Practices and Challenges to Conduct Undergraduate Research in Debre

Tabor University: The case of Graduate students

Samuel Azmeraw

Email: samuelyabatulij@gmail.com

Lecturer, Department of Economics, Debark University, Ethiopia

Abstract
The main objective of this research concerns with the analysis and finding of determinants of
active engagement in research work among graduate students of Debre Tabor University in five
faculties. This research used primary data, hence cross sectional from graduate students Debre
Tabor University from five faculties. To do this the researchers used cluster random sampling
techniques so that the sample students are selected from each faculty concerned. Moreover, the
paper utilized primary data based on semi structured questionnaire as method of data collection
from a total of 150 random samples. Out of the total samples statistically determined about 141
was considered during analysis. The paper has dealt at academic challenges towards research,
fear of applicability of research result, the time devoted for study of reference materials,
journals and books, availability of facility, and curriculum issues, average monthly income and
other determinants of active involvement in research. The binary logit model has been applied
with maximum likelihood as estimation technique the dependent variable being binary, and
likelihood ratio test as diagnostic test. The results show that money income, cumulative grade
point average (CGPA), course result of a student, facility access, and material ownership as
directly related to determine a students’ active engagement in research. These were
simultaneously statistically significantly different from zero and feasible. Accordingly special
emphasis should be given to improve the understanding of the methods and methodology behind
research, there result in the course and suitable condition to improve their CGPA. At the same
time, since facilities are so relevant, it shall be fulfilled by the concerned body as far as possible.
This research put alternatives to solve the basic problem of research work among students in the
University. Key words: Debre Tabor, Logistic regression, Research Methodology
1. Introduction
“All progress is born of inquiry.” it is mostly advocated that any change and prosperity for an
individual and country level is emanated from research: scientific inquiry and empirical
investigation of facts. The word research is composed of two syllable words; re and search
together they form a noun describing a careful, systematic and patient study and investigation of
a certain area either to solve an immediate problem or advance human knowledge (Kothari,
1990).

One of the core missions of higher education is to advance, create and disseminate knowledge
through research and provide service to the community, constant supply of qualified young
researchers to assist societies in cultural, social and economic development, the same source
stated. Research now is the sole objective of educated elites in universities and it is through it
that the world society is on the verge of marching to development.

Many researchers devote much of their life on doing scientific inquiry for one or more of the
following purposes: to get familiarity with a phenomena or to achieve new insight into
something else, to determine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is
associated with, to test a hypothesis, and/or to portray accurately the characteristics of a
particular individual or group. At the same time universities are also with the mission which they
undertake to reach information directly have an important place in the dimension of transferring
information. The main functions which universities are supposed to carry out are: carrying out
scientific research, producing solutions for challenges of humanity, training the human force
which the country needs, teaching skill, experience, emotion and intuition which they obtain to
other people(Sonmez, 2003).

If one looks around the world, the region perhaps least served by relevant research and analysis
of higher education is sub-Saharan Africa. Knowledge based on good research is necessary if
policies are to be thoughtfully planned and implemented Africa’s higher education challenges
can only be addressed with the benefit of locally focused research and analysis-only then can
sound, viable strategy can found (Albach, 2012). One of the core missions of higher education is
to advance, create and disseminate knowledge through research and provide service to the
community, constant supply of qualified young researchers to assist societies in cultural, social
and economic development, the same source stated. but universities in today’s time especially
those in developing countries are not in the right track of creating well equipped with the
techniques of research and its methodology.

Debre Tabor University has been giving education in different departments. It also generates
skilled manpower every year and inject into the country’ economy. It also gives research as a
prerequisite for graduation at the respective graduation period of students. But no one is doing
remarkable and problem solving research, a mere articulation only for graduation purpose. Most
of the papers are simply through plagiarism, and advisors and examiners promote it simply for
the sake of social welfare instead of analyzing the “why?” of the issue.

This being the case our paper in plan is going to examine the challenges for undergraduate
students in preparing their final graduation research paper in Debre Tabor University for the
problem is too serious that reaches have to withdrawal of students from the compound due to
their difficulty in research, and some left out of graduation due to low quality and copied
research with no more improvement.

1.1 Statement of the problem

The conceptual use of research is potentially powerful way to inform policy. when used
conceptually, research serves to introduce new ideas, help people identify challenges and
appropriate solutions in new ways, and provide new frameworks to guide thinking and action
(Carroll,2001).rather than influencing single decision, it shapes how people see the world; how
they respond to challenges they encounter in their everyday work and how they design and
manage solutions (Carroll & Coburn,2001). Kothari (1990) in his book entitled research
methodology identified the following basic challenges in research work in India: lack of
understanding the methods and methodology of research, shortage of Facility such as computer,
low level of University industry interaction, shortage of reliable sources of data, and shortage of
published books that can be references for further research.

Poor research culture is also to blame in circumstances where the concept of research is
associated with a condition to fulfill academic requirements for degree courses not to solve
challenges (Njuguna & Itegi, 2013). Young academics are introduced to research at later stage
with limited or no practical element. The situation becomes more critical in the case of working
students who have financial and time constraints (Njuguna&Itegi, 2013).

Currently, the developing world only shares 10% of the global research. This is mainly shared by
emerging countries such as Brazil, china, Russia and India. Governments of these countries
increasingly focused on fostering research-industry interactions and high technology sectors.
policy makers in both developed economies and national innovation centers have been
concentrating on designing policies that are aimed at increasing the quality of public research
and education (Tesfa, 2015), showing that research and innovation as key objectives of today’s
world.

In the year 2007, higher education institutions in South Africa released reports on plagiarism
involving students both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, and lectures as well. Most of
these students were made to repeat courses or expelled altogether while the lectures were
dismissed at all (ibid, 2013). This obviously implies that the problem of research is too severe at
higher education level both in students and lectures resulted from poor training at the institutions
concerned. The issue is also related to quality education as lower CGPA leads to lower intention
towards research and creativity.
According to Tesfa (2015), there are around 21 research institutes in Ethiopia that focused only
on agriculture, food, disease, policies, economics and water research. In a study by this
individual from different Ethiopian University researchers through questionnaire, from Ethiopian
science and technology institute, found that lack of research facilities and resources, lack of clear
vision, external influence(political),lack of fund( financial constraints),and lack of national
strategy and policy and lack of national research center as well. But still the issue at higher
education level is forgotten besides the limitation in data quality from questionnaire through
online for qualitative research which instead require questionnaire to get the detail.

Guesh (2012) in his study at Mekelle University on the assessment of education quality in
Ethiopian higher education institutions founded that lack of motivation, inadequate e-learning
materials, poor salary and allowance package, shortage of finance, political intervention, and
once more facilities such as library, internet, and academic competencies are the constraints for
quality education and research ability in general, using survey method of data collection through
descriptive and econometric modeling method of data analysis.

Individuals and institutions that are engaged in this issue also don’t focus on “the why” of
graduate students’ failure in preparing their graduate paper at University level. unfortunately,
little emphasis is given on the why of the poor research capacity in developing countries as in
Ethiopia in general and Ethiopian higher education level in particular, and therefore challenges
that University students encounter in research work particularly in Debre Tabor University
initiated us on identifying the basic constraints and setting up better grounds for the future based
upon the challenges identified. Moreover, higher officials of universities and other institutions
order students to do research blindly and at last this research becomes paper value with no the
power to solve challenges in a country nor institutions, and hence not much is written in the area
to boost innovation up. Even the education bureau of Amhara region is short of studying the
issue empirically, though less at country level.

And therefore the paper’s focus was on the identification of basic challenges of regular graduate
Debre Tabor University students in their research paper preparation in 2019.
Generally the focus of the paper in plan is going to be around the following research questions:
• Is academic performance a real challenge for students at University level in preparing
research paper?
• Is fear of applicability of the research output a real impediments to do research?
• Is there any financial problem in students that impede to research?
• Are time devotion, availability of literatures, and books really challenging?
1.2 Objectives of the study
1.2.1 General objective
The general objective of the paper is to identify determinants of active engagement in research
work and problems of undergraduate students of Debre Tabor University.

1.2.2 Specific objectives of the study

The following are the specific objectives of the paper in plan:
• To estimate facility problems that impedes research.
• To identify the significance of time devoted to study on research intent.
• To estimate financial problems of students.
 • To identify the effect of quality education measured by CGPA and course result on the
improvement of the need behind.
1.4. Hypothesis of the study
• Shortage of facility affects research ability negatively.
• Higher course result lead to higher willingness to do research.
• Finance is critical problem.
• Minimum time to study literatures contributes negatively.
1.5 Scope of the study
This research paper primarily concerned with the investigation of challenges of undergraduate
regular Debre Tabor University students for their research paper preparation in 2018/19 G.C in
all faculties except Health sciences faculty for the issue does not go with the rest evaluation
systems. Moreover this research utilized descriptive and econometric modeling approach for the
analysis of primary data that was collected from sample students using close and open ended
questionnaire so as to get the detail of this research questions. Once again the paper tried its best
to examine sectoral, financial, and other related challenges. Hence the data that was collected is
of part of the cross sectional form, and the process is of Econometric modeling and description.
This research was conducted in one of the third generation universities of Ethiopia, Debre Tabor
University, in Amhara national regional state of south Gondar zone.
2. Methodology of the study
2.1. Description of the study area
Debre Tabor University is found in Debre Tabor town of Amhara region. Debre Tabor
University is found in North central Ethiopia in Debre Tabor town of south Gondar
administrative zone. It is 100KM southeast of Gondar town and 50KM east of Lake Tana. It is
one of the higher educational institutions located in south Gondar zone of Amhara national
regional state of Ethiopia in Debre Tabor town. It is one of third generation universities laid its
foundation in 2000 E.C by the honorable Demeke Mekonnen and Addisu Leggesse in 126
hectare of land on the eastern part of the town about 4 kilometers away from its center. The
University began its mission with 2 presidents (president and academic vice president). Then the
assigned presidents started to employ teachers and administrative workers as per the
responsibility and obligation of the ministry of civil service. This helped the University to
employ 114 male, 10 female and total of 124 teachers, and 51 male, 20 female and total 71
administration workers. The University started its teaching learning process by borrowing
classrooms and dormitories from Woreta College of agriculture and setting or centering at
teaching-learning, community services, and doing cutting age researches (Registrar office of
Debre Tabor University, 2019).
Figure 2.1. Map of Debre Tabor Town
 ma

Source: Ethio GIS, 2019).

2.2 The target population

Undergraduate students of Debre Tabor University in 2019 E.C fiscal year are the focus of the
paper. As the office of registrar of the University (2019) indicates, there are about a total of 671
graduate students in the faculty of business and economics in 2019 E.C fiscal year, 1220 in
Technology faculty, 345 in Agricultural and Environmental sciences faculty, 125 in Natural and
Computational including Early childhood from Jigjig University, and 147 in the faculty of social
sciences and humanity registered in the semester. It is from a total of 2543 graduate students
samples are selected and thus data is collected.

2.3 Sample size determination

The sample size is determined from a total of 2543 students using Yamane (1967) formula as
follows.
 N
n= where N= target population; n= sample size; e= margin of error=10%; n=
1+ Ne 2

2543 2543
= =150.
1+ 2543(0.1)2 19.56

Therefore, 150 students were randomly selected from the target group, and to choose from each faculty
concerned I have used proportional allocation formula as follows.
After calculation using proportional allocation formula, I obtained 45 from Technology, 32 from FBE, 17
from social sciences, 30 from agricultural and environmental sciences, and 26 from natural and
computational sciences.
2.4 Sampling technique
Cluster random sampling was used to select the samples from list of students in each faculty
level to avoid any form of bias.
2.5 Method of Data collection
In the research semi structured questionnaire method was used as a tool of data collection so as
to get the detailed information that this research wants to utilize from the samples selected. But
secondary data has also been used in finding the number of students in the sample faculties from
the registrar office of the University and other related issues.

2.5 model specification

I. Binary Logit model
Following the concept of the model from Gujarati (2005), the logit model for research practice at
graduate level determinants can be specified as below:

1.

2.
Where: P (Yi=1) is the probability that a student involves actively as a group leader. Zi= the
function of a vector of explanatory variables), e- represents the base of natural logarithms and
equation (2) is the cumulative distribution function. If P (Yi=1) is the probability of having
income effect, then 1- P (Yi=1) represents the probability that the household has no impact on
his income and is expressed as:

4
Equation (4) simply is the odds ratio, the ratio of the probability that a household will be has
impact on his income to the probability that it will be has no impact on his income. Taking the
natural log of equation (4), we obtain

5
Where: Li is the log of the odd ratio which is not only linear in the explanatory variables but in
the parameters also. Thus, introducing the stochastic error term (Ui), the logit model can be
written as
6

Where
X’s = are explanatory variables that determines the household level of income system,
β0 is the constant term and β’s are coefficients to be estimated.
If so, the empirical model can be depicted as follows:
Li=β0 +β1pc+β2cgpa+β3cresult+β4income+β5facility+ β6time+β7SP+Ui, and pi is the
probability of success, do research, 1-pi is the probability of failure, not do research.
Where: Li= logit showing the Probability of a student to be active at research research.
income= amount of money students gain per month from any source.
CGPA=cumulative score of the student
Cresult= score on the course research
Time=is the time student invest on published materials and books per day
Facili=dummy 1 if available, 0 if not, Facilities as mobile phones, libraries and computer
availability
Sp=smartphone ownership
βi=parameters showing the change in probability of engaging in research as the independent
variables change by a unit as per the variables and also the differential with those retain zero
value.
Ui= residual that are independently and normally distributed with mean zero and constant
variance representing all excluded variables and other factors. And thus we have used Maximum
Likelihood estimation to estimate parameters of the Logit model.
The marginal effect of an explanatory variable on the expected value of dependent variables is
can be found by Li=pi*βi(1-pi), which tells the change in probability of a student to do research
as the explanatory change by a unit for continuous variables and attaining 1 for discrete
variables.

2.5.1 Description of variables and expected signs

The dependent variable
The dependent variable for the study is the willingness of graduate students to do research by
their own capacity which was determined by many other explanatory variables listed below. It is
dummy variable showing willingness, assuming if a student is leader of this research group or
forerunner in this research, 0 otherwise. The major assumption here is that a group leader is the
one who is doing research on his/her will.

Independent Variables
A. CGPA: is a continuous variable which measures academic performance of a student and
expected to have significant impact upon the willingness to do research, was positive the
coefficient.
B. Course result (COGR): is the Grade that a student scored on the course research in their
respective department, and is expected to influence the probability of engaging in research work
since it could be taken as measure of quality teacher too hence positive coefficient is expected.

C. Applicability of research result in the country (App): A culture of secrecy and fear of
unknown prevalent in African societies just like many other societies that are not exposed to the
World have continued to impact on research negatively. Incongruent political patterns also affect
Research. Leaders in Africa have often not demonstrated readiness to accept the truth seek or
incorporate it in legislation as it tends to threaten them politically.

D. financial requirements: Due to financial constraints some students especially at

undergraduate level have no option but to look for ways and means of maintaining themselves
through unethical practices such as stealing, pick-pocketing, and to drugs in some ways. This
leaves them with inadequate time for their study and more on research. The richer (more money
to satisfy research materials a person have), the easier research work was and we expect such
relationship at the end.
E. Facility: there are very few developing countries supporting their scientists at a level which
make national research programmes self-sustaining and significant. For many developing
countries, research facilities are too costly and obsolete is quite acute. In addition existing
research facilities have inadequate equipments such as reference books and previous literatures
in libraries, computers, photocopiers, telephone facility, electricity, and hence hindrance of
communication activities. This also includes ownership of personal computers. The case is going
to be multinomial logit with those variables attaining different values..
F. Time: is another variable tending to affect the propensity towards the issue. It is the maximum
number of hours that an individual devote to study books and other research materials. It is
expected to have significant share in determining the probability.

