Next Article in Journal
Centering Relationships in Leadership Preparation
Previous Article in Journal
Prepared to Ensure Quality Education for All? A Comparative Study of Pre-Service Teachers’ Self-Efficacy for Inclusion in Spain and the United States
Previous Article in Special Issue
Advancing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Strategies for Engaging Generation Z
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 5
10.3390/educsci15050536
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of University Reputation and Academic Quality on University Selection Among Vietnamese Postgraduate Students: A Moderation Analysis of Gender

by
Azadeh Amoozegar
1,*,
Ly Bao Duy Nguyen
2,
Hariharan N. Krishnasamy
1,
Boonyarit Omanee
3 and
Asokan Vasudevan
4
1
Faculty of Education and Liberal Arts, INTI International University, Persiaran Perdana BBN, Putra Milai, Nilai 71800, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
2
Limkokwing Graduate School, Limkokwing University of Creative Technology, Cyberjaya 63000, Selangor, Malaysia
3
Faculty of Liberal Arts, Rajamangala University of Technology Srivijaya, 1 Ratchadamnoennok Rd., Boyang Subdistrict, Songkhla 90000, Thailand
4
Faculty of Business and Communication, INTI International University, Persiaran Perdana BBN, Putra Milai, Nilai 71800, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(5), 536; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050536 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 1 December 2024 / Revised: 5 February 2025 / Accepted: 14 February 2025 / Published: 27 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue International Higher Education: Knowledge, Culture and Public Diplomacy)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study investigated the phases involved in postgraduates’ decision-making process when selecting a university in Vietnam. By analyzing the key factors that influence these decisions, the research provides insights into how these elements impact students’ university choices, offering a deeper understanding of enrolment behavior in the Vietnamese educational context. The survey was conducted by gathering quantitative data. With an emphasis on gender moderating university choice decisions, a 16-item questionnaire was used to measure university reputation and academic quality. Utilizing a quantitative approach, data were collected from a sample of postgraduate students and analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) via SmartPLS 4. The results reveal that both university reputation and academic quality significantly influence university choice decisions. However, the moderating effect of gender on these relationships was found to be insignificant. These findings contribute to the limited literature on higher education marketing in Vietnam, particularly concerning postgraduate students, and offer valuable insights for university administrators. This study is in line with SDG 5 (Gender Equality), which includes topics like gender parity, inclusive participation, and gender equity, and SDG 4 (Quality Education), which highlights the significance of academic quality and reputation when choosing a university.

1. Introduction

The advancement of a country is significantly influenced by its tertiary education system, which serves as a crucial driver of social and economic growth (Duong et al., 2023; Rajanthran et al., 2023). Over the past two decades, Vietnam has prioritized higher education reform as a pivotal strategy for achieving its socio-economic development objectives. These reforms have resulted in significant progress, including a substantial increase in student enrolment, reflecting the nation’s commitment to expanding access to education and meeting the demands of a rapidly evolving economy (Nguyen, 2024). The educational landscape in Vietnam comprises a combination of state-run and privately operated institutions, with government-controlled entities playing a dominant role. Although the exact ratios may vary, state-funded universities typically constitute the larger portion of higher education facilities. According to recent statistics released by the (Ministry of Education and Training (MOET), 2017), there are 171 state-funded universities and 65 privately operated ones. This distribution equates to roughly 72% public and 28% private educational establishments. Vietnam’s government has established an ambitious objective to have a minimum of ten universities ranked among Asia’s top 500 by 2030. Furthermore, the nation aims to cultivate one of the four finest university systems within the ASEAN region, demonstrating its dedication to enhancing the quality of higher education and its competitive standing in the area (Le et al., 2022c). The 2018 Higher Education Law in Vietnam outlines a tertiary education system that includes both public and private institutions offering undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral degrees. These educational establishments are categorized as either research-focused or application-oriented, based on their capabilities and the socio-economic needs they aim to fulfill (Nguyen, 2024).
Vietnam has established international programs and universities designed to enhance academic quality, expand language of instruction options, diversify fields of study, and attract a larger student population. These initiatives aim to elevate the country’s educational standards and make it a more attractive destination for both domestic and international students (Le et al., 2022c; Nguyen, 2024). With a notable rise in the number of universities and improvements in educational standards, many higher education institutions in Vietnam still face significant challenges in student recruitment due to intense competition (Le, 2020). Understanding how students make decisions about university selection is crucial for informing marketing strategies and enabling institutions to craft more effective approaches. This can help universities better align their offerings with student preferences and increase enrolment (Adefulu et al., 2020).
Recently, the identification of selection criteria for higher education institutions has emerged as a crucial area of research to help universities understand how to position themselves effectively. Previous studies on the decision-making process among students have largely focused on undergraduate or final-year high school students (Le et al., 2022a; Le et al., 2022c). Adefulu et al. (2020) found that most research on university choice decision-making among postgraduate students has been conducted mainly in Western and other developing nations (such as Malaysia and Indonesia), with only a few studies focusing on developing countries like Vietnam (Dao & Thorpe, 2015; Ngan & Khoi, 2021). According to Duong et al. (2023), research on student choice in Vietnam is scarce, and studies specifically addressing the university choice decisions of postgraduate students are even rarer. Hence, understanding how educational choices are made provides valuable insights that can help optimize the decision-making process, benefiting both students in selecting the most suitable institutions and society as a whole by producing more qualified professionals across various fields.
The Vietnamese government has prioritized enhancing its higher education system to support rapid economic growth, recognizing that higher education students, as part of the country’s human capital development, play a crucial role in driving this growth (Hirosato & Kitamura, 2009). The progress of students and universities they are affiliated is closely tied to the country’s social, cultural, and political trajectory (Le Ha et al., 2024). Universities, therefore, aim not only to influence students’ decisions in choosing institutions but also to ensure satisfaction by providing quality education and services (Le et al., 2022b). However, universities in Vietnam face major challenges, including a lack of innovative solutions to improve training quality and insufficient human resources (Duong et al., 2023). Consequently, improving academic quality has become a critical priority for Vietnamese universities.
Universities today are no longer solely providers of knowledge; they must also function like businesses by attracting students and cultivating a positive image that enhances students’ perceptions of their brand and reputation (Le et al., 2022a). University reputation is tied to competitive advantages, and the potential to increase profitability, and is a complex construct that influences consumer behavior. It serves as a strategic resource and an intangible asset (Garvanova, 2020). A university’s reputation can be defined as the beliefs individuals hold about it (Padlee et al., 2010). This study examines how students’ opinions, beliefs, and attitudes toward reputation shape their decision-making and recommendations when choosing a university, highlighting reputation as a key factor in the competitive landscape. Despite its importance, there is a significant lack of empirical research in the social sciences on the role of reputation in higher education—this study seeks to address that gap (Garvanova, 2020). As previously mentioned, selecting a university is a complex, multi-phase process, and despite some research in this area, understanding of how students make enrolment decisions remains limited. This study explored the impact of university reputation and academic quality on postgraduate students’ decisions to enroll in VNU-HCM.
The study sheds light on the relative importance of university reputation and academic quality in attracting postgraduate students to VNU-HCM. These two factors are crucial for students when they are making that big decision of where to study. The focus on university reputation and academic quality stems from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, and National Centre for Education Statistics’ (2019) findings that these are the top factors influencing students’ choice of institution. Understanding the role of reputation can help VNU-HCM strengthen its brand image and communicate its strengths effectively to prospective students. This study also highlights the importance of academic quality in attracting postgraduate students. This can encourage VNU-HCM to continuously improve its programs, faculty, and research to remain competitive. Hence, in a competitive higher education landscape, reputation and academic quality are key differentiators for VNU-HCM because they can attract international students, which is contributing to VNU-HCM’s global standing.
Additionally, this study investigates gender differences in student responses. By investigating gender differences, this study reveals whether male and female students prioritize different factors when choosing a university for postgraduate studies. This can help tailor recruitment efforts to specific gender groups. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the factors influencing postgraduate student enrollment decisions at VNU-HCM, with a specific focus on the role of university reputation, academic quality, and gender differences. Its findings have important implications for the institutional strategy, student recruitment, and the broader understanding of student choice in higher education, particularly in the context of Vietnam and Southeast Asia

2. Literature Review

2.1. University Choice Decision

In recent years, the topic of student choice-making has garnered significant academic attention (Adefulu et al., 2020). It is increasingly important for university administrators to grasp the decision-making processes of prospective students, including where they obtain information, as this knowledge can shape and enhance universities’ marketing strategies (Adefulu et al., 2020). Choosing higher education is often considered a high-risk decision (Le et al., 2020). Students face various problems related to misunderstandings and errors in university selection and many students feel lost because they are unsure of their talents and interests (Dela & Wijaya, 2022). For most students, selecting a university is challenging, as it is a decision that significantly shapes their future path (Veloutsou et al., 2004). Thus, the decision-making process concerning the factors that may influence students in their university selection typically involves a series of steps that institutions must thoroughly comprehend (Adília & José, 2021).
Choosing a university depends on students’ beliefs, procedures, effects, and perceptions about continuing their education (Naveed & Khurshid, 2021). In exploring the factors that shape students’ preferences for choosing universities in Vietnam, Dao and Thorpe (2015) found ‘facilities and service’, ‘programme’, and ‘price’ were most important factors influencing Vietnamese students’ choice of university, while Le et al. (2022c) identified individual factors, infrastructure and facility, training activities, study costs, advertisement, and local elements as essential factors influencing choices. Ngan and Khoi (2021) reported that future career expectation, university reputation, enroll opportunity, individual capacity, group references, university characteristics, and communication at university were important choice factors for Vietnamese students. As higher education institutions in Vietnam aim for excellence and global recognition, understanding the key factors influencing university choice, such as university reputation and academic quality, becomes essential.

2.2. University Reputation

In an increasingly competitive landscape, universities strive to attract prospective students while boosting their levels of internationalization. A strong reputation is particularly appealing to students, making it a key factor in their decision-making process (Delgado-Márquez et al., 2012). Reputation can significantly impact an individual’s perception of a higher education institution and the quality of education it offers (Cindrakasih & Hartono, 2024). Reputation is established through various factors, including student experiences at the university, the institution’s ability to attract students, the selection process for incoming students, faculty recruitment, the knowledge possessed by both internal and external stakeholders, as well as university evaluations and rankings (Cindrakasih & Hartono, 2024). University reputation signifies the collective perception of an institution’s past performance, influencing stakeholders’ judgments (Del-Castillo-Feito et al., 2019). It is often seen as a mindset or psychological image of the university. Every institution must develop a competitive advantage, with university reputation serving as a key component (Ramdhiani & Wahdiniwaty, 2018). A strong reputation enhances credibility, attractiveness, and competitive advantage, attracting high-quality students, faculty, and funding (Miotto et al., 2020).
A reputation is a total opinion of something or someone that people construct in their minds (C. Chen & Esangbedo, 2018). University reputation (UR) is a construct defined by the perceptions and attitudes of both students and staff within the institution, as well as the general public. It encompasses the evaluations that differentiate and compare various characteristics of the university (Khoi, 2021). Multiple research studies (Hillenbrand & Money, 2007; Veloutsou et al., 2004; Walsh & Beatty, 2007; Briggs, 2006; Hoyt & Brown, 2003) have highlighted the significant influence of a university’s reputation on students’ decision-making process when selecting an educational institution. According to Ming (2010), the most significant factor in students’ decision-making process for selecting an institution is its reputation. Kusumawati (2010) suggests that reputation plays the greatest role in a student’s decision to attend higher education. Garvanova (2020) have further contributed to this factor that universities consider their reputation a strategic tool that allows them to capture the attention of students. Thus, it can be concluded from the above discussion that the university reputation, prevailing in multiple aspects, has a strong influence over the decisions taken by students to attend universities.

