Choice of Major

Timon Igeria UNDERACHIEVEMENT IN THE UNIVERSITY IS AS A RESULT OF STUDENTS BASING THEIR CHOICE OF PROGRAM ON PRESTIGE. Introduction There is, perhaps, no college termination that is much thought-provoking, gut wrenching and watch-of-your biography orientedor disorientedthan the survival of the fittest of a major. (St. tin, 2000, p. 22) The impact of a misemploy or right quality transc closures beyond the learning satisfaction because it is correlated with trading perceptual constancy and job satisfaction. iodinness would put up a scholar to carry a university computer course of subject arame through extensive query, cognitive determination making and employment of heuristics (pike 200) still unfortunately anecdotal evidence has showed this is non the case. some learners employ tactics of misgiving as opposed to cognitive decision making and many times balance up in the persecute political platform (Beggs ,Banthon, Taylor 2008). It is not surprising then t hat Roese and Summerville (2005) citation meta-analytical evidence that the most frequently determine life mourning for Ameri laughingstocks involve their commandal choices.The difficulty is not just now bound to America plainly as well as to Kenya and the rest of the world. Pressure to recognize a position platform in university may be intrinsic or extrinsic . One of the most salient reasons why university scholars chose the wrong computer programme is because of prestigiousness which manifests itself in multifaceted ways. Prestige is the respect and admiration that roundthing or somebody has because of the social status or that which is admired and respected because it looks expensive and important. Which component part does prestigiousness play in the pickaxe of wrong university majors?How does this lead to underachievement? do of prestige on the choice of college program Before classifying most of the choices made by school-age childs on their university pr ograms as wrong, it is only fair that we elucidate on which parameters we argon using to do so. The distinction mingled with a right and wrong program can be explained using Hollands theory (Holland, 1985). Hollands theory link psychological factors (student individualizedities) with sociological factors (characteristics) of pedantic disciplines to cause a mannikin of personal-environmental fit.According to Hollands theory, individuals can be classified by character types which can be paralleled to model environments (which in our case are the academic programs) . For example, a realist -a person who prefers activities involving manipulating machines- is best suit for a realistic environment worry plan. An opposite component of Hollands theory shows that when there is congruity between a persons traits and the environment, he/she is li competent(predicate) to flourish. From the information above we can vulgarize that scholars whose personality types go intot mates wit h their programs are in the wrong programs.How does prestige contri providede to this? fond prestige Social prestige plays a profound map in the selection of university majors. Top performers in the Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (K. C. S. E) are faced with a conundrum charm making decisions on which program to study for in the university. A student who performs swellspring in the K. C. S. E may be swayed to chose a experience related program despite his/her artistic personality type. tasty travels like arts, English, music, drama and theater (Smart, Feldman and Ethington, 2000) are ranked lowly by the orderliness. question indicates that most of the top performing students in the Kenya Certificate of supportary school education send away up in science related majors . Does this mean that no(prenominal) of the students has an artistic, enterprising, social or conventional personality type? Many of the disillusioned students end up changing their university majo rs later on lacking interest. In one career fare organized by faithfulness Bank, a student revealed how she chose to enlist medication because of social prestige (she had emerged as the second student nationally in K.C. S. E) but ended up leaving the program for Business Communication after one year because that was where her passion was. Family prestige A research by Jeri Mullins Beggs, John H. Bantham, Steven Taylor (2008) on the factors affecting choice of college major showed that rattling few students use career mean tools and information research when choosing a program. Where do students get career information to favour programs from? Many students rely on personal sources which are prejudiced by prestige for information especially parents.In addition, a significant number of parents would sine qua non their children to pursue prestigious programs which they cherished to pursue but did not have the chance to do so . Parents, unlike students, often take education as an investment in which they expect huge returns ( Nabeel, Conaty and To 1989, p. 252). To them, when their child performs well in K. CSE, he/she should undertake a prestigious major like medicine, engineering and law. This willing enable them to have victorious careers and return the investments that were made.In the same breath, the parents will be proud about the courses selected because society reveres the family. Most students who follow their parents choice end up being dissatisfied with their programs and some even discontinue and join other programs(often of a lesser societal rank). locomote and institutional prestige Career prestige is another factor that affects the students career choice. The choice of a college major plays a hypercritical role in determining the pass judgment future earnings of the college students. (Arcidiano, Hotz, Kang 2011). Many students pick out a career based on the future earning streams associated with it.Prestigious careers like medicine, engineering, law, actuarial science and financial engineering are associated with higher(prenominal) future income streams hence more preferred. A student might choose a prestigious career which is not in line with his/her abilities because it has a higher potential for financial success. Job warranter and job stability are also critical factors in the choice of the college program. The spare-time activity was the response by a student in regard to her major choice, In choosing a major, I considered how marketable the mark would be, and what city or area I wanted to be in.I wanted a degree that I could go most anywhere and find a job (College savant diary, 2008). In Kenya, a significant number of the top students choose Medicine because it has been associated with job security and stability over engineering which is mostly contractual. The problem is worse in South Korea where the university chosen is predicted as the highest determinant of the income that one is breathing o ut to receive (Changui Khan, 2004). In Kenya some students agree programs which fit their personality types just because they dont like the university or campus. disciples would want to be associated with the best ranked universities. Most students who pursue majors because of career financial security end up disappoint there is no match with their personalities. destruction Kenya needs the right scholars to develop it as it endeavors to achieve its Vision 2030 goals. Scholars who are not only academically apt, but can also create pragmatic solutions and innovations able to progress the country. The practice of basing the choice of university program on prestige is apocryphal and should be discouraged .Students should choose programs based on their interest after intensive research and outsourcing. References 1. British Educational search Journal published by Taylor& Francis Limited, Vol 33, No2 Apr 2007 2. Reasearch in high Education Vol 47, No7 (Nov, 2006) pp801-822 published by springs. 3. College Student Journal, June 2008,Distinguishing the Factors Influencing College Student Choice of Major Jeri Mullins Beggs, John H Banthon, Steven Taylor (www. findarticles. com) 4. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital The rise of the net generation. New York McGraw-Hill. 5. Roese, N. J. , & Summerville, A. 2005). What we regret most and why. Personality and Social psychology Bulletin, 31 (9, September), 1273-85. 6. Smart, J. C, and Feldman, K. A. (1998). Accentuation effects of mixed academic departments An application and exploration of Hollands theory. Research in Higher Education 39 385-418. 7. Howard, J. A. (2005). Why should we care about student expectations? In Miller, T. E. , Bender, B. E. , and Schuh, J. H. Associates (eds. ), Promoting Reasonable Expectations Aligning Student and Institutional Views of the College Experience Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 10-33.