Determinants Influencing International Students from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia - Ciri

ISSN: 2232-0172
 Vol 10 Issue 2, February 2022
 pp. 24-48

A Contemporary Business Journal

 Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue
 Higher Education in Malaysia
 Salsabil Hossain
 Department of Marketing and Management, Taylor’s University
 ©The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access by Taylor’s Press.

 Abstract: International students from emerging countries have increasingly shown interest
 to study overseas in search of higher education quality worldwide. In Malaysia, there has
 been a rise in the number of students from Bangladesh, India and Pakistan. However, the
 number has decreased prior to the current Covid 19 situation. The push-pull motivation
 theory behind the effect was researched by scholars actively. Still, despite the growth, little
 study on the push-pull motivating elements that attract students from developing nations.
 The purpose of this study is to focus on the 'push-pull' motivating factors that aid in
 understanding the elements of higher education at private schools in Malaysia that affects
 international students from developing South-East Asian nations. Gender and ethnicity are
 being added as new elements to the push-pull concept. A sample size of 167 is employed in
 this study, which is analysed using multiple linear regression analysis and cross-tabulation
 approaches. The research showed that the host country and higher education institutions’
 characteristics such as cost, facilities, locations, and third-party sources have an essential role
 as pull-elements on students’ choice decisions. Moreover, despite having enough resources
 and educational infrastructure at home, International Students choose to study abroad
 portraying a weaker push influence. In addition, comparative disparities between individual
 races have been found in terms of ethnicity and gender. Marketers may concentrate on these
 results to develop marketing tactics to recruit students from these neighbouring nations.

 Key words: International students, higher education, emerging countries, students, Malaysia.

 JEL Classifications: I23 Higher Education • Research Institutions.

1. INTRODUCTION
In present times, the perception of achieving a higher degree has become a necessity
among students. A statistical microscope shows the rise in the number of students
who want to study higher education. In 2017, about 5.3 million International
Students (hereafter abbreviated as IS) were studying overseas worldwide, compared

Correspondence: Salsabil Hossain, Taylor’s University. Email: salsabil.hossain@sd.taylors.edu.my

24 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

to 2 million in 2000 (UNESCO, 2020). Malaysia is one of the nations that encourage
IS to seek higher education. In Malaysia, Higher Education Institutions (hereafter
abbreviated as HEIs) are run by the Ministry of Higher Education (hereafter
abbreviated as MOHE). Institution Malaya was Malaysia's only university in 1970.
Due to the limited enrolment capacity, local children who were studying abroad were
forced to attend local schools following the Asian Financial Crisis in the 1990s.
However, students were unable to secure a placement due to the low capacity of
public higher education (Jamshidi et al., 2012). As a consequence, Malaysia's
government passed the Private Higher Education Institution Act 1996 (Arokiasamy,
2010). The government also encouraged renowned international institutions to
establish branches in Malaysia (Sarjit et al., 2008). Overtime 100 institutions already
exist in the nation, including ten overseas prominent campus branches from the US,
UK, and Japan (Education Malaysia Global Services, 2021). In March 2019, Malaysia
had 127,583 IS, with 70% in the private sector and 30,341 in public institutions (The
Pie News, 2019). However, owing to Pandemic, new IS enrolment in 2020 was 7,000,
down from 16,500 in 2019 (Sharma, 2020). In terms of revenue, the extended
Lockdown and entrance restrictions have put 20% of Malaysian private institutions
in danger of liquidation, 80% of private universities are insolvent, and 97% of private
universities and colleges are projected to lose money in 2020, compared to 55% in
April, thus, international student earnings dropped by 44% (Sharma, 2020).
 UNESCO, which earlier rated Malaysia as the 9th most desired study destination
in the world in 2015 (The Star, 2015), has downgraded Malaysia to the 11th position
(Education Malaysia Global Services, 2021). Highlighting the number of Bangladeshi
students studying in Malaysia grew from 30,530 in 2017 (Statista, 2017) to 34,155 in
2018 (New Age, 2020). The number of students from South East Asian developing
nations increased in 2018 but fell in subsequent years. Inclusion of Covid-19, there
are several other reasons for the drop in enrolment. To add, Perry Hobson, Pro-Vice-
Chancellor of one of Malaysia's best private universities, said the number of IS has
remained flat for a few years (The Pie News, 2019).
 Little research has been done on what motivates students from developing
nations like Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan to study in Malaysia rather than their
institutions. Therefore, understanding how to attract students from developing
countries would help Malaysia to enroll more students. In that context, the push
factors contribute to students’ choice to not study in their respective countries and
similarly understand the attracting factors in the study destination. Moreover, limited
research has been investigated to understand the difference of choice decision on
genders and ethnicity to choose their study destination. Therefore, another primary
goal of this study is investigating the effect of gender and ethnicity on the push-pull
motivation theory to combine internal aspects into the concept.
 Marketers can utilize these pull factors and include them in their strategies to
increase the enrollment numbers of students from these emerging countries who are
willing to study abroad for higher education. Upon which, the country will gain back

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 25

Salsabil Hossain

the rank of 9th or higher by UNESCO placing itself as one of the most preferred
education hubs among IS. This will help enhance the education quality in Malaysian
higher education institutions and boost the economy. Especially after the pandemic
when the economy has been restrained drastically, foreign reserve through FS can
help to boost the economic condition. Besides, this research will increase the
competitive advantage to attract developing country FS to Malaysian private
Universities compared to other Southeast Asian countries in the future. The purpose
of this study is to focus on the 'push-pull' motivating factors that aid in
understanding the elements of higher education at private schools in Malaysia that
affects international students from developing South-East Asian nations.
 Therefore, the following are the research objectives of the current study.
 • To investigate the home country’s push factors influencing IS’ choice
 decision to pursue higher education.
 • To investigate the host country’s pull factors influencing IS’ choice to pursue
 higher education.
 • To investigate the higher education institutions’ pull factors influencing IS’
 choice to pursue higher education.
 • To investigate the third-party influences on IS’ choice to pursue
 higher education.

