Conventional retention measures identify whether students remain but reveal little about what remaining requires. Drawing on conceptual development from a mixed-methods doctoral study of students who seriously considered withdrawal but continued, this article advances two interconnected objectives: conceptualising the work of staying and examining how unequal conditions shape its demands. Five interconnected dimensions of staying work are proposed: interpretive, relational, resource-mobilising, adaptive and temporal. The unequal work of staying extends this framework by examining how material, relational, institutional and structural conditions generate disproportionate or avoidable demands that may remain concealed by equivalent retention outcomes. This distinction recognises that differences in effort are not inherently inequitable. The framework connects student agency with institutional responsibility, recognising students’ active participation in continuation while questioning the demands institutions place upon them. Retention practice should therefore support students’ agency while reducing avoidable continuation work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sarah Yearsley (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: