A SURVEY STUDY OF PERCEPTIONS ON THE
SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONER NOTION:
THE HONG KONG CASE
Joseph Kim-keung Ho
Independent
Trainer, Hong Kong, China
Abstract:
The topic of scholar-practitioner is complex
as it spans a broad number of factors, e.g., career planning, professional
identity and the education system, etc. In addition, these factors have been
examined from different perspectives. Ho (2014a) made an attempt to synthesize
the main factors in scholar-practitioner study into a scholar-practitioner professional
development process framework. That exercise was primarily a theoretical one
grounded on critical systems/ multi-perspective, systems-based thinking. Here,
a follow-up empirical study with a Facebook-based questionnaire survey was
carried out to enhance our understanding on both the scholar-practitioner study
in general as well as on the scholar-practitioner professional development
process framework of Ho (2014a). Using multiple regression analysis on the
survey data, the correlation between a set of factors and the dependent
variable of “aspiration to be a scholar practitioner” in the business
management and non-business management fields are measured. Some weak signals
from the multiple regression analysis are spotted, which suggest the need for more
research work to be done on these factors.
Key
Words: Excel; Facebook-based questionnaire survey;
multiple regression analysis; scholar-practitioner; the scholar-practitioner
professional development process framework
INTRODUCTION
In 2014, this writer
has conducted a study on the scholar-practitioner notion based on literature
review (Ho, 2014a). Out of this study, the model of the scholar-practitioner
professional development process was proposed. The work on scholar-practitioner
has informed other research topics conducted by the writer and vice versa,
notably on double-hybrid management accountant (Ho, 2014b; 2014c), managerial
intellectual learning (Ho, 2014b; 2015a) and multi-perspective, systems-based
(MPSB) scholar-practitioners (Ho, 2014a; 2014b; 2015a). This paper is a
follow-up exercise on Ho (2014a) by gathering empirical survey data to find out
more on the scholar-practitioner topic, mainly about people’s perceptions on
the scholar-practitioner notion in Hong Kong. The next section is an updated
and terse review of the writer’s theoretical work on scholar-practitioner. It
is followed by an account of the Facebook-based survey findings on the topic.
THE SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONER PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Scholar-practitioners
are people who are intellectually competent as well as active in pursuing and
sharing theoretical knowledge with high practical value to others (Ho, 2014a).
For them, scholar-practitioner is their professional identity. Some writers as
well as universities that promote their Ph.D. and D.B.A. programmes also
specify that scholar-practitioners should hold a doctorate degree (Ho, 2014a).
The reason is that these programmes provide vigorous education on research
methods and intellectual learning in business management, e.g., Chan (2008), to
produce scholar-leaders (Cafolla, 2012). Dwelling on scholar-practitioners in
business management, Ho (2014a) points out that, being active in both the
academic and business communities creates unique complexity to the career
development and work-life balance of scholar-practitioners, e.g., experience of
role conflicts. Such complexity facing scholar-practitioners has been studied
in the academic literature under four main topics (Ho, 2014a): (i) the profiles
and career development patterns of scholar-practitioner, (ii) the role
conflicts and professional development challenges, (iii) ways to bridge
knowledge-action gap in management, and (iv) formulation of appropriate
approaches and contents of business management education. In this regard, a
closely related research theme is on the work-life balance management in
managerial intellectual learning (Ho, 2014d). Moreover, to make sense of the
complexity involved, Ho (2014a) proposes a framework on scholar-practitioner
professional development process in business management. This is shown in
Figure 1.
This
professional development process framework[1] (re: Figure 1)
consists of five related parts, namely, supportive infrastructure (Part A),
learning process & motivator (Part B), impacts on skills (Part C),
professional identity (Part D), and on personal well-being (Part E). It is
intended to be comprehensive in assimilating the main ideas from the
scholar-practitioner literature. Specifically it serves two purposes (Ho,
2014a):
Purpose 1: as
a synthesizing theoretical framework on the whole subject of
scholar-practitioner. It is theoretically anchored on critical systems/
multi-perspective, systems-based (MPSB) thinking and is intended to inform
research on the scholar-practitioner subject.
Purpose 2:
as a conceptual guide for aspiring scholar-practitioners to reflect on their
own career and professional development.
