What College Completion Rates Signal about Higher Education

Every year, major higher education research services release data on college completion, and each year the resulting media headlines show mixed reactions. This past December, the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center (NSCRC) released its annual report, showing a continuation of year-after-year increases in six-year graduation rates (now up to 59.7%). Media coverage emphasized both excitement over the record high college completion rates and disappointment that only about 6 out of 10 students graduate in six years. 

It’s no surprise that completion rates get so much attention. Leaving college without a degree can result in a tremendous financial hit not only for students, but for the American public. Mark Schneider and Lu Michelle Yin from the American Institutes for Research published a report on “The High Cost of Low Graduation Rates,” asserting that the students who failed to graduate within six years cost the U.S. $3.8 billion in lost income and $566 million in federal taxes. A provocative paper published by the policy think tank Third Way asserts that raising the graduation rate from 57% to 84% for just one cohort of students would increase employment, reduce poverty, and increase tax revenues. And, loan default rates increase substantially for students with college debt who do not complete; they face the price of college attendance but reap few of the economic benefits that come with a degree. With this much on the line, we need to be sure we understand what the data actually represent. 

This isn’t always easy given the different ways in which these reported numbers are measured. For example, the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) publishes annual graduation rate data drawn from institutional data from the Department of Education’s College Scorecard and self-reported institutional data in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). These data appear similar to the NSCRC results: The reported 6-year graduation rate for 4-year institutions, published in January 2019, is 60%. But these data are only coincidental; the two data banks measure and report two very different versions of graduation rates.

The data released by the NCES focus specifically on completion at the institutional level. The graduation rate for 4-year institutions is defined in terms of “first-time, full-time bachelor’s degree students who receive their degree from the initial institution of enrollment.” In other words, students who transfer from one institution to another, even if they complete a degree, are not counted as successful graduates. To give an example: President Barack Obama — who started his undergraduate study at Occidental College before transferring to and graduating from Columbia University — would be counted as a “college dropout” in the NCES report for his cohort. (He would be a lost student from Occidental’s entering cohort, but since NCES only counts first-time bachelor’s degree matriculants, he would not be added into Columbia’s data.) So while the NCES analysis is helpful to understand the movement of specific cohorts through an institution, it does not tell us much about overall student success. 

The data released by NSCRC are analyzed at the student record level, not at the institution level. As a result, the data capture all students who matriculated into any institution (2-year or 4-year) and tracks their progress to a degree at any institution within the 6-year period. To follow our previous example, the NSCRC report (if it had existed in the early 1980s) would have captured President Obama as a successful graduate, even though he began his career at one institution and ended it at another. In this sense, the NSCRC data give a better measure of overall, national student degree achievement.

But, the headline number from the NSCRC report — an overall 6-year graduation rate of 59.7% — obscures some very important details. For example, that overall 59.7% value reported earlier this year combines 6-year graduation rates across all institution types. The rates at both private 4-year, nonprofit institutions (76.5%) and public 4-year institutions (66.7%) is significantly higher than the overall rate, which is brought down by 2-year institutions (40.8%) and private, for-profit institutions (42.4%). The broad overall data on graduation rates ignore the important subtleties reflected by the diverse landscape of higher education, and as a result, conclusions and policy solutions regarding degree completion often miss the mark. 

For example, the breakdown of NCES data by age of students at first entry shows students who begin college above age 21 experience the lowest graduation rates. It is not surprising, then, that one of the most effective interventions to boost graduation rates is to improve access to child care for students. Some studies estimate that over 20% of all college students have at least one dependent child; and programs that have experimented with affordable, high quality child care for students have shown increases in graduation rates by about a factor of 3. To identify the barriers to completion, we should look beyond the classroom experience and recognize the broader support needs of a diverse population of students (at a diverse range of institutions).

The economic impact of higher education depends on both access to college and college completion. But to understand these further, and to design effective policy proposals, we need to understand the data beyond the headline. My next post will explore how an alternative way to measure college completion sheds important insight on college quality.

Earlier in this series: We Need to Change Our Perceptions of the 'Typical' College Student. Here's Why.

Sean Decatur is the 19th president of Kenyon College. Follow his writing here and on Kenyon’s website.