2. LITERATURE AND HYPOTHESES
The push-pull theory relates to the 19th century, suggesting that people’s migration
from one place to another is guided by the push and pull factors (Ravenstein, 1889).
McMahon (1992) followed the push factors associated with the home country's
unfavourable situation, triggering a student's intention to study abroad rather than
in local universities (Gatfield & Chen, 2006), followed by pull factors associated with
the attractiveness of the host country and the higher institution (Wilkins et al., 2012).
Since then, many studies (Ahmad & Buchanan, 2016; Chloe, 2019; Alfred, 2019;
Lam et al., 2011; Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002; Moreira & Gomes, 2019) have focused
on the push-pull motivation theory to determine the factors affecting IS to study
abroad. Push and Pull Motivation theory gives more emphasis on external forces
rather than internal forces, for instance: socio-economic conditions of the student,
personal characteristics or attitudes, preferences, gender, motivations, and
inspiration which are equally essential to understand the international student’s
choice to study abroad (Wilkins et al., 2012). Therefore, another goal of this study is
to investigate the effect of gender and ethnicity on the push-pull motivation theory
to combine internal aspects into the concept.
 International Student’s Complex Choice Decision: Regarding the demand for higher
education, student choice plays a crucial role as an integral component of theory and
research. Ultimately, all the external factors pressurise the student to make the best

26 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

decision, making the process complex (Moogan & Baron, 2010), and requiring high
involvement (Americanos, 2011). The choice will ultimately impact their life, career,
and profession, which is also time-consuming, deciding high importance (Lee, 2015).
This research paper will address all the factors that would help ease the complex
decision-making of potential IS by determining which attributes of push and pull
factors directly impact the process.
 Home Country as a Push Factor Influencing International Student: One of the
crucial elements in push-pull theory is home country. Circumstances of home
country act as a medium which influences IS not to study locally: such situations are
the perception that overseas education is of better quality, and therefore ranked
home country’s unfavourable conditions as the most influencing factors to push
students to study abroad (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002). In addition, political
instability, low GDP, low priority to education due to limited government support,
fewer educational opportunities, and social inequalities (Bodycott & Lai, 2012), lack
of capacity (Nghia, 2019), unavailability of a specific program in local universities
(Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002) are some external factors of a developing country with
inadequate infrastructure. Moreover, employer recognition, a perception that
overseas study is better than local which would help to achieve greater professional
prospects and future advantaged positions (Chloe, 2019) are some internal factors
affecting students to achieve a better future in terms of career, and some students
are also influenced by the attractiveness to a compatible cultural background (Mucsi
et al., 2019). Therefore, building the first hypothesis of the study.
H1: Home Country’s push factors influence FS’ choice decision to pursue higher education.
 Host Country as a Pull Factor Influencing International Student: Country
image or attractive features of the study destination which lack in the home country
pulls students to pursue education abroad (Ahmad & Buchanan, 2016; Singh, 2016).
In the complex decision process, a positive country image with lower purchase risk
will contribute positively as a pull factor (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002). When the risk
in the study destination is no more applicable, students are influenced by other
factors. Singh (2016) stated that while determining host country, international
students are attracted by lower fees and are socio-economically sensitive. The author
further added, Malaysia is an attractive study destination due to its offering lower
tuition fees than the USA, UK, and Australia. To add, currency fluctuations and
differences that cause students to ponder their daily expenditure and other financial
constraints are critical pull factors. Apart from the financial standpoint, many
students determine the host country based on the ease of visa processing (Alfred,
2019), occupational planning, immigration criteria, stable economy and the security
provided to international students, assuring protection and safety compared to other
western countries (Singh, 2016). In addition, many IS are attracted by the
opportunities they might achieve due to multinational companies in the host country

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 27

Salsabil Hossain

for their future perspective, which they lack in their home country (Kazemi et al.,
2018; Pawar et al., 2019). Therefore, building the second hypothesis.
H2: Host country’s pull factors influence FS' choice to pursue higher education.
 Higher Education Institutions as a Pull Factor Influencing International
Student: Many research articles have highlighted the characteristics which pull
students towards a particular higher education institution, namely: expenses, tuition
fees, location (Amaro et al., 2019; Basha et al., 2016; S. Lee et al., 2018), academic
success, building knowledge and skills (Singh & Jack, 2018), career (Lam et al., 2011),
reputation (Lee et al., 2018), campus facilities, sound support system, quality, image
(Mun et al., 2018), recognition, range of course and programs (Dowling-
Hetherington, 2019). Besides that, safety and security also profoundly impact the
student’s decision to choose the HEIs (Calitz et al., 2019). There each of these
attributes of HEIs is further elaborated.
 Cost: Many scholars have identified cost as the top influencing factor among
others on students’ choice decisions (Ahmad and Buchana, 2015; Americanos, 2011;
Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002, Lam et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2018; Chloe, 2019). Students
prefer lower-cost international study destinations with quality (Lee et al., 2018). In
addition to tuition cost, their choice decision is also influenced by the standard of
living and mobility cost (Ahmad and Buchanan, 2016; Migin et al., 2015; Chloe,
2019). In Malaysia, international students are influenced by low living costs and
tuition fees (Singh, 2016) due to their affordability. On contrary, students are
repelled as they are not permitted to work during their study period, which compels
them to consider earning their living expenses (Migin et al., 2015) which are flexible
in popular western countries.
H3: Higher education institutions’ pull factor (COST) influences FS' choice to pursue
higher education.
 Facilities: Apart from cost, campus facilities or infrastructure are the second
most influencing pull factor which is usually the libraries, internet, lab, sports
facilities, recreational centres, cafes, canteen, hostel, clubs, and societies. A study
found that students impose more importance on these attributes than programs and
course-related matters (Chloe, 2019), as they spend more leisure time here.
According to Migin et al. (2015), clubs and societies are essential for IS because they
want to interact and communicate with peers, enhance their university life, develop
their leadership skills, which also acts as leisure and entertainment by being a part of
a community.
H4: Higher education institutions’ pull factor (FACILITIES) influences FS' choice to pursue
higher education.
 Location: University students consider their preferred colleges/universities
close to their homes (Jackson, 2016). Authors have noted in their research that those
undergraduate students identify the location as one of the significant factors
contributing to their decision to choose the university (Beneke & Human, 2010).