2.3. Academic Quality

Stakeholders have varying perspectives on higher education quality, including students, employers, staff and faculty, the government, funding agencies, accreditation agencies, and assessing bodies (Depo, 2023). An exceptional quality highlights academic excellence and prestige, often equating the two as synonymous with high standards and superior performance (Harvey & Green, 1993). Quality higher education is in demand, so measuring effectiveness and quality is becoming more important (Ryan, 2015). As noted by Elassy (2015), quality can be associated with various contexts, including teaching, learning, academic programs, program designs, student intake and experience, and assessment. Consequently, defining quality is difficult because it can have different interpretations depending on the context (Pham & Starkey, 2016).
The research literature shows that academic quality is one of the most influential institutional factors in the decision to attend a specific college or university. McDuff (2007) pointed out that quality is a key factor influencing school choice, mentioning that students are prepared to tolerate significant tuition increases in return for a higher quality of education. Wozniak (2011) conducted a study to examine how an undergraduate research program impacts recruitment at Northern Michigan University (NMU). Essential recruitment components include the financial contribution, demonstrating the academic quality of the university, allowing admissions officers to showcase the unique program. According to Mazzarol and Soutar (2002), academic quality is a factor that make a particular institution more attractive than its competitors. Likewise, the findings from Nor (2018)’s study in Somalia revealed that academic quality significantly influences students’ university choices, indicating that students tend to prefer universities that provide high-quality programs, professional lecturers, etc. The findings of the research study by Liu (2005) generated 23 major factors that influence students’ choice of selected private universities in China, and indicate that employment prospects, academic quality, and cost are the top three most important categories of college choice factors that students consider when they choose a private university to attend.

2.4. Moderating Variable: Gender

According to Aragonés-González et al. (2020), gender plays a significant role in education at the classroom, individual, and institutional levels. Research on gender differences in university choice decisions has produced mixed results across various geographical regions, often shaped by the unique characteristics of the sample populations. Despite these conflicting findings, there is still a noticeable gap in examining the relationship between gender and the factors influencing university choice decisions (Aydin & Bayir, 2016). Some studies have found significant differences in the determinants of university choice based on gender, while others have reported no notable differences between male and female students regarding their university selection decisions.
Sojkin et al. (2012) found statistically significant differences across three criteria. In their research, male students rated university reputation, available courses, study costs, and accessibility of financial aid as more important compared to female students. Conversely, female students reported a higher mean score concerning social conditions. In contrast, male students expressed greater satisfaction when their chosen university offered a variety of high-quality courses or when professors had strong educational and research credentials. Aydin and Bayir (2016) investigated the connection between gender and the factors influencing the university choice process. Their findings revealed that out of 13 criteria, including education costs, staff quality, job prospects, and advertising, only the significance placed on exchange program opportunities varied significantly by gender. Female students rated exchange opportunities as more important than their male counterparts. The study also highlighted a lack of research examining the relationship between gender and the determinants of university choice decisions.

3. Objectives and Hypothesis

Prior studies have shown that selecting a higher education institution is a significant and potentially risky decision. The choice of university can have long-lasting impacts on students’ future careers (Duong et al., 2023). Universities now compete globally, not just locally or regionally, to attract students, particularly those pursuing postgraduate degrees. Comprehending the factors that influence postgraduate students’ university selection is crucial for effectively promoting higher education, ensuring universities’ long-term viability, and developing successful marketing approaches (Adefulu et al., 2020). In contrast to earlier research that primarily examined developed nations and undergraduate populations, this investigation delves into the factors that shape postgraduate students’ decision-making processes. Given the scarcity of studies addressing this issue from a country-specific perspective, Vietnam was chosen as the focal point for this research.
This study delves into the critical factors influencing postgraduate student enrollment decisions at Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM), a leading higher education institution in Vietnam. Recognizing the increasing competition among universities and the importance of attracting talented postgraduate students, the research specifically examines the role of university reputation and academic quality in shaping student choices. Drawing upon established theories and previous research findings, this study hypothesized a positive correlation between these factors and student enrollment decisions. We further posited that the influence of reputation and academic quality may vary based on gender, suggesting the need for tailored recruitment strategies. The proposed conceptual framework will visually represent these relationships, acknowledging the complex interplay of factors that contribute to student decision-making. By conducting this research, the we aimed to provide valuable insights for VNUHCM and other universities seeking to enhance their postgraduate programs and attract a diverse and talented student body. The findings will have implications for institutional branding, academic quality improvement, and the promotion of gender equity in higher education, ultimately contributing to a better understanding of student choice in the Vietnamese context and beyond. The proposed conceptual framework for this study is illustrated in Figure 1.
The following hypotheses were established in accordance with the framework constructed:
H1. 
University reputation has a significant influence on the university choice decision among postgraduate students at Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM).
H2. 
Academic quality has a significant influence on the university choice decision among postgraduate students at Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM).
H3. 
Gender significantly moderates the relationship between university reputation and university choice decision among postgraduate students at Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM).
H4. 
Gender significantly moderates the relationship between academic quality and university choice decision among postgraduate students at Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM).

