The EDUCAUSE Student Success Almanac

Welcome
Sponsor


This almanac shares the most important EDUCAUSE data regarding the state of student success in higher education. Data for this almanac are derived from the EDUCAUSE Core Data Service (CDS) and EDUCAUSE Technology Research in the Academic Community (ETRAC).

Student Success Technology Maturity

Median maturity of student success technology dimensions, on a scale of 1–5:

  • Student services (4.2)
  • Leadership and culture (3.9)
  • Defined outcomes (3.8)
  • Technology and systems (3.7)

Student Success Technology and Systems

Institutions that agree or strongly agree:

  • 78%
  • Our institution develops and maintains policies and practices that are sufficiently robust to safeguard data, both institutional and student-level, used for student success analytics (e.g., specification of privileges and responsibilities for data access and storage, ethics of data use).
  • 75%
  • Our institution has the technology needed to help students and advisors plan a detailed course of study through degree or credential completion.
  • 54%
  • Our institution provides tools (e.g., dashboards, portals) to ensure that appropriate staff can create reports and communicate the status of student success metrics and initiatives in a timely manner.
  • 50%
  • Our institution effectively shares data related to student success between technology systems (e.g., SIS, LMS, advising, analytics).

Most commonly deployed student success technologies:

  • Degree auditing (81%)

  • Credit transfer/articulation (57%)

  • Education plan tracking (53%)

Most common student success technologies that institutions are planning to deploy:

  • Student success analytics system (e.g., predictive modeling) (24%)
  • Student success analytics dashboards (22%)
  • Student success data warehouse/operational data store (17%)

Least commonly deployed student success technologies:

  • Consent platform for students to opt in/out of data collection/analytics (19%)
  • Student self-service referral to social/community resources (25%)
  • Course/program recommendation system (27%)

Student success technologies reported as very or extremely useful by students:

  • Degree audit tools that show the degree requirements completed (80%)
  • Degree planning or mapping tools that identify courses needed to complete your degree (77%)
  • Self-service tools for conducting student-related business (74%)
  • Self-service systems for tracking credits, credit transfers, and dual enrollment (68%)

Student success technologies reported as moderately to extremely useful by faculty:

  • Suggestions about new or different academic resources for your students (e.g., tutoring, skills-building opportunities) (46%)
  • Alerts if a student's progress in a course appears to be declining (45%)
  • Suggestions for how a student can improve performance (34%)

Student Success Technology Adoption

Institutions that agree or strongly agree:

  • 78%
  • Our institution supports advisors' adoption and use of information systems that support student success (e.g., early alerts, advising systems, degree progress tracking).
  • 66%
  • Our institution supports faculty's adoption and use of information systems that support student success (e.g., early alerts, advising systems, degree progress tracking).

Alerts and Nudges

  • 19%
  • Proportion of students who received an early alert or nudge from someone at their institution regarding academic performance within the past year. Common triggers for nudges include:
    • Low scores on assessments, quizzes, or exams (33%)
    • Missing work (32%)
    • Missed classes, labs, workshops, or tutorials (26%)
  • 55%
  • Proportion of recipients of early alerts or digital nudges who found them either very or extremely useful in helping improve academic performance.

Students who agree or strongly agree:

  • 75%
  • My institution uses advising technologies to help me select courses, plan my degree, seek coaching, track my progress, receive early alerts, and/or plan for my career.
  • 75%
  • My instructors typically use technology during class to enhance learning with additional materials.
  • 66%
  • My instructors typically use technology to engage me in the learning process.
  • 62%
  • My instructors typically encourage the use of online tools to communicate/collaborate with the instructor or students in or outside class.

Student Services

Institutions that agree or strongly agree:

  • 95%
  • Our institution provides support services to students (e.g., tutoring, mentoring, career planning, programs for special populations) to effectively support our student success goals.
  • 93%
  • Our institution has clearly documented degree requirements in academic programs.
  • 83%
  • Our institution provides and maintains a student advising process that effectively supports our student success goals.
  • 82%
  • Our institution continually reviews the needs of students to update the student support and advising services provided.

Measures of success that best describe what students want from their undergraduate experience:

  • Completing a degree (38%)
  • Securing a job (24%)
  • Achieving a high GPA (14%)

Students who agree or strongly agree:

  • 76%
  • My institution gives me access to advisors who will help me develop an education plan linked to my career or further educational plans.
  • 73%
  • My institution promotes a clear vision of the ideal student experience and student success.
  • 70%
  • My institution readily provides comprehensive and high-quality advising and student success support.

Student Success Collaboration

Institutions that agree or strongly agree:

  • 87%
  • Our institution supports collaboration among people from different departments/units to effectively support student success initiatives.
  • 81%
  • Our institution ensures alignment among senior leadership about the initiatives designed to improve student success.
  • 78%
  • Our institution includes faculty on committees related to defining, implementing, and sharing data related to student success goals and measures.
  • 73%
  • Our institution collects and uses input from multiple stakeholders (e.g., IT, faculty, institutional research, students, staff, student affairs) when making decisions about student success technologies.
  • 68%
  • Our institution ensures alignment among senior leadership about student success initiatives and the technologies available.
  • 56%
  • Our institution includes student leaders on committees related to defining and implementing student success goals and measures.

Student Success Funding

Institutions that agree or strongly agree:

  • 51%
  • Our institution has developed an adequate funding model to support institutional student success efforts.
  • 45%
  • Our institution has developed an adequate funding model to support student success technology initiatives.

About the Data in This Almanac

EDUCAUSE Analytics Services provides higher education leaders with data on information technology practice and use. You can use Core Data Service (CDS) and student and faculty data (ETRAC) to identify peer institutions and their technology solutions, benchmark resources, and gain insight on user needs. Our Analytics Services Portal is the online tool you use to contribute and access data.

EDUCAUSE Core Data Service (CDS)

In the summer of 2019, 3,800 institutions were invited to contribute data to the EDUCAUSE Core Data Service (CDS). This almanac summarizes data from the 290 US institutions with 2018 Carnegie Classifications of AA, BA, MA, or DR that responded to the optional student success technologies digital capabilities module. Some publicly available data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS, nces.ed.gov/ipeds/) are used in calculating metrics. Reported statistics are either an estimated proportion of the population or an estimated median (rather than a mean).

EDUCAUSE Technology Research in the Academic Community (ETRAC)

This almanac summarizes data collected from the 2019 Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology (160 institutions, 53,475 student responses), the 2019 Study of Faculty and Information Technology (127 institutions, 10,078 student responses), and the 2020 Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology (77 institutions, 18,536 student responses). To conduct this research, EDUCAUSE collaborated with hundreds of institutions to collect responses from thousands of faculty and undergraduate students about their technology experiences.

For more information, please visit EDUCAUSE Analytics Services.

About the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative

The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI) is committed to the advancement of learning and student success through the development and diffusion of best practices and the creative and transformative application of learning technology. Visit the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative for more information.