The learning experience and satisfaction of management students in a
diverse learning environment:
A Cross Campus Study at the University of Toronto
Dr. Liang Hsuan ChenThis research project is sponsored by CSS @ OISE/UT
© Dr. Liang Hsuan Chen, [email protected]
Agenda• Background of This Study• Purpose of the Study• Research Findings
Student Background Student Choice Student Preparedness and Interaction Course Delivery and Learning Preference Learning Experience, Outcomes, and Expectations Satisfaction
• Conclusion
Background of This Study• This research was sponsored by the Centre for the Study of
Students in Postsecondary Education (CSS at OISE/UT).
• The proposal to study student choice , learning experience, and the level of satisfaction of undergraduate commerce/ management students at 3 UT campuses was accepted and the research was conducted between February and May of 2009 at UTSC, UTM and UTSG.
Purpose of the Study
• The purpose of the study was to: Identify factors influencing student choice of an institution
and a commerce/management program
Understand student learning preferences, interaction with people, self-assessed learning experiences, outcomes, and expectations, and level of satisfaction
Better inform faculty, staff, and administrators of student learning experiences and level of satisfaction
Research Findings Student Background
UTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int'l Total %Male 34 132 55 171 50 221 35%Female 92 233 91 301 115 416 65%Total 126 365 146 472 165 637 100%% 20% 57% 23% 74% 26% 100%
N % N % N %Caucasian 73 15% 9 5% 82 13%Black (North American) 2 0% 0 0% 2 0%Black (African) 7 1% 3 2% 10 2%Latin/S American 8 2% 3 2% 11 2%East Asian* 241 51% 126 77% 367 58%South Asian 100 21% 15 9% 115 18%South East Asian 11 2% 5 3% 16 3%Other 30 6% 3 2% 33 5%Total 472 100% 164 100% 636 100%*International Students: Majority were from China (59%).
Dom Int'l TotalEthnicity
N %1st Yr 193 30%2nd Yr 184 29%3rd Yr 141 22%4th Yr 119 19%Total 637 100%
Student BackgroundHousehold Annual Income
UTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int Total %$150,000 + 4% 2% 14% 4% 6% 26 5%$100,000 – $149,999 17% 15% 19% 17% 14% 85 16%$75,000 – $99,999 17% 13% 17% 15% 14% 76 14%$50,000 – $74,999 31% 25% 20% 26% 24% 133 25%$20,000 – $49,999 25% 37% 25% 32% 32% 169 32%$20,000 – 7% 8% 6% 6% 9% 38 7%Total 102 316 109 388 139 527 100%
Parents Owned a BusinessNo 47.1% 49.1% 43.4% 48.1% 45.6% 289 47.5%Yes 52.9% 50.9% 56.6% 51.9% 54.4% 320 52.5%Total 121 352 136 451 158 609 609
Student Study/Work PatternOverall Pattern
No workWork On Campus
Work Off Campus
Work On+Off Campus
Total
258 19 102 28 40763% 5% 25% 7% 100%
Time Spent on Academic ActivitiesUTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int Total %
< 5 hrs 1% 4% 6% 4% 4% 19 4%6-10 hrs 30% 30% 29% 28% 36% 159 30%11-20 hrs 44% 42% 47% 46% 38% 231 44%21-30 hrs 24% 21% 14% 20% 19% 106 20%> 30 hrs 1% 3% 4% 3% 4% 15 3%Total 102 310 118 393 137 530 100%
Student Study/Work PatternTime Spent on Work - Off Campus
UTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int Total %
0 hr 56% 67% 64% 57.4% 83.2% 339 64%1-10 hrs 20% 16% 20% 20.4% 9.8% 92 17%11-20 hrs 16% 13% 11% 16.2% 5.6% 70 13%21-30 hrs 7% 3% 4% 5.0% 1.4% 21 4%> 30 hrs 0% 1% 1% 1.0% .0% 4 1%Total 98 303 125 383 1.43 526
Time Spent on Work - On Campus0 hr 66.7% 80.3% 86.1% 76.4% 86.0% 465 78.9%1-10 hrs 20.5% 11.6% 8.0% 14.1% 8.3% 74 12.6%11-20 hrs 7.7% 6.0% 5.1% 6.7% 4.5% 36 6.1%21-30 hrs 4.3% 2.1% .7% 2.8% .6% 13 2.2%> 30 hrs .9% .0% .0% .0% .6% 1 .2%Total 117 335 137 432 157 589
Student ChoiceMy Program is my 1st Choice
UTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int Total %No 21.6% 23.8% 13.0% 21.9% 18.2% 133 20.9%Yes 78.4% 76.2% 87.0% 78.1% 81.8% 503 79.1%Total 125 365 146 471 165 636 100.0%
My University is My 1st ChoiceUTM UTSC UTSG Dom Int Total %
No 27% 23% 26% 24.3% 25.6% 125 25%Yes 73% 77% 74% 75.7% 74.4% 383 75%Total 104 290 114 379 129 508 100%
Student ChoiceName of the 1st Choice Program UTM UTSC UTSG Total Name of the 1st Choice University UTM UTSC UTSG TotalBBA Co-op 0 20 1 21 York Schulich 3 20 12 35AFM Waterloo 5 9 1 15 University of Waterloo 7 17 4 28Commerce 5 10 0 15 Queen's University 3 8 6 17BBA Schulich 0 8 4 12 UT Rotman Commerce 2 9 0 11BComm UT Rotman 2 7 0 9 UBC 2 2 1 5BBA 0 4 1 5 McMaster University 3 2 0 5iBBA 0 1 4 5 Wilfred Laurier University 0 4 0 4HBA Ivey 1 1 2 4 McGill University 1 3 0 4BComm Queen's 1 1 1 3 University of Western Ontario 2 1 1 4BBA Laurier 1 1 0 2 Harvard University 0 2 0 2Management 0 2 0 2 Ryerson University 0 1 1 2Mangment and Comp Science 0 2 0 2 Carleton University 0 1 0 1Biotech CA @ Waterloo 0 1 0 1 LSE 0 0 3 3Economics 0 1 0 1 Cornell University 0 0 1 1HR 1 0 0 1 Memorial Univ of Newfoundland 0 0 1 1Mathematics/Accounting 0 1 0 1 National University of Singapore 0 0 1 1Other 7 14 3 24 University of Wisconsin at Madison 0 0 1 1Total 23 83 17 123 National Taiwan University 1 0 0 1Within Total Surveyed (637) 4% 13% 3% 19% York Glendon 1 0 0 1Within Institutions (126, 364, 147) 18% 23% 12% Total 25 70 32 127