Understandably, the theoretical work
of Ho (2014a) on scholar-practitioner has to be informed by empirical studies;
otherwise, it is simply an ivory tower exercise with unclear relevance to
real-life concerns on career planning and professional identity formulation. So
far, the writer solely relies on his personal career development and learning
practices for illustration in his scholar-practitioner study, especially under
the multi-perspective, systems-based (MPSB) scholar-practitioner research
theme. As such, more empirical studies are required. In the next section, the
writer presents an account of a recent Facebook-based questionnaire survey on
the perceptions of scholar-practitioners. Being an empirical study on
scholar-practitioner, this paper is a follow-up study of Ho (2014a), which is a
theoretical paper with the apparent limitation as an ivory tower exercise.
ON THE FACEBOOK-BASED SURVEY
QUESTIONNAIRE EXERCISE FOR THE SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONER STUDY: FINDINGS AND
ANALYSIS
The
Facebook-based questionnaire survey was conducted by the writer from July 8 to
13 this year with his Facebook friends. The survey made use of the survey tool
offered by kwiksurveys.com. An evaluation of the Facebook-based survey method
per se has been made by Ho (2015b), thus not repeated here. There were around
1,500 friends on his Facebook at the time of the survey. Most of them have been
or are the writer’s students with tertiary education background. With Facebook
messages as invitation to participate in the survey, the writer succeeded to
involve 107 respondents in the survey. Survey questions 1 to 5 cover the
profile of the respondents while survey questions 6 to 15 capture the
respondents’ perceptions as related to the scholar-practitioner topic. As all
the respondents are in Hong Kong, the study solely reflects the perceptions of
a group of participants in Hong Kong at this moment in time. The 15 survey
questions and basic statistics are provided in Appendix 1. Here, the main survey findings are provided, some of
which are derived from the data-filtering and multiple regression analysis on
the survey data with the MS Excel tool.
I.
Findings from basic survey
statistics (findings 1 to 8)
Finding 1
(re: survey question 6): only 4 respondents (3.74%) say that they are quite
familiar with the term “scholar-practitioner” while 64 respondents (59.81%) say
that they are not familiar with the term. Overall, the scholar-practitioner
concept is not popular with the respondents.
Finding 2
(re: survey questions 7 and 8): only 8 respondents (7.55%) disagree with the
statement that “a scholar-practitioner is someone with doctoral degree who is
actively engaged in both scholarly activity and practice beyond academy” while
25 respondents disagree with the statement that “a scholar-practitioner needs
not have a doctoral degree to be considered as a scholar-practitioner”. On
balance, thus, more respondents feel that scholar-practitioners are expected to
have acquired a doctoral degree than those who do not feel this way.
Finding 3
(re: survey questions 9 and 10): 9 respondents (8.49%) express that they very
much aspire to be a scholar-practitioner in business management and 8
respondents (7.48%) express the same aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in
non-business management field. Overall, those who hold such an aspiration are
the minority of all the respondents.
Finding 4
(re: survey question 11): 63 respondents (60%) feel that in general being a
scholar-practitioner means more employable. It indicates that this view is
shared by the majority of the respondents. Nevertheless, it is not an
overwhelming view.
Finding 5
(re: survey question 12): 66 respondents (62.86%) think that in general being a
scholar-practitioner means more capable to cope with problems in the workplace.
It indicates that this view is shared by the majority of the respondents, but
not overwhelmingly so.
Finding 6
(re: survey question 13): 56 respondents (52.83%) feel that in general a
scholar-practitioner is a more trustworthy person than a
non-scholar-practitioner. The figure indicates that this view is shared by the
slight majority of the respondents.
Finding 7
(re: survey question 14): 51 respondents (47.66%) consider that in general a
scholar-practitioner is more capable to maintain work-life balance. Basically,
this view is only shared by a significant minority of the respondents.
Finding 8:
(re: survey question 15): 72 respondents (67.29%) feel that it is difficult to
pursue the life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner with the present social and
business environment in Hong Kong. This view is thus shared by the majority of
the respondents.
II.
Additional findings based on
analysis using Excel’s data-filtering function (findings 9 to 13)
Finding 9
(re: survey questions 3 and 9): for the 9 respondents who very much aspire to
be scholar practitioners in business management, 5 of them (56% of the 9
respondents) hold a Master Degree and 4 (44%) possess an Undergraduate Degree.
Finding 10
(re: survey questions 3 and 9): for the 8 respondents who very much aspire to
be scholar practitioners in non-business management field, 5 of them (62.5% of
the 8 respondents) hold a Master Degree and 3 (37.5%) have got an Undergraduate
Degree.
Finding 11
(re: questions 1 and 13): for the 7 respondents who strongly consider that a
scholar-practitioner is a trustworthy person, 6 (86% of the 7 respondents) of
them are male and only 1 of them (14%) is female. In other words, much more
male respondents have this perception on scholar-practitioner’s trustworthiness
than female respondents.
Finding 12
(re: questions 5 and 13): for the 7 respondents who strongly feel that a
scholar-practitioner is a trustworthy person, 5 (71% of the 7 respondents) of
them consider themselves to be middle-class and only 2 of them (29%) consider
themselves to be lower-class. This shows that much more self-perceived
middle-class respondents have this feeling on scholar-practitioner’s
trustworthiness than self-perceived lower-class respondents.
Finding 13
(re: questions 14 and 15): for the 22 respondents who strongly perceive it
difficult to pursue the life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner with the present
social and business environment in Hong Kong, 8 (36% of the 22 respondents) of
them also strongly feel that a scholar-practitioner is more capable to maintain
work-life balance; only 7 of them (32%) do not feel this way. The figure of 36%
is significantly higher than the figure of 11.21% for the whole group of
respondents. Respondents appear to feel that, albeit challenging to pursue the
life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner, a person with such a professional
identity and intellectual competence is more capable to maintain work-life
balance than others.
III.
Additional findings based on
multiple regression analysis (findings 14 and 15)
By
exporting survey data into an Excel file, the writer conducted a multiple
regression analysis (Lind et al.,
2001: chapter 14) with the following two formulas:
Formula 1
Intensity
of aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in business management (y1) = a + b1
x (x1: age group) + b2 x (x2: education background) + b3 x (x3: gender) + b4 x
(x4: self-perceived social class) + b5 x (x5: perceived employability of
scholar-practitioner) + b6 x (x6: perceived difficulty to pursue the life-goal
to be a scholar-practitioner) + b7 x (x7: perceived improved ability to cope
with workplace problems) + b8 x (x8: perceived trustworthiness of
scholar-practitioner)
Formula 2
Intensity
of aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in a non-business management field
(y2) = a + b1 x (x1: age group) + b2 x (x2: education background) + b3 x (x3:
gender) + b4 x (x4: self-perceived social class) + b5 x (x5: perceived
employability of scholar-practitioner) + b6 x (x6: perceived difficulty to
pursue the life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner) + b7 x (x7: perceived
improved ability to cope with workplace problems) + b8 x (x8: perceived
trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner)
The two
multiple regression formulas have 1 dependent variable (y1 for Formula 1 and y2
for Formula 2) and 8 independent variables (the x variables). While the
dependent variables of the two formulas are slightly different, the independent
variables of them are the same. Additional information on these variables is
provided here:
- Intensity of aspiration to be a
scholar-practitioner in business management (y1) is related to survey
question 9.
- Intensity of aspiration to be a
scholar-practitioner in a non-business management field (y2) is related to
survey question 10.
- (x1: age group) is related to survey question 2.
- (x2: education background) is related to survey
question 3.
- (x3: gender) is related to survey question 1.
- (x4: self-perceived social class) is related to
survey question 5
- (x5: perceived employability of
scholar-practitioner) is related to survey question 11.
- (x6: perceived difficulty to pursue the life-goal
to be a scholar-practitioner) is related to survey question 15.
- (x7: perceived improved ability to cope with
workplace problems) is related to survey question 12.
- (x8: perceived trustworthiness of
scholar-practitioner) is related to survey question 13.
As to the
survey responses, they are converted into numerical values using the following
schemes so that they can be analyzed with Excel’s regression function:
Scheme 1 (perception
items):
Yes, very
much so: 3
(or, Yes, I
strongly feel this way)
Basically
yes: 2
(or, Yes, I
mildly feel this way)
No, I do
not: 1
(or, I do
not feel this way)
Scheme 2
(age group):
18 to 27: 22.5
28 to 37: 32.5
38 to 47: 42.5
48 to 57: 52.5
58 to 67: 62.5
68 or above: 72.5
Scheme 3 (education background):
Finished Ph.D. Degree study: 4
Finished Master Degree study: 3
Finished Undergraduate Degree study: 2
Not yet a degree-holder: 1
Scheme 4 (self-perceived social
class):
Upper-class: 3
Middle-class: 2
Lower-class: 1
Scheme 5 (gender)
Female: 1
Male: 2
The
findings from the multiple regression analysis with Excel are as follows:
Finding 14 (re: Appendix 2): Formula 1
Intensity
of aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in business management (y1) = 0.09 +
0.0148 x (x1: age group) – 0.0406 x (x2: education background) + 0.0523 x (x3:
gender) – 0.0547 x (x4: self-perceived social class) + 0.2759 x (x5: perceived
employability of scholar-practitioner) – 0.0006 x (x6: perceived difficulty to
pursue the life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner) + 0.2754 x (x7: perceived
improved ability to cope with workplace problems) + 0.0976 x (x8: perceived
trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner)
Interpretation:
The independent variables of age groups (x1), gender (x3) (in this case, being
male), perceived improved employability of scholar-practitioner (x5), perceived
improved problem-solving ability in the workplace (x7) and perceived
trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner (x8) have some minor positive
correlation with the dependent variable of aspiration to be a
scholar-practitioner in business management (y1). As the p-values of these
independent values are larger than 5% (chosen as the critical value for a
two-tailed test), the null hypothesis that the b values of these independent
variables be zero cannot be rejected. The exception is “perceived improved
employability” (x5), which has a p-value of 4.3% (i.e., smaller than 5%),
indicating that its b value being zero can be rejected in this case. The
independent variables of education background (x2), perceived social class (x4)
and perceived difficulties to pursue the scholar-practitioner life-goal (x6)
have a weak negative correlation with the dependant variable of aspiration to
be a scholar-practitioner (y1). Their corresponding p-values are all much
larger than 5% (the critical value), signifying that the null hypothesis of
these independent variables having a zero b value cannot be rejected.
Finding 15 (re: Appendix 3): Formula 2
Intensity
of aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in a non-business management field
(y2) = 0.2088 + 0.0097 x (x1: age group) + 0.1574 x (x2: education background)
+ 0.3002 x (x3: gender) – 0.1037 x (x4: self-perceived social class) + 0.2104 x
(x5: perceived employability of scholar-practitioner) + 0.1392 x (x6: perceived
difficulty to pursue the life-goal to be a scholar-practitioner) – 0.0521 x
(x7: perceived improved ability to cope with workplace problems) – 0.0433 x
(x8: perceived trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner)
Interpretation:
The independent variables of age groups (x1), education background (x2), gender
(x3) (in this case, being male), perceived improved employability of
scholar-practitioner (x5), and perceived difficulties to pursue the
scholar-practitioner life-goal (x6) have some minor positive correlation with
the dependent variable of aspiration to be a scholar-practitioner in
non-business management field (y2). As the p-values of these independent
variables are larger than 5% (chosen as the critical value for a two-tailed
hypothesis test), the null hypothesis that the b values these independent
variables be zero cannot be rejected. The independent variables of perceived
social class (x4), perceived competence to cope with workplace problems (x7)
and perceived trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner (x8) have a weak negative
correlation with the dependant variable of aspiration to be a
scholar-practitioner (y2). Their corresponding p-values are all much larger than
5% (the critical value for hypothesis testing), indicating that the null
hypothesis of these independent variables having a zero b value cannot be
rejected.
Overall,
most of the independent variables in Formulas 1 and 2 have very minor
correlation with the dependent variables of y1 and y2. Moreover, in most cases,
the null hypothesis of the b values of these independent variables being zero
cannot be rejected. Nonetheless, findings 14 and 15 also reveal that the
correlation pattern between the independent variables (i.e., all the x
variables) and the dependent variable of Formula 1 and Formula 2 differs
somewhat. In this case, more follow-up research works need to be done on this
observation from the two findings. The larger questions are (i) why different
respondents hold different perceptions on scholar-practitioner in the first
place and (ii) whether the respondents’ perceptions are fair and informed[2].
