A Study of Factors Influencing Students’ Decision to
Pursue to Tertiary Education
Rizki Hafidhul Jalaluddin Cheah Megan
Faculty of Business and Information Faculty of Business and Information Faculty of Business and Information
Science, UCSI University, Jalan Science, UCSI University, Jalan Science, UCSI University, Jalan
Menara Gading, 56000 Cheras, Kuala Menara Gading, 56000 Cheras, Kuala Menara Gading, 56000 Cheras, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia Lumpur, Malaysia
rizkihafidhul65@gmail.com megan_4896@hotmail.com
ABSTRACT
There are many underlying factors that may influence the students
to make a decision to further their study in tertiary education
which is a key issue for higher education institution authorities to
acknowledge. Hence, the main purpose of this research is to
identify the factors affecting students’ decision in pursuing
tertiary education. This research will be focusing on the three
factors which are student attributes, social influence and financial
consideration. Online questionnaires were being distributed as a
primary data to the secondary school students by sharing the link
with a sample size of two hundred respondents. A reliability test
was conducted after the collection of data to test the reliability of
the variables. Multiple linear regression and pearson correlation
coefficient were used to measure the relationship between the
independent variables and dependent variable. Result of this work
showed that motivation, family influence and financial
consideration are significantly associated with students’ decision
in pursuing higher education.
CCS Concepts
• Social and professional topics➝ Professional topics
Keywords
Student; tertiary education; factors; choice; attributes
1. INTRODUCTION
Education can be seen as a major component of development and
growth. Good education provides and improves physical and
mental standard [1]. It enables individuals to expand their
knowledge and skills. Education is also known to be the backbone
of a nation. It acts as a tool to sustain and develop the economy
and community of the country, increasing standard of living as
well as reducing poverty [2].
Higher education, undoubtedly, plays a significant role globally in
expanding capabilities of each individual as well as to cope with
the world which is marked by complexities, uncertainties and
rapid changes [3]. Researches show that, tertiary education
graduates have more prestigious employment, greater economic
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that
copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights
for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be
honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or
republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from
Permissions@acm.org.
MSIE 2019, May 24–26, 2019, Phuket, Thailand
© 2019 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6264-1/19/05…$15.00
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3335550.3339902
134
Loh Yue Fang
Lumpur, Malaysia
lohyf@ucsiuniversity.edu.my
stability, better access to health care, as well as having longer life
spans [4].
However, as reported by UNESCO [5], there has been a decrease
of enrollment rate for higher education in the recent years [5]. In
addition, thousands of students have fallen out of the education
system even though the school dropout rates have declined
rapidly, according to study by Siraj et al. [6]. The role of the
education institution is not merely to enroll students in the
education institution but to ensure continuation of their studies to
completion [7].
Thus, several studies have reported in determining students’
decisions in pursuing tertiary education. Harris et al. [8] presented
a well-constructed theoretical frameworks incorporating various
aspects of the impacting students’ decision in pursuing higher
education relevant to this study. The variables include financial
aid, social influence (parents, family and peers), relative
functionalism, self-efficacy, glass ceiling effect, teacher-student
interactions and general preparation for college. Results suggested
that all variables hold significant influence on an individual’s
decision in enrolling in higher education.
Mbawuni et al. [9] have carried out a study focusing on students’
choice of institution for graduate programmes and found that
financial consideration continues to be a significant factor in
students’ decision to enroll in graduate programmes.
Ng et al. [10] investigated the relationship between the
manipulated variables (work knowledge, personal attributes,
financial support, rewards or opportunity, program structures and
support or encouragements) and responding variables (student’s
decision to further doctorate degree in Malaysia) Results showed
that all the six factors of the independent variables show a
significant relationship with the dependent variables.
Yusuf et al. [11] identified the factors that influence local and
international student’s decision to select public higher learning
institutions in Malaysia and found that the determinants affecting
them to choose their institution of higher education are facilities,
cost, influence from peers, families and friends and location
showed a significant relationship with the dependent variables.
In addition, it has been reported that an individual with a high
achievement during his/her young age will tend to go for a higher
achievement in the future while the individual with a low
accomplishment will face difficulties in developing success [12].
