Journal of Interactive Online Learning Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2012

[Link]/jiol ISSN: 1541-4914

Factors Associated With Student Persistence in an Online Program of Study:

A Review of the Literature

Carolyn Hart
Southwest Baptist University

Abstract
This integrated literature review examined factors associated with the ability of students to
persist in an online course. Lack of persistence in online education and its' consequence of
attrition, is an identified problem within the United States and internationally. Terminology has
wavered between persistence and success, where each has been interchangeably used to
characterize a student that completes a course and continues to program completion. Separate
searchers were conducted in Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Plus, the Directory of Open
Access Journals (DOAJ) Education Full Text, Ovid, and the Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching (JOLT). Search terms included persistence, distance education, and online learning.
Inclusion criteria included published after 1999, article from a peer-reviewed journal, and article
addresses student factors leading to persistence. Exclusion criteria included article not related to
factors of persistence, no original data, and article not written in English or not related to online
courses. Factors associated with student persistence in an online program include satisfaction
with online learning, a sense of belonging to the learning community, motivation, peer, and
family support, time management skills, and increased communication with the instructor.
Persistence carries the nuance of complexity beyond mere success. Factors unrelated to
knowledge have the ability to provide support, thus allowing the student to overcome hardships
in completing a course. If persistence factors are not present in sufficient quantity, the student
may be at risk of withdrawing from an online course.

Online courses have proliferated over the last eight years (Christensen, Horn, Caldera, &
Soares, 2011). In 2003, an estimated 10% of students took at least one online course, a statistic
that grew to 30% in 2009 (Christensen et al, 2011). Results of a nationwide survey reveal that
almost four million students were enrolled in an online course in the fall of 2007 (Allen &
Seaman, 2008). Online courses have increased at a 12.9% rate whereas traditional higher
education courses increased at only a 1.2% rate. Moreover, 33% of baccalaureate awarding
institutions view online courses as critical to their strategic plan (Allen & Seaman, 2008).
Despite the popularity of online education, attrition remains a problem faced by many
colleges (Bowden 2008; Kreideweis, 2005). Oftentimes, the decision to drop a course is
unrelated to knowledge and is more a reflection of a lack of persistence. Although multiple
studies have been published regarding the best teaching methods for the online education
environment (Billings, 2000; Cantrell, O'Leary, & Ward, 2008; Moore & Hart, 2004), little is

19
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

known about how to identify the student who is at risk of dropping from an online course (Kerr,
Rynearson, & Kerr, 2006; Liu, Gomez, & Yen, 2009). The lack of persistence has been
identified as an important factor leading to attrition among online nursing students worldwide
(Angelino, Williams, & Natvig, 2007). This integrative review of the literature was undertaken
to examine factors that contribute to student’s ability to remain “persistent” in online educational
programs. Findings from this review are highly relevant for nurse educators who want to address
the problem of student attrition in distance learning programs.

Review
Aims
The purpose of this paper is to synthesize information describing the factors leading to
student persistence. As persistence is a phenomenon resulting in student success or completion of
an online course, factors identified as contributing to success are also included.

Search Methods
Separate searches were conducted in Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Plus, the
Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Education Full Text, and Ovid. Search terms with
the Boolean operators included persistence AND distance education OR persistence AND online
learning. Table 1 presents a history of the search, listing steps conducted and the number of
articles included or excluded.
The entries were scanned for appropriateness (i.e. online learning for adults and success
or persistence) to indicate a potential match to the topic. Inclusion criteria in this literature
review were: (a) published after 1999, (b) appears in a peer-reviewed journal, and (c) addresses
student factors leading to persistence. Exclusion criteria included: (a) not related to student
factors of persistence, (b) do not contain original data, (c) not written in English, and (d) not
related to online courses.
As part of an ancestral review, bibliographies of retained articles were examined for
additional related literature. Online journals that published retained articles were also examined
for pertinent papers. Articles identified with these additional search strategies were then subject
to the same exclusion and inclusion criteria.

20
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Figure 1: Search Strategy and Results

Search Outcome
Following the search methods presented above, 131 articles were identified for review.
Articles were first scanned for appropriateness by year and publication in a peer-reviewed
journal, leaving 98 articles. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for inclusion and exclusion
factors further decreasing the count to 27. Articles were then examined for appropriateness to
this review, resulting in a final count of nine articles. The two additional search strategies,
ancestral and online journal review, yielded an additional 11 articles.

Quality Appraisal
Persistence, as a term, is more prevalent in literature pertaining to the traditional
classroom rather than online learning. These articles, while substantive in nature, were excluded,
as fundamental differences exist in the stressors encountered in the different settings (Thiele,
2001). Within the literature for online learning, research articles exploring the variables
associated with persistence are not as prevalent as those into teaching practices and course

21
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

delivery. All articles included in this study are from peer-reviewed journals to ensure the quality
of reported information. Table 2 presents each article, title, and research question or purpose.

Table 1

Summary of articles retained for review

Author, Year Title

Research Question or Purpose

Aragon & Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of community college

Johnson, 2008 online courses

1. Is there a significant difference in demographic characteristics, enrollment

(hours enrolled) characteristics, academic readiness, and self-directed
learning readiness between students who complete and do not complete
online courses?
2. What are the self-reported reasons for student non-completion of online
courses?

Bocchi, Retaining the online learner: Profile of students in an online MBA program
Eastman, & and implications for teaching them
Swift, 2004
1. The purpose of this study was to establish an accurate profile of the
student most likely to enroll and successfully complete an online MBA
program

Bunn, 2004 Student persistence in a LIS distance education program

1. What factors enable students to persist despite barriers in library and

information science (LIS)?
Dupin-Bryant, Pre-entry variables related to retention in online distance education
2004
1. Are there pre-entry variables that distinguish individuals who complete
university online distance education courses from those who do not?

