Explanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Explanatory factors for dropout from higher
education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
Factores explicativos del abandono de los estudios
en la educación superior en contextos
socio-académicos desfavorables
Fernando ACEVEDO CALAMET, PhD. Profesor. Universidad de la República (face@cur.edu.uy).
Abstract: used, based on survey techniques, in-depth
The extent of dropout from higher edu- interviews, and a focus group, using the 2014
cation is a cause for concern in much of the cohorts as units of analysis. These included
Western world, especially because, despite the students who were still studying and oth-
large amounts of money and resources invest- ers who had dropped out at the time of the
ed over the last two decades, dropout rates empirical work (2016). The main finding of
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
have remained almost unchanged. In view the research was that in unfavourable socio-
of this, the aim of this research is to identi- academic contexts, as in the case in Rivera,
fy and analyse the factors with the greatest the explanatory chain for dropout from high-
impact on dropout in the three higher edu- er education is very different from the one
revista española de pedagogía
cation centres in Rivera (Uruguay), which for more favourable contexts. Indeed, poor
are affected by unfavourable socio-academic academic performance, which often precedes
contexts. A qualitative methodology was dropping out, happens because students do
This article is based on the doctoral thesis Análisis de la persistencia estudiantil en el primer año de la educación
superior en un contexto socio-académico desfavorable. El caso de Rivera, Uruguay (Analysis of student persistence
in the first year of higher education in an unfavourable socio-academic context: The case of Rivera, Uruguay), co-
supervised by Jaume Sarramona and José María Ariso. It was successfully defended at the Universidad Internacional
de La Rioja (UNIR) on 28 September 2018.
Revision accepted: 2019-12-01.
This is the English version of an article originally printed in Spanish in issue 276 of the revista española de
pedagogía. For this reason, the abbreviation EV has been added to the page numbers. Please, cite this article as follows:
Acevedo Calamet, F. (2020). Factores explicativos del abandono de los estudios en la educación superior en contextos
socio-académicos desfavorables | Explanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic
contexts. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 78 (276), 253-270. doi: https://doi.org/10.22550/REP78-2-2020-02
https://revistadepedagogia.org/ ISSN: 0034-9461 (Print), 2174-0909 (Online)
253 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
not study enough, and this can largely be ex- cualitativo, apeló a las técnicas de encuesta
plained by them having little motivation for (censal), entrevista en profundidad y gru-
their chosen programmes because they have po de discusión, tomando como unidades de
enrolled on courses that are not what they análisis las cohortes 2014, es decir, tanto los
would have chosen if they had the chance to estudiantes no persistentes al momento del
take their preferred subject, something they trabajo empírico (2016) como los persisten-
were prevented from doing by the limited tes. El principal resultado de la investigación
range on offer near where they live. The main fue la constatación de que en contextos so-
conclusion is that the structural conditions in cio-académicos desfavorables, como es el caso
unfavourable socio-academic contexts, espe- de Rivera, el encadenamiento explicativo del
cially the limited range of programmes, are a abandono en educación superior es sustanti-
powerful explanatory factor for dropout from vamente distinto que el formulado para con-
higher education, especially in the first year. textos favorables. En efecto, el bajo desem-
peño académico de los estudiantes, antesala
Keywords: dropout, higher education, unfa- del abandono de los estudios, se debe a que
vourable socio-academic contexts, structural no estudian lo suficiente y esto se explica,
factors. principalmente, porque su motivación ha-
cia los estudios elegidos es escasa. Esta baja
motivación es producto, a su vez, de haber
Resumen: cursado una carrera que no es la que hubie-
La magnitud del fenómeno de abandono sen elegido cursar, de haber tenido la posibi-
de los estudios en educación superior es moti- lidad de ingresar en la de su preferencia, por
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
vo de preocupación en buena parte del mundo no existir en la oferta disponible cerca de su
occidental, acrecentada porque, a pesar de la lugar de residencia. La principal conclusión
gran cantidad de dinero y recursos inverti- es que las condiciones estructurales de los
dos, las tasas de abandono se han mantenido contextos socio-académicos desfavorables, en
revista española de pedagogía
prácticamente inalteradas en los últimos dos especial la escasa y poco diversificada oferta
decenios. En atención a ello, el objetivo de la de estudios terciarios, constituye un potente
investigación de base del presente texto fue factor explicativo del abandono de los estu-
identificar y analizar los factores de mayor in- dios en educación superior, sobre todo en el
cidencia en el abandono de los estudios en los primer año.
tres centros de educación superior de Rivera
(Uruguay), caracterizados por estar inscritos Descriptores: abandono de estudios, educa-
en contextos socio-académicos desfavorables. ción superior, contextos socio-académicos des-
El método empleado, de corte eminentemente favorables, factores estructurales.
254 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
1. Introduction: The issue of drop- increasing concern for universities and
out in higher education central educational authorities, especial-
High rates of dropout from higher ed- ly because this is a difficult phenomenon
ucation (HE) are now a common problem, to tackle using usual public policy instru-
observed in some 180 countries around the ments (Brunner, 2011). However, despite
world (Cabrera, Bethencourt, González conceptual advances in this area, exten-
Afonso, & Álvarez Pérez, 2006a). Interna- sive research (Google Scholar records over
tional organisations, such as the Organi- three million articles on student retention
sation for Economic Co-operation and De- in universities between 1980 and 2012
velopment (OECD) and the World Bank [Serra, 2012]), and the large amounts
among others, have estimated that at a of money and resources invested in pro-
global level, the dropout rate from HE is grammes and services to encourage stu-
around 40% (OECD, 2012). During the dent retention over several decades, espe-
last third of the twentieth century, this cially in facilitating students’ transition
phenomenon started to become a cause into the social and academic systems of
for concern in the West — especially in universities, there has been no significant
countries where the process of expan- reduction in dropout rates from HE in the
sion of HE had become established in the last thirty years (Lyche, 2010; Morten-
1970s (Cambours & Gorostiaga, 2016) — son, 2012; Seidman, 2012b). Although it
and it has become more pronounced over is likely that rates would be even higher
the last two decades. Furthermore, inter- without these actions (Seidman, 2012b),
est in reducing dropout rates in HE was the problem and concerns about it persist,
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
strongly boosted when they started to be especially because rates of persistence
used as a key indicator of universities’ at university and completion rates have
performance (Bricall, 1998; OECD, 2012) remained virtually unchanged since the
and quality of education, at an institu- mid-1990s in much of the Western world
revista española de pedagogía
tional and systemic level (Johnston, 2013; (Cabrera, Pérez, & López, 2014). This is
Yorke, 1998), something implemented in most apparent in the case of the USA,
Europe with the creation of the European where «although college student retention
Higher Education Area as a result of the may be the most studied and discussed as-
Bologna Declaration of 1999. Indeed, pect of American higher education, over
there is a consensus that a high dropout the last forty years, nearly every empir-
rate is indicative of low quality (Cabrera, ical study on the causes of attrition and
Tomás, Álvarez Pérez, & González Afon- the impact of interventions on retention
so, 2006b). has yielded only modest results» (Habley,
Bloom, & Robbins, 2012, p. xiii).
