Students’ Decision-Making Processes for Participating in Honours Programmes in the Netherlands

Abstract

Research suggests that students from “non-traditional” backgrounds (e.g., based on first-generation higher education status) are less likely to enrol in higher education programmes than their traditional counterparts. We explored students’ decision-making processes for participating in honours programmes and the factors contributing to this. We analysed data from semi-structured interviews with 28 students who were either enrolled in an honours programme, or were eligible but chose not to. We used both inductive and deductive data analysis informed by the expectancy-value cost model of motivation to gain deeper insights into factors informing students’ decisions on participation. The results highlighted that students’ decisions were shaped by values such as intrinsic interest in learning and specific subjects, positive personal and professional development, the value for CV building, as well as by social conditions (e.g. support and discouragement) and perceived costs (e.g. time and effort). Among students with stronger non-traditional backgrounds the lack of familiarity with the academic environment, and a related lack of confidence and sense of belonging played a role in decision-making, while participating in honours programmes seemed to fit better the smooth educational trajectory of some students with relatively traditional backgrounds. Differences in previous experiences along their education pathways may explain why students with relatively non-traditional backgrounds find the honours programmes less appealing. Our findings can inform strategies during the orientation and recruitment phases to enable and stimulate students less familiar with academia to enter honours programmes. This can include directed information provision and the use of role models.

Keywords

excellence education talent programmes honours programmes expectancy-value cost model of motivation students equity diversity inclusion

Introduction

Honours programmes, originating in the United States, have become a part of higher education systems around the world. These programmes are also referred to as talent or excellence programmes. They aim to attract talented and motivated students – during their bachelor’s or master’s studies – who are looking for more challenges in addition to their regular education (Allen et al., 2015; Huijts & Kolster, 2021; Wolfensberger, 2015). The programmes aim to challenge students and to facilitate critical thinking, creativity, and professional development. The programmes include innovative courses which set them apart from the regular curriculum. For example, the honours programmes offer courses where students are grouped together to work on collaborative projects that they co-produce, design and deliver (Huijts & Kolster, 2021; Jacobs et al., 2021). Students usually need to meet set selection criteria to be able to participate. Traditionally, selection criteria for honours programmes can include high academic performance, doing a job parallel to their study, experience of studying abroad and doing volunteer work, as well as motivation, critical thinking ability and social involvement of students (Huijts & Kolster, 2021; Jacobs et al., 2021; Leest & Wolbers, 2021).

Higher education institutions strive for inclusive admissions and selection processes (Clancy & Goastellec, 2007). From a social justice perspective (Furlong & Cartmel, 2009), students should be able to participate in programmes that suit their potential and aspirations, without facing unjust barriers. However, recent studies, in the context of selection for higher educational programmes with limited seats, found that selection can advantage or disadvantage certain groups of students. The use of certain selection criteria or tools unintentionally provides privilege to students who have the opportunities to meet these selection criteria, such as students from a higher socioeconomic background, higher parental educational level and students without a migration background. These students are referred to as non-traditional students (Fikrat-Wevers et al., 2023; Mulder et al., 2023; Mulder, Wouters, Twisk, et al., 2022; Wouters, 2020). At the same time, self-selection occurs when some students perceive lower chances of getting selected or feel they do not fit particular types of education (Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Mulder, Wouters, Fikrat-Wevers, et al., 2022; Wouters et al., 2017). Similarly, the use of selection and the image of programmes built on academic excellence may hinder non-traditional students’ sense of belonging and have a discouraging effect on their participation in honours programmes. In the American context, research found a lack of ethnic and socioeconomic diversity among honours students. Black and Hispanic students, as well as first-generation and low-income students were particularly underrepresented (Cognard-Black & Spisak, 2019).

Honours Programmes in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, different institutions offer a variety of honours programmes in university education (Allen et al., 2015), mainly in bachelor programmes, but also in some master programmes. These 2-year programmes add an additional study load, for example of 30 European Credits (EC; 1 EC represents 28 hr of coursework). They combine both disciplinary and interdisciplinary courses and activities (Wolfensberger, 2015). Honours programmes vary widely in terms of aims, design and implementation (Jacobs et al., 2021). Some programmes recruit students by sending selective invitations to students with GPAs of 7 out of 10 or higher, while other programmes send open invitations to all students. Next, they usually select students by ‘using a questionnaire with vignettes’. The vignette data consists of previous academic achievements, study-related work experience, extracurricular activities including studying, travelling abroad and volunteering works, motivation, thinking ability and perseverance (Jacobs et al., 2021). In Dutch higher education, about 8% of university students participates in honours programmes (Van den Broek et al., 2023). Participants in honours programmes have demonstrated positive academic performances and achievements, curiosity, motivation for research, and professional development (see e.g. Kool et al., 2016, 2017, 2022; Ommering et al., 2021). Previous research has reported a lower likelihood of students with lower parental educational levels and income levels to participate in honours programmes in the Netherlands (Leest & Wolbers, 2021; Van den Broek et al., 2023). Recent research focusing on first-generation students in honours programmes in universities of applied sciences indicates students face psychological barriers related to identity compatibility, such as experienced distance between their family background and the higher education context (Langeloo & Kamans, 2025). Contrary to findings from the United States (Cognard-Black & Spisak, 2019), Dutch research found that students with a migration background participate in honours programmes more often than their peers (Van den Broek et al., 2023). However, the broader literature points to the underrepresentation of these student groups in selective and honours programmes. Due to previous educational inequalities these students may face additional barriers when trying to participate in honours programmes, and thus have different considerations compared to their peers without a migration background.

Barriers and decision-making processes can differ between students due to their unique backgrounds and experiences. However, little is known about how students’ backgrounds and experiences interact with their decision to participate in honours programmes or not. From an intersectional perspective (Crenshaw, 1989), we acknowledge that the intersection of various aspects of a student’s identity may reinforce educational advantages or disadvantages. This study therefore takes into account the intersection of migrant background and lower parental education level in understanding how students reach this decision. We are sensitive to how both factors may influence and reinforce students’ familiarity with, and ability to navigate, the Dutch higher education system – or the lack thereof. This may help in addressing underrepresentation of student groups and supporting successful honours programme participation. This study, therefore, aimed to gain insight into how and why students decide to participate or not in honours programmes. We investigated the decision-making processes of students, considering aspects and experiences related to their migration background and their parents’ educational levels.

This study aimed to answer the following research questions:

Which factors contribute to students’ decisions to participate in the university honours programme or not?

How can the decision-making process be understood in the context of students’ relatively traditional or non-traditional backgrounds and experiences?