Harrell & Student characteristics that predict persistence

Bower, 2011
1. Which student characteristics (learning style, locus of control, computer
experience and access, previous online experience, demographics) can be
used to best predict the persistence of community college students in
online courses? (p. 179)

22
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Holder, 2007 An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as

predictors of persistence in higher education online programs

1. To what extent do measures of students’ hope, as well as academics,

motivation, and environment, predict persistence in online learning? (p.
249)
Ivankova & Students' persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational
Stick, 2007 leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study

1. Identify factors contributing to students' persistence in the ELHE program

by obtaining quantitative results from a survey of 278 current and former
students and then following up with four purposefully selected individuals
to explore those results in more depth through a qualitative case study
analysis. (p. 95)
Kemp, 2002 Persistence of adult learners in distance education

1. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relation between

persistence, life events, external commitments, and resiliency in
undergraduate distance education. (p. 65)
Levy, 2007 Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses

1. The aim of this study was to look at the two main constructs proposed by
literature (academic locus of control and students' satisfaction) and their
impact on students' dropout from e-learning courses. (p. 190)
Liu, Gomez, & Community college online course retention and final grade: Predictability of
Yen, 2009 social presence

1. Can social presence predict online course retention in a community

college?
2. Can social presence predict online course final grade in a community
college? (p. 167)
Morris, Tracking student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses
Finnegan, &
Wu, 2005 1. What is the relationship of student participation to student persistence and
achievement online?
2. What are the differences and similarities between completers and
withdrawers in various measures of student behavior online?
Morris, Wu, & Predicting retention in online general education courses
Finnegan, 2005
1. How accurately can a student’s persistence be predicted in online learning
courses?
2. Which predictors are the most important with respect to predictive
accuracy of a student’s group membership (completion and withdrawal)?
3. Can a prediction/classification rule be developed that may be used with a
“new” analysis unit (e.g., students)?

23
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Müller, 2008 Persistence of women in online degree-completion programs

1. Why do women persist in online courses?

2. Why do they fail to persist or stop out?
3. How do factors affect women learners’ persistence? (p. 3)
Muse, 2003 The Web-based community college student: An examination of factors that
lead to success and risk

1. In terms of computer confidence, enrollment encouragement, need for

support, preparation, computer skills, tenacity, study habits, Web skills,
motivation, study environment, background confidence, and external
locus of control, which of these factors will be used to compute a
student’s ability to successfully complete a Web-based course?
2. Using a survey, does a weighted combination of the critical factors
indicate which students are at risk for failing to successfully complete the
Web-based class?
3. Do age, gender, GPA, number of hours currently worked, years since last
college course, number of previous distance learning courses taken,
educational level, and number of credits in the current semester
significantly affect successful completion of Web-based classes?
4. What reasons are reported most often for student dropout in Web-based
classes? (p. 245)
Nash, 2005 Course completion rates among distance learners: Identifying possible
methods to improve retention

The purpose of this study was to determine why students dropped or failed a
distance learning course and to identify methods that might improve success
and decrease retention.

Ojokheta, 2010 A path-analytic study of some correlates predicting persistence and student's
success in distance education in Nigeria

1. What predictors enhance persistence and student success?

2. To what extent to the predictors, taken collectively, enhance distance
learners' effective learning?
Park & Choi, Factors influencing adult learners' decision to drop out or persist in online
2009 learning

1. Do the dropouts and persistent learners of online courses show differences

in their individual characteristics, external factors, and internal factors?
2. What factors are significant to predict learners’ decision to drop out of
online courses? (p. 209-210)

24
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Parker, 2005 Identifying predictors of academic persistence in distance education

1. Locus of control, as measured by Rotter’s Locus of Control scale, is a

significant predictor of academic persistence
2. Locus of control scores increase, move toward internality, over the course
of a semester for students enrolled in web-based instruction
Stanford- Persistence in online classes: A study of perceptions among community
Bowers, 2008 college stakeholders

1. Which factors regarding persistence are most important among faculty,

administrators, and students?
2. Where do perceptions of persistence among the three groups of
stakeholders converge?
Sullivan, 2001 Gender differences and the online classroom: Make and female college
students evaluate their experiences
1. Is there anything about the online classroom that has made it easier for
you to learn, achieve your academic goals, or participate in class
discussions?
2. Is there anything that made it harder?

Data Abstraction and Synthesis

Once selected for inclusion, articles were reviewed and variables of interest identified.
Attention was paid to determine if the variable was a positive or negative correlator. As a final
step, all identified variables were assessed for commonalities in variables related to persistence.
The result of this review was the identification and synthesis of factors related to student
persistence in an online course supported by multiple authors in research studies. Table 3
provides sample population and instrument information.

Table 2

Sample population and instrument

Author Sample Instrument

Aragon & 305 students in a rural Midwestern The Bartlett-Kotrlik Inventory of

Johnson, 2008 United States community college Self-Learning (BISL) was used
participated in this study; of these to assess self-directed learning
students, 189 were course completers variables (Bartlett & Kotrlik,
and 116 were noncompleters. Students 1999).
were identified as completers if they
completed one online course.

Bocchi, Eastman, 64 online MBA students were recruited A study specific survey was
& Swift, 2004 from five participating schools within used to assess student
the Georgia WebMBA system. This characteristics, reasons for
includes surveys from a limited number joining the program,

25
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

of students who later withdrew from the expectations, experience with

program. online learning, and views on
team-based learning.

