Motivations of Government-Sponsored Kurdish Students for Pursuing Postgraduate Studies Abroad

Abstract

This study examines the motivations of government-sponsored Kurdish students to study abroad and the reasons for choosing a particular country as their destination choice. Based on data we collected through an online survey and follow-up interviews, we compare demographic differences to explore the diversity among this cohort. The findings of the study show that motivations for overseas education are mainly related to career advancement and experiencing a good quality education. The study also shows that social agents have less influence on Kurdish students who tend to be older and more independent than most study abroad students.

Keywords

Kurdish students HCDP study abroad higher education Kurdistan Iraq

Introduction

To be successful in today’s competitive global market, graduates need to develop some critical inter-cultural skills and competencies (Cant, 2004). This need has increased the volume of international students for overseas higher education around the world (Enders, 2004; María Cubillo, Sánchez, & Cerviño, 2006; Teichler, 2004). In 1999, more than 800,000 students were pursuing overseas education. International enrollments had increased to 1.2 million in 2002 (Australian Education International, 2004). By 2015, it was estimated that more than 5 million students were studying outside their home countries (International Consultants for Education and Fairs [ICEF] Monitor, 2015). As governments around the world introduce various policies and programs to promote overseas education, this number is expected to increase further (Ortiz, Chang, & Fang, 2015). For instance, the Chinese government has established various forms of scholarships to both send home students to study abroad and attract international students to study in Chinese universities (China Scholarship Council [CSC], 2016). In Kazakhstan, the government established Bolashak Scholars Program in 1993. This program supports students to study abroad and, upon their return, to help the nation “transitioning from a state within the Soviet Union to an independent, democratic nation with a market-based economy to produce a more in-depth understanding of the forces contributing to program participation within a particular national context” (Perna, Orosz, Jumakulov, Kishkentayeva, & Ashirbekov, 2015, p. 174). In addition, other countries have launched or expanded national scholarship programs, including Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Vietnam (Engberg, Glover, Rumbley, & Altbach, 2014). Despite sharing some characteristics across these national scholarship efforts, there are a number of differences “in the ways national governments approach these initiatives, what they hope to gain from them and the extent to which they document the results and impact of scholarship programmes” (Engberg et al., 2014, p. 1).

Following this trend, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) of Iraq started its scholarship program known as Human Capacity Development Program (HCDP) in 2010. The HCDP followed the adoption of KRG’s open-door policy toward international markets in an attempt to reintegrate its higher education institutions (HEIs) into the wider world after decades of isolation from the international research and academic community under Saddam’s regime (Association of International Education Administrators [AIEA], 2010). Since the fall of Saddam in 2003, it has been the KRG’s hope to raise the quality of its HEIs by training and educating highly skilled academics both inside and outside of the country. The open-door policy and the reintegration of Kurdistan’s economy within the world economy have provided the opportunity for thousands of foreign companies to make Kurdistan their home for investment. These companies require high-skilled labor, which further pushed the KRG to place more emphasis on quality education to prepare qualified graduates for the labor market.

To meet the demands of the labor market and the growing need of the local HEIs, in mid-2010, the KRG launched the HCDP program and decided to allocate US$100 million annually to enable Kurdish students to pursue their postgraduate studies abroad. Between 2010 and 2012, the KRG granted full scholarships for more than 4,350 students, of whom 27% are PhD students and 21% are females. Furthermore, unofficial statistics show that a larger number of self-funded students are pursuing postgraduate studies abroad.

Despite the significant increase in the number of Kurdish students seeking overseas study, there is no research to answer questions such as the following: What motivates Kurdish students to study abroad? How students make their decisions regarding the final destination choice? In line with María Cubillo et al.’s (2006) recommendations for undertaking research to understand the motivation and decision-making process of students from both national and cross-national perspectives, this study attempts to answer the above questions and fill the existing gap in the literature about overseas student mobility in this part of the world.

The rest of the article is structured as follows: In the next section, patterns of Kurdish students’ overseas mobility are reviewed, followed by a survey of the relevant literature. In later sections, we provide an overview of the study context and design. The final sections present the findings and discussion of the article, which have implications for international education marketers and recruitment agencies.

