INTRODUCTION
Research background
The Vietnamese higher education sector has experienced rapid growth due to the initiatives of the Ministry of Education and Training, reflecting the government's long-term goal of establishing Vietnam as a premier education hub in Southeast Asia This growth is evident in various aspects, including the rise in higher education institutions, increased student enrollment, enhanced government support, and improved quality of educational outcomes.
The Vietnamese higher education sector has experienced significant growth due to government policies promoting liberalization and democratization According to the Ministry of Education and Training, the number of universities and colleges in Vietnam has steadily increased from 403 in 2010 to 421 in 2013 As a result, these institutions are now challenged to compete effectively for student enrollment in their programs.
The growing number of higher education institutions provides high school students with a wider selection of universities for their studies Despite this increased choice, a study conducted by the Supporting and Psychological Counseling Center at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University Hanoi, reveals that 75.6% of students are dissatisfied with their university choices (Duy Anh, 2013).
Moreover, the research also presents that there were 32.4 percent of students wanted to re- choose higher education universities.
Student satisfaction in higher education is crucial for fostering motivation and enhancing future career prospects When students are content with their educational choices, they are more likely to maximize their potential, leading to increased productivity and efficiency in the workplace Conversely, dissatisfaction can result in additional time and financial investment in re-studying Thus, identifying the factors that influence student satisfaction is essential for improving their overall educational experience.
Statement of the problem
As the demand for higher education continues to rise, universities are implementing various promotional strategies to enhance brand awareness and attract more students to their programs This has led to intense competition within the sector To thrive, universities must identify the key factors influencing student satisfaction and develop effective strategies that leverage these insights, ultimately providing superior educational solutions and boosting their reputations.
Besides that, in the reality, there are many students who do not determine exactly their choice in higher education According an investigation result from Nguoi lao dong Newspaper
A significant number of students struggle with career clarity when selecting higher education institutions, with over 64% unable to identify their career objectives, as reported in 2005 Additionally, more than 60% of students acknowledge a lack of career orientation during their university registration process Research from Vietnam National University Hanoi further highlights that 65.4% of students are uncertain about their career goals Consequently, this confusion leads to a notable 75.6% of students expressing dissatisfaction with their higher education choices.
This research aims to identify the factors influencing student satisfaction in their educational choices The findings will assist families, high schools, and educational organizations in developing effective career guidance strategies, ultimately creating optimal conditions for high school students as they select higher education institutions.
As the education sector continues to grow and higher education institutions strive to enhance student satisfaction and attract more enrollees, marketers are increasingly focused on identifying the key factors that influence students' choices Drawing from various theories and research, both internationally and within the Vietnamese context, five critical factors have been identified: student characteristics, the influence of significant individuals, career opportunities, the inherent qualities of higher education institutions, and the universities' efforts to effectively communicate with prospective students This research aims to examine the relationships between these factors and their impact on student satisfaction.
Research objectives
This research investigates the factors influencing student satisfaction with their higher education choices in Ho Chi Minh City It examines the impact of student characteristics, the role of influential individuals, career opportunities, inherent attributes of higher education institutions, and the efforts made by universities to engage prospective students The findings aim to provide valuable insights for scholars and university managers to enhance student satisfaction in their educational decisions.
To archive the objective, this research will try to investigate:
- Whether there is a relationship between students‟ characteristics and satisfaction from students‟ choice or not? If yes, this is the positive or negative correlation.
- Whether there is a relationship between the influences of significant people and satisfaction from students‟ choice or not? If yes, this is the positive or negative correlation.
- Whether there is a relationship between the career opportunities after graduation and satisfaction from students‟ choice or not? If yes, this is the positive or negative correlation.
- Whether there is a relationship between higher education universities‟ fixed characteristics and satisfaction from students‟ choice or not? If yes, this is the positive or negative correlation.
