Postgraduate Options in Australian Universities - Assignment Example

Executive summary Post graduate education in the world is on high demand today. This is probably because of numerous technological, environmental, social, and economic changes in society. To cope with these sudden changes, people opt to pursue postgraduate education in various higher institutions so as to keep up with the competitive world. Their choices vary in terms of learning institutions, and courses. This difference is brought about by the diverse personality attributes, as well as their demographics. Therefore, this essay attempts to create a decision matrix based on university and postgraduate options of three individuals. Secondly, the paper will calculate their evaluative rankings based on compensatory rule, and then analyze personality traits. It also explores the respondents’ difference in choices and evaluative rankings, and uses demographic and personality theories to analyze their choices. Table of contents Introduction Currently, there is a high demand for postgraduate education because the world is getting more and more competitive. In effect, individuals resolve to take postgraduate education so as to cope with these changes. Nevertheless, their choices are determined by various issues relating to demographics and personality traits. Some of the demographic factors include age, income, gender, and family situation. On the other hand, postgraduate choices are determined by personal traits like extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Postgraduate options in Australian universities 1. Masters in Business Administration (Marketing) at Charles Stuart University (CSU) in Australia 2. Master of Science (Computer Science) at Central Queensland University (CQU) 3. Masters of Science (Environmental Science) at University of Melbourne (UM) 4. Masters of Science (Psychiatry) at University of New South Wales (UNSW) 5. Masters of Science (Nursing) at University of Western Australia (USW) 6. Masters of Economics at Charles Stuart University (CSU) in Australia Evaluative criteria 1. Tuition fees 2. Duration of the program 3. Level of interest of the course 4. Program reputation 5. Distance from work 6. Decision matrix Jane’s evaluation Options Tuition fees Duration Interest level Program reputation Distance Entry requirements MBA(Marketing) at CSU; rank=4 5 2 5 5 4 3 Msc. Computer science at CQU; rank=5 5 3 2 5 3 4 Msc (Environmental science ) at UM; rank=2 3 4 3 4 2 4 Msc. Nursing at USW; rank=3 5 4 3 4 3 4 Msc. Psychiatry at UNSW; rank=5 4 2 2 5 4 4 M. Economics at CSU; rank=4 5 3 4 5 4 4 David’s evaluation Options Tuition fees Duration Interest level Program reputation Distance Entry requirements MBA(Marketing) at CSU; rank=5 5 2 4 5 2 3 Msc. Computer science at CQU; rank=5 4 4 3 5 2 2 Msc (Environmental science ) at UM; rank=3 3 3 4 4 3 5 Msc. Nursing at USW; rank=3 5 4 3 5 2 4 Msc. Psychiatry at UNSW rank=4 4 3 3 4 5 2 M. Economics at CSU; rank=2 4 3 2 5 3 4 John’s evaluation Options Tuition fees Duration Interest level Program reputation Distance Entry requirements MBA(Marketing) at CSU; rank=5 5 2 2 4 4 4 Msc. Computer science at CQU; rank=3 4 3 5 4 4 4 Msc (Environmental science ) at UM; rank=2 5 4 2 3 3 4 Msc. Nursing at USW; rank=5 5 2 4 5 3 4 Msc. Psychiatry at UNSW; 4 5 3 2 4 4 5 M. Economics at CSU; rank=4 5 3 4 4 2 4 Application of compensatory decision rule Aac =∑ WacBac Jane Option 1: (4*5+4*2+4*5+4*5+4*4+4*3) =96 Option 2: (5*5+5*3+5*2+5*5+5*3+5*4) =110 Option 3: (2*3+2*4+2*3+2*4+2*2+2*4) =40 Option 4: (3*5+3*4+3*3+3*4+3*3+3*4) =69 Option 5: (5*4+5*2+5*2+5*5+5*4+5*4) =105 Option 6: (4*5+4*3+4*4+4*5+4*4+4*4) =100 David Option 1: (5*5+5*2+5*4+5*4+5*2+5*3) =100 Option 2: (5*4+5*4+5*3+5*5+5*2+5*2) =100 Option 3: (3*3+3*3+3*4+3*4+3*3+3*5) =66 Option 4: (3*5+3*4+3*3+3*5+3*2+3*4) =69 Option 5: (4*4+4*3+4*3+4*4+4*5+4*2) =84 Option 6: (2*4+2*3+2*2+2*5+2*3+2*4) =42 John Option 1: (5*5+5*2+5*2+5*4+5*4+5*4) =105 Option 2: (3*4+3*3+3*5+3*4+4*4+3*4) =76 Option 3: (2*5+2*4+2*2+2*3+2*3+2*4) =42 Option 4: (5*5+5*2+5*4+5*5+5*3+5*5) =120 Option 5: (4*5+4*3+4*2+4*4+4*4+4*5) =92 Option 6: (4*5+4*3+4*4+4*4+4*2+4*4) =88 Analysis of postgraduate options Personal Characteristics Post graduate options among individuals are determined by their personal attributes. This implies that individuals intending to undertake postgraduate education often make choices based on their personal traits. There are five major; big five personality traits that determine one’s choice of postgraduate option, or occupational choices and these include conscientiousness, neuroticism, agreeableness, extraversion, and openness to experience. To start with, people’s choices of post graduate education are determined by their conscientiousness. Conscientiousness entails an attribute of careful and painstaking, or the value of operating as per the orders of an individual’s conscience (O’Connor & Paunonen 2007, pp. 971-990). Some of its elements include carefulness, self-discipline, organization, thoroughness, carefulness, deliberation, and achievement need. Notably, conscientious people are generally reliable and hardworking. Therefore, individuals who are conscientious tend to opt for managerial postgraduate positions as they require such qualities as carefulness, thoroughness, organization, and self-discipline (Marín, Infante & Troyano 2001, pp. 299-306). People that score highly