Theoretical Framework

We chose to approach this study from a theoretical framework of motivation to understand students’ decision to participate. According to research, the chances of participating and choosing the honours programmes are higher in students who are more intrinsically and extrinsically motivated (Leest & Wolbers, 2021; Van Broekhoven et al., 2020). However, being driven by extrinsic factors could also lead to negative outcomes in the long term such as decreased interest or reduced creativity (Kusurkar et al., 2011). Other research demonstrates that factors related to students’ backgrounds affect students’ motivation and confidence to apply to selective education programmes (Mulder, Wouters, Fikrat-Wevers, et al., 2022; Wouters et al., 2017). Leest and Wolbers (2021) found that students who are motivated and creative, hold a good academic record, and demonstrate higher levels of critical thinking are more likely to participate in honours programmes. However, less is known about how the honours student population is formed. Deeg et al. (2024) identified a variety of factors that influenced students’ participation in honours education in the United States, including costs and benefits, challenge, prestige, encouragement from others and the desire to build relationships with staff and peers. Non-participation has not received much attention yet. Nichols et al. (2016) found that eligible students who never enrolled were less likely to perceive the benefits and enjoy the intellectual stimulation of honours programmes. Non-participants were also less likely to value friends’ and family members’ opinions about honours programmes, and to have been encouraged by university advisors. However, these studies did not take into account the unique backgrounds and experiences of students.

We considered the expectancy-value-cost model of motivation useful for identifying and categorising considerations and relevant factors in students’ decision-making process. The expectancy-value-cost framework includes a dynamic approach of interactions between factors, while including subjective expectations about being able to succeed, and the assessment of relative costs (Savolainen, 2018). The expectancy-value-cost model of motivation, an updated model of Eccles and colleagues (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992), could help in understanding students’ educational choices and decision-making. The model asserts that an individual inspects various options when it comes to whether or not they can successfully do a task (i.e. Expectancy for success, ‘can I do the task?’); whether they want to do the task and how it will help them (i.e. Task value, ‘why do it?’); and what they will need to do to engage in the task (i.e. Cost, ‘what do I need to give up if I do this task?’). The Task value components in the expectancy-value-cost framework of what motivates students’ choices are further divided into three sub-components: Intrinsic interest value (i.e. an individual enjoys engaging in the task and does it for its own sake); Utility value (i.e. an individual evaluates the usefulness of the task and then engages in it); and finally Attainment value (i.e. an individual sees that the task affirms a valued aspect to develop their identity and therefore is important to engage in; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). Previous research indicates that expectancy and value are often positively associated with students’ academic choices, while the cost is negatively associated with the decision outcomes (Mak-van der Vossen et al., 2018). Recent studies have asserted that the cost factor successfully predicts the students’ decision for education, their continuous interest in the programmes, and their educational outcomes (Deeg et al., 2024; Jiang et al., 2018; Schnettler et al., 2020; Vanslambrouck et al., 2018). These research findings suggest that, in addition to intrinsic interest value and expectancy, individuals’ perception of cost is a significant variable in decision-making in the educational context, providing us with a framework for analysing how students weigh these factors when deciding whether or not to participate in the honours programmes.

Methods

Study Context: The VU-UvA Honours Programme

The VU-UvA honours programme is a 2-year joint extracurricular programme offered by the two research universities in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (VU-UvA Honours committee/collective, 2021). The programme consists of a combination of more demanding educational units (in part selected by the students themselves), developed to provide opportunities for more in-depth study or to broaden students’ horizons by offering a more interdisciplinary approach. The balance between faculty courses and interfaculty courses required to complete the honours programme can differ between faculties, but at least 12 ECs should be obtained by taking faculty courses. The students are required to obtain a total of 30 ECs by taking courses (ca. four to five) throughout the final 2 years of their bachelor’s degree (180 ECs). Participating in other activities that meet the honours programme requirements can also be possible or required. At the end of the bachelor’s programme, students who have obtained a 7.5 out of 10 Grade Point Average (GPA) or higher and completed the additional 30 ECs for the honours programme receive an honours mentioning on their diploma supplement. Students are eligible to participate if they passed all first-year bachelor courses with a weighted average of 7.5 by the end of the first year. In special cases, students with a GPA below 7.5 can still be admitted. Application procedures take place in the last quarter of the first year of the bachelor programme and vary across the different disciplines of the university. Selection can be based on (combinations of) selection instruments such as motivation letter, GPA, CV or interview. Prior to applying, students can participate in a provisional course to get familiar with the honours programme and get provisional entry. In the academic year during which this study took place (2021–2022), the programme reached a peak in terms of the number of students enrolling. A total of 373 VU students (7.6% of the VU cohort) and 688 UvA (7.5% of UvA cohort) joined the honours programme, in line with the overall increase in student registration at both universities.

Participants

We analysed interviews with 28 participants. See Table 1 for each participants’ background characteristics. We experienced difficulty in recruiting more students who were eligible but decided not to apply for the honours programme, despite using different online and offline avenues for recruitment.

Table 1.

Overview of Participants and Their Background Characteristics.

Participant	Honours programme participation	Migration background	First in family to attend higher education
P1	HP+	Int	FIF−
P2	HP+	Int	FIF+
P3	HP+	Int	FIF−
P4	HP+	Int	n/a
P5	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P6	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P7	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P8	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P9	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P10	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P11	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P12	HP−	MB−	FIF−
P13	HP−	MB−	FIF−
P14	HP^a	MB+	FIF+
P15	HP−	MB+	FIF−
P16	HP−	MB+	FIF+
P17	HP−	MB+	FIF−
P18	HP+	n/a	FIF−
P19	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P20	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P21	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P22	HP+	MB−	FIF+
P23	HP+	MB−	FIF−
P24	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P25	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P26	HP+	MB+	FIF+
P27	HP+	MB+	FIF−
P28	HP+	MB+	n/a

Note. P = participant number (e.g., P1); H+ or H− = honours programme participation (+) or not (−); Int = international student; MB+ or MB− = migration background (+) or not (−); FIF+ of FIF = first in family to attend higher education (+) or not (−); n/a = information unclear or not fully available.

HP try-out course.

Data Collection

In this study, in line with our constructivist approach for a qualitative study design, we conducted semi-structured interviews with students from the VU-UvA honours programme. In the interviews we explored the various factors that informed the decision-making of students on whether to participate in honours programmes or not. To gain insights into potential explanations for differences in honours participation rates, we considered these factors in light of students’ personal circumstances and educational experiences, which are rooted in their intersecting identity aspects. We used a combination of purposive sampling and snowball sampling to recruit both international and Dutch students across varied study programmes. We employed different online and offline avenues for recruitment. We included both students who had applied and eligible students who had not applied to the honours programme to understand their considerations. Our aim was to include a sample that would potentially be richest in information: students from a variety of migration and parental education backgrounds. We strived for data sufficiency, which meant collecting enough data to provide robust explanations to address the research questions (Stalmeijer et al., 2024). We did not wish to label students as strictly ‘traditional’ or ‘non-traditional’ and compare both groups, because we acknowledge that contextual experiences and how these affect students can differ across individuals. We therefore considered students’ narratives in light of how these were shaped by their (relatively traditional or non-traditional) experiences and backgrounds.

