Next Article in Journal
A Review of Poultry Waste-to-Wealth: Technological Progress, Modeling and Simulation Studies, and Economic- Environmental and Social Sustainability
Previous Article in Journal
Optimal Scale Selection and an Object-Oriented Method Used for Measuring and Monitoring the Extent of Land Desertification
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/su15075621
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Decision-Making Process in Access Paths to Master’s Degree Studies: The Case of International Students in Spain

by
Robert G. Valls-Figuera
1,*,
Mercedes Torrado-Fonseca
1,
Soledad Romero-Rodríguez
2 and
Pedro Jurado-de-los-Santos
3
1
Department of Research and Diagnostics in Education, University of Barcelona, 08007 Barcelona, Spain
2
Department of Research and Assessment Methods in Education, School of Education, University of Sevilla, 41013 Seville, Spain
3
Department of Applied Pedagogy, Autonomous University of Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(7), 5621; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075621
Submission received: 20 February 2023 / Revised: 12 March 2023 / Accepted: 21 March 2023 / Published: 23 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Education and Approaches)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
International student mobility is an important dimension of internationalisation in higher education, involving a high percentage of students in certain subject areas. A literature review revealed the absence of studies deepening our knowledge of this group of students in specific contexts and stages. Thus, this survey study was undertaken to gather data on the profiles and academic and professional careers of a sample of students. Specific differences in their intrinsic and extrinsic motives for their choice of degree subject were found. A total of 314 students from 14 Master’s degree programmes at two public universities responded, 42.4% of whom were international students. The data showed differences in reasons for choice between international and Spanish-native students when enroling in a Master’s degree programme. The foreign students had diverse motivations, in many cases related to each other, with no predominance of extrinsic or intrinsic motives. This suggests that, when students are deciding to study abroad, universities should consider the importance of offering guidance to these students at the stage prior to accessing the Master’s degree.

1. Introduction

Universities in Europe have undergone constant change as a result of the implementation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), and this has led to the standardisation and equivalence of university qualifications. This process, at both national and European levels, has resulted in a restructuring of university education into three new cycles which, combined with the universities’ own internationalisation policies, have boosted one of the most important current dimensions of university life, i.e., student mobility.
In this article, “international students” are those undertaking study-related stays outside the country in which they first enrolled in higher education. It is important to distinguish this form of mobility from shorter-term study periods, internships, language courses and other such foreign stays for educational purposes (referred to as “short-term mobility,” or “credit mobility”). The term “study abroad” is often used as a synonym for international student mobility (ISM). However, according to Netz [1], strictly speaking, “study abroad” emphasizes individual action at the micro level, while ISM describes cross-border student flows from the macro perspective.
In the last two decades, enrolments in higher education abroad have increased from 2 million to more than 6.4 million (2020 figures) [2]. The constant growth in these numbers has only faltered during the COVID pandemic, declared in March 2020, which resulted in a drop of 15% in international student enrolments for that year. Current data, however, show numbers of international students returning to pre-pandemic levels [3].
Analyses of student mobility flows have revealed the existence of countries and regions that are highly appealing destinations for international students (the USA, the UK, Canada and Australia attract almost 50% of international students), while other areas emerge clearly as exporters, with China (900,000) and India (600,000) heading this list [2,4,5]. A literature review also revealed the relationship between these mobility flows and other variables such as degree level [5,6], field of study [3,4,5,7], gender [8], social class [9,10] and prior trajectory [11].
If we consider the level of the degree, more than 14% of students who decide to study abroad take a postgraduate or Master’s degree programme [5]. In absolute terms, credit mobility, mainly at the undergraduate level, predominates; however, this trend is reversed among those enroling for a full degree, who are in clearly greater numbers in Master’s and PhD programmes [6].
The data confirm the relationship between international mobility and the type of course: With few exceptions, the proportion of international students enrolled in higher education programmes gradually increases with the level of the degree, a tendency that remains constant over time. However, this relationship differs according to gender [4,8]. Although the feminisation of higher education is a clear trend, we find a higher number of male foreign students as the level increases.
The field of study is another variable to take into account. Data collected by the OECD [4,5] suggest a differential pattern according to areas of knowledge and host countries. Generally speaking, more than one third of international students are concentrated in the fields of social sciences, economics and law, followed by engineering and health.
In the specific context of this article, figures from the Spanish Ministry of Universities (MU) show that the total number of international students enrolled in the 2018–2019 academic year was 139,708 (8.8% of the total number of students in the Spanish University System (SUE)). The percentage of this group at the Master’s level rose to 22.2% (47,667 international Master’s degree students) [7]. These mainly originated from Latin American and Caribbean countries (62.1%), and five out of ten students chose courses in the social sciences and law [12]. Catalonia and particularly the city of Barcelona were found to be the main destinations for international students choosing Spain [7].
Research has shown how the historical link between countries, a colonial past, or a common language [13,14,15,16,17,18,19], a deficit in training provision or the perception of the quality of training in home countries [20,21,22,23,24,25], as well as the prestige and/or reputation of host institutions [13,26,27,28,29,30] often wrongly represented by international rankings, encourage (or maybe promote) mobility flows and the choice of certain destinations when pursuing a degree abroad.
The scale of this phenomenon attests to the importance of research in the field, which has been prominent on the agendas of higher education institutions for more than two decades. The lack of studies on the transition to Master’s degrees and on the specific group of international students in the Spanish context [16,31,32,33,34] makes this study necessary in complementing an already extensive body of research carried out in other countries.

International Students’ Decision-Making Processes: What Are Their Objectives in Choosing a Course?