In any case, dropout from HE is wor-
rying given its social, institutional, and One plausible explanation for this sit-
personal repercussions (Cabrera et al., uation is that it is generally not wholly
2006b; Webb & Cotton, 2018). It is, there- within the reach of institutional or sys-
fore, unsurprising that it should be of temic management to implement effective
255 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
actions to reduce dropout significantly in access to HE are below the average for
HE. As well as the importance in this re- the region, dropout rates are relatively
gard of certain contextual-structural fac- high, and the highest dropout risk is dur-
tors, which are considered below in this ing the period of transition to HE (Ace-
text — especially those associated with vedo, 2017).
the structure of educational and employ-
ment opportunities — it is important to Given that dropout rates in the first
recall that the greatest risks of dropout year of HE are similar in all parts of Uru-
in the transition to HE are because stu- guay and in the large majority of organ-
dents undergo major personal, academic, isations in the sector, the insight that
and social changes (Álvarez González, inspired the present research is that the
Figuera, & Torrado, 2013; Corominas, similarity between these rates masks
2001; Holliman, Martin, & Collie, 2018) very different conditions, situations, and
during this varied, complex, and multi- circumstances, both when considering
faceted period (Dorio & Corti, 2014). This different geographical areas and differ-
is a difficult stage in the lives of many ent HE organisations: there are marked-
young people, especially for first-genera- ly different educational and employment
tion HE students from sectors that suf- opportunity structures and the dropout
fer socio-economic deprivation — as is risk events are of differing types and rel-
the case for the bulk of the student pop- ative importance (Acevedo, 2013, 2014a,
ulation in HE institutions in Rivera in 2014b, 2017). In effect, unlike what hap-
north-eastern Uruguay — who can suffer pens in favourable socio-academic set-
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
a degree of culture shock when they en- tings, the contextual-structural factors in
ter HE (Christie, Tett, Cree, Hounsell, & the region where the HE centres studied
McCune, 2008; Krause & Coates, 2008; here are located are decisive as explanato-
Scanlon, Rowling, & Weber, 2007). ry factors for dropout, as well as for per-
revista española de pedagogía
sistence and student success.
In the case of Uruguay, there has been
a noticeable increase in discourses and In this regard, approaches with a par-
texts emphasising crises in public educa- ticular focus on the areas Tinto (2012b)
tion in general and the pre-tertiary level calls «institutional commitments» (aca-
in particular. Furthermore, since the end demic, social, and financial support, guid-
of the last decade, widening access and ance and advice, curriculum, evaluation,
reducing dropout from HE have been ex- monitoring, and extra-curricular activi-
plicit goals of the authorities in the sec- ties among others) dominate current ac-
tor, especially those of the Universidad ademic work. This is probably because of
de la República, the institution with the the great influence of Tinto’s work and
longest tradition, largest student popu- ultimately because academic organisa-
lation, and greatest social significance in tions can have the most immediate and
the country. This aspiration is worrying effective impact on these areas (Webb &
if we consider that in Uruguay rates of Cotton, 2018).
256 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
However, while focussing on these as- This is very noticeable in Tinto’s most
pects, which are inside the grey circle in recent works (2012a, 2012b, 2017), as
Graph 1, these approaches pay little or well as in the most recognised ones in
no attention to contextual factors (struc- the current international academic field:
tural, extra-organisational: external com- Habley et al. (2012); Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh,
mitments), something that might also be Whitt, & Associates (2010); and Seid-
because these factors do not seem to have man (2012a, 2012b). A similar emphasis
a negative impact on students’ academic is found in the most recent studies that
pathways in the countries that produce focus on Uruguay (i.e., Boado, Custodio,
the most influential academic work on this & Ramírez, 2011; Fernández & Cardozo,
subject (Acevedo, 2017). 2014a, 2014b).
Graph 1. Tinto’s model (2012b): «Elements of a Model of Institutional Action».
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
revista española de pedagogía
Source: Own elaboration based on Tinto, 2012b, p. 258.
2. Objectives vourable socio-academic contexts. We
In light of what is set out above, define unfavourable socio-academic
the aim of the research on which this contexts as ones distinguished by the
text is based was to prepare a «pro- existence of a limited offer of higher
persistence» model for first-year HE education with a little diversity, as in
students that can be applied in unfa- the case of Rivera.
257 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
The research activities used to fulfil terviews, and a focus group. The units of
this aim cover four specific objectives. The analysis were the 2014 cohorts of the three
first objective is to identify and analyse the HE centres in Rivera, that is to say, the
principal characteristics of the conditions, young people who at the time of the field
situations, and circumstances that have work (2016) were still studying as well as
the greatest impact on students’ decisions those who had dropped out.
to abandon their studies in the first year
of HE in each of the three centres of this The census survey technique was
level in Rivera and the different ways in used with the students who started in
which they do so. these three cohorts, including those
classed as type (iv) informants — stu-
The general lines of the methodological dents still studying at one of the centres
approach used to fulfil this specific objec- after the start of their third academic
tive are briefly set out below, and the prin- year in 2016 — and type (v) informants
cipal results obtained are presented and — members of these cohorts who had
discussed. abandoned their studies before the end
of the first three months of the third aca-
demic year, around June 2016. Table 1
3. Method shows the number of students surveyed
The essentially qualitative method in each centre covered, the number of
used to fulfil the objective mentioned valid surveys, and the corresponding re-
above comprised a survey, in-depth in- sponse rate.
