This article was downloaded by: [University of Liverpool]

On: 09 June 2015, At: 10:38

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Maritime Policy & Management: The

flagship journal of international
shipping and port research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tmpm20

Pursuing maritime education: an

empirical study of students’ profiles,
motivations and expectations
a b
Athanasios A. Pallis & Adolf K. Y. Ng
a
Department of Shipping, Trade and Transport , University of the
Aegean , Chios, Greece
b
Department of Logistics and Maritime Studies , The Hong Kong
Polytechnic University , Hong Kong, China
Published online: 06 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: Athanasios A. Pallis & Adolf K. Y. Ng (2011) Pursuing maritime education: an
empirical study of students’ profiles, motivations and expectations, Maritime Policy & Management:
The flagship journal of international shipping and port research, 38:4, 369-393

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2011.588258

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015
 MARIT. POL. MGMT., JULY 2011,
VOL. 38, NO. 4, 369–393

Pursuing maritime education: an empirical study of

students’ profiles, motivations and expectations

ATHANASIOS A. PALLISy and ADOLF K. Y. NG*z

yDepartment of Shipping, Trade and Transport, University of the
Aegean, Chios, Greece
zDepartment of Logistics and Maritime Studies, The Hong Kong
Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China

This study reveals the profiles, motivations, and expectations of students pursuing
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

undergraduate maritime programmes. Although a number of tertiary institutions

offer maritime programmes, the characteristics and structures of the demands for
such programmes remain under-researched. This paper illustrates and discusses
the results of a survey completed by students pursuing undergraduate
programmes in maritime business and management at three universities in Asia
and Europe, and compares them with the findings of a database examining
similar issues towards postgraduate students within the same institutions.
Research highlights include the tendency of undergraduate students to combine
studies and work, considering real-world experiences as a vital contributor to
career prospects. Shipping (notably tankers, dry bulks and containers) stands out
as the ideal professional paths within the maritime industries. Another key
finding is that the current marketing strategies of the institutions are rather
irrelevant. This paper provides a solid foundation for understanding the profile
students pursuing maritime programmes and contributes to the effective planning
and management of maritime programmes, thus to the overall professional
quality of the maritime industries.

1. Introduction
This is a pioneer study about the structures and characteristics of the demands for
undergraduate degrees in maritime business and management. Higher education
institutions, notably in Asia and Europe, increasingly offer under- and postgraduate
programmes in maritime studies contributing to the professionalization of the
maritime industries [1, 2]. As in a wide range of fields, substantial professional
competence can today be gained by applying academic knowledge to solve practical
problems [3], bridging scientific knowledge and practical performance.
What exactly motivates undergraduate students to enrol for a programme in
maritime studies? How do they choose to enrol such programmes? What do they
expect to achieve afterwards? Do such programmes serve these ambitions? The
characteristics of the demands for such programmes have remained unexplored and
empirically under-researched.

*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: lgtan@polyu.edu.hk

Maritime Policy & Management ISSN 0308–8839 print/ISSN 1464–5254 online ß 2011 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2011.588258
 370 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

This is even though increasing enrolments and degrees prove worries that
maritime studies would gradually ‘fade out’ through integration in courses covering
broader themes to be redundant [4]. The changing global environment had led to an
increasingly emphasis on professional, dedicated knowledge and research [5]. In view
of such requirements, employees of the highest calibre were required to respond
effectively to ongoing changes. As professional education could be a direct and
effective approach to improve productivity (c.f. [6]), a massive growth in ‘practice-
based’ and ‘professional’ programmes has taken place within academic institutions
[7]. The latter increasingly provide professional education on subjects which
traditionally emphasized non-academic, apprentice-style learning approach.
Maritime studies serve as a typical example of the above. The well-documented
transformation of the maritime industries from highly labour- to capital-intensive
industries (cf. [8–11]) contributed towards the presence of tertiary education in
maritime studies. Experience on board and the resulted tacit knowledge had been the
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

pivotal skills in affecting a career within the maritime world [12, 13]. Especially
shipping had traditionally regarded the skills, knowledge, and willingness of ex-
seafarers as contributing to their efficient operation [14]. Today professional
programmes meet the requirements for more-than-monolithic skills and knowledge.
Perspective staff gains office-based skills to respond effectively to the ongoing
changes within the business process, for instance in areas of financial appraisal and
business management [5]. Sophisticated maritime business models, the integration of
maritime transportation in complex supply chains, and technological developments
need personnel with more than experienced-gained, technical and business knowl-
edge [15]. Additional business and management skills, like decision-making,
interpersonal, leadership and organizational knowledge became core competencies
to modern day maritime stakeholders. Formal education offers students invaluable
opportunities to gain general understandings on the overall industrial environment
rather than just narrow knowledge closely linked to specialized job responsibilities
[16]. The possible career paths within the maritime industries can be found in
Figure 1.
Still, the profiles and motivations of the students that decide to follow this career
path via higher education degrees are not well-known. With several competencies
gained through formal education cannot be easily acquired otherwise, the general
perception that pure economic incentives are the core students’ motivation in
pursuing tertiary education (cf. [6]) might not hold true for maritime studies. In
managerial level appointments long-term career plans and job promotion [17], the
need to obtain management/business qualifications that stand as obstacles for
experienced practitioners [18], social, intellectual and cultural appreciations, peer
pressure, personal prestige, or simply seeking rewarding and satisfying feelings [19],
might all be core inspirations for pursuing the specific degrees. Besides, maritime
stakeholders might ‘push’ towards these degrees so as to raise educational
requirements and enhance the prestige of the sector. The more educated employees
are, the more willing employers and the public would be to better compensations and
enhanced working conditions, especially in occupational groups that traditionally
emphasize skills and apprenticeship [3]. Although the details of the maritime
programmes differ, they usually serve common purposes such as the enhancement of
the ‘professional’ image of the maritime industries [20].
Empirical studies investigating the significance of different incentives in decisions
to embark on maritime education have remained scarce. The extent that the actual
 Pursuing maritime education 371

THE MARITIME INDUSTRIES

Onshore track Offshore track

Non-maritime-related career
Non-maritime-related career

Senior management Master mariner/chief engineer

(Up gr adin g/modular /

Getting specialization courses)
onshore
Junior/middle management
Deck officer/engineer

Work Work
Education Education

Postgraduate education
Seagoing
Vocational training

Undergraduate education
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Elementary and secondary education

Keys: Conventional maritime career path Influences of postgraduate education on maritime career path

Figure 1. Selected career paths within the maritime industries.

