Introduction
There have been increasing concerns over education standards all over the world. Debates are ongoing about numerous education related issues both at national and international levels. The light-speed trends that have been observed in technological advancement have necessitated the development of educational structures that streamline education and training to the needs of the labor market. For instance, an automated production line may force a firm to seek more highly skilled personnel to supervise and program it (Holmes and Mayhew 3). Such personnel may be obtainable through retraining of a firm’s existing workforce or simply seeking freshly trained personnel.
Higher education institutions have thus been grappling with the need to produce better skilled trainees to match the requirements of the job market. However, contrary to expectations, higher education systems around the world are faced with numerous challenges, which constrain their ability to deliver adequately. Despite the challenges, the overall trends in student intake have registered growth in the recent past (Duderstadt 14).
This growth includes the engineering discipline, which is of interest to this report. Duderstadt (31) notes that engineering faced a decline in student interest up to around 2003 but since then, there has been an upward trend in enrollment for engineering courses.
Oregon State University (OSU), which forms the basis of this study, is part of the higher education system and as such, is no exception to the prevailing dynamics. The University was placed in the 276-300 category by The Times Higher Education World University Rankings for the 2012/2013 period. The ranking implies that the University although it tries to bring itself to world standards, it still falls behind many American universities in terms of performance and general outlook. Of particular interest to this report however, is the performance of OSU’s engineering students.
Research Problem
The current engineering job market requires better-trained and well-equipped engineers who are more creative and potential high achievers. However, the education and training sector has increasingly been plagued with numerous challenges including claims of deteriorating standards. Higher education policy agendas of the United States have in the past revolved around increasing degree production and access to higher education issues but have largely ignored increasing educational performance or creativity of the graduates released to the job market. Issues of performance and creativity of graduates seem to be largely left to the internal structures of higher education institutions to address.
Many institutions of higher learning have thus endeavored to set themselves apart as centers of excellence through obtaining internationally acclaimed accreditations such as the ISO certification. However, such accreditations do not directly translate to higher academic achievement for students. The Oregon State University for instance, like other American universities, produces engineering graduates who have an insufficient body of knowledge (Perkins 44).
This assertion implies that they have to learn some concepts while already on the job. This trend is undesirable and the relevant stakeholders should address it conclusively. This research study thus sought to explore avenues of increasing educational performance and creativity of engineering students at the Oregon State University in order to avail the stakeholders with viable options, which they can employ while addressing performance related challenges at OSU and other American universities.
Significance of the Proposed Study
The study is expected to be instrumental in heightening the performance and creativity of engineering students at the University. This improvement is expected to change the reputation of Oregon State University graduates, which seems to be very low in the regions surrounding the University and some other parts of the United States and as Wallace and Madesn (33) note, play a key role in developing the Corvallis region. The study recommendations shall also be open for implementation by other faculties within the University and beyond. In this manner, the study could set precedence for an overhaul of the entire Higher Education System in the state of Oregon and even the entire country.
Purpose of the study
The purpose of the study was to suggest new techniques or ways of improving the existing instruction techniques and other relevant engagements that will culminate into better educational achievement and creativity for engineering students at the Oregon State University.
Statement of Hypothesis
The study was based on the hypothesis that
Educational performance and creativity of engineering students at OSU are below acceptable levels.
Assumptions of the Study
The study made the following assumptions:
- That the students who were interviewed in the study gave their honest opinion of the true state of affairs at OSU.
- That the past performance of engineering students at OSU was evaluated under the same prevailing conditions.
- That the disparities arising due to differences in cohort numbers had negligible impacts on overall performance.
Limitations of the Study
Some of the most notable limitations faced during the conduction of this study were as listed below.
- Some students were unwilling to commit a portion of their time to respond to the researcher’s questions.
- Certain vital documents related to student performance were not accessible due to their sensitivity.
Review of Related Literature
The engineering realm, for some time in the recent past, increasingly attracted dwindling numbers of new enrolments. The trend has since then changed and currently, the overall numbers of enrolments indicate an upward trend (Duderstadt 31). However, engineers who are currently in the field find it increasingly difficult to cope with the current technology and high-tech knowledge requirements of contemporary times without seeking additional education and training.