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
Table 1. Students by HE centres in Rivera, valid surveys and response rate.
Number of Valid Response rate
Educational centre
students surveys
revista española de pedagogía
Centro Regional de Profesores del
365 302 83%
Norte
Centro Universitario de Rivera 340 172 51%
Instituto de Formación Docente de
114 81 71%
Rivera
TOTAL 819 555 68 %
Source: Own elaboration.
The semi-structured, in-depth inter- economic sector in the last decade —,
view method was used with three ex- seven of type (ii) — the seven heads of
perts and 70 qualified informants: six of the region’s HE centres —, nine of type
type (i) — people with in-depth knowl- (iii) — the three longest-serving teach-
edge of and/or the capacity to influence ers at each of Rivera’s three HE cen-
decision-making processes in each local tres —, 24 of type (iv) — students still
258 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
studying in June 2016 —, and 24 of type well as these aspects, described by Tinto
(v) — students no longer studying at (2012b) as «internal commitments», a
that date. wide range of other characteristics that
are intrinsic to students also have an
A focus group was used with a group impact, such as intrinsic motivation and
comprising six of the twelve previous- learning dispositions, expectations, as-
ly-interviewed type (iv) informants pirations, interests, and emotions. Most
— two students from each of Rivera’s of the focuses that start from the theo-
three HE centres who, having started retical pathway developed by Tinto over
studying at one of them in 2014, were forty years ago ignore or exclude these,
still studying in June 2016 —, and six of but they have great explanatory power
the twelve type (v) informants who had for decisions relating to dropping out
also previously been interviewed — two from HE in the case of educational cen-
students from each of these three co- tres with unfavourable socio-academic
horts who, as of June 2016, had dropped situations, as is the case with Rivera.
out from their studies. The twelve fo-
cus-group participants were selected on The second finding was that the
the basis of the analysis of the informa- meaning and magnitude of these charac-
tion produced in the in-depth interview teristics — especially students’ intrinsic
situation (Acevedo, 2017). motivation and learning disposition —
are not inherent to them per se, but are
strongly affected by the structural con-
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
4. Results and discussion ditions, situations, and circumstances
With regards to identifying and analys- of the educational centre’s geographical
ing the factors that have the greatest im- location. In other words, in the case of
pact on students’ decision to drop out from HE organisations in locations with un-
revista española de pedagogía
their studies in the first year in Rivera's favourable socio-academic situations,
HE centres, the research had three prin- the structural conditions, situations, and
cipal results. circumstances of this situation will have
a negative impact on certain inherent
The first was the finding that this characteristics of the students, especial-
decision is also significantly affected by ly their intrinsic motivation and learn-
students’ conditions, situations, and cir- ing disposition. Intrinsic motivation and
cumstances at the moment they decide to learning disposition are associated with
enrol at an HE centre, such as academic other inherent socio-psychological char-
preparation (cognitive competences and acteristics (the ability to delay gratifica-
prior knowledge), skills and abilities, tion, perceived self-efficacy, self-esteem,
personal attributes (the moment in their resilience, coping), which taken together
life course, gender and class attributes, prevent social and academic integration
in particular cultural and economic cap- (Holliman et al., 2018; Kahu & Nel-
ital), and their attitudes and values. As son, 2018) to the degree that, Tinto has
259 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
repeatedly said (i.e., 1975, 1987, 1993, essary for persistence in their studies.
2007, 2010, 2012a, 2012b, 2017) is nec- Graph 2 presents this proposition.
Graph 2. Contextual-structural factors (external commitments) and factors inherent to
students (internal commitments) in favourable socio-academic contexts (like Rivera).
Source: Own elaboration.
The third result, which is clearly re- unit of analysis: the educational centre,
lated to the previous two, is that in un- either the teachers or the students (Álva-
favourable socio-academic contexts, the rez, Cabrera, González, & Bethencourt,
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
explanatory chain for dropout from HE 2006).
is substantially different from the one in
favourable contexts. For example, in the most widespread
of the approaches of Tinto (1975, 1993,
revista española de pedagogía
Indeed, any attempt to determine the 2012b), who is the main theoretical ref-
explanatory factors for student persis- erence point on this subject, «although
tence or dropout from HE must start by every student who accesses higher ed-
recognising that it is a multidimensional ucation does so with his or her own in-
and multicausal phenomenon character- terests, expectations, and intentions,
ised by an always complex and dynamic in- what basically determines the decision
teraction between contextual-structural, [to dropout] is the level of social and aca-
institutional-systemic, and personal fac- demic integration he or she achieves in
tors inherent to the student (Astin & the university institution» (Álvarez et
Oseguera, 2012). Except in the case of the al., 2006, p. 3). Other researchers un-
approaches — very much in the minori- derline the effect of the quality of the
ty — that focus on the structural condi- teaching provided and of the type of re-
tions of the locations of the HE centres, lationship teachers establish with stu-
empirical research carried out from the dents (i.e., Acevedo, 2012, 2011; Hong,
other two focuses considers a distinct Shull, & Haefner, 2012; Lillis, 2012), as
260 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
well as curriculum aspects and student On the other hand, academic articles
support programmes (i.e., Juarros, 2006; that present results from empirical stud-
Pineda-Báez, Pedraza-Ortiz, & Moreno, ies on this topic do not generally explore
2011; Raju & Schumacker, 2015). There the reasons for the existence of the inter-
are also many other studies that under- vening factors associated with both the
line the importance, above any other school system and teachers or students.
intervening factor, of students’ inher- For example, it has not generally been
ent characteristics, both with regards to asked why educational centres do not im-
academic background when starting HE plement student retention strategies, or
(prior knowledge, skills, capacities) and why these strategies are ineffective when
attitudinal attributes (i.e., Bean, 1990; they do, or why teachers do not teach well
Gairín et al., 2014; Gale & Parker, 2014; or why students do not study enough and
Gunuc & Kuzu, 2015; Kahu, 2013; Karp, are unsuccessful in their academic path-
2011; Tinto, 2017; Zepke, 2014). way. In any case, even though there are
no policies or programmes focussing on
The research on which this text is student retention in Rivera’s HE centres,
based has shown that in the case of un- the limited range of programmes, which
favourable socio-academic contexts, the restricts the possibilities for any effective
variables from the three sets of factors action to that effect, is the condition that
mentioned above — ones corresponding best explains low student academic per-
to the educational centre, the teachers, formance and teachers’ lack of education-
and the students, which are the groups al effectiveness.
