Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Choosing a University: A conjoint analysis of the impact of higher fees on students applying for university in 2012

  • Published:
Tertiary Education and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the light of the forthcoming policy shift to full-cost fees for English undergraduates, this study examines the impact of fee changes on how students weigh up their university choices. Conjoint analysis is used to examine the importance that students attach to various attributes of a university. It also explores differences across subsections of the student population in terms of patterns of utility. A key finding is that students from families where there is no history of attending university will experience more disutility from the higher fees. Other patterns in utility are identified including differences between social classes and between genders. The implications for “inclusiveness” in higher education are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D. E. (2002). Toward a theory of consumer choice as socio-historically shaped practical experience: The Fits-Like-a-Glove (FLAG) framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 515–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergerson, A. A. (2010) College choice and access to college: Moving policy, research and practice to the 21st century. ASHE Higher Education Report, 35(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • BIS Report. (2011). Department for Business Innovation and Skills; HEI participation rates 06-10. Retrieved June 3, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.bis.gov.uk/analysis/statistics/higher-education/national-statistics-releases/participation-rates-in-higher-education/HEIPR-2006-to-2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, S., & Wilson, A. (2007). Which university? A study of the influence of cost and information factors on Scottish undergraduate choice. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(1), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. (2002). ‘Edinburgh, Exeter, East London — or employment?’ A review of research on young people’s higher education choices. Educational Research, 44(2), 217–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, R. C. (1986). Toward a theory of college selection: A model of college search and choice behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 13, 246–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, R. G. (1993). Non simultaneous relative performance analysis: Meta-analysis from 80 college-choice surveys with 55,276 respondents. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 4(1/2), 405–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, M. (2007). The impact of higher education rankings on student access, choice, and opportunity. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coccari, R., & Javalgi, R. (1995). Analysis of students’ needs in selecting a college or university in a changing environment. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 6(2), 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coughlan, S. (2010). How about 80% going to university? Retrieved November 1, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11438140

    Google Scholar 

  • Cubillo, J. M., Sanchez, J., & Cervino, J. (2006).International students’ decision-making process. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(2), 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnellan, J. (2002). The impact of marketer controlled factors on college-choice decisions by students at a public research university (Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst). UMI number: 3039350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doolan. (2009). Weight of costs — the financial aspects of student course choices and study experiences in a Croatian higher education setting. PhD paper produced by Institute for Social Research Zagreb, Croatia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, J. R. (2007). Note on conjoint analysis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Sloan Management Courseware, 1–19. Retrieved September 1, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.mit.edu/~hauser/Papers/NoteonConjointAnalysis.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2011). Retrieved October 25, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1897&Itemid=239