This inadequacy can partly be attributed to the fact that their initial training did not equip them adequately for the job environment as noted by Perkins (44), and partly to the fact that there has been minimal attention directed towards the improvement of higher education as noted by AASCU State Relations and Policy Analysis Team (1). These two aspects of the higher education system combine to affect the quality of the engineering graduate that is released to the job market and consequently his/her performance while in practice.
This state of affairs is not desirable and cannot be encouraged because according to Seliger et al. (11), engineering has a bearing on virtually every aspect of society and involves many people in ensuring that engineering plans and designs are delivered. It calls for only the best to be in practice since anything less can easily translate to inferior designs and poor quality structures, which could even turn out to be safety hazards.
It thus becomes worrying when Perkins (44), notes that the North American engineer is released to the field before fully acquiring the necessary knowledge he/she needs to start as a fully equipped self-reliant engineer. It is very risky for the higher education system to let engineers learn some vital job related facts while practicing because then, it is not guaranteed that the additional knowledge they gain is up to the standards of their training institutions.
According to Seliger et al. (14), engineers play a key role in societal development by coming up with ways that can help drive forward economic development in different aspects. However, the authors also note that society perceives an engineer as an individual who is over- concerned with science-related issues to the extent of having problems in communicating to society or responding to the social needs of those around them. Seliger et al. (13) further strengthen this assertion when they note that currently, most high school students in Canada do not perceive engineering as an avenue that could lead to success and prestige that match the sacrifices made during the rigorous training period. Surely, the training is rigorous but that should not discourage students from pursuing engineering.
These occurrences have been ongoing amid concerns over the fact that new paradigms need to be incorporated in the engineering discipline. Duderstadt (2) notes that studies indicate that engineering practice, research and education need to take on new approaches that will help it to satisfy the twenty first century needs adequately due to their rapidly changing nature. Technological advancement has made the world a global village and as such, engineers are increasingly required to have an adequate knowledge base on global issues to fit well in the global outlook that firms tend to assume today.
Nations have also discovered that cutting-edge technologies are central to ensuring economic prosperity and are therefore encouraging research in various areas of engineering because engineering is pivotal in delivering the said technologies (Duderstadt 4). To add to the importance attached to engineering, there is a serious need to realize that the existing structures and systems that were used to train engineers originate in the twentieth century. In addition, no matter how much effort is channeled towards trying to streamline structures and systems to current engineering needs, the engineering discipline will still face challenges in the fast paced and sophisticated twenty first century mode of life (Duderstadt 5).
Past studies indicate that the quality of higher education especially in engineering has deteriorated over the years despite relentless efforts to keep them high. The concerns over quality seem to stem from the fact that education systems across the globe try to train current engineers using the twentieth century curriculum yet they are expected to fit in the twenty first century job arena.
Duderstadt (4) notes that the twenty first century job market requires engineers to be ‘technically competent, globally sophisticated, culturally aware, innovative and entrepreneurial, flexible, and mobile.’ There have been attempts at reforming the engineering curricula to match the current needs of the job market but the approach only seems to overload the curricula making the training almost a harrowing experience for the trainees.
Scott et al. (41) opine that today society has embraced diversity and so institutions of higher learning are required to consider diversity in their intake of students. The diversity in student intake, especially considering the educational background of each student, puts institutions in a tight spot on the approach to employ insofar as the educational process is concerned. Logically, the diverse backgrounds of students would require diversity in the educational process as well.
However, such an approach is not practically possible and as such, an entire cohort is often subjected to the same educational process. The approach ends up favoring only one or a few groups within the cohort because the educational process was developed with these groups in mind (Scott et al. 41). Such a scenario is witnessed because globalization in education is relatively new and education systems and curricula around the world still bear the outlook of the traditional educational requirements, which in turn favor the traditional beneficiaries of the systems and curricula.
Universities in the United States should thus take a proactive approach to matters of improving graduates’ abilities for instance adopting models that have proved fruitful elsewhere. A comparison between a European engineering graduate and an American engineering graduate reveals that the training received by the American graduate falls short of expectations at some point. This assertion stems from the fact that European universities embraced the ‘Bologna Process’ which has been instrumental in changing the state of higher education in Europe (Perkins 44). Such a model could as well be tried in the American context since it has a demonstrated record of accomplishment of producing high output graduates.