2.6 Methods data analysis

We have used Maximum Likelihood estimation to estimate parameters of the binary Logit model. In this
research descriptive and Econometric method of data analysis and interpretation was employed.

This is the descriptive aspect of the study in that the dependent variables were related to the independent
ones. The explanatory variables were explained based on their effect on the dependent variable
theoretically as causation and correlation upon the prevailing econometric result of the parameters.
3. Data Analysis and Interpretation
3.1. Processing of Data
In this 0chapter, the major findings of the research will be discussed in two major subdivisions as
descriptive and econometric analysis. In the former case, description will be made through
tabulation, percentage and wording, while in the latter case the result from regression will be
discussed in detail. Out of the total determined sample size, 141 was considered while the rest 9
not recognized due to inconvenience, inconsistency and irregularities by respondents, hence
everything will be talked via 141 sample size.

Table 3.1. Sex structure of the respondents

Sex Number Percentage
Male 82 58%
Female 59 62%
Total 141 100%
Source: Own survey, 2019

As indicated in the table above (3.1), the majority of the samples incorporated are of male than
female though small difference between them.
Table 3.2. Perception of Respondents for Research

Issue Response Number Percentage

Do you think that Yes 76 56%

undergraduate research
solves problems?
No 65 44%

Do you think that Yes 62 43%

Research works are
applicable?
No 79 57%

Will curriculum Yes 91 64%

adjustment improve
research performance?
No 50 36%
Source: Own survey, 2019
From table 3.2., it can be observed that about 56% of the samples considered don’t think that
undergraduate research works solve problems in reality, while the rest 44% thought that the
reverse will happen. This tells us that there is uncertainty of problem solving ability on whether
to participate actively or not.
At the other turn, about only 62% of respondents thought that research works are applicable by
the concerned body, but 79% of people respond by saying “No we are discouraged to actively
engage in research work because research in Ethiopia is not applicable”. This statement,
therefore, has a signal on whether to undertake research or not.
On the other hand, about 64% of respondents said that for the research intent motivation by
students to elevate, some sort of curriculum adjustment is needed like bringing domestic values,
languages of learning and focus on innovative action is needed; while the rest 46% thought no
need of curriculum adjustment.
Table 3.3. Facility access criteria
Status Response Personal Smartphone Percentage
computer Pc phone
Active Yes 41 54 53 71
No 35 22 47 29
76 76 100 100
Inactive Yes 13 36 20 55
 No 52 29 80 45
Total 65 65 100 100
Source: Own survey, 2019

From table 3.3., we can understand that personal computer and Smartphone ownership has
something to say on whether to actively engage in research work or not, since about 71% of the
actives own Smartphone and 53% personal computer; while about 80% of the passive have no pc
and 45% of them have no Smartphone. At the same time only 20% of the inactive own pc and
55% Smartphone. This certainly tells us that those with computer and /or Smartphone are active
in research while the haven ‘ts passive. One thing that we may understand here is that the issue
of Smartphone ownership in that there is no that much difference between the actives and
inactive. This may tell us that the role of this tool differs across people.

Table 3.4: Accessibility of Facilities

Facility Value Total
Poor Satisfactory Good Very
Good
Electricity 28 52 50 11 141
Computers in 101 20 1 0 141
Library
Internet and 12 34 62 33 141
Library
Total 141 106 113 44 -
Source: Own survey, 2019

When we come to the facility provided in the institution and its value and relevance for research
work, we found that about 120 of the students gave poor value for computer facility that have
significant contribution for research work, proportionally satisfactory value for Electricity and
Good result for internet and Library access. In a nutshell, about 160 of the respondents reply
shows the facility is not sufficient to undertake research, while 106 of them respond as
satisfactory, 113 good and only 44 as very good. Here we can understand that the contribution of
computers for those who do not have computer is too discouraging. This fact emanates from the
idea that research success depends upon the extent to which the required facility is easily
accessible. But in dealing with our case most of the respondents are discouraged due to low
access to facilities in general and computer access in particular. The cumulative result as can be
observed is even higher for the “poor” answer and the share of computer facility is high.

Table 3.5. Serious Problems in Research

Problem Number Percentage
Applicability 65 46%
Money and facility 85 60%
Poor understanding of the 110 78%
 methods and methodology
Data access 45 32%
Source: Own survey, 2019

As can be observed from table 3.5., the most serious challenge for research is emanated from the
poor understanding of research methods and methodology from which about 78% of the
respondents belong, followed by lack of money to finance different activities related to research
as materials, about 60% of respondents are included; fear and carelessness due to applicability of
research output in real world composes a proportionate share(46) that discourage students to
actively involved in research and finally the secretive nature of the required data from the
concerned body, which is a threat for about 45% of respondents is also a challenge to actively
engage in research. Table 3.6. Source of Research Topic
 Agent Number Percentage

The group leader 44 31%

From other University friends 54 38%

Internship experience 12 8%

Advisor and Department head 8 7%

Discussion and participation of Groups 23 16%

Total 141 100%

Source: Own survey, 2019
From this table too, we can understand that above half (38%) of the respondents including active
respond that their research topic come from other universities for ease of copy-paste. The next
majority (31%) of the students stated that wherever it comes, it is in hand of the group leader we
don’t know then. It is only 16% of respondents who selected topic in discussion with each other
and only 8% from internship experience. And the rest 8% of respondents replied that we are
given our research topic from advisor and department head for we have no the ability and
experience to do so. This obviously tells the future innovative and research capacity and prospect
of the university in particular and the country in general is at risk.
4.2. Econometric Analysis
Here interpretation of parameters of the binary logistic regression has been made based on the
following (table) stata output.
The probability value of 0.000 rejects the hypothesis that at least one parameter is not different
from zero, and declares that at least one parameter is different from zero since it is below any
level of significance. This obviously implies that all the variables under consideration are
statistically and conceptually significant for the variation of the level of active involvement for
undergraduate research.

