KEY Careers: Increasing Retention and Graduation Rates With Career Interventions

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate how promoting participation in KEY Careers, a career intervention program available to all incoming matriculates, influenced 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates compared to nonparticipants at a singular institution. Archival data of 14,099 matriculates from the 2011–2014 freshman fall cohorts were utilized to examine the significance of a career intervention program on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for various student demographics through an analysis of covariance. The results of this study suggest student participation in a career intervention program causes a statistically significant increase in 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates regardless of gender or race. The discussion of this study is focused on why vocational identity development is significant at the beginning of the college experience and includes suggestions for how university administration can proactively infuse career development into their practices to benefit students of all backgrounds.

Keywords

career intervention graduation retention career development career services

Across the United States, there has been a call to action to raise retention and 4-year graduation rates. As of 2015, only 60% of all students completed their respective 4-year degrees within a 6-year period (Blumenstyk, 2015). In a time where higher education institutions are increasingly being examined for their ability to create pathways and programming to enable student success, it is necessary to find the gaps existing within the college student experience with the intent of positively influencing 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates. One crucial factor Tinto (1975, 1987) identified as a necessity for students to persist in higher education is if they had a goal for their college degree and understood the outcome of their education. Research suggests career interventions, that provide opportunities to consider careers and their personal vocational identity, are one type of programming that may influence student success and likelihood of graduating within 4 years (Folsom, Peterson, Reardon, & Mann, 2002; Osborn, Howard, & Leierer, 2007). Understanding how career interventions impact a student’s probability to return for their sophomore year, likelihood of graduating within 4 years, and which specific students populations (i.e., race, gender, college major) are influenced by interventions may allow higher education administrators to make informed decisions on programming.

In 2012, the Indiana Commission for Higher Education published a report indicating the 4-year graduation rate for students at 4-year Indiana universities was 28% and urged institutions to create programming to impact this statistic. As a response, one institution implemented a developmental career intervention program with the intent to influence 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates. This study sought to investigate the effectiveness of KEY Careers, a career intervention program, as measured by 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for students who engaged with the program compared to nonparticipants at a midsized, research, residential institution.

Literature Review

The theoretical framework for understanding the influence of career interventions on student persistence based on vocational identity development is rooted in Tinto’s (1987) student integration model and Holland’s (1973, 1997) theory of occupational themes. Regarding student persistence, Tinto’s theory has been one of the most established in terms of studying student retention (Metz, 2002). Tinto’s (1987) student integration model premised that for students to remain at an institution they must feel integrated into the community both socially and academically (Cuseo, 2003; Talbert 2012). One of the six factors Tinto (1975) deemed to be critical regarding a student’s persistence was their goals and aspirations for their college degree, more commonly known as vocational identity. An institution can play a large role on successful student transition to academia and likelihood of persistence; various initiatives, services, and professionals influence student persistence (Tinto, 2006). One way institutions can increase a student’s probability of persisting is by encouraging them to clearly identify career goals (Astin, 1975). When students commit to a career goal, they are more likely to engage in their academics and persist (Chambliss & Takacs, 2014).

Establishing vocational identity is an essential developmental task, a college student must achieve to avoid having career indecision and dysfunctional career thoughts (Osborn et al., 2007; Yanchak, Lease, & Strauser, 2005). Within the study of career development and counseling, Holland (1973) is one of the most widely accepted theorists (Nauta, 2010; Ohler & Levinson, 2012). Holland’s (1973, 1997) theory suggests there are six persisting personality types among people and there are certain careers associated with the various combinations of personalities (Ohler & Levinson, 2012). Holland’s theory assists individuals in vocational identity exploration; several tools have been created from Holland’s work to assist students in identifying their skills, abilities, ideal work environment, and career interests (Nauta, 2010; Ohler & Levinson, 2012). One tool developed from Holland’s research is My Vocational Situation (MVS), which assesses an individual’s vocational identity clarity (Brown & Lent, 2005).

Measurements of Higher Education Institutional Success

One of the main outcomes a university has is successful degree completion, which is why retention and graduation rates are common indicators of institutional success due to the objectivity and quantifiable nature of the data (Sanders & Burton, 1996; Seidman, 2012). Retention is defined as a student remaining enrolled at a singular institution from the point of matriculation until successful completion of their degree (Habley, Bloom, & Robbins, 2012). Tinto (1975) stated students need to be academically and socially integrated if they were to persist. Nationally, nearly one third of all matriculates did not return to their institution the following year (American College Testing (ACT), 2010). One-year retention rates are important to focus on because students are more likely to remain at the institution for the duration of their collegiate career if they persist from their first to their second year (DeNicco, Harrington, & Fogg, 2015). Fowler and Boylan (2010) concluded 1-year retention rates can be increased by intervening with personal development issues, such as vocational identity, through institutional policies and programming.

Four-year graduation rates, another prominent indicator of institutional success, are also important to stakeholders. Public institutions, such as state governments who provide funding to higher education, are interested in 4-year graduation rates because they influence resource allocation to higher education institutions through financial aid for students and university funding (Shin & Milton, 2004). Student affairs educators have been called to focus on how their students can earn their degrees on time due to financial and student success implications.

Career Centers and Career Development on College Campuses

Securing a job after graduation is often the predominant reason why people pursue a college degree (Curran, 2012; Pryor, Hurtado, Saenz, Santos, & Korn, 2007). Career centers encourage students to engage in the career exploration process; learn more about their personality, skills, and interests; help students learn how to search job; and connect students to potential employers (Schaub, 2012). Within career centers in higher education, the popular model consists of having designated campus departments that provide career development programming and conduct one-on-one coaching on a wide array of career topics (Grassgreen, 2013). Career centers are often administratively located within the division of student affairs because the primary focus of the service is geared toward student development.