The relationship between higher education universities' communication efforts and prospective students' satisfaction with their choices is a critical area of study Effective communication can significantly enhance students' perceptions and satisfaction, suggesting a positive correlation Conversely, inadequate communication may lead to dissatisfaction, indicating a negative correlation Understanding this dynamic is essential for universities aiming to improve their recruitment strategies and student engagement.
Research significance
This research aims to enhance understanding of student satisfaction regarding their choice of higher education institutions It will explore the impact of student characteristics, the influence of key individuals, career opportunities, inherent traits of universities, and the communication efforts of universities with prospective students The findings will assist higher education managers in improving educational services, attracting more students, and boosting institutional reputations.
Research scope
The research focuses in students from higher education universities in Ho Chi Minh
The period of distributing the questionare to the repondents lasted from August 2014 to early September 2014.
Research structure
The research consists of five parts Here below structure will be proposed for it:
Chapter I: Introduction provides a comprehensive overview of the research, outlining its background and the statement of the problem It highlights the objectives of the study, emphasizes its significance, defines the research scope, and presents the overall structure of the research.
- Chapter II: Literature review, Hypotheses and Conceptual model This chapter reviews previous related theories and research, as well as offers the hypotheses and proposes the conceptual research model.
- Chapter III: Research methodology This chapter provides general method how the research is designed and implemented, data collection and data analysis method, as well as measurement scales.
- Chapter IV: Data analysis and Findings This chapter translates primary data collected from surveys, analyzes data as well as discusses the result findings in connection with literature review.
- Chapter V: Conclusion, Implication, Limitation and Direction for future research. This chapter will conclude the research finding, provide research implication and give the further suggestion as well as research limitation.
This chapter introduces the background of the selected research topic, outlining the problem context, research objectives, and scope It also presents the research structure, providing an overview of the study's contents The subsequent chapter will include a literature review, along with the formulation of hypotheses and the proposed conceptual research model.
LITERATURE REVIEW, HYPOTHESE AND CONCEPTUAL MODEL
The concept of Higher education
In today's fast-paced world, defining higher education poses significant challenges According to UNESCO's 1998 declaration, higher education encompasses all forms of post-secondary studies, training, and research provided by universities and other accredited institutions recognized by relevant state authorities.
Higher education encompasses a diverse range of educational types, including academic, professional, technical, medical, artistic, and pedagogical disciplines It is typically offered by universities, technical institutes, and teacher training colleges, catering to students who have successfully completed their secondary education.
According to the Education Law 2005 enacted by the Vietnamese National Assembly, higher education encompasses four types of training: college, university, master’s, and doctoral education This research primarily concentrates on university education due to its specific limitations.
University education typically requires four to six years of study for individuals with upper secondary or professional secondary education diplomas, while those with professional secondary diplomas in the same field may need two and a half to four years Additionally, individuals holding college diplomas in the same discipline usually complete their studies in one and a half to two years (Education Law 2005, p.15).
Overview of students ‟ choice
The metaphor of students as consumers is increasingly prevalent in higher education, particularly in North America and Europe (Fisher, 1993) Research by Vrontis et al (2007) indicates that when higher education is viewed as a process, students become the customers within that framework Consequently, universities, akin to providers in other industries, prioritize meeting the needs of these customers.
Considering students as consumers, their choice of higher education reflects a consumer decision-making process Numerous researchers have explored and analyzed this behavior among students.
Many students evaluate universities based on economic effectiveness, weighing the costs against perceived benefits This decision-making process involves comparing different institutions and factoring in individual preferences and values (Hossler et al., 1999; Manski and Wise, 1983).
Chapman's students' choice model (1981) identifies four key factors influencing a student's decision-making process: individual student characteristics, the impact of significant individuals, the inherent qualities of universities, and the efforts made by universities to effectively communicate with prospective students.
In his 1982 study, Jackson explores the decision-making process students undergo when choosing a higher education institution, identifying three key stages The first stage, known as the preference stage, highlights the significant impact of academic achievement on students' educational aspirations, alongside influences from family background and social context During the second stage, students focus on specific characteristics of potential universities, such as tuition fees, location, ranking, and academic quality After evaluating these factors, students narrow down their options and arrive at a final decision regarding their university choice.