Students with a high self belief of their own ability displayed
higher achievement in academics compare to those with low
confidence [13]. The student’s interest will increase when their
self-efficacy is strong, and this will lead to attaining unexpected
outcome or achievement [13]. In addition, studies suggested that
social influence particularly family, friends and peers play
prominent role in affecting student’s decision to pursue tertiary
education [14,15]. Research shows that social influence in Asian
countries is much stronger than in the Western countries [16].
Also, often parents live vicariously through their children. They
long for their children to accomplish their own unrealized
ambitions, just as psychologists have theorized [17]. If their child
succeeds in achieving their own failed ambitions, there is a sense
of redemption in the parents for their own failures to measure up
to what they wanted to be [17]. On the other hand, it has been
reported that the likelihood of students enrolling into the higher
education institutes would increase when generous financial aids
policies are made available with the purpose of reducing students’
loan. Through these financial aids, students are able to make
educational choices base on their academic accomplishment rather
than their affordability [18].
Malaysia has achieved significant growth in the education sector
over the years. There is a significant amount of effort from the
ministry of education to ensure education system being able to
adapt to the market demand [19]. Undoubtedly, technological
changes has rapidly accelerated and has had a major impact on the
workforce since the dawn of the industrial age. Continual
enhancement and expansion of skills and knowledge are required
for an individual to cope with the technological advancement [20].
Individuals who do not further their studies are more likely unable
to adapt to the transition [21].
Thus, this work has aimed to analyzed and identify the
determinants impacting students’ decision in pursuing tertiary
education in Malaysia. Specifically, this study has analyzed the
association between the student attributes, social influences,
financial consideration and the students’ decision to further study
in tertiary education in Malaysia.
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Research Design
In this work, quantitative approach was used to perform the study.
Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework for this study. For this
study, The three chosen manipulated variables are financial
consideration in the form of financial support/scholarship, student
attributes (self-efficacy and motivation) and social influence
(family, friends and peers), whereas the responding variable is
students’ decision in pursuing tertiary education in Malaysia.
Figure 1. Proposed conceptual model
2.2 Hypothesis
In order to achieve the research objectives of this study, the
following hypothesis were developed: H01: The association
between motivation and students’ decision in pursuing tertiary
135
education is not significant. HA1: The association between
motivation and students’ decision to in pursuing tertiary education
is significant. H02: The association between self-efficacy and
students’ decision in pursuing tertiary education is not significant.
HA2: The association between self-efficacy and students’
decision in pursuing tertiary education is significant. H03: The
association between family influence and students’ decision in
pursuing tertiary education is not significant. HA3: The
association between family influence and students’ decision in
pursuing tertiary education is significant. H04: The association
between friends and peers influence and students’ decision in
pursuing tertiary education is not significant. HA4: The
association between friends and peers influence and students’
decision in pursuing tertiary education is significant. H05: The
association between financial consideration and students’ decision
in pursuing tertiary education is not significant. HA5: The
association between financial consideration and students’ decision
in pursuing tertiary education is significant.
2.3 Sample and Population
The targeted population for the present research is from the
secondary schools, specifically students of Form 4 and Form 5 in
public schools of Malaysia. The targeted population is defined as
such due to this group of people having the highest possibility in
pursuing higher education after completing their studies in
secondary schools. The location of sampling for present research
focuses on the secondary schools located around the Peninsular
Malaysia. Secondary school students will be requested to fill up
online Google form. A total of 200 responses from secondary
school students in Malaysia will be collected as our sample size.
The sampling technique used was non-probability sampling.
2.4 Data Collection
Primary data was collected by survey questionnaire that was
distributed through Google form whereby links were shared to our
targeted respondents. Secondary data was collected through
literature review. For the questionnaire, The measureable items of
independent and dependent variables were adapted mainly from
former studies done by Loh et al. [22].
2.5 Data Analysis
Data gathered through the online survey questionnaires were
analyzed and interpreted using Microsoft Excel and SPSS
program. The data’s were then analyzed based on multiple
regression analysis and Pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis.
3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents
Table 1 shows the respondents in our research comes from
different range of age in Malaysia. The results were gathered from
a total of 199 respondents that comes from different state in
Malaysia. Based on our findings, there are 88.9% of 15-17 years
old respondents which is 177 people, 10.1% of 18-20 years old
respondents which is 20 people, 0.5% of 12-14 years old
respondents which is 1 people and 0.5% of 21 years old and above
which is 1 people. In addition, There were 58.3% which is 116
male respondents and 41.7% which is 83 female respondents. .
