UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA

Transcription

1 Higher Education Marketing Concerns: Factors Influencing Malaysian Students Intention to Study at Higher Educational Institutions Master of Business Administration Lau Sear Haur ( CGA ) UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA 2009

2 Higher Education Marketing Concerns: Factors Influencing Malaysian Students Intention to Study at Higher Educational Institutions Lau Sear Haur Bachelor of Science (Hons.) University of Malaya, Malaysia 2006 Master of Science (Distinction) University of Malaya, Malaysia 2007 Submitted to Graduate School of Business Faculty of Business and Accountancy University of Malaya, in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Master of Business Administration 2009

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to my supervisors, Dr. Yusniza Binti Kamarulzaman, who has provided me supervision, guidance and advice. This research project would not have been success without her constant support and concern. Her trust and patience is very much appreciated. My special thanks go to Mr. Frankie Lee Chee Lih, Mr. Yong Yuan Wu, Mr. Chin Kian Hoong, Ms. Ding Kay Lee, Ms. Ng Yin Lee, Mr. Ting Teck Kai, Ms. Norashikin, and Ms. Lee Wei Ting, who have afforded me advice, help, encouragement, and suggestion related to this study. I would like to extend my thanks and appreciation to the supporting staff of Graduate School of Business (UM-GSB) for the tremendous support given throughout the entire duration of my research project. Last but not least, my deepest gratitude also goes to my family numbers, who were very understanding, and have given their best support and encouragement to me throughout this study. i

4 ABSTRACT Higher education industry in Malaysia has been given a boost in the past couple of decade. Due to the tremendous increased number of HEI; HE environments have become intense competitive and HEIs have to compete for recruiting students from the market. However, with the numbers of HEIs and courses around, it is difficult to understand how students select HEIs for their choice. Therefore, it is a key issue for HEI authorities to know what the underlying factors that influencing students intention to study at a HEI. The purpose of this research is to assist HEIs marketing effort in understanding of what determines a student s intention to study at a HEI. Moreover, the differences among students gender and academic background regard with their perceived important attribute towards HEI are investigated. A conceptual model integrating the different factors that influencing the study intention of Malaysian students at a HEI was proposed in this study. The employed instrument was developed based on adaption from previous studies. The instrument was then subjected to validity and reliability test to ensure the appropriation. Result proved that the instrument is appropriate, and applicable in Malaysia context. A total of 480 pre-university level respondents from Klang Valley were surveyed in this study. Samples were selected using stratified random sampling. Findings indicated that the six proposed factors were significant influence on students intention to study at a HEI. Meanwhile findings revealed there were significant differences among respondents gender and their academic backgrounds on those important attributes towards a HEI. These findings would provide marketers a comprehensive overview of the different factors that play important roles in influencing students intention to study at a HEI. ii

5 Content ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT ABBREVIATIONS LIST OF FIRURE LIST OF TABLE Page i ii vi vii viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Education System in Malaysia An Overview of the Malaysian Higher Education System The Emergence of Marketing in Higher Education Institutions Studies of Higher Education Marketing in Malaysia Problem Statements Research Objectives Research Questions Scope of the Study Significance of the Study Limitations of the Study Organization of the Study Conclusion of the Chapter 18 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURES REVIEW 2.1 Introduction The Nature of Education as a Service Background of the Study Colleges and University Selection Process Review of Important Attributes Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information Significant People (Family, friends, peers and Teachers) Review of Multiple Attribute Researches Gender Effect on HEI Selection Academic Background Effect on HEI Selection Conclusion of the Chapter 44 iii

6 CHAPTER 3 CONCEPTUAL MODEL 3.1 Introduction Conceptual Model Definition of Variables Hypotheses Development Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information Influences from People (Family, friends, peers and 54 Teachers) Gender Differences on Important Attributes of HEI Academic Background Differences on Important 56 Attributes of HEI 3.5 Conclusion of the Chapter 58 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 4.1 Introduction Research Design Selection of Sample Sampling Instrument of Measurement Data Collection Research Approaches Determination of Sample Normality Descriptive Analyses Validity Test Reliability Test Relationship Approach Differences Approach Assumptions of the Study Conclusion of the Chapter 67 CHAPTER 5 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 5.1 Introduction Result of Sampling Respondents Profile Normality Test Histogram Stem-and-leaf Plots Boxplot Descriptive Statistic Summary of Normality Tests Descriptive Analysis 78 iv

7 5.6 Validity Test Independent Variables Dependent Variables Reliability Test Correlation Analysis Multiple Regression Analysis Independent Sample t-test One-Way Analysis of Variance (One-Way ANOVA) Conclusion of the Chapter 108 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION 6.1 Introduction Discussion of Results Normality Tests Descriptive Analysis Validity and Reliability Test Pearson s Correlation Multiple Regression Independent Sample t-test One-Way ANOVA Conclusion Implications Recommendations Contribution of the Study Suggestion for Future Research Conclusion of the Chapter 129 REFERENCES 130 APPENDIX I Questionnaire 144 APPENDIX II Figures of Normality Tests 148 APPENDIX III SPSS Analysis Data 159 v

8 ABBREVIATIONS DV etc H HE HEI i.e. IV Dependent Variable Et Cetera Hypothesis Higher Education Higher Educational Institution In Example Independent Variable L.O.U. Local Matriculation, Oversea Pre-U and University Foundation Programme N.A. NS PHEI Pre-U S.D. Sig. QL QT Not Applicable Not Significant Private Higher Educational Institution Pre-university Standard Deviation Significant Qualitative Quantitative % Percent vi

9 LIST of FIGURES Figure 1.1 Flowchart of the education system in Malaysia Figure 1.2 The organization of the present study Figure 3.1 A model of international students preference by Cubillo et al. (2006) Figure 3.2 The proposed conceptual model in this study, adapted from Zeithaml et al. (1996), Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000), and Cubillo et al. (2006). Figure 3.3 The conceptual model and proposed hypotheses in the study Figure 5.1 The gender group profile of the respondents Figure 5.2 The age group profile of the respondents Figure 5.3 The ethnic group profile of the respondents Figure 5.4 The profile of respondents religion Figure 5.5 The highest qualification status profile of the respondents Figure 5.6 The family size profile of the respondents Figure 5.7 The family gross monthly income profile of the respondents Figure 5.8 Screen plot between eigenvalue and number of factors Figure 5.9 Screen plot for items in dependent variable Figure 5.10 Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual for dependent variable Figure 5.11 The scatter plot of residuals observed value and predicted value vii

10 Table 1.1 Table 1.2 LIST of TABLES Malaysia national education system Higher educational institutions in Malaysia Table 1.3 Student enrolment into HEIs in Malaysia Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 3.1 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 5.1 Summary of important attributes that affect students intention to study at a HEI The literature concerning multiple-attributes employed in previous studies The definition of each variable in the study Purposive sampling and targeted response Normality tests employed in this research The summary of analysis The Detail of Sampling Result Table 5.2 The Demographical Profiles of the Respondents (N = 480) Table 5.3 Statistical normality tests for scale data from the sample (N = 480) Table 5.4 Summary of normality tests of the sample (N = 480) Table 5.5 Summary of the mean of items according variable (N = 480) Table 5.6 Summary of the means of computed items according to variable (N = 480) Table 5.7 The ranking order of each important factor (N = 480) Table 5.8 The overall score of each factor ranked by respondents (N = 480) Table 5.9 Table 5.10 Table 5.11 Table 5.12 Table 5.13 Table 5.14 Table 5.15 Table 5.16 Table 5.17 Table 5.18 Table 5.19 Table 5.20 KMO and Bartlett s Test for independent variable Total variance explained for independent variables Output from parallel analysis Comparison of eigenvalue from PCA and criterion values from parallel analysis Rotation component matrix result for independent variables KMO and Bartlett s Test for dependent variable Total variance explained for items in dependent variable Component matrix result for dependent variable Cronbach s alpha value of variables Inter-Item Correlation Matrix for variable: Cost of Education The correlations between the independent variables and the dependent variable (N =480) Multiple correlation of independent variables with dependent variable viii

11 Table 5.21 Table 5.22 Table 5.23 Table 5.24 Table 5.25 Table 5.26 Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Table 6.4 Significances of Independent variables Regression coefficients and significance of independent variables Independent sample t-test result for male and female respondent towards proposed variables One-way ANOVA, F values and effect size One-way ANOVA, comparison between groups Findings from comparison of groups Comparison of ranking order of importance for three distinct nations Summary of findings from differential analyses Overall result of hypotheses testing Overall implication of findings from the present study ix

12 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Education System in Malaysia 1.3 An Overview of the Malaysian Higher Education System 1.4 The Emergence of Marketing in High Education Institutions 1.5 Studies of Higher Education Marketing in Malaysia 1.6 Problem Statements 1.7 Research Objectives 1.8 Research Questions 1.9 Scope of the Study 1.10 Significance of the Study 1.11 Limitations of the Study 1.12 Organization of the Study 1.13 Conclusion of the Chapter

13 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Education System in Malaysia 1.3 An Overview of the Malaysian Higher Education System 1.4 The Emergence of Marketing in High Education Institutions 1.5 Studies of Higher Education Marketing in Malaysia 1.6 Problem Statements 1.7 Research Objectives 1.8 Research Questions 1.9 Scope of the Study 1.10 Significance of the Study 1.11 Limitations of the Study 1.12 Organization of the Study 1.13 Conclusion of the Chapter Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion

14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Education is a growing industry and one where Malaysia is gaining acceptance as a reputable study destination in the region. The education sector offers a variety of higher educational programmes as well as professional and specialised skill courses that are comparatively priced and of excellent quality. In fact, the Malaysian government has policies to encourage both public higher education institutions (HEIs) and private higher education institution (PHEIs) to become involved in the provision of tertiary education and, indeed, has ambitions for establishing Malaysia as a regional hub for education in South East Asia (David and Anne, 2007). Consequently, a number of HEIs were established in Malaysia within the last two decades. A market-sensitive educational system is evolving in Malaysia. Traditionally, public universities were responsible for providing undergraduate and graduate studies. While private colleges have been in existence in Malaysia for a couple of decades, the government has been actively supporting them since 1995 to develop their own unique and innovative higher education systems. In turn, the higher education (HE) environment has become increasingly competitive and institutions have to compete for the recruitment of students in the market. With the introduction of student fees, it is potential applicants to higher education that have become increasingly consumerist. As a result, the changes that have occurred in the education sector in Malaysia over the past few years have aimed at introducing efficiency and competition into this industry. 1

15 Furthermore, as competition for students intensifies, private universities and private colleges of higher education have been very aggressive and creative in the use of marketing approaches and techniques to recruit and attract students. HEI marketers argue that knowing the reasons applicants choose universities and courses of study is central to developing institutional positioning in an increasingly competitive HE environment. As a matter of fact, students entering institutions of higher education today are very different than those of previous generations (Abrahamson, 2000). When making decisions about attending college, and ultimately which college to attend, they consider factors differently than previous generations. Therefore, from time to time, HEI marketers need to study the underlying factors that affect students HEI choice. Moreover, the study of choice and decision making in HE is an area of growing research interest, primarily because HE has been transformed from a domesticated, centrally funded non marketised entity to a highly marketised and competitive environment (Soutar and Turner, 2002). In summary, this study aims to identify the important factors that significantly influence students intention to study at a HEI. Moreover, the differences among students gender and academic background with regard to their perception of important attributes towards HEIs are investigated. The findings of this study will be beneficial in terms of decision making and contribute to the roles that assist the HEI marketers to plan and improve their marketing strategy for the recruitment of students. 2

16 1.2 Education System in Malaysia In Malaysia education is the responsibility of the federal government. The national education system encompasses education from pre-school to university. Pre-tertiary education (i.e. from pre-school to secondary education) is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education (MOE) while tertiary education is the responsibility of the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE). Generally, the Malaysian education system provides eleven years of basic education to every child in the country. Both public and privately funded educational institutions at all levels of education exist in the national education system. The educational structure is 6-3-2, that is, six years of primary education, three years of lower secondary education, and two years of upper secondary education. Primary education and secondary education are free in public school due to full subsidization by the Malaysian government. Over 95% of primary and secondary education for Malaysian children is provided by public schools. The admission age to the first year of primary education is seven. Primary schooling is mandatory for all children between the ages of seven and twelve. Students sit for common public examinations at the end of primary (UPSR), lower secondary (PMR) and upper secondary levels (SPM). In short, Malaysia has been striving towards universal primary and secondary education since its independence (Molly, 1999). While in the past, the education system only provided for nine years of basic education, a reform in the early 1990s extended the basic education from nine years to eleven years. Instead of sitting for a selective public examination at the end of the lower secondary level (i.e., Form 3) with only about 50% of the Form 3 students 3

17 proceeding to Form 4, today all Form 3 students are promoted to Form 4. This has changed an elitist school system into a system that provides for mass education (Molly, 2004). The successful democratisation of secondary education has resulted in an increasing demand for post-secondary education, which, in turn, has brought about a rapid expansion of higher education as reflected in the increased number of universities and the proliferation of private colleges. Furthermore, upon completion of secondary education, students interested in continuing their study may opt to pursue one to two years of post-secondary education, which is the university entrance preparatory course (also called preuniversity programme). Examples of pre-university programmes are STPM, GCE A- level, Local Matriculation, Canadian Pre-University, South Australia Matriculation, etc. After the completion of pre-university level education, students are eligible to further their study at the tertiary education level. At the tertiary education level, institutions of higher learning offer courses leading to the award of Certificate, Diploma, Degree and postgraduate qualifications. Certificate, Diploma, Degree, Higher Degree programmes (in academic and professional fields) are adequately provided for by both the public and private education sectors. Therefore, at this level, students have several choices for furthering their studies. As far as higher education marketing is concerned, there is a market for HEIs and the reasons behind students preferences of HEIs have been studied in previous researches. Generally, the Malaysian national education system is summarized in Table 1.1 and Figure

18 Table 1.1: Malaysia national education system Education Level Starting Age Duration Pre-school Five Two years Primary Seven Six years Lower secondary Thirteen Three years Upper secondary Sixteen Two years Post-secondary Eighteen One to two years Tertiary Twenty Three to five years Post-graduate (Master or PhD) - One to five years Pre-school education Primary Education (Six Years) Compulsory Education Pre-Secondary (One Year) Secondary Education (Five Years) STPM GCE A-Level Matriculation University Foundation Year Overseas Pre-U (CPU, SAM) Tertiary Education Figure 1.1: Flowchart of the education system in Malaysia 5

19 1.3 An Overview of the Malaysian Higher Education System In the early 1990s, there were approximately 200 private colleges, seven public universities and no private universities in Malaysia. With the nation s focus on the development of HEIs, by the end of 2001 there were eleven public universities, five conventional private universities, and branch campuses of three foreign universities. By 2005, Malaysia had approximately 72 public and 559 private institutions. Currently, the number of tertiary education institutions has further increased. There are now 79 public tertiary education institutions, which comprises 20 universities, 22 polytechnics, and 37 community colleges. Furthermore, at the time of this study there were approximately 600 PHEIs in Malaysia. The statistics for HEIs is shown in Table 1.2. Table 1.2: Higher educational institutions in Malaysia Year Institution Public University Polytechnic Community College Sub-total Private University Branch Campus College * Sub-total Total *Approximation (Source: accessed 2 Feb 2009) As the statistics in Table 1.1 show the number of HEIs in Malaysia has dramatically increased within the last decade, similarly the enrolment of students into HEIs in Malaysia has also increased. In 2002, there were 253,153 students enrolled into HEIs. The number increased to 336,845 by 2007 with a compounded annual 6

20 growth rate (CAGR) of 6.9%. The statistics for student enrolment are presented in Table 1.3. Table 1.3: Student enrolment into HEIs in Malaysia Institution Year CAGR (%) Public 87,390 98, , , , , Private 165, , , , , , Total 253, , , , , , Despite the increasing trend of student enrolment into HEIs, a noticeable pressure is being faced by the HEIs. It has become more difficult to recruit an adequate number of students due to the increased competition, especially for PHEIs. The competition has become intensified as many private colleges have forged various kinds of institutional linkages with foreign universities to offer different types of degree programmes and professional qualifications. Recently, this practice was extended to include institutional linkages between private colleges and local public universities. Programmes that are linked with foreign universities are sometimes known as transnational education programmes and these include twinning programmes, credit transfer programmes, external degree programmes and distance learning programmes. The twinning programmes are split degree programmes where the students study part of the degree programme in a local institution before proceeding to the foreign university to complete the programme. Typical twinning arrangements are either 2+1 (2 years in a local college and 1 year in an overseas twinning university) or 2+2. However, a number of private colleges began to offer 3+0 programmes when the economic crisis hit Malaysia in 1997 as fewer students could afford to 7

21 continue their studies overseas due to the devaluation of the Malaysian Ringgit. Currently, there are more than 12 private colleges offering 3+0 programmes and five branch campuses of foreign universities, which means that Malaysians can obtain a foreign degree without having to go abroad (Molly, 2004). Furthermore, as tuition fees are the main source of revenue for most PHEIs, their programmes have to be tailored to meet the market demand. As a result, the PHEIs tend to offer programmes in disciplines that do not require a large capital outlay such as accountancy, business studies, and computer studies. In order words, the majority of PHEIs in Malaysia offer similar programmes. Consequently, it further stimulates the competition among PHEIs as well as public HEIs. 1.4 The Emergence of Marketing in Higher Education Institutions Most HEIs now recognise that they need to market themselves in a climate of competition, which for universities is frequently a global one, and substantial literature on the transfer of the practices and concepts of marketing from other sectors to HE has been developed (Gibbs, 2002). For example, Nguyen and LeBlanc (2001) focused on the image and reputation of the institution and referred to the crucial role these factors played in the development of market positioning they drew on the well established concepts and theories in business sector marketing for their study. On the other hand, Binsardi and Ekwulugo (2003), who claimed that a centrally important principle of marketing is that all marketing activities should be geared towards the customer, relied on the literature used in business sector marketing, and applied it in the context of higher education. 8

22 Kotler and Fox (1985) provided a definition of education marketing as early as 1985, stating that marketing in the context of education was: the analysis, planning, implementation and control of carefully formulated programmes designed to bring about voluntary exchanges of values with a target market to achieve organisational objectives. Some of the earlier definitions concentrated on product marketing, for example, Kotler and Fox s (1985) definition stated that students were the product and employers were the customers, Levitt (1980) also viewed a university s offerings as products (Binsardi and Ekwulugo, 2003). Later in the 1990s higher education marketing was defined within the services marketing definition, for example, Mazzarol (1998) highlighted the key characteristics that provide services marketing based on the nature of the services using a theory developed by well-established researchers in business management (Zeithaml et al., 1985; Parasuraman et al., 2004). The recognition that HE is a service industry further shows that some authors in the field were anxious to ensure that HE is recognised as a business: a service sector business. In contrast, Ogbuehi and Rogers (1990) cited that American universities have been forced to pay more attention to the utilization of marketing techniques in their recruitment processes due to the sharp decrease in the number of US High School graduates. This rationale is increasingly apparent within the Asian region. In the past, due to the relatively low participation rates in university education and the largely public provision of such education, Asian Universities tended to have a captive audience, requiring very little in the way of marketing. However, in recent years, participation rates have exploded and many private institutions have emerged. This 9

23 means that Asian tertiary institutions need to give close attention to the utilization of marketing techniques and improving student recruitment. 1.5 Studies of Higher Education Marketing in Malaysia Studies relating to the marketing of HEIs in Malaysia are relatively few. Nonetheless, a number of studies have been conducted by many researchers on the institutional characteristics influencing the choice of institutions in various host countries, including regions close to Malaysia. Most studies identified the factors that influence the students choice of institutions, however, studies such as Lin (1997), Joseph and Joseph (1998), Joseph and Joseph (2000), AEI-International Education Network (2003), Sidin et al. (2003) and Gray et al. (2003) analyze further the underlying factors of the many variables. From the existing literature at least six variables can be identified, (1) financial attractiveness, (2) programme and course suitability and availability, (3) ease and flexibility of enrolment procedure, (4) future ease of employment after graduating, (5) attractiveness of institutions, and (6) quality reputation, which have been adopted as the basis of the hypotheses in this research. In addition, the outcome of the focus group of an extended study done by Krishnan and Nurtjihjia (2007) revealed that 32 variables should be used instead of 26 variables. However, the research field of higher education marketing in Malaysia is still at a relatively pioneer stage with much research still to be carried out both from an exploratory and strategic perspective. 10

24 1.6 Problem Statements In Malaysia today there is greater opportunity for secondary school students to attend colleges and universities. Moreover, students are able to select their preference from a large pool of universities and colleges regardless of whether they are public or private, or local or overseas HEIs. Consequently, the competition for HEIs to recruit more students and retain them has become fiercer than ever before (Sohail et al., 2003). Facing a growing competitive environment, HEIs have dramatically increased the competition for recruiting and retaining students by providing a high quality service as the solution to compete in this turbulent market. Due to the increasing competitive forces for marketing education in Malaysia, marketers need to be more aware of the underlying factors considered by students when selecting a HEI (Hassan and Sheriff, 2006) if they want to survive in this competitive environment (Vaira, 2004). Thus, it is very important for marketers to know the factors that influence the study intention of prospective students and to understand the nature of the relationship among them. These factors are significant from the perspective of the HEIs marketing strategy planning for student recruitment. As a result, an extensive investigation of the important attributes that influence Malaysian students intention to study at a HEI is proposed in this study. Furthermore, although previous researchers identified many attributes that influenced students choice of institutions, the attributes that distinguish competing services from one another have not been clearly described. In other words, the determinant attributes that cause students to choose to attend a particular HEI are undetermined. Determinant attributes are referred to some way may down the list of service characteristics that are important to purchasers/students, but they are the 11

25 distinguishing attributes that allow customers/students to differentiate between the competing alternatives (Lovelock, 2007). It is typical for HEI marketers to identify the determinant attributes that motivate students to attend a HEI as these determinant attributes are the essence for HEI marketers to gain a competitive advantage in their crafting strategies for student recruitment. In the empirical search process in this study, no studies were found that address the difference by students gender with regard to the choice of HEI in Malaysia. Previous studies have demonstrated that the gender effect plays an important role in HEI student recruitment (Shank and Beasley, 1998; Mansfield and Warwick, 2005). Researchers argue that male and female students differ in the selection criteria they consider important when choosing a HEI. Thus, it will be interesting to see whether such gender differences also arise within the Malaysian HEI context. Furthermore, few studies were found that investigate the difference by students academic background (especially at pre-university level) towards their perceived important attributes of a HEI. Elizabeth Ng (2003) observed that students who studied in different programmes at pre-university level had different preferences concerning HEIs when studying abroad. The student s decision in the selection of a pre-university programme is often associated with a predisposition to attend a HEI in the near future. Hence, it will be topical to find out whether such academic background differences arise in the Malaysian HEI context. 12

26 1.7 Research Objectives In line with the problem statements, this study has two specific objectives 1. To determine and understand the factors influencing students intention to further their study at a HEI 2. To identify the significant differences between students gender and academic backgrounds concerning factors they perceive as important when selecting a HEI to attend. 1.8 Research Questions The following research questions were developed in order to guide the present study: Q1: What are the influencing factors and the contributions they make to a students intention to study at a HEI? The purpose of this research question is to identify and determine the important factors (i.e. cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspect and facilities, value of education, institutional information, and people (family, friends, peers and teachers)) that affect a students intention to study at a HEI. Q2: How students of different genders and from different academic backgrounds differ in the selection criteria they consider important when choosing a HEI? The purpose of this research question is to identify the differences between students gender and respective academic backgrounds on proposed factors that affect their intention to study at a particular HEI. 13

27 1.9 Scope of the Study The scope of this study is limited to those students who live in the Klang Valley. This is because most of the PHEIs that conduct pre-university courses are concentrated around major urban areas in the Klang Valley. Moreover, the number of public schools that offer Form Six (STPM) in these areas is higher than other states. As a result, a sample from this segment may be considered to adequately represent the actual population. Students who are currently attending pre-university level programmes, such as Form Six (STPM), GCE A-Level, local matriculation, overseas Pre-U courses, and other foundation courses are defined as the target sample in this study. The targeted sample is defined as such due to this group of people having the highest possibility of furthering their studies in HEIs in the near future. To a certain extent they are of interest to HEI marketers in order to determine the factors that can alter a student s choice of HEI Significance of the Study The findings of the research would expound on the theoretical contributions, thus, enriching the existing literature. This research will explain further those factors that influence a students intention to study at a HEI. The findings of this research will be beneficial to both students (customers), and institutions (service providers) for better future planning and decision making. Moreover, the results of this research will provide HEI marketers with a better view of the important factors that students consider in their selection of a HEI. Hence, HEI marketers may gain a better understanding of the actual needs and perceptions of 14

28 students in their further study decision making process. In consequence, HEIs may improve their marketing strategy in student recruitment Limitations of the Study The sampling process of the present study was carried out in the Klang Valley. Even though the majority of educational institutions that offer pre-university programmes are concentrated in this urbanized area, there are some others located in Suburban areas of Malaysia. For instance, public high schools that offer Form Six programmes. Thus, samples from the Klang Valley may not be adequate in generating an exhaustive picture that reflects the whole student population in Malaysia. Furthermore, students from sub-urban areas may have distinct preferences concerning HEIs compared to students who live in urban areas. Also, the accessibility of respondents to the questions in the questionnaire remains unknown. This study applied a quantitative approach; the instrument was developed by adapting a few sets of established questionnaires from previous studies. To a certain extent, evaluations made by respondents may not be accurate due to gaps or misunderstandings between the respondents and the concepts measured by the question. Moreover, the honesty of respondents in answering the questions during the survey is a constraint of this study. 15

29 1.12 Organization of the Study This thesis consists of six chapters and the organization of the study is as follows: Chapter 1: This chapter presents the introduction, related information on the interests of study, problem statements, research objectives, research questions, research scope, and significance and limitations of study. Chapter 2: This chapter addresses the nature of education as a service, the background of the study, college and university selection process, comprehensive review of important attributes and multiple attribute researches, and gender and academic background effects on HEI selection. Chapter 3: This chapter focuses on the development of the conceptual model, definition of proposed variables, and hypotheses development. Chapter 4: this chapter covers the selection of the sample, sampling technique, instrument design, data collection process, extensive research approach and research methodology employed in this study, and assumptions of the study. Chapter 5: This chapter presents the sampling results and respondents profile, data analysis and findings from various analyses such as normality tests, validity and reliability tests, Pearson s correlation, multiple linear regression, independent sample t-test, and One-way ANOVA. Chapter 6: This chapter includes an in depth discussion of the results, conclusion, implications, recommendations, contribution of the study, and suggestions for future research. The organization of this study is graphically presented in Figure

30 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion Figure 1.2: The organization of the present study 17

31 1.13 Conclusion of the Chapter This chapter described the general view of the present study. Information relating to the interest of the study was discussed. The problem statement, research objectives, and research questions were clearly defined. Further, the scope and significance of the study were covered. Limitations of the study were stated, and the chapter ended with the organization of the study. The literature regarding this study is reviewed in Chapter 2. 18

32 CHAPTER 2 Literature Review 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The Nature of Education as a Service 2.3 Background of the Study 2.4 Colleges and University Selection Process 2.5 Review of Important Attributes Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information Significant People (Family, friends, peers and Teachers) 2.6 Review of Multiple Attribute Researches 2.7 Gender Effect on HEI Selection 2.8 Academic Background Effect on HEI Selection 2.9 Conclusion of the Chapter

33 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The Nature of Education as a Service 2.3 Background of the Study 2.4 Colleges and University Selection Process 2.5 Review of Important Attributes 2.6 Review of Multiple Attribute Researches 2.7 Gender Effect on HEI Selection 2.8 Academic Background Effect on HEI Selection 2.9 Conclusion of the Chapter Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion

34 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction This chapter presents an extensive review of the literature and research related to factors that influence a students intention to study at a HEI. This chapter first discusses the nature of education as a service industry. The second part focuses on the background of the study, followed by stages in the college or university selection process. Moreover, this chapter describes literature concerning the important attributes, multiple-attribute researches, gender, and academic background effects on HEI selection. This chapter ends with a discussion on marketing in higher education. 2.2 The Nature of Education as a Service Services present special characteristics that require a particular marketing strategy application (Stanton, 1974; Andreson et al., 1993; Kotler et al., 1995). By their nature, services cannot be touched, tasted, or possessed (Dawidow et al., 1989). In general, services are intangible, heterogeneous, perishable, and require simultaneous production and consumption (Zeithaml et al., 1985; Ahmed et al., 2002). Students usually associate intangibility with a high level of risk. Thus, intangibility hinders the communication of services to the customer (Rathmell, 1966) and the setting of prices for international education (Mazzarol, 1998). Consequently, the decision process of consumers is influenced by indirect mechanisms of service evaluation. Students evaluate these aspects based on the image of the brand, the institution, and the country of destination. 19

35 Higher education is a pure service and is characterized by a greater amount of interpersonal contact, complexity, divergence, and customization compared to other service businesses (Patterson et al., 1998). Most of the quality attributes in higher education cannot be perceived, felt, or tested in advance. This nature brings difficulties to the evaluation of a programme, especially for an international student (Harvey and Busher, 1996; Patterson et al., 1998; Srikatanyoo and Gnoth, 2002). 2.3 Background of the Study Researchers have focused on student choice of college or HEI for more than 40 years. In the 1960s and 1970s, this research related to sociology, which explored the process of social mobility and occupational attainment (Sewell & Shah, 1968; Alexander & Eckland, 1975). Other researchers, such as Lewis and Morrison (1975), examined college choice as complex decision-making. In the 1980s and 1990s, most collegechoice research focused on three basic studies: factors influencing college choice, stage models, and student (as consumer) behaviour. In this case, the proposed research in this study is one of the analyses towards factors influencing students intention to study at a HEI. Nevertheless, the stage model is discussed in the next section for a better understanding that will complement the implications of this study. 2.4 College and University Selection Process Choosing a college or university is a critical stage for all high school graduates who plan to attain higher education in the future. However, students may make decisions that will affect persistence, which is a critical stage in their education. The literature on student college choice suggests a three-stage process for decisions to select a HEI (Jackson 1982; Litten 1982; Chapman 1984; Hossler and 20

36 Gallagher 1987; Hossler et al., 1989). Hossler and Gallagher (1987) proposed a three phase model of college choice. At each phase of the model, individual and organizational factors interact to produce outcomes that influence the student college choice process as follows: The first stage is the predisposition phase in which students determine whether they would like to continue their education beyond the secondary level or not. This phase is affected by student ability, achievement, socioeconomic status, parents, peer, educational activities and school characteristics (Tillery, 1973; Litten, 1982; Stage and Hossler, 1989; Nora and Cabrera, 1992; Somers et al., 1999). The second stage is the search phase during which they gather information about institutions of higher education and formulate a choice set that is the group of institutions to which they will actually apply. The search phase is affected by the students preliminary HEI values, their search activities and college or university search activities for students (Chapman, 1981; Hossler and Gallagher, 1987). The third stage is that of choice, that is, deciding which college or university to actually attend. Educational and occupational aspirations, costs and financial aid, and college or university courtship activities influence the choice phase (Hossler and Gallagher, 1987; John, 1990; Nora and Cabrera, 1992). According to the literature, there are many attributes affecting a students choice decision making, especially at the second and the third stage. It is known that physical characteristics, personal influences, costs and financial aids and academic and social variables influence the students choice and persistence towards a HEI (Hossler, et al. 1989: Bean, 1990; Paulsen, 1990; Cabrera et al., 1992). 21

37 The purpose of this study is to investigate students perceived important attributes during the university choice process, and whether there are significant differences between student s gender and course of study during their pre-university level (academic background). This information is vital to HEI marketers as understanding the factors affecting students choice and persistence will enable HEI marketers to influence students decisions towards choosing their college or university. Hence, it provides significant insights that allow HEI marketers to gain a competitive advantage over their competitors. 2.5 Review of Important Attributes Higher education is not a frequent purchase and demands a high level of involvement from students (Brookes, 2003). Indeed, the decision to study at a HEI involves cost (time and monetary) and people surrounding the student. Moreover, as discussed in Section 2.2, education is one kind of service that cannot be easily touched and tasted. The only way to evaluate the appropriateness of the choice to study at a HEI is to go through the process by experience. In turn, the perceived risk of making a decision of HEI choice is relatively high. Therefore, in order to determine their preferences, prospective students consider what is important for them, and then generate a conscious/unconscious tradeoff among the attributes (Soutar and Turner, 2002). In fact, a number of researches were carried out to study the important attributes that influence students study intention. In this study, attention was given to six important attributes. 22

38 2.5.1 Cost of Education Tillery and Kildergaard (1973) stated that cost is more influential concerning whether a student attends college or not than it is on which college he or she attends. Cabrera and La Nasa (2000) pointed to research that consistently showed a significant negative relationship between tuition increases and enrolment. Besides, in the research done by Leslie and Brinkman (1988), findings suggest that all students were sensitive to tuition cost. According to research done by Hossler et al. (1989) 70% of students and 87% of parents indicated that they were either well informed or informed about financial aid programmes and their eligibility for financial aid. Some theorists cited that receiving aid is more important than the amount of aid received, because that aid becomes the substantive way the institutions communicate that we want you to be part of our community (Jackson, 1982; Abrahamson & Hossler, 1990; Freeman, 1997). In contrast, Hossler et al. (1998) concluded that parents willingness to contribute, regardless of family income, has some effect on tuition and financial aid sensitivity. Their research also concluded that for Asian students, financial aid offers a vehicle in attracting them to specific institutions. Foskett et al. (2006) found that flexibility of fee payment, availability of financial aid, and reasonable accommodation costs in that order exert a significant influence on students choice of HEI. 23

39 2.5.2 Degree (Content and Structure) Hooley and Lynch (1981) observed that the suitability of the programme is the most important factor, as students will accept any level of the other factors. Studies that focused on the variables that influence students selection of tertiary institution (Houston, 1979; Krone et al., 1983; Webb, 1993) point towards a wide range of choice criteria. The criteria that seem to be most important are programme related issues such as flexibility and length of the programme, and programme entry requirements. Houston (1979) found length of the programme was at the bottom of the scale, while in Webb s (1993) study it is one of the most important elements. Krampf and Heinlein (1981) found that prospective students compare programmes offered with those promoted by competing institutions in order to check their suitability. The elements that influence the programme evaluation are: the selection of courses (Qureshi, 1995), their quality (Turner, 1998), availability of courses, and entry requirements (Bourke, 2000). The availability of majors is one of the primary considerations shaping actual matriculation (Choy and Ottinger 1998; Hossler et al., 1999). Also, Brennan (2001) stated that admission criteria as a proxy for quality is potentially more important than the programme offering. Programme evaluation is conceptualised as the consumers attitude towards targeted programmes (Peng et al., 2000) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Chapman (1984) cited that fixed college characteristics are one of the external influences that influence a student s intention to study at a particular HEI. The fixed 24

40 characteristics comprising college size, campus environment and good quality of faculty members are for the most part under the control of the institution. Researchers such as Litten (1980), Tierney (1983), and Seneca and Taussig (1987) found that academically-talented students look for different attributes compared to average students. The former evaluate an institution based on the quality of their programmes while the latter, in addition to good programmes, are also interested in factors like physical appearance and social life. This illustrates the scope for segmenting the market and approaching the recruitment of the distinct segments with tailor-made strategies. Jackson (1982) stated that most students only seriously consider colleges located relatively near their homes that present no extraordinary financial or academic obstacles. Wajeed and Micceri (1997) identified that the location of the HEI has a significant influence on the college choice of high school students. Their research at the University of South Florida (USF) suggested that geographic location or proximity is a primary motivating factor for students choosing to attend USF. They concluded that First Time in College (FTIC) and students from community colleges show enrolment preferences for institutions in their home counties or regions. Past studies pointed out that HEI selection is determined by several factors including the quality and expertise of its teaching faculty, attractiveness and campus atmosphere (Krampf and Heinlein, 1981; Lin, 1997; Mazzarol, 1998; Soutar and Turner, 2002). 25

41 The physical environment of the service production constitutes an important element in the decision-making process. Price et al. (2003) found that when provided with a high standard, facilities are considered as a relevant factor in influencing the students selection of the institution in which they will pursue their studies. The output of Price et al. (2003) analyses the degree to which facilities and location factors influence the decision of a group of customers. The most important factor related to facilities is social life at the university and its surroundings. Results also revealed that factors such as safety, security, cleanliness, and sports facilities are considered less significant. Other physical factors influencing the students HEI choice through auxiliary services are: library facilities (Qureshi, 1995), availability of computers, quality of library facilities, availability of quiet areas such as study rooms, and the availability of areas for self-study (Price et al., 2003) Value of Education The academic reputation and image of the institution are the sum of opinions, ideas, and impressions that prospective students have of the institution (Kotler and Fox, 1995). Their opinion about the reputation and image of the institution are formed from word of mouth, past experience, and marketing activities of the institution (Ivy, 2001). Thus, very often the perception of the institution s excellence goes beyond its actual quality (Kotler and Fox, 1995). 26

42 Increasingly, students are becoming extremely critical and analytical when choosing their educational institutions (Binsardi and Ekwulugo, 2003). Due to the growing competence in international education, HEIs need to maintain and develop a distinctive image in order to reach a competitive advantage (Paramewaran and Glowacka, 1995). In this way, the quality of reputation and branding are two important sources for this purpose (Hall, 1993; Qureshi, 1995; Mazzarol, 1998; Bourke, 2000). A positive image can strongly influence the decision to attend an educational institution (Krampf and Heinlein, 1981; Qureshi, 1995; Mazzarol, 1998; Bourke, 2000; Gutman and Miaoulis, 2003). The institution selection is determined by several factors such as the academic reputation and prestige of the institution (Krampf and Heinlein, 1981; Lin, 1997; Mazzarol, 1998; Soutar and Turner, 2002). Prospective students also consider the positioning of the institution within the ranking of academic organizations Institutional Information Cleopatra (2004) cited that in order to increase participation and to assist students in their choice of institution, information is needed that will change the attitude of the potential students and facilitate their decision-making. Moreover, due to the highly competitive HEI market, facing concerns relating to widening access, and students facing new choices and many more alternatives, produce and seek increased information to enable them to reach an informed and better decision. Applicants information seeking continues even after students initial selection of institutions and the completion of their post-secondary form or pre-university level (Moogan et al., 1999). 27

43 Furthermore, Cleopatra (2004) identified that information regarding career prospects and area of study for a course were significantly important to students in the study. Career prospects information such as the average earnings of the graduates and the percentage of graduates who are employed within a year of their graduation; area of study referred to the content of a specific course and the course as a learning experience. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) reported that the course and career information is, by far, the most important category of information during the selection of a specific higher education institution. Studies found that potential students place a strong emphasis on the need to collect, and no doubt compare, academic information such as area of study, and career opportunities after graduation (Cleopatra, 2004; Felix, 2006) Significant People (Family, friends, peers and Teachers) Studies of the college and university choice process have shown that a person s decision to attend college is influenced by individuals with personal or social ties to the student. Sheppard et al. (1992) showed that parents, other family members, and, to a lesser extent, peers had the largest influence on students college aspirations. Chapman s model includes the influence of high school personnel as an additional significant person in a student s college choice process. Research done by Hossler et al. (1999) on significant persons to student college choice indicated that by the junior year, the search activities of the students rose dramatically from their sophomore year. The study showed that 43% of 28

44 respondents reported that they spoke with friends, teachers, counsellors, or parents about college. Another 61% obtained information from counsellors and local libraries. In addition, 55% sent off for college information and 55 % visited one or more campuses. Consequently, by the end of the junior year, teachers and counsellors played an important role in assisting students learn about specific institutions. In sum, when students must make the decision concerning which college to attend, they tend to consult family, friends, peers, teachers, counsellors, and college recruiters. All these individuals will have a certain degree of influence on the students decision (Stefanie, 2006). Family and Parental Influence The influence of the family on college attainment for students and the way the family imparts values differs from what the research indicates about the influence of the family towards college attainment for all students (Freeman, 1997; Wilson & Allen, 1987). Descriptive and univariate analyses by Hossler et al. (1999) revealed that students in the ninth grade who talked the most with their parents (rather than with peer, teachers, or counsellors) about their postsecondary plans were more likely to be planning to attend college and were also more likely to be certain of their plans. Many studies have shown that parental encouragement is highly influential on a student s college choice. The research of Carpenter and Fleishman (1987) revealed that as the level of parental encouragement increased, student achievement also increased. 29

45 According to Cabera and La Nasa (2000), parental encouragement has two dimensions; motivational and proactive. In the motivational stage, parents maintain high educational expectations for their children. During the proactive stage, parents become involved in school matters, discuss college plans with their children and save for college (Stage & Hossler, 1989; Flint, 1992, 1993; Hossler & Vesper, 1993; Miller, 1997; Hossler et al, 1999; Perna, 2000). In other words, to know students and their parents expectations could be one of the effective ways that colleges have to take to face the highly competitive new environment (Thomas et al., 1996; Walther, 2000; St. John et al., 2005; Schweitzer, 2006). Friends Influence According to Hayden (2000), opinions of friends and former students weigh heavily on the minds of college applicants when deciding between colleges. These studies and others expound upon the knowledge that the more a high school student interacts with other students with college plans, the more likely they are to consider going to college. Maringe (2006), Hemsley-Brown and Oplatka (2006) found that approximately 27% of the students turned to their friends and neighbours for their HEI choice. This is because formal sources of interpersonal information such as agents, experts, university staff and counsellors are less easily accessed than informal sources such as friends, family, neighbours and relatives. However, formal sources 30

46 may be more believable if the product is perceived to be highly technical and high involvement (Coccari et al. 1995). Peers Influence Hossler and Stage (1987) showed a correlation between non-college bound students and their non college bound peers. These researchers stated that students with peers with no college plans influence the predisposition phase of students; college choice. Their research also found that students who were not planning to attend a HEI were more likely to consult their peers. While parental encouragement is still considered the greatest influence on college attainment, the effect of student s peers does add an additional dynamic to the overall college choice process for high school students. Several researchers (Coleman, 1966; Tillery, 1973; Russell, 1980; Falsey & Haynes, 1984) examined the relationships between student interaction with other college bound students and their college participation. Teachers and Counsellors Influence Leslie et al. (1977) reported research data that shows that students are most likely to rely on information about college from their high school counsellor. This study concluded that upper income students cite parents, students, catalogues, college representatives, and private guidance counsellors as sources for information on their college search. 31

47 Researchers have studied the influence of high school personnel on the college choice of minority students (Lewis & Morrison, 1975; Hossler & Stage, 1997). Research indicates that minority students are more likely to consult with counsellors about their college choice. According to the literature discussed in this section, a variety of attributes have been identified as influencing factors in the decision-making process of students intention to study at a HEI. Therefore, a multi-attribute model is proposed to provide tertiary institutions with a set of important attributes that students use in their decision making for their further study. These important attributes are summarized in Table

48 Table 2.1: Summary of important attributes that affect students intention to study at a HEI Reference Important Attributes 1 Baird (1967) Good faculty High academic standards Special programmes 2. Bowers and Pugh (1972) Good faculty High standards 3. Chapman (1979) Quality of the institution Cost of education 4. Murphy (1981) Academic reputation Cost of education 5. Maguire and Lay (1981) Financial aid Peer influence Special programmes Size of the institution Location Athletic facilities Social activities 6. Krampf and Heinlein (1981) Attractiveness of the campus Recommendation from family Closeness to home Good programme in their major Friendliness of the campus atmosphere Informative campus visits Informative university catalogue 7. Hooley and Lynch (1981) Course suitability Academic reputation University location Distance from home Advice from parents and teachers Type of university (morden/old) 8. Chapman (1981) Significant person Fixed college characteristics College efforts to communicate with students 9. Discenza et al. (1985), Hossler (1985) 10. Litten (1980), Seneca and Taussig (1987) and Tierney (1983) Academic reputation Peer influence, financial assistance, and location Good programmes Social life 33

49 Reference 11. Houston (1979), Krone et al. (1983), Webb (1993) Important Attributes Flexibility and length of the programme Reputation and prestige Cost of education 12. Qureshi (1995) University reputation Wide selection of courses Total cost of attendance Availability of financial aid Reputation of the programme 13. Mazzrol et al. (1996) Recognition of their qualification by future employers Quality reputation Willingness to recognize previous qualification Staff s quality, reputation and expertise 14. Lin (1997) Quality of education offered Degree opportunities Reputation of institution Internship opportunities Faculty qualifications Academic standards Availability of modern facilities Curriculum Emphasis Student life Student bodies 15. Turner (1998) Future job prospects Recognition of qualification by employers Availability of modern facilities Teaching standard International recognition of programme 16. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) 17. Soutar and Turner (2002) Course suitability Academia reputation Job prospects Teaching quality Campus atmosphere Value of education Degree (content and structure) Cost of education Physical aspect and facilities General (Information and influence of family & friends) 34

50 Reference Important Attributes 18. Pimpa (2003) Family influences (finance, information, expectation, competition, persuasion) 19. Price et al. (2003) Course suitability Availability of computers Quality of library facilities Good teaching reputation Availability of quiet areas 20. Chen and Zimitat (2006) Environmental Cultural and attitudinal influences Social class Family influence 2.6 Review of Multiple Attribute Researches Several relevant analyses were demonstrated by different researchers to study the factors that influence students intention to study at a HEI. As discussed in Section 2.5, studies indicate that students consider several factors when it comes to choosing a HEI to attend. In this section, findings of those researches described multiple attributes that influence students intention to study at a HEI, instead of reliance on a single attribute. Krampf and Heinlein (1981) undertook one of the earliest studies into the marketing of universities, interviewing prospective students for a large mid-western university in the USA. Their objective was to determine the needs of the prospective student market, examine the university's image, and develop ways of identifying potential students who had a high probability of matriculating and were eligible for entry. Their sample was collected from the American College Testing program, which provides more than 100 pieces of information for each student who completes their profile. Using factor analysis, they found that prospective students who had a positive attitude towards the university rated highly the attractiveness of the campus, 35

51 informative campus visits, recommendation of family, good programmes in their major, informative university catalogue, closeness to home and the friendliness of the campus atmosphere, suggesting that these factors might influence preferences. Hooley and Lynch (1981) examined the choice processes of prospective students of UK universities via a conjoint analysis. Qualitative research was used to determine the attributes used in the decision process, followed by face-to-face data collection using stimulus cards to obtain preferences for a set of experimentally chosen university profiles. The six attributes that Hooley and Lynch (1981) identified were course suitability, university location, academic reputation, distance from home, type of university (modern/old), and advice from parents and teachers. The conjoint analysis suggested that course suitability was the most important attribute in determining university choice. According to Lynch (1981) prospective students appeared to be prepared to accept that the conjoint approach was helpful and that a larger study would permit more reliable conclusions to be drawn. Oosterbeek et al. (1992) examined university choice and graduates' earnings in the Netherlands. Their objectives were to determine whether different universities were associated with different earnings prospects and whether the decision to attend a particular university was influenced by these prospects. They found that although there were significant differences, earnings prospects were not a particularly important factor in the choice of a specific university. Mazzarol et al. (1996) examined the factors that influenced international students' choice of study destination using a sample of students studying in Australia. Students were asked to rate the importance of 17 factors to their decision to study at a 36

52 particular institution. They found that the most important selection factor was the recognition of their qualifications by future employers. This was followed by the institution's reputation for quality, its willingness to recognize previous qualifications and the staff's reputation for quality and expertise. Lin (1997) investigated the reasons for students' intention to study at an educational institution in the Netherlands. Self-completion questionnaires were randomly distributed to students in the lobbies of seven universities. A combination of descriptive and factor analysis was used to identify the main reasons for their choice of institution. The most significant reasons for a student's choice of institution were the quality of education offered, career opportunities, the school's reputation, opportunity for traineeships, faculty qualifications, academic standards, whether modern facilities were available, curriculum emphasis, student life and whether there was an international student body. Turner (1998) undertook a study of business undergraduates to determine their reasons for choosing to enrol at a particular university. Students rated the most important factors as future job prospects, obtaining qualifications that were valued by employers, being able to use modern facilities, the standard of teaching and the international recognition of the university's programmes. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) found that students from different geographical areas revealed different preferences of attributes towards a HEI. Moreover, they identified that male and female students differ in the selection criteria they consider important when choosing a HEI. Some relevant multiple-attribute analyses are summarized in Table

53 Reference Table 2.2: The literature concerning multiple-attributes employed in previous studies Analysis Applied 1. Chapman (1981) Model of Student College Choice (combined model) Kind of Study QT/QL Top Five Factors Identified/Main Finding 1. Significant persons 2. Fixed college characteristics 3. College efforts to communicate with student 2. Krampf and Heinlein (1981) Multiple discriminant analysis QT Finding: Identifies the steps a prospective user would follow 1. Attractiveness of the campus 2. Recommendation from family 3. Closeness to home 4. Good programme in their major 5. Friendliness of the campus atmosphere 3. Hooley and Lynch (1981) MONANOVA Conjoint analysis QT/QL Finding: Need of segmentation of prospective students 1. Course suitability 2. Academic reputation 3. University location 4. Distance from home 5. Advice from parents and teachers 4. Qureshi (1995) Correlation analysis ANOVA Model of Consumer Behaviour Notes : QT = Quantitative, QL = Qualitative QT 1. University reputation 2. Wide selection of courses 3. Total cost of attendance 4. Availability of financial aid 5. Reputation of the Programme 38

54 Reference Analysis Applied 5. Lin (1997) Descriptive analysis Factorial analysis 6. Mazzarol (1998) Factor analysis Logistic regression model Kind of Study QT QT Top Five Factors Identified/ Main Finding 1. Quality of education offered 2. Degree opportunities 3. Reputation of institution 4. Internship opportunities 5. Faculty qualifications 1. Image and resources 2. Coalition and forward integration 7. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) Multi-attribute Model Descriptive analysis Ranking-Important Rotated factor score analysis QT/QL New Zealand Students: 1. Value of education 2. Degree (content and structure) 3. Cost of education 4. Physical aspect and facilities 5. General (Information and influence of family & friends) Indonesian Students: 1. Course and career information 2. Physical aspect and facilities 3. Cost of education 4. Degree (content and structure) 5. Value of education 8. Ivy (2001) Correspondence analysis QT Old UK Universities: 1. Top quality teaching 2. Research output 3. The range of courses offered 4. Staff reputation Notes : QT = Quantitative, QL = Qualitative South African Technikon: 1. Lower fees 2. Including bursaries 3. Physical facilities 4. Part-time tuition 39

55 Reference 9. Soutar and Turner (2002) Analysis Applied Combined analysis/conjoint analysis Cluster analysis Kind of Study QT 1. Course suitability 2. Academic reputation 3. Job prospects 4. Teaching quality 5. Campus atmosphere Top Five Factors Identified/ Main Finding 10. Binsardi and Ekwulugo (2003) Ranking-independence analysis of Chi-square statistics QT/QL Country Aspects: 1. Education standard/recog. qualify - worldwide 2. Ease of university admissions 3. Ease of immigration procedures 4. Ease of finding employment 5. Cost of living, accommodation, safety and culture Institution Aspects: 1. Lower tuition fee 2. Providing more scholarship 3. Providing better quality care and services 4. Supplying more facilities 5. Alumni networks international students 11. Price et al. (2003) Descriptive analysis QT/QL 1. Course suitability 2. Availability of computers 3. Quality of library facilities 4. Good teaching reputation 5. Availability of quiet areas Notes : QT = Quantitative, QL = Qualitative 40

56 2.7 Gender Effect on HEI Selection Literature cited the notion that in general, males and females differ in their psychological orientation along the dimensions of agency and communion (Bakan, 1966; Meyers-Levy, 1988). Meyers-Levy (1988) determined that males are characterized as being relatively self-focused and are guided by agency goals encompassing self-assertion and achievement-oriented concerns; whereas, females are more sensitive to the needs of both self and others and are guided by communal concerns including interpersonal affiliation, a desire to be at one with others, and harmonizing relations between themselves and disparate parties. Hence, this theory offers a partial explanation for why there are gender differences in processing strategies (Laroche et al, 2000). Meyers-Levy and Mahjeswaran (1991) and Meyers-Levy and Sternthal (1991) assess differences in processing strategies based on a selectivity model, which indicates that females attempt to engage in effortful, comprehensive, itemized analysis of all available information giving equal weight to information relevant to self and others. Whereas, males often do not engage in the comprehensive processing of information, but rather they are selective information processors processing heuristically and, therefore, missing subtle cues. In addition, males tend to rely on a single cue or cues that are highly available and particularly salient in the focal context. These suggested differences between genders should be of interest for HEIs across the nation as such knowledge will enable colleges to better understand their targeted customers, as well as allowing HEIs to assess how and to what extent 41

57 changes occurring in the gender roles are likely to impact the kinds of appeals that will be effective with students, both male and female (Mansfield and Warwick, 2005). This view is supported by previous research findings. A pilot study by Schab (1974) reported that the women in his sample frequently chose nonprofessional reasons as explanations for why they were attending college. He found that women viewed the motives for attending college of other women as: finding a suitable husband, pleasing their parents, having fun, being able to rear their children better, and pledging a particular sorority. Schab s findings suggested that it was unclear if women were attending college in order to gain knowledge that would prepare them for the workforce. Hayes et al. (1995) demonstrated a research on gender differences by using a different targeted population, different-determinant attributes and by exploring other issues in the decision-making process of choosing a HEI. Specifically, the research explored the impact of gender on two integral components of the college decisionmaking process the importance of determinant attributes of a university and the importance of various information sources when choosing a university. Shank and Fred (1998) performed a study regarding gender differences in the university selection process. Results indicated that male and female students differ in terms of the importance placed on various attributes of a university. Jacobs (1999) described that the significant gender differences found among high school seniors may be more important than ever as women now constitute the 42

58 majority of associate and other two year degree recipients, the majority of bachelor's degree recipients, about half the master's and professional degree recipients, and nearly 40% of doctoral degree recipients. A more recent study reported that females attend college primarily to improve their chances of success in the workplace (Green & Hill, 2003). This led us to probe if there are different influential factors for choice of colleges between males and females. In conclusion, there is no doubt that male and females differ in their decision making for HEI attendance. 2.8 Academic Background Effect on HEI Selection The Chapman (1981), Freeman (1999) and Cabera and La Nasa s (2000) models all illustrate aspects of student characteristics as an influencing factor to college selection. Each of these three models examine the influence of academic status such as the highest academic qualification, courses attended during high school, high school achievement or academic ability and educational aspiration as characteristics of students, which researchers have concluded influence how students conclude their college choice. Additionally, Sohail and Saeed (2003) claimed that in the Malaysian context, the courses that students attended at pre-university or high school is positively associated with a predisposition to attend a HEI in the future. Furthermore, Elizabeth Ng (2003) observed that Malaysian students who studied in different programmes at pre-university level have a distinct perception towards their HEI preference. In sum, 43

59 students coming from different academic backgrounds may have a distinctive perceived importance on the attributes of a HEI. 2.9 Conclusion of the Chapter This chapter discussed the relevant literature comprehensively. It is apparent that there are several important attributes that influence students intention to study at a HEI. These attributes were grouped in categories for the purpose of this study. As discussed in earlier sections, the groups of attributes are cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, institutional information, and People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers). Also, the literature revealed that there are gender and academic background differences in the importance students place on these attributes. The relationships and the differences between these attributes will be further discussed in the next chapter. 44

60 CHAPTER 3 Conceptual Model 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Conceptual Model 3.3 Definition of Variables 3.4 Hypotheses Development Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information Influences from People (Family, friends, peers and Teachers) Gender Differences on Important Attributes of HEI Academic Background Differences on Important Attributes of HEI 3.5 Conclusion of the Chapter

61 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Conceptual Model 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Conceptual Model 3.3 Definition of Variables 3.4 Hypotheses Development 3.5 Conclusion of the Chapter Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion

62 CHAPTER 3 CONCEPTUAL MODEL 3.1 Introduction This chapter presents the study using the theoretical approach, the proposed conceptual model, variables and the research hypotheses. The research hypotheses include the relationship between these important influencing factors and students intention to study at a HEI. In addition, research hypotheses also cover the difference concerning important attributes among students gender and academic background. The development of the conceptual model is extensively discussed, and the variables are defined in this chapter. 3.2 Conceptual Model The theoretical model is adapted from a previous study by Cubillo et al. (2006). Previous study proposes a theoretical model that integrates the different groups of factors that influence the decision-making process of international students. The theoretical model comprises the purchase intention, as a dependent and not observable variable, and four factors with a total of 19 items identified from the existing literature. The factors identified are personal reasons, country image, institution image, and programme evaluation. The theoretical model is presented in Figure 3.1. Modifications to the developed theoretical model are proposed in order to accommodate the purpose of this study. The developed theoretical model has been modified by substituting the five existing independent variables (IVs) with six IVs that were adopted from Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000). The six substituted IVs are 45

63 cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, institutional information, and influences from people (family, friends, peers, and teachers). The theoretical model is modified in such a way to study the important attributes that influence students intention to study at a HEI, which is in line with the objectives of this study. Personal Reasons (3 Items) Country Image Effect (3 Items) City Image (4 Items) Purchase Intention Institution Image (5 Items) Programme Evaluation (4 Items) Figure 3.1: A model of international students preference by Cubillo et al. (2006) In addition, a further modification of the items within the IVs adopted from Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) is made to address the important attributes that influence students intention to study. The dependent variable (DV) proposed in this study is the students intention to study at a HEI. This variable has the same magnitude as the DV (purchase intention) in the adapted model. According to the favourable behavioural intention studies demonstrated by Zeithaml et al. (1996), it was found that certain behaviours signal that customers are forging bonds with a company. When customers praise the firm, express a preference for the company over 46

64 others, increase the volume of their purchase, or agreeably pay a price premium, they are indicating behaviourally that they are bonding with the company. The phenomenon is similar to the HEI industry, in this case students act as customers. If students intend to study at a HEI, the students reveal a favourable behavioural intention towards the HEI. In turn, students may say positive things about the HEI, recommend the HEI to others, remain loyal to the HEI, spend more time with the HEI, and pay a premium rate for the HEI (Parasuraman et al., 1996). The proposed conceptual model of this study is shown in Figure 3.2 Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution Institutional Information Family, Friends and Peers Figure 3.2: The proposed conceptual model in this study, adapted from Zeithaml et al. (1996), Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000), and Cubillo et al. (2006). 47

65 The model presented in this study aims to explain the factors influencing the study intention of Malaysian students. The intention to study is used as a predictor for the preferential choices of students, and is defined as the intention of the student to study at a particular HEI (Peng et al., 2000; Srikatanyoo and Gnoth, 2002; Cubillo et al., 2006). 3.3 Definition of Variables Items of IVs are adopted from the previous studies by Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000). The items of DV are adopted from Zeithaml et al. (1996). These items are reorganized in such a way as to be applicable in the Malaysian context. The definition and items for each variable is summarized in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: The definition of each variable in the study 1. Independent Variable Cost of education (IV 1 ) Definition: Students financial consumption during study (Foskett et al, 2006) Five Measurable items - Reasonable cost - Availability of financial aid - Availability of scholarship - Flexible payment of fee - Accommodation at reasonable cost Sample item Provides education at a reasonable cost 48

66 2. Independent Variable Degree (Content and Structure) (IV 2 ) Definition: The availability and suitability of the offered courses to students (Hooley and Lynch, 1981) Five Measurable items - Reasonable entry requirements - Wide range of courses - Flexibility in selecting courses/subjects - Specialized programmes - Reasonable completion periods of study Sample item Have reasonable entry requirements for its programme 3. Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources (IV 3 ) Definition: Institutes structures and properties (Price et al., 2003) Eight Measurable items - Ideal Location - Environment conducive to learning - Great recreation and other facilities - Expected social life on campus - Availability of necessary resources (include facilities) - Cleanliness - Safety - Quality faculty members Sample item Be situated in an ideal location 4. Value of Education (IV 4 ) Definition: The preserved importance and principles of quality education (Kotler and Fox, 1995) Five Measurable items - Well known reputation - Well known academic values - Recognition from other academic institutions - Recognition from professional bodies - Recognition from respected industries Sample item Well known reputation 49

67 5. Independent Variable Institutional Information (IV 5 ) Definition: Information made available by institutions to students (Cleopatra, 2004) Five Measurable items - Application process - information availability - Career opportunities - Area of study - Post-graduate studies Sample item Provide students with information regarding application processes 6. People (Family, Friends, Peer and Teachers) (IV 6 ) Definition: Influences of family members, friends and peers that affect students intention to study (Sheppard et al., 1992) Eight Measurable items - Rely on family members opinion - Family views are important - Rely on friends advice - Friends perceptions are important - Rely on peers idea - Peers suggestions are vital - Rely on teachers view - Teachers recommendations are vital Sample item I usually rely on my family member s opinion 1. Dependent Variable Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (DV) Definition: Students intention to further their study at a higher educational institution (Mazzarol, 2000) Six Measurable items - Likelihood to further study - Strong interest to pursue study - Recommend the chosen HEI - Say favourable things about the chosen HEI - Willing to spend - Willing to pay at high rate Sample item The likelihood to further my study at a HEI is high 50

68 3.4 Hypotheses Development Cost of Education In a previous study, James et al. (1999) stated that overall costs incurred have not usually been a strong influence in the applicants decision and choice of university. While confirming the above, research done in England (Fokskett et al., 2006) suggests factors influencing students intention to study at a HEI could be turned upside down now that financial considerations are of greater importance to students. Moreover, the recently announced introduction of student fees in HEIs may result in greater consumerist behaviour by applicants as the issue of value for money may become a major factor affecting students decision making. Thus, this study hypothesises that the cost of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H1: The cost of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI Degree (Content and Structure) Studies (Mazzarol, T. 1997, 1998, 1999) have found that the majority of students when making decisions for their further study only have limited knowledge about the programme and its content. Thus, it may be argued that the ability of a HEI to offer a wide range or specialised courses for its students is not the main factor that attracts student s intention to study at the HEI. Nevertheless, some other researchers expressed contrasting opinions. 51

69 Hooley and Lynch (1981) observed that the suitability of the programme is the most important factor, as students will accept any level of the other factors. In this sense, prospective students will compare programmes offered with those being promoted by competing institutions in order to check their suitability (Krampf and Heinlein, 1981). Consequently, this study hypothesises that the content and structure of degree is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H2: The content and structure of the degree is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Some researchers cited that the physical aspects of a HEI, including its location and good social life on campus, are not usually the determinants in students intention to study at a HEI (Robert, 1998; Hemsley-Brown, 1999). However, Price et al. (2003) found that when provided, high standard facilities are considered as a relevant factor that influence the students selection of institution for the pursuit of their studies. Hence, this study hypothesises that the physical aspects, facilities and resources of an institution form a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H3: The physical aspects, facilities and resources of an institution are a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI 52

70 3.4.4 Value of Education Concerning the influence on student s intention to study at a particular HEI in comparison with other factors, previous studies (Foskett, 1999; Smith et al, 2002) indicate that relatively the academic value of education is not an important factor. In contrast, some researchers found that the value of education does play a role in the students decision making process concerning further study. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) found that the value of education is the most important factor to be considered by New Zealand students in their planning for further study, however, the impact level varies between countries. Accordingly, this study hypothesises that the value of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H4: The value of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI Institutional Information Studies (Turner, 1998) have found that the institutional information does not have a major affect on students intention to study at a HEI. Studies also indicate that in the decision making process for further study, most students consider other factors as being more important and that institutional information only acts as a guide for them. However, there are arguments that institutional information is an important factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI due to its ability to convey a significant message that affects the decision making process. In addition, some researchers argued that the comprehensive information provided by a HEI is the primary factor that determines students intention to study at the HEI (Cleopatra, 53

71 2004). Therefore, this study hypothesises that the institutional information is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H5: The institutional information is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI Influences from People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Results from previous studies (McMahon, 1992, Kemp, 1995), showed that many HEI marketers were of the opinion that students who intend to continue their studies at a higher level were often those that were considered mature, independent and in possession of a critical thinking mentality. Hence, they concluded that the influence of students family, friends and peers was not the main factor affecting their intention to study at a HEI. Nevertheless, recently many academic researchers have found that family members and friends act as significant people that encourage students to study at a HEI (Krampf and Heinlein, 1981; Turner, 1998; Bourke, 2000). Moreover, this situation is more obviously revealed in the Asian context based on research results (Pimpa, 2003; Chen and Zimitat, 2006). As a result, this study hypothesises that the significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) are a significant factor that influence students intention to study at a HEI in the Malaysian context. H6: The significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI 54

72 3.4.7 Gender Differences on Important Attributes of HEI Numerous studies have addressed the differences between males and females with regard to their psychological orientation and behaviour. From a consumer behaviour perspective (in this study, students as customers), there have been several studies directed towards gender differences. Studies have addressed gender differences in information processing strategies (Meyers-Levy and Maheswran, 1991), roles and attitudes (Fischer and Arnold, 1994), cueing and judgment-related activities (Meyers- Levy and Sternthal, 1991), and right-brain/left- brain activity (Meyers-Levy, 1994) to name a few. Previous studies have also found judgment-related differences between males and females when evaluating promotional materials, and their attentiveness to different forms of advertising appeals (Holbrook, 1986; Meyers-Levy, 1994). This finding may draw the attention from HEI marketers and is significant in advertising and promotion strategies. Given that research has also found gender differences in shopping behaviour (Roberts and Wortzel, 1984;.Zeithaml, 1985) and in the characteristics males and females consider when evaluating products (Fischer and Arnold, 1994; Meyers-Levy and Sternthal, 1991), it is likely that gender differences are extended to the evaluative criteria in the selection of a college. As a result, this study hypothesises that there are significant differences between students gender concerning the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. H7: Male and female students differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. 55

73 3.4.8 Academic Background Differences on Important Attributes of HEI Sohail and Saeed (2003) proposed that the different academic background of students leads to different preferences towards a HEI. Other researchers found that students, who come from a distinct academic background, especially those who studied different courses at pre-university level, revealed different perceptions of which HEI to attend (Hassan and Shariff, 2006). Nevertheless, a few studies were found that addressed the differences in students academic background with regards to the HEI selection process in the Malaysian context. Consequently, this study hypothesises that there is a significant difference between students academic background and the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. H8: Students with different academic background will differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. A comprehensive conceptual model and the proposed hypotheses are presented in Figure

74 Independent Variables, IVs Dependent Variable, DV Cost of Education (5 Items, Interval) H1 Degree (Content and Structure) (5 Items, Interval) H2 Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources (8 Items, Interval) Value of Education (5 Items, Interval) H3 H4 H5 Students Intention to study at a Higher Educational Institution (6 Items, Interval) Institutional Information (5 Items, Interval) H6 People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teacher) (8 Items, Interval) Figure 3.3: The conceptual model and proposed hypotheses in the study As a summary, in total there are eight proposed hypotheses in this study: H1: The cost of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI H2: The content and structure of the degree is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI H3: The physical aspects, facilities and resources of an institution are a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI 57

75 H4: The value of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI H5: The institutional information is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI H6: The significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI H7: Male and female students will differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. H8: Students with different academic background will differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. 3.5 Conclusion of the Chapter This chapter discussed the development of the proposed conceptual model. This model combines a few previous studies as a platform, allowing the present study to investigate the relationships between variables, and the difference in students gender, and academic background concerning their intention to study at a HEI. Each proposed variable is comprehensively defined in this chapter. A total of eight research hypotheses have been developed to address the research objectives and research question. These hypotheses will act as the guide to the sequential analysis, which will be discussed in Chapter 5. The next chapter discusses the detail of the research methodology employed in this study. 58

76 CHAPTER 4 Research Methodology 4.1 Introduction Selection of Sample 4.4 Sampling 4.5 Instrument Design 4.6 Data Collection 4.7 Research Approaches Determination of Sample Normality Descriptive Analyses Validity Test Reliability Test Relationship Approach Differences Approach 4.8 Assumptions of the Study 4.9 Conclusion of the Chapter

77 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Research Design 4.3 Selection of Sample 4.4 Sampling 4.5 Instrument Design 4.6 Data Collection 4.7 Research Approaches 4.8 Assumptions of the Study 4.9 Conclusion of the Chapter Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion

78 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 4.1 Introduction This chapter reveals the research methodology employed in the present study. The chapter begins with a discussion on the sample selection and sampling, followed by instrument design and data collection. A complete methodology of the performed analyses is discussed in the later section of this chapter. 4.2 Research Design The research design is the blueprint for fulfilling objectives and answering questions. In this study, the qualitative approach was employed as the theories are well developed and lead to a formal conceptual model. As a result, hypotheses can be developed and tested. The instrument was adapted from previous studies (Zeithaml et al., 1996; Joseph and Joseph, 1998 & 2000). The instrument was a self-administered questionnaire that was distributed to the respondents in the form of survey, and the data collected was primary data for the analysis. 4.3 Selection of Sample The targeted sample of this study was students who were currently attending preuniversity level programmes, including Form Six (high school), GCE A-Level, local matriculation, overseas Pre-U courses, and other foundation courses. Recent school leavers, for instance, those students who graduated from their secondary school within the previous two years were eligible for participation in this study. However, no school leavers participated in the study; all respondents were currently attending preuniversity level programmes. 59

79 The targeted sample was defined as such, as these groups of people have the highest possibility of continuing their study at a HEI. In other words, their intention to continue their study at a HEI was assumed. Consequently, they are of interest to HEI marketers for identifying what factors influence the students intention to study at a HEI. Moreover, knowing the reasons why students choose a university and course of study is central to developing institutional positioning in an increasingly competitive HE environment. 4.4 Sampling As mentioned in Chapter 1, most of the PHEIs that conduct pre-university courses are concentrated around major urban areas in the Klang Valley. Moreover, the number of public schools that offer Form Six (STPM) in this area is higher than other states. As a result, a sample from this segment may adequately represent the actual population. Thus, this study focuses on Malaysian students who are currently attending courses at the pre-university level around the Klang Valley. Sampling was carried out in selected PHEIs, matriculation centres and tuition centres. The samples were collected using stratified convenience sampling. Using this method, the selection of sample for this research was based on the appropriateness of the research objectives; specifically, the respondents academic background (as respondents highest qualification in questionnaire) was divided into three distinct categories with a minimum of 150 responses each; as presented in Table 4.1. Therefore, respondents were asked to identify their study status, and then only qualified respondents were considered for participation in the sampling process. 60

80 Table 4.1: Purposive sampling and targeted response Academic Background Targeted Response 1. Form Six/STPM GCE A-level L.O.U. 150 Total 450 * L.O.U. = Local matriculation, overseas Pre-U, university foundation programme 4.5 Instrument of Measurement The instrument used in this study was designed based on prior published researches regarding the important factors affecting students selection of a HEI. A multiple attribute model was developed for use in this study by adapting those employed in previous studies (Zeithaml et al., 1996; Joseph and Joseph, 1998 & 2000; Cubillo et al., 2006). The instrument was a structured self-administered questionnaire that was distributed to the respondents in the form of survey and then collected back for use as the primary data. Basically, the questionnaire contained three sections: Section A: Section B: Section C: Attributes that affect university or college choice Ranking order of important attributes Respondents demographic information In Section A, items were designed to measure and compare the importance of factors that influence respondents intention to study at a HEI. The questionnaire comprises 42 items and seven variables; six IVs and a DV. The measurable items of IVs and DV were adapted from previous researches done by Joseph and Joseph (1998 & 2000) and Zeithaml et al. (1996), respectively. Responses to both the IVs and DV were measured based on a five-point Likert scale, in increasing order, ranging from strongly disagree, disagree, not sure, agree, to strongly agree. In order to make the survey easy and convenient for the respondents, the five scales were 61

81 displayed in numerical form in the questionnaire, where one represented strongly disagree, and five represented strongly agree. In Section B, a table was provided for respondents to place the ranking order in the blank column, regarding their perceived importance of factors influencing their intention to study at a HEI. The ranking order of important factors ranged from one to six in decreasing order of importance. For example, one represented the most important factor, whereas six represented the least important factor. An example was give next to the table to provide assistance in answering the section correctly and to avoid any confusion. Section C, consisted of a series of questions addressing the respondents demographic information. These questions were used to identify the respondents gender, age group, ethnic group, religion, highest academic qualification, family size and gross monthly income. Based on the obtained demographic data, the respondents characteristics could be identified. It was significant in this study as stratified sampling was applied and, therefore, responses from the subgroups must be in line with the proposed quantity. In this case, respondents academic background was the controllable stratum. 4.6 Data Collection Self-administered questionnaires were distributed in the form of a survey and completed by the respondents. The respondents were informed that participation was voluntary. The data collection was completed with assistance from lecturers from HEIs, and teachers from tuition centres. The results of the sampling are presented in Chapter 5. 62

82 4.7 Research Approaches Data was coded using Statistical Package for Social Studies (SPSS), version Data was screened and cleaned in order to identify any significant outlier or missing value Determination of Sample Normality In order to perform the parametric analyses on the samples, all collected scale type data from the survey was subject to exploration for the normality tests before subsequent analyses. The objective of sample normality tests is to ensure the sample is normally distributed and randomly selected. It is important that the normality of the sample is confirmed before subjecting it to inferential and differential analyses, as it proves the capability and appropriateness of the sample in representing the actual population. Thus, the findings from consequent analyses in this study can be generalized to the population with confidence. Several normality tests were carried out on the data by employing graphical and statistical analyses on the sample as shown in the following table: Table 4.2: Normality tests employed in this research Method Analysis 1. Histogram Graphical 2. Stem-and-leaf Plots Graphical 3. Boxplot Graphical 4. Descriptive Statistics Statistical 63

83 4.7.2 Descriptive Analyses Descriptive analyses were performed on two distinctive sections of the collected data, namely, Section A and Section B. The analyses were: Section A: Mean and standard deviation for items in each variable; and computed mean and standard deviation for the variables. Section B: Rank ordering score for the influencing factors Validity Test The validity test of the instrument in this study was performed by factor analysis. Generally, factor analysis is carried out to condense a large set of scale items down to a smaller, more manageable number of factors. It can be done by summarizing the underlying patterns of correlation and looking for groups of closely related items. In this study, there were 36 items allocated in seven variables, including six IVs and a DV. The objective of the validity test in this study was to identify whether the proposed items were valid for measuring the underlying concept. In this case, the concept referred to the respondents perceived importance of factors influencing their intention to study at a HEI. In order words, the confirmatory factor analysis approach was employed. In short, the validity test was demonstrated to test and ensure the appropriateness of the instrument used in the present study Reliability Test The reliability test of this instrument was examined through Cronbach s Alpha Coefficient. The objective of the reliability test was to ensure that the measurable items of each variable were measuring the same underlying construct. If the results reveal a high alpha value then the internal consistency of the set of items is 64

84 determined. Consequently, these items were eligible for making up the scale (be computed) for the following analyses Relationship Approach Two inferential analyses were carried out to investigate the relationship between the proposed IVs and DV in the present study; Pearson s correlation and multiple linear regression. First, the correlation analysis was carried out to identify the significant strength and direction of the linear relationship between the proposed IVs and DV. Computed items under each variable and averaged variable score of IVs and DV were subject to analysis using Pearson s correlation. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the prediction of the DV from the six proposed IVs. Moreover, this analysis was used to indicate the predictor and its contribution towards the criterion. In this study, the independent variables were the suspected predictors and the dependent variable was the criterion Differences Approach The t-test was used to compare the mean score of the continuous items. In the analysis, the different groups of respondents were defined by their gender, male respondents and female respondents. ANOVA was performed to compare the mean score of three groups of respondents. In this section, the respondents were divided into three different groups according to their academic background, namely, Form six/stpm, GCE A-level, and others (comprising all other courses). The ultimate objective of differential analyses is to identify which groups are significantly different from one another on the proposed variables. The overall research approaches are summarized in Table

85 Table 4.3: The summary of analysis Analysis Methodology Objective of Analysis Normality tests Graphical and statistical normality tests To ensure the sample are normally distributed and the homoscedasticity of sample Descriptive (A) Comparison of means Statistical description To compare the tendency of means for measured items and variables (B) Rank ordering Statistical description To identify the orders of important factors Validity test Factor Analysis To confirm the items were valid to measure the underlying concept Reliability test Cronbach s Alpha Coefficient To ensure the internal consistency of the measureable item scale Relationship Approach (A) Relationships between variables (B) Predictors and its contribution to criterion Differences Approach (A) Difference between gender (B) Difference between academic background Pearson s Correlation Multiple Regression To identify the relationships between the IVs and the DV To determine the significant predictors and their contribution towards the criterion Independent Sample To identify differences in important t-test attributes between gender One-way ANOVA To identify differences in important attributes between academic backgrounds 4.8 Assumptions of the Study There are other factors that may influence the students intention to study at a HEI. However, other factors are not considered as significant factors as the impact level may be negligible. Students or respondents who participated in the survey are assumed to have a high possibility and intention to further their study at a HEI. All the respondents were assumed to understand the items in the questionnaire, and answer honestly. As a result, the findings in this study represent real situations. 66

86 4.9 Conclusion of the Chapter The research methodology employed in the present study was extensively discussed in this chapter. The discussion included research design, sample selection and sampling process, measurement design and the data analysis the study is going to apply. The findings of these analyses are exhibited in Chapter 5. 67

87 CHAPTER 5 Data Analysis and Findings 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Result of Sampling 5.3 Respondents Profile 5.4 Normality Test Histogram Stem-and-leaf Plots Boxplot Descriptive Statistic Summary of Normality Tests 5.5 Descriptive Analysis 5.6 Validity Test Independent Variables Dependent Variables 5.7 Reliability Test 5.8 Correlation Analysis 5.9 Multiple Regression Analysis 5.10 Independent Sample t-test 5.11 One-way Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA) 5.12 Conclusion of the Chapter

88 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Result of Sampling 5.3 Respondents Profile 5.4 Normality Test 5.5 Descriptive Analysis 5.6 Validity Test 5.7 Reliability Test 5.8 Correlation Analysis 5.9 Multiple Regression Analysis 5.10 Independent Sample t-test 5.11 One-Way Analysis of Variance 5.12 Conclusion of the Chapter Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion

89 CHAPTER 5 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 5.1 Introduction This chapter presents the findings obtained from the analyses. The chapter begins with the results of the sampling, which illustrates the sources of respondents from various locations within the Klang Valley. The exact locations and response rate are clearly indicated. The demographical data is shown in the respondents profile section. Normality tests were performed to ensure the sample normality, then descriptive analyses were performed for each item and variable. Two inferential analyses were carried out, namely, Pearson s correlation and multiple regression. The bivariate analysis analyzes the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable. Multiple regression analysis is to indicate its predictor and criterion. In addition, differential analyses including independent t-test and One-Way ANOVA were carried out to identify the difference between the respondents gender and highest qualification (academic), respectively. 5.2 Result of Sampling Questionnaires were distributed in the form of a survey to students currently at preuniversity level in the three selected sampling areas: tuition centres at Jalan Petaling, International Islamic University Malaysia (UIAM) Matriculation Centre, and private institutes at Wangsa Maju, Subang Jaya and Cheras. The entire sampling was completed in approximately 22 days. A total of 800 questionnaires were distributed and 522 responses were returned, contributing to a percent response rate, which is reasonably good. However, a total of 30 students responses were excluded from 68

90 analysis due to leaving one or more items blank. Eight responses were excluded due to incorrect answers in their questionnaires. Another four responses from undergraduate students were eliminated as they were not qualified as the targeted sample for this study. The remaining 480 respondents accounted for percent of the total number of distributed questionnaires and were eventually used for analysis. The report of sampling is shown in Table 5.1. Table 5.1: The Detail of Sampling Result 1. Number of Questionnaires Distributed Return of Questionnaire Return of Questionnaire (Percentage) Total Respondents Subject to Analysis Sampling Location (A) Pusat Tuisyen K (Jalan Petaling) (B) Pusat Tuisyen Y (Jalan Petaling) International Islamic University Malaysia Matriculation Centre (Petaling Jaya) (A) Tunku Abdul Rahman College, TARC (Wangsa Maju) (B) Taylor University College (Subang Jaya) (C) University College Sedaya International, UCSI (Cheras) Total

91 5.3 Respondents Profile The respondents demographical data is descriptively analyzed in this section. The comprehensive demographical profiles of the respondents are shown in Table 5.2. Female respondents outnumber male respondents in this sample, accounting for percent and 42.1 percent, respectively. The majority of the respondents are from the years (46.70%) age group and years (49.60%), and no respondents fall in the age group of 15 and below. Although there are some respondents aged over 22 years the number is relatively small. As a result, this finding manifests that the age range of pre-university level students in Malaysia is mostly between 16 to 21 years old. From the ethnic perspective, Chinese represented the highest number of respondents (40.2%) among the ethnic groups, followed by Malay (33.1%), Indian (25%), and others (1.7%). In the religion context, about percent, percent and percent of respondents were Buddhist, Muslim and Christian, respectively. The majority of respondents come from small (1-4 persons) and average (5-6 persons) sized families. These family sizes account for 79.5 percent in this category. Most respondents family gross monthly income is RM6,000 and below which accounted for 86.6 percent, and the largest income group is in the range of RM2,001 to RM4,000 at 38.5 percent. This result indicates that most of the respondents have a medium family monthly income level. The findings are graphically shown in Figure 5.1 to Figure

92 Table 5.2: The Demographical Profiles of the Respondents (N = 480) Frequency, n Percentage, % Gender Age Group Ethnic Group Religion Highest Qualification (Including Currently Attending) Family Size (Including Respondent) Family Gross Monthly Income Male Female Total years or below years years years and above Total Malay Chinese Indian Others Total Muslim Christian Buddhist Hindu Others Total STPM/Form Six GCE A-Level Oversea Pre-U Local Matriculation University Foundation Programme Others Total persons persons persons persons Above 8 persons Total RM 2000 or less RM 2001 RM RM 4001 RM RM 6001 RM RM 8001 RM RM and above Total

