Welcoming Communities Initiative Immigrant and Visible Minority Applicants to PSE
48
1 Welcoming Communities Initiative Immigrant and Visible Minority Applicants to PSE November 17, 2011 Presented by Peggy Sattler, Academica Group
description
Welcoming Communities Initiative Immigrant and Visible Minority Applicants to PSE. November 17, 2011 Presented by Peggy Sattler, Academica Group. Academica Group. WCI partner organization Research and consulting firm 15 years experience in higher education - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Welcoming Communities Initiative Immigrant and Visible Minority Applicants to PSE
1
Welcoming Communities Initiative
Immigrant and Visible Minority Applicants to PSE
November 17, 2011Presented by
Peggy Sattler, Academica Group
2
Academica Group
• WCI partner organization • Research and consulting firm• 15 years experience in higher
education• Policy research, marketing,
communications, and enrollment management expertise
• Annual studies (UCAS, ADS, DNA, etc.) survey more than 300,000 PSE applicants annually (40+ institutions)
• Daily newsbrief Academica’s Top Ten (12,000 subscribers)
3
PSE Experiences and Outcomes
• Experience of immigrant and visible minorities applicants to PSE in the GTA and 2nd and 3rd tier cities
• Current education research projects:1. 2010 applicants to Ontario colleges and universities2. Longitudinal study of Ontario college applicants (2007-2010)3. Educational and labour market outcomes of 2005-2009
applicants to PSE (in partnership with the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)
4. Work-integrated Learning in Ontario’s Postsecondary Sector Graduating Student Survey (in partnership with HEQCO)
4
Today’s Presentation
• UCAS Dataset• 2010 preliminary findings• Differences in demographic profiles of immigrant applicants to
college and university based on locale (2nd/3rd tier cities vs. GTA)• Analysis of applicants from 2nd/3rd tier cities
– Influence of word of mouth – Exploration of reasons for applying to PSE– Key decision factors in selection of first-choice institution
5
UCAS Methodology and Analytics
• 2010 sample of 167,073 applicants – 63,418 applicants to Ontario colleges randomly selected by the Ontario College
Application Service (OCAS) – 103,655 applicants to six Ontario universities (Waterloo, Laurier, Western, UOIT,
Brock, York)• Survey administered online March-June , 2010 • University applicant response rate of 22%
– Margin of error +/- 0.57% 19 times out of 20• College applicant response rate of 19%
– Margin of error +/- 0.85% 19 times out of 20• Statistical tests (p<.001)
– Chi-square, ANOVA, Bonferroni post-hoc
6
Applicant Profile
7
Immigrant Status
2nd/3rd Tier (n=3130) GTA (n=2707) 2nd/3rd Tier (n=6144) GTA (n=10105)College University
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
13
36
18
37
87
64
82
64
ImmigrantNon-Immigrant
8
Arrival in Canada
2nd/3rd Tier GTA 2nd/3rd Tier GTACollege University
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
49
43
5047
26 2730
33
2529
20 20
Before 20012001 - 20052006 - 2010
9
Visible Minority Status - College
Visible Minority Non-Visible Minority Visible Minority Non-Visible Minority2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
76
24
85
15
7
93
40
60
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
10
Visible Minority Status - University
Visible Minority Non-Visible Minority Visible Minority Non-Visible Minority2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
78
22
90
1013
87
5248
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
11
Ethnicity – College2nd/3rd Tier GTA
Immigrant Non-Immigrant
Immigrant Non-Immigrant
Black 24% 2% 15% 15%
Latin American 11% 2% 7% 4%South Asian 10% >1% 29% 6%Arab 9% >1% 3% >1%East Asian 8% >1% 13% 7%Other Asian 7% >1% 5% 3%Filipino 7% >1% 12% 4%
12
Ethnicity – University
2nd/3rd Tier GTAImmigrant Non-Immigrant Immigrant Non-Immigrant
East Asian 25% 3% 35% 21%
South Asian 17% 3% 37% 17%
Arab 10% 1% 3% 1%
Other Asian 8% 2% 4% 4%Latin American 8% 1% 2% 1%Black 7% 2% 5% 6%Filipino 3% >1% 4% 2%
13
Commuting and Age• 2nd/3rd tier immigrants more likely to
commute• 70% college and 44% universitycommuters
vs. 61% and 32% non-immigrants• More college commuters, fewer university
commuters among GTA immigrants
Commuting
• Immigrant college applicants more likely to be older (30+), particularly in 2nd/3rd tier cities (36% vs. 10% non-immigrant)
Age
14
Gender and Marital/Family Status
•Similar gender distribution for college applicants•More male university applicants (Waterloo effect?)