Bunn, 2004 This study included distance students in Not applicable as this is a
the master of library and information qualitative study.
studies at Victoria University of
Wellington, New Zealand. Focus groups
contained 6, 7, and 5 participants,
respectively. Group 1: former distance
students; Group 2: distance students in
2nd or 3rd year; Group 3: first year
distance students

Dupin-Bryant, For this study, 1000 students from The study specific questionnaire
2004 various academic programs enrolled in was subject to review by an
an online course at Utah State University expert panel and previous pilot
were invited to participate with 464 testing.
useable surveys returned.

Harrell & Bower, 225 online students from five Florida The Barsch Learning Style
2011 community colleges were enrolled in this Inventory (1966) contains eight
study. items for each of the four
learning styles. The Abbreviated
Measure of Internal-External
Locus of Control is an 11-item
forced-choice scale based on
Rotter’s (1996) Locus of Control
Scale and adapted by Valecha &
Ostrom (1974). A study specific
10-item Likert scale was used to
determine computer experience
and access.

Holder, 2007 209 online undergraduate and graduate Study specific and based on
students in degree-completion programs previously validated
in a Midwest university, with 209 instruments; 60 items designed
classified as persisters and 50 as to measure hope, academics,
nonpersisters. motivation, and environment
through 12 subscales.

Ivankova & Stick, 270 current and former Doctoral students A study specific survey was
2007 in the Educational Leadership in Higher developed and purported to
Education program at the University of measure the five internal and
Nebraska-Lincoln, including students external entities affecting
who withdrew. Follow-up with 4 student persistence as well as
purposefully selected individuals further nine variables of interest (online

26
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

explored survey results. learning environment, program,

virtual community, faculty,
Groups: (1) students who completed 30 student support services,
or fewer credits (n=78) (2) completed academic advisor, family and
more than 30 hours (n=78) (3) former significant other, employment,
students who graduated (n=26) and (4) and self-motivation).
former students who withdrew or were
terminated from the program (n=25)

Kemp, 2002 121 First-time undergraduate distance Resiliency Attitudes Scale and
students at Athabasca University, the Life Events Inventory were
Canada. used to collect data along with a
study specific questionnaire.

Levy, 2007 108 students who completed a course The author developed two
and 25 students who did not complete a instruments for the purposes of
course from 18 undergraduate and this study. The first was
graduate e-learning courses at a major comprised of a 12-item
state university in the southeastern instrument based on Trice’s
United States. (1985) Academic Locus of
Control Instrument. The second
consisted of a 7-item survey
adapted from Bures et al.'s
(2000) instrument measuring
student satisfaction.

Liu, Gomez, & A convenience sample of 108 students The Social Presence and Privacy
Yen, 2009 enrolled in one or more online courses at Questionnaire (SPPQ) developed
a suburban community college in by Tu (2000) were used to
Maryland measure social readiness. This
consists of 30 items with 3 sub-
scales each for a total of 90
questions.

Morris, Finnegan, Data was collected over three semesters Participation was evaluated
& Wu, 2005 at the University System of Georgia for through engagement (number of
three online courses: English (4 content pages viewed, number of
sections), U.S. History (7 sections), and discussion posts read, and
Introduction to Geology (2 sections). number of follow-up posts) and
The total population of 423 students four duration variables (seconds
included 137 withdrawers, 72 non- spent viewing content pages,
successful completers, and 214 seconds spent reading
successful completers. discussions, seconds spent
creating original posts, and
seconds spent creating follow-up

27
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

posts).

Morris, Wu, & This study included 211 students Rotter's (1996) Internal-external
Finnegan, 2005 enrolled in online general education locus of control scale containing
undergraduate courses developed by the 29 items was used to assess
University System of Georgia in the students’ perceptions of
humanities, sciences, and social motivation.
sciences.

Müller, 2008 A purposive sample of 20 female online Not applicable as this is a

students from undergraduate (n=9) and qualitative study.
graduate degree (n=11) completion
programs at a college in the northeastern
United States

Muse, 2003 276 students completing a Web-based Study specific based on previous
class at Montgomery College, Maryland work by Osborne (unpublished
with 22 students randomly selected for dissertation) and Kronheim,
follow-up interview. Pugh, & Spear (2001).

Nash, 2005 478 students from Coastline Community Study specific questionnaire
College enrolled in a distance learning underwent a small pilot study to
course. refine questions and confirm
areas of student interest and
concern.

Ojokheta, 2010 1245 students from 200 - 400 level Study specific surveys designed
courses in two distance teaching to measure variables of interest
institutions located in Nigeria and previously tested for
content/concurrent validity and
reliability

Park & Choi, 147 students who either completed or Study-specific instrument to
2009 dropped out of one of three online measure family and
courses offered by a large Midwestern organizational support;
university. Satisfaction and relevance based
on Keller’s (1987) Instructional
Materials Motivation Survey.

Parker, 2005 95 online and face-to-face students and Rotter’s (1996) locus of control
four faculty instructors from a scale
community college in Arizona
participated in this study.

Stanford-Bowers, Thirty-nine volunteers from 10 Open-ended question in which

2008 community colleges in Alabama were participants listed factors
recruited to participate in a faculty, perceived to support persistence.
administrator, or student capacity.

28
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Eligibility was determined by

completion of an online questionnaire by
the potential candidate.

Sullivan, 2001 195 students from the Connecticut The study’s two research
Distance Learning Consortium who were questions listed were included
able to successfully complete an online with course evaluations
course. completed by students.