93 Respondent's Gender Male, n = % Female, n = % Figure 5.1: The gender group profile of the respondents Respondent's Age Group % 49.6% Number of Students % years years 22 years and above Year Figure 5.2: The age group profile of the respondents 72

94 Respondent's Ethnic Group Indian n =120, 25% Others n =8, 1.7% Malay n =159, 33.1% Chinese n =193, 40.2% Figure 5.3: The ethnic group profile of the respondents Respondent's Religion Hindu n = 77, 16% Others n=5, 1% Muslim n=164, 34.2% Buddhist n =130, 27.1% Christian n=104, 21.7% Figure 5.4: The profile of respondents religion 73

95 Respondent's Highest Qualification (Including Currently Attending) Local Matriculation n =63, 13% Overseas Pre-U n =60, 13% University Foundation Programme n =37, 8% GCE A-Level n =160, 33% STPM/ Form Six n =160, 33% Figure 5.5: The highest qualification status profile of the respondents Respondent's Family Size (Including Respondent) Number of 100 Respondents % 1-2 persons 38.1% 38.1% 3-4 persons 5-6 persons Family Size 16.9% 7-8 persons 3.5% Above 8 persons Figure 5.6: The family size profile of the respondents 74

96 Respondent's Family Size (Including Respondent) Number of Respondents % 1-2 persons 38.1% 38.1% 3-4 persons 5-6 persons Family Size 16.9% 7-8 persons 3.5% Above 8 persons Figure 5.7: The family gross monthly income profile of the respondents 75

97 5.4 Normality Test According to Pallant (2007), normality is described by a symmetrical bell shaped curve, which has the greatest frequency of scores in the middle, with smaller frequencies towards the extremes. In this study, after exploration for the normality tests, some potential outliers were found in the findings and then removed in sequence. Hence, the total sample size was reduced from N = 522 to N = 480. The normalized findings are shown in the following sub-chapters Histogram All the scale type data shows a normally distributed curve in the histogram chart. The findings indicate that the sample is normally distributed. The histogram is shown in Appendix II Stem-and-leaf Plots Stem-and-leaf plots of the collected data are emerging normal distributions; therefore the sample is normally distributed. The result of the stem-and-leaf plots is shown in Appendix II Boxplot The potential outliers were counter checked by boxplot and all potential outliers were eliminated. The boxplot of collected data is shown in Appendix II. The distribution of the boxplot showing the sample is normally distributed after drawing the potential outlier respondents data (normalization). Furthermore, no significant outliers were revealed in the boxplot for the any of the variables. 76

98 5.4.4 Descriptive Statistics The normality of the sample is deduced from the results of the Skewness and Kurtosis tests. All the values are between -2 to +2, which fall in the normal range for the Skewness and Kurtosis tests (Sekaran, 2003). Therefore, the normality of the sample is acceptable. The details of the findings are reported in Table 5.3. Table 5.3: Statistical normality tests for scale data from the sample (N = 480) Cost of education Degree (content and structure) Physical aspects, facilities and resources Value of Education Institutional information People (Family, friends, peers and teachers) Intention to study at a HEI Mean % Trimmed Mean Median Variance Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Range Skewness Kurtosis Summary of Normality Tests All the normality tests (histogram, stem-and-leaf plots, boxplot, and descriptive statistics shows the data are normally distributed. The results of the tests are summarized in Table 5.4. Table 5.4: Summary of normality tests of the sample (N = 480) Test Normal Distribution of Sample Histogram Support Stem-and-leaf Plots Support Boxplot Support Descriptive Statistic (Skewness and Kurtosis) Support 77

99 The overall results indicate that the distribution of the sample is normal. Hence, the sample is acceptable and can be considered as normally distributed and randomly selected from the population. The importance of the determination of the sample s normality is to ensure its homoscedasticity. The residual between the observed value and the predicted value must be small enough so that the model fits the sample indicating that the sample is representative of the population. 5.5 Descriptive Analysis The summary of the means for the 42 items according to each variable is shown in Table 5.5. All the items have a mean score of above Thus, the findings indicate that the majority of the respondents agreed with the statement of items for each variable, and considered those items important for their intention to study at a HEI. Table 5.5: Summary of the mean of items according variable (N = 480) Importance Variable Mean S.D. Cost of education(iv 1 ) C1 Provide education at a reasonable cost C2 Make financial aid available to its students C3 Make scholarships available to its students C4 Make flexible payment of fee to its students C5 Make accommodation available to its students at reasonable cost Degree (Content and Structure) (IV 2 ) D1 Have reasonable entry requirements for its programmes D2 Provide a wide range of courses for students to select from D3 Provide students flexibility in selecting courses/subjects during 3.56 their study 0.75 D4 Provide students with a number of specialized programmes to suit their needs D5 Offer degrees with reasonable completion periods of study Note: Importance score: 5 = maximum, 1 = minimum 78

100 Importance Variable Mean S.D. Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources (IV 3 ) P1 Be situated in an ideal location P2 Provide students with an environment that is conductive to learning P3 Provide students with great recreation and other facilities P4 Provide students with an expected social life on campus P5 Provide students with all the necessary resources that are required for their education P6 Provide students with a clean study environment P7 Provide students with a safe condition for study P8 Have exceptional quality of faculty members Value of Education (IV 4 ) V1 Well known for the reputation V2 Well known for their academic value V3 Well recognized by other academic institutions V4 Well recognized by professional bodies V5 Well recognized by respected industries Institutional Information (IV 5 ) I1 Provide students with information regarding application processes I2 Make information easily available to students from time to time I3 Provide students with information regarding career opportunities I4 Provide students with information regarding their area of study I5 Provide students with information regarding post-graduate studies People (Family, Friend, Peers and Teachers )(IV 6 ) F1 I usually rely on my family members opinion F2 My family views on the HEI are important F3 I usually rely on my friends advice F4 My friends perceptions towards the HEI are important F5 I usually rely on my peers idea F6 My peers suggestions are vital F7 I usually rely on my teachers view F8 My teachers recommendations are vital Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (DV) S1 The likelihood of furthering my study at a HEI is high S2 I have a strong interest in pursuing my study at a HEI S3 I will recommend the HEI I choose to my friends S4 I will say favourable things about the HEI I chose S5 I am willing to spend to study at a HEI S6 I am willing to pay a high rate for the HEI I chose Note: Importance score: 5 = maximum, 1 = minimum 79

101 A summary of the computed means of all the items according to the variables is shown in Table 5.6. The overall scores for each variable were obtained by averaging the response to the appropriate items. Table 5.6: Summary of the means of computed items according to variable (N = 480) Importance Variable Mean S.D. Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Intention to Study The means of all computed items are above This result indicates that the respondents consider all the factors listed above have some importance regarding their intention to continue their studies at a HEI. The results of ranking the important factors influencing students intention to study at a higher educational institute are shown in Table 5.7. Table 5.7: The ranking order of each important factor (N = 480) Variable Rank (I) Number of respondent, n Score (I n) Cost of Education (IV 1 ) Total 985 Degree (Content and Structure) (IV 2 ) Total

102 Variable Rank (I) Number of respondent, n Score (I n) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources (IV 3 ) Total 1340 Value of Education (IV 4 ) Total 2069 Institutional Information (IV 5 ) Total 2267 People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) (IV 6 ) Total 1502 In order to obtain the score for each factor, the ranking was multiplied by the number of respondents accordingly. Thus, the sum score of each factor was obtained. The scores were sorted in ascending order (from low to high), with the lowest score indicating the first rank, and the highest score indicating the last rank. The result of this analysis is shown in Table

103 Table 5.8: The overall score of each factor ranked by respondents (N = 480) Rank Variable Total Score 1 Cost of Education Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Degree (Content and Structure) Value of Education Institutional Information 2267 In summary, in ranking order analysis, cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources of the HEI, and the people factor such as influences from family members, friends, peers, and teachers, are the three that students perceive as the most important factors influencing their intention to study at a HEI. 5.6 Validity Test The validity test is used to determine that the questions in the questionnaire are tapping the right concept and not something else (Sekaran, 2003). Validity tests determine how well an instrument measures the particular concept it is supposed to measure. Pallant (2007) cited that there are two main issues to consider in determining whether a particular data set of a sample is appropriate for factor analysis; sample size and the strength of the relationship among the items or variables. For sample size, Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) suggested that it is comforting to have at least 300 cases for factor analysis. The sample size of this study is 480, which exceeds the minimum number required, therefore, the data set for the sample is acceptable for factor analysis. The validity test is performed through factor analysis. Factor analysis is carried out to validate the appropriateness of the measureable items used in this study. 82

104 The strength of the inter-correlation among the items must also be considered. According to Tabachnick and Fidell (2007), a correlation coefficient (loading level) greater than 0.3 is considered acceptable for analysis. Based on the result of factor analysis, a total of 36 items listed in the independent variables were included. An inspection of the correlation matrix revealed the presence of many coefficients of 0.3 and above, see Appendix III. Two statistical measures were also carried out to determine the ability to perform factor analysis. In other words, the suitability of data for factor analysis was assessed. First, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy, and Bartlett s test of Sphericity. According to Tabachnick and Fidell (2007), Bartlett s test of Sphericity should be significant (p < 0.05) in order for the factor analysis to be considered appropriate, while the minimum value for a good factor analysis is 0.60 for the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index (Pallant, 2007). In this section, two factor analyses were carried out separately for the independent variables and the dependent variable Independent Variables The results of the KMO and Bartlett s Test for independent variable are shown in Table 5.9. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value is 0.81, exceeding the value of 0.60 (Kaiser 1970, 1974), and Bartlett s Test of Sphericity (Bartlett 1954) is statistically significant (P < 0.00), supporting the factorability of the correlation matrix. Table 5.9: KMO and Bartlett s Test for independent variable Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy..805 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df 630 Sig

105 In the principal components analysis (PCA), a total of 36 items listed under independent variables were subjected to analysis. The results reveal the presence of seven components with eigenvalues exceeding 1, explaining 19.3%, 14.5%, 12.6%, 10.5%, 7.0%, 4.1%, and 2.9% of the variance, respectively, as shown in Table An inspection of the scree plot (Figure 5.8) revealed a clear break after the sixth component. Furthermore, the Parallel Analysis showed only six components with eigenvalues exceeding the corresponding criterion values for a randomly generated data matrix of the same size of data (36 items 480 respondents). Therefore, six components are accepted as appropriate factors in this study. These findings are shown in Table 5.11 and Table Scree Plot 6 Eigenvalue Component Number Figure 5.8: Screen plot between eigenvalue and number of factors 84

106 Table 5.10: Total variance explained for independent variables Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. 85

107 Number of variables: 36 Number of subjects: 480 Number of replications: 100 (specify) Eigenvalue # Random Eigenvalue Standard Dev Monte Carlo PCA for Parallel Analysis Table 5.11: Output from parallel analysis Table 5.12: Comparison of eigenvalue from PCA and criterion values from parallel analysis Component Actual Eigenvalue Criterion value from Decision Number from PCA Parallel Analysis Accept Accept Accept Accept Accept Accept Reject 86

108 Table 5.13: Rotation component matrix result for independent variables Component F1 I usually rely on my family members' opinion.932 F5 I usually rely on my peers' idea.909 F8 My teachers' recommendations are vital.897 F4 My friends' perceptions towards the HEI are important.891 F7 I usually rely on my teachers' view.880 F3 I usually rely on my friends' advice.873 F6 My peers' suggestions are vital.862 F2 My family s view on the HEI is important.647 D4 Provide students with a number of specialized programmes to suit their needs.785 D3 Provide students flexibility in selecting courses/subjects during their study.776 D2 Provide a wide range of courses for students to select from.753 D5 Offer degrees with reasonable completion periods of study.618 D1 Have reasonable entry requirements for its programmes.597 P7 Provide students with a safe condition for study.873 P5 Provide students with all the necessary resources that are required for their education.870 P4 Provide students with an expected social life on campus.837 P2 Provide students with an environment that is conductive to learning.809 P1 Be situated in an ideal location.784 P6 Provide students with a clean study environment.645 P8 Have exceptional quality of faculty members.622 P3 Provide students with great recreation and other facilities.394 I1 Provide students with information regarding application processes.949 I2 Make information easily available to students from time to time.933 I5 Provide students with information regarding postgraduate studies.901 I4 Provide students with information regarding their area of study.888 I3 Provide students with information regarding career opportunities.813 V5 Well recognized by respected industries.743 V4 Well recognized by professional bodies.740 V1 Well known for the reputation.663 V2 Well known for their academic value.442 V3 Well recognized by other academic institutions.328 C2 Makes financial aid available to its students.787 C3 Make scholarships available to its students.731 C5 Make accommodation available to its students at reasonable cost.407 C1 Provide education at a reasonable cost.349 C4 Make flexible payment of fee to its students

109 A complete rotation component matrix result for independent variables is shown in Table Only items with a factor loading value greater than 0.30 were considered. Based on the results, there are six identified factors as follows: Component Factor 1 People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) 2 Degree (Content and Structure) 3 Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources 4 Institutional Information 5 Value of Education 6 Cost of Education Factor 1 includes I usually rely on my family members opinion, I usually rely on my peers idea, My teachers recommendations are vital, My friends perceptions towards the HEI are important, I usually rely on my teachers view, I usually rely on my friends advice, My peers suggestions are vital, and My family views on the HEI are important. All the proposed eight items are categorized under the independent variable called People (family, friends, peers, and teachers). Factor 2 contains four items, they are Provide students with a number of specialized programmes to suit their needs, Provide students flexibility in selecting courses/subjects during their study, Provide a wide range of courses for students to select from, and Offer degrees with reasonable completion periods of study. These items fall into the independent variable named Degree (Content and Structure). Nonetheless, there are five items under this variable in the instrument. Have reasonable entry requirements for its programmes was not included as its factor loading was less than

110 There are seven items in Factor 3, namely, Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources. It consists of Provide students with a safe condition for study, Provide students with all the necessary resources that are required for their education, Provide students with an expected social life on campus, Provide students with an environment that is conducive to learning, Be situated in an ideal location, Provide students with a clean study environment, and Have exceptional quality of faculty members. Factor 4 comprises Provide students with information regarding application processes, Make information easily available to students from time to time, Provide students with information regarding post-graduate studies, Provide students with information regarding their area of study, and Provide students with information regarding career opportunities. This factor is categorized as Institutional Information. All items within this variable have relatively high loading value compared to other variables, with above Items such as Well recognized by respected industries, Well recognized by professional bodies, and Well known for the reputation are included in factor 5, which is classified as Value of Education. Factor 6 consists of Make financial aid available to its students and Make scholarships available to its students. These two items are categorized under the variable of Cost of Education in this study. In general, the overall results of factor analysis for the independent variables is reasonable, and supports the proposed questionnaire. The identified six factors accounted for 68.44% of the total variance explained. Thus, this finding revealed an acceptable result, as all the proposed items of the independent variables in the 89

111 instrument are valid; it means the measurement measured what it is supposed to measure in this study Dependent Variables The results of the KMO and Bartlett s Test for independent variable are shown in Table The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value is 0.75, exceeding the minimum value of 0.60 (Kaiser 1970, 1974), and Bartlett s Test of Sphericity (Bartlett 1954) reached statistically significant, supporting the factorability of the correlation matrix. Table 5.14: KMO and Bartlett s Test for dependent variable Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy..750 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df 15 Sig..000 In the principal components analysis (PCA), a total of six items listed under dependent variable were subjected to analysis. Results revealed only the components with eigenvalues exceeding 1, explaining 54.2% of the variance; these are shown in Table Furthermore, an inspection of the scree plot shown in Figure 5.9 revealed a clear break after the first component. A complete component matrix result for dependent variables is shown in Table The results clearly indicate that only one factor was measured from the items in the dependent variable, which is Intention to study at a HEI. This factor comprises five items comprising The likelihood to further my studies at HEI is high, I am willing to spend for studying in a HEI, I will say favourable things about the HEI I chose, I am willing to pay at a high rate for the HEI I choose, and I have a strong interest to pursue my studies at a HEI 90

112 Table 5.15: Total variance explained for items in dependent variable Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Table 5.16: Component matrix result for dependent variable Component 1 The likelihood to further my study at HEI is high.876 I am willing to spend for studying in a HEI.822 I will say favourable things about the HEI I chose.809 I am willing to pay at a high rate for the HEI I choose.696 I have a strong interest to pursue my studies at a HEI.696 Scree Plot 4 3 Eigenvalue Component Number Figure 5.9: Screen plot for items in dependent variable 91

113 In conclusion, the measureable items performed in this study reflect the validity of the instruments, as well as the defined variables. Hence, this instrument is acceptable to measure the population as the proposed concepts are aligned with the objective in this research. 5.7 Reliability Test Reliability is concerned with estimates of the degree to which a measurement is free of random or unstable error (Donald and Pamela, 2003). Besides, the reliability of a measure indicates the extent to which it is without bias (error free) and, hence, ensures consistent measurement across time and across the various items in the instruments. The reliability of the scales instrument employed in this study was investigated through the Cronbach s alpha coefficient test. The reliability of a measure is an indication of the stability and consistency of the extent that the instrument measures the concept and helps to assess the goodness of a measure (Sekaran, 2003). Briefly, reliability tests show how consistently a measuring instrument measures a particular concept. There are two frequently used indicators of a scale s reliability in research; they are the test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Test-retest reliability is concerned with the reliability coefficient obtained with a repetition of the same measure on a second occasion (Sekaran, 2003). Whereas the internal consistency refers to the degree to which the items that make up the scale are all measuring the same underlying attribute (Pallan, 2003). 92

114 In this study, Cronbach s alpha coefficient was used to measure the internal consistency of the scales employed in this survey. The Cronbach s alpha value for each variable is shown in Table Table 5.17: Cronbach s alpha value of variables Variable Number of item Cronbach s alpha Value IV Cost of Education IV Degree (Content and Structure) IV Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources IV Value of Education IV Institutional Information IV People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) DV Intention to study at a HEI Table 5.17 shows that all the variables except the cost of education revealed Cronbach s alpha Values greater than As Nunnally (1978) and DeVellis (2003) recommend a minimum level of 0.70, the scale of the six variables can be considered as having high reliability. Also, the Cronbach s alpha values are dependent on the number of items. Pallant (2007) cited that when there are a small number of items in the scale, for instance fewer than ten items, it is common to find low Cronbach s alpha values (i.e. 0.50). The results show that those items under the variable of cost of education contribute a Cronbach s alpha value of 0.65, which is lower than the minimum level of In this case, it is more appropriate to report the mean inter-item correlation for the items within the variable, see Table Briggs and Cheek (1986) recommend an optimal range for the inter-item correlation of 0.20 to Accordingly, half of the mean value of items within the 93

115 variable fall within this optimal range. Additionally, a minimum Cronbach s alpha value cut-off point of 0.60 is common in social-science research (Cohen, 1988). As a result, the scale of this variable is acceptable to be considered as reliable in this study. Table 5.18: Inter-Item Correlation Matrix for variable: Cost of Education Provide education at a reasonable cost Make financial aids available to its students Make scholarships available to its students Make flexible payment of fee to its students Make accommodation available to its students at reasonable cost Provide education at a reasonable cost Make financial aids available to its students Make scholarships available to its students Make flexible payment of fee to its students Make accommodation available to its students at reasonable cost In conclusion, the findings of both the validity and the reliability tests support the appropriateness of the instrument used throughout this study. In other words, the items in the variables are valid and reliable to measure the concept that they are supposed to measure. Therefore, the outcome of the instrument is suitable for a higher level of analyses such as inferential and differential analysis. 94

116 5.8 Correlation Analysis In this section, Pearson s correlation is used to explore the relationship between the independent variables (IVs) and the dependent variable (DV). Correlation coefficients are able to provide a numerical summary of the direction and the strength of the linear relationship between the IVs and the DV. Pearson s correlation coefficients (r) range from -1 to +1 and the sign in front indicates whether there is a positive or negative correlation. The size of the absolute value provides information on the strength of the relationship (Pallant, 2007). The findings of correlations between the independent variables and the dependent variable are summarized in Table Table 5.19: The correlations between the independent variables and the dependent variable (N =480) Intention to study, DV Cost of education, IV 1 Pearson Correlation 0.11** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.02 Degree (content and structure), IV 2 Pearson Correlation 0.20** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Physical aspects, facilities and resources, IV 3 Pearson Correlation 0.09** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.04 Value of education, IV 4 Pearson Correlation 0.18** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Institutional information, IV 5 Pearson Correlation 0.10** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.03 People (Family, friends, peers and teachers, IV 6 Pearson Correlation 0.16** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Cost of education (IV 1 ) There is a significant, weak and positive correlation between the Cost of Education and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (r = 0.11, p <.01). This correlation shows that the more reasonable the cost of education offered by a higher 95