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
of factors to which most of the specialist
literature attributes the most explana- Eight of the nine teachers and six of the
tory power for dropout in HE — whether seven directors interviewed in the course
taken individually or together, are not of the research stated that the factors with
revista española de pedagogía
the ultimate explanation of dropout or the greatest effect on dropout rates in HE
student persistence. Rather, they are in the region are students’ poor prior aca-
epiphenomenal manifestations of fac- demic training — a recurring condition
tors operating at an underlying level. mentioned in the specialist literature
Strictly speaking, each of these three — and the attitudes associated with this
groups of variables refers to structural condition. Of the 555 students surveyed,
factors, outside the educational system 80% agreed with this assessment, while
and its agents. In practical terms, this 11% cited problems combining academic
leads us to conclude that if an agent or and work responsibilities as the main ex-
educational centre acts on these issues planatory factor; only 4% regarded some
without altering structural conditions of their institutional commitments as
or factors to some extent, the interven- influential factors: educational quality,
tion will not be sustainable over time, social, academic, and economic support,
however effective it might be in the organisational climate, meeting expecta-
short term. tions, among others. The testimonies from
261 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
the focus group reaffirmed the predomi- In effect, according to what has
nance of these perceptions. It is important emerged from the testimonies provided
to note that in the northeast of Uruguay, during the in-depth interviews and focus
there is an unintentional process of aca- group, if students have sufficient intrin-
demic selection in secondary education, sic motivation towards their studies and
especially in the transition to upper- towards fulfilling their academic goals in
secondary education — the Baccalaureate general, motivation they would have if the
— and in students’ pathways at this level. programmes they pursue were what they
Students with the best pre-tertiary aca- actually wanted to study, they would be
demic preparation, especially ones from able to overcome shortcomings in their
wealthier homes, continue their education academic preparation and initial attitude
in Montevideo, the country’s capital. This through increased effort and dedication.
largely explains why a large majority of Indeed, perseverance, toleration for frus-
students entering HE in Rivera have defi- tration, resilience, and positive coping
cient academic preparation. would gradually become attitudes that
tend towards student persistence.
Some of the qualified informants inter-
viewed also agreed that the attitudes of a Similarly, if students have sufficient
large number of students, which in many intrinsic motivation, the attitudes re-
cases are to some extent associated with sulting from this will give them a greater
their deficient academic preparation, are chance of success in overcoming the chal-
a factor that also helps explain dropout. A lenges they might face with combining
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
few of them mentioned, as explanatory fac- the time and effort their studies require
tors, the difficulty some students face with of them with the time and effort they
combining academic and work responsi- must sometimes apply to other tasks out-
bilities, both paid and domestic. Further- side academia, for example, in the work-
revista española de pedagogía
more, it is striking that very few qualified place or home. In any case, it is very hard
informants explicitly mentioned elements to determine the direction of a supposed
of the centre effect (including institution- causal link between dedication to work
al commitments) as factors that influence and the limited time and effort dedicat-
students’ decisions regarding dropping ed to studies, as has been found in other
out: educational quality, governance, or- locations, for example, Australia (Coates,
ganisational atmosphere, among others. 2008; Krause, Hartley, James, & McInnis,
2005). That is to say, dedication to work
Nonetheless, the students’ deficient could result in disaffection with studies,
academic preparation and inadequate but it could also be this disaffection that
attitudes when starting at HE centres in drives the search for a job or a greater
the northeast of Uruguay, as well as the dedication to it.
difficulties faced by ones who also work or
even the components of the centre effect, Ultimately, even if students say they
are not genuine explanatory factors. have dropped out of university because
262 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
of low academic performance («I did bad- not study enough (Tinto, 2012b). The key
ly in evaluations and exams» was a very to explaining it then shifts to asking our-
common response in the survey and the selves — and the students — why they
in-depth interviews), this is not a gen- did not study enough. According to re-
uine explanatory factor. The key is to ask cent proposals by Tinto (2012b), in the
ourselves — and the students — what USA this largely seems to be because uni-
caused this low performance. In a large versities’ expectations of what students
majority of cases, the answer is that they must do to succeed in their studies are
made little effort and were not dedicated low or unclear or because the universi-
to their studies, reaffirming what Kuh et ties do not construct educational settings
al. (2010) concluded after a large-scale re- that require them to study more than
view of empirical research in the subject: they do. This is not the case in the HE
«The time and energy students devote to centres in Rivera, where a large major-
educationally purposeful activities is the ity of the students mainly do not study
single best predictor of their learning and enough because they have little motiva-
personal development» (p. 8). It has also tion for their chosen studies because they
been noted that «student success is more are on a course that they would not have
likely to occur as students increase the chosen if they had been able to study
time and effort they put into their stud- their favoured course, something they
ies» (Habley et al., 2012, p. 12). could not do because of the small range of
HE programmes available close to where
The low academic performance of they live. Graph 3 outlines the argument
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
many students is simply because they do put forth.
Graph 3. Explanatory chain for Rivera’s higher education center.
revista española de pedagogía
Source: Own elaboration.
