Students' choice of international branch campus in Malaysia: a gender comparative study

Abstract

PurposeIn the last decade, female students' enrolment in higher education has experienced significant growth. However, male and female students still differ in criteria set of choosing higher education institutions. While several studies have been disentangled in developed countries in analyzing gender differences in pursuing higher education, a similar area of studies conducted in developing countries is scarce. The purpose of this study is to examine gender differences and the factors that influence first-year students' choice of higher education in a developing country.Design/methodology/approachThe study involved 575 students who were either enrolled in an undergraduate or foundation program of an international branch campus. We tested the hypotheses using partial least squares multigroup analysis (PLS-MGA).FindingsOur results revealed that graduate employability, information sources, program characteristics, institution characteristics and campus safety were influential factors affecting the students' institutional choice. The MGA results also indicated that gender differences exist in selecting higher education institutions. Male students are more strongly influenced by information sources such as family, friends, media compared with female students.Originality/valueVery few international branch campus choice studies explore gender differences in developing countries. This study enriches the current literature of institutional choice through the lens of an Asian developing country and extends the discourse regarding the role of gender in influencing students' institutional choice, of which they are commonly overlooked in most literature. The study has significant implications for student recruitment managers in higher education institution to develop marketing strategies targeting to potential male and female students.

Who are studying at International Branch Campuses in China? A case study

“…Although the choice of IBC is like the process of college choice, it should note that the choice of IBC is not identical to college choice because of IBC’s different institutional characteristics, which is a foreign presence in the host country. The studies on the choice of IBC can be found in the context of Malaysia (Ahmad & Buchanan, 2015; Pyvis & Chapman, 2007; Sim et al, 2020) and the Middle East (Wilkins & Huisman, 2013, 2015). A few studies on the choice of IBC have been found in China.…”

To verify or not to verify: using partial least squares to predict effect of online news on panic buying during pandemic

“…Compared to the covariance-based SEM, Kervenoael et al (2020) elucidated that PLS-SEM offers greater flexibility to early-stage development types of study, which are frequently used for theory testing. Additionally, PLS-SEM has been deployed in studies of different contexts, including tourism (Mathew and Soliman, 2020), events (Tan et al, 2020c), education (Sim et al, 2020) and human resources (Tan et al, 2020a). Considering that the proposed model has not been previously tested before, and the purpose of our research is to extend TPB, PLS-SEM is appropriate for the analysis.…”

I give discounts, I share information, I interact with viewers: a predictive analysis on factors enhancing college students' purchase intention in a live-streaming shopping environment

“…Unlike the covariance-based SEM, PLS-SEM’s strength lies in its ability to perform predictive analysis of the model, which is one of the research objectives. Being a nonparametric method with no distributional assumptions, PLS-SEM is widely deployed in different study contexts, including tourism (Ali et al , 2018; Tan et al , 2020c; Fam et al , 2020), human resources (Tan et al , 2020a; Sarstedt and Danks, 2021; Tan et al , 2020d), education (Ghasemy et al , 2020; Sim et al , 2020; Tan et al , 2020b), technology adoption (Leong et al , 2020; Wong et al , 2019), consumer behavior (Tan et al , 2021) and knowledge management (Cepeda-Carrion et al , 2019). Following the recommendations by Hair et al (2017), we adopted a two-stage approach of assessing the measurement model followed by the structural model.…”