Undergraduate Student Retention Activities: Challenges and Research Agenda

Data Collection and Sample

The documents were collected in the Scopus database and WoS, considering all those available in the base journals in Social Sciences. For the selection, we only chose articles between 2014 and 2022, and the search expression was “student retention.” The search took place in the title, abstract, and keywords. Our full sample can be retrieved by typing the following query in Scopus and WoS: “TITLE-ABS-KEY (“student retention”) AND PUBYEAR > 2013 AND PUBYEAR < 2023 AND DOCTYPE(ar) AND SUBJAREA(SOCI).” Five hundred forty-one articles were initially selected.

Analysis

We used the Bibexcel software to capture and organize information about the articles, making it possible to generate the co-occurrence matrix (Bernard & Ryan, 2010; van den Besselaar & Heimeriks, 2006). In co-occurrence matrices, the rows and columns have the same labels in a square matrix. The matrix data represents a similarity measure (Bernard & Ryan 2010). These matrices enable the use of multivariate techniques to support qualitative exploratory studies (Bazeley, 2013, p. 301). The co-occurrence matrix serves as the basis for the bibliographic coupling.

In the bibliographic coupling, pairs of articles share the same reference. In this case, it indicates similar lines of research that are taking place (Vogel & Güttel, 2013). To reach the articles that started to represent the research front in retention, at Bibexcel, we selected only articles that share at least one citation with themselves. This procedure reduced the sample from 541 to 360 articles left to compose the bibliographic coupling matrix, which corresponds to about 67% of the total sample. Our analysis was conducted by reading all articles to label and identify the components that emerged from the bibliographic coupling. We also superimposed the articles in a network analysis visualization.

A principal component analysis (PCA) was performed using the bibliographic coupling matrix, converted into a Pearson correlation matrix (Vogel & Güttel, 2013). The components were extracted using varimax rotation (Lin & Cheng, 2010) and Kaiser normalization. We kept only variable loads above or equal to absolute 0.4. Our final sample decreased to 125 articles. We used parallel analysis to calculate the number of components to extract (Hayton et al., 2004; Horn, 1965). The result of the parallel analysis for this work indicated that we should retain three components.

We also performed a network analysis. To make the analysis more robust and complement the PCA, we used the same bibliographic coupling matrix as an adjacency matrix, that is, support with another method (Vogel & Güttel, 2013). It allows viewing the structure of the field from a network diagram. The nodes in the diagram represent the publications. The edges represent the relationship between the publications in the case of a bibliometric article. We analyzed using the Ucinet software. We superimposed the PCA results onto the network. In the result section, we present the bibliographic coupling analysis results for the principal components analysis and the superimposed network.

The density and cohesion of the relationship network were also calculated (Vogel & Güttel, 2013). Density represents the extent to which the components define a frequent conceptual basis. The maximum value, 1, represents the exhaustion of the connections between the components references (Vogel & Güttel, 2013). The bibliographic coupling indicates that the articles use common references and clearly focus on grouping research. Cohesion, also a measure of density, represents the connection with other components, meaning the degree of interdependence between the components (Wasserman & Faust, 1994). The bibliographic coupling helps interpret the results, making it possible to understand how the research fronts are related.

We evaluated the influence of the primary references on each component’s articles to assist in identifying the orientation of the components based on the organization of a table, comparing the accumulated influence of the references in the articles that made up the component. The influence was verified by reading two authors, not only by title and abstract but by organizing a table with the main topics of the components. Additionally, we verified the presence and influence of the main references identified in the texts. With the interpretation of cross-loads and the article network, this procedure made it possible to elaborate on the reference research streams in higher education retention.

To evaluate the relationship between the components, we assessed the cross loads that are in Table 1, the network metrics (Table 2), and the network (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SqPElMxnyickqTbmGvI3zHljELv1xCws/view?usp=share_link). This joint analysis enabled the organization of Figure 1, which we used to guide the discussion and future research agenda.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Bibliographic Coupling Analysis.

The shade entries represents the largest factor among the components.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Bibliographic Coupling PCA and Network Metrics.

