Getting our Money’s Worth: Consumerist Attitudes among Indiana University Students

Getting our Money’s Worth: Consumerist Attitudes among Indiana University Students Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at Indiana University Bloomington February 11, 2005

Bernice Pescosolido Chancellor's Professor of Sociology Emily Fairchild Suzanna Crage PhD Candidates, Sociology Jack Martin Executive Director, Schuessler Institute of Social Research in collaboration with: Ray Smith Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Retention David Perry Director, IU Bloomington Evaluation Services and Testing Lisa Kurz Director, Writing Tutorial Services

The Issue of “Consumerism” Broad Stakeholder Issue Legislative/Endowment Support: “Outcomes” Focus

The Issue of “Consumerism” Broad Stakeholder Issue Students/Parents/Granting Agencies: Inflation concern for tuition and job availability concerns

The Issue of “Consumerism” Broad Stakeholder Issue Faculty: Latest Twist on “Barbarians at the Gate” Arguments

“Before my college days, when I lived at home, my father would say, ‘When you start paying the bills around here, than [sic] you can make the decisions.’ I feel the same should apply to college. We the students and the parents pay the bills, not the professors or the advisors. … Before I graduate from IU, my family will have spent well over 60,000 dollars. Let me say that again, well over 60,000 dollars. It is important that the university shows this expense is justified … I know if I spent $60,000 on lets [sic] say a car, I would want that car to be perfect.” Selected text from unsolicited email received May 2004

Research Questions • How might we define and measure “consumerism” in higher education? • What is the prevalence of consumerism among IUB undergraduates? • Are there characteristics that separate IUB undergraduates who do and do not embrace this perspective?

Survey Instrument • Sampling of issues addressed: • Who should decide what teaching methods are used in courses?

Survey Instrument • Sampling of issues addressed: • How much work should students do? Should there be “Easy A’s”? Should instructors be wary of harming students’ GPAs?

Survey Instrument • Sampling of issues addressed: • What is the role of students in university administration, particularly hiring and firing of instructors?

Survey Instrument • Sampling of issues addressed: • What are the necessary characteristics/behaviors of instructors and the university?

Survey Instrument We approached these issues from the perspectives of students, but we asked about: • The entitlements and obligations of students • The entitlements and obligations of instructors • The entitlements and obligations of the university

Survey Instrument One section of the survey included explicit “consumerist” items.

Survey Instrument Examples of the 7 items include: “I think of my education as a product I am buying.”

Survey Instrument Examples of the 7 items include: “My tuition dollars entitle me to certain benefits”

Survey Instrument The final section of the survey addressed critical thinking skills. (Facione, Peter A. 1998. “Critical Thinking: What it is and Why it Counts.” California Academic Press)

Survey Instrument Examples of the 8 items include: “I always do better in classes where I’m expected to think things out for myself”

Survey Instrument Examples of the 8 items include: “I hate it when teachers discuss a problem instead of just giving the answers”

Survey Instrument Examples of the 8 items include: “If my belief is truly sincere, evidence to the contrary is irrelevant.”

Survey Instrument Summary • 82-items One item asking the source of funds for their college expenses All other demographics came from the Registrar • Maintained online by BEST Password-protected Only invited students

Data Collection • 1200 randomly selected IUB undergraduates Sample generated by Registrar Contacted by letter and email • May-July 2004 • Students were given a $10 VISA gift card for participating

Sample 553 students participated; 529 had complete data Our sampleIUB population 63.4% female 53% female 71.8% residents of Indiana 68% residents 20.4% freshman 23% freshman 21.3% sophomore 23.5% sophomore 24.5% junior 22% junior 33.8% senior 31.5% senior Average GPA: 3.15 3.05

Analytic Methods • Factor analysis to determine scales • Ordinary least squares regression to determine correlates • Qualitative analysis of an open-ended item for texture

Findings: Factor Analysis We identify 5 scales in the instrument: • Consumerism • Instructors’ responsibilities • University provisions for students • Students’ focus on grades rather than academics • Students’ responsibilities

Research Question 1 • How might we define and measure “consumerism” in higher education?