4. Methodology

4.1. Sample and Design

A descriptive correlational study was designed to examine the effect of university reputation and academic quality on students’ decisions to choose a university with respect to gender. This study focused on first-year postgraduate students at institutions affiliated with the Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM) system. As one of the most esteemed and extensive university systems, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM) comprises 7 affiliated universities. It stands as a prominent hub for academic research and tertiary education within the Southeast Asian region. With its substantial postgraduate student body, VNU-HCM presents an ideal setting for examining the factors that influence this particular group’s decision to enroll. The study centered on postgraduate students, as they have already been exposed to the university’s service environment, unlike undergraduates, who lack such experience (Adefulu et al., 2020).
The study utilized a validated online survey platform (Google Forms) to gather anonymous responses from participants. Online surveys offer benefits such as ease of use and perceived privacy. By ensuring confidentiality and anonymity, and eliminating social pressure to provide desirable answers, respondents are more inclined to give truthful responses. This approach enhances the likelihood of obtaining honest feedback from the participants.
The sample size was calculated using Yamane’s formula from 1967 [n = N/1 + N(e2)], resulting in a requirement of 367 students to adequately represent the population of first-year postgraduate students. Qazi et al. (2021) suggest that a sample size of 150 is sufficient for convergence. Thus, the present study’s sample size was considered adequate for conducting estimations. Additionally, to address ethical concerns during data collection, participants were assured that their provided information would remain confidential and be used exclusively for this research project.
A questionnaire survey was distributed to 367 full-time postgraduate students currently enrolled at the seven member universities of Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNUHCM) between 1 September 2023 and 30 November 2023. Out of the 367 questionnaires, 258 valid samples were returned, giving a response rate of 70%. Based on the most recent meta-analysis by Wu et al. (2022) in education-related research, the average online survey response rate is 44.1%. Hence, the response rate in this study was sufficient for data analysis.

4.2. Measuring Tools

This study used a survey questionnaire as the primary research instrument. A survey questionnaire is one of the most common instruments in social science research (Liu, 2005). Consistent with the purpose of this study, a structured questionnaire was adopted to elicit the perceptions of freshman postgraduate students about the factors that influenced their college choice. Students were asked to rate the importance of each item to their choice of the university by responding to a Likert scale. A simple random sampling was adopted for collecting data from postgraduate students studying in seven universities under Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM). With the help of the university administrators, a list of first-year postgraduate students at VNU-HCM was generated. Students were contacted via email and were invited to participate in this research.
Items relating to the university choice decision were adopted from the study of Le (2020). The questionnaire comprised 4 items in a five-point rating scale (1—strongly disagree to 5—strongly agree). The scale indicated good internal consistency (0.711). Sample items for the university choice decision included “compared to the ideal university, I am pleased with the decision to choose this university”. The items relating to university reputation were adopted from Qazi et al. (2021); they comprised o5 items with high reliability (0.896). Sample items for the university reputation included “This university has good prestige within the community”, “This university has many achievements”, and “This university has high academic standards”. Finally, the items for academic quality were adopted from (Liu, 2005) and comprised 7 items. The response scale was a 1–5 Likert scale. The sample items included “This university has a high quality of teaching”.

5. Results and Interpretation

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) uses a confirmatory approach to analyze complex, phenomenon-based structures, accounting for measurement error, to provide more reliable conclusions about relationships between multiple indicators compared to methods like linear regression (S. Chen & Ye, 2023). In this study, PLS-SEM was employed using SmartPLS 4 to estimate the effect of university reputation and academic quality on university choice decisions. Additionally, the moderation effect of gender was evaluated to understand potential differences in how these factors influence decision-making based on gender. The user-friendly interface and extensive visualization capabilities of SmartPLS enabled us to clearly define and illustrate our intricate model (Farrukh et al., 2024). Measurement and structural models are included in the PLS-SEM. The assessment of the model was established and performed in two stages. Firstly, the model’s reliability and validity were assessed, and then hypotheses and the structural model were tested (Qazi et al., 2021).

5.1. Measurement Model

5.1.1. Convergent Validity

To investigate the measurement model, including reliability and validity, PLS-SEM was applied. Four metrics were examined in the reliability assessment: outer loadings, Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted. The values of each item must exceed 0.70. In addition, all constructs must have an AVE score of at least 0.50 (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). Based on Table 1 and Figure 2, Cronbach’s alpha value exceeded 0.7 (Wangyanwen et al., 2023) and the composite reliability (CR) values ranged from 0.907 to 0.944, exceeding the threshold of 0.7 (S. Chen & Ye, 2023). A high level of reliability and internal consistency was confirmed by these findings. A test of convergent validity was performed by examining the average variance extracted (AVE), which ranged from 0.583 to 0.807. An adequate convergence was demonstrated by the AVE values exceeding the threshold of 0.5 (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023).

5.1.2. Discriminant Validity

Researchers employ a concept called discriminant validity to assess whether a measurement can be differentiated from other unrelated measurements. Content validity, a type of construct validity, evaluates if a measure accurately captures what it was intended to measure, rather than something unintended (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). This approach helps ensure that research instruments are both precise and relevant to their intended purpose.
Discriminant validity plays a crucial role in any measurement system by ensuring that a measure is distinct from other measures and evaluates a unique concept. Multiple approaches can be employed to assess discriminant validity. In order to complete the discriminant validity evaluation, three specific tests are used: the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT), Fornell–Larcker criteria, and cross-loading analysis (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). This research utilized the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) of correlations, as shown in Table 2, to evaluate discriminant validity. The HTMT approach is a well-established technique for assessing this aspect of validity in scientific investigations. The HTMT correlation test is frequently regarded as superior to the Fornell–Larcker criteria and (partial) cross-loadings for assessing discriminant validity. This research employed a 0.9 threshold for determining discriminant validity, as recommended by previous studies (S. Chen & Ye, 2023). The study evaluated HTMT ratios to determine if correlations between distinct constructs fell below this threshold, indicating sufficient differentiation. Discriminant validity is considered excellent when the HTMT value is less than 0.9.
The research also examined the Fornell–Larcker criteria, which posit that the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct should surpass its correlation with other constructs (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). Table 3 presents this comparison, offering further confirmation of the uniqueness of the examined constructs. The analysis revealed that the AVE square root for individual constructs ranged from 0.763 to 0.898, surpassing the correlation coefficient in each case.
The cross-loading test was conducted as the final step, with the outcomes displayed in Table 4. This test was the third method employed in this study to assess the discriminant validity of the variables. The purpose of this approach is to determine if indicators associated with a specific latent construct exhibit higher loadings on that construct compared to any other constructs within the same row (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). This suggests that the primary construct must have a greater loading of indicators or objects compared to any other structure. The results presented in Table 4 demonstrate that, when compared across rows, the loading of all latent variables (indicators) exceeds that of other constructs. These findings reveal a strong one-dimensionality for each examined element (Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2023). In sum, this thorough approach strengthens our assurance that the constructs in our research are separate and not excessively affected by common variance.

