The aim of the study was to enhance timely graduation of Postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business. Based on the widespread perceptions that most Postgraduate (masters) students at the Graduate of Business (GSB) at the University of Zambia (UNZA) spend unusually long durations to complete their studies. The researcher decided to investigate these phenomena to identify factors responsible for extended completion or non-completion of Postgraduate students at Graduate School of Business. The study employed a mixed method study design because of its efficacy in rendering research findings credible and reliable. Data was obtained from Postgraduate students and Supervisors at the GSB. Structured survey questionnaires were administered to One hundred seventy-six (176) students, and semi-unstructured personal interviews were conducted with supervisors at GSB. Quantitative data was analysed using Social Package and Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16 and qualitative data was analysed using semantical content analysis.
Table of Contents
DECLARATION Fehler! Textmarke nicht definiert.
COPYRIGHT Fehler! Textmarke nicht definiert.
APPROVAL Fehler! Textmarke nicht definiert.
ABSTRACT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DEDICATION
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Aim of the study
1.4 Objectives of the Study
1.5 Research Questions
1.6 Scope of the Study
1.7 Organization of the study
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Concept of Academic continuity and Disruptions of Academic Calendars
2.3 Factors Influencing the Disruption of Academic Calendars
2.4 Factors contributing to delay in student Graduation (Throughput factors)
2.4.1 Introduction
2.4.2 Student factors
2.4.3 Institutional Factors
2.4.4 Supervision factors
2.5 Benefits of Early Thesis Completion and Graduation
2.6 Some useful Student Throughput Models
2.6.1 Vincent Tinto’s Model of Student Retention
2.6.3 The Student Development Model
2.6.4 Jiranek’s Dissertation Research (DR) Completion Triangle
2.7 Theoretical Framework
2.8 Research Gaps
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research design
3.2 Population and Sample
3.3 Conceptual Framework
3.4 Operationalisation of Variables
3.5 Data Collection
3.6 Data Analysis
3.7 Ethical Considerations
CHAPTER FOUR DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Descriptive analysis
4.2.1 Response rate
4.3 Profiles of respondents
4.4 One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) analysis based on Delay Score
4.4.1 Postgraduate Student Status
4.4.2 Gender
4.4.3 Cohort (Year Enrolled)
4.4.4 Employment status during studentship
4.5.1 Graphical Test for Normality
4.5.2 Multicollinearity
4.6.1 Model Fitness
4.6.2 Regression
4.7 Summary of Findings
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Institutional (GSB) factors
5.3 Supervision factors
5.4 Student (personal) factors
5.5 Limitations and Research Implications
5.6 Significance of the Study
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Conclusion
6.3 Recommendations
6.4 Dissertation model providing the solution to enable timely graduation of Postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
ABSTRACT
Based on the widespread perceptions that most Postgraduate (masters’) students at the Graduate of Business (GSB) at the University of Zambia (UNZA) spend unusually long durations to complete their studies. The researcher decided to investigate these phenomena to identify factors responsible for extended completion or non-completion of Postgraduate students at Graduate School of Business. The aim of the study was to enhance timely graduation of Postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business. The study employed a mixed method study design because of its efficacy in rendering research findings credible and reliable. Data was obtained from Postgraduate students and Supervisors at the GSB. Structured survey questionnaires were administered to One hundred seventy-six (176) students and semi-unstructured personal interviews were conducted with supervisors at GSB. Quantitative data was analysed using Social Package and Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16 and qualitative data was analysed using semantical content analysis. The findings of this study indicated that they was a significant relationship between study delay, GSB factors and Supervision factors while student factors were not found to have a significant relationship with study delay at GSB. The study concludes that study delay at GSB was caused by GSB factors and Supervision factors. The study recommended that all the key players/ stakeholders involved in Postgraduate study delivery to carry out their duties well and in an efficient manner, in order to enhance timely graduation of postgraduate students at GSB and increase the graduation rate for the school.
Keywords: Study delay, Student graduation. Institutional (GSB) factors, Supervision factors, Student factors, GSB, UNZA
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I am grateful to the Almighty God, the source of all fulfilments. For the wisdom and perseverance that you bestowed upon me during this research project.
I want to thank all the Supervisors and Postgraduate students at GSB who participated in this study. Their enthusiasm to take part in the surveys and interviews highly contributed for the success of this study. In addition, am highly grateful to all individuals who have made it possible in one way or other for me, to carry out and complete this research.
I am so grateful and would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to my parents, brothers and sister. May the Almighty God Bless You!
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my family, Dad and Mum, for all the support, sacrifice and encouragement you have put in to ensure I reach where I am in life and to my brothers to inspire them to excel in their lives and have successful careers. May the Good Lord continue blessing you all.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Enrolment status of masters’ respondents
Table 4.2: Gender distribution of masters’ students
Table 4.3: Employment status of masters’ students
Table 4.4: Anova for Postgraduate Student Status (GSB factors)
Table 4.5: Anova for Postgraduate Student Status (Supervision factors)
Table 4.6: Anova for Postgraduate Student Status (Student factors)
Table 4.7: Anova for Gender (GSB factors)
Table 4.8: Anova for Gender (Supervision factors)
Table 4.9: Anova for Gender (Student factors)
Table 4.10: Anova for Cohorts (GSB factors)
Table 4.11: Anova for Cohorts (Supervision factors)
Table 4.12: Anova for Cohorts (Student factors)
Table 4.13: Anova for Employment status (GSB factors)
Table 4.14: Anova for Employment status (Supervision factors)
Table 4.15: Anova for Employment status (Student factors)
Table 4.16: Test for Multicollinearity of the Independent Variables in the Model
Table 4.17: Regression Model Summary
Table 4.18: Analysis of Variance
Table 4.19: Regression Coefficient output
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Tinto’s Model of Student Retention
Figure 2.2: Tinto’s Model of Student Departure
Figure 2.3: Student Development Model
Figure 2.4: Jiranek’s Dissertation Research Completion Triangle
Figure 2.5: Theoretical Framework
Figure 3.1: Conceptual Framework
Figure 4.1: Normality Test
Figure 4.2: Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual
Figure 6.1: Model of the Dissertation
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Research questionnaire for students
Appendix 2: Interview schedule for Lecturers/ Supervisors at the Graduate School of Business
Appendix 3: Ethical clearance
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
illustration not visible in this excerpt
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
This chapter presents the background to the study, the statement of the problem, Aim of the study, objectives of the study, research questions and significance of the study, scope of the study and lastly the organization of the study.
This study stems from the researcher’s experience. The researcher is a postgraduate student at the Graduate School of Business (GSB) and the Director in a meeting with students expressed concern about delay in the graduating of postgraduate students, at the Graduate School of Business. Where the majority of postgraduate students were taking longer than the recommended two years to complete their postgraduate programmes. The discussions that follow would centre on these matters of concerns to create awareness of the seriousness of the subject matter of postgraduate study delay or throughput in higher education.
Programming of an academic calendar is a common problem that almost every university has to solve. Programming of an academic calendar can impact on a wide range of institutional outcomes, including student satisfaction, graduation rates and time to graduation, and university expenditures. Given the importance that scheduling can have on how students, faculty, and administrators make decisions, it becomes essential that programming of an academic calendar reflect student and institutional needs (Bowen, 2009).