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdswoth, D., & Nind, D. (2005). Choice modelling New Zealand high school seniors’ preferences for university education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 15(2), 81–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooley, G. J., & Lynch, J. E. (1981). Modelling the student university choice process through the use of conjoint measurement techniques. European Research, 9(4), 158–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossler, D., & Gallagher, K. S. (1987). Studying student college choice: A three-phase model and the implications for policymakers. College and University, 62(3), 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivy, J. (2006). Higher education institution image: A correspondence analysis approach. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6/7), 276–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, R. (2000). Non-traditional students in Australian Higher Education: Persistent inequities and the new ideology of “Student Choice”. Tertiary Education and Management, 6(2), 105–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, B. (2006). Public services and the service economy: Individualism and the choice agenda. Journal of Social Policy, 35(1), 143–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallio, R. (1995). Factors influencing the college choice decisions of graduate students. Research in Higher Education, 36(1), 109–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotier, P., & Fox, K. (1995). Strategic marketing for educational institutions (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, L. (1997). What are student education and educational related needs? Marketing and Research Today, 25(3), 199–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovelock, C., & Wirtz, J. (2011). Services marketing: People, technology, strategy (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, K., Reiss, M. C., & Capella, L. M. (1999). An examination of perceived risk, information search and behavioral intentions in search, experience and credence services. The Journal of Services Marketing, 13(3), 208–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moogan, Y. J. (2011). Can a higher education institution’s marketing strategy improve the student-institution match? International Journal of Educational Management, 25(6), 570–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. L. (2002). Modeling preparatory commitment and non-repeatable decisions: Information processing, preference formation, and educational attainment. Rationality and Society, 14(4), 387–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. (1981). Consumer buying roles in college choice: Parents’ and students’ perceptions. College and University, 56(2), 140–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasternak, R. (2005). Choice of institutions of higher education and academic expectations: The impact of cost-benefit factors. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(2), 189–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulsen, M. B. (1990). College choice: Understanding student enrollment behavior (ASHEERIC Higher Education Report No. 6). Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perna, L. W. (2006). Understanding the relationship between information about college prices and financial aid and students’ college-related behaviors. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(12), 1620–1635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitre, P. E., Johnson, T., & Pitre, C. C. (2006). Understanding predisposition in college choice: Toward an integrated model of college choice and Theory of Reasoned Action. College and University Journal, 81(2), 35–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, L., Matzdorf, F., Smith, L., & Agahi, H. (2003). The impact of facilities on student choice of university. Facilities, 21(10), 212–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qureshi, S. (1995). College accession research: New variables in an old equation. Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 12(2), 163–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raposo, M., & Alves, H. (2007). A model of university choice: An exploratory approach. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA), Paper No. 5523. Retrieved October 19, 2011, from https://doi.org/mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5523/

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, S. L. (2010). Globalising UK Higher Education. Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies. Retrieved October 25, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.llakes.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawtooth Technical Paper. (2011). Interpreting the results of Conjoint Analysis. Retrieved October 20, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/interpca.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanka, T., Quintal, V., & Taylor, R. (2005). Factors influencing international students’ choice of an education destination — a correspondence analysis. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 15(2), 31–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, J., & Stratton, A. (2010). Tuition fees rise ‘won’t put off poor students’. The Guardian. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from https://doi.org/www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/03/tuition-fees-poor-students

    Google Scholar 

  • Shostack, G. L. (1977). Breaking free from product marketing. Journal of Marketing, 41(2), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soutar, G., & Turner, J. (2002). Students’ preferences for university: A conjoint analysis. The International Journal of Education Management, 16(1), 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, W. G., & Venegas, K. M. (2009). Finding money in the table: Information, financial aid and access to college. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(4), 363–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. P. (1998). An investigation of business undergraduates’ choice to study at Edith Cowan University (Unpublished research report). Edith Cowan University, Perth.

    Google Scholar 

  • UCAS. (2011). Data summary. https://doi.org/www.ucas.com/about_us/stat_services/stats_online/data_tables/datasummary

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, M. (1993). Variables influencing graduate business students’ college selections. College and University, Feature (Fall 1992/Winter 1993), 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia. Retrieved April 5, 2011, from https://doi.org/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjoint_analysis_(marketing)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto, G. T. (2006). University evaluation-selection: A Turkish case. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(7), 559–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaichowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(December), 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. (1981). How consumer evaluation processes differ between goods and services. In J. Donnelly & W. George (Eds.), The marketing of services (pp. 186–190). Chicago, IL: AMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). Problems and strategies in services marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49(Spring), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. West London Business School, University of West London, Room A312, St Marys Road, Ealing, London, W5 5RF, UK

    Andrew Dunnett, Jan Moorhouse, Caroline Walsh & Cornelius Barry

Authors
  1. Andrew Dunnett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Moorhouse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Caroline Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cornelius Barry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Moorhouse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dunnett, A., Moorhouse, J., Walsh, C. et al. Choosing a University: A conjoint analysis of the impact of higher fees on students applying for university in 2012. Tert Educ Manag 18, 199–220 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2012.657228

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2012.657228

Keywords

Search

Navigation