Improving an Educational Experience: Improving Educational Opportunities for Working Students - Term Paper Example

Improving an Educational Experience: Improving Educational Opportunities for Working Background Information College students who for some reason are not able to pay for attending school from the combination of personal financial resources and grants are left with only a choice of three options including leaving school, obtaining loans from public or private sources and/or working. Recently, data has shown that students are increasingly opting for student loans and taking up part time jobs as means to ensuring that their education is paid for, in addition to other college related expenses. In the past, more attention and emphasis has been focused on student loans and grants, whereas a significant number of students have taken up jobs which occupy a substantial amount of their time while they are still enrolled at their various institutions of higher learning. Over time, the percentages of working students continue to grow, for instance in the last three decades the rates have risen from 36 percent in 1973 to 48 percent in 2003. The percentages of the full time students who have taken up jobs that require them to work for at least 20hours a week have also increased from 17 percent in 1973 to 30 percent in 2003 (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Attending college is a dream for many individuals, and some of the people get to attend college at the “right” time, which is after high school. However, for others, other life commitments get in the way and they are charged with the responsibilities of raising a family and having to earn a living before they are able to attend college. When time comes for them to enroll, they are charged with managing time and juggling between multiple commitments which include family and work. The benefits that come with obtaining a college degree outweigh the concerns and as such, students strive through to get the education. In the United States, young adults aged between 25 and 34 years earn more than their counterparts who are high school dropouts, while it is common knowledge that over the course of their working life, college graduates make approximately $650, 000 more in comparison to high school graduates. A college degree or diploma could also be a means of offering job security whereby it ay act as a buffer in instances of layoffs. For some other professions, retaining their current jobs requires them to have a college degree as in the case of nurses. Promotion in the workplace cannot be left out when speaking of college degrees, two factors which often go hand in hand in many organizations. Some employers have been known to completely shut off any promotions for persons without college degrees irrespective of their performances, while yet others have taken the ball into their hands by extending tuition assistance programs to assist employees who may be in need of advancing their careers through advancing their education (Aaup.org). Prevalence of Working College Students It may come as a surprise for those individuals who are yet to join the post-secondary world, but the fact remains that a large percentage of students work as they pursue their college degrees. As a matter of fact, more than 78 percent of undergraduate students work while enrolled in college, and this figure does not include the non-traditional students like working adults mentioned earlier. Based on prior research carried out on working students, the following facts were compiled to explain the prevalence of working students: On average, a working student spends up to 30 hour a week working, while at the same time attending their classes. On average, about a quarter of full-time students work full time An estimated one-third of working students portray themselves as workers/employees who study. These individuals are older and often attend college on art-time basis as they continue to hold their jobs Studying employees have a higher tendency of reporting that there exists a connection between their major and their jobs. As such, it can be concluded that they study in a bid to advance their careers Research suggests that working for at most 15 hours a week, preferably on campus or in a field that is closely related to the academic interests of the student could bring about positive results, and also increases the degree of completion. However, only a minute percentage work on campus (9 percent), while only 38 percent have jobs that are related to their majors A whopping 60 percent of all working students, when interviewed, stated that their key reason for taking up jobs was so as to pay for their tuition, fees as well as other living expenses (Nces.ed.gov). According to the CBS Moneywatch (Feb 15, 2013), taking up a job while in college is a big plus for students, despite the fact that most of the students work for longer than recommended. A census carried out in the United States in 2011 was able to determine that 71% of the country’s 19.7 million undergraduate students were working as they studied. Of the number, 20 percent were taking up jobs that occupied 35 hours of their time per week, all year round. Amongst those who took up part time jobs, more than 50 percent of them put in more that 20 hours a week. In terms of location, or state in this matter, the Northeast and the West states experienced lower percentages of full time students, while those with the highest percentages were also in the West, as well as the Mid-Atlantic. The report continues to state that “while many undergrads are nontraditional students, who are probably juggling family, work and school obligations, there are plenty of undergrads who have decided that working full-time and going to school part-time is the best strategy. Some of these students are afraid of taking on any debt so they work to pay for school a class or two at a time. In addition, students who attend college part-time, however, are much more likely to never graduate” (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Either way, however much justification may be attached to working while pursuing college education, and regardless the reasons behind taking up a job, striving to meet the multiple and often conflicting concurrent demands of the various roles including student, parent, employee and many others regularly tends to create elevated levels of anxiety and stress. This could even end up reducing the likelihood of completion of degrees. As such, working students have a lot to contend with and this paper seeks to find ways in which their learning experiences could be improved so as to make their stay in college tolerable, while at the same time allowing them to complete their degrees at the time they are supposed to finish, and with good grades. Improving Educational Opportunities for Working Students Despite the fact that working students have an independent obligation towards their academic responsibilities, it is imperative that the colleges and universities also take it upon themselves the duty of care, and in this way ensure that all students, whether working or not, are successful in their learning. The paper shall look at a number of was in which the learning institutions may come in handy in assisting the students to have a better experience, as they continue working. Determining the Characteristics and Consequences of Employment The institutions of higher learning should make an effort aimed at identifying the most appropriate institutional responses, while the individual campuses should take the initiative of examining the characters and experiences of the working students enrolled at their institutions. The details that should be collected should be designed to include the characteristics of the working students, the kinds of employment in which they are engaged and the reasons that make them work. Research that has been carries out in the past regarding employed students suggests that employment to a large extent varies based on a number of demographic characteristics, financial dependency in particular. This means that in comparison with students who wholly rely on their parents and guardians for financial support, students who happen to be financially dependent have a higher likelihood of seeking employment, and for more hours. Such students also have a tendency of viewing themselves primarily as employees, as opposed to viewing themselves as students who work. From several analyses carried out too, students from all over the nation work different number of hours in a week, in varying locations and for different reason (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Gauging from the information mentioned above, colleges should take it upon themselves to identify the extent to which their students recognize themselves as primarily employees or students. Students make “choices” that are concerned with the extent to which they work while still enrolled at school and if this is not considered by the institutions as they carry out their research, the results of the analyses could be biased. For instance, a negative relationship that exists between educational and employment results could more often that not be construed as reflecting the negative consequences of working for engagement, involvement and integration. However, if endogeneity has not been put into consideration, then the undesirable connection could affect the decision of the student, forcing them to be more committed to the labor market as opposed to college performance, persistence and involvement. As earlier stated, various analyses that have been carried out give the opinion that the persistence of students and the rates of degree completion vary depending on the perception that students have of themselves and their status; primarily students who work, or employees who study. This was clarified by a 1995-1996 research survey dubbed “Beginning Postsecondary Student Survey”, which confirmed that students who view themselves primarily as employees who study are less likely than other students to persist toward completion of an associate’s or bachelor’s degree after taking into account degree aspiration. The research was carried out by Hudson and Hurst (2002), and they were also to make the observation that students who are inclined towards viewing themselves as employees who study have also got other traits that contribute to the decreased rates of persistence and completion of the degree programs. Such issues in their lives could include full time employment while still in school or college, being single parents, lacking a standard high school diploma, or even having a lower parental achievement of education. With this in mind, institutions must be in a position to totally identify the students’ goals and perceptions in a bid to comprehend the reasons behind, and consequences of, working and the suitable responses that the institutions should have in place in response to such employment arrangements. In 2003-2004, almost all working dependent students viewed themselves as students who work, with only a 10 percentage section of them viewing themselves as employees who study. However in contrast to this, the working independent students in the same period of time viewed themselves more as employees who study (56 percent), as opposed to students who work (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). With such information in their systems, institutions of higher are than faced with the urgency to do something that will get their students back into their senses, and encourage them to perceive themselves as students first and as employees secondly. Reducing the Financial Need to Work A perspective of public policy is of the suggestion that one of the main reason why students work is due to the gap that has been created between the costs of enrolling