conscientious seem to be organized and less jumbled in their offices and homes. Such people fit managerial positions in work places; hence their choice of post graduate programs related to management (Salgado 2002, pp. 117-125). Some of these individuals are most likely to opt for postgraduate courses like master of business administration in human resource management and sales and marketing management. Another personality trait that influences individual’s choice of postgraduate programs involves neuroticism. This is a basic personality attribute in the psychological studies that entails a long-term predisposition to face negative emotional conditions. People that score highly in the neuroticism are likely to undergo feelings like anger, anxiety, guilt envy, and depressed mood (Marín, Infante & Troyano 2001, pp. 299-306). Such individuals also poorly respond to environmental pressure, and likely to understand events as threatening, and minor disappointments as hopelessly hard. Such people are also shy and self-conscious, and can find it hard to control urges and hindered satisfaction. This personality trait is known to be a risk feature for mental abnormalities like depression, phobia, and panic disorder among other neuroses (Salgado 2002, pp. 117-125). On contrast, individuals that score low in neuroticism are said to have emotional stability and are less responsive person. These people seem to even-tempered, calm, and less probable to rattled feel tense (Chamorro‐Premuzic & Furnham 2003, pp. 319-338). Additionally, such people are known to be more satisfied and happy with their lives and work. Therefore, low neuroticism individuals are likely to choose postgraduate courses that are challenging like Master of Science in computer science and engineering. This is because such people can manage to respond to environmental strains and understanding of various situations effectively (Seibert & Kraimer 2001, pp. 2-21). The third personal trait that affects one’s choice of postgraduate program is agreeableness. As Salgado (2002, pp. 117-125) argues, this involves a personality attribute that is accommodating and pleasant in social contexts. In the modern psychology, this trait reflects individual differences in social harmony and cooperation. High scoring individuals in this case are considerate, emphatic, friendly, helpful and generous (Salgado 2002, pp. 117-125). They also display an optimistic opinion on human nature, and seem to believe that majority of people are trustworthy, decent, and honest. For those that score low on the trait, they are less empathetic and considerate than those that score highly. Other agreeableness sub-traits include altruism, morality, sympathy, trust, modesty, and cooperation (Buchanan 1998, pp. 8-84). With respect to postgraduate options, high scoring agreeableness individuals are most likely to opt for courses like Master of Science in psychiatry, counseling, nursing, medicine, and hospitality management. This is because they are generous, empathetic, helpful, and friendly; hence, their ability to handle various people of distinct characters (Furnham, Monsen & Ahmetoglu 2009, pp. 769-782). Fourthly, postgraduate options are determined by a personality trait involving openness to experience. As Buchanan (1998, pp. 8-84) asserts, this trait is related to forbearance of uncertainty, a potential to take in information, staying focused, and the capacity to know thoughts, feelings and impulses concurrently. It also involves aesthetic sensitivity, active imagination, intellectual curiosity, preference for diversity, and attention to internal feelings. The outcome is intense and deep experiences. These people are also known to look for complexity and the unfamiliar (Seibert & Kraimer 2001, pp. 2-21). A person who scores high in openness to experience is flexible, creative, adventurous, and curious. He also enjoys diversity and desire originality. On contrast, one with low openness seems to enjoy routines, such as, structure and certainty, and seems to disengage in mind on normal basis. In terms of postgraduate options, there individuals that score highly in the openness to experience go for courses like Masters of Business Administration in public relations, sales and marketing; Master of Arts in literature, graphic designs; Master 0f Science in architecture; and engineering and computer science. Extraversion personality characteristic is another determinant factor in the section of postgraduate education alternatives. Seibert and Kraimer (2001, pp. 2-21) indicate that this is a personal trait that entails talkativeness, sociability, excitability, and assertiveness. High extraverts seem to look for social motivation and chances to be involved with other people. They are termed to be full of energy, positivity and energy. In case of group gatherings, high extraverts are probable to assert themselves and talk often. By contrast, introverts have low extraverts and are reserved, quiet, and minimally participate in social events. Introverts are not shy, but prefer less social stimulation than extraverts. Some of the attributes of extraverts include cheerfulness, talkativeness, warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, action-oriented, enjoyment of attention, and search for excitement and novelty (Nieken & Störmer 2010, pp. 3-28). Extraverts often assume leadership duties because of their assertiveness. They