2012 The EARLI SIG 4 Higher Education Conference

Factors affecting international doctoral students’
academic progress, satisfaction, and dropping out
Yusuke Sakurai, Kirsi Pyhältö & Sari Lindblom-Ylänne
University of Helsinki

Yusuke SAKURAI, Doctoral student, Yusuke.sakurai@helsinki.fi
Centre for Research and Development of Higher Education www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 29.8.2012 1

International doctoral students in
Finland
2500

2000

1500
2,153
1000 2009

500

0
1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Centre for Research and Development of Higher Education www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto 2

Factors contributing to doctoral
students’ study progress
研
究

Advisors Teaching Paper work Family Cultural

Colleagues Facilities Financing Language

Research tasks
 What factors promote international doctoral students’ studies?;

 What factors hinder international doctoral student engagement?

 Which factors are significantly associated with students’
satisfaction with their studies? and ;

 Which factors are significantly associated with their considering
dropping out?

Finnish doctoral education
 Dissertation, coursework, & public defence

 Monograph or article-based dissertation

 6 - 7 years – university recommendation: 4 years

 Work individually, in group or both

 No tuition fees

Instrument
 Online survey (March 2011) -
“Questionnaire on doctoral education and
the implementation of guidelines for
postgraduate degrees at the University of
Helsinki”

 Saari, S. & Moilanen, A.
2012. International Evaluation of Research
and Doctoral Training at the University of
Helsinki 2005–2010. University of
Helsinki, Administrative Publications 81.
http://goo.gl/08ku9

Survey items
 “Name the three most important factors that
have contributed/hindered to the progress of
your postgraduate studies and doctoral
dissertation”.

 “Have you considered withdrawing from
your doctoral studies?”

Survey items
 My studies required for the doctoral degree have supported the research work conducted
for the doctoral dissertation.

 My studies required for the doctoral degree have provided skills for research work.

 My studies required for the doctoral degree have provided skills for other expert
assignments.

 My studies required for the doctoral degree have provided skills necessary on the labour
market outside academia. Satisfaction scale
 My studies required for the doctoral degree have progressed as planned. a =.83
 My studies required for the doctoral degree are of appropriate scope so that full-time
students are able to complete the degree in four years.
1=fully disagree - 5=fully agree
 Please assess the level of your satisfaction with your doctoral education.
1=very dissatisfied - 5=very satisfied

Respondents (1)
 120 students  85 (71%) full-time

 Response rate - 20 %  78 % - age from 25 to 34

62
 No information about students’ nationalities
 (52%) women


Respondents (2)
Faculty Dropping out Satisfactory level
considered not considered M SD
Agriculture and Forestry 6 18 3.64 0.9
Biological and Environmental 4 10 3.43 0.56
Medicine 5 11 3.31 0.59
Science 5 10 3.38 0.95
Social Sciences 6 7 3.26 0.87
Arts 3 6 2.9 0.9
Pharmacy 4 3 3.26 0.8
Law 4 3 2.81 1.51
Behavioural Sciences 1 4 3.63 0.52
Veterinary Medicine 2 1 3.48 0.73
Theology 0 0 - -
Unknown 0 1 3.14 -
Total 40 74 3.35 0.84

Respondents (3)
Dropping out Satisfactory level
considered not considered M SD
Student status Full time 28 52 3.35 0.91
Part time 12 22 3.34 0.67
Gender Women 20 38 3.44 0.81
Men 19 36 3.30 0.84
Science vs. Humanities Science 26 53 3.45 0.76
Humanities 14 20 3.13 0.98


Factors affecting study progress (1)
Themes Subthemes
Scholarly Community Supervision , Academic colleagues, Conferences
Financing, Facilities, Administrative duties, Information,
Departmental issues
Teaching, Structural
Subject Matter Courses, Research activity, Expertise, Writing
Emotional Self-discipline, Motivation, Interest
Cultural Language, Foreignness
Student status, Family, Living condition, Support from
Private Domain
others, Physical condition
Miscellaneous

Factors affecting study progress (2)
Promoting Hindering
Themes f % f %
Scholarly Community 139 41.0 55 19.4
Departmental issues 68 20.1 97 34.2
Subject Matter 55 16.2 53 18.7
Emotional 55 16.2 15 5.3
Cultural 4 1.2 31 10.9
Private Domain 8 2.4 21 7.4
Miscellaneous 10 2.9 12 4.2
Total 339 284

Regression analysis
Independent variables - dummy variables Dependent variables
Supervision Faculty - Arts or not
Colleague Faculty - Medicine or not Satisfactory level
Subject Matter Faculty - Law or not Multiple regression analysis
Cultural Faculty - … or not
Emotional Student status
Departmental Format – monograph or not
Consideration of dropout
Private Domain Format – article-based or not Logistic regression analysis
Gender
Research group - individual
Research group - group

Factors affecting
academic satisfaction
b SE Standardised b 95% CI
Intercept 3.19** 0.14 2.90-3.48
Promoting factor (identified=1, not identified=0)
Supervision 0.33* 0.16 0.19 0.01-0.64
Private domain 0.55† 0.32 0.17 -0.08-1.17
Hindering factor (identified=1, not identified=0)
Supervision -0.34† 0.18 -0.17 -0.69-0.02
Faculty
Arts (1, other faculties=0) -0.48† 0.28 -0.16 -1.04-0.09
Thesis format
Undecided (1, monograph/article-based=0) 0.41* 0.20 0.19 0.01-0.81
**. p<.001; *. p<.05; †. p<.10

