1887
Volume 2015, Issue 1
  • EISSN: 1703-1958

Abstract

The scholarship program in Qatar provides aid for students wishing to enroll in “top-ranked” universities around the world by supplying them with tuition, fees, board, and travel. The selectivity (high or low ranking, as determined by international ranking agencies) of the universities implies specific outcomes in terms of graduation and time of study at the university. In this study we attempt to understand how selectivity is related to education functional outcomes. Based on Qatari students enrollment in higher education programs around the world, students were bifurcated into high ranking or low ranking universities and whether they graduated or terminated in relation to specific functional outcome as in achievement (e.g. grade point average) and time of study in a program. A Kruskal-Wallis analysis was conducted using the selectivity of university as an independent variable and graduation status (whether they were terminated or graduated) on student university achievement and time of study. The finding showed the main effects for selectivity, bifurcated into ranked universities (top-1096 universities) and those non-ranked on university achievement. When the selectivity was narrowed by bifurcating students who were enrolled in highly ranked (top-200 universities) and those lower-ranked universities (below the top 200-ranked universities or non-ranked universities), a main and significant statistical difference was found for selectivity on university achievement and time of study. Surprisingly, those in the “top- ranked” universities were more likely to underperform than those in the lower-ranked universities. The findings suggest that students who enroll in high ranking universities were more likely to face difficulty in maintaining the high averages to continue. A greater insight and qualitative approaches is needed to understand Qatari student lower achievement in the top ranking universities around the world.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2015.3
2015-08-25
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/nmejre/2015/1/nmejre.2015.3.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2015.3&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alon S, Tienda M. Assessing the “mismatch” hypothesis: Differentials in college graduation rates by institutional selectivity. Sociology of Education. 2005; 78:4:294315.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alon S, Tienda M. Diversity, opportunity, and the shifting of meritocracy in higher education. American Sociological Review. 2007; 72:4:487511.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Astin A. Minorities in American higher education: Recent trends, current prospects, and recommendations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers 1985.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker GS. Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research 1964.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Berger JB, Milem JF. Organizational behavior in higher education and student outcomes. In: Smart JC, ed. Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. Vol. 15. New York: Agathon Press 2000;:268338.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bettinger E. How Financial Aid Affects Persistence. In: Hoxby C, ed. College Choices: The Economics of Where to Go, When to Go, and How to Pay for It. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press 2004;:207238.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bowen W, Bok D. The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press 1998.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowen WG, Chingos MW, McPherson MS. Crossing the finish line. Princeton: Princeton University Press 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Braunstein A, McGrath M, Pescatrice D. Measuring the impact of income and financial aid offers on college enrollment decisions. Research in Higher Education. 1999; 40:3:247259.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brewer D, Augustine C, Zellman G, Ryan G, Goldman C, Stasz C, Constant L. Education for a new era: Design and implementation K-12 Education reform in Qatar. Pittsburgh, PA:R and Corporation 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cabrera AF, Nora A, Castanieda MB. The role of finances in the persistence process: A structural model. Research in Higher Education. 1992; 33:5:571593.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Carnevale AP, Rose SJ. Socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and selective college admissions. New York: Century Foundation 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen R, DesJardins S. Investigating the impact of financial aid on student dropout risks: Racial and ethnic differences. The Journal of Higher Education. 2010; 81:2:179208.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cofer J, Somers P. A comparison of the influence of debt load on the persistence of students at public and private colleges. Journal of Student Financial Aid. 2000; 30:2:3958.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dale S, Krueger A. Estimating the payoff to attending a more selective college: An application of selection on observables and unobservables. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2002; 117:4:14911528.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. DesJardins SL. Assessing the effects of changing institutional aid policy. Research in Higher Education. 2001; 42:6:653678.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. DesJardins SL, Ahlburg DA, McCall BP. Simulating the longitudinal effects of changes in financial aid on student departure from college. Journal of Human Resources. 2002; 36:3:653679.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Glocker D. The Effect of Student Aid on Duration of Study. Economics of Education Review,. 2011; 30:1:177190.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gross JPK, Vasti T, Desiree Z. Financial Aid and Attainment Among Students in a State with Changing Demographics. Research in Higher Education. 2013; 54:4:383406.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Gulf Times (2015, June15). Scholarship plan for 21,386 Qatari students, govt staff. The Gulf Times, Doha Qatar.
