4 Attitudes to term-time work
4.4 Attitudes to term-time work and study
Students were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with a number of statements about their term-time job.
Students who worked during term-time felt two different things about their job. Sixty-two per cent said that working and studying made them feel constantly overloaded, but Table 4.4 also shows that 62 per cent of students felt that their term-time job helped them develop useful skills. However, it was evident that more students agreed with the negative than the positive aspects of term-time work.
Table 4.4: Extent of agreement with statements about term-time work Agree, % Disagree, % Neither Agree nor Disagree,% Don’t Know/ No statement,%
I feel constantly overloaded because of my job and the demands of my academic work
62 18 16 4
My job helps me develop useful skills 62 17 17 4 I find it difficult to juggle the demands
of my job and the demands of my course
48 26 21 4
Overall, my job has negatively affected my time at university
32 36 27 4
My university actually makes it possible to combine term-time work and study
26 38 32 4
My job helps me use my time better 26 44 25 4 Overall, my job has positively affected
my time at university
22 38 35 5
My job gives me opportunities to apply knowledge and skills from my studies
19 63 14 4
My job is related to my studies 16 70 9 4
My job gives me an opportunity to access resources that I can use for my studies
9 72 15 4
Question: To what extent do you agree with the following statements about your term-time job/s? Base: N = 806
Almost half had difficulty juggling the demands of their course and work. As the number of hours students worked increased so did the proportion of students having difficulty juggling these two demands. Thirty- five per cent of students who worked up to five hours per week said they had difficulty juggling. This increased to 46 per cent of those working 5-15 hours per week and it jumped to 58 per cent among those working more than 15 hours per week.
About a quarter of students said that the university made it possible to combine term-time work and study. From focus group discussions, it was clear that students expected to be able to arrange regular patterns of term-time working, and some felt aggrieved if lecture/seminar/ practical timetables did not accommodate such paid work arrangements:
‘The staff don’t seem to understand that we have to work….there are often gaps in lectures in the afternoons, but then an early evening lecture every week which cuts right across our work
commitments………also the timetables are not advertised sufficiently long in advance to ‘plan’ paid work around the timetable.’ (Students at University D)
However, for another group of students, fairly relaxed timetables meant that combining work and study was feasible:
‘…in years one and two, there were so many gaps in the timetable that it was possible to combine study and paid term-time work, especially given the emphasis on end-of-semester
assessments….mind you it might be different for different degree programmes and more continuous assessments linked to practicals and the like.’ (Students at University D)
Staff groups also felt pressure to structure timetables to accommodate students’ paid work commitments:
‘….we’re under pressure to give them (the students) a day or two off each week. If we don’t do that we’re seen as ‘oh! you’re telling me I have to come in just for one hour of lectures!…and at midday!’’ (Academic staff at University B)
For this same group of staff, such reactions served to highlight what they see as divided loyalties among students:
‘….we have students who have established patterns of term-time work to fit with the first semester timetable, but then find the ‘fit’ is no longer there when we move to the second semester with its different timetable…..Then it’s a case of students saying ‘this class clashes with my work…how important is it (the class)? ‘…and that’s strange, because there’s this philosophical flip because it’s ‘with my work’…this existence in academia isn’t seen as their work, because we don’t give them a payslip, the person to whom they’re beholden is their employer…….they do have torn
loyalties…….’.
Only 26 per cent of students felt that working during term-time helped them make better use of their time, although data from focus groups contradicts this as students often mentioned how they had to organise their time to juggle all the competing demands:
’……we’re much better organised (than those not doing term-time work).. we have to be! As you know when you’re going to be tired, and when you’re not…especially with things like revision… even though sometimes we have to do all-nighters [ie work on assignments all through the night to meet deadlines], the other girls in my house also have to do that even though they’re not working …that’s because they’re lazy!...’ (Students at University B)
However term-time work rarely aids students’ academic performance. Only 19 per cent agreed that it gave them an opportunity to apply their academic knowledge and skills, 16 per cent said it was related to their studies and just 9 per cent said it gave them access to resources that they could use for their studies.
There were institutional differences. Sixty per cent of students at University B and University E said they found it difficult to juggle the demands of their course and work, compared to 50 per cent of the students at University D, University F and University G. Only 35 per cent of students at University A and University C experienced such difficulties. Students from routine and manual backgrounds were also more likely to have difficulty juggling the demands of work and study compared to those from professional and managerial backgrounds, at 56 per cent and 44 per cent respectively. White students were also more likely than minority ethnic students to agree with this statement, 51 per cent against 37 per cent. Students with dependent children were the most likely to agree with this statement. Although the numbers were small, 62 per cent agreed they had difficulty juggling, compared to 48 per cent of those without children.
Younger students and those without children were more likely to agree that their term-time job helped develop useful skills, than older students and those with dependent children. Interestingly students living with their family were more likely to agree that their job helped them develop useful skills then those living independently (68 per cent compared to 58 per cent) – probably because they were younger students.
4.5 Summary
Three reasons dominate students’ decision not to work during term-time, two of which are academic reasons. The majority of students in the sample did not work so they could concentrate on their studies and because they felt their academic work would suffer if they engaged in term-time work. Older students emphasised they could not work because they were already juggling academic studies and family responsibilities.
For younger students the decision not to work is influenced by a wider range of factors than it is for older students making the same decision.
Students from higher socio-economic classes are more likely not to have to work because of the financial support they are able to obtain from their parents.
The study suggests that there is a group of students (identified as white, young and from higher socio- economic classes) who conform to a traditional picture of higher education students. They attach importance to their academic studies and the wider social experience of being at university and they do not work during term-time. These students can afford to forgo term-time working because they have other sources of financial support (eg from their family or work in vacations).
As found in previous studies, the majority of students in this survey undertook term-time work out of financial necessity. They engaged in term-time work to obtain money for basic needs, which is assumed to mean food, rent, and bills. Eighty-two per cent of students say they work because their student loan is not adequate.
More than half of the students engaged in term-time work because their family could not help them financially. Students from lower socio-economic classes are much more likely to work because they cannot count on financial support from their families.
A significant minority of students in the sample demonstrated debt averse behaviour. They either engage in term-time work to reduce the amount of loan they borrow, or they work in order to avoid taking out a student loan. Slightly more than a quarter of the students worked to reduce the amount of loan they borrowed from the Student Loan Company. Debt aversion is significantly higher among particular groups of students, which has also been found by other studies (Callender and Kemp, 2000; and Callender, 2003). As a result of debt aversion, these students trade time for money. Minority ethnic students, Muslim students, students living with their families and students studying in London, were more likely to undertake term-time work so they can reduce the amount of loan they borrow.
Sixteen per cent of students work during term-time to avoid taking out a student loan.
Students in the sample reported more negative than positive impacts of working term-time. Term-time work increased levels of stress. Students also indicated that their job did not contribute to their academic studies. While some students reported benefits from term-time work, it is likely that the students try to find something positive to say about an experience they are forced into out of financial necessity. These findings are similar to other findings discussed in chapter one.
As Curtis and Williams (2002) have previously identified, students are a ‘reluctant workforce’. Students work mainly out of financial necessity. While students do report learning some useful skills, term-time work rarely enhances students’ academic studies.