28 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

The authors also added that students place priority on the programs rather than the
institute’s geographical location. Therefore, this study wants to investigate the
significant influence of location on students’ choice decisions.
H5: Higher education institutions’ pull factor (LOCATION) influences FS' choice to pursue
higher education.
 Programme: Availability of programs and a broader spectrum of courses and
study duration are suggested the main attributes of the programme, and it is also a
part of the institute’s reputation and recognition (Chloe, 2019). A decision-maker
will reconcile the specialization of the program offered by the institute, its quality,
international recognition, and appreciation among future employees when choosing
higher education to instate to study abroad (Cubillo et al., 2006; Wu, 2014).
Generally, IS who want to study in Malaysia compares the universities on program
quality, ease of admission, credit transfer and duration (Singh, 2016).
H6: Higher education institutions’ pull factor (PROGRAM) influences FS' choice to p ursue
higher education.
 Reputation: Many scholars firmly affirmed that the influence of a HEIs
reputation plays a crucial role in the choice decision (Cubillo et al., 2006; Mazzarol
and Soutar, 2002). Lee et al. (2018) stated in their research that international students
are concerned about the university’s reputation they choose for overseas study. They
usually prefer highly reputed HEIs, that will be beneficial for their career which is
the core reason for them studying abroad.
H7: Higher education institutions’ pull factor (REPUTATION) influences FS' choice to
pursue higher education.
 Third-Party Sources as a Pull factor Influencing International Student: There
is limited research conducted on the third-party influences on a student’s decision-
making process. However, Rekhter and Hossler (2019) found that students who
have no connections abroad solely rely on the institution’s social media presence for
the decision process and would not even consider an institution without social media
presence. However, testimonies of alumni and word of mouth (Americanos, 2011),
peers, and family studying abroad equally influence the choice decision (Mozzarol
and Soutar, 2002; Chloe, 2019). In addition, the family’s contribution to the decision
is very influential as they motivate or have elevated expectations; they also play
functional roles like the financial supporter (Lee, 2015).
H8: Third-party influences FS' choice to pursue higher education.

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 29

Salsabil Hossain

 PUSH FACTOR

 Home Country
 H1

 PULL FACTORS
 H2
 Choice
 Host Country Decision
 Institution
 Characteristics H3 – H7
 • Cost
 • Facilities
 • Location
 • Programs H8
 • Reputation
 Third Party Sources

 Figure 1: Conceptual framework

3. METHODOLOGY
The quantitative survey research technique has been applied using primary data. A
cluster sampling technique was employed to collect the data, splitting the population
into three subgroups or clusters and randomly selecting individuals from each cluster
for study. An estimated sample size of 25 people per cluster was considered.
However, 50 people per cluster would be ideal (Stehman, 1996). So, based on the
respondents' origins, a total sample size of 150 was estimated for the research. The
survey form has been shared in these universities: Taylor’s University, Monash
University, Sunway University, INTI University, and Heriot-Watt University. In the
final sample size in this research, a total of 167 (N=167) responses has been collected
among the above-mentioned pre-determined criteria in 21 working days.
 Data were gathered from international students studying in Malaysia from
Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan of the Southeast Asian region. A close-ended
questionnaire was constructed with 37 questions divided into six sections with a 5-
point Likert Scale in the survey. Section A-C used the following Likert Scale with
the value of 1 as ‘Strongly Disagree’, 2 as ‘Disagree’, 3 as ‘Neutral’, 4 as ‘Agree’ and
5 as ‘Strongly Agree’ to showcase their level of agreement or disagreement with the
question items. The scale was adopted from Mun et al. (2018). The akin scale was

30 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

applied to Section D-E with the value of 1 as ‘Not Important at all’, 2 as ‘Not
Important’, 3 as ‘Moderately Important’, 4 as ‘Important’, and 5 as ‘Very Important’.
The scale was adapted from Mun et al. (2018), indicating respondents’ rating of the
emotional scale.
 Descriptive statistics analysis has been conducted on the respondents’
characteristics, i.e., their gender, age, ethnicity, highest qualification, and funding
source during the analysis. As the research paper has more than four (4) independent
variables, multiple linear regression is used to investigate how a couple of
exploratory variables are linked with a response variable of interest. The following
are the components of the multiple linear regression analysis in this research paper:
Model Summary, ANOVA, Coefficients. Cros-tabulation is also applied to analyse
the difference between gender and ethnicity of significant factors. However, before
sharing the survey all the internal reliability of the constructs were analysed using a
sample size of 30 (N=30).
 According to Cronbach’s Alpha Table 1, all independent variables have high-
reliability values, i.e., home country, higher education institute, third party sources,
except the host country with a 0.540 alpha value. A low alpha, which occurred due
to poor correlation, should be revised, or discarded (Tavakol and Dennick, 2011).
The Independent Variable 2 (IV2) showed 0.540 alpha with 5 questionnaire items
and predicted an increase to 0.688 when questionnaire item 4 (HCM4) (Table 1), ‘I
wanted to improve my English’, is removed from the questionnaire items.

Table 1: Reliability test (N=30)
 Revised
 Independent Cronbach’s Questionnaire Questionnaire
 Cronbach’s
 Variables Alpha Items Items
 Alpha
 Home 0.748 5 0.748 5
 Country
 Host 0.540 5 0.688 4
 Country
 Higher 0.733 10 0.733 10
 Education
 Institution
 Third-party 0.723 5 0.723 5
 Sources
 Dependent
 Variables
 Choice 0.534 7 0.534 7
 Decision

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 31

Salsabil Hossain

 Table 2 shows the increased Cronbach’s alpha value for the independent
variables on the 167-sample size. All constructs with an alpha value greater than 0.7
are acceptable and show a higher degree of reliability. The construct to have the
highest alpha value is the home country, i.e., 0.904. According to Taber (2018)
recorded alpha value above 0.84 - 0.90 is reliable. Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) have a high alpha value, i.e., 0.898 and Host Country with .873 reliability. It
is also observable comparing Tables 1 and 2 that with increasing sample size, the
Cronbach’s value of the dependent variable also increased drastically, for instance,
0.534 to 0.855.