Prior studies on international students’ motivations for making choices have centred on Lee‘s push–pull factor model of migratory processes [35]. In the specific case of international students, examples of important work include Mazzarol and Soutar [36] and de Wit’s classification [37] of four main factors: educational, political-social, cultural and economic.
From the point of view of transitions and student guidance, the reasons for degree choice are characterised by students’ motivations and expectations regarding their choices. Fakunle [38] affirmed that international students interweave varying rationales for studying abroad in order to achieve their goals. This idea coincides with Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory [39], which stresses that these goals or motivations can include both intrinsic and extrinsic factors. In fact, research has found that students embark on their educational journey seeking to acquire more qualifications by means of an experience that can benefit them both professionally and personally. Many students also have common extrinsic motives, such as enhanced economic or professional outcomes and/or social recognition [40,41,42].
This allows us to situate motivations as key variables of the student’s personal microsystem. These experiential reasons or motives include a number that lead to the choice to take a Master’s degree in another country, and amongst them we may find the desire to enjoy new social and cultural experiences, for example, or to expose oneself to more diverse environments (leaving the comfort zone, living independently and making this decision autonomously and without constraints). In many cases, the educational value of experiencing mobility is included in these motivations.
Haas and Terryn [43] identified the personal factors that facilitated or limited the decision-making process: the student’s motivations, expectations and prior academic and professional career. The authors identified the reasons for making choices as a measure of the expectations that students have of their education. Other studies in the field have argued that the main motive for a person to decide to leave their country to study abroad can be found in the quest for an international experience that facilitates growth on three levels: personal, academic and professional [44,45].
Although motives of different types can coexist, the research has found differences in the weight of one or other type of reason for undertaking a stay abroad. In [46], the authors analysed patterns of choice according to the type of mobility, i.e., credit or degree, and found that priorities differed between credit mobility students, on the one hand, who experienced their move abroad as an experience of socialisation and acculturation, aiming to enjoy the host culture and learn in a new environment and, on the other hand, the academic and professional motivations of those who were travelling to obtain a full degree. Various studies have also highlighted differences depending on the stage of education, i.e., undergraduate, Master’s degree or PhD, and have found that the importance of specialisation and promotion increased for postgraduate levels [22,24,47,48].
Studies conducted with Master’s degree students in Spain have also pointed to differences related to the type of degree itself. Thus, intrinsic motives, for example, the enjoyment of education for its own sake, were stronger among students of research degrees compared to those of professionally oriented courses, amongst whom extrinsic motives played a leading role [40,41,42]. Several studies have found that students sought options to fit their motivations, prioritising certain aspects of the degree or the professional opportunities it afforded [26,29,38,49,50].
Other variables studied include student background [51,52]. For example, Bhandari [53] argued that the fundamental motivations of students from the developing world were different. In his research among Indian students, he concluded that their primary motives for studying in the West were not the pursuit of cultural exchange or the desire to learn a foreign language, but that their considerations were more pragmatic, driven by the insufficient capacity of high-level Indian institutions and their desire for career advancement. King and Sondhi [52] explored the differences between students from India and the United Kingdom, and Cantwell et al. [51], in a study of international students in Mexico, noted differences among motivations relating to participants’ countries of origin.
Similar studies have identified the host country as an influential variable. Chen and Zimitat [54], for instance, found differences among Taiwanese students depending on whether they travelled to universities in the United States or Australia: For those who chose Australia, their perception of the country’s higher education was more important, while for those opting for the USA, the influence of family and social context weighed more heavily. The importance of these last two factors in the development of a student’s mobility project has been confirmed by many research studies [26,28,49,55].
The international mobility project has to do with the way in which a person conceives and imagines his or her professional development on the basis of a discipline or professional field and its related labour market. As Pinto [11] has shown, this representation is closely related to biographical factors, i.e., the student’s prior academic and professional career and concomitant processes of socialisation. On the basis of her research among international Master’s degree students from Latin America, she identified different types of trajectories linked to occupational experience: (a) young people without work experience, whose aim was to specialise in an international context; (b) young university and research centre employees for whom a degree abroad enabled them to boost their academic career; (c) public sector workers who wanted to improve their skills abroad due to the need for international specialisation for progress to higher levels; (d) professionals in specific areas seeking greater job opportunities in their sector; (e) primary- and secondary-education teachers seeking access to university positions; and (f) professionals who were dissatisfied either because of difficulties in entering the labour market or because of the precarity of their current jobs. Job dissatisfaction is one of the reasons for the mobility of Mexican students coming to Spain, as found by Trejo Peña and Suárez Bequir [56].
When choosing a degree programme, expectations of employment prospects or the benefits stemming from promotion at work are important. Academic motives such as interest in highly specific technical training or the quality of the teaching and the reputation of the teaching and research staff are the main factors. Thus, international students analyse both the extrinsic or prestige objectives relating to the course and the intrinsic objectives arising from their interest in the subject [57]. Finally, the choice of university will be influenced by its reputation, quality and, to a lesser extent, its position in the international rankings and the location and surroundings of the campus, with campus facilities, services, social life and diversity also influencing the decision.
Students’ expectations, motivations and personal characteristics are important variables in evaluating the impact of an academic programme [41]. Studies by Hardré and Hackett [58] and Hardré et al. [59] found that differences between expected and actual experiences negatively predicted overall satisfaction with academic experience, while the degree of congruence between the objectives for pursuing the Master’s degree and the perceived benefits of the course determined student satisfaction in the short term and assessment of impact beyond the completion of the degree. Figuera et al. [40,41] identified an even stronger relationship between intrinsic motivation and satisfaction, finding that intrinsic motivation was one of the most significant predictors of perceived success among graduate students [60] and also predicted satisfaction among international students [61].
However, do we really know what international students who come to study Master’s degrees in our country are like, or what their motives are for their choice of degree? This paper sets out to answer these questions within the framework of a broader research project whose purpose is to understand the transition processes of students embarking on Master’s degrees.
Student transitions in different university settings are systemic, dynamic processes with multiple influencing factors. This article centres on analysing the decision-making process in the choice of graduate degree among Spanish-native and international students.