Perkins (45) notes that the training period for engineers in Europe is longer than in the US because after adopting the Bologna resolutions on higher education, European countries discovered that the engineering curricula could not be adequately delivered in four years (Perkins 44). Forums such as the one that was organized in Bologna are often aimed at ensuring that globalization includes education so that students can transfer from or to any excellent institution without much difficulty. However, such efforts still face numerous challenges such as that of some governments being hesitant in committing to such agreements.
The past literature indicates that numerous studies have been conducted in the area of engineering education in the entire world as well as in the USA. These studies address various issues, which are considered important for engineers both in training and in practice. The most dominant theme that emerges from most of the studies however, is the need for change in the approach to engineering, which has been necessitated by the rapid changes that have been witnessed in the job market. This aspect thus makes it clear that engineering education as it is, no matter how much the traditional principles underlying engineering are amended to take on the outlook of current times, will still face challenges. The need for a completely new approach to engineering at this time cannot be overemphasized.
Research Methods
The research study sought to achieve its purpose through a comprehensive review of existing primary and secondary literature on the University, its faculty of engineering as well as general literature on higher education and techniques of achieving better performance in higher education. This goal was achieved through a careful analysis of accessible University records to determine the trends in the academic performance of students. Specific attention was paid to performance trends of engineering students at the University.
In the researcher’s quest to establish a non-biased result, a few engineering students were interviewed to get their perspective on OSU’s engineering program. This move was thought necessary given the fact that the students are the major beneficiaries of the programs run by the university and were therefore capable of evaluating how helpful the programs have been to them. Where students could not be reached, online student reviews of the institution and its programs were employed to get a student perspective.
The established findings were then discussed elaborately in the discussion section with an emphasis on pointing out alternative approaches to the currently used approaches. The discussion of findings included the incorporation of relevant graphs, charts and tables, which support the established facts. The graphical representations were incorporated to strengthen the findings and make it easier to understand the researcher’s interpretations of the findings.
The researcher then wound up by identifying principal ideas that could lead to the success of the universities endeavors and outlined them as recommendations for Oregon State University because they were considered relevant to the situation of the University.
Analysis and Data
Overview of OSU
Oregon State University (OSU) currently boasts of about 20,500 undergraduate and about 4,000 graduate students enrolled in its various programs (Oregon State University Para.3). At undergraduate level the university runs over two hundred (200) programs while at the graduate level, it boasts of about eighty (80) different programs to choose from (Oregon State University Para.6). The University is one of the Carnegie Research Universities in the US and as such, is under obligation to carry out intensive research. The student population is almost divided equally gender wise with male students at 52.9 per cent and female students 47.1 per cent of the overall student population as shown the chart below.
Of this total population, the college of engineering has 5,907 students at both graduate and undergraduate levels of which 4,989 are male and 918 female (Oregon State University Para.13). The total number of engineering students amounts to about 25 per cent of the total OSU student population. This realization implies that about a quarter of the OSU student population is composed of engineering students.
OSU’s Engineering Programs and their Assessment
The study also established that the University offers a variety of degree programs for the student to choose from as they register. Under the department of engineering, it was established that OSU offers thirteen different engineering or science courses, which include all the traditional engineering areas such as mechanical, electrical, civil, and production engineering as well as newer ones such as computer engineering.
Others include closely related areas of study such as Computer Science and Radiation together with Health Physics among others (Oregon State University Para.11). For all these programs, OSU has clearly defined assessment criteria that outline the parameters that are employed in assessing each program and trying to ensure quality training for its graduates. The criteria are as indicated in the table below.
It is evident from the table that the institution struggles to ensure that its students receive high quality training at its level. Almost all programs are checked against each of the outlined criterion showing that the program follows or meets the criterion in question.
In addition to OSU’s elaborate Student Performance Assessment (SPA), the University also tries to ensure that the engineering students meet all requirements before enrolling for any engineering program. The University offers pre-engineering training for those who may not directly qualify for the engineering programs that it offers (Oregon State University Para. 16). No student can be allowed to join any of OSU’s engineering programs before satisfactorily proving that they are adequately qualified for the same. After joining the programs, the university expects students to uphold integrity by maintaining academic honesty as outlined in the University Academic Honesty Policy or be penalized according to the guidelines in the policy.
In an effort to ensure that its curricula remain relevant to the changing needs of society, OSU reviews its academic programs every ten years. The reviews serve to streamline the training programs provided by OSU with the prevailing market needs for each area of training. In the reviews, the non-obsolete parts of the curricula are scraped off and the areas that are lagging behind updated to bring it to the standards that are generally acceptable at the particular time.
Accreditation of engineering programs
OSU just like many other American universities enlists the services of non-governmental bodies to assist in accrediting its programs. Most of its “engineering programs are accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)” (Oregon State University Para. 13). A few are accredited courtesy of other bodies; for instance, The American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) accredits Construction Engineering Management. Such bodies help institutions to strive to meet some necessary requirements in their operation.
International Ranking for Oregon State University
The study able to establish that in terms of overall performance, OSU was ranked by The Times Higher Education Rankings of 2013 in the collective category of ranging between 276 and 300 (Times Higher Education Para. 4). This ranking places OSU behind many North American universities. In the North American context, OSU appears takes position 222 behind numerous American and several Canadian universities (Times Higher Education Para. 6).
These rankings considered several key parameters such as the teaching-learning environment, international outlook, the extent of research at the university and its contribution to industry income and the extent to which scholars have cited its materials. On all the five areas of evaluation, only the extent of citation of its materials was able to score above average at 64.1 per cent (Times Higher Education Para. 10). All the other parameters scored below average with the teaching-learning environment and research areas scoring below the 30 per cent mark at 27.1 per cent and 24.2 per cent respectively (Times Higher Education Para. 8).
These findings indicate that by world standards, OSU is generally a below average performer so that even though it is ranked ahead of many universities across the world, the fact remains that its performance leaves much to be desired. Emphasis should be placed on performance rather than the position because the university could still hold its position but with higher scores if the higher education standards were as expected.
About 60 American universities attained an overall score of above the 50 per cent mark with up to 17 of them scoring above 80 per cent in the overall score (Times Higher Education Para.13). The bottom line from these findings is that OSU can and should do better than its current position. It plays on the same platform with the leaders and as such, has no reason to stop it from matching their scores.
On a different front, OSU was ranked at position 70 out of 150 among the top American universities of research by the Center for Measuring University Performance in their 2011 annual report (Capaldi et al.12). This aspect once again portrays the university as one that averagely falls around the half way mark in terms of research. However, what should be noted from the table below, it is clear that the university has shown a slow but steady downward trend in terms of research over the years. The universities standards seem to be gradually dropping over the years from 1990 to 2009.
Despite these rankings, which seem to paint the university as a place where everything shows a downward trend, the university has registered some positive milestones of which it can boast among its peers. These milestones can be seen in the following areas.
Recent Achievements by the OSU Engineering Community
The college of engineering at OSU has made notable achievements in the recent past. Among these achievements, the university was able to claim the top spot in the recently concluded 2013 Formula Sun Grand Prix competition in Austin (Oregon State University Para. 11). The university’s engineering team drove their solar car to victory despite spirited competition from high-class universities in the United States of America. This aspect is a clear indicator that the University’s engineering team is capable of coming up with technology that can favorably compete at national level.
In addition to its achievement in producing a top class solar racing car, the OSU engineering team, in collaboration with experts from Arkansas University, is likely to revolutionize the cargo transportation industry. This revolution involves rolling out a cutting-edge technology that is touted as being capable of dramatically reducing costs in the truck transport industry as well as improving the quality of life for truck drivers (Oregon State University Para. 9).
The technology may not have been approved yet for public implementation but the fact that it is in the offing is a clear pointer to OSU’s endeavors aimed at staying relevant in addressing the needs of society.
OSU’s news and research communication section also recently reported that research was ongoing on the possibilities of coming up with solar cells from some cheap materials combined with ethylene glycol, a substance that is commonly in antifreeze products (Oregon State University Para.9). The solar cells if successfully developed will encourage the use of solar energy, which is currently considerably low because materials used in making solar appliances are either expensive or toxic and as such discourage widespread development of the appliances.
Students’ take on OSU
Students’ evaluation of OSU was done at both the direct interview level and through an analysis of online reviews of the University courtesy of current and former students. It was established that there was a mixture of feelings about the university. A substantial number of students noted that OSU a good place but the institution seems to place too much emphasis on sports that is, athletics (Student Review Para.13). Sports are rated very highly among other key areas of the University’s activities. It was also established that OSU is a good institution for engineering students since they receive more attention and the university culture favors them (Student Review Para. 11). For instance, an assessment of the nuclear engineering school, which is one of the schools under the college of engineering, yielded the following results.
