Öğrencilerin Tez Çalışmalarına İlişkin Eğilimlerinin Belirlenmesinde Konjoint Analizi

Başta pazarlama olmak üzere bir çok alanda uygulamalarina sikça rastlanan Konjoint Analizi, eğitim alaninda da tercih önceliklerinin belirlenmesinde başvurulan analitik bir yaklaşimdir. Bu çalişmada, yüksek lisans öğrencilerinin tez çalişmalari ile ilgili tercih ve eğilimleri Konjoint Analizi ile incelenmiştir. Tez konusu önerisinin kaynaği (danişman hoca/öğrenci), tezin ağirlikli kismi (teori/uygulama) ve veri toplama teknikleri (ikincil veri, anket, diğer teknikler) şeklinde tanimlanan üç faktör için tam profil yaklaşimina dayali bir analiz ile öğrencilerin tez çalişmalarina başlamadan önceki tercihleri tespit edilmiştir.

The Use of Conjoint Analysis for the Determination of the Postgraduate Students Tendencies Regarding Their Thesis Studies

The Conjoint Analysis as the increasingly applied analytical approach in many fields especially the Marketing has also been applied in the field of Education for the determination of preference priorities. Within this study, the preferences and the tendencies of the postgraduate students regarding their thesis studies was investigated with the Conjoint Analysis. In the study, the student tendencies before starting their thesis study was tried to be revealed with the use of an analysis based on the Full Profile Approach for three defined factor, which were the source of the thesis subject proposal (advisor/students), the weighted part of the thesis (theory/practice) and data collection techniques (secondary data, questionnaire, other techniques).

___

  • Aaker, David A., V. Kumar and George S. Day; (2007), Marketing Research, 9th ed., John Wiley & Sons.
  • Chapman, David W.; (1981), "A Model of Student College Choice", The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 52, No. 5 , pp. 490-505.
  • Garver, Michael S. and Richard L. Divine; (2008), "Conjoint Analysis of Study Abroad Preferences: Key Attributes, Segments and Implications for Increasing Student Participation", Journal of Marketing For Higher Education, Vol. 17, Iss. 2, pp. 189 - 215.
  • Garver, Michael S., Richard L. Divine and Samuel A. Spralls; (2009), "Segmentation Analysis of the Volunteering Preferences of University Students", Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 21, Iss. 1, pp. 1 - 23.
  • Green, P.E. and V.R. Rao; (1971), "Conjoint Measurement for Quantifying Judgemental Data". Journal Of Marketing Research, Vol. 8, pp. 355-363.
  • Green, Paul E. and V. Srinivasan; (1990), "Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice", The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 3-19.
  • Green, Paul E., Abba M. Krieger and Yoram (Jerry) Wind; (2001), "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects", Interfaces, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. S56-S73.
  • Gustafsson, Anglers, Andreas Herrmann and Frank Huber (eds.); (2000), Conjoint Measurement: Methods and Applications, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  • Halperin, Michael and Maureen Strazdon; (1980), "Measuring Students' Preferences for Reference Service: A Conjoint Analysis", The Library Quarterly, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 208-224.
  • Janssens, Wim, Katrien Wijnen, Patrick de Pelsmacker and Patrick Van Kenhove; (2008), Marketing Research With SPSS, Pearson Education Limited.
  • Johnson, Richard M.; (1974), "Trade-Off Analysis of Consumer Values." Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 11, pp: 121 -127.
  • Moogan, Yvonne J, Steve Baron and Steve Bainbridge; (2001), "Timings and Trade-offs in The Marketing of Higher Education Courses: A Conjoint Approach", Marketing Intelligence & Planning,Vol 19, No 3, pp 179-187.
  • Nakip, Mahir; (2006), Pazarlama Araştırmaları, Teknikler ve (SPSS Destekli) Uygulamalar, Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık Orme, Bryan K. ;(2010), Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research. Second Edition, Madison, Wis.: Research Publishers LLC.
  • Pietrzak Dale, Kelly Duncan, James S. Korcuksa; (2008), "Counseling Students' Decision Making Regarding Teaching Effectiveness: A Conjoint Analysis", Counselor Education and Supervision. Vol. 48, Iss. 2; pp. 114-133.
  • Sohn, So Young,Yong Han Ju; (2010), "Conjoint Analysis For Recruiting High Quality Students for College Education", Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, Iss. 5, pp. 3777-3783.
  • Soutar, G.N. and J.P. Turner; (2002), "Students' Preferences For University: A Conjoint Analysis", The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 40-45.
  • Srinivasan, V. and Allan D. Shocker; (1973), "Linear Programming Techniques for Multidimensional Analysis of Preferences." Psychometrika, Vol. 38, pp: 337-369.
  • Tashchian, Roobina O. and Jon B. Freiden; (1983), "Student Preferences for Class Scheduling: A Conjoint Analysis", Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 42-48.
  • Taylor, Steven A., Michael Humphreys, Roger Singley and Gary L. Hunter; (2004), "Business Student Preferences: Exploring the Relative Importance of Web Management in Course Design", Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 42-49.
  • Wittink, Dick R. and Philippe Cattin; (1989), "Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: An Update", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53, No.3, pp. 91-96.
  • Zufryden, Fred S.; (1983), "Course Evaluation and Design Optimization: A Conjoint Analysis-Based Application", Interfaces, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 87-94.