1. Bibliographic Information

1.1. Title

What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature

1.2. Authors

• George D. Kuh (Indiana University Bloomington)

• Jillian Kinzie (Indiana University Bloomington)

• Jennifer A. Buckley (Indiana University Bloomington)

• Brian K. Bridges (American Council on Education)

• John C. Hayek (Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education)

  The authors are researchers and experts affiliated with prominent educational institutions and organizations, indicating a strong background in higher education research and policy. George D. Kuh is particularly known for his work on student engagement and assessment in higher education.

1.3. Journal/Conference

Commissioned Report for the National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student Success.

This indicates that the paper was specifically prepared for a significant national forum, suggesting its findings were intended to inform policy discussions and practice among educational leaders and policymakers. While not a peer-reviewed journal in the traditional sense, a commissioned report for a national symposium often carries substantial weight and influence in its field due to its direct relevance to policy and practice.

1.4. Publication Year

2006

1.5. Abstract

This report examines the factors influencing student success in postsecondary education. By reviewing existing literature, it aims to identify key themes and effective practices that contribute to student retention and achievement. The findings underscore the importance of institutional support, student engagement, and the alignment of educational policy with student needs.

1.6. Original Source Link

http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/Kuh_Team_ExecSumm.pdf This is the official PDF link from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), confirming its status as a publicly available, authoritative report.

2. Executive Summary

2.1. Background & Motivation

The core problem the paper aims to address is the persistent underrepresentation of certain student populations (e.g., African American, Hispanic, Native American, first-generation, low-income, and students with disabilities) in postsecondary education, despite the increasing necessity of higher education for economic self-sufficiency and navigating complex societal issues. The paper highlights that four-fifths of high school graduates require some form of postsecondary education, making student success a critical national concern.

The motivation stems from the recognition that while much is known about factors influencing student success, this knowledge is not consistently applied in practice. There's a need to synthesize existing research, identify effective interventions, and inform a comprehensive theory of student success to foster better outcomes for all students, particularly those from historically underserved groups. The paper seeks to move beyond simply identifying problems to offering actionable propositions and recommendations for improving student success.

2.2. Main Contributions / Findings

The paper's primary contributions are:

• Comprehensive Synthesis: It provides a synthesized review of major research findings related to student success (defined broadly as academic achievement, engagement, satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, persistence, attainment of objectives, and post-college performance).

• Theoretical Perspectives: It summarizes major theoretical perspectives (sociological, organizational, psychological, cultural, and economic) that underpin student success research.

• Seven Propositions: It distills the extensive literature into seven actionable propositions that summarize the most critical factors influencing student success. These propositions serve as guiding principles for policy and practice.

• Actionable Recommendations: For each proposition, the paper offers concrete recommendations for interventions at various levels (K-12, institutional, policy).

• Identification of Research Gaps: It clearly outlines areas where more research is needed to further enhance understanding and effectiveness, particularly concerning diverse student populations and institutional types.

  The key conclusions and findings are encapsulated in the seven propositions:

1. Early Preparation: Academic success in college is largely determined by rigorous pre-college academic preparation.

2. Family & Community Support: Strong family and community support significantly boost educational aspirations and persistence.

3. Financial Factors: Adequate and appropriate financial aid is crucial, while excessive loan debt can hinder persistence.

4. Early Interventions: At-risk students benefit greatly from early and sustained interventions during college transitions.

5. Connections & Engagement: Students who form meaningful connections within the postsecondary environment are more likely to engage and persist.

6. Student-Centered Institutions: Institutions focused on student success through supportive environments and effective practices achieve better outcomes.

7. Assessment & Accountability: Focusing assessment and accountability on what truly matters for student success drives improvement.

   These findings collectively address the problem by offering a holistic framework for understanding and promoting student success, moving beyond single-factor explanations to a multi-faceted approach involving students, families, institutions, and policy.