These vital questions are not examined here. At this point, it is also useful
to indicate how the 15 survey findings are associated to the
scholar-practitioner professional development process framework of Ho (2014a)
since it contributes to more understanding of the framework. This is done in
Table 1.
Table 1: The association of
the survey findings with the scholar-practitioner professional development
process framework
|
Main
parts of the scholar-practitioner professional development process framework[3] (re: Figure
1 and Ho, 2014a)
|
Associated
Facebook-based survey findings
|
|
Part A: supportive infrastructure
|
Findings
8, 13
|
|
Part B: Learning process & motivators
|
Findings
3, 9, 10, 14
|
|
Part C: Impacts on skills
|
Finding 5
|
|
Part D: Professional identity
|
Findings
1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14
|
|
Part E: On personal well-being
|
Findings
4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13
|
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On scholar-practitioner research, both theoretical
exploration as informed by literature review (first task) and empirical study
(second task) are important. Ho (2014a) dealt with the first task. Here, the
primary effort is exerted on the second task. With that in mind, this paper
does not offer elaboration on scholar-practitioner theories and concepts as Ho
(2014a) does. Some weak signals on the correlation between a set of independent
variables (i.e., x1 to x8) and the two dependent variables (i.e., y1 and y2) of
Formulas 1 and 2 have been detected in the multiple regression exercise here.
These additional empirical findings enhance our understanding on the
scholar-practitioner topic as well as the scholar-practitioner professional
development process framework (Ho, 2014a). By utilizing statistical analysis to
discover patterns on perceptions in the external world, the research method
employed here is very much positivist in research orientation. Nevertheless,
findings on scholar-practitioner perceptions from a group of respondents in
Hong Kong per se, based on non-probabilistic sampling with a Facebook-based
survey, have quite limited practical and academic values. All in all, more
research needs to be done on scholar-practitioner study based on diverse
research perspectives so as to improve our knowledge on this subject.
Bibliography
1. Cafolla,
L. 2012. “Doctorate is degree of choice for the experienced” South China Morning Post March 12.
2. Chan,
C.Y. 2008. “Challenging programme for leaders” South China Morning Post October 23.
3. Ho,
J.K.K. 2014a. “A theoretical review on the professional development to be a
scholar practitioner in business management” European Academic Research 1(12) March.: 5393-5422.
4. Ho,
J.K.K. 2014b. “A Research Note on why and how to develop double-hybrid
management accountants (DHMAs)” European
Academic Research 2(5) August: 6493-6515.
5. Ho,
J.K.K. 2014c. “An exploratory exercise to establish the profile of a
double-hybrid management accountant with justifications” European Academic Research 1(11) February: 4261-4273.
6. Ho,
J.K.K. 2014d. “An examination of the underlying concern of work-life balance
for managerial intellectual learning” European
Academic Research 2(6) September: 7516-7536.
7. Ho,
J.K.K. 2015a. “An examination on the study scope and theoretical principles of
managerial intellectual learning” European
Academic Research 3(4) July: 4602-4618.
8. Ho,
J.K.K. 2015b. “A Facebook-based questionnaire survey study on social justice
perceptions in Hong Kong housing policy” European
Academic Research 3(1) April: 589-603.
10.
Lind, D.A., W.G. Marchal and R.D. Mason. 2001. Statistical Techniques in Business &
Economics. McGraw-Hill Irwin. Boston.
Appendix
Appendix 1: the
Facebook-based survey questions (15 questions) and responses statistics, from
July 8 to 13, 2105.
|
Survey questions
|
Survey statistics
|
|
Question
1: What is your gender?
|
Male:
52 (48.6%)
Female:
55 (51.4%)
Standard
deviation: 1.5
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
2: What is your age?
|
18
to 27: 7 (6.54%)
28
to 37: 46 (42.99%)
38
to 47: 43 (40.19%)
48
to 57: 10 (9.35%)
58
to 67: 0 (0%)
68
or above: 1 (0.93%)
Standard
deviation: 19.18
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
3: What is your education background?
|
Not
yet a degree-holder: 21 (19.63%)
Finished
University Undergraduate Degree study: 64 (59.81%)
Finished
Master Degree study: 22 (20.56%)
Finished
Ph.D. Degree study (or equivalent): 0 (0%)
Standard
deviation: 23.23
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
4: What is the major field of study of your tertiary education?
