A STUDY ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

Syed Muazzam Ali Kazmi Syed Ayan Haider Naqvi

Muhammad Hasnain Naeem

December 2018

Abstract

We study how educational background in secondary school, motivation

and ambition for the future, sleep routine, social life, planning, method
of studying, hostelite status, and few other factors affect academic per-
formance as measured by GPA and how some of them are correlated. We
conducted a survey in various schools of NUST, Islamabad and almost
60 people responded. We base our study on those responses. We use
simple statistical averaging techniques and according to our study, there’s
no statistically significant difference between students from different sec-
ondary school educational background. However, future career aspirations
strongly correlated.

Keywords

Secondary Education, Higher Education, Academic Performance, Average Cor-

relation Modeling, Future Goals, Motivation, Learning Skills, Habits.

1 Introduction

There has been multiple studies concerned with predicting educational achieve-
ment. The motivation could vary from determining the best candidate for uni-
versity admission or advising students with low grades.

1
1.1 Factors

Although various factors, ranging from parents income to conductive home en-
vironment to intermediate grades, are factors, we chose to study some of them.
These are listed below.

1.1.1 Secondary School Background

Pakistan has two secondary school streams, running in parallel, Cambridge

board with O Level/GSCE and A Level qualifications and state- run secondary
and post-secondary boards that provide secondary and higher secondary certifi-
cates. The former is associated with higher socio-economic status as students
and higher salary and better jobs as professionals as surveyed by A Ailaan,
2017 [1].

1.1.2 Future Goals

Future ambitions are a huge motivating factor as certain careers require better
grades than others.

Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002) find academic motivation linked with aca-
demic goals as an academic enabler for success in school [2].

1.1.3 Student Housing

As determined by Robert L. Hall and Ben Willerman (1963), dormitory roo-

mates can affect study habits and grades [3].

Dormitories or hostels are part of most Pakistani universities but they may
fail to accommodate all the students. Some of them temporarily seek housing
and boarding privately-run hostels near university campus. The study also
takes into account the students not living in hostel, otherwise known as ”day
scholars.”

1.1.4 Study Habits

Study habits are correlated with grades. Note taking, effort put in, planning,
proper place to study are the factors.

2
 However, some studies, for instance, Howard Schuman, Edward Walsh, et
al. (1985) found no link between self-reported effort and grades [4].

1.1.5 Social Life

Universities provide many avenues of social life like societies and clubs.

Long (2012) found certain parts of social life to be beneficial to academics [5].

1.1.6 Motivation

According to P.A. Jacobs and S.E. Newstead (2000), motivation can be derived
from inherent want to excel at a subject or excel at general skills or knowledge
in general [6].

Motivation throughout the semester or term can determine academic success.

Source of motivation can vary form inner satisfaction, monetary benefits, or
appreciation from family and peers.

In a study by Kusurkar, RA and Ten Cate, et al. (2013), motivation is

correlated to proformance of students, as studied in a medical college [7].

1.2 Hypothesis and Objective

The main objective is to determine disparities between students from different

educational backgrounds, comparing average students to bright ones and differ-
entiating them by their every day habits, and finding the role of future goal in
academic success.

We hypothesize that educational backgrounds are largely irrelevant at uni-

versity level and small habits, combined with a clear goal that requires certain
educational achievements, determines grades.

We hypothesized high GPA correlated with future goal in descending order

as follows: academia/research, job, startup, family business.

3
2 Method

2.1 Population

Out of National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad’s

student population of about 15,000, n=59 filled a form which was floated on the
Internet and some people were individually asked to fill it.

2.2 Sample

The sample had students from diverse departments, ranging from humanities
department, School of Humanities and Social Sciences; business department,
NUST Business School; and an engineering department, School of Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science.

Those who responded were generally bachelors students.

2.3 Instrument

An Internet form was floated on the mailing list. It had questions about the de-
partment, academic background, housing status, ultimate goal, question about
being morning or evening person, average hours of sleep, studying during lec-
ture, note taking, group study, question about preferring books, online resources
and lecture slides, study breaks, source of motivation, approach to studying (”I
just study”, ”hard work”, ”smart work”, ”hard+smart work”, social life, com-
ment on a statement about mental health affecting performance, and grading
point average (GPA) with range from 2 to 3.8+ with gaps of 0.2 to 0.3

There were yes/no questions about whether one is performing at one’s best,
studying well enough for exams, studying on daily basis, motivation during
semester, proper place to study, and planning one’s day.

2.4 Data Analysis

To find correlation between different variables, one or two variables were varied
and others were made constant. Average was recorded for each variation.

At the end, data from various variations of variables were combined so that
only one variable vary and that is reported.