3. Prerequisite Knowledge & Related Work

3.1. Foundational Concepts

To fully understand this paper, a reader should be familiar with several key concepts related to higher education:

• Postsecondary Education: This term refers to any education or training received after high school, encompassing two-year colleges (community colleges), four-year universities, and vocational schools. The paper specifically focuses on postsecondary education as a pathway to economic self-sufficiency and civic engagement.
• Student Success: The paper defines student success broadly, moving beyond just academic grades. It includes:
  • Academic achievement: Performing well in coursework, indicated by grades, GPA, etc.
  • Engagement in educationally purposeful activities: Active participation in learning activities both inside and outside the classroom (e.g., discussions, research, internships, extracurriculars).
  • Satisfaction: Students' contentment with their college experience.
  • Acquisition of desired knowledge, skills and competencies: Gaining relevant skills for careers and life.
  • Persistence: Continuing enrollment from one term to the next, crucial for graduation.
  • Attainment of educational objectives: Achieving goals like earning a baccalaureate degree (a bachelor's degree) or other postsecondary credential.
  • Postcollege performance: Success in careers and life after graduation.
• Retention: The ability of an institution to keep students enrolled from one term or year to the next until they graduate. High retention rates are a key indicator of student success.
• First-Generation Students: Students whose parents or guardians did not complete a four-year college degree. These students often face unique challenges navigating the complexities of higher education due to a lack of familial experience with college.
• Low-Income Students: Students from families with financial resources below a certain threshold, often qualifying for financial aid programs. Affordability is a major barrier for this group.
• Underrepresented Minorities (URM): Refers to racial and ethnic groups (e.g., African American, Hispanic, Native American) whose proportional representation in higher education is lower than their proportion in the general population.
• Theoretical Perspectives on Student Success: The paper identifies five major lenses through which student success is typically studied:
  • Sociological: Focuses on how societal structures, background characteristics (socioeconomic status, race, gender), and social integration within the institution influence student outcomes.
  • Organizational: Examines how institutional characteristics, policies, resources, and culture (e.g., size, mission, support services) affect student success.
  • Psychological: Concentrates on individual student attributes such as motivation, self-efficacy, learning styles, resilience, and sense of belonging.
  • Cultural: Explores the impact of students' cultural backgrounds, values, and how these interact with the dominant culture of the institution.
  • Economic: Analyzes the role of financial factors, such as tuition costs, financial aid, opportunity costs, and the economic returns of education, in student success and persistence.
• Interventions: Specific programs, policies, or practices designed to support student success. Examples mentioned include bridge programs (pre-college academic preparation), safety nets (support systems for struggling students), early warning systems (identifying at-risk students), intrusive advising (proactive and personalized advising), first-year seminars (courses to ease transition), learning communities (grouping students for shared academic experiences), and undergraduate research programs.

3.2. Previous Works

As a literature review, this paper synthesizes findings from numerous previous studies rather than presenting a single new empirical work. It builds upon decades of research in student retention, student development theory, and educational psychology. Key areas of previous work that this paper draws from include:

• Student Departure Theories: Influential models like Vincent Tinto's Theory of Student Departure (1975, 1993) which posits that student persistence is a function of academic and social integration into the college community. Students are more likely to persist if they feel they belong and are succeeding academically. The paper implicitly leverages this by emphasizing engagement and connections (Proposition 5).

• Student Engagement Research: Work pioneered by Alexander Astin (e.g., Input-Environment-Outcome (I-E-O) model) and later significantly advanced by George Kuh and the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). This research highlights that students learn and develop more when they are actively involved in their education, both inside and outside the classroom. This forms the basis for Proposition 5 and parts of Proposition 6.

• Higher Education Policy and Economics: Studies examining the impact of financial aid policies (e.g., grants vs. loans), tuition trends, and state funding on access, affordability, and student persistence. This directly informs Proposition 3.

• Developmental Education and Readiness Research: Studies focusing on the importance of K-12 preparation for college-level work, and the challenges faced by academically underprepared students. This underpins Proposition 1 and Proposition 4.

