The Role of Service-Learning on the Retention of First-Year Students to Second Year

Service-learning has gained recognition as a curricular strategy that yields multiple positive outcomes for students. In addition to academic gains (Ash, Clayton, & Atkinson, 2005; Batchelder & Root, 1994; Gray, Ondaatje, Fricker, & Geschwind, 2000; Markus, Howard, & King, 1993; Osborne, Hammerich, & Hensley, 1998; Reeb, Sammon, & Isackson, 1999; Vogelgesang & Astin, 2000), students in service-learning courses have educationally meaningful community service experiences that enhance personal and civic development during their undergraduate education and beyond (Ash et al.; Astin & Sax, 1998; Eyler & Giles, 1999; Eyler, Giles, Stenson, & Gray, 2001). To the degree that service-learning results in perceptions of enhanced learning and academic engagement for students, service-learning experiences can contribute to overall satisfaction with college (Astin & Sax) and, possibly, persistence and retention in terms of continued enrollment (Osborne et al.). As a "mature educational reform" service-learning has important implications for the first-year experiences of undergraduates (Gardner, 2002). In addition to student benefits, the prevalence of service-learning courses may also provide institutional benefits. Institutions of higher education can develop meaningful partnerships with the community and engage students and faculty in activities that contribute to the community's quality of life. Service-learning increases student involvement in the learning process itself (Astin & Sax, 1998), which is a fundamental component of theories of student development (Astin, 1984) and persistence (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993). Exploring this relationship between service-learning and retention is of fundamental importance to colleges and universities. Bean (1986) presents three primary reasons for institutional attention to the issue of retention. The first reason is economic. A decline in overall institutional enrollment will result in lower tuition income. For example, the income produced by four first-year students who leave after one year is equaled by one student who remains at the institution for four years. In addition, institutions benefit by investing to recruit one student instead of four. Secondly, colleges and universities have an ethical responsibility to demonstrate good faith in the probability of success for students they admit and supporting their students to optimize success. The third reason is the cost to the institution, not in dollars, but in morale and quality. High attrition can lead to a demoralized faculty, staff, and administration with a possible result of employee attrition following the pattern of student departure. Although there is wide variation across institutions, approximately one-half of college students fail to graduate in five years (American College Testing, 2003; Astin & Oseguera, 2005; Carey, 2004). The first year is particularly vulnerable to attrition, with the largest proportion of students being lost between the first and second year (American College Testing; Tinto, 1993). Furthermore, about one third of all first-year students drop out of the college they first enter (Levitz & Noel, 1989) and more than 25% of first-year students at four-year institutions do not return to their college of enrollment for a second year (Vogelgesang, Ikeda, Gilmartin, & Keup, 2002). In response to these patterns, many campuses have developed programs and course-based strategies focused particularly on the first-year experience to assist students in making the transition to college and successfully completing a plan of study (Barefoot, 2007; Zlotkowski, 2002). Over 70% of campuses offer first-year seminars (Skipper, 2002), and it is estimated that 10% of first-year students participate in learning communities that intentionally schedule a group of students in consecutive courses to increase peer-to-peer interaction and student-to-faculty interaction (Keup & Stolzenberg, 2004). …