Exploring the Factors that Influence the Hospitality and Tourism Management Students’ Choice Of Higher Education Institution: A Survey-Based Analysis / Philippines

This decision is very important as students can make the most crucial decision related to the choice of higher education institution (HEI). This pattern depends on a whole lot of factors including academic reasons, economic calculations, academic popularities and social factors. This literature journal survey sought to examine the different factors that determine the decision of students in the Hospitality and Tourism Management course to select higher education institutions with particular attention to the region of Bulacan in the Philippines.

Demographic Characteristics

To know what are the factors that drive the students of Hospitality and Tourism Management (HTM) to choose which Higher Education Institution (HEI) in Bulacan, Philippines. There is much influence on age on educational decisions and younger students usually put extra emphasis on other aspects as opposed to older students (Hossler, Schmit, & Vesper, 1999). Sex is also a factor which may affect the career desires, safety and social demands thus, resulting in HEI choices (Davies & Guppy, 1997). Financial issues such as the amount of tuition fees a student can cover in place of financial aid can be a strong factor in determining choice of HEI on the side of the student because of their household income (Perna, 2006). Learners who transfer to public institutions may be of varied experiences and expectations with those in the private institutions. By way of example, it is possible that our public-school students will consider affordability and access to study but private school students consider the reputation and resources offered at the HEI available (Clark, 2009). It is also central geographically. Close-distance Location of a home to an HEI can influence cost and convenient, thus having a significant impact on the decision-making process (Turley, 2009). Moreover, urban and rural students usually differ in theirtastes and prerequisites in choosing an HEI, and the choice of the students is also predetermined by different aspects (Hu & Kuh, 2003).

Academic Factors

The importance of academic characteristics and perceived educational programs quality as determinants in the student HEI choice. Researchers have found out that institutions with good academic reputation and good well rounded and top-quality programs in the area the student is interested in become a topic of priority amongst the students (Soutar & Turner, 2002). Maringe, 2006, established the fact that the students tend to join the institutions which are famous in the field of academic excellence and that these institutions have properly designed programs which provides the students with possibilities in the career that they have chosen.

The issue of program quality is especially relevant in its application to the sphere of Hospitality and Tourism Management, because of the applied character of this discipline. Schools that provide good training facilities, internship opportunities, and being connected with the industry usually receive more admissions (Kotler & Fox, 1995).

Financial Considerations

Matters of money and cost of education, scholarships and general affordability are very important factors that influence the decision-making process of students. Along with the other factors, a study carried by Hossler, Schmit, and Vesper (1999) conducted found that the cost considerations rank highly as a determinant on which HEI to attend. The alternative of having financial aid and scholarships can play a major part in reducing the amount of financial stress involved and have it become more universally available to more students.

In Philippines, where most families are not financially well off the education cost is a key determinant. Students and their households will be drawn by those institutions that have competitive tuition expenses and high financial aid offers (Commission on Higher Education, 2022).

Institutional Reputation

Whether a certain institution is prestigious and of a high quality may strongly determine the decisions made by students because in many cases, the greater its reputation, the greater career and academic opportunities. Students of HTM may find it worthwhile to select a university that has a good reputation in the hospitality and tourism sector, as it will allow them networking experience and increase the possibility of employment (Bourke, 2000). It has been found out that there are often positive relationships between high institutional reputation with improved career prospects, improved alumni networks, and improved academic facilities and therefore an institution with a high reputation is an important aspect in the decision making (Bourdieu, 1986). Institutional rankings and reputations are often used by students as an indicator of education quality and possible career advantages, which tendency is, in particular, strong in such a discipline as hospitality and tourism where relations with the industry are crucial (Espinoza, Bradshaw, & Hausman, 2002).

Social Influences

The influence of family, peers, and social networks is quite strict on the choice of studying. Altbach and de Wit (2018) indicate that the expectations and suggestions of the family might be the most crucial factor influencing the decision of students. The influence of peers also plays a major role as the students will tend to be influenced by the choices and experience of their friends (Soutar & Turner, 2002). The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) emphasizes the role played by the subjective norms that can be defined as the influence of perceived social pressure to either or not address a certain behavior (Ajzen, 1991). When it comes to the selection of an HEI, family, friends, and significant others can act as subjective norms and their expectations and views can be included in the subjective norms.

METHODS

Study Design and Locale

In this study, descriptive-correlational study design was used. The descriptive element implied the collection of data to outline the existing situation of the factors that predetermine students of Hospitality and Tourism Management to choose the institutions of higher education in Bulacan, Philippines. The correlational part was to explore the connections between the demographic data of the students and the dimensions affecting selection of higher education establishments. The research was carried in Bulacan, a province in the Philippines that has been recognized with educational establishments and expanding hospitality and tourism sector. Bulacan is an apt locality to conduct the study because there are many HEIs which have programs in HTM which means that there is a large number of people who can be used in the research.