117 educational institute, the higher the students intention to further their study at the institute. Degree (Content and Structure) (IV 2 ) Similar to the cost of education, there is a significant, weak and positive correlation between the Degree (Content and Structure and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (r = 0.20, p <.01). This correlation indicates that a higher educational institute that is able to provide students with a wide range of courses and more specialist programmes will attract more students intention to further their study at the institute. Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources (IV 3 ) There is a significant, weak and positive correlation between the Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (r = 0.09, p <.01). This correlation reveals that the better the physical aspects and facilities provided by a higher educational institute to its students the more able it is to retain more students intention to study at the institute. Value of Education (IV 4 ) There is a significant, weak and positive correlation between the Value of Education and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (r = 0.18, p <.01). This correlation shows that the higher the possibility that a higher educational institute has a good reputation and ability to deliver high academic value in their programme, the higher the students intention to continue their study at the institute. 96

118 Institutional Information (IV 5 ) The correlation between the Institutional Information and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution is significant, weak and positive (r = 0.10, p <.01). This correlation indicates that the higher the ability of a higher educational institute to provide comprehensive and relevant information regarding study, the students are more likely to further their study at the institute. People (Family, Friends and Peers and Teachers) (IV 6 ) There is a significant, weak and positive correlation between the People (Family, Friends and Peer) and the Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (r = 0.16, p <.01). This correlation shows that the higher the influence of the respondents significant people such as family members, friends, peers and teachers, the higher the students intention to continue their study at the institute. 5.9 Multiple Regression Analysis In this section, a multiple regression analysis was performed to determine the predictor and its contribution towards the criterion. In other words, it is to find out the prediction of a single dependent continuous variable from a group of independent variables. In order to ensure the appropriateness of the outputs from the regression analysis, the assumptions of multiple regression must comply. In this case, the normality, linearity, homoscedasticity, multicollinearity, autocorrelation, and multivariate outlier, all refer to the various aspects of the distribution of scores and the nature of the underlying relationship between the variables. These assumptions were 97

119 checked by inspecting the Normal Probability Plot (P-P) of the Regression Standard Residual, Scatter plot, and other tests that complement the regression analysis. According to the histogram of the intention to study at a higher educational institution (see Appendix II), the data of the dependent variable is normally distributed. Hence, it ensures the normality of the sample. In addition, sample normality is further demonstrated by a Normal P-P of the Regression Standard Residual, as shown in Figure Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual Dependent Variable: Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (HEI) 1.0 Expected Cum Prob Observed Cum Prob Figure 5.10: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual for dependent variable In the Normal P-P plot, points are laid in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right. It indicates no major deviation from normality. 98

120 On the other hand, from the scatted plot of residuals in Figure 5.11, the residuals are roughly rectangularly distributed, with most of the scores concentrated in the centre along the 0 axes. (red line). The findings indicate that the predictors (independent variables) are linearly related to the residual of the criterion (dependent variable). Therefore, the homoscedasticity of the sample is ensured. The findings show that no outliers are detected as no score has a standardized residual of more than 3.3 or less than Scatterplot Dependent Variable: Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (HEI) Regression Standardized Residual Regression Standardized Predicted Value Figure 5.11: The scatter plot of residuals observed value and predicted value In addition, in the collinearity statistic tests all three predictors have tolerance values greater than 0.10, and variance inflection factor, (VIF) values less than 10. It reveals that there is no multicollinearity between the variables. The Durbin-Watson value in this analysis is 1.54, which falls in the range of 1.5 to 2.5, indicating that 99

121 there is no autocorrelation in the residual. The Mahalanobis adjustment is performed to encounter the potential multivariate outliers in the computed data. In conclusion, all the assumptions were complied with throughout the regression analysis. Hence, the appropriateness of these findings is ensured. After all the assumptions were complied with, the multiple regression analysis was carried out. The results of the multiple regression are shown in Table 5.20 to Table Table 5.20: Multiple correlation of independent variables with dependent variable Model Summary d Change Statistics Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change Durbin- Watson 1.199(a) (b) (c) a. Predictors: (Constant), Degree (Content and Structure) b. Predictors: (Constant), Degree (Content and Structure), People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) c. Predictors: (Constant), Degree (Content and Structure), People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers), Cost of Education d. Dependent Variable: Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (HEI) There are multiple correlations (R =.28) of three significant predictors with the criterion (dependent variable), as shown in Table From the model, factors that influence students intention to study at a HEI are degree (content and structure), people (family, friends, peers and teachers), and cost of education. The three factors have a significant effect size that explains 7.90 percent of the variability towards the intention to study at a HEI. The adjusted R 2 indicates that in the population, the three factors account for 7.30% of the variance in respondents intention to study at a HEI. 100

122 A total of 92.70% of the variance of the criterion is unaccounted for. Table 5.21 reveals this regression is significant (F 3, 476 = 13.58, p <.01). Table 5.21: Significances of Independent variables ANOVA d Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 3 Regression (c) Residual Total c. Predictors: (Constant), Degree (Content and Structure), People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers), Cost of Education d. Dependent Variable: Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (HEI) Model Table 5.22: Regression coefficients and significance of independent variables Coefficients a Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Collinearity Statistics Std. Error Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF B 3 (Constant) Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) a. Dependent Variable: Intention to Study at a Higher Educational Institution (HEI) Table 5.22 indicates that only three significant predictors out of six independent variables are positively related to the criterion in the regression. They are degree (content and structure), IV 2 (t = 4.40, p <.01), People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers), IV 6 (t = 3.42, p <.01), and Cost of Education, IV 1 (t = 1.81, p <.05). 101

123 The degree (content and structure) has the highest regression coefficient, 0.19 (95% CI = 0.11 to 0.28), followed by people (family, friends, peers and teachers), 0.18 (95% CI = 0.05 to 0.18), and cost of education, 0.11 (95% CI = 0.07 to 0.30). [Confidence level, CI please refer to Appendix III] Effects from other predictors are insignificant in this set of combinations, and those factors are not included in the multiple regression equation. Therefore the multiple regression equation is as follows: DV = IV IV IV 6 Where, DV = Intention to study at a HEI. IV 1 = Cost of Education IV 2 = Degree (Content and Structure) IV 6 = People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) The beta value indicates that one unit increase in degree (content and structure) will result in an increase in the respondents intention to study by 0.19 units. If the influences from significant people such as family, friends, peers and teachers increases by one unit, the respondents intention to study will increase by 0.11 units. If the reasonability of cost of education increases by one unit, respondents intention to study will increase by 0.19 units. The relationship and implications are further discussed in Chapter

124 5.10 Independent Sample t-test An independent sample t-test was carried out to identify the differences between respondents gender on the perceived importance of factors that influence their study intention towards a HEI. The results of the independent sample t-test are shown in Table Table 5.23: Independent sample t-test result for male and female respondent towards proposed variables Variable Male ( N = 202) Female ( N = 278) t P <.05 Cost of Education Mean Sig S.D Degree (Content and Structure) Mean NS S.D Physical Aspects, Facilities Mean Sig and Resources S.D Value of Education Mean Sig S.D Institutional Information Mean NS S.D People (Family, Friends, Peers Mean NS and Teachers) S.D Intention to Study Mean Sig S.D * Note: S.D. = Standard Deviation, Sig = Significant, NS = Not Significant According to Table 5.23, four out of seven variables are significantly different between the gender of the respondent s. These variables are cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and intention to study. The other three variables degree (content and structure), institutional information, 103

125 and people (family, friends, peers, and teachers) remain insignificant. Furthermore, the findings show that all variables have a small effect size. In terms of cost of education, female respondents exhibit a higher mean score than male respondents. This indicates that female students place more importance on the cost of education in their HEI choice compared to male students. Furthermore, the results reveal similar outcomes to the cost of education for three other variables: physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and intention to study. Female students tend to be more concerned with these attributes, which affect their HEI selection. The result is supported by findings from previous studies; females are more comprehensive in evaluating information and often consider more attributes than males in their decision making (Meyers-Levy et al., 1991). Moreover, the findings show that female students have a relatively high willingness to further their study to tertiary level. The further discussions are presented in Chapter One-way Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA) In this study, One-way ANOVA was used to investigate the significant difference between respondents academic background on perceived importance of factors that influence their study intention towards a HEI. The use of One-way ANOVA is to compare the variance between the different groups of respondents academic background with the variability within each of the groups (analysis of variance). In general, One-way ANOVA shows whether or not the means of the various groups are significantly different from one another, as indicated by the F statistical value. The F value shows whether two sample variances differ from each other or if 104

126 they are from the same population. The F distribution is a probability distribution of sample variances and the family of distributions changes with the changes in sample size. In order words, the F value is the ratio of the variance between groups divided by the variance within groups. Therefore, the greater the likelihood of between-group variance compared with within-group variance, the greater the probability that the means of the groups will be different (Sekaran et al., 2000). In brief, One-way ANOVA was performed through two steps. In the first step the significance of F value was determined. The F values were obtained from overall ANOVA. The second step was the multiple comparisons between groups. However, these comparisons were only applicable to those variables that were found to have a significant difference in overall ANOVA; those variables with a significant F value. In this section, the Scheffe test was used to compare the significant difference between respondents academic background; STPM/Form Six, GCE A-Level, and L.O.U. (comprising all other courses). The mean difference between groups indicated whether groups were statistically significantly different from one another. In addition, the Scheffe test was able to identify the strength of those differences. The results for the F value and effect size for each variable are presented in Table 5.24; the comparison between groups is shown in Table Table 5.24: One-way ANOVA, F values and effect size Variable F P <.05 Cost of Education Sig Degree (Content and Structure) Sig Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources 6.01 Sig Value of Education Sig Institutional Information 2.01 NS People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Sig Intention to Study 1.79 NS * Note: Sig = Significant, NS = Not Significant 105

127 Table 5.25: One-way ANOVA, comparison between groups Respondent s Qualification (I) Group Respondent s Qualification (J) Mean Difference (I-J) P <.05 Variable Cost of Education STPM GCE A-Level 0.16 Sig STPM L.O.U Sig GCE A-Level L.O.U Sig Degree (Content and Structure) STPM GCE A-Level Sig STPM L.O.U Sig GCE A-Level L.O.U Sig Physical Aspects, Facilities and STPM GCE A-Level Sig Resources STPM L.O.U NS GCE A-Level L.O.U Sig Value of Education STPM GCE A-Level Sig STPM L.O.U Sig GCE A-Level L.O.U Sig Institutional Information STPM GCE A-Level NS STPM L.O.U NS GCE A-Level L.O.U NS People (Family, Friends, Peers STPM GCE A-Level Sig and Teachers) STPM L.O.U Sig GCE A-Level L.O.U NS Intention to Study STPM GCE A-Level NS STPM L.O.U NS GCE A-Level L.O.U NS * Note: L.O.U. = Local Matriculation, Overseas Pre-U, University Foundation Programme, Sig = Significant, NS = Not Significant The results revealed that five out of seven variables are significantly different among the respondent s academic background. These variables are cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and people (family, friends, peers and teachers). The other two variables remained insignificant. In terms of their effect size, degree (content and structure) and value of education have a large effect size, followed by a moderate effect size for cost 106

128 of education and people (family, friends, peers and teachers). The variable which has the significant smallest effect size is physical aspects, facilities and resources. Further, from the results of group comparisons, students with STPM/Form six backgrounds are more concerned with the cost of education than students with GCE A-Level backgrounds and L.O.U.. Nevertheless, within the same variable, students with GCE A-Level place a higher importance on the cost of education compared to students with L.O.U. academic backgrounds. The detail of the comparison is summarized in Table 5.26, and the further discussion is presented in Chapter 6. Table 5.26: Findings from comparison of groups Variable Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Significant Difference from Comparison of Groups Students with STPM qualification place highest importance, followed by students with GCE A- Level, and students with L.O.U. qualifications STPM > GCE A-Level > L.O.U.. Students with GCE A-Level qualification place highest importance, followed by students with L.O.U. qualifications, and students with STPM qualification. GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Students with GCE A-Level qualification place higher importance than students with STPM and L.O.U. qualification. No significant difference found between students with STPM and L.O.U. qualification. GCE A-Level > STPM GCE A-Level > L.O.U. 107

129 Variable Value of Education Significant Difference from Comparison of Groups Students with GCE A-Level qualification place highest importance, followed by students with L.O.U. qualifications, and students with STPM qualification. GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Students with GCE A-Level and L.O.U. qualifications place higher importance than students with STPM qualification. GCE A-Level > STPM L.O.U. > STPM 5.12 Conclusion of the Chapter All the performed analyses were extensively discussed throughout this chapter. Normality tests indicate that the sample is normally distributed. The factor analysis and Cronbach s alpha coefficient test confirm the validity and reliability of the instrument employed in the present study. Correlation analysis and multiple linear regression were carried out to establish the relationships between IVs and DV. Mean Difference analyses were performed to identify the significant differences between the respondent s gender as well as academic background towards the importance placed on a HEI. The further discussions of those findings are presented in Chapter

130 CHAPTER 6 Discussion and Conclusion 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Discussion of Results Normality Tests Descriptive Analysis Validity and Reliability Test Pearson s Correlation Multiple Regression Independent Sample t-test One-Way ANOVA 6.3 Conclusion 6.4 Implications 6.5 Recommendations 6.6 Contribution of the Study 6.7 Suggestion for Future Research 6.8 Conclusion of the Chapter

131 Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literature Review Chapter 3 Conceptual Model Chapter 4 Research Methodology Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Findings Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Discussion of Results 6.3 Conclusion 6.4 Implications 6.5 Recommendations 6.5 Contribution of the Study 6.7 Suggestion for Future Research 6.8 Conclusion of the Chapter

132 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 6.1 Introduction This chapter presents in depth discussions on the findings obtained from Chapter 5. The conclusion of the study discusses whether the findings support the proposed hypotheses, answer the research questions, and achieve the research objectives. Implications and recommendations are provided for HEI marketers to gain insights into crafting their strategies for student recruitment. The contributions of the study are discussed based on theoretical, methodological and practical approaches. Lastly, suggestions for future research are presented in this chapter. 6.2 Discussion of Results Normality Tests According to the findings obtained from the analyses of sample normality, both graphical and statistical results reflect the positive approach. Hence, the overall results of the normality tests confirm that the sample used in this study is normally distributed. This result reveals that the sample is well defined and the stratified convenience sampling method is appropriate for the present study. Consequently, the homoscedasticity of the sample is ensured and the sample is representative of the real population. Thus, the findings of this study can be confidently generalized to the population. 109

133 6.2.2 Descriptive Analysis Comparison of Means In the descriptive analysis of the means of all items for each variable, all items revealed mean scores of more than 3.00 (Table 5.5). Responses to the items were measured on a five-point Likert scale where 1 means Strongly Disagree and 5 means Strongly Agree. Hence, the findings show that the majority of the respondents agreed with the importance of the proposed items. Therefore, these items are significant to their decision making when choosing a HEI to attend. The means of all computed items variables are more than 3.00 (Table 5.6). The results indicate that, in general, most of the respondents agreed with the importance of all the proposed variables as influencing their study intention towards a HEI. In the comparison of means between variables, Physical aspects, facilities and resources has the highest mean score, followed by institutional information. Cost of education, Degree (content and structure) and People (family, friends, peers and teachers) have similar means, which are about Subsequently, value of education has the lowest mean score compared to the others. The findings reveal that students place more importance on the HEI s physical aspects such as the location, conducive learning atmosphere, recreation and sports, cleanliness, safe environment, campus social life, facilities, and quality faculty members. In addition, students also place importance on the ability of the HEI to provide relevant information. Information such as on-time application processes, area of study of offered programmes, future job prospects and career opportunities, and possibility of post-graduate studies upon the completion of the programme. 110

134 Students consider the value of education as being relatively of less importance to them. The reputation of the HEI, recommendations from academic institutions, professional bodies, and industries are of less consequence to Malaysian students in the selection of a HEI. This finding contrasts with the earlier study by Krishnan and Nurtjahja (2007); a study of evaluative criteria for selection of PHEIs in Malaysia. In their research, they found that private universities students placed highest importance on the variable of Recognition and reputation of the institution (with a mean score of 3.73). This phenomenon can be explained by the different samples used in the respective studies. Krishnan and Nurtjahja (2007) defined their targeted sample as students who were studying in private universities and colleges. Whereas, the targeted sample of the present study is tudents who are attending pre-university programmes. Specifically, this group of students has not made their decision on the selection of a HEI; they are potential customers of HEIs instead of existing students of HEIs. Moreover, as discussed in Chapter 2, the nature of education is closely related to service. According to Hoffman (2006) and Lovelock (2007), because of the four basic service characteristics (intangibility, inseparability, heterogeneity and perishability), an evaluation of a service can only take place when the service is completely delivered, and the customer experiences the service instead of gaining something from the service. Therefore, in the service industry, it is often found that the customer perceives the value and importance of a service as different between the before and after actual purchase. In other words, the perceived value of customers alters over the service delivery process. In the previous study, students have chosen 111

135 PHEIs as their study destination; however, students in the present study have not decided to attend either a public HEI or PHEI. It shows that students in the previous study were more focused on PHEIs. Thus, those students will have a distinct perceived importance of the HEI they choose compared to the students in this study. The findings of the previous study are in line with the findings obtained from differential analysis of the students academic background in this study. The further discussion is presented in section The dependent variable, intention to study has a high computed mean value of 3.93, which is higher than all the independent variables. This finding indicates that respondents have a high interest in pursuing their tertiary education. Their intention to continue their studies at a HEI in the near future is assumed. In sum, based on the computed mean value for each variable, the proposed six factors in this study affect the students intention to study at a HEI. Ranking Order of Important Factors According to Table 5.10, Malaysian students place the cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources of a HEI, and the influences from significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) as the first three most important criteria that concerns them in their further study decision. As a matter of fact, results show that Malaysian students have a significantly different perception of their intention to study at a HEI compared to other nations. Joseph and Joseph (1998, 2000) have carried out two similar studies of ranking order in two different cultural frameworks, namely, New Zealand and Indonesia. The comparisons of ranking order of importance for three distinct nations are shown in Table

136 Table 6.1: Comparison of ranking order of importance for three distinct nations Rank New Zealand, Year 1998 (N = 216) Indonesia, Year 2000 (N = 110) Malaysia, Year 2009 (N = 480) 1 Value of Education Course and Career Cost of Education Information** 2 Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspect, Facilities and Resources Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources 3 Cost of Education Cost of Education People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) 4 Physical Aspect, Facilities and Resources Degree (Content and Structure) Degree (Content and Structure) 5 General* Value of Education Value of Education 6 N.A. N.A. Institutional Information Note: *Consists of institutional information and influences from significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) **Includes influences from people (family, friends, peers and teachers) N.A. = Not Applicable The comparison shows that students from the different nations have distinctive perceptions of the varying importance in their further study intention. Thus, HEI marketing strategies will also vary from nation to nation. Some factors may be the main focus in some countries while they may be of low significance in others. Therefore, it is important to understand the psyche of students in the nation that affects their intention to study at a particular HEI. In order words, there is no one size fits most strategy for the education industry. The perceived importance for Malaysian students is similar to Indonesian students. The only difference is that cost of education ranked as the primary concern for Malaysian students, whereas it was ranked number three by Indonesian students. This is probably because Indonesia and Malaysia are located in the same region. These two neighbouring countries often have similarities in their cultural 113

137 frameworks. It is not surprising that students from both these countries share some common perceived importance factors that influence their study intention Comparatively, Malaysian students are assumed to be more cost conscious than other nations. Students are willing to enrol in a HEI that provides education at a reasonable cost. Furthermore, students are likely to prefer a HEI that provides them with financial aid. Despite this, however, the physical aspect, facilities and resources of a HEI was ranked as the second most important by both Malaysian and Indonesian students. It may be concluded that ASEAN students prefer a HEI if they foresee that the HEI has the ability to provide adequate facilities and resources for them. Malaysian students study intention is influenced by a group of significant people, such as family members, friends, peers, teachers, counsellors, relatives, etc. This result is consistent with the findings from previous studies; personnel influence on Asian students choice of HEI (McMahon, 1992; Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002; Pimpa, 2003, Chen and Zimitat, 2006). Studies found that the influences from significant personnel are more persuasive to Asian students, and that it does play an important role in students choice of HEI in the Asian context. According to Table 6.1, in comparison with New Zealand students, Malaysian students show little concern for the content and structure of the degree, and the value of the education. This fact is further supported by the outcome of an earlier study. David and Anne (2007) cited that non-malaysian students typically selected a HEI as an aid to procuring a new identity. They found that this group of students viewed HE with the hope of expunging provincial outlooks. These students wanted new ways of viewing the world, new habits of thinking and new skills and approaches. As a result, 114