The focus of this study is postgraduate throughput and for that matter postgraduate students. This is because there is a growing concern worldwide over the quality of post-graduate training, the length of time it takes postgraduate students to complete their studies, success rate of postgraduate students, and the high percentage of postgraduate students who terminate their studies. In the early nineties, for instance, several institutions in Canada expressed concern about problems with postgraduate education, especially the long time it takes students to complete their research (Holdaway, Deblois, &Winchester (1995). In the United States of America, the Council of Graduate Schools reported in 1991 that time-to-degree and the changing research environment was of great concern to many stakeholders in higher education. Similarly, Lessing & Schultze (2002) noted that attrition rates and completion rates of postgraduate students were becoming statistics of vital concern to governments, and funding agencies as they tended to rely on a performance-driven model to make informed judgments about higher degree research.
Sayed, Kruss & Badat (1998) indicated that only 10 percent of masters’ students completed their dissertations in three years at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa, in 1998. These concerns point to a common phenomenon; that is, postgraduate students in both advanced and developing countries are experiencing problems which either delay their studies and prevent them from completing on time, or make them abandon their studies.
In view of the above realizations and similar trends across the world, studies on postgraduate durations and concerns about shortening the time taken to complete postgraduate studies have become of utmost interest not only to managers of higher education institutions but also to governments, funders of postgraduate studies and other stakeholders in higher education (Amhoe, 2013).
Some scholars in educational research (Hockey, 1994; Fraser & Mathews, 1999; Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (2000); Lessing & Schultze, 2001; Mouton, 2001; Grant, 2002) believe that problems of low completion rates and inability of postgraduate research students to complete their studies on time are mainly due to poor supervision and they can therefore be solved by improving upon supervision offered to students and the student-supervisor relationship. Although the emphasis here is on the role of the supervisor, the significance of the student’s role in the relationship towards achieving timely completions has also been recognized as a significant factor. Manathunga (2005), for instance, explored how experienced supervisors detect and deal with early warning signs which point to problems likely to be encountered by research students in order to improve postgraduate study completion rates. Her study also investigated the reasons why some students do not discuss their difficulties directly with their supervisors. The study further proposed that supervisors would be able to improve timely completions if they are aware of these reasons and if they could adopt a number of strategies to support students’ learning.
Studies that support the view that institutional inadequacies are responsible for slow completions and non-completions rather than student-centred factors also support attempts that focus on enhancing the supervisory process, postgraduate supervisor development efforts, enhancing supervisors' understanding of their responsibilities in order to improve upon their relationships with students and co-supervisors (Dillon and Mallot, 1981; Helm, 1989; Binns and Porter, 1989; Deist, 1990; Hockey, 1994; Rademeyer, 1994;Van Schalkwyk, 1994; Johnston, 1996; Pearson, 1996; Nerad and Miller, 1997; Fraser and Mathews, 1999; Albertyn, Kapp and Bitzer, 2008; Lee, 2009). Hockey (1996) was concerned that the training of supervisors at postgraduate level is a “crucial factor” in students’ successful completion of a PhD programme. Likewise, Moses (1984) attributed the delay in completing the degree to poor supervision, and Lussier (1995) to lack of adequate mentoring. What these studies have in common is that their investigations were based on student perceptions and they all stressed the role of supervisors as an important factor in improving postgraduate education.
Contrary to the above position is another school of thought that believes that the problems of slow completion and non-completion are student-centred rather than deficient institutional arrangements including poor supervision. Mouton (2007), argued in this regard that too much attention was being given to managerial and administrative solutions to throughput problems in South African higher education instead of tackling the challenges posed by academically under-prepared postgraduate students. This implies that problems of low throughput may also result from poor academic preparation at the Bachelors level. Similarly, Ibarra (in Lovitts, 2001) in his comments on completion rates among ethnic minorities in the U.S. indicated that policies adopted to address the non-completion problem were based on the assumption that the problem lies within the student and not the system. In an article titled “selective admissions myth” (cited in Lovitts, 2001), Bekins stated that strict admission procedures identify the most able students and that those who fail to complete their studies do so as a matter of choice. This implies that if the most qualified students are selected into a programme, they should be able to complete their programmes successfully irrespective of prevailing institutional arrangements and inadequacies including supervision.
Lovitts (2001) however cautions against the student-centred view and advised universities not to consider tightening of selection procedures as a way of reacting to increasing non-completion rates and lengthy time-to-degree. By doing so, attention would rather be focused on student-centred issues rather than on institutional structures and research cultures. According to Manathunga (2002), it is not advisable to recommend changes in student cohorts and characteristics as an approach to achieving timely completion rates.
Other studies support the view that a balanced approach must be adopted in addressing students’ inability to complete their studies and research on time. Findings of the 1987 OECD Report cited by Manathunga (2005) and Lessing & Schulze (2002), point to both student-centred factors and institutional factors including research culture and quality of supervision. Lessing & Schulze (ibid) compared the views of both students and supervisors on postgraduate supervisory processes in the Faculty of Education at the University of South Africa and came to the conclusion that whereas supervisors on one hand found some aspects of the supervision process rewarding and desired the recruitment of higher potential students who would deliver better work, students on the other hand, indicated issues related to the planning of the research, research methodology, contact with supervisors, feedback, response time and examination feedback as some of their unmet needs. Likewise, in a study by Lessing & Lessing (2004) on supervision of research for dissertations and theses involving academics from both local and international universities, it became known that while students needed much support and training in scientific formulation and writing, there was also a definite need for newer academic staff to be schooled in research supervision. This revelation gives a clear indication that the problems of non-completion and slow completion are neither completely student-centred nor due to institutional deficiencies alone. It ought to be looked at from both angles and on a case-by-case basis.
The foregoing debate is the underlying motivation for this research as it tries to establish the factors responsible for delayed completion or non-completion among postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business (GSB). In order to enhance timely graduation of postgraduate students at GSB and increase the graduation rate for the school.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The Graduate School of Business has been facing issues to do with the programming of academic activities and study delay of postgraduate students. The majority of postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business, who are pursuing various programmes are unable to complete their master’s programme in the recommended time which is two (2) years. The majority of postgraduate students take more than two (2) years to successfully complete their studies and graduate. This is an issue needing solutions. As a result, this provides the researcher’s motivation to embark on this study, in order to identify the major factors responsible for delayed completions and non-completions among postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business and how they can be addressed to ensure they is timely graduation and high completion rates for the institution.
1.3 Aim of the study
To develop a model, that would be used to enhance timely graduation of Postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this study is to investigate the causes of delayed completion or non-completion among Postgraduate students at the Graduate School of Business.
This study shall be guided by the following specific objectives.
1) To explain using the theory of constraints why there is a delay in Postgraduate student graduation at the Graduate School of Business.
2) To develop a Model that enhances Postgraduate student graduation at the Graduate School of Business.
1.5 Research Questions
1) Why is there a delay in Postgraduate student graduation at the Graduate School of Business?
