La ordenación del Paseo de Valencia al Mar: Hoja 12-B (1952)

In order to explore the role public university education plays in highereducation capabilities expansion among students, the study used three categories of respondents (or participants). The respondents were: the new graduates (2001-2010) because they were the latest recipients of public university education; the lecturers who deliver university education; and the senior public service officials who represent public employers who supervise the new graduates at the workplace (see also 5.3 & 5.4).

The new graduates were selected from among the alumni of two public universities in Uganda. The selected universities were: Makerere University, and Mbarara University. The new graduates are those first degree holders who graduated from university during the 10-year period from 2001 to 2010 (see also 5.3). They are graduates of Social Work, Political Science, Sociology, Education, Development Studies, and Business Studies. Thenew graduates are generally young persons, with about 90% of them falling in the age range of 23 – 35. These new graduates were the key respondents in the study because they had been direct ‘consumers’ and ‘products’ of the public university education processes in Uganda.

This study also covered the lecturers from the same schools and departments from which the new graduates were selected. The lecturers belonged to a wide age range from 30 to 65. Therefore, it was the involvement of both junior and senior lecturers that facilitated the generation of rich information and the comparison of views from lecturers. Basically, this category of respondents covered only those lecturers who had taught at university for at least seven years prior to 30 June 2010 when data collection started.

Finally, the study includes data from nine senior public service officials who were purposively selected from three government ministries. The ministries were: i) the Ministry of Education and Sports; ii) the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development; and iii) the Public Service Commission. The officials were interviewed to generate qualitative data regarding the relevance and quality of knowledge, skills, learning, and capacities that public universities in Uganda offer to the students. These

147 public service officials are at the ‘receiving end’ of the university products (new graduates) that are emerging from the public university education processes.

6.2.1 Interviews with respondents

Interviews were done with 14 new graduates who were located through snowballing processes (see also 5.5 &Appendices D, E, & G). The interviews provided rich information regarding university education processes and higher education capabilities. They were conducted atdifferent locations such as restaurants, university canteens and offices. Meanwhile, interviews with lecturers were done intheir respective offices after appointments were fixed. Similarly, interviews with senior public officials were done intheir respective offices in Kampala City. All interviews were recorded verbatim using two digital recorders. The researcher ensured confidentiality and, as much as possible, created a relaxed atmosphere. The interviews were later on transcribed and the text analysed to generate information for this study.

6.2.2 Focus groups with respondents

Three focus groups were constitutedduring the study (see also Appendix F). The first one comprised seven members from the Department of Social Work and Social Administration of Makerere University. A discussion with this focus group was carried out in the morning hours (9:00am to 10:50am) in an open space at the Makerere University Guest House. During the interview, the participants were relaxed and talked freely,probably because the researcher had earlier on studied atthat department and was familiar with some of the focus group members. However, the discussion yielded contradictions regarding some issues which the researcher probed in order to understand the university education processes. Six respondents came on time and the interview started; the seventh respondent, who happened to be the most senior person, joined after about an hour and participated in the last 40 – 50 minutes of the discussion.

The second focus groupwas drawn from among members of the Department of Development Studies at Mbarara University. It comprised one gentleman and five ladies, including a head of department. The discussion with this group was conducted in a

148 computer laboratory in the Department of DevelopmentStudies block. Members were very relaxed and talked freely in a lively discussion. All the six members were total strangers to the researcher. The focus group was organised by the head, Department of Development Studies, after clearance was obtained from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Mbarara University. The members articulated issues of development and development theory, including the capability approach, from a technical perspective.

The third and last focus group discussion took place atMbarara University in the School of Education. The group had ten members and the interview took place in a science laboratory in the New Science Building. It was characterised by a relaxed atmosphere, although somenoise occasionally slipped in through the windows from the nearby highway. The group ranged in age from about 31 to the late 50s. It was organised by the head, Department of Science Education.