Chapman (1984) presents a distinct perspective on students' decision-making stages, identifying two key phases: the pre-search stage and the search stage During the pre-search stage, family income significantly influences students' choices, alongside their consideration of universities that match their academic abilities In the subsequent search stage, students actively collect information about specific universities to inform their decisions.
The Hanson and Litten model significantly enhances the understanding of student choice by integrating elements from both Jackson's student-based model and Chapman's institution-based model This comprehensive framework is structured into three distinct stages, providing a nuanced perspective on the factors influencing students' educational decisions.
The journey to post-secondary education begins with students deciding to pursue higher education, followed by researching universities and compiling a list of potential candidates The final step involves applying to and enrolling in a chosen institution Throughout these stages, various factors influence students' decisions, including their race and family culture, the quality and social composition of their high school, guidance from parents and counselors, personal self-image and personality, economic conditions, available financial aid, college recruitment activities, and the size and programs offered by colleges.
Vrontis et al (2007) expanded upon existing models to explore the factors influencing higher education students' choices Their research identifies four key determinants: individual factors, environmental influences, characteristics of higher education institutions, and attributes of high schools.
Satisfaction from Student s‟ choice
Customer satisfaction is defined as the emotional response a person experiences when evaluating a product's performance against their expectations, as noted by Kotler (cited in Dinh, 2012) When a product's performance falls short of expectations, it leads to customer dissatisfaction Conversely, if the performance meets expectations, customers feel satisfied, and when it exceeds those expectations, they experience a heightened level of satisfaction or delight.
According to Wilson (1995), service expectations significantly influence how services are evaluated Individuals with lower expectations tend to be less critical of the service they receive compared to those with higher expectations Consequently, survey ratings of services can be seen as a comparison between the actual experience of service delivery and the expected level of service.
The student choice process is a multifaceted journey influenced by various factors, as highlighted in the research of Chapman (1981), Jackson (1982), and Hanson and Litten (1989) A similar framework is presented by Hossler and Gallagher (1987), which outlines three key stages: predisposition, search, and choice.
In the initial stage of the educational decision-making process, students identify their interests for further education after high school The next stage involves researching and collecting relevant information to aid their choices Finally, in the decision-making stage, students assess various universities they have considered and make their ultimate selection.
Students' decision-making processes are significantly influenced by psychological factors, including their expectations and the opinions of key individuals in their lives, which are essential for assessing their satisfaction with university education (Arambewela and Hall, 2001) The quality and performance of educational services are evaluated only after students have experienced them, with their satisfaction perceptions serving as a key measure of this evaluation.
After enrolling in an educational institution, students evaluate whether the services provided meet their initial expectations, leading to a comparison of their standards and perceptions of the experience.
A student may pose some questions; for example, is it value for money, time and effort? And have they made the right decision by enrolling at that specific university?
The measurement scale for students‟ satisfaction is adapted from the customer satisfaction scales from Taylor and Baker (1994).
Hypotheses
Students' characteristics significantly influence their decisions regarding participation in post-secondary education According to Chapman (1981), three primary factors affect students' choices of higher education institutions: the current attributes of the student, their family background, and the characteristics of the universities themselves.
The Hanson and Litten model highlights that student characteristics, such as race and personality, significantly influence their decisions when selecting a university for higher education (Hanson and Litten, 1989).
According to Vrontis et al (2007), the characteristics of students significantly influence their choices, shaped by their abilities and interests Key factors in this regard include class, self-image, personality, and lifestyle.
The relationship between individual characteristics and students' choices in higher education institutions is significant When a student's traits align with a university's offerings, their likelihood of selecting that institution increases Additionally, students with strong academic abilities tend to achieve better high school results, which expands their options for university selection.
12 for post secondary education Besides that, the family income also affected to the students‟ choice.
Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: There is a positive correlation between students’ characteristics and satisfaction from students’ choice in higher education universities.
Research by Chapman in 1981 highlights the significant influence of friends and family on students' decisions regarding higher education Supporting this, a study conducted with Johnson in 1979 revealed that first-year students prioritize the opinions and university choices of their peers when making their own decisions Additionally, Jackson (1982) emphasizes that family plays a crucial role in the decision-making process for students at three key stages when selecting a university.
In Asian culture, family and friends significantly influence students' higher education choices Research by Joseph & Joseph (1998, 2000) highlights the combined impact of institutional information and family influence as a key independent variable in this decision-making process Similarly, Pimpa (2004) emphasizes that family influence is crucial for Thai students when selecting higher education options Yusof et al (2008) further support this notion, indicating that family prospects play a vital role in students' selection processes.
Research by Chen and Zimitat (2006) highlights the significant impact of family and friends on Taiwanese students' intentions to study abroad, a finding echoed by Wagner and Fard (2009) Similarly, Joseph (2010) emphasizes that family members, teachers, guidance counselors, and admission counselors play a crucial role in influencing students' decisions when selecting higher education institutions.
Advisory from trusted individuals plays a crucial role in helping students choose higher education institutions Students often opt for universities that receive positive recommendations from family, teachers, friends, or other relatives.
Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: There is a positive correlation between influence of significant people and satisfaction from students’ choice in higher education universities.
According to Hanson and Litten (1989), environmental factors such as occupational structure and cultural conditions significantly influence students' decision-making processes Additionally, the Cabrera and La Nasa model (2000) highlights the importance of students' occupational aspirations as a key factor in shaping their choices (Marvin, 2006).
According to Kandiko (2013), students primarily choose higher education institutions to enhance their career prospects They seek guidance and support from these universities to improve their knowledge and skills, ultimately paving the way for future career advancement.
Students increasingly prefer universities that offer strong prospects for future careers and broaden their options in career paths.
Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: There is a positive correlation between career opportunities after graduation and satisfaction from students’ choice in higher education universities.
According to Chapman (1981), the characteristics of higher education institutions significantly influence students' choices He identifies key factors such as location, costs, campus environment, and the availability of desired programs as relatively fixed attributes that impact decision-making for prospective students.
According to Maringe (2006), the introduction of fees in higher education has led to an increase in "consumerist behaviour" among applicants, making value for money a crucial factor in their decision-making process She emphasizes that price-related information, including tuition fees, living costs, and scholarships, plays a significant role alongside program characteristics in influencing potential students' choices.
According to Marvin (2006), key characteristics of higher education institutions significantly influence students' choices In addition to location and costs, he highlights the importance of a university's reputation and the availability of support services.
In conclusion, it can be inferred that students have a trend to choose the higher education universities that have suitable characteristics with themselves, and support them most to study in.
Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: There is a positive correlation between higher education universities’ characteristics and satisfaction from students’ choice in higher education universities.
2.4.5 Higher education universities’ efforts to communicate with prospect students
According to Chapman (1981), marketing activities in higher education institutions play a crucial role in attracting prospective students He emphasizes that effective communication with potential students significantly enhances their likelihood of choosing a particular university Therefore, providing comprehensive information about higher education institutions increases the chances of student selection.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research process
This research is described in the figure 2:
Research design
In order to archive the research objective, both qualitative and quantitative data collection was used to collect primary data in this study.
Qualitative research, as defined by Kirk and Miller (1986), allows for an in-depth exploration of phenomena that are either under-researched or offer new insights into established ideas In this study, qualitative methods were employed to assess respondents' satisfaction with their choices of higher education institutions, enabling potential modifications based on findings This approach aims to provide robust evidence to support the research hypotheses and model.
Quantitative research involves the collection of numerical data through structured surveys, which allow for easy statistical presentation of results (Neville, 2007) This method is particularly effective for testing theories or explanations (Creswell, 2003) In this study, a questionnaire derived from a literature review is utilized to examine the factors influencing students' choices in higher education It employs measurement scales to assess the impact of individual determinants, environmental factors, and the characteristics of universities and high schools on students' decisions.
