Push and Pull Factors

As push and pull factors’ influence on Chinese students’ decision-making process is also a part of the research, based on previous research (Wilkins et al., 2011), both push and pull factors have external influences on students’ behaviour and decision-making process, and different students react to the same factors in different ways. The push and pull factor model can be highlight students’ concerns about their situation.

A questionnaire which includes 40 items was used to test the push and pull factors’ influence. All the items used seven-point rating scale ranging from 1 which means not true or not important at all to 7 which means important or extremely important (Wilkins et al., 2011). The questionnaire also contained two open questions which asked participants to identify the advantages and disadvantages of studying in a branch university or college in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) rather than study in the university or college in the UK, Australia or other countries. The questionnaire was completed on paper or online.

In the questionnaire, collected data included participants’ gender, nationality, and level of education. They were also asked questions about ease of life and study (location of university or college, distance between UAE and origin countries, access to job, study programme, social life, close to friends and/or families, language difficulty), and country’s attraction (safety, pleasant to live and/or study, and culture and lifestyle difference) (Wilkins et al., 2011). They sent questionnaire to the students in their capstone project, which is a type of final year subject at an international branch university campus in the UAE, by sending a survey link on Facebook and sending emails with questionnaire to students. The questionnaire distribution process lasted for five weeks. However, this method was not perfect, as sending questionnaires online or by email resulted in a low response rate; only 320 usable responses were obtained (Wilkins et al., 2011). Also, as their sample was only for students studying in international branch

94 university in the UAE, there was no comparison group to compare how different push and pull factors work.

In the research, they used the push and pull factor model to analyse international students’ choice of destination countries, and this research still focused on the decision and consideration about branch universities and colleges (Wilkins and Huisman, 2011). Their pre-study included twelve individual interviews with international students, and each interview was in a semi-structured format, and lasted between 15 and 30 minutes. All interviewees were international postgraduates aged between 22 and 35. There is no doubt the sample does not represent international students’ decisions and study choice in branch universities and/or study abroad, however, based on their research purpose, the sampling method and interview did not influence their study much. After the pre-study, they used questionnaires to examine the research questions. The whole questionnaire survey period lasted 3 weeks and 160 international students participated.

In the questionnaire, there were 35 items to test exploratory factors. To avoid systematic error, all questions were divided into three topics, decision to study abroad (9 items), decision about destination country (10 items), and decision about education institution (16 items). For each item, they used a four-point scale to test the level of agreement/disagreement or importance for international students. A further 20 questions were used to test the international students’ views about available choices of destination countries, branch universities and colleges. The final question examined students’ choices and considerations about whether they would consider study in branch universities and colleges, or study abroad after they finish current programme or graduated.

In the literature studying family influences on Thai students’ foreign study decision, the researcher used two-phase mixed methods including a qualitative phase with focus group interviews and a quantitative phase with questionnaires, to collect information (Pimpa, 2003). There were three focus group interviews organised and each of the groups had nine participants (Pimpa, 2003). The first group of participants were recruited from

95 relevant students’ associations, and the rest of them were recruited using the snowball technique. The researcher moderated all the focus group interviews (Pimpa, 2003). The interview contained introduction to the study, general information collection (such as age and gender), foreign study choice and family influences discussion.

The questionnaire was for Thai students who were undergraduate, master or doctoral degree students in Australia. In total there were 803 valid responses for analysis (Pimpa, 2003). The questionnaire included 30 scale questions that covered the five factors mentioned above. Respondents could choose from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strong agree) to answer each of the questions (Pimpa, 2003). The method used for data analysis was one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) in order to test, investigate, compare and contrast the differences on their perspectives of the family influence on the foreign study decision between students from different levels of education (Pimpa, 2003).

Similar to that study, a study on the motivation of students from mainland China to study in Hong Kong and Macau also used questionnaires and interviews to collect quantitative and qualitative data (Li and Bray, 2007). The interviews were conducted to collect information about students’ perspectives, attitudes and motivations for choosing to study in Hong Kong or Macau (Li and Bray, 2007). In total there were 28 students interviewed, 18 of them were in Hong Kong and the rest were in Macau (Li and Bray, 2007).

Bodycott (2009) also used two-phase mixed methods to collect data. Questionnaires and focus group interviews were both used as survey methods. 251 parents and 100 students from mainland China (Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou) completed the survey (Bodycott, 2009). The literature suggested using two-stage survey strategy which incorporated the use of quantitative methods (questionnaires) and qualitative methods (focus group interviews) to collect data (Moschis and Moore, 1979; Golafshani, 2003; Bodycott, 2009). The quantitative method was used to collect statistical information including foreign study destination information and its sources, factors influencing foreign study attitude and factors that influence foreign study destination choice

96 (Bodycott, 2009). The qualitative method probed respondents thoughts, opinions, and attitudes towards different factors and their influences in the decision-making process (Bodycott, 2009). For the purpose of understanding the factors that influence the foreign study decision, the focus group interviews asked three main questions; reasons study abroad, their opinion of their ideal foreign study destination, how to one institution from many education institutions (Bodycott, 2009). The focus group interviews were conducted in Mandarin. 25 parents and 25 students were interviewed, and interviews were recorded, transcribed, collated and analysed (Bodycott, 2009). The study used ANOVA to identify and analyse parents’ and students’ different attitudes and opinions towards push and pull factors (Bodycott, 2009).

3.3.3.2. Parental Involvement

In order to examine the relationship between parents’ education achievement and their children’s education aspirations and achievements, researchers collected data through questionnaire surveys and telephone interviews to increase the response rate in the study and follow up (Sewell and Shah, 1968a). The sampling frame of the questionnaire survey and telephone interview included all secondary school senior students in Wisconsin public, private and parochial secondary schools. The follow-up study was conducted in about one-third of the target students.