138 New Zealand students placed greater importance on the value of education and the degree (content and structure) obtained. They are much appreciative of the value and the knowledge that can be gained from education. Thus, the appropriateness of the reputation, organization, and content of degree is more significant to New Zealand students compared to Malaysian students. In summary, HEI authorities may use these findings regarding Malaysian students perceived importance. In strategic planning, this finding may be useful in managing the students priorities of the influencing factors. Ultimately, it helps to achieve the goal of education that is beneficial to both HEIs and students Validity and Reliability Test The validity and reliability of the instrument employed in this study were investigated through factor analysis and Cronbach s alpha coefficient test, respectively. The results exhibit that a total of six IVs are identified from a pool of 36 items, and only one DV, which consists of six items. Generally, IVs and the DV in this study have high Cronbach s alpha values, which are above 0.70, except the variable cost of education (0.65). Nevertheless, this variable is still considered as reliable as the majority of the mean values of items within this variable fall within the optimal range for the inter-item correlation of 0.20 to In conclusion, the validity and reliability test ensure the appropriateness of this instrument. The instrument is reliable and valid in measuring the concepts proposed in this study. Moreover, it proves that the adaption and further modification of the instrument are applicable in the present study. 115

139 6.2.4 Pearson s Correlation According to Table 5.21, the results reveal that all independent variables (IV 1 to IV 6 ) are weak (<0.30) and positively correlated with the dependent variable at the high significance level p <.01. Hence, there is a significant relationship between each independent variable (IV 1 to IV 6 ) and the dependent variable Multiple Regression Based on the findings obtained from the multiple linear regression analysis in Chapter 5, the multiple regression equation is as follows: DV = IV IV IV 6 Where, DV = Intention to study at a HEI. IV 1 = Cost of Education IV 2 = Degree (Content and Structure) IV 6 = People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) There are three significant predictors presented in this model. Content and structure of degree offered by a HEI has the highest coefficient value meaning that the content and the structure of the degree has the highest contribution level towards students intention to study at a HEI. The second highest contribution predictor is cost of education, followed by influence from significant people such as family members, friends, peers and teachers. The remaining predictors are insignificant predictors in the intention to study at a HEI. These silent predictors are physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and institutional information. 116

140 This finding is almost in line with the ranking order of students perceived importance. Students ranked cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources, people (family, friends, peers and teachers) and degree (content and structure) as the four most important factors in the decision making of choosing a HEI. The only difference is that the physical aspects, facilities and resources is the silent predictor in the multiple regression analysis. Based on the regression equation, the constant value is 2.00, which is greater than zero. This means that the respondents have a strong predisposition to further their study even without the stimulus from proposed important factors. Furthermore, this constant value is higher than all the coefficient values of the three predictors. To a certain extent, these predictors may only act as some encouragement to motivate students in choosing a particular HEI. Taking into account the findings of the Pearson s correlation and multiple regression, the present study concludes that the proposed factors have a positive relationship towards Malaysian students intention to study at a HEI. More specifically, all the proposed factors appear to be important attributes in students HEI selection. However, only three factors are the determinant attributes that distinguish the intention to attend a particular HEI instead of others. For example, perhaps, Malaysian students assume that if the HEI is able to offer certain programmes, the HEI must have sufficient capabilities such as facilities, resources, and faculty members to support the administration of those programmes. As a result, the physical aspect of a HEI may not be a key attribute that students see as a significant difference among competing alternatives. 117

141 In summary, there are three key determinant attributes that affect students intention to study at a HEI. These attributes are cost of education, content and structure of the degree, and influences from significant people such as family members, friends, peers and teachers. Thus, the proposed hypothesis (H7) is rejected due to some proposed predictors being insignificant in the multiple regression analysis. In conclusion, based on the results of the multiple regression, the first, second and sixth hypothesis (H1, H2 and H6) are accepted, whereas the third, fourth and fifth hypothesis (H3, H4 and H5) are rejected Independent Sample t-test According to Table 5.25, four out of seven proposed variables are significantly different between the gender of the respondents. These variables are cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and intention to study. The other three variables degree (content and structure), institutional information, and people (family, friends, peers, and teachers) are not significantly different between male and female students. Generally, the mean difference shows that female students are more concerned with these three important attributes than male students. Also, the findings reveal that female students have a higher intention to further their study at a HEI than male students. This result is consistent with earlier studies regarding the gender differences in shopping behaviour (Meyers-Levy et al., 1991; Mansfield and Warwick, 2005). Those studies indicated that females attempt to engage in effortful, itemized analysis of all available information giving equal weight to information of attributes relevant 118

142 to self and others; whereas, males tend to rely on a single cue or a cue that is highly available and particularly salient in the focal context. Hence, this could help explain why female students take more consideration on these important attributes than male students in the HEI context. Furthermore, the findings indicate that Malaysian female students often engage in comprehensive processing of information, and exhaustive evaluation of important attributes. Consequently, HEI marketers may take this finding into consideration for designing and managing integrated marketing communications (IMC) for potential students, especially female students One-Way ANOVA According to Table 5.24, the results reveal that five out of seven variables are significantly different between respondent s academic backgrounds. These variables are cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and people (family, friends, peers and teachers). The other two variables are not significantly different between students academic backgrounds. In the variable of cost of study, students with a STPM background present higher mean values compared to students with A-levels and other academic backgrounds. This shows that STPM students are more concerned with financial consumption during their study compared to others. In addition, students with an A- level background also have a higher mean value than students with other academic backgrounds. 119

143 It is apparent that students with an A-level background view the content and structure of the degree offered by a HEI as typical compared to students with the other two different academic backgrounds. This finding indicates that A-level students are more conscious of the availability and suitability of the offered courses by a HEI. Moreover, students with other backgrounds also have a higher mean value than students with STPM backgrounds. In the variable of physical aspects, facilities and resources, students with A- level background reveal a significantly higher mean value compared to students with STPM and other academic backgrounds. This result indicates that A-level students consider the facilities and physical aspects that a HEI could offer them as important. Nonetheless, there is no significant difference between STPM students and other academic background students in the perceived importance of a HEIs physical aspects. Furthermore, students with A-level background view the value of education as more important compared to students from the other two academic backgrounds. This output indicates that A-level students are more appreciative of the importance and principles of quality education. Additionally, students with other backgrounds also have a higher mean value than students with STPM backgrounds. In conclusion, male and female students, and students with different academic background place significantly different importance on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. Hence, there is sufficient evidence supporting the two hypotheses (H7 and H8). Thus, these hypotheses are accepted in this study. The discussion of differential analyses is summarized in Table

144 Table 6.2: Summary of findings from differential analyses Variable Cost of Education Degree (Content and Structure) Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources Value of Education Institutional Information People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) Intention to Study Gender Female students are more cost conscious than male students No significant difference between male and female students Female students are more concerned than male students Female students appreciate the value more than male students No significant difference between male and female students No significant difference between male and female students Female students have higher intention than males Difference Academic Background STPM students place highest importance, followed by A-level, and L.O.U., as follows: STPM > GCE A-Level > L.O.U. A-level students place highest importance, followed by L.O.U., and STPM, as follows: GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM A-level students place more importance than STPM and L.O.U.. No significant difference between STPM and L.O.U.. As follows: GCE A-Level > STPM GCE A-Level > L.O.U. A-level students place highest importance, followed by L.O.U., and STPM, as follows: GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM No Significant difference between students from different academic background A-level and L.O.U. students place more importance than STPM students. No significant difference between A- level and L.O.U.. As follows: GCE A-Level > STPM L.O.U. > STPM No Significant difference between students from different academic background 121

145 6.3 Conclusion According to the findings from the inferential analyses, all proposed IVs are significant and positively correlated to the DV. Therefore, the first to sixth proposed hypotheses (H1 to H6) in this study are accepted. In addition, the eighth and ninth proposed hypotheses (H7 and H8) are also accepted. This statement is supported by the findings of the present study that reveal a significant difference between students gender and academic backgrounds on their perceived important factors for selecting a HEI. The overall result of the hypotheses testing is presented in Table 6.3. To answer the first research question (Q1), the significant factors influencing students intention to study at a HEI are cost of education, degree (content and structure), and people (family, friends, peers, and teachers). The factor of degree (content and structure) has the highest impact on students intention to study at a HEI, followed by cost of study, and people (family, friends, peers, and teachers). To answer the second research question (Q2), male and female students do differ significantly in the selection criteria that they consider important when choosing a HEI. Male and female students significantly differ in the following factors: cost of education, physical aspects, facilities and resources, and value of education. In general, female students place higher weight on these important factors. Additionally, female students reveal that they have a higher study intention than male students. Also, students from different academic backgrounds such as STPM, GCE A-level, and other academic backgrounds significantly differ in the selection criteria they consider important when choosing a HEI. These factors are cost of education, degree (content and structure), physical aspects, facilities and resources, value of education, and people (family, friends, peers and teachers). Generally, students from different 122

146 academic backgrounds tend to have distinctive opinions concerning the important factors affecting their choice of HEI. In conclusion, the present study is successful in testing the proposed hypotheses. Moreover, the research questions are answered as well as achieving the objectives of this study. In other words, this study is complete, and the findings of the study could be beneficial to both students (customers), and institutions (service providers). Table 6.3: Overall result of hypotheses testing H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 Hypothesis The cost of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI The content and structure of degree is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI The physical aspects, facilities and resources of an institution are a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI The value of education is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI The institutional information is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI The significant people (family, friends, peers and teachers) is a significant factor that influences students intention to study at a HEI Male and female students will differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. Students with different academic background will differ in the importance placed on the factors that influence students intention to study at a higher educational institution. Result Accepted Accepted Rejected Rejected Rejected Accepted Accepted Accepted 123

147 6.4 Implications Through this study, Malaysian students have shown the proposed variables that influence their intention to study at a HEI. As a result, it will be interesting to further investigate the impact of those variables on their study intention. Moreover, it may create a complete picture if the differences among students gender and academic backgrounds were defined. Therefore, findings from the analyses in this study are integrated in order to provide appropriate, meaningful, and comprehensive implications to HEI marketers as well as other researchers. The overall implications of this study are presented in Table 6.4. According to Table 6.4, there are six important factors that influence students in their HEI choice. In essence, it is suggested that HEI marketers focus more attention on the determinant factors such as cost of education, influences from significant people (family members, friends, peers and teachers), and content and structure of degree. Although all factors influence students HEI choice, to a certain extent, these significant factors are the key factors influencing their decision to attend a HEI. In order words, HEIs may develop their institutional positioning, and craft relevant strategies based on the findings accordingly. It will enable HEIs to gain certain insights and develop a competitive advantage over competitors. In fact, knowing the actual reason that students choose a HEI is the essential element that allows a HEI to be sustainable and survive in an increasingly competitive HE environment. 124

148 Rank Variable 1 Cost of Education 2 Physical Aspects, Facilities and Resources 3 People (Family, Friends, Peers and Teachers) 4 Degree (Content and Structure) 5 Value of Education 6 Institutional Information N.A. Intention to Study Table 6.4: Overall implication of findings from the present study Relationship with Difference study intention Impact Gender Academic Background Positive Significant factor Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Insignificant factor Significant factor Significant factor Insignificant factor Insignificant factor Female students are more cost conscious than male students Female students are more concerned than male students No significant difference between male and female students No significant difference between male and female students Female students appreciate the value more than male students No significant difference between male and female students N.A. N.A. Female students have higher intention than male students STPM students place highest importance, followed by A-level, and L.O.U., as follows: STPM > GCE A-Level > L.O.U. A-level students place more importance than STPM and L.O.U. students. No significant difference between STPM and L.O.U. students. As follows: GCE A-Level > STPM GCE A-Level > L.O.U. A-level and L.O.U. students place more importance than STPM students. No significant difference between A-level and L.O.U. students. As follows: GCE A-Level > STPM L.O.U. > STPM A-level students place highest importance, followed by L.O.U., and STPM, as follows: GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM A-level students place highest importance, followed by L.O.U., and STPM, as follows: GCE A-Level > L.O.U. > STPM No Significant difference between students from different academic background No Significant difference between students from different academic background Note: N.A. = Not Applicable 125

149 Furthermore, such findings assist marketers to plan and improve their marketing strategy for recruiting students. It may aid HEIs in Malaysia to retain Malaysian students and deter them from studying abroad. In addition, there is also a strong possibility of attracting foreign students to study in Malaysia. Thus, by doing this, Malaysia is able to reverse the outflow of funds and reduce the current service deficit. In order to achieve this goal, HEI authorities must understand the students needs and the HEI selection criteria. 6.5 Recommendations HE is a services industry and within this industry HEIs play a role as service providers with students as the customers. The decision made to study at a particular HEI is often referred to as a high purchase involvement. It is because the decision involves many people surrounding the student, and such decisions are normally associated with a higher perceived risk. Therefore, usually many attributes are taken into consideration by students in evaluating the HEI before a decision is made. According to the findings presented in this study, both the significant and insignificant factors are identified. Further, differences among students gender and academic background concerning these attributes are clearly defined. As a result, HEI authorities may make use of these findings to tailor their marketing elements with potential students needs. For instance, in this study students with STPM background are more sensitive to expenditure; HEIs could offer those students scholarships or other financial aid to reduce their perceived risk in selecting the HEI of their choice. 126

150 6.6 Contribution of the Study Theoretical The findings of this study prove that male and female students differ in the selection criteria that they consider important when choosing a HEI in the Malaysian context. This approach is in line with the theory proposed in previous studies (Shank and Beasley, 1998; Mansfield and Warwick, 2005). Furthermore, the findings reveal that students from different academic backgrounds differ in their perceived importance towards a HEI. This approach confirms that the assumption in a previous study by Elizabeth Ng (2003) is demonstrable. In her study, she found that Malaysian students from different courses at pre-university level have distinct selection criteria in selecting educational institutions abroad. Methodological The research instrument employed in this study is based on the adaption and further modification of previous studies (Cubillo et al., 2006; Joseph and Joseph, 1998; 2000; Zeithaml et al., 1996). This instrument has passed the validity and reliability tests in this study indicating that the adaption and modification of this instrument are appropriate. In other words, this is a new approach instrument, and is applicable in the Malaysian context. Practical The findings of this study can assist HEI authorities to have a better understanding regarding the factors that influence students intention to study at a HEI. This study discusses the difference between students gender and academic background concerning the important attributes. It enables HEI authorities to have a fuller comprehension of students needs. 127

151 6.7 Suggestion for Future Research Further research is suggested to investigate some other underlying concepts, as follows: 1. To identify gender difference in parents evaluative criteria when students are in the process of selecting a college. Mansfield and Warwick (2006) carried out a study that addressed differences by parent gender with regards to the HEI selection process in the United States. They found that male and female parents differ in the selection criteria and that it directly affects the students ultimate choice of HEI. In fact, the majority of Malaysian students studying in HEIs do so at the cost of their parents. It will be interesting to see whether such differences also arise in the Malaysian context. 2. In this study, the dependent variable: students intention to study did not specify whether the intention was to further their studies at a public or private HEI. As a matter of fact, students perceived values of public HEIs and PHEIs are very different. Krishman and Nurtjahja (2007) cited that PHEIs charge students a higher fee than public HEIs. Hence, the students evaluative criteria for a PHEI will be very different from that of a public HEI. Consequently, future research may be redesigned to include two parallel sets of questionnaires to measure the two distinct variables, namely, the intention to study at a public HEI and the intention to study at a PHEI. 128

152 3. To identify the differences among students socioeconomic factors concerning their intention to study at a HEI, future studies could compare the differences between students socioeconomic factors, such as ethnicity and family income, which may affect their intention to study at a HEI. 6.8 Conclusion of the Chapter The findings of the present study are extensively discussed in this chapter. Moreover, this chapter summarises the tasks completed in the present study by reporting the hypotheses testing, answering the research questions, and describing the achievement of the research objectives. Additionally, this chapter outlines some implications and recommendations for HEI authorities for gaining a better understanding of students needs. Finally, the chapter describes the contributions of the study, and then proposes some insights for future research. 129

153 References Abrahmson, T. and Hossler, D. (1990), Applying Marketing Strategies in Student Recruitment, The Strategic Management of College Enrollments. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Ahmed, Z.U., Johnson, J.P., Ling, C.P., Fang, T.W. and Hui, A.K. (2002), Country-of-origin and Brand Effect on Consumers Evaluations of Cruise Lines, International Marketing Review, Vol. 19, No. 2/3, pp Alexander, K.L. and Eckland, B.K. (1975), Basic Attainment Processes: A Replication and Extension, Sociology of Education, Vol. 48, pp Armstrong, J.J. and Lumsden, D.B. (1999), Impact of Universities Promotional Materials on College Choice, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp Anderson, E. and Sullivan, M. (1993), The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms, Marketing Science, Vol. 12, pp Annie Wong, M.N. and Hamali, J. (2006), Higher Education and Employment in Malaysia, International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp Baird, L. (1967), The Educational Tools of College Bound Youth, American College Testing Program Research Report, Iowa. Bakan, D. (1966), The Duality of Human Existence: An Essay on Psychology and Religion, Chicago. IL: Rand McNally Publishing Company. Bartlett, M.S. (1954), A Note on the Multiplying Factors for Various Chi Square Approximations, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 16, pp Bean, J.P. (1990), Why Students Leave: Insights from Research, The Strategic Management of Enrollment, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Becker, G.S. (1975), Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, New York Bureau of Economic Research, Columbia University. Bennet, D. (2006), The Effectiveness of Current Student Ambassadors in HE Marketing Recruitment and Retention, Paper Presented at the International Conference on HE marketing Cyprus, 3-5 January. Binsardi, A. and Ekwulugo, F. (2003), International Marketing of British Education: Research on the Students' Perception and the UK Market Penetration, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp Briggs, S.R. and Cheek, J.M. (1986), The Role of Factor analysis in the Development and Evaluation of Personality Scales, Journal of Personality, Vol. 54, pp

154 Bingham, F. (1989), Promotion: An Inseparable Part of the Marketing Effort, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp Borjas, G.J. (1994), The Economics of Immigration, Journal of Economic Literature, December, pp Bowers, T. and Pugh, R. (1972), A Comparison of Factors Underlying College Choice by Students and Parents, American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Brennan, L. (2001). How Prospective Students Choose Universities: A Buyer Behavior Perspective. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Australia. Brookes, M. (2003), Higher Education: Marketing in a Quasi-commercial Service Industry, International Journal of Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp Bourke, A. (2000), A Model of the Determinants of International Trade in Higher Education, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp Cabera, A.F., La Nasa, S.M. (2000), Understanding the College-Choice Process New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 107 San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Cabera, A.F., Nora, A. and Castaneda, M.B. (1992), The Role of Finances in the Persistence Process: A Structural Model, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 33, No. 5, pp Carpenter, P., and Fleishman, J. (1987), Linking intentions and behavior: Australian students college plans and college attendance, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 24, pp Carver, R.H., Nash, J.G. (2006), Doing Data Analysis with SPSS Version 14, Thomson Book Corporation, Canada. Cavana, R.Y., Delahaye, B.L. and Sekaran, U. (2000), Applied Business Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd., Singapore. Chapman, D. (1981), A Model of Student College Choice, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 52, pp Chapman, R. (1979), Pricing Policy and the College Choice Process, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 10, No. 37, p. 57. Chapman, R. (1986), Towards a Theory of College Selection: A Model of College Search and Choice Behaviour, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, Utah. Chen, C.H. and Zimitat, C. (2006), Understanding Taiwanese Students Decision-Making Factors Regarding Australian International Higher Education, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp

155 Choy, S.P. and Ottinger, C. (1998), Choosing a Postsecondary Institution. Statistical Analysis Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Cleopatra, V., John, W.L. and Robert, A.P. (2004), University Selection: Information Requirements and Importance, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp Coccari, R. and javalgi, R. (1995), Analysis of Students Needs in Selecting A College or University in a Changing Environment, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp Cohen, J.W. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd Edition, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Coleman, J. (1966). Peer Culture and Education in Modern Society, College Peer Groups: Problems and Prospects for Research. Chicago: Aldine. Connor, H. (2001), Deciding for or Against Participation on Higher Education: The View of Young People from Lower Social Class Backgrounds, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp Cook, R. and Zallocco, R. (1983), Predicting University Preference and Attendance, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp Cronin, J. and Taylor, S. (1992), " Measuring Service Quality: A Re-examination and Extension", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, July, pp Cubillo, J.M., Sanchez, J., Cervino, J. (2006), International Students Decision-making Process, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp Dawidow, W.H. and Uttal, B. (1989), Service Companies: Fows or Faller, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 67, July-August, pp.77. Dehne, G., Brodigan, D. and Topping, P. (1991), Marketing Higher Education: A Handbook for College Administrators, Washington, DC: Consortium for the Advancement of Private Higher Education. DeVellis, R.F. (2003), Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 2nd Edition, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Discenza, R., Ferguson, J. and Wisner, R. (1985), Marketing Higher Education: Using A Situation Analysis to Identify Prospective Student Needs in Today's Competitive Environment, NASPA, Vol. 22, pp Donald, R.C. and Pamela, S.C. (2003), Business Research Methods, McGraw-Hill Inc., United State. Elizabeth Ng P.P. (2003), Factor Affecting Students When Selecting Education Institutions Abroad, unpublished MBA Dissertation, University Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. 132