Sample selection
The population for this research was 5 higher education universities in total 48 universities in Ho Chi Minh City.
Krejcie and Morgan (1970) determined that for a population of 200, a sample size of 152 is suitable Bryant and Yarnold (1995) emphasized that the sample size should be at least five times the number of variables, establishing a subjects-to-variables ratio of five or greater They also noted that analyses should include a minimum of 100 observations, regardless of this ratio Supporting this, DeCoster (2004) reiterated that the minimum sample size for statistical analysis should be at least five times the number of independent variables, but not less than 100 Therefore, the sample size must meet these criteria to ensure robust analysis.
N >= 100 and N >= 5k (where k is the number of variables).
This research has 23 observation variables, as the results, the minimum sample size required is:
Therefore, the sample size of this research - 300 students –was acceptable The data was selected using simple random sampling techniques.
Data source
Based on the research process, primary data was collected from interviewing opened questions (qualitative research) and questionare survey (quantitative research).
The study utilized face-to-face interviews with predetermined questions to explore factors influencing student satisfaction in higher education Interviewees were encouraged to elaborate on their responses, providing deeper insights into their choices The detailed interview questions can be found in Appendix 1 Decisions were made based on a consensus, requiring at least two-thirds of the interviewees to share similar viewpoints.
In a recent study, seven out of ten participants shared similar views on factors affecting satisfaction in higher education choices They highlighted the impact of students' characteristics, the influence of significant individuals, and the inherent qualities of universities as key elements Additionally, some expressed uncertainty regarding career opportunities and the efforts made by universities to engage with prospective students Ultimately, the majority agreed that students' characteristics are the most crucial criterion influencing their satisfaction with their chosen higher education institutions.
20 their satisfaction As the result, this first investigation provided strong evidence to confirm the research hypotheses and model.
The questionnaire survey was designed as a structured interview, ensuring that all participants received the same questions in a consistent manner (Sekaran & Bougie, 2011) To achieve a high response rate, the questionnaires were personally delivered to respondents, while additional copies were distributed via email and in hard copy format (Kothari et al., 2005).
The collected data was analyzed by SPSS software.
Secondary data was crucial to this research, as it facilitated the identification of the problem statement and research objectives A significant portion of the literature review was derived from secondary sources, providing a comprehensive understanding of the topic while saving time and resources The research incorporated information from various sources, including existing literature, books, international business journals, articles, and professional newspapers, as well as relevant content from expert websites on the internet.
Measurement scales
The research identified five key variables influencing students' choices in higher education: personal characteristics of students, the impact of significant individuals, career expectations, inherent traits of universities, and the efforts made by universities to engage with prospective students These variables were assessed using a Five-point Likert scale, where responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
The following table – table 1 - shows the measurement scales for this research model:
SSC01 Overall, this university service matches my expectations Adapted from Taylor and Baker
(1994) SSC02 I feel being satisfied with this university
Variables Questions: Whether did these factors affect to your choice in higher education universities or not?
SC01 The suitability between student‟s ability with the university‟s characteristics
SC02 The suitability between student‟s interest with the university‟s characteristics SC03 The family financial statement
SC04 Students‟ performance in high school
The influences of significant persons
ISP01 The advise from teachers
ISP02 The advise from parents
ISP03 The advise from older brothers/ other sisters
ISP04 The advise from friends
ISP05 The advise from high school admission officers
Adapted from Hanson and Litten (1989)
CO02 The probability to have good job
CO03 The probability to have high income
CO04 The probability to reach high position in society
Adapted from Chapman (1981) HEUC02 Scholarship
Adapted from Marvin (2006) HEUC05 The student support services
Higher education universities’ efforts to communicate with prospect students
HEUE01 Advertisement via newspapers, magazines
HEUE03 Advertisement at the high school
HEUE04 Campus tour Adapted from Hossler and
HEUE05 Recruiment activities Adapted from Vrontis et al
Data analysis method
The analysis of the collected data was conducted using SPSS software version 20 for Windows Initially, Descriptive Statistics were employed to outline the sample profile, providing a comprehensive overview of the fundamental characteristics relevant to the research.