2. Materials and Methods

This paper presents the results of a study carried out among Master’s degree students, specifically international students (Project titled Transiciones y trayectorias de acceso a los estudios de máster en la universidad española: un análisis en el ámbito de ciencias sociales (Transitions and Access Paths to Master’s Degrees in Spanish Universities: an Analysis in the Social Science Field; Grant EDU2016-80578-R funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and, “ERDF A way of making Europe”, by the “European Union”). A descriptive survey study was chosen in order to analyse the reasons for choosing the degree, according to a set of demographic variables from students’ profiles and previous career and academic paths.
The survey population consisted of students enrolled in 14 official Master’s degree programmes in social sciences at two public Catalan universities (the University of Barcelona and the Autonomous University of Barcelona). These universities have the highest percentage of international students at the Master’s level [7]. The Master’s degree programmes chosen were classified according to their orientation or focus: professionally oriented Master’s degree programmes that provide training in skills for the practice of a particular profession; research degree programmes aiming to develop research skills in a specific field, usually focused on a subsequent PhD programme; and lastly, mixed Master’s degree programmes offering both paths. Among the Master’s degree programmes offered at both universities, they were also selected intentionally, since permission of the degree coordinators and the criterion of a minimum number of international students enrolled were required. The selected degrees have a duration of one year (60 ECTS) and are in the field of Social Sciences, represented by the areas of Communication Sciences, Political Science and Sociology, Law, Economics, and Education.
Table 1 shows the distribution of the sample participating in the study; 68.9% of the total students enrolled in the degree programmes answered the questionnaire (sampling error = 3.2%, 95% confidence interval for finite populations, p and q = 0.5). The sampling method was non-probabilistic and purposive, based on student attendance in the classroom during the first semester. Of the 314 students, 133 (42.4%) students were international students, of whom seven out of ten students were from Latin American and Caribbean countries, and the remaining students (181) were Spanish-native students.
To gather data, a questionnaire was devised that featured closed questions on demographic information and reasons for choice (Table 2). For the reasons for choice scale, factors associated with intrinsic and extrinsic motives were enquired into using a 10-item scale with 5 evaluation points, to which the item “PhD access” was added because doing a doctorate is an important motive for international students, who sometimes want to be able to access a doctorate at a foreign university after completing their Master’s degree.
The reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s α) of the reasons for choice scale (Table 3) was 0.677, indicating that its responses had acceptable internal consistency. To explore the construct validity, a factor analysis (FA) was performed using the principal component extraction method and varimax rotation, and the test application assumptions were met (KMO = 0.675 and Bartlett’s test p = 0.000). The items of the scale were grouped into four factors that explained 62.72% of the variance. As found in the validation of the reasons for choice scale carried out in previous studies [40,41,42], there were three clear motivational factors (intrinsic, extrinsic, and those having to do with a change or reorientation of profession). In addition, for the specific case of international students, a subdivision emerged between intrinsic factors of academic or personal self-realisation, (Factor 3) and professional prospects (Factor 4).
The questionnaire responses were analysed using the SPSS-Win v.25 statistical programme. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric contrast tests were performed to verify the differences between Spanish-native and international Master’s degree students, using Cohen’s d statistic to interpret the effect size. For the comparative analysis, information was gathered on students’ access trajectory or profile [40,42,62,63], according to whether they were students who had enrolled in the Master’s degree programme directly after their first degree or had followed a discontinuous path, without working previously or with either related or unrelated work experience. In addition, data were collected on the students’ regions of origin, differentiating between those from Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and those from other regions. Lastly, profile variables such as gender and age (which have been identified as differentiating factors in previous studies, as found in the literature) were included. Multivariate statistical tests were used to identify student profiles associated with the variables analysed.

3. Results

In this section, first, we present a description of the general profile of the international students in the sample, followed by an analysis of their reasons for choosing the programme as a group, and then specifically according to region of origin, with the aim of obtaining a vision of the specific and common factors among international students, particularly those from Latin America and the Caribbean, as opposed to Spanish-native students. Secondly, we analyse those variables in student profile, type of degree and access path which, according to the studies discussed above, are related to their reasons for choice, taking differences in student origin into account.
The detailed international student profile (Table 4) corresponds to research degree students (46%) with related work experience (65.6%), 67% of whom were women. The majority of Spanish-native students were mostly taking professionally oriented degrees (57.5%) with a direct access path from their undergraduate programme (62.6%), 78% of them being women.
The reasons for choice by region of origin showed that LAC students formed a group of international students with distinct characteristics (Table 5).
The scores for each of the factors according to origin reflected statistically significant differences between LAC and Spanish-native students regarding personal and academic self-fulfilment motives (F2) and professional prospect motives (F3); in addition, Dunn’s post hoc test revealed differences in extrinsic motives between the two groups of international students (F1).
Differences according to type of degree were also found. This variable was intended, as described in the theoretical framework, to differentiate degrees focused on the development of professional competencies (and for which the completion of an external internship was required) from research-oriented degrees, which were more theoretical and directed towards the subsequent completion of a PhD; for the same reason, we also included mixed Master’s degrees, i.e., those allowing students to choose one path or the other according to their needs and motivations.
As can be seen in Table 6, significant differences were found among the students in research degree programmes. Thus, international students had higher scores for extrinsic and intrinsic motives (i.e., for personal and academic self-realisation and for professional prospects) compared to Spanish-native students in the same degree; thus, corroborating the mix of motivations characterising students seeking educational experience abroad.
Students’ types of access show significant differences, in general terms, in the third and fourth factors (Table 7). Focusing on the statistically significant differences, on the one hand, students with related work experience had higher scores in motives related to professional prospects (mean = 4.67) than those without relevant experience or those who went straight into the Master’s degree programme from their first degree. On the other hand, students without work experience related to their degree showed greater interest in a change or redefinition of their professional career (mean = 3.43), with higher scores in this area than their peers with different access paths.
The analysis according to student origin revealed statistically significant differences for each access type. Among students coming directly from their first degree, Spanish-native students had higher scores than their international peers (4.56 and 4.04, respectively); while among those who did not have related work experience, the differences were found in the second factor (personal and academic development), which was more important for international students than for Spanish-native students. Lastly, among those with work experience relevant to their degree, intrinsic motives (personal and academic development as well as professional prospects) were more important for the international students than for the Spanish-native students.
Furthermore, in general terms, differences were also observed between the different types of Master’s degree programmes. Students in programmes of a research nature were characterised by higher intrinsic motives, while students in professionally oriented and/or mixed degrees showed a greater tendency towards extrinsic motives. These results are consistent with the different orientations stemming from the purpose of each type of degree.
By means of a multiple correspondence analysis, we set out to graphically show the grouping of categories according to profiles, which allowed us to identify the demographic characteristics defining the main reasons for choice according to student origin, type of degree and students’ previous academic and work history.
Figure 1 shows a clear distinction between Spanish-native and international students in the type of Master’s degree programme chosen (professional or research), previous academic and work experience and reasons for choice. Firstly, we observed that international students had prior careers in jobs relating to the degree subject, unlike Spanish-native students, who were younger, and therefore had not had a fixed occupation or had worked in jobs unrelated to their degree programme. In addition, most of the Spanish-native students embarked on their Master’s degree directly after completing their undergraduate studies; thus, reinforcing the view of the Master’s as a continuation of their education and not as a form of training for professional specialisation. Secondly, we were able to visualise the options for each student individually, finding that international students chose research degrees, with more theoretical content and tending to be directed towards PhD studies, while Spanish-native students opted for professionally oriented Master’s degrees of a more practical nature.
Finally, this brings us to the motives for choice relating to students’ origins and types of Master’s degrees. In this area, Spanish-native students, who chose professional training degrees, showed a greater tendency towards extrinsic reasons for taking the course, while among international students, we observed a mix of motivations, with extrinsic motives prominent, but also motivations of personal and academic growth and those leading to enhanced professional prospects, which were characteristics shared by all students choosing a research degree.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