6.2.3. Questionnaires with respondents

A total of 190 questionnaires were distributed, targeting 178 respondents, who were sampled to complete the questionnaires (see also Appendix H). Two research assistants were used to distribute and collect the questionnaires in Kampala City and the surrounding areas; and the third research assistant collected data from Mbarara Municipality and the surrounding areas. The three research assistants were first briefed on the snowballing method of locating respondents and the thoroughness and criteria requiredin the distribution and collection of questionnaires (see also 5.5). A total of 173 questionnaires were received back, but only the first 166 questionnaires correctly completed in time were considered. Of the 166 questionnaires, 122 were from new graduates of Makerere University and 44 were from new graduates of Mbarara University. These 166 questionnaires were quantitatively analysed and the findings are indicated in these three chapters (Six, Seven and Eight).

In this study, it was important that respondents are sampled from different departments to obtain fairly representative data for quantitative analysis. The respondents’ university and department are indicated in Table 6.1.

149

Table 6.1:Respondents covered in the survey(questionnaires)

University Department No. of new

graduates Percentage

1 MUK Science, Tech.& Vocational Education 24 14.6

2 MUK Social Science & Arts Education 23 13.9

3 MUK Development Studies 15 9.0

4 MUK Foundations & Curriculum Development 00 00

5 MUK Social Work & Social Administration 19 11.4

6 MUK Political Science 16 9.6

7 MUK Sociology & Anthropology 25 15.1

8 MUST Management Science 12 7.2

9 MUST Science Education 12 7.2

10 MUST Development Studies 20 12.0

Total 166 100.0

Source: Field Data

Key: MUK = Makerere University Kampala; MUST = Mbarara University of Science and Technology

Table 6.1 shows the distribution of questionnaire-respondents by department for the 10sampled departments under study. In this table, Makerere University accounts for 122 (73%) and Mbarara University has 44 (27%) of the respondents. This is because of the differences in university population sizes, where Makerere University is a very big university compared to Mbarara University (see also 5.3).

In addition, it was important that the time of completion of university by the respondents be indicated since the scope of the study was a 10-year period (2001 – 2010) (see also 1.7 &5.6.1). Table 6.2 summarises the data on the number of new graduates (respondents) from the different years under study.

150

Table 6.2: Year of graduation by questionnaire respondents

As shown in Table 6.2, there is a variation in the distribution of respondents across the years covered by the study. A slightly bigger number occursin the last half of the study period. This bigger number captured was because the most recentgraduates were the easiest to access since they were in bigger numbers and had not yet dispersed ‘very far in the world’.

It should be noted that the total number of respondents who actually participated in the study was 166 (new graduates who completed the questionnaires) + 14 (new graduates interviewed) + 09 (lecturers interviewed) + 23 (lecturers in focus groups) + 09 (public officials interviewed) = 221 respondents. The 221 respondents out of the 243 respondents the study had targeted represent a 91% response rate (see also 5.4).

In qualitative interviews, quantitative questionnaires and focus groups, the respondents were asked a number of questions generated from what some scholars refer to as “a provisional ‘start list’ of codes [developed] prior to fieldwork” (Miles and Huberman 1994:58) that the researcher had developed. The ‘start list’ was guided by the objectives of the study, which had three sub-variables, namely: curriculum content; teaching processes; and learning processes (see also 6.1). The three sub-variables formed the major objectives (and later on themes) that were discussed in relation to student higher

Year of graduation Number of new graduates Percentage 2001 15 9.0 2002 9 5.4 2003 15 9.0 2004 12 7.2 2005 17 10.2 2006 17 10.2 2007 21 12.7 2008 22 13.3 2009 24 14.5 2010 14 8.5 Total 166 100.0

151 education capabilities expansion. As already explained elsewhere, in this sixth chapter, only one objective of the study (the first objective) is addressed (see also 1.4).

6.3 Curriculum Content and Higher Education Capabilities Expansion among