Secondly, to access the internal consistency of the constructs, this study was examined by Cronbach‟s alpha test.
Cronbach's alpha, as defined by Yu (2001), is a metric that evaluates the squared correlation between observed scores and true scores, indicating the reliability of a measurement This reliability is quantified by the ratio of true score variance to observed score variance, with Cronbach's alpha values typically ranging from 0 to 1 A Cronbach's alpha value exceeding 0.7 is generally considered acceptable, as supported by Nunnally (1978) and George and Mallery (2003).
To identify the factors influencing the measures and assess the strength of their relationships, this study utilized Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).
Factor analysis is a multivariate statistical method that identifies the underlying relationships among numerous variables Its primary goal is to condense the information from a vast array of variables into a more manageable set of factors, facilitating easier interpretation and analysis (Hair et al 1998).
In Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure is crucial for assessing the validity of measurement scales, with values ranging from 0 to 1 As outlined by Hair et al (2010), essential criteria for retaining items include a factor loading exceeding 0.5, Eigenvalues greater than 1, cumulative explained variance above 50%, a KMO value over 0.5, and a significant Bartlett test result (p < 0.05).
Finally, Multiple Linear Regression method was used to test the research model and hypotheses.
According to Hair et al (2010, p 156), a discrepancy exists between the actual and predicted values of the dependent variable, leading to random errors during sample data predictions This discrepancy is referred to as the residual (e).
Based on these studies, the multiple regression formula was:
Here is the formula to estimate the satisfaction of students‟ choice (SSC) from the.
Y (SSC) = B0 + B1*(SC) + B2*(ISP) + B3*(SOS) + B4*(CE) + B5*(HEUC) + B6*(HEUE)
Where in: Y (SSC): is the dependent variable, it is the satisfaction from students‟ choice
B0: is constant B1,B2,…,Bn: is called beta weight, standardized regression coefficient, or beta coefficient
The study identifies five independent factors influencing students' decisions: students' characteristics (SC), the impact of significant individuals (ISP), career expectations (CE), fixed attributes of higher education institutions (HEUC), and universities' efforts to engage prospective students (HEUE) Additionally, Meyers, Gamst, and Guarino (2006) highlight the importance of R², which measures the variance in the dependent variable explained by the regression model, with higher R² values indicating stronger explanatory power (Hair et al., 2010).
This chapter outlines the research methodology, covering key aspects such as the research process, design, sample selection, data sources, data analysis methods, and measurement scales The subsequent chapter will focus on analyzing the collected data and presenting the findings.
DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Sample descriptive statistics
A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed to students in Ho Chi Minh City, yielding 257 responses However, 12 responses were deemed invalid due to incomplete information, resulting in 245 valid questionnaires for analysis.
The survey are gathered from 131 male respondents (53.5%) and 114 female respondents (46.5%).
In a study on higher education, the majority of respondents, accounting for 27.8%, were from economic universities, totaling 68 participants This was followed by 52 respondents from natural universities, representing 21.2%, and 57 from social universities, making up 23.3% Additionally, 49 respondents, or 20%, were from technological universities, while 19 participants, equating to 7.8%, came from other types of universities.
Table 4.2: Kind of higher education universities (HEUs)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid NATURAL
Table 4 3: Gender, Kind of higher education universities (HEUs)
Assessment and Refinement of measurement scale
Cronbach's alpha is a widely utilized measure of reliability in statistics, often employed to assess the consistency of survey factors This method yields a reliability coefficient that typically falls between 0 and 1, indicating the level of reliability of the data collected.
George and Mallery (2003) provide the following rules of thumb: _ > 0.9 – Excellent, _
> 0.8 – Good, _ > 0.7 – Acceptable, _ > 0.6 – Questionable, _ > 0.5 – Poor, and _ < 0.5 – Unacceptable.