4
 We also compare averages of the population to averages of top-performing
students, as measured by 3.8+ GPA.

3 Discussion

3.1 Findings

Findings, reported as statistics and correlations are given below:

3.1.1 Background

Out of those who responded, 22% were with A Level background. The average
GPA of F.Sc. background students and A Level background students is 3.24
and 3.21, respectively.

3.1.2 Future goal

The percentage figures for students that listed their future goal as ”job,” ”startup,”
”family business,” ”academia/research” were 39% , 33.9% , 5.1% , and 22% ,
respectively.

Their average GPAs were, in that order: 3.11, 3.18, 3.0, 3.5 as shown in
Figure 1.

3.1.3 Effort

Most (86%) reported that they are not performing at their best. About the same
percentage reported not studying on daily basis. That percentage dropped to
67.9% when asked about studying enough for exams.

The above mentioned queries revealed no significant difference when the goal
was reported as startup, and in case of academia, the difference was 3.4 vs 3.6,
when they answered yes to either question about performing at their best and
studying enough for exams. For other goals and their relation to the above
queries, there was not enough data available for any correlation.

5
 Figure 1: Goals and GPAs

3.2 Average Students and High Achievers

Focusing on students with GPA 3.8+ (n: 9), some marked differences were
obtained as given by Table 3.

44.44% of high achievers get less than 6 hour of sleep compared to 27.1% of
average students. They are less likely to take notes, with 77% of average students
and 55.55% of high achievers taking notes. High achievers also preferred self-
study (100% vs. 76.3%). They took less breaks, at 66.66% as compared to
79.3% of general population. 0% of high achievers reported staying motivated
throughout the semester vs. 18.6% of general population. ”Inner satisfaction”
as motivational factor was reported as 33.33% and average student reported
it at 45.8%. They were also more likely to plan their day at 44.44% of them
vs. 33.9%. 22% of high achievers reported poor or non-existent social life as
compared to 12% of general population.

A significant difference was preference for academic career at 66.66% vs.

22% in other students.

Other variables were studied but no significant correlation was found.

6
3.3 Findings Related to Hypothesis and Objective

Some habits had surprisingly opposite effects, like taking notes and short-breaks.
Motivation throughout the semester had same effect. Planning one’s day was
found to be effective when comparing average and high scoring students.

The effect of reporting that one is studying enough and doing as good as one
can was effective in case one’s future goal was listed as ”academia/research.”

Habits like being a morning or evening person or preferring books or slide

were not statistically correlated with GPA.

We also found no correlation between university grades and type of high

school education received, confirming our hypothesis. However, a strong corre-
lation between future goal and GPA was found, again confirming our hypothesis.
The hypothesis about grading point average order was also affirmed.

4 Conclusion

We studied the role of various factors in determining grading point average

of students enrolled in various schools of National University of Sciences and
Technology (NUST). The factors can be divided into academic background,
study habits, general habits, motivation and stress, and future goals.

The conclusions we reached on are as follows. Academic background in

secondary education is mostly not relevant to grades obtained in an higher ed-
ucational institute. Moreover, most habits that we take for granted like taking
notes, group study, taking breaks and getting enough sleep, were also found
ineffective. However, things like planning your day do work. An important con-
clusion is the role of mindset, oriented towards either job or academic research or
business, can significantly affect motivation for studying, hence, grading point
average.

We suggest students not to choose their major, or even choosing to attend

a university at all, for wrong reasons. For instance, for a person with family
business unwilling to join job marketplace should have the option to skip uni-
versity and get into business early on. A student that chose startup as a career
path may or may not benefit from higher education. They must do clear cut
cost-benefit analysis and choose wisely whether the major they are in helps their
future career

7
References
[1] Ailaan, A. (2017) Who gets the good jobs? Alif Ailaan. Accessed September ,
22.
[2] Linnenbrink, E. A. and Pintrich, P. R. (2002) Motivation as an enabler for
academic success. School psychology review , 31, 313–327.

[3] Hall, R. L. and Willerman, B. (1963) The educational influence of dormitory

roommates. Sociometry, pp. 294–318.
[4] Schuman, H., Walsh, E., Olson, C., and Etheridge, B. (1985) Effort and
reward: The assumption that college grades are affected by quantity of
study. Social Forces, 63, 945–966.

[5] Long, L. D. (2012) A multivariate analysis of the relationship between under-

graduate fraternity/sorority involvement and academic performance. Oracle:
The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, 7.
[6] Jacobs, P. and Newstead, S. (2000) The nature and development of student
motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 243–254.

[7] Kusurkar, R., Ten Cate, T. J., Vos, C., Westers, P., and Croiset, G. (2013)
How motivation affects academic performance: a structural equation mod-
elling analysis. Advances in health sciences education, 18, 57–69.