Lopez (2014) stated career services on college campuses are charged to do more than just connect students with jobs; rather, career educators need to engage students in a process where they discover and internalize their interests, personalities, and career goals. Reducing negative career thoughts and giving students the skills and confidence to make their own vocational decisions are a goal that career centers need to strive for (Osborn et al., 2007). Career centers must also assess the needs and goals of their institutions and modify their practices accordingly to help students overcome obstacles influencing their postcollegiate success.

Career Intervention Programs

Holland, Magoon, and Spokane (1981) summarized the five essential components needed for a successful career intervention program including (1) the client gaining information on self and potential work environments, (2) the individual acquiring realistic expectations for their career goals, (3) providing ongoing social support, (4) having opportunities for the individual to conceptualize future career possibilities, and (5) having the tools to effectively mobilize and navigate career exploration. In higher education, career interventions are diverse and can be delivered as online modules, group counseling sessions, a semester-long course, or an individual session with a career advisor (Brown & Lent, 2005).

One salient reason why students enroll in higher education is to enhance their career prospects upon graduation (Curran, 2012), which is why offering students career guidance during their early collegiate careers is important. Undergraduate students tend to make impetuous decisions when choosing academic majors and do not always thoroughly evaluate their options and therefore benefit from structured guidance (Cuseo, 2005). Students who engage in structured career development are more likely to graduate within 4 years than their peers who did not engage in career planning curriculum (Osborn et al., 2007).

Many college students struggle with their vocational identity, which is why providing career development is essential in higher education (Johnson, Nichols, Buboltz, & Riedesel, 2002). Investing in career development programming can significantly impact the student experience. An investigation conducted by Damminger, Potter, and Pritchard (2009) found 82.6% of students who completed a career intervention course during their first year of college reported they felt more confident in completing their degree. Researchers determined it was because students had investigated their interests and skills and felt more committing to a major after thoroughly exploring their options. The findings of another study conducted in 2016 by Fouad, Ghosh, Chang, Figueiredo, and Bachhuber suggested students who engaged in a career intervention on campus were more likely to be occupationally engaged with their studies, more confident about their career direction, and therefore more likely to persist.

Career interventions have the potential to impact a student’s likelihood of graduating within 4 years. Reardon, Melvin, McClain, Peterson, and Bowman (2015) found a statistically significant relationship existing between students who participated in a career development course and their likelihood of graduating within 4 years. Likewise, Folsom, Peterson, Reardon, and Mann (2002) found that students who participated in career interventions graduated an average of one semester earlier than those students who did not participate in a career intervention.

One career intervention tool used on college campuses includes the MVS assessment (Fuller, Blinne, & Johnston, 1994). The MVS briefly screens students to assess an individual’s career clarity, decision-making abilities, and confidence based upon Holland’s theory (Lucas, Gysbers, Buescher, & Heppner, 1988; Tinsley & Bowman, 1990). The MVS assessment is utilized by career centers to assess the needs of students and to provide a more customized experience for individuals in relation to their vocational identity status.

There is little literature available regarding the influence of career interventions on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for entire cohorts of students. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of KEY Careers, a career intervention program, as measured by 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for students who engaged with the program. This study addressed the following research question: Are there statistically significant differences in 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for student demographic populations (i.e., race, gender, college major, and initial MVS score) who engaged in a career intervention program compared to students who did not participate?

Method

This empirical study examined the influence of a career intervention program on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates in an ex post facto design. The archival data utilized for dependent variables were categorical and reflected observations of student 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates (Brace, Kemp, & Sneglar, 2013; Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003). An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) allows for certain extraneous variables to be controlled to minimize the error of the calculations in regard to understanding the variable in question (Brown, 2014). A covariance model was specifically chosen to minimize the influence of high school grade point average (GPA), since it is one of the most reliable predictors of student success (Laskey & Hetzel, 2011; Sawyer, 2013), to more accurately determine the program’s influence on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates.

Setting

This study utilized data from a midsized, research, public institution located in the Midwest. At the university, the career center provides on-campus employment opportunities and has full-time career coaches who meet with students and oversee career-related programming. One initiative by the career center, the KEY Careers program, is designed to allow all first-year incoming students to gain clarity in their career goals (Lucas, 2011). The program was created as a response to the institution’s initiative to increase 4-year graduation rates and was implemented starting with the fall 2011 freshman cohort. The program has consistently been a means of a career intervention offered to all first-year students who elect to participate and has encouraged first-year students to engage in career development, intentionally select a major, and strengthen their overall vocational identity. Although the program is highly promoted and encouraged for all students, it is not mandatory.

The KEY Careers program uses the MVS survey as a benchmark to assess each student’s vocational identity clarity and confidence. The MVS result determines the amount of support and programming students may need regarding their vocational identity. For example, students who score at risk on the survey have additional programming opportunities and are a specific focus group for career development professionals on campus. Regardless of their score, all students are encouraged to participate in the initiative.

The KEY Careers program is structured to be a four-step program. All matriculates are encouraged to complete Stages 1 through 4 of the program. The first step is the distribution of the MVS survey, which is sent to all incoming freshman students. The survey is used to determine the career clarity of individuals. Results are utilized to identify students who have low, average, and high career clarity and are used to appropriately provide resources and content for each student in Stage 2.