Gender
•Immigrant college applicants more likely to be married, especially from 2nd/3rd tier cities (36% vs. 11% non-immigrant)
Marital Status
•Immigrant college applicants more likely to have dependent children, especially from 2nd/3rd tier cities (32% vs. 9% non-immigrant)
Family Status
15
Employment – College
Working Unemployed/NILF Working Unemployed/NILF2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
49 51 5248
65
34
59
41ImmigrantNon-immigrant
16
Employment – University
Working Unemployed/NILF Working Unemployed/NILF2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
47
53
35
6568
32
47
53
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
17
Grade Averages – College
2nd /3rd Tier GTAImmigrant Non-Immigrant Immigrant Non-Immigrant
90%+ 13% 6% 11% 5%
80%-89% 39% 37% 36% 32%70%-79% 37% 45% 39% 47%60-69% 11% 11% 13% 15%
18
Grade Averages – University
2nd /3rd Tier GTAImmigrant Non-Immigrant Immigrant Non-Immigrant
90%+ 29% 20% 23% 17%
85%-89% 27% 28% 26% 27%80%-84% 24% 31% 25% 29%75%-79% 13% 15% 15% 17%>75% 8% 7% 11% 9%
19
Entry Type - College
Direct Former PSE Direct Former PSE2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
20
60
24
54
36
4338
44 ImmigrantNon-immigrant
20
Entry Type - University
Direct Former PSE Direct Former PSE2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
78
16
87
8
85
12
92
6
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
21
First Generation - College
First Generation Not First Gen First Generation Not First Gen2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
33
67
26
74
27
73
27
73
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
22
First Generation - University
First Generation Not First Gen First Generation Not First Gen2nd/3rd Tier GTA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
11
89
11
89
12
88
16
84
ImmigrantNon-immigrant
23
Ultimate Degree Intention - College
2nd /3rd Tier GTAImmigrant Non-Immigrant Immigrant Non-Immigrant
College Certificate 8% 6% 5% 5%
College Dip./Adv. Dip. 51% 61% 48% 51%
College Degree 8% 7% 11% 12%
College Grad. Cert. 2% 3% 4% 4%
University Undergrad 12% 10% 12% 12%
Post-Grad (eg. MA, PhD) 11% 7% 12% 10%
24
Ultimate Degree Intention - University
2nd /3rd Tier GTAImmigrant Non-Immigrant Immigrant Non-Immigrant
University Undergrad 20% 29% 21% 25%
Master’s Degree 25% 27% 27% 26%
PhD 15% 11% 13% 10%Medical Degree 19% 10% 16% 13%
MBA 10% 6% 13% 11%Law Degree 6% 6% 5% 7%
Teaching Degree 2% 8% 3% 6%
25
Marketing Efforts
26
College Marketing - Word of Mouth
*High School Coach
High School Teachers
High School Guidance Counselors
*Family
Current Students
Friends
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
13
28
34
35
55
58
9
33
40
44
57
55
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
27
University Marketing - Word of Mouth
High School Coach
*High School Teachers
High School Guidance Counselors
*Family
*Friends
*Current Students
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
17
54
54
68
74
75
17
52
56
66
70
76
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
28
PSE Decision Making Process
29
Reasons for Applying to College
Participate in student life and campus activities
*Encouragement from parents, friends or teachers
Improve leadership skills
*Career advancement
*Meet new people
Give back to society
*Improve social status
Enhance confidence and self-esteem
Pursue future graduate or professional study
*Increase knowledge
Increase earning potential
Support personal and intellectual growth
Explore future options
*Career preparation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9017
22
29
29
30
34
35
39
43
56
57
57
58
69
21
31
31
18
46
28
19
40
41
61
62
65
65
82
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
30
Reasons for Applying to University
*Career advancement
*Improve social status
*Give back to society
Participate in student life and campus activities
*Enhance confidence and self-esteem
*Improve leadership skills
Encouragement from parents, friends or teachers
*Meet new people
Increase earning potential
*Pursue future graduate or professional study
*Support personal and intellectual growth
Explore future options
*Career preparation
Increase knowledge
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
23
35
45
46
46
48
51
57
69
74
76
76
79
80
16
20
37
48
38
43
50
65
67
69
81
76
84
79
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
31
Key Decision Factors
32
Key Decision Factors
• 50 key factors in five areas– Academic Factors– Outcome Factors– Campus Factors– Nurturing Factors– Financial Factors
• Impact on selection of first-choice institution• Seven-point scale from strongly negative (-3) to strongly positive (+3)• Perceived strengths and weaknesses of applicant’s first-choice
institution
33
Academic Factors - College
*Special programs for academically gifted students
*High admission average
*Undergraduate research opportunities
*High-profile research
*Library collections/facilities
Investments in latest technology
*Institution rankings/guidebook ratings
Quality of faculty
*Academic reputation of institution
Academic reputation of program/major
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.700000000000001
0.8
1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.6
1.8
1.8
0.2
0.5
0.5
0.600000000000001
0.700000000000001
1
0.9
1.5
1.6
1.6
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
34
Academic Factors - University
*Special programs for academically gifted students
*High admission average
*Library collections/facilities
*Investments in latest technology
*High-profile research
*Undergraduate research opportunities
*Institution rankings/guidebook ratings
Quality of faculty
*Academic reputation of institution
Academic reputation of program/major
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.700000000000001
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.9
2.2
2.2
0.3
0.8
1.1
1
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.8
2
2.1
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
35
Outcome Factors - College
*International exchange options
Easy to get accepted
*Opportunities for student leadership
*Can transfer credits earned from another institution
Can transfer credits earned to another institution
*Graduates get into top professional and grad schools
Relevant industry in the area
*National/professional accreditation
Co-op programs/internships
Graduates get high-quality jobs
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.600000000000001
0.9
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.7
0.2
0.600000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.8
1.1
0.8
1.3
1.6
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
36
Outcome Factors - University
Easy to get accepted
*Can transfer credits earned to another institution
Can transfer credits earned from another institution
International exchange options
*Relevant industry in the area
*Opportunities for student leadership
*National/professional accreditation
*Co-op programs/internships
*Graduates get into top professional and grad schools
*Graduates get high-quality jobs
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.1
0.600000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.9
1
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.9
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.8
1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.7
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
37
Financial Factors - College
*Availability of child care
*Availability of merit-based scholarships
Cost of tuition
Part-time job opportunities
Costs of attending excluding tuition
*Flexible course delivery (evening classes, online etc.)
