| 5. The influences on
school-leaver applicants In this chapter we explore the decision-making patterns of school-leavers. The chapter to follow looks at mature-age applicants. While the choice patterns of the two groups are similar in many ways, the differences between them are sufficient to warrant separate reporting. In the overview to follow we indicate the major variations between the two groups. School-leavers are defined for this study as the applicants who were completing or expecting to complete secondary school in 1998. Of the 937 useable responses, 684 fell in this category. Ninety-six per cent of the school-leavers were aged eighteen years or younger, 68 per cent were female and 32 per cent were male. Around 40 per cent of school-leavers had been focused on their preferred course for at least several years (compared with 33 per cent of mature-age applicants). Most of the group (59 per cent), however, made their decision on their preferred course and university within their final year of school, with 19 per cent reporting that they made their decision only when they began seriously thinking about making a tertiary application. The following main conclusions can be drawn from the survey responses of school-leaver applicants.
5.1 Influences on field of study preferences The findings unambiguously show that the majority of applicants, including school-leavers, are primarily focused on gaining entry to a particular field of study. The factor analysis we conducted on the items relating to school-leavers’ motives in pursuing a particular field of study indicates four key dimensions in their thinking (Table 5.1). We have labelled these:
School-leavers are mainly motivated by the first of these. Their principal objectives are related to exploring an area that interests them and in which they believe they have talent or ability, and in opportunities for an interesting career. To a lesser extent, they are also concerned with the likely employment prospects. In common with our previous research on first year students (McInnis & James 1995), the comments of respondents in the present study show they typically balance their intrinsic interests in learning for its own sake and their more instrumental, vocational aspirations. While the written responses to the survey are generally brief and simple, they are nevertheless indicative of well-formed interests and objectives:
Although the impressions of the field, including its prestige and image, are important to approximately one-third of this group, a higher proportion of respondents in each case indicates that these considerations have little or no influence. School-leaver applicants are very conscious of their talents and abilities in making their choice of field of study, with 85 per cent reporting that these are a strong or very strong influence. Far fewer are influenced by their likely school results at the point of application; nevertheless 45 per cent report that this is a strong or very strong influence on them, a figure suggesting that the pressure of academic performance is still a major consideration in shaping the decisions of about half. Since school results clearly determine whether or not most applicants gain entry to their preferred courses, it is interesting that this figure is not higher. Table 5.1 Influences on field of study preference, school-leaver applicants
While this study collected no direct information to explain this result, it is possible that many applicants have long-established views of their aptitudes and capacities, and these personal assessments are figured into their choice of a suitable field of study and course–institution combination. At the point of application then, a proportion of applicants may no longer be reporting the influence of their likely results, since they conservatively ‘pitched’ their aspiration and confidently expect to gain entry to the chosen course. Only about one-quarter of respondents indicate that styles and approaches to teaching in the field have an influence on them. The level of HECS fees is of minor importance, and the wishes of parents carry little weight. Advice from teachers is marginally more influential, but what friends are choosing has little impact at all. The extent to which parents’ views are of influence is surprisingly small, since their attitudes and opinions are usually assumed to be extremely important in the formation of educational ambitions. The explanation may be that parents have a strong influence over the aspiration to continue studying and the decision to go to university. These influences are experienced throughout the early stages of shaping educational ambitions, the first stage in the model described in Chapter 3. At the actual point of tertiary application, however, parents may have less influence over the specific choices to be made, perhaps as a result of growing independence during the transition to higher education and the possibly limited knowledge among this generation of parents about tertiary fields, options and careers.
Note: * 5 point scale Employment rates for graduates in the field is certainly a consideration for this group of applicants, but in the rankings of importance, this motivation falls a long way behind the three major considerations of intrinsic interest, the prospect of an interesting and rewarding career, and the applicant’s talents and abilities. This suggests that the concern for employment outcomes, while strong, is somewhat general and diffuse. Given the notorious difficulty of forecasting labour market patterns some years in advance, this approach may be sensible and appropriate. The fact that starting salaries for graduates in the field is a strong or very strong influence for only about one-quarter of respondents and of little or no influence for almost half suggests further that applicants’ vocational interests are not narrowly strategic at this stage. Financial considerations seem to be less important than the desire to work in an area of interest and personal fulfilment. Of course, the notion of a ‘rewarding’ career can encompass both dimensions and probably does for many applicants. As Table 5.2 shows, although many school-leaver respondents indicate a high or reasonable level of knowledge of career opportunities in their chosen field of study (66 per cent), there is still a ‘gap’ between this figure and the 88 per cent who suggest that this is a strong influence on their choice. The gap is of some concern, since it suggests that some applicants are making this crucial decision on the basis of hazy impressions and vague hopes, rather than concrete information and realistic expectations. There appears to be, at least for some, a taken-for-granted assumption that university leads unproblematically to a career. 5.2 Influences on course and university preferences 5.2.1 Course decisions The factor analysis we conducted on the items relating to school-leavers’ motives in pursuing a particular course indicates three key dimensions in their thinking (Table 5.3). We have labelled these:
The specific influences associated with attainability and personal ambition that emerge as the most significant in school-leavers’ course choices are their confidence in their ability to meet the demands of the course and their wish to go to the university which offers the course. In addition, the perceived reputation of the course among employers, employment rates for graduates and the satisfaction of graduates from the course figure highly. The desire to ‘get the most out of’ TER/TES scores is also important for a sizeable group (46 per cent) although, counter to the conventional wisdom, a further 31 per cent state that this is of little or no influence. Again, the views of parents, teachers and friends have a minor influence. Table 5.3 Influences on choice of preferred course, school-leavers