and attending their classes, and the financial aid and other financial resources that are available to them. From an economic perspective, it would be correct to state that the reasons why students work is to reduce the costs of foregone earnings, and this forces them to work while studying to avoid forgoing the earnings. A sociocultural perspective on the other hand would suggest that the reason behind students choosing to work while studying is the fact that their parents and guardians are unwilling to undertake the college expenses, or because both the parents and the students are not willing to go into debt by taking up loans to finance the education of the students. However, despite the perspective behind the prevalence of working students, a large percentage of them report that they work as a means to supporting their college-related expenses (Aarg.org). In a bid to counter this, institutions of higher learning could look into ways of reducing the financial needs of the students to work. This could be done by controlling the costs of attending college, increasing the availability and access to need-based grants for the low and lower middle income students, as well as encouraging responsible borrowing from students (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Controlling the costs of college attendance translate to reducing the loan and work burden borne by students. The decade between 1995/96 and 2005/06 saw a dramatic increase in the costs of attending college in terms of tuition and fees by up to 54 percent at public four-year institutions, 37 percent at private four-year institutions, and 30 percent at public two-year institutions(Hudson & Hurst, 2002). These costs alone would discourage any student from furthering their college education but due to the benefits associated with college education mentioned earlier, students opt for struggling to see themselves attain a college degree, despite the harsh economic surroundings. To counter this though, a number of recommendations were suggested by the Lumina Foundation for education in their publication “Course Corrections: Experts Offer Solutions to the College Cost Crisis”. The recommendations brought forward included outsourcing of any functions that were not central to the mission of the institution of higher learning, establishing a system that allowed for dual enrolment with high schools with the aim of reducing the amount of time that students took in completing their degree programs, allowing credit for the programs that are conducted by student services, as well as making use of technology to redesign the delivery of courses to students. In reducing college costs, the problem of the financial student’s need to work will be reduced significantly (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Maximizing grants for low and lower-middle income students, as stated could drastically reduce the financial based need of students to work. From various studies carried out, practically all full time and full year dependent students from the mentioned financial backgrounds were in some form of financial need in comparison with their counterparts from the upper middle and upper income backgrounds whose financial needs were more minimal. However, those related to the ability or lack of it to pay for the more crucial needs like tuition fees were more prevalent amongst those from the low and middle lower income backgrounds. In this regard, it is crucial that institutions devote considerable resources aimed at reducing the loan and work burden off low income students. Princeton University for instance, has over the past few years gradually increased availability of need-based grants to low- and lower-middle-income students. Beginning fall of 198, the university has been able to meet 100 percent of its financial requirements without the need for loans but by using grants, work-study and scholarship programs for the students whose family income fall below $40, 000. On the same breath, students whose family incomes fall within the range of $40, 000 and $57, 000 have had their loan amounts reduced by the university. In the same year, Princeton abolished home equity as a consideration in the analysis for financial needs for students whose family incomes fell below $90, 000. The 2001 fall saw another milestone in the efforts of the university to aid the students when 100 percent of all financial aid to the undergraduate students were financed by means other than loans. Since the steps were implemented, the university has reported an increase in the share of students receiving loans from 38 percent in 1998 to 52 percent in 2005 (Princeton, 2005). Princeton University is just one of the few institutions offering the generous aid packages alongside other public universities including the University of North Carolina, the University of Virginia and the University of Maryland. However, as much as the effects of such initiatives by the learning institutions on the decisions to seek or not to seek employment have not been evaluated, their effect cannot be underestimated. It would also be crucial to note that the cost of need based grants are high and as such, the programs may not cover a large number of students as they may wish. Nonetheless, meeting 100 percent of financial needs as well as providing students with 10-15 hour weekly work-study jobs are steps that are surly likely to lift off the burden of students, and therefore reduce the financial pressures to work excessive numbers of hours off campus and promote the most beneficial type and amount of employment (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Encouraging students to borrow wisely is the third strategy that the universities could apply in a bid to reduce the financial need to work for the students. For most of the students, some amount of borrowing is crucial for financing costs of education. A study carried out by King (2002) dubbed Beginning