The increase in the number of foreign students as a cross-border phenomenon is related to the internationalisation of higher education, a natural response to globalisation in the university context [64,65,66]. Indeed, Knight and de Wit [67] pointed out that, in the last two decades, internationalisation has changed from being a marginal and minor factor in higher education to being a global, strategic and dominant factor. This new context has increased research interest in transition processes among international students, who present different characteristics from those pursuing a degree in their country of origin.
An important variable in the study of transitions is reflected in the analysis of the reasons for students embarking in a Master’s degree programme. These are highly important decisions in the transition to this level of education and, in the case of international students, such decisions are a key element in the initial stages of developing their mobility projects. This is a complex process, since the decision involves not only enroling in a Master’s degree programme but also many other planning and logistical factors, although the purpose of the programme itself is a common thread in the objectives pursued.
As can be seen from the data analysed here, there were differences in the reasons for choosing a degree programme according to the origin of the students, in line with previous research in the analysis of this scale [40,41,42]. Thus, Spanish-native students, whose access profiles differed from those of their foreign peers, opted for an academic path focused on the results they could obtain for their professional future, marked by extrinsic motivations linked to expectations of an assured entry into the labour market. Likewise, in the case of international students, we observed the importance of education itself in their choices, with particular importance given to motives of personal and academic growth, characterised by the central role of the educational experience abroad, both in terms of the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake and closely related to their previous professional careers, typically working in the same field as their studies [43,44,46]. Students having to move to another country to obtain a degree were also much more focused on these intrinsic motives, unlike those students with shorter credit mobility projects [22,24,46,47,48].
During international students’ journeys in fulfilment of their mobility projects, the decision-making process leading to taking a degree abroad played a central role in their lives, as also evidenced in numerous studies, models and publications on this topic [13,36,37,47,68,69]. As the literature and the results indicate, students seek options that suit their motivations, prioritising certain aspects of training or career opportunities that are linked to obtaining an international degree [26,29,38,49,50].
Broadening the contextual factors to delve more deeply into the key variables in students’ personal microsystems, such as their motivations and prior expectations, is an important step in the explanation and understanding of the phenomenon, given the influence of these variables on the development of the mobility project [38].
We found that the profile of international students and their motives for choosing a degree programme differed from those of Spanish-native students. On the one hand, the Spanish-native students were typically young, recent graduates, mostly women, with no work experience and still living with their parents. On the other hand, international students had a more discontinuous path, with work experience related to their studies. This discontinuity also contrasts with studies among Spanish-native students by Figuera et al. [40,62] and Hernández and Pérez [12], which showed a trend towards an unbroken academic trajectory in access to Master’s degrees.
The motivations leading the students to pursue a Master’s degree were also different, and clearly related to their profiles. Authors such as Chen and Zimitat [54] and Bhandari [53] have previously pointed to the existence of different priorities or hierarchies of motives depending on the country of origin, which are also related to the country’s level of development. International students moved to the host country motivated by their interest in pursuing their studies, mainly to the PhD level, responding either to personal concerns or in order to return to their society of origin (intrinsic motives). In addition, they also showed extrinsic motivations related to long-term economic and/or professional improvement, as we were able to establish from the qualitative analysis.
The influence of students’ previous trajectories has also been the subject of prior studies. Mendoza and Ortiz [50], for example, identified differences in the educational and professional paths of Master’s degree students in Barcelona, the most important being the previous professional experience of Latin American students compared to local students who entered directly from their first degrees with the aim of specialising. This previous professional situation, and the students’ attitudes towards it, showed a less homogeneous picture than that of their Spanish peers, since Latin American students’ expectations formed a continuum ranging from enhancing a more or less settled professional career by taking an international degree to striking out in a different direction from that of their former career.
Our findings suggest that higher education institutions should pay careful attention to international students who come to their universities in search of a degree. Considering the life cycle of the international student [47,70], the first stage analysed in this contribution is a time of tension, bureaucratic hurdles and insufficient information [69,71]. In spite of this, there is a lack of attention by host higher education institutions to this stage, mainly marked by the recruitment of foreign students and, on numerous occasions, leaving aside the accompaniment of these during their mobility project planning process.
Establishing protocols and guidelines for reception and guidance services for international students with the aim of ensuring successful transitions, as indicated by Arthur and Flynn [72], is necessary in order to support the experience of mobility through actions for decision-making. Pérez-Encinas [70], for example, highlighted the importance of guidance for students, both psychologically and from the more administrative perspective.
