Transcript EDUCATIONAL EXCLUSION IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN …

How students ”at risk” experience
their educational and professional
career?
Juhani Rautopuro
Finnish Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä
Vesa Korhonen
School of Education, University of Tampere
Background (Higher education in Finland)
• Season 2007/2008: almost 40 000 students (7,5 %) interrupted
their studies and about 6 % interrupted studies aiming to a degree
totally (Statistics Finland, 2010)
– Higher education:
– in Finnish universities a little bit over 5 % (nearly 8000) students
interrupted their studies for good.)
– Nearly one out of hundred switched the sector of education
• Students enrolled 2003 in Finnish universities
(situation at the end of 2008):
– about 2 % was with no degree and not continuing studies in any
institute
– about 4 % was in working life without a degree
– about one out of 500 (0,2 %) was unemployed without a degree.
– approximately 25 % completed Master’s degree
Definitions for “at risk” students
• Weak commitment/motivation towards studying
– superficial orientation on studies
– lack of study related goals and unclear professional career views,
– easy entrance and opportunism
– working while studying common (especially in Finland)
• Problems of well-being and lowered studying competence
– mental distress and exhaustion during studies
– depression
– deficiencies in necessary academic studying skills
• Considering giving up or interrupting/prolonging studies is
common:
– drop-out or voluntary withdrawal from studies (opt-out)
– in statistical/student register terms:
– student departure
– non-continuing students
– non-completion
Focus of this study
• Finnish university students’ weak commitment (Mäkinen &
Olkinuora 2004) and dysfunctional orientation (Lonka et al.
2008)
– Great number of students who have zero or few study credits in the
beginning of the studies (1st and 2nd study year)
– Risk of educational exclusion?
• The target group is students who have enrolled in autumn
2005 or later (after Bologna reform)
• Main research questions:
– what kind of study motives students “at risk” have had when started
their HE studies
– what kind of educational and professional career expectations the
students “at risk” have
– how these expectations are connected to their motives to perform
university studies and aspire higher education degree?
Students’ engagement into educational
and professinal careers at HE
• The Student Motivations for Attending University (SMAU)
(Cote & Levine 1997; 2002)
–
–
–
–
–
careerist-materialist (CAR) motivation
personal-intellectual development (PER) motivation,
humanitarian (HUM) motivation,
expectation-driven (EXP) motivation,
default (DEF) motivation
• Vocational and professional aspirations of students (i.e.
Furlong & Cartmel 1997; Rojewski 2005)
– generalistic vs. professional education
– nature and formation of future aspirations
– socioeconomic background and social capital of university students
Data and analyses
• Student register data
–
–
–
–
University of Helsinki
University of Jyväskylä (JyU)
University of Tampere (TaU)
Tampere University of Technology
• Students studying according to Bologna
• “tabula rasa” students
• Questionnaires (web based and posted)
– aimed to student’s “at risk” in JyU and TaU
– response rate quite low (about 25 %), n = 231
– Interviews (ongoing)
• Mostly statistical analyses
– descriptive statistics
– description of relationships and group differences
Results (1): Describing the respondents
• Gender: Male (31,2 %), Female (68,8 %) !!!
• Age of enrolment (years)
– Mean 23,5 (s.d. 5,9) ; Median 21,0 (Q1 = 20, Q3 = 26)
• Duration of the studies (seasons)
– Mean 3,9 (s.d. 2,7); Median 3,0 (Q1 = 1, Q3 = 6)
– Obs! One academic year = 2 seasons
– Obs! Only 40 % were “full-timers”, 49 % more or less working
• Credits (study points) per season
– Mean 4,8 (s.d 3,9); Median 5,0 (Q1 = 0, Q3 = 8
– Obs! Bachelor degree in 7 years requires in average 13 sp/season
• Field of education
– Education (11,3 %), Humanities (21,2 %), ICT (17,7 %),
Science (13,0 %), Social and economic sciences (21,6 %), Others
(15,2 %)
Results (2): Study activities (hours/week)
Contact
hours
Individual
working
Information
retrieval
Mean
9,6
10,3
3,7
Median
8,0
10,0
2,0
Std. Deviation
8,8
7,9
4,5
Percentiles 10
0,0
0,5
0,0
25
4,0
4,2
1,0
75
14,0
15,0
5,0
Results (3): Preconception of future
occupation
• Nearly on out of four (23 %) had a weak or very a weak idea
• Almost same percentage (25 %) were more or less insecure
about the selection of the main subject/study field
• More than half (60 %) had found out something about the
employability of the study field
• Most of the respondents (63 %) had not changed their point of
view of possible future occupation
• Nearly a half (48 %) had considered breaking up
Results (4): Some relationships
• Male less sure about future occupation than female(p = 0,022)
• Statistically significant association between unsureness and
field of education (p = 0,000)
– most distinct outlook: education, humanities
– most unclear outlook: ICT
• Statistically significant association between unsureness and
risk of breaking up of studies (p = 0,008)
– most unlikely: education, social and economic sciences
– most likely: ICT, science
Results (5): Motives for university studies
Personal and
intellectual
Humanitarian
development (PER) (HUM)
“University will
provide a setting for me
to develop myself
personally.”