263 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
In short, «this is not for me» — or, Furthermore, according to the findings of
more specifically, «what I am studying is this research, the results of implementing
not what I would have preferred to study if programmes intended to reduce the phe-
I had the chance» — best summarises the nomena of poor educational achievement
main reason explicitly and implicitly un- and dropout in this period, as well as di-
derpinning the large majority of decisions rect action by agents of HE organisations
to dropout that are taken in the first year in the area that are most able to take ac-
of HE in Rivera. «This is not for me» could tion (centre directors and teachers), are
reflect students’ idea that the course they also negatively affected by these contex-
are studying or started studying is not tual-structural conditions.
what they would have picked if they had
the option to choose or their perception — Ultimately, any policy intended to re-
generally in the early stages of higher edu- duce dropout rates in the period of transi-
cation — that the course they chose is not tion to HE in a particular educational cen-
what they had expected. tre must also pay particular attention to
the diversity of the conditions, situations,
With regards to this latter view, it is and circumstances in which it occurs.
worth taking into account that many of
the students from Rivera we interviewed This being so, in the case of HE cen-
made it clear that their social representa- tres that, like those in Rivera (Uruguay),
tions about available courses and the in- are located in unfavourable socio-
formation they receive also have the effect academic contexts, it is appropriate and
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
of impeding their entry into or persistence necessary to formulate an explanatory
in their studies. model as an alternative to Tinto’s «Model
of Institutional Action» (2012b), one that
accentuates the importance of consider-
5. Conclusions
revista española de pedagogía
ing contextual-structural factors (exter-
The main conclusion from this research nal commitments in Tinto’s words) and
is that in unfavourable socio-academic factors inherent to the student (internal
contexts, like in the case of Rivera, the commitments), which have much more
structural conditions of the contexts, and influence on decisions relating to drop-
in particular the very limited range of HE ping out than institutional factors (insti-
programmes available, are a major ex- tutional commitments).
planatory factor for dropout in the period
of transition to HE, above all in the first Graph 4 shows a model that takes as
year. Indeed, their explanatory power is its basis and includes all of the elements
considerably greater than that of other of the Model of Institutional Action pro-
factors, such as for example, the ones posed by Tinto (see Graph 1), but which
institutional and systemic management is designed to be applicable in the specif-
have attempted to improve (the institu- ic case of unfavourable socio-academic
tional commitments considered by Tinto). contexts. In line with what is established
264 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
above, this alternative model emphasises especially those relating to their intrinsic
the influence of factors outside the scope motivation, learning disposition, and the
of institutional management for achiev- emotions that underpin both of them.
ing student success, which is the prin-
cipal aim of all HE institutions. It also Consequently, in this type of situation,
shows that contextual-structural factors institutional management (the set of in-
(external commitments) affect the fac- stitutional commitments) should pay spe-
tors inherent to students at the moment cial attention to analysing the two sets of
they enter HE (internal commitments), factors that precede it.
Graph 4. An alternative to Tinto’s model that is applicable in unfavourable socio-
academic situations.
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
revista española de pedagogía
Source: Own elaboration.
As a corollary, Graph 5 sets out an at- These steps combine the three types
tempt at a proposal to be implemented to of intervening factors: those correspond-
promote persistence and student success ing to the students’ inherent character-
in unfavourable socio-academic contexts istics when they start HE (internal com-
in accordance with what has emerged from mitments, which can be improved in the
this research. medium term, both by the institution’s
265 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
management and by the system’s man- are effectively within reach of both the
agement), contextual-structural ones institutional and systemic management
(external commitments, which can be in the short term (the factors that make
improved by the institution’s manage- up the centre effect, or institutional com-
ment in the long term), and ones that mitments).
Graph 5. A pro-student persistence model for higher education suitable for in
unfavourable socio-academic contexts (specifically Rivera).
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
revista española de pedagogía
Source: Own elaboration.
References Acevedo, F. (2012). Ante el naufragio. Una propues-
ta para la formación de actores de la enseñanza.
Acevedo, F. (2009). El Centro Universitario de
Montevideo: Consejo de Formación en Educa-
Rivera, impulsor del sistema nervioso de la
ción, Administración Nacional de Educación
región. Análisis, diagnosis, prognosis. Mon-
Pública.
tevideo: Comisión Coordinadora del Interior, Acevedo, F. (2013, October). Abandono y riesgos
Universidad de la República. de abandono en la educación superior en el
Acevedo, F. (2011). Dicen. Calidad educativa y interior del país. Un análisis provisional. In
gobernabilidad en un instituto de formación Transiciones entre ciclos, riesgos y desafi-
docente. Montevideo: Erga Omnes Ediciones. liación en la Educación Media y Superior de
266 EVExplanatory factors for dropout from higher education in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
Uruguay. Symposium conducted at the regio- nos. Retrieved from http://www.oei.es/oeivirt/
nal seminar-workshop of the Centro Univer- bricall.htm (Consulted on 11-09-2017).
sitario de Rivera, Universidad de la Repúbli- Brunner, J. J. (2011). Constantes, novedades y
ca, Rivera. preguntas sobre la deserción escolar. Notas
Acevedo, F. (2014a). Una aproximación a la des- para el Seminario «Deserción Escolar en Edu-
afiliación educativa en la transición hacia la cación Básica». CEPAL. Retrieved from ht-
Educación Superior en el interior de Uruguay. tp://200.6.99.248/~bru487cl/files/Notas_Deser-
Páginas de Educación, 7 (1), 131-148. cion_1205011.pdf (Consulted on 8-11-2017).
Acevedo, F. (2014b). La desafiliación en un centro Cabrera, A., Pérez, P., & López, L. (2014). Evolu-
de formación docente. Un análisis provisional. ción de perspectivas en el estudio de la reten-
In T. Fernández & Á. Ríos (Eds.), El tránsito ción universitaria en los EE.UU.: bases con-
entre ciclos en la Educación Media y Superior ceptuales y puntos de inflexión. In P. Figuera
de Uruguay (pp. 183-208). Montevideo: Comi- (Ed.), Persistir con éxito en la universidad: de
sión Sectorial de Investigación Científica, Uni- la investigación a la acción (pp. 15-40). Barce-
versidad de la República. lona: Laertes.
Acevedo, F. (2017, September). La oferta de es- Cabrera, L., Bethencourt, J. T., González Afonso,
tudios terciarios en el noreste de Uruguay y M., & Álvarez Pérez, P. (2006a). Un estudio
sus efectos en la persistencia estudiantil. In transversal retrospectivo sobre prolongación y
XVI Jornadas de Investigación Científica de abandono de estudios universitarios. RELIE-
la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Symposium VE, 12 (1), 105-127.
conducted at the sessions of the Faculty of Cabrera, L., Tomás, J., Álvarez Pérez, P., & Gonzá-
Social Sciences Universidad de la República, lez Afonso, M. (2006b). El problema del aban-
Montevideo. dono de los estudios universitarios. RELIEVE,
Álvarez, P., Cabrera, L., González, M., & Bethen- 12 (2), 171-203.
court, J. (2006). Causas del abandono y prolon- Cambours, A. M., & Gorostiaga, J. M. (2016). Re-
gación de los estudios universitarios. Paradig- flexiones finales. Hallazgos y tareas pendien-
ma, 27 (1), 01-22. tes. In A. M. Cambours & J. M. Gorostiaga
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
Álvarez González, M., Figuera, P., & Torrado, M. (Coords.), Hacia una universidad inclusiva.
