Higher Ed clings to shaky metric
Graduation rates punish colleges that serve low-income students
Robin Capehart
May 22
Graduation rates are the coin of the whelm for the higher education establishment. It is often cited as some type of indication of the quality of the education offered by an institution.
This just isn’t true. Let’s start by seeing the manner in which the higher education ruling class determines “graduation rates”
Freethinking Higher Education is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Calculating graduation rates
Graduation rates are calculated by tracking a cohort of first-time, full-time students who start at an institution and determining the percentage of these students who graduate within a certain timeframe, typically 150% of the expected time to graduate. This means 6 years for a 4-year degree and 3 years for a 2-year degree.
The calculation of graduation rates involves defining both the numerator and the denominator. The numerator represents the number of students who graduate within the specified timeframe. The denominator, on the other hand, represents the total number of students who could have graduated, including those who take longer to graduate or who transfer out of the institution.
However, the traditional calculation of graduation rates has been criticized for not fully capturing the diversity of the student population at many institutions. Specifically, transfer students and non-traditional students are often not included in the numerator, even though they may eventually graduate. This is because these students are not part of the original cohort of first-time, full-time students that the graduation rate calculation tracks.
In the case of transfer students, they are included in the denominator but not in the numerator. This means that if a student transfers to another institution and graduates there, they are still counted as a non-graduate at the original institution. This can lead to lower reported graduation rates for institutions with a high number of transfer students.
Similarly, non-traditional students, such as those who attend part-time or who take longer than the expected time to graduate, are also included in the denominator but not the numerator. This can also lead to lower reported graduation rates for institutions that serve a large number of non-traditional students.
These limitations of the traditional graduation rate calculation have led to calls for more comprehensive measures that better reflect the diverse pathways that students take to earn a degree. Some of these alternative measures include tracking students over a longer timeframe, including part-time and transfer students in the calculation, and considering other indicators of student success, such as course completion rates and job placement rates after graduation.
A misleading metric
As such, graduation rates can indeed be a misleading statistic when it comes to assessing student learning and the overall quality of an educational institution. This is especially true at colleges that provide an educational opportunity for students who are not adequately prepared for college due to home or regional problems, e.g. high poverty. Here’s why:
Limited Scope: Graduation rates traditionally measure only a specific segment of the student population: first-time, full-time degree seekers. This means that part-time students, transfer students, and non-traditional students are often not included in the calculation. This includes many institutions that serve low income areas. As a result, the graduation rates may not accurately reflect the learning outcomes of the entire student body at an institution.
Potential for Manipulation: There are instances where schools might manipulate their graduation rates. For example, some institutions might primarily admit students who are high achievers and are highly likely to graduate within the standard timeframe. This can inflate the graduation rates, making the institution appear more effective than it might actually be in terms of student learning.
Incomplete Picture of Student Success: Graduation rates do not necessarily reflect the quality of education or the level of student learning at an institution. A high graduation rate might simply indicate that a large number of students completed their degrees, but it does not provide information about the students’ academic performance, the rigor of the curriculum, or the students’ ability to apply their learning in real-world contexts.
Disparity in Data Reporting: The way graduation rates are reported can also be misleading. Some states do not provide graduation rate data for specific student groups, such as students with disabilities or low-income students. This lack of transparency can hide disparities in graduation rates among different student populations, making it difficult to assess the institution’s effectiveness in serving all students.
Overemphasis on a Single Metric: Graduation rates are often used as a key measure of an institution’s success, but they are just one metric among many. Other important measures of student learning and institutional effectiveness can include course completion rates, pass/fail rates, student retention rates, and job placement rates after graduation.
In conclusion, while graduation rates can provide some insight into an institution’s performance, they should be interpreted with caution and considered alongside other measures of student learning and institutional effectiveness. The most important of these other measures is “student learning” because, of course, isn’t that the real reason we have colleges and universities – to learn?