Figure 3.1. Logistic regression result

Logistic regression Number of obs = 141
Logistic regression LR Number
chi2(7)of obs = = 119.38141
LR >chi2(7)
Prob chi2 = = 119.38
0.0000
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Prob R2
Pseudo > chi2 = = 0.0000
0.6145
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Pseudo R2 = 0.6145

activeengagement Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]

activeengagement Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
pcownership 2.018641 .7112299 2.84 0.005 .6246563 3.412626
pcownership
cgpa 2.018641 .9385212
2.56062 .7112299 2.732.84 0.006
0.005 .6246563 4.400088
.7211522 3.412626
cgpa .0404079
cresult 2.56062 .0472952
.9385212 0.852.73 0.393
0.006 .7211522 .1331048
-.0522891 4.400088
cresult
income .0404079 .0472952
.0539111 .3490572 0.85
0.15 0.877 0.393 -.0522891
-.6302286 .1331048
.7380507
income .2997946
facility .0539111 .1590049
.3490572 1.890.15 0.059
0.877 -.6302286 .6114386
-.0118493 .7380507
facility
time .2997946 .1590049
.6664633 .2724278 1.89
2.45 0.014 0.059 -.0118493
.1325146 .6114386
1.200412
time 1.757065
sphoneownership .6664633 .6346212
.2724278 2.772.45 0.006
0.014 .1325146
.5132303 1.200412
3.0009
sphoneownership
_cons 1.757065 4.023544
-16.62119 .6346212 -4.13
2.77 0.000
0.006 .5132303 -8.735189
-24.50719 3.0009
_cons -16.62119 4.023544 -4.13 0.000 -24.50719 -8.735189

Source: Own stata output, 2019

Figure 3.2 Odds ratio value of the regression result

Logistic regression Number of obs = 141
LR chi2(7) = 119.38
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Pseudo R2 = 0.6145

activeengagement Odds Ratio Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]

pcownership 7.52809 5.354203 2.84 0.005 1.867604 30.34484

cgpa 12.94384 12.14807 2.73 0.006 2.056802 81.45801
cresult 1.041235 .0492455 0.85 0.393 .9490545 1.14237
income 1.055391 .3683918 0.15 0.877 .5324701 2.091854
facility 1.349582 .2145902 1.89 0.059 .9882206 1.843081
time 1.947338 .530509 2.45 0.014 1.141696 3.321485
sphoneownership 5.795403 3.677886 2.77 0.006 1.670679 20.10362
_cons 6.05e-08 2.43e-07 -4.13 0.000 2.27e-11 .0001608

Source: Own stata output, 2019

Explanation of the Econometric Regression Result

• Personal computer ownership (pc): This is a dummy variable supposed to affect

engagement in research considered weather the respondent has pc or not. As the
regression result shows, the probability of those who own personal computer increases by
2.018641 more than those who do not have personal computer in the given interval. The
odds ratio also indicates that those who own pc are more likely to be active in research
work by more than 7.52809 times than those without at 95% confidence interval. The p
value (0.005) tells that it is statistically significant at 10%

• Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA): Is continuous variable taking the value of
cgpa of the respondents that tend to affect the issue under consideration. As shown from
the regression output, when CGPA increase by 1 mark(point), the probability to actively
engage in research work increases by 2.56062 and the odds ratio shows that those with
high CGPA are of 12.94384 likely to actively involved in research work. The p value
(0.006) tells that it is statistically significant at 10%.
• Course result (cresult): This also affects the intent behind being active at research.
When course result out of 100 rise by 1 score, the probability to actively engage in
research work increase by.0404079, and those with high course result are 1.041235 more
likely to actively engage in research work. The p value ( 0.393) tells that it is not
statistically significant at any of the level of significance.

• Monthly income: This is continuous variable measured by amount of money in birr that
a student receive from any source, which tends to have a significant effect on whether to
be active or not in research. Based upon the research output, when a students’ monthly
income rise by 1 birr, the probability for him to be active in research increases by.0539111
and the odds ratio for this variable shows that students with more monthly income are
1.055391 times likely to actively involved in research than those with less monthly
income. The p value (0.877) tells that it is not statistically significant at any of the level of
significances.

• Facility: Is measured by the answer for the respondents and translated to dummy variable
with two categories, poor on one hand and good, very good responses on the other.
Therefore, the variable, as of the regression result, shows the probability of those who
respond by saying good and very good to be active at research increase by .2997946
keeping other factors are same. The odds ratio shows that those who respond good and
very good responses increase in there level of engagement more than poor responses
by1.349582 other things being same. The p value (0.059) tells that it is statistically
significant at 10%.

• Time spent: Is the average number of hours that a student spent on review of different
journals, books and literatures related to research per week. As per the result of the
regression, as the time increased by an hour the probability of a student to be active at
research increases by .6664633 other things being the same. At the same time those who
spent a lot of time are about1.947338 more likely to be active than those who study little.
Since the p-value (0.312) is less than our level of significance (5%). The p value ( 0.014)
tells that it is statistically significant at 10%.