features of these programmes correspond to the aspirations of the enrolled student

has also not being empirically studied. This is not to downplay the significance of
previous works on similar topics (for a review, see [2]). However, these studies share
common methodological shortcomings. First, their contents are overwhelmingly
factual and descriptive but short of applied methodologies such as experimental,
statistical, or otherwise in addressing different empirical propositions. Second,
students - the direct users of educational services - are unjustifiably under-researched
as studies of maritime education focus almost exclusively on the changing business
environment and the emerging needs of the industries. Only recently relevant
empirical studies paid attention on post- rather than undergraduate students (for
instance, see [1, 2]).
Seeking answers to the identified research questions, this study examines
undergraduate education with the students pursing programmes in maritime studies
being the analytical unit surveyed. The paper analyses the results of a questionnaire
survey of students pursuing undergraduate degrees in maritime business and
management (hereinafter called ‘maritime programmes’) at three academic institu-
tions in Greece and Hong Kong, China, and concludes on students’:
(a) Social and maritime related backgrounds;
(b) Motivations, considerations and sources of information before embarking on
such programmes;
(c) Expectations, in terms of personal and wider professional development;
(d) Perspectives regarding after graduation professional paths; and
(e) Assessments of the actual development features of these programmes.
The elements of this survey are compared with the findings of a database
examining similar issues for postgraduate students within the same maritime
institutions. First hand information establishes whether the perceptions between
 372 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

under- and postgraduate students are uniform and to what extent diversified
motivations and attitudes exist. The two propositions of the study are as follows:
(a) The motivation of undergraduate students in pursuing a maritime programme
is ‘strategic’ and mostly inspired by practical considerations, e.g., easiness in
getting a job, better professional prospects, etc., rather than, say, self-interests
and personal development.
(b) The perceptions of under- and postgraduate students are not uniform, as they
have diversified motivations and attitudes when making the decision to
pursue a maritime programme.

2. Methodology
A questionnaire survey was conducted to the intended study sample, focusing on (i)
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

first year; and (ii) final year undergraduate students. To facilitate comparisons,
questionnaires were also distributed to postgraduate students who are pursuing
master’s maritime programmes, so as to create the database mentioned in the last
section and enable comparisons.
600 questionnaires (400 and 200 under- and postgraduate students, respectively)
had been distributed between October 2009 and January 2010 in three different
higher education institutions located in Asia and Europe. Two of the institutions are
located in Greece, a country with a strong maritime tradition and a dependency of its
balance of payments on income generated in shipping activities. These are the
Department of Maritime Studies of the University of Piraeus and the Department of
Shipping, Trade and Transport of the University of the Aegean. The third one is the
Department of Logistics and Maritime Studies, The Hong Kong Polytechnic
University, Hong Kong, China. The curriculum of these programmes focuses on
general business and management issues within the maritime industries, rather than
highly specialized sub-themes (i.e. maritime law, marine engineering etc). By March
2010, we received a reasonable response rate of 436 completed questionnaires
(Table 1).
The questionnaire was divided into two sections. In section A, participants
provided background information related to their studies and work experiences, e.g.,
highest academic qualification, years of working experience within the maritime
industries, nationality, age, etc. In section B, they were requested to provide
information about their studies by replying to questions on choices regarding higher
education enrolment, scholarships and employment during their studies, followed by
questions about plans for the after graduation. Moreover, students provided answers
into three major themes, namely: (i) issues considered when deciding to pursue their
respective programmes; (iii) information channels for their respective programmes;

Table 1. Selected career paths of survey participants.

Student category Male Female Frequency Percent

Undergraduates 151 198 349 80.0

Postgraduates 44 43 87 20.0
Total 195 241 436 100.0
 Pursuing maritime education 373

and (iv) description of their respective programmes. Questions were asked in the
form of statements and respondents stated the extent that they agree to particular
statements or not (eight to nine statements per theme). To address the propositions
of the study, the empirical results are analyzed as follows: (i) descriptive statistics; (ii)
measuring the correlation between different factors by applying Pearson’s product
moment correlation coefficient; and (iii) comparing the opinions of under- and
postgraduate students with the assistance of ANOVA.
To respect confidentiality, data analysis and presentations are undertaken only in
agglomerate without any references to particular institution(s) or survey partici-
pant(s). Finally, some information in the discussion section was obtained through
various semi-structured, in-depth interviews with a number of survey participants.
The main objective was to understand the underlying reasons and rationale behind
their choices and opinions in the survey.
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

3. Empirical results
3.1. Background information
Students who have enrolled for an undergraduate programme in maritime studies
have typically completed secondary level education in the previous academic year (or
up to two years). In all cases, the homogeneity of nationalities enrolling at the
specific educational programmes is a remarkable phenomenon. With all EU students
eligible to go through the selection process, language limitations in Greece clearly
affect this outcome. Language limitation in Hong Kong is much less significant, as
English serves as the main language of instructions within their maritime
programmes, as reflected by the existence of (at least several) non-Chinese students
enrolled in such programmes every year [22].
In general, one out of five enrolled undergraduate students has a family
background that is somehow associated with the shipping industry or the maritime
world (Table 2). The percentage of those enrolling for postgraduate studies is
remarkably higher and stands at 37.2%. 15 of the replying students have a first
merchant marine officer in the family, six a merchant marine engineer, three a second
officer, and 11 a ratting. The rest have a family member working at a shipping
company ashore, or in maritime related activities. The role of maritime tradition is
not insignificant, as in Greece a country associated with a strong maritime tradition,

Table 2. Family members with work experiences within the maritime

industries.

Student category Answer Frequency Percent

Undergraduates Yes 62 21.6

No 286 78.4
Postgraduates Yes 32 37.2
No 54 62.8
Under- and postgraduates Yes 340 78.0
No 94 21.6
Missing answers 2 0.5
Total 436 100.0
 374 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Table 3. Hometown currently associated with jobs related to the shipping industries (survey
participants in Greece only).