Table 2: Reliability test (N=167)
 Independent variables Cronbach’s alpha Questionnaire items
 Home Country 0.904 5
 Host Country 0.873 4
 Higher Education 0.898 10
 Institution
 Third Party Sources 0.844 5
 Dependent Variable
 Choice Decision 0.855 7

4. DISCUSSION
Table 3 shows the demographic profile of the 167 respondents from Pakistan,
Bangladesh, and India, including 84 (50.3%) Females and 83 (49.7%) Male
participated in the survey. In terms of age, the age group 21-31 has 114 responses
which are 68.3% of the total sample size.

Table 3: Demographic profile
 Characteristics Categories Frequency Percent (%)
 Gender Female 84 50.3
 Male 83 49.7
 Total 167 100.0
 Age 20 or below 13 7.8
 21-31 114 68.3
 32-42 40 24.0
 Total 167 100.0
 Ethnicity Bangladesh 33 19.8

32 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

 (Home Country) India 38 22.8
 Pakistan 96 57.5
 Total 167 100.0
 Education Level Diploma Degree 28 16.8

 (Highest Diploma Degree; 1 .6
 Qualification) Undergraduate Degree
 Postgraduate Degree 82 49.1
 Undergraduate Degree 56 33.5
 Total 167 100.0
 Funding Government 14 8.4
 Personal 119 71.3
 Personal; 3 1.8
 Government;
 Scholarship
 Personal; Scholarship 1 .6
 Scholarship 30 18.0
 Total 167 100.0

 The independent variables explain 44.7% of the variability of our dependent
 variable, i.e., the choice decision of international students (Table 4). Therefore, the
 R² is moderately high. The remaining 55.3% of the variation is caused or explained
 by other factors than the independent variables mentioned in this model. Durbin-
 Watson value in this research model is 1.493, below 2, indicating no autocorrelation
 between the independent variables.

Table 4: Model summary
 Std. Error Change Statistics
 Adjusted Durbin-
 Model R R Square of the R Square Sig. F
 R Square F Change df1 df2 Watson
 Estimate Change Change
 1 .668 .447 .419 .50317 .447 15.956 8 158 .000 1.493
a. Predictors: (Constant), TPS, HOC, Cost, Location, HCM, Programme, Reputation, Facilities
b. Dependent Variable: CHD
Statistical Significance of the Model

 Table 5 shows the independent and dependant variables as the F-score is F
 (8,158) = 15.958, p (0.00)

Salsabil Hossain

Table 5: ANOVA
 Sum of Mean
 Model df F Sig.
 squares square
 1 Regression 32.319 8 4.040
 15.956 .000
 Residual 40.003 158 .253
 Total 72.321 166
 a. Dependent variable: CHD
 b. Predictors: (Constant), TPS, HOC, Cost, Location, HCM, Programme, Reputation,
 Facilities
Significance of the Beta Coefficients

5. HOME COUNTRY

Hypothesis 1 states Home Country as push factors where Table 6 shows the
regression coefficient of the home country independent variable is statistically
insignificant ( =0.1113, t = 1.409, p (0.161) > 0.05). Therefore, the H1 is rejected at
a 5% confidence level. Unlike Chloe (2019), who found a significant "home country"
impact on their study model. Since the current study utilized Multiple Linear
Regression, while the latter used Explanatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation
Modelling, and the sample demographics differed, the opposing would be an outcome.
 The finding contradicts Chloe (2019) conclusion that restricted access to the
home nation is significant in studying abroad. Furthermore, although having enough
resources and educational infrastructure at home, IS chosen to study abroad because
they perceive it as a more rewarding experience than studying at home. Singh and
Jack (2018) pointed out that graduating abroad would be a credential on a student’s
profile; with benefits of open networking, internationally recognised degrees, career
prospects, and migration (Mazzarol and Sautor, 2002).
5.1 Host Country
Hypothesis 2 states Host Country as pull factor where Table 6 illustrates statistical
significance on the regression model ( =0.362, t = 4.265, p (0.00) < 0.05). Thus, H2 is
accepted at a 5% confidence level. Another research by Ming et al. (2020) showed
favourable significance on students' decision to study abroad and Malaysia as a host
country. The study also indicates that Malaysian HEIs impact student choice and are the
most influential factor. Both of his findings are supported by this research paper.
 Other researchers examining international students studying in Malaysia who
are significantly affected by the host country's situation support the results (Ahmad
and Buchanan, 2016; Chloe, 2019). Malaysia, a developed Islamic country, draws
students with comparable religious and cultural backgrounds and a safe environment,
multicultural society, streamlined immigration (Singh, 2016). In addition, other

34 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

academics have endorsed the current study's results on higher education institution
characteristics (Ahmad and Buchanan, 2016; Lee et al., 2018; Migin et al., 2015;
Chloe, 2019).
HEIs Attributes
5.2 Cost
Hypothesis 3 states Higher education institutions’ pull factor (COST)
where Table 6 illustrates statistical significance on the regression model ( 
= 0.214, t= 2.355, p (0.020) < 0.05). Therefore, H3 was accepted at a 5%
confidence level.
 Cost is the most crucial characteristic of HEIs, since 71% of the sample
demographics are self-funded and just 29% are subsidised (referred to Table 3), the
majority of sample demographics prefer affordability over program modules. The
outcome could be a consequence of the sample demographic from emerging
countries with limited financial support from their family. Thus, as they are self-
funded, they are cost-sensitive. Singh (2016) supports that the inexpensive cost of
schooling in Malaysia appeals to IS due to the lower currency value. Apart from
tuition, affordable housing and living expenses also impact IS.
5.3 Facilities
Hypothesis 4 states Higher education institutions’ pull factor (FACILITIES), where
Table 6 shows facilities to have positive and statistical significance ( =0.161, t
=1.665, p (0.098) 0.05). The analysis states that international students are not
highly influenced by the choice of programmes offered. Thus, H6 is rejected at a
5% confidence level.
 The finding contradicts with two of the crucial findings of other sholars.
Where Chloe(2019) found the program offered by a Malaysian Institute is