Online or face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with interested students according to their convenience and depending on COVID-19 restrictions between September 2021 and February 2022. The interviews lasted for about 45 to 60 min. The interview guide was developed based on findings from the literature. However, the questions (included in Appendix) were customized according to students’ demographic characteristics, for example international or Dutch student; students enrolled in the honours programme, students who had recently completed honours or had decided to not enrol in the honours programmes. The questions were also framed in order to explore the possible barriers that affected the accessibility to the honours programmes, especially for underrepresented student groups.

Analysis

The interviews were transcribed verbatim for content analysis. Analysis was done both deductively (using the expectancy-value cost model framework) and inductively. The software MAXQDA was used to analyse the interview data. In the preliminary analysis stage, a postdoc researcher (NB) and AW first analysed the first two interviews independently and then compared the coding. Next in this stage, coding and interpretation was discussed between NB and IvW. In a subsequent stage of analysis, following changes in the research team, AW and MS performed analysis on the entire data set to formulate themes in which students’ backgrounds (based on migration and parental education background) and background-related experiences were considered to answer the second research question. Findings were discussed within the research team. Such procedures allowed us to increase the trustworthiness of the data analysis, prevent prejudice and presumptions, and make use of the team members’ methodological and content expertise.

Reflexivity

Each team member contributed unique expertise, perspectives and backgrounds to the research. The team consisted of researchers with various professional backgrounds (in social studies, medicine, psychology, educational sciences). RAK and NB have a migration background. AW was a first-generation university education student. NB has expertise on how young people navigate transitions. AW and RAK have expertise in diversity and selection in medical education. IvW coordinates excellence/talent development programmes and has expertise in selection. Methodological expertise in qualitative research (AW, RAK, MS and NB) added to the rigour of the research. The diversity of our backgrounds encouraged reflexivity (Barrett et al., 2020) and critical dialogue, ensured we interpreted the data using different theoretical and conceptual lenses, and resulted in proactively looking for potential blind spots.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations regarding the protection of participants were thoroughly considered prior to and during conducting the study. The Medical Ethics Review Committee VUmc has determined that the study does not fall within the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (file number 2021.0111). An information letter about the study and a consent letter were sent to the honours programmes coordinators at VU and UvA for dissemination among students. It was clearly communicated that participation was voluntary, students could withdraw their participation without providing a reason at any point during data collection, and data were handled and stored in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity of VSNU. Students received a €10 gift card as a token of appreciation for their participation. To ensure confidentiality, only pseudonyms were used in the publication of the research, limiting the risk of individual participant identification. Participants were informed that they would not experience any disadvantages from participating in this study apart from the time investment, and that they would not personally benefit from participating in this study, but that the research was expected to provide useful information for the future.

Results

In line with the research questions, the sections below present (1) the factors students mentioned as involving their decision-making (i.e. Expectancy, Task value, Cost and Social influences) and (2) how students’ decisions can be understood in the context of their background and experiences.

Illustrative quotations are provided with information on the students’ characteristics for context:

P: participant number (e.g. P1).

H+ or H−: honours programme participation (+) or not (−).

Int: international student.

MB+ or MB−: migration background (+) or not (−).

FIF+ of FIF−: first in family to attend higher education (+) or not (−).

Factors Contributing to Students’ Decisions to Participate in the Honours Programme or Not

The expectancy-value-cost components (i.e. expectancy, task value, cost) could be identified in students’ decision-making processes. In addition, students described how social influences contributed to their decision to apply or not. We discuss and illustrate the components separately.

Expectancy

The expectancy to successfully participate in the programme was a driver for students to apply and join. This could be based on being familiar with selective programmes and previously experienced educational success, such as being good at learning and combining school or their study programme with extracurricular activities. Some of these students planned to join the honours programme already during high school.

I always did very well in school, so I already sort of knew [here the participant is referring to enrolling in HP] […] I was one of those people who took many subjects in my school […] learning is something that generally comes easy to me and it is something I enjoy. So I already knew […] if I want to consider HP, this is already a sort of obvious option […] (P8; H+, MB−, FIF−).

One student, despite being aware of their good grades, and aiming for the honours programme, was not sure if they would be able to keep it up, and therefore did not join the provisional course, but eventually did join the honours programme.

I first heard about it when I was in Groningen for an open day for just medicine in general and they said: ‘10% can do an honours programme’, and then I was still stressed about even going through the selection. It is so cool you are going through the selection and you can be one of those 10% that can do honours programme, so that was a bit of a goal, because I thought it was cool that you could be the 10% and then I heard it a second time when you can start in the first year [the provisional course], and I thought about it. But you had two exams at that point, and I had good grades then but I didn’t know if I would have good grades the whole year, so I thought I wait because you don’t have to start in the first year. So I waited and then I waited for more information and I read about it on the website and then I started my second year [the actual HP]. (P10; H+, MB−, FIF−)

Other students expressed more insecurity and described how they suffered from imposter syndrome in education, how they expected adding additional courses would be too difficult, or how they did not think they fit the image of a ‘standard HP student’.

I think at that time I probably wouldn’t have [taken the opportunity to apply for honours programme]. Because I think I would want to just focus on what I was doing with the normal routine and I probably would have thought that it was too difficult for me to do. (P15; H+, MB+, FIF−)

On the one hand, I was very nervous about going into it. Because, I didn’t see myself as a standard honours student. So on the one hand I was relieved that I didn’t really have that extra pressure for the upcoming year, and on the other hand also disappointed that I wasn’t able to add that extra challenge I guess. (P17; H−, MB+, FIF−)

Task Value

Intrinsic interest value, attainment value and utility value were all reflected in the factors informing students’ decision-making for participation in honours programmes, and often combinations thereof. Some students showed an intrinsic interest in learning about certain topics or being able to choose from a variety of topics. Others were excited by the additional challenges. Many students joined for the sake of learning, expanding their horizon in terms of academic knowledge and skills, and learning from the perspectives of students from other disciplines.

I think, I mostly expect to gain more knowledge on things that really interest me, so human rights law and globalization, also the cultural complex course that I am really excited about. I am just excited to meet new people, after 1 year of COVID, […] so I am just looking for a way to expand my mindset and gain more knowledge. (P27; H+, MB+, FIF−)

I think mostly I was just searching for like an extra challenge for myself. And I was really curious about the courses in the honours programme. I just really wanted to try it out, a new thing, a new programme. (P22; H+, MB−, FIF+)

One student chose not to enrol because the courses were not related to their own area of study. Rather than looking for broadening their education, this student wanted to deepen it.

I looked it up, the honours programme, and I saw that you had to do like two courses that were not connected to your own study, or your own field and I thought: I am just interested in medicine, […] so if the honours programme was about [deepening], about medicine, I would apply, because I really like studying and to know everything about medicine, and I have enough time and I have good marks, but I am not really interested in something else, so that’s the reason why I chose not to do the honours programme. (P12; H−, MB−, FIF−)

Some students liked the status of doing an honours programme, or saw it as an opportunity to enhance their future plans and professional profile. This could help them stand out from other candidates when applying for internships or jobs.

It is so cool to do that in my LinkedIn, like, medical honours student. I thought it had some kind of status. And I think it would help in solicitations and applications later in my career, and when they see, like, honours, then I hope they’re like: ‘wow he did the honours programme. He must have potential or something’. But I hear also from other medical students, who don’t follow the honours programme, that people really don’t care if you do the honours programme or not. (P24; H+, MB+, FIF−)

Future interest, which is just that now the job market, especially for law, it’s very competitive and very tense and just a law master or bachelor is very often not really enough anymore. Because everyone in that job market has those, so I also want to be able to show that I can kind of run the extra mile, I can do the extra things and therefore, make myself more applicable for future jobs. (P4; H+, Int, parental education unclear)

For other students, potential future benefits of participating in the honours programme were less important. They thought that participating would not significantly impact their future careers.

For my future career I don’t know. I guess so, I haven’t really thought about that, I guess it’s always a thing. It looks good on your degree that it says honours, but it is not something that is really important to me. (P21; H+, MB+, FIF−)

The following student made a strategic comparison of the benefits of the honours programme with other opportunities, weighing up the intrinsic interest and utility value of participating.

if I do the honours programme, I do it of course for myself, because I want to know more, but I also do it for […] my CV. And we [student and their parents] both thought it would be better then to do something like an extra job or something, because that is more medicine related than honours programme, for my own development. It would be better for me to do an extra job than to do the honours programme. […] I don’t know if I have a lot of profit from it if it’s just one course and I don’t get a certificate or something that proves that I participated, so if it’s just for fun and for only one course, I don’t know if I would apply. (P12; H−, MB−, FIF−)

The statements above describe how being part of the honours programme holds intrinsic interest value and attainment value for students, and is also seen by some as something that could help them achieve their short- or long-term goals (utility value). They illustrate how these components are weighed individually.

Cost

Although the majority of students who decided to take part in the honours programme expressed multiple values informing their choices, they sometimes also mentioned the costs involved, which were usually in terms of time and effort. They also talked about stress and how participating could affect their regular grades.

that was my consideration going in basically: do I have time to do this or not (P8; H+, MB−, FIF−)

And also the effort that you have to put into it. People maintaining their GPA of a 7.5 can be quite intensive especially if not every course is your favourite and not every course you are good at. […] Just the idea of having to deal with the stress constantly and needing to work your ass off just to get a GPA was not worth it for me, it was a big disadvantage. (P16; H−, MB+, FIF+)

Students were studying in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. The lockdowns due to the pandemic also affected students’ decision-making differently in terms of investing time in an honours programme.

Not really [felt they had to give up other activities]. But I also think that has to do with the fact that we were in a lockdown and I couldn’t really do a lot of fun activities, I couldn’t go out to dinner with friends. So of course because you can’t do those things you felt like you had extra time to take extra courses. (P28; H+, MB+, parental education unclear)

Last year everything was online, so the whole day I sat behind my desk and the whole day was online school and a lot of the programmes were in the evening, so in the evening, I didn’t like it anymore. I wanted to do other things. School was a lot and to do also an honours programme, […] I think that was too much for me. […] I don’t think so [take the opportunity if it was face to face]. Because in the evenings, I have also my sports and my work and friends. I also have to have time for those things too. (P13; H−, MB−, FIF−)

For some, the values they ascribed to participating clearly overshadowed the potential costs, or they did not foresee much costs.

I was very excited to do it, so I wasn’t really thinking about the workload and also law, I can’t speak for everybody, but in general it’s less workload than some other intensive studies, so for the law programme it was actually quite doable to do the honours programme as well. (P7; H+, MB−, FIF−)

I think the fact that you can earn extra study points in a very interesting and exciting way, for free, on the same university and besides that everything is just organized for you. You don’t need to do anything. (P19; H+, MB+, FIF−)

Social Influences

When talking about their choices in relation to the honours programmes, students referred to social influences in various ways. While most students said they made their own educational decisions, they also mentioned how external support or pressure had played a part. If they discussed the honours programme with others, this was usually with family members, particularly parents, as well as with peers. Some students felt obliged to excel in education to make their parents proud. Some students mentioned their parents would not really understand honours programmes.

Yeah. I talk with my parents a lot about what they thought that I was doing and what would fit with me, what kind of subjects, or some kind of route that was made out for me. But they really set me free. They made me choose my own direction. (P11; H+, MB−, FIF−)

For me that is also why I am now, I want to make the absolute most out of it, because my mother worked so hard, she hated her job, gave this to me, so take that with me and make the most out of it. Therefore, I want to honour that. Also that she helps out financially so that I can focus on school and I don’t have to work and […] things in my education, for me I can really prioritize my education. Like someone else who works very hard to get that opportunity. (P4; H+, Int, parental education unclear)

In some cases, peers who were equally ambitious and supportive seemed to positively influence the value that students attributed to the honours programmes. Students also mentioned this when describing their experiences in the honours programme.

I had a few friends that already started law school the year before me and two of them actually got into the honours programme as well. They were really excited about it. They told me they had a really great course and it was way more interesting than all the other courses. Overall … like … it was a very nice experience for them. So, that is how I learned about it. (P7; HP+, MB−, FIF−)

I like it so much, because there is this bunch of really motivated smart people that are also fun people to be around, and they are all collected at one place with different study backgrounds. (P24; H+, MB+, FIF−)

Students also consulted their peers to assess their suitability for the programme. To a lesser extent, students consulted their mentors or teachers.

I was seeing a lot of students who also do the honours programme, I sent them a message: can you give me some tips, do you think is possible for me to do it and they all told me: if you think you can do it, do it. (P26; H+, MB+, FIF+)

I talked to my tutor about it. Like where you have the first initial meeting, where he suggested it. And then I asked him again about it like towards the end of my first year. Just about like how much time does it take and if he thinks that it’s going to like worsen my GPA and everything. And then I asked a friend who is doing another honours programme. Because I didn’t know anyone who is doing the same. And he is doing the social science honours programme. He really liked it. So, yeah, I decided to go for it. (P2; H+, Int, FIF+)

While family and peers played an important role in informing students about the honours programme, some students relied on official communications alone. The way in which students received information about the honours programme varied, as did the extent to which they received it. Sources of information included email, a mentor or a mention during a lecture.