Within Total Surveyed (637) 4% 11% 5% 20%Within Institutions (126, 364, 147) 20% 19% 22%
Factors Influencing Choice1. Personal decision (4.38/5 in the Likert scale)
2. Female and International students are more likely to be influenced by their parents than male and domestic students.
3. Choice of Institution: Reputation and quality of the university (4.48/5)
Management degree from UT improves career and job prospects (4.38/5)
Reputation and quality of the program (4.31/5)
Program characteristics (e.g. co-op) and campus location (3.75 & 3.68)
4. Choice of Field:1. Personal interest in the field
2. Economic factors (e.g. lucrative job, prestige and/or social status)
3. Significant others (e.g. professors, and parents)
Student Preparedness & Interaction• Students in general reported that they were academically and
emotionally prepared for university learning, but less prepared for time management, work habits and study skills.
• Students reported that: Their professors are available and responsive to the class. They prefer to work with students who are from the same
cultural/ethnic background. They prefer to work with students who have better or equal
academic abilities to their own.
Student Learning Preferences1. Attending a class where the professor’s teaching style matches
my learning style (4.32/5)
2. Independent Learning: Learn best by studying and practicing by myself (4.19/5) Learn best by summarizing major points and information from class notes/readings,
and taking detailed notes during class (3.78/5).
3. Interactive Learning: Learn best by explaining material to someone else (3.80/5) Other interactive learning (e.g. class discussion, group project, presentation) were
ranked low (2.95 ~ 3.15)
4. Group Learning – studying and discussing in a group (3.28)
5. On-line Learning – on-line lecture & exercises (3.14~3.26) (UTSC)
Findings are different from some previous studies on “Millennial learners.”
Course Delivery• Students strongly agreed that:
Their professors know their subject matter well and use good teaching techniques.
They like the content and material that they were learning. Their program offers various learning modes.
• However, they ranked low on “My professors understand my learning challenges.”
Learning Experience (comments)• Students were satisfied and had good overall learning
experiences.
• Academic Related Issues: UTM: limited course selection/availability, professor UTSC: courses were seen with high level of difficulty, pre-program
issues, professor UTSG: course content and delivery
• Administrative Issues: Common to 3 campuses: limited study space Course Enrolment, Career Centre Services
• Social Related Issues – very positive experience
Learning Outcomes
1. Critical Thinking/Problem Solving (4.00/5)
2. Core Knowledge in Subject Areas: (3.55~3.82)
Business/Strategy > Communications > Finance > OBHR
3. Generic Skills: (3.30~3.63)
Social Networking > Self-confidence > Time Management > Writing > Leadership > Presentation
ExpectationsStudents agreed that:
They would continue with their program of study. They would recommend their program to others. They expect to achieve their educational goals this year.
However, they ranked slightly lower (3.35/5): “My program of study meets my expectation.”
Satisfaction• Knowledge & Education:
Students ranked fairly high (3.82/5): the amount of knowledge gained in the past year and quality of education.
• Administration: Students ranked lower: the course registration process,
support from academic services, help from university administrators and staff. (3.26~3.37)
The availability of study space was ranked the lowest (2.94/5).
Future Plans• Find employment and work in Canada (4.25/5)
• Pursue a professional designation (4.07/5)
• Work abroad (3.77/5)
• Obtain an MBA (3.75/5)
• Attend a graduate program (other than MBA) (3.21/5)
ConclusionKey messages from the study:1. Student choice has an impact on learning experience:
Students who were not particularly interested in quantitative courses may find the UT programs a poor fit.
Students who reported that UT was not their first choice of university were less satisfied, and had lower self-reported knowledge and skills gained.
2. Program expectations should be made clear to high school students; marketing materials should reflect program strength.
3. A review of course offerings/availability should be conducted.
4. The level of integration of international students with domestic students is still less than desirable.
5. Students reported that they learned best by attending classes with a match between the professor’s teaching style and their learning style: We need more awareness of who our students are and their learning challenges.
6. “Millennial Learners” – Hype or Reality?