The second stage of the KEY Careers program is an interactive online learning experience containing modules that promote vocational development. All students are encouraged to complete the modules that include different opportunities such as prompts for identifying possible career paths, exploring potential interests, understanding their personality type, and other career assessments. Students who score within the low and average range of career clarity are also encouraged to take the I Start Strong Interest Inventory, a more in-depth career assessment developed by Holland (1973).

The third stage is on-campus programming (i.e., peer groups, events, and individual appointments) that is personalized to directly engage students in career exploration. Students who scored low on the MVS are placed into groups of KEY Career families with a student mentor who engages them in career exploration and provides direct support during their first year on campus. Students who did not score at risk on the MVS are invited to various workshops on campus which are facilitated by career development professionals. The fourth step of the program is the administration of a posttest of the MVS. Surveys are distributed at the end of the student’s first semester to measure whether they made progress in establishing their vocational identity. Students who scored low on the second MVS test or who have not declared a major by their sophomore year continue the program through their sophomore year.

Participants

The study utilized the data of 14,099 matriculates from the fall 2011–2014 freshmen cohorts to analyze the influence of career interventions on 1-year retention rates. There were 3,781 of the 14,099 students who participated in the KEY Careers program (26.8% participation rate). Although participation in KEY Careers was highly encouraged, it was not mandatory for students. Data from the fall 2011 cohort of 3,781 matriculates were utilized to analyze the influence of career intervention participation on 4-year graduation rates. A total of 1,072 of the fall 2011 cohort actively participated in the KEY Careers program. Only data from first-time traditional freshmen under the age of 24 were utilized for this study.

Data Collection Procedures

Archival data of student engagement with the KEY Careers program and student information on 1-year retention, graduation information, and demographic data (i.e., high school GPA, race, gender, college major, and initial MVS score) were retrieved by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness. For the racial demographic populations, students were classified dichotomously as “White” or “non-White” because populations of individual minority groups were too small to be statistically significant. Students were identified dichotomously as “male” or “female” for gender, and the number of students not identifying a gender was omitted from this demographic because the group was not large enough for statistical accuracy. Students were grouped by similar major to examine whether students pursuing similar career projections would be comparably influenced by a career intervention.

Involvement and participation in KEY Careers was defined by the career center either as attendance at an on-campus workshop to create a career action plan or as completion of at least two of the six career development online modules for the purposes of this study. A nonparticipant was defined as a student who did not choose to engage with the KEY Careers program to the extent described previously in this paragraph. Although completion of the MVS is the first step of the program, participating in either the online modules or on-campus programming was chosen as the definition for engagement in the program since these are the stages where the career intervention and developmental learning took place.

Students were also classified by their initial MVS scores. The MVS instrument results are of a total of 18 points. Students who initially scored 0–5 on the instrument were classified as at-risk students, those who scored 6–12 were considered to be moderately at risk, and students who scored 13 or more were classified as high scorers with high vocational identity clarity. Information was correlated by student identification numbers.

Data Analysis

Data were computed to percentages of 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for participants and nonparticipants for the entire sample to gather initial observations (Drösler, 1989). ANCOVA was used to analyze the KEY Careers program participation effect on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates. The ANCOVA model was chosen for data analysis to statistically control an independent variable, high school GPA, which research suggested is a strong predictor 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates (Brown, 2014). The statistical analysis was utilized to determine whether a causal relationship existed among students who engaged with a career intervention and increased 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates. Analyses were calculated for each student demographic variable (i.e., race, gender, college major, and initial MVS score) to understand how career intervention influences measurements of institutional effectiveness.

Findings

The average 1-year retention rate for students who participated in KEY Careers was 86.3% compared to the nonparticipant retention rate that was 77.5% as shown in Table 1. There were 4,195 students who participated in the KEY Careers program and 9,902 nonparticipants in the program in the fall 2011–2014 cohorts. The 4-year graduation rate of participants was 58.4% compared to the 43.4% 4-year graduation rates of nonparticipants. There were 1,072 students in the 2011 fall cohort who participated in the program. Overall, 1-year retention was 8.8% higher and 4-year graduation rates were 15% higher for participants.

Table 1.
One-Year Retention and 4-Year Graduation Rates Summary for KEY Careers Participants Versus Non-KEY Careers Participants.

Data Total N of Students KEY Career Participants Nonparticipants

N Percentage N Percentage

One-year retention rate information 14,099

Returned second year 3,621 86.3 7,677 77.5

Did not return second year 574 13.7 2,227 22.5

Four-year graduation rate information 3,781

Graduated in 4 years 626 58.4 1,176 43.4

Did not graduate in 4 years 446 41.6 1,533 56.6

Note. The 1-year retention rate information reflects the fall freshmen cohorts of 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. Four-year graduation rate information was based off of fall 2011 cohort information.

Results of the influence of the KEY Careers program on 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates of various demographic groups can be found in Table 2. The covariate in this ANCOVA was high school GPA because it is a proven indicator of student retention and 4-year graduation. According to the results, involvement in KEY Careers is a strong statistically significant indicator of 1-year retention and 4-year graduation based on the calculated p value of <.001. The results of the ANCOVA summary with high school GPA as the covariate indicated participation in the KEY Careers program and high school GPA were also statistically significant indicators (p < .001) of a student graduating within 4 years.

Table 2.
Summary of KEY Careers Participation Impact Significance on 1-Year Retention and 4-Year Graduation Rates of Various Student Demographics.