|
Business
studies-related: 71 (66.36%)
Non-business-studies-related:
14 (13.08%)
Both
business and non-business studies-related: 16 (14.95%)
Not
applicable/ no idea: 6 (5.61%)
Standard
deviation: 25.82
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
5: What is the social class that you consider yourself belonging to?
|
Upper
class: 0 (0%)
Middle
class: 55 (51.89%)
Lower
class: 39 (36.79%)
Not
applicable/ no idea: 12 (11.32%)
Standard
deviation: 21.69
Responses:
106
|
|
Question
6: Are you familiar with the term “scholar-practitioner”?
|
Yes,
very much so: 4 (3.74%)
Yes,
I have some idea about it: 39 (36.45%)
No,
I am not familiar with the term: 64 (59.81%)
Standard
deviation: 24.61
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
7: Do you agree with the following statement: “A scholar-practitioner is
someone with doctoral degree who is actively engaged in both scholarly
activity and practice beyond academy”?
|
Yes,
I fully agree with it: 13 (12.26%)
Yes,
I mildly agree with it: 59 (55.66%)
No,
I do not agree with it at all: 8 (7.55%)
No
idea: 26 (24.53%)
Standard
deviation: 19.88
Responses:
106
|
|
Question
8: Do you agree with the following statement: “A scholar-practitioner needs
not have a doctoral degree to be considered as a scholar-practitioner”?
|
Yes,
I fully agree with it: 19 (17.92%)
Yes,
I mildly agree with it: 43 (40.57%)
No,
I do not agree with it at all: 25 (23.58%)
No
idea: 19 (17.92%)
Standard
deviation: 9.84
Responses:
106
|
|
Question
9: Do you aspire to be a scholar-practitioner in business management?
|
Yes,
very much so: 9 (8.49%)
Basically
yes: 44 (41.51%)
No,
I do not: 37 (34.91%)
No
idea: 16 (15.09%)
Standard
deviation: 14.43
Responses:
106
|
|
Question
10: Do you aspire to be a scholar-practitioner in a non-business management
field?
|
Yes,
very much so: 8 (7.48%)
Basically
yes: 36 (33.64%)
No,
I do not: 42 (39.25%)
No
idea: 21 (19.63%)
Standard
deviation: 13.25
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
11: Do you feel that in general being a scholar-practitioner means more
employable?
|
Yes,
I strongly feel this way: 16 (15.24%)
Yes,
I mildly feel this way: 47 (44.76%)
No,
I do not feel this way: 29 (27.62%)
No
idea: 13 (12.38%)
Standard
deviation: 13.4
Responses:
105
|
|
Question
12: Do you feel that in general being a scholar-practitioner means more
capable to cope with problems in the workplace?
|
Yes,
I strongly feel this way: 11 (10.48%)
Yes,
I mildly feel this way: 55 (52.38%)
No,
I do not feel this way: 26 (24.76%)
No
idea: 13 (12.38%)
Standard
deviation: 17.57
Responses:
105
|
|
Question
13: Do you feel that in general a scholar-practitioner is a trustworthy
person?
|
Yes,
I strongly feel this way: 7 (6.6%)
Yes,
I mildly feel this way: 49 (46.23%)
No,
I do not feel this way: 33 (31.13%)
No
idea: 17 (16.04%)
Standard
deviation: 15.96
Responses:
106
|
|
Question
14: Do you feel that in general a scholar-practitioner is more capable to
maintain work-life balance?
|
Yes,
I strongly feel this way: 12 (11.21%)
Yes,
I mildly feel this way: 39 (36.45%)
No,
I do not feel this way: 39 (36.45%)
No
idea: 17 (15.89%)
Standard
deviation: 12.38
Responses:
107
|
|
Question
15: Do you feel that it is difficult to pursue the life-goal to be a
scholar-practitioner with the present social and business environment in Hong
Kong?
|
Yes,
I strongly feel this way: 22 (20.56%)
Yes,
I mildly feel this way: 50 (46.73%)
No,
I do not feel this way: 13 (12.15%)
No
idea: 22 (20.56%)
Standard
deviation: 13.92
Responses:
107
|
Appendix
2: Excel multiple regression report for Formula 1.