(2011). La problemática de la transición Bachi- Nuevos escenarios y miradas (pp. 217-221).
llerato-Universidad en la Universidad de Bar- Buenos Aires: Aique Grupo Editor.
celona. Revista Española de Orientación Psico- Christie, H., Tett, L., Cree, V., Hounsell, J., & Mc-
pedagógica (REOP), 22 (1), 15-27. Cune, V. (2008). A real rollercoaster of confi-
revista española de pedagogía
Astin, A., & Oseguera, L. (2012). Pre-College and dence and emotions: learning to be a university
Institutional Influences on Degree Attainment. student. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (5),
In A. Seidman (Ed.), College Student Reten- 567-581.
tion: Formula for student success (pp. 119-143). Coates, H. (2008). Student engagement in campus‐
Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield. based and online education: university connec-
Bean, J. P. (1990). Understanding why students lea- tions. London: Routledge.
ve: Insights from research. In D. Hossler & J. P. Corominas, E. (2001). La transición a los estudios
Bean (Eds.), The Strategic Management of Co- universitarios. Abandono o cambio en el primer
llege Enrollments (pp. 147-169). San Francisco: año de universidad. Revista de Investigación
Jossey-Bass. Educativa, 19 (1), 127-151.
Boado, M., Custodio, L., & Ramírez, R. (2011). La Dorio, I., & Corti, F. (2014). El primer año en la
deserción estudiantil universitaria en la UDE- universidad. La experiencia de los estudiantes.
LAR y en Uruguay entre 1997 y 2006. Montevi- In P. Figuera (Ed.), Persistir con éxito en la uni-
deo: Comisión Sectorial de Investigación Cien- versidad: de la investigación a la acción (pp.
tífica, Universidad de la República. 157-172). Barcelona: Laertes.
Bricall, J. M. (Ed.) (1998). Informe Universidad Fernández, T., & Cardozo, S. (2014a). Acceso y
2000. Organización de Estados Iberoamerica- persistencia en el tránsito a la educación su-
267 EVFernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
perior en la cohorte de estudiantes uruguayos Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing Student Engagement
evaluados por PISA en 2003. In T. Fernández in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Educa-
& Á. Ríos (Eds.), El tránsito entre ciclos en la tion, 38 (5), 758-773.
Educación Media y Superior de Uruguay (pp. Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2018). Student engage-
123-146). Montevideo: Comisión Sectorial de ment in the educational interface: understan-
Investigacion Científica, Universidad de la Re- ding the mechanisms of student success. Hi-
pública. gher Education Research & Development, 37
Fernández, T., & Cardozo, S. (2014b). Educación (1), 58-71.
Superior y persistencia al cabo del primer año Karp, M. M. (2011). How Non-Academic Supports
en Uruguay. Un estudio longitudinal con base Work: Four Mechanisms for Improving Student
en la cohorte de estudiantes evaluados por Outcomes. New York: Community College Re-
PISA 2003. Páginas de Educación, 7 (1), 103- search Center.
128. Krause, K.-L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ enga-
Gairín, J., Triado, X., Feixas, M., Figuera, P., Apa- gement in first-year university. Assessment &
ricio-Chueca, P., & Torrado, M. (2014). Student Evaluation in Higher Education, 33 (5), 493-
dropout rates in Catalan universities: profile 505.
and motives for disengagement. Quality in Hi- Krause, K.-L., Hartley, R., James, R., & McInnis,
gher Education, 20 (2), 165-182. C. (2005). The First Year Experience in Austra-
Gale, T., & Parker, S. (2014). Navigating change: lian Universities: Findings from a Decade of
a typology of student transition in higher edu- National Studies. Melbourne: Department of
cation. Studies in Higher Education, 39 (5), Education, Science and Training, Australian
734-753. Government-Centre for the Study of Higher
Gunuc, S., & Kuzu, A. (2015). Student engagement Education, University of Melbourne.
scale: development, reliability and validity. Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J., Whitt, E., & Asso-
Journal Assessment & Evaluation in Higher ciates (2010). Student Success in College. Crea-
Education, 40 (4), 587-610. ting Conditions that Matter. San Francisco:
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
Habley, W., Bloom, J., & Robbins, S. (2012). Increa- Jossey-Bass.
sing Persistence. Research-Based Strategies for Lillis, M. P. (2012). Faculty emotional intelligence
College Student Success. San Francisco: Jos- and student-faculty interactions: implications
sey-Bass. for student retention. Journal of College Stu-
Holliman, A. J., Martin, A. J., & Collie, R. J. dent Retention: Research, Theory & Practice,
revista española de pedagogía
(2018). Adaptability, engagement, and degree 13 (2), 155-178.
completion: a longitudinal investigation of uni- Lyche, C. (2010). Taking on the Completion Cha-
versity students. Educational Psychology, 38 llenge: A Literature Review on Policies to Pre-
(6), 785-799. vent Dropout and Early School Leaving. OECD
Hong, B. S., Shull, P. J., & Haefner, L. A. (2012). Education Working Papers, 53. doi: https://doi.
Impact of perceptions of faculty on student org/10.1787/5km4m2t59cmr-en
outcomes of self-efficacy, locus of control, per- Mortenson, T. G. (2012). Measurements of Persis-
sistence, and commitment. Journal of College tence. In A. Seidman (Ed.), College Student
Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practi- Retention: Formula for student success (pp. 35-
ce, 13 (3), 289-309. 59). Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield.
