Making Contrasts and Comparisons

Miles and Huberman, 1994 (cited Robson (2006, p. 480-1) claim that “making contrasts and comparisons, establishing similarities and differences between and within data sets” is an important stage of transforming raw data into meaningful information. The above Table 6.1 was themed into five categories; quality of education, lifestyle, cost, environment and work/immigration opportunities. These themes were interrogated, using an Internet questionnaire to ascertain the relevant potency of each influence. In accordance with the Critique Interpretative Approach, recurrent feedback in the investigation facilitated continual refinement to the developing theory and the direction of further inquiry. The researcher, prior to issuing the Internet questionnaire, was unaware of the extent of parents’ involvement in destination choice for overseas study.

6.1.7 Checking for Researcher Effects

Although this was a grounded study I was aware of many influences affecting students’ study-abroad options through my experiences during professional employment at CCIEE and BIEE. Nevertheless, an absence of pre-conceived bias can be found in the many discussions and emails between professor Singh and myself, which show a changing and evolving understanding of the importance of each of the factors being measured. The two key findings of this research, parental involvement in the decision- making process, and corruption and resulting immigration issues, emerged after the

31 _{An extradition treaty was signed with China in 2007, but it still awaits ratification. The} Australian Government has doubts about this treaty because it “ contains weaker human rights protections than is the case in other extradition treaties to which Australia is a party” (Patterson, 2017, n. p.).

Internet questionnaire had been completed. These latter findings were confirmed by reports published in credible media sources and the follow-up interviews, in China and Australia. Previous researchers in this field were unaware of Olesen’s (2016) revelations in the Panama Papers and failed to make the connection between other evidence of corruption in China and Australia (Chung 2013; Cornwall 2014; De Jong 2014). This link provides a powerful motive for HNWIs in China to emigrate.

.

Although the proportion of students involved in this scheme could not be measured, Olesen (2016) estimates that 40% of HNWIs are involved in capital flight, and HNWIs are the parents of the majority of students who study in Australia.

6.2 DISCUSSION

Follow up interviews, in Australia and China, prosecuted after the Internet questionnaire, confirmed the reservations as to the validity of the collected data. Twelve parents of Chinese students who had completed tertiary education in Australia were emailed in China to give written response to the following questions:

1. Was the choice to study overseas made by the parent or the students? 2. Who had the most influence in selecting Australia as host country? 3. What was the main reason for choosing Australia?

4. Do the parents intend to migrate to Australia in the short or long term?

5. Have the parents, either in their own name or the name of the student, purchased any property in Australia?

Table 6.3: Summary of parents' responses

Parent Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PP1 Child Child - No No

PP2 Father School in

China

USYD No No

PP3 Child Agent Environment No No

PP4 Family Education/

environment

School Yes No

PP5 Family Child’s uncle & brother

Relative in Australia

Yes No

PP6 Child Child Environment Yes Intended

PP7 Father Agent Lifestyle &

safety

No Yes

PP8 Family Family Lifestyle,

safety & environment

Yes No

PP9 Parents Mother Quality of

Education & environment

Yes Yes

PP10 Mother Agents Environment No Intended

PP11 Father Father Environment No No

PP12 Child Child Immigration Yes Yes

Five out of twelve respondents have definitely stated that it was the parent who made the decision of where to study. Yet another three stated that it was ‘family’, perhaps a euphemism for parents.

Acquiescent bias and dissemination is evidenced in these responses. One respondent initially denied owning property and having immigration intentions, but further investigation showed that she owned two properties in Sydney and that she had applied for a business sponsored immigration visa. Parents perceive that quality of education and safety are the most ‘acceptable’ reasons for choosing Australia and hence rate these highly, even if they have not influenced their decision to choose Australia as a host nation.

The parents were asked two further questions with options offered and tested by a Likert Scale:

6. What was the main purpose for study overseas? 1 Strongly Agree... 5 Strongly Disagree

7. What factors influenced your choice of host country? 1 Strongly Agree... 5 Strongly Disagree

The results are shown in Figures 6.2 and 6.3

Figure 6.2: Comparison of factors contributing to the decision in favour of overseas study?

The first column represents a Likert score 1 (strongly agree). Quality of Education rates very highly. This an example of acquiescent bias coupled with the need to provide an acceptable reason. In that context it could also be an honest reason in every case. No person strongly disagreed with any influence.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 Frequency Quality of Education Career Opportunities Immigration Comparison of influences on parents sup porting their decision to send their child to study overseas.