveness
(Lencioni, 2002; Schein, 2004). Consequently, the purposeful sample had to be sufficiently large
to support a meaningful interview group and at least one focus group at each of the two coaching
locations.
This study was designed around the collection of rich, contextual, and multi-layered data
and information through intensive, in-person interviews. Given the time constraints of the interview
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 65

methodology, a sample of an adequately large enough interview group was developed to provide a
low margin of error and a high confidence interval while keeping the group small enough to allow
the completion of lengthy interviews at two distant locations within a short time. Given these
considerations, the total target number of interviews was between ten and fifteen.
Data Collection Procedures
As approved by the University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board, this
dissertation of practice employed a four-part qualitative data collection methodology. The KMO
sections of the study that are associated with each of the four-part qualitative methodology are
described in Table 5.
Table 5
Data Collection Methodology for the KMO Elements of the Study
What KMO do
the Inside Track
Coaches have that
enable them to
perform at such a
high level?
Interviews of the
10-15 Best Coaches
Working with
Online Degree
Completion Students
Observation of
the Culture at
the Inside Track
Coaching
Centers
Focus Group at
Each Coaching
Center to
Evaluate
Organizational
Elements
Document
Review of the
Inside Track
Coach
Assessment
Rubric

Knowledge

X

X

Motivation

X

X

Organization

X

X

Interviews were utilized to evaluate the knowledge and motivation elements of the Clark and
Estes (2008) and Rueda (2011) analysis framework. The interview focused on how the coaches work
with their students and was designed to explore and evaluate the coaches’ knowledge and motivation
as these relate to their retention work with online degree completion students. Another aspect of the
methodology involved exploration and assessment of Inside Track’s culture. Therefore, focus groups
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 66

along with direct public observations of the workplace, were used. These observations focused on
how staff interacted with their social surroundings in order to understand the culture, atmosphere,
and overall mood at the two coaching centers. The focus groups explored how the Lencioni (2002)
and Schein (2004) frameworks for observing and evaluating organizations apply to Inside Track. A
short interview of the coaching center manager at each location was also conducted. Finally, the
study incorporated a document review of Inside Track’s coach evaluation rubric.
Interviews of Outstanding Coaches
The interviews were designed to elicit the collection of rich, contextual and multi-layered
data and information through formal, but unstructured, individual interviews of the ten to fifteen
most effective and successful Inside Track coaches working with online degree completion
students. The interviews took place at the Inside Track coaching centers in Nashville, Tennessee
and Portland, Oregon. Individual coach interviews lasted approximately one hour and each of the
two manager interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes.
The intention of the interview was to understand what elements of knowledge make the
coaches exceptional and what aspects of motivation are central to their work as a coach
(Merriam, 2009). To draw out this information, the in-person interview sessions were structured
around an ordered set of open-ended questions designed to gather details of the knowledge and
motivation assets of the coaches and how these assets enable the coaches to reach and maintain a
high level of performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). The four-part hierarchy of factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge from Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) was used to
organize the discussions with the interview subjects. The interviews were recorded and then
transcribed.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 67

Use of the Unstructured Formal Interview
While the interviews were structured on a predetermined set of questions, participants were
able to provide open-ended answers (Merriam, 2009). Because this study assumed that the
individual coaches would explain and define their coaching roles in unique and personal ways,
open-ended answers and the ability of the participants to react to the questions in unrestricted and
personalized ways was an important element of the study design and framework. Use of the formal,
but unstructured interview, supported a fluid and flexible interview where, according to Merriam
(2009), “neither the exact wording nor the order of the questions” are determined in advance and
permitted the researcher to “respond to the situation at hand, to the emerging worldview of the
respondent, and to new ideas on the topic” (p. 90).
Use of a Numerical or Letter Based Pseudonym to Protect Participant Identity
In to protect the identity of the coach and focus group participants, each interview was
coded with a numerical pseudonym and focus group participants were identified by a number or
a letter pseudonym. By using the numerical or letter based pseudonym, gender, colleges that the
coach attended, highest degree attained, and length of tenure at Inside Track was tracked. The
pseudonym also enabled ready access to a particular interview transcript or to a set of field notes
when any of the above dimensions were being examined during the data analysis phase
(Merriam, 2009). The actual identity of the coaches was recorded on a list that was kept in a
separate location from all other dissertation documentation and where the list was secured in a
locked compartment suitable for the reliable storage of valuables.
The Observation at the Coaching Centers
The study utilized an observation and a focus group at each coaching center to evaluate
the organization. The observation followed Merriam’s (2009) “complete observer approach”
with the researcher in a public setting at each coaching center. The observer’s role and identity
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 68

was communicated to the Inside Track coaches and any other Inside Track employees, vendors,
or clients that were onsite during the observations. The goal of the observations was to “get
inside the perspective of the participants” (Merriam, 2009, p. 125). It was expected that at all
times during the observation sessions that the researcher would remain “an outsider” to the
organization and the coaching activity being evaluated (Merriam, 2009, p. 126).
The observation focused on how the Inside Track staff interacted with their social
surroundings and on understanding the organizational culture at each coaching center. The
observational element of the study examined the organization as a whole and focused on internal
employee interactions in order to describe the culture, atmosphere, and mood of the work
surroundings. The purpose of the observation methodology was to determine if the settings of the
Inside Track coaching centers supported and enhanced the coaches’ knowledge and their
motivation to succeed (Lencioni, 2002; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004). The observation was
designed to focus on identifying and recording how the organization supports the coaches’ work,
how the culture and social environment of Inside Track positively impacts coaching, to look for
evidence of modeling and the use of role models as well as an understanding of the supplies and
equipment provided to the coaches and how they use them.
Focus Groups at the Nashville and Portland Coaching Centers
At least one focus group was conducted at both the Nashville and Portland coaching
centers and each focus group consisted of between three to five elite coaches. The focus group
participants at each location were selected by Inside Track leadership from its elite coaching
ranks. Because the focus group evaluated the cultural and organizational elements of Inside
Track, this provided an opportunity for elite coaches supporting additional aspects of Inside
Track services, such as career coaching, campus application and admission processes, and
traditional student and graduate programs to participate in the study.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 69

The focus groups explored the various and distinct elements of team function within
Inside Track, which included the social and work interactions and communications that are
central to the culture of the organizations well as the use of modeling and socialization within the
hierarchy of the coaching core specifically, and the organization as a whole (Lencioni, 2002;
Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004). Patton (2002) argues that the object of a focus group is to “get high-
quality data in a social context where people can consider their own views in the context of the
views of others” (as cited in Merriam, 2009, p. 94).
The focus group discussion was developed around Lencioni’s (2002) five elements of a
functional team: high levels of trust, effectively and proactively dealing with conflict, consistently
being results oriented, high levels of accountability, and high levels of commitment. During the
focus group, the participants were asked to discuss how these elements apply and operate within
successful coaching relationships and within the Inside Track organization as a whole. Then, using
the Schein (2004) operator subculture characteristics, the participants were asked to discuss the
human interaction, communication, trust, and teamwork skills that they expected to see in an
outstanding coach as well as how they would expect management and Inside Track executive
members to interact with and support the coaches.
Document Review
The fourth source of data collection was a document review designed to explore and
understand how Inside Track assesses all of its coaches and how management identifies and
classifies its most outstanding coaches. It was assumed that Inside Track’s assessment rubric and
evaluation methodology would further identify and contextualize the KMO elements of coaching
that the organization valued and considered to be most effective in student retention and student
success. As the Inside Track coach evaluation rubric was developed independently from this
study, it provided grounded and non-reactive data points that added validity and points of
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 70

correlation for data developed via the interview, observation and focus groups methods of the
study (Merriam, 2009). Table 6 below shows the methodology for obtaining information from
the coaches about their KMO assets.
Table 6
Assumed Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational (KMO) Assets of the Coaches

Assumed Knowledge Assets

Method for Assessing
the Knowledge Assets

Factual: Coaches’ know about each student’s challenges and obstacles to
course and program completion. The Coaches know what skills the
students are lacking.

INTERVIEW
Conceptual: Coaches know about effective counseling and motivation
methods. Coaches know how and when to set goals with students.
Coaches’ know how to hold the student’s accountable to goals.

INTERVIEW
Procedural: The coaches are able to explain concepts clearly, efficiently
and effectively. The Coaches’ know techniques to tailor and apply
coaching and motivation methods to the individual students

INTERVIEW
Metacognitive: The coaches know how to reflect on and analyze the
causes of student success or failure (evaluation). The coaches know how to
monitor and adjust their interventions (self-regulate). The coaches know
about the strategies they use for learning and problem solving (self-aware).
The coaches are aware of their own biases, judgments and goals and how
these internal attributes affect coaching (self-awareness).

INTERVIEW

Assumed Motivation Assets

Method for Assessing
the Knowledge Assets

Choice: The Inside Track coaches choose to engage and work through
individual retention challenges.

INTERVIEW
Persistence: The Inside Track coaches persist throughout the term with
their entire roster of students on retention challenges and obstacles to
student success.

INTERVIEW
Effort: The coaches’ invest mental effort in engaging with the students.
The coaches use appropriate strategies to engage and activate the students.
The Inside Track coaches use appropriate strategies to help students solve
retention challenges.

INTERVIEW
Values and Self-efficacy: The coaches have values, self-efficacy, mood
and/or perspective that enhance student retention, resilience and student
success.

INTERVIEW

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 71

Table 6, continued

Assumed Organization Assets
Method for Assessing
the Organization
Assets
The Inside Track staff has positive social and work-based interactions
throughout the day. The culture, atmosphere, and mood of the workplace
are positive and supportive of the organization’s coaching work. Positive
work behaviors are modeled by elite coaches to the less experienced or less
accomplished coaches. The coaches have tools and resources that enable
and support their coaching work.

OBSERVATION

The organization as a whole and the coaches in particular demonstrate:
1) High levels of trust 2) No fear of conflict 3) Attention to results 4) High
accountability and 5) High levels of commitment (Lencioni, 2002).
FOCUS GROUP
and DOCUMENT
REVIEW
There is a strong alignment between the services that the coaches provide
and the services and supports provided by the institutional clients.
DOCUMENT
REVIEW
Inside Track uses incentives to achieve high performance and appropriate
performance feedback to improve the coaches’ performance. Role models
and best practices are important elements of coaching success.
FOCUS GROUP and
DOCUMENT
REVIEW

Data Analysis
Interview and focus group results along with transcribed and coded field notes from the
observation at each coaching center were based on the KMO framework from Clark and Estes
(2008). Particular emphasis was placed on Rueda’s (2011) adaptation of the KMO framework,
which facilitated understanding the educational settings and identifying learning theories that
support promising practices for learning and student success. Motivational assets were identified
from the concepts of self-efficacy, goal orientation, goal alignment, choice, persistence, and mental
effort. Structured around Schein’s (2004) subculture framework with special emphasis on the
elements and characteristics of the operator subculture, the organizational culture and the
organizational models at the two coaching centers were described and analyzed using Merriam’s
(2009) observation methods. Organizational elements were coded using Lencioni’s (2002) five
elements of team function. The organizational elements of the study were also analyzed using a
combination of Schein (2004) and Rueda’s (2011) concepts of role model utilization, company
values, cultural models and cultural impact. Themes in the data were analyzed in detail and then
used to support or distinguish assumed assets from discoveries and findings throughout the study.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 72

Richardson and St. Pierre (2005) point out that triangulation requires a “fixed point” or
“object” to begin the process of triangulation (Merriam, 2009, p. 216). In this study the Inside
Track coach evaluation rubric was the “fixed point” because it was developed independently and
provided a stable point of analysis from which to begin the triangulation process and cross
checking of data and findings. The Coach Leveling Criteria document provided a “fixed point”
from which to analyze the data from the interviews and observations and allowed triangulation and
validation of the data from the focus groups, observations and interviews by permitting cross
verification of data from two or more sources (Merriam, 2009).
Trustworthiness of Data
This study utilized a four-part, triangulated data collection methodology to increase the
validity, reliability, and credibility of both the analysis and the study’s findings (Merriam, 2009, p.
215). Interview responses were triangulated against field notes from the observations and the focus
groups at the Nashville, Tennessee, and Portland, Oregon, coaching centers and the findings from
the document review of the Inside Track coach evaluation rubric.
In addition to the triangulated approach to data collection, this study used a pilot interview
process to increase the trustworthiness of the interview data. Upon receipt of review board
approval to conduct the study, a single pilot interview was conducted with a senior Inside Track
employee who worked as a coach for many years and who now directs multiple coaching teams.
Upon completion of the interview protocol a “member check” or “respondent validation” process
was also undertaken with the management level interviewee to ensure that the interview questions
reliably targeted the assumed coaching assets (Merriam, 2009, p. 217). Maxwell (2005) argued that
a “member check” process is the “single most important way of ruling out the possibility of
misinterpreting the meaning of what participants say and do and the perspective they have on what
is going on, as well as being an important way of identifying your own biases and
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 73

misunderstandings of what you observed” (as cited in Merriam, 2009, p. 217). Finally, the
researcher challenged the validity of the data by “purposefully looking for variation in the
understanding” of the impact of coaching on retention (Merriam, 2009, p. 219).
Role of the Investigator
As the Executive Director for Online Education and Online Innovation for the California
State University system, I have worked with numerous online programs throughout the 23
campus system. While many of the online programs across the California State University system
do not work with Inside Track, four campuses–Dominguez Hills, Channel Islands, Fullerton and
Monterey Bay–are Inside Track clients and at least two additional campuses were in the process
of considering Inside Track contracts to support new and continuing online programs at the time
of this study. Through the involvement with the participating campuses and programs, the
researcher maintained a client type relationship with Inside Track; however, the researcher is not
a decision maker at the campus level and does not participate in decisions regarding Inside Track
contracts for the individual campuses.
Inside Track coaches and staff members were informed about the research purpose to
develop a doctoral candidate dissertation and steps were taken by the organization to ensure the
anonymity of interview participants and employees. As part of the interview protocol, Inside
Track coaches were informed that the primary purpose of the project was to gather information
for the purpose of improving the understanding and retention of online degree completion
students. The participants were also informed that any information obtained during the study
would be reported anonymously, used only for the study, and that no identifiers were collected so
as to ensure the highest possible level of participant confidentiality. All participants and
employees were assured that participation in the study or observation was voluntary and that there
would be no consequences for electing not to participate. Finally, it was explained that the
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 74

anonymous findings would be presented to the leadership of Inside Track and to the leadership of
the California State University system.
Limitations and Delimitations
There were some limitations resulting from the design of this project. The interview and
focus groups elements of the study were limited by the honesty and social or professional
desirability bias that results in participants providing answers that they believe to be socially
and/or professionally desirable in the workplace setting and not a true presentation of their
experience. The observation of the coaching centers and the interview processes were also limited
by the fact that participants were made aware that the researcher was conducting an observation
and that findings from the study would presented to leadership of Inside Track and leadership of
the California State University system. Further, the interview and focus groups processes assumed
that all participants understood and interpreted the questions in the manner intended.
The purpose of this study was to conduct a promising practice analysis of coaching as a
method for improving retention of online degree completion program students specifically and to
increase undergraduate retention rates generally. A primary delimitation of the study was that it
was context specific to Inside Track. The principal analysis focuses on Inside Track’s mission,
vision, culture, and goals in a way that might not be readily generalized. However, post-
secondary institutions that are struggling with retention challenges and online degree completion
retention may benefit from the study’s exploration of the KMO assets of the Inside Track
coaches that enabled them to attain and maintain high performance levels.
This study was also delimited by its examination of only one key stakeholder group
experience; therefore, the unique perspective of the Inside Track coaches working with online
degree completion students may or may not be representative of other stakeholder groups or
other perspectives relating to retention generally and online degree completion program retention
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 75

issues specifically. While this study readily acknowledges that other stakeholder groups are key
to an assessment of retention issues and, especially online program retention, an in-depth
investigation of other stakeholders and contributors were beyond the scope of this study.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 76

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this chapter is to report the findings of the collected data. Qualitative data
were collected through interviews, focus groups, coaching center observations, and review and
analysis of a single comprehensive document called the “Coach Leveling Criteria,” the rubric for
performance excellence of the coaches developed by the organization. The data were reviewed,
analyzed, and triangulated to understand the KMO assets of the elite Inside Track coaches that lead
to increases in retention of coached students generally and online degree completion students
specifically. The results were then compared to the assumed KMO assets described in Chapter
Three. Based on the data, determinations were made as to whether the assumed KMO assets were
valid, and, therefore, a part of the promising practice of coaching to improve retention in online
degree completion programs, or whether the assumptions were not validated and outside the core
competencies that support excellence in coaching.
This chapter is organized according to the KMO framework and consists of the following
four sections:
 descriptions of participating stakeholders and data collection methodology;
 results and findings of the knowledge assets of the coaches;
 results and findings of the motivation assets of the coaches;
 results and findings of the organizational assets of the coaches.
Each section highlights the assumed assets that have been validated, those that have not
been validated, and any new assets central to coaching excellence that were identified during
fieldwork. The chapter concludes with a summary of the validated causes that inform the
development of the solutions and recommendations offered in Chapter Five.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 77

Participating Stakeholders
From its elite coaching corps, Inside Track senior leadership invited 12 coaches to
participate in the researcher’s interviews. Ten of the initial invitees accepted and leadership
subsequently identified two additional coaches to invite. Both second round invitees accepted
for a total of 12 interviews. All 12 coaches were interviewed, indicating a 100% interview
response rate.
As the focus groups were designed to study the Inside Track organization, it was the
significant preference of the researcher to include coaches from various segments of the coaching
organization in the focus groups as well as to have continuity of perspective between the interviews
and the focus groups. Therefore, the design of the study called for half of the interviewees to also
participate in a focus group. All seven of the interviewees who were invited to participate in a
focus group session accepted the invitation. The remaining six focus group participants did not
provide an interview. These six coaches were elite coaches working with graduate programs, face-
to-face-programs, career coaching and community college programs. All 13 coaches invited to
participate in a focus group successfully completed a focus group session, again indicating a 100%
response rate. Participating coaches across the interviews and focus groups had an average of 5.8
years of tenure with Inside Track.
Observations of the Nashville and Portland coaching centers were conducted during the
researcher’s visits to the locations to conduct the interviews and focus groups. The observations
were designed to assess the organizational culture, context and environment of the Inside Track
coaching centers. The observations included the elite coaches who participated in the
interviews and focus groups as well as the general population of coaches and administrative
personnel working at the coaching center on the days of the observations.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 78

Data Collection Methodology
Fieldwork began with a pilot interview and observation at the Portland, Oregon, coaching
center on October 19, 2015, and was conducted with a former elite coach who was promoted to
manager of the coaching team leaders in the Portland office in 2014. The regular fieldwork took
place from October 27 to November 11, 2015, and was conducted at the Inside Track coaching
centers in Portland, Oregon and Nashville, Tennessee and remotely, via Inside Track’s Zoom
videoconference platform. Table 7 lists the schedule for data collection.
Table 7
Data Collection Schedule
Date Location Activity
10/19/2015 Portland, Oregon Pilot Interview with a former coach, who was promoted to
manager of the Coaching Team Leaders
Pilot Observation of the coaching floor (one hour)
10/27/2015 Nashville, Tennessee 9 am Focus Group 1 (three participants)
10 am Interview
11 am Interview
Noon Nashville Coaching Center Manager Interview
1 pm Observation Time (coaching floor area)
2 pm Interview
3 pm Interview
4 pm Observation Time (coaching floor)
11/05/2015 Remote Interviews, via
Zoom
Videoconference
11 am Focus Group 2 (three participants)
1 pm Interview
2 pm Interview
11/09/2015 Portland, Oregon
Day One
11 pm Observation Time (lunch room)
1 pm Interview
2 pm Interview
3 pm Observation Time (coaching floor)
11/10/2015 Portland, Oregon
Day Two
9 am Focus Group 3 (three participants)
11 am Interview
Noon Observation Time (lunch room)
1 pm Interview
2 pm Interview
3 pm Observation Time (coaching floor)
11/10/2015 Portland, Oregon
Day Three
9 am Focus Group 4 (four participants)
10 am Interview
Noon Observation Time (lunch room)
2 pm Observation Time (coaching floor)
3 pm Portland Coaching Center Manager Interview

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 79

Twelve individual coach interviews and four focus groups that consisted of 13 coaches as
well as observation sessions were conducted. The final data collection method was a document
review of the “Coach Leveling Criteria.” This internal document set forth the performance
criteria for entry level through elite coaches and identified the elements of entry level through
elite coaching from the perspective of senior management.
At the request of the researcher, the “Coach Leveling Criteria” document was not
provided until after the conclusion of the fieldwork. Delaying access to the perspective of
management regarding the level of training and the skills required of an elite coach helped to
ensure that the researcher was not biased, predisposed, or potentially impacted by certain
assumptions or perspectives set forth in the document during the interviews, observations or
focus groups. Therefore, the document was utilized as the “fixed point” or “object” of the
analysis; and, its independence from the other study methods was important in order to maintain
the integrity of the data triangulation process (Merriam, 2009, p. 216, as cited in Richardson &
St. Pierre, 2005).
Data Analysis
Between November 15, 2015, and January 25, 2016, the researcher transcribed the
interviews and focus group recordings and organized the observation field notes. The researcher
compiled raw notes from the coaching center observations, and, then, created a Word document
transcript for each interview and focus group. Summaries of each interview and focus group
session were developed following the sequence of interview questions and the KMO coding. An
Excel data entry template was developed for calculating the frequency, the similarities, and the
distinctions between interview and focus group responses to facilitate quantitative data summary
charts and graphs.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 80

The researcher reviewed findings and responses across methods to triangulate and
crystallize findings as compared to the Coach Leveling Criteria document, the “fixed point”
anchoring the analysis (Merriam, 2009, p. 216). Through this process the researcher delineated
findings in both quantitative and qualitative formats, which resulted in the development of
graphics for reporting the findings. The researcher determined that an assumed asset was
validated if the findings were consistent across more than one data source or if the majority of
the coaches confirmed the findings.
Findings for Knowledge Causes
Table 6 in Chapter Three lists the 11 assumed knowledge assets. Table 8 below breaks out
these knowledge assumptions into 11 discrete enquiries and findings.
Table 8
Knowledge Assets Validated, Not Validated and New Asset Identified

Category

Assumed Knowledge Assets

Validated
Not
Validated
Validated
New Asset

Factual 1
The coaches’ know the student’s
challenges and obstacles to course
and program completion

Validated

Procedural 1
The coaches’ have a process to
develop, set and modify goals with
the students
Not
Validated

Procedural 2
The coaches’ have an approach and a
process to assess what skills the
students are lacking

Validated

Conceptual 1
The coaches’ know when and how to
develop non-cognitive skills and
growth mindset concepts
Validated
New Asset

Conceptual 2
The coaches’ know when and how to
work on the student’s retention
challenges and obstacles

Validated

Conceptual 3
The coaches’ know how to counsel,
coach, motivate and support
individual students

Validated

Conceptual 4

The coaches’ communicate concepts
clearly and effectively

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 81

Overall, ten assets were validated, one asset was not validated and one new knowledge asset was
identified and validated. Following the KMO framework and consistent with Table 8, the
findings and results have been grouped into four knowledge categories, factual, procedural,
conceptual and metacognitive, which are discussed in order.
Factual Knowledge
The study’s sole factual knowledge asset was validated through interview question one:
“What are the biggest challenges and obstacles to course and program completion that your students
experience?” The question allowed coaches to identify multiple challenges and obstacles to the
retention of online degree completion students. Therefore, while the number (N) of respondents was
12, each coach identified multiple common obstacles and challenges in answering the question and
throughout the interview resulting in 33 total responses in Figure 1.
Table 8, continued

Category

Assumed Knowledge Assets

Validated
Not
Validated
Validated
New Asset

Conceptual 6
The coaches’ know how to hold
students accountable and how to help
students develop accountability skills

Validated

Metacognitive 1
The coaches’ know how to evaluate
and analyze the causes of student
retention successes and failures

Validated

Metacognitive 2
The coaches’ know how to monitor
and adjust their coaching to improve
retention and student success

Validated

Metacognitive 3
The coaches’ are aware of their
biases and judgements and how these
internal attributes affect coaching

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 82

Figure 1. Challenges and obstacles to course and program completion. Coaches’ responses to
interview question one: “What are the biggest challenges and obstacles to course and program
completion that your students experience?”

According to the findings, the two main factors affecting retention of online degree
completion students are deficiencies in non-cognitive skills with 11 responses and work-life
balance with nine responses. Technology skills and lack of accountability in online programs
each had five responses as the next common obstacle. Lack of academic preparedness was only
mentioned twice; none identified difficulty of the course or program as a retention challenge.
Interview 12 explained,
[i]t’s never academics, people don’t drop out of school because any one
assignment or class is too hard. It is always some combination of managing your
commitments, accessing resources that you need, believing that you can be
successful and being resilient enough to get back up when things get tough and
keep trying.
11
9
5 5
2
0
LACK OF NON-
COGNITIVE SKILLS
TIME MGMT TECH SKILLS LACK OF
ACCONTABILITY
ACADEMIC
PREPAREDNESS
COURSE/PROGRAM
DIFFICULTY
CHALLENGES AND OBSTACLES
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 83

All but one interview made substantial mention of non-cognitive skills and growth mindset. All
but one interview used one or more of the following specific terms when describing student
obstacles and challenges: commitment, determination, attitude, grit, confidence, perseverance
and believing you can do it.
When talking about the common obstacles of time management, technology skill levels,
lack of accountability, and academic preparedness almost all of the coaches overlaid some
component of these obstacles with growth mindset and non-cognitive skill development
factors. Interview 11 explained that in “getting them to commit and believe in their ability to
succeed” you tackle the time management, technology fears and accountability issues without
having to address them piecemeal. These common obstacles are more a symptom of non-
cognitive deficits than individual obstacles to retention. It was for this reason that Interview 6
stated, “my coaching is less about scheduling, time management and work/life balance and
more about the ‘growth mindset.’”
Table 9
Non-Cognitive Skills and Work-Life Balance

Interview 1

Time management and putting enough time and energy into the program.
Online does not mean easy or flexible. Balancing priorities of life and work.
Commitment and determination.
Interview 2 Biggest challenges are time/energy management and work-life balance.
Students are often unprepared for the rigors of an accelerated online program. A
lot of students are struck by how different online learning is and the level of
technology skills required to use the LMS.
Interview 3 Online bills itself as convenient and “students mistake convenient for easy.”
“The non-cognitive skills of grit and determination play a major role in
retention.” “The issue that is fairly unique to online programs is students have
to hold themselves accountable.”