Johnston, B. (2013). El primer año de universidad. OECD (2012). Education at a Glance 2012: OECD
Una experiencia positiva de transición. Madrid: Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: ht-
Narcea. tps://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2012-en
Juarros, M. F. (2006). Educación Superior, ¿como Pineda-Báez, C., Pedraza-Ortiz, A., & Moreno, I.
derecho o como privilegio? Las políticas de ad- (2011). Efectividad de las estrategias de reten-
misión a la universidad en el contexto de los ción universitaria: la función del docente. Edu-
países de la región. Andamios, 3 (5), 69-90. cación y Educadores, 14 (1), 119-135.
268 EVA systematic review of tablet use in primary education
Raju, D., & Schumacker, R. (2015). Exploring Stu- Tinto, V. (2012a). Completing College: rethinking
dent Characteristics of Retention that Lead to institutional action. Chicago: The University of
Graduation in Higher Education Using Data Chicago Press.
Mining Models. Journal of College Student Tinto, V. (2012b). Moving from Theory to Action.
Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 16 (4), A Model of Institutional Action for Student
563-591. Success. In A. Seidman (Ed.), College Student
Scanlon, L., Rowling, L., & Weber, Z. (2007). ‘You Retention. Formula for Student Success (pp.
don’t have like an identity... you are just lost 251-266). Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield.
in a crowd’: forming a student identity in the Tinto, V. (2017). Reflections on student persisten-
first-year transition to university. Journal of ce. Student Success, 8 (2), 1-8.
Youth Studies, 10 (2), 223-241. Webb, O. J., & Cotton, D. R. E. (2018). Early with-
Seidman, A. (2012a). Introduction. In A. Seidman drawal from higher education: a focus on aca-
(Ed.), College Student Retention. Formula for demic experiences. Teaching in Higher Educa-
Student Success (pp. 1-5). Plymouth: Rowman tion, 23 (7), 835-852.
& Littlefield. Yorke, M. (1998). Undergraduate Non-completion
Seidman, A. (2012b). Taking Action. A Retention in England: Some Implications for the Higher
Formula and Model for Student Success. In A. Education System and its Institutions. Tertiary
Seidman (Ed.), College Student Retention. For- Education and Management, 4 (1), 59-70.
mula for Student Success (pp. 267-284). Ply- Zepke, N. (2014). Understanding Teaching, Mo-
mouth: Rowman & Littlefield. tivation and External Influences in Student
Serra, L. (2012). How to Define Retention. A New Engagement: How Can Complexity Thinking
Look at an Old Problem. In A. Seidman (Ed.), Help? Research in Post-compulsory Education,
College Student Retention. Formula for Stu- 16 (1), 1-24.
dent Success (pp. 81-99). Plymouth: Rowman
& Littlefield.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education:
Author’s biography
a theoretical synthesis of recent research. Re- Fernando Acevedo Calamet is an
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020, 253-270
view of Educational Research, 45 (1), 89-125. Architect, Bachelor in Social Anthropol-
Tinto, V. (1987). El abandono de los estudios supe- ogy and Master in Education Policy and
riores. Una nueva perspectiva de las causas del Management. PhD from the Universidad
abandono y su tratamiento. Mexico: UNAM-
Internacional de La Rioja. He works as a
ANUIES.
revista española de pedagogía
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: rethinking the Profesor at the Northeast Regional Uni-
causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: versity Centre of the Universidad de la
The University of Chicago Press. República and is the Academic Head of the
Tinto, V. (2007). Research and Practice of Student Centre for the Study of Educational Pol-
Retention: What Next? Journal of College Stu-
icies. His main lines of research focus on
dent Retention, 8 (1), 1-19.
Tinto, V. (2010). From theory to action: Exploring the quality of education and the dropout
the institutional conditions for student reten- rate in higher education.
tion. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory
and Research, 25, 51-90. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0815-7980
269 EVrevista española de pedagogía
año 78, n.º 276, mayo-agosto 2020
Spanish Journal of Pedagogy
year 78, n. 276, May-August 2020
Table of Contents
Sumario
Editorial Jesús Miguel Jornet Meliá, María Jesús Perales
Editorial Montolío, & José González-Such
The concept of validity of teaching evaluation
José Antonio Ibáñez-Martín processes
An educational consideration on the pandemic: El concepto de validez de los procesos de evaluación
endure...and progress de la docencia 233
Una consideración educativa sobre la pandemia: resistir…
Fernando Acevedo Calamet
y adelantar 181 Explanatory factors for dropout from higher education
in unfavourable socio-academic contexts
Factores explicativos del abandono de los estudios en la educación
Studies
superior en contextos socio-académicos desfavorables 253
Estudios
Bernardo Gargallo López, Fran J. García-García,
Notes
Inmaculada López-Francés, Miguel Ángel Jiménez Notas
Rodríguez, & Salomé Moreno Navarro
The learning to learn competence: An assessment María-Carmen Ricoy, & Cristina Sánchez-Martínez
A systematic review of tablet use in primary education
of a theoretical model
Revisión sistemática sobre el uso de la tableta en la etapa de
La competencia aprender a aprender: valoración de
educación primaria 273
un modelo teórico 187
Jaime Carcamo-Oyarzun, & Christian Herrmann
Construct validity of the MOBAK test battery for the
assessment of basic motor competencies in primary
school children
Validez de constructo de la batería MOBAK para la evaluación
de las competencias motrices básicas en escolares de
213 educación primaria 291Concha Iriarte Redín, Sara Ibarrola-García, & Maite Book reviews
Aznárez-Sanado
Proposal for a school mediation evaluation Esteban-Bara, F. (2019). La universidad light: Un análisis
tool (MEQ) de nuestra formación universitaria [The light university: An
Propuesta de un instrumento de evaluación analysis of our university education] (José L. González-
de la mediación escolar (CEM) 309 Geraldo). Ruiz-Corbella, M., & García-Gutiérrez, J. (Eds.)
(2019). Aprendizaje-Servicio. Los retos de la evaluación
Bruno Echauri Galván, & Silvia García Hernández [Service learning: The challenges of evaluation] (Andrea
Translating in colours: Translation as an Muñoz Villanueva). Lafforgue, L. (2019). Recuperemos la
assessment tool for reading comprehension escuela [Reclaiming the school] (Beatriz Gálvez). Ferraces-
in English as a second language Otero, M. J., Godás-Otero, A., & García-Álvarez, J.