156 Ennew, C., Reed, G. and Binks, M. (1993), Importance-performance Analysis and the Measurement of Service Quality, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp Falsey, B. and Haynes, B. (1984), The College Cannel: Private and Public Schools Reconsidered, Sociology of Higher Education, Vol. 57, pp Fischer, E. and Arnold, S. (1994), Sex, Gender Identity, Gender Role Attitudes, and Consumer Behaviour, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp Flint, T. A. (1993), Early Awareness of College Financial Aid: Does it Expand College Choice?, Review of Higher Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp Flint, T. A. (1992), Parental and Planning Influences on the Formation of Student College Choice Sets, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp Ford, J., Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (1998), An Importance Performance Analysis of Service Quality in Education: A Comparison of New Zealand and United States Business Students, The Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp Fornell, C. (1992), A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, January, pp Foskett, N. and Hemsley-Brown, J. (2001), Choosing Futures: Young Peoples Decision Making Bin Education Training and Career Markets, Routledge Falmer, London. Foskett, N. (1999), Strategy, External Relations and Marketing, Managing External Relations in Schools and Colleges, Paul Chapman, London. Foskett, N., Maringe, F. and Roberts, D. (2006), Changing Fee Regimes and Their Impact on Student Attitudes to Higher Education, Higher Education Academy UK, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp Freeman, K. (1997), Increasing African Americans Participation in Higher Education: African American students Perspective, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 68, No.5, pp Gibbs, P. (2002), From the Invisible Hand to the Invisible Hand-Shake: Marketing Higher Education, Research in Post Compulsory Education, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp Gray, B.J., Fam, K.S. and Llanes V.A. (2003), Branding Universities in Asian Markets, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp Green, R.J. and Hill, J.H. (2003), Sex and Higher Education: Do Men and Women Attend College for Different Reasons?, College Student Journal, Vol. 12, pp Gutman, J. and Miaoulis, G. (2003), Communicating a Quality Position in Service Delivery: An Application in Higher Education, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp

157 Hall, R. (1993), A Framework Linking Intangible Resources: An Capabilities to Sustainable Competitive Advantage, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14, pp Harvey, J.A. and Busher, H. (1996), Marketing Schools and Consumer Choice, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp Hassan, A. (2006), Current Practices of Malaysia Higher Education, International forum: Globalization and Integration in Higher Education, Kolej Univarsiti Sains dan Tecknologi Malaysia, Malaysia. Hassan, F.H. and Sheriff, N.M. (2006), Students Need Recognition for Higher Education at Private Colleges in Malaysia: An Exploratory Perspective, Sunway Academic Journal, Vol. 3, pp Hawes, J.M. and Rao, C.P. (1985), Using Importance-performance Analysis to Develop Health Care Marketing Strategies, Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp Hawes, J.M., Kiser, G.E. and Rao, C.P. (1982), Analyzing the Market for Planned Retirement Communities in the Southwest, Baylor Business Studies, Vol. 13, August-September-October, pp Hayden, M. (2000), College Choice Influences: Urban High School Students Respond. Community College, Journal of Research and Practice, Vol. 24, pp Hayes, T.J. (1989), How Students choose a College: A Qualitative Approach, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp Hayes, T.J., Walker, M. and Trebbi, G. (1995), Promoting to Women: It s Not What You Think in Symposium for Marketing of Higher Education, Chicago:American Marketing Association. Hemmasi, M., Strong, K. and Taylor, S. (1994), Measuring Service Quality for Strategic Planning and Analysis in Service Firms, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp Hemsley-Brown, J. (1999), College choice: Perceptions and Priorities, Educational Management & Administration, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp Hemsley-Brown, J. and Oplatka, I. (2006), Universities in A Competitive Global Marketplace: A Systematic Review of the Literature on Higher Education Marketing, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp Hossler, D. (1985), A Research Overview of Student College Choice, Association for the Study of Higher Education, Chicago, IL. Hossler, D. (1999), Effective Admissions Recruitment. New Directions for Higher Education. Jossey- Bass. 134

158 Hossler, D., Bean, J.P. and Associates (1990). The Strategic Management of College Enrollments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hossler, D., Braxton, J.M. and Coopersmith, G. (1989). Understanding student college choice, in Smart, J.C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. New York: Agathon Press. Hossler, D. and Gallagher, K.S. (1987), Studying Student College Choice: A Three-Phase Model and the Implications for Policymakers, College and University, Vol. 62, No. 3, pp Hossler, D., Hu, S., Schmit, J. (1998). Predicting Student Sensitivity to Tuition and Financial Aid, Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Diego California Hossler, Don., Schmit, Jack., & Vesper, Nick., (1999), Going to College, How Social, Economic, and Educational Factors Influence the Decisions Students Make, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore & London. Hooley, G.J. and Lynch, J.E. (1981) Modeling the Student University Choice Process Through the Use of Conjoint Measurement Techniques, European Research, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp Houston, M. (1979), Cognitive Structure and Information Search Patterns of Prospective Graduate Business Students, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. VII, October, pp Ivy, J.P. (2001), University Image: The Role of Marketing in MBA Student Recruitment in State Subsidized Universities in the Republic of South Africa, Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Leicester, Leicester. Ivy, J.P. (2001), Higher Education Institution Image: A Correspondence Analysis Approach, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 15, No. 6/7, pp Jackson, G. A., (1982), Public Efficiency and Private Choice in Higher Education, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp Jacobs, J. (1999), Gender and the Stratification of Colleges, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 70, No. 2, pp James, J., Baldwin, G. and McInnis, C. (1999), Which University? The Factors Influencing the Choice of Prospective Undergraduates. A study undertaken under the Australian Higher Education Division s Evaluations and Investigation Programme, Canberra. John, E.P. (1990), Price Response in Enrollment Decisions: An Analysis of the High School and Beyond Sophomore Cohort, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp

159 Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (1998), Identifying Need of Potential Students in Tertiary Education for Strategy Development, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (2000), Indonesian Students Perceptions of Choice Criteria in the Selection of a Tertiary Institution: Strategic Implications, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (1997), Service Quality in Education: The Role of Student as Primary Consumer, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp Kaiser, H. (1970), A Second Generation Little Jiffy, Psychometrika, Vol. 35, pp Kaiser, H. (1974), An Index of Factorial Simplicity, Psychometrika, Vol. 39, pp Kinnell, M. (1989), International Marketing in UK Higher Education: Some Issues in Relation to Marketing Educational Programmes to Overseas Students, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp Kinnell, M. and MacDougall, J. (1997), Marketing in the Non-For-Profit Sector. Jordan Hill, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Kotler, P. (1975), Marketing for Nonprofit Organization, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall Inc. Kotler, P. (1979), Strategies for Introducing Marketing into Nonprofit Organizations, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43, no. 1, pp Kotler, P. and Andreasen, A.R. (1996), Strategic Marketing into Nonprofit Organizations, 5th Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. Kotler, P. and Fox, K.F.A. (1985), Strategic Management for Educational Institutions, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Kotler, P. and Fox, K.F.A. (1995), Strategic Management for Educational Institutions, 2nd Edition, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Kotler, P. and Levy, S.J. (1969), Broadening the Concept of Marketing, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp Krampf, R.F. and Heinlein, A.C. (1981), Developing Marketing Strategies and Tactics in Higher Education Through Target Market Research, Decision Sciences, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp Krishnan, A. and Nurtjahja, O. (2007), Evaluative Criteria for Selection of Private Universities and Colleges in Malaysia, Journal of International Management Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp Krone, F., Gilly, M., Zeithaml, V. and Lamb, C. (1983), Factors Influencing the Graduate Business School Decision, American Marketing Association Educators Proceedings, Chicago, IL. 136

160 Laroche, M., Saad, G., Cleveland, M. and Browne, E. (2000), Gender Differences in Information Search Strategies for a Christmas Gift, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp Leslie, L. L., and Brinkman, P. T. (1988), The Economic Value of Higher Education. American Council on Education, Macmillan. Leslie, L. L., Johnson, G. P. and Carlson, J. (1977), The Impact of Need-Based Student Air upon the College Attendance Decision, Journal of Education Finance, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp Levitt, T. (1980), Marketing Success Through Differentiation of Anything, Harvard Business Review, February, pp Lewis, G.H. and Morrison, S. (1975), A Longitudinal Study of College Selection. Technical Report No. 2, Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University. Lin, L. (1997), What are Student Education and Educational Related Needs?, Marketing and Research Today, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp Lin, C. and Kao, D.T. (2004), The Impact of Country-of-origin on Brand Equity, Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 5, No. 1/2, pp Litten, L. (1980), Marketing Higher Education, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp Litten, L.H. (1982), Different Strokes in the Applicant pool: Some Refinements in a Model of Students Choice, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 4, pp Loudon, D. and Della Bitta, A. (1988), Consumer Behaviour: Concepts and Applications, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill International, Singapore. Lovelock, C. (2007), Services Marketing: People, Technology, Strategy, 6th edition, Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Maehl, W. (2000), The Challenge to Postsecondary Education From An Expanding Pool of Learners, Lifelong Learning at Its Best: Innovative Practice in Adult Credit Programs, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Maguire, J. and Lay, R. (1981), Modeling the College Choice: Image and Decision, College and University, Vol. 56, pp Manilla, J. and James, J. (1977), Importance-performance analysis, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41, January, pp Mansfield, P.M. and Warwick, J. (2005), Gender Differences in Students and Parents Evaluative Criteria When Selecting a College, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp

161 Maringe, F. (2006), University and Course Choice: Implications for Positioning, Recruitment and Marketing, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp Mazzarol, T. and Hosie, P. (1996), Exporting Australian Higher Education: Future Strategies in maturing market, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp Mazzarol, T. (1999), An examination of the factors critical to the establishment and maintenance of competitive advantage for educational service enterprises within international markets,unpublished PhD thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Australia. Mazzarol, T.W. (1998), Critical Success Factors for International Education Marketing, International Journal of Education Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp Mazzarol, T.W., Choo, S. and Nair, V.S. (2001a), Australia and the Indian Postgraduate Science and Technology Market. Examining Why Indian Students Choose to Study in Countries Other than Australia, Australian Education International, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Mazzarol, T., Kemp, S. and Savery, L. (1997), International Students Who Choose Not to Study in Australia: An Examination of Taiwan and Indonesia, Australian International Education Foundation, Canberra. Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G.N. and Tien, V. (1996), "Education Linkages Between Canada and Australia: An Examination of the Potential for Greater Student Flows", Unpublished Paper, Institution for Research into International Competitiveness, Curtin Business School, Perth. Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G.N. and Thein, V. (2000), Critical Success Factors in the Marketing of An Education Institution - A Comparison of Institutional and Student Perspectives, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G.N. (2002), Push-pull Factors Influencing International Student Destination Choice, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp Mazzarol, T.W., Soutar, G.N., Smart, D. and Choo, S. (2001), Perceptions, Information and Choice: Understanding How Chinese Students Select a Country for Overseas Study, Australian Education International, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. McMahon, M.E. (1992), Higher Education in a World Market: An Historical Look at the Global Context of International Study, Higher Education, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp Meyers-Levy, J. (1988), The Influence of Sex Roles on Judgment, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp

162 Meyer-Levy, J. and Mahjeswaran, D. (1991), Exploring Difference in Males and Females Processing Strategies, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18, pp Meyer-Levy, J. and Sternthal, B. (1991), Gender Differences in the Use of Message Cue and Judgments, Journal of Marketing Research, pp Miller, E.I., (1997), Parents Views on the Value of a College Education and How They Will Pay for It, Journal of Student Financial Aid, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 20. Molly, N.N.L. (2006), Centralized Decentralization in Malaysia Education, Educational Decentralization, Springer, Netherlands. Molly, N.N.L.(1999), Education in Malaysia: Towards Vision 2020, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp Molly, N.N.L.(2004), Global Trends, National Policies and Institutional Responses: Restructuring Higher Education In Malaysia, Educational Research for Policy and Practice, Vol. 3, pp Murphy, P. (1981), Consumer Buying Roles in College Choice, College and University, Vol. 56, pp Nguyen, N. and LeBlanc, G. (2001), Image and Reputation of Higher Education Institutions in Students Retention Decision, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp Noble, M.S. (1986), Marketing Programs at Colleges and Universities: A Progress Report, College and University, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp Nora, A. and Cabrera, A.F. (1992), Measuring Program Outcomes: What Impacts are Important to Assess and What Impacts are Possible to Measure? Paper Prepared for the Design Conference for the Evaluation of Talent Search. Washington. D.C.: Office of Policy and Planning. U.S. Department of Education. Nunnaly, J.O. (1978), Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation, Thousand Oaks: Sage. Ogbuehi, A. O. and Rogers, H. P. (1990), Recruitment for Higher Education: Targeting the Excellent High School Student, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp Oosterbeek, H., Groot, W. and Hartog, J. (1992), An Empirical Analysis of University Choice and Earnings, The Economist, Vol. 140, No. 3, pp Ortinau, D. and Anderson, R. (1986), College Students Post-Purchase Educational Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction Decision Process: A Conceptual Model, AMA Educator ' Proceedings, Chicago, IL. 139

163 Ortinau, D., Anderson, R. and Klippel, R. (1987), The Impact of Student Involvement and Expectancy Beliefs on Course/Faculty Evaluations, AMA Educators' Proceedings, Chicago, IL, pp Pallant, J.F. (2007), SPSS Survival Manual, 3rd Edition, Open University Press, United Kingdoms. Paramewaran, R. and Glowacka, A.E. (1995), University Image: an Information Processing Perspective, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L. (2004), SERVQUAL: A Multiple-item Scale for Measuring Customer Expectations of Service Quality, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp Patterson, P., Romm, T. and Hill, C. (1998), Consumer Satisfaction As a Process: A Qualitative, retrospective Longitudinal Study of Overseas Students in Australia, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp Paulsen, M.B. (1990), College Choice: Understanding Student Enrollment Behavior, ASHE- ERIC Higher Education Report No. 6, Washington, D.C.: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University. Peng, Z., Lawley, M. and Perry, C. (2000), Modeling and Testing Effects of Country, Corporate and Brand Images on Consumers Product Evaluation and Purchase Intention, Paper Presented at the ANZMAC 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge Conference. Perna, L. W. (2000), Differences in College Enrollment Among African Americans, Hispanics and Whites, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp Peters, M. (1992), Performance Indicators in New Zealand Higher Education: accountability or control?, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp Pimpa, N. (2003), The influence of Family on Thai Students Choices of International Education, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp Price, I., Matzdorf, L. and Agahi, R (2003), "The Impact of Facilities on Student Choice of University", International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 21 No. 10, pp Qureshi, S. (1995), College Accession Research: New Variables in an Old Equation, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp Rathmell, J.M. (1966), What is Meant by Services?, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, October, pp Roberts, K. (1984), School Leavers and Their Prospects: Youth in the Labour Market in the 1980s, Open University Press, Milton Keynes. 140

164 Rosen, D.E., Curran, J.M. and Greenlee, T.B. (1998), College Choice in Brand Elimination Framework: The High School Students Perspective, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp Russell, C. (1980), Survey of Grade 12 Students Postsecondary Plans and Aspirations, Manitoba: Canadian Department of Education. Rust, R. and Zahorik, A. (1993), Customer Satisfaction, Customer Retention and Market Share, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69, Summer, pp Schab, F. (1974), Reasons for Attending College as Reported by Female Students, Florida Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 16, pp Schweitzer, S. (2006), N.E. Colleges Preparing for Drop in Local Students, Boston Globe, Jan. 24, 2006, A.1. Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 4th edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc., U.S. Seneca, J. and Taussig, M. (1987), The Effects of Tuition and Financial Aid on the Enrolment Decision at a State University, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 26, August, pp Sethna, B.N. (1982), Extensions and Testing of Importance-performance Analysis, Business Economics, September, pp Sewell, W., and Shah, V. (1968), Social Class, Parental Encouragement, and Educational Aspirations, America Journal of Sociology, Vol. 73, pp Shank, M.D. and Beasley, F. (1998), Gender Effects on the University Selection Process, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp Sheppard, L., Schmit, J., and Pugh, R. (1992), Factors Influencing High School Students Changes in Plans for Post Secondary Education: A longitudinal Study, Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Sidin, M.S., Hussin, S.R. and Tan, H.S., (2003), An Exploratory Study of Factors Influencing the College Choice Decision of Undergraduate Students in Malaysia, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp Smith, D., Scott, P. and Lynch, J. (1995), The Role of Marketing in the University and College Sector, Heist, Leeds. Sohail, M.S., Rajadurai, J. and Rahman, N.A.A. (2003), Managing Quality in Higher Education: A Malaysian Case Study, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp

165 Sohail, M.S. and Saeed, M. (2003), Private Higher Education in Malaysia: Students Satisfaction Level and Strategic Implications, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp Somers, P., Cofer, J. and Putten, J.V. (1999), The Influence of Early Aspirations and Attitudes on Postsecondary Attendance, American Educational Research Association Conference, Montreal, Canada. Soutar, G. and Turner, J. (2002), Students Preferences for University: a Conjoint Analysis, The International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp Srikatanyoo, N. and Gnoth, J. (2002), Country image and international tertiary education, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp St. John, Edward, P., Michael, B., Paulsen and Deborah, F.C. (2005), Diversity, College Costs, and Postsecondary Opportunity: An Examination of the Financial Nexus Between College Choice and Persistence for African Americans and Whites, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 30, pp Stage, F.K. and Hossler, D. (1989), Differences in Family Influences on College Attendance Plans for Male and Female Ninth Graders, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp Stanton, W.J. (1974), Fundamentals of Marketing, McGraw Hill, Tokyo. Stefanie. D., Teresa, L. and Danielle, L. (20060, Higher Education Marketing Concerns: Factors Influence Students Choice of Colleges, The Business Review, Cambridge, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp Swinyard, W.R. (1980), Strategy Development With Importance/Performance Analysis, Journal of Bank Research, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp , Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2007), Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th Edition, Boston: Pearson Education. Teichler, V. (2004), The changing debate on internationalization of higher education,. Higher Education, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp Thomas, M.S., Adams and Birchenough, A. (1996), Students Withdraw From Higher Education, Educational Management and Administration, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp Tierney, M. (1983), Student College Choice Cets: Toward An Empirical Characterization, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 18, pp Tillery, D. (1973), Distribution and Differentiation of Youth: A Study of Transition from School to College. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. Tillery, D., and Kildegaard, T. (1973), Educational Goals, Attitudes and Behaviors: A Comparative Study of High School Seniors, Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger. 142

166 Topor, R. (1983), Marketing Higher Education: A Practical Guide, Washington, DC: Council for Advancement and Support of Education. Turner, J.P. (1998), An Investigation of Business Undergraduates Choice to Study at Edith Cowan University, Unpublished Research Report, Edith Cowan University, Perth. Turner, P., Anne, C. (2007), Why University Student Choose an International Education: A Case Study in Malaysia, International Journal of Education Development, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp Vaira, M. (2004), Globalization and Higher Education Organizational Change: A Framework for Analysis, Higher Education, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp Wajeeh, E.M. and Micceri, T. (1997), Factor Influencing Students College Choice at Traditional and Metropolitan Universities, Paper Presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Orlando, FL. Walther, E. (2000), The Relationships Between Student Satisfaction and Student Retention in Higher Education, Unpublished Dissertation, Faculty of Graduate School, University of North Carolina, Greensboro. Watson, B.L. (2000), A Descriptive Study of Enrollment Marketing Strategies for Four-Year Public Colleges and Universities, Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 61, No. 10. Webb, M. (1993), Variables Influencing Graduate Business Students College Selections, College and University, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp Wilson, K. R., and Allen, W. R. (1987), Explaining the Educational Attainment of Young Black Adults: Critical Familial and Extra-familial Influences, Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L. (1985), Problems and Strategies in Services Marketing, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, Spring, pp Zusman, A. (1999), Issues Facing Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century, American Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century, Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press. 143