Student's choice of FPT University - International University - Hoa Sen University
description
Transcript of Student's choice of FPT University - International University - Hoa Sen University
MBA THESISA Study of Factors Influencing
Student’s Choice of FPT University
Student: Nguyen Thanh Duoc
Advisor: Nguyen Quynh Mai, Ph. D.
September 2013
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
THE GROWTH OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN VIETNAM
Year
2000 - 2001
2005 - 2006
2011 - 2012
Institutions 178 279 419
3-year colleges
104 154 215
Universities 74 125 204Source: MOET (2012)
Booming growth in number of higher education institutions in recent years.
OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
More opportunities for students to pursue higher education
More challenges for higher education institutions to attract and recruit new students (Lam,
2012)
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Competitive pressure
Recruiting strategies – high cost
Not as many new students as expected
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1
•To explore factors that are most influential to students’ choice of university
2
•To compare and contrast the most influential factors among students by characteristics
3
• To compare and contrast the most influential factors influencing student’s choice of FPT University and other universities
4
• To provide suggestions to FPT University on recruiting strategies
SCOPE
Researched students: first-year students of International University, Hoa Sen University and FPT University HCMC
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
LITERATURE REVIEW
College choice theory
Economic models
Sociological models
Combined models
Economic models: reflecting the influence of cost on students’ decision-making Sociological models: demonstrating the influence of interrelated factors influencing college aspirations Combined models: a combination of Economic models and Sociological models in later studies to reflect a more comprehensive view of students’ college choice
Kinzie et al. (2004)
LITERATURE REVIEW
Factors influencing student’s choice of university
Student characteristics
Significant people
University characteristics
University communication efforts
Chapman (1981), Hossler and Gallapher (1987)
TWO COMMON WAYS TO STUDY COLLEGE CHOICE
1. Indirect: - Research models and hypotheses are proposed and
tested- Respondents are asked indirectly to study their
intention of choosing a university.2. Direct: - More applicable when researched students are
current college students.- Respondents are asked directly about factors
influencing their choice.- Descriptive analysis and mean comparison are
applied to find results.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research method: Quantitative with self-administrated questionnaire (5 – point scale: 1 – not influential; 5 strongly influential)
Data collection:Population: freshmen students (IU, Hoa Sen, FPT) Sample size: at least 198 subjectsSampling method: Quota and ConvenienceQuestionnaire were delivered and collected at the three universities campuses.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Data Analysis: Descriptive StatisticsOne-sample T – TestANOVA
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
SURVEY RESPONSE RATE
International University
Hoa Sen University
FPT University
Total
Number of questionnaires 100 100 100 300Number of response 86 74 97 257Response rate
86% 74% 97% 85.7%Number of valid response 73 60 87 220Valid response rate 84.8% 81% 89.7% 85.6%
RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
Respondents: 220Male: 111Female: 109
IUHoa Sen
FPT
45.2
36.7
64.454.8 63.3
35.6
Percentage of respondents by university
Male Female
PARENTS’ EDUCATION LEVEL
Father’s education level is higher than mother’s
Father Mother0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Parents’ education level
Less than high schoolHigh schoolDiplomaBachelorPostgraduate
ACADEMIC ABILITY
IU students are better than students of Hoa Sen and FPT.
< 7.0 7.0 - 7.9 ≥ 8.00%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
Respondents by grade 12 GPA
IU Hoa Sen FPT
< 15 15 - < 20
20 - < 25
25 - 300%
20%40%60%80%
Respondents by Uni-versity Entrance Exam
Score
IU Hoa Sen FPT
LIVING AREAS
Rural
are
a
Town
Prov
incial
city
Centra
l city
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Respondents by living areas
IUHoa SenFPT
More students are from cities than students from other areas.
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Household income of IU students is higher than Hoa Sen and FPT students’
<10 10 - < 15 15 - < 20 20 - < 25 ≥ 25
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Respondents by household income (mil. Dong/ month
IUHoa SenFPT
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7 Relatively high internal consistency (DeVellis,
2003)
Factors Number of items
Cronbach’s alpha
Significant people 7 0.78
University characteristics
15 0.81
University communication
6 0.86
MEANS OF ALL FACTORS
Parents are the most influential of all significant people
Rank Significant People
N Mean Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
1 Father 220 3.05 1.310 .088
2 Mother 220 3.00 1.340 .090
3 Friends 220 2.33 1.176 .079
4 Siblings 220 2.00 1.242 .084
5 Teachers 220 2.12 1.114 .075
6 Counselors 220 1.85 1.038 .070
7 Relatives 220 1.74 .957 .065
Rank University CharacteristicsN Mean Std.
DeviationStd. Error Mean
1 Employment opportunities 220 4.46 .807 .054
2 Educational facilities 220 4.01 .951 .064
3 English instruction language 220 4.00 1.051 .071
4 Lecturers’ qualification 220 3.99 .958 .0655 University reputation 220 3.80 1.024 .069
6 Cost 220 3.75 1.204 .0817 Admission opportunities 220 3.74 1.139 .077
8 Preparation for graduate study 220 3.59 1.259 .085
9 Student services 220 3.47 1.176 .079
10 Extra curriculum activities 220 2.99 1.307 .088
11 Location 220 2.81 1.270 .08612 Course variety 220 2.84 1.260 .08513 Public institution 220 2.82 1.427 .096
14 Scholarships 220 2.70 1.368 .09215
Size of student population 220 2.62 1.178 .079
Formal university communication efforts seem not effective to student’s choice of university.