Source 1-Year Retention Rates 4-Year Graduation Rates

Sum of Squares Mean Square F Significance Sum of Squares Mean Square F Significance

Entire sample

Covariate of high school GPA 87.952 87.952 583.293 .000* 89.571 89.571 404.992 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 11.026 11.026 73.121 .000* 0.854 10.854 73.121 .000*

By gender

Males

Covariate of high school GPA 47.763 47.763 297.809 .000* 33.720 33.720 154.159 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 3.979 3.979 24.810 .000* 3.799 3.779 17.637 .000*

Females

Covariate of high school GPA 40.177 40.177 278.226 .000* 50.919 50.919 228.491 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 7.375 7.375 51.070 .000* 6.833 6.833 30.644 .000*

By race

White

Covariate of high school GPA 71.978 71.978 488.709 .000* 75.214 75.214 338.683 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 10.063 10.063 68.324 .000* 9.367 9.367 42.177 .000*

Non-White

Covariate of high school GPA 14.247 14.247 83.911 .000* 9.203 9.203 42.695 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 0.796 0.796 4.960 .030* 1.330 1.330 6.169 .013*

By major

Applied science and technology majors

Covariate of high school GPA 17.596 17.569 109.433 .000* 17.822 17.822 81.151 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 2.910 2.910 18.126 .000* 3.312 3.312 15.082 .000*

Architecture majors

Covariate of high school GPA 2.919 2.919 31.129 .000* 1.638 1.638 7.280 .008

KEY Career involvement effect 0.102 0.102 1.084 .298 0.011 0.001 0.050 .823

Business majors

Covariate of high school GPA 7.786 7.786 51.730 .000* 11.228 11.228 50.769 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 0.722 0.722 4.794 .029* 0.810 0.810 3.665 .056

Communications, information, and media majors

Covariate of high school GPA 9.487 9.487 70.125 .000* 7.615 7.615 33.012 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 1.132 1.132 8.371 .004 1.590 1.590 6.891 .009

Education majors

Covariate of high school GPA 1.719 1.719 14.848 .000* 6.613 6.613 30.480 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 0.602 0.602 5.198 .023* 1.724 1.724 7.945 .005

Fine arts majors

Covariate of high school GPA 4.027 4.027 31.857 .000* 7.669 7.669 33.785 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 0.063 0.063 0.497 .481 0.003 0.003 0.014 .906

Science and humanities majors

Covariate of high school GPA 33.385 33.385 206.375 .000* 24.836 24.836 112.073 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 5.520 5.520 34.123 .000* 3.396 3.396 15.325 .000*

Undecided students

Covariate of high school GPA 8.312 8.312 47.699 .000* 3.599 3.599 18.718 .000***

KEY Career involvement effect 0.918 0.918 5.271 .022* 1.645 1.645 8.557 .004

By MVS

No initial MVS score

Covariate of high school GPA 8.294 8.294 42.456 .000* 2.522 2.522 11.369 .001*

KEY Career involvement effect 0.424 0.424 2.169 .141 0.770 0.770 3.471 .064

Initial at-risk MVS score

Covariate of high school GPA 4.992 4.992 34.340 .000* 5.715 5.715 26.345 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 2.480 2.480 17.057 .000* 1.847 1.847 8.513 .004

Initial moderately at-risk MVS score

Covariate of high school GPA 21.697 21.697 146.511 .000* 20.622 20.622 91.148 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 2.891 2.891 19.522 .000* 2.129 2.129 9.410 .002

Initial high MVS scores

Covariate of high school GPA 51.770 51.770 352.425 .000* 59.290 59.290 271.247 .000*

KEY Career involvement effect 4.383 24.383 29.838 .000* 6.296 6.296 28.803 .000***

Note. df = 1. GPA = grade point average; MVS = My Vocational Situation.

The analysis in Table 2 revealed career intervention participation was a statistically significant indicator of 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates for students regardless of race or gender. Involvement in the KEY Careers program was found to be an indicator of 1-year retention and 4-year graduation for the majority of college majors except for students majoring in architecture or fine arts. Four-year graduation rates were also not significantly influenced by participation in a career intervention for students majoring in business.

The analysis of the demographic of initial MVS score revealed the KEY Careers program was effective for program participants regardless of initial score. However, students who did not have an initial MVS score were not statistically significantly impacted by the program because the calculated p value was found not to be of significance for 1-year retention (p = .141) or 4-year graduation rates (p = .064).

Discussion

This discussion investigates how the KEY Careers program influenced 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates of various demographic populations matriculates to understand the significance and need for career intervention programming on a college campus.

Career Interventions as a Predictor of 1-Year Retention Rates

Results of this study suggested participation in a career intervention program was a statistically significant influencer of 1-year retention for all participants regardless of gender or race. One-year retention rates were positively influenced for KEY Careers participants, which are revealed by the higher percentage of 1-year retention compared to students who did not participate in the program. This evidence suggests that when a student made the decision to engage in a career intervention program on campus, they were more likely to return for their sophomore year than their counterpart peers who did not participate.

On a college campus, administrators and educators are charged with finding methods to improve retention rates and cultivate motivation for students to return to the university the following year (Habley et al., 2012). Tinto (1975) described the necessity for students to feel integrated into their community if they are going to return the following year. The KEY Careers program assisted students in solidifying academic and career goals that connected with their strengths and interests, which may have effected their academic commitment as indicated by the increase in retention. It is common for students to struggle with their vocational identity (Johnson et al., 2002) that may impact their motivation to return to their institution the following year. However, a facilitated career intervention enables students to confidently and conscientiously choose a major and shape their career goals. Regardless of gender or race, students were positively impacted by involvement in the KEY Careers program and were more likely to return the following fall semester than nonparticipants.

