our brm final

8/10/2019 Our Brm Final

1/23

SIkandar Butt 10108018Shuja Ahmad 10108008Section B

Acknowledgement

First of all from the depth of our heart we are really thankful to ALLAH that HE gave us strength

and opportunity to do such a precious work as our academic and then we want to thanks our

instructor Dr. Ismaeel Ramay without whom support we could not do even a single step

regarding this project. He supervised us on every step so that we could do such a worthy work

and became able to establish our first proposal. We also thankful to GIFT University as well as

our parents who give us opportunity to get education in this institute.


2/23

Academic performance and

life satisfaction of student

Shuja Ahmad, Sikandar Sajjad

Gift Business School, Gujranwala, Pakistan

Abstract

The basic aim of this study is to locate those factors which affect a student life satisfaction eitherit was external or internal. We want to establish a relationship between the life satisfaction of the

students and their academic performance. This study is about those students which are studying

in different universities. In this study we want to make analysis and comparison between privateand public university students which belongs to different SES and also from different areas(rural and urban). For this study we collected the data from the questionnaire from Governmentand public universities. We filled out questionnaire from the students of undergraduates and

graduates. Total 150 questionnaires we filled for our research study. Factor analysis was performed to check the success of factors. Then use the correlation to check the relationshipbetween variables and Regression is also applied to check the impact of Independent variableson dependent variable. Correlation s result is positive related and significant. In regressiononly one hypothesis can be rejected. Single sample and double sample independent t-test canalso be applied. The limitation of our study is that our response rate is very low. We shouldcalculate data from more than three private n public universities. This is research paper.

Keywords Brand: Life satisfaction; Academic performance; Family satisfaction; Students lifesatisfaction; Life style.


3/23

Introduction:

The current study explored the extent to which demographic, academic, and psychologicalvariables directly and interactively predicted life satisfaction within a large sample of adolescentsimmediately prior to their enrollment in college. Across indicators of gender, disability,

academic achievement, and religiousness, students displayed very similar levels of satisfaction.Multigroups application of path analysis was used to examine the interaction of demographic,academic, and psychological variables in predicting satisfaction. Although the psychologicalvariables predicted life satisfaction equally well across gender and disability status, meaning inlife was a stronger predictor of life satisfaction among Asian Americans than among any otherracial/ethnic group. With some exceptions, the predictors of life satisfaction for incoming collegestudents appear very similar to those for current student and adult populations.

Life satisfaction is defined as a positive cognitive evaluation of ones life, and an importantindicator of subjective well-being (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). The literature

exploring the demographic, academic, and psychological predictors of life satisfaction is robust.In their meta-analysis on predictors of life satisfaction, Diener, Suh, Lucas, and Smith (1999)noted that demographic variables which are the data that colleges and universities most oftencollect regarding their matriculating students generally fail to account directly for substantialvariance in subjective well-being. Rather, demographic variables more often interact with

psychological factors to predict life satisfaction. Building upon past research on demographicand psychological predictors of life satisfaction with college student and adult populations, thisstudy may further our understanding of how demographic and psychological factors interact withregard to life satisfaction for students prior to any changes they may experience during theirtransition into college. In the following sections, we examine previous, and sometimesconflicting, evidence regarding the specific predictors of life satisfaction used in the currentstudy. When possible, information is provided on those predictors as they relate to a young adult

population .


4/23

Significance of the Study

Life satisfaction is defined as the global evaluation of life of a person (Pavot & Sandvik,

1991). Although many studies about students life satisfaction have been conducted (Diener,

1994), students life satisfaction has recently became focus of the empir ical work. The recent

work have been demonstrated huge importance of life satisfaction that is put up in the

understanding of the psychological well being of the students, children and adolescents. The

increase in life satisfaction of students has been measured the important operation of education

(Neill, 1981). In addition the satisfaction of life has both positive as well as negative effect,

which is necessary constituent of individual well-being (Neil etal., 1985).

A survey has conducted and this study exposed that the university students of Regina Canada

were normally fairly fulfilled with the lives especially with respect to the ancestral relationships,

livelihood environment, and relationships with very close friends, and the living arrangements. A

survey in the University of Regina revealed that respondents who indicated a higher socio-

economic Status, achieved higher GPA, and become more satisfied with their Academic

performance, self-esteem, social relationships, and living Conditions, expressed a very higher

level of satisfaction with their life (Stratton, 1990; Pounder, 2007; Henry P.H. Chow, 2005).

