Integrating narratives of working students into higher education curriculum: Equalizer for the socio-economically challenged
Vol 8, Issue 2, 2023, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 666 (Abstract) 445 (PDF)
Abstract
Background: Socioeconomically challenged students are the prospective source of relevant development in higher education to actualize an inclusive education. Their situation shapes their individual skills which are integral, especially in learning and subsequently becoming contributors to national development as they become productive members of the community instead of becoming a part of the attrition or unemployment statistics. Objectives: This study analyzes the narratives of working students, particularly self-management practices, specific academic arrangements, and curriculum features that can be integrated into the higher education curriculum. Methods: Four (4) working students, four (4) professionals who were working students in their college years, and four (4) curriculum designers were interviewed to shed valuable narratives and information for the intent of this research. Results: The current and former working students were in unison in saying that they needed more priority in the guidelines of educational engagements because they are already economically disadvantaged and do not have the fluidity of time. Narratives reflect the opportunities for higher education to integrate new forms of learning that are inclusive to those socioeconomically challenged. Conclusion: Curriculum designers recommend that working students are already tailored to succeed because of their ability to manage resources but would be able to self-manage in reducing retention or longer time elapses in their stay in college if the curriculum and policies in the schools were flexible and lenient to their state.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Only half of working students finish college: CHED. Available online: https://news.abs-cbn.com/lifestyle/youth/06/13/10/only-half-working-students-finish-college-ched (accessed on 14 July 2023).
2. Summary inflation report consumer price index (2018=100): December 2022. Available online: https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/survey/price/summary-inflation-report-consumer-price-index-2018100-december-2022#:~:text=The%20Philippines'%20average%20inflation%20rate,inflation%20rate%20of%203.9%20percent (accessed on 14 July 2023).
3. Stefani L. Planning teaching and learning: Curriculum design and development. In: A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 3rd ed. Routledge; 2008. pp. 58–75.
4. McKimm J, Jones PK. Twelve tips for applying change models to curriculum design, development and delivery. Medical Teacher 2018; 40(5): 520–526. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1391377
5. Sayaf AM, Alamri MM, Alqahtani MA, Al-Rahmi WM. Information and communications technology used in higher education: An empirical study on digital learning as sustainability. Sustainability 2021; 13(13): 7074. doi: 10.3390/su13137074
6. Sousa MJ, Marôco AL, Gonçalves SP, de Bem Machado A. Digital learning is an educational format towards sustainable education. Sustainability 2022; 14(3): 1140. doi: 10.3390/su14031140
7. Agrawal R, Wankhede VA, Nair RS. Analysis of drivers of digital learning in COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 scenario using an ISM approach. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series B 2021; 102: 1143–1155. doi: 10.1007/s40031-020-00528-8
8. Amadi WA, Du Plessis M, Solomon S. Will working students flourish or give up? Exploring the influence of academic psychological capital, grit, and time management. South African Journal of Higher Education 2022; 36(6): 192–209. doi: 10.20853/36-6-4486
9. Taylor A. ‘Being there’: Rhythmic diversity and working students. Journal of Education and Work 2022; 35(5): 572–584. doi: 10.1080/13639080.2022.2092607
10. Lefebvre H. Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Everyday Life. Bloomsbury Academic; 2013.
11. Miller K, Danner F, Staten R. Relationship of work hours with selected health behaviors and academic progress among a college student cohort. Journal of American College Health 2008; 56(6): 675–679. doi: 10.3200/JACH.56.6.675-679
12. Faizuddin A. The experiences of working while studying: A case study of postgraduate students at International Islamic University Malaysia. Islamic University Malaysia; 2017.
13. Saunders MNK. Choosing research participants. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/3821166/Choosing_research_participants (accessed on 17 July 2023).
14. Singh K. Quantitative Social Research Methods. SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd; 2007.
15. Bernard HR. Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 6th ed. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; 2002.
