UHDs Increased Student Retention Feasibility - Case Study Example

UHD’s Increased Retention Feasibility Report Prepared for: Lisa Montgomery, Ph.D., Vice President for Success and Enrollment Management Prepared by: Kevin Farley, Researcher James Field, Committee member Sarah Lee, Committee member Date: November 1, 2012 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 3 Research methods 3 Leasing of off-campus housing for students: 4 Retaining first year’s students by means of on-campus housing program:…………….4 Renovating of nearby old buildings: 5 Results 6 Conclusion and recommendation 6 References…………………………………………………………………………………………8 Executive Summary The University of Houston Downtown has an average intake of approximately 10,000 to 14,000 student’s a year. The number of students joining the university is anticipated to rise in the future years. This fact has led to the creation or renovation of new buildings to create space for the expanding numbers of the student intake. The university offers various facilities to facilitate the learning process that the students partake, hence, making it the fourth largest University in the state of Texas. The campus has a retention rate of approximately 63% of first-time freshmen; however, the number of students anticipated to increase with the execution of the admission principles. The new buildings, the renovation and the proposed housing solutions will indeed help in achieving the rise in retention rate. This will increase the University’s growth in the number of student receiving its full potential. Students’ retention at the University of Houston Downtown has proven to be a challenge. Over the years, the University has found it hard to preserve the large numbers of student intake. This paper is a feasibility report on a research that was initiated to find possible solutions to the addressed challenge. This report will scrutinize the possible solutions and offer recommendations and a conclusion. Proposed solutions The university of Houston downtown is the fourth largest university in the state of Texas. This shows the stretch of the high number of students using the university’s facilities. However, most of the students who join the University of Houston Downtown have trouble finding hostels or apartments within the school. The pressure of the growing population means that the administration has to find solutions in order to accommodate increasing numbers of student (Geiger Mass & College Prowler Firm, 2011). This has led to the three possible solutions that include; the leasing of off-campus apartments that are owned by the university; retaining first years by means of on campus housing program, renovating of the old buildings around the school for spacing and accommodation purposes (Geiger Mass & College Prowler Firm, 2011). Research Methods The following are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunity and threats (SWOT) analysis of these proposed solutions. Leasing of off-campus housing for students. According to my investigations, the university has considerable support from the neighboring properties owner but at a rate agreeable to both parties. The properties have the capacity to house approximately 12% of the students in the campus. The properties are in decent shape and are secure. The owners are interested in making a deal with the university; hence, the university has a chance to make the leasing agreement possible. The cost of the leasing can range from a minimum of 9% to 14% of the university’s income. The effectiveness of leasing oof-campus houses will be determined by terms of agreement by the University and the property owners. The implementation of this program is both time and money efficient. The deals also provide a threat to the successful implementation of this program. The parties involve may have disagreements over the rent rates (Simha & Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003). Either, charging some of the lease rent to the student or focusing on the properties owners prepared to cooperate with the University has proposed rates can solve this. Retaining first year’s students by means of on-campus housing program. In order to maintain a high retention of freshmen students, the University of Houston downtown can formulate a process where the first-year students have the first priority when it comes to on-campus housing (Simha & Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003). This will create a time-period where they can familiarize themselves with the surrounding environment. One year is enough to explore the surrounding neighborhood where the student can find a suitable housing apartment once the year is over. A recent survey shows that some of the first-years responded positively to this idea but about, 6% of the interviewed freshmen were against it. They opposed it because the idea of having just a year to adapt to new environment seemed short. The University can organize programs where the student can interact with the locals. Programs like sports and community projects take time to make the new student socialize amongst themselves, and in the long-run the society at large (Sailes, 1998). The cost of housing the first-year student is substantially almost the same as the cost the university incurs to support the up keep of the students, who currently leave in the school. The effectiveness of this program, after it has begun operating, is the student intake numbers will increases (Sailes, 1998). The implementation process can be done with phases. The phases can be done by substituting the old student living on-campus with new students at the end of every semester. The probability of success of this program highly depends on the older students; hence, the administration must give full closure to the old students before administering the program. The implementation process can last for a least of 6 months to an utmost of one year. Renovation of nearby old buildings. UHD is a growing institution of higher learning with available resource for the university students. The University has lots of space in the form of buildings. The possibility of creating space for accommodation purposes can be done by renovating the old buildings (Denzin & Athens, 2012). The building can be changed to become hostels making accommodations in UHD available for a larger number of students. Some of the modified facilities can make room for the old resource facilties thereby making more space for new students. The cost for renovating is highest in all of the above solution but its effectiveness will run for a longer time (Sailes, 1998). Its effectiveness will also take a longer time than the rest of the solution, but after an approximated time of 2 years the student living on the campus grounds will increase. This will help in the retention process of UHD students. The research revealed that most student would prefer living on the campus grounds instead of off-campus. This can only be achieved by making more space for accommodation in the campus (Denzin & Athens, 2012). However, not all students can live within the school premises; therefore, the administration will have to have a sensitive selection process in determining the student who are going to live in the in-campus house/hostels. This may help in the retention process. Results The outcomes of this feasibility research prove that UHD has the latent to increase the students number. This can be done by improving the accomodations options that new students have in joining this renowned University. The solutions offered in my proposal, offers the University a better chance to improve on the living standards which affects its ability to have a large number of intake (Denzin & Athens, 2012). The increase of the accommodation facilities will in turn help the University in keeping the large number of students in a comfortable environment. The best option is to either, renovate the old buildings and build new accommodation facilities, or relocate some students to off-campus facilities that are in partnership with the University. This way, new students from distant places will have the on-campus facilities as they familiarize themselves with the new surroundings (Denzin & Athens, 2012). The implementation processes, of all the three solutions, are easy. This provides the administration with several options of increasing the number of intakes. Conclusion and Recommendations I highly recommend the university’s administration, to use the above solutions in order to have a large and manageable number of students. The solutions have been used in other learning institution and have successfully been implemented. The effectiveness of this program, after it has begun operating, is the student intake numbers will increases. The new buildings, the renovation and the proposed housing solutions will indeed help in achieving the rise in retention rate. References Denzin, N. K., & Athens, Lonnie. (2012). Blue-ribbon papers: Behind the professional mask: the autobiographies of leading symbolic interactionists. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Pub. Ltd. Geiger, W., Mass, A., & College Prowler Firm (2011). Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, NC. Pittsburgh, PA: College Prowler. Sailes, G. A. (1998). African Americans in sport. New Brunswick: Transaction Publ. Simha, O. R., & Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2003). MIT campus planning, 1960-2000: An annotated chronology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Read More