The MVS assessment is distributed to students at the beginning of the KEY Careers program is to intentionally determine which students are at risk, moderately at risk, or not at risk to properly allocate resources among students (Buescher, Johnston, Lucas, & Hughey, 1989; Fuller et al., 1994). KEY Careers was found to be effective for students improving their vocational clarity regardless of their initial score. This analysis suggests the MVS can be used as a tool to identify what depth of support and resources a student needs for their career development. However, students without an initial score were not impacted by KEY Careers participation that may have been due to lack of information as to what resources and level of support to provide these individuals. Knowing what resources to provide to students may give higher education professionals a more informed approach to career intervention delivery for first-year matriculates.

Career Interventions as a Predictor of 4-Year Graduation Rates

The 15% increase in the 4-year graduation rate of students who participated in a career intervention their first year of college compared to nonparticipants reflects how engaging in KEY Careers greatly influenced a student’s likelihood of graduating within 4 years. The results of this analysis provide evidence that all students, regardless of their race or gender, can benefit from participating in a career intervention their first semester of college.

The results of this study suggest participation in a career intervention is a statistically significant predictor of a student graduating within 4 years, as suggested by the literature (Damminger, Potter, & Pritchard, 2009; Folsom et al., 2002; Reardon, Melvin, McClain, Peterson, & Bowman, 2015). One reason students do not graduate within 4 years is due to the lack of vocational identity clarity (Cuseo, 2005). Tinto’s (1975) research suggested it was essential for students to have a commitment to degree completion if they were to persist, which KEY Careers enables. Allowing students to explore their occupational themes, personality, and skills allows for meaningful career exploration and creates a more focused academic experience (Cowger, Chauvin, & Miller, 2009; Holland, 1997; Ohler & Levinson, 2012). For students who initially pursued majors with linear career paths (i.e., architecture, business, and fine arts), it was anticipated that career interventions would not have a statistically significant impact on their 4-year graduation rates because their career goals are typically established prior to entering higher education (Brown et al., 2003).

Practice Implications

Over one third of students who enroll to complete a college degree are not able to finish within 6 years (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2013). Thus, finding effective programming initiatives is essential to foster student success and enable students to efficiently complete their college degree. Research suggested career interventions can significantly influence 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates (Damminger et al., 2009). There are steps institutions can take to create a more career-focused environment to foster student success.

Incoming matriculate students may not always be focused on developing their vocational identity during their first semester of college. Thus, student affairs educators need to proactively put forth the effort to encourage students to start thinking about their choice of major and career goals. Although developing a career intervention program may not be feasible, making an effort to ensure students know what resources exist on their campus is essential. E-mailing students with information about resources on campus for career development support, having career development professionals presenting in first-year seminars, or including career development resources in syllabi are practical steps to promote vocational development on campus.

Orientation is another avenue to encourage career development. A simple strategy is having a career development resources presentation at orientation resource fairs. Presenting resources available to incoming cohorts of matriculates and how career development professionals can support them in their academic and career goals helps to foster the importance of vocational identity development on a college campus. Additionally, creating informational literature for how parents and guardians can support their student’s career development may be a supplemental avenue of encouraging students to engage in vocational identity development. The document may include specific reflective questions to ask their student during their first year of college and information about online and on-campus resources for career support.

More exposure to career exploration and planning content allows students more opportunities to engage in developing their vocational identity. Establishing a presence on campus by offering campus-wide career programming, encouraging students to come meet with a career development professional, or promoting resources on social media such as Twitter, Instagram, and other outlets allow greater exposure to career development. Cultivating multiple opportunities for career interventions to occur may influence a student’s commitment to the university and ability to graduate within 4 years.

For campuses developing a career intervention program, the utilization of the MVS tool is recommended to maximize the experience of each participant. The initial distribution of the MVS assessment allows for administrators to identify which students are at risk or secure in their vocational identity. Rather than providing identical support or resources for all students, administrators can focus more of their efforts on at-risk students who have the most to gain from a career intervention. Appropriately allocating career exploration resources and time of career development staff based on initial MVS scores can help the program be more effective.

Beginning the intervention immediately when a matriculate enrolls in higher education was found to be effective. The results of this study and relevant research suggested it is beneficial to have students engage in developing their vocational identity during their first year of college (Damminger et al., 2009; Johnson et al., 2002). Likewise, following up with students after the career intervention is recommended to ensure the most positive response on increasing 1-year retention and 4-year graduation rates. Conducting a postassessment allows administrators to identify students needing further support.

Providing students with resources to explore their occupational identity is essential during the process of a career intervention. A career center is most effective for students when it offers a wide array of resources during career intervention including: one-on-one coaching sessions, additional exploratory inventories, group settings, and peer mentoring. Students having multiple capacities to explore and verbalize their academic and career interests optimize gaining vocational identity clarity (Holland, Magoon, & Spokane, 1981).

Limitations

One major limitations in this study is acknowledging that students who volunteered to participate in the program are more likely to be engaged with their collegiate experience and therefore be more likely to be retained and graduate within 4 years. Students who are engaged in university programs tend to be committed to investing their time into their education and integrating within the university setting through other cocurricular activities like the KEY Careers program (Bergen-Cico & Viscomi, 2012). Thus, students who chose to participate in the KEY Careers program may have been more likely to be involved on campus which would have also led to an increase in their likelihood to return to the university the following year. This limitation could also be related to social capital, and that the students who are likely to be involved already feel they belong at a higher education institution and are thus more likely to persist (Budgen, Main, Callcot, & Hamlet, 2014; Thomas, 2002).