Academic performance of students, their educational experience, and their life satisfaction are

positively related to each other (Bailey and Miller, 1998; Cheung, 2000; Gilman et al., 2000;

Hong and Giannakopoulos, 1995). Satisfaction of a student with family life and friends are

positively associated with their overall life satisfaction (Dew and Huebner, 1994; Greenspoon

and Saklofske, 2001; Maton, 1990; Seibel & Johnson, 2001). Better living conditions like its

place of residence and the people which are the respondents live are significantly and positively

related with the life satisfaction among the university students.


5/23

Problem Statement

Generally it is studied and understands that student performance is based on their life

satisfaction. A students life satisfaction based on four main things which are leisure satisfaction,

family satisfaction, university satisfaction and social satisfaction which hits the student

performance directly. Students with high satisfaction showing a greater resiliency and be less

delicate in the face of academic challenges. Additionally it was prompt by our experience with

the converse, that is a student having low level of their life satisfaction and seemed to detail their

focus and deteriorate their performance in the class room (Joseph C, Arthaud, 2005).

In essence, Students which are studying in the public and private universities, belong to different

SES and belongs to different areas shows different level of satisfaction. Satisfaction of the

students with both academic and nonacademic life domains are positively related to their overall

life satisfaction (Joseph C. Arthaud-Day, 2005). The study purpose is to establish the relationship

between students life satisfaction and its academic performance who are studying in different

universities and the comparison between private and public university students belongs to

different SES and geographic.

Aim of the Study

The basic aim of this study is to locate those factors which affect a student life satisfaction either

it was external or internal. We want to establish a relationship between the life satisfaction of the

students and their academic performance. This study is about those students which are studying

in different universities. In this study we want to make analysis and comparison between private

and public university students which belongs to different SES and also from different areas (rural

and urban).


6/23


7/23

outside the class and the achievement of student depend upon the satisfaction of the student

(Astin, 1993), or relation between objective university characteristics and student's academic

performance (Astin, 1993; Hu & Kuh 2003). The relationship between university characteristics

and student performance really matters but there are many other variables which influence the

student life satisfaction and their performance. That educational experience, academic

performance and life satisfaction are positively related (Bailey, 1998; Hong and Giannakopoulos,

1995). Satisfaction with friends and family are positively related with the life satisfaction (Dew,

1994; Saklofske, 2001; Seibel & 2001). A lot of variables have been focused and discussed

which have influence on students life satisfaction with respect to their achievements. Studentswho are highly satisfied with their life show better resiliency and they are fragile to face

academic problems and challenges. The research also tells us that the students with low level of

satisfaction are derailed and deteriorate from their goals and objectives (Joseph, Jennit P. 2005).

The students with high level of satisfaction are motivated towards their goals and objectives

because their needs and wants are being fulfilled and they are confident to achieve their goals

and converse of it, the students with low level of satisfaction are de-motivated because they feel

a sense of low confidence level and are confused about the future. The performance of student

can be estimated by the grades which it gets from its teachers in return of some tasks and

assignments Well being and performance is an in basket exercises (Staw, 1993). The student

performance is also the base of student attitude which shows educations role in addressing

social issues. A good social interaction with people is an important thing as it increases or

decreases the risk of loss when you are serving an organization. In such cases when good social

interaction skills are not developed in a student he/she would never prove her/him in the field of

industry. Students, who belong to a higher socio economic status (SES), get higher GPA and the


8/23

other who were the more satisfied with self-esteem, academic experience and relationship as well

as living conditions were extra satisfied with their live. Those students are show better

performance (Stratton, 1990, 2005). These are the major factors which increase or decrease a

student satisfaction with their life. Cross-national study have suggested that the student of the

western university, economically well off societies account higher rank regarding life satisfaction

(Dorahy, 1995, 2000). It will more appropriate and understandable when a survey study will be

conducted between those students which enjoy different social status, studying in different

universities and belongs to different areas.

Basically two frameworks are applied in the study. Firstly the relationship between dependent

and independent variables will be discussed of first framework and later the relationship between

IV and DV of second framework will be discussed. Our model is based on the integrated life

perspective and it proposes that the performance of the student is affected by different life

domains. The satisfaction level within all these domains is having a greater impact. The relation

between performance and satisfaction shows the overall life satisfaction. These domains differ

on the basis of population and demographics (Andrews & withy 2006).

Family Satisfaction

The relation between family satisfaction and life satisfaction of the student discusses as a student

life satisfaction level greatly influence by their relationship with family. Family relationship is

based under respondents level of satisfaction of student re lationships with mother, father and

siblings. Studies concluded that satisfaction of students with friends & family are positively

related with the life satisfaction (Dew, 1994; Saklofske, 2001, Johnson, 2001). A student who

has high family satisfaction, become more satisfied with their life and act more positively


9/23

towards their academic performance and achievement. Many recent studies have been explored

that the ways in which students' satisfaction with life and motivation for learning can be

enhanced, the major role can be played by parents (Deci, 1981). All these a student life satisfaction

leads by family satisfaction in which parents attention in appropriate and positively manner for their

children is moderately effect.