16. Hall R. The work-study relationship: Experiences of full-time university students under-taking part-time employment. Journal of Education and Work 2010; 23(5): 439–449. doi: 10.1080/13639080.2010.515969
17. Scott-Clayton J. What explains trends in labor supply among U.S. undergraduates? National Tax Journal 2012; 65(1): 181–210. doi: 10.17310/ntj.2012.1.07
18. Kiger ME, Varpio L. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE guide No. 131. Medical Teacher 2020; 42(8): 846–854. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030
19. Crede M, Kuncel NR. Study habits, skills, and attitudes: The third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2008; 3(6): 425–453. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00089.x
20. Rytkonen H, Parpala A, Lindblom-Ylanne S, et al. Factors affecting bioscience students’ academic achievement. Instructional Science 2012; 40: 241–256. doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9176-3
21. Wolters CA, Brady AC. College students’ time management: A self-regulated learning perspective. Educational Psychology Review 2020; 33: 1–33. doi: 10.1007/s10648-020-09519-z
22. Chuderski A. Time pressure prevents relational learning. Learning and Individual Differences 2016; 49: 361–365. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.07.006
23. Roskes M, Elliot AJ, Nijstad BA, De Dreu CK. Time pressure undermines performance more under avoidance than approach motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2013; 39: 803–813. doi: 10.1177/0146167213482984
24. Remenick L, Bergman M. Support for working students: Considerations for higher education institutions. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education 2021; 69(1): 34–35. doi: 10.1080/07377363.2020.1777381
25. Triventi M. Does working during higher education affect students’ academic progression? Economics of Education Review 2014; 41: 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.03.006
26. Teixeira L, Lowden A, da Luz AA, et al. Sleep patterns and sleepiness of working college students. Work 2012; 41: 5550–5552. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0879-5550
27. Grozev VH, Easterbrook MJ. Accessing the phenomenon of incompatibility in working students’ experience of university life. Tertiary Education and Management 2022; 28(3): 241–264. doi: 10.1007/s11233-022-09096-6
28. Robotham D. Student part-time employment: Characteristics and consequences. Education + Training 2012; 54(1): 65–75. doi: 10.1108/00400911211198904
29. Holmes V. Working to live: Why university students balance full-time study and employment. Education + Training 2008; 50(4): 305–314. doi: 10.1108/00400910810880542
30. Farruggia SP, Han CW, Watson L, et al. Noncognitive factors and college student success. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 2018; 20(3): 308–327. doi: 10.1177/1521025116666539
31. Aeon B, Aguinis H. It’s about time: New perspectives and insights on time management. Academy of Management Perspectives 2017; 31: 309–330. doi: 10.5465/amp.2016.0166
32. Britton BK, Glynn SM. Mental management and creativity: A cognitive model of time management for intellectual productivity. In: Glover JA, Ronning RR, Reynolds CR (editors). Handbook of Creativity. Springer; 1989. pp. 429–440.
33. Burt CD, Weststrate A, Brown C, Champion F. Development of the time management environment (TiME) scale. Journal of Managerial Psychology 2010; 25(6): 649–668. doi: 10.1108/02683941011056978
34. van Eerde W. Time management and procrastination. In: The Psychology of Planning in Organizations: Research and Applications. Routledge; 2015. pp. 312–333.
35. Sansgiry SS, Monali B, Kavita S. Factors that affect academic performance among pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2006; 70(5): 104. doi: 10.5688/aj7005104
36. Claessens BJC, van Eerde W, Rutte CG, Roe RA. A review of the time management literature. Personnel Review 2007; 36(2): 255–276. doi: 10.1108/00483480710726136
37. Strunk KK, Cho Y, Steele MR, et al. Development and validation of a 2 × 2 model of time-related academic behavior: procrastination and timely engagement. Learning and Individual Differences 2013; 25: 35–44. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.02.007
38. Nunez AM, Sansone VA. Earning and learning: Exploring the meaning of work in the experiences of first-generation Latino college students. The Review of Higher Education 2016; 40(1): 91–116. doi: 10.1353/rhe.2016.0039
39. Sacova M. Campus Employment as a High Impact Practice: Relationship to Academic Success and Persistence of First-Generation College Students. Colorado State University ProQuest Dissertations Publishing; 2016.
40. Mutya RC, Geverola IJR, Cano Jr AC, et al. Coping with uncertainties: Unveiling the lived experiences of working students in the new normal. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science-Social Sciences 2022; 12(1): 112–129. doi: 10.46223/HCMCOUJS.soci.en.12.1.2264.2022
41. Wahome TJ. Who Cares? Student Perceptions of Factors that Promote Resiliency in High School. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2003.
42. Mostafa H, Lim Y. Examining the relationship between motivations and resilience in different international student groups attending US universities. Journal of International Students 2020; 10(2): 306–319. doi: 10.32674/jis.v10i2.603
43. Bunn M, Bennett A, Burke PJ. In the anytime: Flexible time structures, student experience and temporal equity in higher education. Time & Society 2018; 28(4): 1409–1428. doi: 10.1177/0961463X18787649
44. Rubin M, Wright CL. Age differences explain social class differences in students’ friendship at university: Implications for transition and retention. Higher Education 2015; 70: 427–439. doi: 10.1007/s10734-014-9844-8
45. Bergman M, Gross JPK, Berry M, et al. If life happened but a degree didn’t: Examining factors that impact adult student persistence. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education 2014; 62(2): 90–101. doi: 10.1080/07377363.2014.915445
46. Pintrich PR. Understanding self-regulated learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 1995; 1995(63): 3–12. doi: 10.1002/tl.37219956304
47. Afandi IN, Ismail NS, Asdalifa. Role conflict on working students. In: Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Conference of Psychology, Health, and Social Science (ICPHS 2021); Atlantis Press SARL; 2022. pp. 145–150.
