Перейти к главному меню навигации Перейти к основному контенту Перейти к нижнему колонтитулу сайта

Том 4 № 29 (2025)
Theoretical aspects in the formation of pedagogical sciences

Статьи

FAMILY AS A SILENT DECISION-MAKER IN PRIVATE UNIVERSITY ENROLLMENT: EVIDENCE FROM TASHKENT

Опубликован 2025-12-31

  • Ahmad Jawid Jamali

Ahmad Jawid Jamali
Tashkent State University of Economics, Uzbekistan

Аннотация

In many higher education systems, university enrollment choices are seen to be as individual choices guided by academic interests, preferences the trends in the market. (Hemsley-Brown & Oplatka, 2015; Kotler & Fox, 1995). In Uzbekistan, students, that apply to private universities do not make the  decision themselves alone. This conference paper is based on the results driven from doctoral PhD dissertation on socio-cultural determinants with regards to private university choices in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and examines the way enrollment decisions are formed and shaped after going through filters of family discussions, shared value judgments, and social expectations the exist in Tashkent. Based on a mixed-methods approach study of 275 students that are enrolled in private universities of the capital Tashkent, the paper combined google survey with qualitative student accounts in order to demonstrate how Uzbek families act as the early gatekeepers of the admission process for the students, it is a pattern that is widely observed in collectivist and post-Soviet societies (Hofstede, 2011; Marginson, 2016).

Ключевые слова

private universities, enrollment decisions, family influence, perceived value, Uzbekistan, higher education marketing

PDF

Библиографические ссылки

  1. Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2019). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution (2nd ed.). Brill.
  2. Hemsley-Brown, J., & Oplatka, I. (2015). Higher education consumer choice. Palgrave Macmillan.
  3. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
  4. Kotler, P., & Fox, K. F. A. (1995). Strategic marketing for educational institutions (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.
  5. Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610683711
  6. Marginson, S. (2016). The worldwide trend to high participation higher education: Dynamics of social stratification in inclusive systems. Higher Education, 72(4), 413–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0016-x
  7. Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (2001). Image and reputation of higher education institutions in students’ retention decisions. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540110401453
  8. Soutar, G. N., & Turner, J. P. (2002). Students’ preferences for university: A conjoint analysis. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210415523
  9. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2015). Factors affecting university choice in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(3), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2015.1034429
  10. Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2019). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution (2nd ed.). Brill.
  11. Hemsley-Brown, J., & Oplatka, I. (2015). Higher education consumer choice. Palgrave Macmillan.
  12. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
  13. Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610683711
  14. Marginson, S. (2016). The worldwide trend to high participation higher education: Dynamics of social stratification in inclusive systems. Higher Education, 72(4), 413–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0016-x
  15. OECD. (2020). Education in Central Asia: Reforms and challenges. OECD Publishing.
  16. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2015). Factors affecting university choice in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(3), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2015.1034429
  17. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  18. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
  19. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
  20. Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610683711
  21. Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2019). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution (2nd ed.). Brill.
  22. Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (2001). Image and reputation of higher education institutions in students’ retention decisions. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540110401453
  23. Soutar, G. N., & Turner, J. P. (2002). Students’ preferences for university: A conjoint analysis. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210415523