IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p9196-d615497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Students Prioritize Majors or Specific Colleges? Analyzing the Factors That Influence Preferences in China

Author

Listed:
  • Congbin Guo

    (Graduate School of Education, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Mengchao Guo

    (Graduate School of Education, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Xiaowei Hao

    (Graduate School of Education, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

Abstract

China’s college entrance examination has always been regarded as a system that promotes social stability and sustainable development. Students with different characteristics may have dissimilar professional aspirations. Due to the increasing popularity of higher education in China, these characteristics may constitute new influences among students’ professional priorities and educational preferences, and it is interesting to explore how such characteristics, especially family backgrounds, affect these choices. Compared to previous investigations, this study conducted a more systematic and quantitative empirical examination of family background. Accordingly, we used data obtained through a survey on higher education reform conducted by the Graduate School of Education at Peking University. Results showed that family backgrounds significantly influenced student priorities when deciding whether majors or specific colleges were most important. When deliberating over the “unpopular majors” offered at higher-level colleges/universities and the “popular majors” offered at relatively lower-level colleges, students with comparatively advantageous family backgrounds were more likely to prioritize specific colleges; that is, they were more willing to choose higher-level colleges than “popular majors” at lower-level colleges. Conversely, students with relatively disadvantaged family backgrounds were more likely to prioritize majors; that is, they were more willing to forego higher-level colleges/universities in favor of “popular majors” at relatively lower-level colleges.

Suggested Citation

  • Congbin Guo & Mengchao Guo & Xiaowei Hao, 2021. "Do Students Prioritize Majors or Specific Colleges? Analyzing the Factors That Influence Preferences in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9196-:d:615497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9196/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9196/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kimberly A. Goyette & Ann L. Mullen, 2006. "Who Studies the Arts and Sciences? Social Background and the Choice and Consequences of Undergraduate Field of Study," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(3), pages 497-538, May.
    2. Rochat, Denis & Demeulemeester, Jean-Luc, 2001. "Rational choice under unequal constraints: the example of Belgian higher education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 15-26, February.
    3. Chunyan Song & Jennifer E. Glick, 2004. "College Attendance and Choice of College Majors Among Asian‐American Students," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1401-1421, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Iryna Y. Johnson & William B. Muse, 2017. "Choice of Academic Major at a Public Research University: The Role of Gender and Self-Efficacy," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 58(4), pages 365-394, June.
    2. Sharron Xuanren Wang & Arthur Sakamoto, 2021. "Can Higher Education Ameliorate Racial/Ethnic Disadvantage? An Analysis of the Wage Assimilation of College-Educated Hispanic Americans," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    3. Anna Manzoni & Jessi Streib, 2019. "The Equalizing Power of a College Degree for First-Generation College Students: Disparities Across Institutions, Majors, and Achievement Levels," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 60(5), pages 577-605, August.
    4. Paolo Buonanno & Dario Pozzoli, 2009. "Early Labour Market Returns to College Subject," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 23(4), pages 559-588, December.
    5. Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2011. "Risk Aversion And Major Choice: Evidence From Italian Students," Working Papers 201107, Università della Calabria, Dipartimento di Economia, Statistica e Finanza "Giovanni Anania" - DESF.
    6. Amy E. Stich, 2018. "Stratification with Honors: A Case Study of the “High” Track within United States Higher Education," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Joop Hartog & Luis Diaz-Serrano, 2015. "Why Do We Ignore the Risk in Schooling Decisions?," De Economist, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 125-153, June.
    8. Taylor K. Odle & Jennifer A. Delaney, 2022. "You are Admitted! Early Evidence on Enrollment from Idaho’s Direct Admissions System," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 63(6), pages 899-932, September.
    9. Julia Varga, 2006. "The Role of Labour Market Expectations and Admission Probabilities in Students' Application Decisions on Higher Education: The Case of Hungary," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 309-327.
    10. Yang, Lijun, 2018. "Higher education expansion and post-college unemployment: Understanding the roles of fields of study in China," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-74.
    11. David Bardey & Nohora Forero Ramírez, 2008. "Teorías y algunas experiencias internacionales en el financiamiento de la educación superior: lecciones para Colombia," Documentos de Trabajo 4692, Universidad del Rosario.
    12. Claude Diebolt & Magali Jaoul-Grammare, 2016. "Cliométrie de l’enseignement supérieur : une analyse expérimentale de la théorie de l’engorgement," Working Papers of BETA 2016-07, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    13. Jean Luc De Meulemeester & Claude Diebolt, 2004. "The economies of education: unkept promises?," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 47(3-4), pages 303-320.
    14. Charles Jaret & Donald C. Reitzes, 2009. "Currents in a Stream: College Student Identities and Ethnic Identities and Their Relationship with Self‐Esteem, Efficacy, and Grade Point Average in an Urban University," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 90(2), pages 345-367, June.
    15. Claude Diebolt & Olivier Darné, 2005. "Cliometrics of Academic Careers and the Impact of Infrequent Large Shocks in Germany before 1945," Post-Print hal-00279246, HAL.
    16. Bratti, Massimiliano & Mancini, Luca, 2003. "Differences in Early Occupational Earnings of UK Male Graduates by Degree Subject: Evidence from the 1980-1993 USR," IZA Discussion Papers 890, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Magali Jaoul, 2004. "Enseignement supérieur et marchés du travail. Analyse économétrique de la théorie de l’engorgement," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 166(5), pages 39-57.
    18. Kieron J. Barclay & Martin Hällsten & Mikko Myrskylä, 2016. "Birth order and college major in Sweden," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2016-008, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    19. Massimiliano Bratti, 2005. "Social Class and Undergraduate Degree Subject in the UK," UNIMI - Research Papers in Economics, Business, and Statistics unimi-1015, Universitá degli Studi di Milano.
    20. Jean Luc De Meulemeester, 2007. "L'économie de l'éducation fait-elle des progrès? Une perspective d'histoire de la pensée économique," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 50(1), pages 89-111.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9196-:d:615497. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.