Student Success in College: Creating Conditions That Matter (review)

Similar to the earlier work Involving Colleges (Kuh, Schuh, Whitt and Associates, 1991), Student Success in College presents the findings of a multi-institutional study aimed at identifying programs and policies at colleges and universities that enhance student learning and achievement. The Documenting Effective Educational Practice (DEEP) project, the focus of this work, has a relatively straightforward purpose: "to discover what a diverse set of institutions does to promote student success so other colleges and universities that aspire to enhance the quality of the undergraduate experience might learn from their example" (p. 18).

The findings presented in the book offer a wealth of information about the institutional policies and practices designed to promote student success and achievement in higher education. This book strives to extend our understanding of the important linkages between organizational characteristics and student learning outcomes. While Student Success in College is written to appeal to a dual audience of higher education practitioners and scholars, practitioners in the field of higher education are likely to derive the greatest benefit from the book's content.

Using regression analysis, the authors identified institutions that scored above predicted levels on the five clusters of student engagement used by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE): level of academic challenge, active and collaborative learning, student interaction with faculty members, enriching educational experiences, and supportive campus climate. After this initial cut, they devised a second regression model accounting for institutional inputs to determine which of the institutions from the list also had higher-than-predicted graduation rates.

The project team, composed of 24 individuals from across the country, then selected 20 institutions about which to conduct in-depth case studies. They selected diverse institutional types in order to make comprehensive observations about effective educational practices. They did not, however, include two-year institutions, which limits the book's potential audience. The authors assert that, after accounting for differences in institutional-level measures obtained from IPEDS data, the institutions they selected "add value" (p. 10) to the undergraduate experience and are therefore worthy of in-depth examination. However, the authors ignore a critically important determinant of the outcomes of interest in their regression analyses: the input characteristics of the students who attend these institutions.

After identifying the 20 institutions, team members conducted a series of site visits that yielded the data for the analyses provided in the book. Notably absent is a description of steps the team took to ensure that the 24 different team members were consistent in their approaches, observations, and interpretations across the various sites. Another key concern is that the authors do not provide enough information about the methodology used in selecting institutions and analyzing the case study data for readers to have a good sense of what those methods were and whether they were appropriate. In fact, the description of the methodology is tucked away in a short appendix to the book. The authors direct readers who are interested in specific information about the regressions that they conducted to a website for a full description of the methods and findings.

The book is organized into three major sections. Part 1 introduces the DEEP initiative. In Part 2 (chaps. 2–7), the authors illustrate the commonalities in institutional practices found across the 20 institutions in their sample. They divide these common pratices into six broad categories: "A 'living' mission and a 'lived' educational philosophy; An unshakable focus on student learning; Environments adapted for educational enrichment; Clearly marked pathways to student success; An improvement oriented ethos; and, Shared responsibility for educational quality and student success" (p. 24).

Of the institutional characteristics the authors, two seem to provide a foundation for considering the rest: "(1) clearly articulated educational purposes and aspirations, and (2) a coherent, relatively well understood philosophy that guides...