Study Participants

The researchers, who are the main clients of the study, are students, who are currently enrolled in Hospitality and Tourism Management (HTM) programs in the Top 5 Higher Education Institutions in Central Luzon, Philippines, at the time of publication of the study on the uniRank University Ranking site, published in 2024 among the Top 5 (uniRank, 2024). This is to include both the students of the public and the privately-owned institutions as well as those at different levels of their academic life (freshmen to seniors). Among the students, the different institutions must be represented proportionately as well as the different demographic groups in Bulacan.

Sample Size and Sampling

A sample size of 353 respondents was used in the study. This is the sample size that will be selected to confirm that the study has a broad overview of the factors that determine the Higher Education  Institutions (HEIs) choice of Hospitality and Tourism Management (HTM) students in Bulacan, Philippines. This number is sufficient to be statistically significant and reflect on the varied view of the target audience. The mixed method used in the study was the Purposive Sampling through dint of the Snowball Method in conjunction with the Random Sampling. Quantitative method provides a strong and sample that is representative and covers both narrow and wide aspects.

Research Instrument

The study employed a self-administered survey questionnaire to gather data from participants. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the influence of various factors on respondents’ decisions. The scale ranges from “1 – Not Influential at all” to “4 – Highly Influential,” with intermediate options providing varying degrees of influence. Structured questionnaires were distributed to collect data on the variables of interest to gain deeper insights into their decision- making processes. The investigated factors influencing Hospitality and Tourism Management students’ choice of higher education institution in Bulacan, Philippines. The questionnaire was reviewed by experts in the field of education and hospitality management to ensure that it covers all relevant aspects of the study.

Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess the reliability of the scales used in the questionnaire. A Cronbach’s alpha results from the constructs of demographic characteristics of good reliability with alpha equal to .8972, academic factors with excellent reliability of .9024, financial consideration .8234, institutional reputation .7910, and social influence .8011, all with good alpha results, respectively. The questionnaire was reviewed and organized by the study’s content. A pilot test was performed during the preliminary survey, and a statistician consulted about the scale’s accuracy and situational applicability. Feedback from the pre-test was used to make the necessary adjustments to the questionnaire.

Table 1: Reliability Coefficient of Constructs

Data Gathering Procedures

The questionnaire was distributed to the selected sample of students through online platforms and in-person distribution in collaboration with the participating institutions. The researcher created a pool of participants for the formal survey using the snowball sampling method, in which the researcher asked for a referral from individuals who shared the same characteristics of the research interest as the target population (Frey, 2018). Responses were collected over a predetermined period, ensuring a high response rate through follow-ups and reminders. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, ensuring confidentiality and anonymity of their responses.

The gathered information through the distributed questionnaires was recorded and tabulated about the statistical treatment method, such as arranging and summarizing data based on the number of occurrences using frequency and percentage distribution, correlation analysis using mean and standard deviation, and the chi-square to test the significant relationship of the variables presented.

Ethical Consideration

The research proposal was reviewed and approved by an appropriate ethics review board or committee before the study began. Participants were provided with detailed information about the study’s purpose, procedures, and their rights.• All data collected were kept confidential and used solely for this research. Participants’ identities were disclosed, and responses were anonymized to protect their privacy.• Participation in the study was entirely voluntary. Participants had the right to withdraw from the study at any time without any consequences.• Collected data were securely stored, accessible only to the research team. Digital data with password-protected, and physical data were stored in a locked cabinet.

RESULTS

To analyze the data gathered, the following statistical treatments were used:

To test the reliability of the instrument, Cronbach’s Alpha was used. To arrange and summarize data depending on the number of occurrences, frequency distribution, and percentage distribution were used. According to Creswell (2018), the mean was used to indicate a numerical average for a set of responses, whilst the standard deviation was used to determine how scattered the data was in comparison to the mean. For data to measure the relationship of variables, a non- parametric test was utilized. Correlation Analysis using chi-square was used to measure and quantify the direction and strength of the linear relationship between the variables.

DISCUSSION

Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents 

The age breakdown of hospitality and tourism management students at higher education institutions reveals a diverse student population. The majority (61.76%) are in the 18-20 age bracket, indicating a young student population fresh out of high school. However, a significant portion (35.24%) are aged 21 and above, with 23.51% in the 21- 23 age group, 10.76% in the 24-26 age group, and 3.97% aged 27 and above.

This age range suggests that the institution should employ targeted recruitment strategies to attract both traditional and non-traditional students. For the younger demographic, the institution could focus its marketing efforts on high school students and recent graduates, highlighting factors important to this age group, such as hands-on learning opportunities, experiential learning, and the institution’s reputation. The institution ought to consider flexible course schedules, delivery, as well as professional growth and promotion as a way of attracting the older students.