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 35

Salsabil Hossain

considered third most influencing factor; Migin et al. (2015) discovered that when
a qualification is also recognized in their home country, students are more willing
to pursue an internationally recognized program abroad. However, the current
study indicates the insignificant influence of program offered by the Malaysian
private HEIs on students from these particular 3 emerging countries. Such
findings would be beneficial for marketers to plan their marketing strategies
accurately and precisely.
5.6 Reputation
Hypothesis 7 states Higher education institutions’ pull factor (REPUTATION)
where Table 6 shows Reputation to have statistical insignificance ( =0.059, t
=0.614, p (0.540) > 0.05). Indicating, international students are not likely to be
influenced by the reputation of the private institute. Thus, H7 was rejected at a
5% confidence level.
 In addition to the previously mentioned similar findings, the current
study underlines the minor importance of the private institute's reputation
and curriculum among respondents from the three emerging count ries. This
is not in line with the findings of Migin et al (2015) where academic
reputation was positively significant on international students’ choice of
HEIs. The contradictory outcome of both studies might have resulted from
the distinct sample demographic, where the former specifically surveyed a
particular clster of students where later non-randomly investigated foreign
students, therefore, showcasing the difference of wants and needs of
different group of students background.
5.7 Third-party sources
Hypothesis 8 states Third-party influences IS’ choice to pursue higher education.
Table 6 show this independent variable to be negative and statistically significant
on the regression model ( =-0.217, t = -2.119, p (0.036) < 0.05). International
students are highly influenced by the negative reviews while determining the
Malaysian private university for future studies. Therefore, H8 was accepted at a
5% confidence level.
 On the other hand, studies found that the role and suggestion of others
influence IS studying in Malaysia (Ahmad and Buchanan, 2016; Singh, 2016). For
example, family, friends, and relatives help the IS make choices by sharing their
own experiences and tales about the host nation (Ahmad and Buchanan, 2016).
Third-party sources who shared negative suggestions to the potential students
would hugely impact the potential student’s choice decision, because of their
reliability and trustworthiness. Such incidents would impact students to
completely abandon the chosen university, study destination, and motivate them
to look for alternatives.

36 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

Table 6: Coefficients in multiple linear regression
 Standardized
 Unstandardized coefficients
 Model coefficients t Sig.
 B Std. error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.355 .327 4.144 .000
 HOC .075 .053 .113 1.409 .161
 HCM .312 .073 .362 4.265 .000
 Cost .179 .076 .214 2.355 .020
 Facilities .122 .073 .161 1.665 .098
 Location .218 .096 .212 2.269 .025
 Programme -.082 .080 -.096 -1.025 .307
 Reputation .057 .093 .059 .614 .540
 TPS -.216 .102 -.217 -2.119 .036
 Dependent variable: CHD

 5.1 Cross-tabulation: HEIs attributes, gender and ethnicity
 Further elaborating the statistical significance of Cost, Facilities and Location as the
 attributes of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) influencing Choice decisions, the
 author is determined to investigate explicitly on students from which, home
 countries, i.e., Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, are affected by these factors most.
 Cost of Program Fees and the Payment Convenience (COS 1): According to
 Table 7, 25 (66%) Indians, followed by 61 (63%) Pakistanis and 15 (45%)
 Bangladeshis, strongly agree that tuition fees and payment convenience are essential
 for them to determine a private Malaysian university for further studies.
 Furthermore, each ethnicity has a different point of view according to gender. For
 example, among Indians, both Male-Female (14-11) collaboratively believe the
 importance of lower tuition fees, whereas Pakistani Male and Bangladeshi Females
 are more significantly affected.

 Table 7: COS1
 Count
 COS1
 Home Country Strongly Strongly Total
 Disagree Neutral Agree
 Agree Agree
 Bangladesh Gender Female 6 4 10 20
 Male 2 6 5 13
 Total 8 10 15 33
 India Gender Female 1 3 1 11 16
 Male 0 2 6 14 22
 Total 1 5 7 25 38

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 37

Salsabil Hossain

Pakistan Gender Female 2 1 7 11 27 48
 Male 0 1 5 8 34 48
 Total 2 2 12 48 84
Total Gender Female 2 2 16 16 48 84
 Male 0 1 9 20 53 83
 Total 2 3 25 36 101 167

 Cost of Accommodation and Cost of Living (COS 2): According to Table
 8, 25 Indians (66%), 57 Pakistanis (59%) and 16 Bangladeshis (48%) strongly
 agree that affordable cost of living is essential while choosing the private
 institutions in Malaysia, which has been supported by witnessing an equal number
 of responses of Male-Female among Indians and Pakistanis. However,
 Bangladeshis differed as more females believe in the statement than males.

Table 8: Cross tabulation COS 2
 Count
 COS2
 Home Country Strongly Strongly Total
 Disagree Neutral Agree
 Agree Agree
Bangladesh Female 1 5 4 10 20
 Gender
 Male 0 2 5 6 13
 Total 1 7 9 16 33
India Female 1 2 1 12 16
 Gender
 Male 0 2 7 13 22
 Total 1 4 8 25 38
Pakistan Female 1 10 8 29 48
 Gender
 Male 0 6 14 28 48
 Total 1 16 22 57 96
Total Female 2 1 17 13 51 84
 Gender
 Male 0 0 10 26 47 83
 Total 2 1 27 39 98 167

 Reputable Clubs and Society (FAC 1): Table 9 shows that 20 Indians (53%)
 and 51 Pakistanis (53%) strongly agrees that clubs and society is an influencing factor
 while deciding their choice of a private institute in Malaysia; however, 8 Bangladeshis
 (24%) strongly agreed to the statement, but overall showed a very different
 perspective of not being influenced by this factor when deciding their future study
 institute. Furthermore, an equal number of female-male Indian and Pakistani
 respondents strongly agreed to this statement, and the facility influences more
 Bangladeshi males than females.