Results
Although students generally report being satisfied with the online environment and
learning outcomes are similar to those of the traditional classroom, challenges exist which can
result in an inability to complete a course and, in turn, an inability to complete the program
(Ivankova & Stick, 2007; Levy, 2007; Müller, 2008; Park & Choi, 2009). Various studies have
been conducted to determine what factors are positively related to student success (Bunn, 2004;
Harrell & Bower, 2011; Kemp, 2002; Levy, 2007). Other studies have assessed which factors
interfere with success, and how students' attitudes are related to course and program completion
(Holder, 2007; Müller, 2008; Park & Choi, 2009).
A difficulty in the literature is the lack of consistent terminology in addressing
persistence, attrition, and success as outlined in Table 4. Persistence has been variously defined
as the antonym of attrition or as a constellation of factors that lead to completion of a course
(Park & Choi, 2009). The use of the term persistence related to post-secondary education first
emerged in the 1980's, when persistence was merely the opposite of attrition or departure from a
traditional college (Greer, 1980). Berger and Braxton (1998) used ‘intent to return’ as a measure
of persistence in first-year students in face-to-face courses. In online education, persistence has
evolved as a more complex set of factors that is unrelated to knowledge and results in student
success (Park & Choi, 2009). In this review, persistence will be treated as a multi-faceted
phenomenon that leads to completion of an on-line program of study. Although several studies
have examined the relationship between persistence and on-campus student success, little
consensus exists for which factors are significant and lead to persistence in the online student
(Levy, 2007; Müller, 2008).

29
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Figure 2: Definitions

Persistence as a Phenomenon
Researchers have identified variables that are both facilitators and barriers to persistence
in online student success (Bunn, 2004; Ivankova & Stick, 2007; Levy, 2007; Park & Choi, 2009).
Facilitators are those factors that positively correlate to persistence as shown in Table 5. Factors
that negatively correlate to persistence have been identified and, when present, make it difficult
for the student to persist (See Table 6). Finally, factors may either positively or negatively affect
persistence, depending on the circumstance. For example, the presence of family support can
increase persistence whereas the lack of family support can decrease student persistence.

Facilitators of Persistence
College status and graduating term. As proposed by Levy (2009), college status and
graduating term are related factors. College status refers to student placement within a program
(freshman, sophomore, junior, senior) and graduating term indicates when the student expects to
graduate (last term, this term, next term, in two terms, more than two terms). Students who are at
a higher status and closer to graduation (within the next term) are more likely to persist in their
program of study (Levy, 2009). Dupin-Bryant (2004), in reporting similar findings, postulates
that prior educational experience may augment confidence through increased familiarity with the
online environment.

Flexibility, asynchronous format, time management. Müller (2008) reports that

women engaged in an online program of study find the flexibility and convenience of the
schedule to be a positive aspect in their learning. Although several participants favored
residential experiences in education, all note being able to complete work when convenient as
imperative to managing family and work demands (Müller, 2008). Ivankova and Stick (2007)

30
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

and Nash (2005) support this finding, citing this flexibility as one means of obtaining an
education that might not otherwise be possible. Sullivan’s 2001 study finds that this flexibility
was equally important to both male and female students.
Bunn (2004) notes that a heavy workload is not necessarily problematic as long as
students have a realistic expectation of what will be involved. Furthermore, the author notes that
students who actively plan to accommodate workload tend to be persistent. Holder (2007) notes
that students with good study habits, the ability to stay on task with assignments and readings,
and are able to successfully manage time are more apt to persist compared to non-persisters.
Stanford-Bowers (2008) agrees with this, stating that administrators, faculty, and students
acknowledge the importance of time management in persistence. Aragon and Johnson (2008)
also find support for this and note a moderate difference in the ability of students who are
enrolled in more online courses to persist when compared to noncompleters.

Goal commitment. Ivankova and Stick (2007) cite goal attachment and commitment to
graduation as a quality found in all levels of online students except those who withdraw from a
course. While graduates are the most motivated in terms of goal attachment, matriculated and
beginning students are also positively motivated. Students who ultimately withdrew from the
course are the least motivated to complete their degree (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Müller (2008)
finds that persistent students viewed their education as important to goal attainment and valued
the career or financial outcomes of their education.

Grade point average. Harrell and Bower (2011) and Morris, Finnegan, and Wu (2005)
report grade point average (GPA) as significantly predictive of student persistence. The authors
postulate that students with a higher GPA are better able to maneuver within the online
environment and more savvy in successful academic behaviors than students who withdraw.
Furthermore, Harrell and Bower note that this finding is consistent with previous evidence that
lower GPA is associated with a higher rate of withdrawal. Muse (2003) reports similar evidence
with the combination of GPA, age, and years since previous college course as accurately
discriminating between those students who will and will not complete an online course.
Conversely, Aragon and Johnson (2008) found GPA to have a low positive correlation with
successful completion of an online course.

