Educational Part 4: Procedures, Approaches, And Assignments
Educpart 4 Procedures Approaches Assignment Instructionstopicafford
Educpart 4 Procedures Approaches Assignment Instructions Topic: Affordability of Higher Education Submit a well-developed draft of the Procedures Approaches Two and Three of the prospectus. Include a title page and add the two approaches (focus group and survey). A focus group requires a minimum of 10 questions. A survey requires a minimum of 3 demographic questions and 10 survey questions of similar type. The draft will be a minimum of 7 full pages. The submission must include at least 4 additional unique sources/citations, which are also properly listed on a reference page using proper APA format.
Paper For Above instruction
Introduction
The affordability of higher education remains a critical concern for policymakers, students, families, and educational institutions. Addressing this issue requires comprehensive research approaches that elicit diverse perspectives and quantifiable data. This paper develops Procedures Approaches Two and Three for a research prospectus focused on investigating the factors influencing higher education affordability, utilizing focus groups and surveys to gather relevant insights. These approaches will provide qualitative and quantitative data necessary to understand the limitations and potential solutions related to the financial accessibility of higher education.
Approach Two: Focus Group
The focus group method involves guided discussions among selected participants to glean nuanced perceptions related to higher education costs and affordability. The focus group will consist of 10-12 participants, selected from diverse demographics, including students, parents, educators, and policymakers. The discussion will be facilitated by a trained moderator to ensure an open and equal participation environment and will last approximately 1 to 1.5 hours.
The primary goal of the focus group is to explore participants' attitudes, beliefs, and personal experiences regarding higher education expenses, perceived barriers to affordability, and potential policy interventions. The data collection will include a set of 10 carefully constructed questions designed to provoke discussion and gather in-depth qualitative insights. Sample questions include:
1. What do you believe are the main factors contributing to the high cost of higher education?
2. How do you perceive the impact of student loans on affordability?
3. What policies do you think could effectively reduce the financial burden of college?
4. How does the cost of higher education influence your or others' decision to pursue college?
5. In what ways could colleges make their programs more financially accessible?
6. What role do scholarships and financial aid play in making education affordable?
7. How do you view the relationship between educational quality and cost?
8. What barriers do low-income students face in affording higher education?
9. How should government and institutions collaborate to improve affordability?
10. Can you share any personal experiences related to financing higher education?
The qualitative data from the focus group will be transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and unique insights, which will enrich the overall understanding of the affordability issue.
Approach Three: Survey
The survey complements the focus group by providing quantifiable data from a broader population. The survey will consist of demographic questions and standardized questions related to perceptions and experiences concerning higher education costs.
Demographic questions will address:
1. Age
2. Income level
3. Educational background
Survey questions will include 10 items designed to measure attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors, such as:
1. On a scale of 1-10, how affordable do you consider higher education in your country?
2. Have you or your family ever faced difficulty paying for college? (Yes/No)
3. In your opinion, should the government provide more financial aid? (Likert scale)
4. Do you believe that rising tuition fees deter lower-income students from attending college? (Yes/No)
5. How effective are current scholarship programs in making college affordable? (Likert scale)
6. Would you consider taking additional loan debt to afford higher education? (Yes/No)
7. How important is the availability of part-time work opportunities for financing college? (Likert scale)
8. Do you think free college tuition should be implemented? (Yes/No)
9. How has the cost of higher education affected your personal or family decisions regarding college? (Open-ended)
10. What is your preferred method of financing college expenses? (Multiple choice: loans, scholarships, savings, work-study, etc.)
Data collection will be conducted through online survey platforms, ensuring anonymity and encouraging honest responses. The numeric data will be statistically analyzed to identify trends, correlations, and significant factors influencing perceptions of affordability.
Data Analysis and Expected Outcomes
The combination of qualitative insights from the focus group and quantitative data from the survey will offer comprehensive perspectives on higher education affordability. Themes from discussions may include concerns about rising costs, the impact of student debt, and policy suggestions. The survey results are expected to reveal widespread perceptions of financial barriers, varying attitudes towards financial aid, and preferences for different funding methods.
This mixed-methods approach allows for triangulation, improving the validity of results and providing actionable recommendations. It is anticipated that these findings will inform policymakers and educational institutions about effective strategies to enhance affordability and access.
Conclusion
Developing detailed procedures for focus groups and surveys is crucial for capturing diverse viewpoints and measurable data regarding higher education affordability. By carefully designing questions and selecting appropriate participants, this research can uncover insights that guide policy reforms and institutional changes. The integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches ensures a comprehensive understanding necessary for meaningful interventions.
References
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (2007). A Conceptual Model of Nontraditional Undergraduate Student Attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 58(4), 468–492.
Conrad, C. F., & Serlin, R. C. (2006). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Sage Publications.
Hossler, D., & Vesper, N. (2018). Student Financing of Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education, 49(1), 65–92.
Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is 'enhanced' and how do we know? A critical discussion. Higher Education, 66(1), 3–17.
Marmorstein, H., & Seifer, S. (2019). Financial Literacy and College Affordability: A Critical Review. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 49(2), 6–21.
McPherson, M. S., & Shapiro, M. O. (2018). The Economics of Higher Education. In Economics of Education (pp. 215–227). University of Michigan Press.
Perna, L. W., & Titus, M. A. (2005). The Relationship Between Parent Involvement as a "Proxy" for Socioeconomic Status in the Study of College Goes to College Decisions. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(3), 264–298.
Scott, J., & Power, S. (2017). The Impact of Student Loan Debt on College Completion and Post-Graduation Earnings. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(3), 193–212.
Smith, D. G. (2008). Learning to Work and Working to Learn: College Students' Perceptions of How Paid Employment Affects their Academic Achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 49(6), 583–599.
Zhao, C. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding Value: Learning Communities and Student Engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115–138.