H1: Family satisfaction of a student enhances their life satisfaction which increases students

academic performance and achievements.

Life style

Life style of a student matters a lots towards the student life satisfaction. Life style is measured on the

basis of living conditions of a student. Living satisfaction is assumed to be as a function of the variety and

quality of facilities available to a student at their residence (Norman D. Aitken, 1982). In our term paper

we actually want to make a comparison between those student who lived in different areas and how they

think and relate their life satisfaction with their life style. Better living condition in terms of bodily

condition and people to whom respondents live are positively and significantly related with the life

satisfaction between the university students (Chow, 2004).

H2: life style of the students positively related to their life satisfaction and academic

performance.

Socio Economic Status (SES)

There is reason to believe that socio economics status (SES) play an essential role for life

satisfaction in the students. Socio-economic status (SES) is usually described on the degree of

satisfaction with family background and financial status of the students. There is verification in

literature that socio economic status considerably affects the life satisfaction (Zumbo, Michalos,


10/23

2000; Henry.P.H and Chow, 2004). In beam of the elevated costs linked with the university

education and family background, it does not surprising that students from higher socio

economic background are more satisfied with their life.

H3: Students belong to a higher socio economic status (SES) background shows extra

satisfaction with their life and academic performance .

University retention

Direct thing which normally related with the performance of the students is their university and

the university retention. No doubt a student which more satisfied with their university life

showing good academic performance and more satisfy with their life. In our research we want to

make comparison between public and private university students, how they think and relate their

life satisfaction and achievements with their university life, university environment and how

much their university retention is related to their life satisfaction as a student. Teaching strategies

are significantly moderate to University retention and the student s life satisfaction. A student

will show a better performance when teachers maximized pressure and his controlling strategies

force a student to do hard work (Charley Flink 1990). A teacher plays an important role in the

student life and academic performance . Teachers teaching strategies are very helpful to create a

good communication environment in which student can learn effectively and efficiently. Self

esteem of students plays important role in the life satisfaction of the students. This factor hits

psychologically to the students. All the other factors which effect a student satisfaction are in

sense of external factors, but only self esteem is that which effects to a student internally.


11/23

Self esteem

Self-esteem is measured on the basis of respondents level of satisfaction of student with their

bodily appearance as well as self-image. A student which is more satisfied with their personality,

physical appearance and self image becomes more satisfy with their life.

H4 : In current situation students studied in private universities are more satisfied with their

academic performance and showing more life satisfaction.

The second framework have life satisfaction as IV and student performance as DV.

Life Satisfaction

The component of happiness should be related to satisfaction. It is obvious that if a person is

happy, he will be motivated towards his goal, same in our model the student performance will be

high when he will satisfy with his life. As Cropanzano and Wright (2001) note, happiness is

considered to be highly valuable by most people and scarce by many people, suggesting their

need to conserve or maintain happiness whenever possible. They term this model of happiness

the "resource maintenance model," and explain its differential effects for happy and unhappy

people. When an unhappy person goes to the job, he or she must be conscious about its reserve

happiness.

H5: Self esteem of the students has direct impact on their life satisfaction.

Academic performance

Everybody will be conscious when something he or she has in a limited supply (Joseph C.Rode

2007) we propose that the above arguments should also apply to the relationship between student


12/23

life satisfaction and academic performance. The moods of the person predicts that the positive

mood have an important impact on a persons behavior. (Organ 1990) This argument should be

applied to the relationship between life satisfaction and student performance. Various studies

have been found the relationship between student well being and its performance (Croponzano

1999, 2000). This relationship has a very strong link between life satisfaction and student

performance.

H6: Overall life satisfaction of students is positively related with their performance.

The study certainly addresses all the aspects but interest of student was not addressed properly. It

has a great importance because until student has any interest in the related field or course he/she

can never perform well. The independent variables which are addressed in this study are showing

strong relationship with dependent variable.