2) What model can be used to improve Postgraduate student graduation at the Graduate School of Business, in order to mitigate study delays?
1.6 Scope of the Study
The research study was done at Graduate School of business, because this is the institution facing the problem of student graduation delay at Postgraduate level. The study area was most suitable because it had the relevant, adequate and diverse target population to enable the researcher pick the sample size required, from which to obtain the desired data.
1.7 Organization of the study
The study was divided into six (6) main chapters or components.
Chapter One – Dealt with the introductory aspect of the study, the background of the study, objectives of the study, significance of the study and the scope of the study.
Chapter Two – Was devoted to reviewing of the relevant literature.
Chapter Three – Outlined the research methodology used to answer the research objectives and questions.
Chapter Four – Provides the Presentation and analysis of research results.
Chapter Five – Provides the discussion of the research results.
Chapter Six – Provides the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations for the study
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the literature related to disruptions of academic calendars and factors influencing student study delay in Higher Education. It begins with defining the key concept of Academic continuity and disruptions of academic calendars and goes on with factors contributing to delay in student graduation in Higher Education, followed by a review of the other empirical studies related to the research topic.
2.2 The Concept of Academic continuity and Disruptions of Academic Calendars
The World Conference on Higher Education, 1998 discussed that the mission of universities is to educate, to train and to undertake research. Shattock, further reiterated that universities mandates are learning and research. Other sources add a third reason being ‘service’. Learning therefore can be defined as an agent in achieving academics through the different offerings of academic programs by universities. This concludes that learning as an agent of completing academic programs by students is a core activity in universities hence in the Graduate School of Business, which is the case of this study. Students are able to acquire knowledge or learn through an academic program which may be defined as a broad area of study but usually referring to specific types of degree paths, namely pre-university, undergraduate and postgraduate academic programs. The undergraduate academic programs take four years to complete while the pre-university and postgraduate academic programs may take two years or less (Schwebber, 2008).
As the importance of academic programs in universities has been provided as above, as well as exploring its agents, it is only prudent to conclude that continuity of academic programs is an important aspect in universities. Therefore, there should always be availability of this important service to students and faculty who are the main stakeholders in learning and teaching respectively of academic programs (bid, p.45).
It is important to note that continuity of academic programs may be threatened if disruptions or an interruption of the academic calendar takes place. In Kenya for instance, fires, inter-community clashes, floods, strikes, riots are some examples of the calamities that Kenya is prone to. Calamities bring about disruptions by causing significant physical damage or destruction to institutions or organizations, loss of life, or drastic changes to the environment. It goes without saying that these same calamities can affect institutions such as universities (Wallace, 2013).
Disruptions brought about by disasters or calamities can either be brought about by an act of God or a manmade event. Disruptions do not come knocking at one’s doorstep attempting to notify people that they are about to hit a nation, city, town, community or an institution and that is why higher learning institutions should be well prepared for such eventualities at all times. Disruptions may take minutes, hours, days or months to be rectified hence they have dire consequences to the continuity of academic programs which ultimately affect the university academic calendar. It is therefore wise for Universities to have preparedness plans in place for the mitigation of such risks (Steele, 2008).
To further explain the importance of having preparedness plans and its effects on time, the different activities unique in a university are mainly dictated by the academic calendar. Any event threatening the continuity of the academic calendar, in most cases disrupts learning since the calendar is time-based. The calendar should be followed to the letter by all stakeholders who include students, faculty, support staff and the management, so as not to delay activities such as continuous students’ assessments, lecturers/classes examinations, and graduations or disrupt the continuity of academic programs. Since an academic calendar is a framework that assists in the accomplishment of academics which include learning and examinations, there is need to ensure that disruptions which may affect the core activities in universities be inhibited to take place as much as possible. Time lost as resumption of service is sought for, may never be recovered. It is because of this reason and the importance of continuity of academic programs in universities that disruptions be tamed. It is prudent to ensure that academics still continues in disruptive events, because as the saying goes, ‘time is money’. Universities stakeholders need to come up with measures to ensure that learning thus continuity of academic programs even in unbearable situations continues (Doughty, 2000).
2.3 Factors Influencing the Disruption of Academic Calendars
2.3.1 Student activism
Student involvement and formal representation in university governance in Kenya have not eliminated student activism in the institutions. This may be due to the complications arising from huge student enrolments, the expansion of universities and a lack of corresponding levels and numbers of representation. Student activism may be defined as ‘the informal or extraordinary political activities of students’ and ‘the public expression of new ideas, about shaping public debate on a topic’ which is typically political in nature (Luescher-Mamashela, 2015). Student activism is not limited to higher education institutions; it has even influenced national issues in the country. In cases where students feel underrepresented, misrepresented or not represented at all in the formal decision-making processes of university governance, the likelihood of student activism increases. In most universities in Kenya, student activism has been blamed for the numerous strikes and closures over the past decade, thus prolonging the time required by students for completing their studies, disrupting academic life, and driving prospective students and staff to private and overseas institutions, similarly this is also the case at the University of Zambia (Mwiria et al., 2007).
2.3.2 Conflicts of Interest in Tertiary Institutions
Staff versus Federal/State Government:
Areas of interest included nonpayment of certain benefits and allowances. In Federal University of Technology, Akure, the non-teaching staff went to strike for almost a year in 2016 due to certain conflict between the workers and the Vice-Chancellor while both academic and non-teaching staff of Adeyemi College of Education went on strike for six months in 2014 in demand for their rights. This ugly incidence had led to strikes, students’ unrests, and closure of schools in many institutions in Nigeria. In Nigeria it was found that conflict in Federal University of Technology (FUTA), Rufus Giwa Polytechnic and Adeyemi College of Education occurred frequently. Nonpayment of salaries as at when due was the major cause of conflict in these institution. As a result, this lead to strikes in Higher learning institutions which lead to the disruption of academic calendars in this institutions, so is the case at the University of Zambia (Adeyemi, 2016).
2.3.3 Student unrest
Nigerians have for some time been disturbed by the alarming rate at which students' unrest in Nigerian institutions of higher learning have led to destruction of lives and property and untimely interruption of the planned academic programmes.
Students unrest has become a common phenomenon in institutions of higher learning since independence, even though it earliest manifestation was pre-independence (Aluede, 1999). The phenomenon has come to be a receiving socio-political problem in Nigerian history. In recent times, students' unrest has acquired national scale and mobilization capacity that they constitute serious threat to the political authority and national security. (Ikelegbe, 1992 and Onwuejeogwu, 1992)
Students' unrest in the institutions of higher learning is prevalent in recent years. In the words of Aluede and Aluede (1999), students' unrest is caused by many factors such as welfare problems which arise in the form of lack of electricity and pipe borne water, inadequate facilities for learning, lack of proper motivation on the part of lecturers and facilitators. This unrest occurs in the form of riot demonstration, protest, boycotts, harassment and strike. Today students' unrest has been recognized as one of the most visible perennial problems of significance in Nigerian institutions of higher learning. Thus if there is anything predictable among students of higher institutions of learning, it is the fact that they will riot in any academic session. As a result, there is incessant closure of schools, which adversely affect the coverage of the curriculum in a given academic session (Odu, 2014).