It was a general email, I believe, I think it was to everyone who was in my faculty, saying that if you want to apply for the honours programme, you can. I don’t think they singled out the people who have high GPAs or anything. (P27; H+, MB+, FIF−)

before a lecture she [coordinator of the honours programme] had a little talk about the honours programme and there were two students that talked about their experiences. (P24; H+, MB+, FIF−)

Some students received no information at all, as the following quote illustrates:

I didn’t know that this was something that you could do. That for me was really the reason that I didn’t know what it was and I didn’t know that I was able to do that. […] So in my case, I didn’t even get the information from the school. So, I can imagine other people also not getting that from the school. (P15; H−, MB+, FIF−)

Students’ Decision-Making Processes in the Context of Their Background and Experiences

Taking a broader look at students’ decision-making revealed that their personal identity, context, and how these affected whether they felt they would belong in the honours programme were key factors in several narratives. For some students, their choices could be understood in the context of how easy or challenging their educational journey had been, and how familiar they were with university and honours programmes. Students with relatively traditional backgrounds often had a smooth educational trajectory, with academic support from parents who had attended higher education, and familiarity with the academic environment and educational opportunities. For these students, enrolling in the honours programme seemed an obvious and easy next step. Some had even planned to enrol already in high school. See for example this student:

Yeah, I think honours was my priority. I saw it as a very natural extension of just my normal study. So I, it was always something that I wanted to do. […] In high school I had, I think 14 hr of extracurriculars a week. I was quite used to a high workload. And I talked to my parents about maybe continuing with honours. Because I thought it would be very interesting. […] I like went through high school and it was quite a high level that I just automatically assumed that I have to continue on this path. And my family, we make jokes that I would be doing my PhD and things like that. And I think probably because my father would tell me, well, this is how I did it and things like that. So there was not a pressure expectation but I think if you have that precedent it’s easier to imagine. (P1; H+, Int, FIF−)

Others only learned about the honours programme during their undergraduate studies, and decided to ‘just give it a try’, because ‘why not?’ By comparison, many students who were first in their family to attend higher education (or university in particular) and students with a migration background had previously experienced struggles (including racism) and needed time to adjust to the mechanics of university life. Despite being eligible to apply based on their academic record, they did not always feel they were smart enough and would fit in the honours programme.

I heard it when I was doing my second course, that there is something about an honours programme, and I looked for it and I saw that you had to be a 7.5 and I was a 7.5. But it came so fast that I thought: I am not ready for this. I didn’t know that you can just sign up for one [provisional] course. I thought: if I sign up now, I sign up for the whole programme. So I thought: no, it’s too early. I have to get in the study and then I let it go. (P26; H+, MB+, FIF+)

But they don’t have like an academic background. And I think that’s something I have also like encountered. That it’s harder when you need help with something, you can just ask your parents. And I think that might be also maybe a bit of an imposter syndrome. Like everybody seems smarter because they know more things or they kind of know how university works. I had that a lot in first year. I got a lot better, but I mean, in first year is usually when you make the decision to join the programme. (P2; H+, Int, FIF+)

It is worth noting that some students with a stronger traditional background could also feel insecure if they had to work hard to achieve good grades in their regular programme. And like more traditional students, some students without an academic parental background also decided to give it a try, as the next quote illustrates.

I have one girl in my year who also wanted to apply for the honours programme, and also did eventually. So, we really just explored a bit together. But next to that I didn’t really have people that also did the honours programme. My family, I was the first in my family to go to higher education, so my family just don’t know what the honours programme is. So, I just really signed up to try it out and see how it was. (P22; H+, MB−, FIF+)

The following student describes how various aspects of her background had different effects. Her narrative illustrates how the interplay of these factors led her to decide to join the honours programme.

my parents always raised me to have most of the Dutch culture and they also gave a lot of Surinamese culture with food and holidays and birthdays, but they always wanted us to be part of the Dutch culture and I always felt Dutch when I was a child. But then I was 6 or 7 and experienced racism and I noticed that many Dutch people didn’t look at me as Dutch. So it’s pretty complicated but now I would say I am a Surinamese Dutch person.[…] Yes I think [I encountered problems regarding my identity], because if my parents did not have the resource or time or money to go against the prejudice that are in the Dutch educational system, that I wouldn’t be here. […] I vaguely remember that I was just looking around for my programme and I saw that there was an option for extra-curricular activities and honours programme. I didn’t take it that seriously because, I am not insecure about myself, but sometimes I feel like those are things that I am not smart enough for. But I also know that I have done things that show that I am good enough. I have proper grades and stuff. So when I read that at first, just on the website. I thought: that is not for me, but after 6 months at university I just applied and was like: maybe it’s a yes and maybe it’s a no. We will see. […] So my granddad also went to university and I have different family members that went to university so for me it was more common to do that. But I also know that that is also something that I was lucky with, someone else that is from an ethnic minority, and it doesn’t always come as normal I think. (P20; H+, MB+, FIF−)

For students who decided not to apply the reasons varied, but their familiarity with academia or honours programmes in particular seemed to have had influence. The students who were not in the honours programme differed in their assessment of whether they would be able to succeed and belong in the honours programme. The students with more traditional backgrounds seemed to be more positive about their chances of success but were mainly interested in other activities, while two students with more non-traditional backgrounds (both with a migration background, but not first in family to attend higher education) mentioned how doing an additional course would be too difficult, or how they did not see themselves as a standard honours programme student. See for example this student, who faced stereotyping and had difficulty integrating into student life (partly due to COVID-19, but also because the student community was focused on activities that involved drinking and partying). She always felt the need to do better in education to defeat stereotypes because of her Moroccan background.

Or during education, mostly in high school, I was in a class with a lot of Dutch people and I felt the need to basically do better than everyone else in order to sort of defeat those stereotypes. Because there is stereotypes about Moroccan people being dumb, etc. And I felt the need to adjust that. […] Because I am myself a Muslim, so I don’t drink etc. So it’s kind of hard to integrate into the Dutch student life that is all about drinking and partying […] So then you don’t feel integrated into a student community at all, so it could lead you to […] into an honours programme or any other stuff […]. Like it’s also with student organizations, I don’t see a lot of people with a foreign background there, and I think that is basically because of, we’re sort of, outside of it. Because the whole student culture is not really mixable with the culture I myself grew up in, the partying and drinking alcohol and having a free life. That’s not really what I have been brought up to. (P14; honours try-out student but thinks about quitting, MB+, FIF+)

The lack of representation in education was also mentioned by another student who refrained from applying.

I don’t know. I am also a first [generation] student. I think the university is new and I never heard stories about my parents what they did in university, so I think you have to, especially in the first year: you have to look around and what is it, what can I do. I think that when you also do an honours programme, that’s a lot. Because you don’t know what university is. It’s quite different than secondary school. So, I think because you didn’t hear stories of others and you also don’t see other people who do it. (P13; H−, MB−, not first in family in higher education, but calls themselves ‘first generation student’, father attended higher education, but not university)

Participants also touched upon the financial situation as a factor that could contribute to students’ decision to apply or not. Some honours students did not experience or mention costs that were relevant for their own decisions but hypothesized about costs that other students could experience.