• Smartphone ownership: This is a dummy variable supposed to affect engagement in

research considered weather the respondent has smartphone or not. As the regression
result shows, the probability of those who own personal computer increases by 1.757065
more than those who do not have personal computer in the given interval. The odds ratio
also indicates that those who own pc are more likely to be active in research work by
more than 5.795403 times than those without at 95% confidence interval. The p value
(0.006) tells that it is statistically significant at 10%.

Figure 3.3 correlation values

 active~t pcowne~p cgpa cresult income facility time sphone~p

activeenga~t 1.0000
pcownership 0.6236 1.0000
cgpa 0.6333 0.5170 1.0000
cresult 0.5473 0.4020 0.6379 1.0000
income 0.3756 0.4265 0.3887 0.2981 1.0000
facility 0.3483 0.2762 0.2296 0.1951 0.2600 1.0000
time 0.4829 0.2953 0.4056 0.3930 0.3685 0.1716 1.0000
sphoneowne~p 0.5985 0.4972 0.4402 0.4927 0.2589 0.2491 0.3053 1.0000

Source: Own stata output, 2019

As it can be observed from the above table of correlation, CGPA and personal computer
ownership are highly correlated with active engagement in research followed by
continuous assessment result and smartphone availability. While facilities in the
university and time devoted to study show the lower correlation. The surprising event is
that all the concerned variables show positive correlation or relationship, showing all the
concerned variables contribute positively.

Figure3.4. Value of Marginal effect

Marginal effects after logit
Marginal effects after logit
y = Pr(activeengagement) (predict)
y = Pr(activeengagement) (predict)
= .61740098
= .61740098

variable dy/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| [ 95% C.I. ] X

variable dy/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| [ 95% C.I. ] X

pcowne~p* .43276 .12219 3.54 0.000 .193271 .672249 .432624

pcowne~p* .43276 .12219 3.54 0.000 .193271 .672249 .432624
cgpa .604862 .22649 2.67 0.008 .160955 1.04877 3.23496
cgpa .604862 .22649 2.67 0.008 .160955 1.04877 3.23496
cresult .009545 .01131 0.84 0.399 -.012625 .031716 77.1844
cresult .009545 .01131 0.84 0.399 -.012625 .031716 77.1844
income .0127347 .08231 0.15 0.877 -.148595 .174064 2.04965
income .0127347 .08231 0.15 0.877 -.148595 .174064 2.04965
facility .0708166 .03715 1.91 0.057 -.002003 .143636 6.37589
facility .0708166 .03715 1.91 0.057 -.002003 .143636 6.37589
time .15743 .06531 2.41 0.016 .029431 .285429 2.65248
time .15743 .06531 2.41 0.016 .029431 .285429 2.65248
sphone~p* .4042283 .13155 3.07 0.002 .146387 .66207 .588652
sphone~p* .4042283 .13155 3.07 0.002 .146387 .66207 .588652

(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1

(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1
Source: Own stata output, 2019
Marginal effects show the rate of change in the dependent variable for a one more variation in
the independent variable/s. For a unit increase in CGPA and hours of study hour, continuous
result, and income of a student, the variation in the probability of a student to be active at
research increases by 0.6048, 0.15743,009545 and 0.0127347 respectively. This indicates that
for a student to be the future best researcher, he/she has to invest in hours of study, total monthly
income that will help at covering academic expenses and improve continuous result. Moreover,
the changes in ownership of facilities are too significant.
4. Conclusion and recommendation
4.1. Conclusion
Accordingly, the following can be inferred from the findings of the descriptive and Econometric
analysis.
• About for majority (78%) of the students the level of understanding of the methods and
methodology of research is a great challenge.

• For about 60% of respondents’ money and facility is the challenge and for the rest 46%
fear of applicability is the problem.

• Cumulative grade point average and course result in introduction to research are
determinants of a student to be active at research.

• Facilities provided in the university also are challenges to determine a students’

propensity towards the discipline.

• Monthly average income is also a significant variable to affect active engagement in

research.

• The time that students devote in studying books, journals and literatures related to
research is significant in that as time devoted increase also increase propensity towards
research.

• More than half (57%) of respondents report that research works are not applicable in
Ethiopian standard.

• About 56% of the respondents stated that undergraduate research works solve problems,
but not well designed due to many constraints.

• About 38% of respondents derive their research topic from other university, 31% report
that the topic was selected by the group leader, and it is only 16% who selected through
discussion and participation of all the team and 12% from internship experience.

• For many of the respondents, the computer access in the university is the serious
problem.

4.2. Recommendation
Since the future fate of a country in terms of development depends on its capacity in research, it
has to be offered special emphasis for improving the research capacity starting from lower levels
of education at undergraduate level in that this will help to improve and sustain to the highest
level. According to the result of the study, special emphasis and effort has to be used to improve
the understanding for students of the methodology behind research work. Moreover, facilities, as
computers in libraries, electricity supply in the campus should be improved to assist students at
research. Once more, students shall invest on books, literatures, and journals related with
research so that their understanding, interest and capacity will be improved.