Factors affecting 8 monograph
Format undecided
academic satisfaction16 9
83
Science
work individually
Hindering factors in: Humanities 9 .
supervision 0.34 ↓
* 1 10
.
36
Arts students 0.38 ↓
†

Promoting factors in Study satisfaction
0.33 ↑
supervision †

private domain 0.55 ↑ †
Stepwise method (entry:p<.05;
Thesis format – not decided 0.41 ↑ * removal>.10), Adjusted R2 = 13%,
unstandardised b values, *. p<.05; †. p<.10


Factors affecting
consideration of dropout
Coefficient (b) SE Wald Odds Ratio 95% CI p

Intercept -1.60 0.41 15.55
Hindering factor in
Unidentified (0) Reference - - - - -
supervision
Identified (1) 1.43 0.47 9.40 4.16 1.67-10.37 0.00
Hindering factor in
Unidentified (0) Reference - - - - -
departmental issues
Identified (1) 0.92 0.45 4.20 2.51 1.04-6.07 0.04
Forward & backward methods (entry:p<.05; removal>.10), 69% classfication rate


Factors affecting
consideration of dropout
Hindering factors in supervision

4.16 times more likely

Hindering factors in departmental issues

2.51 times more likely
Consideration of
dropout
Forward & backward methods (entry:p<.05; removal>.10), 69% classfication rate,
Supervision: 95% CI =1.67-10.37, p<.01, departmental issues: 95% CI =1.04-6.07, p<.05,


Reflections
 Little association with wider scholarly communities?

 Departmental resources (e.g., financing) & responsibilities
(e.g., paper work & teaching) – need careful monitoring

 Balancing between academic work and private matters


Other reflections
 Methodological limitations


Major results
 41% of “promoting” comments were about scholarly community.
 34% of “hindering” comments were about departmental resources and responsibilities.
 Hindering factors in supervision: 0.34*↓
 Arts students: 0.38†↓
 Promoting factors in supervision: 0.33†↑
 Promoting factors in private domain: 0.55†↑
 Thesis format – not decided: 0.41*↑
 Hindering factors in supervision: x 4.16
 Hindering factors in departmental: x 2.51


Centre for Research and Development of Higher Education www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto

4
International students
Worldwide
3
3,673,925
2009
2

1 Europe
1,672,422
2009
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
OECD. (2011). Education at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators: OECD Publishing.

Background
 Increase of international students

 Attracting more international doctoral
students


Rationale
Engagement construct Learning outcome
Preventing dropout
Meaningful work

Environmental Personal

demands-resources

Content analysis
Promoting Hindering
Themes f % Subthemes (f) f % Subthemes (f)
Scholarly Community 139 41.0 Supervision (69), Academic colleagues 55 19.4 Supervision (34), Academic colleagues
(68),Conference (13) (25),Conference (0)
Departmental 68 20.1 Financing (35), Facilities (30), 97 34.2 Financing (47), Facilities (18),
Administrative duties (0), Information (1), Administrative duties (22), Information (8),
Teaching (3), Structural (2) Teaching (5), Structural (4)

Subject Matter 55 16.2 Courses (16), Research activity (19), 53 18.7 Courses (23), Research activity (16),
Expertise (19), Writing (4) Expertise (12), Writing (2)
Emotional 55 16.2 Self-discipline (24), Motivation (16), 15 5.3 Self-discipline (6), Motivation (7), Interest
Interest (16) (2)
Cultural 4 1.2 Language (2), Foreignness (2) 31 10.9 Language (23), Foreignness (9)
Private Domain 8 2.4 Student status (2), Family (5), Living 21 7.4 Student status (8), Family (5), Living
condition (0), Support from others (1), condition (4), Support from others (0),
Physical condition (0) Physical condition (4)

Miscellaneous 10 2.9 12 4.2
Total 339 284


Factors affecting
academic satisfaction
Correlation
b SE Standardised b 95% CI SATIS P-SV P-PD H-SV HU UD
Intercept 3.19*** 0.14 2.90-3.48 -
Promoting factor (identified=1, not identified=0)
Supervision 0.33* 0.16 0.19 0.01-0.64 .269** -
Private domain 0.55† 0.32 0.17 -0.08-1.17 .166† .142 -
Hindering factor (identified=1, not identified=0)
Supervision -0.34† 0.18 -0.17 -0.69-0.02 -.188† -.084 -.148 -
Faculty
Arts (1, other faculties=0) -0.48† 0.28 -0.16 -1.04-0.09 -.163† -.162† .192* -.090 -
Thesis format
Undecided (1, monograph/article-based=0) 0.41* 0.20 0.19 0.01-0.81 .190† -.036 -.120 -.015 -.138 -
Notes. SATIS=satisfactory level; P-SV=promoting factor in supervision; P-PD=promoting factor in private domain; H-SV=hindering factor in supervision; HU=Faculty of Arts;
UD=Thesis format undecided. ***. p<.001; **. p<.01; *. p<.05; †. p<.10


Analytical procedures
Preliminary analysis Regression analysis
t-test - Satisfactory level
faculties, gender, thesis Multiple regression analysis
Satisfactory level as dependent variable
Content format & student status
analysis
Promoting/hin Chi-square test -
dering factors Consideration of dropout Logistic regression analysis
faculties, gender, thesis Consideration of dropout as dependent
format & student status variable


2012 The EARLI SIG 4 Higher Education Conference

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à 2012 The EARLI SIG 4 Higher Education Conference

Similaire à 2012 The EARLI SIG 4 Higher Education Conference (20)

Plus de Yusuke SAKURAI, PhD

Plus de Yusuke SAKURAI, PhD (14)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

2012 The EARLI SIG 4 Higher Education Conference