2.4 Factors contributing to delay in student Graduation (Throughput factors)
2.4.1 Introduction
Factors contributing to study delay or delay in student graduation in Higher Learning Institutions are also referred as Throughput factors, throughput concept is discussed as follows;
Cairn cross (1999) defined throughput as the number of students who completed their studies within the prescribed time.
Furthermore, according to de Beer (2006) the use of the term throughput may be traced to attempts by quasi-academics and politicians to equate success rates or completion rates in higher education institutions to the input and output production concept in industry. This input and output production terminology, according to de Beer (2006), is synonymous to the conveyer belt syndrome of a factory, whose success rate is determined by the quantum of output released through a revolving door. In ordinary non-technical language, the dictionary defines throughput as "the amount of work, people, or things that a system deals with in a particular period" (Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, 2007). This dictionary definition presents a more comprehensive definition as it goes beyond the input and output production concept in industry which appears to be limited to goods or products; it involves the number of people that a system deals with in a particular period.
On the basis of the original industry concept, and the non-technical dictionary definition, student throughput can be defined as the number of students an institution deals with, in a specified period. Furthermore, since throughput also has to do with output or product, the idea of completing something or finishing a task is an important consideration. Therefore, to render the term throughput more meaningful in the school set up, we can define student throughput as the number of students who successfully complete their studies in an institution or a country within a specified period. It is however, agreed universally that universities are not factories and therefore cannot behave completely like factories because of differences in their objectives and products.
From the discussion of throughput concepts, a number of reasons emerge as factors that determine completion time for students and throughput in higher education institutions in different contexts. The literature on factors responsible for completion and non-completion in throughput studies is extensive (Jacks et al., 1983; Rudd, 1985; Moses, 1994; Baker et al., 1996; Seagram et al., 1998; Myers, 1999; Lovitts, 2000; Wright & Cochrane, 2000; Ballantyne, 2001; Martin et al., 2001; Newman, 2003; McCormack, 2005).
Since the 1970s, universities and governments have been concerned about how to ensure timely completion rates among research higher degree students and this has resulted in studies aimed at understanding the factors that make it possible to predict successful and timely completions (Manathunga, 2005). A number of these studies carried out in the UK, USA, Canada, Sweden, France, and The Netherlands focused on finding out the reasons why research students complete or do not complete their programmes and have resulted in the conclusion that the reasons are complex (OECD, 1987; Becher et al., 1994).
Writing on students’ perceptions of non-completion, McCormack (2005) summarized the factors that affect research students’ time to completion into two main categories: institutional factors and student (personal) factors. This view does not depart from those expressed by Tinto, Yorke, Draper and Jiranek. Institutional factors include the academic environment, disciplinary differences, admission criteria, and the quality of student support services. In addition, Institutional factors also encompass Supervisory arrangements include the quality of supervision arrangements, and student-supervisor relationship. Student factors or personal factors refer to personal or emotional problems, financial difficulties, combining work with study, lack of peer support, loss of interest, pre-entry qualification of student, and age at first registration.
Most authors share similar views on the above factors and generally agree that they do influence the ability of higher education students, especially research postgraduate students to complete their programmes within approved durations. A study by Mutala (2009) sums up the factors affecting postgraduate completion as: delays in approving the research topic, unnecessary delays in getting feedback (from supervisors), supervisors’ unavailability, problems arising from balancing work/occupations and school, intimidations by supervisors, difficulties in finding relevant literature, and delays from external examiners. Yorke (2003) in his study on ‘‘why students leave early in higher education in the UK’’ cited from his 1999 studies and that of Davies and Elias (2003) Include ‘wrong choice of study’, ‘wrong choice of institution’, ‘academic difficulties’, ‘financial problems’, ‘personal problems’, ‘poor quality of the student experience’, ‘unhappiness with the social environment’, ‘dissatisfaction with institutional provision’ as the reasons that influenced their departure. The factors determining student throughput are discussed under the three broad categories suggested by McCormack.
2.4.2 Student factors
2.4.2.1 Student experience
Yorke (1999) identified that the quality of the student experience is influenced by the quality of teaching, level of support from staff and organization of the programme.
Lack of support can be divided into institutional support and social support. Social support refers to the already identified factor of inclusion. Institutional support can be both provision of physical facilities (such as library, computers and specialist equipment) and ‘soft’ facilities such as coaching, study advice and social facilities. This was first identified by Tinto (1993) who reiterates that a student should feel inclusive. This is strengthened by the research of Terenzini and Pascarella (1977) who found that the amount of contact between faculty members and students positively influenced student persistence. However, this was found to be related to the type of institution by Pascarella and Chapman (1983), as it was statistically significant for residential universities, but not for two or four-year commuter institutions. The importance of inclusion was also found by Jenkins (2007) who stated that minority students are more successful at colleges who provide special support for minority students, and by Madgett and Bélanger (2008), who found that students often feel a number and that students considering dropping out usually have difficulty integrating.
Support should be given at an early stage, before serious problems arise (Lowis and Castley, 2008). A good introduction programme has been found to enhance the student experience. Early experiences are an important factor in the persistence of students (Grayson, 2003). Students often feel overwhelmed in the first weeks due to the large amount of information (Glogowska et al., 2007). Offering support for emotional, academic and social adjustment is perceived to be successful by students (Lubben, Davidowitz, Buffler, Allie, & Scott, 2010).
2.4.2.2 Programme choice
Difficulty in coping can be related to different factors. It may be related to a wrong choice of programme or unhappiness with the social environment or the demands of the programme. A poor choice of course or university is identified as one of the main factors influencing the decision of students to discontinue (Christie et al., 2004; Lassibille and Navarro Gómez, 2009; Van Onzenoort, 2009; Yorke, 1999). A poor choice relates to wrong choice of study, but also to a gap between expectations and actual programme or to a lack of commitment. In the Netherlands, more than one in five students with a HAVO background change their studies to another institute or other education (22.4%). For MBO, this percentage is only 8% (HBO-Raad, 2011).
Research has identified that there is a gap between student expectations and actual experience in higher education. Tinto (1993) refers to this mismatch between the needs and expectations of the individual and the institution as incongruence, which can be both social and academic. Academic incongruence can be either because the academic demands are too high or not high enough, leaving the individual either too challenged or unchallenged. When they are too high, it will lead to involuntary departure. When the individuals are unchallenged, it may lead to voluntary departure. Social incongruence refers to the extent to which the student expectations are met. This has been found to influence student persistence (Braxton, Vesper, and Hossler, 1995; Tinto, 1993). It is essential to provide accurate and comprehensive information to prospective students to assist them in making the right choices (Braxton et al., 1995; McInnis, Hartley, Polesel, and Teese, 2000; Yorke, 1999). According to Madgett and Bélanger (2008) a sense of belonging is essential. When students feel they have made the right choice, they no longer feel insecure about their future. This also fits with the institutional commitment as identified by Tinto (1993).