• Impact of Student Support Services: Research demonstrating the effectiveness of various institutional support programs, such as advising, mentoring, tutoring, and learning communities, in supporting diverse student populations. This is reflected in Proposition 4 and Proposition 6.

  The paper doesn't present specific formulas from these prior works because it's a high-level synthesis rather than an empirical study replicating or extending a specific model. However, the conceptual frameworks (like social integration or student engagement) from these prior works are fundamental to the paper's propositions.

3.3. Technological Evolution

The evolution of student success research has shifted from a primarily deficit-based approach (focusing on student shortcomings) to an asset-based and holistic perspective, which this paper exemplifies.

• Early Research (1970s-1980s): Focused heavily on student attrition and retention, often using demographic variables to predict who would leave college. Theories like Tinto's highlighted the importance of academic and social integration.

• Mid-Period (1990s-early 2000s): Increased emphasis on the student experience and student engagement as key drivers of success. Surveys like NSSE provided empirical data on how students spend their time and interact with their institutions. This period also saw growing attention to the diverse needs of non-traditional and underrepresented students.

• Current State (post-2000s): The field has moved towards more sophisticated data analytics, early warning systems, and predictive modeling to identify at-risk students proactively. There's also a greater focus on systemic institutional change, equity, and the role of institutional culture in fostering success. Technology has also evolved, offering new ways to track student progress, deliver support services, and personalize learning.

  This paper, published in 2006, sits at the cusp of the shift towards a more comprehensive and actionable understanding of student success. It integrates the lessons from retention and engagement research to propose a framework that is both empirically grounded and practically oriented.

3.4. Differentiation Analysis

Compared to earlier works that might have focused on singular aspects of student success (e.g., a specific retention model or the impact of financial aid), this paper's core innovation lies in its comprehensive synthesis and actionable framework.

• Holistic View: It moves beyond discrete factors to integrate sociological, organizational, psychological, cultural, and economic perspectives into a single coherent framework.
• Translating Research to Action: Many literature reviews synthesize findings, but this paper explicitly translates those findings into seven propositions and concrete recommendations, making it a valuable resource for practitioners and policymakers.
• Emphasis on Interconnectedness: It highlights how pre-college factors, institutional conditions, student engagement, and support systems are all interconnected and collectively determine student success.
• Focus on Underserved Students: While addressing student success broadly, it pays particular attention to the needs of historically underserved students, framing student success as an equity issue.
• Call for Systemic Change: It argues that institutions themselves must cultivate a student-centered culture and use evidence-based practices to improve outcomes, challenging the notion that student success is solely the student's responsibility.

4. Methodology

4.1. Principles

The core principle of this paper's methodology is a systematic, comprehensive review and synthesis of existing academic and policy literature on student success in postsecondary education. The aim is to move beyond simply summarizing individual studies to identifying overarching themes, distilling key propositions, and generating actionable recommendations. This approach is grounded in the belief that a holistic understanding of the multifaceted factors influencing student success is necessary to inform effective policy and practice. The theoretical basis is that student success is a complex phenomenon influenced by student characteristics (inputs), institutional environments (processes), and educational outcomes.

4.2. Core Methodology In-depth (Layer by Layer)

Since this paper is a literature review, it does not involve mathematical formulas or experimental procedures in the traditional sense. Instead, its methodology follows a structured process of inquiry and synthesis:

4.2.1. Defining the Scope and Guiding Questions

The review began by clearly defining student success to include a broad range of indicators: academic achievement, engagement in educationally purposeful activities, satisfaction, acquisition of desired knowledge, skills and competencies, persistence, attainment of educational objectives, and postcollege performance.

The review was then guided by several specific questions to focus the literature search and analysis:

• What are the major studies that represent the best work in the area?
• What are the major conclusions from these studies?
• What key questions remain unanswered?
• What are the most promising interventions prior to college (such as middle school, high school, bridge programs) and during college (such as safety nets, early warning systems, intrusive advising, required courses, effective teaching and learning approaches)?
• Where is more research needed and about which groups of students do we especially need to know more?
• How does the work in this area inform a theory about student success?