“The biggest obstacles to completion usually come down to non-cognitive elements like attitude,
grit, confidence and having the ability to fail and get back up and try again.” Interview 4
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 84

Table 9, continued
Interview 4 Technology skills. “Without the accountability piece it is easier for online
students to fade out.”
Interview 5 “I regularly work on building grit, resilience, motivation, confidence and
determination in my students.” Technology can be an issue. “Accountability
issues and feeling disconnected from the campus are also common obstacles.”
Interview 6 “The biggest challenges are grit, resilience, fear, confidence and motivation.
So my coaching is less about scheduling, time management and work/life
balance and more about the ‘growth mindset’.” “Often the student is working
under the incorrect assumption that online means easy and less work than face-
to-face-programs.”
Interview 7 “Many online degree completion students come into the program unprepared
for the rigor of the program and the amount of work and time they will need to
put in. Work/life balance is almost always an issue.” Technology issues.
“Confidence and fear can also be issues for stopped-out students coming back
after a lengthy break.”
Interview 8 “Perseverance and believing you can do it.” Knowing of and accessing
important resources. Organization, scheduling and time management.
Interview 9 “The big obstacles are more around soft skills and non-cognitive elements like
grit and resilience than the challenge of a single class or assignment.”
Accountability. “In online programs sometimes it is easy for the student to fade
away and feel disconnected.”
Interview
10
“Time management is a huge concern. Students translate online as ‘easy’ and
are unprepared for how rigorous the programs are.” “Technology fluency can
be a big obstacle, especially for students who have been out of school for a
while.” “Grit, determination and resilience can also be issues and
procrastination is death in online.”
Interview
11
Time management, academic skills and preparedness. “Getting them to commit
and believe in their ability to succeed and put in the necessary time and energy
are the big challenges.”
Interview
12
“It’s never academics; people don’t drop out of school because any one
assignment or class is too hard. It is always some combination of managing
your commitments, accessing resources that you need, believing that you can be
successful and being resilient enough to get back up and keep trying when
things get tough.”
Non-Cognitive and growth mindset Comments Highlighted in Italics

Through excerpts from the responses to interview question one, Table 9 contextualizes
and shows the connection between insufficient non-cognitive and growth mindset skills and the
commonly stated issues of time management, technology skill and lack of accountability
obstacles from Figure 1. Table 9 also illustrates the strong consensus among the coaches
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 85

around the broad importance of growth mindset and non-cognitive skill development across all
aspects of their coaching work.
These Table 9 statements from the coaches about the work, life, school balance
conundrum and non-cognitive and skill development inform and provide context around all of
the following knowledge findings generally and they are especially informative to the new
conceptual asset finding discussed below.
Procedural Knowledge
According to the results in Table 10, of the two procedural assets, one was validated and
the other was not validated.
Table 10
Summary of Procedural Asset Findings

Procedural Asset of Coaches’ Development of Student Goals
The procedural asset that coaches have a process to develop, set and modify goals with
their students was not validated. The interviews established that there is no set, established or
preferred process around goal development. This finding was revealed through interview
question four, “How do you set goals with your students?” Figure 2 illustrates the even division
among the coaches’ responses in four general, yet distinct and divergent, categories pertaining to
this question. The coaches may or may not work on goal identification and goal setting,
exhibiting broad discretion and divergent strategies around if, how, and when they approach their
students on planning and goal setting topics. Further, the categories of Figure 2 demonstrate that
the coaches are focused on what they feel is the best approach for each individual student, not on
goal setting necessarily. The findings also illustrate differing and divergent approaches to
Procedural
Asset 1
The coaches’ have a process to develop, set and modify
goals with the students
Not
Validated
Procedural
Asset 2
The coaches’ have an approach and a process to assess
what skills the students are lacking

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 86

identifying common retention issues and multiple approaches or options for tackling the
problems once they are identified.

Figure 2. Approaches to goal identification and goal setting: Coaches’ responses to interview
question four: “How do you set goals with your students?”

Interview 10 explained the lack of a unified approach:
The wonderful thing about coaching, and the thing that makes coaching so hard to
describe to outsiders is that it is so tailored to the student. So there is no set way
that I use goals. It is all about what is going to be best for that particular student.
Interview 11 concurred and explained that “[n]ot everyone is ready to do goal setting.” This
coach goes on to explain that many students need to work on improving skills or addressing a
specific challenge to such an extent that their entire coaching relationship will not include
incremental goals or sessions on goal development or attainment. Almost all of the coaches
emphasized that it is the coaches’ job to address whatever is best for that individual student and
that for many students goal setting would not be helpful in the near term. Several coaches
approached the lack of a goal setting process from the opposite perspective by relaying
situations or discussing types of students for whom they found discussions around goals to be
harmful or detracting from more important discussions.
0 1 2 3 4
Sometimes creates an action plan
No set process or approach to goals
Sometimes does specific goal setting
Collaboratively selects things to work on
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 87

Some coaches did have a somewhat standardized or preferred approach to goals, even if
they did not to use the word goal or goal setting. The coaches uniformly preferred to use the term
“coaching plan” and they talked about the “development of a coaching arc.” Interview 8 typified
the general reluctance to use the word “goal” by explaining that,
[m]ost students understand that they need a plan. As we develop the plan together, the
skills and resources that the student needs to work on will come into focus. Then we will
set steps around the skills we need to develop.
As a group the coaches emphasized that the process of identifying and then selecting issues and
obstacles to work on is collaborative and highly personalized to the issues and challenges of the
individual student. This highly individualized and collaborative approach was a constant across
all of the issues that the coaches work on with their students and also characterizes the broad
discretion of the coaches to set direction based on what they believe to be best for each particular
student.
Procedural Asset of Student Skills Assessment
The procedural asset, of coaches’ ability to assess student skills and what they are lacking
was validated and revealed through interview question two, “how do you know what skills to
coach to and reinforce?” All of the coaches assessed the skill level of each student by asking
about expected or perceived issues and obstacles, offering up a list of possible issues and
obstacles and then asking the students to rate the obstacles on a scale from 1 to 10. Sometimes
the coaches used Inside Track’s eight focus areas: (a) finances, (b) health and support, (c)
effectiveness, (d) commitment to graduation, (e) career as a focus, (f) academics, (g) school
community, and (h) managing commitments to help the student through the skill evaluation
process. These focus areas help the coaches to identify and assess student skills, strengths,
weaknesses, values, goals, concerns, and fears. Although the coaches emphasized that skill
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 88

assessment must be conducted in a way that fits the individual student and in a manner that helps
to build a trusting relationship between student and coach, as a group, they referenced the same
processes to the point that skill assessments are clearly conducted through an established set of
procedural options.
Once the coach has assessed the skills that are lacking, there was consensus among all
respondents that the coaches then typically work to combat the most immediate challenge first.
These immediate challenges are called “gateway issues,” and they are defined as issues that
affect the student’s ability to be enrolled in a class or to have a successful beginning to a course.
Interview 2 explained that “successful retention requires a firmly established student who is
focused on the class. So you must address gateway issues immediately so the student can commit
to the class without distraction or worry.” Gateway issues such as completion of financial aid
paperwork, proper registration in the correct section of the online course, business holds, having
the correct course materials, evidence of successful completion of required pre-requisites and
knowing the basics of navigating the learning management system were commonly mentioned
by the coaches as gateway or priority issues requiring immediate attention. These proactive
efforts by the coaches to quickly identify and address gateway issues are considered to be an
important retention tool and highly effective at reducing drop rates.
Conceptual Knowledge Asset Findings
As set forth in Table 11 below, the fieldwork identified and validated one new conceptual
knowledge asset and validated all five of the assumed conceptual knowledge assets from Chapter
Three.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 89

Table 11
Summary of Conceptual Asset Findings

Conceptual Knowledge Asset in Non-Cognitive Skill Identification and Development
The first conceptual knowledge finding is a new asset that was not part of the
researcher’s assumed knowledge assets as set forth Table 6 in Chapter Three. Through the
interviews, the researcher discovered that a core component of coach knowledge is that they
know how to identify, assess, and then develop non-cognitive and growth mindset skills. For
instance, one coach explained how important they felt that the early identification of non-
cognitive skill gaps are by stating, “non-cognitive skills of grit and determination play a major
role in retention and coaches should assess for them with new students.” Further, developing
non-cognitive skills and supporting growth mindset development is considered central to student
success generally, and it is considered to be especially important for online degree completion
students. All of the coaches referred extensively to growth mindset concepts and Interview 6
typified the majority by explaining that the “biggest challenges are grit, resilience, fear,
confidence and motivation. So my coaching is less about scheduling, time management and
work-life balance and more about the growth mindset.” These excerpts and the non-cognitive
and growth mindset comments in italics in Table 9 illustrate the central role of non-cognitive and
growth mindset skills and the importance of coaching work around these concepts.
Conceptual
Asset 1
The coaches’ know when and how to develop non-
cognitive skills and growth mindset concepts
Validated
New Asset
Conceptual
Asset 2
The coaches’ know when and how to work on the
student’s retention challenges and obstacles

Validated

Conceptual
Asset 3
The coaches’ know how to counsel, coach, motivate
and support individual students

Validated

Conceptual
Asset 4
The coaches’ communicate concepts clearly and
effectively

Validated

Conceptual
Asset 5
The coaches’ know how to tailor and apply their
coaching to individual students

Validated

Conceptual
Asset 6
The coaches’ know how to hold students accountable
and how to help students develop accountability skills

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 90

In addition to identifying the core importance of non-cognitive and growth mindset skill
assessment along with the consistent approach of the coaches to supporting these soft skills
development, the interviews also revealed that coaching to non-cognitive and growth mindset
skill development is a new initiative within Inside Track. While many elite coaches had coached
to these concepts for years, the new initiative formalized and further emphasized the importance
of this work. A workshop series and a comprehensive rubric for identifying and coaching to
non-cognitive and growth mindset skill development was recently launched. Further, Inside
Track recently established a steering committee to lead implementation of the initiative across all
aspects of the organization.
In detailing the non-cognitive coaching initiative, one of the coaches explained that the
Inside Track rubric and the initiative is based on the expansive work on mindset of Dweck
(2006). The rubric organizes non-cognitive and growth mindset development work around the
four pillars of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs. Central to coaching to these elements are
guiding principle statements. For beliefs some of the core guiding sentiment statements are “I
belong here,” “this is worthwhile,” “I can learn and improve,” and “people like me can do this.”
When coaching to attitudes, recognizing and becoming comfortable with vulnerability, being
open to accepting help and support, looking at failure as an opportunity to improve and learn,
and recognizing that ownership of failure leads to success are core components of
communication that the coaches are encouraged to stress and to develop.
The rubric and trainings encourage the coaches to build, over a sequence of coaching
meetings, a “praise sandwich” or a “praise equation.” This approach brings together the specific
action of the student and the character trait or value associated with the specific action and then
looks for ways to connect these elements to the individual student’s ability to be successful in
their class and program. Interview 4 explained that the theory is that the “more the coach can pull
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 91

these elements together, the more the students will respond by increasing their behavior that will
result in the coach being able to further praise them in an empathetic, sincere and meaningful
way.” Interview 7 explained that empathy and sincerity are important in this type of work
“because it lets the student know that they are being understood.” The rubric and the trainings
also provide guidelines for the coaches on developing conversations and opportunities to
complement the students when they display grit and resilience. The trainings then promote ways
for the coach to consistently reinforce non-cognitive skill development when coaching across a
wide range of issues.
During the Portland observation, a coach was observed coaching to the rubric with a
student who was struggling with critical feedback on a paper. The coach was overheard saying
that what she admired about the student was the extreme effort to take and use the professor’s
critical feedback to improve the next paper. The coach then said that she knew that it was
frustrating to get a low grade on a paper that the student had put so much time and effort into, but
that by approaching the feedback as a challenge instead of a defeat the student was creating a
channel for meaningful improvement. The coach was then overheard saying that the challenge to
improve on the next paper was both evidence of how far the student has come and that the
student is now finding ways to achieve and improve and that this alone was proof that the student
“can do this.” The coach then went on to praise the student extensively before telling the student
that she was sending over some links to the Purdue Online Writing Lab about citations and
plagiarism. The coach then ended the call by scheduling the next session and, finally, touching
again on how proud the coach was of the student for taking the professor’s criticism as a
challenge.
When examined in aggregate, the findings from question one demonstrated extensive
mention of lack of non-cognitive skills as obstacles to completion. Combined with Inside Track’s
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 92

formalized commitment to the development of non-cognitive and growth mindset coaching
methods, a new conceptual coaching asset of knowing when and how to develop non-cognitive
skills and growth mindset concepts was validated. This finding is an important new element in
understanding excellence in coaching and the promising practice of coaching as a retention
initiative. As a newly validated asset, it also provides a clear distinction between the roles of
subject matter based support services, such as tutoring and academic advising that may be
available at the campus, and the work of the coaches.
Conceptual Knowledge Asset: The Coaches Know About Retention and Motivation Issues
The second conceptual knowledge asset that the coaches know when and how to work on
retention challenges was validated and revealed by interview question two “how do you know
what skills to coach to and reinforce?” The third conceptual asset that the coaches know how to
counsel, coach, motivate, and support individual students was validated and revealed by question
three, “how do you know what goals will be most helpful?” It was by combining the responses to
these two questions, that the findings were revealed and then validated.
A central tenet to knowing when and how to work on the student’s challenges was the
necessity of building a strong, trusting, non-judgmental and authentic relationship with the
student. Through narrative responses establishing coach proficiencies in assessing the skill level
of each student, and then, triaging and prioritizing issues so that coaches work to combat the
most immediate challenges first, followed by the development and implementation of a coaching
plan over the balance of the term, the coaches validated these conceptual knowledge assets.
Through interview excerpts from different coaches, Table 12 shows the central role of trust in
successful retention coaching.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 93

Table 12
The Importance of Trust and Relationship Building in Coaching
“I have to develop a relationship with them over time to draw out the challenges and determine
what this individual student needs most.”

“Through assessment you can begin to identify possible issues and phases of growth and as
you build your relationship with the student and as they begin to trust that you are there to help
and support them deeper issues will start to emerge.”

“You have to establish a strong relationship before you have permission to dig into the ‘why’
and this helps you to understand the deeper and more sensitive issues that the student is
facing.”

“If the student has poor communication skills you can’t just tell them they are a poor
communicator -- that is going to be a touchy subject. If you wanted to tackle that head on you
would have to have a very strong relationship with the student.”

“A lot of my coaching is carried by the relationships and the deep connections that I build.”

“I wait to do deep assessments until I have a strong relationship with the student and when
they trust me to work on stuff that is hard to express.”

The student must quickly develop enough trust in the coach to engage honestly and
straightforwardly about their unique challenges. Once a trusting relationship has been
established, the coach must skillfully guide the student through the appropriate and
individualized pathway to develop the skills that will enable that student to be successful.
Therefore, retention success requires an important student component and an important coach
component.
Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Communication
The fourth conceptual knowledge asset that coaches communicate clearly and effectively
was validated and revealed through interview question five, “what strategies do you use to engage
the students?” and interview question six, “what strategies do you use to address retention
challenges?” The number of respondents was 12; however, the questions permitted each coach to
identify, discuss and give examples of multiple communication strategies or approaches to student
communication which resulted in 37 total responses and the identification of six distinct
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 94

communication strategies or approaches. Figure 3 below illustrates the communication strategies
mentioned and explained by the coaches.

Figure 3. Frequency of coach communication strategies: Coaches’ responses to interview question
five, “what strategies do you use to engage the students?” and interview question six, “what strategies
do you use to address retention challenges?”

While the coaches regularly mentioned and provided examples of multiple
communication strategies and approaches they uniformly emphasized that the coaching
communication approach selected must be tailored and individualized to each student and the
particular issues and obstacles that the student is facing. Through this discussion, nine coaches
explained the importance of anchoring communication with trust and constant relationship
building; nine coaches talked about the importance of working to understand why or “digging
into the why” around a particular student’s resistance to discussion of a topic, issue or obstacle.
3
4
5
7
9
9
Never Become Accusatory
Multi-Channel Coaching
Empathy is Core to Communication
Tie Everything Back to the Graduation
Vision
Trust Anchors Communication
Work to Understand Resistance
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 95

Seven coaches discussed the importance of consistently tying work on all issues, obstacles,
challenges and especially retention issues back to the graduation vision or the main reason why
the student entered the program or decided to return to the school to complete their degree. Three
coaches discussed the importance of never becoming accusatory, judgmental, or critical of the
student and five coaches felt that all communication and coaching work must originate from a
sincere empathy for and desire to support and nurture the student.
Table 13
Select Quotes around Communication Strategies and Approaches

Interview 1 “Transparent communication is one of the most important things you can do as
a coach.”
Interview 2 “Commitment to graduation is a key focus area that we are constantly
assessing for and communicating around throughout the coaching sessions.”
Interview 3 “It is important to never become accusatory with a student. But you can and
should call them out if necessary and where appropriate.”
Interview 4 “The coach has to try different communication styles. It is important to frame
everything based on your care for the student, especially if you want to give
constructive feedback.”
Interview 5 “If a student tells me that class is too hard and they want to drop I just go right
back to the motivation that brought them back to school and try to re-establish
that motive and re-connect them to the vision and visual of graduating.”
Interview 6 “I use multi-channel coaching. Younger students have little experience on the
phone and they prefer to communicate via email, text or through Facebook or
another App.”
Interview 7 “Even when I coach via text or Facebook, all of my communication is empathy
based.”
Interview 8 “Coaching should come from a place of authentic caring, compassion and
empathy.”
Interview 9 “You can have go to language and set approaches to certain things but the
more you can tailor and customize your approach and communication based
on the issues the student is facing, the better the relationship will be and the
better the results for the student.”

“The relationship and the communication can’t be false in any way. I just try to explain that I
am a caring non-judgmental person who is here for them and wants to support them.”
Interview 2
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 96

Table 13, continued
Interview 10 “Listening for what the student is not telling you is important. Calling a
student out if you sense an unrealistic expectation is part of the job.”
Interview 11 “I center my coaching on authenticity, empathy, kindness and trying to
understand ‘the why’.”
Interview 12 “I tend to communicate in the ‘who and what’ format and pattern but
sometimes changing to a communication style that is not my go to style gets a
student to engage and open up.”

Excerpts from the responses to interview questions five and six in Table 13
contextualize and provide examples to further support the finding that the coaches use various
communication styles and strategies to communicate concepts clearly and effectively based on
the individual needs and the particular issue or obstacle that the student is facing. The broad
implication of this finding, consistent with the Chapter Two review of the literature, is that
standardized retention approaches at the institutional level are unlikely to meaningfully impact
retention rates.
Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Coaching to Individual Needs
The fifth conceptual knowledge asset that the coaches know how to tailor and apply their
coaching to individual students was validated and was revealed through responses to interview
questions three, five and six. Interview question three asked, “how do you know what goals will be
most helpful?” Interview question five asked “what strategies do you use to engage the students?”
And, interview question six asked “what strategies do you use to address retention challenges?”
Through narrative responses the coaches established a strong and comprehensive sensitivity to
tailoring coaching to the individual and the immediate issue at hand. The coaches also indicated that
their individualized and student centered approach is a fundamental distinction between coaching
and on-campus services, such as tutoring and learning and academic resource center programs.
“Coaching has to be fluid. Good coaches are constantly tailoring their approach and making
adjustments based on the individual needs of the student and the issue at hand.” Interview 1
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 97

Further, the coaches uniformly believed that addressing individual student challenges is the
difference maker in retention and that their individualized and student centered approach to
retention is far removed from most large scale institutional retention projects that focus on macro
data trends to determine retention rates and remote from broad retention best practices; the key to
successfully retaining a student is a fluid and unique student centered intervention. These
distinctions are important to understanding the promising practice of coaching as a retention
initiative. Table 14 provides examples of the conceptual skills of the coaches in coaching to
individual needs.
Table 14
Tailoring Coaching to each Student’s Specific Needs

Interview 1 “As a coach you have to understand how each person thinks about and
articulates their obstacles.”
Interview 2 “The coach has to find the motivation elements and context that are going to
be most helpful to each student and then figure out an approach that will most
help that individual student.”
Interview 3 “I work to customize my approach based on the understanding that the student
has of their life and their challenges.”
Interview 4 “You have to do a lot of prioritizing to determine what’s most urgent and what
you might approach after you know the student better.”
Interview 5 “I work to be aware of who they are, what they can relate to, what their culture
is and where they are coming from and adjust as I need to.”
Interview 6 “Each individual student is going to take a different trajectory and I want to
understand each student’s core internal motivation issues.”
Interview 7 “I listen carefully around how they want to communicate and style my
approach to suit them.”
Interview 8 “I want to know what will make each person stick to their plan and what might
derail them.”
Interview 9 “Everything has to be tailored to the individual student and the issues in play
for them.”
Interview 10 “Coaching is different for each person and you have to translate and adjust for
each student.”

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 98

Table 14, continued
Interview 11 “I am always trying to evolve so that I can optimize my approach based on the
student needs.”
Interview 12 “Coaching is nuanced to the situation and the trigger that the student is
experiencing.”

Conceptual Knowledge Asset of Accountability
The sixth conceptual knowledge asset that the coaches know how to hold students
accountable was validated and revealed through responses to interview questions three, five and
six. As a group the coaches work to establish themselves as an empathetic and honest
accountability partner to the student and the student’s educational journey. Consistent with the
findings above, the development of the accountability partnership is an individualized process
that is grounded in the individual student’s needs and experiences. Interview 8 explained,
Most students want some sort of an accountability partner on one or more concerns. But
you have to establish a strong relationship with the student before you can call them out
on accountability issues. You have to bring empathy, compassion and understanding to
the conversations around missed deadlines, retention or disappointments. Building
motivation and time management skills to support accountability takes time and is
something that you touch on throughout the term and across a wide variety of issues.
There was also strong consensus across the interviews that accountability issues are more
prevalent in online programs generally and degree completion programs in particular and that
most online courses and programs are not designed to support student accountability. There was
also agreement that accountability issues are best addressed across a range of student issues
rather than by trying to address accountability as a specific or isolated issue. These findings
suggest that online course and degree programming should focus their faculty and instructional
designers on developing methods and approaches to building accountability within the online
course.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 99

Metacognitive Knowledge
As set forth in Table 15, the study validated all three of the assumed metacognitive
knowledge assets.
Table 15
Metacognitive Knowledge Asset Findings

Metacognitive Knowledge Asset: Evaluate and Analyze Retention Issues
The first metacognitive knowledge asset that the coaches know how to evaluate and
analyze the causes of student retention successes and failures was validated and revealed through
responses to interview question eight, “how do you know if you are doing a good job?” The
coaches were free to identify and describe multiple methods and strategies, therefore, while the
number of respondents was 12, there were 46 total responses that resulted in the identification of
five general methods for evaluation and analysis. Figure 4 illustrates the methods and approaches
to evaluating and analyzing retention issues discussed by the coaches.

Metacognitive
Asset 1
The coaches’ know how to evaluate and analyze the causes of
student retention successes and failures

Validated
Metacognitive
Asset 2
The coaches’ know how to monitor and adjust their coaching to
improve retention and student success

Validated
Metacognitive
Asset 3
The coaches’ are aware of their biases and judgements and how
these internal attributes affect coaching

Validated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 100

Figure 4. Evaluation and analysis methods: Coaches’ responses to interview question eight,
“How do you know if you are doing a good job?”
Metrics were an important part of the coaches’ evaluation of retention successes and
failures. Inside Track provides weekly reports on retention factors, such as time in the online
class, most recent log in, and status of assignments. The coaches routinely review and use
these tools to prioritize students for outreach or to evaluate a student’s status. Eleven of the
coaches mentioned that they keep individual coaching session notes in the Salesforce
Customer Relations Management database system. Nine coaches stated that they discuss
retention successes and failures with managers and colleagues and that they regularly seek
advice and collaboration on such issues. Eight coaches mentioned that they take time to reflect
on issues and students throughout the term and at the end of the term. Six coaches mentioned
that they evaluate retention issues and student success through student feedback.
An example of personal reflection that represented other coaches’ feelings about
retention success and failures came from Interview 12:
I judge my performance by how I feel about the quality of the interaction. If I
have done a good job, the student is on a path to transformation and broad skill
development and eventually to being able to coach themselves.
12
11
9
8
6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Metrics Keep Retention
Notes
Discuss with Mgrs
Colleagues
Personal
Reflection
Student Feedback
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 101

Among the coaches who mentioned student feedback, the general sentiment was that
receiving a thank you from a student was a nice affirmation that the coach is having a positive
impact.
These findings indicate that (a) the coaches are highly reflective about their impact, and (b)
they synthesize and harmonize their intrinsic desire to make individual impact on the student with
macro level external metrics that reveal retention trends and issues at the course, program, and
institution level. While this balance of intrinsic and extrinsic reflection around retention is core to
Inside Track coaching excellence, it is another distinction from institutional retention efforts that
are principally data driven by institutional reporting and compliance requirements.
Metacognitive Knowledge Asset: Coach Monitoring and Adjustments to Improve
Retention
The second metacognitive knowledge asset that the coaches know how to monitor and
adjust their coaching to improve retention and student success was validated and revealed
through responses to interview question seven, “how do you monitor and adjust your
coaching?” All of the coaches provided examples of adjustments based on feedback they
received from the student in order to improve the interaction. This is a foundational element
of good coaching that is reflected across almost all of the above findings. Table 16 provides
some examples of individualized coaching work that is designed to optimize the quality of the
interaction with the student.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 102

Table 16
Monitoring and Adjusting Skills
“If the student is quick clear and concise then I match that style. With other students I
will take a more organic approach or make my communication more informal. Meeting
the student where he or she is helps put the coach in sync with them and improves
engagement and comfort levels.”
Interview 2
“When I work with a student who is resisting engaging I work on trying to understand why
they are resistant. I might say, if you don’t agree with what we are talking about or what I
am suggesting then what do you think? Putting it back on the student and calling out their
resistance can sometimes move a student to engage. Coaches should not be afraid to call
out a student who does not want to engage if the coach feels that it might help.”
Interview 3
“A lot of younger people rarely talk on the phone or they associate phone calls with their
Mom calling. So here I am calling them up and asking them what must feel like very
personal questions and it is often clear right away that the phone might not be the best
medium to coach this particular student. So I will ask if the student would prefer to text
back and forth for our next meeting.”
Interview 6
“I will ask them – is there a better way for me to speak that you can more easily hear?”
Interview 8
“Often just by asking the student to reschedule I can give myself another chance to reach
the student in a more productive way.”
Interview 8
“I try to describe coaching in a way that captures the need and interests of the student,
which is obviously different for each student and you can tell that by a lot of different
ways, whether that’s tone, how they answer the phone, the time that they say they have,
how scared they are about starting a new school program, how open they are to support
from others, if they have been a student for a long time or if it has been ten years since the
student took a class, those are all things that I will listen for because they all help me to
understand how I can engage and help this particular student.”
Interview 10
Metacognitive Knowledge Asset: Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation

The third metacognitive knowledge asset that the coaches are aware of their own biases
and judgements was validated and revealed through responses to interview question seven, “how
do you monitor and adjust your coaching?” The finding is validated because the majority of the
coaches provided examples of being aware of their own personal influences and biases and
Coaching is like playing chess with your heart and your brain at the same time. You are thinking
and feeling and figuring out your strategy as you go with empathy being a constant. Interview 7
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 103

detailed strategies that they use to limit the impact of these internal and personal factors on the
student.
Coaches new to the elite coaching rank exhibited lower levels of skill in this area. While
new coaches were aware of tone and energy matching changes made based on student feedback,
they were often unaware of subtle adjustments they made on the call until they went back and
listened to recordings or until they worked with their managers or other coaches. Conversely,
the most tenured elite coaches said that “it took me a long time as a coach to progress to this
space” (Interview 6). Interview 12 explained that
becoming self-aware of my own communications preferences and tricks while on a
student call took years of practice and training, and I still have to work at catching myself
and ensuring that my biases and judgements don’t creep into my coaching.
These findings suggest that self-awareness and self-regulation during a student call is a highly
developed skill, even among elite coaches. The difficulty of developing these important coaching
skills should be a core consideration for institutions weighing a decision to outsource coaching
services or to develop and build out their own coaching organization. When the researcher
developed Table 17 for these findings, it resulted in a pattern of lower and higher levels of self-
awareness and self-regulation based on years of coaching tenure at the elite level.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 104

Table 17
Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation Skills

Interview Inside
Track
Tenure
Elite
Coach
Tenure

Finding

Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation
1

5 Years 2 Years Validated You have to be aware of when you are letting your
own personal influence take over. When I start giving
advice and telling someone what to do then I am
coming from a more personal place. The student
should always be doing more talking. If the coach is
doing most of the talking an adjustment that needs to
be made.
2 3 Years 30
Days
Validated
In Part
I am often unaware of my subtle adjustments and
calibrations until I listen to my calls but I actively
match tone, energy and speech styles.
3 3 Years 30 Days Validated
In Part
I make adjustments based on the issues that the
students are dealing with. Self-diagnosis and
strategies to improve as a coach are things that you
work on outside the call. One of the best things that
you can do is to listen to calls that didn’t go well.
Actively matching energy, style and tone is helpful.
4 3 Years 1 Year Validated
In Part
I intentionally work to try to match tone and energy
levels. I work on identifying adjustments with my
manager and with other coaches.
5 6 Years 2 Years Validated
In Part
I work to match the student in tone and energy and
that is effective.
6 9 Years 2 Years Validated If I am not reaching a student, I stop talking and re-
focus on the student, what they are and aren’t saying.
In that intentional listening I will often see that I
should try a different approach or ask the same
questions differently. I also try to intentionally match
their tone, energy and communication style.
7 10
Years
2 Years Validated I am always thinking about how it is going and should
I be making adjustments to improve the interaction. I
actively do tone and energy matching. I have learned
to start with a more tempered tone, then I can turn up
the energy level to match their energy rather than
having to dial it back.
8 6 Years 2 Years Validated If I feel like I am getting triggered then I have to
ground myself quickly and I have to put both feet on
the floor, take a breadth and call myself out. And I
will tell the student, hold on a minute that was me
making an assumption that was wrong, let’s back up
and let me ask you a couple more questions.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 105

Table 17, continued
Interview Inside
Track
Tenure
Elite
Coach
Tenure

Finding

Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation
9 7 Years 2 Years Validated Everything has to be tailored to the individual and the
issues in play for them and how best that student can
hear and interact with you. Tone is also important and
matching the student’s tone and focus level is helpful.
10 7 Years 2 Years Validated Active listening and being completely present help
you make subtle adjustments. Sometimes making
subtle adjustments is more on what you don’t hear
versus what you do hear. I change everything from the
words that I use to the tone of the words.
11 6 Years 2 Years Validated Matching the student’s tone, energy and focus level is
one way of adjusting. If I am not reaching a student I
try to listen for what the student is not telling me and
that often helps me to see different approaches.
12 5 Years 2 Years Validated Becoming self-aware of my own communications
preferences and tricks while on a student call took
years of practice and training and I still have to work
at catching myself and ensuring that my biases and
judgements don’t creep in.
Note: The Elite Coach Classification was established in 2014

Synthesis of Findings for Knowledge Assets
Overall, the findings from the various sources of data showed that ten of the 11 assumed
knowledge assets were validated and one new asset was discovered and validated for a total of
11 validated assets, which are summarized in Table 18.
Table 18
Summary of Validated Assumed Knowledge Assets
Knowledge
Category

Assumed Knowledge Assets

Validated
New
Asset

Factual
The coaches’ know the student’s challenges and
obstacles to course and program completion

Validated

Procedural
The coaches’ have an approach and a process to assess
what skills the students are lacking

Validated

Conceptual
The coaches’ know when and how to develop non-
cognitive skills and growth mindset concepts
Validated
New
Asset

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 106

Table 18, continued
Knowledge
Category

Assumed Knowledge Assets

Validated
New
Asset

Conceptual
The coaches’ know when and how to work on the
student’s retention challenges and obstacles

Validated

Conceptual
The coaches’ know how to counsel, coach, motivate
and support individual students

Validated

Conceptual
The coaches’ communicate concepts clearly and
effectively

Validated

Conceptual
The coaches’ know how to tailor and apply their
coaching to individual students

Validated

Conceptual
The coaches’ know how to hold students accountable
and how to help students develop accountability skills

Validated

Metacognitive
The coaches’ know how to evaluate and analyze the
causes of student retention successes and failures

Validated

Metacognitive
The coaches’ know how to monitor and adjust their
coaching to improve retention and student success

Validated

Metacognitive
The coaches’ are aware of their biases and judgements
and how these internal attributes affect coaching

Validated

Triangulation of the interview findings with the focus groups, observations, and the
review of the “Coach Leveling Criteria” rubric revealed that coaches know the challenges and
obstacles that their students face, but that the coaches’ responses to even the most common
obstacles are highly individualized. The factual findings also revealed that the coaches consider
lack of non-cognitive skills to be a common obstacle to course and program completion and that
their coaching emphasizes non-cognitive or soft skill development because they believe it is one
of the most important elements in retention and student success.
The assumed procedural asset of a standardized process for setting and modifying goals
with students was not validated. There was no established approach to goal setting among the
coaches; the coaches resisted using the term “goal,” instead preferring to discuss “coaching plans”
and the “development of coaching arcs.” While there was no uniform process concerning goals, the
assumed asset of a process to assess for student skills and obstacles was validated as the coaches
use a suite of common approaches to scan for skills and obstacles. The coaches also universally
assess for and then immediately tackle a narrow set of challenges called “gateway issues.”
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 107

The coaches demonstrated a strong set of conceptual knowledge skills. Findings validated
all of the assumed conceptual assets of knowing (a) how to work on retention challenges; (b) how
to build student accountability; (c) how to counsel, coach, motivate, and support students; and (d)
how to communicate concepts clearly to the students. Consistent with the factual and procedural
findings discussed above, the assumed assets of knowing how to tailor and apply coaching to
individual students was also validated. The fieldwork also revealed an important new conceptual
asset. The new conceptual knowledge asset, that the coaches’ know when and how to develop non-
cognitive and growth mindset skills, was validated by the findings, and is complementary to the
sole factual knowledge finding around identification of a lack of non-cognitive skills as a common
obstacle to course and program completion.
Congruent with the conceptual findings, the coaches demonstrated a strong and highly
developed set of metacognitive knowledge skills. The coaches used multiple intrinsic and
extrinsic methods to evaluate and analyze the causes of retention success or failure. As a group
the coaches’ demonstrated that they know how to monitor and adjust their coaching interventions
to improve retention rates, that they are aware of their own biases and judgments and that they
work to identify and remove these internal elements from their coaching sessions. The findings
also revealed that these metacognitive skills are difficult to develop even among the elite
coaching corps. In summary, if there is a principal finding from the factual knowledge fieldwork,
it is that all coaching work is intensely focused on supporting the individual student through the
particular issue at hand and that the role of the coach is not standardized or governed by
established processes.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 108

Findings for Motivational Assets
There were six assumed motivational indicators and assets: five were validated, one was
not validated, and no new assets were identified. The motivation findings are presented
according to the motivational classifications from Clark and Estes (2008), who classified the first
three motivational elements of choice, persistence, and mental effort as key indicators of
motivation to succeed rather than as stand-alone motivational assets. Similarly, Eccles and
Wigfield (2002) classified choice, persistence and mental effort as indicators of expectancy or
“how one will do on different tasks or activities” (p.110). The final three categories of values and
beliefs, mood and perspective, and, finally, self-efficacy are recognized as specific motivational
assets rather than indicators of performance (Bandura, 1997; Clark & Estes, 2008; Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002). Table 19 provides a listing of the assumed motivational indicators and assets
and the respective findings.
Table 19
Summary of Motivational Indicators, Assets and Findings

Motivation
Category

Assumed Motivation Assets

Validated
Not
Validated
Active
Choice
The coaches actively choose to engage with and
build working relationships with their students

Validated

Persistence
The coaches’ are persistent and consistent
throughout the term in supporting their students

Not
Validated
Mental
Effort
The coaches’ invest high levels of mental effort in
engaging with and coaching their students

Validated

Values and
Beliefs
The coaches have values and beliefs that enhance
student retention and success

Validated

Values and
Beliefs
The coaches avoid stereotypes and are sensitive to
the student’s culture and background

Validated

Self-
Efficacy
The coaches are confident in their ability to coach
well and effectively

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 109

Motivational Indicator: Active Choice
The study’s first motivational indicator that the coaches actively choose to engage with and
build relationships with their students was already validated as part of the second conceptual
knowledge asset finding. The second conceptual knowledge finding, that the coaches know how and
when to work on student retention challenges, explained the central role of relationship building in
successful retention coaching and its core importance to the process of understanding each student’s
individual challenges. Within the conceptual knowledge discussion, Table 19 illustrated the active
intentionality of the coaches around relationship building. The active choice relationship building
work that the coaches do is an important part of the coaches’ conceptual knowledge skill set and is
also the starting point to understanding the coaches’ motivation assets. The inclusion of the active
relationship building work of the coaches in the conceptual knowledge section above demonstrates
the closeness, and, in this case, the overlap and interactivity between the assumed knowledge and
motivation assets within this study.
Motivational Indicator: Persistence
The study’s sole persistence asset, that the coaches are persistent and consistent throughout
the term in supporting their entire roster of students was not validated. The finding was assessed and
developed through the interviews as a whole. The interviews revealed that coach persistence
throughout the term is subject to the institutional contract, to the approach of the campus coaching
team and its managers, and to student choices regarding their participation in coaching, at what level
and with what frequency. Some institutional partnerships request that the coaches focus on at-risk
students using a metrics driven approach, such as time in the class, currency of assignments, and
grade point average. In these instances, coaches may choose to relegate certain types of students to
peripheral and technology driven communication so that they can focus on a specific group or type
of student.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 110

Another factor relating to persistence is roster size, which is again affected by the
contract with the institution. Some institutions and contracts are built around large coaching
rosters. The coaches have discretion to identify and work with the students that they believe will
find coaching most beneficial or to work with students that are responsive and welcoming of the
support. Other institutions use a more passive approach to coaching. When the student initiates
contact or if there is a faculty or administrative referral, the coach provides responsive support.
Coaching support differs across institutional contracts in various factors, such as the
predetermined coaching schedule, level of coach/student contact established by the contract, and
the length and number of semesters provided for enrolled students. The interviews revealed that
the current set of institutional partner contracts have evolved to the point that the coaches do not
have weekly sessions throughout the entire term with all of the students on their rosters.
Finally, coach persistence is directly governed by the student. All of the coaches said that
some students are reticent or difficult to engage in coaching for a variety of reasons, that a subset
of their most at-risk students are always hard to reach, and that some students will drop off the
radar as the term progresses. Therefore, while the fieldwork did not validate the assumed
motivational asset that the coaches are persistent with their entire roster of students throughout
the term, the finding is more accurately explained as follows: the level and type of coach
persistence that the researcher presumed in Chapter Three is not reflective of the current state of
Inside Track’s contracts with its institutional partners. While it became evident that the coaches
are not persisting with their full roster of students throughout the entire term, this finding does
not imply that the coaches are not motivated to persist with their students. To the contrary, there
is a great deal of evidence throughout the study to suggest that the coaches are persistent and
consistent in their work with their students. However, the coaches as a group do not persist with
all of the students on their roster throughout the term.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 111

Motivational Indicator: Mental Effort
The study’s sole mental effort indicator, that the coaches invest high levels of mental
effort in their coaching work was validated through the interview and then corroborated through
the observation field notes. During the interview, the majority of the coaches mentioned the high
levels of focus, presence and energy that are required of good coaching and the need to pace
themselves throughout the day and the term. This is corroborated by the description from the
Nashville observation field notes, “the coaches appear to be doing a lot of active listening, they
are leaning in and are intensely focused on their calls.”
Interview 3 further explained that coaches “can’t endlessly dive into difficult situations
and calls, you will burn-out if you don’t take care of yourself.” Interview 3 states that Inside
Track understands that high levels of mental effort and energy are needed in good coaching, and
that the company has support in place to help sustain energy and to provide senior coaching help,
and that fast hand-off options are available, if and when a coach encounters a potentially serious
situation (PSS). Inside Track also has a policy that, any time a coach has to work through a
potentially serious situation or has to engage the PSS team, the coach must take a break of at
least 15 minutes.
A PSS hand-off was observed during the Portland coaching center observation. A coach
had just started a call with a student who had apparently missed class and some assignment
deadlines because she had a hospitalized child. The student might be crying or extremely
agitated. Once the coach decided to bring a Special Situation Coach (SSC) into the call, the
coach explained to the student that she was going to bring a SSC into the call. She described the
SSC as a specialized coach who helps when students are dealing with extremely difficult
situations and that the SSC can work beyond the time and scope abilities that this coach handles.
Hearing this exchange, two other coaches on the same institution team, walked over to the coach
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 112

and gently, but quickly, put a hand on the coach’s shoulder to show support. The coach then
picked up her laptop and went into one of the private booth spaces to continue the call.
Several coaches discussed intentionality around the high levels of mental effort required
for good coaching. Interview 12 discussed a daily process or routine for determining his
readiness to engage and be present with his students as well as techniques that he employs
around self-awareness of when not to coach:
I am cognizant of where I am at the beginning of the day; how do I feel, how is my
energy, am I in a place to be present and completely attentive to my students? I have a
self-awareness of when I shouldn’t talk to students. If I am not going to be one hundred
percent, then I will recalibrate until I am as good as I can possibly be.
In discussing the high levels of mental effort that coaching requires Interview 10 explained that
coaching is a “hard job to fake” and that the coach has to be able to “shut off the outside” and
focus one hundred percent on your students. Most coaches made comments along the lines of
Interview 10’s statement that, “if you are not present within yourself, it is hard to do a good job.”
The majority of the coaches also noted that taking short breaks throughout the day and
having some fun and comradery with fellow coaches helps them to keep their mental energy up.
There was also consensus that the most energizing and uplifting event is a great coaching call or
to overhear a fellow coach having a great coaching call. The uplifting nature of a positive
coaching call was confirmed during the Portland coaching center observation. During the
observation a coach was seen animatedly discussing how a student he was working with had
transitioned from dreading assignments to looking forward to digging into them. The coach that
he was talking to responded by saying that was fantastic and inspiring. Taken together these
findings and observations validate the assumed motivation asset that high levels of mental effort
are required to support good coaching.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 113

Motivational Asset: Common Values and Beliefs
The first of the two assumed motivational assets in the value and belief category is that
the coaches bring to their work values and beliefs that enhance student retention and success. To
assess this assumption, interview question nine asked: “What values and perspective do you have
that help you improve student retention, resilience and student success?” The first category
focuses on the coaches’ strong value to help people in a caring and empathic manner; the second
concentrates on a core and guiding belief that coaching can change lives and that anyone can
succeed if given the right tools and supports. The final category is centered in the coaches’ belief
in the value and importance of education as a social transformation pathway.

Figure 5. Broad categories of coach values and beliefs: Coaches’ responses to interview question
nine asked: “What values and perspective do you have that help you improve student retention,
resilience and student success?”

Figure 5 assembles the coaches’ narrative responses to question nine into three broad value
and belief categories. Although the coaches were free to identify and describe multiple values and
beliefs in response to the question, the interviews identified nine coaches who focused on one value
grouping and then made reference to one other category. Two coaches discussed only one of the
10
7
6
NEED AND DESIRE TO HELP PEOPLE:
EMPATHY
BELIEVE COACHING CAN CHANGE
LIVES: PEOPLE CAN ACHIEVE
ANYTHING WITH RIGHT HELP AND
SUPPORT
VALUE EDUCATION: EDUCATION IS
CRITICAL SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION
PATHWAY
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 114

value and belief categories and one coach mentioned all three areas. Therefore, while the number of
respondents was 12, there were 23 total responses across the three value and belief categories.
While it shows the value and belief categories mentioned by the coaches, Figure 6 indicates
the values and belief category that was the primary discussion focus for each interviewee. Eight out
of 12 interviewees mentioned that their primary value that supports their success as a coach is to
help people with empathy and caring.

Figure 6. Primary and Guiding Belief of the Coaches

In reflecting on this strong consensus around the core value and belief of empathy, many
of the coaches mentioned that Inside Track intentionally selects and hires people with the core
values of caring, empathy, and the desire to support others as well as a strong belief in the value
of higher education. One coach explained,
I think the people that get hired are “missional.” They are connected to the mission of the
organization and have a mission to help others. So there is a certain trust in the shared
goals from the get go. I don’t think you would want to work here if you didn’t believe in
the core focus of helping people.
8
3
1
0 2 4 6 8
NEED OR DESIRE TO HELP PEOPLE: EMPATHY
BELIEVE COACHING CAN CHANGE LIVES: PEOPLE CAN
ACHIEVE ANYTHING WITH RIGHT HELP/SUPPORT
VALUE EDUCATION: EDUCATION IS CRITICAL SOCIAL
TRANSFORMATION PATHWAY
Primary/Guiding Belief of Coaches
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 115

Inside Track developed a culture that incorporates a core intrinsic motivation approach to
coaching that is distinctively value and belief centered. This goal is achieved through a rigorous
and exhaustive job application process that hires less than five percent of applicants and that can
take up to six months to complete. Pervasive across all of the motivation elements of the study is
a strong and consistent connection to empathy, which therefore must be considered a core
element of the promising practice of coaching. The strenuous process of hiring and developing a
coaching corps with the focused and missional culture of Inside Track should be a core
consideration for institutions deciding whether to outsource coaching services or to build their
own coaching organization.
Motivational Asset: Sensitivity to Culture and Background
The second of the two assumed motivational assets in the value and belief category is that
the coaches avoid stereotypes and are sensitive to student culture and background. These assets
were assessed across the entire interview. Figure 7 shows the aggregate of the coaches’ narrative
throughout the hour long interviews around stereotypes, making assumptions, or categorizing
students into three categories of commentary. The first category captures comments relating to
the guiding principle of never assuming or jumping to conclusions about obstacles, challenges
and issues that the student is facing or always letting the student take the lead in “telling the
why.” The second category captures remarks about the coach meeting the student where they are
and helping them to develop from this initial contact point. The third category captures
comments regarding the presumption of capability, such as,
When we pick up the phone, each student is completely unique and every single student
is perfectly capable. They are creative, they are resourceful and they are whole. Our job is
to give them a space so that they can grow bigger and greater and have happiness and
success not just in this class or program but in life and career.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 116

Figure 7. Cumulative Mention of Sensitivity to Culture and Background: Aggregate of coaches’
narrative
Discussion of all three of these value and belief categories were pervasive across all of
the interviews. Ten coaches mentioned each commentary area at least once and one coach had
eleven coded notations across the three areas. Therefore, while the number of respondents was
12, there were 62 total responses across the three categories.
It is noteworthy that no coach used the word “stereotype” at any time during an
interview, focus group or observation. While no coach uttered the word, one coach did explain
that “there are a few concepts and words that we have removed from our vocabulary” (Interview
12). While the presumption that the student is capable received the lowest number of mentions, it
is important to note that this concept was usually mentioned as a primary differentiator between
the role of the coach and the work of on-campus academic advisors and tutors. Interview 9
explained, “there are similarities between coaching and academic advising, but it comes down to
‘what are our intentions’ versus ‘what are an advisor’s intentions and assumptions.’ We presume
and believe that our students can complete their selected course of study.”
27
23
12
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Never Assume or Jump to
Conclusions
Meet the Student Where They
Are
Every Student Presumed
Capable
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 117

To illustrate the sensitivity and awareness regarding culture and background displayed by
each individual coach, Table 20, disaggregates the data from Figure 7 and reports the frequency
of discussion of each of the three areas by interview. It illustrates the strong consistency of the
elite coaches in discussing these core values and beliefs and shows the frequency of these
comments across the interviews. This combination of consistency and frequency establishes
these values and beliefs as core components of successful coaching.
Table 20
Coach Specific Frequency of Value and Belief Discussion Areas
Interview # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Totals
Never Assume or
Jump to
Conclusions
1 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 5 2 3 1 27
Meet the Student
Where They Are
1 2 1 3 2 2 2 1 3 1 4 2 23
Every Student
Presumed
Capable
0 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 12
Individual Coach
Value and Belief
Discussion Totals
2 4 5 4 7 5 4 3 11 5 8 5 64

The data also illustrate the almost universal perspective of the coaches to consistently and
intentionally remove as many aspects of judgment, categorization, stereotyping or assumptions
as they can across all aspects of their coaching. This perspective is supported by extensive
coaching training and professional development within Inside Track. When viewed in
combination with Table 18 in the knowledge findings section, Table 20 provides further insight
into the core importance of individualizing and tailoring all coaching interventions to the
particular student and issue at hand. By showing the depths of the individual coach sensitivity to
student culture and background this finding also complements and provides additional
perspective around the earlier findings related to trust and relationship building with the students.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 118

Motivational Asset: Confidence
The last motivational asset that the coaches are confident in their ability to coach well
and effectively was validated and revealed through responses to the second part of interview
question eight, “what makes you good at your job” and interview question ten, “does confidence
in your own abilities as a coach affect your success as a coach?” Figure 8 reports the reasons
why the coaches believe they are good at their jobs by grouping the responses into three general
categories.

Figure 8. Values and Beliefs of Successful Coaches: Coaches’ responses to interview question eight,
“what makes you good at your job” and question ten, “does confidence in your own abilities as a
coach affect your success as a coach?”
In Figure 8 above, category one captures responses centered on empathy, caring,
compassion and the desire or need to help people. Category two captures comments related to
self-improvement, commitment to professional development and to becoming the best possible
coach. Category three captures comments related to not judging, assuming or presuming and to
individualizing each session.
As a group, the coaches articulated that the core values of caring, compassion and
empathy support confident and successful coaching. As a group, they felt that, as long as the
10
6
5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Compassion, Caring and
Empathy
Always Striving to Improve Does Not Judge, Presume or
Assume
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 119

coach is confident that their coaching is coming from a caring, compassionate, and
empathetically centered place, they are able to trust that they are providing the best support
possible. There was also agreement that vulnerability was a necessary part of both confidence
and relationship building. Interview 1 explained by saying that “vulnerability is important in a
long-term relationship because if you are only confident, at some point you will seem arrogant.”
The coaches also felt that, when tackling difficult, issues it was important to explain to
the student that they are addressing this difficult issue because they care about the student and
their success this term and beyond. Further, it is important to emphasize through words, tone
and actions that the coach wants to honestly and authentically help and support the student as
they work to overcome the issue. Interview 8 explained, “as long as you come from a place of
caring and compassion, you can say and do just about anything in coaching.” Interview 12
concurs by saying, “confidence is the ability to call students out from a very caring place. I can
be bold and loving at the same time.” The coaches also explained that their training, mentors,
and experience consistently confirm, reaffirm, and model this approach to becoming and being a
confident coach.
The consistent coach responses to the two value and belief assets as well as the self-
efficacy asset of confidence bring into focus three core principles of coaching excellence:
1. Empathy, caring, compassion and the desire or need to help people;
2. Not judging, assuming or presuming, but instead, focusing on individualizing and
optimizing each coaching session to the student; and
3. Confidence that is borne out of and supported by the first principle.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 120

Synthesis of Findings for Motivation Assets
As summarized in Table 21, the data validated five of the assumed motivation indicators
and assets while one of the presumed assets as it was expressed in Chapter Three was not validated.
Table 21
Summary of Assumed Motivation Indicators and Assets

Triangulation of the interview findings with the focus groups, observations and the
review of the “Coach Leveling Criteria” rubric revealed that the coaches employ active choice
around developing and engaging with their students and that they invest substantial mental effort
in their coaching work to the point that the organization has standards and supports around
mental effort expenditure. The motivation findings also revealed that the researcher’s
presumptions about coach persistence were incorrect and did not reflect the current contractual
relationships that Inside Track has with its institutional partners. This resulted in the study being
unable to effectively and comprehensively evaluate coach persistence and the impact of coach
persistence on successful retention coaching.
The key motivation finding of the study is the consistent centrality of the core value of
empathy to successful coaching. The results of the finding, what values and beliefs enhance
student retention and success, and the self-efficacy finding concerning confidence were that
Motivation
Category

Assumed Motivation Assets

Validated
Not
Validated
Active
Choice
The coaches actively choose to engage with and
build working relationships with their students

Validated

Persistence
The coaches’ are persistent and consistent
throughout the term in supporting their students

Not
Validated
Mental
Effort
The coaches’ invest high levels of mental effort in
engaging with and coaching their students

Validated

Values and
Beliefs
The coaches have values and beliefs that enhance
student retention and success

Validated

Values and
Beliefs
The coaches avoid stereotypes and are sensitive to
the student’s culture and background

Validated

Self-
Efficacy
The coaches are confident in their ability to coach
well and effectively

Validated

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 121

empathy and the need or desire to help others is the central and core guiding principle of good
coaching. The principle of empathy was so important that Inside Track built the entire coaching
organization around this principle of empathy as the touchstone of good coaching. Other
principal motivations of the elite coaches as they work with their students are strong coach self-
awareness and determination around never assuming to know a student’s obstacles based on
stereotyping.
Findings for Organizational Assets
There were seven assumed organizational assets; all assumed assets were validated and
no new assets were identified. The organization findings have been organized into the five
distinct categories based on the work of Schein (2004), Rueda (2011), and Lencioni (2002).
1. The socio-cultural elements of the organization.
2. The elements of functional teams.
3. Alignment within the organization.
4. Organizational resources.
5. Overall organizational performance.
Table 22 below summarizes the data and findings of the assumed organizational assets,
provides a listing of the assumed organizational assets, and shows the validated finding for each
element of the organizational section of the study.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 122

Table 22
Summary of Organizational Assets and Findings by Category

Socio-Cultural Elements of the Organization
Clark and Estes (2008) described organizational culture as the “most important ‘work
process’ in all organizations because it dictates how we work together” (p. 107). Culture is also a
“powerful force in performance” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 108). Likewise, Rueda (2011) explains
that “[w]e develop motivational beliefs from others with whom we interact” (p. 39). Assessment
of how the coaches work together and the social aspects of their interactions are explored
through the three socio-cultural asset sections of the study that are summarized in Table 23.