Lubben, Davidowitz, Buffler, Allie and Scott (2010) related the choice of course to the level of career focus. Students with a strong career focus make their decision based on what they want to do after completing their studies. A strong career focus is geared towards the nature of the work, rather than the outcome of the work (working for people, improving the environment) or with the related benefits such as a good income. Students with a programme focus are more engaged with the chosen discipline rather than the associated careers. They found six criteria used by students in making their choice for a course: interest in the subject, achievement in the subject at school level, extra-curricular experience in the subject, influence of role models, interest in programme outline and pressure, and stimulus from family. Those students who made a choice of course not closely related to the career aspirations were often discouraged to continue.
There are other influencing factors, such as self-efficacy, determination and commitment and intention to succeed and handle failure (Glogowska et al., 2007). Self-efficacy is an important factor in student success as it relates to their belief of being able to achieve their objectives. This may relate to determination, for example the strength with which the student wants to persist, even when things are tough. Students with a strong determination are committed to completing the education and are more prepared to deal with failure. As stated, Tinto (1993) also identified commitment and intention as main factors for student departure at the individual level. Lack of commitment and lack of preparation were identified in the HEFCE report (1997) as factors leading to non-completion, especially for the traditional student aged 18-21 on entry as well. Lack of commitment is regarded in this report to be due to parental or peer group pressure for entering higher education rather than the individual need to obtain a degree. On the other hand, Lubben et al. (2010) found in their case study that parental or peer pressure was hardly mentioned as a reason for choosing a particular course. Pryjmachuk et al. (2009) did research at a large English university into student dropout in nursing education. They identified that a higher age on entry leads to higher completion rates. Students with a higher age at entry were found to be more committed than younger students, which is consistent with the findings of the HEFCE report (1997).
2.4.2.3 Social environment
As stated, research has indicated that engagement and inclusion is an important factor to retain students (Thomas, 2002; Tinto, 1993; Zepke and Leach, 2010). Zepke and Leach (2010) detail integration into the institutional environment even further in that institutional cultures should be welcoming to students of diverse backgrounds. The culture of an institute is influenced by many factors: the heterogeneity of the population (both students and staff) as well as autonomy given to students on their learning process. The more heterogeneous the institutional community, the more welcoming the institute is perceived. Creating opportunities to enhance students to learn autonomously and with others, thereby developing their sense of being competent to achieve their objectives increases the chance of study success.
Isolation is another aspect of social incongruence, which may also happen to individuals who are not very different from the other members of the faculty (Tinto, 1993). The amount of contact with the faculty can play a role in this. Isolation often leads to departure in the first semester. To counteract isolation, individuals must find either academic and/or social groups to make contact with (Zepke and Leach, 2010). These are often referred to as subcultures. The importance of friendship, social networks and mutual support was also identified by Thomas (2002) as one of key aspects in student persistence. Van Onzenoort (2009) also found a positive relation between the expectations of students of feeling at home at the institute. Yorke (1999) refers to this incongruence as unhappiness in the social environment, which includes factors such as homesickness, difficulty in making friends, dislike of the location of the university or accommodation problems. Glogowska et al. (2007) found that informal support (from family, friends and student group) was an important factor in the student’s decision to persist or to withdraw, as was formal support (i.e. the support from staff and the institution).
2.4.2.4 Demands of the programme
The inability to cope with demands of the programme (stress related to programme, difficulty and work load) is another important factor and may lead to both voluntary and involuntary departure (Tinto, 1993; Yorke, 1999). If the academic demands cannot be met, it may lead to involuntary departure. On the other hand, the student may also decide to leave voluntary if the academic level is perceived too high. In his study of 2234 students in a higher education institute in the Netherlands, Van Onzenoort (2009) found that 33.8% of students found their academic achievements disappointing. Main reasons identified were lack of motivation, lack of self-study and the connection between secondary and higher education.
Students sometimes have difficulty seeing whether they are meeting the academic demands. Lowis and Castley (2008) found in their study that students need to be affirmed through tutor feedback that they are achieving the academic level. Madgett and Bélanger (2008) found that study habits play a major role in both academic performance and academic integration. Tinto (1993) refers to this as adjustment to the academic context, for example starting to study requires adjustment from the individual. There are two distinct sources of difficulty in adjustment: the different social and intellectual demands college study requires and the first-time separation from home. Grayson (2003) found that adjustment is not a problem for the majority of students. Factors that influence adjustment are discipline, analytical skills and institutional and student support. He indicates that support in analytical skills may be of value of overcoming adjustment difficulties related to this aspect. Factors related to high school marks, educational level of parents and involvement in university activities were found of little or no consequence for adjustment. Even though the outcomes of his research do not denote a large influence of early adjustment on graduation rates, Grayson does state it is a legitimate aim in itself to create positive feelings of adjustment for students.
2.4.2.5 Financial considerations
One of the often-indicated reasons for withdrawal or extended completion is financial burden. Yorke (1999) identified matters relating to financial need as one of six main factors leading to student withdrawal. This may include financial problems, needs of dependents and difficulty in balancing employment and study. The latter was also found by Peng and Ling (2010), who found that an increase in tuition fees lead to an increase in hours worked, even though it may have been more efficient to borrow additional funds, which students could repay after graduation. This indicates that students may prefer not to build up debts. On the other hand, they concluded that many students worked during summer when there were no study activities and that for those students, it did not seem to affect university persistence. Christie, Munro & Fisher (2004) contradict an adversity to debt. They found in their research of 800 students of two Scottish universities that an adversity to debt is more likely to influence a student’s decision to start in higher education rather than while attending university as they found an increase in debt and debt tolerance in the progression through university. It would seem that when a student has started, the resistance against debt decreases. Financial strain was also one of the push factors identified by Glogowska, Young and Lockyer (2007).
2.4.3 Institutional Factors
2.4.3.1 Research
For research students, thesis is a fundamental component of the University life after completion of their course work . Thesis, sometimes described as dissertation is purely an academic exercise that is expected to be the original idea of a postgraduate research student and serves as a core component of the requirements for the award of degree in one’s area of study. Research students’ thesis is therefore a fundamental component of the University life as it is seen as a means to achieving an end (Buttery, Richter and Filho, 2005). Students are therefore expected to complete their thesis within a stipulated duration of time, mostly two years. It a typical feature of the Ghanaian educational system is that; a large proportion of research students spend more years than the curricular prescribe to attain their degrees. This proposition has gained support by scholars as Rennie and Brewer (1987) whose work indicated that students spend more years than programme duration at post graduate level, majorly owing to slow pace of the thesis completion. Due to this, it came as no surprise to Rennie and Brewer (1987) as they saw the occurrence of thesis delay as ‘thesis blocking’. Delayed graduation of research students is becoming a widespread phenomenon and, hence, a topical issue not only in the case of Ghana, but in a growing number of countries, such as the United States of America, Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden and many other European countries (see, among others, Brunello and Winter-Ebmer, 2003; Bowen, Chingos and McPherson, 2009; Hakkinen and Usitalo, 2003; Van Ours and Ridder, 2002). A significant body of research identifies factors that contribute to students delays in thesis completion and graduation as followings;
Thesis Blocking
Experience has shown that students spend more years than programmed at post graduate level majorly owing to slow pace of thesis completion. This occurrence of thesis delays is deemed to be ‘thesis blocking’ by (Rennie and Brewer, 1987). Rennie and Brewer identified lack of a clear and realistic research topic and a perfectionist tendency as major predictive factors contributing to the delay in completing thesis. The completion of thesis issues and those related to postgraduate degree completion had been widely researched (Elgar, 2003; Jiranek, 2010; Myres, 1999; Olorunnisola, 2011). Some of these researchers affirmed that many post graduate students are being faced with attrition owing to challenges in completion of thesis work. Thesis completion delays as a result of students’ skill in research conduct and students’ lack of capacity and preparedness for research and postgraduate study. The post graduate student’s emotional and psychological problems (Zuber- Skerritt, 1987), social and intellectual isolation (Conrad & Phillips, 1995), students’ personal difficulties (e.g. financing, family issues) (Buttery, Richter, and Filho, 2005), sexual harassment and gender issues in supervision (Lee, 1998), and organizational factors (e.g. work space, facilities) all contribute to the delay. Students’ personal challenges that could delay thesis completion include lack of knowledge, frustration, loss of interest, negative feedback and insecurity from the supervisor and lack of dependence related to mastery of research skills.