Another limitation of this study was data were taken from a singular institution. Students also participated in varying levels that may have impacted results. Likewise, the participation in the KEY Careers program was optional and was not randomly assigned. An additional limitation to this study is that this was not a longitudinal study, and therefore the longer term impact of career interventions was not explored. Future research connecting the findings of this study with First Destination Survey outcomes to measure how students are influenced by career interventions would help administrators continue to understand the impact of this programming.

Summary

Providing a means of a career intervention to incoming students on a college campus, as demonstrated by the KEY Careers program results analysis, has the potential to reap great benefits. A significant increase in 1-year retention and 4-year graduation was seen for students who made the choice to engage in vocational identity development. Institutions and students have much to gain by fostering a spirit of career-mindedness on their campus and by offering students opportunities to engage in career development.

Data	Total N of Students	KEY Career Participants	Nonparticipants
One-year retention rate information	14,099
Returned second year		3,621	86.3	7,677	77.5
Did not return second year		574	13.7	2,227	22.5
Four-year graduation rate information	3,781
Graduated in 4 years		626	58.4	1,176	43.4
Did not graduate in 4 years		446	41.6	1,533	56.6

Source	1-Year Retention Rates	4-Year Graduation Rates
Entire sample
Covariate of high school GPA	87.952	87.952	583.293	.000***	89.571	89.571	404.992	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	11.026	11.026	73.121	.000***	0.854	10.854	73.121	.000***
By gender
Males
Covariate of high school GPA	47.763	47.763	297.809	.000***	33.720	33.720	154.159	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	3.979	3.979	24.810	.000***	3.799	3.779	17.637	.000***
Females
Covariate of high school GPA	40.177	40.177	278.226	.000***	50.919	50.919	228.491	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	7.375	7.375	51.070	.000***	6.833	6.833	30.644	.000***
By race
White
Covariate of high school GPA	71.978	71.978	488.709	.000***	75.214	75.214	338.683	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	10.063	10.063	68.324	.000***	9.367	9.367	42.177	.000***
Non-White
Covariate of high school GPA	14.247	14.247	83.911	.000***	9.203	9.203	42.695	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.796	0.796	4.960	.030*	1.330	1.330	6.169	.013*
By major
Applied science and technology majors
Covariate of high school GPA	17.596	17.569	109.433	.000***	17.822	17.822	81.151	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.910	2.910	18.126	.000***	3.312	3.312	15.082	.000***
Architecture majors
Covariate of high school GPA	2.919	2.919	31.129	.000***	1.638	1.638	7.280	.008**
KEY Career involvement effect	0.102	0.102	1.084	.298	0.011	0.001	0.050	.823
Business majors
Covariate of high school GPA	7.786	7.786	51.730	.000***	11.228	11.228	50.769	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.722	0.722	4.794	.029*	0.810	0.810	3.665	.056
Communications, information, and media majors
Covariate of high school GPA	9.487	9.487	70.125	.000***	7.615	7.615	33.012	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	1.132	1.132	8.371	.004**	1.590	1.590	6.891	.009**
Education majors
Covariate of high school GPA	1.719	1.719	14.848	.000***	6.613	6.613	30.480	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.602	0.602	5.198	.023*	1.724	1.724	7.945	.005**
Fine arts majors
Covariate of high school GPA	4.027	4.027	31.857	.000***	7.669	7.669	33.785	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.063	0.063	0.497	.481	0.003	0.003	0.014	.906
Science and humanities majors
Covariate of high school GPA	33.385	33.385	206.375	.000***	24.836	24.836	112.073	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	5.520	5.520	34.123	.000***	3.396	3.396	15.325	.000***
Undecided students
Covariate of high school GPA	8.312	8.312	47.699	.000***	3.599	3.599	18.718	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.918	0.918	5.271	.022*	1.645	1.645	8.557	.004**
By MVS
No initial MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	8.294	8.294	42.456	.000***	2.522	2.522	11.369	.001***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.424	0.424	2.169	.141	0.770	0.770	3.471	.064
Initial at-risk MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	4.992	4.992	34.340	.000***	5.715	5.715	26.345	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.480	2.480	17.057	.000***	1.847	1.847	8.513	.004**
Initial moderately at-risk MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	21.697	21.697	146.511	.000***	20.622	20.622	91.148	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.891	2.891	19.522	.000***	2.129	2.129	9.410	.002**
Initial high MVS scores
Covariate of high school GPA	51.770	51.770	352.425	.000***	59.290	59.290	271.247	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	4.383	24.383	29.838	.000***	6.296	6.296	28.803	.000***

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

American College Testing. (2010). What are ACT’s college readiness benchmarks? Iowa City, IA: Author.

Astin

A. W.

(1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bergen-Cico

Viscomi

(2012). Exploring the association between campus co-curricular involvement and academic achievement. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice, 14, 329–343. doi:10.2190/CS.14.3.c

Blumenstyk

(2015). American higher education in crisis? What everyone needs to know. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Brace

Kemp

Sneglar

(2013). SPSS in statistics: What everyone needs to know. Abingdon, England: Routledge.

Brown

J. D.

(2014). Analysis of covariance. In Linear models in matrix form (pp. 443–467). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11734-8

Brown

S. D.

Krane

N. E. R.

Brecheisen

Castelino

Budisin

Miller

Edens

(2003). Critical ingredients of career choice interventions: More analyses and new hypotheses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 411–428. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/lYCPhu

Brown

S. D.

Lent

R. W.

(2005). Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Budgen

Main

S. J.

Callcot

Hamlet

(2014). The first year at university: Giving social capital a sporting chance. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39, 157–172. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1029846.pdf

10.