 38 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

 Table 9: Cross tabulation: FAC 1
 Count
 FAC1
 Home Country Strongly Strongly Total
 Disagree Neutral Agree
 Disagree Agree
 Bangladesh Gender Female 2 8 7 3 20
 Male 2 3 3 5 13
 Total 4 11 10 8 33
 India Gender Female 0 1 4 1 10 16
 Male 2 2 2 6 10 22
 Total 2 3 6 7 20 38
 Pakistan Gender Female 1 3 6 12 26 48
 Male 0 1 12 10 25 48
 Total 1 4 18 22 51 96
 Total Gender Female 3 4 18 20 39 84
 Male 4 3 17 19 40 83
 Total 7 7 35 39 79 167

 Career Counselling and Internship Services (FAC 2): According to
 Table 10, 24 Indians (64%), 66 Pakistanis (68%), and 12 Bangladeshi (36%)
 strongly agree that these facilities are very crucial in their choice decision
 when deciding the Malaysian private institute for overseas studies.
 Indicating all of them prefer a supportive career service while determining
 the private university. Furthermore, an equal number of Male -female
 among Bangladeshis and Indians have responded strongly to this service,
 however, more Pakistani male believes such facilities are vital in their
 decision-making process.

Table 10: Cross tabulation FAC 2
 Count
 FAC2
 Home Country Strongly Strongly Total
 Disagree Neutral Agree
 Agree Agree
Bangladesh Female 1 0 5 8 6 20
 Gender
 Male 0 1 2 4 6 13
 Total 1 1 7 12 12 33
India Gender Female 1 0 2 13 16

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 39

Salsabil Hossain

 Male 0 3 8 11 22
 Total 1 3 10 24 38
 Pakistan Female 1 1 7 9 30 48
 Gender
 Male 0 0 5 7 36 48
 Total 1 1 12 16 66 96
 Total Female 3 1 12 19 49 84
 Gender
 Male 0 1 10 19 53 83
 Total 3 2 22 38 102 167

 Private Accommodation Nearby (LOC 1): According to Table 11, 29
 Indians (76%), 68 Pakistanis (71%) and 17 Bangladeshis (52%) are strongly
 influenced by this attribute on their choice decision to determine the university.
 Indicating, they all prefer residing closer to campus. Additionally, while an equal
 number of Male-Female Indians have shown strong influence for closer private
 accommodation to the campus on their choice decision, both Pakistani and
 Bangladeshi males have responded favouring the nearest residence to campus
 than females.

Table 11: Cross tabulation: LOC 1
 Count
 LOC1
 Home Country Strongly Strongly Total
 Disagree Neutral Agree
 Disagree Agree
 Bangladesh Gender Female 1 6 6 7 20
 Male 0 0 3 10 13
 Total 1 6 9 17 33
 India Gender Female 1 0 1 14 16
 Male 0 2 5 15 22
 Total 1 2 6 29 38
 Pakistan Gender Female 1 2 4 9 32 48
 Male 0 1 2 9 36 48
 Total 1 3 6 18 68 96
 Total Gender Female 1 4 10 16 53 84
 Male 0 1 4 17 61 83
 Total 1 5 14 33 114 167

 40 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

 Living in Safe Area (LOC 2): Table 12 shows that 30 Indians (79%), 82
 Pakistanis (85%) and 27 Bangladeshis (81%) have responded that they strongly agree
 with living in a safe area, and it is a contributing factor while choosing a private
 university in Malaysia. According to gender, an equal proportion of Indian and
 Pakistani male-female students reacted strongly to LOC 2. In contrast, more
 Bangladeshi female international students expressed worry about their safety while
 attending a Malaysian private institution.

Table 12: Cross tabulation LOC 2
 Count
 FAC2
 Home Country Strongly Disagre Strongly Total
 Neutral Agree
 Agree e Agree
Bangladesh Female 2 1 17 20
 Gender
 Male 0 3 10 13
 Total 2 4 27 33
India Female 1 0 1 14 16
 Gender
 Male 0 2 4 16 22
 Total 1 2 5 30 38
Pakistan Female 1 1 2 3 41 48
 Gender
 Male 0 0 2 5 41 48
 Total 1 1 4 8 82 96
Total Female 2 1 4 5 72 84
 Gender
 Male 0 0 4 12 67 83
 Total 2 1 8 17 139 167
 The three target nationalities have distinct views and issues, according to
 the comparative study. For example, cost, clubs and societies, and residual
 location impact Indians. On the other hand, Pakistanis are more worried about
 cost, clubs and societies, career services, and campus security. Nevertheless,
 Bangladeshis see things differently than their neighbouring countries. They share
 worries about costs, and instead, they are most worried about campus safety.
 Comparing with other studies
 Gender
 Chloe (2019) found no significant differences in gender perspectives and
 concerns on the pull factors of Malaysian HEIs as an overseas study destination.
 However, in the current study, gender does have a significant and different effect
 on international students' choice decision on HEI pull factors. Studies (Ahmad
 and Buchanan, 2016; Lee et al., 2018; Ming et al., 2020; Migin et al., 2015; Singh,
 2016) on factors influencing international students' choice of private universities
 have not included gender as a significant factor. This study filled a gap in the
 literature by focusing on the increasing number of international students from
 three Southeast Asian emerging countries, and Table 13 shows the impact of
 gender on the significant pull factors of HEIs on their choice decision.

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 41

Salsabil Hossain

Table 13: Multi-ethnic comparisons of HEIs Pull factors influences on gender
 Pull factors
 Gender differences
 Significant heis attributes
 Strongly Agree

 COST COS 1 
 COS 2 
 FACILITIES FAC 1 ✗
 FAC 2 
 LOCATION LOC 1 
 LOC 2 
Note:
Significant Pull factors according to Table 13 (Difference & Similar ✗)

Ethnicity
Due to their growing enrolment in Malaysian HEIs, the three ethnicities are being
studied increasingly often. However, no academics have concentrated on them. For
example, Chloe (2019) received answers from 61 Bangladeshis, 11 Indians, 34
Pakistanis, and 56 other nationalities; Ahmad and Buchanan (2016) only received
responses from 2 Indians in a sample size of 24, and 4 Bangladeshis out of a planned
sample size of 48 (Lee et al., 2018). Despite their increasing enrolment, academics
have given these ethnicities a modest emphasis. This study filled a gap in the
literature by analysing the impact of HEI pull factors on their decision and focusing
on their preferences for the three races indicated in Table 14.
Table 14: Multi-ethnic comparisons of pull factors influences based on their preferences.
 Pull factors
 Bangladesh India Pakistan
 Significant HEIs attributes
 Strongly Agree
 COST COS 1 Program Fees and 3 1 2
 Payment
 COS 2 Accommodation and 3 1 2
 living
 FACILITIES FAC 1 Clubs and Societies 3 1 1
 FAC 2 Career 3 2 1
 Service
 LOCATION LOC 1 Nearby 3 1 2
 Accommodation
 LOC 2 Campus Safety 2 3 1
Note:
Significant Pull factors according to Table 7 and percentage from Table 8- 13
1- Most Influenced; 2- Moderately Influenced; 3- Least Influenced