Postsecondary Student survey established that the financing strategies most used by students comprised of two components: working between 1and 14 hours per week and borrowing. However, in 1995-1996, only a meager 6 percent chose this financing strategy, while a whooping 45 percent chose the strategy with the lowest persistence rates, being ‘no borrowing and working at least 15 hours per week’. In this regard therefore, it is imperative that institutions of higher learning get to enhance the educational experiences of their students by offering guidance and counseling services touching on the ranges of available options available for financing their education. In addition to this, the costs, benefits as well as the consequences of using the various ranges available should be clearly communicated to the students to enable them make sound and informed decisions. This kind of service could be offered as part of the orientation program or first-year experience programs. It is crucial to note that a strategy that encourages borrowing as a means f accessing finance should recognize the potential dangers and risks that borrowing presents, especially for those students that may drop out of college, and therefore care should be taken while addressing this issue (Lerne, 2006). According to King (2002), approximately 20 percent of those students who had enrolled in post secondary institution in 1995/96 had already dropped out by 2001. The risk associated with borrowing for students who drop out of college is that they are less likely to get employment, and as such, they get to default on their loans. Gladieux & Perna (2005) states that borrowing is likely to cause negative long term financial outcomes for those who do not complete their degree programs. However, failure to borrow could also push students to delay in enrolling for higher education upon completion of their high school education, enroll for part time college, or resort to working full time while in college. All these options are well known risk factors that contribute to dropping out of college. As such, the strategy of wise borrowing decisions should be inculcated in students to curb the consequences. Despite all the efforts put at reducing the financial needs of students to work, some portion of students will not give up their employment for full time study. This justifies the concept of improving the quality of students’ employment experiences. This is justified by the sociocultural perspective which suggests that a portion of working students do so as a means of financing their life style choices. This perspective is supported by the finding that more than 65 percent of dependent students with family incomes of more than $100, 000 still work while enrolled in school. As such, it would be entirely impossible to eradicate the issue of working students, and universities and colleges should therefore come up with ways to expand on-campus employment opportunities and support increases in the Federal Work-Study program. In this way, the greatest negative consequences associated with working students of persistence and time-to-degree are reduced by encouraging no more than 15 hours per week of work off campus. Owing to the fact that more than 85 percent of working dependent undergraduate students, and that more than 90 percent of the working independent undergraduate students hold non-work study jobs, it is crucial that institutions develop mechanisms aimed at supporting increased federal funding for work-study employment (Perna, Cooper & Li, 2006). Work-study programs need to be extended with a view of compensating students at a wage rate that is higher than the minimum federal wage, as well as to allow inclusion of an increased number of students into the system. St. John (2003), in his review carried out in the 1980s and 1990s, he was able to establish that if applied in the form of a work-study program, it was negatively related to persistence. In conclusion, he stated that the negative relationship existing between persistence and work-study is a suggestion that either the wages are too low to enable a student to pay the costs of attendance and/or the hours worked by work-study students are too high. The 2003-04 saw a majority of the working dependent and independent undergraduate students holding work-study jobs holding non-work-study jobs simultaneously. This is a suggestion that of the financial inadequacy of work-study employment, which needs to be improved. References American Association of University Professors. Understanding the Working College Student. Retrieved on 23rd April 2014 from http://www.aaup.org/article/understanding-working-college-student#.U1adRKKPAwo Gladieux, L., & Perna, L. (2005). Borrowers Who Drop Out: A Neglected Aspect of the College Student Loan Trend. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Hudson, L., & Hurst, D. (2002). The Persistence of Employees Who Pursue Postsecondary Study. NCES 2002-188. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics King, J. E. (2002). Crucial choices: How Students’ Financial Decisions Affect Their Academic O’Shaughnnessy, L. (2013). More Students Working (a lot) in College. CBS Money-watch. February 5, 2013 Perna, L.W., Cooper, M.A. & Li, C. (2006). Improving Educational Opportunities for College Students who Work. Retrieved on 23rd April 2014 from http://www.indiana.edu/~ipas1/documents/Perna%20Improving%20Educational%20Opportunities.pdf Princeton University. (2005). Undergraduate financial aid. Princeton, NJ: Author. Retrieved 23rd April 2014, from www.princeton.edu St. John, E. P. (2003). Refinancing the College Dream: Access, Equal Opportunity, And Justice for Taxpayers. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Success. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (2011). The Condition of Education, 2011 (NCES 2011-033), Indicator 17 http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77 Read More