Microsoft Word - 04_AtmaJaya_Factors Affecting Student Achievement_a2t.docx Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 25 FACTORS AFFECTING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN FACULTY OF ECONOMICS "X" UNIVERSITY Lily Suhaily1; Yasintha Soelasih2 1, 2Faculty of Economics, Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya Jln. Jenderal Sudirman No. 51, Karet Semanggi, Setia Budi, Jakarta 12930 lily.eddy@atmajaya.ac.id1; yasintha.soelasih@atmajaya.ac.id2 ABSTRACT Education is an important point for many countries, including Indonesia. People with high education in a country could make the country wealthier. Parents are usually aware that it is important for their children to be educated. If the children are well educated, they will increase the standard of living of their parents and their selves. Based on this phenomenon, research evaluated factors that influence student achievement and also evaluated the difference of achievement between students who are active in campus activities and are not active. A number of 329 questionnaires were distributed to Faculty of Economics, “X” University students using random sampling. The result shows that the students themselves as factor that could determine their achievement. The evaluation also found that the achievement of student who is active in campus activities is different with the achievement of student who is not active in campus activities. Keywords: education, achievement, parents, students ABSTRAK Pendidikan merupakan hal penting di berbagai negara di dunia, termasuk Indonesia. Jumlah masyarakat berpendidikan tinggi akan dapat memajukan negara yang bersangkutan. Para orang tua menyadari bahwa mendapatkan pendidikan yang baik merupakan hal penting bagi anak-anak mereka. Jika anak-anak mendapatkan pendidikan yang baik, mereka akan mampu meningkatkan standar hidup orang tua mereka, begitu juga dengan standar hidup mereka sendiri. Berdasarkan fenomena ini, penelitian mengevaluasi faktor-faktor yang memengaruhi prestasi belajar mahasiswa. Penelitian juga mengevaluasi perbedaan antara prestasi mahasiswa aktif tidak aktif dalam kegiatan kampus. Sejumlah 329 kuesioner disebarkan kepada mahasiswa fakultas ekonomi, Universitas "X" dengan menggunakan random sampling. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa hanya mahasiswa sebagai faktor yang dapat menentukan prestasi mereka. Evaluasi juga menemukan bahwa prestasi mahasiswa yang aktif di kegiatan kampus berbeda dengan mahasiswa yang tidak aktif. Kata kunci: pendidikan, prestasi, orang tua, mahasiswa 26 Journal The WINNERS, Vol. 16 No. 1, March 2015: 25-35 INTRODUCTION Education is an important point for many countries in the world, including Indonesia. A number of highly educated people will advance the country. Indonesia as a country emerging in middle class requires good quality education and good graduation achievement as well. So emerging in middle class is an opportunity for foreign investors to invest in Indonesia. Generally, foreign investors require highly educated employees with good avhievement. People in Indonesia realize that education is highly important for children in order to increase standard of living. Parents usually send their children to pursue higher education in the hope for a good education. Universities chosen by the children encouraged by parents can produce graduates with a good achievement, so it is easy to get a job or open their own business (entrepreneurship). The rise or the high level of competition of universities in Indonesia, especially in big cities, eg. Jakarta, makes each university compete to produce graduate students with good achievement. Good achievement facilitates college graduates to work in the business world, so that the college would be famous. Famous universities will positively impact the survival of the college because many parents will enroll their children in those universites. "X" University as one of private universities in Jakarta needs to pay attention to its graduate students and strive to produce students who graduate with good achievement. To produce graduation with good achievement, "X" University needs to pay attention to the factors of student achievement. This research aims to determine the factors that affect achievement of graduate students at the "X" University as well as whether there is a difference of student achievement between the students who actively participates in activities on campus and are not actively participating in activities on campus. The factors that determine the success of the students are: the attitude of the student, and the physical health and readiness of the student to enter the world of college and their hopes after graduation to graduate (Ali, 1983). According to Biegel (2000), the presence of students in the classroom is an important part for achievement. With a presence in class, students could follow what is described by the lecturers and do the tasks given by lecturers as well. Chung (2004) stated there is a significant correlation between the presence of students in the regular class with success achievement. Twenty nine percent of students who works 30-39 hours per week and 39 hours as full-time employees would have a negative impact on their academic success (Fur and Elling