Student category Yes (%) No (%) Do not know

Undergraduate—first year (n ¼ 133) 66.9 24.1 9.0

Undergraduate—final year (n ¼ 114) 70.2 20.2 9.6
Postgraduate (n ¼ 87) 70.1 27.6 2.3

27.4% of the students are coming from a family with members having already
experience in the maritime industries.
In Greece, 60.3% of the students that enrol for a degree in maritime studies
identify a maritime tradition in its hometown (Table 3). This percentage is of the
same range in the case of postgraduate students. The rest of 10.4% feels that cannot
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

answer the question, but this is less important for this analysis; the perceptions of the
students are what valid the most. It is important though that there are more students
in actual numbers (2214202), and even more as a percentage of the students that
have replied to this answer (approximately 70%460.3%) who feel that their
hometown is currently associated with jobs related to the shipping industries.
Evidently, the presence of a strong maritime history and a promising professional
hometown can be relevant to choices made towards maritime studies. The increase of
the percentage that associates its hometown with maritime jobs when approaching
graduation (cf. final vs. first year undergraduates) indicates that deeper knowledge of
the sector does not result in disillusionment as regards the maritime related
employment prospects at the hometown.
Undergraduate students in maritime studies often came from a well-educated
environment. Almost 30% has a father that studied at the university, and the same is
true when looking at the educational level of the mother of the student (Table 4). This
is only slightly lower of the 33% observed in the case of students pursuing
postgraduate maritime. 6% of the undergraduate students have a parent that has
attended a merchant marine academy, with this percentage increasing remarkably
when attention is given to the results obtained by postgraduate students (15%).
Subject to further research, such feedbacks suggest that parents who have ‘gone
maritime’ before advance (rather than restrict) the potential of pursuing a maritime
degree.
Family income stands at the upper scale (Table 5). More than 31% of the
undergraduate students answering this question are part of a family earning more
than 45 000 Euros per year - well above the annual average income in the respective
societies (21 281 Euros for Greece; 321 600 Hong Kong Dollars for Hong-Kong).
A 1:3 rule seems to apply regarding upper, middle and lower income levels.
Unsurprising, comparing under- and postgraduate students, it is obvious that the
latter often excludes students that come from lower income social scale. The fees
involved in pursuing postgraduate programmes (enhanced by their often self-financed
nature) and the comparatively increased needs of mature students to be part of the job
market, rather than continuing education, are two issues that play certain roles.

3.2. Professional experiences before and during enrolment

As expected, undergraduate students usually do not have any professional maritime
experiences when enrolling (Table 6). Only three postgraduate students were found
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Table 4. The highest education qualification of the parents of survey participants.

Father Mother

Education level Postgraduates Percent Undergraduates Percent Postgraduates Percent Undergraduates Percent

No qualification/kingarten 1 1.1% 1 0.3% 1 1.1% 6 1.7%

Primary school 7 8.0% 39 11.2% 11 12.6% 44 12.6%
Secondary school 4 4.6% 68 19.5% 8 9.2% 39 11.2%
High school 20 23.0% 72 20.6% 32 36.8% 99 28.4%
Technical/community college 11 12.6% 41 11.7% 9 10.3% 62 17.8%
University 26 29.9% 72 20.6% 20 23.0% 78 22.3%
Postgraduate 3 3.4% 23 6.6% 3 3.4% 12 3.4%
Merchant Marine Academy 13 14.9% 21 6.0% 1 1.1% 1 0.3%
Other 2 2.3% 9 2.6% 0 0.0% 6 1.7%
Pursuing maritime education

Total 87 100.0% 346 99.1% 85 97.7% 347 99.4%

Missing 0 0.0% 3 0.9% 2 2.3% 2 0.5%
Grand total 87 100.0% 349 100.0% 87 100.0% 349 100.0%

Source: Authors.
375
 376 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Table 5. Annual income of the families of survey participants.

Under- and postgraduates Undergraduates Postgraduates

Income range Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

512 000E 48 11.8 41 12.7 7 8.4

12 000–20 000E 113 27.8 100 30.9 13 15.7
20 000–45 000E 118 29.0 84 25.9 34 41.0
45 000–75 000E 69 17.0 51 15.7 18 21.7
475 000E 59 14.5 48 14.8 11 13.3
Total 407 100.0 324 100.0 83 100.0

Table 6. Professional experiences of survey participants.

Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Yes-part Yes-full
Category No Percent time Percent time Percent Total

Undergraduate—first year 94 71 27 20 12 9 133

Undergraduate—final year 34 16 124 58 57 26 215
Postgraduate 15 17 22 25 50 57 87

Table 7. Major reasons of survey participants in taking up employment while studying.

Under- and postgraduates Undergraduates Postgraduates

Factor Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Programme’s requirement 2 1.0 1 0.8 1 1.4

Self-interest 33 16.8 18 14.5 15 20.8
Gain work experience 52 26.5 31 25.0 21 29.2
Financial incentives 67 34.2 56 45.2 11 15.3
Other reason 1 0.5 1 0.8 0 0.0
Total 155 79.1 107 86.3 48 66.7
Missing answers 41 20.9 17 13.7 24 33.3
Total 196 100.0 124 100.0 72 100.0

to have professional experience at sea, with a minimum of three months and a

maximum of 14 months on board. There are 13 more having experience onshore, six
of them are at accounting departments of shipping companies. This is not to say that
undergraduate students do not have any experience at all; 20% of them have
experience of a non-maritime related part time job and 9% of a non-maritime related
full time job.
Undergraduate students who attend undergraduate programmes tend to combine
studies and work, at least at some point, during their studies. An additional 38% will
have part time professional experiences by graduation, and a further 17% will have a
full time professional experiences. The chance of graduating without any such
experiences is quite low (17%). Out of those survey participants that decided to
reveal the reason for that choice, in almost half cases taking up employment during
studies is attributed to financial reasons and in one in four cases to the importance of
 Pursuing maritime education 377

Table 8. Plans of survey participants after graduation.

Factor Frequency Percent Undergraduates Percent Postgraduates Percent

Further studies, related to 92 30.4 80 37.0 12 6.9

logistics and maritime studies
Further studies, not related to 35 1.6 32 14.8 3 1.7
logistics and maritime studies
Employment in logistics or 141 46.5 78 36.1 63 36.2
maritime industries
Maritime industries 137 31.4 75 34.7 62 71.3
Port industries 3 0.7 1 0.5 2 2.3
Transport industries 6 1.4 4 1.9 2 2.3
Public administration 15 3.4 8 3.7 7 8.0
Sea tourism industries 2 0.5 2 0.9 0 0.0
Coast guard 4 0.9 0 0.0 4 4.6
Shipbuilding industries 4 0.9 3 1.4 1 1.1
Banks/financial sector 8 1.8 5 2.3 3 3.4
Other industries 8 1.8 7 3.2 1 1.1
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Do not know yet 13 3.0 9 4.2 4 4.6

Employment in other fields 31 10.2 5 3.5 6 3.4
Other 4 1.3 3 2.1 3 1.7
Total 303 100.0 33 23.4 87 50.0

gaining experiences (Table 7). The former reason is less of an issue for those
embarking for postgraduate studies (only 15%) where experiences and self-interests
are more frequent justifications.