Patterns of Kurdish Students’ Mobility

The mobility of Kurdish students to pursue overseas education is not a new phenomenon. What is new is the sharp increase in the number of government-sponsored students and a more systematic, transparent, and competitive process for selecting students based on predetermined criteria and the diversity of the destinations. Since the middle of the 20th century, Kurdish students and scholars have gone overseas to pursue higher education. Since then, determining the host countries was monopolized by the Iraqi government, and the government selected the destinations. Until the end of the Cold War between the two blocs of the West and the East, Kurdish students, along with their Arab colleagues in the rest of Iraq, were mainly sent to Soviet-style countries. This is primarily because Saddam Hussein’s regime’s ideology was also Socialist, which had better political, economic, and educational relations with countries that had a similar ideology.

Apart from achieving a high degree, Saddam also aimed to immerse its most talented individuals into the Socialist system and to learn the theories and ideology of Marxism and Socialism to help build and develop a new socialist society and address the demands of Saddam’s socialist ideology. After the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam in 1990, the U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions on Iraq—including Kurdistan. The sanctions limited the exportation of Iraqi oil, which was the largest source of the country’s revenue (Sen, 2003). The sanctions devastated Iraq’s infrastructure in general and its education sector in particular. During the sanctions, the number of students sent abroad decreased substantially (Gusterson, 2011). Those who went abroad were selected based on their political backgrounds and loyalty to the Iraqi regime (Lucas, 2015), but the destinations included the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and other Western countries. The situation continued until the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the majority of the government-sponsored students are sent to countries other than those formerly controlled by the Soviet Union. For instance, the HCDP program has approved only 47 universities from Russia, China, and other countries with a similar ideology, while it has approved more than 750 universities in the West. Of the HCDP candidates who have traveled abroad, more than 97% have chosen to study in the Western countries. In summary, the motivations for overseas study among Kurdish students over the past four decades suggest that political, economic, social, and historical forces affect these choices and decision-making processes.

Literature Review

Much of what is currently known about student mobility and overseas study decision making is based on research outside Kurdistan, Iraq, and the Middle East. Scholars, for instance, Moogan, Baron, and Harris (1999); Mazzarol (1998); Mazzarol and Soutar (2002); and Gomes and Murphy (2003), have investigated the patterns and motivation of students mobility to developed countries, especially to countries like Australia, and the factors that students consider important in their decision-making process. Most of these studies suggest that student overseas decision making is influenced by a combination of “push–pull” factors.

The “push–pull” model was originally used by E. S. Lee (1966), in the theory of migration, to explain the factors influencing the migration of people. In later years, this model was employed to understand and examine the mobility of students across borders and their motivation to study abroad (Maringe & Carter, 2007; Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002; McMahon, 1992). The “push” factors are associated with the home country that “push” or motivate the students to leave their countries of origin to pursue overseas study. “Push” factors include economic or political and seem to play a more significant role in the choice of the host country. On the contrary, “pull” factors operate within the host country and attract students to the destination. Pull factors such as country image, institutional reputation, international recognition of qualifications, teaching quality, and locational factors appear to exert greater influence on specific institutional choice (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002).

Other studies state that the decision-making process of pursuing cross-border education and the selection of the final destination involves at least three stages (Hung, Chung, & Ho, 2000; Hung, Shive, Wang, & Diu, 2005; Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002). In the first stage, the student needs to decide to pursue cross-border study, rather than study locally. Such a decision is mainly influenced by a number of “push” factors within the home country. In the second stage, “pull” factors become increasingly significant, which make one host country relatively more attractive than others. Mazzarol and Soutar (2002) and Mazzarol (1998) found six factors that influence a student’s selection of a host country. These factors are the overall level of knowledge awareness of the host country in the student’s home country; the level of referrals or personal recommendations that the study destination receives from parents, relatives, friends, and others; the cost issues; the environment, which is related to perceptions about the study “climate” in the destination country; the geographic proximity, which is related to the geographic and time proximity of the potential destination country to the student’s country; and the social links, which related to whether a student has a family or friends living in the destination country and whether family and friends have studied there previously. It is believed that these six “pull” factors work in conjunction with the “push” factors discussed earlier to create demand for international education. In the final stage, the student selects an institution (Hung et al., 2005; Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002). The “push” factors strongly influence the decision to study abroad, whereas the “pull” factors dominate the choice of a host country and a host institution (C.-F. Lee, 2013).