Morton and Worthley (1995) identified difficulties with balancing between personal and academic lives as a hindering factor in students’ ability to complete their theses. This could result in students’ insufficient research knowledge. For example, the student may have come from a different discipline and have not received sufficient training in research methodology. This implies that to be efficient in the thesis write up, the student will have to spend extra time to learn the basics of research methods as a foundation to be well grounded in the thesis write up. Glatthorn (1998) also stated that towards the end of students’ coursework, they might have considered change of career plans, values or priorities, which could distract them from completing their theses. Myers (1999) study carried out revealed that, most of the participants for the study stated that family or other personal obligations like paid jobs or professional responsibilities took time away from working on their dissertation. Lack of understanding of the thesis writing process was also found by Myers (1999) as a major hindrance in thesis completion. Glatthorn (1998: 211) also suggested that fear arising from the “lack of knowledge and from students’ own insecurity” may hinder thesis completion while Myers (1999) study showed that frustration and/or loss of interest were the biggest barriers to thesis completion. The frustration, negative feedback, difficult relationship with the supervisor, or a change of interest, could easily make a research student lose the initial enthusiasm he or she had for their studies. In some comparative studies, male students were found to complete their thesis faster than their female counterparts and be less likely to discontinue their studies, though some of these effects were small (Green & Powell, 2005). In another study by Seagram, Gould, and Pyke (1998), gender appeared unimportant to the issue of thesis completion. Also, Green and Powell (2005) found out that workload associated with part-time work commitments were also issues that may partially affect delays in thesis completion. Meanwhile, in their study of 3579 postgraduate students working towards a PhD between 1984 and 1993 in the UK, Wright & Cochrane as reported in Green and Powell (2005) considered gender, age, faculty cluster (e.g. Sciences vs Arts), part-time vs full-time study modes, student origin, source of funding, class of first degree, and whether the students were graduates from within the host university as factors in delays of thesis completion. Key findings were that students most likely to submit their thesis within the years were males and those that were studying a science-based subject, had a high grade first degree, held research funding and, interestingly, were international and studying part-time.
2.4.4 Supervision factors
2.4.4.1 Supervisor’s Role in Thesis Completion
To be able to write a thesis well researched, the role of a supervisor in guiding the student is of utmost importance and cannot be overlooked. Lecturers who are skillful in research work are needed as supervisors to guide postgraduate research students to successfully complete their studies. Without effective supervision of postgraduate studies, it will be difficult to produce new knowledge. Each successful graduate applicant will be assigned a supervisor either during the course work period or after the course work is over. Every research student will be assigned at least one supervisor for research at master’s degree level and at least two for PhD studies. Where the supervisors are two, the team will be made up of a principal supervisor and a co-supervisor and each must hold at least a PhD degree or be a senior lecturer (Seidu, 2015).
Lategan (2009) asserts that postgraduate supervision is the active engagement by the supervisor through the research process to guide the student to solve a research problem. She explained that the process of supervision starts with identifying a suitable supervisor who can assist the student to identify the research problem, apply correct methodologies to address the research problem and find appropriate solutions to the stated problem. In some universities, a supervisor is not expected to supervise more than six full time Ph.D. students and six master’s students as a regulation. This measure is put in place in order for the supervisor to have at least sufficient time for the students. Supervisor/supervisee working relationship could result in delays in thesis completion. Unclear motives and purposes of supervision (Wallace, 2003), supervisors’ preference of some supervisory roles over other roles (Vilkinas, 2002) and lack of research training amongst supervisors are mostly identified as major hindrances to thesis completion. Some supervisors are not trained on the newest research methods that could help them in guiding their students in the postgraduate studies which results in their inability to apply and transfer the appropriate skills and research expertise to their supervisees. This could be attributed to either inability of some university management to organize seminars for research development of these supervisors or supervisors’ lack of intrinsic motivation to develop them.
2.4.4.2 Student-Supervisor Relationship and Thesis Completion
The student-supervisor relationship is imperative for successful thesis completion within program duration. Supervisors are assigned to research students in order to give students technical support for writing their theses. Assignment of supervisors is normally based on their competence and their interest in a particular area of study. Where there is no supervisor to be assigned to guide a student in his/her chosen area of research, the student may be required by the awarding the institution to look for a supervisor whose name is forwarded to the Graduate School for consideration (Seidu, 2015). The relationship between a student and a supervisor commences immediately the supervisor is officially assigned to the student. The relationship should be founded on a solid rock of certain principles, rules and regulations in order to successfully complete the thesis work. Seidu (2015) indicated that many graduate students experience delays with their theses majorly owing to poor student-supervisor relationships. The relationship therefore needs to be carefully managed to achieve its objectives. The student should be of good behavior and the supervisor should live a life worth emulating. Research conducted indicated that unclear motives and purposes of supervision, supervisors’ preference of some supervisory roles over other roles in guiding students contribute to the delays in thesis completion (Wallace, 2003; Vilkinas, 2002). The student-supervisor relationship should be built on honesty and hard work. Honesty requires you to be factual, open and transparent in all that the student says and writes. As Seidu (2015) pointed out, the relationship should not just be “to pass your thesis and go away”. He opined that, student-supervisor relationship that travels beyond the end of the thesis, inter alia, often become beneficial in terms of academic progress. Granted that the relationship is positive, it enables the supervisor to assist such student(s) by way of writing a recommendation letter for further studies and guiding in research publication(s) among others.
2.4.4.3 Research postgraduate students’ expectations of their supervisors
Research Postgraduate students’ expectations of their supervisors as outlined by Phillips and Pugh (1994) include the following: students expect to be supervised (they want to feel that they are being adequately supervised); they expect supervisors to read their work well in advance; they expect their supervisors to be available when needed; they expect their supervisors to be friendly, open and supportive; they expect their supervisors to be constructively critical; to have a good knowledge of their research area; to structure tutorials to be relatively easy to exchange ideas, to have sufficient interest in their research to put more information in the students’ path; to be sufficiently involved in their success to help them get a good job at the end of it all”.
Mouton (2001) further advised students on what they should realistically expect of their supervisors. Considering the supervisor as an advisor, the student can expect the supervisor to: discuss with the student the relevant issues of research conduct and ethics, including consequences of misconduct (such as plagiarism), intellectual property, etc.; suggest ways in which you can make the most effective use of your time; make the necessary time available to you for close and regular contact and to structure meetings in the most effective way.
As an expert guide to the student, the supervisor should: assist the student in selecting a thesis topic, guide the student to the relevant literature (without providing a library service to the student), help the student to decide on a theoretical frame of reference for the study, advise the students on the overall goals, objectives and the scope of the project and the eventual development of a research proposal, train the student in the use of specific research methods or refer the student to courses in research methodology where necessary (Myers, 1999).
As a quality controller, the student expects the supervisor to: monitor the progress of the student’s work in accordance with an agreed schedule and provide the student with constructive criticism, discuss the student’s progress, or lack thereof, with the student at regular intervals, comment on the content and draft chapters of the student’s thesis, indicating whether the draft manuscript is of adequate academic quality and endorse that it may be submitted for examination (Gay, 2005).
As a pastor, the student expects the supervisor to: be alert to her or his personal strengths as well as limitations and in particular, to be able to identify situations in which the student may require additional help, be committed to her or his studies throughout the duration, and show interest at all times in what the student is doing and be supportive where necessary (Amehoe, 2013).
2.5 Benefits of Early Thesis Completion and Graduation
Thesis completion has numerous benefits for society and the individual, the effects of which lead to public investment in higher education institutions. At a societal level, benefits of educational attainment include lower crime rates; lower welfare, medical, and prison costs; and a more stable society and government (McMahon, 2009). Baum and Ma (2007: 2) found that “adults with higher levels of education are less likely to depend on social safety-net programs, generating decreased demand on public budgets” (p. 2). Turner (2004: 14) observed that when degree completion rates are low, or graduation is delayed, the production of skilled workers in the economy is reduced which results in lower tax revenue and spending. Failure to move matriculated students through the educational system to degree completion impacts not only the individual, the academic institution but society as a whole in important ways. Individual benefits are intertwined with societal benefits of educational attainment. The most immediate and significant benefit is the wage premium associated with degree completion (McMahon, 2009; Turner, 2004; Baum & Ma, 2007; Bound, Lovenheim, and Turner, 2009). According to McMahon (2009), college graduates are earning 70% more than high school graduates, a number that has increased dramatically since 1970. Not surprisingly, through effective research work, educational attainment is negatively correlated with rates of poverty and unemployment (McMahon 2009; Baum & Ma, 2007). Non-monetary benefits of higher levels of thesis write up include better health of the individual and his or her children; increased longevity; lower infant mortality rates; likelihood of children attending college; happiness (McMahon, 2009); and easier access to more prestigious positions in society (Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005). At an institutional level, graduation rates are often seen as a measure of the success of the institution (Astin, 1996). Low completion/graduation rates negatively impact on public confidence in higher educational institutions and institutional enrollment management and budgetary stability (Braxton, Hirschy, & McClendon, 2004).
A large number of studies have examined the economic returns to education in order to provide evidence on the motivations that drive the individual’s choice of continuing to study, especially after undergraduate studies. According to the rational-behavioural model, people acquire more education only if their lifetime earnings expectations increase (Becker, 1964; Card 1995, 2001; Heckman and Honoré, 1990; Manski, 1990). In fact, it has been proven that people who invest in education, especially in post graduate research studies, have more job opportunities, and thereby a reduced probability of being unemployed, and they earn more during their entire working life than those who have spent less time in education. It appears that human capital influences directly both the profile and the dynamics of the total work career of each individual as well as his/her income profile. At large, more educated people face low probability of being unemployed and at the same time have more chances of facing better labour market conditions from the start. As US data indicate, an additional year of schooling typically raises an individual’s earnings power (Trostel et al., 2002). Thus, a person decides to invest in education because of the greater expected monetary and non-monetary returns. Higher earnings prospects are the most obvious benefit and the consensus estimate is that the return to education is quite substantial as the thesis work contributes immensely to the development of the country Zambia.
2.6 Some useful Student Throughput Models
Throughput is all about making adequate provisions in the academic environment to help students complete their studies on schedule, improve their success rates in the various programmes, and avoid dropout situations. This involves strategies geared towards integrating students, retaining them and making their experience fulfilling on a sustainable basis. The concepts that underpin student integration, retention and departure have been illustrated by scholars in the following models.
2.6.1 Vincent Tinto’s Model of Student Retention
The most commonly referred to model in the student retention or dropout literature is Tinto’s 1975 model, which has as its central point, the notion of “integration”.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2.1: Tinto’s 1975 model of student retention (adapted by Steve Draper)
By this idea, Tinto claims that whether a student persists or drops out depends on the “degree of academic integration and social integration” as indicated in Figure 1 above which is an adapted version of Tinto’s model of student retention.
Issues that come up to be addressed in the area of academic integration include: whether the student feels that he or she is doing well academically or not; whether the student obtains personal development from what he or she is learning or not; whether the student is enjoying what he or she is learning or not; whether the subjects or courses he or she has chosen have any promise for his or her career goals or not; whether or not studying the subject or course is the same as the student expected it to be; and whether the student identifies himself or herself with the academic norms and values of the institution or not (Tinto, 1993).
With regard to social integration, the student is confronted with finding answers to the following issues: his or her ability to make friends or encounter colleagues who are friendly; social belongingness (whether he or she fits into any of the various groups in the institution);level of acceptability accorded the student by his or her academic staff or mentors and whether they make themselves approachable; whether the student is enjoying being a student of the institution or not; whether the student is enjoying the social activities other students engage in or not; whether the student feels comfortable around campus, the department, in lectures, during group discussions or not (Bid, p,40).
What this model teaches is that the degree of academic and social integration which influences a student’s dropout or retention decision is to a large extent determined by (1) an aggregate of attributes that the student comes with into the institutions, namely, his or her previous qualifications (previous level of education attained and in which institution), his or her personal and family attributes (personal conceptions or misconceptions, family status, background of parents and family conditions), and (2) the institutional environmental conditions such as condition of teaching and learning support facilities, financial and funding matters, medical facilities, counseling services, sports facilities, and so many other institutional facilities needed to make life comfortable for academic progress (Yorke, 1999).
2.6.2 Vincent Tinto’s Model of Student Departure
Various dimensions of Tinto’s original concept have evolved over time. As shown in Figure 2 below, Tinto’s 1993 Model of Institutional Departure states that, “to persist, students need integration into formal and informal academic (faculty/staff interactions) academic systems; as well as formal (extracurricular activities) and informal (peer-group interactions) social systems”.