Bibliographic coupling	Articles	Density	Cohesion	% explained variance	% cumulated variance	KMO	Bartlett
BC1	48	1	0.59	36,77	36.77
BC2	47	1	0.66	25.78	62.55
BC3	30	1	0.66	15.62	78,17
Total	125					0.80	0.000

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Higher education student retention works.

HEI Perspective—Activities for Student Retention (Component 1)

We grouped 48 articles considering this side of the perspective. Most articles deal with the institutional activities of the HEIs that can encourage students to continue their courses (Hinojosa et al., 2022; Tinto, 2017), and attenuate forces beyond students’ immediate surroundings (Mendoza et al., 2015). To prevent dropouts, HEIs should consider the overlapping domains of a social system, an academic system, and teaching (Qvortrup & Lykkegaard, 2022), and increase their satisfaction with the HEI (Strahan & Credé, 2015).

In their 2019 study, Richards and Graber investigated how doctoral programs can prepare physical education teachers to perform retention functions. The faculty plays a significant role in delivering educational services, but other areas of the higher education institution (HEI) can also contribute to student support. To enhance support for students, some authors suggest that HEIs should implement regular programs of encouragement, awareness, and training for the entire team (Cara, 2015; Griffin et al., 2016; Kiser & Hammer, 2016; Lake et al., 2018; Roberts, 2018; Southwell et al., 2018).

Several actions can improve the academic performance of first-year students and increase their retention rates. These include analyzing students’ performance before entering higher education (Behr et al., 2020a, 2020b; Marrero, 2016), offering introductory courses (Bloemer et al., 2017; Windham et al., 2014), consider student entry characteristics (Johnson et al., 2014; K. Walker & Okpala, 2017), administering tests with low levels of difficulty at the beginning to improve confidence (Meer & Chapman, 2014), monitoring complementary course schedules (Hansen et al., 2014), establishing performance goals (Lorch, 2014), providing academic support (García Villa & González y González, 2014; Kiser & Hammer, 2016; Lee & Matusovich, 2016), offering scholarships to financially restricted students (Mendoza et al., 2014), engaging in complementary activities (Crowe, 2015), and developing specific processes for students who experience difficulties (Carter & Yeo, 2016; Damkaci et al., 2017; Sass et al., 2018; Thompson-Ebanks, 2017; Windham et al., 2014). According to several authors (Novak et al., 2016; Picton et al., 2018; Perchinunno et al., 2021; Raju & Schumacker, 2015; Zając & Komendant-Brodowska, 2019), enhancing academic performance in the first few months of a course is a significant motivational factor for students and can increase their retention rates.

HEIs can take various steps to increase student retention rates. One such step is to provide face-to-face services on digital platforms with interaction through social media (Oregon et al., 2018). Other steps include sending motivational emails to students (Inkelaar & Simpson, 2015), offering online tutorials and classes (Maul et al., 2018), and providing remote access to the library collection (Ames et al., 2018; Eng & Stadler, 2015; Soria et al., 2014).

In addition to the benefits mentioned earlier, students’ use of an institution’s physical and digital infrastructure offers several advantages. For instance, digitally, students can access classes (Yu, 2017) and library collections (Krieb, 2018), interact with teachers and peers and use monitoring and control tools to minimize dropout rates. Moreover, Mah (2016) proposes a model that links student learning analysis with digital badges, which can be shared on professional social networks and enhance student retention rates in HEIs (Mah & Ifenthaler, 2020).

HEI Perspective—Activities for Student Success (Component 3)

The 31 articles in this component, from the perspective of HEIs, are predominantly focused on themes related to student success. The student individual level is recognized as important to the retention (Mellado et al., 2018). However, Component 3 differentiates itself by dealing primarily with activities that provide academic services to educational institutions. Academic support programs aimed at helping students during the pre-higher education transition (Kruse et al., 2015; Mezick, 2015; Raelin et al., 2014; Slade et al., 2015; Xu & Webber, 2018) and their first year (Borgen & Borgen, 2016; Mah & Ifenthaler, 2018; Reid et al., 2014; Robertson & Pelaez, 2016; Xu, 2017, 2018) can reduce stress during this critical period. HEIs must take care with the class sizes to avoid dropout (Bettinger & Long, 2018). Weekly sessions for students attending challenging courses (Goomas, 2014; Kimbark et al., 2017) are one such support measure. Additionally, HEIs must facilitate an adaptation process for transferred or exchange students, which includes conveying rules, values, and procedures to minimize the impact on their success (Jacobson et al., 2017; Mosley-Howard et al., 2016).