Some people that I know are responsible for paying everything themselves so they do have to work a lot and make a lot of hours, so they cannot prioritize studying alone and missing out on money and everything, that’s also a factor that plays. That was also for me one of the things and I do know that most Dutch people, their parents pay everything for them, the only thing they need to do is study, get good grades and that’s it. So, for them it is easier to do that. […] (P16; H−, MB+, FIF+)

I am very privileged that my mom and dad both have a good education and that they can pay for my education, because my dad pays my college tuition every year. And because of that I don’t have to work a lot of hours a week, that is why I have the extra time. But not everyone is as privileged as I am, and maybe in general minority students have to pay for their own education and they have to work hard. That’s maybe why there are less minority students. I am not sure, that’s what I think of when I think about my own privilege. (P28; H+, MB+, exact parental education unclear)

These findings demonstrate how students’ unique personal backgrounds and experiences influence their decisions about whether to participate in honours programmes in different ways.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies which explored the factors informing students’ choice for honours programmes using the expectancy-value-cost model framework. This allowed for a better understanding of the interplay between different factors. Identifying various factors and experiences of students could help widening participation in talent programmes, such as honours programmes. Considering students’ decision-making processes in relation to their personal and educational backgrounds can help us to understand the mechanisms that may account for the underrepresentation of more non-traditional student groups in selective and/or talent programmes.

Although students appeared to value honours programmes similarly, their personal circumstances affected their decision to participate, as was also seen in Mulder, Wouters, Fikrat-Wevers, et al.’s (2022) study on selective health professions programmes. Students valued the way honours programmes met their interest in learning and developing knowledge and skills, broadened their perspective, and offered an educational challenge. They also recognized that these programmes could contribute to a competitive CV and benefit their future education or career. The costs students considered were mainly described in terms of time and effort, especially if it would take away time spent on other activities, such as work or social activities. For some students, the task value aspects seemed very important in their decision-making, but it had to be proportional to their time investment, and they also needed to feel competent, as also observed in previous research (e.g., Deeg et al., 2024; Nichols et al., 2016).

Notably, the type of task values (intrinsic interest values, attainment value and utility value) described by students were similar to the findings from previous research on students’ motivation and intentions to join, continue or drop out of the honours study programmes (Deeg et al., 2024; Schnettler et al., 2020; Vanslambrouck et al., 2018). Research applying the expectancy-value-cost framework to another educational domain, that is, professional behaviour of medical students, demonstrated that task values mainly influenced students’ educational choices, rather than expectancies of success (Mak-van der Vossen et al., 2018). In our study, task value was also prevalent in students’ decision-making processes. The importance of valuing or not valuing the educational programmes also aligns with the Self-Determination Theory of motivation (Jiang et al., 2018; Kusurkar, 2019). SDT also emphasises that an individual’s decision to engage in an activity originates from (combinations of) various types of motivations (Ryan & Deci, 2017). For example, students’ decision to engage in an activity can be based on pure enjoyment, how the activity aligns with their personally valued goals or how it can help them reach an external goal (Vansteenkiste & Mouratidis, 2016). In another quantitative study, we found that honours students had different quantities and combinations of autonomous (out of genuine interest or personally endorsement) and controlled (out of external or internal pressure or for prestige or rewards) motivation for joining honours programmes (Basnet et al., 2024). SDT also stresses the importance of feeling competent (feeling of capability) and related (feeling of belonging to the peer group or learning environment; Jiang et al., 2018; Kusurkar, 2019). Similarly, our findings reflect how students estimate their chances of being successful, and whether they would fit into this type of excellence education, in line with research on higher education and selective programmes (Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Langeloo & Kamans, 2025; Mulder, Wouters, Fikrat-Wevers, et al., 2022; Wouters et al., 2017). The choice for joining the honours programme often fitted students’ educational history of engaging in multiple (extracurricular) activities, in line with previous findings (Deeg et al., 2024). Beyond intrinsic interests, the students needed to consider that they would have to combine the programme with their regular studies, other extracurricular activities, work and social life. When intrinsic interest in honours programmes overshadowed the costs associated with education, students decided to participate. For some students, particularly more traditional students, other activities seemed better suited to meet their educational and future career goals. These findings are in line with previous research (Daudt, 2017; Nichols et al., 2016). Next to expectancy, value and cost, social influences were prevalent in the data, which underscores the previously found relevance of interpersonal factors (Deeg et al., 2024). In our study, how students considered the various aspects to come to a decision became visible throughout some narratives. These narratives show that weighing the various factors is a nuanced and rather individualized process.

Considering students’ contexts, we noted how for students growing up in an academically supportive environment making the choice to enrol the honours programme seemed to be more comfortable than for students who were first in their family to attend higher education. They were more likely to know about honours programmes and could see enrolling as a logical continuation of their high achievement. Contrary to this, some students who were less familiar with academia expressed how they needed time to ‘land’, felt they did not belong, and lacked role models. Similarly, students who experienced difficulties in their educational trajectory related to their migration background (e.g. racism, unfamiliarity with the Dutch education system and not fitting in with the majority culture) expressed greater insecurity about their ability to do an honours programme. This is in line with recent findings regarding ‘identity incompatibility’ in honours programmes and a lower sense of belonging to the university among first-generation students and students with an ethnic minority background (Langeloo & Kamans, 2025; Waldring et al., 2020). In some interviews, strong familial, peer, and mentor support could confirm or contribute to students feeling confident about their choice for honours, described by Deeg et al. (2024) as nudges. This has also been observed as an important aspect of improving the experiences of students who are under-represented in medical education (Isik et al., 2021). It is noteworthy that for one student who decided to join the honours programme, their educational decisions involved a sense of purpose. The sense of purpose was not to help someone or support a cause but rather an urge to ‘re-author’ the identity narratives, in line with other research (Rashid et al., 2020). This student wanted to challenge the existing stereotypes about their ethnic group and create a sense of belonging by constructing a coherent narrative about themselves and their community.

The results presented in this article should be interpreted with caution for several reasons. Firstly, the research and interviews were conducted during COVID-19 pandemic which affected the participant recruitment process, as well as students’ decisions to apply for the honours programme or not. Secondly, we experienced difficulties in recruiting eligible students who did not apply for the honours programme, because of which we may not have gotten a good enough understanding of factors contributing to students’ decisions not to apply. Thirdly, as participation in the research was voluntary, it may have appealed to certain types of students more than others, such as students with a strong opinion about honours programmes. Consequently, certain experiences and backgrounds may be underrepresented. However, the results of this research point to some important issues that are relevant for honours programme coordinators and for determining future areas of study. A more in-depth investigation into why eligible students decide not to apply, and into the decision-making processes of students in the post-pandemic era, would be valuable.