Rank University Communication
Efforts
N Mean Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
1 News / events about university on media
220 2.89 1.151 .078
2 Information on university website
220 2.87 1.111 .075
3 Campus visit 220 2.71 1.330 .0904 Recruiting ads 219 2.67 1.131 .0765 Recruiting materials 220 2.67 1.160 .0786 Recommendation of
university reps.220 2.55 1.123 .076
MOST INFLUENTIAL FACTORS
7 most influential belongs to university characteristics.
Employment opportunity
Educational facility
English instruction language
Lecturers’ qualification
University reputation
Cost
Admission opportunity
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
4.46
4.01
4
3.99
3.8
3.75
3.74
Most influential factors, test value = 3.5
Difference of influential factors among students by GPA
More similarities than differences
FactorsGrade 12 GPA
< 7.0 7.0 – 7.9 ≥ 8.0Employment opportunity
No significant difference
Educational facility No significant differenceEnglish instruction language
No significant difference
Lecturers’ qualification No significant differenceUniversity reputation Significant
differenceSignificant difference
Cost No significant differenceAdmission opportunity No significant difference
Difference of influential factors among students by living area
More similarities than differences
FactorsLiving areas
Rural area Town Provincial city
Central city
Employment opportunity No significant differenceEducational facility No significant differenceEnglish instruction language
No significant difference
Lecturers’ qualification Significant difference
Significant difference
Significant difference
University reputation Significant difference
Significant difference
Significant difference
Cost No significant differenceAdmission opportunity No significant difference
Difference of influential factors among students by household income
More similarities than differences
FactorsHousehold income (in Dong per month)
< 10 million 10 - < 15 million
15 - < 20 million
20 - < 25 million
≥ 25 million
Employment opportunity
Significant difference
Significant difference
Educational facility
Significant difference
Significant difference
English instruction language
No significant difference
Lecturers’ qualification
No significant difference
University reputation
No significant difference
Cost No significant differenceAdmission opportunity
No significant difference
Difference of influential factors among students by university
More similarities than differences
FactorsUniversity
IU Hoa Sen FPT
Employment opportunity No significant difference
Educational facility No significant difference
English instruction language
Significant difference
Significant difference
Significant difference
Lecturers’ qualification No significant difference
University reputation Significant difference
Significant difference
Significant difference
Cost No significant difference
Admission opportunity No significant difference
CONTENT
1
•Background of Research
2
•Literature Review & Conceptual Framework
3
•Research Methodology
4
•Data analysis & Findings
5
•Conclusions & Implications
CONCLUSIONS
Most influential factors: 1. Employment opportunity2. Educational facility3. English instruction language4. Lecturers’ qualification5. University reputation6. Cost7. Admission opportunity
More similarities than differences of most influential factors among students by grade 12 GPA, living area, household income and by university.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FPT UNIVERSITY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
Who to communicate
Prospective students
Parents
What to communica
te
Employment opportunities
continue to ensure student’s employment are secured
Facilities more details/ images such as virtual tour on its website
English instruction language
continue to highlight the use of English in training
Teaching staffmore information about qualified lecturers
IMPLICATIONS FOR FPT UNIVERSITY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
What to communica
te
University reputationcontinue to stress on the awards and recognition the university has achieved: Excellence in IT training / Good Business School / QS 3 stars
Costunchanged for four yearsincluding all textbookslaptop allowance
IMPLICATIONS FOR FPT UNIVERSITY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
How to communica
te
News/ events more publicity about university on media
University websitemore information
about career prospects and
facilities
Campus visit More occasions for potential students and parents to visit
the campuses
Advertisements on popular
newspapers or news sites for students
and parents.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FPT UNIVERSITY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
Limitations Respondent’s memory Valid for FPT University HCMC
Recommendations for future research
Further research in a larger scale with respondents of three FPT University campuses
Further research to re-test the influential factors with respondents who are current high school students.
REFERENCE Chapman, D. W. (1981). A model of student University Choice. The
Journal of Higher Education, 52 (5): 490 -505. DeVellis R. F. (2003). Scale Development: Theory and Applications
2nd edition. California, CA: Sage. Hossler, D. and Gallagher, K. S. (1987). Studying student college
choice: A three-phase model and the implications for policy makers. College and University, 62(3): 207-221.
Lam N. (2012). Ket thuc tuyen sinh ĐH-CĐ nam 2012 - Xem lai chi tieu, nganh dao tao? (End of recruiting new students in 2012 –Re-consider quotas and majors. Saigon Giai Phong Newspaper. Available at http://www.sggp.org.vn/giaoduc/tuyensinhdhoccdang/2012/11/305512/
Kinzie, J., Palmer, M., Hayek, J., Hossler, D., Jacob, S.A., and Cummings, H. (2004). Fifty years of University Choice: Social, Political and Institutional Influences on the Decision-making Process. Lumina Foundation for Education. New Agenda Series, 5(3).
MOET (2012). Educational statistics in 2012. Available at http://www.moet.gov.vn/?page=11.10&view=4446