to answer the question what fraction of first year students enrolled in all higher learning institutions between 1999/2000 and 2003/2004 and the fraction that was reported to take remedial courses (Dina 10). Besides, the researchers are trying to find out the reasons behind their course of action. The target population is the fresh undergraduates that are first year students being enrolled in private and public institutions. This is the same population the author is trying to draw conclusion from based on various characteristics. The sample in the study is a section of the first year and fourth year students in the higher learning institutions. The sample is not a representative of the population because it did not consider the continuing students.
There are differences according to the control and level of the institution, according to selectivity of the institution, student characteristics, and differences by the degree program or the study field in regard to the remedial course taking in higher institute of learning. There were notable four distinctions in the proportion of undergraduates who got enrolled in remedial courses for every academic year.
The researcher found that based on the reports of students for remedial courses in the study there was proof that the rate of remedial courses being taken by students might have gone down since 1999/2000. This might not be a logical conclusion given that the variables used were not exhausted. Hence causal conclusion cannot be taken. However, this is a valid conclusion based on the research design. The results can be used by the institutions and the ministry of education to seek the best policies to adopt in the higher education course programs.
The statistical analyses that were used to draw conclusion for the study include: establishment of statistical variance and standard deviation. This was conducted from the information that was collected over telephone and interviews of the population sample which is the