An alpha coefficient of 0.7 or above signifies an acceptable level of internal consistency among the factor's items Additionally, any item with a corrected item-total correlation below 0.3 will be removed from the questionnaire to ensure quality and reliability.
The results of Cronbach„s Alpha coefficients for each scale are given as following tables:
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
Satisfaction of Students’ choice – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.756
The influences of significant persons – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.703
Career opportunities after graduation – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.719
Higher education universities’ characteristics – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.706
Higher education universities’ efforts to communicate with prospect students – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.736
The Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.703 to 0.756, indicating good reliability, with the highest score attributed to student satisfaction regarding their choices The lowest score was associated with the influence of significant individuals Other factors, including students' characteristics, career opportunities post-graduation, the characteristics of higher education institutions, and their efforts to engage with prospective students, also achieved acceptable reliability values above 0.7.
The analysis revealed that the total correlation for all items met the required threshold of 0.3, while the Cronbach's alpha values remained consistent when items were deleted, with the exception of item HEUE04, which did not significantly impact the overall reliability Therefore, there was no necessity to remove this item from the analysis.
From these above analysis, it can be deduced that all scale has satisfied the requirement for reliability test.
Following the assessment of scale measurement reliability, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was employed to evaluate the validity of the measurement scale EFA is a multivariate statistical technique that uncovers the underlying structure among numerous variables, effectively summarizing and condensing the information from a large set of variables into a smaller number of factors (Hair et al., 2010).
In Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure assesses the adequacy of sampling for validating measurement scales, with values ranging from 0 to 1 To ensure the reliability of the factors, certain criteria must be met: each item's highest factor loading should exceed 0.5, eigenvalues must be greater than 1, the cumulative explained variance should surpass 50%, and the KMO value should be above 0.5 Additionally, the Bartlett test must yield a significant result (p < 0.05).
According to the table 6 and table 7, the result has met all the requirements from this test: KMO was 0.500, significant was 0.000, cumulative percentage was 80.384%.
Table 4.6: KMO and Barlett‟s Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square
Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
The analysis revealed a single extracted component related to the dependent factor, indicating that respondents perceived student satisfaction variables as a unified component Consequently, there was no need for a rotated component matrix in this context.
The EFA testing results, as indicated in Tables 9 and 10, revealed a KMO value of 0.796, meeting the necessary criteria for analysis Key findings included a highest factor loading exceeding 0.5, a Bartlett's test result of 0.000, and eigenvalues greater than 1, collectively accounting for 61.978% of the variance in the dependent variable based on the observed variables Consequently, all items were retained for subsequent analysis.
Table 4.9: KMO and Barlett‟s Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy
Bartlett's Test of Approx Chi-Square
The Rotated component matrix revealed the loadings of variables on seven independent factors, leading to the removal of two variables, ISP03 and HEUC05, for not meeting the criteria Consequently, the scale was reduced from 23 items to 21 items and restructured into six groups, as detailed in the table below.
The influences of significant persons (ISP) ISP01
Social occupational structure after graduation (SOS) CO01
Career expectation after graduation (CE) CO03
Higher education universities’ characteristics (HEUC) HEUC01
Higher education universities’ efforts to communicate with prospect students (HEUE)
Recent changes in various factors have led to a shift in respondents' perceptions of certain observed variables, diverging from previous theories and research hypotheses This shift highlights the interviewers' true understanding of the elements influencing student satisfaction with their choices.
Following the EFA, the Career Expectation (CE) group was subdivided into two detailed categories: Social Occupational Structure (SOS), which comprises CO01 and CO02, and Career Expectation (CE), including CO03 and CO04 Additionally, one item was removed from both the Influences of Significant Persons (ISP) group and the Higher Education Universities' Efforts (HEUE) group, specifically ISP03 and HEUE05, respectively.
CS and HEUC – had no change.
After regroup the items, there is requirement to retest reliability again because some groups have changed and some factors have been deleted from the scale.