31
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Table 3

Facilitators of Persistence
Facilitators Author, Year Synthesis of Studies
College status, Bunn, 2004 The closer to graduation, the more persistent the
graduating term, Dupin-Bryant, student. This may be related to becoming more
comfort with online 2004 technologically savvy and comfortable with online
course work Levy, 2007 instruction.
Flexibility, Bunn, 2004 The flexibility of an online course is very attractive
asynchronous Holder, 2007 to students attempting to balance work and family
format. Time Ivankova & Stick, demands. The asynchronous format allows control
management 2007 over one’s schedule and course work can be
Müller, 2008 accomplished with less disruption to work and
Nash, 2005 family schedules. Persistent students tend to have
Stanford-Bowers, better study habits and complete work in a timely
2008 manner.
Sullivan, 2001
Goal Commitment Ivankova & Stick, Desire to attain goals (degree completion) is a
2007 powerful motivator in the online student. This
intrinsic motivation of pursuing a dream is often
coupled with personal challenge, an appreciation of
learning, and personal responsibility.
GPA Aragon & Students with a higher GPA are often able to better
Johnson, 2008 maneuver through the electronic environment and
Harrell & Bower, adopt successful behaviors that allow them to excel
2011 in the online course. It may be that success in one
Morris, Wu, & class positively motivates the student to work harder
Finnegan, 2005 in the next class.
Muse, 2003
Quality of Ivankova & Stick, Feedback that is constructive and adds meaningful
interactions and 2007 input into learning is viewed as valuable by the
feedback Bocchi, Eastman, students and will contribute to persistence.
& Swift, Ambiguity in content or communication can be
2004Ojokheta, difficult for the online student to process, thus
2010 increasing the importance of quality interactions
with faculty and other students.
Satisfaction and Ivankova & Stick, Satisfaction as a facilitator of persistence is a
relevance 2007 consistent finding when included as a variable.
Levy, 2007 Persistent students voice satisfaction with the quality
Müller, 2008 of the program, interactions with students and peers,
Park & Choi, the relevancy of the course to individual needs, and
2009 with the learning environment itself.

32
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Self-efficacy, Bunn, 2004

Although goal attainment is a powerful motivator for
personal growth, Holder, 2007
online students, on a daily basis personal resolve and
self-motivation Ivankova & Stick,
determination contribute significantly to persistence.
2007 Students who have high personal expectations and
Kemp, 2002
self-efficacy as well as those who enjoy the
Müller, 2008
challenge of online learning will also tend to be
Park & Choi,
more persistent. Students with an internal locus of
2009 control are more apt to persist. These characteristics
Parker, 2005
may lead the student to engage more in the
classroom, ask searching questions, and
constructively work through problems. A sense of
personal and professional growth can increase
motivation to complete the course and promote
persistence.
Social connectedness Ivankova & Stick, Increased comfort with the virtual social interactions
or presence 2007 of an online environment may increase persistence.
Kemp, 2002 When these social connections are transient (i.e. vary
Liu, Gomez, & by course), they may not create a significant source
Yen, 2009 of support, but can be used to create an encouraging
Müller, 2008 environment. The persistent student is able to form
connections within each course, increasing the
positive nature of the experience. The persistent
student also demonstrates increased presence within
the online environment. An active and encouraging
faculty presence is also viewed as contributing to
persistence.
Support Bunn, 2004 The role of family, friends, co-workers, and fellow
Holder, 2007 class members in student persistence is well
Ivankova & Stick, documented. Understanding from family and co-
2007 workers in behaviors needed to manage academic
Kemp, 2002 workload contributes to persistence. Other class
Müller, 2008 members can also provide support and
Park & Choi, encouragement to continue with studies despite
2009 hardship. This virtual community provides a sense of
camaraderie and can assist students in
troubleshooting problems. Faculty may also increase
perceptions of support through feedback and social
presence.

Quality Of Interactions And Feedback

Ivankova and Stick (2007) finds positive and encouraging feedback to be important to the
persistence of students. Qualitative findings indicate that in addition to promptness, the quality of
feedback and the willingness of faculty to meet student needs are viewed as important to student

33
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

persistence. Quality feedback is also seen to be protective in the absence of support from an
advisor (Ivankova & Stick, 2007).
Ojokheta (2011) also finds feedback pattern to have a direct effect on student ability to
successfully complete an online course. In this study, Ojokheta postulates that feedback provided
by faculty will have an impact on student perceptions of course content. This linkage of learning
environment, motivation, feedback, and perceptions directly leads to positive student outcomes
(Ojokheta, 2011). Bocchi, Eastman, and Swift (2004) provide evidence that this feedback should
be consistent and individualized.

Satisfaction And Relevance

Ivankova and Stick (2007) postulate that the further a student progresses in an online
program, the higher their satisfaction, reporting satisfaction levels of 92.3% in graduated
participants, 71.8% in matriculated students, and 57.7% in beginning students. Conversely, the
withdrawn/inactive group reports a 20% satisfaction rate. Levy (2009) also finds satisfaction to
be a significant predictor of student persistence. Within the literature review, Levy notes an
association between satisfaction and learning, suggesting that institutions should place major
emphasis on student satisfaction as a means of promoting persistence. Müller (2008) finds that
when students are not satisfied with faculty or learning they are more apt to be less successful
than their persistent counterparts. Park and Choi (2009) support this finding with persistent
students rating relevance and satisfaction significantly higher than those who drop from an
online course.

Self-Efficacy And Personal Growth

Holder (2007) finds self-efficacy to be one of three criteria that will differentiate the
persistent student from one who will not complete an online course. Self-efficacy for learning
and performance appears to correlate with higher confidence of the student to successfully
complete a course as well as a higher expectation to do well (Holder, 2007). Bunn (2003)
supports this premise, suggesting that personal resolve and determination to succeed strongly
contributes to persistence. Parker (2001) views an internal locus of control and self-motivation as
significant factors in student persistence.
Kemp (2002) observes an association between resiliency skills and persistence, also
commenting that resiliency directly relates to self-efficacy and motivation. Noting previous work
by Pajares and Miller (1994), Kemp states that this higher level of self-efficacy will positively
affect the effort expended on studies and increase resiliency in the face of obstacles to
persistence. Likewise, Müller (2008) reports that increasing proficiency in academics and
computer skills contribute to a sense of personal growth, thereby increasing a sense of
accomplishment and enabling persistence.
Ivankova and Stick (2007) hypothesize that persistent students are generally highly
motivated to complete their program of study while students who are less motivated will likely
withdraw. This finding is replicated in Park and Choi's 2009 study. Ivankova and Stick view self-
motivation, along with personal challenge and responsibility, as the intrinsic motivation to
complete a program. Thus, self-motivation becomes one of the factors used to discriminate
between persistent and non-persistent students (Ivankova & Stick, 2007).