The Consumerism Scale • “I think of my education as a product I am buying.” • “My relationship with the university is similar to the relationship between a customer and seller.” • “I believe most students think of their education as a product they are buying.” • “Students should get tuition and fee reimbursement for classes they think they didn’t learn anything from.” • “I believe students should think of their education as a product they are buying.”

Individual Consumerism items Chronbach’s alpha = .80 Eigenvalue = 2.50 Factors all over .44 Range 1-10 (higher number indicates agreement)

Frequency of Consumerism Scores Average consumerism score: 27.57; Range: 5-50

Research Question 3 • Are there characteristics that separate IUB undergraduates who do and do not embrace this perspective?

Findings: OLS Regression Two individual characteristics are related to consumerism: • GPA: lower GPA, higher consumerism score • Percentage of college expense the student pays: the more they pay, higher consumerism score

Findings: OLS Regression Some responses to the other scales and individual items are related to consumerism. Students are more likely to be consumerist if they: • scored high on the university provisions scale • scored high on the focus on grades rather than academics scale • said that their tuition entitles them to benefits

Findings: OLS Regression One critical thinking item has a significant effect on consumerism. Students are more likely to be consumerist if they agree with the statement: • “If my belief is truly sincere, evidence to the contrary is irrelevant.”

Qualitative Responses Open-ended item: “What three things does your tuition most entitle you to while at Indiana University?” • There were a total of 1541 responses to this item. • Individually coded responses were categorized by topic.

Most Frequent Qualitative Response Categories • Education, 268 responses “Tuition entitles me to a good education” “Opportunity to learn about the world around me” “Exposure to different ways of thought” • Instructor qualities, 191 responses “Top of the line professors” “Professors that are able to teach effectively” “Professors that care about what they do and the students they teach”

Facilities, 119 responses “Access to libraries” “Good Classrooms” “The campus sidewalks should be well kept, without snow in winter and leaves in the fall.” • Technology, 116 responses “Access to up-to-date technology” “Access to computers on campus 24 hrs a day” • Jobs/Job prep/Job placement, 115 responses “A good job after graduation” “Preparation for the workforce” “Good job placement services” • Classes, 101 responses “Attending classes” “Availability of classes” “A wide variety of classes”

Select Qualitative Responses “Better parking, why those who are paid to be here have more benefits then [sic] those who pay to be here. At a store, the employees park way out so that customers may park close. All about pleasing the ones that pay your bills”

Select Qualitative Responses “A detail of what the money pays for, if I do not use a service, I should not pay it. For example, I do not attend athletic events or care about them, so I should not have to pay the athletic fee.”

Select Qualitative Responses “We want say in some of the choices the university makes. i.e.: waste of over $100,000 on a new school symbol, when our art program could have done one for FREE!”

Conclusions • We can identify a “crass” consumerism scale

Conclusions • Consumerism is fairly normally distributed at IUB. Most students fall in the middle.

Conclusions • Those with a lower GPA are more likely to take this approach, as are those who pay a greater percentage of their own college expenses. • Those who scored higher on the “non-academic focus” and “university provisions” scales are more likely to be consumerist. • Most critical thinking measures do not have a significant effect on consumerism.

Conclusions • The qualitative data tell us that issues of entitlements are on students minds, but that few take the approach most critics have been concerned about.

Conclusions • We can identify a “crass” consumerism scale • Consumerism is fairly normally distributed at IUB. Most students fall in the middle. • Those with a lower GPA are more likely to take this approach, as are those who pay a greater percentage of their own college expenses.Those who scored higher on the “non-academic focus” and “university provisions” scales are more likely to be consumerist. Most critical thinking measures do not have a significant effect on consumerism. • The qualitative data tell us that issues of entitlements are on students minds, but that few take the approach most critics have been concerned about.

Contact us by e-mail with additional questions: Bernice Pescosolido pescosol@indiana.edu Emily Fairchild efairchi@indiana.edu

Getting our Money’s Worth: Consumerist Attitudes among Indiana University Students