Various studies have explored the notions of higher education choice and the decision-making process, especially in the context of home students and consumers in the developed world (Baldwin & James, 2000; Drakopoulos, 1992; Maringe & Carter, 2007; Mazzarol &Soutar, 2002). However, fewer studies are available that explore these ideas in the context of international students seeking to study abroad (Davey, 2005; Maringe & Carter, 2007). In addition, the literature review shows that there is no scholarly work available about the motivation and decision-making processes of Middle Eastern students in general, and Kurdish students in particular, who pursue postgraduate studies abroad under the HCDP scheme. Even fewer studies are available on the influence of different factors among different segments of students (Wu, 2014). Our study is an attempt to fill this gap.

Research Design

To answer the present study’s questions, we adopted a mixed method design, in which both quantitative and qualitative research methods were employed. In the first quantitative phase, a survey with 31 items was developed to generate some statistical information. The questions were initially in English, and some were translated into Kurdish to make sure that everyone understands the information. The accuracy of the translation was checked by professionals who hold a master’s degree in translation. A 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) was used to measure the extent to which various factors influenced the students in their decision-making processes. To ensure the validation of the instruments, items were mostly adapted from scales developed and validated by previous studies (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002; Wu, 2014), and the researchers’ personal experience as HCDP scholars who studied in Australia and the United Kingdom.

The survey was pilot-tested with 10 HCDP scholars to ensure that the questions were clear, concise, and capable of effectively capturing the information. Once these conditions were satisfied, the survey was published on HCDP’s official page on Facebook, which is the main channel of communication between the HCDP team and the students. In total, 436 valid responses were collected—roughly 10% of the scholarship recipients (Table 1).

Table 1.

Demographics of the Survey Participants.

Variable	n (%)
Gender
Male	275 (78.8)
Female	74 (21.2)
Missing	87
Total	436 (100)
Age (years)
≤30	139 (39.6)
31-40	201 (57.3)
41-50	11 (3.1)
Missing	85
Total	436 (100)
Program of study
MSc/MA	243 (70.4)
PhD	102 (29.6)
Missing	91
Total	436 (100)
Governmental employee
Yes	318 (91.1)
No	31 (8.9)
Missing	87
Total	436 (100)

To complement the quantitative data analysis and to probe participants’ thinking and decision making about items provided in the survey, the second qualitative stage involved interviews with 15 HCDP candidates—11 males and four females—who are currently studying or have studied abroad. The qualitative sample is described as purposeful and non-probabilistic, and its size typically relied on the notion of “saturation” or the point at which no new or different dimensions, properties, or conditions are seen in the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2014). Based on the data from 60 in-depth interviews, Guest, Bunce, and Johnson (2006) found that saturation could occur as early as six interviews or within the first 12 interviews. In our study, we found that saturation occurred after 11 interviews but carried out five more interviews to verify the saturation.

Data Analysis

The survey data were analyzed using the IBM SPSS (version 21.0). Initially, we computed descriptive statistics (i.e., means and standard deviation) to identify the differing influences of various motivating factors. We compared two variables using the independent-sample t test. Later, we analyzed the interview data manually. The qualitative data analysis involved noting the frequency of similar responses, drawing connections between ideas or comments presented, and identifying patterns of association between different items.