13/23

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Independent Variables (IV) Dependent Variable (DV)

P arents

attentionFamilySatisfaction

Life style

(rural/urban)

Student Life

Satisfaction

Studentacademicperformance/achievements

SocioEconomic

status

Universityretention

(private/public)

Teachingstrategies

Self esteem


14/23

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

Population frame

The population frame/sample frame of this study is all those university students which are

studying in private and government universities also having different life style and belongs to

different socio-economic status (SES). All questionnaires related to our study are filled by the

university students about their overall life satisfaction as a student and academic performance. A

student more appropriately explains the factors about their life satisfaction and those factors

which effect their academic performance and achievements. So our population frame is

university students of private and government. The educational performance and achievements

of the students is very closely related to their life satisfaction so its very import ant to study all

those variables which effect the students life satisfaction and their performance.

Unit of analysis

In this study as the questionnaire filled by the university students so the unit of analysis is

individual. Students very well know about their satisfaction and perfectly explain which factors

affect their life satisfaction and academic performance. Thats why we use single (individual)

unit of analysis in our study. Additional, in this study all the things that we take for measurement

and comparison are non-contrived. Because in this study there is no artificial settings and all the

steps taken were as they are in actual and natural.


15/23

Type of the Study

We use causal study because we want to check the impact of independent variable on dependent

variable. Students life satisfaction and their academic performance and achievements take as

dependent variable (DV). Family satisfaction, life style of the students on the basis of urban and

rural area, socio-economic status, and university retention in public and private universities and

self esteem of the students take as independent variable (ID). Parents attention takes as

moderating variable (MV) at the family satisfaction and teaching strategies attention takes as

moderating variable (MV).

Sample Selection

In this study total sample size is 175 through non statistical formula by taking the ratio 10:1, in

which 150 filled from those students which studying in private universities and 150 from those

who studying in Government universities, having different life style and belong to different SES.

This is sufficient sample size for our study due to time issue. This study is discussed the students

life satisfaction and their academic performance and achievements. This takes as dependent

variable (DV). In our study we independent variables (IV) such as family satisfaction in which

parents attention towards their children moderately effects, life style of the students on the basis

of urban and rural area, socio-economic status, university retention in public and private

universities in which teaching strategies is moderately effects and self esteem of a student. These

all variables are demographic and geographic variables. Thats why multiple sampling

techniques apply on our study.


16/23

Proposed data collection procedures

Structured Questionnaires are used for the data collection procedures in this study. We will

distribute the questionnaire to individual (university students) to get the data about our study and

then analyze and compare it through various tools, so then we can get present perfect results.

Proposed data analysis techniques

In this study we apply descriptive data analysis, factor analysis, correlation and regression to

check the relation between Independent and dependent variable. Through all above tools we

know the reliability of data. We want to see the impact of family satisfaction, life style, SES,

university retention and self esteem of the students towards overall life satisfaction and academic

performance of the students and also know that how hypothesis can be accept or reject.


17/23

DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS:

Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis is the measure of relationship or association between two numeric variables

that indicate both the direction and degree. Correlation also checks the strength and direction

between the variables. Signs with the values tell about the direction of the variables.

Table No 4: Correlation Analysis

Variable FS LS SES UR SE LST AP

FS 1

LS .613** 1

SES .464** .551** 1

UR .548** .684** .453** 1

SE .536** .519** .343** .608** 1

LST .521** .592** .496** .598** .602** 1

AP .426** .467** .472** .561** .477** .617** 1

Note: ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 (1%) level (2- tailed).

*Correlation is significant at 0.05 (5%) level (2- tailed).

Above tables show the correlation analysis between the variables. Here we check the relation

between all variables on by one. Family satisfaction (FS) give value of correlation with FS is 1

which means they are perfectly positive related to each other. Life style (LS) correlation value with

FS is .613 which means they are moderately strong positive correlate to each other and a double star

sign indicates that this correlation is significant at 1% and LS correlation value with LS is 1 which

shows they are perfectly positive related to each other. Socio-economic status (SES) correlation


18/23

value with FS is .464 which means they are week positive correlated to each other. SES correlation

value with LS is .551 which shows they are moderately strong positive correlated to each other and

SES correlation value with SES is 1 which shows they are perfectly positive correlated to each

other. University retention (UR) correlation value with FS is .548 which shows they are moderately

positive correlated to each other. UR correlation value with LS is .684 which shows they are also

moderately positive correlated to each other. UR correlation value with SES is .453 which shows

they are week positive correlated to each other and UR correlation value with UR is 1 which shows

they are perfectly positive correlated to each other. Self esteem (SE) correlation value with FS is

.536 which shows they are moderately strong positive correlated to each other. SE correlation valuewith LS is .519 which shows they are also moderately strong positive correlated to each other. SE

correlation value with SES is .343 which shows they are week positive correlated to each other. SE

correlation value with UR is .608 which shows they are also moderately positive correlated to each

other and SE correlation value with SE is 1 which shows they are perfectly positive correlated to

each other. Life satisfaction (LST) correlation value with FS is .521 which shows they are

moderately positive correlated to each other. LST correlation value with LS is .592 which shows

they are also moderately positive correlated to each other. LST correlation value with SES is .496

which shows they are week positive correlated to each other. LST correlation value with UR is .598

which shows they are also moderately positive correlated to each other. LST correlation value with

SE is .602 which shows they are moderately strong positive correlated to each other and LST

correlation value with LST is 1 which shows they are perfectly positive correlated to each other.