42 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

6. CONCLUSION
In today’s world, higher education has relentlessly become a major part of all human
beings. Higher education does not only ensure their career growth but also builds
them as competent professional individuals. But the competitive business sector
which witnessed a substantial number of graduated students demands potential
candidates with good and reputed educational backgrounds. This change in norm
has extensively influenced students, affecting their choice decision to study abroad.
In this way, push-pull factors of the host country and higher education institutes
require to be more alluring for students to choose them among many other
alternatives. Malaysia, requires creating a more popular and alarming study
destination image. However, with the current Covid 19 situation and the decreasing
international student enrolment statistics, Malaysia requires to alternate its marketing
practices to attract more students. Considering this importance, the current study
aimed to determine the push-pull driving factors that prompted a significant
enrollment shift particularly from 3 developing Southeast nations who are more
willing to study abroad to pursue education in Malaysia. Three themes have been
identified in the study which is discussed based on their influence and relevance.
 The target respondents in the study acknowledged that motivational push and
pull factors are important determinants of their choice decision to study abroad
fulfilling the research objectives, RO2-R04. In the availability of many other study
destinations, students are favourably affected by Malaysia's as a host nation and
institutional characteristics but negatively influenced by third-party sources. It is
evident that the home country attributes of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan do not
directly influence the decision to study abroad, implying that the home countries’ do
have high educational infrastructure and facilities for higher education, they are
politically stable, and despite these favourable conditions, students still chose to
study overseas. Therefore, it is their choice and personal desire in choosing their
study destination rather than being compelled to.
 Moreover, the current study had looked at both push and pull variables
affecting IS's decision to study in Malaysia with the impact of third-party party
sources). Therefore, adding to the theoretical literature on international
students' choices by including push and pull incentive factors and third -party
sources in inclusion to gender and ethnicity. Gender and ethnicity, therefore,
influence the connection between the independent and dependent variables due
to their distinct preferences and desires for private HEIs in Malaysia. The study
illustrates the gender and ethnic disparities on the critical constructs of their
choosing decision.. In gender comparison, where the gender differences on
choice and importance of the significant HEIs attributes were found in five of
6 attributes, ethnicity comparison showed Indians who prefers affordable cost,
Pakistanis prefer attractive facilities provided by institution and Bangladeshi’s
look for campus safety. Evident that each ethnicity has concerns in variant

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 43

Salsabil Hossain

HEIs attributes. Managers need to understand the difference between these
differences and strategize marketing tools as per the influencing attributes. Such
accurate and focused marketing campaigns would help marketers, recruite rs,
and managers in Malaysian HEIs to attract more students from these nations,
thus increasing enrolment statistics which would eventually help to gain the lost
Global ranking position. Therefore, this article fills gaps in the literature with
the new edition of elements in the push-pull motivation concept.
 However, there are certain limitations to the article. The cluster sampling
technique used in the study has its own biases, as the number of students from
these clusters is susceptible to change every semester, and the findings from the
clusters relate to the specific nations specified in the study but not to other
countries. The present study is limited to 3 neighbouring countries only; future
research papers on other countries, including Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and the
Maldives, can be included in the target respondents for a broader sample
demographic profile. Again, the paper only focuses on the ‘push-pull’
motivation theory. However, other important variables such as thoughts,
perception, and attitude as push factors might also significantly influence
students’ choice decisions, which can be researched in the future. It might not
be sufficient to study the influence of external environments such as host
country, HEIs and third-party sources on IS choice decisions, but
understanding the other internal factors of an individual’s characteristics via
perception and attitude will provide better insight into future studies.

Acknowledgement
The author would like to express her heartfelt gratitude to the following individuals
for their assistance in completing the research paper. To begin, thanks to Dr. Nurlida
Ismail, the project supervisor at Taylor's University, who has been very
communicative, dedicated, and helpful in teaching and guiding on drafting the
research project, data collection, and data analysis, the completion of this case study
has been possible. Prof. Dr Jayaraman Krishnaswamy for his consistent and
suggestive motivation, feedback, and direction. Finally, the author would like to
express her heartfelt gratitude to her family and friends for their unending support
and all the respondents who voluntarily participated in the study.

References
Ahmad, S. Z. & Buchanan, F. R. (2016). Choices of destination for transnational
 higher education: “pull” factors in an Asia Pacific market. Educational Studies,
 42(2), 163-180.

44 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

Alfred, K. K. (2019). Pull-push factors and international students’ experiences in Uganda: A
 case of two universities. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Pretoria,
 South Africa.
Amaro, D. M., Marques, A. M. A., & Alves, H. (2019). The impact of choice factors
 on international students’ loyalty mediated by satisfaction. International Review
 on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 16(2), 211-233.
Americanos, A. (2011). Factors influencing international students’ decisions in choosing a
 Cyprus Higher Education Institution : Implications for recruitment and marketing. Ph.D.
 Thesis, Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom.
Arokiasamy, A.R.A. (2010). The impact of globalization on higher education in
 Malaysia. ERIC Clearinghouse, 13 pages.
Basha, N.K., Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2016). International students’
 university preferences: How different are Malaysian and Chinese students? In
 International Journal of Educational Management, 30(2), 197-210.
Beneke, J., & Human, G. (2010). Student recruitment marketing in South Africa -
 An exploratory study into the adoption of a relationship orientation. African
 Journal of Business Management, 4(4), 435-447.
Bodycott, P., & Lai, A. (2012). The influence and implications of chinese culture in
 the decision to undertake cross-border higher education. Journal of Studies in
 International Education, 16(3), 252-270
Calitz, A. P., Cullen, M. D. M., & Jooste, C. (2019). The influence of safety and
 security on students’ choice of University in South Africa. Journal of Studies in
 International Education, 24(2), 269-28.
Chloe, T. W. S. (2019). Investigating key factors influencing international students’ choice of
 private Higher Education Institutions (HEIs ) in Malaysia. Degree Thesis, Victory
 University Business School, Melbourne, Australia.
Cubillo, J. M., Sánchez, J., & Cervio, J. (2006). International students’ decision-
 making process. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(2), 101-115.
Dowling-Hetherington, L. (2019). Transnational higher education and the factors
 influencing student decision-making: The Experience of an Irish University:
 Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(3), 291-31.
Dowling-Hetherington, L. (2019). Transnational higher education and the factors
 influencing student decision-making: The Experience of an Irish University:
 Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(3), 291-31.
Education Malaysia Global Services. (2021). Malaysia higher education in brief.
 Education Malaysia global services. Retrieved 19, August, 2020) from