3.3. Plan after graduation

Many undergraduate students tend to pursue postgraduate education in maritime
studies after the competition of their first degree (37%, see Table 8). In total, a
remarkable 52% believes that a first degree alone is not enough to secure
professional success, with four out of five even suggest that further studies in
postgraduate maritime programmes are particularly challenging and intellectually
inspiring. 14% is interested in combining a first maritime degree with a postgraduate
degree in another discipline. In the case of postgraduate students, a small (yet so
significant that cannot be ignored) group (7%) is interested in continuing education
after the completion of their current postgraduate degree. The interests of these
students are also in studying further maritime- and logistics-related themes, with
decisions to study in another discipline being rare.
Employment plans also reflect a ‘maritime’ nature. For three out of four of the
students that are not interested in continuing their studies after university
graduation, finding a job in maritime and logistics industries is the preferred
option. Again there is no tendency to seek professional life in another sector.
Students heading directly to employment were also asked to explain their choice in
more detail. The vast majority would prefer a post in the maritime industries (over
65% of the valid total, and at 72% in the case of undergraduates), with public
administration posts being the secondly most preferred option (7% of the valid total;
8% in the case of undergraduate students). The only other sector that is worth to be
mentioned is the financial/banking sector (approximately 5% of the total).
Asking those who see the maritime world as the ‘ideal sector to be associated with’
to provide further details about their preferred shipping sector, the survey identified
significant differences between under- and the postgraduate students (Table 9).
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

378

Table 9. For survey participants, if ‘maritime industries’ is the ideal sector to be associated with, then which sub-sector?

Factor Frequency Percent Valid percent Undergraduates Percent Postgraduates Percent

Valid Containers 56 12.8 23.6 46 26.4 10 15.9

Tankers 56 12.8 23.6 30 17.2 26 41.3
Dry bulk 45 10.3 19.0 25 14.4 20 31.7
Cruise 42 9.6 17.7 40 23.0 2 3.2
Coastal shipping 18 4.1 7.6 17 9.8 1 1.6
Other 20 4.6 8.4 16 9.2 4 6.3
Total 237 54.4 100.0 174 63
Missing 199 45.6
Total 436 100.0
A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Notes: Others include: Broker: 1/Chartering: 3/Insurance Claims: 1/LNGs: 3/Maritime Law: 1.
 Pursuing maritime education 379

Table 10. First crucial—the most attractive feature of the programme.

Factor Frequency Percent Undergraduates Percent Postgraduates Percent

Accredited by a professional unit 109 36.2 81 37.7 28 32.6

Practice/occupational orientated 134 44.5 92 42.8 42 48.8
Relatively lower academic 37 12.3 31 14.4 6 7.0
entrance requirements
Other 21 7.0 11 5.1 10 11.6
Total 301 100.0 215 86

Notes: Others include: Easy to find a job: 1/Easy to graduate: 1/Promising future: 2/International
prospects 2/Related to my interests: 1.

For the former group, the picture is quite balanced. A number of sectors are seen as
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

important. The picture is quite different in the case of postgraduate students. In that
case over 40% of the students demonstrate an interest in tankers and a further 32.7%
for dry bulks. Containers or cruise are less preferred, both in terms of absolute
number of students and when compared with the cases of undergraduate students.
26% of the undergraduate students and 16% of the postgraduate are indifferent
regarding the sub-sector that who they would prefer to be employed.

3.4. Motivation in pursuing a maritime programme

Studying for a maritime programme is the first choice for 45% of the undergraduate
students pursuing such programme. The case is different in masters’ programmes
where 94% of the students enrol because maritime studies are the first choice among
the different higher education themes. The most attractive feature of the maritime
programme is the fact that it is practice (or occupational) oriented (Table 10).
214 undergraduate students have answered the question regarding scholarships
pursuing. Only 16 of them are scholarship winners from universities, with seven more
having a scholarship awarded by external parties. The picture is not different among
postgraduate students, whereas three of them are scholarship winners offered by
universities and six more from external parties. In general, scholarships are few, and
thus not an important reason for enrolling in the degrees under examination.

3.5. Issues considered in pursuing a maritime programme

Undergraduate students reacted to statements about the issues considered to enrol at
the particular programme, with answers ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 6
(strongly disagree) (Table 11). Evidently: (i) the good networks that the institution
retains with the industries; (ii) the potential to enhance knowledge about logistics
and maritime industries; (iii) the high reputation of the programme or the
department; and (iv) the high quality of supporting facilities of the institution,
scored the best means as considered issues; followed by (v) the programme’s
accreditation by professional units.
With standard deviation from the means been important in all cases, the skewness
of replies illustrates the lack of distribution symmetry, with answers skewing at
higher numbers than the average. This is more emphatic in the two first cases, with
the kurtosis findings being beyond the normal (3.00) and suggesting heavy tails of the
two distributions at a higher average. In short, those feeling strong for the first issues
 380 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Table 11. Issues considered in pursuing the programme–undergraduates.

Standard
Factor Mean deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Department/faculty/university has 1.97 1.08 1.74 3.71

good networks with industries
Enhance knowledge about logistics and 2.01 0.81 1.23 3.00
maritime industries
High reputation of programme/ 2.01 1.23 1.34 1.26
department
High quality of supporting facilities of 2.01 1.21 1.35 1.49
the institution
Programme’s accreditation by profes- 2.03 0.88 0.99 1.06
sional units
High quality of teaching staff 2.06 1.21 1.39 1.57
Great interest in providing courses 2.07 1.37 1.21 0.39
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Successfully admitted to the pro- 2.20 1.38 0.99 0.08

gramme with academic performance
Higher chance getting a job 2.25 1.24 0.78 0.23
Smooth graduation 2.25 1.38 1.03 0.23
Courses are practice-orientated 2.41 1.63 0.84 0.64
Easy to obtain good grades in courses 2.41 1.53 0.63 1.03
Affordable tuition fees 2.44 1.56 0.68 0.82
Internships/training 2.55 1.67 0.71 0.83
Want to be associated with my coun- 2.77 1.77 0.41 1.35
try’s maritime tradition
Higher earnings in maritime/logistics 2.95 1.78 0.19 1.45
industries than others
Friends–family encouraged me to enrol 2.98 1.83 0.36 1.38
in the programme
Friends–colleagues also enrolled in the 3.07 1.67 0.49 1.13
programme
Chances to secure scholarships– 3.43 1.70 0.31 1.30
financial support

Notes: Mean close to 1 means that the statement is valid (Scale: 1 ¼ Strongly agree; 2 ¼ Agree; 3 ¼ Rather
agree; 4 ¼ Rather disagree; 5 ¼ Disagree; 6 ¼ Strongly disagree).