”It is important that my
education benefits also
other people’s wellbeing”
“University will be
satisfying because it
will give me the
opportunity to study
and learn.”
“My education should
enable me to help
people who are less
fortunate.”
“University will be a
setting that will allow
me to improve my
intellectual capacity.”
“University allows a
possibility for an
interesting career
“I intend to use my
education to contribute
to the improvement of
the human condition.”
Expectation driven
(EXP)
Careerism (CAR)
Default (DEF)
“There are considerable
pressures on me
from my friends / family to
get a university
degree.”
“University is a
practical means for
me to achieve
personal success.”
“I’m going to
university basically
because
there are few other
options.”
“My parents would be very
disappointed in me if I didn’t
get a university degree.”
“I have enrolled because I’m
supposed to graduate”
”I have experienced social
pressures ”
“University is a way
by which I can
achieve a position of
higher status in
society.”
“I basically have no
choice but to
go to university.”
”University helps me
to achieve valued
things if life
“I don’t think I’ll get
anything out of
university, but it
beats the
alternatives.”
“My education helps
me to understand the
diverseness of life”
“I often ask myself
why I’m going to
university.”
(reverse)
Alpha = 0,76
Mean correlation 0,42
Alpha = 0,55
Mean correlation 0,22
Alpha = 0,83
Mean correlation 0,55
Alpha = 0,78
Mean correlation
0,53
Alpha = 0,64
Mean correlation
0,36
Results (6): Level of the dimension of the
motives
Personal and
intellectual
development
(PER)
Humanitarian
(HUM)
Expectation
driven
(EXP)
Careerism Default
(CAR)
(DEF)
Mean
4,1
3,5
2,0
3,2
2,1
Median
4,2
3,7
1,7
3,3
2,0
Std. Dev.
0,7
0,9
1,0
1,0
0,9
Results (7): Some associations and group
differences
• No statistically significant association between age of enrolment
and/or duration of studies and motives
• Only one statistically significant difference between male and
female in motives (p = 0,002)
– female a little bit more humanitarians
• Statistically significant differences in motives and certainty of
future occupation
– personal and intellectual development (PER), p = 0,000
– PER to those with quite unclear outlook is lowest
– humanitarian (HUM), p = 0,017
– those with unclear outlook or no outlook and less humanitarian, those
with clear outlook are most humanitarian
– default (DEF), p = 0,002
– those with clear outlook have lowest DEF
Results (7), continue…
• Some statistically significant differences in motives
between fields of education
– personal and intellectual development (PER), p = 0,001
– PER on the highest level in education and social and economic
sciences, especially when compared with sciences
– humanitarian (HUM), p = 0,001
– HUM on much lower level in ICT, especially when compared
with education and also with social and economic sciences
Conclusions/discussion
• The Student Motivations for Attending University (SMAU) –
scales seem to be quite general and predictive
– Most differences between disciplines/study areas
– Personal and intellectual development (PER) and humanitarian
(HUM) motives seem to form a basis for a clearer outlook of future
occupation and vocational and professional aspirations
– Expectation driven (EXP) and default (DEF) motives seem to be
connected to a weaker engagement in educational and professional
career and to a danger of educational exclusion
• Generally slowly advancing students seem not significantly
differing of other higher education students
– unsureness and risk of breaking up of studies/prolonged studies is
createst in ICT and natural science fields
• Careful with genralisations (non random data!)