9. Money for upkeep on campus: 1 for “Not enough”, 2 for “Just enough”, 3 for
5.5 Descriptive discussion of data for each section of the questionnaire
5.5.1 Social – demographic characteristics of the respondents (Section A)
The socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 5.4. The data from Table 5.4 were used to evaluate the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents for the purpose of relating them to different aspects of prevention and risks pertaining to transmission and infection by HIV and AIDS covered by this study.
Gender
The percentage of males and females among the respondents (ALL) are 42.5% and 57.5%
respectively. These were distributed at 26% in the Faculty of Science (and Agriculture) and 74.0% from Education. While males (48.7%) and females (51.3%) were comparable at UNAD, females’ percentage was much larger (61.9%) than males’ (38.1%) at UNIZULU. The relatively larger number of female participants in Education at UNIZULU reflected the prevailing demography in the Faculty.
Age
The largest number of students is in the 19-21 years cohort (48.8%, UNAD; 34.8%, UNIZULU) at
first year, while about 21% of the respondents fell within the 15-18 years bracket. The weight shifted to the 22 -24 years range at the time of data collection where an increase from 21.7% to 34.9% in the combined respondents was recorded and a reduction of the 19 – 21 years bracket to 32.1% from 40.6%. There were negligible number of students who were older than 30 at UNAD (0.2% at first year, 1.2% at current age). The corresponding figures for UNIZULU are 8.2 and 12.0% respectively. The mean age of all respondents in the first yeas was 21.44.1 years (UNAD = 20.1 years; UNIZULU = 22.3 years).
Study levels
The distribution across study levels was above 20% for each of levels 1-3 but lower than 20% at level 4. The overall lower figure for level 4 was due to the disproportionate drop of this level to 14.1% at UNIZULU whereas it is much higher, at 24.7%, at UNAD. This could be rationalised on the basis of the difference in the system of education in both countries. In Nigeria degree programmes are straight 4 years post-matriculation leading to honours degrees whereas in South Africa there is an exit level after three years and continuation to honours is a choice.
Marital status
Over 90% of the respondents were single, followed by 7.1% who were married. Others were either divorced or widowed.
Table 5.4: Respondents’ biographical data
Characteristics Distribution No. of valid respondents UNAD
N = 604
UNIZULU N = 856
ALL N = 1460
No. % No. % No. %
Gender Male
Female
294 310
48.7 51.3
326 530
38.1 61.9
620 840
42.5 57.5 Age (Years):
At first year
Age now
15-18 19-21 22-24 25-30 Older than 30 15-18 19-21 22-24 25-30 Older than 30
146 295 142 20 1 23 176 289 109 7
24.2 48.8 23.5 3.3 0.2 3.8 29.1 47.8 18.0 1.2
164 298 175 149 70 59 293 220 181 103
19.2 34.8 20.4 17.4 8.2 6.9 34.2 25.7 21.1 12.0
310 593 317 169 71 82 469 509 290 110
21.2 40.6 21.7 11.6 4.9 5.6 32.1 34.9 19.9 7.5 Level of study First year
Second year Third year Fourth year
116 185 154 149
19.2 30.6 25.5 24.7
267 328 140 121
31.2 38.3 16.4 14.1
383 513 294 270
26.2 35.1 20.1 18.5 Marital status Single
Married Divorced Widowed
562 40 1 1
93.0 6.6 0.2 0.2
785 64 5 2
91.7 7.5 0.6 0.2
1347 104 6 3
92.3 7.1 .4 .2 Number of children None
One Two More than 2
554 27 15 8
91.7 4.5 2.5 1.3
501 223 78 54
58.5 26.1 9.1 6.3
1055 250 93 62
72.3 17.1 6.4 4.2
Religion Christianity
Islam Traditional Others
492 95 15 2
81.5 15.7 2.5 0.3
712 3 103 38
83.2 0.4 12.0 4.4
1204 98 118 40
82.5 6.7 8.1 2.7 Where brought up Village/rural
Town/semi urban Big town Capital City
70 143 171 220
11.6 23.7 28.3 36.4
626 191 26 13
73.1 22.3 3.0 1.5
696 334 197 233
47.7 22.9 13.5 16.0 Family household
resources
Not enough Just enough Have most things More than enough Missing
90 335 115 63
14.9 55.6 19.1 10.4
442 311 67 28
52.1 36.7 7.9 3.3