find them too significant, but not all feel strong about them when deciding about the
programme to enrol.
At the other end of the table that we are able to find more consensuses and
conclude that perspective students consider less on: (i) family encouragement; (ii)
enrolment of family members at the programme and (iii) chances to secure
scholarship when choice of program to enrol is made. The highest standard deviation
by the mean of the answers is found in: (a) the association with the maritime
tradition; and (ii) the higher earning of the sector.
To determine which of these variables are interdependent, i.e., the extent to which
they vary together, we undertake a correlation analysis based on Pearson’s product
moment correlation coefficient (r). This analysis (see: Appendix I) allows to classify
factors as ‘strongly correlated’ (where 0.505r51.00), and ‘correlated’
(0.305r50.499), and exclude all factors where r50.30 as ‘not significantly
correlated’.
 Pursuing maritime education 381

For this question, the findings suggest the absence of any strongly correlated
factors, but a number of noteworthy positive correlations. The great interest in
provided courses correlate with knowledge enhancement about maritime industries
(0.33), with the latter correlating with high quality teaching staff (0.35). The interest
in practice-oriented courses correlates with internship and training (0.31), whereas
those students seriously considering the potential to obtain good grades are also
interested in the potential of admission to the program given previous academic
performance (0.34) and foremost in the smooth graduation potential (0.47).
Undergraduate students who look at the presence of high quality staff are also
those that are interested in the overall reputation of the department (0.38) and the
networks of the department with the industries (0.36). The strongest relationship is
observed in the case of those that focus on their wish to be associated with the
country’s maritime tradition. These are students having friends and colleagues who
are, or have been enrolled, at the programmes (0.49) - suggesting that the ‘world of
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

mouth’ is not irrelevant for the choices of undergraduate students.

To identify the major similarities and differences between undergraduate students
and their postgraduate counterparts, we have undertaken ANOVA between under-
and postgraduates students so as to identify the statistically significant factors. The
results are illustrated in Table 12 (only factors that reached the critical threshold of F
at a significance level of 0.05 are illustrated).
Table 12 indicates that undergraduate students pay less attention to whether the
institutions concerned have established good networks with the industries. They
seem to be more interested in the courses provided, quality of teaching staff, as well
as enhancing knowledge about the logistics and maritime industries. Compared to
postgraduate students, they also consider more on the earning of a career in the
maritime industries (e.g. whether they can earn more than in the case of other
industries). Interestingly, when considering whether to pursue the programme or not,
both groups of students are significantly affected by the presence of friends and
colleagues who have already enrolled in particular maritime programmes. Finally,
undergraduate students put slightly more emphasis on the availability of internships
and training than postgraduate students, which is in line with the practice-oriented
nature of the maritime programmes as mentioned earlier (Table 10).

3.6. Information channels for the maritime programme

The next question addresses the ways that students get to know about the
programme they pursue (Table 13). It is clear that most undergraduate students do
not have access to specific sources of information. Thus, it comes to little surprise
that social networks become another important source. Those having family
member(s), friend(s), or knowing a third person that has a link with the programme
or the institution, seek information from these contacts. Enrolment is not due to
aggressive marketing by the respective institutions; not only the mean is too high
(3.90) but all other indicators suggest that this is among the most undergraduate
students share this view more than any other else. A very significant finding is the
absence of any active role of the maritime industries, whether companies or interest
groups and associations representing them, in ‘pushing’ young people to pursue
higher education by introducing relevant courses to them (mean 3.10; answers do not
negative skew and there is no statistically significant kurtosis). Maritime industries
seem to passively rely on the higher education system to attract the best of the
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

382

Table 12. Issues considered in pursuing the programme by under- and postgraduates.

Sum of Mean
Factors Undergraduates Postgraduates squares df square F Significance

Great interest in providing courses 2.07 1.72 Between groups 13.52 1 13.52 11.47 0.00
Within groups 506.96 430 1.18
Total 520.48 431
Enhance knowledge about logistics and maritime 2.01 1.65 Between groups 6.82 1 6.82 9.08 0.00
industries Within groups 323.62 431 0.75
Total 330.44 432
A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Internships/training 2.55 2.48 Between groups 10.05 1 10.05 4.57 0.03

Within groups 647.94 295 2.20
Total 657.99 296
Department/faculty/university has good networks 1.97 2.42 Between groups 6.39 1 6.39 4.96 0.03
within the industries Within groups 553.93 430 1.29
Total 560.31 431
Successfully get admitted to the programme with 2.20 2.10 Between groups 11.01 1 11.01 7.57 0.01
academic performance Within groups 433.34 298 1.45
Total 444.35 299
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

High quality of teaching staff 2.06 1.89 Between groups 19.68 1 19.68 12.46 0.00
Within groups 676.09 428 1.58
Total 695.78 429
Friends and colleagues also enrolled in the 3.07 3.06 Between groups 16.41 1 16.41 7.13 0.01
programme Within groups 996.33 433 2.30
Total 1012.75 434
Friends and family encouraged me to enrol in the 2.98 2.43 Between groups 69.99 1 69.99 25.49 0.00
programme Within groups 820.97 299 2.75
Total 890.96 300
Want to be associated with my country’s 2.77 1.98 Between groups 8.98 1 8.98 4.23 0.04
maritime tradition Within groups 919.62 433 2.12
Total 928.60 434
Higher earnings in the maritime/logistics 2.95 1.86 Between groups 30.49 1 30.49 16.08 0.00
industries than other industries Within groups 564.91 298 1.90
Total 595.40 299
Pursuing maritime education
383
 384 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Table 13. Source of information—undergraduates.

Factor Mean Standard deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Family member is a student/ 2.50 0.972 0.454 0.516

graduate of this institution/
university
Someone who know enrolled the 2.80 1.549 1.309 0.997
programme before
Friends 3.00 1.633 0.191 1.761
Other channels 3.00 1.944 0.567 1.067
Suggested by professions in the 3.10 1.197 0.233 0.369
maritime/logistics industries
Intentionally searched for related 3.20 2.098 0.123 1.769
information on the
programme
Learnt this programme from 3.80 1.549 0.036 0.094
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

mass media
Learn this programme from 3.90 1.449 0.334 1.151
university exhibitions

Notes: Mean close to 1 means that the statement is valid (Scale: 1 ¼ Strongly agree; 2 ¼ agree; 3 ¼ Rather
agree; 4 ¼ Rather disagree; 5 ¼ Disagree; 6 ¼ Strongly disagree).

potential graduates, whereas the higher education system does not market itself to
potential candidates by any obvious means, at least from the perspective of students.
The correlation coefficient analysis regarding this question provides little
additional information, The identified correlation (in between 0.33 and 0.44) of
social network-related answers, which are ‘friends’, ‘teachers’, ‘someone who has
previously enrolled in the programme, scores the three lower means, and stands as a
logical finding. The identified correlation (0.42) between the ‘mass media’ and the
‘exhibition’ answers leads to the same conclusion. The findings also suggest that
there are considerable differences on how under- and postgraduate students get
access to the information of the programmes that they are pursuing. The
comparisons of programme information channels for different student groups are
illustrated in Table 14 (presenting factors which have reached the critical thresholds
of F at a significance level of 0.05).