Note: * 5 point scale ** percentage of respondents ranking item as either 1st, 2nd, or 3rd most important influence on them. Only clearly predominant items are reported. The response to the item ‘your wish to go to the university which offers the course’ requires further analysis. In the design of the questionnaire, this item was intended to identify those students for whom the choice of university overrode the course preference. In an extreme case, such a student would change preference from a course in Faculty X, if unable to get a place, to a completely different course in Faculty Y because he/she had such a strong wish to attend this particular institution. The item is balanced by a reverse item in the ‘preferred university’ section of the questionnaire—‘Your wish to do a particular course this university offers’—where the implication is that the university in itself does not really matter.The responses to these two items are initially puzzling. On the first, 60 per cent of respondents indicate that the university is a strong or very strong influence. On the second, the comparable figure is 83 per cent, suggesting the course takes priority. Theoretically the items should be mutually exclusive: in the first case, the institution preference overrides the course preference; in the second, the reverse is true. The pattern of responses suggests that this is not the way most respondents see the relationship between course and institution. They seem to see ‘this course at this university’ as a single entity, and their choice as a one-stage (course at institution) rather than two-stage (course then institution) process. In both sections, this composite is a strong influence on their choice. Applicants consistently link their preference to the reputation of courses:
However, there are ‘gaps’ between the claimed extent of various influences and the actual knowledge of these matters (Table 5.4). While a high proportion of 57 per cent of respondents state that the reputation of the course is a strong influence, only 36 per cent believe they have a reasonable or good knowledge of that reputation. Forty-four per cent of respondents indicate that the quality of teaching in the course is a strong influence, but only 25 per cent claim to know much about it.
* 5 point scale Similar gaps exist for ‘approaches to teaching and learning in the course’, ‘satisfaction of graduates from the course’ and, to a smaller extent, ‘employment rates for graduates’. However, the direction of the gap is reversed for the item on ‘opportunities for flexible study options’ with more respondents claiming knowledge of this area than those who indicate that it is a strong influence. Despite evidence of areas of uncertainty among this group of applicants, some appear well-informed about specific course characteristics and are strongly motivated by them. Applicants who focused on course qualities made comments such as ‘in this course the university gives you paid experience in the workplace as a part of the course’ or mentioned the opportunities for picking elective subjects. 5.2.2 University decisions With the exception of the wish to do a particular course offered by the institution, already mentioned, the university-specific motives are generally not as strong as those affecting choice of field or course. As the data in Table 5.5 indicate, the factor analysis we conducted on the items relating to school-leavers’ motives in selecting an institution indicates three key dimensions in their thinking. We have labeled these:
Overall, none of these aggregate factors was a particularly strong consideration for school-leavers, compared with the field of study and course influences reported earlier, though individual items within the scales do show moderate influence. Among the stronger university-specific items were the campus surroundings and atmosphere, the institution’s prestige and the sense that ‘I would fit in well’, but no one of these was a major influence for more than half of the school-leavers and these items barely matched the simple influence of ‘ease of access from home’. Respondent comments about their chosen university reveal very broad impressions:
Size of campus is influential for only one-quarter of the group. University facilities, including information technology, are not very important in the thinking of most respondents, nor is the availability of housing. The employment rate of graduates from the university is a strong influence for almost half of the applicants, and this item was nominated among the three most important considerations by 26 per cent (Table 5.5)—and as the single most important consideration by 14 per cent. Typically, respondents made comments along the following lines:
Again, parents’ views and friends’ plans are not perceived to be a major influence by most applicants, with teacher’s recommendations somewhat more influential. Table 5.5 Influences on choice of university, school-leaver applicants
5=very strong influence to 1=no influence at all ** percentage of respondents ranking item as either 1st, 2nd, or 3rd most important influence on them. Only clearly predominant items are reported. Some applicants were not particularly concerned about the university they would attend, as long as they were offered a course they perceived to be valuable. As one school-leaver commented,
5=a good deal of knowledge to 1=very little knowledge at all A sizeable shortfall between perceived influence and actual knowledge is evident in relation to employment rates of graduates, the university’s research reputation, opportunities for higher degree study, the academic services (such as learning skills support), and starting salaries for graduates. A reverse gap is evident on some other items—that is, more respondents report high levels of knowledge than indicate that the item has been a strong influence on them. This applies to the items dealing with clubs and societies, opportunities for flexible study options, sporting and recreation facilities, size of the campus and campus surroundings, and the availability of accommodation. These patterns may indicate that the information available to prospective students is better in relation to what they perceive as relatively superficial matters than to core matters or concerns. 5.3 Summary In Table 5.7 the most influential considerations in school-leavers’ decision-making are summarised. It shows the dominance, as discussed, of field of study preferences. At the heart of these preferences is interest in studying a particular area of knowledge and later working in a related field. Table 5.7 Summary of main influences and perceived knowledge of these influences, school-leaver applicants
When it comes to choosing a particular course, confidence in their capacities to meet the demands of the program figures highly in applicants’ thinking. The italicised items in the table also reveal the close association between course and institutional preference identified by the study. The table shows the sometimes large gaps between the extent of influence of particular considerations and applicants’ apparent lack of confidence in their levels of knowledge of these. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contents Any comments or queries should be sent to: highered@detya.gov.au |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||