532 648 182 91 9
36.7 44.5 12.5 6.3 Stipend for upkeep at
school
Not enough Just enough Enough
More than enough Missing
148 245 176 35
24.5 40.6 29.1 5.8
569 180 90 10
67.0 21.2 10.6 1.2
717 425 266 45 7
49.3 29.2 18.3 3.1 Parent’s income
Dad
Mum
No response High Middle Low No income Missing No response High Middle Low No income Missing
69 155 194 117 5 63 63 177 231 16
12.8 28.7 35.9 21.7 0.9 11.5 11.5 32.2 42.0 2.9
318 88 62 112 271 245 67 71 192 280
37.4 10.3 7.3 13.2 31.8 28.7 7.8 8.3 22.5 32.7
387 243 256 229 276 69 308 130 248 423 296 55
27.8 17.5 18.4 16.5 19.8 21.9 9.3 17.7 30.1 21.1
Number of children
Of the 72.3% of all respondents without a child, 91.7% of the UNAD’s respondents were without children as against 58.5% of UNIZULU’s respondents. About 20% had one or more than one child of which 4.2% had more than two children. When compared with the 90% unmarried respondents who participated in this study, it seems that about 20% of the sampled population were single parents. The percentages of UNAD’s respondents who had one, two or three children were 4.5, 2.5 and 1.3 respectively. Corresponding figures for UNIZULU were 26.1%, 9.1% and 6.3%. If one postulates that the number of children from unmarried respondents was a reflection of the level of unprotected sex, it could be concluded that the level of risky sexual activity among UNIZULU students was higher than among UNAD students.
Religion
Most of the respondents were Christians (82.5%), almost proportionately distributed in the two institutions. While 15.7% respondents are Moslems at UNAD, only 0.4% is at UNIZULU. On the other hand, the percentage traditionalists in UNIZULU are about 5 times those at UNAD.
Where brought up
Over 70% of UNIZULU’s respondents were from villages/rural areas as against over 60% of UNAD’s respondents who came from big towns and capital cities. Thus although the two institutions are located in relatively rural settings, the demography appeared to be at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Family household resources
Over 50% of UNIZULU’s respondents came from families who did not have enough resources as against just about 15% for UNAD’s. On the contrary about 30% of UNAD’s respondents had most things/more than enough as against 10% for UNIZULU’s.
Stipend for up-keeping
About 75% of UNAD’s respondents had ‘just enough’ to ‘more than enough’ stipends as against about 33% of UNIZULU’s respondents. Only 1.2% of UNIZULU’s students reported that they had
‘more than enough’ as against 5.8% of UNAD.
Parents’ income
UNAD’s respondents’ dads (64%) fell in the middle to high income bracket; only 17.6% of parents of UNIZULU’s students were within this bracket. However, 45% of UNIZULU’s students were either in the low income (13.2%) or no income (31.8%) cohort. The corresponding figures for UNAD were 21.7 and 0.9% respectively.
The figures for mums were relatively poorer: 43.7% (UNAD), 16.1% (UNIZULU), for middle/high income and 44.9% (UNAD) and 55.2% (UNIZULU) for low/no income. Only 0.9% of dads and 2.9% of mums were without income among UNAD’s parents as against 31.8 and 32.7% for dads and mums respectively of UNIZULU’s parents. Unemployment rate among dads and mums of UNIZULU’s respondents was approximately equal.
It is evident from the above preliminary analysis that there are clear distinctions in the demography of students of each institution who participated in this study. The most glaring differences are found where the students were brought up as youths, the level of resources from homes, parental incomes, stipend, and single parenthood. In the subsequent analyses, it would be clearer if these differences generated any statistical differences in the responses to issues pertaining to the knowledge, awareness, prevention and transmission of HIV between the two institutions.
5.6 Knowledge of HIV and AIDS transmission (Section G) and knowledge of protection