34
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Social Connectedness Or Presence

Studies assessing social connectedness find persistent students believe social
relationships can be established in the online environment. Ivankova and Stick (2007) report
persistent students being comfortable with the discussion format of an online course and find
non-persistent students being the least satisfied with their comfort level in this environment. Liu,
Gomez, and Yen (2009) report a strong positive relationship between social presence and
retention. Findings from Kemp’s 2002 study on resiliency indicate that students who are more
adept in forming positive social relationships in the online environment will likely be persistent.
Müller (2008) provides evidence to support this stance, citing students with stronger social
connections to peers will derive support and encouragement to persist. This sense of a virtual
community contributes significantly to a model used to discriminate between persistent and non-
persistence learners (Ivankova & Stick, 2007).

Support
Emotional support can be derived from family, friends, or peers (Holder, 2007). Holder
(2007) reports a feeling of camaraderie within the classroom will significantly contribute to
persistence. Ivankova and Stick (2007) as well as Park and Choi (2009) report persistent students
perceive family and friends to be supportive of their educational endeavors with non-persistent
student reporting less support. Kemp (2002) notes that persistent students tend to score higher in
having supportive partners and in maintaining healthy relationships. Müller (2008) also cites
support from classmates and faculty as imperative to student persistence, noting that feedback
and social connections with peers and faculty contribute to the ability to complete a course
despite hardships.
Technical support consists of practical assistance with computer and technology. Bunn
(2004) notes that as students have varying levels of computer skills, tutorials outside of the
regular course may be helpful. Bunn also notes that the perception of being unsupported is more
of an issue than the actual technical difficulty. While Ivankova and Stick (2007) did not find
technical support to be predictive of persistence, the authors do report that non-persistent
students were the least satisfied with support services. Conversely, Ojokheta (2011) did find
technical support to influence persistence.

Barriers to Persistence
Auditory learning style. Harrell and Bower (2011) find auditory learning style to be a
significant predictor of non-persistence in the online student, stating this is congruent with
previous research (Ho & Tabata, 2001; Mathes, 2003). The authors postulate that a decreased
ability to process verbal information contributes to this finding. Moreover, Harrell and Bower
anticipate that a disconnect between learning style and the nature of the online environment
could lead to frustration and eventual withdrawal.

Basic computer skills. Harrell and Bower (2011) report that while basic computer skills
will enhance persistence in the online student, an increased level of computer skill is associated
with a subsequent increase in withdrawal rates. The authors propose three possible reasons for
this finding. Students may simply overestimate their computer ability or underestimated the level
of skills required in an online course. The data is collected via self-report and thus reflects the
perception of ability rather than a direct measurement of computer skill. Students with higher
computer skills may also be distracted by the Internet and have less focus on course content. It is

35
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

possible that these students are engaged in Internet activities as opposed to completion of
coursework. Harrell and Bower also note the possibility that this finding is a statistical anomaly
related to the small sample size. Further research is recommended to determine the effect of
computer skill on persistence. Although Dupin-Bryant (2004) finds that increased computer
skills are not related to student retention, the author does not report a negative correlation.
College status and graduating term. In contrast to facilitating factors, Levy (2009)
postulates that students who are at a lower college status and further from graduation are more
likely to drop out from a program of study. This finding has been replicated by Dupin-Bryant
(2004). Students who do not complete a course are more likely to be graduating in more than two
terms (Levy, 2009). Levy draws the conclusion that students with less experience in online
learning are more apt to withdraw than the student who is nearing completion of a program of
study. In an anecdotal note, Levy observes that students, when faced with less than an optimal
grade, may electively withdraw from a course and retake the course a later time. Presumably, this
strategy would be employed by those students not yet ready to graduate.

Difficulty in accessing resources. Bunn (2004) reports difficulty in accessing resources,

primarily the electronic library, as problematic for students. Once having a negative experience
with the electronic library, students are often disinclined to problem-solve and typically make
alternate arrangements. Dissatisfaction with resources also extends to difficulties in obtaining
course materials (Bunn, 2004). Furthermore, Bunn finds that lack of a single point of contact was
viewed as contributing to dissatisfaction with support.

Isolation and Decreased Engagement. Bunn (2004) cites two types of isolation: (a)
isolation from faculty and (b) isolation from fellow students. This barrier is somewhat mitigated
is by alternate means of interaction, such as those possible in an electronic environment or via
audio-conferencing (Bunn, 2004). Ivankova and Stick (2007) find that non-persistent students
were less satisfied with the online environment, citing a lower comfort level compared to
persistent learners. Bunn also notes that strong peer connections may limit the extent or impact
of isolation as a barrier.
Morris et al. (2005) report statistically significant differences in the amount of time spent
in engagement activities between students who withdraw from a course and successful
completers. Engagement activities are defined as time spent reading and responding to posts as
well as viewing discussions and content pages. Participation is held to be a discriminating factor
between withdrawers and completers.

Lack of computer accessibility. Following employment of the Delphi technique for

consensus reaching, Stanford-Bowers (2008) finds that administrators, faculty, and students view
computer access and accessibility as necessary for persistence in an online course. This finding is
a practical concern, as the nature of an online course logically demands the ability to access and
interact with course content via the computer. It is interesting to note that computer accessibility
emerged as a round one concern only for administrators. It was only in the final round of
consensus-reaching that accessibility was retained as a concern across all groups (administration,
faculty, and students) although students did not rate its' importance as high as the other two
stakeholders (Stanford-Bowers, 2008).