To our knowledge, our study is the first to explore the decision-making process of both honours and non-honours students in light of their parental education and migration background and intersections thereof. It elucidated mechanisms that are considered subtle and unconscious (Langeloo & Kamans, 2025). Our findings can help to improve the support, informing and recruitment of non-traditional students. As students can struggle to adjust to and gain confidence in university, a strong support system should be put in place to help them navigate university life. This gives them the confidence to pursue interesting activities alongside their regular education. This can include peer-support groups, mentors and visible relatable role models (e.g. students, alumni and teachers with a migration background and who are newcomers in higher education) to help them feel more connected (Isik et al., 2021; Wouters, 2020). By providing broader and more active information provision about the opportunities and value of honours programmes, these students can make an informed choice about applying, even if participating in such educational activities is not common in their personal environment. Students often mentioned that, once in the honours programme, they enjoyed the inspirational, social and networking value of participating in an honours programme with equally motivated students from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, which is also described elsewhere (Langeloo & Kamans, 2025; Nichols et al., 2016). This could be stressed in recruitment practices. In interviews with students from different disciplines, we noticed large differences in the ways and extent of information provision about honours programmes. This ranged from a general e-mail to it being discussed by a tutor or it being announced by the coordinator and honours students during a lecture. Literature on interventions aimed to improve access to and success in higher education in general can inform efforts to improve participation of non-traditional students in honours programmes. Research points out how access to academic (e.g. tutoring) and social-emotional support (e.g. mentoring) contributes to students’ academic success, sense of belonging, aspirations and confidence. It also stresses the importance of addressing the deeper cultural and institutional barriers (Negrea & Gartland, 2025). As students often require time to navigate the university environment, and advisors’ encouragement can stimulate participation (Nichols et al., 2016), we recommend implementing personalized guidance through teachers and tutors. Some efforts implemented in Amsterdam include the use of student ambassadors (as role models), introducing the honours programme to prospective students already during outreach and university introductory programmes (e.g. during the VU Better Prepared programme, aimed at first generation higher education students), targeted mailing of prospective international students, and information provision through study advisors. Further research should investigate the effectiveness of these efforts in widening participation in honours programmes.

From our interviews, it was challenging to distil how students weighed the variety of factors involved in their individual decision-making. Moreover, we did not particularly focus on whether (different types of) students valued long-term and short-term goals differently. In future research, adding quantitative research techniques (e.g. Q-sort methodology (Kusurkar et al., 2021)) to qualitative interviews could be helpful, especially for better understanding how non-traditional students arrive at the decision not to apply. Such a study would also enable the consideration of students’ socio-economic background, which was not part of the current study, as well as the insights and experiences of other stakeholders, such as faculty members. In addition, thorough investigation of the representativeness of the student composition, especially at the institutional level, and outcomes of recruitment efforts could contribute to achieving equitable talent education.

Conclusion

This study aimed to gain insight into how and why students decide to participate or not in honours programmes using the expectancy-value-cost framework and considering students’ traditional or non-traditional background characteristics and experiences. Students ascribed a variety of values to honours programmes, such as learning about new and exciting topics, developing skills, broadening their thinking, and adding to their CV. Students mainly considered time and effort as costs. To some students other activities seemed more relevant than participating in an honours programme. Students’ personal contexts in terms of migration background and parental education background seemed to influence their educational experiences and choices, for example through their expectancy for success. This resulted in students who were familiar with the Dutch educational system, university, and honours programmes making the decision to enrol in honours programmes with more ease and confidence than students who were newcomers in university education and students who had a migration background. Experiences of not fitting in and a lack of role models may result in a decision not to participate. Our findings can inform strategies during the orientation and recruitment phases to enable and stimulate students less familiar with academia to enter honours programmes. This can include directed information provision and the use of role models.

Footnotes

Appendix

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the participants of this research, and the Honours Students Councils and Honours Students Coordinators Eva Meijerink at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and Andrea Manneke and Marleen van der Meer at University of Amsterdam for their support in this research, providing information about the honours programmes, and their feedback on the article. We would also like to acknowledge Neha Basnet (NB) for her contributions to the research (especially to the data collection, preliminary analysis and writing) as a Postdoctoral researcher at Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Research in Education, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

ORCID iDs

Anouk Wouters

Malou Stoffels

Inge Johanna van Wijk

Rashmi A. Kusurkar

Ethical Considerations

The Medical Ethics Review Committee VUmc has determined that the study does not fall within the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO; file number 2021.0111). Data were handled and stored in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity of VSNU. To ensure confidentiality, only pseudonyms were used in the publication of the research, limiting the risk of individual participant identification.

Consent to Participate

Written informed consent for participation and the publication of participant data was obtained from all participants. Participants were informed that participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any point during data collection without providing a reason. Students received a €10 gift card as a token of appreciation for their participation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and funding acquisition: RAK and AW. Data analysis: AW, IJvW, and MS. All the analyses and results were discussed with the team. Writing draft paper: AW. Writing – review & editing: MS, IJvW, and RAK.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study received funding from The Netherlands Initiative for Education Research (project: 40.5.19945.602).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available upon reasonable request.

References

Allen

Belfi

van der Velden

Jongbloed

B. W.

Kolster

Westerheijden

D. F.

Leest

van Broekhoven

Wolbers

(2015). ‘Het beste uit studenten’: Onderzoek naar de werking van het Sirius Programma om excellentie in het hoger onderwijs te bevorderen. https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/5136932/het-beste-uit-studenten.pdf

Barrett

Kajamaa

Johnston

(2020). How to… be reflexive when conducting qualitative research. The Clinical Teacher, 17(1), 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13133

Basnet

Wouters

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2024). Students' motivation for honors programs in the Netherlands. SAGE Open, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231218097

Clancy

Goastellec

(2007). Exploring access and equity in higher education: Policy and performance in a comparative perspective. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00343.x

Cognard-Black

A. J.

Spisak

A. L.

(2019). Creating a profile of an honors student: A comparison of honors and non-honors students at public research universities in the United States. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 20(1), 123–157. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/623/

Crenshaw

(1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics [1989]. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 8. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8/

Daudt

(2017). Gifted and talented students’ academic performance and choices at TU Delft. Journal of the European Honors Council, 1(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.31378/jehc.51

Deeg

M. D.

Boone

A. L.

Chen

Shirley

(2024). Why honors? A qualitative investigation and taxonomy of student motivations for enrolling in honors programs. Studies in Higher Education, 49(12), 2797–2811. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2323615

Eccles

Adler

Terry F.

Futterman

Robert

Goff

Susan B.

Kaczala

C. M.

Meece

Judith

Midgley

Carol

. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviours. In Spence

J. T.

(Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). W.H. Freeman.

10.

Fikrat-Wevers

Stegers-Jager

K. M.

Afonso

P. M.

Koster

A. S.

Van Gestel

R. A.

Groenier

Ravesloot

J.H.

Wouters

Van Den Broek

W.W.

Woltman

A. M.

(2023). Selection tools and student diversity in health professions education: A multi-site study. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 28(4), 1027–1052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10204-9

11.

Furlong

Cartmel

(2009). Higher education and social justice. McGraw-Hill Education.

12.

Greenhalgh

Seyan

Boynton

(2004). “Not a university type”: Focus group study of social class, ethnic, and sex differences in school pupils’ perceptions about medical school. BMJ, 328(7455), 1541. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7455.1541

13.