Results

Motivating Factors for Pursuing Overseas Education

As discussed above, the existing literature suggests that the main motivation for cross-border education refers to professional and academic development (Altbach, 1991; Mazzarol, 1998; Yao, 2004). However, our study also identified key factors such as “future career advancement” (M = 4.41, SD = 0.904), followed by “the high quality of overseas education” (M = 4.37, SD = 0.904) and “experiencing a different teaching and learning style” (M = 4.18, SD = 0.990), and studying in a country with “a natural English language environment” (M = 4.15, SD = 1.107), followed by “cultural enrichment” (M = 4.10, SD = 0.967). Below, some of these themes are triangulated with the interviews and are further discussed.

Career advancement

Table 1 showed that 91.1% of the respondents are government employees. In the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, career advancement and salary are positively related to the degree that one holds. For instance, for someone who holds a master’s degree and works as an academic in a university, the highest position one can take up is head of a department or assistant dean. If one aims to be promoted to a deanery position or above, it is a basic requirement to have a PhD. As one interviewee argued,

I worked at a university for seven years; the highest position I got was Head of a Department. Two years ago, a guy returned from abroad with a PhD. He was soon promoted to take up the deanery position, simply because he held a PhD but my colleagues and I did not have it. Therefore, I decided to go abroad to study for a PhD. (Student 5)

Another participant who works in the private sector believed that he needed to develop a range of cutting-edge skills related to his profession to be able to keep up with the demands of the employers because, as he said,

Honestly, our universities do not prepare graduates for the private sector. They (the universities) teach some old materials which are no longer needed by the private sector. Therefore, by studying abroad, I hoped to learn different technical and soft skills to deal with problems in different situations in real life. (Student 7)

Also related to the career advancement is the increase in salary. In Kurdistan, the base salary for a bachelor, a master, and a PhD holder is US$245, US$300, and US$355 per month, respectively. There is a positive correlation between a higher degree and a higher salary. An interviewee who is studying PhD abroad stated,

When I complete my PhD and return to Kurdistan, my total salary will increase by 25%, without being required to do an extra job. (Student 9)

Another one who works in the private sector said,

Before going abroad, I received $1800 as a geologist in an oil company. After taking a one-year long master degree in the UK and returning to the same company, I currently earn $2800 per month. (Student 1).

The fact that returning to Kurdistan with a foreign degree provides students with better career opportunities and increased salary can be seen as a key motivating factor to pursue cross-border study by Kurdish students.

High quality of overseas education

One of the ongoing concerns in Kurdistan is about the low quality and academic standards of HEIs. HEIs have been criticized on the grounds of inefficiency and provision of low quality of teaching and research. In recent years, the government has initiated several programs to raise the quality and academic standards of its HEIs, but so far the HEIs have failed to meet the expectations of students and stakeholders. To experience a high-quality education, students pursue the overseas education. For instance, in addition to the survey respondents who identified quality education as the second most important motivating factor, several interviewees indicated one of the most significant reasons for going abroad was due to “the good education,” “quality of study,” “quality of education is much better abroad than in Kurdistan,” and “the high academic standards” (mentioned by Students 1, 5, 7, 14, respectively).

Unlike HEIs in Kurdistan which are considered old-fashioned and stifle students’ passion for learning, the students believed overseas education often had superior teaching systems, which can give students better learning opportunities and experiences. Of Kurdistan’s 30 public and private universities, none appeared in the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Ranking which ranked top 800 world universities for the year 2015-2016 (THE, 2015). The results show that the perceived state of the low quality of education in Kurdistan has worked as “push” factor, and the “high quality” of overseas education has worked as “pull” factor which pushed/pulled Kurdish students to study abroad.

Cultural enrichment

Previous studies show that experiencing a different culture has been valued highly by international students seeking cross-border education. For instance, a study by Wu (2014) identified that the desire for inter-cultural immersion had triggered Chinese students’ decision to pursue overseas studies. This to some extent is echoed by results from other studies mentioned above. However, our survey identified cultural immersion as fifth most important motivating factor among 10 factors (M = 4.10, SD = 0.97). Surprisingly, when students were asked about their motivations to study abroad in the follow-up interviews, the majority mentioned cultural enrichment as one of the most significant motivating factors. Students described the study abroad as an opportunity to experience a difference; some of the comments are summarized below:

Many factors motivated me to study abroad; one of them which I value highly is acquaintance with a new culture. It was a life-changing experience which gave me the chance to make lifetime friends around the world. (Student 1)

Studying abroad not only gives me an opportunity to learn about my areas of expertise, but it also gives me an incredible opportunity to live and interact with different people from different parts of the world. (Student 9)

Influence of Social Agents on Students’ Motivation to Study Abroad

Studies by Arthur (2004), Azmat et al. (2013), Bodycott and Lai (2012), Buchmann and Dalton (2002), and Mazzarol and Soutar (2002) indicate that social agents, most notably: family members, teachers, and friends, play a major role in shaping students to study abroad and in choosing the final destination. However, no research has examined the extent to which these findings apply in countries like Kurdistan. Therefore, we were interested in examining the influence of social agents on students’ motivation to study abroad.

Our survey results indicate that social agents had the least impact on the students’ decision to study abroad. Among the 10 influential motivating factors, the lowest ratings were given to the influence of “parents and relatives” (M = 2.74, SD = 1.274), and an even lower rating was given to “friends and teachers” (M = 2.49, SD = 1.162). Our results suggest that it may be true that social agents have played important roles in students’ educational life in the past, but the decision regarding one’s future education and career has begun to rest with the students themselves (Wu, 2014). In the follow-up interviews, it appeared that students take most of the responsibility for their decisions. A student stated,

I am already 25 years old. I know what’s good and what’s bad. Instead of depending on my parents or friends’ advice, I will get advice from the internet. With the help of the internet, I can make decisions regarding my educational and career endeavors independent of my parents. (Student 12)

A study by Bodycott and Lai (2012) showed that 55.8% of study-abroad initiatives were made by the students’ parents. Only 44.2% of the initiatives were made by the students themselves. On the contrary, our study found that 76.1% of the students initiated the idea of studying abroad, and the rest being made by social agents: parents, relatives, and friends. Our results show that social agents have less influence on Kurdish scholarship holders who tend to be older and more independent than most study abroad students. Accordingly, they tend to take responsibility of their career decisions.

Intuitively, it is widely believed that when it comes to decision making, Kurdish females are more dependent on their families, friends, and peers than males. We conducted independent t-test analysis to examine whether statistically significant differences exist between males and females with regard to influence from social agents. Our findings show no statistically significant differences between males and females for being influenced by parents, t(436) = −1.025, p> .05, or by friends and teachers, t(436) = 0.845, p> .05. The degree to which a student is influenced by social agents depends, to a great extent, on the student’s readiness and maturity for accepting the challenges they face when they undertake overseas study, rather than their gender.

Motivation for Choosing the Destination Country

As discussed above, the HCDP scholars had the freedom to choose their destinations, without intervention from the KRG. Therefore, we were interested to find out why and how students choose their destination countries.

Our results show that nearly 68.7%, 12.6%, and 7.6% of the participants went to the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia, respectively. These three English-speaking countries alone attracted nearly 90% of the students. The remaining participants went to countries like Malaysia (3%), France (2%), Canada, and Turkey (1%) in each country.

When participants were asked to rate the reasons for choosing a particular country as their destination, the highest score was given to “obtaining a world recognized qualification” (M = 4.24, SD = 0.876), followed by the “world-class educational system” (M = 4.16, SD = 0.899), and “a good opportunity to improve my English language” (M = 3.94, SD = 1.218). The findings of our study are inconsistent with studies undertaken by Chan and Zhang (1999), Binsardi and Ekwulugo (2003), and Wu (2014) which reinforce students’ desire for English proficiency by studying in English-speaking countries. But the results of the interviews were consistent with these studies, and all of the participants who are studying or have studied in these three English-speaking countries stated that improving their English language was among their top priorities.