4.2.2. Literature Identification and Selection

The authors, being experts in the field, likely drew upon their extensive knowledge of seminal and contemporary research. While the paper does not detail the exact search strategy (e.g., databases, keywords), it implies a focus on "major studies" and "best work" in the area, suggesting a selective, expert-driven approach to identifying relevant literature rather than a purely exhaustive, quantitative meta-analysis. The included references section would reflect the breadth of literature considered.

4.2.3. Synthesis and Categorization of Findings

The identified literature was then synthesized and organized around a structured framework:

• Theoretical Perspectives: The review first summarized the major theoretical lenses through which student success is understood: sociological, organizational, psychological, cultural, and economic. This step establishes a multi-dimensional conceptual foundation for understanding the factors at play.
• Key Areas of Research Findings: The research findings were then categorized into four main areas:
  • students' background and precollege experiences: Factors originating before college enrollment.
  • students' postsecondary activities emphasizing engagement in educationally purposeful activities: What students do once they are in college.
  • postsecondary institutional conditions that foster student success: The environment and support structures provided by colleges.
  • the desired outcomes of college and postcollege indicators of success: The ultimate goals and long-term impacts.

4.2.4. Formulation of Propositions

Based on the synthesis of findings across these theoretical and empirical categories, the authors derived seven propositions about student success. These propositions represent high-level, evidence-based statements that capture the most significant and consistent findings from the literature review. Each proposition acts as a concise, overarching conclusion drawn from the body of research.

4.2.5. Development of Recommendations and Identification of Research Needs

For each of the seven propositions, the authors then formulated practical recommendations for action. These recommendations are designed to translate the research findings into concrete strategies for educators, policymakers, and institutions. Finally, the review concluded by identifying specific areas where more research is needed, particularly concerning diverse student groups and effective interventions.

In summary, the methodology is a structured qualitative analysis of existing literature, aimed at synthesizing diverse findings into an integrated framework, generating actionable insights, and guiding future inquiry. It prioritizes the clear articulation of propositions and recommendations derived from a broad base of knowledge.

5. Experimental Setup

As a literature review and commissioned report, this paper does not involve traditional experimental setups, datasets, evaluation metrics, or baselines in the way an empirical study would. Its "data" is the existing body of academic and policy literature on student success.

5.1. Datasets

There were no datasets used in the experimental sense. The "data" for this paper consisted of a wide array of published research, theoretical models, and practical reports related to student success in postsecondary education. This includes studies covering student demographics, academic preparation, financial aid, student engagement, institutional support programs, and educational outcomes. The strength of this review lies in its comprehensive scope across various types of literature, rather than an analysis of a specific quantitative dataset.

5.2. Evaluation Metrics

No evaluation metrics were used in this paper because it did not conduct an experiment or propose a new model to be quantitatively assessed. Instead, the "evaluation" process was qualitative: the authors assessed the robustness and consistency of findings across the reviewed literature to formulate their seven propositions and recommendations. The effectiveness of the paper itself is judged by the clarity, coherence, and actionable nature of its synthesis.

5.3. Baselines

Similarly, there were no baseline models in the context of comparing performance as one would in an empirical study. The paper's "baseline" understanding is the collective knowledge about student success available prior to its publication. The paper's contribution is to move beyond this baseline by providing a more structured, synthesized, and actionable framework.

6. Results & Analysis

The main results of this literature review are the seven propositions about student success, each accompanied by specific recommendations for action. These propositions summarize the most robust findings from the academic literature and serve as a framework for understanding and improving student success.

6.1. Core Results Analysis

The paper argues that student success is a complex outcome influenced by a confluence of pre-college experiences, institutional conditions, and student engagement. The seven propositions highlight key leverage points for intervention.