rarely undergo anxiety or negative response as they have optimistic life viewpoint (Ham, Junankar &Wells 2009). In terms of postgraduate options, such individuals are more likely to choose courses with a lot of interaction with the society, such as marketing, teaching, sales, politics, and public relations. On the other hand, introverts are more probable to take postgraduate courses involving accounting, engineering, computer programming. Analysis of respondents’ choices To begin with, Jane’s highest ranked postgraduate option is Master of Science in computer science at CQU, followed by Master of Science in psychiatry at UNSW, and then master of economics at CSU. These are Jane’s top postgraduate alternative courses. Her choice for computer science is determined by her personality trait to openness to experience as it is a technical course that involves search for new, complex things (Seibert & Kraimer 2001, pp. 2-21). She also has low neuroticism in that she can handle tough courses like computer science. This implies that she is not anxious, and has an ability to cope with environmental pressures. Her second choice rank is psychiatry, a course that needs empathy, sympathy, friendliness, helpfulness, and generosity (Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman & ter Weel, 2008, pp. 972‐1059). This choice demonstrates that Jane has a high agreeableness personality trait that accommodates and helps others in society. In terms of her third choice, Jane opts for a tough course in economics; hence demonstrating that she has high openness to experience and low neuroticism. Her choices are also stimulated by her level of interest on courses, affordable tuition fees, and reputation of the program. David’s postgraduate choices are determined by personality traits that include openness to experience, extraversion, agreeableness and low neuroticism. His top three ranked postgraduate options concern marketing, computer science and psychiatry. First, his marketing choice is dependent on his extraversion and openness to experience personality traits. This is because such a career requires one’s ability to interact, persuade, and handle different people in society (Seibert & Kraimer 2001, pp. 2-21). Therefore, David opts for marketing course since he is an extravert, and that the course’s reputation is high. He is also motivated by the fact that tuition fees are affordable compared to other universities. David’s second ranked choice is determined by his openness to experience. He is interested in the course, and finds the tuition fees affordable. His third ranked option is psychiatry, and is based on his agreeableness trait. On the other hand, John opts for a master of science in nursing he seems to have agreeableness and extraversion. This means that she is generous, sociable, friendly, sympathetic, empathetic, and helpful. This is because nursing involves many social interactions in the society. His second ranked option is marketing, a demonstration that he is an extravert, sociable, persuasive, assertive, and friendly (Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman & ter Weel, 2008, pp. 972‐1059). His choice of the university is based on the distance and convenience. The respondents’ rankings and postgraduate choices are different because of their distinct personality traits. Jane seems to be more, an introvert, and of low neuroticism high openness to experience as compared to John who is an extravert, sociable, hospitable, empathetic, and sympathetic. On the other hand, David’s choices and rankings are almost the same as John’s, but different from Jane’s. These rankings are based on their personality traits, tuition fees affordability, and interest levels on the programs. Their postgraduate choices are also based on their tuition fee affordability, reputation of the courses, distance of the university, as well as their levels of interest on particular courses. Therefore, the respondents’ choices and evaluative rankings are different because they have different personal traits, socioeconomic status, and interest levels on the study areas. Theoretical analysis of respondents’ choices The difference on the respondents’ choices and evaluative rankings can be explained with reference to certain theories, such as demographics and personality. Demographics Some of the demographic factors include age, gender, income, ethnicity, and family situation. Firstly, the respondents have different ratings and choices of postgraduate courses because of their demographic differences. Jane’s choice of computer science shows that she is more open to experiences and has emotional stability than John who is an extravert, sociable, and helpful. John is also hospitable and enjoys helping other people to feel happy in life (Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman & ter Weel, 2008, pp. 972‐1059). Moreover, David’s choice in terms of personality is determined by his openness to experience and low neuroticism. In terms of income, respondents seem to be of different levels as their choices are based on their affordability of their tuition fees. Jane prefers computer science at CQU because of affordable tuition fees, while David opts for marketing at CSU because of favorable tuition fees and entry requirements. In the case of family situation, individuals tend to choose courses that are aligned with their families (Nieken & Störmer 