Organization
Category

Assumed Organization Assets

Finding
Socio-cultural
Elements
The Inside Track coaches have positive social and work-based
interactions throughout the day

Validated
Socio-cultural
Elements
The culture, atmosphere, and mood of the workplace are
positive and supportive of the organization’s coaching work

Validated
Socio-cultural
Elements
Positive work behaviors are modeled by elite coaches and the
use of role models is important to the organization

Validated
Elements of
Functional
Team
The organization as a whole and the coaches in particular
demonstrate:
1) High levels of trust
2) No fear of conflict
3) Attention to results
4) High accountability and
5) High levels of commitment

Validated
Alignment There is strong alignment between the services that the
coaches provide and the services that the coaches receive from
the organization
Validated
Resources The coaches have tools and resources that enable and support
their coaching work
Validated
Performance Inside Track uses incentives to achieve high performance and
appropriate performance feedback to improve coaching
performance

Validated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 123

Table 23
Summary of Socio-Cultural Organizational Assets and Findings

Coach Interactions
The first socio-cultural asset, that the coaches have positive social and work-based
interactions throughout the day, was validated. The finding was assessed and validated through the
observations and then substantiated by the focus group discussions. The observations in the break
rooms of the Nashville and Portland offices revealed that the coaches have a rich set of positive
social interactions throughout the day. The interactions ranged from groups spending lunch
together to employee recognitions and engaged conversations. Table 24 captures observations of
positive social interactions from the Portland and Nashville break and lunch rooms.
Table 24
Observed Positive Social Interactions in the Break Areas
A group of six people are in the lunch room looking at the vacation photos of a co-worker
on the large flat screen television. There is loud periodic laughter from the group.
Portland
A group of people who went to lunch together returned with a box of gluten free cookies
which they laid out next to the coffee machine with a sign that said “You Are Awesome.”
Portland
2 pm: One of the Nashville coaches who is in Portland for the week is being recognized for
her work in designing the Portland office lounge area. As part of the presentation she is
sharing comments about the remodel and people are applauding the remodel and her work.
Portland/Nashville

Organization
Category

Assumed Organization Assets

Finding
Socio-cultural
Element
The coaches have positive social and work-based interactions
throughout the day

Validated
Socio-cultural
Element
The atmosphere, and mood of the workplace are positive and
supportive of the organization’s coaching work

Validated
Socio-cultural
Element
Positive work behaviors are modeled by elite coaches and the
use of role models is important to the organization

Validated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 124

Table 24, continued
In a conference room a team of coaches are having a pot luck lunch and they seem at ease
with each other are socializing and actively talking about both social and work topics.
Nashville
Two coaches standing in the lunch area are having an animated discussion about how to
deal with complaints about group work. One is saying “I try to focus on a combination of
the work and the relationship building that happens in the group.” The other is saying, “I
have sent a link to a short blog on group dynamics that some students like.”
Portland

The observations of rich social interactions were then substantiated in the focus groups.
In discussing human interaction and teamwork skills each focus group commented extensively
on the quality of the people that they work with and the rich and meaningful social relationships
that are built within the organization. Table 25 provides an overview of the focus group
discussion around social and work interactions within the organization.
Table 25
Focus Group Discussion of Social and Work Interactions and Connections
Focus Group Discussion of Social and Work Interactions
Focus Group One * It’s the human interaction that keeps people here
* You simply could not find a better group of people to work with
* We coach with kindness and caring and we approach each other the same
way
* The office environment is intentionally designed for connecting and
socializing
Focus Group Two * The campus teams end up becoming like families
* We all have each other’s back, we support and care deeply about each other
* I can’t imagine going anywhere else and finding people that I like this
much
* The coaches are committed to each other, we pull for everyone’s success
Focus Group
Three
* We have an active and inclusive happy hour culture here
* It is important to support and celebrate your friends and colleagues here
* We value casual social interaction here and the company supports it too
* People here are open and vulnerable in a loving and supportive way
* We are kind, caring, compassionate people who value personal connection
Focus Group Four * There is a culture of mutual respect, kindness and real friendship here
* We have a culture of openness and shared respect here that I love and value
* The company intentionally created nice social spaces for us to connect in
* Organizationally there is a high value on connectedness, caring and
empathy

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 125

Considered together the observations of office social interactions and the focus group
discussions around work and social interactions as well as the friendships and relationships that are
developed at work validate the assumed organizational asset that the coaches have positive social and
work-based interactions throughout the day.
Atmosphere and Mood of the Workplace
The assumed organizational asset that there is an atmosphere and mood to the workplace
that is positive and supportive of the organization’s coaching work was validated. This finding
was partially revealed through question four of the coaching center manager interview, “why is
the coaching center organized this way?” The finding was also revealed through the focus
groups and the observations.
In response to manager interview question four, the Nashville coaching center manager
explained that the “office supports and amplifies the culture.” The office layout and décor at both
the Nashville and the Portland office were recently intentionally redesigned to provide places for
people to relax, socialize and connect both in a structured work format and in informal and
organic social ways. The break room at the Portland office was even renamed “The Living
Room” to emphasize its relaxed format and to encourage people to socialize there. Appendix F,
provides pictures of The Living Room and the office design and décor of the Nashville and
Portland offices.
The focus groups further corroborated the positive atmosphere and mood to the
workplace. Some of the key focus group comments, as shown in Table 25 regarding the
atmosphere and mood of the workplace, were that (a) the office environment is intentionally
designed for connecting and socializing; (b) the institutional coaching teams become like
families; (c) there is an active and inclusive happy hour culture; and (d) there is a high value on
connectedness, caring, empathy, and friendship within the organization. Finally, the observations
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 126

confirmed the warm interactions between the coaches during the workday, over lunch and on
other breaks. Some of the observed behaviors and interactions included coaches appearing to
“coach each other” to be positive and patient, a coach receiving praise from teammates after a
particularly positive call, much social interaction and personal conversations in the lounge area,
and coaches who were at an afternoon meeting with snacks made a point to bring snacks back to
their teams for the coaches who were not part of the meeting. Taken together, the observations,
the Nashville manager interview comments about the office design and the focus group
comments about social and work interactions validate the assumed organizational asset that the
coaches have positive social and work-based interactions throughout the day.
Mentoring and Role Models
The assumed organizational asset that positive work behaviors are modeled by elite
coaches and that the organization uses role models was validated. This finding was revealed
through the focus groups, the observations, and the “Coach Leveling Criteria” rubric document.
Several mentor/mentee discussions were observed at both the Portland and the Nashville
locations. At the Portland center, a mentor coach sat with her mentee to listen together to a call.
After listening to the call, the mentor offered some different examples of how the mentee might
approach the issues differently and encouraged the mentee to dig deeper by asking more “why”
questions and by challenging the student more. The mentor coach then walked the mentee coach
through a template that the student can use to plan for financial aid deadlines and to track
financial aid emails and information. They then reviewed a couple of self-paced company
learning tools around financial aid. During the interaction, the mentor and mentee coaches were
focused on each other, leaning towards each other. The following day, the same mentor and
mentee team was observed doing a role play. After the role play the mentor coach suggested
some more positive language and more positive words to use. While I did not observe a mentor-
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 127

mentee coaching session during the Nashville visit, I did observe a group of four mentors and six
mentees having lunch together in a conference room. The mentee coaches provided the lunch as
a way to say thank you to their mentors. The group appeared be at ease with each other,
socializing and actively talking about social, personal, and work topics.
All four focus groups mentioned the responsibility that they feel as elite coaches to model
good coaching behaviors and to mentor new and less experienced coaches. Table 26 captures
select comments from each focus group on the topic of mentoring and modeling behaviors for
other team members.
Table 26
Recognizing the Importance of Modeling and Mentoring to New Coaches
As an elite coach you have to model that it is OK to mess up and show that failure is an
important part of the learning process.
Focus Group One
For a new coach the most important relationship is with your mentor. The mentor programs
make you a better coach. As mentors we invest a lot of time and energy in working with our
formally assigned mentees and the younger coaches on our teams who need role models to grow.
Focus Group One
As the senior member of my team I am cognizant of how important it is to demonstrate my
commitment to the team, to show the other members of the team that I will not let them down.
Focus Group Two
My first mentor was instrumental to my success here and I want to provide this same support to
new and younger coaches on my team.
Focus Group Three
A core part of an elite coach role is to model behaviors and strategies that will help to develop
younger and less experienced coaches. I work hard to show through my actions my deep
commitment to my students and my team members.
Focus Group Four

The final element for validation of this assumed organizational asset regarding the modeling of
behaviors and mentorship by elite coaches to less experienced coaches and to other members
of the organization was found in the “Coach Leveling Criteria” document. The document
mentions mentoring, modeling, and leading by example across all of the foundational elements
of the elite coach role. Following the guidelines from the rubric, the researcher assembled the
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 128

expected mentoring, modeling, training, leadership, and best practice demonstration elements
in a pyramid formation to illustrate the different elements from lowest to highest level of
importance, which is illustrated in Table 27. Table 27 also shows the individual elements of
mentoring, modeling, training, leadership and best practice demonstration that are expected of
the elite coaches in the “Coach Leveling Criteria” document.

Figure 9. Organizational Staircase: Elite Coach Modeling Behaviors and Mentoring Expectations
Moreover, the focus group discussion when combined with the review of the “Coach
Leveling Criteria” document validated that positive work behaviors are routinely modeled by the
elite coaches. And further, the “Coach Leveling Criteria” document validated that the use of role
models was an established as important element of coaching success and that it is highly
supported and evaluated element within the organization.
The Lencioni Elements of Organizational Success or Failure
Lencioni (2002) offers five core components that define team success or failure.
Lencioni’s (2002) “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team” uses a storyline narrative to illustrate the
five main reasons that teams fail and are unable to meet goals or objectives. Conversely, this
5) Has expansive positive impact on
managers, coaches’ and staff companywide
4) Adds value to the team by modeling leadership,
extensive mentoring and demonstration of best practices
3) Mentors and trains new coaches to the highest standards
2) Breaks down complex, multidimensional problems or processes into key parts
that are easily digestible and understood so they can be executed by the team
1) Leads or takes a leadership role on best practices and partnering with managers around a
wide variety of topics and issues that are important to the team
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 129

study uses the five key Lencioni (2002) elements as a rubric for evaluating and then validating
the strong and functional team environment at Inside Track. When described in terms of defining
success, Lencioni’s (2002) five key elements of functional teams are (a) high levels of trust; (b)
no fear of conflict; (c) attention to results; (d) high levels of accountability; and (e) high levels of
commitment. Evaluation and discussion of Lencioni’s (2002) five key elements of functional
organizations and teamwork were the central discussion points of the four focus group sessions.
Therefore, the findings on the Lencioni (2002) elements were revealed and validated principally
through the focus groups with some support from the observations and the Coach Leveling
Criteria document.
Lencioni Element One: High Levels of Trust

The assumed organizational asset that the organization as a whole and the coaches in
particular demonstrate high levels of trust was validated principally through the focus group
discussions. The four focus groups agreed that trust is the keystone of both organizational and
individual coach success. There was also consensus that trust is the overarching central concept
around which the other four Lencioni (2002) elements circulate in varying levels of importance.
From the focus group discussion Figure 8 illustrates the central position and role of trust and the
relative importance of the other four concepts in relation to trust.

“You must have trust to be successful in coaching. It has to be inside the organization and with your
students and it is almost impossible to develop trust with your students if it is lacking in the
organization. So everyone at Inside Track is invested in finding ways to build and develop trust.”
Focus Group One
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 130

Figure 10. Trust as Core to Conflict Resolution, Results, Accountability and Commitment
While each focus group considered and confirmed the central role of trust inside the
organization slightly differently, there was consensus that trust encompasses and both builds and
is built upon the other four Lencioni (2002) elements. For example, Focus Group One focused on
“trust as the anchor and the foundation that everything else is built on top of,” while Focus
Group Two said, “trust is built on our ability to work through conflict in a positive way, our
commitment to each other and to a lesser extent our ability to generate results and to be

No Fear of
Conflict
High Levels of
Accountability
Attention to
Results
High Levels of
Commitment TRUST
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 131

accountable to each other.” Another member of Focus Group Two agreed and added that
“organizationally trust flows right into accountability and commitment.” These and other key
commentaries from each focus group describing trust as the key foundational concept around
which both organizational and individual coaching success revolves are set forth in Table 28.
Table 27
Trust is the Key to Both Organizational and Individual Coaching Success
“You must have trust to be successful in coaching. It has to be inside the organization and with your
students and it is almost impossible to develop trust with your students if it is lacking in the
organization. So everyone at Inside Track is invested in finding ways to build and develop trust.”
Focus Group One
“It is the high levels of trust and commitment that make us good at the items in the middle, the
proactively dealing with conflict, consistently being results oriented and maintaining the high levels of
accountability. My level of trust, in not just the organization but in each of my coworkers who I know
are equally as committed to their students as I am, I think this is what gives us these other elements.”
Focus Group Two
“I actually have a hard time separating my work with students from my work with the organization.
When it comes to trust, conflict, results – all of these things – are the same thing that I want to bring to
a student coaching meeting and I think they translate in the office just as well. I am coached by my
manager and I then turn the feedback and work with my manager into the work that I do with students.
The cornerstone of the trust is that we are all committed to unlocking human potential.”
Focus Group Three
“Trust is built on our ability to work through conflict in a positive way, our commitment to each other
and to a lesser extent our ability to generate results and to be accountable to each other.”
Focus Group Four

As illustrated in Table 28, the coaches had trouble separating organizational trust from
the trust elements central to their student coaching relationships. Focus Group One participants
mentioned that it was “impossible to develop trust” with a student if trust is lacking in the
organization. Focus Group Two concurred that it was the high levels of trust inside the
organization that enabled coaches to be successful with their students. All four focus groups
expressed that organizational and student trust were inexorably linked and central to individual
coach success, the success of the coaching teams, and the success of the organization as a whole.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 132

While Table 28 illustrates the central role of trust within the organization as described by
each focus group, Table 29 describes the guiding principle of trust by breaking down the
discussion of trust down into five broad trust themes. Table 29 illustrates the number of times
each focus group mentioned or discussed trust across the five defined trust themes and shows the
number of times that each theme was mentioned across all four focus groups.
Table 28
Key Trust Concepts within Coaching and the Organization
Focus Group One Two Three Four Totals
Coaches/Managers Intentionality Work on Trust 8 5 6 7 26
Trust is the Foundational Element of Coaching 7 6 5 5 23
Successful Coaching Requires High Levels of Trust 4 7 5 6 22
The Organization is Trust Driven/Focused 6 3 3 5 17
Trust is Built Through Strong Relationships 4 3 5 4 16
Totals 29 24 24 27 104

The frequency of discussion of each of the five trust themes by each focus group further
illustrated that trust is the core focus and primary guiding value of this organization. This finding
was parallel and complemented the second conceptual knowledge finding about the critical
importance of trust and relationship building in coaching (Table 6). Table 29 illustrates the
extreme sensitivity and awareness around trust both in student coaching and within the
organization.
Lencioni Element Two: No Fear of Conflict
The focus groups revealed that the coaches are comfortable with conflict because they
work on it and handle consistently within their student coaching relationships. Focus Group One
explained, “we coach to conflict every day and we work hard to show and explain to our students
that conflict is OK.” Focus Group Two expressed that as a group the coaches were “good at
assuming the good intentions of others and we trust that we can resolve conflict.” A participant
in Focus Group Three gave an example of the positive role of healthy conflict within a large
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 133

coaching team and how working through it improved both their student retention rates and their
student satisfaction scores. A Focus Group Four participant explained that difficult conversations
or different approaches “never really feels like conflict. It just feels like a good, honest, self-
reflective conversation.” Another coach in Focus Group Four elaborated by explaining that
conflict is “nuanced.” This coach believed that, if you asked the coaches about conflict, they
would voice the opinion that the types of conflict common in most work environments do not
exist within this organization because “here, conflict is just another level of conversation and
discussion” around meeting shared goals and serving and supporting their students. Another
focus group remarked that “here, we have healthy conflict.”
And finally, there was consensus that, when there are difficult conversations, divided
approaches or heated exchanges during meetings, that “regardless of the levels of conflict in a
meeting, management trusts” that the coaches will go back out onto the coaching floor and do
their absolute best with each of their students (Focus Group 4). In an almost identical comment,
Focus Group Three stated that “regardless of the levels of conflict in a meeting, management
trusts that we are going to get the job done” and that we will give our students our complete
focus. Further, there was agreement that managers and executives work hard at giving
constructive feedback in nurturing and supportive ways and that the coaches trust that feedback
and criticism from colleagues, managers and even students will help the coaches grow and
develop higher level skill sets.
Another notable conflict discussion developed regarding new hires. Most of the focus
groups agreed that most new hires are not used to dealing with so much healthy conflict and
constructive criticism in the workplace and that it can take a lot of “nurturing, training and
support to get people comfortable with and able to handle both the level of feedback and the
detail level of the feedback given” to new coaches from throughout the organization. Another
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 134

focus group explained that new coaches have to “know that we are working with them only for
the better and so that we can know how to better support them.” One comment from a participant
couched the conflict issue in terms of trust by saying that for “me trust comes from being able to
have conflict without negative repercussions.”
In response to the Lencioni (2002) conflict element, a member of Focus Group Three
took the time to detail a process based on the work of Bridges and Bridges (2009) that she used
to run a workshop for her team that was dealing with some difficult conflicts. The coach
commented that after a series of short workshops using Bridges and Bridges (2009), Managing
Transitions: Making the Most of Change, the team was able to use the conflict to lead them to
trust using the authors’ “cycle of openness, vulnerability, grief and hope.” The coach and the
other members of Focus Group Four also felt that it was notable that the team manager fully
supported the workshop series and the concept that team members could “grieve” for some of the
changes.
While the focus group discussions were the primary source of discussion and support for
the validation of the finding that the coaches do not fear conflict, the “Coach Leveling Criteria”
document provided some additional support. It states that elite coaches should encourage team
members “to discuss concerns and conflicts openly” and that elite coaches should know “how to
solve conflicts to everyone’s benefit.” Another statement from the documents was that elite
coaches should take “initiative to identify conflicts within a team and foster an environment
which supports resolution.” The alignment between the discourse from the focus groups and the
excerpts from the “Coach Leveling Criteria” provided support for the validated finding that the
coaches do not fear conflict, and further, that they have specific training and skill sets that enable
conflict resolution across the organization.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 135

Lencioni Element Three: Attention to Results
Consistent with the discussion and findings around the second metacognitive knowledge
asset the coaches felt that they have a variety of reports and tools to assist them in tracking
individual, team, and organizational results. The coaches also stated that they are highly attuned
to changes in retention rates as well as individual and overall student satisfaction rates as
measured by a number of different tools and surveys (Figure 4 and Metacognitive Knowledge
Section above). Results were also the key focus of the weekly one-on-one sessions that each
coach has with their manager; however, the focus groups revealed that attention to results was
the least critical stand-alone component of the Lencioni (2002) equation.
Rather than focusing on metrics, the focus groups felt that it was more important to focus on
doing what is best for their students. Focus Group Two stated that, if “I trust that I am doing the
very best that I can for the individual student every single time and I am committed to them, then
the results will come.” Focus Group Three echoed this sentiment by explaining that the coaches and
the teams are held accountable in many ways, but it is never only about bottom line results. The
coaches expressed that what really matters is student impact; however, the coaches also understood
that developing measures to gauge and differentiate between different levels and types of student
and institutional impact will be difficult. Focus Group Two explained “when you talk about being
results oriented I like to think about unlocking human potential and not some arbitrary number that
you are trying to achieve.”
Results, while important, were discussed primarily in the context of other Lencioni (2002)
elements such as trust, commitment and accountability. For example, Focus Group Three stated that
they prefer to focus on “accountability, engagement and impact” rather than the set of results
metrics that are provided at the end of the term and that are principally backward facing. Focus
Group Four stated that the focus on data driven metrics was being replaced by other more impact
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 136

based measures of performance. It is interesting to note that on the topic of results the “Coach
Leveling Criteria” described that elite coaches should evidence the ability to “produce continuous
results though extended periods of change,” yet it does not list or reference any reports or processes
for measuring these desired results. While the company and the coaches are results oriented, the
coaches’ repeatedly indicated that they want additional clarification around how the company will
measure the important elements of impact, accountability, commitment and engagement. Perhaps
most importantly in terms of the Lencioni (2002) elements, the coaches wanted to participate in the
process of developing the methods for tracking accountability, engagement. Likewise, on the issue
of impact and how to quantify and measure it, the coaches wanted to be an equal partner with
management in the development of clear expectations around these types of performance
measurements.
Lencioni Element Four and Five: Accountability and Commitment

The focus groups discussed accountability in terms of its relationship to trust, the
cornerstone of the company and the coach/student relationship, rather than as a stand-alone
element. As demonstrated in the highlighted quote from Focus Group One above, most focus
group participants could not separate accountability from trust or commitment. Throughout the
four focus group transcripts, there was not an instance where accountability was discussed as a
stand-alone component of coaching or organizational success. In each instance in which
accountability was mentioned, it was connected to either trust, commitment, or engagement.
Table 29 displays the number of times that each focus group mentioned accountability in
connection with trust, commitment, and engagement. It shows the overlap of the three
“Trust and accountability are like being in shape. It takes time to build it up and you have to put a
lot of work into it on a daily basis. But it doesn’t take much to tear it down. When it comes to
accountability, it helps to build trust if when I say I will do something that I do it and follow
through completely.” Focus Group One
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 137

accountability elements and the strong and consistent connection between trust and
accountability as well as the more modest connections to commitment and engagement.
Table 29
Accountability and its Nexus with Trust, Commitment and Engagement
Focus Group One Two Three Four Totals
Accountability as an Element of Trust 6 7 4 5 23
Accountability as an Element of Commitment 3 1 2 1 7
Accountability as an Element of Engagement 2 1 1 2 6

Moreover, while accountability is an important element within successful coaching and
especially within the coaching team dynamics, the coaches consider accountability to be an element
of trust and not a separate measure of either their performance or of organizational success.
By all methods and measures, the coaches are committed to their students, their coaching
work and to the organization. The focus groups regularly mentioned that
one of the great things about working here is that everyone is truly committed to helping
their students and to student success and to our mission and the work that we are doing.
This creates this high level of engagement so that you can really trust that your
colleagues care about the same things that you do.
Consistent with the accountability discussion above, this quote similarly highlights the extent of
the overlap between the trust, commitment and engagement elements.
A few of the focus group participants felt that commitment is a meaningful and important
counterweight to trust. For example, Focus Group One noted that “commitment helps you get
through those moments when trust is wavering.” Focus Group Four stated that in moments of
conflict and “crisis, commitment to the organization and team members will prevail and bring
people back together.” However, more of the focus group participants noted the opposite with
Focus Group One stating that “if you have strong trust it can help to bolster commitment.”
Overall, the focus groups thought that the “company brings an amazing level of trust,
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 138

engagement and commitment to just about everything” (Focus Group One). Focus Group Three
echoed this by stating that “here there is a deep desire to do one’s best” in all aspects of the job
and that the “people that get hired here are ‘missional.’ They are connected to the mission of the
organization and have a deep commitment to helping others. So there is both trust and shared
commitment.” This comment is reflective of the consensus that the organization hires for the
key element of commitment and does a good job of identifying and hiring mission-driven
individuals who are strongly aligned with the educational mission of the organization.
Direct Alignment of Coaching Services and Organizational Supports

The fifth assumed organizational asset that there is a strong alignment between the services
that the coaches provide and the services that the coaches receive was validated through the focus
groups. A specific element of each focus group was discussion of and response to the prompt,
“how do you expect management to interact with and support the coaches?” Focus group
discussion revealed that a core component of organizational strength at Inside Track was the strong
and direct alignment between how the coaches work with their students and how the company
managers work with the coaches. The core concepts of coaching applied equally to how the
coaches expected to be managed and to what the coaches expected of the organization’s senior
management. The core concepts included trust, relationship building, growth mindset
development, engagement, empathy, authentic communication, intense focusing and listening to
the student, understanding and building on the individual’s motivation, and meeting the student
where they are.
“We are a coaching company. We work hard to coach our students and help them establish a
growth mindset. I expect my manager to do the same with me. My boss can tell me what to do, set
boundaries and hold me accountable but has to treat me the same way that I treat my students.”
Focus Group One
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 139

Table 30
Coach Expectations of Management
Focus Group Coach Expectations of Management
Focus Group One * As a manager I would not ask a coach to do something that I am not
willing to do
* We are a company of communicators so I expect my manager to be
centered by trust
* Managers have to trust that the coach is going to do what is best for the
student
* My manager must be as respectful and supportive of me as I am of my
students
Focus Group Two * We are coached by our managers in the same way that we coach our
students
* We trust enough to speak candidly with our managers
* Coaches do not suffer in silence. We bring issues and solutions to our
managers
* I can have conflict with my manager without negative repercussions
Focus Group Three * I listen intently to my students to understand what it is that they need and
I expect the very same thing from my manager. It’s just another coaching
relationship
* I expect my manager to stay engaged with me and to be there as I
develop and grow
* I expect my manager to make sure that I am OK, just as I do with my
students
Focus Group Four * Trust permeates all levels of leadership, management and communication
here
* I love the trust of management to say ‘you got it, go be you’
* For me the levels of caring, gratitude, self-awareness and support that I
get from my manager feel unique to Inside Track and they are the reasons I
have stayed here

Table 30 captures key focus group discussion points that highlight the strong expectations of
the coaches that they be managed, trained, and supported at the same levels and in the same way that
the coaches work with their students. The “Coach Leveling Criteria” rubric document was reflective
of the coaches’ perspectives by incorporating this specific element of coach expectations of
management into the elite coach role as follows: The elite coach must evidence the “ability to provide
direct feedback to manager to create a productive working relationship.” In discussing the ability to
give feedback and criticism to managers and executives, Focus Group Four explained, “I can actually
give the CEO serious criticism. There is a true and open dialog about what is and is not working.”
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 140

While the interview protocol did not directly provide questions or prompts directed at
coach expectations of management, there are several notable comments from the interviews on
this topic. For example, Interview 8 stated that “I interact with my managers and executives the
same way that I interact with my students.” Similarly, Interview 12 remarked that there is “a lot of
interactivity between the Ninja coaches and the managers throughout the day as we share
strategies and observations about how to optimize the team and meet our shared goals.”
Interview 7 stated that “having real and deep trust between coach and management is a big part of
this company and what makes it successful.” Interview 4 said that “part of what Inside Track does
well is that we carry over the care and support we give our students to the employees that work
here.” Based on the freedom and obligation of the elite coach to provide direct feedback to
managers that was evidenced in the focus group and the interview commentary describing the
coach manager relationship, the assumed organizational asset that there is a strong alignment
between the services that the coaches provide to their students and the services and emotional
support that the coaches receive from their managers and the organization as a whole was
validated.
Tools, Supports and Resources that Support Coaching Excellence
The sixth assumed organizational asset that the coaches have tools and resources that
enable and support their coaching work is validated. This finding was revealed through interview
question 12, “how does Inside Track support and incentivize you to improve as a coach?”
Professional development opportunities were mentioned most frequently with eleven interviewees
commenting on the various types of professional development available and the high levels of
support from management to do professional development. The coaches also stated that the
weekly one-on-one sessions with their manager were an important element of support and that
both the formal mentoring programs and informal or impromptu mentoring were useful resources
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 141

and tools to build skill levels, confidence, and personal and work relationships. Three coaches
mentioned training or support coming directly from their institutional partners. It was evident that
most partner institutions do not provide a wide range of coaching tools or support services beyond
the start-up meetings and trainings associated with the launch of a new contract. Only one
interviewee had spent a significant amount of time on the campus of the institutional partner.
There was unanimity in the comments that the company has an extensive library of
training and mentoring programs and that the coaches view these trainings and programs as
valuable tools and support to improve their coaching. Participating in these programs was
described as valuable, enjoyable, and confidence building, often leading to the development of
strong work and personal relationships among the coaches. Figure 9 displays how the coaches
responded when asked about the tools, resources, and support services in the interview process.
The coaches were free to identify and describe multiple tools, resources, and support services;
therefore, while the number of respondents was twelve, there are 42 total responses across six
classifications of tools, supports and resources.