REFERENCES
Ademonda, d.(2017). Challenges of research in Nigeria as a developing country. kyowakirininc.
Abuja, Nigeria.
Albach.P.G.(2012). African higher education challenges. Center for international higher
education.
Bellenger, d. n.& Barnett, a.(1996). “Marketing research—management information
approach."Greenberg.
Carroll,A.B.(2018). a guide to qualitative field research(3rd ed.). virginia, usa. sage publishing.
Creswell, j.w. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.
Thousand oaks, ca:sage publications.
Coyne,I.T.(1997). Sampling in qualitative research: purposeful and theoretical sampling; journal
of advanced learning.
Debre Tabor University Registrar and Alumni Office(2019). Student information center
directorate director.
Glaser,B.G. &Strauss,A.L.(1967).The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative
research. piscataway, new jersey.
Guesh.(2012). Testing education quality in Ethiopian higher education institutions.mekelle
University, adi-haki campus: Mekelle, Ethiopia.
Kothari, c. r. (1999). Research methodology: theories and practices; new delhi, india; new age
international publishers.

Maddala, S. (1997).Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics.Cambridge University;

England.

Malterud.(2001). Qualitative research: “standards, challenges and guidelines.” the lancet.

McDonald, J., &Moffat, R.A. (1980).The use of Binary Logit analysis.Review of economics and statistics
Mugenda, A.G.(2008).social science research: theory and principle. Nairobi: applied research &
training.
Njuguna, f. &Itegi, f.(2013). Research in institutions of higher education in
Africa.KenyattaUniversity press: Nairobi, Kenya.
Ortas. (2002). universitelekin sorunlan-1; retrieved from www.universite-toplum
org/summary.phps.
Sandelowski, m. (1995).“Sample size in qualitative research.” research in nursing and health.
Slesinger, d. and stephenson, m.(1930). “The encyclopedia of social sciences.” MacMillan.
Sonmez.(2003). Yuksekogretiminyenidenyapulanmasaozerinebirdeneme, egitim.
Tesfa. (2015).challenges of Ethiopian Researchers.huddersfield University, England..
UNESCO.(2005). Educational research for development in Africa, unesco; paris.
Vedder,.r.(2018).challenges of research in American universities. NewYork, United States of
America.
Zegeye, A., Worku, A., Tefera, D., Getu, M., and Sileshi, Y. (2009).introduction to research
methods.AddisAbabaUniversity press.AddisAbaba, Ethiopia.
Bibliography
• D.N.Gujarati. (2000). Basic Econometrics (4th ed.). New Delhi, India.

• D.R., Cooper, P.S. Schindler, &J.K. Sharma(2012). Business Ressearch Methods(11 th

ed.). New Delhi, India. MCGraw hill.

• D.R.Andersen, D.J.Sweeney & T.A.Williams.(2019). Statistics For Business and

Economics(11th ed.). USA.Macmillan Company.

• EEA(2009). 'Proceedings of the fifth international conference on the Ethiopian

Economy'. Volume 5, Addis Ababa.

• ፕሮፊሰር አ. ዮሃንስ.(2010). መሰረታዊ የጥናትና ምርምር መርሆችና አተገባበር. ባህር ዳር ዩኒቨርሲቲ. ኢትዮጽያ.
 Appendix 1

Questionnaire
DEBRE TABOR UNIVERSITY
Dear respondents, this is a questionnaire prepared by Graduate students of Debre Tabor
University in the department of Economics in the title ‘Challenges to Do Undergraduate
Research in Debre Tabor University’, and you are lucky to be the sample to our research, and
therefore you are sincerely asked to answer the following series of questions with their respective
requirements. All information will be used for academic purposes only and will be kept secretly,
hence no need to hide anything and try to supply your information openly. Your successful and
accurate data will benefit the great mass; graduate students, the researchers and our country at
large. For your own sake, don’t write your name, and ID number! For multiple choice questions
indicate your answers that most represents you with a check mark (√) in the appropriate box and
circle as required.

SECTION ONE: Background Information

1 Sex A. Male B. Female
2. Write your department name here! _________________.
SECTION 2: General Information on Academic Issues.
1. Are you doing your graduate research?
A. Yes .B No
2. If your answer for the above is yes, are you doing in group or alone?
A. In group B. Alone
3. If your answer for Q.2 is in group (A), are you the group leader? A. Yes C. No
4. Do you lose more time on your research work than your group members/friends?
A. Yes b. No
5. How much is your CGPA? _________?
6. How much do you score on your introduction to research?________?
7. How much total average amount of money do you get from any source per month?
A. Less than 300 B.300_1000 C. 1000_3000 D. 3000 and above
8. Who selected your research, project or seminar topic/title? Me myself..From other university
friends .the group leader. I don’t know Mention if any other source.
___________________________.
9. Evaluate the electricity facilities in the University?
Very good Good satisfactory poor
10. How do you evaluate library and internet services delivery?
Very good Good satisfactory poor
11. How do you evaluate computers in the library for research work?
Very good Good Satisfactory poor
12. Do you have personal computer (PC)? Yes No
13.Do you have modern cell phone? Yes; No
14. Do you think that curriculum adjustment will help students to do quality research?
A. Yes B. No
15. If your answer for Q. 12 is “Yes”, list what should be done as per your thinking?
_______________________________________.
________________________________________.
_________________________________________.
_________________________________________.
_________________________________________....
16. How much time you devote to study literatures and books related to research per week?

