University choice factors: a case of two types of higher education in the third-largest island in the world

Figures & data

Figure 1. Number of departments by field.

Source: Higher Education Database at https://pddikti.kemdikbud.go.id/

Table 1. Differences between State GHE and IHE in Indonesia.

No	Aspect	GHE	IHE
1	Structure	Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology (MECRT)	Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA)
2	Field	Social science and humanities, science and technology	Islamic studies and limited number social humanity, science and technology. STAIN and IAIN just provide Islamic studies.
3	Academic Management	All departments are under MECRT	Islamic studies departments are under MoRA, general social science and humanities are under MECRT, and science and technology are under MECRT.
4	Tuition fee/semester*	USD 32.72–USD 1146.12	USD 25.82–232.06
5	Quality assurance	National Accreditation Board or Independent Accreditation Agency	National Accreditation Board or Independent Accreditation Agency
6	Total number of state higher education institution	125 institutions	66 institutions

Note. *Based on tuition fee in Lambung Mangkurat University and Antasari State Islamic University Banjarmasin Indonesia.

Figure 2. Research process.

Table 2. Normality and homogeneity test.

Test	Sig
Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z	0.958*
Bartlett	0.45*

Note. *Sig > 0.05 Data are normal and homogenous.

Table 3. Reasons for choosing a university.

No	Indicator	GHE	StdDev	IHE	StdDev
University reputation and quality (X1)—Cronbach’s α = 0.791		3.445	0.464	3.347	0.458
1	The university has a good reputation	3.706	0.493	3.618	0.527
2	University graduates’ careers have good prospects	3.390	0.652	3.250	0.674
3	University name is widely recognized	3.529	0.634	3.454	0.679
4	Lectures and other academic activities	3.326	0.695	3.276	0.673
5	Faculty is in line with my interests	3.576	0.572	3.526	0.551
6	Facilities and equipment	3.142	0.752	2.954	0.749
Emotion and meaning (X2)—Cronbach’s α = 0.730		2.966	0.670	3.080	0.563
7	Special attachments	2.922	0.865	2.901	0.804
8	University is open to students	3.020	0.754	2.993	0.676
9	University promotion	2.956	0.914	3.125	0.800
10	Extracurricular activities	2.788	0.899	2.882	0.821
11	Religious sect	3.142	0.854	3.500	0.651
Function and comfort (X3)—Cronbach’s α = 0.707		2.909	0.602	3.003	0.456
12	Convenience of transportation or roads to campus	3.155	0.770	3.099	0.726
13	Distance from home to campus	2.653	0.927	2.678	0.896
14	Other facilities around campus	2.985	0.782	2.928	0.756
15	Scholarships available	2.948	0.843	3.040	0.689
16	Dormitory quality	2.399	0.949	2.816	0.817
17	Tuition fee	3.315	0.791	3.461	0.718
Scale and structure (X4))—Cronbach’s α = 0.665		2.712	0.744	2.716	0.659
18	Campus area	2.843	0.922	2.730	0.891
19	Campus view	2.660	0.937	2.579	0.850
20	Male to female ratio	2.329	0.963	2.441	0.889
21	Library collection	3.015	0.866	3.112	0.742

Note. Results of data processing using SPSS V. 26.

Figure 3. Comparison of factors for choosing a university.

Note. Results of data processing using SPSS V. 26.

Table 4. Independent sample t-test results in factors of choosing a university.

	X1	X2	X3	X4	Total
Asymp. Sig. (two-tailed)	0.029*	0.066	0.078	0.955	0.467

Note. Results of data processing using SPSS V. 27.

*Statistically significant differences (Sig < 0.05).

Table 5. Clusters of university students.

No	University	R	Cluster 1	Cluster 2	Cluster 3	Total (%)
1	GHE institution	344	45.93%	34.59%	19.48%	100
2	IHE institution	152	51.97%	31.58%	16.45%	100

Note. K-mean cluster analysis result.

Table 6. Gender-related choice factor.

	X1	X2	X3	X4	Total
Asymp. Sig. (two-tailed)	0.597	0.247	0.477	0.046*	0.573

Note. Results of data processing using SPSS V. 27.

* Sig < 0.05.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Ahmad Juhaidi, upon reasonable request.