Practitioners felt that poor attendance was primarily responsible for learners’ lack of progress while learners reported problems with the course itself. Although this finding is not conclusive, it is very interesting. Retention efforts that focus on attendance will be ineffective if the real reasons for learners’ poor attendance are related to the program itself. Programs might benefit from a more thorough exploration of practitioners’ and learners’ perceptions of progress – what encourages it and what inhibits it.

Behaviour is a very powerful, but perhaps less reliable indicator. Not every learner who is having difficulties with attendance and progress will react the same way. Some will persist in spite of their difficulties and some will leave. While indicators can generally alert us that learners may be at risk, they do little to tell us who will persist and achieve their goals and who won’t.

A Model for Redirecting Learners

Learner persistence is a highly complicated issue and studies show that non-completion has numerous complex causes. Kerka (1995) suggests that it not enough to think about learners as simply completers or non-completers. She also suggests that it is misleading to consider program leavers as a homogeneous group.

Several studies, in fact, have attempted to explain the complexities of completion/noncompletion by developing categories or types of learners. A guidebook developed by the West Virginia Adult Basic Education describes the following five types of learners that are often found in adult basic education programs:

• Completers – students who have achieved their purpose for attending class and have moved on to new goals
• Persisters – students who are currently enrolled and attending frequently
• Pretenders – students who are currently enrolled but not attending regularly
• Withdrawers – students who have left the program for a reason beyond the program’s control
• Dropouts – students who have left for minor reasons

Although we found these models very helpful, they did not quite capture the movement of learners into and out of a typical LBS college program. Nor did they tell us when a learner might be at risk. Some adults, for example, are redirected before they even begin the program; they may be asked to postpone their goals to take care of more pressing personal needs. Support staff at one college reported that they often knew from their very first meeting with a learner whether or not that learner would ‘make it’. Many learners either had severe financial problems or lacked the basic budgeting skills to budget for their book deposit. Other learners had difficulty getting organized for school, e.g., they were not able to provide the necessary documentation to register. Still others had very little in the way of a support system. Learners, who needed to postpone their education, were usually encouraged to return when their situations stabilized.