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
Satisfaction of Students’ choice – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.756
The influences of significant persons – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.692
Social occupational structure after graduation – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.654
Career expectation after graduation – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.919
Higher education universities’ characteristics – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.706
Higher education universities’ efforts to communicate with prospect students indirectly – Cronbach‟s alpha 0.669
The Cronbach's alpha values in the study generally exceeded the acceptable threshold of 0.7, with the exception of the ISP and SOS groups; however, these outliers can still be considered acceptable.
In the HEUE group, removing HEUE04 would raise the Cronbach's alpha from 0.669 to 0.701, indicating an increase in reliability Consequently, this item will be excluded from the measurement scale The revised scale, now consisting of 20 items, will undergo exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to assess its validity.
The Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) yielded a KMO value of 0.786 and a cumulative variance of 61.215%, indicating that the results met the necessary criteria for the EFA test Consequently, all items will be retained for the subsequent analysis phase.
Table 4 14: KMO and Barlett‟s Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Approx Chi-Square
After conducting a rotation analysis, six factors were identified that collectively explain 61.215% of the variance in the dependent variable The first factor contributes 24.950%, followed by the second factor at 9.713%, the third factor at 8.459%, the fourth at 6.270%, the fifth at 6.063%, and the sixth at 5.760%.
Hypotheses Testing
The homoscedasticity test for residuals is essential in verifying that the variance of residuals remains consistent across all predicted responses When residuals are randomly distributed around zero, it indicates that the variance is constant, ensuring the reliability of the regression model.
From the figure 4, test for homoscedasticity was not violated.
There are two stages to identify multicollinearity, they are: inspection of correlation coefficients and Tolerance/VIF value.
These below results in table 18 and table 19 showed that the data has met the requirement of multicollinearity test.
SSC SC ISP SOS CE HEUC HEUE
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
B Std Error Beta Tolerance VIF
Figure 5 illustrates that the shape of the residuals resembles a symmetrical bell curve, with the mean close to zero Additionally, the majority of the plots in Figure 6 are aligned in a linear fashion Consequently, this indicates that the residuals follow a normal distribution.
To estimate student satisfaction with their choices (SSC), consider key independent factors such as student characteristics (SC), the influence of significant individuals (ISP), the social occupational structure (SOS), career expectations (CE), the inherent attributes of higher education institutions (HEUC), and the proactive communication efforts of universities with prospective students (HEUE).
Y (SSC) = B0 + B1*(SC) + B2*(ISP) + B3*(SOS) + B4*(CE) + B5*(HEUC) + B6*(HEUE)
The hypotheses regarding the dependent variable, satisfaction, were formulated based on multiple linear regression analysis, which serves to test the model's hypotheses Utilizing SPSS software, the following tables present the outcomes of the multiple linear regression analysis.
Std Error of the Estimate
The Model Summary table revealed an R value of 0.696 and an R-Square value of 0.627, indicating that 62.7% of the variance in student satisfaction can be attributed to the independent variables in the model.
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
The significance level was below 0.01, indicating that the model effectively fits the data This suggests a strong linear correlation between the independent and dependent variables, with a confidence level of 99%.
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
The analysis revealed that all independent variables, except for HEUE, exhibited significant correlations with the dependent variable, as indicated by their Sig values below 0.05, confirming a 95% confidence level Consequently, HEUE was excluded from the model due to its negligible impact on student satisfaction Additionally, the Constant value was minimal, negating the necessity for further calculations in the formula.
Therefore, the equation was showed:
Y (SSC) = 0.261*(SC) + 0.123*(ISP) + 0.151*(SOS) + 0.295*(CE) + 0.149*(HEUC)
H1: There is a positive correlation between students’ characteristics and satisfaction from students’ choice in higher education universities.
The Standard regression coefficients beta of students‟ characteristics (CS) on satisfaction from students‟ choice (SSC) was 0.261, t-value was 4.545 and the Sig value was
0.000 (