5.2. Structural Model

This study employed the bootstrapping method with 5,000 random resamples to test the path coefficients. Table 5 shows the results of the hypothesis tests, with two out of the four proposed hypotheses supported by the data. The path coefficients are illustrated alongside the explained variance (R2) of the endogenous variables in Figure 3.
The results of the PLS analysis in this study investigating the relationship between university reputation (UR), academic quality (AQ), and students’ decision when choosing university (DUCS) with the moderating role of gender are as follows:
H1: The positive and significant path coefficient indicates that academic quality has a significant positive effect on students’ university choice decisions (β = 0.276, t-value = 3.704, p = 0.000). A higher perception of academic quality increases the likelihood of students choosing a university. The T-value is well above 1.96, and the p-value is below 0.05, indicating strong statistical significance. Hence, H1 was supported.
H2: University reputation also has a significant and positive impact on university choice decisions, with a stronger influence than academic quality (path coefficient = 0.522). The higher the university’s reputation, the more likely students are to choose that university. The t-value and p-value indicate a highly significant result. Hence, H2 was supported.
H3: The interaction between gender and university reputation does not significantly moderate the relationship between university reputation and university choice decision (β = −0.018, t-value = 0.164, p = 0.870). The path coefficient is negative and very close to zero, and the t-value is far below 1.96, with a high p-value (greater than 0.05), indicating no statistically significant moderation effect of gender in this relationship. Hence, H3 was not supported.
H4: Similarly, the interaction between gender and academic quality is not significant in moderating the relationship between academic quality and university choice decision (β = −0.028, t-value = 0.257, p = 0.797). The path coefficient is also close to zero, the t-value is far below the threshold, and the p-value is well above 0.05, indicating no significant moderation effect of gender in this relationship. Hence, H4 was not supported.
The results of this study indicated that both academic quality and university reputation significantly influence students’ university choice decisions, with university reputation having a stronger effect. However, gender does not significantly moderate the relationship between these factors (academic quality, university reputation) and university choice decisions. Thus, the impact of university reputation and academic quality on university choice is consistent across genders. It means that the effects of university reputation and academic quality on students’ university choice decisions are similar for both male and female students. Whether the student is male or female, the way these factors influence their decision to choose a university remains consistent

6. Discussion

Students’ university choice decision was confirmed to be influenced by academic quality (H1), similar to research conducted by Chapman (1981), which suggests that quality faculty and their degrees, as well as overall academic reputation, play a significant role in students’ decisions. Academic quality is essential for the survival of universities, especially when they are competing for student enrolment. The findings of this study are consistent with Liu (2005), who highlighted that academic quality is the most important factor students consider when selecting a private university in China.
In an increasingly competitive environment, universities must maintain a consistent institutional reputation by enhancing their visibility. This is crucial because universities recognize the importance of cultivating a strong image that resonates with their target audiences, ensuring that their reputation remains favorable and attractive to prospective students and stakeholders (Esangbedo & Bai, 2019). It has been proposed by Amado et al. (2023) that university reputation is determined by the quality of educational services students receive. This view aligns with definitions by authors like Qazi et al. (2021), who suggest that reputation emerges from collective experiences among university stakeholders and the institution’s performance.
The university reputation influences students’ university choice decision (H2), as similarly found in studies by Garvanova (2020). The results of the study conducted by Al Tamimi et al. (2023) revealed that the impact of a university’s reputation on admissions decisions was positive and significant. While university reputation has become a crucial component of higher education in a globalized context, attracting students, staff, and research investments (C. Chen & Esangbedo, 2018), the extent of its influence on students’ choice decisions remains debatable, primarily due to a lack of consensus on the relationship between reputation and university selection (Khoi, 2021). Lomer et al. (2018) assert that reputation serves as a crucial distinguishing factor in higher education institutions (HEIs). Hence, the reputation of an institution increases its chances of being selected by potential students because they perceive it as less risky.
Furthermore, H3 and H4 seek to examine the relationship between gender as a moderator between academic quality, university reputation, and university choice decision. The results of this investigation, revealing that gender plays no significant role in moderating the selection criteria for postgraduate university programs in Vietnam, present a notable divergence from some previous research findings in the field. Research indicates that gender is a key factor influencing university preferences and selections. Multiple investigations have demonstrated the impact of gender on higher education decisions. For instance, Xu et al. (2023) discovered notable gender-based disparities in the selection of undergraduate majors. Similarly, Heng et al. (2024) found that gender acts as a moderating variable in the connection between a university’s reputation, the quality of its teaching staff, and the enrollment intentions of high school graduates. Nevertheless, the results of this research align with the study by Nichols and Chang (2013), which investigated gender-based differences in how factors like competitive advantage, reduced class sizes, institutional reputation, and faculty relationships influenced enrollment choices at South Dakota State University. Their analysis showed that these variations were not statistically significant. This study’s findings, which show no significant moderation effect, indicate that gender may not be as influential in determining university choices for Vietnamese postgraduate students.
A potential explanation for this inconsistency lies in the nature of this study’s sample. This research focuses on postgraduate students, who may demonstrate different university selection behaviors compared to the undergraduate students and high school graduates examined in previous studies. Social factors, the campus environment, and peer influence may have a stronger impact on high school graduates and undergraduates, potentially leading to gender-related variations in their choices. Conversely, postgraduate students tend to prioritize academic excellence, research prospects, faculty expertise, and career advancement opportunities, which may diminish the role of gender in their decision-making process. This suggests that gender might be more influential in earlier educational stages but becomes less significant as students advance to postgraduate studies. The divergent findings between this study and prior research could be partly attributed to these differences in sample composition.
According to Anggraini (2020), enhancing institutional reputation and the quality of academic services leads to greater student satisfaction. Research by Qasim et al. (2021) identified reputation and the quality of teaching as the primary factors influencing students’ selection of universities in Kurdistan-Iraq. Furthermore, Qasim et al. (2021) explained that the significance of a university’s reputation stems from the intangible nature of higher education as a service. The difficulty in assessing service quality based on concrete attributes makes reputation the most reliable indicator of anticipated quality in the higher education sector.

