Abstract
In the context of university higher education at undergraduate level, the model of student-institution integration, proposed by Tinto & Cullen and later refined in some of its parts, has often been used to explain the process of dropout/persevere, and even to anticipate such events. This paper approaches the evolution of the Tinto's model since its proposal and reports an analysis of versions of the model found in the literature. The conducted analysis was directed with focus on how to make the model operational, in a way that it could be implemented by universities as an academic computational support system for predicting dropouts. Aiming at its future computational implementation, the analysis approaches the model in relation to its lack of precise definitions of some concepts employed, the loose specification of both, variables and processes involved and questions the extreme importance given to the social integration aspect experienced by students, for explaining dropout.
Highlights
One of the main problems in higher education nowadays is related to the high dropout rates universities have been experiencing for a few years already, in both types of undergraduate courses: traditional learning as well as e-learning
Considering the dropout problem, it is very important to have in mind that the more relevant are the variables that define the modules, and better defined are the processes which deal with those variables, the better will be the outcome of a computational system that implements the simulation of a dropout/persevere process conducted by a student
It was not the intent of the work described in this article to consider a comparison between the few theoretical models of dropout presented
Summary
One of the main problems in higher education nowadays is related to the high dropout rates universities have been experiencing for a few years already, in both types of undergraduate courses: traditional learning as well as e-learning. A relevant and difficult aspect to consider in relation to the Pascarella's model (and, in an extent, to the other models) is how to determine at which level the variables in Table 1 contribute to the decision of dropout and, how to define them so they can be tangible variables and, still, represent the semantics of their names It can be found in the literature a few definitions of the concept of dropout having different associated semantics. The model has a smaller number of modules when compared with the number of modules in the previous two models, the Bean's model is too general to function as a pragmatic way of analysing dropout
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