48. Baltes BB, Heydens-Gahir HA. Reduction of work-family conflict through the use of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology 2003; 88(6): 1005. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1005
49. Clinton ME, Conway N, Sturges J, et al. Self-control during daily work activities and work-to-nonwork conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior 2020; 118: 103410. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103410
50. Gilardi S, Guglielmetti C. University life of non-traditional students: Engagement styles and impact on attrition. The Journal of Higher Education 2016; 82(1): 33–53. doi: 10.1080/00221546.2011.11779084
51. Lang KB. The similarities and differences between working and non-working students at a mid-sized American public university. College Student Journal 2012; 46(2): 243–255.
52. Perna LW (editor). Understanding the Working College Student: New Research and Its Implications for Policy and Practice. Stylus Publishing, LLC; 2023.
53. Garcia-Melgar A, East J, Meyers N. Peer assisted academic support: A comparison of mentors’ and mentees’ experiences of a drop-in programme. Journal of Further and Higher Education 2021; 45(9): 1163–1176. doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2020.1851665
54. Bradley VM. Learning management system (LMS) use with online instruction. International Journal of Technology in Education 2021; 4(1): 68–92. doi: 10.46328/ijte.36
55. Goncalves SA, Trunk D. Obstacles to success for the nontraditional student in higher education. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research 2014; 19(4): 164–171. doi: 10. 24839/2164-8204.JN19.4.164
56. Fairchild EE. Multiple roles of adult learners. New Directions for Student Services 2003; 2003(102): 11–16. doi: 10.1002/ss.84
57. Luthans BC, Luthans KW, Jensen SM. The impact of business school students’ psychological capital on academic performance. Journal of Education for Business 2012; 87(5): 253–259. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2011.609844
58. Luthans F, Youssef-Morgan CM. Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 2017; 4: 339–366. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113324
59. Datu JAD. Flourishing is associated with higher academic achievement and engagement in Filipino undergraduate and high school students. Journal of Happiness Studies 2018; 19(1): 27–39. doi: 10.1007/s10902-016-9805-2
60. Datu JAD, Valdez JPM. Psychological capital predicts academic engagement and well-being in Filipino high school students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 2016; 25: 399–405. doi: 10.1007/s40299-015-0254-1
61. Krishna S, Pelachaud C, Kappas A. Towards an adaptive regulation scaffolding through role-based strategies. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents; 2–5 July 2019; Paris, France. pp. 264–267.
62. Poitras E, Mayne Z, Huang LY, et al. Scaffolding student teachers’ information-seeking behaviours with a network-based tutoring system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2019; 35(6): 731–746. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12380
63. Siadaty M, Gašević D, Hatala M. Associations between technological scaffolding and micro-level processes of self-regulated learning: A workplace study. Computers in Human Behavior 2016; 55(Part B): 1007–1019. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.035
64. Kasworm C. Adult workers as undergraduate students. In:Perna LW (editor). Understanding the Working College Student: New Research and Its Implications for Policy and Practice. Routledge; 2010. pp. 49–70.
65. Quiggins A, Ulmer J, Hainline MS, et al. Motivations and barriers of undergraduate nontraditional students in the college of agricultural sciences and natural resources at Texas Tech University. NACTA Journal 2016; 60(3): 272–281.
66. McKimm J. Curriculum design and development. Medical Education 2007; 1–32.
67. Curriculum design, development and models: Planning for student learning. Available online: https://oer.pressbooks.pub/curriculumessentials/chapter/curriculum-design-development-and-models-planning-for-student-learning-there-is-always-a-need-for-newly-formulated-curriculum-models-that-address-contemporary-circumstance-an/ (accessed on 17 July 2023).
68. Cleveland-Innes M, Emes C. Principles of learner-centered curriculum: Responding to the call for change in higher education. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education 2005; 35(4): 85–110.
69. Claudia E, Cleveland-Innes M. A journey toward learner-centered curriculum. Canadian Journal of Higher Education 2003; 33(3): 47–69. doi: 10.47678/CJHE.V33I3.183440
70. Sezer B, Karaoğlan Yılmaz FG, Yılmaz R. Integrating technology into classroom: The learner centered instructional design. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications 2013; 4(4): 12.
71. Chavez J, Lamorinas DD. Reconfiguring assessment practices and strategies in online education during the pandemic. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education 2023; 10(1): 160–174. doi: 10.21449/ijate.1094589
72. Chavez JV. Academic and health insecurities of indigent students during pandemic: Study on adaptive strategies under learning constraints. Journal of Multidisciplinary in Social Sciences 2020; 16(3): 74–81.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v8i2.1736
(666 Abstract Views, 445 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Coline C. Ceneciro
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/