Figure 11. Coaching Tools, Resources and Support Services. Coaches’ responses to interview
question 12 asked: “How does Inside Track support and incentivize you to improve as a coach?”
11
9
8
6
5
3
0 2 4 6 8 10
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
TRAININGS/WEEKLY MGR MTGS
FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAMS
INFORMAL MENTORING & DISCUSSION
TEAM MEETINGS
WORK DIRECTLY WITH UNIV PARTNER
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 142

Several coaches commented on the value and importance of having open and frequent
interactions with their fellow coaches throughout the day through both the formal mentoring
programs and the informal or impromptu mentoring among the junior and senior coaches on
each team. Interview 12 stated, “I am constantly throwing situations out there to my colleagues
for comment and perspective,” and Interview 6 said “I love when others take an interest in my
coaching and want to work with me and I also role play at every opportunity.” Because of the
frequency of these comments formal and informal mentoring were broken out as separate
categories in Table 32. These types of comments go both to the value of mentoring and to the
high value attributed to recognition and collaboration within the organization. The coaches also
value the one hour a week one-on-one sessions that they have with their managers which
usually focus on some aspect of the coaches’ professional development path. Overall, these
findings demonstrate that the coaches have a diverse set of highly valued tools, supports and
resources. Managers also actively support their coaches and team to use these tools, supports
and resources. Further, considerable time is set aside or committed to these tools and resources
on a weekly basis. This finding also highlights the high value that the coaches place on both
their professional development and their efforts to continuously improve themselves and their
coaching skills.
Performance Incentives and Appropriate Feedback to Improve Coach Performance
The final assumed organizational asset is that Inside Track uses incentives and
appropriate feedback to achieve high levels of coaching performance, which was revealed and
validated through interview question 12, “how does Inside Track support and incentivize you to
improve as a coach?”
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 143

Figure 12. Incentives and Feedback to Improve Coaching Performance. Coaches’ responses to
interview question 12 asked: “How does Inside Track support and incentivize you to improve as
a coach?”

As shown in Figure 10, the coaches were free to identify and describe multiple company
incentives or forms of feedback to improve performance; therefore, while the number of
respondents was 12, there are 39 total responses across five identified types of company
incentives and feedback. As illustrated in Figure 10, the company provided incentives listed in
order of importance by the coaches in response to question 12 included (a) encouragement and
support through relevant, consistent feedback; (b) the option to work from home, available only
to outstanding and elite coaches; (c) recognition and support of strong internal motivation to
improve; (d) the coaches’ individual values are recognized and prized by the company; (e) pay
raises and promotions. Consistent with the other findings across this study detailing the intrinsic
motivation of the coaches, this finding illustrates the relative lack of importance around
financial and other extrinsic motivation among the coaches. This final finding validates that
Inside Track understands its coaches and has been able to design a set of incentives and
4
6
7
10
12
PAY RAISES
PROMOTIONS
INTERNAL
MOTIVATION
APPRECIATED
MY VALUES ARE
RECOGNIZED/PRIZED
WORK @ HOME
OPTION
ENCOURAGEMENT
SUPPORT THROUGH
FEEDBACK
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 144

feedback strategies that work for coaches who are internally motivated and who seek a
missional or service role.
Synthesis of Findings for Organizational Assets
Overall, the findings from the various sources of data showed that all seven of the
assumed motivation assets across the five distinct organizational asset categories were
validated. Triangulation of the focus groups, observations, interviews and the “Coach Leveling
Criteria” rubric document for the organizational findings revealed the key organization finding
of this study: The strong and consistent alignment of individual coaching success factors and
overall organizational success factors. This achievement is based on a carefully crafted and
intentional set of socio-cultural elements and organizational factors. These elements included
positive social and work-based interactions throughout the organization, a positive and
supportive workplace atmosphere, the extensive use of role models and modeled behaviors to
support and maintain the culture, and the necessary levels of trust and commitment to shared
individual and organizational goals. The validated organizational assets are summarized in the
below table.
Table 31
Summary of Validated Assumed Organizational Assets

Organization
Category

Assumed Organization Assets

Finding
Socio-cultural
Elements
The Inside Track coaches have positive social and work-based
interactions throughout the day

Validated
Socio-cultural
Elements
The culture, atmosphere, and mood of the workplace are positive and
supportive of the organization’s coaching work

Validated
Socio-cultural
Elements
Positive work behaviors are modeled by elite coaches and the use of
role models is important to the organization

Validated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 145

The organization findings also revealed that, based on the five Lencioni (2002) elements
for evaluating team success or failure, Inside Track is a highly functional organization that is
committed to developing and maintaining high levels of trust, working through conflict in
healthy and developmental ways, and seeking a set of meaningful outcomes that utilize a holistic
set of measures of coach and team performance. While all of these findings are notable, the
principal touchstone of Inside Track’s organizational success that make it a promising practice in
coaching to improve retention could be described by its commitment across sectors of the
organization towards the shared mission of helping students to graduate. The strong and
consistent alignment of individual coaching and organizational success factors that enable a
committed missional approach to coaching students for retention and success, according to the
findings of this research, make this a functional team organization.

Table 31, continued
Organization
Category

Assumed Organization Assets

Finding
Lencioni
Elements
The organization as a whole and the coaches in particular demonstrate:
1) High levels of trust
2) No fear of conflict
3) Attention to results
4) High accountability and
5) High levels of commitment

Validated
Alignment There is strong alignment between the services that the coaches provide
and the services that the coaches receive from the organization
Validated
Resources The coaches have tools and resources that enable and support their
coaching work
Validated
Performance Inside Track uses incentives to achieve high performance and
appropriate performance feedback to improve coaching performance

Validated
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 146

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS, APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTATION AND
EVALUATION
The purpose of this chapter is to present evidence based recommendations about coaching
as an effective retention focused student support service, generally, and around the effective use of
coaching in online degree completion programs, specifically. This chapter will explore the key
validated coaching assets that make coaching a promising practice and that enable and support
individual student retention and successes well as improved program level or institution-wide
retention rates. In particular, Chapter Five responds to the second research question, “[w]hat
solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources do the Inside Track coaches have that may be appropriate for solving retention problems
at another academic organization or institution?”
This chapter is divided into four sections. The first section presents the key validated assets
and explains the rationale for selecting them for further discussion. The second section provides
recommendations that draw on applied research theories relating to the identified key coaching
assets. These recommendations and considerations, combined with recent applied research and
studies that support and further explain these core coaching elements are designed to help
institutions identify and evaluate possible approaches and solutions to difficult retention issues
across a wide range of campus stakeholders and departments.
The third section offers best practices, methods, planning options, and comparison
information around two distinct institutional scenarios for the implementation and utilization of
coaching services. The first scenario is for institutions that want to consider and evaluate using
outside coaching professionals to support their campus or program. The second scenario is for
institutions that are considering and evaluating the development of an internal coaching
department. Finally, section four presents an evaluation plan for assessing coaching services for
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 147

either of the two possible scenarios described and provides guidance for implementations well as
for assessing the value and impact of the coaching services on retention and student success once
they are implemented.
Validated Assets Selected for Further Discussion and Rationale for Selection
In order to ensure that the study recommendations focus on the most significant elements
of successful undergraduate retention coaching and the key attributes that make retention coaching
in online degree completion programs a promising practice, the following two guiding inquiries
were used to determine the most significant validated assets for discussion in Chapter Five.
1. What coaching assets are most important and impactful to individual student retention
and student success?
2. What assets of successful coaching are most important for an educational institution
to understand in order to effectively evaluate and utilize coaching as a retention tool?
Review of the data and findings from Chapter Four yielded six key coaching assets that
will be further evaluated and discussed throughout Chapter Five: (1) the coaches know when and
how to develop non-cognitive skills and growth mindset concepts with their students, (2) the
coaches share the core value and belief of empathy that enhances student retention and success,
(3) The coaches focus on tailoring their coaching to each student’s specific needs, (4) The coaches
individually, and the organization as a whole, exhibit high levels of trust; this trust is the
foundation of individual coaching work and the organization as a whole, (5) The coaches are self-
aware as they monitor and adjust their coaching to improve results; they are aware of their biases
and carefully avoid making judgements or stereotyping their students, and (6) the coaches are
working in a highly positive, supportive, and well aligned and role model driven culture and
environment.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 148

Based on the Chapter Four findings, these assets were identified and ranked by the
researcher based on the two distinct criteria. “Criterion One” ranks the elements of coaching that
the coaches expressed are most important and impactful to student retention and success. While
“Criterion Two” ranks the coaching elements that are most crucial for educational institutions in
order to effectively understand, evaluate, utilize and implement coaching services. Table 32
shows how the assets were ranked by the researcher based on the findings from Chapter Four.
Table 32
Ranking of the Key Validated Coaching Assets under Criteria 1 and 2
Validated Key Assets Of Coaching
As A Promising Practice [Category]
Criterion
#1 Rank
Criterion
#2 Rank
Knowing When/How to Develop Non-Cognitive Skills and
Growth Mindset
[Conceptual Knowledge]
1
st
3
rd

The Coaches’ share the key Core Values of Empathy and Caring
[Values/Beliefs: Motivation]
2
nd
1
st

Tailoring Coaching to each Student’s Specific Needs
[Conceptual Knowledge]
3
rd
2
nd

The Coaches have High Levels of Trust with each Student and
within the Organization as a Whole
[Socio-Cultural: Organization]
[Values/Beliefs: Motivation]

4
th

6
th

The Coaches are Self-Aware. They Monitor and Adjust their
Coaching to Improve Results. They are Aware of Biases and they
Avoid Judgements and Stereotypes
[Metacognitive Knowledge]
[Values/Beliefs: Motivation]

5
th

4
th

The Coaches Work in a Positive, Supportive, Aligned and Role
Model Driven Culture/Environment
[Socio-Cultural: Organization]
[Values/Beliefs: Motivation]

6
th

5
th

As demonstrated in Table 33, utilizing a side-by-side ranking of the key coaching assets
based on the identified criteria illustrates how a distinct assessment focus can yield a different
ranking of the same core coaching assets. The comparison is important because Criterion One can
help organizations evaluating the role of coaching to understand the most important elements of
successful coaching, while Criterion Two can help them to discern the key assets that result in
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 149

retention success. However, all of the key coaching assets listed above are based on unique
organizational values and principles that may be difficult to replicate within an institution. Overall,
the below recommendations are designed to assist institutions in identifying and evaluating possible
approaches and solutions to difficult retention and student support issues.
The Core Components of Successful Retention Coaching
This section focuses on helping organizations and institutions understand the six most
important elements of successful coaching and to look for ways to apply and incorporate these
important elements and concepts across a wide range of student services and support structures at
their own institution or organization. The recommendations were developed using a combination of
the study findings and current, applied research studies that provide background, perspective,
context and explanation around the recommendations.
The Importance of Non-Cognitive and Growth Mindset Skills to Retention

Based on the findings in Chapter Four, the principal issues affecting retention of online
degree completion students are deficiencies in non-cognitive skills and lack of a growth mindset
or belief in one’s ability to succeed (Table 9). This finding confirms that the intrinsic skills of
commitment, determination, attitude, grit, confidence, perseverance, and “believing I can do it”
are the keys to undergraduate retention (Clark & Estes, 2008; Dweck, 2006; Dembo & Seli,
2012; Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007; Rueda, 2011). These factors are even
more determinative of persistence to graduation in online degree completion programs because
these students have already experienced at least one significant interruption of their studies.
Further, the modality of distance education makes it more difficult to hold students accountable;
it is easier for students to fade away and stop participating in an online course because they are
“The growth mindset is based on the belief that your basic qualities are things you can cultivate.”
“With the right mindset and the right teaching people are capable of a lot more than we think.”
(Dweck, 2006, p 7 and p. 64)
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 150

not face-to-face. These students are almost always working adults with busy schedules and
many competing priorities (Table 9).
The non-cognitive skill level and growth mindset state of the student is a key predictor of
both retention and student success (Markle, Brenneman, Jackson, Burrus, & Robbins, 2013).
Therefore, evaluation of the non-cognitive skill level and growth mindset state of the student during
the admissions process or at the start of a program can help inform if the student is a good fit for a
particular online course or program and the appropriate course level placement for the student as
they begin the program or as they re-enter the university (Markle & Robbins, 2013). In addition,
this type of information can assist in decision making about which students should be provided
individualized support, such as coaching, counseling, tutoring or mentorship programs. Finally, for
institutions such as the California State University system that is trying to target stopped-out
students for readmission through space limited online degree completion programs, having a
predictor of persistence to graduation and overall program GPA could help in the selection of
students with the highest likelihood of graduation within a specific timeframe (California State
University, 2016).
The more that a program can understand a student’s likelihood for success at the start of the
program, the better equipped the program will be to proactively provide meaningful resources and
supports along with reasonable expectations of program graduation rates. The latter is important
because many public regional comprehensive systems, such as the California State University
system, are under political pressure to develop alternative access pathways to graduation to alleviate
campus impaction and a lack of seats for returning or “stopped-out” students (Lumina Foundation,
2012). However, in some cases senior leadership’s expectations about graduation rates for these new
online degree completion program offerings were not realistic and resulted in criticisms of program
and teaching quality.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 151

The ETS SuccessNavigator® Assessment
In July of 2013, Educational Testing Services (ETS) a non-profit testing company that
administers tests such as the GRE® and the TOEFL® introduced a self-paced online assessment
tool called “SuccessNavigator® Assessment.” The assessment is “specially designed to assess
essential post-secondary preparedness skills” (ETS, 2016). Further, it is specifically designed to
assess for a wide range of non-cognitive and growth mindset skills. ETS cites research from
Richardson, Abraham and Bond (2012) that shows that students’ “non-cognitive skills and
behaviors are just as important as their academic achievement in determining whether they will
succeed in college.” ETS also draws on the work of Robbins, Lauver, Le, Davis and Langley
(2004) for the finding that “[s]trong non-cognitive skills and effective co-curricular strategies can
help compensate for certain deficiencies in academic achievement.”
ETS commissioned a pilot study on the SuccessNavigator® Assessment by Rikoon,
Liebtag, Olivera-Aguilar, Robbins and Jackson (2014) to evaluate the effectiveness of the
assessment in community college math placement decisions. The pilot study findings were that
students for “whom SuccessNavigator recommended acceleration passed their mathematics
courses at higher rates than those receiving a cautionary recommendation,” and, further, that the
SuccessNavigator was “predictive of overall college grade point average” (p. i). While the focus
of the pilot study on community college mathematics class placement is not informative to
persistence in online degree completion programs, grade point average prediction is an important
predictor of a student’s likelihood to persist. Additional studies of the potential uses of the
SuccessNavigator® Assessment are currently under way as are development of various scoring
formats that may prove helpful across a wider range of placement, admission, and student
support service allocation decisions (ETS, 2016). This developing work is consistent with the
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 152

now general agreement among educational leaders and researchers that assessing
students more effectively on affective dimensions, along with assessments of
academic knowledge and incorporating past indicators of success such as high
school GPA, is a promising direction for community colleges and other
educational institutions committed to increasing retention and completion rates.
(Markel & O’Banion, 2014).
The SuccessNavigator® Assessment is a first to market assessment tool that should lead to
the development of additional and improved predictive tools and measures. However, the
SuccessNavigator® Assessment in its current form is a meaningful indicator of a student’s non-
cognitive and growth mindset level and can help programs make more informed decisions around
program admission, deployment of coaching services, and other individualized student support
services. An interesting utilization of the SuccessNavigator® Assessment is underway at the
University of New Mexico. In addition to using the assessment to identify students with weak skill
sets, students who score high on the assessment are recruited into a peer mentorship program
designed around improving grit and resilience in at-risk students.
For institutions that are currently utilizing internal or external coaching services the ETS
SuccessNavigator® Assessment might be a useful tool to augment the coaches’ processes for
determining the number and the severity of challenges that a particular student is facing. If a coach
has the student’s results from the ETS SuccessNavigator® Assessment prior to the first coaching
meeting this information could help the coach to quickly and more comprehensively assess the
non-cognitive and growth mindset level of the student, and then, begin tackling gateway issues and
core retention issues more quickly and efficiently. By using the SuccessNavigator® Assessment as
a starting point for the first coaching meeting, the coaches would also have a meaningful starting
point to explain their role as a coach to the student. Further the student’s familiarity with the
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 153

SuccessNavigator® Assessment should help the student to understand the importance of
developing the “soft skills” they will need in order to be successful in their selected academic
program or course of study.
The Importance of Individually Tailored Student Support

“The wonderful thing about coaching, and the thing that makes coaching so hard to
describe to outsiders is that it is so tailored to the student” (Interview 10). The coaches’ extensive
work to carefully tailor their coaching to each student’s specific needs is a key differentiator of
coaching from most on-campus student support services such as academic advising, tutoring and
learning resource centers. And it is a principal reason the majority of institution-wide retention
strategies and projects have had minimal or no impact on the institutions overall graduation rates
(Kelly & Schneider, 2012). And it is why the majority of recommendations for improving
retention of undergraduate students generally and online degree completion students specifically
focus on the provision of individualized and targeted support (Bettinger & Baker, 2013). As
explained in Chapter Four, the key to coaching as a promising practice is the combination of a
highly individualized and targeted support with the caring, empathetic and non-judgmental
counseling of a “missional” professional who authentically desires to help the student. It is this
intentional two-part approach that leads to meaningful improvement in retention and persistence as
well as improvement in the individual student’s feelings and perspective about their successful
degree completion goals and future career success (Table 14).
For institutions that have been focused on large scale retention programs and increasing
opportunities for channeling remedial students to tutoring and academic advising, the
recommendation from this study and the research is to move away from programs that do not
provide individualized support and to focus on building capacity to work with students in an
“No one retention strategy fits everyone, and proactive coaches can carefully customize
strategies to fit the specific needs of individuals.” (Bettinger and Baker, 2013, p. 2)
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 154

individualized context (Bettinger & Baker, 2013). Obviously, professional coaching services are
the preferred method of this study for achieving meaningful retention and student success support.
However, the sections below suggest a range of strategies and projects that institutions can
consider across a wide range of institutional departments to positively impact student retention.
Early and Consistent Incorporation of Career Coaching

During the interviews and focus groups, several coaches noted that a key element of
individualized student support and successful retention is to ensure that students are evaluating and
then enrolling in the right program. Through their experiences coaching stopped-out undergraduate
students, the coaches ascertained that a prominent reason for stopping-out was that the student did not
believe that their program of study was interesting, engaging, or sufficiently related to their desired
career path. To avoid this type of retention issue with stopped-out students, first-time freshmen, and
transfer students, the coaches like to incorporate career coaching into their prospective and enrolled
student coaching work to try to carefully match each student with the right program.
Three recent studies focused on improving retention of nursing students and then
maintaining the young professional nursing graduate in the career field of nursing have explored
and established a link between effective career counseling and course, program and career
retention. In their study, Waddell, Spalding, Navarro, and Gaitana (2015) found that early and
consistent incorporation of career counseling directly impacted early career satisfaction. In a
similar study from 2011 that looked at multidisciplinary strategies to improve retention of
nursing students from disadvantaged backgrounds, the authors found that by incorporating a
career coach who “taught strategies for crafting their preferred future,” the students were better
able to develop resumes and prepare for interviews and that this work also “generated greater
“Any coaching call should include some element of career coaching and work beyond the most
immediate challenge because we are trying to teach the students life skills that will sustain them
beyond their program. We need to make sure that success in the class is directly connected to larger
success in career and life.” Interview 11
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 155

discussion among students about the advantages of planning for advanced nursing education as a
part of their career goals” (Igbo et al., 2011, p. 37). Finally, the study by Burkhardt,
Gower, Flavell, and Taplin (2015), found a beneficial impact on retention and career satisfaction
based on the establishment of a professional nursing identity during undergraduate study.
These studies from the field of nursing combined with the career coaching perspective
shared by the coaches during the interviews and focus groups of this research suggest that
institutions should strategically incorporate career counseling into the recruitment, application,
and admission process to ensure that students select a program that will have a direct, positive
long-term career impact. The research suggests that early and consistent incorporation of career
counseling will lead to increased program retention as well as increased student satisfaction with
the program. Finally, by using career coaches to develop professional identities during their
course of study, the students will subsequently report higher career satisfaction metrics and have
stronger alumni relationships with their institution. It is also important to note that the coaches
with experience working with prospective students, stated that, by strategically incorporating
career counseling into the recruitment process, prospective students became more open,
receptive, and engaged with program recruitment and outreach efforts. This recommendation to
increase career counseling activities throughout the various stages of the student lifecycle is
important to consider in close conjunction with the below recommendation to increase
personalized student support through the use of established on-campus counselors.
Increasing Personalized Student Support through Counselors and Advisors

This study focused on understanding and assessing professional coaching as a promising
practice to improve persistence and retention. One rationale for this study was that professional
“Streamlined personal assistance may address many potential barriers.”
(Bettinger, Long, Oreopoulos, & Sanbonmatsu, 2010,
p. 1207)
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 156

coaching for educational completion is a relatively new type of student support service deserving
of further study and greater understanding. However, the use of academic advisors, financial aid
counseling, guidance counselors, and enrollment representatives are established practices at almost
all post-secondary institutions. Finding ways to systematically increase personalized student
interactions by academic advisors, financial aid counseling staff, guidance counselors, and
enrollment representatives can positively affect both enrollment yield and retention rates.
Goldrick-Rab’s (2010) study of interventions and strategies to increase retention and
persistence at community colleges found that increasing personalized support to students through
counseling and advising was important and that incorporating the support during the initial
transition to community college was especially valuable. Similarly, a study of two Ohio
Community Colleges by Scrivener and Weiss (2009) found that significantly reducing the size of
guidance counselor rosters increased levels of student interaction and that this provided “short
term positive” impacts to retention. However, the positive impact ended when the “high touch”
advising concluded.
When conducting a study of students and families that received personalized, one-on-one
assistance from a financial aid advisor to complete the FASFA form compared to those that did
not receive the personalized assistance, Bettinger, Long, Oreopoulos, and Sanbonmatsu’s (2012)
found that students who received personalized help in conjunction with individualized
counseling about financial aid were “substantially more likely to submit the aid application,
enroll in college the following fall, and receive more financial aid” (p. 1). These studies suggest
that increasing personalized interactions with students through academic advisors, financial aid
staff, guidance counselors, and enrollment representatives “might bridge students’ informational
gaps and help students complete tasks they might not otherwise complete” (Bettinger, Long,
Oreopoulos, & Sanbonmatsu, 2012, p. 1).
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 157

Increasing Student Support that is Non-Judgmental, Grounded in Empathy and Caring

In conjunction with systematically looking for ways to increase individualized interactions
with students by academic advisors, financial aid staff, guidance and enrollment counselors and any
other student facing service personnel on campus, these departments and their staff should receive
training around how to communicate with and support students in a caring, empathetic and non-
judgmental way that is designed to engage the student as an equal partner in the interactions and
discussions. Table 34 illustrates the five key communication elements and strategies from the coach
interviews that should be built into a campus-wide staff training on communicating effectively with
students. The pyramid places the least important element of the communication approach at the
bottom and then builds upward to most important element at the top.

Figure 13. Key Elements of Communication Training from Least Important (1) to Most Important (5)

“Don’t judge, teach. It’s a learning process.” (Dweck, 2006)
5) Ground all communications in
empathy. Consistently let student know
you are there to help and support them.
1) Allow the student to select the communication channel most comfortable for them.
Communication channels may include: phone, text, FB, Skype, FaceTime or in person
meeting.

