Introduction In the environment of globalization of economy and technology, higher education institutions in Thailand have to face many challenges, such as maintaining educational and social commitments, while competing for financial resources from public and private sectors. In order to cope with these challenges, the Royal Thai Government put forward the Educational Reform Act in 1999 (ERA 1999) which focuses on academic and research excellence, as well as effectiveness and accountabilities of higher education institutions. The Office of National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) was established to conduct the assessment; the quality of graduates and effectiveness of institutions are the two most important targets of evaluation. ONESQA considered qualified student retention as one of the most important key performance indicators (KPI), since it can reflect both the academic excellence of students and the effectiveness of the institutions. The ability to retain qualified students has become a determining KPI according to the new government budget policy, and being a factor in obtaining public esteem, institutional image and reputation. Statistics have shown that many freshmen in bachelor degree programs of science and technology drop out during or after the first year, and the institutions with high freshman retention rates tend to possess higher percentage of graduation within four years (Charter, 2006). Theoretical models have been proposed as institutional frameworks for understanding factors affecting student retention. Tinto (1975) put forward a dynamic longitudinal model for student integration, which reveals that the student persistence process depends on the social and academic domains of the student's institutional experience. The student attrition model of Bean (1985) also pointed out the importance of external factors and socialization process. The theory of involvement proposed by Astin (1975) describes factors critical to student's decision to persist or drop out, and suggests that institution policies can be effective only to the extent that it increases student involvement (Astin, 1984).Objectives The purposes of the present study were to identify factors associated with student retention in higher education institutions in Thailand and to suggest effective measurements and administrative mechanism to increase student retention rates. Of particular interest were students in bachelor degree programs in science and technology.Methods In-depth personal interviews were conducted on a number of participants namely, administrators, faculty members and supporting staff. The interviews were non-structured and made in the office of participants; recorded on audio files, and later transcribed verbatim by researchers and assistants. The data were sorted from the transcripts, using categories based on emerging patterns from the data, from which the range of responses or main themes (codes) was identified. Each transcript was coded independently by two coders, who compared and discussed codes until consensus was reached.Results Most participants suggested that, at the institutional level, administration policies and decision, activities in study programs, campus life, administration structure and image can help improve student retention rate, by ensuring that all important services, such as funding, academic support, cooperative learning environment etc., are available for students. Since faculty play the most important role in promoting educational growth and positive relationships between faculty and students constitute important fundamental attitudes in learning process, there are many ways, in which faculty members can help maintain positive learning environment for students. Especially in the context of Thai tradition and culture, faculty as "teachers" have been viewed as the second parent of students, to which proper respect has to be paid. In addition to the findings, management strategies and effective measurements to improve student retention rate in Thai higher education will be presented and discussed in details. References Astin, A. W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: a development theory of higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308. Bean, J. P. (1985). Interaction effects based on class level in an exploratory model of college student dropout syndrome. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 35-64. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.