Due to the multifactorial and systemic nature of the international student mobility project, it is important to establish future lines of work that allow us to approach the different levels of the transition of this group, for example, the adjustment and adaptation processes of international students [73,74], the post-mobility trajectories [75,76,77] taking into account those who return home and those who continue with new projects abroad and the impact of training in international contexts on employability in both home and host countries [38,78,79,80].
The complexity of the phenomenon discussed here leads us to comment on a methodological factor limiting the study, since a qualitative approach via narratives or reflective interviews would have yielded a deeper understanding of international students’ transitions. In response to this limitation, and as a prospective line of research, we are currently working on the validation of a specific questionnaire for international students that will allow us to identify new dimensions and categories of analysis for interviews with this group.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; methodology, R.G.V.-F. and M.T.-F.; software, R.G.V.-F. and M.T.-F.; validation, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; formal analysis, R.G.V.-F. and M.T.-F.; investigation, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; resources, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; data curation, R.G.V.-F. and M.T.-F.; writing—original draft preparation, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; writing—review and editing, R.G.V.-F., M.T.-F., S.R.-R. and P.J.-d.-l.-S.; project administration, M.T.-F.; funding acquisition, M.T.-F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by EDU2016-80578-R; European Union: ERDF A way of making Europe grant number MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This research adhered to the standards of the Social Sciences of the Ethical Committee of Experimentation of the University of Barcelona (Spain).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All participants have been informed the anonymity is assured, why the research is being conducted and how their data will be used. As with all research involving humans, ethical approval from the University of Barcelona ethics committee has be obtained prior to conducting the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to private and ethical restrictions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Netz, N. Who benefits most from studying abroad? A conceptual and empirical overview. High. Educ. 2021, 82, 1049–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. UNESCO Global Flow of Tertiary-Level Students. Available online: http://uis.unesco.org/en/visualisation/global-flow-tertiary-level-students#slideoutmenu (accessed on 10 December 2022).
  3. Open Doors. Available online: https://opendoorsdata.org/data/international-students/ (accessed on 15 December 2022).
  4. OECD. Education at a Glance 2020: OECD Indicators; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. OECD. Education at a Glance 2022: OECD Indicators; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Marinoni, G. Internationalization of Higher Education: An Evolving Landscape, Locally and Globally. IAU 5th Global Survey; International Association of Universities: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ministerio de Universidades. Datos y Cifras del Sistema Universitario Español. Publicación 2020–2021; Ministerio de Universidades: Madrid, Spain, 2020; Available online: https://www.universidades.gob.es/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Datos_y_Cifras_2021_22.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2022).
  8. Van Mol, C. Exploring explanations for the gender gap in study abroad: A case study of the Netherlands. High. Educ. 2022, 83, 441–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Glass, C.R.; Streitwieser, B.; Gopal, A. Inequities of global mobility: Socioeconomic stratification in the meanings of a university education for international students. Comp. A J. Comp. Int. Educ. 2021, 51, 43–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Xu, C.L. Time, class and privilege in career imagination: Exploring study-to-work transition of Chinese international students in UK universities through a Bourdieusian lens. Time Soc. 2020, 30, 5–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pinto, C. Estudiar un posgrado en el extranjero: ¿una migración previsible? Rev. Soc. Y Equidad 2014, 6, 214–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Hernández, J.; Pérez, J. La Universidad Española en Cifras 2016–2017; CRUE: Madrid, Spain, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  13. Beech, S.E. The Geographies of International Student Mobility; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Gacel-Ávila, J.; Marmolejo, F. Internationalization of Tertiary Education in Latin America and the Caribbean. In Global and Local Internationalization. Transgressions: Cultural Studies and Education; Jones, E., Coelen, R., Beelen, J., de Wit, Y.H., Eds.; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kingeski, L.; Olivella Nadal, J. International Academic Mobility: The Attraction Factors of Brazilians Students in Spain; Editorial Universitat Politècnica de Valènci: Valencia, Spain, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kingeski, L.; Nadal, J.O. Impacto de los programas de becas en la movilidad de estudiantes internacionales: El caso de Brasil. Braz. J. Bus. 2021, 3, 296–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Madge, C.; Raghuram, P.; Noxolo, P. Engaged pedagogy and responsibility: A postcolonial analysis of international students. Geoforum 2009, 40, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Trejo Peña, A.P.; del Álamo Gómez, N. Movilidad estudiantil y académica de educación superior en Iberoamérica. In Migraciones: Movilidad y globalización en Iberoamérica; Casal, J.D., Loro, V.M., Gutiérrez-Sánchez, J.D., Eds.; Cooperación Editorial: Madrid, Spain, 2019; pp. 12–24. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zheng, P. Antecedents to international student inflows to UK higher education: A comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 136–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Agarwal, V.B.; Winkler, D.R. Foreign Demand for United States Higher Education: A Study of Developing Countries in the Eastern Hemisphere. Econ. Dev. Cult. Chang. 1985, 33, 623–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Brooks, R.; Waters, J. Social networks and educational mobility: The experiences of UK students. Glob. Soc. Educ. 2010, 8, 143–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Calikoglu, A. International student experiences in non-native-English-speaking countries: Postgraduate motivations and realities from Finland. Res. Comp. Int. Educ. 2018, 13, 439–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. del Álamo-Gómez, N.; Trejo-Peña, A. Los estudiantes venezolanos en España: Un colectivo migratorio cualificado afectado por el conflicto. América Lat. Hoy 2020, 85, 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. García, D.H.; Tamez, G.; Leyva, O. Factores que determinan la selección de la universidad destino en el ámbito internacional. Opción Rev. De Cienc. Hum. Y Soc. 2018, 86, 235–258. [Google Scholar]
  25. Simpson, R.; Sturges, J.; Weight, P. Transient, unsettling and creative space: Experiences of liminality through the accounts of Chinese students on a UK-based MBA. Manag. Learn. 2010, 41, 53–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Austin, L.; Shen, L. Factors influencing Chinese students’ decisions to study in the United States. J. Int. Stud. 2016, 6, 722–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Boyacia, A.; Ozb, Y. Opinions of international students on choosing a state university in a developing country. J. Int. Stud. 2019, 9, 338–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chen, Y.A.; Li, R.; Hagedorn, L.S. Undergraduate international student enrollment forecasting model: An application of time series analysis. J. Int. Stud. 2019, 9, 242–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Eskelä, E. Migration Decisions of Skilled Migrants: International Degree Students in an Offbeat Destination. Nord. J. Migr. Res. 2013, 3, 145–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Gautam, C.; Lowery, C.; Mays, C.; Durant, D. Challenges for Global Learners: A Qualitative Study of the Concerns and Difficulties of International Students. J. Int. Stud. 2016, 6, 501–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Culubret, C.; González, A.; Iglesias, M.; Moreno, S.; Roigé, V. Academic Tourism in Barcelona (Spain) in the COVID-19 Era. Region 2022, 9, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Grasset, C.; García Menéndez, B. El Impacto Económico de los Estudiantes Internacionales en España. ICEX, SEP and EDUESPAÑA. 2018. Available online: http://www.spaineduprograms.es/wp-content/uploads/Economic-Impact-of-International-Students-in-Spain-2018-FINAL.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2022).
  33. Levantino, A.; Eremenko, T.; Molinero Gerbeau, Y.; Consterdine, E.; Kabbanji, L.; Gonzalez-Ferrer, A.; Jolivet-Guetta, M.; Beauchemin, C. Opening or closing borders to international students? Convergent and divergent dynamics in France, Spain and the UK. Glob. Soc. Educ. 2018, 16, 366–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Perez-Encinas, A.; Ammigan, R. Support Services at Spanish and U.S. Institutions: A Driver for International Student Satisfaction. J. Int. Stud. 2016, 6, 984–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lee, E.S. A theory of migration. Demography 1966, 3, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mazzarol, T.; Soutar, G.N. “Push-pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2002, 16, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. de Wit, H. Changing Dynamics in International Student Circulation: Meanings, Push and Pull Factors, Trends, and Data. In The Dynamics of International Student Circulation in a Global Context; de Wit, H., Agarwal, P., Said, M.E., Sehoole, M., Sirozi, M., Eds.; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 15–46. [Google Scholar]
  38. Fakunle, O. Developing a framework for international students’ rationales for studying abroad, beyond economic factors. Policy Futures Educ. 2020, 19, 671–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq. 2000, 11, 227–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Figuera, P.; Buxarrais, M.R.; Llanes, J.; Venceslao, M. Perfil, motivación y satisfacción académica en los estudiantes de máster: El caso de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas. Estud. Sobre Educ. 2018, 34, 219–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Figuera, P.; Llanes, J.; Torrado, M.; Valls, R.G.; Buxarrais Estrada, M.R. Reasons for Course Selection and Academic Satisfaction among Master’s Degree Students. J. Hisp. High. Educ. 2022, 10, 261–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jurado, P.; Figuera, P.; Llanes, J. Análisis de las motivaciones y de las expectativas de los estudiantes de máster en Educación. Educar 2019, 55, 325–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Haas, S.; Terryn, F. Decision-Making Process of Prospective International Students: A Proposed Generic Complementary Model. Wiss. Beiträge 2019, 23, 103–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Branco Oliveira, D.; Soares, A.M. Studying abroad: Developing a model for the decision process of international students. J. High. Educ. Policy Manag. 2016, 38, 126–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Conradson, D.; Latham, A. Transnational urbanism: Attending to everyday practices and mobilities. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 2005, 31, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pérez-Encinas, A.; Rodríguez-Pomeda, J.; de Wit, H. Factors influencing student mobility: A comparative European study. Stud. High. Educ. 2020, 46, 2528–2541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Fakunle, O. International Student Perceptions on Studying Abroad and Developing Employability during a UK Masters. Doctoral Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2019. Available online: https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/36056 (accessed on 19 February 2023).
  48. Moogan, Y.J. An investigation into international postgraduate students’ decision-making process. J. Furth. High. Educ. 2020, 44, 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Caldwell, E.F.; Hyams-Ssekasi, D. Leaving Home: The Challenges of Black-African International Students Prior to Studying Overseas. J. Int. Stud. 2016, 6, 588–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mendoza, C.; Ortiz, A. Procesos migratorios y transiciones vitales de un grupo de jóvenes universitarios extranjeros en Barcelona, España. Econ. Soc. Y Territ. 2016, 16, 103–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cantwell, B.; Luca, S.G.; Lee, J.J. Exploring the orientations of international students in Mexico: Differences by region of origin. High. Educ. 2009, 57, 335–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. King, R.; Sondhi, G. International student migration: A comparison of UK and Indian students’ motivations for studying abroad. Glob. Soc. Educ. 2018, 16, 176–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bhandari, R. Global Student and Talent Flows: Reexamining the Brain Drain Equation. Int. High. Educ. 2019, 99, 6–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Chen, C.H.; Zimitat, C. Understanding Taiwanese students’ decision-making factors regarding Australian international higher education. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2006, 20, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rafi, M.A. Influential factors in the college decision-making process for Chinese students studying in the US. J. Int. Stud. 2018, 8, 1681–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Trejo Peña, A.P.; Suárez Bequir, S.S. Estudiantado mexicano de posgrado en España: Motivaciones y mecanismos impulsores detrás de la movilidad estudiantil. Périplos Rev. De Estud. Sobre Migrações 2018, 2, 36–50. [Google Scholar]