Measures aimed at supporting students during the pre-higher education transition (Slade et al., 2015) and their first year (Borgen & Borgen, 2016; Gallegos et al., 2018; García-Ros et al., 2018; Mah & Ifenthaler, 2018; Reid et al., 2014; Thomas & Hovdhaugen, 2014), as student affairs offices (Gansemer-Topf et al., 2014) can reduce stress during this critical period. One such measure is academic support programs, including weekly sessions for students attending traditionally tricky courses (Goomas, 2014; Kimbark et al., 2017). In cases where HEIs receive students who have permanently transferred or are going through an exchange period, an adaptation process that includes the transmission of rules, values, and procedures is necessary to minimize the impact on the success of the new student (Jacobson et al., 2017; Mosley-Howard et al., 2016).

Students who pursue higher education and receive a diploma and professional training expect to improve their job prospects, which is associated with their satisfaction levels (James & Yun, 2018; Luke et al., 2015), and identity (Bowman & Felix, 2017). In this context, transforming academic advisors into career coaches (Tudor, 2018) to guide students in developing their academic and professional skills can enhance student success rates. Furthermore, creating pathways between students and potential employers is crucial for facilitating their transition to the job market.

Student Persistence (Component 2)

This component consists of 47 articles whose focus is on the student’s perspective regarding permanence. Unlike Tinto’s (1975, 1987) integrated student model approach, which focuses on the student’s sociological aspects, most articles of this component approach Bean’s (1980) student friction model approach that evolved the previous model including psychological aspects of the student.

Self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977, 1986) is a prominent approach in the academic context, often used to indicate students’ confidence in their academic skills. Holt and Fifer (2018) showed that a teacher’s self-efficacy in mentoring improved the mentee’s performance and increased their retention. Fong et al. (2018) found that motivation and self-perception were associated with students’ achievement and persistence in community colleges. Student motivation seems significant role in determining academic success and college persistence (Slanger et al., 2015). L. Walker (2016) found that implementing a course on successful strategies for nursing students improved their self-efficacy. Wood et al. (2015) showed that self-efficacy in mathematics benefited academic integration, promoting meetings between students, teachers, and academic advisors. Marczuk (2022) argues that a highly structured curriculum and practical activities may improve students’ academic self-efficacy, reducing dropout intention, but achievement norms have the opposite effect.

Another key factor, highlighted in the study by Bean and Eaton (2000), is that as students interact with the campus environment and its members, such as teachers, fellow students, and staff, they undergo psychological processes that evaluate their experiences and feelings, ultimately increasing their retention rates. Studies by Licursi (2018), Fussy (2018), Jilg and Southgate (2017), Flanders (2017), Collings et al. (2014) show that students who are oriented toward peer relationships have higher levels of integration into the university. Similarly, articles by Amegbe et al. (2018), Cotton et al. (2017), Boateng et al. (2016), Thistoll and Yates (2016), Richardson (2015), McDonald and Robinson (2014), Witt et al. (2014) reveal that the frequency and quality of interactions with teachers, both inside and outside the classroom, can clearly increase persistence.

Other components that have been highlighted in the literature include consistent use of library services (Knapp et al., 2014; Murray, 2015; Murray & Ireland, 2017), scholarship programs (Harrison et al., 2018), summer bridge programs (programs that help incoming students integrate into US HEIs) (Wachen et al., 2018), the difference of online students (Fraser et al., 2018; Gaytan, 2015; Shea & Bidjerano, 2014; Slanger et al., 2015), and the analysis of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) (McCluckie, 2014). These components contribute to the development of positive psychological factors that can increase students’ persistence and ultimately lead to course completion.