4) Work to build trust and a meaningful relationship with
the student that goes beyond the work based interaction.
3) As much as possible tie all actions, encouragements and suggestions
back to graduation vision/the reason the student entered the program.
2) Work at trying to understand a student’s resistance or reluctance to engage.
Never become accusatory. Always presume that every student is capable.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 158

It is recommended that the training programs be designed and delivered by an
outstanding coach or by group of experienced coaching professionals who will know how to
intentionally and strategically incorporate these core coaching communication strategies and
perspectives around communication into the campus-wide training.
Increasing Course Persistence through Pedagogy and Instructional Design Strategies

In the Chapter Four, findings related to student accountability and how the online course
and program modality can make it more difficult to hold students accountable, and several coaches
mentioned online course design components and pedagogical approaches that could help increase
student engagement and that could enhance the likelihood of course persistence. This perspective
is well supported by recent literature and studies around Web 2.0 tools in the online and blended
learning environments.
Web 2.0 Tools
A 2013 study by Wankel, Blessinger, Stanaityte and Washington (as cited in Wankel &
Blessinger, 2013) found that incorporating mobile applications such as Skype, texting, and video
components, as well as, gamification of some course elements, such as quizzes and threaded discussions,
was effective at increasing student engagement and had the additional benefit of increasing non-
academic communication between students. Likewise, Karin and Behrend (as cited in Wankel &
Blessinger, 2013) found that providing students with options and control over how they learned the
material improved engagement and time in the online class, which resulted in a positive impact on
successful course completion. According to Karin and Behrend, this instructional design strategy was
particularly appealing to adult learners and as such it would have greater impact on retention in online
degree completion programs (as cited in Wankel & Blessinger, 2013).
“The learners own meaning-making and aspiration are significant in task design.”
(Beetham & Sharpe, 2013)
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 159

Additionally, a 2013 study by Malik (as cited in Wankel & Blessinger, 2013) suggests that
appointing students as moderators and peer teachers during an online course is an effective
engagement tool and increases social connections within the course. And finally, there are two recent
studies by Blessinger and Wankel (2013) and Asbaugh (2013) finding that the select incorporation of
multimedia technologies, video annotations, videoconferencing as well as collaborative and sharing
applications and transmedia storytelling can increase engagement, especially with younger online
learners (as cited in Wankel & Blessinger, 2013). As a group these articles concur with the coaches’
suggestions that online courses and programs should train and focus their faculty and instructional
designers on developing methods and approaches to building accountability, engagement, and social
interaction as well as choices of how to learn and apply the material within the online course. Online
course faculty should be encouraged and taught how to host informal coffee hours or chat sessions
for their students and how to create meaningful social and support connections among students and
between students and faculty (Wankel & Bettinger, 2013).
Removing Gateway Issues
As detailed in Chapter Four, the coaches spend a considerable amount of time at the
beginning of each term scanning for and addressing “gateway issues” because “successful retention
requires a firmly established student who is focused on the class” (Interview 2). Gateway issues are
defined as issues that affect the student’s ability to be enrolled in a class or to have a successful
beginning to a course. Course persistence and retention will be positively impacted if institutions and
programs systemically work to remove as many gateway issues as possible for their students. By
removing these key barriers and issues to course access and participation, the coaches would have
additional time to address non-cognitive and growth mindset issues and other learning and student
success topics more extensively with their students.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 160

Timely and proper access to the correct course materials was listed as one of the most
common gateway issues that the coaches encountered and it was also mentioned as a difficult issue to
fix within a short timeframe. For online courses generally and for accelerated online courses and
online degree completion courses specifically, the recommendation is to load all course materials into
the online course shell. Further, programs should make student access to these embedded materials
available at no additional charge. Finally, the student should be able to access these materials with as
few additional required navigation steps or clicks as possible. This would effectively and efficiently
remove almost all barriers to immediate and ongoing access to course materials.
Open Educational Resources
Several recent studies on the use and benefits of Open Educational Resources (OER)
within online courses generally and online degree completion programs specifically are
instructive. The large and ongoing study from the OER Research Hub of the Open University of
the UK by Farrow et al. (2015) found that “implementation of OER can improve student
performance, but often indirectly through increased confidence, satisfaction and enthusiasm for
the subject,” and concluded that use of OER has important financial benefits for institutions and
students. Similarly, Shank’s (2014) expansive work indicates that there are many student
learning and engagement benefits to careful and select embedding of OER tools. Once students
understand that the course materials are free and always readily available, combined with
knowledge of how to independently access and navigate through the curse materials, there is a
positive impact on learning outcomes.
Key Elements of Successful Coaching that are Difficult to Independently Develop
The above sections provide recommendations, strategies, and approaches that administrators
can consider across their campuses to attempt to integrate and leverage some of the key elements of
successful coaching into the provision of standardized student support services, course design and
course work, and service allocation decisions. However, some of the most important assets of
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 161

successful coaching, such as trust, developing highly effective coaches, and the optimized and
unique environment within which successful and effective coaches work are going to be difficult to
develop and maintain within established student support departments and the overall institutional
culture and environment. Institutions wishing to access the below discussed key coaching assets in
support of retention should consider partnering with an outside professional coaching organization,
or in the alternative, developing a specialized coaching unit within their institution that is
specifically designed to incorporate and optimize the following key coaching elements.
Trust is the Keystone of Successful Coaching Relationships and the Foundation of the
Successful Coaching Organization

One of the key findings from Chapter Four is that the coaches individually and the Inside
Track coaching organization as a whole exhibit high levels of trust. This trust is the basic
foundation of their individual coaching work and it also grounds and centers the organization as a
whole (Table 12 and Figure 8). While some aspects of trust development can and should be built
into the institution-wide strategies and recommendations discussed above, coaching as a promising
retention practice requires extremely high levels of trust and a complex set of supporting individual
and organizational components that are unique and which could prove difficult for institutions to
independently develop and maintain. Lencioni (2002) calls this highest level of trust “vulnerability-
based” trust. “Vulnerability-based trust cannot be achieved overnight. It requires shared experiences
over time, multiple instances of follow-through and credibility, and an in-depth understanding of
the unique attributes of team members” (Lencioni, 2002, p.197). Lencioni further explains that
“achieving vulnerability-based trust is difficult because in the course of career advancement and
education, most successful people learn to be competitive with their peers, and protective of their
“You must have trust to be successful in coaching. It has to be inside the organization and with your
students and it is almost impossible to develop trust with your students if it is lacking in the organization.
So everyone at Inside Track is invested in finding ways to build and develop trust.” Focus Group One
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 162

reputations” and that turning these learned instincts off is difficult even for short time periods or
short term collaborative projects (Lencioni, 2002, p. 196). These key high level trust concepts are at
the core of what institutional administrators need to understand about successful coaching.
Furthermore, institutional leaders need to reflect on if and how they could build a coaching team
with this level of trust when they are contemplating and determining the appropriate strategy for
implementing successful and impactful coaching services at their organization or institution.
Optimized Coaching Culture and Environment
Similar to the discussion above about the difficulty of creating and sustaining a highly
evolved trust based organization that is intentionally optimized to support excellent coaching, the
highly positive, supportive, aligned and role model driven culture and environment of the Inside
Track workplace is going to be difficult to replicate within the institution. As explained in Chapter
Four, Inside Track has developed a culture that incorporates a core intrinsic motivation approach to
coaching that is distinctively value and belief centered. This is achieved through a rigorous and
exhaustive job application process that hires less than five percent of applicants and that can take up
to six months to complete. New coaches are given extensive training throughout the first year that is
augmented by several types of mentoring and formal and informal role models and best practice
demonstrations by the elite level coaches. These hiring practices and formal training elements are
then supported by a strong and supportive network of social and work interactions across all levels of
the organization (Table 25). Developing and sustaining a culture of this type within a large post-
secondary institution could be a difficult and failure to attain the types of cultural and environment
supports detailed in Chapter Four might result in less impactful and beneficial coaching.
In discussing the decade of significant transformation and restructuring of the Rossier
School of Education at the University of Southern California (USC) that began in 2000, Rueda
(2011) explains that defining cultural change and then building the culture and environment to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 163

support the desired model is difficult and requires an extended time period. Transformation
requires committed long-term leadership and a commitment to change on multiple levels, among
multiple constituencies and stakeholders (Rueda, 2011, p 62). Through participating in and
evaluating this ten-year transformation process Rueda (2011) found that “learning, motivation,
and organizational issues can and do interact in complex ways” (p. 66). Further, that “efforts to
change educational organizations are better seem as a cyclical process that occur over time, rather
than a linear process that is over in a short finite time span” (p. 67). Given Rueda’s USC example,
the strenuous and difficult process of hiring, developing, and maintaining a “missional” coaching
corps with the shared empathy and caring belief principles of Inside Track should be a core
consideration for institutions deciding whether to outsource coaching services to an established
and experienced coaching organization or to build their own coaching organization.
Developing and Retaining Highly Effective Coaches
The difficulty of developing highly effective coaches who are self-aware, can monitor and
adjust their coaching to improve outcomes, and are aware of biases, carefully avoiding making
judgements or stereotyping their students cannot be overstated. As explained in Chapter Four, even
when a coach reached the elite or highest coaching classification, usually after a 5- to 8-year period
of progressive promotion through the four lower coaching levels, they were still working hard
developing and fine tuning self-awareness, monitoring and adjusting skills, and systematically
eliminating as much bias and judgement as possible from their coaching. Interview 12 explained,
becoming self-aware of my own communications preferences and tricks while on a
student call took years of practice and training and I still have to work at catching
myself and ensuring that my biases and judgements don’t creep into my coaching.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 164

The tenure and the commitment levels required to develop these high level and important
coaching skills are another important consideration for institutions weighing a decision whether
to outsource coaching services or to develop and build out their own coaching organization.
Summary of Recommendations
The key KMO assets of the coaches that support successful coaching and the corresponding
recommendations for leveraging these key assets across the institution are illustrated in Table 33.
Table 33
Summary of Key Coaching Assets and Corresponding Recommendations
Key Coaching Asset Recommendation
Knowledge and Evaluation of
Student’s Non-Cognitive Skills and
Growth Mindset Levels
Consider using non-cognitive assessment tools such as the
ETS SuccessNavigator®

The Coaches Provide Individually
Tailored Student Support and
Engagement
Increase personalized student support through the use of
counselors and advisors and incorporate career counseling
into admission and program selection decisions. Increase
course persistence through engaged pedagogy and
instructional design strategies that selectively incorporate
Web 2.0 tools
The Coaches Provide Student
Communication and Support that is
Non-Judgmental and Grounded in
Caring and Empathy
Provide training by professional coaches across all student
facing campus units to teach faculty and staff the five key
elements of how to communicate with students in non-
judgmental ways that are based in caring and empathy
The Coaches Provide Timely
Intervention on Behalf of Students,
especially on ‘Gateway Issues’
Remove ‘Gateway Issues’ such as access to course materials
by embedding all course materials within the online course
and by using OER to reduce cost and improve timely and
consistent access
The Coaches Build High Levels of
Trust with their Students and with
Other Members of their Coaching
Organization
Recommend use of an professional coaching organization
with an established track record of success in building
trusting student relationships as well as the ability to
leverage these relationships to improve retention and student
success
The Coaches are Self-Aware. They
Monitor and Adjust their coaching
to Improve Results. They are
Aware of Biases. They Carefully
Avoid Judgements and Stereotypes
Recommend use of an established professional coaching
organization that has a career pathway for coaches so that
elite and experienced coaches have progressively expansive
coaching roles to support retention of experienced coaches
with the high level skill sets
The Coaches Work in a Highly
Developed and Supportive
Coaching Environment
Recommend use of an established professional coaching
organization that is acutely focused on providing extensive
training and on developing and maintaining a culture and
environment that is optimized to support coaching
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 165

Institutional Level Implementation of Coaching Services
This section offers best practices, methods, planning options, and comparison
information for two institutional scenarios for the implementation and utilization of coaching
services. The first implementation scenario is for institutions that want to consider and evaluate
using outside coaching professionals to support their campus or program. The second scenario is
for institutions that are considering and evaluating the development of an internal coaching
department.
Evaluation and Selection of Outsourced Coaching Services
For institutions and programs that want to develop and deliver coaching services with the
goal of increasing program completion and student satisfaction, the recommended and preferred
approach of this study is to use an outsourced contract model to create a partnership with an
established and successful coaching organization. The preferred method for evaluating and
selecting a coaching organization and then awarding a carefully tailored contract is via a formal
Request for Proposal process. The following implementation steps and sample documents are
designed to walk administrators through a formalized RFP driven evaluation and selection
process. The Sample RFP for Coaching Services (Appendix H) was designed and drafted to
comply with California’s open meeting and public procurement requirements but can easily be
tailored to meet the laws of other states and other statutory and/or institutional requirements.
While the coaching services contract will be the main focus of this implementation plan,
smaller related policies and implementations should also be incorporated into the scope of work.
For example, communication protocols and training sessions designed to develop comprehensive
knowledge about the benefits of coaching and the actual coaching services that are available
under the contract will help to promote understanding of the contract and buy-in for the services
across the institution. Another small support project would be the development and
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 166

implementation of active referral pathways to the coaching program among program faculty and
administrative staff. Finally, the internal development of complementary support policies and
services at both the institution and the participating program level will be essential to successful
implementation of the coaching services.
Key Implementation Considerations
Especially at large public institutions, one of the expected impediments to implementation of
an outsourced coaching contract will be the negative perception of a top-down decision to contract
out for coaching services, fear of outsourcing and perceived negative impact on existing campus and
program personnel. At unionized public institutions, proactively addressing union concerns and
negative perceptions about outsourcing will also be a critical component of any early stage
implementation plan and process.
Strategies for Unionized Institutions
For unionized organizations and institutions, one potential pathway to lower resistance to
an outsourced coaching contract might be to think of the coaching contract with an outsource
provider as a “pilot program” that can be implemented quickly. Then, if the outsourced services
prove to be sufficiently successful and impactful, the long-term vision or strategy can be to
develop an internal coaching center within the organization using union personnel and job
classifications. As the research and Chapter Four suggest, developing a highly effective coaching
corps with extensive skills in retention and student success coaching takes years, even within
highly evolved coaching organizations. Therefore, a pilot program utilizing an established
organization that has a strong track record of success will provide access to the needed high level
skill sets and an opportunity to study the impact of the services as well as the opportunity and
ability to study the practicalities of establishing an internal coaching unit within the student
services umbrella of the institution at a later date. Conversely, if the program does not yield
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 167

sufficiently impactful results, the contract can be terminated at the conclusion of the five-year
pilot program term with minimum disruption to existing campus personnel and union classified
jobs.
Budget Considerations
Another consideration is budget capacity to enter into a comprehensive coaching contract
and the long-term ability of the organization to sustain the significant financial commitment to
the program over the term of the contract. As coaching services contracts are expensive, the
budgetary parameters will require extensive and protracted consultation with senior business and
finance leadership at the institution or program level. One budgetary consideration for large and
dispersed systems is to consider paying for the services centrally and waiving any charge backs
to the units using the services. This creates an attractive inducement to participation in the pilot
program and can also help to generate support for the coaching services from participating
programs and campuses.
Leadership Considerations
Implementation of an outsourced coaching contract will require guidance and extensive
work from a strong campus or program leadership team. Selecting and establishing a project
leader well in advance of any public announcement of the project is an important early step in
the implementation process. If existing leadership is to be used to fill this role, review and
possible revision of the individual’s job description may be required. It may also be necessary to
hire or assign sufficient support personnel at both the administrative and professional level to
ensure that project leadership has the capacity and sufficient support to handle all phases of the
project implementation.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 168

Outline of Operational Steps to Implementation of Coaching Services
The California State University, the University of California, and many other public and
private post-secondary educational institutions require that contracts with an annual value of
more than $200,000 go through an open and competitive bid process. As it is likely that a
coaching contract will have an annual cost in access of $200,000, it is highly recommended that
institutions follow a formalized, transparent and inclusive RFP process for the selection of
outsourced coaching services.
The selected project leader(s) should develop the RFP in close consultation with an
assigned leadership team or in consultation with the coaching project’s governing board,
advisory board or other oversight committee. The following steps are designed to provide a
guide or outline to the development of a coaching services RFP.
First, consider including a “Notice of Intent to Propose” in the RFP process. Adding this
element to the timeline can provide the project administrators and the selection panel with a
sense of the number of anticipated responses that will need to be managed and evaluated. If the
“Notice of Intent to Propose” deadline does not yield a sufficient number of responses, it is early
enough in the process that further advertising and circulation of the RFP can be done with
minimal adjustment to the overall RFP schedule. However, filing a Notice of Intent to Propose
should be a recommended step but not a requirement for submitting a RFP response.
Second, set a proposal due date that is at least three weeks after the deadline for the
Notice of Intent to Propose. This provides time during the pendency of the Notice of Intent to
Propose deadline to circulate the RFP as widely as possible to make sure that as many
organizations as possible know about the RFP process and have time to develop full and
thoughtful responses.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 169

Third, within the RFP, proactively set forth all of the dates for interviews, presentations
and possible site visits so that responding companies and organizations can plan to have their key
staff members available on the posted dates.
Fourth, set a deadline for vendor selection that will complement and be close in time to
committee and advisory board meetings that will be addressing and participating in the RFP
process.
Fifth, set a deadline for proposed board action on the contract award in consultation with
the senior staff and stakeholders and ensure that this timeframe is sufficient to give each
stakeholder the necessary time to address the contract in a full and fair way.
Sample Timeline for the RFP and for the Implementation
Below is a sample schedule that incorporates each of the above steps as well as several
others that are required by California open meeting laws or to comply with the California
Education Code or California Public Procurement Regulations. The sample timeline in Table 36
illustrates an expeditious but reasonable implementation timeline.
Table 34
Sample RFP and Implementation Timeline
RFP Event Timeframe
RFP posted on Institution Procurement Website March 1, 20XX
Deadline for Written Public Comment March 15, 20XX
Issuance of the RFP April 1, 20XX
Notice of Intent to Submit a Proposal Due April 26, 20XX
Proposal Due Date May 26, 20XX
Dates for Interviews and Presentations June 29 and 30, 20XX
Dates for Possible Site Visits Week of July 10
th
, 20XX
Deadline for Committee to Recommend a Vendor August Board/Committee Meeting
Recommendation to Award the Contract September Board/Committee Meeting
Presentation of Selected Vendor to the Board October Board/Committee Meeting
Board/Committee Action on the Contract: November Board/Committee Meeting

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 170

Table 34, continued
RFP Event Timeframe
Two Pilot Programs being to Offer Coaching Spring Semester/Term
Continue to Rollout Coaching Services to
Additional Programs
Summer and Fall Semesters or Terms
Full Complement of Coaching Services (All
Programs & Students)
Spring Term/Semester of Following
Year

Sample RFP for Coaching Services
A sample RFP for coaching services to support and improve undergraduate retention and
student success incorporating the above sample timeline is included as Appendix H. The sample
RFP has been developed to address and comply with various California open meeting laws and
California Public Procurement Regulations but the form template can be easily revised and
updated to meet various state and local regulations.
Approval Steps and Considerations
The above sample RFP schedule includes a public comment process. This type of notice and
comment process period may be required for public institutions; but, it is recommended that all
institutions consider using this type of comment and discussion process begin to introduce the
coaching project across the campus and to help to gauge reaction across various stakeholders within
the institution. It is also an opportunity for the governing board or the committee that is sponsoring
the project to shape the public debate around the project and to introduce carefully crafted talking
points to the campus community. These public comment discussions can take several forms but one
suggested approach is to conduct several town hall style meetings across the system as well as
informal meet and confer meetings with union groups or other specially affected stakeholders.
Staffing the RFP Selection Committee
The project leader in consultation with the sponsoring advisory board or committee should
develop a list of proposed invitees to serve on the RFP selection committee. The official invitation to
sit on the selection committee should come from the Chair of the Committee or Advisory Board that
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 171

is sponsoring the project. It is recommended that the project leader chair the selection committee and
the selection panel should be large enough to include key stakeholder groups but small enough to
operate effectively. A panel size of from 7 to 15 members is recommended.
Meeting and Conferring with Union Groups
If the institution is unionized, then project leadership in close consultation with the Labor
Relations Office should proactively invite all affected union groups to meet and confer on the
proposed outsource contract for coaching services. In consultation with Labor Relations and the
Office of the General Counsel, project leadership should develop a presentation to the union
leadership outlining the proposed contract. As mentioned above, one strategy to consider is to
utilize the five-year outsource contract as a “pilot study” during which the institution will
determine the effectiveness of coaching as a student support and its impact on retention. If year-
one through year-three results from the pilot study demonstrate the desired increases in retention,
then the institution can use the remaining two years of the contract to transition to an internal
coaching organization utilizing unionized personnel. If the policy does not yield sufficiently
impactful results, the contract will be terminated with as little impact as possible on union
membership and union job classifications.
Leadership and Staffing of the Selection Process and the Implementation Project
Job descriptions for the senior staff member that will spearhead the project will need to be
revised to include the project leadership role. In consultation with human resources leadership,
salary adjustments should be considered to secure retention of this staff member through the entire
implementation process and project timeline. New positions at the administrative and the
professional level should be considered based on the scope and size of the contract
implementation. The work and job descriptions of these support positions should also be drafted or
updated to reflect the new initiative.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 172

Project Leadership at the Campus or Program Level
To support the implementation, each participating program should appoint a coaching
project representative. The project leaders should conduct monthly implementation meetings or
conference calls to brief the campus and program representatives on the status of the initiative.
The campus or program representatives will be responsible for educating around and supporting
the coaching initiative across their respective campus or program. The campus or program
representative should attend any formal kick-off seminars or events for the coaching services and
should be invited to attend a day-long visit of the selected coaching operation. In conjunction
with program leadership and the new coaching service, the program representatives will be
instrumental in developing and implementing the plan for how each program will utilize the
coaching service within their existing program and enrollment structure.
Internal Marketing and Education Campaigns to Support the Implementation
The project leader should develop an internal system-wide marketing and education
program around the initiative to help generate support for the initiative from participating
programs and campuses. The plan should include a variety of programs scheduled over the first
year of the project to educate existing campuses personnel and programs about the benefits of
student retention coaching. The programs should highlight the distinctions between retention
coaching and other student support services that are currently provided at the campus or the
program level. The education initiatives should also include a plan and training around how each
program will utilize the coaching service within their program structure.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 173

Scenario 2: Designing and Developing a Coaching Unit at the Institution
The principle recommendation of this study is that institutions wishing to implement
coaching services use an outside professional coaching organization rather than attempt to develop
and build an internal coaching team or unit within the program or institution. However, there may
be political, organizational or financial reasons why institutions want to develop their own coaching
units or departments. For institutions facing one or more of these types of situations or that have a
specific leadership directive to design and develop an internal coaching unit, below are some
important recommendations and considerations based on the findings of the study:
First, seek professional support and guidance in the design and development of the new
coaching unit or department. Recognizing that some institutions may prefer to develop their own
coaching services or coaching departments inside their institutions or within their student
services models, Inside Track offers a variety of strategic planning, program design and staff
training programs to help institutions set up and develop their own coaching services (Inside
Track, 2016). Inside Track can also provide readiness assessments to help determine when initial
services should be made available and they can help institutional leadership develop reasonable
expectations for results based on the skill sets and roster sizes of the coaches. Leveraging the
expertise of Inside Track, another professional coaching organization, or the International
Federation of Coaches will also help to insure that the new coaching unit or department meets or
exceeds the established ethical guidelines and professional standards for coaches. Partnering with
an established provider will also provide resources and expertise to guide you through options
and decision making as you envision and begin to develop your own unit. Because training and
quality assurance are critical to coaching success, bringing experts into the process of developing
the coaching job description, the recruiting and hiring process as well as new hire training is
strongly recommended.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 174

Second, the importance of assessing non-cognitive skills and “mindset” and developing
an approach to nurturing should be represented across all aspects of your coaching work. As
detailed throughout Chapter Four, developing student’s non-cognitive skills and nurturing a
growth mindset are critical aspects of successful coaching (Table 9). Developing a method for
quickly and effectively assessing a student’s non-cognitive skill level and mindset should be a
central component of the project. As discussed above, consider using the ETS
SuccessNavigator® Assessment or leveraging faculty with subject matter expertise to design and
develop a proprietary assessment of key soft skills. Once a method for assessing soft skills is
determined, developing an extensive approach to cultivating and improving these skills in
students will be important. Finally, providing coaches with extensive training, knowledge, skills
and resources around these non-cognitive and growth mindset variables will be critical.
Third, use data and analytics to inform, support and enhance coaching efficiency and
effectiveness. An important element of Inside Track’s coaching success is the effective and
efficient utilization of its proprietary technology tools that are designed to harvest and display
institution specific data points. The technology elements that Inside Track has developed are
“typically out of reach for individual colleges and institutions” (Bettinger & Baker, 2011, p. 2).
However, effective May 2016, Inside Track began to license its “uCoach” technology platform
directly to institutions. The uCoach platform enables users to collect and utilize a broad set of
coaching specific data points that are institutional specific and can be customized by program and
other relevant subsets (Inside Track, 2016). The system can be used to design, develop and deliver
automated email and text messages to students as well as “nudges” or prompts about upcoming
assignment due dates and deadlines. It also includes a library of interactive coaching content,
videos, and off-the-shelf mobile apps (Inside Track, 2016). The system also tracks student progress
and helps to deploy the right levels of coaching interventions for each student. “It also supports
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 175

prioritization of coaching and student interventions through adaptive roster management, which
combines unique scoring algorithms, alert monitoring, and intervention triggers” (Inside Track
website, 2016). Students can message back and forth with their coaches through the system and
schedule coaching sessions as well as “access a library of interactive support modules on topics
ranging from admissions processes to career readiness” (Inside Track, 2016). For institutions that
wish to develop their own coaching units, having this type of coaching specific back office system
and structure around which a coaching model can be built will prove invaluable.
Fourth, design, build and sustain a supportive coaching environment and culture built on
trust. As discussed throughout Chapter Four, and especially in Tables 28, 29, 30 and 31 and the
accompanying text, an optimal environment for successful coaching is built on a strong and deep
foundation of trust that permeates all levels of the organization. This key trust component is
complemented by the other Lencioni (2002) elements of attention to results, high levels of
accountability and commitment, and the ability of the organization to express and resolve
conflict without fear of reprisal or negative consequences. Establishing a trusting environment
must be at the core of the project and should be a focal point for all significant and strategic
decision making in the start-up phase. Once the trusting organization is created, consistently
nurturing and supporting this trust must be a central element of leadership’s philosophy and
operational approach. Further, leadership should consider intentionally developing a flat
organization and avoiding top down reporting structures and rule making while enhancing and
supporting collaborative decision making structures. Organic processes that allow and encourage
participation in the leadership of the organization and in decision making across all levels of the
organization should be supported.
Fifth, recruit, train and retain coaches with the core values and beliefs of caring and
empathy. As discussed throughout the Motivation and Organization sections of Chapter Four, as
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 176

a group the coaches share core values and beliefs of caring, empathy, and desiring to help others
and be of service as well as a commitment to improvement and excellence. Inside Track has an
exhaustive application and interview process that screens for these values and beliefs, and then,
intentionally develops these elements through extensive training of first-year coaches. As much
as possible a similar application, interview, and training process should be developed for the
coaching unit. Further, these key elements should be central to the hiring of coaches, managers,
administrators, and any other staff members that will work within the unit. Extensive use of
mentoring and role models should also be built into the training and development programs for
the unit. Finally, all members of the coaching unit, from coaches to administrators and support
staff must be singularly focused on the service and support of the individual students. The entire
staff and coaching unit must share a singular vision with a culture that treasures these core values
and beliefs of the coaches.
While some institutions may initially favor the creation of a coaching unit within the
student services division of the institution, based on the Chapter Four findings around the skill
levels and the guiding values and beliefs of highly successful coaches as well as the unique
organizational environment and culture of a successful coaching organization, this option should
be considered judiciously. Institutions that select this option will surely face a set of difficult
challenges as they work to design and develop institution specific coaching units and then support
them for ongoing success. Further, it is likely that initial results from an internal coaching corps
will lag behind results from established outside professional coaching organizations. And finally,
while this study does not address the comparative costs of coaching services through an outsourced
vendor contract versus a stand-alone institutional unit, institutional leaders should complete
extensive evaluation of costs and expected return on investment studies before committing to
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 177

designing and developing an internal coaching unit, especially if the institution has not previously
worked with a professional coaching company.
Evaluating the Quality and Impact of Coaching Services After Implementation
Assessment and evaluation is the final important step in the implementation process (Clark
& Estes, 2008). In order to determine the extent to which the coaching services that have been
implemented are impacting retention, a comprehensive assessment combined with thoughtful
analysis of the assessment data must be undertaken on a regular and continuous cycle. The
recommendation is to use the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) four-level assessment model to
evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the selected coaching program and coaching services once
they are implemented.
Level One: Measuring Reactions to Coaching
The first of the four Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) levels measures participants’
reactions to the coaching services and it also provides an initial measure of the motivation levels
of the students as well as insight into what the student has learned from the coaching sessions. In
addition, it assesses the extent to which this learning will improve course and program
persistence. The recommendation for assessing level one reactions to the coaching program
using the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) methodology is to utilize the 11-question survey
described in Table 37. The survey includes six Likert scale questions and five short answer
questions. As the recommendation of the implementation plan is to provide three consecutive
terms of coaching to all new, readmitted or returning students that are enrolled in online degree
completion programs, the student survey of coaching should be launched at the end of the
student’s third term.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 178