  57. Maringe, F.; Carter, S. International students’ motivations for studying in UK HE. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2007, 21, 459–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hardré, P.L.; Hackett, S. Defining the graduate college experience: What it “should” versus “does” include. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 2015, 10, 57–77. [Google Scholar]
  59. Hardré, P.L.; Liao, L.; Dorri, Y.; Beeson, M.A. Modeling American graduate students’ perceptions predicting dropout intentions. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 2019, 14, 105–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Amida, A.; Algarni, S.; Stupnisky, R. Testing the relationships of motivation, time management and career aspirations on graduate students’ academic success. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 2021, 13, 1305–1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Valls-Figuera, R.G. Transiciones y Trayectorias de los Estudiantes Internacionales en el Nivel de Máster. Doctoral Thesis, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  62. Figuera, P.; Llanes, J.; Valls, R.G. Online Master’s Students’ Profile and Motives for Enrollment. Univers. J. Educ. Res. 2019, 7, 629–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Raitz, T.; Corti, F.; Ferreira, D.J.; Vanzuita, A.; Zeni, M. La transición de los estudios de máster: Motivaciones y expectativas de estudiantes de dos universidades brasileñas. Educar 2019, 55, 343–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Knight, J. The internationalization of higher education scrutinized: International program and provider mobility. Sociologías 2020, 22, 176–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Pérez-Encinas, A.; Howard, L.; Rumbley, L.E.; de Wit, H. Internacionalización de la Educación Superior en España: Reflexiones y Perspectivas; Servicio Español para la Internacionalización de la Educación Superior (SEPIE): Madrid, Spain, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  66. Rodríguez-Espinar, S. La Universidad: Una visión desde “fuera” orientada al futuro. Rev. De Investig. Educ. 2018, 36, 15–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Knight, J.; de Wit, H. Internationalization of Higher Education: Past and Future. Int. High. Educ. 2018, 95, 3–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Cubillo, J.M.; Sánchez, J.; Cerviño, J. International students’ decision-making process. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2006, 20, 101–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Wadhwa, R. Students on the move: Understanding decision-making process and destination choice of Indian students. High. Educ. Future 2016, 3, 54–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Pérez Encinas, A. La Experiencia de Intercambio de Estudiantes Internacionales: Servicios de Apoyo Formales e Informales en la Universidad de Acogida. Doctoral Thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 2017. Available online: https://repositorio.uam.es/bitstream/handle/10486/680616/perez_encinas_adriana.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 20 April 2022).
  71. Jindal-Snape, D.; Rienties, B. Understanding multiple and multi-dimensional transitions of international higher education students: Setting the scene. In Multi-Dimensional Transitions of International Students to Higher Education; Jindal-Snape, D., Rientes, B., Eds.; Routledge: Oxford, UK, 2016; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  72. Arthur, N.; Flynn, S. Career development influences of international students who pursue permanent immigration to Canada. Int. J. Educ. Vocat. Guid. 2011, 11, 221–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Jindal-Snape, D.; Ingram, R. Understanding and supporting triple transitions of international doctoral students: ELT and SuReCom models. J. Perspect. Appl. Acad. Pract. 2013, 1, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Schartner, A.; Young, T.J. Towards an integrated conceptual model of international student adjustment and adaptation. Eur. J. High. Educ. 2016, 6, 372–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Gomes, C. Footloose transients: International students in Australia and their aspirations for transnational mobility after graduation. Crossings J. Migr. Cult. 2015, 6, 41–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Tran, L.T.; Blackmore, J.; Rahimi, M. “You are not as localised as I need”: Employability of Chinese returning graduates. High. Educ. Ski. Work.-Based Learn. 2021, 11, 949–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Trejo Peña, A.P. La Cooperación Académica en Educación Superior entre México y España 1977–2017. Una Política Migratoria y Contexto de Acogida Diferenciado. Educ. Policy Anal. Arch. 2020, 28, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Jacobs, E. Work visas and return migration: How migration policy shapes global talent. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 2020, 48, 1647–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Nilsson, P.A.; Ripmeester, N. International Student Expectations: Career, Opportunities and Employability. J. Int. Stud. 2016, 6, 614–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Tran, L.T.; Rahimi, M.; Tan, G.; Dang, X.T.; Le, N. Post-study work for international graduates in Australia: Opportunity to enhance employability, get a return on investment or secure migration? Glob. Soc. Educ. 2020, 18, 495–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 05621 g001 550
Figure 1. MCA, joint category plots.
Figure 1. MCA, joint category plots.
Sustainability 15 05621 g001
Table
Table 1. Population and sample of students participating in the study.