The impact of psychological issues on students is still being discussed in the evolution of existing theoretical and conceptual models (Demetriou & Powell, 2014). It reinforces the central role of trust in improving student loyalty, favoring their persistence (Heo & Lee, 2016). Students who do not feel that their social or institutional expectations have been met accurately are much less likely to return to the institution (Ahmed et al., 2015; Martín et al., 2018; Mckendry et al., 2014; Pleitz et al., 2015). Students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher risk of dropping out of higher education because they are concerned with the cost and benefits of higher education (Miranda & Guzmán, 2017; Müller & Klein, 2022). However, employed students may engage more with their courses and have a stronger identification with them (Kocsis & Pusztai, 2021; Kocsis et al., 2022; Pokorny et al., 2017).

However, despite surveys identifying the challenge of retaining students and recommending actions, institutionalized planning articles and structured initiatives for student retention in HEIs as a whole are lacking. Instead, there seem to be motivational initiatives implemented at the course or department level, which are not part of a comprehensive strategy for addressing the challenge of student retention. Student retention should be viewed as a student retention form a holistic perspective that considers its complexity (Forsman et al., 2014, 2015; Pereira et al., 2015).

Summary of Activities

Table 3 summarizes the actions proposed for addressing student retention from different perspectives. HEIs (Higher Education Institutions) develop retention activities that include academic support programs, activities to address student difficulties and motivation, and technology support. Activities that consider the student’s perspective, particularly in addressing their difficulties and motivation, are also important for student success and retention.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Summary of Activities by Perspective.

Perspective	Activities for …	Example of activities	References
HEI	Student retention
	Academic supporting activities and programs	Teachers and teams dedicated to student retention	Richards and Graber (2019); Lake et al. (2018); Roberts (2018); Southwell et al. (2018); Kiser and Hammer (2016); Griffin et al. (2016)
		Program to develop performance goals for students	Lorch (2014)
		Academic support	García Villa and González y González (2014); Lee and Matusovich (2016); Kiser and Hammer (2016)
		Analyze students previous performance	Marrero (2016); Behr et al. (2020a, 2020b)
	Supporting students’ difficulties and motivation	Scholarships for students with financial restrictions	Mendoza et al. (2014)
		Develop specific processes for students who have difficulties	Windham et al. (2014); Carter and Yeo (2016); Damkaci et al. (2017)
		Motivational emails for students	Inkelaar and Simpson (2015)
		Offering of introductory courses	Windham et al. (2014); Bloemer et al. (2017)
		Low level of difficulty at the Beginning to improve student confidence	Meer and Chapman (2014)
		Monitoring in their complementary course schedule	Hansen et al. (2014)
	Technological supporting activites	Making available all their face-to-face services on digital platforms with interaction through social media	Oregon et al. (2018)
		Improving academic performance in the first months of the course	Raju and Schumacker (2015); Picton et al. (2018); Perchinunno et al. (2021); Zając and Komendant-Brodowska (2019)
		Tutorials and permanent online classes	Maul et al. (2018)
		Remote access to the library collection	Soria et al. (2014); Eng and Stadler (2015); Ames et al. (2018); Krieb (2018)
		Digital access to classes	Yu (2017)
		Digital badges	Mah (2016); Mah and Ifenthaler (2020)
	Student success
	Academic supporting activities and programs	Supporting students in the pre-higher education transition	Slade et al. (2015)
		STEM - invest in a favorable learning environment, emphasizing quality teaching, and friendly academic advice; more structured family background receive more support to find the right information and support on campus to help them succeed	Xu (2018); Kruse et al. (2015)
		Link between satisfaction and getting a job; academic assistant into a career coach	James and Yun (2018); Tudor (2018)
		Class size increases, dropout rates also increase	Bettinger and Long, 2018
	Supporting students’ difficulties and motivation	Supporting students during their first year	Reid et al. (2014); Borgen and Borgen (2016); Mah and Ifenthaler (2018)
		Academic support programs have weekly sessions for students who attend traditionally difficult courses	Goomas (2014); Kimbark et al. (2017)
		Students transferred or going through an exchange period, there must be an adaptation process	Mosley-Howard et al. (2016); Jacobson et al. (2017)
		Non-traditional students, teachers and managers will have to act to transform norms and structures to provide consistent support to increase student success	Zerquera et al. (2018)
Students	Student persistence
	Supporting activities and programs	The teacher’s self-efficacy in mentoring improved the mentee’s performance and, consequently, increased his permanence	Holt and Fifer (2018)
		Highly structured curriculum and practical activities may improve students’ academic self-efficacy lowering dropout intention, but achievement norms have an opposite effect	Marczuk (2022)
		Constancy in the use of library services	Murray and Ireland (2017); Murray (2015); Knapp et al. (2014)
		Scholarship program	Harrison et al. (2018)
		The summer bridge programs (programs that integrate the incoming student in the US HEI)	Wachen et al. (2018)
		Analysis of the receiver’s operating characteristics - ROC	McCluckie (2014)
		Motivation and self-perception were associated with students’ achievement and persistence from community colleges	Fong et al. (2018)
		Improvement in students’ self-efficacy occurred after implementing a course on successful strategies for nursing students	L. Walker (2016)
		Self-efficacy in mathematics offered benefits for academic integration in college, promoting meetings between students, teachers, and academic advisors	Wood et al. (2015)
	Supporting students’ difficulties and motivation	Peer-oriented individuals showed higher levels of integration into the university	Licursi (2018); Fussy (2018); Jilg and Southgate (2017); Flanders (2017); Collings et al. (2014)
		The frequency and quality of interaction with teachers, inside and outside the classroom, clearly increase persistence	Amegbe et al. (2018); Cotton et al. (2017); Boateng et al. (2016); Thistoll and Yates (2016); Richardson (2015); McDonald and Robinson (2014); Witt et al. (2014)
		Trust plays an important and central role in improving student loyalty, favoring their permanence	Heo and Lee (2016)
		Students who do not feel that their social or institutional expectations have been met accurately are much less likely to return to the institution	Pleitz et al. (2015)
		Especially students with lower socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher risk of dropping out of higher education because they are concerned with the rewards, cost, and benefits of higher education	Müller and Klein, 2022
		Employed students may engage and have more identification with their courses	Kocsis and Pusztai (2021); Kocsis et al. (2022)