A Appendix

A.1 Tables

8
Academic Background GPA
FSC 3.5
FSC 2.4
FSC 2.95
FSC 3.2
FSC 2.95
FSC 2.75
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.85
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.85
FSC 3.6
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.6
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.2
FSC 2.75
FSC 3.85
FSC 3.85
FSC 3.6
FSC 3.2
FSC 2.75
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.2
FSC 2.75
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.6
FSC 2.95
FSC 3.85
FSC 2.95
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.2
FSC 3.4
FSC 3.2
FSC 2.25
FSC 2.75
FSC 3.85
FSC 2.75
FSC 2.95
FSC 3.85
Average 3.2443181818

Table 1: Matric/F.Sc. Background

9
Academic Background GPA
A Levels 3.2
A Levels 3.85
A Levels 3.2
A Levels 3.2
A Levels 2.95
A Levels 2.95
A Levels 2.95
A Levels 3.4
A Levels 2.65
A Levels 2.95
A Levels 3.4
A Levels 3.2
A Levels 3.85
Average 3.2115384615

Table 2: A/O Level Background

All (n=59) 3.8 plus (n=9)

Performing at best 14.00% 22.22%
Studying well for exam 32.10% 44.44%
Morning person 49.20% 55.55%
Below 6 hour sleep 27.10% 44.44%
Lecture over self-studying 39.00% 44.44%
All (book, online, slides) 44.10% 55.55%
Self study 76.30% 100.00%
No notes 27.10% 44.44%
No breaks 20.70% 44.44%
Motivated through semester 18.60% 0.00%
Inner satisfaction 45.80% 33.33%
Smart work 28.80% 22.22%
Proper place to study 40.70% 33.33%
Plan their day 33.90% 44.44%
Poor/non-existent social life 11.90% 22.22%
Interested in Academia 22.00% 66.66%

Table 3: Average Students vs. High Achievers

10
Goal Prepare well for exams? Doing your best? GPA

Startup No No 2.65
Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 2.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.85
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 2.25
Startup No No 3.85
Startup Yes Yes 3.4
Startup Yes Yes 2.95
Average 3.1638888889

Table 4: Future Goal: Startup

Prepare well for exams?

Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.4
Startup Yes No 3.85
Startup Yes No 2.25
Startup Yes Yes 3.4
Startup Yes Yes 2.95
Average 3.1785714286

Table 5: Future Goal: Startup

11
 Prepare well for exams?
Startup No No 2.65
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 2.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.85
Average 3.1545454545

Table 6: Future Goal: Startup

Doing your best?

Startup No No 2.65
Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 2.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 3.85
Startup No No 3.2
Startup No No 3.4
Startup No No 3.2
Startup Yes No 2.25
Startup No No 3.85
Average 3.1625

Table 7: Future Goal: Startup

Doing your best?

Startup Yes Yes 3.4
Startup Yes Yes 2.95
Average 3.175

Table 8: Future Goal: Startup

12
Goal Prepere well for exam? Doing your best? GPA
Academia No No 3.2
Academia Yes No 3.4
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.2
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 2.65
Academia No No 3.2
Academia Yes No 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.2
Average 3.4958333333

Table 9: Future Goal: Academia

Prepere well for exam?

Academia Yes No 3.4
Academia Yes No 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.2
Average 3.63

Table 10: Future Goal: Academia

Prepere well for exam?

Academia No No 3.2
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.2
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 2.65
Academia No No 3.2
Average 3.4

Table 11: Future Goal: Academia

13
 Doing your best?
Academia No No 3.2
Academia Yes No 3.4
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 3.2
Academia No No 3.85
Academia No No 2.65
Academia No No 3.2
Academia Yes No 3.85
Average 3.45

Table 12: Future Goal: Academia

Doing your best?

Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.85
Academia Yes Yes 3.2
Average 3.6333333333

Table 13: Future Goal: Academia

Goal Prepere well for exam? Doing your best? GPA

Family Business No No 2.95
Family Business No No 3.4
Family Business No No 2.65
Average 3

Table 14: Future Goal: Family Business

14
Goal Prepere well for exam? Doing your best? GPA
Job No No 3.4
Job No No 3.85
Job Yes No 2.95
Job Yes No 3.2
Job No No 2.65
Job No No 3.2
Job No No 3.2
Job No No 2.95
Job No No 2.95
Job No No 3.4
Job No No 2.95
Job No No 2.95
Job No No 2.95
Job No No 2.65
Job Yes No 3.2
Job No No 3.2
Job No No 3.2
Job No No 2.65
Job Yes No 3.2
Job No No 2.65
Job Yes Yes 3.2
Job No Yes 3.4
Job 3.75
Average 3.1173913043

Table 15: Future Goal: Job

Prepere well for exam?

Job Yes No 2.95
Job Yes No 3.2
Job Yes No 3.2
Job Yes No 3.2
Job Yes Yes 3.2
Average 3.15

Table 16: Future Goal: Job

15