6.1.1. Proposition 1: The trajectory for academic success in college is established long before students matriculate.

• Analysis: This proposition emphasizes the foundational role of K-12 education. It posits that strong academic preparation, particularly in math and reading by eighth grade, is non-negotiable for college success. Deficiencies acquired early are very difficult to overcome later.
• Recommendations:
  • Ensure all students receive rigorous, intensive precollege academic preparation.
  • Develop a comprehensive national college readiness strategy.
  • Align high school curricula with college performance standards.
  • Instill an assets-based talent development philosophy in K-12 educators.

6.1.2. Proposition 2: Family and community support are indispensable to a student's raising educational aspirations, becoming college prepared, and persisting in college.

• Analysis: Beyond academic preparation, social capital and informational support from families and communities are crucial. Students whose families are knowledgeable about college opportunities and costs, and who encourage college preparation, are more likely to earn a baccalaureate degree. Effective school-community partnerships also play a vital role.
• Recommendations:
  • Expand effective college encouragement and transition programs (e.g., GEAR UP, Twenty-First Century Scholars Program).
  • Ensure students and families have accurate information about college, including real costs and aid availability.

6.1.3. Proposition 3: The right amount and kind of money matter to student success; too little can make it impossible for students to pay college bills; too much loan debt can discourage students from persisting.

• Analysis: Affordability is a critical determinant of whether students view college as attainable. Both the perceived and actual cost are major barriers for historically underserved students. The type of aid (grants vs. loans) also impacts persistence.
• Recommendations:
  • Align financial aid and tuition policy to meet students' need.
  • Create small pockets of emergency funds for students.

6.1.4. Proposition 4: Most students—especially those who start college with two or more characteristics associated with premature departure—benefit from early interventions and sustained attention at various transition points in their educational journey.

• Analysis: Students with multiple risk factors (e.g., first-generation, low-income, ethnic minorities at predominantly White institutions) are particularly vulnerable to struggling academically and socially during the initial weeks and months of college. Proactive early interventions are essential.
• Recommendations:
  • Clarify institutional values and expectations early and often.
  • Concentrate early intervention resources on high-risk students (two or more risk factors).
  • Provide multiple learning support networks, early warning systems, and safety nets.

6.1.5. Proposition 5: Students who find something or someone worthwhile to connect with in the postsecondary environment are more likely to engage in educationally purposeful activities during college, persist, and achieve their educational objectives.

• Analysis: Social integration and engagement are vital. When students form affinity groups, build relationships with faculty or staff, or take on meaningful responsibilities, they become more invested in their studies and the institution.
• Recommendations:
  • Make the classroom the locus of community.
  • Structure ways for commuter students to spend time with classmates.
  • Involve every student in a meaningful way in an activity or with a positive role model.

6.1.6. Proposition 6: Institutions that focus on student success and create a student-centered culture are better positioned to help their students attain their educational objectives.

• Analysis: Institutional culture and practices significantly impact persistence. Supportive peers, high expectations from faculty/staff, and engaging academic experiences (first-year seminars, advising, mentoring, learning communities, undergraduate research) are crucial.
• Recommendations:
  • Instill an assets-based talent development philosophy in postsecondary educators.
  • Use effective educational practices throughout the institution.
  • Use technology in educationally effective ways.
  • Provide incentives for institutions to address debilitating cultural properties.

6.1.7. Proposition 7: Because we value what we measure, focus assessment and accountability efforts on what matters to student success.

• Analysis: Continuous improvement in institutional effectiveness and student success depends on valid, reliable information to guide change and monitor performance. If institutions don't measure what truly contributes to success, they won't improve it.
• Recommendations:

  • Conduct periodic examinations of the student experience, inside and outside the classroom.

  • Provide incentives for postsecondary institutions to responsibly report and use information about the student experience.

  • Provide incentives for postsecondary institutions to adopt a common reporting template for student success indicators to enhance transparency.

  • Further develop state and institutional capacity for collecting, analyzing, and using data for accountability and improvement.

    These propositions collectively validate a comprehensive, ecological model of student success where student agency interacts with pre-college preparation, family support, financial resources, and institutional environment. The advantages of this approach are its holistic nature and its focus on actionable interventions at multiple levels. The paper does not present disadvantages of its own approach, as it is a synthesis of widely accepted best practices.

6.2. Data Presentation (Tables)

The paper does not contain traditional result tables from empirical data. The primary "data presentation" is the structured list of propositions and their recommendations, which I have presented above in the Core Results Analysis section.

6.3. Ablation Studies / Parameter Analysis

This section is not applicable to a literature review. The paper does not propose a model with components that would be subject to ablation studies or parameter analysis. Its analysis is a qualitative synthesis of existing knowledge.

7. Conclusion & Reflections

7.1. Conclusion Summary

This paper, "What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature," comprehensively synthesizes a vast body of research to identify the key factors influencing student success in postsecondary education. It defines student success broadly, encompassing academic achievement, engagement, persistence, and post-college performance. The authors distill their findings into seven powerful propositions, each accompanied by practical recommendations. The core message is that student success is a multifaceted challenge, determined by pre-college preparation, family and community support, financial stability, early interventions, meaningful connections within the college environment, and student-centered institutional cultures that prioritize assessment and accountability. The paper concludes by highlighting that while much is known, the critical challenge lies in consistently applying promising policies and effective educational practices.

7.2. Limitations & Future Work

The authors explicitly identified areas where more research is needed:

• Effective approaches for encouraging different types of students (e.g., first-generation, low income, students of color) to participate in and benefit from postsecondary encouragement programs.

• Effective ways for colleges and universities to inform high schools about their graduates' college performance and use the information to improve.

• Effective uses of financial aid to encourage student preparation for college and to make college affordable for students who need financial support to attend.

• What postsecondary institutions can realistically do and at what cost to help academically underprepared students overcome the deficiencies they bring with them to college.

• Approaches to learning (e.g., active learning, electronic technology) that foster success of different groups of students (academically underprepared, low income, first generation, ethnic minorities, immigrants, men) at different types of institutions (2-year and 4-year colleges, public and private schools, for-profit institutions).

• Responsible ways to accurately measure, report, and use student success indicators for purposes of accountability and improvement.

  A key limitation, inherent in any literature review of this nature, is its reliance on existing studies. While comprehensive, it reflects the state of research up to 2006. New technologies (e.g., learning analytics, AI-driven advising), evolving demographics, and changes in the economic landscape may introduce new factors or alter the salience of existing ones, which would necessitate further review and research. Additionally, the paper, while offering recommendations, does not delve into the practical challenges of implementing these recommendations across diverse institutional contexts with varying resources and cultures.

7.3. Personal Insights & Critique

This paper remains remarkably relevant almost two decades after its publication. Its strength lies in its ability to synthesize complex educational research into clear, actionable propositions. For a novice in higher education administration or policy, this report provides an excellent foundational understanding of student success drivers.

One of the most valuable insights is the emphasis on the trajectory for academic success being established long before college (Proposition 1), highlighting the shared responsibility of K-12 and higher education. This underscores the need for vertical alignment across educational sectors. The focus on early interventions for at-risk students (Proposition 4) and the importance of connections and engagement (Proposition 5) are perennial truths in student support that still guide current best practices. The call for student-centered institutions (Proposition 6) and accountability based on meaningful metrics (Proposition 7) are powerful messages for institutional leaders.

The paper's methods and conclusions are highly transferable. Its framework can be applied to almost any educational setting seeking to improve student outcomes, from K-12 schools aiming to foster college readiness to adult learning programs. The propositions serve as an excellent checklist for institutions to assess their own practices and identify areas for improvement.

A potential area for further development, considering advancements since 2006, would be to explore the role of digital literacy and online learning environments in student success, especially post-pandemic. The use of technology (mentioned in Proposition 6) has become far more integrated and sophisticated, requiring a deeper analysis of its implications for engagement, equity, and learning outcomes. Additionally, while financial aid is covered, the increasing complexity of student loan debt and its psychological burden could warrant more specific recommendations. Finally, further research into neuroscience and cognitive psychology could offer deeper insights into effective learning approaches for diverse student populations, enriching the understanding of "what matters" even further.