The focus of the articles in Component 1 is on preventing student dropouts in higher education institutions (HEIs) by considering the overlapping domains of a social system, an academic system, and teaching. The articles discuss various actions that HEIs can take, such as analyzing students’ performance before entering HEIs, offering introductory courses, providing academic support, and using digital platforms and services to increase student retention rates. The articles also emphasize the importance of faculty and institutional support, including regular programs of encouragement, awareness, and training for the entire team.

The 31 articles in Component 3 primarily focus on academic services provided by HEIs, whereas those related to student success primarily appear in other components. Supporting students during the pre-higher education transition and their first year is critical, and academic support programs, such as weekly sessions for students taking challenging courses, can be effective. An adaptation process is necessary to ensure that transferred or exchange students receive the information they need to succeed. Transforming academic advisors into career coaches can help students develop both academic and professional skills and enhance success rates. Creating pathways between students and potential employers is essential for facilitating their transition to the job market.

The articles in Component 2 suggest that student retention in higher education is affected by psychological factors, such as self-efficacy, interactions with campus members, and meeting social and institutional expectations. Other factors, such as the use of library services, scholarship programs, and summer bridge programs, also contribute to positive psychological development that increases student persistence. HEIs need to develop comprehensive strategies to address the challenge of student retention, including academic support programs, technology support, and activities that consider the student’s perspective. However, current institutional planning and initiatives for student retention lack a comprehensive approach.

We classified each article of the components in Table 3 into one of three categories: academic supporting activities and programs, supporting students’ difficulties and motivation, and technological supporting activities. Academic supporting activities and programs are activities and programs designed to help students succeed academically, such as tutoring, academic advising, study skills workshops, and academic support centers. Supporting students’ difficulties and motivation are activities and programs designed to address students’ personal and emotional challenges, such as mental health counseling, financial aid support, and career counseling. They also aim to motivate and engage students in their academic journey by providing them with opportunities for personal growth and leadership development. Technological supporting activities are activities and programs that use technology to support students’ academic and personal success, such as online learning platforms, digital tools for organization and time management, and social media platforms for communication and collaboration with peers and faculty.

