Interview on university students

Interview on university students

The interview made use of a list of ordered questions in a close-ended questionnaire. The questionnaire had a total of twenty-five questions that were mean to collect different characteristics of the sample population. The interview was administered to a total of twenty-seven students who were students at the University. The data contains missing instances in the type of job variable for unemployed persons. The sample was selected from the population in such a way that it represents the opinions of the entire population of the University.

Of the twenty-seven interviewees, 55.6% were male while 44% were female.  The sample was composed of 29.6% of students aged between 18 and 21, 37% aged between twenty-two and twenty-five, 3.7% aged between twenty-six and thirty, 22.2% aged between thirty and forty, and 7% aged over forty.

The table below shows the distribution of the ages

The interview had respondents undertaking different degree programs at the university. The sample is composed up of 3.7% of students taking Accounting MSc., 14.8% taking International Business-MSc, 3.7% taking International Business Economics-MSc, 11.1% taking International Investment Banking-MSc and another 3.7% taking an MBA in leadership. 7.4% takes management-MSc., 3.7% take leadership-MBA. The highest represented course among the interviewees is International Business-MSc while the least represented is Accounting-MSc. The distribution of respondents in different courses ensures that the whole University is represented in this pilot study.

Of the total sample, 33.3% were foreigners while the remaining 66.7% were local people attending the university. 51.9% of the total population was under any form of employment while the remaining 48.1% were unemployed. Of the 51.9% of the respondents who have been employed, 7.4% are employed full time, 18.55 are employed part-time, 14.8% are self-employed and 11.1% are unemployed. The pie chart below shows a summary of the distribution of the employed respondents among various employee groups.

About 40% of the sample population move more than seven miles to get to the university. From this, it can be noted that most people do not live within the surrounding areas of the university or inside the university. 33% travel between 3-4 miles, 14.8% travel between 1-2 miles to get to university. The most common means of transport for the students is a car which is used by about 22% of the sample to get to school. The least used means of transport to reach school is the train which accounts for only a small portion of about 11% of the mode of transport for the students.

A large proportion, about 45%, of the sample agree that the modules offered at the university now offer opportunities for teaching and learning sustainability. Only 7.4 % disagree with this while 11.1% completely disagree with this suggestion. The students strongly agree that the elements on sustainability encountered in their models changed their perceptions of climate change. 7.4% disagree while 18.5% strongly disagree.  59.3% of the students have not chosen an optional module that includes sustainability. From the students who took an optional module, 14.8% which represents a majority of them took it for extra credits while only 7.4% took the module due to their interests in sustainability. Of all the people who took the optional module, 18.5% considered the optional module which included sustainability extremely important. There is little difference between those who would embrace the idea of having sustainability as a core module. The difference between the two groups is only 4%. A majority of the sample which represents around 29.6% views having sustainability as a core module in their programs is extremely important while a minority of about 14.8% consider it slightly important.

Unfortunately, a larger number of the participants did not know what was meant by climate emergency. Only 51.9% of the total sample know what climate emergency means. This implies that in the population, for every one person who knows the definition of climate emergency, there is another person who cannot define climate emergency. A large proportion of the population which is about 40.7% defines climate emergency which is the third option in the questionnaire. This option defines a climatic emergency as the rise in the average temperatures of the earth’s surface due to increased emission of greenhouse gases which leads to climate change.

59.3% are aware of the climate emergency declaration in many countries while a smaller proportion of about 44.4% knows of the University’s declaration of a climate emergency. The sensitization of climate change is likely not being felt. 59.3% of the total population know that the university has been acknowledged for its high ranking efforts in reducing its impact on the environment. A majority which is represented by 25.9% of the total population strongly agrees that the university is doing enough to increase awareness of the climate emergency. About 37% which is a majority of the population indicate that they are neither satisfies nor dissatisfied with actions to reduce effects on the environment by the university.

However, despite the acknowledgment of the impact of the university’s efforts of creating awareness, a majority of them which is represented by 25.95 strongly disagree with the extent to which the university is going to reduce and solve its effect on the environment. 33.3% of the interviewees agree that the school needs to improve on recycling efforts while 29.6% agree that the school needs to improve on waste management. A majority of the students which is represented by 25.9% acknowledge their efforts in tackling climatic change. 25.9% of them neither agree nor disagree on the extent they are going to tackle climate change.