Table 1. Percentage and frequency distribution of the respondents with regard to Age

An analysis of the sex distribution of hospitality and tourism management students in higher education institutions depicts that the student population is more dominated by the female students, 34.26% more than the male students. This disparity indicates that the institution needs to study its hiring methods and curriculum so as to make them conducive and attractive to both genders. In an attempt to recruit and retain male students, the institution ought to realize that they need to conduct specific recruitments where they emphasize the variety of careers and dynamic workplaces offered by the hospitality and tourism sectors. The curriculum must also be examined to see that the male view is put in, a case study, guest lecture and course materials in the curriculum that reflects the contribution of the men in the discipline and their experience.

Table 2. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the respondents in terms of Sex

REFERENCES

1. Baliyan & Mokoena (2024). Students’ choice management: Recipe for improving enrollment in private higher education institutions. Asian Journal of University (AJUE) Vol. 20, No. 1, January 2024
2. Biancardi, A. and Ekwulugo, F. (2003), ‘’International Marketing of British. Education: Research on the students’ Perception and the UK Market Penetration”; Marketing, Intelligence, and Planning.
3. Bourdieu, P (1986). “The Forms of Capital”. In J. Richardson (Ed) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp.241-258). Greenwood.
4. Brennan, L. (2001), How Prospective student choose Universities. A buyer. behavior perspective, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Australia.
5. Brown, C. (2009), “University courses selection and services marketing “. Marketing Intelligence and Planning Vol. 27 Issue: 3, pp.310-325, HTTPS:||Doi. org|10.1108|02434500910455227.
6. Buckley, P., & Lee, P. (2021). The impact of extra-curricular activity on the student experience. Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.1123/jis.2016-0014
7. Burns, M.J. (2006), – Factors influencing the college choice African- American . students admitted to the College of Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources (Master Thesis)- University Missouri- Columbia Missouri.
8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
9. Espinoza, S., Bradshaw, G., & Hausman, C. (2002). “The Importance of College Choice Factors from the Perspective of High School Counselors”. College and University, 77(3), 19-24.
10. Gan et al (2022). Factors influencing students’ choice of an institution of higher education. Journal of positive school psychology. 2022, vol. 6, No 4, 1005-10043
11. Ivy, J. (2001). “Higher Education Institution Image: A Correspondence Analysis Approach”. The International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 276-282. doi:10.1108/09513540110401484
12. Lau, C.M. (2005), The Impact of Physical Facilities on student choice of university in Hong kong. Hong kong: Karl Paoyan Youseki the University of Hong Kong.
13. Leslie, L.L. (2007), The economic value of Higher Education, American Council on Education, Macmillan.
14. Levitz, R.N. (2007), Long, B.T. (2008), The effectiveness of financial aid in improving college enrollment: Lessons for policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Matzdorf, P.I. (2003),
15. Mkulu, D. G., & Paschal, M. J. (2020). The Contribution of Private Sector in the provision ofHigher Education in Tanzania: Growth and Challenges. Journal of Humanities andEducation Development (JHED), 2(3), 155-169. (PDF) Students’ Choice Management: Recipe for Improving Enrollment in Private Higher Education Institutions. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/jhed.2.3.2
16. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push-pull Factors Influencing International Student Destination Choice”. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82-90. doi:10.1108/09513540210418403
17. Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (2001). “Image and Reputation of Higher Education Institutions in Students’ Retention Decisions”. The International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 303-311. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005909
18. Noel-Levitz, Inc. (2007), Why did they enroll? The factors influencing college choice; national research report. Iowa City, IA: Author.
19. Nuseir, M., & El Refae, G. (2021). Factors influencing the choice of studying at UAE universities:
20. An Empirical Research on the adoption of educational marketing strategies. Journal Of Marketing for Higher Education, 1 (PDF) Factors Influencing Students’ Choice of An Institution of Higher Education. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 08841241.2020
21. Peng, Z. (2000), “Modelling and testing the effect of country, Corporate, and brand image or consumer’s product Evaluation and purchase intention”. Paper presented at the ANZMAC 200 visionary marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge Conference.
22. Perna, L.W. (2000), “Differences in College Enrollment Among African-Americans, Hispanics and
23. Whites” Journal of Higher Education, VOl.71, No. 1, pp. 177-141
24. Raposo, M. and Alves H. (2007), A model of University’s choice: An exploratory approach. Retrieved October 20, 2008, from http:||mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/5523/1/MPRA|_paper_5523.pdf
25. Siding, S.M., Hussin, S.T., & Tan, S.H. (2003), “An Exploratory study of factors influencing the college choice decision of undergraduate students in Malaysia”. Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 259-28