2010, pp. 3-28). For instance, parents’ may have a great influence in one’s choice of postgraduate course, so that if one’s parent were in computer science field or marketing fields, their children are more likely to follow in their footsteps. In this case, Jane’s choice of computer science may be traceable to her parents influence. It is highly probable that John’s choice of nursing is influenced by the fact that her mother was a nurse. By contrast, David’s choice for marketing is probably affected by his father’s marketing career. Therefore, family situations have an upper hand in determining one’s postgraduate education. Still on family situation, Nieken and Störmer (2010, pp. 3-28) say that individuals who have stable families tend to be emotionally stable; hence, ready to pursue tough courses like computer science and economics, like in Jane’s case. On the contrary, those in unstable families tend to fear complex situations and environmental pressures; hence opting for less complex courses like marketing and nursing as they need to interact with many people in the society. Personality This is another strong factor that affects one’s choice of postgraduate education. In this case, Jane is highly open to experience and focused, which is an indication that she can handle complex and strenuous issues in the environment (Seibert & Kraimer 2001, pp. 2-21). On contrast, John and David are extraverts as they opt for Nursing and Marketing respectively. David opts for marketing because he is an extravert, persuasive, assertiveness, friendly, and sociable. He also likes new things and enjoys social interactions (Borghans, Duckworth, Heckman & ter Weel, 2008, pp. 972‐1059). John’s choice for nursing is also based on empathy, social, friendliness, sympathy, and helpfulness. He likes helping others, especially the sick, and interacting with different people every day. Therefore, their friendly, helpful, sociable, persuasive and helpful characteristics are influential in their postgraduate options. Conclusion People’s postgraduate choices, in the modern world, are influenced by certain factors that differ from one person to another. Some of these influences include demographics like age, family situation, income, age and gender; and personality traits, such as, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and extraversion. Therefore, in this case, respondents’ choices, ratings and rankings are based on their different personality traits and demographics. References Borghans, L, Duckworth, AL Heckman, JJ& ter Weel, B2008, ‘The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits’, Journal of Human Resources, vol.43, no.4, pp. 972‐1059. http://ftp.iza.org/dp3333.pdf Buchanan, LB 1998, The impact of big five personality characteristics on group cohesion and creative task performance, pp. 8-84 http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/public/etd-32198-18285/materials/etd.pdf Chamorro‐Premuzic, T & Furnham, A 2003, ‘Personality predicts academic performance: Evidence from two longitudinal university samples’, Journal of Research in Personality, vol.37, no. 3, pp. 319–338. http://www.elsevier.com/authored_subject_sections/S05/S05_361/misc/JRP_Chamorro.p df Furnham, A, Monsen, J & Ahmetoglu, G 2009, ‘Typical intellectual engagement, Big Five personality traits, approaches to learning and cognitive ability predictors of academic performance’, British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 79, no.4, pp.79, 769-782. http://www.viriya.net/jabref/resilience/Typical_intellectual_engagement_Big_Five_personality_traits_approaches_to_learning_and_cognitive_ability_predictors_of_academic_per formance.pdf Ham, R, Junankar, PN, Wells, R 2009, ‘Antagonistic Managers, careless workers, and extraverted salespeople: an examination of personality and occupational choice’, IZA Discussion Paper Series, no. 4193, Bonn, Germany. http://melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/hilda/Bibliography/Working+Discussion+Research_Papers/2009/Ham_etal_Antagonistic_Managers.pdf Marín, M, Infante, E & Troyano, Y 2001, ‘Personality and academic productivity in the University student. Social Behavior and Personality’, An International Journal, vol. 3, no.29, pp. 299-306. http://personal.us.es/einfante/uploads/PUBLICACIONES/NOVA1.pdf Nieken, P & Störmer, S 2010, ‘Personality as Predictor of Occupational Choice: Empirical Evidence from Germany’, University of Hamburg, no. 8, pp. 3-28. http://www.bwl2.uni-bonn.de/staff/dr.-petra nieken/08_nieken_stoermer_personality_as_predictor_of_occupational_choice.pdf O’Connor, MC& Paunonen, SV 2007, ‘Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance’, Personality and Individual Difference, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 971– 990 http://www.viriya.net/jabref/resilience/Big_Five_personality_predictors_of_post-secondary_academic_performance.pdf Salgado, JF 2002, ‘The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Counterproductive Behaviors’, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, vol. 10, no.1/ 2, pp.117‐125. http://www.mendeley.com/research/the-big-five-personality-dimensions-and-counterproductive-behaviors/#page-1 Seibert, SE & Kraimer, ML 2001, ‘The Five‐Factor Model of Personality and Career Success’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 58, no.3, pp.1‐21. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2747784/ Read More