*Availability of needs-based financial aid/bursaries
Institution is close to home
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.2
0.9
1
1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.6
-0.3
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.700000000000001
0.8
1.5
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
38
Financial Factors - University
*Availability of child care
Cost of tuition
Costs of attending excluding tuition
*Flexible course delivery (evening classes, online etc.)
Availability of merit-based scholarships
*Availability of needs-based financial aid/bursaries
*Part-time job opportunities
Institution is close to home
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
-0.3
0.4
0.600000000000001
0.8
1
1.1
1.1
1.1
-0.4
0.4
0.5
0.600000000000001
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
39
Nurturing Factors - College
*Religious considerations
Small student population
Friends attending
Small surrounding community
*Student evaluations of professors
Small class sizes
Personal attention during application/admission process
*Campus safety/security
*Faculty-student interaction
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.4
0.5
0.700000000000001
0.700000000000001
1
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.4
-0.1
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.600000000000001
1
0.8
0.9
1.1
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
40
Nurturing Factors - University
*Religious considerations
Small student population
Small surrounding community
Friends attending
Small class sizes
Student evaluations of professors
Personal attention during application/admission process
Campus safety/security
Faculty-student interaction
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.2
0
0.5
0.600000000000001
0.5
1
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
2nd/3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
41
Campus Factors - College
Same institution as parent(s)
*Campus housing/residences
*Varsity athletic teams
Campus cafeteria/food service options
Availability of off-campus housing
Clubs and social activities
Off-campus urban life
*Large student population
*Attractive campus
Recreational sports/fitness facilities
*History/tradition of institution
*Diversity of student population
Reputation for student experience
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
-0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.600000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.2
1.3
-0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.600000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.5
1
0.700000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.600000000000001
1.3
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
42
Campus Factors - University
Same institution as parent(s)
Varsity athletic teams
Campus cafeteria/food service options
Availability of off-campus housing
*Campus housing/residences
*Large student population
Off-campus urban life
History/tradition of institution
Recreational sports/fitness facilities
Clubs and social activities
*Diversity of student population
*Attractive campus
Reputation for student experience
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
-0.4
0.600000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.700000000000001
1
1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.6
-0.4
0.600000000000001
0.700000000000001
0.600000000000001
0.9
0.5
1.1
1
1.2
1.2
0.9
1.6
1.7
2nd /3rd TierNon-ImmigrantImmigrant
43
Implications and Next Steps
44
Implications• 2nd and 3rd tier mmigrants represent a smaller proportion of the PSE
applicant pool than GTA immigrants, but immigrant applicant pool is not homogenous
• Compared to GTA immigrants, 2nd/3rd tier immigrants are:– Less likely to be visible minority– Older, married, dependent children– More likely to have former PSE– More likely to be first generation PSE– Higher educational aspirations
45
Implications - College• Within 2nd/3rd tier cities, differences between immigrant and non-
immigrant applicants– More likely to attend local institutions– Less influenced by family in deciding where to apply– More motivated to apply by improving social status, career advancement– More influenced by several factors in selection of first-choice institution
• Institutional reputation• Faculty/student interaction• Campus safety/security• Guidebook rankings• Professional accreditation• Diversity of student population• Graduate study options• Library holdings• Needs-based bursaries
46
Implications - University• Within 2nd/3rd tier cities, differences between immigrant and non-
immigrant applicants– More likely to attend local institutions– More influenced by friends and family in deciding where to apply– More motivated to apply by an interest in post-graduate study, improving
leadership skills, enhancing confidence, giving back to society, improving social status, and career advancement
– More influenced by several factors in selection of first-choice institution• Institutional reputation• Graduate employment outcomes• Graduate study options• Co-ops• Guidebook rankings• Undergraduate research opportunities• Attractive campus
47
Further Analysis• Hierarchical logistic regression to further explore key decision
factors– Immigrant status– Place of residence– Age– Visible minority status
