The Pilgrim’s Protest

Various CIU-relevant topics clamor for attention among students, faculty and staff. Many of these issues revolve around campus life, academics, student life and broader issues, such as retention. In reaction to the recent budget cuts and lack of funding, many students have formed the impression that CIU struggles to retain students. And it seems that every student has his own opinion of why this is so. In light of this, TPP has researched the statistical evidence as well as the student and administrative opinion about retention. In doing so, we discovered that our first impression was incorrect. But while the numbers demonstrate that CIU is competitive in retention with other schools, student and administrative opinion demonstrates a feeling of unrest and dissatisfaction.

Retention: The Facts

A common definition for undergraduate retention is the percentage of freshmen who enter in the fall of one year and return in the fall of the next year. Retention in regards to program completion (i.e. graduation) is commonly charted on a 6 year period, and schools use their rates and the rates of other similar schools to evaluate their performance. In spite of fluctuating numbers of incoming students each year, CIU meets, or exceeds, the retention rates of other comparable schools. Between the student’s freshmen and sophomore years for 2000-2005, CIU retention ranged from 68% to 76% of students. For program completion, CIU retained an average of 57% of the students that enter as freshmen over a five year span. These statistics are equal with or even above the national averages of comparable schools. From 2000-2005 the national average ranged from 68%-75% for returning Sophomores and 48% for program completion. These retention rates are encouraging in showing that the school does retain a considerable number of its students. However, statistics are not the end of the story.

The Survey

In order to gather information on student’s feelings about the school and retention, TPP created a survey and compiled feedback from 106 students from different classes and programs. The areas students were asked to rate were dorms, professors, administration, chapel, standards, spiritual formation and community. On the surveys the faculty and staff received the highest ratings of 4.5 on a five point scale, while the standards rated as needing the most improvement at 3. The final question on the survey was, “If you could change one thing about your college experience here at CIU, what would it be?” The answers were varied, but there was a trend. Many surveys referenced the atmosphere at the school and a desire for grace and honest, open communication between students, faculty, staff, and administration. In regards to standards, one student said, “Some of the standards inspire guilt where God does not intend guilt to be, feeding a false spirituality and sense of morals.” Academically, some students mentioned more courses, more flexible hours, and more than one professor teaching a course. A need for increased financial aid and lower tuition costs was also a concern.
The Forum

We also hosted a forum on March 28^th with Dr. Blewett and Dr. Jones expressly for the purpose of hearing student concerns. About 60 students attended the forum, which went about two and a half hours long. During the forum, many of the students suggested a shift from a focus on rules to a focus on grace, in order to cultivate an atmosphere for growth. These students expressed the desire to make their own choices and be allowed to grow, even in the midst of mistakes. One student felt that “the way the standards are now is damaging.” Others expressed a desire to see them maintained, but adequately justified from Scripture and more lovingly enforced. One area of spiritual formation addressed was that of personal care and counseling. At least two students referenced difficulties they had encountered because of this area of life at CIU. There were also inquiries about mandating waivers of privacy in regards to professional counseling. Another area covered was academics. Some students suggested that it does not seem wise to expand into more academic departments, when some existing departments are already struggling. Others indicated that there should be greater balance in how CIU views disciplines that are not strictly related to missions or Bible. Many have the impression that programs not specifically in these areas are not given equal importance. But while many students used the forum to express their concerns, others used it as an opportunity to articulate their appreciation for the things CIU does well. As indicated above, the student body deeply appreciates the faculty and staff not only for the instruction they provide in the class room, but also for the way these individuals impacted them on a personal level. Furthermore, even those students who felt that the level of education can be improved indicated a high level of satisfaction with the training they received in their Bible major. Some even found standards, which were most harshly criticized by others, to be a helpful part of their spiritual development at CIU. Although some considered a few of the comments negative, the majority of the student body present sought to express their opinions in love and in an attempt to create unity through the analysis and discussion of ideas and critiques. One student phrased it succinctly when she shared that her interest in the forum was rooted not in a heart of resentment, but in a love for the school. While it is good to avoid negativity, simply questioning the way something is done is not inherently negative, especially when the questioning is motivated out of love and a concern for improvement.

Administration Response

Also critical to this issue are thoughts of those directly involved in the decision making process. For this reason TPP interviewed Academic Dean, Pat Blewett, Vice President of Corporate Planning, Bob Kallgren, and Provost, Bill Jones. In the interview, Dean Blewett suggested that good retention should not be defined by insuring that every student graduates from this institution, but by asking the question, “Do we have a program here that meets their needs?” Bill Jones further explained that measuring up to other schools retention rates is not the goal; rather, he believes that “maybe we could do exceptionally beyond what others do.”

In light of Jones’ statement, having good numbers is not the quintessential evidence of success at a Christian institution. That is why the area of improvement was an essential aspect of TPP’s research. In one survey the top three reasons given for leaving CIU were “adequate financial aid not available,” “mounting debt,” and “standards too strict.” These reasons were cited on surveys in spring 2001 as well as in the fall of 2005. Each of those interviewed cited financial aid as one of the most important areas to improve. “Lack of physical fitness, sports facilities, and opportunities” was also listed as a reason to leave CIU. In light of this, Dean Blewett hopes that “the new gym will change where and how we relate outside of school work.” Bob Kallgren also referred to the new gym as “a whole new thing to do and place to go.” Improvement to the dorms and the campus are also on the administration’s short list for the future. The fact that retention is being monitored here at CIU demonstrates this issue is a concern to the administration. Dean Blewett hopes that the school can do a better job of “catching the students that fall through the cracks.” One suggestion he made was the cultivation of relationships. One survey cited “close mentoring relationships with godly professors” as the third most important reason for staying at CIU. Although academics are important, relationships are a vital part of the CIU environment.

TPP Editorial on Retention

This article presents topics that are not easy to discuss. It may seem that the data is even inconclusive in this case. While students point out some problems, the retention data indicates that the school is doing well by national standards. However, average should not be enough; we should continue to strive for excellence. It also seems that some of the problems pointed out by students should not be occurring at a Christian institution. When students refer to being hurt by a department that is supposed to help students in times of trouble, this is a grave concern. Furthermore, students should not feel that their various academic departments are treated unfairly. Also it is a problem when people do not treat all areas of their work with excellence. Both biblical subjects and general education subjects should be treated with equal importance as a means to glorify God. It is always easier to point out a flaw than to fix it. However, improving problems is vital to the development of this institution. Yet why should students concern themselves with the issues before the administration? As stated before, statistics demonstrate that retention is comparable to other schools. But perhaps things would look different if the situation was considered more personally: the freshmen who came in the year 2005 started in a class of 90 people, but by the time they began their sophomore year in 2006, the class had dwindled to 63. Mathematically they retained 70% of their class from the year they started. But what of the other 30%? What of the 63 people who came back with one less friend, one less roommate, one less person who could have greatly influenced their life? CIU may have competitive retention rates, but for a school committed to knowing Christ and making Him known, is this enough? Not everyone leaves for the problems at CIU, but for those who do, their individual situation needs to be considered. CIU has proven adept at reaching out to the community and indeed the world, yet in our desire to do so have we failed to love those ten feet from our own doors? It is not easy to discern how to go about working on these problems or even what problems should be addressed. However, the approach and mindset we should take is that we are working, and we are working with people, and more importantly, we are working in the Body of Christ. No one person or group can decide what is best for any institution, but as a community, perhaps we can develop a place that fosters spiritual growth and academic excellence.

Click the “Retention” link to view the research used for this article.