36
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Non-academic issues. Balancing work and family demands is a recurring theme in the
literature (Aragon & Johnson, 2008; Bunn, 2004; Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Coping measures
include decreasing leisure activities or socialization with friends (Bunn, 2004). Ivankova and
Stick (2007) also note that the asynchronous format of an online course allows students to
maintain family and work schedules. This flexibility to pursue further education in an
asynchronous format is a strong advantage to online learning (Ivankova & Stick, 2007). Aragon
and Johnson (2008) find personal time constraints to be a common theme among those students
who were unable to successfully complete an online course.

Poor communication. Students strongly view incomplete or ineffective communication

as a barrier to persistence (Aragon & Johnson, 2008; Bunn, 2004). Lack of, or late,
communication regarding changes, slow feedback, difficulty in contacting faculty and staff, and
limited communication with faculty are specific issues reported by Bunn (2004) as contributing
to this sense of a barrier. Aragon and Johnson (2008) also report negative student perceptions of
the level of instructor responsiveness as contributing to a decision to withdraw from an online
course.

Table 4

Barriers to Persistence
Barriers Author, Year Synthesis of Studies
Auditory learning Harrell & Bower, As preference for an auditory learning style
style 2011 increases, so too does withdrawal from an
online course. This is believed to be a
consequence of the inherently written format of
online learning. Difficulty in processing verbal
information by the auditory learner can lead to
frustration and attrition.
Basic computer skills Harrell & Bower Advanced computer skills negatively related to
2011 persistence. The authors postulate that the
student with advanced skills may be distracted
by the internet and spend less time with actual
course work. It must be noted that this was a
small sample and could be an anomaly.
College status and Dupin-Bryant, 2004 The less experience a student has with
graduating term Levy, 2009 education, the more likely they are to
withdraw.
Difficulty in accessing Bunn, 2004 Hindered by an unclear understanding of who
resources to contact, students experiencing difficulty in
accessing online resources may become
frustrated with the course and decide to drop.
Access to an online library and technical
support was considered problematic (either
inadequate access or vague points of contact)
by online students who ultimately withdrew
from the course.

37
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Isolation and Bunn. 2004 Students who withdraw from an online course
decreased engagement Morris, Finnegan, & spend less time engaged in learning activities
Wu, 2005 than their successful counterparts.
Ivankova & Stick,
2007
Lack of computer Stanford-Bowers, This is a logical extension of attending class in
accessibility 2008 an online environment. Failure to have reliable
access to a computer is a barrier to persistence.
Non-academic issues Aragon & Johnson, Non-academic issues include a wide array of
2008 factors and events such as work and family
Bunn, 2004 responsibilities, job changes or loss,
Ivankova & Stick, bereavement, illness, and financial difficulties.
2007 Pressures from these issues may fuel the
Park & Choi, 2009 decision to withdraw from an online course,
but can be mitigated by the presence of strong
support and social connections within the
course.
Poor communication Aragon & Johnson, Communication problems may stem from late,
2008 inadequate, or lack of notification of changes
Bunn, 2004 to the program, slow or contradictory feedback
from faculty, and an inability to contact staff or
support services.

Discussion
Persistence is a complex phenomenon that results in student completion of an online
course. Almost unanimous agreement exists in the literature that communication with the
instructor, motivation, and peer and family support can be used to overcome barriers to
persistence and lead the student to success in an online course (Levy, 2007; Müller, 2008; Park
& Choi, 2009). Recent literature builds upon an expanded definition of persistence as a
phenomenon that is a key component of student success in online educational courses (Billings,
Connors, & Skiba, 2005; Bonnel, 2008). Based on this review, it is hypothesized that those
factors that lead to success actually increase persistence in the student, thereby leading to
success. The limitations of this review include nonstandard use of the term persistence as well as
the lack of research into the constellation of factors that contribute to persistence in the online
student.
Persistence is a complex variable that has been associated with student success in online
courses where success is defined as completion of the course (Bunn, 2004). Oftentimes unrelated
to knowledge, persistence is the sum of those factors that enhance a student's ability to complete
an online course successfully (Park & Choi, 2009). Lack of persistence results in failure to
complete the course or in failure to continue with a program of study (Müller, 2008). Early
identification of the student who may not succeed in an online course can allow application of
evidence-based interventions by the educator to strengthen student persistence.

38
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Conclusion
Numerous interventions have been proposed to help increase online student persistence
and decrease attrition rates (Billings, Connors, & Skiba, 2005; Bonnel, 2008; Park & Choi,
2009). Despite this growing body of knowledge in course delivery and faculty interventions,
attrition remains a significant problem. Persistence as a phenomena characterizes the
constellation of behaviors, attitudes, skills needed by the student to successfully complete an
online course. Factors that will enhance persistence or create barriers to completion of a program
need to be understood in order to improve application of evidence based interventions.
Research is needed to develop and evaluate evidence-based interventions that can
strengthen the phenomenon of persistence for the online student. Development of the means by
which students at risk of attrition may be identified would also be of value to educators.