Academic performance (AP) correlation value with FS is .426 which shows they are week positive

correlated to each other. AP correlation value with LS is .467 which shows they are also moderately

positive correlated to each other. AP correlation value with SES is .472 which shows they are week


19/23

positive correlated to each other. AP correlation value with UR is .561 which shows they are also

moderately positive correlated to each other. AP correlation value with SE is .477 which shows they

are week positive correlated to each other. AP correlation value with LST is .617 which shows they

are moderately positive correlated to each other and AP correlation value with AP is 1 which shows

they are perfectly positive correlated to each other. All the variables show positive relation to each

other. No one in this have negative relation.

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Variance

AGE 150 1 4 1.89 .592 .351

GENDER 150 0 2 .52 .514 .265

EDUCATION 150 1 2 1.37 .485 .236

UNIVERSITY STATUS 150 1 2 1.50 .502 .252

CGPA 150 1 4 2.78 1.035 1.072

LIFE STYLE 150 1 3 1.25 .448 .200

INCME (EXPENCE) 150 1 4 2.31 1.177 1.384

Valid N (listwise) 150


20/23

FREQUENCY:

FS1 FS2 FS3 FS4 FS5 FS6 LS1

N

Valid 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 3.30 3.88 4.04 4.24 3.98 4.16 4.12

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Mode 5 5 4 a 5 5 5 4

Std. Deviation 1.509 1.080 .968 .902 1.046 .913 .897

Variance 2.279 1.167 .938 .814 1.094 .833 .804

Minimum 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

LS2 LS3 LS4 LS5 SES1 SES2 SES3

N

Valid 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 3.96 3.96 4.07 3.77 3.76 3.78 3.71

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Mode 4 5 4 a 4 4 4 5

Std. Deviation .911 1.022 .864 1.071 1.097 1.086 1.138

Variance .831 1.045 .747 1.147 1.204 1.179 1.296

Minimum 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5 5 5 5 5


21/23

SES4 SES5 UR1 UR2 UR3 UR4 UR5

N

Valid 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 3.85 3.50 3.95 3.67 4.01 3.94 3.87

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Mode 4 3 4 a 4 4 4 4

Std. Deviation 1.021 1.140 .951 1.059 .855 1.025 1.047

Variance 1.043 1.299 .904 1.121 .731 1.050 1.096

Minimum 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

UR6 SE1 SE2 SE3 SE4 SE5 LST1

N

Valid 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 3.81 4.19 3.98 3.99 4.02 4.02 3.92

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Mode 4 5 4 a 4 4 4 4

Std. Deviation 1.097 .910 1.046 .966 .871 .945 .916

Variance 1.204 .828 1.094 .933 .758 .892 .839

Minimum 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5 5 5 5 5


22/23

Statistics

LST2 LST3 LST4 LST5 LST6 AP1 AP2

N

Valid 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 3.91 3.87 4.01 3.95 3.73 3.97 3.84

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Mode 4 4 4 a 4 4 4 4

Std. Deviation .941 1.041 .934 .958 1.047 .904 .997

Variance .885 1.083 .872 .917 1.096 .818 .994

Minimum 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

AP3 AP4 AP5

N

Valid 150 150 150

Missing 0 0 0

Mean 4.01 3.25 3.46

Median 4.00 3.00 4.00

Mode 4 3 5 a

Std. Deviation 1.007 1.331 1.319

Variance 1.013 1.771 1.740

Minimum 1 1 1

Maximum 5 5 5


23/23

REGRESSION:

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .754 a .569 .551 2.55591

ANOVA a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 1233.826 6 205.638 31.478 .000 b

Residual 934.174 143 6.533

Total 2168.000 149

Coefficients a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1

(Constant) 3.323 1.515 2.194 .030

FS .050 .063 .060 .797 .427

LS .201 .101 .169 1.977 .050

LS .115 .071 .113 1.619 .108

LS .077 .084 .079 .915 .362

LS .275 .079 .256 3.472 .001

LS .292 .071 .292 4.136 .000

our brm final

Documents