Huijts

Kolster

(2021). Excellence programmes in higher education: Selection of students, effects on students, and the broader impact on higher education institutions. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1850313

14.

Isik

Wouters

Croiset

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2021). “What kind of support do I need to be successful as an ethnic minority medical student?” A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 21, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02423-8

15.

Jacobs

Huijts

van Broekhoven

Straetmans

Meng

van der Velden

(2021). Effects of participation in excellence programmes on cognitive and non-cognitive skills among higher education students in the Netherlands. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(1), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1850315

16.

Jiang

Rosenzweig

E. Q.

Gaspard

(2018). An expectancy-value-cost approach in predicting adolescent students’ academic motivation and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.005

17.

Kool

Kamans

Wolfensberger

M. V.

(2022). Dutch Honors alumni looking back on the impact of Honors on their personal and professional development. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 23(1), 221–236. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/723/

18.

Kool

Mainhard

M. T.

Jaarsma

A. D. C.

Brekelmans

van Beukelen

(2016). Academic success and early career outcomes: Can Honors alumni be distinguished from non-Honors alumni? High Ability Studies, 27(2), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2016.1238818

19.

Kool

Mainhard

Jaarsma

van Beukelen

Brekelmans

(2017). Effects of honours programme participation in higher education: A propensity score matching approach. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(6), 1222–1236. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1304362

20.

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2019). Autonomous motivation in medical education. Medical Teacher, 41(9), 1083–1084. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1545087

21.

Kusurkar

R. A.

Mak-van der Vossen

Kors

Grijpma

J. W.

van der Burgt

S. M.

Koster

A. S.

de la Croix

(2021). ‘One size does not fit all’: The value of person-centred analysis in health professions education research. Perspectives on Medical Education, 10(4), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00633-w

22.

Kusurkar

R. A.

Ten Cate

T. J.

Van Asperen

Croiset

(2011). Motivation as an independent and a dependent variable in medical education: A review of the literature. Medical Teacher, 33(5), e242–e262. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.558539

23.

Langeloo

Kamans

(2025). First-generation students’ identity compatibility, sense of belonging and self-efficacy going to and through honors talent programs: A mixed-method study. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 9, Article 100498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100498

24.

Leest

Wolbers

M. H.

(2021). Critical thinking, creativity and study results as predictors of selection for and successful completion of excellence programmes in Dutch higher education institutions. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1850310

25.

Mak-van der Vossen

Teherani

Van Mook

W. N.

Croiset

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2018). Investigating US medical students’ motivation to respond to lapses in professionalism. Medical Education, 52(8), 838–850. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13617

26.

Mulder

Akwiwu

E. U.

Twisk

J. W.

Koster

A. S.

Ravesloot

J. H.

Croiset

Kusurkar

R. A.

Wouters

(2023). Inequality of opportunity in selection procedures limits diversity in higher education: An intersectional study of Dutch selective higher education programs. PLoS ONE, 18(10), e0292805. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292805

27.

Mulder

Wouters

Fikrat-Wevers

Koster

A. S.

Ravesloot

J. H.

Croiset

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2022). Influence of social networks in healthcare on preparation for selection procedures of health professions education: A Dutch interview study. BMJ open, 12(10), e062474. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062474

28.

Mulder

Wouters

Twisk

J. W.

Koster

A. S.

Akwiwu

E. U.

Ravesloot

J. H.

Croiset

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2022). Selection for health professions education leads to increased inequality of opportunity and decreased student diversity in The Netherlands, but lottery is no solution: A retrospective multi-cohort study. Medical Teacher, 44(7), 790–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2041189

29.

Negrea

Gartland

(2025). An umbrella review of widening participation in higher education: Strategies, challenges, and research gaps. Review of Education, 13(3), e70120. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.70120

30.

Nichols

Ailts

Chang

K. L.

(2016). Why not Honors? Understanding students’ decisions not to enroll and persist in Honors programs. Honors in Practice, 12, 33–58. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchchip/251/

31.

Ommering

B. W.

Van Blankenstein

F. M.

van Diepen

Gruis

N. A.

Kool

Dekker

F. W.

(2021). The importance of motivation in selecting undergraduate medical students for extracurricular research programmes. PLoS ONE, 16(11), e0260193. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260193

32.

Rashid

Jabeen

Shahbaz

(2020). Re-writing Muslim identity and self against Western discourse of terrorism in Naqvi’s Home Boy. SJESR, 3(2), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss2-2020(68-75)

33.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford publications.

34.

Savolainen

(2018). Self-determination and expectancy-value: Comparison of cognitive psychological approaches to motivators for information seeking about job opportunities. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(1), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-10-2017-0242

35.

Schnettler

Bobe

Scheunemann

Fries

Grunschel

(2020). Is it still worth it? Applying expectancy-value theory to investigate the intraindividual motivational process of forming intentions to drop out from university. Motivation and Emotion, 44, 491–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09822-w

36.

Stalmeijer

R. E.

Brown

M. E.

O’Brien

B. C.

(2024). How to discuss transferability of qualitative research in health professions education. The Clinical Teacher, 21(6), e13762. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13762

37.

Van Broekhoven

Huijts

Isendam

Jacobs

Kolster

Leest

Meng

Westerheijden

Wolbers

(2020). Excellentieonderwijs: Selectie van studenten en individuele effecten (No. 001). ROA. ROA Reports No. 001. https://doi.org/10.26481/umarep.2020001

38.

Van den Broek

Termorshuizen

Cuppen

(2023). Monitor beleidsmaatregelen hoger onderwijs 2022-2023. https://studentenmonitor.nl/docs/Monitor%20beleidsmaatregelen%202022-2023.pdf

39.

Vanslambrouck

Zhu

Lombaerts

Philipsen

Tondeur

(2018). Students’ motivation and subjective task value of participating in online and blended learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 36, 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.09.002

40.

Vansteenkiste

Mouratidis

(2016). Emerging trends and future directions for the field of motivation psychology: A special issue in honor of Prof. Dr. Willy Lens. Psychologica Belgica, 56(3), 317. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.354

41.

VU-UvA Honours committee/collective. (2021). Annual Report VU-UvA Honours Programme Academic year 2019-2020 (Internal report).

42.

Waldring

Labeab

van den Hee

Crul

Slootman

(2020). Belonging@VU. Diversity Office Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Retrieved April 21, 2023, from https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/belongingvu

43.

Wigfield

Eccles

J. S.

(1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12(3), 265–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-P

44.

Wolfensberger

M. V. C.

(2015). Talent development in European higher education: Honors programs in the Benelux, Nordic and German-speaking Countries (p. 335). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12919-8

45.

Wouters

(2020). Getting to know our non-traditional and rejected medical school applicants. Perspectives on Medical Education, 9(3), 132–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-020-00579-z

46.

Wouters

Croiset

Isik

Kusurkar

R. A.

(2017). Motivation of Dutch high school students from various backgrounds for applying to study medicine: A qualitative study. BMJ Open, 7(5), e014779. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014779