English language improvement

Unlike the results of the survey that identified English language improvement as the third motivating factor to go to the English-speaking countries, the results of the interviews indicate that English language improvement was a top priority for studying in an English-speaking country. Some common themes are as follows:

I think the best and most effective way to learn a language is to be immersed in a culture that speaks the language you are learning. You’re surrounded by people who naturally speak the language on a daily basis. For these reasons, I went to the UK. (Student 7)

Living and studying in an English-speaking country is an incredible opportunity for me to learn and interact with native English speakers in a natural environment. (Student 5)

One explanation why interviewees attached the greatest importance to English language improvement may be that, in the past 10 years, Kurdistan has attracted thousands of foreign companies that usually prefer someone who speaks English to someone who does not. Thus, proficiency in English language, as one interviewee stated, “makes it easier to get a high-paid job in a foreign company operating in Kurdistan” (Student 5). Another student narrated a real story that had happened to him during an interview in Kurdistan and said,

When I completed my bachelor degree in petroleum engineering in 2010, I applied for a job with an American oil company which operates in Kurdistan. After several oral and written interviewees, another applicant and I made it to the final stage. Finally, the company offered the job to the other candidate despite the fact that I performed better than him in the interviews, but honestly, his English was way better than mine. (Student 11)

The comments show that fluency in English language represents an important cultural and social capital for individual career and social development in Kurdistan.

Why Studying in the United Kingdom?

As indicated above, 68.7% of the survey respondents were from the United Kingdom, and according to the data we received from the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientitif Research (MHESR), 69% of the total students have chosen the United Kingdom as their destination. We were interested to find out why the majority of the students preferred to study in the United Kingdom despite the fact that the United States, Canada, and Australia are also English-speaking countries. In addition, when it comes to world-class education, the U.S. universities outperform the U.K. ones, as indicated by THE Rankings and Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) by Shanghai Jiao Tong University (ARWU, 2015; THE, 2015). According to THE rankings, the United States alone has 39 universities among the top 100 best universities, while the United Kingdom has only 16 universities among the top 100 universities in the world (THE, 2015).

In response to the question of why students preferred to study in the United Kingdom rather than other countries like the United States, Australia, or Canada, students provided different justifications for their decisions. For instance, one student stated,

I studied in the UK because it takes only one year to complete and it is recognized like the two-year master degrees in the US or other countries. I completed my master degree within a year and returned to Kurdistan and started working. While my friends in the US returned one year later, which meant I was making a lot of money while he was still doing the master degree. (Student 2)

Admission criteria are, on average, lower in British universities compared to American universities because most of the British universities offer conditional offers and do not require standard test reports like GMAT and GRE, which are extremely tough. (Student 9)

Discussion and Conclusion

The main objective of this study was to identify the influential factors that motivated government-sponsored Kurdish students to undertake postgraduate studies abroad and the choice of study abroad destination. In this study, students were pushed by a desire for enhancing their “future career advancement,” followed by “the high quality of overseas education,” one which provides international experiences. Those students who study abroad and learn English language have better employment options and brighter futures than those who study domestically, as indicated by (Gareth, 2005). Fluency in English enables students to interact with other people from different cultures and backgrounds and represents an important economic, social, and cultural capital for individual career development in Kurdistan. Unlike the students studied by Mazzarol and Soutar (2002) and Wu (2014), the students in this study rated social factors, such as experiencing a different culture, as not so important compared with other factors.

The most important contribution of the study is that it shows that social agents have less influence on mature Kurdish graduate students studying abroad than they are reported to have on study abroad students more generally. Therefore, students take most of the responsibility in their decision making. The study also adds to the push–pull theory (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002) by the detailed examination of a particular push factor: the influence of family on students in general and gender differences in particular.

Britain was preferred compared with other countries as the destination choice typically because of the quality of the academic program, English language experience, and the short duration of master’s and PhD programs. In addition, the fact that British universities offer conditional admissions to students without adequate Test of English as a Foreign Language/Internation English Language Testing Syste (TOEFL/IELTS) test scores is another significant factor. Other factors that motivated students to study in the United Kingdom include the geographical proximity to Kurdistan compared with other developed countries such as the United States, Canada, or Australia; the ease with which a visa may be obtained from the British Consulate General in Erbil, the capital of Kurdistan; and the influence of the KRG representation and the Kurdish community in the United Kingdom. We should not also forget the historical ties of academia in Iraq and Kurdistan with the U.K. academia and that the Iraqi system of education is mainly based on the British system.

The study found that, compared with the earlier generations in the 1970s and 1980s that aimed to assist in the development of Saddam’s socialist society, contemporary students undoubtedly pursue personal goals and self-development. Therefore, it is important for universities to research their current and prospective students’ expectations and requirements in today’s competitive environment.

Limitations and Further Research

There are some significant limitations to this research that prevent generalization in these findings to broader contexts. First, this study focused on a modest sample of Kurdish students in a small region—the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. Other students from the rest of Iraq and those self-funded students who study overseas generally live under different social and economic contexts, which, in turn, may well show differences in the primary beliefs that affect their decision making regarding overseas study and their destination choice. Future research could compare the motivational factors of government-sponsored and self-funded students for pursuing the overseas education. Furthermore, the majority of participants in the study indicated that “quality of education” at overseas institutions was their top priority. Future studies, therefore, may investigate the extent to which the perceived quality of education met their expectations. Also, future studies can include the views of family members such as fathers, mothers, siblings, and grandparents involved in the cross-border decision-making process.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Ahmad Bayiz Ahmad is a PhD candidate in the School of Economics and Management at Beihang University, China. His research interests include international student mobility, quality, quality assurance, and change management in higher education.

Hemin Ali Hassan is an assistant lecturer at the University of Raparin, Kurdistan Region, Iraq. He holds a master of management and a master of accounting from the University of South Australia, Australia. His research interests include governance and public management, managing change, and higher education.

Mustafa Wshyar Abdulla Al-Ahmedi is a lecturer at Koya University, Kurdistan Region, Iraq. He holds a master’s degree in English language and literature from the University of Central Lancashire. His research interests include student mobility, internationalization of higher education, and quality assurance in education.

References

Academic Ranking of World Universities. (2015). About Academic Ranking of World Universities. Retrieved from http://www.shanghairanking.com/aboutarwu.html

AIEA. (2010). Opportunities for U.S. universities in Iraqi higher education. Retrieved from http://www.aieaworld.org/assets/docs/Conference_Materials/2014/docstoupload2/iraqi%20scholarships%202014_02_20.pdf

Altbach

P. G.

(1991). Impact and adjustment: Foreign students in comparative perspective. Higher Education, 21, 305-323.

Arthur

(2004). Counseling international students: Clients from around the world. New York, USA: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Australian Education International. (2004). Competitor analysis: Australia’s competitors in international education for the USA, UK, Canada, and New Zealand update. AEI-International Network, Commonwealth of Australia.

Azmat

Osborne

Le Rossignol

Jogulu

Rentschler

Robottom

Malathy

(2013). Understanding aspirations and expectations of international students in Australian higher education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 33(1), 97-111.

Baldwin

James

(2000). The market in Australian Higher Education and the concept of student as informed consumer. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22, 139-148. doi:10.1080/713678146

Binsardi

Ekwulugo

(2003). International marketing of British education: Research on the students’ perception and the UK market penetration. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21, 318-327.

Bodycott

Lai

(2012). The influence and implications of Chinese culture in the decision to undertake cross-border higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 16, 252-270.

10.

Buchmann

Dalton

(2002). Interpersonal influences and educational aspirations in 12 countries: The importance of institutional context. Sociology of Education, 75, 99-122.

11.

Cant

(2004). Internationalizing the business curriculum: Developing intercultural competence. Journal of American Academy of Business, 5, 177-182.

12.

Chan

K. W.

Zhang

(1999). The Hukou system and rural-urban migration in China: Processes and changes. The China Quarterly, 160, 818-855.

13.

China Scholarship Council. (2016). Study in China. Retrieved from http://www.csc.edu.cn/studyinchina/scholarshipen.aspx

14.

Corbin

Strauss

(2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Tashakkori A & Teddlie C.

15.