39
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

References

Aragon, S. R., & Johnson, E. S. (2008). Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of
community college online courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 22(3),
146-158.
Allen, J. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course: Online education in the United States. The
Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from
[Link]
Angelino, L. M., Williams, F. K., & Natvig, D. (2007). Strategies to engage online students and
reduce attrition rates. Journal of Educators Online, 4(2). Retrieved from
[Link]
Barsch, J. (1996). Barsch learning style inventory. Novato, California: Academic Therapy
Publications.
Bartlett, J. E., & Kotrlik, J. W. (1999). Development of a self-directed learning instrument for
use in work environments. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 24(4), 185-208.
Berger, J. B., & Braxton, J. M. (1998). Revising Tinto's interactionalist theory of student
departure through theory elaboration: Examining the role of organizational attributes in
the persistence process. Research in Higher Education, 39(2), 103-119.
Billings, D. M. (2000). A framework for assessing outcomes and practices in web-based courses
in nursing. Journal of Nursing Education, 39(2), 60-67.
Billings, D. M., Connors, H. R., & Skiba, D. J. (2005). Best practices in web-based courses:
Generational differences across undergraduate and graduate nursing courses. Journal of
Professional Nursing, 21, 126-133.
Bocchi, J., Eastman, J. K., & Swift, C. O. (2004). Retaining the online learner: Profile of
students in an online MBA program and implications for teaching them. Journal of
Education for Business, 70(4). doi:10.3200/JOEB.79.4.245-253
Bonnel, W. (2008). Improving feedback to students in online courses. Nursing Education
Perspectives, 29(5), 290-294.
Bowden, J. (2008). Why do nursing students who consider leaving stay on their courses? Nurse
Researcher, 15(3), 45-59.
Bunn, J. (2004). Student persistence in a LIS distance education program. Australian Academic
Research Libraries, 35(3), 253-270.
Bures, E. M., Abrami, P. C., & Amundsen, C. (2000). Student motivation to learn via computer
conferencing. Research in Higher Education, 41(5), 593-621.
Cantrell, S. W., O'Leary, P., & Ward, K. S. (2008). Strategies for success in online learning.
Nursing Clinics of North America, 43, 547-555. doi: 10.1016/[Link]. 2008.06.003
Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., Caldera, L., & Soares, L. (2011). Disrupting college: How
disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education.
The Center for American Progress. Retrieved from
[Link]
Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Pre-entry variables related to retention in online distance education
[electronic version]. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 199-206.
[Link]/10.1207/s15389286ajde1804_2
Greer, L. (1980). Persistence and academic success among non-traditional age students at a
junior college. Proceedings of the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional

40
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Research, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from

[Link]
Harrell, I. L. & Bower, B. L. (2011). Student characteristics that predict persistence in
community college online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 25(3), 178-
191.
Ho, C. P., & Tabata, L. N. (2001). Strategies for designing online courses to engage student
learning. Presented at the 2001 Teaching in Community Colleges online conference.
Holder, B. (2007). An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as
predictors of persistence in higher education online programs. The Internet and Higher
Education, 10, 245-260. doi:10.1016/[Link].2007.08.002
Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2005). Collegiality and community-building as a means for
sustaining student persistence in the computer-mediated asynchronous learning
environment. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(3).
Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational design. Journal
of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2-10.
Kemp, W. C. (2002). Persistence of adult learners in distance education. The American Journal
of Distance Education, 16(2), 65-81.
Kerr, M. S., Rynearson, K., & Kerr, M. C. (2006). Student characteristics for online learning
success. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 91-105.
Kreideweis, J. (2005). Indicators of success in distance education. CIN: Computers, Informatics,
Nursing, 23(2), 68-2
Kronheim, S., Pugh, M., & Spear, M. H. (2001). Readiness for online studies. College Park,
Maryland: University of Maryland University College.
Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers and
Education, 48, 185-204.
Liu, S. Y., Gomez, J., & Yen, C. (2009). Community college online course retention and final
grade: Predictability of social presence. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2),
165-182. Retrieved from [Link]
Mathes, J. L. (2003). Predictors for student success in online education. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana.
Moore, P., & Hart, L. (2004). Strategies for teaching nursing research online. International
Nursing Review, 51, 123-128.
Morris, L. V., Finnegan, C., & Wu, S. (2005). Tracking student behavior, persistence, and
achievement in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 221-231.
Morris, L. V., Wu, S., & Finnegan, C. (2005). Predicting retention in online general education
courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 23-36.
Müller, T. (2008). Persistence of women in online degree-completion programs. International
Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2), 1-18.
Muse, H. E. (2003). The web-based community college student: An examination of factors that
lead to success and risk. The Internet and Higher Education, 6, 241-261.
doi:10.1016/S1096-7516-(03)00044-7
Nash, R. D. 2005. Course completion rates among distance learners: Identifying possible
methods to improve retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
8(4). Retrieved from [Link]

41
 Journal of Interactive Online Learning Hart

Ojokheta, K. O. (2011). A path-analytic study of some correlates predicting persistence and

student’s success in distance education in Nigeria. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 11(1).
Osborn, V. (2000). Identifying at-risk students: An assessment instrument for distributed
learning courses in higher education. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
North Texas, Texas.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in
mathematical problem-solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 86,
193-203.
Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners' decision to drop out or
persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207-217.
Parker, A. (2003). Identifying predictors of academic persistence in distance education. USDLA
Journal, 17(1), 55-62.
Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectations for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1-28.
Stanford-Bowers, D. E. (2008). Persistence in online classes: A study of perceptions among
community college stakeholders. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(1).
Retrieved from [Link]
Sullivan, P. 2001. Gender differences and the online classroom: Male and female college
students evaluate their experiences. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 25, 805-818.
Thiele, J. E. (2003). Learning patterns of online students. Journal of Nursing Education, 42(8),
364-366.
Trice, A. D. (1985). An academic locus of control scale for college students. Perceptual & Motor
Skills, 61(3). 1043-1046.
Tu, C. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment.
International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45.
Valeccha, G. K., & Ostrom, T. M. (1974). An abbreviated measure of internal-external locus of
control. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 369-376.

42