1. Israel CBS 1

2. What will be presented: What is the problem at hand? Data Sources What has been accomplished up to now? Expectations from the Twinning Workshop 2

3. What is the problem with “Dropouts”? Conceptualization – How are dropouts defined? Measurement – How are dropouts captured empirically? Analysis – How are dropouts understood? Presentation – How are dropouts explained? 3

4. Conceptualization – Who is a student dropout? Is formal enrollment necessary to attain and retain student (non- dropout) status? (“frozen” enrollment). Is formal declaration of dropout intent necessary? Is final degree attainment necessary for not being labeled a dropout (e.g., the eternal student)? Hybrid statuses within “enrollment” – sabbaticals, year abroad and specialized work-study programs 4

5. Conceptualization – Who is a dropout? 5 Are there forms of unobserved “latent” dropouts? Reduced learning loads (full to part-time curriculum) Fictitious enrollments (health, social, library and gym services) Empirical Definitions – Arbitrary and Convergence to stability over time Censoring – continuing students and dropout groups confounded Unrealistic, programmatic, sensitive to institutional fluctuations? Administrative Definitions – Relationship to “Standard” (full-time study) degree attainment time slide 14 slide 14 Normative? Deterministic? A-theoretical? - (5-year thresholds) slide 20 slide 20 To what level of accuracy? (5%, 2%, 1%, 0.005%)? Slide 10 Slide 10

6. Measurement – How are dropouts captured? What is the acceptable level of error?  Administrative file follow-up  Discontinued enrollment across units of analysis (field of study, learning institution & system, country of higher education)  Inaccurate case record matching – biased results  Irregular non-enrollment patterns Cumulative length, sequential and non-consecutive time-periods  Inconsistencies between sample surveys/censuses and administrative files  Enumerated in Social Survey as learning in college, but absent from Israel higher education student files. 6

7. Analysis of dropouts – which information is most valuable?  Cross-tabulation  What are factors/variables that correlate with dropout rates? Demographic variables, socio-economic background, current employment standing, etc. (slide8)slide8 Key hard to gather “soft” variables missing – motivation?  Statistical modeling?  What is the appropriate methodology? Where is it appropriated (regular publications, monographs) 7

8. Cross-tabulation - Example 8

9. Presentation of dropout statistics – What and how to present it?  Dropout versus Completion Rates  Presentation of both “drop-out” and complementary (continuer/completer) cells? (slide 17 )slide 17  Detailed presentation – too much or too little?  Matrices of follow-up trajectories - entrance year by year of enrollment see:( slide19, slide 10 ). Cumulative or relative frequency? slide19slide 10  Truncated Grouping Categories (degree up to n th year) (slide 21)slide 21  Summary measures – misleading?  Non-completion in relation to “standard” degree-attainment time ( slide 15 ) slide 15  Jumps between levels of analysis – too complicated? ( slide 20 ). slide 20 9

10. Trajectory graphs - Example 10

11. Data Sources in Israel CBS Students in Academic InstitutionsAcademic Degrees RecipientsNon-Academic degree studentsTertiary degree holder’s from abroad recognition fileCensuses and Sample Surveys (LFS, Social Survey) 11

12. What has been accomplished? - CBS Publications 12  Table in Annual Statistical Abstract and publication : Completions in relation to “Standard Degree Time” - (ongoing since 2012).  Table in Annual Statistical Abstract: 5-Year Follow- Up – (1997-2011).  Special Publications – Pathways of Learning - (1997 & 1993).

13. What has been accomplished? - CBS Publications Table 11: Duration of Studies (standard and average) until completing Degree, For 1 st Degree Recipients who Began their Studies in 1999-2001, by type of Institution and Field and Subject of Study (slide #13).slide #13 TABLE 12.- Percentage of Students Who Completed First Degree, of Those Who Began their Studies in 1999-2001, by Duration of Studies for a Degree in Relation to Standard Duration, Type of Institution and Fields of Study (slide #14)slide #14 Publication 1471 (and in Statistical Abstract) since 2012 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. Table 8.67 – Status of Students in Universities After Five Years From the Beginning Studies, By Year of Beginning Studies, Degree and Field of Study ( slide 17 ) slide 17 Statistical Yearbooks – Graduation Rates within Five Years (1997 - 2011) What has been accomplished? CBS Publications 16

17. 1997-2011: Annual Statistical Abstract of Israel 17

18. Table 1: Course of studies for first degree students by year of beginning studies and year of study : (slide 16)slide 16 Table 7: State of Learning during the first 5 years of study including changes in the field of study and/or institution (slide 17).slide 17 Table 3: First-Degree Recipients by Year of Beginning Studies, number of years until receiving the degree and field of studies in the first year of study (slide 18).slide 18 In Depth Special Publication #1056 (1997) and #929 (1993) What has been accomplished? CBS Publications 18

19. Special Publications: Course of Studies Students 19

20. 20

21. 21

22. Expectations from the Twinning Workshop: Challenge and Solutions  Discussion and ideas to advance 4 aspects of our dropout challenge: 1. Conceptualization 2. Measurement 3. Analysis 4. Presentation 22

23. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND INPUT Education Department – Learning Transitions and Follow-Up Sector 23