Student Retention and Context - HEI and Cultural

Retaining students in higher education has been a priority for university managers for more than six decades as a response to high dropout rates (Aljohani, 2016; Qvortrup & Lykkegaard, 2022). Despite ongoing efforts, the number of students who drop out remains high and stable, with rates around 50% across regions, countries, and types of institutions. This is an etic phenomenon that needs to be understood in its specific context (Marsh, 2014). Therefore, standardized approaches may not be effective, and retention strategies should be tailored to individual institutions and student populations.

The studies analyzed in this research show a predominant focus on higher education institutions in the United States, with some representation from European institutions, but a lack of research on institutions in less developed countries and economies. However, it is essential to consider the context of the HEI and the region in which it is located. For instance, when examining Latin America, the ethnic and minority factors present in North American studies may not be relevant (Aguinis et al., 2020). Additionally, Latin America faces significant economic and social challenges that may impact student retention (e.g., Slade et al., 2015). The region also offers a large number of distance learning courses, including 2-year and 4-year non-integral programs. Therefore, to advance our knowledge of student retention, it is essential to consider the context of different countries and regions, not only to benefit these countries but also to enable cross-cultural comparisons and improve our understanding of the factors that impact student retention globally (Lazzarini, 2012).

The significant volume of both quantitative and qualitative studies conducted on student retention in higher education suggests that more systematic reviews are necessary to synthesize and compare existing research evidence. Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis studies should be considered, as they can explore various aspects of student performance and assess the effects of different retention initiatives. By examining the dimensioning of the effect, we can evaluate what is common across different contexts (Snyder, 2019). Systematic reviews can provide an objective assessment of the evidence and help identify effective strategies for student retention. Therefore, it is crucial to continue conducting systematic reviews to advance knowledge in this area.

Freshmen, Senior, and Others

A considerable proportion of the literature focuses on first-year students, given that 60% of dropouts occur in the first 2 years of study, with most happening in the first year (Ross et al., 2012). Nonetheless, it is necessary to gain a better understanding of dropout across both 2-year and 4-year courses. Even if we exclude the dropout that happens in the first year, retention rates significantly decrease until the end of the course, with up to 20% of students dropping out (Ross et al., 2012). Longitudinal studies are necessary to improve our understanding of dropout across the course. It is also crucial to examine dropout beyond the first year, as the factors that influence students’ persistence appear to be distinct, and involve psychological and social aspects beyond institutional factors and student characteristics (Ross et al., 2012).

While many studies indicate that the majority of students who drop out are under 25 years of age, it is important to consider that in less developed countries, there may be many older and working students, as well as gender differences, that could be significant factors in dropout rates. Future research should consider these distinctions and the use of subgroups, such as people with similar behaviors in a given context, and the evolution of these subgroups over time to better understand the factors that contribute to dropout (Picton et al., 2018).

Focus from the Student

To increase retention in higher education, future research should consider the actions, activities, and services provided by HEIs from the student’s perspective and with the goal of promoting persistence and success. Most HEIs seem to focus on reducing dropout, but they should also consider the broader context of retention as a strategic issue that requires integration between sectors and levels of the university. Surprisingly, only a few studies have examined the impact of the curriculum and teaching techniques and technologies on retention. It is essential to consider both psychological and social aspects in retention research, with a focus on the student’s perspective (Dewberry & Jackson, 2018; Gray & Swinton, 2017).

Offer Mode - Face-to-Face, Hybrid, or Distant Learning

Traditionally, HEI studies deal with face-to-face and distance learning courses. Some papers also examine graduate courses. Despite the importance of face-to-face and distance learning, the future indicates the growth of hybrid courses and skills development for the job market. Distance learning courses, for example, present problems of social integration and direct relationship with the teacher, which have been identified as necessary for retention (Hoffman, 2014). Face-to-face courses, on the other hand, do not incorporate available technology to increase their value. With the emergence of hybrid courses, the challenge remains to understand better the type of on-site courses for distance learning as a continuum, regardless of HEI’s position. This understanding involves investigating aspects of price, cost, teaching methodologies, standardization, or not of curriculum and adoption of technological innovations.

Adopting teaching technologies has been highlighted, but the effects on retention are not in the studies we have evaluated. Due to the novelty of the theme, it seems to be a need for qualitative studies that evaluate experiments and their impacts on students’ persistence and success. It was clear from the effect of COVID-19 on higher education the many possibilities that technology can bring through remote education (Tang et al., 2021). However, there are challenges to understanding the engagement and quality control of courses in these circumstances, which opens up significant possibilities for postgraduate and other offer levels.