7. Conclusions

The current research contributes information to the literature on university choice, specifically as it relates to postgraduate students. For institutions to attract students to apply and enroll, they must understand which attributes are most important to prospective students. The questions that were answered help understand the underlying factors important to postgraduate students. To develop successful and sophisticated recruitment strategies, universities must better understand why and how students choose universities.
There is a significant contribution to the literature on higher education marketing, especially in relation to Vietnamese postgraduate students. It offers valuable insights into the factors influencing postgraduate students’ decision-making processes and lays the foundation for further research initiatives. From a managerial standpoint, this study highlights the need for university managers and administrators to implement more strategic marketing communications, foster stronger relationships with stakeholders, and improve the overall student experience. Gaining a deeper understanding of student choices at the postgraduate level can enhance marketing practices and allow universities to customize their marketing strategies more effectively.
By focusing on the VNU-HCM system, this study provides valuable insights for higher education establishments in developing nations confronting comparable challenges of intensified competition and growing student expectations. The results should assist VNU-HCM-affiliated universities in identifying the primary factors influencing student enrolment, allowing them to craft strategies that focus on building their reputation and improving academic standards.

Author Contributions

Methodology, A.A.; Software, A.A.; Validation, L.B.D.N. Investigation, H.N.K.; Resources, H.N.K.; Writing—original draft, L.B.D.N.; Writing—review & editing, A.A.; Supervision, H.N.K.; Project administration, B.O. and A.V.; Funding acquisition, L.B.D.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of Limkokwing University of Creative Technology (2023-00375-02, approved 1 February 2023) for studies involving humans.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statements