Never read A. less than 3, B. 3_6 C. 7_10 D. Above 10

17. Do you think that undergraduate research and project works solve problems in Ethiopia?
Yes No
18. If your answer for Q. no 12 is No, can you list reasons?
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
_________________________________.
19. Do you think that research output is applicable to solve problems by policy makers and
Concerned people? Yes I expect they apply No, I don’t think it will be applied
.
 Appendix 2
logit activeengagement pcownership cgpa cresult income facility time sphoneownership

Iteration 0: log likelihood = -97.13361

Iteration 1: log likelihood = -38.457831
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -37.457172
Iteration 3: log likelihood = -37.442496
Iteration 4: log likelihood = -37.442486
Iteration 5: log likelihood = -37.442486

Logistic regression Number of obs = 141

LR chi2(7) = 119.38
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Pseudo R2 = 0.6145

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
activeengagement | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
pcownership | 2.018641 .7112299 2.84 0.005 .6246563 3.412626
cgpa | 2.56062 .9385212 2.73 0.006 .7211522 4.400088
cresult | .0404079 .0472952 0.85 0.393 -.0522891 .1331048
income | .0539111 .3490572 0.15 0.877 -.6302286 .7380507
facility | .2997946 .1590049 1.89 0.059 -.0118493 .6114386
time | .6664633 .2724278 2.45 0.014 .1325146 1.200412
sphoneownership | 1.757065 .6346212 2.77 0.006 .5132303 3.0009
_cons | -16.62119 4.023544 -4.13 0.000 -24.50719 -8.735189

logistic activeengagement pcownership cgpa cresult income facility time sphoneownership

Logistic regression Number of obs = 141

LR chi2(7) = 119.38
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Pseudo R2 = 0.6145
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
activeengagement | Odds Ratio Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
pcownership | 7.52809 5.354203 2.84 0.005 1.867604 30.34484
cgpa | 12.94384 12.14807 2.73 0.006 2.056802 81.45801
cresult | 1.041235 .0492455 0.85 0.393 .9490545 1.14237
income | 1.055391 .3683918 0.15 0.877 .5324701 2.091854
facility | 1.349582 .2145902 1.89 0.059 .9882206 1.843081
time | 1.947338 .530509 2.45 0.014 1.141696 3.321485
sphoneownership | 5.795403 3.677886 2.77 0.006 1.670679 20.10362
_cons | 6.05e-08 2.43e-07 -4.13 0.000 2.27e-11 .0001608
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------number of observations = 141
number of covariate patterns = 140
Pearson chi2(132) = 188.10
Prob > chi2 = 0.0010
Correlation
. estat vce, correlation

Correlation matrix of coefficients of logistic model

| active~t
e(V) | pcowne~p cgpa cresult income facility time sphone~p _cons
-------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
activeenga~t |
pcownership | 1.0000
cgpa | -0.0587 1.0000
cresult | 0.0231 -0.3379 1.0000
income | -0.2173 -0.0805 -0.0939 1.0000
facility | 0.0428 0.1139 -0.0009 -0.0466 1.0000
time | 0.1165 -0.0022 -0.0979 -0.1895 -0.0275 1.0000
sphoneowne~p | -0.0682 0.1687 -0.2964 0.1207 0.0326 0.1003 1.0000
_cons | -0.0115 -0.4726 -0.6048 0.0315 -0.3179 -0.0651 0.0184 1.0000
. margins, dydx(*) atmeans

Conditional marginal effects Number of obs = 141

Model VCE : OIM

Expression : Pr(activeengagement), predict()

dy/dx w.r.t. : pcownership cgpa cresult income facility time sphoneownership
at : pcownership = .4326241 (mean)
cgpa = 3.234965 (mean)
cresult = 77.1844 (mean)
income = 2.049645 (mean)
facility = 6.375887 (mean)
time = 2.652482 (mean)
sphoneowne~p = .5886525 (mean)
Marginal effect
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Delta-method
| dy/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
pcownership | .4768373 .1592242 2.99 0.003 .1647637 .788911
cgpa | .6048619 .2264873 2.67 0.008 .1609549 1.048769
cresult | .009545 .0113117 0.84 0.399 -.0126255 .0317155
income | .0127347 .0823124 0.15 0.877 -.1485945 .174064
facility | .0708166 .0371534 1.91 0.057 -.0020027 .1436359
time | .1574299 .0653068 2.41 0.016 .0294309 .285429
sphoneownership | .4150486 .1487538 2.79 0.005 .1234964 .7066007
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------tabstat activeengagement pcownership cgpa cresult income facility time sphoneownership

stats | active~t pcowne~p cgpa cresult income facility time sphone~p

---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mean | .5460993 .4326241 3.234965 77.1844 2.049645 6.375887 2.652482 .5886525
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
logistic activeengagement pcownership cgpa cresult income facility time sphoneownership

Logistic regression Number of obs = 141

LR chi2(7) = 119.38
Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
Log likelihood = -37.442486 Pseudo R2 = 0.6145

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
activeengagement | Odds Ratio Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-----------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
pcownership | 7.52809 5.354203 2.84 0.005 1.867604 30.34484
cgpa | 12.94384 12.14807 2.73 0.006 2.056802 81.45801
cresult | 1.041235 .0492455 0.85 0.393 .9490545 1.14237
income | 1.055391 .3683918 0.15 0.877 .5324701 2.091854
facility | 1.349582 .2145902 1.89 0.059 .9882206 1.843081
time | 1.947338 .530509 2.45 0.014 1.141696 3.321485
sphoneownership | 5.795403 3.677886 2.77 0.006 1.670679 20.10362
_cons | 6.05e-08 2.43e-07 -4.13 0.000 2.27e-11 .0001608
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------