In the variable measurement and test section, parents’ education was divided into two groups, father’s education and mother’s education (Sewell and Shah, 1968a). Each of them was measured by a six-category scale ranging from elementary school to graduate work. The independent variable, intelligence, was secondary data which was collected from Henmon-Nelson Test of Mental Ability which is administered to all junior students in high schools in Wisconsin. Based on the data, intelligence is labelled by high, middle or low (Sewell and Shah, 1968a). Perceived parents’ encouragement indicated parents’ attitude to their children’s education plan. In the questionnaire, it was a four-item scale question which included four options; parents want children to study in college, parents do not want children to study in college, parents do not care about it, and parents do not

97 allow children to study in college. The independent variable, college plan, measured whether the student, as a senior student in the secondary school, planned to study in college, university or another choice. College attendance and college graduation were based on whether students attended and gradation from college. Students were classified as high if they attended college and/or they graduated from college, and all others were classified as low.

In order to test the influence of family on male and female students’ postsecondary education plan, the researchers used questionnaires and telephone interview survey methods to collect data (Stage and Hossler, 1989). Their data was collected from 21 secondary schools in Indiana. Meanwhile they used a cluster sampling method to select schools to represent different categories or groups under their model. Ethnic group and socioeconomic status were independent variables (in Step of Predisposition). They posted a package to ninth-grade students from the targeted schools and their families. Each package contained two surveys, one for the student and one for one of their parents. They sent a reminder package one month later. The four questionnaires covered areas including demographics, family background, secondary school experience, and parents’ education expectations. To those who did not return any surveys, they adopted a telephone interview method to collect data, and compared the data gotten through this method to the data gotten through the questionnaires to see whether there is a significant difference between them. Based on their research, there were a few significant differences between the data collected from questionnaire and data collect from telephone interview.

For the questionnaire, they used a seven-category scale ranging from completion of grade school to postgraduate degree. A ten-category scale was used to measure total family income, which ranged from $10,000 to above $50,000 and the difference between each category was $4,999. Both parents’ education expectations for students, and students’ own education aspirations were measured by a six-item scale ranging from uncertain/high school diploma to professional degree. Students’ education achievements are mainly focused on their secondary school education achievement, as they were high school

98 students. They were measured using a five-category scale ranging from an A grade to an F grade. Students’ education achievements were self-reported rather than collected from schools and/or teachers. High school activities were measured by a four-point scale ranging from very active to not active. They used data collected from questionnaires and telephone interviews which are mainly focused on the factors in the predisposition stage to analyse variables’ impact on the search stage and the choice stage.

Williams et al. (2002) used mixed methods design to collect quantitative and qualitative data. They conducted a telephone survey which reached 2,019 English households. In the questionnaire, they used closed questions to collect general information. Ordinal questions and interval questions were used to test parents’ attitude towards certain parental involvement behaviour, such as visiting the teacher, and ensuring children go to school on time. Moreover, they used categorical questions to identify parents’ perspectives, such as their responsibility and school’s responsibility on children’s education. They also used open questions to gather information about parents’ opinion, such as their involvement of children’s school life. In the second stage, they used some of the questionnaire’s questions in the interview to collect qualitative data.

Schnabel et al. (2002) used questionnaires and interviews to collect information on parental involvement on education in America and Germany. In the questionnaire, they used ordinal questions, scale questions and open questions to collect data about parental involvement. The ordinal questions gathered general information such as parents’ education level. Scale questions were used to test students’ psychological variables, such as their perspectives towards a certain course, and exams. Parents’ occupations were asked as open questions and then coded by using Standard International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status (ISEI) (Ganzeboom et al., 1992).

Bodycott and Lai (2012) used mixed methods design to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. In the research, they used questionnaires in Mandarin to collect

99 information from 98 students to explore the factors influencing their decision-making. In the second stage, they interviewed 24 students to collect qualitative information.

The research used interviews to collect qualitative data. Those studies’ sampling methods and data collection methods will be helpful to decide the sampling frame, sampling method and data collection in this research.

This research analysed students’ decision to study overseas. The original data was about the education and earnings (or earnings expectation) of students. Previous studies mainly used secondary data from PSID (Panel Survey of Income Dynamics), US Census, SIE (Survey of Income and Education), Population Censuses, BIS Surveys of Consumer Expenditures, the periodic Current Population Surveys of the Census Bureau, the Michigan Surveys of Consumer Finances, PISA (Programme for International Students Assessment), EOPP (the Employer Opportunity Pilot Project), and NLSY (the National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth).

Because of the paucity of secondary data relating to international students’ decisions to study abroad, it was necessary to collect primary survey data from international students. Using an original survey instrument, data was gathered about students and the factors affecting their decisions on foreign study, both decisions to study abroad or not to study abroad. The design of the survey instrument was informed by the theoretical and conceptual frameworks from the literature.

The questionnaires used closed questions (for general question: gender, age group, education level, region belongs to, etc), scale questions (to test the importance of the assumed factors) and open questions (to explore the factors that influence the decision- making process). The questionnaire was administered electronically through online survey system.

100 The target population was all international students who were studying in Ireland, and the sample frame was all international students who were studying in University College Cork. The sampling technique was convenience sampling.

Additionally, this research used additional secondary data from the China Statistics Office, China Education Department, and Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Ireland. The secondary data was mainly used to make comparisons between different time periods and also to display the variation in Chinese students’ overseas study after 1978, when the Reform and Opening-up Policy was initiated.