Table 1. Population and sample of students participating in the study.
Total Enrolment
(N)		Sample
(n)		Response Percentage (%)Spanish Students n (%)International Students
n (%)
Total45631468.9181 (57.64)133 (42.36)
Table
Table 2. Questionnaire dimensions and questions.
Table 2. Questionnaire dimensions and questions.
DimensionDescriptionQuestions/Items
Demographic Personal characteristics and the student’s academic and working career.Gender (M/F);
Type of access (direct from first degree/unrelated work experience/related work experience); type of Master’s degree (research/professional/mixed).
Reasons for choiceThe reasons for choice were seen as a measure of the expectations that students had of their course or programme. The relative weight of the different indicators of motivation for pursuing the degree was measured using a scale of eleven items.ME1, to change the professional area (within the same career); ME2, to redefine the professional project (radical change); ME3, to improve the professional situation; ME4, to enjoy a new educational experience; ME5, to increase the network of contacts; ME6, to enter or stay in the labour market; ME7, to progress economically; ME8, to enhance professional skills; ME9, to acquire further educational qualifications; ME10, to stay active; ME11, to gain access to a PhD
Table
Table 3. Technical analysis of the reasons for choice scale.
Table 3. Technical analysis of the reasons for choice scale.
FactorsScale ItemsExtractionWeight of the Item in the Factor% of Variance of the Item% of Variance of the Factor
Factor 1ME6 Enter or stay in the labour market0.6980.82726.37617.592
ME7 Achieve economic progress0.9740.79315.947
ME3 Achieve work promotion0.5510.58711.213
Factor 2ME11 Achieve access to a PhD0.4430.6549.8215.965
ME5 Expand contact network0.6010.6218.293
ME4 Enjoy a new educational experience0.5130.6147.597
ME10 Stay active0.4220.5995.149
Factor 3ME8 Enhance professional skills0.7860.8645.17215.399
ME9 Acquire further academic qualifications0.7800.7634.285
Factor 4ME2 Redefine professional project (radical change)0.7230.8413.56513.761
ME1 Change the professional area (within the same career)0.7080.8312.952
Note: Factor 1. Extrinsic motivations; Factor 2. Motivations of personal and academic self-fulfilment motives; Factor 3. Motivations relating to professional prospects; Factor 4. Professional change or redefinition motives.
Table
Table 4. Profile and access path of the Spanish-native and international students in the sample.
Table 4. Profile and access path of the Spanish-native and international students in the sample.
VariableCategoriesPercentage
SpanishInternational
GenderMale2233
Female7867
Access pathDirect from first degree62.621.6
No related work experience11.212.8
Related work experience26.365.6
Type of Master’s Professional57.525
Research27.146
Mixed15.529
Table
Table 5. Reasons for choice according to student origin.
Table 5. Reasons for choice according to student origin.
Factors on the Reasons for Choosing the Master’s ScaleTotal (n = 314)Spanish (n = 181)LAC
(n = 96)		Other International Students
(n = 37)		K-W H Effect Size
Mean (Sd.)Mean (Sd.)Mean (Sd.)Sig
(p < 0.05)		Cohen’s d (1-β)
Factor 1. Extrinsic motives3.93 (0.88)3.94 (0.86)4.03 (0.88)3.59 (0.91)0.0400.130
Factor 2. Personal and academic develop motives3.55 (0.74)3.40 (0.72)3.94 (0.69)3.30 (0.58)0.0000.260
Factor 3. Professional prospect motives4.54 (0.70)4.53 (0.66)4.70 (0.65)4.19 (0.88)0.0000.150
Factor 4. Change career motives2.91 (1.12)2.85 (1.07)2.97 (1.22)3.06 (1.07)0.427
Table
Table 6. Reasons for choice according to type of Master’s and type of student.
Table 6. Reasons for choice according to type of Master’s and type of student.
Type of DegreeReasons for Choice of Degree ScaleSpanish (n = 181)International
(n = 133)		K-W H Effect Size
Mean (Sd.)Mean (Sd.)Sig (p < 0.05)Cohen’s d (1-β)
Professionally oriented degreesF1. Extrinsic motives4.13 (0.71)4.06 (0.83)0.771-
F2. Personal and academic develop3.31 (0.72)3.48 (0.74)0.456-
F3. Professional prospect4.52 (0.75)4.27 (0.91)0.147-
F4. Change career2.91 (1.06)3.31 (1.13)0.070-
Research degreesF1. Extrinsic motives3.55 (1.03)3.98 (0.91)0.035 *0.443
F2. Personal and academic develop3.65 (0.62)4.04 (0.64)0.003 *0.619
F3. Professional prospect4.58 (0.58)4.80 (0.48)0.021 *0.415
F4. Change career2.82 (1.04)2.94 (1.15)0.560-
Mixed degreesF1. Extrinsic motives3.88 (0.83)3.66 (0.96)0.346-
F2. Personal and academic develop4.13 (0.71)4.06 (0.83)0.231-
F3. Professional prospect3.31 (0.72)3.48 (0.74)0.685-
F4. Change career4.52 (0.75)4.27 (0.91)0.613-
Note: * indicates statistically significant differences.
Table
Table 7. Reasons for choice according to type of access and type of student.
Table 7. Reasons for choice according to type of access and type of student.
Type of AccessReasons for Choice of Degree ScaleSpanish (n = 181)International (n = 133)K-W HEffect Size
Mean (Sd.)Mean (Sd.)Sig (p < 0.05)Cohen’s d (1-β)
Direct from GradeF1. Extrinsic motives4.02 (0.82)3.64 (0.98)
F2. Personal and academic develop3.50 (0.64)3.38 (0.60)
F3. Professional prospect4.56 (0.61)4.04 (1.02)0.0100.638
F4. Change career2.87 (1.00)2.96 (1.16)
No related experienceF1. Extrinsic motives4.03 (0.68)3.93 (0.87)
F2. Personal and academic develop3.13 (0.86)3.91 (0.64)0.0051.04
F3. Professional prospect4.40 (0.82)4.38 (0.89)
F4. Change career3.30 (1.21)3.61 (.76)
Related experienceF1. Extrinsic motives3.74 (1.00)3.98 (0.89)
F2. Personal and academic develop3.27 (0.79)3.82 (0.74)0.0000.719
F3. Professional prospect4.51 (0.72)4.76 (0.51)0.0240.407
F4. Change career2.61 (1.16)2.88 (1.19)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Valls-Figuera, R.G.; Torrado-Fonseca, M.; Romero-Rodríguez, S.; Jurado-de-los-Santos, P. The Decision-Making Process in Access Paths to Master’s Degree Studies: The Case of International Students in Spain. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5621. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075621

AMA Style

Valls-Figuera RG, Torrado-Fonseca M, Romero-Rodríguez S, Jurado-de-los-Santos P. The Decision-Making Process in Access Paths to Master’s Degree Studies: The Case of International Students in Spain. Sustainability. 2023; 15(7):5621. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075621

Chicago/Turabian Style

Valls-Figuera, Robert G., Mercedes Torrado-Fonseca, Soledad Romero-Rodríguez, and Pedro Jurado-de-los-Santos. 2023. "The Decision-Making Process in Access Paths to Master’s Degree Studies: The Case of International Students in Spain" Sustainability 15, no. 7: 5621. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075621

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop