Those are failures.

No one starts College with the expectation of no degree.

Huge waste of money and often those are the students going on loans. So they have to pay back the loans and have no degree!

Professor here. To add to what others have said, a solid graduation rate suggests reasonably good advising (yes, I know this varies a lot) and a curriculum that together give students clear paths to completion. It suggests the school has structures in place so that it is aware when students are struggling and, as PPs said, supports them appropriately. It suggests a school that is committed to outcomes and not just to bringing in as many tuition-paying bodies as possible and not worrying about what comes next. It suggests good planning on the part of the school for the resources needed for four organized years of undergrad.

Anonymous wrote:Happy students. Students who wanted to stay.
A university that produces, by far, a positive outcome. Students leave in a better economic, wage earning position than how they came in. The university has used their resources well and has distributed financial aid.

Hopefully, the drop out rate is not due only to finances and not being able to pay for the education.

EXCEPT that attrition is much more influenced by factors other than the college itself. For example, family commitments. It is yet another way that the USNWR rankings unfairly favor colleges that predominantly cater to wealthy and UMC students at the expense of underprivileged ones. I’m not saying universities have no responsibility here; they do, of course. It’s just that the grad rate isn’t telling you as much as you think it is.

Anonymous wrote:Happy students. Students who wanted to stay.
A university that produces, by far, a positive outcome. Students leave in a better economic, wage earning position than how they came in. The university has used their resources well and has distributed financial aid.

Hopefully, the drop out rate is not due only to finances and not being able to pay for the education.

+1. The worst possible outcome for a college education is to be forced to drop out with no degree and with debt

Generally agree

Happy students. Students who wanted to stay.
A university that produces, by far, a positive outcome. Students leave in a better economic, wage earning position than how they came in. The university has used their resources well and has distributed financial aid.

Hopefully, the drop out rate is not due only to finances and not being able to pay for the education.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see how having a low graduation rate reflects poorly on a school. This seems like an odd measure to give weight to. Am I missing something here?

A low graduation rate means they don't know how to support and retain the students that they accept. It's very costly to start but not graduate from college, so it's good to know if a school doesn't do well in getting most of its students across that line. I think it's more of a meaningful measure of selective schools than open-admission/less selective schools though. A selective school with a low graduation rate is worrisome because the students should generally be prepared to do the work.
A less selective school might just be holding strong standards with students who are inadequately prepared AND/OR it might be inadequately supportive.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see how having a low graduation rate reflects poorly on a school. This seems like an odd measure to give weight to. Am I missing something here?

I don't know what the right weight is for this, but it is not odd to give it some weight. A poorly run school can affect graduation rates. For example, if they fail to offer enough classes to allow students to satisfy major or graduation requirements in a timely fashion, they don't hire enough professors, they don't have enough seats in classrooms, they don't provide enough financial or academic support or academic advising to keep students on track etc. There are explanations for students not graduating that don't reflect poorly on the school, such as job opportunities for students before graduation (e.g., athletes or entertainers), but it's certainly a red flag that merits further investigation.

I don't see how having a low graduation rate reflects poorly on a school. This seems like an odd measure to give weight to. Am I missing something here?