Salsabil Hossain

Jamshidi, L., Arasteh, H., NavehEbrahim, A., Zeinabadi, H., & Rasmussen, P. D.
 (2012). Developmental patterns of privatization in higher education: a
 comparative study. Higher Education, 64(6), 789-803.
Kazemi, A., Baghbanian, A., Maymand, M. M., & Rahmani, H. (2018). Contributing
 factors to migration growth among Iranian students: Drivers of migration to
 Malaysia. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 19(3), 757-770.
Lam, J. M. S., Ariffin, A. A. M., & Ahmad, H. J. A. (2011). Edutourism: Exploring
 the push-pull factors in selecting a university. International Journal of Business and
 Society, 12(1), 63-78.
Lee, A. K. K. (2015). Revealing the unspoken: Malaysian students’ intrinsic influences in
 selecting the UK for higher education migration. Ph.D. Thesis, University of
 Hertfordshire, United Kingdom.
Lee, S., Nguyen, H. N., Lee, K. -S., Chua, B. -L., & Han, H. (2018). Price, people,
 location, culture and reputation: determinants of Malaysia as study destination
 by international hospitality and tourism undergraduates. Journal of Tourism and
 Cultural Change, 16(4), 335-347.
Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). ‘Push-pull’ factors influencing international
 student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2),
 82-90.
McMahon, M.E. (1992). Higher education in a world market. Higher Education, 24(4),
 465-482.
Migin, M. W., Falahat, M., Yajid, M. S. A., & Khatibi, A. (2015). Impacts of
 institutional characteristics on international students’ choice of private higher
 education institutions in Malaysia. Higher Education Studies, 5(1), 31-42.
Ming, X. P., Azam, S. M. F., Haur, F. C., & Khatibi, A. (2020). Aspects of Chinese
 Undergraduate Students in Malaysia : An Empirical Study. European Journal of
 Human Resource Management Studies, 4(1), 106-117.
Moogan, Y. J., & Baron, S. (2010). An analysis of student characteristics within the
 student decision making process. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 27(3),
 271-287.
Moreira, L., & Gomes, R. M. (2019). Study abroad: The influence of city and
 university attractiveness factors. European Journal of Tourism Research, 22, 79-93.
Mucsi, A., Malota, E., & Török, A. (2019). International student motivations and
 satisfaction with the study abroad program. Proceedings of the 11th International
 Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Palma, Spain.
Mun, Y. W., Aziz, Y. A., & Bojei, J. (2018). Preliminary study of international
 students in malaysia on perceived university and destination image towards
 intention to recommend. Journal of Research in Business, Economics and Management,
 10(5), 2078-2091.
New Age. (2020). Bangladeshi students heading for univs abroad on rise. Retrieved
 on 13 September, 2020 from https://www.newagebd.net/article/49482/
 bangladeshi-students-heading-for-univs-abroad-on-rise>.

46 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022

Determinants Influencing International Students
 from Emerging Countries to Pursue Higher Education in Malaysia

Nghia, T. L. H. (2019). Motivations for studying abroad and immigration intentions.
 Journal of International Students, 9(3), 758-776.
Pawar, S. K., Dasgupta, H., & Vispute, S. (2019). Analysis of factors influencing
 international student destination choice: a case of Indian HE. Journal of Further
 and Higher Education, 44(10), 1388-1400.
Ravenstein, E.G., (1889). The laws of migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,
 52(2), 241-305.
Rekhter, N., & Hossler, D. (2019). Place, prestige, price, and promotion: how
 international students use social networks to learn about universities abroad.
 The Journal of Social Media in Society, 8(1), 124-145.
Sarjit, K., Morshidi, S., & Norzaini, A. (2007). Globalization and internationalization
 of higher education in Malaysia. Penang, Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Sains
 Malaysia and National Higher Education Research Institute.
Sharma, Y. (2020). Private universities at risk as foreign students stay away. Retrieved
 on 18 June, 2021 from https://www.universityworldnews.com/
 post.php?story=2020120216283461.
Singh, J. K. N., & Jack, G. (2018). The benefits of overseas study for international
 postgraduate students in Malaysia. Higher Education, 75(4), 607-624.
Singh, M. K. M. (2016). Socio-economic, environmental and personal factors in the
 choice of country and higher education institution for studying abroad among
 international students in Malaysia. International Journal of Educational Management,
 30(4), 505-519.
Study International. (2018). Which country is home to the largest international
 student population? Retrieved on 13 September, 2020 from https://www.
 studyinternational.com/news/country-home-largest-international-student-
 population/.
Statista. (2017). Malaysia: International Students in Malaysia 2017. Statista. Retrieved
 on 13 September, 2020 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/
 866731/international-students-in-malaysia-by-country-of-origin/.
Stehman, S. V. (1996). Estimating the kappa coefficient and its variance under
 stratified random sampling. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 62(4),
 401-407.
Tavakol, M. and Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International
 Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55.
The Pie News. (2019). Malaysia to recalibrate strategy as 200K int'l student target by
 2020 looks unlikely. Retrieved on (19, August, 2020) from
 https://thepienews.com/news/malaysia-to-recalibrate-strategy-as-200000-
 target-looks-out-of-reach/.
The Star. (2015). Malaysia ranked as world's ninth most-desired destination for
 further studies. Retrieved on 13 September, 2020 from
 https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2015/02/14/msia-rank-9-edu/>.

 Taylor’s Business Review, Vol. 10 Issue 2, February 2022 47