Not applicable. The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Adefulu, A., Farinloye, T., & Mogaji, E. (2020). Factors influencing postgraduate students’ university choice in Nigeria. In Higher education marketing in Africa: Explorations into student choice (pp. 187–225). Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Adília, M. d. C. e. S. G., & José, M. A. C. S. (2021). Factors influencing the choice of higher education institutions in Angola. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, 13(1), 23–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Alnehabi, M., & Al-Mekhlafi, A.-B. A. (2023). The Association between Corporate Social Responsibility, Employee Performance, and Turnover Intention Moderated by Organizational Identification and Commitment. Sustainability, 15(19), 14202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Al Tamimi, N. N. M., Al Mashrafi, O. M. S., & Thottoli, M. M. (2023). Exploring the Factors that Influence University Selection: Insights from College Students. Journal of Business Management Review, 4(6), 439–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Amado, M., Guzmán, A., & Juarez, F. (2023). Relationship between perceived value, student experience, and university reputation: Structural equation modeling. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Anggraini, R. (2020). The effect of reputation and academic service quality toward student satisfaction. In 2nd international media conference 2019 (IMC 2019) (pp. 437–446). Atlantis Press. [Google Scholar]
  7. Aragonés-González, M., Rosser-Limiñana, A., & Gil-González, D. (2020). Coeducation and gender equality in education systems: A scoping review. Children Youth Services Review, 111, 104837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Aydin, O. T., & Bayir, F. (2016). The Impact of Different Demographic Variables on Determinants of University Choice Decision: A Study on Business Administration Students of the Foundation Universities in Istanbul. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(4), 1147–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Briggs, S. (2006). An exploratory study of the factors influencing undergraduate student choice: The case of higher education in Scotland. Studies in Higher Education, 31(6), 705–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chapman, D. W. (1981). A model of student college choice. The Journal of Higher Education, 52(5), 490–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chen, C., & Esangbedo, M. O. (2018). Evaluating university reputation based on integral linear programming with grey possibility. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2018(1), 5484326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chen, S., & Ye, J. (2023). Understanding consumers’ intentions to purchase smart clothing using PLS-SEM and fsQCA. PLoS ONE, 18(9), e0291870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cindrakasih, N. A., & Hartono, A. (2024). The influence of organizational identification, reputation, costs, and infrastructure factors on new student satisfaction at private universities. Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Sharia Economics, 7(3), 6373–6386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dao, M. T. N., & Thorpe, A. (2015). What factors influence Vietnamese students’ choice of university? International Journal of Educational Management, 29(5), 666–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dela, R. M., & Wijaya, T. (2022). Factors affecting student’s interest in determining majors higher education in Era 4.0. Dinamika Pendidikan, 17(1), 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Del-Castillo-Feito, C., Blanco-González, A., & González-Vázquez, E. (2019). The relationship between image and reputation in the Spanish public university. European Research on Management Business Economics, 25(2), 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Delgado-Márquez, B. L., Bondar, Y., & Delgado-Márquez, L. (2012). Higher education in a global context: Drivers of top-universities’ reputation. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 40, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Depo, G. (2023). The influence and limitations of university rankings: An examination of student perspectives on the alignment between university rankings and institutional quality [Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota]. [Google Scholar]
  19. Duong, M.-Q., Nguyen, V.-T., Bach, T.-N.-D., Nguyen, H.-P., & Le, T.-Y.-D. (2023). Factors influencing postgraduate students’ university choice decisions at the Vietnam National University. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(5), 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elassy, N. (2015). The concepts of quality, quality assurance and quality enhancement. Quality Assurance in Education, 23(3), 250–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Esangbedo, M. O., & Bai, S. (2019). Grey regulatory focus theory weighting method for the multi-criteria decision-making problem in evaluating university reputation. Symmetry, 11(2), 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Farrukh, M., Raza, A., Rafiq, M., & Ansari, N. (2024). Team GHRM and Team Pro-environmental behavior. Environment, Development Sustainability, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Garvanova, M. (2020). The significance of reputation in choosing and recommendation a university. Test Engineering and Management, 83, 8545–8553. [Google Scholar]
  24. Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Heng, H. K., Wang, R., Yeap, C. K., Ithnan, I. H. M., Abidin, I. S. b. Z., & Lai, P. Y. (2024). Breaking barriers: Exploring the gender moderation in factors affecting university choice for students. In Islamic finance: New trends in law and regulation (pp. 345–357). Springer Nature Switzerland. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hillenbrand, C., & Money, K. (2007). Corporate responsibility and corporate reputation: Two separate concepts or two sides of the same coin? Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 261–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hirosato, Y., & Kitamura, Y. (2009). The political economy of educational reforms and capacity development in Southeast Asia: Cases of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam (Vol. 13). Springer Science & Business Media. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hoyt, J. E., & Brown, A. B. (2003). Identifying college choice factors to successfully market your institution. College University, 78(4), 3. [Google Scholar]
  29. Khoi, B. H. (2021). Factors influencing on university reputation: Model selection by AIC. In Data science for financial econometrics (pp. 177–188). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kusumawati, A. (2010, July 16–18). Privatisation and marketisation of Indonesian public universities: A systematic review of student choice criteria literature. The Indonesian Student International Conference 2010, Melbourne, Australia. [Google Scholar]
  31. Le, H. Q. (2020). Factors affecting students’ decision to select private universities in Vietnam. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(4), 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Le, T. D., Le, N. V., Nguyen, T. T., Tran, K. T., & Hoang, H. Q. (2022a). Choice factors when Vietnamese high school students consider universities: A mixed method approach. Education Sciences, 12(11), 779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Le, T. D., Robinson, L. J., & Dobele, A. R. (2020). Understanding high school students use of choice factors and word-of-mouth information sources in university selection. Studies in Higher Education, 45(4), 808–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Le, T. N., Duong, B. T., & Le, L. H. (2022b). Factors affecting choice of high-quality university program: A case study of students in Vietnam. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(4), 7842–7855. [Google Scholar]
  35. Le, T. T. T., Tran, M. T., & Le, H. B. H. (2022c). Factors affecting students’ decision to choose regional public universities: An empirical study from Vietnam. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 9(4), 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Le Ha, P., Bao, D., & Windle, J. (2024). Global Vietnam: Across time, space and community. In Vietnamese language, education and change in and outside Vietnam. Springer Nature. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liu, J. (2005). Factors influencing students’ choice of selected private universities in China [Doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University]. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lomer, S., Papatsiba, V., & Naidoo, R. (2018). Constructing a national higher education brand for the UK: Positional competition and promised capitals. Studies in Higher Education, 43(1), 134–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push-pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. McDuff, D. (2007). Quality, tuition, and applications to in-state public colleges. Economics of Education Review, 26(4), 433–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ming, J. S. K. (2010). Institutional factors influencing students’ college choice decision in Malaysia: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Business Social Science, 1(3), 53–58. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). (2017). Statistical yearbook of education and training; Ministry of Education and Training (MOET).
  43. Miotto, G., Del-Castillo-Feito, C., & Blanco-González, A. (2020). Reputation and legitimacy: Key factors for Higher Education Institutions’ sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Business Research, 112, 342–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Naveed, S., & Khurshid, M. (2021). Factors Influencing the university choice decision of business students at higher education level: A case from Pakistan. Hamdard Islamicus, 43(2), 33–43. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ngan, N. T., & Khoi, B. H. (2021). Using PLS-SEM algorithm for choice of university in Vietnam. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1933(1), 012066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nguyen, T. A. (2024). The internationalization of higher education in Vietnam: Impacts of study abroad programs. In Impacts of study abroad on higher education development: Examining the experiences of faculty at leading universities in southeast asia (pp. 183–207). Springer Nature. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nichols, T. J., & Chang, K.-L. M. (2013). Factors influencing honors college recruitment, persistence, and satisfaction at an upper-midwest land grant university. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 14(2), 105–127. [Google Scholar]
  48. Nor, A. I. (2018). Factors contributing to the students’ choice of university: A case study of somali national university. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 4(1), 49–55. [Google Scholar]
  49. Padlee, S. F., Kamaruddin, A. R., & Baharun, R. (2010). International students’ choice behavior for higher education at Malaysian private universities. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(2), 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pham, H. T., & Starkey, L. (2016). Perceptions of higher education quality at three universities in Vietnam. Quality Assurance in Education, 24(3), 369–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Qasim, A. M., Al-Askari, P. S. M., Massoud, H. K., & Ayoubi, R. M. (2021). Student university choice in Kurdistan-Iraq: What factors matter? Journal of Further Higher Education, 45(1), 120–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Qazi, Z., Qazi, W., Raza, S. A., & Yousufi, S. Q. (2021). the antecedents affecting university reputation and student satisfaction: A study in higher education context. Corporate Reputation Review, 25(4), 253–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Rajanthran, S., Wider, W., Wong, L., Chan, C., & Maidin, S. (2023). Utilization of high-impact educational practices (hips) to engage undergraduates: A preliminary case study. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 12(1), 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ramdhiani, N. V., & Wahdiniwaty, R. (2018, November 22). The effect of the college reputation on student’s decision making to choose it. International Conference on Business, Economic, Social Science and Humanities (ICOBEST 2018), Bandung, Indonesia. [Google Scholar]
  55. Ryan, T. (2015). Quality assurance in higher education: A review of literature. Higher learning research communications, 5(4), n4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sojkin, B., Bartkowiak, P., & Skuza, A. (2012). Determinants of higher education choices and student satisfaction: The case of Poland. Higher Education, 63, 565–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, and National Centre for Education Statistics. (2019). NCES 2019-404. Stats in brief: What high schoolers and their parents know about public 4-year tuition. Available online: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019404/ (accessed on 5 February 2025).
  58. Veloutsou, C., Lewis, J. W., & Paton, R. A. (2004). University selection: Information requirements and importance. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(3), 160–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Walsh, G., & Beatty, S. E. (2007). Customer-based corporate reputation of a service firm: Scale development and validation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wangyanwen, L., Senathirajah, A. R. b. S., & Haque, R. (2023). Influence of enterprise risk management (ERM) on perceived organizational performance: Evidence from Chinese-based organizations. International Journal of Operations Quantitative Management, 29(1), 68–82. [Google Scholar]
  61. Wozniak, C. (2011). Freshman fellows: Recruiting and retaining great students through research opportunities. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 32(2), 8–15. [Google Scholar]
  62. Wu, M.-J., Zhao, K., & Fils-Aime, F. (2022). Response rates of online surveys in published research: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 7, 100206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Xu, C., Xiang, F., Duan, R., Miralles-Cardona, C., Huo, X., & Xu, J. (2023). An analysis of factors influencing chinese university students’ major choice from the perspective of gender differences. Sustainability, 15(18), 14037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Education 15 00536 g001
Figure 1. Hypothetical framework of the proposed study.
Figure 1. Hypothetical framework of the proposed study.
Education 15 00536 g001
Education 15 00536 g002
Figure 2. Measurement model.
Figure 2. Measurement model.
Education 15 00536 g002
Education 15 00536 g003
Figure 3. Structural model.
Figure 3. Structural model.
Education 15 00536 g003
Table 1. Reliability and validity of the model.
Table 1. Reliability and validity of the model.
ConstructsOLCronbach’s AlphaCRAVE
AQ 0.8820.9070.583
1. This university has a high quality of teaching.0.750
2. This university offers a wide range of desired majors.0.827
3. The faculty at this university are highly qualified and experienced.0.788
4. The courses offered by this university are relevant and diverse.0.744
5. This university provides excellent learning resources and facilities.0.729
6. There is strong interaction between students and faculty at this university.0.704
7. The degrees granted by this university are well-recognized and valued.0.793
ConstructsOLCronbach’s AlphaCRAVE
UR 0.8990.9250.713
1. This university has good prestige within the community.0.769
2. This university is a well-respected one.0.853
3. This university’s reputation positively influences the value of my degree0.887
4. This university has many achievements.0.854
5. This university has high academic standards.0.855
ConstructsOLCronbach’s AlphaCRAVE
DUCS 0.9200.9440.807
1. Compared to my expectation, I am satisfied with my decision to choose this university.0.872
2. Compared to the ideal university, I am pleased with the decision to choose this university.0.918
3. I have faith in my decision to choose this university.0.888
4. In general, choosing this university is the right decision for me.0.914
Table 2. HTMT ratio of PLS-SEM.
Table 2. HTMT ratio of PLS-SEM.
AQDUCSUR
AQ
DUCS0.682
UR0.8050.776
Table 3. Fornell–Larcker criterion.
Table 3. Fornell–Larcker criterion.
AQDUCSUR
AQ0.763
DUCS0.6440.898
UR0.7320.7110.845
The diagonal elements, highlighted in bold, represent the square root of the AVE.
Table 4. Cross-loadings.
Table 4. Cross-loadings.
AQDUCSUR
AQ10.7500.5910.585
AQ20.8270.4740.531
AQ30.7880.4060.537
AQ40.7440.3710.527
AQ50.7290.3560.463
AQ60.7040.4590.526
AQ70.7930.6400.669
DUCS10.5920.8720.627
DUCS20.6130.9180.690
DUCS30.5270.8880.603
DUCS40.5760.9140.628
UR10.5760.4970.769
UR20.5970.6120.853
UR30.6410.6510.887
UR40.6210.6350.854
UR50.6550.5910.855
Table 5. Results of hypothesis tests.
Table 5. Results of hypothesis tests.
HypothesesPathsCoefficientt Valuep ValuesSupported
H1AQ → DUCS0.2763.7040.000Yes
H2UR → DUCS0.5227.0000.000Yes
H3Gender × UR → DUCS−0.0180.1640.870No
H4Gender × AQ → DUCS−0.0280.2570.797No
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