  21. Harrison N, Baxter A, Hatt S. From Opportunity to OFFA: Discretionary Bursaries and Their Impact. Journal of Access Policy and Practice. 2007; 5:1:321.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Harrison N, Hatt S. Expensive and Failing? The Role of Student Bursaries in Widening Participation and Fair Access in England. Studies in Higher Education. 2012; 37:6:695712.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hillman K. The First Year Experience: The Transition from Secondary School to University and TAFE in Australia. LSAY Research Reports: 44. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoenack SA. Economic behavior within organizations. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press 1983.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hoxby C. How the changing structure of U.S. higher education explains college tuition. (NBER Working Paper No. 6323). Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research 1997.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. James R. Socioeconomic Background and Higher Education Participation: An Analysis of School Students’ Aspirations and Expectations. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Jiyun K, DesJardins SL, McCall BP. “Exploring the Effects of Student Expectations About Financial Aid on Postsecondary Choice: A Focus on Income and Racial/Ethnic Differences. Research in Higher Education. 2009; 50:8:741774.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. John EPS, Hu S, Weber J. State policy and the affordability of public higher education: The influence of state grants on persistence in Indiana. Research in Higher Education. 2001; 42:4:401428.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Kim MM, Rhoades G, Woodard DB. Sponsored research versus graduating students Intervening variables and unanticipated findings in public research universities. Research in Higher Education. 2003; 44:1:5181.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. King JE. Crucial Choices: How Students’ Financial Decisions Affect their Academic Success. Washington, D.C. American Council on Education 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Light A, Strayer W. Determinants of college completion: School quality or student ability? Journal of Human Resources. 2000; 35:2:299332.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Marcus RD. Freshmen retention rates at U.S. private colleges: Results from aggregated data. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement. 1989; 15::3755.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Melguizo T. Quality matters: Assessing the impact of attending more selective institutions on college completion rates of minorities. Research in Higher Education. 2008; 49:3:214236.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Metzger CA. Study Abroad Programming: A 21st Century Retention Strategy? College Student Affairs Journal. 2006; 25:2:164175.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Monks J, Ehrenberg RG. The impact of U.S. News & World Report college rankings on admissions outcomes and pricing policies at selective private institutions. (CHERI Working Paper #1), 1999. Retrieved March 1, 2015, from Cornell University, ILR School site: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/1 .
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Noble J, Sawyer R. Predicting different levels of academic success in college using high school GPA and ACT composite score. ACT Research Report Series, 2002. Retrieved June 21, 2009 from http://act.org/research/researchers/reports/pdf/ACT_RR2002-4.pdf .
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Paulsen MB, St. John EP. Social class and college costs: Examining the financial nexus between college choice and persistence. Journal of Higher Education. 2002; 73:2:189236.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Porter A, Yang R, Hwang J, McMaken J, Rorison J. The Effects of Scholarship Amount on Yield and Success for Master's Students in Education. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2014; 7::166182.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Qatar General Secretariat for Development Planning. Qatar National Vision 2030. (QNV), 2008. Available at http://www.gsdp.gov.qa/portal/page/portal/gsdp_en/qatar_national_vision/qnv_2030_document/QNV2030_English_v2.pdf .
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Qatar General Secretariat for Development Planning. Qatar National Development Strategy 2011-2016 , 2010;. Available at http://www.gsdp.gov.qa/gsdp_vision/docs/NDS_EN.pdf .
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Saupe JL, Smith TY, Xin W. Institutional and student characteristics in student success: First-term GPA, one-year retention and six-year graduation. Paper presented at the annual Association for Institutional Research Forum: Seattle, WA, 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Sjoberg CE . The Relationship of Environmental Predictors and Institutional Characteristics to Student Persistence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma, State University: OK 1999;.
  43. Slater M. The Impact of Financial Aid on College GPA at Three Flagship Public Institutions. American Educational Research Journal. 2009; 46:3:782815.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. St. John EP. Price response in enrollment decisions: an analysis of the high school and beyond sophomore cohort. Research in Higher Education. 1990; 31:2:161176.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. St. John EP. Untangling the web: using price-response measures in enrollment projections. Journal of Higher Education. 1993; 64:6:676695.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. St.John E, Paulsen M, Starkey J. The nexus between college choice and persistence. Research in Higher Education. 1996; 37::175220.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. St. John EP, Somers PA. Assessing the impact of financial aid offers on enrollment decisions. Journal of Student Financial Aid. 1993; 23:3:712.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Teese R. Structural Inequality in Australian Education: Vertical and Lateral Stratification of Opportunity. In: Teese RLamb SDuru-Bellat M, eds. International Studies in Educational Inequality, Theory and Policy: Volume 2 – Inequality in Education Systems. New York, NY: Springer 2007;:3963.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Titus MA. Examining the influence of institutional context on persistence at four-year colleges and universities: A multilevel approach. Research in Higher Edu-cation. 2004; 45:7:673699.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Titus M. The Production of Bachelor's Degrees and Financial Aspects of State Higher Education Policy: A Dynamic Analysis. The Journal of Higher Education. 2009; 80:4:439468.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Yang P. The Impact of Financial Aid on Learning, Career Decisions, and Employment. Evidence from Recent Chinese College Students. Chinese Education and Society. 2011; 44:1:2757.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2015.3
Loading
/content/journals/10.5339/nmejre.2015.3
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error