Effects of business school student’s study time on the learning process

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to clarify the relationship between the student’s study time and the learning process in the higher education system by adapting the total quality management (TQM) principles-process approach. Contrary to Deming’s (1982) constancy of purpose to improve the learning process, some students in higher education postpone their studies till the last few weeks of an examination. Design/methodology/approach The paper opted for an experimental study with three different classes of business school students. The experimental research question was “Do student’s study time (massed or distributed spacing) has an impact on the learning process?” Findings Results indicated that students in the “Strictly supervised study time” group improved on their learning process more than the “Not Strictly Supervised study time” and the control group. It is important for students to manage their own learning activities and follow a regular study time and constantly improve their learning process as proposed by Deming (1982). Research limitations/implications This study used restricted to undergraduate business school students in a university in Ghana, and may not necessarily be applicable universally. One other limitation was that the authors did not control for lecturer’s expectancies and how these may have influenced the students’ learning process. Another potential limitation was that TQM was the only subject area used for this study. Practical implications This objective of the study is to use the TQM principles of process approach, the Learning Theory and the Learning Strategies from the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) – Pintrich et al. (1991) – to support theoretical and practical implications of the relationship between the student’s study time and the learning process. The results imply that students must take a more active role in their learning by having a regular study time. Originality/value Currently, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are not many experiment-based studies on a student’s study time using the MSLQ-Pintrich et al. (1991) approach. This study contributes to the literature by examining how a student’s study time (massed or distributed spacing) has an impact on the learning process.

Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: a structural equation modeling approach

“…Thus, e-learning gives the students the flexibility in terms of time and place; it can also be as a mean of education that incorporates self-motivation, communication, efficiency and technology. E-learning is the acquisition and use of knowledge distributed and facilitated primarily by electronic means (Janda, 2016;Tetteh, 2016). Driscoll (2002) categorized the benefits of e-learning as strategic and technical benefits.…”

University students’ intention to use e-learning systems

“…In terms of time and location, e-learning provides learners convenience and flexibility. Learners acquire and make use of knowledge disseminated digitally (Tetteh, 2016). E-learning does not exclusively refer to Web-based learning; it also includes mobilelearning, where materials are delivered to wireless devices such as smartphones, tablets or other mobile devices; hence, the term e-learning covers a wide spectrum including computerbased training, computer-based instructions, online education and other terms, and it is useful to facilitate learning at educational institutions and to provide a conducive atmosphere for efficient and effective corporate training (Turban et al, 2015).…”

Effects of Classroom Attendance and Learning Strategies on the Learning Outcome

“…What may be surprising is that the predictive value lies particularly with having a regular time of studying and attending classes regularly. The predictive value of students’ regular study time impact on the learning outcome has been well established (Tetteh, 2016). Thus, based on previous research, one might argue that students attending classes regularly and regular study time will have a greater chance of improving their learning outcome.…”

“…As the data were collected and analyzed, an interpretative framework was constructed, so the sampling strategy changed from largely judgmental to largely theoretical, to build on the learning outcome theory (Tetteh, 2016). All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 20.…”

“…Other studies have identified a number of factors that may have contributed to influence the learning outcome, such as the benefits of spaced versus massed learning (Goode et al , 2008; Tetteh, 2016). Although our current study adds to the body of knowledge demonstrating this relationship between students’ class attendance and learning outcome (Abrokwa, 2016; Aldamen et al , 2015; Bos et al , 2016), there is little information about the effect of the students’ learning strategies, study time and demographic characteristics (gender, part-time or full time student) on the learning outcome (Lin, 2016; Louis et al , 2016).…”