Nuclear Engineering Rating
The ratings match some sentiments that were raised by a student in an online review on the University website. The student noted that OSU was great for engineering students and but the problem was with accessing the faculty and dealing with the office. The office is portrayed as being unhelpful to the students.
However, from online reviews, it was established that about 46.8 per cent of current or former students would come back to OSU if given the chance to do so. The remaining 53.2 per cent asserted that they would not come back to OSU even if given a chance to do so (Student Review Para. 16).
Summary of Findings
Based on the study findings outlined in the preceding section, every indicator seems to point to the fact that OSU is a prestigious engineering university in the state of Oregon and beyond. Gender parity is minimal at the overall student population. However, it emerges clearly in the college of engineering where out of over five thousand students; only less than 1000 are female. This information shows that there are other programs, which have higher female students than male students.
The University, in its engineering education strives to ensure quality through intensive internal assessment and external accreditation. The university largely depends on ABET for accreditation of its engineering courses. However, despite its efforts, the university was ranked badly both nationally and internationally. It performed generally below average in the parameters that were used for evaluating its performance. This realization tends to suggest that the university is a below average performer in all its activities but an internal analysis reveals otherwise.
OSU’s research efforts indicate that it is indeed a university, which should rank better. It recently developed a solar car that performed than all other research universities’ cars in the Formula Sun Grand Prix competition. Although closely followed by competitors, the fact remains that its car outperformed all the others. The university is also working on a technology that could revolutionize the truck transportation industry.
In addition to this, OSU’s researchers are working on possibilities of developing cheap and non-toxic solar cells that could boost usage of solar energy. They are clearly carrying out research in a manner that helps them stay relevant to the needs of society. They do what they can on their own and involve other universities in places, which need teamwork.
Student reviews on OSU also indicate that the University is a good place for engineering students. A quick look at the nuclear engineering program reveals that it rates among the highest in all the programs the university has to offer. Although some students perceived OSU as an institution, which concentrates too much on extra curricula activities, this perception does not seem to affect the college of engineering which was the object of this study.
Based on the findings of the study, the researcher has reason to believe that the creativity of and educational performance of OSU engineering students is not below acceptable standards. The study thus refutes the hypothesis as stated.
Conclusion
It has emerged that OSU is a university, which strives to ensure that it delivers only the best to its students. Though ranked world wide as a below average performer, a careful analysis of OSU’s internal structure revealed that the university leaves no room for poor performance especially in its college of engineering. Therefore, this assertion means that even though there might be a need for better performance because there is always room for improvement, OSU can only strive to slightly improve its engineering programs using best practices that are outlined by experts because the university has already ensured that the programs are up to acceptable levels. OSU College of engineering is thus a good place for aspiring engineers as it has the capability of setting a good precedence to a student’s engineering career.
Recommendations
Despite the fact that the study established that the University is a haven for engineering programs where students meet friendly faculty and are supported by extensive research to explore their creative ideas in engineering, it is still important to point out a few areas that could make things better than they are. The researcher thus recommends the following:
Responding to changing needs
OSU’s research program has focused on addressing fundamental societal issues as evidenced by its recent achievements. This move is good for the University but there is also need for the university to shorten the duration of its program review period. With the current pace of technological advancement, ten years is quite a long time, to keep pace with the rapid changes, minor adjustments could be made every six years or so. This aspect will help place the college in a better standing for federal funding to help support research programs and explore ideas that are more creative. The changes should also include new approaches to teaching which adequately prepare expert for prevailing conditions in the job market.
Broaden the spectrum of partnerships
The University has done well in collaborating with other institutions in its research endeavors and placement of its students for internship. However, there is a need to broaden its partnership base to include every relevant institution in all sectors. This move should incorporate all players in education from elementary to the highest stakeholder at the state and national level, which should also include research and resource sharing with the best in the industry. It would help in expanding boundaries for student creativity and performance since they will be able to borrow from some partners, inspire others, and in so doing, improve their own standings.