|
SUMMARY OUTPUT
|
||||
|
Regression Statistics
|
||||
|
Multiple R
|
0.544271369
|
|||
|
R Square
|
0.296231323
|
|||
|
Adjusted R Square
|
0.183628335
|
|||
|
Standard Error
|
0.59979747
|
|||
|
Observations
|
59
|
|||
|
ANOVA
|
||||
|
|
df
|
SS
|
MS
|
F
|
|
Regression
|
8
|
7.571471785
|
0.946433973
|
2.630758985
|
|
Residual
|
50
|
17.98785025
|
0.359757005
|
|
|
Total
|
58
|
25.55932203
|
|
|
|
|
Coefficients
|
Standard Error
|
t Stat
|
P-value
|
|
Intercept
|
0.090046786
|
0.518247491
|
0.173752479
|
0.862761554
|
|
Age group
|
0.014795439
|
0.00965679
|
1.532127995
|
0.131794207
|
|
Education background
|
-0.040642877
|
0.142301863
|
-0.28561029
|
0.776356516
|
|
Gender
|
0.052313074
|
0.168678579
|
0.310134658
|
0.757747582
|
|
Perceived social class
|
-0.054667593
|
0.190101826
|
-0.28757006
|
0.774864424
|
|
Perceived improved employability
|
0.275893895
|
0.132818203
|
2.077229536
|
0.042937273
|
|
Perceived difficulties to pursue
the scholar-practitioner life-goal
|
-0.000563527
|
0.167102076
|
-0.00337235
|
0.997322679
|
|
Perceived competence to cope with
workplace problems
|
0.275435064
|
0.164999328
|
1.669310214
|
0.101306299
|
|
Perceived trustworthiness of scholar-practitioner
|
0.097621001
|
0.141224535
|
0.691246752
|
0.492607589
|
Appendix
3: Excel multiple regression report for Formula 2.
|
SUMMARY OUTPUT
|
||||
|
Regression Statistics
|
||||
|
Multiple R
|
0.482294425
|
|||
|
R Square
|
0.232607912
|
|||
|
Adjusted R Square
|
0.104709231
|
|||
|
Standard Error
|
0.626634973
|
|||
|
Observations
|
57
|
|||
|
ANOVA
|
||||
|
|
df
|
SS
|
MS
|
F
|
|
Regression
|
8
|
5.713176791
|
0.714147099
|
1.818688902
|
|
Residual
|
48
|
18.84822672
|
0.39267139
|
|
|
Total
|
56
|
24.56140351
|
|
|
|
|
Coefficients
|
Standard Error
|
t Stat
|
P-value
|
|
Intercept
|
0.208797741
|
0.54417684
|
0.383694648
|
0.70289912
|
|
Age group
|
0.009687208
|
0.010226795
|
0.947237899
|
0.348262121
|
|
Education background
|
0.157396964
|
0.152028279
|
1.035313725
|
0.305710357
|
|
Gender
|
0.300192938
|
0.17998814
|
1.667848438
|
0.101857745
|
|
Perceived social class
|
-0.103669743
|
0.201634196
|
-0.51414763
|
0.609507886
|
|
Perceived improved employability
|
0.210425052
|
0.147164996
|
1.429858034
|
0.159234846
|
|
Perceived difficulties to pursue
the scholar-practitioner life-goal
|
0.13924048
|
0.184041792
|
0.756569898
|
0.453005139
|
|
Perceived competence to cope with
workplace problems
|
-0.052089509
|
0.174253651
|
-0.29892923
|
0.766284473
|
|
Perceived trustworthiness of
scholar-practitioner
|
-0.043342403
|
0.148605528
|
-0.29166077
|
0.771802801
|
[1] Readers interested
in the professional development process framework are referred to Ho (2014a)
for more detailed explanation of the framework.
[2] For example, were
the respondents able to spare more time to study the scholar-practitioner
literature, thus better informed, would their perceptions on the scholar-practitioner
concept be different? Very plausibly, the answer is affirmative.
[3] The
scholar-practitioner professional development process framework was formulated
by Ho (2014a) specifically for the business management field; in this paper, it
is employed to also cover the non-business management field as it is employed
in a general manner only. The task of formulating a scholar-practitioner
professional development process framework for the non-business management
field, though valuable to do, is outside the study scope of this paper.
No comments:
Post a Comment