Lesson Three:
Data Should Guide Compassion
Perhaps the most surprising lesson came from the corporate case study involving Slippery Rock University.
Their remarkable improvement did not occur because they purchased sophisticated software.
It occurred because they learned how to ask better questions.
Instead of treating all struggling students the same, they examined specific patterns.
Some students needed academic support.
Others needed financial assistance.
Some simply required timely advising before a small problem became a permanent one.
Technology was not the solution.
It simply helped leaders identify where human intervention was most needed.
Schools should never become data-driven at the expense of relationships.
Rather, data should help leaders know who needs a relationship most.
Lesson Four:
Every School Needs a Mirror
The National Student Clearinghouse’s national persistence report serves as something every institution needs—a mirror.
It reminds leaders that improvement requires honest measurement.
We cannot improve what we refuse to examine.
National data reveal that persistence differs according to age, enrollment status, academic discipline, institutional type, and student background.
These differences should not discourage educators.
They should motivate better questions.
Are our own trends improving?
Which students are thriving?
Which students quietly disappear?
The purpose of data is not comparison.
The purpose is improvement.