3.7. Description of the maritime programme

The last question requested participants to describe the maritime programmes that
they have enrolled. The distribution of received answers can be found in Table 15.
The statement that final year undergraduate students mostly agree with is that the
‘programme outcome fits my initial expectations’. Notably, in the specific question
all answers are within the range of strongly agree (1) to rather agree (3), with none of
the 345 survey participants disagreeing. Students tend to think that the courses are
too theoretical and academic, though they seem to be taught by well-qualified staff
(notably no students disagree with that - looking at the minimum and maximum
values there was no negative answer, i.e. ranging between 4 and 6) and provide
updated information. At the other end of the spectrum, respondents seriously
challenge the practical orientation of the courses. In this case, the very high mean
(3.75) of the received answers is also associated with a 3 minimum -5 maximum
range. This implies that, while no students are entirely disappointed, at the same
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Table 14. Information channels for the programme for under- and postgraduates.

Sum of Mean
Factor Undergraduates Postgraduates squares df square F Significance

Someone who know enrolled 2.80 2.81 Between groups 81.86 1 81.86 30.46 0.00
the programme before Within groups 800.87 298 2.69
Total 882.73 299
Family member is a student/ 2.50 4.55 Between groups 28.83 1 28.83 10.28 0.00
graduate of this institution/ Within groups 835.72 298 2.80
university Total 864.547 299
Intentionally searched for 3.20 1.68 Between groups 35.88 1 35.88 15.95 0.00
related information on Within groups 670.37 298 2.25
Pursuing maritime education

the programme Total 706.25 299

385
 386 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Table 15. Describe the programme–undergraduates.

Standard
Factor Mean deviation Minimum Maximum Skewness Kurtosis

Programme outcome fits 2.00 1.155 1 3 0.000 6.00

my initial expectation
Courses are too aca- 2.13 1.16 1 5 0.86 0.13
demic–theoretical
Courses are taught by 2.50 0.58 2 3 0.00 6.00
well-qualified teaching
staff
Provision of updated 2.50 1.29 1 4 0.00 1.20
information
Increases students’ pro- 2.64 1.40 1 6 0.73 0.21
fessional competence
and skills
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Transmit job-related skills 2.75 0.957 2 4 0.855 1.28

to students
Students built up net- 3.00 1.41 1 4 1.41 1.50
works with people
within industries
Variation of teaching 3.00 2.160 1 6 1.190 1.50
methods
Workload is too heavy 3.03 1.46 1 6 0.14 0.90
Courses are too practi- 3.75 1.60 1 6 0.44 0.87
cally oriented
Teaches industries related 3.75 0.96 3 5 0.86 1.29
academic theories to
students
Other 3.75 1.500 3 6 2.000 4.00

Notes: Mean close to 1 means that the statement is valid (Scale: 1 ¼ Strongly agree; 2 ¼ Agree; 3 ¼ Rather
agree; 4 ¼ Rather disagree; 5 ¼ Disagree; 6 ¼ Strongly disagree).

time, none of them feel that the courses offered are really associated with practical
themes.
It is in this question that the strongest correlations exist between the answers
provided. The programme outcome fits the initial expectations, when students feel
that increases their competence (0.57), is taught by well-qualified staff (0.57) and
provides updated information (0.52). A correlation also exists with the extent that
the programme transmits job-related skills (0.48). The strongest correlation
is between providing updated information and increasing professional competen-
cies and skills find a programme (0.60). Those who feel that the courses are
too practice-oriented agree that the programme increases their professional
competencies and skills (0.50). Transmission of job-related skills is associated with
well-qualified staff (0.55) and a variation of teaching methods during the
programme (0.51).
The comparison with the perceptions of postgraduate students is analysed in
Table 16, which illustrates those factors that have reached the critical threshold of
F at a significance level of 0.05. Table 16 indicates that the views of both student
groups are largely similar, although some diversifications can still be identified.
First, while appreciating the practice-oriented nature of the maritime programmes
(Table 10), undergraduate students generally have fewer complaints on the
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Table 16. Description of the programmes by under- and postgraduates.

Sum of Mean
Factors Undergraduates Postgraduates squares df square F Significance

Courses are too academic/theoretical 2.13 2.50 Between groups 7.495 1 7.495 6.410 0.012
Within groups 350.813 300 1.169
Total 358.308 301
It increases students’ professional 2.64 2.14 Between groups 15.215 1 15.215 9.477 0.002
competence and skills Within groups 480.028 299 1.605
Total 495.243 300
Provision of updated information 2.50 2.57 Between groups 11.928 1 11.928 10.707 0.001
Within groups 333.095 299 1.114
Total 345.023 300
Pursuing maritime education

Courses are taught by well-qualified staff 2.50 2.00 Between groups 14.373 1 14.373 14.336 0.000
Within groups 299.786 299 1.003
Total 314.159 300
387
 388 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

academic or theoretical aspects of the courses taught by teaching staff. Moreover,

comparing to postgraduate students, undergraduates also seem to appreciate more
on the acquirement of professional competence and skills taught by qualified
teaching staff.

4. Discussing the findings

This study reveals the structures of demand for maritime programmes by providing
an anatomy of the profiles, motivations and expectation of undergraduate students
in pursuing maritime-related programmes.
Our findings suggest the presence of a triple maritime dimension: students choose
to pursue a maritime undergraduate programme, and then want to study for a
postgraduate maritime degree, and dream to work in the maritime sector for good.
Analytical results support the proposition that the motivation of undergraduate
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

students deciding to pursue maritime programmes is strategically driven by practical

