OnTrack to university: understanding mechanisms of student retention in an Australian pre-university enabling program

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by McGucket

University-based enabling programs provide a key pathway to higher education for non-traditional students, and this study examines the mechanisms behind sustained high retention. Using data on 2,115 students enrolled in an Australian pre-university enabling program from 2008–2014, results show three-quarters retained to program completion, 90% of retained students received offers, and 94% of those offers led to undergraduate enrolment. Multivariate regression indicated demographic and prior education factors explained little, while withdrawals were mainly linked to medical or emotional issues and family responsibilities. Overall, pre-program conduct and in-program practices—especially strong peer and tutor-student relationships and community connections—may strengthen retention outcomes.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages27

Reading Time1 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Context

Aim and study focus

Attrition in enabling programs

Retention mechanisms and factors

Australian Journal of Adult Learning Volume 56, Number 2, July 2016 OnTrack to university: understanding mechanisms of student retention in an Australian pre-university enabling program Joanne G. Lisciandro Gael Gibbs Murdoch University University-based enabling programs have become an important pathway to university for non-traditional students. There is increasing interest in understanding the mechanisms that facilitate retention and success of enabling pathway students, with the aim of developing effective strategies for maximising opportunities for university access and participation. The current study focuses on an Australian enabling program that has achieved and sustained high retention rates, with three-quarters of its 2115 students that enrolled during the last seven years (2008 – 2014) retained until the end of the program. Further, 90 per cent of retained students were successful in receiving an offer to university; and 94 per cent of students that received an offer subsequently enrolled in an undergraduate course. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that demographic and prior educational factors explained little about student retention in the program. The main reasons cited for withdrawal were medical or emotional issues, and family problems or responsibilities. Overall, this data suggests that OnTrack to university: understanding mechanisms of student retention 199 both pre-program conduct and in-program practices may enhance student retention outcomes. Specifically, practices that support the development of strong peer and tutor-student relationships, and that foster community connections, are thought to provide a significant and positive influence on student retention in enabling programs. Keywords: enabling programs, retention, attrition, success, nontraditional students Introduction In an environment characterised by deregulation and widening participation agendas, university-based enabling programs have become an important pathway to university for non-traditional students. Thereis increasing interest from Higher Education (HE) institutions and funding bodies, in understanding the mechanisms which facilitate retention and success of students engaged in enabling programs; a common aim being the development of strategies for maximising opportunities for university access and participation. The aim of the current study was to report on student retention for a large cohort of students engaged in a pre-university enabling program over an extended period of time (2008 – 2014), and to investigate factors (demographic and other) which have influenced retention in the program. Context Pre-university enabling programs, otherwise referred to as “bridging courses, university preparation courses, foundation courses and pathway courses”(Hodges et al., 2013) have become an increasingly popular pathway to university, particularly for non-traditional students. Many of these programs are funded by the Australian Government as a part ofits ‘widening participation’ agenda that aims to increase enrolment of individuals from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds and other under-represented groups for equity, economic and social justice reasons (Bradley, Noonan, Nugent, & Scales, 2008) . Enabling programs have been shown to attract a high proportion of non-traditional students, and many of these students have successfully 200 Joanne G. Lisciandro and Gael Gibbs progressed to Bachelor degree level (Andrewartha & Harvey, 2014; Lomax-Smith, Watson, & Webster, 2011). Therefore, enabling pathways play an important role in social inclusion by boosting university participation for non-traditional students and providing a second chance to those whose “circumstances may have masked the extent of their academic capability”(Willis & Joschko, 2012:23). Currently available data suggests that following commencement of a first year undergraduate course, outcomes of enabling pathway students are comparable

FAQs

What retention and progression outcomes did the study report for students in the enabling program?

Three-quarters of 2,115 students (2008–2014) were retained to the end of the program. Of retained students, 90% received an offer to university, and 94% of those offers led to enrolment in an undergraduate course.

Which factors explained little about student retention according to the analysis?

Multivariate regression analysis found that demographic and prior educational factors explained little about student retention in the program.

What were the main reasons given for students withdrawing from the program?

The main cited reasons for withdrawal were medical or emotional issues, and family problems or responsibilities.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by McGucket