in Watanabe & Jasinski, 2005). Working full time has a large negative impact on students' academic value, so that to obtain a bachelor degree is difficult (Astin in Watanabe & Jasinski, 2005). It occurs because the workload given takes time and is difficult to concentrate in completing the tasks. However, poor sleep habits may contribute to the ability of students to reach the achievement (Buboltz, Brown, & Soper, 2001). Students who have poor sleep habits are difficult to focus in class because of sleepiness. Therefore, as in Chung (2004), there is a significant correlation between the presences of students in regular class with success achievement. Additionally, student’s willingness to work hard would achieve the learning achievement (Noftle & Robins, 2007). On the other hand, lecturer attitude to students, types of classroom control, curriculum content, lecturer adequacy in professional qualification and preparation, instructional contents and presentation, use of relevant teaching aids would have a positive impact on student achievement (Flowers, 1966; Burstall, 1970; Pidgeon, 1970). Lecturer who is friendly with students would make the students dare to ask in the class if they do not understand the lesson. Ability of lecturer in controlling the atmosphere in the classroom would make students understand the explanation given by the lecturer. Professional qualification of teachers in terms of mastering science taught would make students have accurate Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 27 knowledge of the discipline. Lecturer preparation to teach with a good presentation is important because the material taught can be explained well. If the student asks, the lecturer will be able to answer the question, so that the student could appreciate the lecturer. Additionally, relevant tools such as in-focus, video, loudspeakers functioning properly make the student eager to to attend the class. Type of university, the number of students in the classroom, discipline, interaction among students, the current value of the entrance exam, exam given would have an impact on the student achievement (Pidgeon, 1970; Ali, 1983). Environment and motivation give a very strong influence on academic achievement (Cronbach, 1969; Atkinson, 1978). While the condition of campus buildings, such as the condition of the lift and the classroom affect the student achievement (Edwards, 1991). If the conditions and the number of lift are inadequate, they would make the student late for class, so they will affect on the student achievement. Uncomfortable classrooms and nonworking AC make students feel the heat so the learning process cannot run properly. The number of students in the classroom also affects their achievement (Angrist & Lavy, 1999; Hoxby, 2000). The number of children in the family also affects the student achievement (Hanushek, 1992). This condition may occur because there is no serenity to learn at home. Moreover, family income and parents education are also one of the factors that affect the learning process the student (Murnane, Maynard, & Ohls, 1981; Hanushek, 1992; Goldhaber & Brewer, 1997; Ehrenberg & Brewer, 1994; Ferguson & Ladd, 1996). This condition may occur because the family is not able to pay their children’s tuition, so the children should work to pay for the tuition. If parents education is not high, how they can educate their children. The closeness of family with children is a major factor in determining children’s academic performance (Lee, Hamman, & Lee, 2007). This condition allows the children who have problems at school could talk to their parents. From the psychological side, children do not feel pressured when they face problems because there are solutions from the parents. This makes children concentrate to study well. The involvement of parents in their children's education will encourage children to study more diligent so the performance is expected to be achieved (Halawah, 2006). Another factor that determines the success of students to reach the achievement is family background (Strauss, 1951; Lloyd & Pidgeon, 1961; Ali, 1983). When the parents are not harmonious and divorced; and students cannot face this situation, it will affect the learning process. Hence, based on the theory, this research looks for the factors which can improve student performance of the Faculty of Economics (FE) in "X" University. Besides, this research looks for the difference of FE student achievement between students who actively participate in campus activities and students who do not actively participate in campus activities in "X" University as well. The research model is as follows. Figure 1 Research Model 1 Student Lecturer University Family Student Achievement IPS Score IPK Score 28 Journal The WINNERS, Vol. 16 No. 1, March 2015: 25-35 Figure 2 Research Model 2 METHOD This research used descriptive analysis by examining the factors that influence student achievement and the difference between active and not active student in campus activities. The indicators are described in Table 1. Table 1 The Indicators that Affect Student Achievement Variable Indicator Source Student 1. Students who lack sleep, hard to concentrate in class. 2. Students who often not study (skip) make it difficult to understand what has been taught by lecturers. 