Buescher

K. L.

Johnston

J. A.

Lucas

E. B.

Hughey

K. F.

(1989). Early intervention with undecided college students. Journal of College Student Development, 30, 375–376. Retrieved from IUCAT. (Accession No. 087-5294)

11.

Chambliss

D. F.

Takacs

C. G.

(2014). How college works. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

12.

Cowger

E. J.

Chauvin

Miller

M. J.

(2009). An “inverse” validation of Holland’s theory. College Student Journal, 43, 807–811. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/6vAlf0

13.

Curran

S. J.

(2012). Essential data on colleges and careers. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/rgNHlA

14.

Cuseo

. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections and systemic interventions. Unpublished manuscript, Policy Centre on the First Year of College, Brevard College, NC. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/CmE4t5

15.

Cuseo

(2005). Decided, “undecided,” and in transition: Implications for academic advisement, career counseling, & student retention (Unpublished manuscript). Madison: University of Wisconsin Colleges. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/AYLfjw

16.

Damminger

J. K.

Potter

G. C.

Pritchard

R. E.

(2009). Adding value to the first-year experience: Embedding self and major exploration in the college of business curriculum. American Journal of Business Education, 2, 49–56. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/krpjOH

17.

DeNicco

Harrington

Fogg

(2015). Factors of one-year college retention in a public state college system. Research in Higher Education Journal, 2, 1–13. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1056244.pdf

18.

Drösler

(1989). Quantitative psychology. Lewiston, NY: Hogrefe.

19.

Folsom

Peterson

Reardon

Mann

(2002). The impact of a career course on retention and academic performance (Technical Report No. 34). Tallahassee: Florida State University. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/A61WAC

20.

Fouad

N. A.

Ghosh

Chang

Figueiredo

Bachhuber

(2016). Career exploration among college students. Journal of College Student Development, 57, 460–464. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/QnNCP8

21.

Fowler

P. R.

Boylan

H. R.

(2010). Increasing student success and retention: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Developmental Education, 34, 2–4. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/ku8drM

22.

Fuller

B. E.

Blinne

W. R.

Johnston

J. A.

(1994). First year student early intervention project: The applications of “My Vocational Situation” in career outreach programming. Journal of Career Development, 21, 149–154. doi:10.1177/089484539402100211

23.

Grassgreen

(2013). Career services must die. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/uI73dX

24.

Habley

W. R.

Bloom

J. L.

Robbins

(2012). Increasing persistence: Research-based strategies for college student success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

25.

Holland

J. L.

(1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

26.

Holland

J. L.

(1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

27.

Holland

J. L.

Magoon

T. M.

Spokane

A. R.

(1981). Counseling psychology: Career interventions, research, and theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 279–305. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/hMy2cO

28.

Indiana Commission for Higher Education. (2012). Reaching higher, achieving more: A success agenda for higher education in Indiana. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/GUreX3

29.

Johnson

Nichols

C. N.

Buboltz

W. J.

Riedesel

(2002). Assessing a holistic trait and factor approach to career development of college students. Journal of College Counseling, 5, 4–14. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/E5qm7C

30.

Laskey

M. L.

Hetzel

C. J.

(2011). Investigating factors related to retention of at-risk college students. Learning Assistance Review, 16, 31–43. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/KxyIYN

31.

Lopez

S. J.

(2014, 4). A good job is hard to find…until students know what they do best. About Campus, 19, 2–6. doi:10.1002/abc.21144

32.

Lucas

(2011). A proposal for career assessment and exploration services for freshmen at Ball State University. Unpublished manuscript, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.

33.

Lucas

E. B.

Gysbers

N. C.

Buescher

K. L.

Heppner

P. P.

(1988). My Vocational Situation: Normative, psychometric, and comparative data. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 20, 162–170. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/lZMXo1

34.

Metz

G. W

. (2002). Challenges and changes to Tinto’s persistence theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus, OH. Abstract retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED471529.pdf

35.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2013). Federal student loan debt burden of noncompleters. Stats in brief (NCES 2013-155). Retrieved from http://goo.gl/ruWzRX

36.

Nauta

M. M.

(2010). The development, evolution, and status of Holland’s theory of vocational personalities: Reflections and future directions for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 11–22. Retrieved from https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/a0018213

37.

Ohler

D. L.

Levinson

E. M.

(2012). Using Holland’s theory in employment counseling: Focus on service occupations. Journal of Employment Counseling, 49, 148–159. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1920.2012.00016.x

38.

Osborn

D. S.

Howard

D. K.

Leierer

S. J.

(2007). The effect of a career development course on the dysfunctional career thoughts of racially and ethnically diverse college freshmen. Career Development Quarterly, 55, 365–377. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/fdNW3

39.

Pryor

J. H.

Hurtado

Saenz

V. B.

Santos

J. L.

Korn

W. S

. (2007). The American freshman: Forty year trends. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA. Retrieved from http://heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/40TrendsManuscript.pdf

40.

Reardon

R. C.

Melvin

McClain

Peterson

G. W.

Bowman

W. J

. (2015). The career course as a factor in college graduation. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 17, 336–350. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/RxEfXk

41.

Sanders

Burton

J. D.

(1996). From retention to satisfaction: New outcomes for assessing the freshman experience. Research in Higher Education, 37, 555–567. Retrieved from https://link-springer-com.web.bisu.edu.cn/article/10.1007/BF01724938#page-1

42.