The three major ethnic in Malaysia is Malay, Chinese and Indian.
Based on our findings, there are 35.7% of Malay respondents
which is 71 people, 30.7% of Chinese respondents which is 61
people, 23.6% of Indian respondents which is 47 people and
10.1% of others ethnic respondents which is 20 people.
 Table 1. The age of respondents variables is positively moderate. The P-value of family influence
Age Frequency Percentage Cumulative is 0.000, lower than the significance level, 0.01 denotes the
Percentage rejection of null hypothesis. The correlation reveals that a high
family influence will attract more students to further study in
12-14 years 1 0.5 0.5
tertiary education
old
15-17 years 177 88.9 89.4 Based on the result in Table 3, a significant, weak and positive
old relationship can be seen between friends and peers and students’
18-20 years 20 10.1 99.5 decision to further study in higher education (r = 0.183). With the
old P-value of 0.01, which is equivalent to the level of significant,
21 and above 1 0.5 100.0 0.01, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is
Total 199 100 accepted. Otherwise stated, the more influences from friends and
peers, the higher the possibility of students pursuing tertiary
3.2 Reliability Analysis education.
Table 2. shows the value of the variables Cronbach’s alpha.
Table 3 demonstrate that, with correlation coefficient, r of 0.361,
Motivation and self-efficacy have internal consistencies that are there is a significant, moderate positive association between
questionable as the alpha values are within the range of 0.6 ≤ α financial consideration and students’ decision in pursuing higher
< 0.7. The internal consistencies for family influence, friends and education. Alternate hypothesis is accepted as the null hypothesis
peers influence, financial consideration and higher education are is rejected due to its p-value of 0.000, which is less than the
acceptable as the value of alphas are within the range of 0.7 ≤ α significance level, 0.01. In other words, the better the financial
< 0.8. consideration, the higher the students’ decision to pursue tertiary
Table 2. Analysis of Variance education.

Variable Number Cronbach’s Consistency Table 3. Correlation between the independent variables and
of items Alpha the dependent variable
(N) Variable Higher Education
Motivation Pearson Correlation 0.371**
Independent Variables
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Motivation 4 0.692 Questionable N 199
Self -efficacy Pearson Correlation 0.150*
Self-efficacy 4 0.626 Questionable
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.034
Family Influence 5 0.737 Acceptable N 199
Family Pearson Correlation 0.404**
Peer and Friend 5 0.863 Acceptable Influence Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Financial 5 0.749 Acceptable N 199
Consideration Friends and Pearson Correlation 0.183*
Peers Influence Sig. (2-tailed) 0.010
Dependent Variables N 199
Higher Education 5 0.709 Acceptable Financial Pearson Correlation 0.361**
Consideration Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
N 199
3.3 Pearson’s Correlation Test
Table 3 shows the results of Pearson’s correlation between 3.4 Multiple Linear Regression
independent variables and dependent variable. According to the Based on Table 4, p-value 0.000 is less than level of significant
Pearson test in Table 3, motivation and students’ decision in 0.05, suggests that the F statistics is significant and that the
pursuing tertiary education have a correlation coefficient, r of alternate hypothesis is supported (F5, 193 = 18.52, P < 0.05).
0.371, ranging between ±0.30 to ±0.50, indicates that there is a Simply put, the three predictors including student attributes
positive moderate significant between the two variables. Null (motivation and self-efficacy), social influence (family influence
hypothesis is rejected as P-value of motivation, 0.000 is lesser and friends and peers influence), and financial considerations
than the significance level, 0.01. In other words, the higher the have significant effect in explaining variance of students’ decision
motivation by students, the higher students’ decision to pursue in pursuing higher education.
tertiary education.
Table 4. Analysis of Variance, ANOVA
Result in Table 3 shows that there is a significant, weak positive
association between self-efficacy and students’ decision in Source of Sum of Degree Mean F Significanc
pursuing higher education with correlation coefficient 0.150. Due Variation Square of Squar Value e
to the low P-value of 0.034, which is lesser than the level of s Freedo e
significant, 0.05, null hypothesis is rejected. Simply put, students m
are more likely to pursue tertiary education when they have high Regressio 20.135 5 4.027 18.51 0.000
self-efficacy. n 7
Residual 41.973 193 0.217
As shown in Table 3, the correlation coefficient of family
Total 62.107 198
influence and students’ decision in pursuing higher education, r =
0.404 suggests that the strength of association between two

136
The R² in this research, 0.324, as exhibited in Table 5, denotes 0.692 and 0.626 respectively. Whereas, the internal consistencies
that 32.4% of the variability towards students’ decision to further for family influence (0.737), friends and peers influence (0.863)
study in higher education can be explained by all predictors and financial consideration (0.749) and the dependent variable
(students’ attributes, social influence and financial consideration). higher education (0.709) are acceptable as the value of alphas are
The adjusted R² reveals the three predictors account for 30.7% of within the range of 0.7 ≤ α < 0.8.
