Stories

Since this is about stories, let me tell you one.

______________________________________________________________

There once was a young girl in second year of her degree. One terrible day, she had a horrific car accident and her boyfriend, who was driving, died and she had broken her neck. Hearing this news, a couple of people from one area of the uni thought about contacting the student by email.

"No, no", some others said, "she won't want to hear from uni people, let her family be with her now".

The two people who wanted to make contact went ahead so anyway. The email they received in reply from the student was one of utmost gratefulness. The uni cared! The uni was still there and not going to let her slip through the crack due to this tragic and sudden turn of events! She was delighted! She was also so happy to have someone else email her as that made the prospect of being in traction in hospital for months a little more bearable.

Almost 2 years and several communications later, the student returned. No, she wasn't just an attrition statistic! She was a valued member of the university community!

_____________________________________________________________

Now, back to the paper by Bowser, Danaher & Somasundaram: Stories as perspectives and interests: Approaches and issues in conceptualising student attrition and retention at Central Queensland University

This was certainly a view of attrition different from most. The analysis of a conversation to find out what people’s ideas and definitions are is a good idea because it can capture things that are not captured when people are simply writing a scholarly article.

Analogy 1 – that university study is like a medical condition, or surgery. Doctors take an oath to try their best to treat everyone, so I don’t really see the analogy. If there is a 50% chance you won’t get through a degree, then isn’t there something more we can do? Doctors don’t give up on patients from the beginning if there is only a 50% survival rate!

Analogy 2 – that university is like a parent. That is quite a demeaning way to look at the students – as children needing to be guided into adulthood. Yes, it might be true for some students, but with such a large proportion of adult learners at CQUniversity, I don’t think this analogy is very accurate. It is like saying that a student and a lecturer are never on the same level. It doesn’t respect other types of knowledge and abilities that students bring with them, but instead says, ‘I have information, you don’t, therefore I am superior’. In fact, the information or knowledge each has is just different.

Analogy 3 – like unemployment, some amount of attrition is acceptable. I do tend to agree with that. There are always going to be students whose personal situation changes and they are unable to continue studying, or at least studying at that time. Serious illness, new job, having children. Part time students can take more than 15 years to complete a degree – things happen. It is how the student feels when leaving that is important. The institution can do a little bit there. Yes, as said, it might be negative for the students involved, but if the uni says, ‘oh well, things happen, good luck’, then what is the student going to think? What about, ‘that is unfortunate/exciting/wonderful and here is how we can help you stay in touch with the university community so that you are still involved and can come back when you are able/ready’? Would that be more positive for the students involved? The question, however, of attrition to maintain academic standards… well that is just rubbish and egotistical. There quite well maybe some students who are not capable of doing a degree they have been accepted into, but that’s no reason to cast them out either, just for the sake of academic standards. I don’t think I want to work for an institution with that as its underpinnings.

Perspective 1 – definition of attrition: at the gate or after they are in? What’s the university’s obligation to the community? With the demographic that we draw from, a person’s past may not reflect their ability. I believe that CQUniversity is wise enough to have recognized that. There is, however, still a ‘gateway’ with enabling programs, so we don’t just say that, “we’re not prepared to risk you”.

Perspective 2 – attrition as a problem or way to boost the uni’s GPA and graduate performance. Oh please don’t let it be the second! Again, how egotistical. So is targeting categories of students if they are to boost the uni’s performance or ‘image’. Yes, every student who leaves must be considered, and yes, sometimes it is for the student’s best interest. We don’t need to lower academic standards to keep students here, we might just need to optimize the transition as is mentioned.

Interests – I really hope that we don’t keep students at uni for less than altruistic reasons. In my line of work, I certainly know that we do what is in the student’s best interest. We do, however, dig to the bottom off each issue. While it is waste of time and money if a student is coerced to do another course even though they might still drop out afterwards, it might just be worth that shot at another course, and they might make it through, hence not making waste of the time and money they spent on the previous courses. I would not put ‘inevitable’ with any terms related to study.

The paper is saying – work out what attrition is, what it means for the uni and the students and see what we can do about it. Talk more, pin down more, do something.