3. Students who are not healthy will be often not study and do not understand the cause of the courses be taught. 4. Students have aspirations after graduating college. 5. Students must have a strong motivation to get the best value. 6. Students will ask the professor if not understand being taught. 7. Students active in campus activities will face obstacles to attend college. 8. Students active in campus activities will be obtain the value of the low tuition. 9. Students who are active in campus activities will be take courses who little persemesternya. (Buboltz et al., 2001) (Biegel, 2000) Fur and Elling (Watanabe & Jasinski, 2005) (Noftle & Robins, 2007) Lecturer 10. Lecturer with a friendly attitude with the student, then students are not afraid to ask. 11. Lecturers who teach master taught courses. 12. Lecturers who ready to teach will be give a good study. 13. Dosen using in-focus easier for the student to understand what is being taught. 14. Dosen using video easier for the student to understand what is being taught. 15. Lecturer using loudspeakers facilitate students to understand what is being taught. 16. Nilai exams who distributed to the student, will trigger them to study harder. (Flowers, 1966); (Pidgeon, 1970) University 17. Good university, generally have professional teaching staff. 18. University with a high degree of discipline who will be have an impact on the learning process. 19. Campus environment who clean, do not smoke make the student learn better. 20. The more the number the student in one class, the learning process will be disrupted. 21. Building a good campus, elevators who sufficient and adequate number of classrooms who can make the student learn well. (Pidgeon, 1970); (Cronbach, 1969); (Atkinson, 1978); (Edwards, 1991); (Angrist & Lavy, 1999); (Hoxby, 2000) Achievement Students active participate in campus activities Achievement Students who are not active participate in campus activities ≠ Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 29 Table 1 The Indicators that Affect Student Achievement (continued) Variable Indicator Source Family 22. Harmonious family atmosphere support the success of the study. 23. The involvement of parents in their children's education will be encourage the student to learn more diligent so the performance is expected to be achieved. 24. Family income is one of the success factors of the study. 25. Education of parents is one of the factors of success in the study. (Murnane et al., 1981); (Hanushek, 1992); (Goldhaber & Brewer, 1997); (Ehrenberg & Brewer, 1994); (Ferguson & Ladd, 1996) (Lee et al., 2007) (Halawah, 2006) (Strauss, 1951); (Lloyd & Pidgeon, 1961); (Ali, 1983) The population was FE students "X" University. The students were the class of 2010, 2011, and 2012 because they have entered into semesters 8, 6, and 4. So that the they had experienced a minimal learning process of four semesters. The number of students was as much as 1855. Based on the existing population, it would be sampled using Slovin formula as follows: 21 Ne N n + = (1) Description: n = sample size N= population size e = Concessions inaccuracy because sampling error can be tolerated, eg 5% or 10%. The number of sample: ( )2%518551 1855 x n + = =n 328,9 = 329 students. Total samples were 329 respondents. Samples were taken with simple random probability sampling. This method was conducted by randomizing the student class of 2010, 2011, and 2012. The number of student class of 2010 was as many as 495 people, class of 2011 was 657 people, and class of 2012 was 703 people. Furthermore, research shuffled the students of 2010, the result of the scramble obtained the number of students 83 people, for the class of 2011 earned the number of students as many as 107 people and the forces in 2012 as the number of students obtained 139 people. Furthermore, research distributed questionnaire in class attended by students of class 2010, 2011, and 2012 in July to August 2014. Data were analyzed using multiple regression analysis and different test. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the factors that influence student achievement in University "X". While different test was used to determine whether there was a different in student achievement if they were active in campus activities. 30 Journal The WINNERS, Vol. 16 No. 1, March 2015: 25-35 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Test results of indicators in this study were shown by reliability and validity test. Reliability test used Cronbach's alpha, while the validity test used Pearson correlation. From the reliability test (see Table 2), it can be said that all the variables studied are reliable because the value of Cronbach Alpha above 0.60 (Sunyoto, 2007). Table 2 Reliability Test Variable Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Student .684 9 Lecturer .718 7 University .679 5 Family .601 4 The validity test results showed that all indicators can form the existing variable, as shown by the validity of significant value (Table 3). Results of data collected then seen the characteristics of respondents in Table 4. Table 3 Validity Test Indicator Student Lecturer University Family X1 .471** X2 .563** X3 .585** X4 .431** X5 .430** X6 .477** X7 .617** X8 .608** X9 .578** X10 .429** X11 .625** X12 .630** X13 .686** X14 .636** X15 .630** X16 .621** X17 .694** X18 .724** X19 .660** X20 .604** X21 .658** X22 .473** X23 .538** X24 .562** X25 .547** Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 31 Table 4 Characteristics of Respondents Number. Characteristics of Respondents Total % 1. Gender: Man Woman 155 174 47.1 52.9 2. Force: 2010 2011 2012 24 68 237 7.3 20.7 72 3. IPK Score 2 .00– 2.75 2.76 – 3.5 3.51 – 4.00 87 179 63 26.4 54.4 19.1 4. KHS Score 0.00 – 1.29 1.30 – 1.49 1.50 – 1.99 2.00 – 2.59 2.60 – 3.59 3.60 – 4.00 5 6 18 64 205 31 1.5 1.8 5.5 19.5 62.3 9.4 5. Student who participate the organization Yes No 199 130 60.5 39.5 Table 4 shows that respondents are more women than men, drawn most of class 2012. The number of respondents who fetched by highest IPK is from 2.76 – 3.5, while for KHS IPS values are drawn from 2.60 – 3.59. The FE students active in organization were 199 respondents. Table 4 shows overall FE students are relatively active in the organization activities. Although they are active, but the GPA or IPS they are not too low. To answer the problems, the research used regression and different test. Regression analysis was used to determine the influence of factors that exists for student achievement to determine differences in student while active and inactive against achievement then used a different test. Regression Analysis Table 5 Model Summaryb Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .143a .021 .008 1.38966 a. Predictors: (Constant), mahasiswa, dosen, universitas, keluarga b. Dependent Variable: Prestasi From the table above, the value of R Square is 21%. It means variable performance can be explained by student, faculty, university, and family by 21% and the remaining 79% is explained by other variables outside the model. 32 Journal The WINNERS, Vol. 16 No. 1, March 2015: 25-35 Table 6 ANOVAb Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 13.147 4 3.287 1.702 .149a Residual 625.692 324 1.931 Total 638.839 328 a. Predictors: (Constant), student, lecturer, university, family b. Dependent Variable: achievement ANOVA results above show a significance value of 0.149 above 0.05. This shows that the simultaneous variables: students, faculty, university, and the family have no effect on student achievement. Table 7 Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 6.602 .077 86.170 .000 Student -.175 .080 -.125 -2.183 .030 Lecturer -.069 .092 -.050 -.755 .451 University .159 .098 .114 1.621 .106 Family -.012 .093 -.009 -.128 .899 a. Dependent Variable: Prestasi From the coefficient table above, it can be said there is a partial influence on student achievement student, but the faculty, the university, and the family have no effect on student achievement. Difference Test Table 8 Group Statistics Organization N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Achievement Yes 199 6.7136 1.27262 .09021 No 130 6.3769 1.65312 .14499 Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 33 Tabel 9 Independent Samples Test Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference Lower Upper Achievement Equal variances assumed 14.268 .000 2.081 327 .038 .33664 .16181 .01833 .65496 Equal variances not assumed 1.971 226.137 .050 .33664 .17076 .00015 .67314 For two-independent sample t-test, seen from the results of hypothesis Lavene's Test to determine whether the assumption of equal variance is both met or not met with the hypothesis: Ho: σ1 2 = σ22 to Hi: σ12 ≠ σ22 where σ12 = variance group 1 dan σ22 = variance group 2. From the Levene’s Test result obtained that p-value = 0,00 is smaller than α = 0,05, so Ho: σ12 = σ22 is rejected. In other words, assuming the variance is not great (equal variances not assumed). Because the results of Lavene’ test show the second assumption variance is not as great; it is necessary to use t-test results of two independent sample assuming unequal variances both for the hypothesis Ho: µ1≥µ2 to Hi: µ1<µ2 that give the value t = 1.971 degree of freedom 226.137 and p-value (2-tailed) = 0.050. It can be concluded that the means of student active in organization have lower achievement than students who are not active in organization. On the model summary table above, the value of R Square by 21% means a variable achievement can be explained by students, faculty, university, and family. The remaining 79% is explained by other variables outside the model. Another variable that could have influence is social environment of the students. The results showed the presence of the effect of self respective student to student achievement. This is due to student themselves decide whether they want to quickly pass by best value or not. For students by high motivation for achievement is certainly not will be skip study, study hard, tried hard to understand what is described by the lecturer. However, lecturers, university and family have no effect on student achievement. It happens all the back to the students concerned. Any professional lecturers who teach, students who do not care or do not have the motivation to excel still no effect. As well as any facilities provided by the university and harmonious as any family, not necessarily make student intend to excel. Furthermore, there are differences in achievement between the students who are actively involved in campus activities that do not active participate by campus activities. This means that students who are actively involved by campus activities different achievement who did not participate. For students who active participated campus activities achievement will be go down because the time spent to go study and learn a limited. CONCLUSION The results showed that there is an influence of student to student achievement. However, lecturers, university, and family have no effect on student achievement. Moreover, there are differences in achievement between the students who are actively involved in campus activities than they who do not actively participate in campus activities. 