Amoozegar, A.; Nguyen, L.B.D.; Krishnasamy, H.N.; Omanee, B.; Vasudevan, A. Impact of University Reputation and Academic Quality on University Selection Among Vietnamese Postgraduate Students: A Moderation Analysis of Gender. Educ. Sci. 2025, 15, 536. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050536

AMA Style

Amoozegar A, Nguyen LBD, Krishnasamy HN, Omanee B, Vasudevan A. Impact of University Reputation and Academic Quality on University Selection Among Vietnamese Postgraduate Students: A Moderation Analysis of Gender. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(5):536. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050536

Chicago/Turabian Style

Amoozegar, Azadeh, Ly Bao Duy Nguyen, Hariharan N. Krishnasamy, Boonyarit Omanee, and Asokan Vasudevan. 2025. "Impact of University Reputation and Academic Quality on University Selection Among Vietnamese Postgraduate Students: A Moderation Analysis of Gender" Education Sciences 15, no. 5: 536. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050536

APA Style

Amoozegar, A., Nguyen, L. B. D., Krishnasamy, H. N., Omanee, B., & Vasudevan, A. (2025). Impact of University Reputation and Academic Quality on University Selection Among Vietnamese Postgraduate Students: A Moderation Analysis of Gender. Education Sciences, 15(5), 536. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050536

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