lessen the effects of the SES imbalance in terms of the quintile factor through the introduction of access and foundation programmes such as in the humanities. On the other hand, in the faculty of law it seems they have also ‘bypassed’ the SES imbalance through their admission criteria which include only selecting high matric students (as shown in table 12) including selection tests and also some national benchmark tests. The idea for them, it can be maintained, they focus on individual ability which says let us invest in a proportion of the student population that will graduate within the shortest period of time rather than absolute numbers.
4.10 Graduation and Attrition rates per quintile
Table 30 Number of students registered per quintile, 1990-2011 quintile reg3 reg4
1 2429 1425
2 1705 982
3 6206 3399
4 11185 6255 5 36479 18296 Total 58004 30357
reg3 and reg4 refer to registrations for three- and four-year degrees respectively.
4.10.2 Time-to-Degree and Graduation Rates for three-year Degrees
Table 31 below shows the number of years a student has been registered for a three-year degree before graduating per quintile.Table 31 Number of years registered for three- year degree before graduating per quintile, 1990-2004
status/quintile quintile1 quintile2 quintile3 quintile4 quintile5
Did not
graduate 505 376 1709 3582 10812
3 years 236 134 670 1533 7567
4 years 187 117 564 1099 3628
5 years 80 36 238 451 1249
6 or more
years 43 31 112 187 456
Total 1051 694 3293 6852 23712
% dropout 48 54.2 51.9 52.3 45.6
%
graduates 52 45.8 48.1 47.7 54.4
Chi-square = 481.55 with a p-value 0.000.
From this analysis three trends have been observed:
1 The percentage that graduated within three years increases from quintile 2 to quintile 5.
2 The percentage that graduates within four years decreases for quintiles 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
3 The percentage that did not graduate is the lowest for quintile 5 (see figure 2 below).
Figure 2 Graduation percentages for 3 year degrees for quintile rated schools
The odds that a student will graduate after three years are enhanced as one moves up the quintile categories. Furthermore, upper quintile 5 had fewer students who did not graduate than other quintiles. Thus, the higher the quintile, the lower the dropout rate and the higher the quintile, the higher the graduation rate. Thus, there is an association between the level of livelihood assets (quintile) and time-to-degree measures (graduation on regulation time or dropout).
Interestingly, quintile has an effect on graduation rates (including dropout, as seen in subsequent sections). Graduation is a component of academic progress. Thus, quintile as a measure of background in terms of a school’s socio-economic status, including community background, is an important explanatory variable for time-to-degree variables such as graduation or dropout rates.
Time-to-degree variables are important because they give an indication of whether students will eventually graduate or dropout. Academic progress should be viewed in its full cycle, that is, from registration to graduation and what happens to students between these two points.
Institutional policy should focus on identifying at-risk students, that is, those who are vulnerable to shocks and stresses such as failure or dropout; and also strengthening or improving the learning environment for those who are doing well so they can excel.
4.10.3 Time-to-Degree and Graduation Rates for four-year Degrees
Table 32 indicates the number of years a student has been registered for a four-year degree before graduating per quintile.
Table 32 Number of years registered for four-year degree before graduating per quintile, 1990-2004
status/quintile quintile1 quintile2 quintile3 quintile4 quintile5
Did not
graduate 289 160 920 2094 5950
4 years 101 101 403 900 3335
5 years 63 63 214 453 1273
6 years 66 66 192 401 901
7 or more
years 28 25 102 167 274
Total 547 415 1831 4015 11733
% dropout 52.8 38.6 50.2 52.2 50.7
%
graduates 47.2 61.4 49.8 47.8 49.3
Chi-square = 238.545 with a p-value 0.000.
Three conclusions can be drawn from figure 3 below:
1 The percentage that did not graduate is lowest for quintile 2.
2 The percentage that graduated within four years is the highest for quintile 5.
3 The percentage that graduates within five years or more is lower for quintiles 3, 4 and 5 than for quintiles 1 and 2.
Figure 3 Graduation percentages for 4 year degrees for quintile rated schools
As with the three-year degree programmes, the odds that a student will graduate on time (in this case within four years) is dependent on the quintile of the student. Thus, the majority of students who graduated within four years came from quintile 5. Furthermore, most of the students who graduated after five years or more were more in quintiles 1 and 2 than in other quintiles.
The time taken to graduate has implications for both the student and institution. The student who takes longer to graduate consumes resources which could be otherwise used to finance other deserving students. The longer a student takes to complete their degree, the more debt is accumulated especially when the sponsor is the NSFAS, a bank, or Edu-loan. Again here the analysis point to the relationship between the level of assets (quintile) and outcome (length of study measures, graduation or dropout). However, the higher percentage of graduates in quintile 2 (61.4% in table 32) attracts our attention in these cohort years. The performance of quintile 2 which seems to contradict the norm – that low quintile students take longer to graduate or record lower graduation rates – could be due to personality factors such as motivation and improved university environment (improved livelihood assets in terms of financial aid and pedagogical resources) for students from low quintile schools.
Meanwhile, some students from lower quintiles stay longer before they graduate because they are on financial aid (NSFAS) compared to their counterparts who are supported by their families. Those financed from family coffers are likely to graduate on regulation time because parents might withdraw their support should one take longer than expected. This reveals how livelihood assets dictate on the pace at which one arrives at or achieve livelihood outcomes. Thus, terms and conditions apply on the duration of investment on one’s education if one’s education is financed privately by the family than those whose education is funded from NSFAS bourse, they can take their time (refer to figure 3 above, item 3).
4.10.4 Dropout Rates for Three-Year Degree per Year per Quintile
Between 1998 and 2004 the quintile 5 dropout rate appears to be the lowest and the quintile 2 dropout rate the highest. An overview of these results is provided in table 33 below.
Table 33 Dropout percentage for three-year degree per year per quintile, 1990- 2004
year/quintile quintile1 quintile2 quintile3 quintile4 quintile5
1991 46.4 40.7 38.8 42.2 37.1
1992 26.9 55.6 42.8 47.4 38.7
1993 48.2 44 50.8 46.5 40.9
1994 33.8 36.7 43.8 47.3 43.3
1995 40.8 42.4 46.8 56.9 46.8
1996 37.9 45.1 51.1 51 43.3
1997 47.6 43.9 51 52.8 42.9
1998 47.5 66.7 57.1 54.6 46.4
1999 48.9 57.1 53.4 49.9 42
2000 63 61.2 58.5 52.2 43.2
2001 45.8 76.7 58.7 51 37.5
2002 50 71.9 48.3 47.7 39.6
2003 56.2 74.4 56.2 54.4 41.5
2004 57.8 67.5 57.9 50.2 43.5
Based on this analysis the dropout rate is related to the level of quintile (livelihood asset base). The higher the quintile category, the lower the dropout rate. On the other hand, the lower the quintile category, the higher the dropout rate. Thus, students in quintile 5 were more likely to persist at university and graduate than students from quintile 2. Using quintile as a measure of the socio-economic status in terms of assets, the quintile variable is a strong
predictor of the dropout rate of students in three-year programmes within the period under study. Thus, high asset base students (quintile 5) were less prone to dropout than lower asset base (low quintile). Further, the level of livelihood assets was related the risk or vulnerability to shocks such as failure or dropout for lower quintile students.
Figure 4 Dropout percentage for three-year degree per year per quintile, 1990-2004
4.10.5 Dropout Rates for Four-Year Degree per Year per Quintile
I could not distinguish between the dropout rates for the quintiles for four-year degrees for the period1990-2004. Thus, unlike in figure 4 above on three-year programmes, Figure 3 on dropout percentages for four-year degrees per year per quintile, 1990-2004, showed no clear pattern amongst the different quintiles.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
year
percentage quintile1
quintile2 quintile3 quintile4 quintile5
Table 34 Dropout percentage for four-year degree per year per quintile, 1990-2004 year/quintile quintile1 quintile2 quintile3 quintile4 quintile5
1990 86.7 65 61.6 64.2 70.4
1991 43.8 37.5 45.1 52.7 48.6
1992 44.4 16.7 40.7 40.5 42.8
1993 43.3 56 45.6 47.2 47.9
1994 51.9 61.5 41 44.5 45.2
1995 67.7 57.1 50.3 48.6 47.7
1996 65.3 52 55 56.5 48.3
1997 70 50 60 55.6 52.9
1998 54.7 63.6 56.1 55.2 51
1999 46.4 68.2 55.9 55.3 53
2000 50 56.3 44.8 53 51.1
2001 45 43.8 42.5 49.5 49.1
2002 36.2 53.3 43 37.4 36.7
2003 45.8 28 45.5 47.2 36.5
2004 28.9 31.9 40.5 50.9 44.6
Figure 5 Dropout percentage for four-year degree per year per quintile, 1990-2004