the variance in students’ decision to pursue higher education in
the population. There is a total of 69.3% (100% - 30.7%) of the The Pearson’s correlation analysis reveal that independent
variance of the dependent variable is unaccounted for in this variables motivation, family influence and financial consideration
study. are moderate and positively associated with the dependent
variable whereas self-efficacy and friends and peers have weak
Table 5. R Square positive relationship with the dependent variable. Each
Regression Statistics independent variable has a significant relationship with the
dependent variable at the significance level p < 0.01 (motivation,
Multiple R 0.569 family influence, friends and peers influence and financial
R Square 0.324 consideration) and p < 0.05 (self-efficacy).
Adjusted R Square 0.307
Multiple regression analysis suggested that the F-statistic is
Standard Error 0.4664 significant due to its p-value of 0.000, which is less than
Table 6 shows the regression coefficient and significance of significance level of 0.01. The adjusted R² reveals the three
independent variables. Based on Table 6, three significant predictors account for 30.7% of the variance in students’ decision
predictors of all three independent variables are positively to pursue tertiary education in the population. There is a total of
associated with the dependent variable in the regression. These 69.3% (100% - 30.7%) of the variance of the dependent variable
predictors include motivation, with p-value of 0.000 which is is unaccounted for in this study. Based on the findings attained
lesser than the level of significant, 0.05. Family influence has p- from the multiple regression analysis, financial consideration has
value of 0.000, lesser than value of alpha, 0.05 indicates a the highest regression coefficient of 0.294, followed by both
significant relationship with the dependent variable. Financial motivation and family influence, which have equal regression
consideration is also positively related to students’ decision in coefficient of 0.262. The remaining predictors (self-efficacy and
pursuing higher education due to its p-value of 0.000, which is friends and peers influence) have insignificant relationship with
less than level of significant 0.05. Both variables including self- students’ decision in pursuing tertiary education.
efficacy and friends and peers influence with p-values of 0.17 and
0.85 respectively which are far higher than the level of significant, 4. CONCLUSION
0.05 do not have significant association with students’ decision in This work has identified the determinants impacting students’
pursuing higher education. decision in pursuing tertiary education in Malaysia The
association between student attributes, social influences, financial
Table 6. Parameter Estimates
consideration and the students’ decision to further study in tertiary
Variables Coefficients Standard T- P Value education in Malaysia was analyzed. Key findings showed that
Error Statistics apart from self-efficacy and friends and peers influence which
Constant 1.353 0.362 3.741 0.000 have very weak to zero significant on the dependent variable,
Motivation 0.262 0.070 3.747 0.000 finding of this study demonstrates that all independent variables
Self-efficacy -0.099 0.072 -1.378 0.170 (motivation, family influence and financial consideration) are
Family 0.262 0.059 4.458 0.000 significantly associated with students’ decision in pursuing higher
Influence education. In essence, it is encouraged that higher education
Friends and -0.008 0.041 -0.190 0.850 institution marketers put more attention on the determinant factors
Peers including motivation, family influence and financial
Influence consideration.
Financial 0.294 0.054 5.464 0.000
Consideration 5. REFERENCES
[1] Rasberry, C. N., Lee, S. M., Robin, L., Laris, B. A., Russell,
According to Table 6, financial consideration has the highest L. A., Coyle, K. K., & Nihiser, A. J. (2011). The association
regression coefficient of 0.294, followed by both motivation and between school-based physical activity, including physical
family influence which have equal regression coefficient of 0.262. education, and academic performance: a systematic review of
Both self-efficacy and friends and peers influence with the literature. Preventive medicine, 52, S10-S20.
coefficients of -0.099 and -0.088 respectively are insignificant
[2] Gibb, A., Haskins, G., & Robertson, I. (2012). Leading the
predictors of the dependent variable and are excluded from the
entrepreneurial university: Meeting the entrepreneurial
regression equation. Hence the multiple regression equation is as
development needs of higher education institutions.
follows: Students’ decision in pursuing higher education = 1.353
In Universities in change (pp. 9-45). Springer, New York,
+ 0.262 (Motivation) + 0.262 (Family influence) + 0.294
NY.