considerations, while their behaviours are also significantly different from postgrad-
uate students pursuing in similar programmes. These students range from middle to
upper income above average educated families, with the family or hometown
association with the maritime industry being frequent but not deterministic. The
good news is that all the 345 students that answered the questionnaire feel that, in
general, the programmes they attend fit their initial expectations.
The paper also concludes on vital degree choice considerations. The first point is
the definition of a ‘good programme’ (which fits their expectation), of which the
ability to increase student professional competence and skills, the provision of
updated information and courses taught by well-qualified staff serve as the most
important criteria. Students also believe that the existence of well-qualified staff
offering various teaching methods are the key attributes in transmitting job-related
skills to students and enhancing their knowledge about the maritime industries.
Undergraduate students believe that whether the maritime programmes are
‘practice/occupational-oriented’ mainly depends on whether the institution has
established good networks with the industries, as reflected by the availability of
internships and trainings offered to the universities (and, of course, ultimately to the
students). Unsurprisingly, they believe that whether teaching staff possesses decent
quality depends on the extent they can enhance students’ knowledge in the industries.
However, this also correlates to the university’s industrial networks. This perhaps
explains why many maritime programmes increasingly employ part-time visiting
lecturers from the industrial world to deliver various maritime-related courses,
lectures and workshops to students. Perhaps this policy is necessary, given that the
perception of teaching staff’s quality seems to be correlated with the reputation of
the programme/institution concerned. This study also indicates that there is a
significant number of undergraduate students who decide to pursue a maritime
programme purely due to its relative easiness (when compared to some traditional
disciplines) in getting admitted to universities, obtaining good grades and thus
smooth graduation.
As mentioned, significant diversifications exist between under- and postgraduate
students. For the former, decisions in choosing the respective programmes tend to be
highly affected by friends, colleagues and family members, while strategic decisions
are illustrated by their emphasis on the programmes’ practice-oriented nature,
opportunities for internships and training, as well as expecting higher earnings. They
 Pursuing maritime education 389

also seem to be reliant on friends and colleagues who are already pursuing the
programmes in providing necessary information, although publicly accessible
information related to the programmes is equally (if not more) important.
Notably, while shipping companies have started to replace ex-officers with university
degree holders, applying to a comparative lesser extent the traditionally considered
best practice of employing the skills, tacit knowledge, and willingness of ex-seafarers
who transit to onshore positions after a successful offshore career [12, 23], the
empirical findings suggest that, for the time being, any ‘pushing forward’ by the
maritime industries remain, to say the least, unidentified by students.
In terms of programme expectation, however, undergraduate students tend to be
more ‘forgiving’ than their postgraduate counterparts. Although they choose
respective programmes due to their ‘practice/occupational-oriented’ nature, in
general, they are more receptive to academic/theoretical knowledge offered by such
programmes. This phenomenon is perhaps due to the relatively fewer, if any,
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

practical experiences possessed by undergraduate students. As per information

provided by survey participants through various in-depth interviews conducted with
them (Section 2), given the substantial amount of tuition fees that they have paid [1],
most of which directly from their own pockets, postgraduate students generally
assess ‘returns’ differently from their undergraduate counterparts. The former
mainly look for skills and knowledge which can be used directly (and immediately) to
solve practical, day-to-day operational and management problems, rather than
academic theories or knowledge which help to enhance their overall understandings
of the maritime industries. Such emphasis on practicality is less significant on
undergraduate students. This view is also supported by the fact that in stark contrast
their postgraduate counterparts many undergraduate students who decided to work
(either part time or internships) during their studies did so out of financial necessities
rather than self-interests or the desire to gain professional experiences.

5. Concluding remarks
When the increasing number of enrolments proves earlier worries that ‘maritime
studies’ would progressively disappear to be redundant, continuation, improvement,
expansion strategies depend on the empirically unexplored demand structures. The
academia, maritime industries, current students and perspective ones need to know
the characteristics of the supply and demand for higher education maritime
programmes.
This study unlocked the profiles, motivations and expectations of undergraduate
students who follow these programmes. Following the discussed survey, we know
more about the students’ social and maritime related backgrounds, motivations,
considerations, and sources of information before embarking on such programmes.
The expansion of this exercise to broader samples will enhance knowledge about
elements of students’ assessment of the courses pursued, and about differences
between under- and postgraduate students.
The conducted empirical research, and any similar ones to follow might have an
immense long-term impact, Evidently, the use of users’ perspectives on maritime
education contributes to a better understanding of the professionalization process of
the maritime industries. It also fills a knowledge gap produced by the fact that most
current research on maritime education focuses on the change of the business
environment and the emerging needs of the industries while, apart from a few
 390 A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

exceptions mentioned earlier, students’ demands are under-researched. At a micro-

level, information on student expectations on their personal and professional
development when they enrol to such programmes helps to understand individuals’
education decision process. At a macro-level, the findings enable to understand how
an occupational group obtains its professional status through a progress attainment
of higher level of education by their members.
The present study is a valuable basis for more sophisticated investigations on the
relations of credentials and professionalization. First, it helps to explain and predict
the development of maritime education. Second, it provides constructive advice to
improve the quality of such programmes so as to meet the demand of professional
groups. In addition it has staged a perfect platform for further research on this
important topic, notably the commonalities and differences between students
from different backgrounds, e.g., culture, professional experience, gender, compe-
tency, etc.
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

To know more about these critical issues, maritime and education scholars need to
be engaged in further empirical maritime education research, including perceptions
of those that decide to attend university maritime programmes. This is not least
because the increase of awareness on the stated issues is extremely pivotal for the
development of dynamic and well-educated personnel to contribute to the prosperity
of modern maritime industries.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Drs Ilias Bissias and Aimilia Papachristou for assistance in
data collection and compilation, and Prof C. Chlomoudis, M. Lekakou, A. Merikas,
I. Tsamourgelis and Dr H.S. Wong for assisting in questionnaire distributions. We
would also like to thank our research assistant, Nicole, in handling the tedious task
of data entries and processing. Foremost, we would like to thank all the survey
participants and anonymous referees for their invaluable inputs. Usual disclaimers
apply.

References and notes

1. NG, A. K. Y., KOO, A. C. and HO, W. C. J., 2009, The motivations and added values of
embarking on postgraduate professional education: Evidences from the maritime
industries. Transport Policy, 16(5), 251–258.
2. NG, A. K. Y., KOO, A. C. and PALLIS, A. A., 2011, Professionalization of the shipping
industry via postgraduate education. Ocean and Coastal Management, 54(5), 364–373.
3. TOBIAS, R., 2003, Continuing professional education and professionalization: travelling
without a map or compass? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(5), 445–456.
4. Here is interesting to recall the plenary session at the Annual Conference of the
International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME) 2000, held in Naples, Italy,
discussing this issue in light of the restructuring of Cardiff University, UK and the
integration of the then Department of Maritime Studies and International Transport to
the University’s Business School. To the best of our memories, several scholars expressed
at that time the view that the ‘end of maritime studies higher education degrees’ was
probable.
5. MOREBY, D., 2004, Editorial. Maritime Policy and Management, 31(2), 89–91.
6. Becker, G., 1993, Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special
Reference to Education. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
7. BOURNER, T., BOWDEN, R. and LAING, S., 2001, Professional doctorates in England.
Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 65–83.
 Pursuing maritime education 391