34 Journal The WINNERS, Vol. 16 No. 1, March 2015: 25-35 REFERENCES Ali, A. (1983). Attitudes of Nigerian secondary school students towards school and their academic achiement in science. Journal of Nigerian Education, 3(2), 11–17. Angrist, J., & Lavy, V. (1999). “Using Maimonides” rule to estimate the effect of class size on scholastic achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64(2), 533–576. Atkinson, J. W. (1978). The Mainsprings of Achievement Oriented Activity. In J. W. Atkinson & J. O. Raynor (Eds.), Personality Motivation and Achievement (pp. 11–39). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Biegel, S. (2000). The interfaces between attandance, academic achievement, and equal educational opportunity. Northern District of California. Buboltz, W., Brown, F., & Soper, B. (2001). Sleep habits and patterns of college students: A preliminary study. Journal of American College Health, 50(3), 131–135. http://doi.org/10.1080/07448480109596017 Burstall, C. (1970). French in the primary school: Some early findings. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 2(1), 48–58. http://doi.org/10.1080/0022027700020107 Chung, C. J. (2004). The impact of attendance, instructor contact, and homework completion on achievement in a developmental logic course. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 20(2). Retrieved from https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3- 589967561/the-impact-of-attendance-instructor-contact-and Cronbach, L. (1969). Heredity, environment, and educational policy. Harvard Educational Review, 39(2), 338–347. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.39.2.nvr226676j010551 Edwards, M. M. (1991). Building conditions, parental involvement, and student achievement in the D.C. Public school system. Georgetown University. Ehrenberg, R. G., & Brewer, D. J. (1994). Do school and teacher characteristics matter? Evidence from High School and Beyond. Economics of Education Review, 13(1), 1–17. Ferguson, R. F., & Ladd, H. F. (1996). How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding School Accountable: Performance–based Reform in Education (pp. 256–298). Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Flowers, C. E. (1966). Effects of an Arbitrary Accelerated Group Placement on the Tested Academic Achievement of Educationally Disadvantaged Students. Teachers College, Columbia University. Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1997). Why Don’t Schools and Teachers Seem to Matter? Assessing the Impact of Unobservables on Educational Productivity. Journal of Human Resources, 32(3), 505–523. Halawah, I. (2006). The effect of motivation, family environment, and student characteristics on academic achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(2), 91–99. Factors Affecting Student…… (Lily Suhaily; Yasintha Soelasih) 35 Hanushek, E. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84–117. Hoxby, C. (2000). The effects of class size on student achievement: New evidence from population variation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(4), 1239–1285. Lee, P.-L., Hamman, D., & Lee, C. C. (2007). The relationship of family closeness with college students’ self-regulated learning and school adjustment. College Student Journal, 41(4), 779– 787. Lloyd, F., & Pidgeon, D. A. (1961). An investigation into the effect of coaching on non-verbal test materials with European, Indian and African children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 31(2), 145–151. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1961.tb02926.x Murnane, R. J., Maynard, R. A., & Ohls, J. C. (1981). Home resources and children’s achievement. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 63(3), 369–377. Noftle, E. E., & Robins, R. W. (2007). Personality predictors of academic outcomes: Big fivecorrelates of GPA and SAT scores. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 116–130. Pidgeon, D. A. (1970). Expectation and Pupil Performance. NFER. Strauss, M. A. (1951). Mental Ability and Cultural Needs – A Physho-Cultural Interpretation of Inteligence Test of Ceylon University Entrants. American Sociological Review, 16, 371–375. Sunyoto, D. (2007). Analisis regresi dan kolerasi bivariat: Ringkasan dan kasus. Yogyakarta: Amara. Watanabe, L. E., & Jasinski, J. (2005). The effects of college Student Employment on Academic Achievement. The University of Central Florida Undergraduate Research Journal, 1, 38–47. Retrieved from https://www.urj.ucf.edu/docs/urjmanuscript_watanabe_080509.pdf