Developmental Path to Generalized Entitlement in a South African Higher Education Institution

Le résumé fourni par la source

Academic entitlement in South African higher education institutions is a complex issue, deeply rooted in the country’s history of apartheid. Despite numerous educational reforms aimed at addressing challenges related to access, equity, and quality within the South African education system, socio-economic disparities persist, contributing to feelings of inadequacy and a generalized sense of entitlement among students from disadvantaged backgrounds. This study examines the perceived sense of academic entitlement among 348 students from a higher education institution in South Africa, using a descriptive survey design and quantitative methods. Descriptive and inferential statistics reveal significant differences in academic entitlement scores across demographic variables (p < 0.05). Older students, female students, second-year students, students from rural areas, and international students exhibited statistically higher levels of entitlement. Conversely, African students demonstrated significantly lower levels of entitlement compared to students from other racial groups. The findings highlight the complexity of academic entitlement and its demographic dimensions, emphasizing important implications for institutional policy and practice. One potential policy response is the adoption of the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act of 2024, which would promote inclusivity and equity regarding the language of instruction at all educational levels. The study also recommends the development of tailored support programs, such as mentorship initiatives for second-year students, empowerment workshops for female students, and integration programs for international students and those from rural areas. These interventions aim to address the unique challenges and perceptions contributing to academic entitlement, fostering a more equitable and supportive educational environment.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.