The least developed countries’ challenges are significant in guaranteeing skills development for the labor market. These challenges also exist in developed countries (Govindarajan & Srivastava, 2020). Traditionally, despite the existence of MOOCs (massive open online course), HEIs do not take advantage of this need, nor do professional certifications, which institutes of practitioners usually offer. It appears to be a strategic challenge for long-term sustainability to be considered and investigated, not only because of the long-term reduction in the stock of eligible students and young people but also the continuing education that smaller consulting companies have explored.

Future Research Agenda Summary

Below we present more explicitly the future agenda based on the analysis of research in student retention. Some possible research questions and explicit future research agenda topics are presented in Table 4.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Future Research Agenda.

Group	Research questions	Future agenda
Student retention and context - HEI and cultural	How do student retention strategies differ across diverse cultural contexts, especially in less developed countries? What unique challenges does Latin America face regarding student retention, and how do these challenges compare to other regions? Are there universally applicable retention strategies, or should all strategies be context-specific? How do ethnic and minority factors in retention research differ across global contexts?	Conduct cross-cultural comparative studies to understand global retention nuances. Develop tailored retention strategies for specific regions, especially less-represented ones. Conduct meta-analysis to understand the global landscape of student retention research.
Freshmen, senior and others	What specific factors contribute to student dropouts beyond the first year? How do dropout rates and reasons differ between 2-year and 4-year courses? What unique challenges do older students face, especially in less developed countries, that contribute to dropout?	Conduct longitudinal studies that follow student cohorts throughout their academic journey. Investigate the significance of age, gender, and working status in relation to dropout rates. Delve deeper into psychological and social aspects influencing student retention beyond the first year.
Focus from the student	How do different curriculum designs and teaching techniques impact student retention? What services and supports do students feel are most beneficial to their persistence and success? How can HEIs strike a balance between dropout prevention and a broader strategic focus on retention?	Conduct qualitative research capturing the student perspective on retention strategies. Investigate the direct impact of curriculum and pedagogical techniques on retention rates. Develop strategies that promote a holistic approach to student, emphasizing both prevention and strategic integration.
Offer mode - Face-to-face, Hybrid or distant learning	How do retention rates compare between face-to-face, hybrid, and distance learning modes? What specific challenges do hybrid courses present concerning student retention? How can technology be best used to enhance retention across different course modes? What are the specific challenges and opportunities posed by MOOCs concerning traditional HEIs, especially in the context of skills development for the job market?	Examine the long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on retention rates across various learning modes. Investigate the role of engagement and quality control in distance and hybrid learning. Understand how HEIs can better cater to skills development, especially in less developed countries, through technological interventions.

Research on student retention has predominantly focused on higher education institutions in developed regions like the United States (Aljohani, 2016). To achieve a holistic understanding of retention challenges and strategies, it is imperative to consider institutions in less developed economies (Aguinis et al., 2020). The varying cultural, economic, and social contexts, like those in Latin America, underscore the importance of region-specific research (Lazzarini, 2012; Slade et al., 2015).

The spotlight on first-year dropouts, given the majority occur during this period, risks overlooking the significant number that continue throughout the course (Ross et al., 2012). To truly combat dropout rates, research must venture beyond the freshman year and delve into diverse age groups, especially since factors influencing persistence can differ greatly with progression (Picton et al., 2018).

Universities tend to emphasize dropout reduction, but a broader, more strategic focus is essential (Dewberry & Jackson, 2018; Gray & Swinton, 2017). This involves examining retention from the student’s perspective, considering both psychological and social aspects, and evaluating the impact of curriculum modifications and evolving teaching techniques.

With the future hinting at the rise of hybrid courses, it becomes crucial to decipher the unique retention challenges they present (Hoffman, 2014). COVID-19 unveiled the untapped potential of remote education (Tang et al., 2021), but the nuances of engagement and quality assurance in such modes remain underexplored. Furthermore, the response of HEIs to the demands of the job market, especially in less developed regions, needs attention (Govindarajan & Srivastava, 2020).