Sawyer

(2013). Beyond correlations: Usefulness of high school GPA and test scores in making college admissions decisions. Applied Measurement in Education, 26, 89–112. doi:10.1080/08957347.2013.765433

43.

Schaub

(2012). The profession of college career services delivery: What college counselors should know about career centers. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 26, 201–215. doi:10.1080/87568225.2012.685854

44.

Seidman

(2012). College student retention: Formula for student success. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

45.

Shaughnessy

J. J.

Zechmeister

(2003). Research methods in psychology. Retrieved from http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072494468/student_view0/

46.

Shin

Milton

(2004). The effects of performance budgeting and funding programs on graduation rate in public four-year colleges and universities. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12, 1–27. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/177

47.

Talbert

P. Y.

(2012). Strategies to increase enrollment, retention, and graduation rates. Journal of Developmental Education, 36, 22–24. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/0hW1xV

48.

Thomas

(2002). Student retention in higher education: The role of institutional habitus. Journal of Education Policy, 17, 423–442. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/QZDPD5

49.

Tinsley

Bowman

(1990). Career decision scale, my vocational situation, vocational rating scale, and decision rating scale: Do they measure the same constructs? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 115–120. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/dwxr4o

50.

Tinto

(1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89–125. doi:10.3102/00346543045001089

51.

Tinto

(1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

52.

Tinto

(2006). Research and practice on student retention: What next? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8, 1–19. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/PAkmJS

53.

Yanchak

K. V.

Lease

S. H.

Strauser

D. R.

(2005). Relation of disability type and career thoughts to vocational identity. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 48, 130–138. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/30Pv

Data	Total N of Students	KEY Career Participants		Nonparticipants
Data	Total N of Students	N	Percentage	N	Percentage
One-year retention rate information	14,099
Returned second year		3,621	86.3	7,677	77.5
Did not return second year		574	13.7	2,227	22.5
Four-year graduation rate information	3,781
Graduated in 4 years		626	58.4	1,176	43.4
Did not graduate in 4 years		446	41.6	1,533	56.6

Source	1-Year Retention Rates				4-Year Graduation Rates
Source	Sum of Squares	Mean Square	F	Significance	Sum of Squares	Mean Square	F	Significance
Entire sample
Covariate of high school GPA	87.952	87.952	583.293	.000***	89.571	89.571	404.992	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	11.026	11.026	73.121	.000***	0.854	10.854	73.121	.000***
By gender
Males
Covariate of high school GPA	47.763	47.763	297.809	.000***	33.720	33.720	154.159	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	3.979	3.979	24.810	.000***	3.799	3.779	17.637	.000***
Females
Covariate of high school GPA	40.177	40.177	278.226	.000***	50.919	50.919	228.491	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	7.375	7.375	51.070	.000***	6.833	6.833	30.644	.000***
By race
White
Covariate of high school GPA	71.978	71.978	488.709	.000***	75.214	75.214	338.683	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	10.063	10.063	68.324	.000***	9.367	9.367	42.177	.000***
Non-White
Covariate of high school GPA	14.247	14.247	83.911	.000***	9.203	9.203	42.695	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.796	0.796	4.960	.030*	1.330	1.330	6.169	.013*
By major
Applied science and technology majors
Covariate of high school GPA	17.596	17.569	109.433	.000***	17.822	17.822	81.151	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.910	2.910	18.126	.000***	3.312	3.312	15.082	.000***
Architecture majors
Covariate of high school GPA	2.919	2.919	31.129	.000***	1.638	1.638	7.280	.008**
KEY Career involvement effect	0.102	0.102	1.084	.298	0.011	0.001	0.050	.823
Business majors
Covariate of high school GPA	7.786	7.786	51.730	.000***	11.228	11.228	50.769	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.722	0.722	4.794	.029*	0.810	0.810	3.665	.056
Communications, information, and media majors
Covariate of high school GPA	9.487	9.487	70.125	.000***	7.615	7.615	33.012	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	1.132	1.132	8.371	.004**	1.590	1.590	6.891	.009**
Education majors
Covariate of high school GPA	1.719	1.719	14.848	.000***	6.613	6.613	30.480	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.602	0.602	5.198	.023*	1.724	1.724	7.945	.005**
Fine arts majors
Covariate of high school GPA	4.027	4.027	31.857	.000***	7.669	7.669	33.785	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.063	0.063	0.497	.481	0.003	0.003	0.014	.906
Science and humanities majors
Covariate of high school GPA	33.385	33.385	206.375	.000***	24.836	24.836	112.073	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	5.520	5.520	34.123	.000***	3.396	3.396	15.325	.000***
Undecided students
Covariate of high school GPA	8.312	8.312	47.699	.000***	3.599	3.599	18.718	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.918	0.918	5.271	.022*	1.645	1.645	8.557	.004**
By MVS
No initial MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	8.294	8.294	42.456	.000***	2.522	2.522	11.369	.001***
KEY Career involvement effect	0.424	0.424	2.169	.141	0.770	0.770	3.471	.064
Initial at-risk MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	4.992	4.992	34.340	.000***	5.715	5.715	26.345	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.480	2.480	17.057	.000***	1.847	1.847	8.513	.004**
Initial moderately at-risk MVS score
Covariate of high school GPA	21.697	21.697	146.511	.000***	20.622	20.622	91.148	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	2.891	2.891	19.522	.000***	2.129	2.129	9.410	.002**
Initial high MVS scores
Covariate of high school GPA	51.770	51.770	352.425	.000***	59.290	59.290	271.247	.000***
KEY Career involvement effect	4.383	24.383	29.838	.000***	6.296	6.296	28.803	.000***