8. GRAMMENOS, C. T., 2002, The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business (London:
LLP).
9. HEAVER, T. D., 2002, The evolving roles of shipping lines in international logistics.
International Journal of Maritime Economics, 4, 210–230.
10. LEVINSON, M., 2006, The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and
the World Economy Bigger (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
11. STOPFORD, M., 2009, Maritime Economics, 3rd ed. (London: Routledge).
12. HARLAFTIS, G. and THEOTOKAS, I., 2004, European family firms in international business:
British and Greek tramp shipping firms. Business History, 46(2), 219–255.
13. THEOTOKAS, I., 2007, Top of world shipping: Greek shipping companies: organization
and management. In Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, edited by A. A. Pallis
(London: Elsevier), pp. 63–93.
14. GARDNER, B. M., MARLOW, P. B., NAIM, M. M., NAIR, R. and PETTIT, S. J., 2006, The
policy implications of market failure for the land-based jobs market for British seafarers.
Marine Policy, 31(2), 117–124.
15. O’NEIL, W. A., 2003, The human element in shipping. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs,
2(2), 95–97.
Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

16. GREWAL, D. and HAUGSTETTER, H., 2007, Capturing and sharing knowledge in supply
chains in the maritime transport sector: Critical issues. Maritime Policy and
Management, 34(2), 169–183.
17. DINWOODIE, J., 2001, Motivational profiling of logistics masters students in Great
Britain. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 31(3),
187–202.
18. BARNETT, M., GATFIELD, D., OVERGAARD, B., PEKCAN, C. and GRAVESON, A., 2006,
Barriers to progress or windows of opportunity? A studying career path mapping in the
maritime industries. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 5(2), 127–142.
19. HESKETH, A. J. and KNIGHT, P. T., 1999, Postgraduates’ choice of programme: helping
universities to market and postgraduates to choose. Studies in Higher Education, 24(2),
151–63.
20. For a detailed literature review on students’ motivations and expectations, and their
application to maritime education, see [1, 2, 19, 21].
21. BOURNER, T., BOWDEN, R. and LAING, S., 1999, A national profile of research degree
awards: Innovation, clarity and coherence. Higher Education Quarterly, 53(3), 264–280.
22. This may include overseas exchange students coming to Hong Kong for one semester/
year.
23. THEOTOKAS, I., LEKAKOU, M. B., PALLIS, A. A., SYRIOPOULOS, T., and TSAMOURGELIS, I.,
2008, Greek Shipping, Employment, Competitiveness (in Greek) (Athens: Gutenberg).
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Appendix
392

Correlation table for question 22

Enhance Departments Want

knowledge faculty/ Successfully Friends– to be
Great about university get admitted Easy to colleagues associated
interest logistics has good to the obtain High High also with my
in and networks Courses programme good reputation of quality of enrolled country’s
providing maritime Internship/ within the are practice- with academic grades in Smoothly programme/ teaching in the maritime
courses industries training industries oriented performance courses graduation department staff programme tradition

Great interest in Pearson 1.000 0.327 0.217 0.125 0.145 0.221 0.164 0.160 0.095 0.267 0.096 0.087
providing correlation
courses
Significance 0.000 0.002 0.021 0.035 0.001 0.016 0.020 0.165 0.000 0.076 0.106
(two tailed)
Enhance knowl- Pearson 0.327 1.000 0.110 0.307 0.200 0.115 0.053 0.115 0.164 0.351 0.093 0.063
edge about correlation
logistics and
maritime
industries
Significance 0.000 0.113 0.000 0.003 0.095 0.444 0.097 0.017 0.000 0.083 0.244
(two tailed)
Internship/ Pearson 0.217 0.110 1.000 0.250 0.308 0.145 0.161 0.081 0.141 0.211 0.132 0.025
training correlation
A. A. Pallis and A. K. Y. Ng

Significance 0.002 0.113 0.000 0.000 0.036 0.020 0.247 0.043 0.002 0.057 0.719
(two tailed)
Departments fac- Pearson 0.125 0.307 0.250 1.000 0.289 0.198 0.172 0.256 0.249 0.364 0.225 0.086
ulty/university correlation
has good net-
works within
the industries
Significance 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.111
(two tailed)
Courses are prac- Pearson 0.145 0.200 0.308 0.289 1.000 0.187 0.200 0.235 0.125 0.254 0.011 0.053
tice-oriented correlation
0.035 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.003 0.001 0.069 0.000 0.878 0.440
 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 10:38 09 June 2015

Significance
(two tailed)
Successfully get Pearson 0.221 0.115 0.145 0.198 0.187 1.000 0.335 0.291 0.137 0.199 0.015 0.167
admitted to the correlation
programme
with academic
performance
Significance 0.001 0.095 0.036 0.004 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.046 0.004 0.827 0.014
(two tailed)
Easy to obtain Pearson 0.164 0.053 0.161 0.172 0.200 0.335 1.000 0.469 0.116 0.251 0.005 0.152
good grades in correlation
courses
Significance 0.016 0.444 0.020 0.012 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.090 0.000 0.937 0.026
(two tailed)
Smoothly Pearson 0.160 0.115 0.081 0.256 0.235 0.291 0.469 1.000 0.199 0.207 0.000 0.030
graduation correlation
Significance 0.020 0.097 0.247 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.995 0.666
(two tailed)
High reputation Pearson 0.095 0.164 0.141 0.249 0.125 0.137 0.116 0.199 1.000 0.381 0.198 0.014
of programme/ correlation
department
Significance 0.165 0.017 0.043 0.000 0.069 0.046 0.090 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.838
(two tailed)
High quality of Pearson 0.267 0.351 0.211 0.364 0.254 0.199 0.251 0.207 0.381 1.000 0.211 0.150
teaching staff correlation
Pursuing maritime education

Significance 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.005
(two tailed)
Friends– Pearson 0.096 0.093 0.132 0.225 0.011 0.015 0.005 0.000 0.198 0.211 1.000 0.485
colleagues also correlation
enrolled in the
programme
Significance 0.076 0.083 0.057 0.000 0.878 0.827 0.937 0.995 0.004 0.000 0.000
(two tailed)
Want to be asso- Pearson 0.087 0.063 0.025 0.086 0.053 0.167 0.152 0.030 0.014 0.150 0.485 1.000
ciated with my correlation
country’s mari-
time tradition
Significance 0.106 0.244 0.719 0.111 0.440 0.014 0.026 0.666 0.838 0.005 0.000
(two tailed)
393

Remarks: Factors which are correlated (0.3005r50.500) are in bold.