Traducir en colores: la traducción como herramienta (2019). Cómo realizar un estudio científico en ciencias
de evaluación de la comprensión lectora en inglés sociales, de la educación y de la salud [How to do a scientific
como lengua extranjera 327 study in the social, educational, and health sciences]
(Carolina Rodríguez-Llorente). 347
This is the English version of the research articles and book reviews published orig-
inally in the Spanish printed version of issue 276 of the revista española de pe-
dagogía. The full Spanish version of this issue can also be found on the journal's
website http://revistadepedagogia.org.
ISSN: 0034-9461 (Print), 2174-0909 (Online)
https://revistadepedagogia.org/
Depósito legal: M. 6.020 - 1958
INDUSTRIA GRÁFICA ANZOS, S.L. Fuenlabrada - MadridFactores explicativos del abandono de
los estudios en la educación superior en
contextos socio-académicos desfavorables
Explanatory factors for dropout from higher education in
unfavourable socio-academic contexts
Dr. Fernando ACEVEDO CALAMET. Profesor Adjunto. Universidad de la República (face@cur.edu.uy).
Resumen: apeló a las técnicas de encuesta (censal), entre-
La magnitud del fenómeno de abandono de vista en profundidad y grupo de discusión, to-
los estudios en educación superior es motivo de mando como unidades de análisis las cohortes
preocupación en buena parte del mundo occi- 2014, es decir, tanto los estudiantes no persis-
dental, acrecentada porque, a pesar de la gran tentes al momento del trabajo empírico (2016)
cantidad de dinero y recursos invertidos, las como los persistentes. El principal resultado
tasas de abandono se han mantenido práctica- de la investigación fue la constatación de que
año 78, n.º 276, mayo-agosto 2020, 253-269
mente inalteradas en los últimos dos decenios. en contextos socio-académicos desfavorables,
En atención a ello, el objetivo de la investiga- como es el caso de Rivera, el encadenamiento
ción de base del presente texto fue identificar explicativo del abandono en educación superior
y analizar los factores de mayor incidencia en es sustantivamente distinto que el formulado
revista española de pedagogía
el abandono de los estudios en los tres centros para contextos favorables. En efecto, el bajo
de educación superior de Rivera (Uruguay), desempeño académico de los estudiantes, an-
caracterizados por estar inscritos en contex- tesala del abandono de los estudios, se debe a
tos socio-académicos desfavorables. El método que no estudian lo suficiente y esto se explica,
empleado, de corte eminentemente cualitativo, principalmente, porque su motivación hacia los
Este artículo está basado en la tesis doctoral «Análisis de la persistencia estudiantil en el primer año de la educación
superior en un contexto socio-académico desfavorable. El caso de Rivera, Uruguay», co-dirigida por Jaume Sarramona
y José María Ariso; fue defendida en la Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR) el 28 de septiembre de 2018.
Fecha de recepción de la versión definitiva de este artículo: 01-12-2019.
Cómo citar este artículo: Acevedo Calamet, F. (2020). Factores explicativos del abandono de los estudios en la educación
superior en contextos socio-académicos desfavorables | Explanatory factors for dropout from higher education in
unfavourable socio-academic contexts. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 78 (276), 253-269. doi: https://doi.org/10.22550/
REP78-2-2020-02
https://revistadepedagogia.org/ ISSN: 0034-9461 (Impreso), 2174-0909 (Online)
253Fernando ACEVEDO CALAMET
estudios elegidos es escasa. Esta baja motiva- socio-academic contexts. A qualitative method-
ción es producto, a su vez, de haber cursado una ology was used, based on survey techniques, in-
carrera que no es la que hubiesen elegido cur- depth interviews, and a focus group, using the
sar, de haber tenido la posibilidad de ingresar 2014 cohorts as units of analysis. These includ-
en la de su preferencia, por no existir en la ofer- ed students who were still studying and others
ta disponible cerca de su lugar de residencia. who had dropped out at the time of the empir-
La principal conclusión es que las condiciones ical work (2016). The main finding of the re-
estructurales de los contextos socio-académicos search was that in unfavourable socio-academic
desfavorables, en especial la escasa y poco di- contexts, as in the case in Rivera, the explana-
versificada oferta de estudios terciarios, consti- tory chain for dropout from higher education is
tuye un potente factor explicativo del abandono very different from the one for more favourable
de los estudios en educación superior, sobre contexts. Indeed, poor academic performance,
todo en el primer año. which often precedes dropping out, happens
because students do not study enough, and
Descriptores: abandono de estudios, educa- this can largely be explained by them having
ción superior, contextos socio-académicos des- little motivation for their chosen programmes
favorables, factores estructurales. because they have enrolled on courses that are
not what they would have chosen if they had the
chance to take their preferred subject, some-
Abstract: thing they were prevented from doing by the
The extent of dropout from higher educa- limited range on offer near where they live. The
tion is a cause for concern in much of the West- main conclusion is that the structural condi-
año 78, n.º 276, mayo-agosto 2020, 253-269
ern world, especially because, despite the large tions in unfavourable socio-academic contexts,
amounts of money and resources invested over especially the limited range of programmes, are
the last two decades, dropout rates have re- a powerful explanatory factor for dropout from
mained almost unchanged. In view of this, the higher education, especially in the first year.
revista española de pedagogía
aim of this research is to identify and analyse
the factors with the greatest impact on dropout Keywords: dropout, higher education, unfa-
in the three higher education centres in Rivera vourable socio-academic contexts, structural
(Uruguay), which are affected by unfavourable factors.
1. Introducción: la problemática y Álvarez Pérez, 2006a). Otros organis-
del abandono de los estudios en mos internacionales —la Organisation
la educación superior for Economic Co-operation and Develop-
El elevado nivel de abandono escolar ment (OECD) y el Banco Mundial, entre
en educación superior (de aquí en adelan- otros— han estimado que a nivel global la
te, ES) es hoy un fenómeno generalizado, tasa de abandono escolar en ES es del or-
presente en unos 180 países del planeta den del 40 % (OECD, 2012). En el último
(Cabrera, Bethencourt, González Afonso tercio del siglo pasado este fenómeno em-
254You can also read