Davey

(2005). Chinese students’ motivations for studying abroad. International Journal of Private Education, 2, 16-21.

16.

Drakopoulos

S. A.

(1992). Keynes’ economic thought and the theory of consumer behavior. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 39, 318-336.

17.

Enders

(2004). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47, 361-382.

18.

Engberg

Glover

Rumbley

L. E.

Altbach

P. G.

(2014). The rationale for sponsoring students to undertake international study: An assessment of national student mobility scholarship programmes. The British Council Retieved from http://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/britishcouncil.uk2/files/e002_outward_mobility_study_final_v2_web.pdf

19.

Gareth

(2005). Chinese students’ motivations for studying abroad. International Journal of Private Higher Education, 2, 16-21.

20.

Gomes

Murphy

(2003). An exploratory study of marketing international education online. International Journal of Educational Management, 17, 116-125.

21.

Guest

Bunce

Johnson

(2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18, 59-82.

22.

Gusterson

(2011). Iraq had a long tradition as a center of higher learning: How America’s war destroyed Iraq’s universities. Retrieved from http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraq-had-a-long-tradition-as-a-center-of-higher-learning-how-america-s-war-destroyed-iraq-s-universities/27418

23.

Hung

F.-S.

Chung

Y.-P.

E. S.-C.

(2000). To work or to continue to higher education? The choice of senior secondary students in Shenzhen, China. Higher Education, 39, 455-467.

24.

Hung

F.-S.

Shive

Wang

Diu

(2005). A report on export potential of Hong Kong’s education services: Consultancy study for the Hong Kong trade development council. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

25.

ICEF Monitor. (2015). The state of international student mobility in 2015. Retrieved from http://monitor.icef.com/2015/11/the-state-of-international-student-mobility-in-2015/

26.

Lee

C.-F.

(2013). An investigation of factors determining the study abroad destination choice: A case study of Taiwan. Journal of Studies in International Education, 4, 362-381. doi:10.1177/1028315313497061

27.

Lee

E. S.

(1966). A theory of migration. Demography, 3(1), 47-57.

28.

Lucas

(2015). Iraq government cuts threaten its brightest students abroad. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/iraq-government-cuts-threaten-its-brightest-students-abroad-38187

29.

María Cubillo

Sánchez

Cerviño

. (2006). International students’ decision-making process. International Journal of Educational Management, 20, 101-115.

30.

Maringe

Carter

(2007). International students’ motivations for studying in UK HE: Insights into the choice and decision making of African students. International Journal of Educational Management, 21, 459-475.

31.

Mazzarol

(1998). Critical success factors for international education marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 12, 163-175.

32.

Mazzarol

Soutar

G. N.

(2002). “Push-pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82-90.

33.

McMahon

M. E.

(1992). Higher education in a world market. Higher Education, 24, 465-482.

34.

Moogan

Y. J.

Baron

Harris

(1999). Decision-making behaviour of potential higher education students. Higher Education Quarterly, 53, 211-228.

35.

Ortiz

Chang

Fang

(2015). International student mobility trends 2015: An economic perspective. Retrieved from http://wenr.wes.org/2015/02/international-student-mobility-trends-2015-an-economic-perspective/

36.

Perna

L. W.

Orosz

Jumakulov

Kishkentayeva

Ashirbekov

(2015). Understanding the programmatic and contextual forces that influence participation in a government-sponsored international student-mobility program. Higher Education, 69, 173-188.

37.

Sen

(2003, July). 2003 IRQ: Iraq watching briefs—Overview report. United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/index_29697.html

38.

Teichler

(2004). The changing debate on internationalisation of higher education. Higher Education, 48(1), 5-26.

39.

Times Higher Education. (2015). World University Rankings 2015-2016. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/-1

40.

(2014). Motivations and decision-making processes of mainland Chinese students for undertaking master’s programs abroad. Journal of Studies in International Education, 18, 426-444. doi:10.1177/1028315313519823

41.

Yao

(2004, September 15-17). The Chinese overseas students: An overview of the flows change. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial Conference of the Australian Population Association, Canberra.