These views which were later simplified and adapted by Mantz Yorke as presented in Figure 2, identifies three major sources of student departure, namely, academic difficulties, the inability of individuals to resolve their educational and occupational goals, and their failure to become or remain incorporated in the intellectual and social life of the institution.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2.2: Tinto’s 1993 model of student departure (simplified and adapted by Mantz Yorke)
From the two models, it can be seen that what Mantz Yorke refers to as ‘academic experiences’ and ‘social experiences’ is not different from Peter Draper’s ‘academic integration’ and ‘social integration’ concepts. Both conditions influence student departure, drop-out or retention decisions.
Tinto (1993) also developed a set of action plans known as the Dimensions of Institutional Action to provide answers to the problems that often lead to either student departure or drop-out if not attended to, or those that result in retention when addressed. The action plan recommends the following three key actions and principles required by institutions to succeed in retaining students and preventing drop-out:
2.6.2.1 Defining dropping out from higher education
This requires institutions to understand that drop-out constitutes both an individual and institutional failure and not only a negative action on the part of the student, and is sometimes a positive response to a situation by the student. Its significance lies in the fact that there is the need for institutions to take into consideration the personal goals and commitments of their students in determining their educational mission (Amhoe, 2013).
2.6.2.2 The principle of effective retention
By this principle, institutions are advised to put more premium on student welfare than institutional goals and let this reflect in their retention programmes which must aim at encouraging the development of an academic environment that is socially and intellectually accommodating to all students (Yorke, 1993).
2.6.2.3 The principle of effective implementation
This relates to actions required of institutions if they wish to realize positive and sustained change. By this principle, effective implementation calls for ensuring the availability of resources and incentives for their teaching and non-teaching staff, recognizing and listening to their external publics in the institutional change process, giving attention to staff development and capacity building, and monitoring and evaluation of institutional policies. Tinto’s (1993) Dimensions of Institutional Action also suggests stages of retention, institutional actions required to improve student retention, and effective student retention programmes, which serve as a guide in formulating policies for higher education institutions.
2.6.3 The Student Development Model (Adapted from Tinto’s model)
Another model derived from Tinto’s original models of student retention is the Student Development Model. According to the UCSC’s 1992 survey on the academic and social climate, the Student Development Model (SDM) shown in Figure 3 below is based on the assumption that student characteristics (e.g. income status) determines his or her educational aspirations or plans. Once in school, the student encounters the realities of the institutional environment based on his or her characteristics and aspirations.
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2.3: Student development model
There is some level of self-evaluation as to whether the student’s plans and aspirations are being met, given the elements (academic work, facilities, attention from lecturers and institution administrators) within the institutional environment as he or she begins to adjust or adapt to prevailing situations. These factors determine whether the student would become more academically integrated than socially integrated into the institution or vice-versa. The extent of integration (i.e. whether socially or academically) determines how satisfied the student would be with his or her academic experience which then informs whether the student would persist (stay on his or studies) or become dissatisfied with the institutional environment and drop out. This explanation does not deviate from the other models already discussed (Tinto, 1993).
In conclusion, Tinto’s theory and models basically point to the fact that when students are admitted into institutions of learning, they go through a process of integration to enable them adjust positively to the new environment in which they find themselves, and that the nature of the integration process may either lead to what he referred to as ‘persistence’ (the adoption of some strategies to survive in the system), or ‘departure’ (exiting the system because of difficulties). It means that when students are positively integrated, they will persist to the end of their programmes (bid).
2.6.4 Jiranek’s Dissertation Research (DR) Completion Triangle
Closely related to Tinto’s Integration Models and adapted versions is Jiranek’s Dissertation Completion Triangle shown in Figure 4 below. Although this model focuses on one key aspect of postgraduate studies - research, it was based on extensive studies to determine completion times, carried out in Australia and UK by Jiranek (2010); Kearns, Gardiner & Marshall (2008); Wright (2003); Wright & Cochrane (2000); Spear (1999) and Martin et al. (1999). The studies revealed a number of factors that influence completion time or candidature duration for research Masters and Doctoral students. Among these factors are the students’ field of study, attendance mode (part-time or full-time), scholarships held, and technical difficulties in the course of research. Jiranek (2010) sums up all the factors identified by these studies into three broad categories, without which the research project may not succeed. These are (1) Student qualities and personal situation (referring to academic ability, financial situation, language skills, interpersonal skills, and persistence versus self-sabotaging behaviors); (2) the nature and quality of supervision (referring to how often student meets with supervisors, and support received from other students and research colleagues); and (3) resources and facilities available to the project (referring to materials, equipment and expertise).
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2.4: Jiranek’s Dissertation Research (DR) Completion Triangle
Source: International Journal of Doctoral Studies, Vol. 5, 2010
The extent of influence of these factors on the individual’s ability to complete the research or otherwise depends on the individual student’s setting or personal characteristics and the interplay of these factors on the individual (Wright, 2003). Figure 4 shows the three broad groups of factors which contribute to timely completion by higher degree research students, with the interrelationship of these factors shown by the arrows.
From the foregoing discussion of throughput models, the main determinants of throughput can be classified as personal or student-related factors and institutional factors, though some models consider supervisory arrangements for the research postgraduate student to be so crucial in the throughput equation to merit special attention. The models show that the degree of students’ academic or social integration, level of satisfaction or dropout/withdrawal decisions are determined by personal factors (students’ prior qualifications, pre-entry requirements, individual attributes, family attributes and personal financial status, goals, intentions and expectations about the institution) and institutional factors (institutional teaching and learning support facilities, institutional environment including institutional supervision arrangements). Another observation about the models is the strong relationship among the various factors and how they impact upon the degree of students’ integration into the academic environment and consequently the decision taken by the student to withdraw or persist (Jiranek, 2010).
2.7 Theoretical Framework
Based on the objectives and research questions posed in this study, the study lends itself to the theory of constraints. Open systems like organizations are expected to perform optimally to achieve their goals, but open systems tend to experience constraints. For example, Universities that have Calendars which are systems tend to experience disruptions or non-adherence to their calendars due to constraints.
Nowadays, companies/Institutions struggle to survive in a global competitive environment. Every company/Institution tries to find the best philosophy which is suitable with their strategy to gain any and every advantage among their rivals. Companies/Institutions should be more focused on understanding their own structure in terms of processes whether they are in the production or service sector. In this situation, Theory of Constraints (TOC) becomes an important theory which focuses on the weakest ring(s) in the chain. TOC views processes as they are rings of the same chain instead of thinking they are independent from each other. At the same time, theory focuses on the weakest points which are bottlenecks for the entire company/Institutions and try to determine the relationship of these bottlenecks. Therefore, this integrated management philosophy changes the way of thinking for both the Structure and Agents, and therefore become an important tool for solving root problems (Blackstone, 2010).
Originally TOC is used to plan the production process and allocate resources but its content is improved day by day as the technology evolves and competition between rival companies increases in business world. Nowadays it can be used as a kind of management philosophy. It is not of importance which sector your company/Institution belongs to because TOC is actually based on system improvement. Since 30 years, TOC is successfully implemented by almost every sector and with almost every size of companies (Bid, p.20).
[...]
- Quote paper
- Boniface Banda (Author), 2021, Factors for Completion or Non-Completion of Studies. Postgraduate Study about the University of Zambia (UNZA), Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1254755
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.