(Financial consideration).
[3] Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning
3.5 Overall Summary experiences: An integrated approach to designing college
Reliability and validity of the research instrument employed were courses. John Wiley & Sons.
examined through Cronbach’s alpha coefficient test to ensure the [4] Ameny-Dixon, G. M. (2004). Why multicultural education is
appropriateness of this instrument. The finding shows that both more important in higher education now than ever: A global
variables, motivation and self-efficacy have questionable internal perspective. International Journal of Scholarly Academic
consistencies (0.6 ≤ α < 0.7) with Cronbach’s alpha values of Intellectual Diversity, 8(1), 1-9.

137
[5] Blanchfield, L., & Browne, M. A. (2013). The United
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO). Washington, DC: Congressional Research
Service.
[6] Siraj, H. H., Salam, A., Roslan, R., Hasan, N. A., Jin, T. H.,
& Othman, M. N. (2014). Stress and its association with the
academic performance of undergraduate fourth year medical
students at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. The
International Medical Journal Malaysia, 13(1), 19-24.
[7] Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). The flat world and education:
How America's commitment to equity will determine our
future. Teachers College Press.
[8] Harris, S. M., & Halpin, G. (2002). Development and
validation of the factors influencing pursuit of higher
education questionnaire. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 62(1), 79-96.
[9] Mbawuni, J., & Nimako, S. G. (2015). Critical Factors
Underlying Students’ Choice of Institution for Graduate
Programmes: Empirical Evidence from Ghana. International
Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 120.
[10] Ng, S. F., Muhd, N. M. N., Ab Rahman, K., & Ismail, N.
(2011). Influential factors to pursue doctorate degree in
Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15,
2028-2032.
[11] Yusuf, B. N. M., Ghazali, M. Q. M., & Abdullah, M. F. S.
(2017). Factors Influencing Local and International Students
Decision in Choosing Public Higher Learning Institutions in
Northern Region of Malaysia. International Journal of Social
Sciences, 48(1).
[12] Muola, J. M. (2010). A Study of the Relationship between
Academic Achievement Motivation and Home Environment
among Standard Eight Pupils. Educational Research and
Reviews, 5(5), 213-217.
138
[13] Van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors
affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher
education. Educational research review, 6(2), 95-108.
[14] Jackling, B., & Keneley, M. (2009). Influences on the supply
of accounting graduates in Australia: a focus on international
students. Accounting & Finance, 49(1), 141-159.
[15] Kusumawati, A. (2013). A qualitative study of the factors
influencing student choice: The case of public university in
Indonesia. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific
Research, 3(1), 314-327.
[16] Kember, D., Ho, A., & Hong, C. (2010). Initial motivational
orientation of students enrolling in undergraduate
degrees. Studies in Higher Education, 35(3), 263-276.
[17] Brummelman, E., Thomaes, S., Slagt, M., Overbeek, G., De
Castro, B. O., & Bushman, B. J. (2013). My child redeems
my broken dreams: On parents transferring their unfulfilled
ambitions onto their child. PloS one, 8(6), e65360.
[18] Hillman, N. W. (2013). Economic diversity in elite higher
education: Do no-loan programs impact Pell
enrollments?. The Journal of Higher Education, 84(6), 806-
833.
[19] Ariffin, A. A. M., Ahmad, A. H., Ahmad, S., & Ibrahim, A.
(2008). Determining decision-making styles and
demographic differences in selecting higher education
services among Malaysian. International Journal of Business
and Society, 9(1), 1.
[20] Jones, G., & Sallis, E. (2013). Knowledge management in
education: Enhancing learning & education. Routledge.
[21] Romele, L., & Purgailis, M. (2013). Estimation of private
and social rates of return to investments in education in
Latvia. European Integration Studies, (7), 51-59.
[22] Loh, C. C., Chew, C. C., Leong, W. L., Tan, T. C., & Yan,
W. Y. (2014). A study on factors influencing students‟
intention to pursue higher education (Doctoral dissertation,
UTAR).