Which University?

The factors influencing the choices of prospective undergraduates

Richard James
Gabrielle Baldwin
Craig McInnis

Centre for the Study of Higher Education
The University of Melbourne

99/3

August 1999

Evaluations and Investigations Programme Higher Education Division Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs

©Commonwealth of Australia 1998
ISBN 0 642 23914 2
ISBN 0 642 239150 (Electronic)
DETYA No. 6381.HERC99A

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without permission from AusInfo. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Legislative Services, AusInfo, GPO Box 84, Canberra ACT 2601.

 The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

Executive Summary

This study investigates the factors influencing tertiary applicants’ selection of a preferred university, including the information sources they are using and the extent of the influence of these sources.

The report is based on a survey of tertiary applicants at the time of application in 1998 (937 responses, 29 per cent response rate), a follow-up survey at the time of offer (538 responses, 57 per cent response rate) and a series of interviews with twelve applicants.

While the surveys and interviews were of a modest sample drawn from a large applicant population, the findings provide valuable information for various groups interested in the application and selection process for entry to undergraduate education.

The research was concerned with the considerations that undergraduate applicants take into account and their levels of knowledge of particular influences. The findings reveal that many applicants could be considered to be under-informed on key matters, basing their decisions extensively on word-of-mouth information. This is apparent in the main impressions they have formed of their preferred universities, many of which are vaguely reputational, idealistic, or limited to impressions of the campus buildings and surrounds.

Overall, the study found that:

• field of study preferences are clearly the dominant factor in prospective students’ decision-making;
• applicants’ field of study preferences are associated with striking differences in the factors they consider important in their choice of a course and university;
• applicants focus strongly on broadly conceived course and institutional reputations when making their selections;
• course entry scores, and by implication ‘university scores’, serve as a proxy for quality in prospective students’ eyes;
• with the exception of ease of access from home, institutional characteristics beyond the specific qualities of particular courses are not strong influences; and
• applicants report generally low levels of knowledge of specific characteristics of courses and universities.

The most frequently used and influential information sources are materials distributed by careers teachers (for school-leavers), tertiary admission centre guides, and university open days. Commercial guides are used by less than one-third of applicants.

Curiously, applicants report they are influenced or strongly influenced by some decision-making considerations about which they claim to have little or moderate knowledge. Included here are the career opportunities for graduates in particular fields, the approaches to teaching and learning in particular courses and institutions, graduate satisfaction, and the quality of teaching in particular courses.

Applicants’ gender, socioeconomic background and geographical location are not strongly related to their decision-making, though on particular matters there are significant differences in the attitudes of these subgroups—such as the widely known gender differences in field of study preferences.

Predictably, applicants’ field of study preferences are strongly related to the factors they consider important in choosing a course and university.

• Business/Administration/Economics applicants and Engineering applicants are the most instrumentally vocational, focusing more on graduate employment rates, graduate starting salaries, and institutional image and prestige than other applicants.
• In contrast, Health, Arts and Education applicants are less vocationally focused and appear less influenced overall by specific institutional characteristics.
• Science applicants are characterised by the emphasis they attach to an institution’s research reputation and the opportunities for higher degree study.

Equally predictably, the type of university (classified for the purposes of the analysis as research-intensive, technology, metropolitan or regional) which students are applying as their first preference is related to the particular influences they consider to be most important in making their decision.

• Applicants to the ‘research’ universities show the most clear-cut patterns of decision-making, being more strongly influenced by research reputation, institutional image and prestige, and the on-campus social and cultural life than the others.
• The patterns of decision-making for applicants to the ‘technology’ universities also stand out for their focus on flexible study options and ease of access from home and work.
• The atmosphere on campus, ‘fitting in well’, and, as expected, the availability of accommodation, are stronger influences for applicants hoping to attend ‘regional’ universities.
• On the findings of this study, applicants to the ‘metropolitan’ universities are the least easy to characterise in terms of the specific influences on their decision, with ease of access from home the only area they report as a stronger consideration than other applicants.

The final chapter of the report discusses the complexity involved in providing prospective undergraduate students with helpful information on which to base their decisions. It examines some of the alternatives available and the responsibilities for ensuring the accessibility and accuracy of the information made available.

Overall, we make three main suggestions:

• in the interests of equity and efficiency, the higher education sector should make further efforts to provide access to relevant information on courses and universities. The necessary information is in three areas: the characteristics of the academic experiences that are offered, the anticipated personal knowledge and skill outcomes, and the career possibilities and likely prospects;
• all stakeholders need to make concerted efforts to alert prospective students to the importance of making informed decisions and educating them in terms of the skills and judgements required to make these decisions; and
• further monitoring is required of the information sources available to applicants and the ways in which they exercise their choices if the market in higher education provision is to function effectively. The questionnaire developed for this study may assist in this process.

It is clear from this study that applicants differ substantially in their priorities and that field of study preferences are perhaps the most reliable predictors of the particular considerations that applicants are likely to take into account. Policies designed to expand and enhance the information base on which prospective students make their decisions should take into account the diverse interests, values and emphases outlined in this report.

Download Full Report