Level Two: Assessing Student Learning
The second of the four Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) levels measures participants’
“learning.” The recommendation for assessing “Level Two Learning” from the provided
coaching services is to utilize a pre and post coaching assessment of the student’s non-cognitive
and growth mindset skill levels. This Level Two assessment requires a set of baseline data
measures for each student’s skill and preparedness level; therefore, it is recommended that all
students take the ETS “Success Navigator® Assessment” as part of the readmission process or
prior to enrolling in their first course. This online assessment is designed to “assess essential
post-secondary preparedness skills directly related to academic success and retention” (ETS,
2016).
As most students will receive coaching only during their first three terms in the program
or for three terms after readmission, the “Success Navigator® Assessment” post-test should be
deployed at the conclusion of the student’s third term in the program. Comparison of pre and
post assessment scores along with the grades that the student received during the first three terms
should provide insight into what was learned during and as a result of coaching. These pre and
post assessment scores in comparison with grades can also assist faculty and administrators in
making determinations about continuing coaching or perhaps increasing the level of coaching
and other student support services for students who continue to be at risk of non-retention at the
end of the third term.
Level Three: Assessing Transfer of Knowledge and Skills
The third of the four Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) levels measures the level of
transfer of knowledge and skills as well as the behavior changes that are attributable to the
program. This assessment will reveal whether, as a result of the three terms of coaching, the
student learned new skills and behaviors or reinforced existing behaviors, skill sets, and
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 179

knowledge critical to their success. The Level Three assessment will also determine whether the
student will be able to continue to apply and develop these important student success elements
once the coaching sessions have concluded. The Level Three assessment requires a three-part
strategy regarding when the Level Three data should be collected, how often behavior changes
should be evaluated and the best method for collecting the behavior change data (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2006). For online degree completion programs that are designed as short, streamlined
pathways to graduation for upper division readmission students, the recommendation is to
conduct a single Level Three assessment; for programs that are designed to be of longer duration,
two Level Three assessments are recommended.
In order to assess behavior changes for the student related to the coaching services, the
Level Three assessment should take place at the end of the second term after the conclusion of
coaching, which is likely the fifth term in the program for the student. The preferred method for
collecting the Level Three data is a short anonymous survey that is embedded within the student’s
online course. To ensure an extremely high response rate, it is recommended that the survey be
set up within the learning management system so that it “pops up” prior to the final assignment
and further that the student must submit the survey in order to see the prompt that enables
submission of the final assignment. The suggested Level Three survey, as shown in Table 35,
utilizes five Likert scale questions and a single open-ended question so that results can easily be
aggregated and sorted by variables such as instructor, program, class, and term within a simple
searchable data base.
Level Four: Assessing Results and Impact
The last of the four Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) levels measures the results and
impact of the program. While Clark and Estes (2008) found that Level 4 assessment is the most
difficult level to assess and often requires expansive work that is expensive, the recommendation
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 180

for the initial program-wide assessment is to use a simple comparison of program retention rates
and a single benchmark goal to evaluate impact and results. As detailed in Chapter Two, two
studies of Inside Track coaching found that a five percentage point increase in retention can be
attained through the addition of comprehensive coaching services (Bettinger & Baker 2013;
Brahm, 2006). While there are no studies specifically addressing retention increases in online
degree completion programs due to coaching, the recommendation is to use a five percentage
point increase as the benchmark goal for the initial assessment cycle. The first comprehensive
assessment of the impact of the coaching services should take place at the three-year mark and
continue annually thereafter.
For institutions that do show meaningful retention increases or that meet the five
percentage point increase benchmark, the challenge is to determine how much of the measured
retention increase is due to coaching or to other retention initiatives that were underway or that
overlapped the relevant time period (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2006). Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2006) explain that this is a difficult task and that delineations of this nature are often
impossible to ascertain; however, the level four data should be used to inform and confirm the
data from the level-one through level-three assessments. If the four stages of the assessment
when viewed as a whole illustrate a consistent pattern, this is likely the best evidence available of
individual program impact (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Similarly, inconsistent data from
the four levels may indicate that the data is less trustworthy. However, when the data from the
four assessments are studied as a whole, the assessment process should provide program
leadership with the information that they need to make informed decisions about the future of
coaching services within the organization.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 181

Table 35
Assessing Coaching Using the Kirkpatrick Four-Level Assessment Model
Level One
Reactions
Level Two
Learning
Level Three
Behavior
Level Four
Results
Measure reactions at the
conclusion of the student’s
3rd term of enrolled
student coaching using an
anonymous online survey
containing closed-ended
Likert scale and open-
ended questions.
Prior to admission
or enrollment in the
first course all
students take the
ETS “Success
Navigator®
Assessment.”
Measure behavior
changes at the conclusion
of the student’s 2nd term
after coaching services
have concluded using an
online survey containing
5 closed-ended Likert
scale questions and a
single open-ended
question.
Compare overall
program retention
rates before coaching
with retention rates
three years after the
implementation of
coaching services.
Likert Scale Questions Likert Scale Questions
To what extent were the
coaching sessions helpful
for you?
To what extent did you
apply things that you
learned/discussed during
your coaching sessions to
this class? Please provide
an example of a coaching
concept you applied in
this class.

To what extent did you
find the coaching sessions
engaging?
To what extent did the
coaching sessions you
received during your first
three terms help you to
address and overcome
challenges and obstacles
to completing this class?
Benchmark goal for
the initial program
assessment is a five
percentage point
increase in program
retention.

To what extent were the
coaching sessions relevant
to your coursework?
To what extent did the
coaching sessions you
received during your first
three terms impact your
confidence in this class?

To what extent did the
coaching sessions help
you to address challenges
and obstacles to
completing your class?
At the conclusion
of the third term
all students re-
take the “Success
Navigator®
Assessment.”
To what extent did the
coaching sessions you
received during your first
3 terms make you a more
successful student in this
class? Please provide an
example.
Assess how much of
the retention increase
is due to coaching or
to other retention
initiatives but looking
at the consistency or
lack thereof of the data
across the four
assessment levels.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 182

Table 35, continued
Level One
Reactions
Level Two
Learning
Level Three
Behavior
Level Four
Results
To what extent did the
coaching sessions
motivate you to improve
your performance in class
To what extent did the
coaching sessions you
received during your first
three terms impact your
grades on assignments in
this class? Please provide
an example

To what extent would you
recommend coaching
services to other students?

Open-Ended Questions Open-Ended Question
What coaching topics
were most relevant to
you?

Compare pre and
post-test scores
for insight into
what was learned
during and as a
result of
coaching.
What did you learn from
your coaching sessions
that was helpful during
this class?

What issues or
discussions were
particularly engaging for
you?

What did you like most
about your coach?

What did you like most
about the coaching
sessions?

What, if anything, did
you dislike about you
coach?

What, if anything, did
you dislike about the
coaching sessions?

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 183

Future Research
The obvious limitation and major drawback of coaching is that it is extremely expensive
because it relies on a one-on-one relationship with the student that is developed over time and
that is extremely difficult to leverage or scale. In an attempt to address the significant financial
barrier for the use of coaching services, Inside Track is trying to leverage technology to help
coaches reach more students. The coaches are beginning to develop strategies to move certain
types of students to peripheral or more technology driven coaching, such as sending texts to
students at regular intervals to support and encourage them with reminders about assignments or
important due dates. The coaches are also starting to use multi-channel coaching through web-
based applications such as Facebook and other texting, virtual or real time technology services.
Additional research is necessary to understand the effectiveness, impact, and limitations of these
new coaching channels and strategies.
Another area for future study is the integration of career coaching early in the application
and admission process. While there are studies on the use of career coaching in the field of
nursing, a better understanding of the use of career coaching within online degree completion
programs would be an informative study. Research into the effectiveness of early career
coaching might help institutions offering degree completion programs to develop or tailor
strategies to recruit, admit, and retain students with increased likelihoods of persistence as well
as to improve career expectations and satisfaction among eventual graduates.
Finally, given the key findings of this study around the importance of non-cognitive skills
and growth mindset development, further study and additional development efforts around
effectively assessing these skills and then measuring improvement over time in these areas is
needed. While further development by ETS around its SuccessNavigator® Assessment will be
helpful and should lead to utilization of this type of assessment in other areas such as workforce
development and career satisfaction, further independent academic study of the ETS tool would
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 184

be useful to inform the various non-cognitive and growth mindset elements and how to coach for
improvement and support of these concepts.
Conclusion
Low undergraduate retention rates are a persistent problem across a wide range of
American post-secondary institutions. Despite significant and ongoing efforts to increase them,
higher education completion rates have remained relatively unchanged for the last 15 years and it
is a consistent fact that half of all undergraduate students do not earn a baccalaureate degree
within five years of initial enrollment (ACT, 2016). For students who return to school after a
hiatus, graduation rates are markedly lower, with approximately one-third of NFT students
graduating within four years of readmission (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014). For
NFT students attempting to complete their baccalaureate degree in an online degree completion
program, graduation rates are even lower, though the exact national figure is unknown. Failure
to address these poor retention rates generally and the lowest overall retention rates of online
degree completion programs specifically will ensure the continuation of social inequality, limited
options for social transformation, and a widening educational divide between traditional and
non-traditional students.
The ineffectiveness of institution based retention efforts has led researchers to conclude
that retention solutions are more likely to come from comprehensive re-examination of the status
quo and from looking outside the institution for new approaches (Bettinger & Baker, 2013;
Bosworth, 2006; Kelly & Schneider, 2012). This led some institutions to consider and to begin
utilizing individualized professional coaching services to assist in the retention of certain
segments of students. In December of 2014, based on the Bettinger and Baker (2013) study of
Inside Track coaching and several other data points, the U.S. Government acknowledged that
Inside Track coaching showed the most promise for making meaningful improvement in
undergraduate retention (IES, 2014). Given these indicators, this promising practice study was
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 185

undertaken to improve the understanding of the key assets of professional retention coaches
generally and to improve the understanding of how coaching impacted retention generally and
online degree completion retention specifically.
While the role and perspective of all of the stakeholders in the coaching process are
important to understanding coaching and its impact on retention, this study sought to
understand coaching through the lens of the coach and how these coaches are effective in
improving individual student retention. This study used the Clark and Estes (2008) analysis
framework with superimposed assessment overlays from Patrick Lencioni’s (2002) elements of
functional teams and Edgar Schein’s (2004) approach to defining, categorizing, and assessing
how organizational culture positively affects coaching performance. Using these three
complimentary analytical approaches the following questions were explored and studied:
1. What knowledge, motivation and organizational assets do the Inside Track coaches have
that contribute to increased online course and program completion rates?
2. What solutions and recommendations in the areas of knowledge, motivation and
organizational resources do the Inside Track coaches have that may be appropriate for
solving this problem of practice at another academic organization or institution?
Data was collected at the Inside Track coaching centers in Portland, Oregon, and
Nashville, Tennessee, as well as through remote meetings during October and November 2015.
Data collection took place through interviews of 12 elite coaches and two short interviews of the
coaching center manager at each location, four focus groups, observations at each coaching
center and a document analysis of the Coach Leveling Criteria. The findings were analyzed and
triangulated using the “Coach Leveling Criteria” rubric document as the fixed point of the
analysis from November 2015 until February 2016.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 186

Through a literature review focused on retention data, the reasons behind low retention
and recommendations for improving retention rates, 11 assumed knowledge assets, 6 assumed
motivational assets and 7 assumed organizational assets were identified. In total, the study
looked at 24 assumed assets of the outstanding retention coach and in the process one new
conceptual knowledge asset was identified and then validated. Of the 24 assumed assets of the
outstanding retention coach, 22 were validated. With the addition of the one new validated
conceptual knowledge asset there were a total of 23 validated coaching assets. From these 23
validated assets, 6 key assets were selected as the most critical to understanding excellent
coaching and its impact on retention. Recommendations for improving retention and for
addressing various types of retention issues were developed based on these 6 key coaching
elements.
The key findings showed that the most important assets of successful coaching are that
the coaches (a) know when and how to develop non-cognitive skills and growth mindset
concepts with their students; (b) share the core value and belief of empathy that enhances
student retention and success; (c) focus on tailoring their coaching to each student’s specific
needs; (d) individually, and the organization as a whole, exhibit high levels of trust and that
this trust is the foundation of individual coaching work and the organization as a whole; (e) are
self-aware, monitor, and adjust their coaching to improve results, along with being aware of
their biases in order to carefully avoid making judgements or stereotyping their students; and
(f) work in a highly positive, supportive, well aligned, and role model driven culture and
environment.
The primary recommendation of the study for institutions that want to consider
evaluating professional coaching to support their campus or program is to partner with an
experienced professional coaching organization, such as Inside Track, to provide coaching
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 187

services through an outsourced vendor model. The alternative, less attractive and more difficult,
recommended scenario is the development of an internal coaching department within the
institution. In addition to these two scenarios, Chapter Five presents a set of more generalized
recommendations designed to help institutions address a variety of retention challenges by
incorporating key coaching elements across the institution.
The primary recommendation of the study, to use an established professional coaching
service through a outsourced partnership contract, was developed because many of the most
important assets of successful coaching, such as trust, developing highly effective coaches, and
the optimized and unique environment within which successful and effective coaches work, are
very difficult to develop and maintain within established student support departments and the
overall institutional culture and environment. The difficulty of developing highly effective
coaches who are self-aware, can monitor and adjust their coaching to improve results, are aware
of biases, and are carefully avoiding making judgements and/or stereotyping their students
cannot be overstated.
Finally, in order to determine the extent to which the coaching services that have been
implemented are impacting retention, a comprehensive assessment combined with thoughtful
analysis of the assessment data must be undertaken on a regular and continuous cycle. The
recommendation is to use the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) four-level assessment model
to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the selected coaching program and coaching services
once they are implemented. A four-part coaching assessment program based on this model is
included in Chapter Five.
While limitations in the design of this study, and especially the focus on a single
coaching provider, impact the applicability of the findings, the recommendations and solutions
identified throughout Chapter Five have broad implications across a wide range of post-
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 188

secondary institutions that are looking for options and programs to increase student retention and
student satisfaction. The recommendations also seek to address both incremental approaches to
improving retention, such as increasing personalized student support through counselors and
advisors and developing institution-wide training around all types of student communications
and interactions as well as specific approaches to the implementation of comprehensive coaching
services. Institutions can select one or more incremental approaches to improving retention or
choose to work on a more comprehensive coaching service implementation based on the needs of
their unique programs and institutions. Moreover, by expanding their understanding of the key
components of excellent retention coaching, educational leaders will be able to positively affect
and inform change across a wide variety of retention projects and across the full complement of
university-wide student support services.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 189

References
Autor, D. H. (2014, May 23). Skills, education, and the rise of the earnings inequality among the “other
99 percent.” Science, 344(6186), 843-851. doi: 10.1126/science.1251868
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014, January). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United
States 2014. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradechange.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2015, February). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United
States 2015. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradechange.pdf
American College Test. (2016). College student retention and graduation rates from 2000
through 2015 [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/reports/graduation.html
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged ed.). New
York, NY: Longman.
Asbaugh, M. L. (2013). Leadership from ID (instructional design) for web 2.0 adoption:
Appropriate use of emerging technologies in online courses. In C. Wankel & P.
Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing Student Engagement and Retention in e-Learning
Environments: Web 2.0 and Blended Learning Technologies, (Vol. 6G). Bingley, UK:
Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). The changing face of psychology at the dawning of a globalization
era. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 42(1), 12-24. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0086876
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st
century learning. New York, NY: Rutledge Publishers.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 190

Bettinger, E., Long, B. T., Oreopoulos, P., & Sanbonmatsu, L. (2012). The role of application
assistance and information in college decisions: Results from the H&R Block FAFSA
experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(3). Retrieved from
http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=bridget_long&pageid=icb.page547524
Bettinger, E. P., & Baker, R. B. (2013). The effects of student coaching: An evaluation of a
randomized experiment in student advising. Retrieved from http://www.insidetrack.com/
wp-content/uploads/2014/09/aera-educational-evaluation-policy-analysis.pdf
Blessinger, P., & Wankel, C. (2013). Novel approaches in higher education: An introduction to
web 2.0 and blended learning technologies. In C. Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.),
Increasing Student Engagement and Retention in e-Learning Environments: Web 2.0 and
Blended Learning Technologies, (Vol. 6G). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing
Limited.
Boles, E., Cass, B., Levin, C., Schroeder, R. E., & Smith, S. M. (2010). Sustaining students: Retention
strategies in an online program. Retrieved from
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/sustaining-students-retention-strategies-online-program
Borkowski, J. G., Carr, M., Relliger, E., & Pressley, M. (1990). Self-regulated cognition:
Interdependence of metacognition, attributions, and self-esteem. In B. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.),
Dimensions of Thinking and Cognitive Instruction, (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bosworth, C. R. (2006). Coaching online students to persist (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Information and Learning Company. (3251453)
Bound, J., Lovenheim, M. F., & Turner, S. (2010, July). Why have college completion rates declined?
An analysis of changing student preparation and collegiate resources. American Economic
Journal, 2(3), 129-57. doi: 10.3386/w15566.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 191

Brahm, G. (2006). Students with staying power. Retrieved from http://www.nacubo.org/ Business_
Officer_Magazine/Magazine_Archives/June_2006/Students_With_Staying_Power.html
Bridges, W. (2009). Managing transitions: Making the most of change (3
rd
ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Da
Capo Press.
Burkhardt, M. S., Gower, S., Flavell, H., & Taplin, J. (2015, December). Engagement and creation of
professional identity in undergraduate nursing students: A convention-style orientation event.
Journal of Nursing Education, 54(12), 712-715. Retrieved from
http://www.healio.com/nursing/journals/jne/2015-11-54-12/%7B1775b1e8-d5b2-4f44-a4ae-
605c2f8693cb%7D/engagement-and-creation-of-professional-identity-in-undergraduate-
nursing-students-a-convention-style-orientation-event
The California State University (2012). Analytic studies statistical reports. [Data file]. Retrieved
from: http://www.calstate.edu/as/stat_reports/2012-2013/index.shtml.
The California State University. (2016). Home page. Retrieved from
https://www.calstateonline.net/
Carnevale, A. P. (2012, July 2). The great sorting. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/The-Great-Sorting/132635/
Carnevale, A. P., Jayasundera, T. & Cheah, B. (2012). The college advantage: Weathering the
economic storm. Retrieved from https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2014/11/CollegeAdvantage.ExecutiveSummary.081412.pdf.
Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N. & Strohl, J. (2013). Recovery: Job growth and education
requirements through 2020. Retrieved from https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2014/11/Recovery2020.FR_.Web_.pdf.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 192

Carnevale, A. P. & Rose, S. J. (2015). The economy goes to college: The hidden promise of
higher education in the post-industrial service economy. Retrieved from
https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/EconomyGoesToCollege.pdf.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results turning research into results: A
guide to selecting the right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Christensen, C. M. (2003). The innovator's dilemma: The revolutionary book that will change
the way you do business. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Complete College America. (October, 2011). Time is the Enemy. Retrieved from
http://completecollege.org/docs/Time_Is_the_Enemy.pdf.
Cook, B. & Pullaro, N. (2010). College graduation rates: Behind the numbers. Retrieved from
https://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/College-Graduation-Rates-Behind-the-
Numbers.pdf.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative
review. Annual Review Psychology, 51, 171-200.
Daly, M. C. & Cao, Y. (2014, April). The Federal Bank of San Francisco annual report: Does
college matter? Retrieved from
http://sffededucation.org/annualreport2014/files/2014%20Annual%20Report.pdf.
Dembo, M. H., & Seli, H. (2008). Motivation and learning strategies for college success: A
focus on self-regulated learning. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor.
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Distinguishing
effortful persistence from conscientiousness. Journal of Individual Differences, 36(4),
205-214. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000175
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Ballentine Books
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 193

Dyer, J., Gregersen, H. B., & Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator's DNA: Mastering the
five skills of disruptive innovators. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology, 53, 109.
Elliot, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.
Farkas, K. (2014, October 8). Adults who re-enroll in college often don’t graduate. Northeast Ohio
Media Group. Retrieved from http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/10/
adults_who_re-enroll_in_colleg.html
Farrow, R., Pitt, R., de los Arcos, B., Perryman, L., Weller, M., & McAndrew, P. (2015, June 12).
Impact of OER use on teaching and learning: Data from OER Research Hub (2013–2014).
British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 972–976.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56.
Ginder-Vogel, K. (2012, October 19). Committed to online student success: Providing coaching
to help students succeed [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.insidetrack.com/
committed-to-online-student-success-providing-coaching-to-help-students-suc/
Goldrick-Rab, S. (2010). Challenges and Opportunities for Improving Community College Student
Success. Review of Educational Research. 80: 437DOI: 10.3102/0034654310370163
Retrieved from http://knowledgecenter.completionbydesign.org/sites/default
/files/75%20Goldrick-Rab-2010.pdf
Grove, A. (2015). Best six-year graduation rates: 23 colleges and universities with the best six-
year graduation rates. About Education. Retrieved from
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 194

http://collegeapps.about.com/od/collegerankings/tp/Best-Six-Year-Graduation-
Rates.01.htm
Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2001). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical
issue for the 21
st
century. Review of Educational Resources, 70, 151-180.
Hill, C. (2010). Faculty focus special report: Strategies for increasing online student retention
and satisfaction. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/free-reports/strategies-for-
increasing-online-student-retention-and-satisfaction/
Holder, B. (2007). An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as
predictors of persistence in higher education online programs. Internet & Higher
Education, 10(4), 245-260. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.08.002.
Ice, P., Díaz, S., Swan, K., Burgess, M., Sharkey, M., Sherrill, J., … & Okimoto, H. (2012,
June). The par framework proof of concept: Initial findings from a multi-institutional
analysis of federated postsecondary data. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks.
16 (3), 63.
Igbo, I. N., Straker, K. C., Landson, M. J., Symes, L., Bernard, L. F., Hughes, L. A., & Carroll,
T. L. (2011). An innovative, multidisciplinary strategy to improve retention of nursing
students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Nursing Education Perspectives, 32(6), 375.
Inside Track Website. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.insidetrack.com/
Inside Track. (2016). Inside Track makes uCoach® Platform available to college and university
clients. Retrieved from http://www.insidetrack.com/2016/04/18/insidetrack-makes-
ucoach-platform-available-college-university-clients-2/
Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Website (2014). What works clearinghouse. Retrieved
from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 195

International Coach Federation. (2015). Home page. Retrieved from
http://www.coachfederation.org/
Kantrowitz, M. (2015). The smart guide to financial aid: Defaulting on student loans. FinAid
Page, LLC. Retrieved from http://www.finaid.org/loans/default.phtml
Karim, M. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2013). Controlling engagement: The effects of learner control
on engagement and satisfaction. In C. Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing Student
Engagement and Retention in e-learning Environments: Web 2.0 and Blended Learning
Technologies (175 – 197). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Kelly, A. P. & Schneider, M. (2012). Getting to graduation: The completion agenda in higher
education. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Laureate International Universities Website. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.laureate.net/.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. New York, NY: Jossey-
Bass.
Lotkowski, V. A., Robbins, S. B. & Noeth, R. J. (2004). The role of academic and non-academic
factors in improving college retention. Retrieved from
https://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/college_retention.pdf.
Lumina Foundation. (2015). A stronger nation through higher education. Retrieved from
http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications
Malik, K. (2013). Engaging learners as moderators in an online management course. In C.
Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing Student Engagement and Retention in e-
learning Environments: Web 2.0 and Blended Learning Technologies (59-82). Bingley,
UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 196

Markle, R., & Robbins, S. (2013). SuccessNavigator® Assessment: Improving course placement
decisions. Retrieved from
https://www.ets.org/research/policy_research_reports/publications/report/2013/jspf
Markle, R., Brenneman, M., Jackson, T., Burrus, J., & Robbins, S. (2013, December). Synthesizing
frameworks of higher education student learning outcomes. ETS Research Report Series, Vol.
2013(2), i–37.
Markle, R., & O'Banion, T. (2014). Assessing Affective Factors to Improve Retention and Completion.
Retrieved from
http://www.ets.org/research/policy_research_reports/publications/article/2014/jtgd
Martin, A. & Lehren, A. W. (2012, May 12). A generation hobbled by the soaring cost of
college. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/business/student-loans-weighing-down-a-
generation-with-heavy-debt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, R. (2011). Vygotsky in perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Müller, T. F. (2007). Factors affecting persistence of women in online degree-completion programs
(Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest Information and Learning Company. (UMI Number:
3264269)
Müller, T. F. (2008). Persistence of women in online degree completion programs. International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2), 1 - 2. ISSN: 1492-3831 Retrieved
from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/455/1069
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 197

NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education. (2014). National study of non-first-
time students shows disturbing completion rates. [News Release]. Retrieved from:
NASPALowestGradRatesNonFirstTimeOct2013.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014, May). The condition of education. Institutional
retention and graduation rates for undergraduate students. [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cva.asp
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. (2016). Persistence and
completion: Graduation rates. [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://www.higheredinfo.org/dbrowser/index.php?submeasure=27&year=2009&level=na
tion&mode=data&state=0#/-1/
Nistor, N., & Neubauer, K. (2010). From participation to dropout: Quantitative participation patterns in
online university courses. Computers & Education, 55(2), 663-672.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.026
OER Research Hub. (2014). Building understanding of open education. OER Evidence Report 2013 –
2014. Retrieved from https://oerresearchhub.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/oerrh-evidence-
report-2014.pdf
Parkay, C. & Kilgore, W. (2014). Insights on retention of adult students entering open-enrollment 2
and 4-year institutions with prior credit. Retrieved from http://www.insidetrack.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/12/insidetrack-aacrao-sem-2014-nft-student-study.pdf?81c193
Parsloe, E., & Leedham, M. (2009). Coaching and mentoring: Practical methods to improve
learning (2
nd
ed.). London, GBR: Kogan Page Ltd.
Pfeffer, F. T., & Hertel, F. R. (2014, March). How educational expansion shaped social mobility
trends in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/pdf/rr14-
817.pdf
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 198

Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components
of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Regier, P. (2014, September 15). Using technology to engage the non-traditional student.
Retrieved from: http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/using-technology-engage-
nontraditional-student
Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., & Rollett, W. (2000). Motivation and action in self-regulated
learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner, (Eds.), Handbook of Self-
Regulation, 503-529. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Richardson M., Abraham C., & Bond R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students'
academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22352812
Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do
psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis.
Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14979772
Rikoon, S., Liebtag, T., Olivera-Aguilar, M., Robbins, S., & Jackson, T. (2014, November). A
pilot study of holistic assessment and course placement in community college: Findings
and recommendations. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RM-14-
10.pdf
RTI International. (2013, January 14). Additional selected outcomes of the advisory committee
on measures of student success. Retrieved from:
https://edsurveys.rti.org/ipeds_trp/documents/TRP40_Suggestions_final.pdf.
Rueda, R. (2011). The three dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 199

Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2014). Fall 2014 new student enrollment retention outcomes report.
Retrieved from https://www.noellevitz.com/papers-research-higher-education/2014/fall-
2014-new-student-enrollment-and-retention-outcomes-report
Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.noellevitz.com/student-retention
Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2015). [A simple interactive worksheet for four year institutions to
estimate the value of increasing retention for a single cohort of full-time, first-year
students]. Retention Revenue Estimator. Retrieved from
https://www.noellevitz.com/documents/shared/Student_Retention/RetentionRevenueEsti
mator4year.pdf
Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2015). [An interactive worksheet for four year institutions to estimate
return on investment (ROI) from retention initiatives]. Return on Investment Estimator.
Retrieved from https://www.noellevitz.com/documents/shared/Student_Retention/
ReturnonInvestmentEstimator
Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2015). 2015 Student retention indicators benchmark report. Retrieved
from https://www.noellevitz.com/papers-research-higher-education/2015/2015-student-
retention-indicators-benchmark-report
Ruffalo Noel Levitz. (2015). 2014-15 National online learner’s priorities report. Retrieved from
https://www.noellevitz.com/papers-research-higher-education/2014/2014-15-national-
online-learners-priorities-report
Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for
optimal motivation and performance. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3
rd
ed.). New York, NY: John
Wiley & Sons.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 200

Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2000). Self-regulatory and academic learning self-efficacy
enhancing interventions. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner, (Eds.),
Handbook of Self-Regulation, 631-649. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Scrivner, S., & Weis, M. J. (2009). More Guidance, Better Results? Three-Year Effects of an
Enhanced Student Services Program at Two Community Colleges. Retrieved from
http://www.mdrc.org/publication/more-guidance-better-results
Securities and Exchange Commission (2013). Apollo Group annual report form 10-K. Retrieved
from http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/929887/000092988713000150/apol-
aug312013x10k.htm
Shank, J. D. (2014). Interactive open educational resources: A guide to Finding, Choosing, and
Using What's Out There to Transform College Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Street, H. (Winter 2010). Factors influencing a learner’s decision to drop out or persist in higher
education distance learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(4),
1-4. Retrieved from:http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter134/street134.html
Synder, J. (2014). Student perceptions of online learning and persistence for course completion
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from UMI Dissertation Publishing. (UMI Number:
3613731).
Talbert, P. Y. (2012). Strategies to increase enrollment, retention, and graduation rates. Journal
of Developmental Education, 36(1), 22–36.
Tierney, W. G., & Hentschke, G. C. (2007). New players different game: Understanding the rise
of the for-profit college and universities. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 201

United States Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U. S.
higher education. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/final-report.pdf.
United States Department of Education. (2009, October 27). Institutional eligibility under the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, and the secretary's recognition of
accrediting agencies; final rule (Federal Register, Vol. 7, No. 206, Doc E9-25186).
Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2009-
4/102709a.html
United States Department of Education. (2012, February). Pathways to success, integrating
learning with life and work to increase national college completion. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/acsfa/ptsreport2.pdf
Waddell, J., Spalding, K., Navarro, J., & Gaitana, G. (2015, November 25). Integrating a career
planning and development program into the baccalaureate nursing curriculum Part III:
Impact on faculty's career satisfaction and confidence in providing student career
coaching. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26618575
Walden University Website. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.waldenu.edu/
Wankel, C., & Blessinger, P. (Eds.). (2013). Increasing student engagement and retention in e-
learning environments: Web 2.0 and blended learning technologies. Bingley, UK:
Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Wankel, L. A., & Blessinger, P. (Eds.). (2013). Increasing student engagement and retention
using multimedia technologies: Video annotation, multimedia applications,
videoconferencing and transmedia storytelling. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing
Limited.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 202

Witherspoon, R., Goldsmith, M., Lyons, L., & Freas, A. (2000). Coaching for leadership: How
the world's greatest coaches help leaders learn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (2008). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for
teaching all adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Yeager, D. S. & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe
that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist 47(4), 302-314.
doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.722805.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 203

Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Five minutes of introductory and background questions focused on what motivated the interviewee
to work as a coach and at Inside Track, how they approach and prepare for a new client, and how
they introduce themselves and their role to the students will kick off the interview.
Question 1: What are the biggest challenges and obstacles to course and program completion
that the students experience?
Question 2: How do you know what skills to teach/reinforce?
Question 3: How do you know what goals will be most helpful to the student?
Question 4: How do you set goals with the student?
Probe/Follow up: How do you know when to modify or extend a goal?
Question 5: What strategies do you use to engage the students?
Question 6: What strategies do you use to address retention challenges?
Question 7: How do you monitor and adjust your coaching/interventions?
Probe/Follow up: Do you monitor and adjust the way you think about problems and barriers to
student success? If so, how and why?
Question 8: How do you know if you are doing a good job?
Possible Probe/Follow up: What makes you good at your job?
Question 9: What values and/or perspective do you have that help you improve student retention,
resilience and student success?
Question 10: How does confidence in your own abilities as a coach affect your success as a coach?
Question 11: How does Inside Track support and incentivize you to improve as a coach?
Question 12: What are the most important elements of coaching and why?
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 204

Appendix B
Observation Protocol for the Organizational Element of the Study
The observation will focus on how the Inside Track staff interacts with their social
surrounding and on understanding the organization culture. The observational element of the study
is not specific to coaches and it does not address how the coaches interact with students. Rather the
observation will focus on internal employee interactions and the culture, atmosphere, and mood of
the work surroundings. Field notes will be developed and organized around the following themes:
Social Interactions and Communication
How many times during a given period of time do staff members communicate with others
around them? Do they greet each person individually or just sit down to start work? Do they have
lunch with other coworkers or do they eat at their desk while doing an individual activity? Do they
seem to socialize during their breaks or are they occupied at their desk? Are the conversations more
frequently about work issues or personal information (i.e. Family, relationships, interests, off work
activities, etc.)? How frequent are the types of communication?
Work Interactions and Communication
What behaviors do the staff exhibit that demonstrates their relationship to management? With
their colleagues in their work space? When they are working do they communicate with those around
them? When in meetings are they attentive and seem to be participating or are they closed off and not
making eye contact? Do they discuss with other coaches around them specific problems or
interactions with the students who are part of their case load? Do they work continuously or do they
take breaks to interact with other coaches between calls or other duties for their job?

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 205

Modeling Behaviors and Evidence of Role Models
What kinds of behaviors are modeled for the coaches? Do they appear open to the modeling
and improvement process? Are they able to demonstrate this behavior when working with their
caseload with individuals over the phone? Do they model appropriate behavior for coworkers? What
behaviors are exhibited that might be indicative of modeling their role models?

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 206

Appendix C
Focus Group Protocol for the Organizational Element of the Study
A focus group will be conducted at the Nashville and Portland coaching centers. Each
focus group will consist of between 3 to 5 elite coaches. The focus groups will explore the various
and distinct elements of team function within Inside Track as well as the social and work
interactions and communications that are central to the culture of the organization. The focus
groups will also look at the use of modeling and socialization within the hierarchy of the coaching
core specifically and the organization as a whole (Lencioni, 2002; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004).
The focus group discussion will be developed around Lencioni’s five elements of a
functional team: high levels of trust, effectively and proactively dealing with conflict, consistently
being results oriented, high levels of accountability and high levels of commitment. During the
focus group the participants will be asked to discuss how these elements apply and operate within
successful coaching relationships and within the Inside Track organization as a whole.
Then using the Schein operator subculture characteristics, the participants will be asked to
discuss the human interaction, communication, trust and teamwork skills that they would expect to
see in an outstanding coach, as well as, how they would expect management and Inside Track
executive members to interact with and support the coaches.
Focus Group Participants
Because the purpose of the focus groups will be to evaluate the cultural and organizational
elements of Inside Track, the focus group at each coaching location will provide an opportunity to
include elite coaches, who support additional aspects of Inside Track services, such as career
coaching, campus application and admission processes, and traditional student and graduate
programs. Focus group participants will be selected by Inside Track leadership based on the rubric
used by management for coaching performance excellence.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 207

Appendix D
Interview Protocol for Managers
Question 1: Is there planned or structured time for coaches to share information and interact?
Question 2: How do the coaches work with and collaborate with each other?
Question 3: How do the coaches work with and collaborate with management?
Question 4: Why is the coaching center organized this way?
Question 5: What autonomy do the coaches have over their work schedule and duties?

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 208

Appendix E
Infographic Prepared by Ruth Claire Black
for Dr. Tatiana Melguizo’s
EDUC 628 course, Educational Organizations: Governance and Finance II

Data on the following topics:
Graduation Rates by Gender and Race
Graduation Rates by Institution Type
Number of Degrees Awarded
Debt Rates among Graduates

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 209

Copyright © 2015, Ruth Claire Black
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 210

Appendix F
The American College Test (ACT)
2015 Retention/Completion Summary Tables
© 2015 by ACT, Inc. All rights reserved. 4077

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 211

Table 1: Retention Trends 1983–2015: Freshman to Sophomore Year

Table 2: Completion Trends 1983–2015: Two-Year Colleges Graduation in 3 Years or Less

Table 3 Completion Trends 1983–2015: Four-Year Public Colleges Graduation in 5 Years
or Less

Highest Percent Lowest Percent Current Percent
Public 38.8 (’89) 21.9 (’14, ’15) 21.9
Private 66.4 (’90) 43.7 (’14) 40.2
All 44.0 (’89) 22.7 (’15) 22.7

Highest Percent Lowest Percent Current Percent
BA/BS Public 52.8 (’86) 36.0 (’13) 36.4
BA/BS Private 58.5 (’13) 53.3 (’01) 57.2
MA/MS Public 46.7 (’86) 37.0 (’00) 38.9
MA/MS Private 58.4 (’88) 53.5 (’01) 54.1
PhD Public 50.6 (’89, ’90) 45.0 (’01) 49.5
PhD Private 68.8 (’86) 62.4 (’14) 62.5
All

Highest Percent Lowest Percent Current Percent
Two-Year Public 55.7 (’10) 51.3 (’04) 54.7
Two-Year Private 72.6 (’92) 55.5 (’08, ’12) 63.4
BA/BS Public 70.0 (’04) 64.2 (’14, ’15) 64.2
BA/BS Private 74.0 (’89)
67.3 (’10, ’12,
’13)
70.2
MA/MS Public 71.6 (’06) 68.1 (’89) 69.9
MA/MS Private 78.0 (’85) 69.5 (’13) 73.9
PhD Public 78.6 (’10, ’15) 72.9 (’08) 78.6
PhD Private 85.0 (’85) 80.2 (’12) 81.7
All 68.0

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 212

Percentage of 4-Year College Students Who Earn a Degree Within 5 Years of Entry

Percentage of First-Year Students at 4-Year Colleges Who Return for Second Year

Source: Compiled from ACT Institutional Data Files

Source: Compiled from ACT Institutional Data Files

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 213

Appendix G
Photographs of the Design and Décor of the Inside Track Coaching Centers

Entrance to ‘The Living Room’ from the Elevators

The Living Room View 1

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 214

The Cat Room – Two Person Meeting Room

The Living Room View 2
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 215

The Living Room View 3

The Living Room View 4

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 216

The Game Room

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 217

Appendix H
Sample RFP for Coaching Services
[Institution or Program Name]
Request for Proposals for
Coaching Services to Support and Improve
Undergraduate Retention

______________________________________________________

[Institution or Program Name] invites proposals from organizations and companies presently
engaged in the business of providing comprehensive professional coaching services to support and
improve undergraduate retention and graduation rates. [Institution or Program Name] may select
one or more firms to provide the services requested herein. Firms may work in groups to submit
proposals.

SECTION I
CALENDAR OF EVENTS
AND GENERAL INFORMATION

RFP posted on Institution Procurement Website: March 1, 20XX
Deadline for Written Public Comment: March 15, 20XX
Issuance of the RFP: April 1, 20XX
Notice of Intent to Propose Due: April 26, 20XX
Proposal Due Date: May 26, 20XX
Dates for Interviews and Presentations: June 29 and 30, 20XX
Possible Site Visits: Week of July 10
th
, 20XX
Recommendation of Vendor to Board/Comm August Bd/Committee Meeting
Award of Contract: September Bd/Com Meeting
Presentation of Selected Vendor: October Bd/Com Meeting
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 218

Proposed Board Action on the Contract: November Bd/Com Meeting
Two Pilot Programs will offer coaching: Spring Semester/Term
Continued Rollout of Coaching Services: Summer and Fall Semesters/Terms
Full Complement of Services/Programs: Spring Semester following year

Notice of Intent to Propose

Interested parties should submit a brief Notice of Intent to Propose to this RFP to [email address] on
or before 5:00 p.m. on Friday, April 26, 20XX. The Notice must include the single point of contact
at your firm responsible for the RFP response and must provide telephone, fax and e-mail
information for this individual.

No Contact

No contact with [Institution or Program Name] Board members or senior staff of [Institution or
Program Name] is permitted during the pendency of this RFP.

Written Questions

Written questions will be accepted only via e-mail at [email address]. Copies of all questions and
responses thereto will be circulated via e-mail to all organizations and firms filing the Notice of Intent
to Propose. Written questions to the above e-mail address will be accepted only from [enter time
frame].

Withdrawal of RFP

Proposers may withdraw their submittal at any time prior to the deadline upon presentation of a
written request to [enter name and email address]. After the submission deadline, submittals shall be
firm and may not be withdrawn for a period of 180 days.

Due Date

Seven printed copies and an electronic copy (thumb drive or CD) of your proposal are due no later
than 5:00 p.m. on May 26, 20XX, in a sealed package or packages. All proposals must be delivered
to:

[Institution or Program Name and address]
Attention: Project Director

Proposals received after this deadline will not be considered, nor will email or faxed proposals,
whenever received.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 219

No Reimbursement for RFP Expenses

[Institution or Program Name] will not provide reimbursement for any expenses incurred in
connection with this RFP including the costs of preparing the response, providing any additional
information and attending an interview or interviews. All material submitted in response to this RFP
will become the sole property of [Institution or Program Name]. [Institution or Program Name]
expressly reserves the right to utilize any and all ideas submitted in the proposals received unless
covered by legal patent or proprietary rights.

Interviews and Presentations

Interviews and presentations by top-qualifying firms may be conducted at [Institution or Program
Name] discretion. All firms or partnership groups selected for an interview and presentation will be
notified of the proposed interview date(s) at least one week in advance.

Organizations, firms or partnership groups selected for interview must present, for in-person
interview, both the dedicated/lead point of contact for the project and the vendor representative with
financial decision making authority for the project. No other individuals from the vendor’s
organization(s) will be allowed to sit in or participate during the interviews.

Confidentiality

All responses to this RFP become the property of [Institution or Program Name] and will be kept
confidential until such time as a recommendation to negotiate a contract has been announced by the
[Institution or Program Name] Board of Trustees. Thereafter, submittals are subject to public
inspection and disclosure under the California Public Records Act. If a respondent believes that any
portion of its submittal is exempt from public disclosure, such portion may be marked
“confidential.” [Institution or Program Name] will use reasonable means to ensure that such
confidential information is safeguarded but will not be held liable for inadvertent disclosure of such
materials, data and information. Any proposal marked “confidential” in its entirety will not be
honored and [Institution or Program Name] will not deny public disclosure of all or any portion of
submittals so marked.

By submitting information with portions marked “confidential”, the respondent represents it has a
good faith belief that such material is exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records
Act and agrees to reimburse [Institution or Program Name] for, and to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless [Institution or Program Name], its officers, fiduciaries, employees and agents from and
against: (a) any and all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, suits, judgments, fines, penalties, costs
and expenses including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees, expenses and court costs of any nature
whatsoever (collectively, “Claims”) arising from or relating to [Institution or Program Name] non-
disclosure of any such designated portions of a proposal if disclosure is deemed required by law or
court order.

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 220

SECTION II
CONTRACT PERIOD

The term of the contract/award will be for a five-year period. [Institution or Program Name]
may, in its discretion issue up to three one year extensions of the contract.

SECTION III
[Institution or Program Name] BACKGROUND AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Describe institution and or program as well as the goals and objectives of the proposed coaching
program.

SECTION IV
PROPOSED TERM SCHEDULE

Describe term schedule(s)

SECTION V
PROPOSED LAUNCH TIMELINE

[Institution or Program Name] expects to officially launch this coaching support program in [enter date]
with as many as XX degree programs. For the XX term (beginning in XXX, 20XX) we anticipate
offering a pilot program using XX programs as a beta test.

SECTION VI
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY FEES AND COSTS

[Institution or Program Name] expects to work with the programs and campuses to pay all costs associated
with intellectual property acquisition.

SECTION VIII
ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

Vendors should base cost proposals on services to XXX number of students taking approximately XXX
number of three unit courses in year one. [Provide as much information about the number of students
as possible and the number of courses they are taking]

SECTION IX
PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SERVICES TO BE DELIVERED

Following is a list of the information to be provided by the Proposer. A proposal that does not include
the information required below may be deemed non-responsive and subject to rejection. In setting forth
its qualifications, each firm shall provide, in concise but adequate detail, the information sought below.
Proposals may not exceed 25 pages in length.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 221

For each item listed below briefly describe the services your firm will provide.
Some options might include

 Student success coaching from prospect phase through middle of third term
 Student success coaching students identified as at risk for non-retention
 Student success coaching for all readmitted students
 Student success and career coaching services for [Institution or Program Name]

Firm Qualifications
[Institution or Program Name] invites proposals from organizations or firms presently engaged in
the business of providing comprehensive professional coaching services that support and enhance
retention to graduation and student success. [Institution or Program Name] may select one or more
organizations or firms to provide the services requested herein. Organizations and firms may work
in partnership groups to submit proposals.

While partnership groups and joint proposals may include new or less established firms as well as
innovative or specialized companies and organizations, the lead proposer must meet the following
firm qualifications. Briefly describe how the lead proposer meets each of the following criteria

a. Continuously engaged in the business of providing comprehensive professional
coaching services to support retention and student success for at least 5 years.

b. Recognized industry leader in the provision of professional coaching services.

c. Total annual revenue in excess of $XX annually.

d. At least XX current contracts in excess of $XX annually to provide comprehensive
professional coaching services to XXX type of educational institutions.

e. Is qualified to do business in XX state(s).

Management Qualifications

State the names of the firm personnel who would be assigned to the [Institution or Program Name]
partnership. Describe the services to be provided by each individual.

Identify the partner/senior director in charge of the project and, for this partner/senior director,
provide five client references relating to engagements similar to the ones described in this RFP.
Briefly describe each partner/senior director’s experience working with engagements similar to the
ones described in this RFP.

Identify the dedicated program administrators and managers to be assigned to the project and, for
each program administrator and manager, provide five client references relating to engagements
similar to the ones described in this RFP. Briefly describe each administrator’s and manager’s
experience working with engagements similar to the ones described in this RFP.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 222

Describe your firm’s experience related to the services to be provided, including a brief summary
of any current and prior contracts, partnerships, transactions or relationships which you feel
demonstrate the nature and extent of your firm’s expertise. Provide XX client references relating
to the delivery of comprehensive professional coaching services.

Fee Proposal

Set forth preferred financial metric, monthly cost for up to XX number of students, per student
fees, or whatever type of fee proposal would be best for the proposed project some fee proposal
options might include:

1. Proposals may provide a tiered or waterfall based fee that adjusts as enrollments build
over time.

2. If additional items and/or services can be delivered briefly describe the additional
deliverable and itemize the cost in the required format.

Briefly state any special considerations, concepts or proposals that you believe differentiate your
proposal from other submissions and make your firm’s services more cost-effective or superior.
Each proposal may put forward any alternative fee models deemed appropriate as a supplement to
the items and format requirements listed above.

SECTION X
EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA

[Institution or Program Name] will only consider proposals from financially responsible firms
presently engaged in the business of providing comprehensive professional coaching services.
The award will be made to the most responsible vendor or partnership group whose proposal is
determined to be the most advantageous to the University based on the following criteria, listed
in order of importance:

1. [List out selection criteria some other criteria might include]

2. Interview with demonstration (XX points)

3. Past performance and experience with similar large scale projects and clients (XX
points)

4. Demonstrated ability to meet the launch timelines (XX points)

5. Information provided by client references (XX points)

6. Overall organization, completeness, and quality of proposal, including cohesiveness,
conciseness, and clarity of response (XX points)

COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 223

7. Qualifications of key partnership personnel including longevity of service to the
vendor/partner and time commitment and long-term availability to [Institution or
Program Name] (XX points)

Selection Process

Any proposal that does not address all requested requirements or is incomplete will be rejected.

[Institution or Program Name] may afford firms the opportunity to clarify proposals for the purpose of
assuring a full understanding of their responsiveness to the RFP.

[Institution or Program Name] may conduct interviews of Proposers found to be most qualified
to perform the services required, based upon the criteria listed in this RFP. If so, Proposers will
be notified in advance of the proposed interview date.

All Proposers will be notified in writing once one or more organizations or firms have been selected.

SECTION XI
PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS AND CONDITIONS

Limitations

1. This RFP does not commit [Institution or Program Name] to award a contract, pay
any costs incurred in the preparation of a response, or procure or contract for services
of any kind whatsoever. [Institution or Program Name] reserves the right, in its sole
discretion, to negotiate with any or all firms considered, or to cancel this RFP in
whole or in part.

2. Proposers may be requested to clarify the contents of their proposal. Other than to
provide such information as may be required by [Institution or Program Name], no
Proposer will be allowed to alter its proposal or to add new information after the RFP
due date.

3. A proposing firm may be required to participate in negotiations and to submit price,
technical or other revisions to its proposal which may result from such negotiations.

4. All material submitted in response to this RFP will become the sole property of
[Institution or Program Name].

Proposal Submission

Proposals may not exceed 25 pages. Proposals must include a cover letter indicating the mailing address of
the office from which the proposal is submitted, the name of the individual who will represent the firm as
the primary contact person for the proposal, and the telephone, fax and e-mail information of the primary
contact. The Proposal cover letter must also include a specific acceptance of the administrative
specifications below.
COACHING TO INCREASE RETENTION 224

1. Non-responsive proposals include, but are not limited to, those that:

a. Are irregular or not in conformance with RFP requirements and instructions

b. Are conditional, incomplete, indefinite or ambiguous

c. Have no signature or an improper one

d. Are not submitted on time or are submitted at any time via fax or e-mail

2. [Institution or Program Name] may waive minor informalities or irregularities in a proposal
that are merely a matter of form and not substance and the correction of which would not be
prejudicial to other proposals.

Administrative Specifications

1. All proposals must be irrevocable for 180 days and signed by an authorized officer of the
firm or of each firm if there is a joint response.

2. The successful Proposer must agree to provide [Institution or Program Name] with audit
access on request during the term of the contract and for 7 years thereafter.

The cover letter of the Proposal must confirm your organization acceptance of the above
administrative specifications. Failure to specifically confirm your Proposal’s acceptance of each of
the above administrative specifications may result in your Proposal being deemed non-responsive.

Errors and Admissions

If a Proposer discovers any ambiguity, discrepancy, omission or other error in this RFP, please
immediately notify [Institution or Program Name] in writing of such error and request clarification
or modification of the document.

Should [Institution or Program Name] find it necessary, modification to the RFP will be made by
addenda. Such modifications or requests for addenda may be given by written notice to all parties
who have furnished an RFP or a written Notice of Intent to Propose.

If the Proposer fails to notify [Institution or Program Name] of a known error or an error that
reasonably should have been known prior to the final filing date for submission, the Proposer shall
assume the risk. If awarded the contract, the Proposer(s) shall not be entitled to additional
compensation or time by reason of the error or its late correction.

SECTION XII
CONTRACT APPROVAL

[Institution or Program Name] selection of one or more successful Proposers shall not be binding
until it has been approved by the [Institution or Program Name] Board of Directors.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study of Inside Track, a for-profit coaching organization, examined using professional coaching to improve retention and graduation rates among the group with the lowest retention rate: the online student seeking degree completion. The aim of the study was to understand and assess the knowledge, motivation and organizational assets of outstanding coaches and how their student-focused coaching contributed to increased online course and program completion rates. Data was collected through interviews, focus groups, observations and a document review. Findings showed that successful retention coaching is based on high levels of trust between student and coach and that the coaches are guided by a core set of values and beliefs anchored by trust and empathy. Findings also showed that developing successful coaches is an extensive and demanding process and that Inside Track has a highly developed organizational culture within which to nurture and develop new and experienced coaches. Chapter Five provides a range of recommendation and strategies for addressing retention issues and also offers best practices, methods, planning options and comparison information around two distinct institutional scenarios for the implementation and utilization of coaching services. The paper concludes with an evaluation framework for assessing the impact and effectiveness of coaching services once they are implemented.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Retention rate of online students in the associate's degree program in addiction education counseling: a gap analysis

PDF

Completion in online learning: graduate students' perspectives

PDF

Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study

PDF

An exploration of student experiences in a preparation program for online classes in the California community college system

PDF

Teacher retention in an urban, predominately Black school district: an improvement study in the Deep South

PDF

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

PDF

Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion

PDF

Advancing retention strategies at a historically Black university

PDF

Understanding student persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCs): an evaluation study

PDF

Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

PDF

Advising strategies to support high graduation rates of transfer students

PDF

Transfer first-generation college students: the role of academic advisors in degree completion

PDF

First-generation student retention and completion at a California community college: evaluation study

PDF

Creating a comprehensive professional development program for MBA students: a needs analysis

PDF

Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...

PDF

Instructional coaching, educational technology, and teacher self-efficacy: a case study of instructional coaching programs in a California public K-12 school district

PDF

Instructional coaching in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs in elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher self-efficacy with educational...

PDF

The role of student affairs professionals: serving the needs of undocumented college students

PDF

Instructional coaching and educational technology in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools with educational technolo...

PDF

Crisis intervention and mental health support services in online graduate degree programs: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Black, Ruth Claire (author)

Core Title Coaching to increase retention in online degree completion programs

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Global Executive

Publication Date 08/04/2016

Defense Date 07/15/2016

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

Tag cultural models,for-profit institutions,graduation rates,growth mindset,individualized student supports,inside track,international coaching federation,mentoring,non-cognitive skills,non-first time students,OAI-PMH Harvest,online degree completion programs,online retention,open education resources,organizational culture,program assessment,retention,retention coaching,role models,self-awareness,self-regulation,soft skills,student specific support

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member), Tambascia, Tracy (committee member)

Creator Email rucblack@icloud.com,ruthblac@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-298507

Unique identifier UC11281145

Identifier etd-BlackRuthC-4745.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-298507 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BlackRuthC-4745.pdf

Dmrecord 298507

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Black, Ruth Claire

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