Lifelong learning
Lifelong learning is a concept that has been in the education and training domain for a long time. However, engineers seem not to benefit from it since they only serve in organizations for some time before their skills become obsolete. OSU should devise measures, which will help to inculcate a culture of lifelong learning in its graduates so that as they practice, they keep in touch with the University to keep on updating their skills and knowledge base to stay relevant to the industry. Such a program could be expensive, but is viable as the beneficiaries can also help to support it.
Works Cited
AASCU State Relations and Policy Analysis Team: Top 10 Higher Education State Policy Issues 2013. Web.
Capaldi, Elizabeth, John Lombardi, Craig Abbey, and Diane Craig 2010, The Top American Research Universities: 2010 Annual Report. Web.
Duderstadt, James. Engineering for a Changing World: A Roadmap to the Future of American Engineering Practice, Research, and Education. 2009. Web.
Holmes, Craig, and Ken Mayhew. The Changing Shape of the UK Job Market and its Implications for the Bottom Half of Earners. 2012. Web.
Oregon State University. 2013. Web.
Perkins, Sarah. “A Comparative Analysis of Civil Engineering Program Standards in Canada, the United States and Europe.” ITE Journal 79.5 (2009): 44-5. Print.
Scott, Ian, Nan Yeld, and Jane Hendry. “A Case for Improving Teaching and Learning in South African Higher Education: Educational Strategies for Improving Graduate Output.” Higher Education Monitor 6.1 (2007): 41-58. Print.
Seliger, Gunther, Marwan Khraisheh, and Ismail Jawahir. Advances in Sustainable Manufacturing: Future Trends in Engineering Education and Research, New York: Springer Publishing, 2011. Print.
Student Review: Oregon State University: Undergraduate Summary 2013. Web.
Times Higher Education: World University Rankings. 2013. Web.
Wallace, Andrew, and Maria Madsen. “Local Higher Education in a Global Age.” International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning 2.2 (2006): 25-35. Print.
Progress Report
Introduction
This progress report outlines the milestones so far covered in the ongoing research study on the topic “Increasing the Educational Performance and Creativity of Engineering Students at the Oregon State University.” The research process has been challenging and full of adventures in form of previously unknown facts and meeting new people but the progress made is promising. Probably, with the guidance of the methods outlined in the proposal, the study shall be successfully brought to conclusion.
The key areas of the ongoing study include a background to the study, the research problem, the purpose of the study and its significance, assumptions and limitations of the study, a review of the existing literature, a consideration of the findings and finally the recommendations. The status of the ongoing study is as outlined below.
Research progress and key findings
This section describes the areas of the study that have been covered as well as those that are pending. To begin with, the progress that has been so far made is discussed. The researcher began the study by carrying out a background check of the status of the engineering job market to establish if there were any current issues related to training quality. Apparently, practicing engineers encounter numerous challenges occasioned by the rapid technological changes that have been witnessed around the world.
The research problem thus emerged clearly; the job market requires high caliber engineers while the education and training sector is seemingly constrained in meeting the requirements. This made the study significant because if conducted, it will help address the emerging problem. A review of the existing literature, which has already been carried out, was deemed necessary to find out what other scholars’ position on the same issue was.
The literature review revealed that in deed there is a problem concerning harmonizing the education and training sector capabilities with the job market specifications. The literature also showed that many scholars realize the need to depart from current old-fashioned training programs to new approaches that would match the 21st century mode of life in all its aspects.
The researcher thus looks to proceed with the data analysis phase because this is where the study is currently. One of the key finding already established so far is that OSU was ranked in the 276-300 category alongside thirty other universities across the world in the Times Higher Education world university ranking for 2012/2013. The rankings seem to pitch the university as a below average performer. However, more is yet to be established.
What remains pending therefore is the conclusion of the data analysis section, which will lead to summarizing the key findings. From the key findings, it will be possible to identify recommendations that could assist in improving engineering education at OSU.
Overview of methods
Of the methods outlined in the proposal, the researcher has so far employed review and analysis of both primary and secondary literature. Interviews are yet to be conducted and the same applies to the analysis of student reviews on OSU. These two methods are anticipated to help in accomplishing the remaining part of the study.
Way Forward
The researcher looks forward to carrying out the interviews with students as well as analyzing more literature both online and print, in order to bring the study to conclusion. Primary records on student performance have proved difficult to come by but the researcher looks forward to using what will be accessible online and offline to conclude the study.