A scoping review of the “at-risk” student literature in higher education

Abstract

AbstractInstitutions’ inclination to fulfilling the mandate of producing quality graduates is overwhelming. Insistent petition for institutions to understand their students is about creating equitable opportunities for the diverse student bodies. However, “at-risk” students ubiquitously co-exist. This article conducted a scoping review of literature published locally and internationally that sought to understand “at-risk” students in higher education. The study examined the aims, participants, variables, data analytics tools, and the methods used when the topic on “at-risk” students is studied. Broadly, we sought the bigger picture of what matters, where, when, why, and how so. The Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) framework was considered for demarcating appropriate literature for the concept and context of “at-risk” students. The JBI protocol was chosen for selecting relevant literature published between 2010 and 2022, searched from the EBSCOhost and ScienceDirect databases. A search tool was developed using the litsearchr R package and screening proceeded guided by the PRISMA framework. Although 1961 articles were obtained after applying the search criteria, 84 articles satisfied the stipulated inclusion criteria. Although Africa is lagging, research on “at-risk” students is exponentially growing in America, Europe, and Asia. Notably, relevant articles use academic data to understand students at risk of dropping-out or failing in the first year. Often, statistical and machine learning methods were preferred. Most factors that determined whether a student is at risk of failing or dropping out were found to be highly correlated with high school knowledge. Also, being “at-risk” connoted one’s geographical context, ethnicity, gender, and academic culture. It was noted that autonomously motivated students, with good time management, succeed. Ideally, institutions need to identify areas that need intervention, including courses where special tutoring programmes are needed. Institutions should detect staff who need further training. Nonetheless, psychosocial well-being programmes should augment institutional investments to improve students’ success. Precisely, institutional environments should be stimulating, conducive, and motivating.