How students ”at risk” experience their educational and professional

career?

Juhani RautopuroFinnish Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä

Vesa KorhonenSchool 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 studiesPersonal and intellectual development (PER)

Humanitarian (HUM)

Expectation driven (EXP)

Careerism (CAR) Default (DEF)

“University will provide a setting for me to develop myself personally.”

“University will be satisfying because it will give me the opportunity to study and learn.”

“University will be a setting that will allow me to improve my intellectual capacity.”

“University allows a possibility for an interesting career

“I often ask myself why I’m going touniversity.”(reverse)

”It is important that my education benefits also other people’s well-being”

“My education should enable me to help people who are less fortunate.”

“I intend to use my education to contribute to the improvement of the human condition.”

“My education helps me to understand the diverseness of life”

“There are considerable pressures on mefrom my friends / family to get a universitydegree.”

“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 practical means for me to achieve personal success.”

“University is a way by which I can achieve a position of higher status in society.”

”University helps me to achieve valued things if life

“I’m going to university basically becausethere are few other options.”

“I basically have no choice but togo to university.”

“I don’t think I’ll get anything out of university, but it beats the alternatives.”

Alpha = 0,76Mean correlation 0,42

Alpha = 0,55Mean correlation 0,22

Alpha = 0,83Mean correlation 0,55

Alpha = 0,78Mean correlation 0,53

Alpha = 0,64Mean correlation 0,36

Results (6): Level of the dimension of the motives

Personal and intellectual development (PER)

Humanitarian (HUM)

Expectation driven (EXP)

Careerism (CAR)

Default (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!)