Immigrants in higher education.
Factors determining study choices and success for first
year immigrant students
Promoters
M. Lacante, R. Van Esbroeck, W. Lens, M. De Metsenaere
researchers
M. Almaci, M. De Schryver
1
Research purposes (1)
 Problem:
transfer from secondary to higher education and success rate of
immigrant students in H.E. is problematic
 Tinto model (1993):





Social and family background (SES,…)
Personal characteristics: skills and potential (cognitive,
motivational, affective variables)
Earlier schooling
Process of choice
Academic and social integration
2
Research purposes (2)




Participation of immigants in HE
Educational career in SE and HE of immigrants
Assess socio-economic profile of immigrants
Personality characteristics and background factors of
immigrants in HE
 Career choice process and motivation in final year SE
 Process of integration in HE
 Assess presence of risk factors
 Profile of academic success and failure in HE
3
Research methodology:
identification of immigrants
 Based on





Nationality
Place of birth
Family name
Secondary education in Belgium
Efficient in the case of non-European immigrants (error
margin of 14%)
4
Research methodology:
Analysis of existing data banks
 Loso-database: longitudinal research - started in 1989
 Drop out-database: 1999-2000
 SOHO-database: career choice development profiles in SE
(2003-2004)
5
Research methodology:
New research (2004-2005) (1)
 4 universities – 3 institutions of HE (professional colleges)
 Extra group of students from SOHO-project
Etnicity
SOHO
New research
Total
Indigenous
1.019
/
1.019
Immigrant-neighbouring
countries
124
95
219
Immigrant-European
countries
33
166
199
TMA immigrant
46
322
368
rest
26
162
188
6
Research methodology:
New research (2004-2005) (2)
 974 immigrant students = 5.8% of intake
 Proportion varies from one institution to another:
 proportion of immigrants higher in professional colleges (7.2% - 12.3%)
 proportion at universities between 3.3% and 14%
 Association Brussels has highest number of immigrant
VUB 14% / EHB 12.3%.
 ethnic composition varies from one institution to another :
 proportion of TMA-students
 EHB 55.2% and VUB 55.5%
 other professional colleges: 51.8% - 56.1%
 other universities: 18.3% - 36.4%
7
Results (1)
First year students HE: ethnicity by SES
SES
Indigen
ous
Neighb.
Ethnicity
immigrant
Europe
TMA
Total
Rest
Lower SE
95
9.7%
6
3.3%
18
11.7%
157
56.5%
24
16%
300
17.2%
Higher SE
258
26.4%
39
21.5%
56
36.4%
78
28.1%
37
24.7%
468
26.9%
HE
625
63.9%
136
75.1%
80
51.9%
43
15.5%
89
59.3%
973
55.9%
Total
978
100%
181
100%
154
100%
278
100%
150
100%
1741
100%
8
Results (2)
Study choice
 TMA-students opt more to go to university
 Preference for Economics, law, psychology…
Max.
lower SE
Max.
higher SE
Max HE
Total
Type HE
University
Prof. Coll
N
%
N
%
N
%
Indigenous
23
27.7
60
72.3
83
100
TMA
68
53.1
60
46.9
128
100
Total
Indigenous
91
62
43.1
27.6
120
163
56.9
72.4
211
225
100
100
TMA
40
58.8
28
41.2
68
100
Total
102
34.8
191
65.2
293
100
Indigenous
262
47.9
285
52.1
547
100
TMA
33
89.2
4
10.8
37
100
Total
295
50.5
289
49.5
584
100
Indigenous
347
40.6
508
59.4
855
100
TMA
141
60.5
92
39.5
233
100
Total
488
44.9
600
55.1
1088
100
Total
9
Results (3)
Academic success
 average success rate: one quarter of immigrant students against one half of
indigenous students
 TMA-students: 19.4% success rate
Ethnicity
Immigrant
Indigen
Acad. Result
ous
Neighb.
Europe
TMA
Rest
Total
Passed
453
58
57
68
49
685
56.1%
34.3%
31.3%
19.4%
28.2%
40.7%
176
58
57
124
74
489
21.8%
34.3%
31.3%
35.3%
42.5%
29%
179
53
68
159
51
510
22.2%
31.4%
37.4%
45.3%
29.3%
30.3%
806
169
182
351
174
1684
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Failed
Dropout
Total
10
Low success rate is resulting from





Combination of factors
Family and background (SES, …)
Skills and potential
Process of choice
Academic and social integration
11
Results (4)
Background factors
 SES and ethnic identity
 TMA students:
- low SES
- high unemployment rate (SE: 76,4 % fathers unemployed)

SES and ‘objective’ ethnicity:
- both predictive of educational results
- interchangeable

Within immigrant group: SES not related to educational results
Within indigenous group: SES correlates with educ. results

12
Results (5)
Background factors
 Study success by ethnicity and SES
Ethnicity
Indigenous
Academ. result
Passed
lower
higher
higher
lower
higher
higher
SE
Se
educ.
SE
SE
educ.
102
306
50%
61.1%
31
43.7%
Failed
14
19.7%
Dropout
Total
TMA - immigrants
26
54
26.5%
48
104
20.8%
91
36
15
7
20%
17.5%
25
13
29.9%
33.3%
32.5%
67
35
20
24.5%
44
36.6%
23.5%
18.2%
45.6%
46.7%
50%
71
204
501
147
75
40
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
13
Results (6)
Skills and potential
 Type secundary education and school career are significant
predictors of HE results
Ethnicity
Indigen
Immigrant
Type SE
ous
Neighb.
EU
TMA
Rest
Total
General
648
154
139
171
132
1244
63.3%
71%
70.2%
46.5%
71%
62.6%
371
61
54
141
48
675
36.4%
28.1%
27.3%
38.3%
25.8%
34%
0
2
5
56
6
69
0%
0.9%
2.5%
15.2%
3.2%
3.5%
1019
217
198
368
186
1988
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Technical
Professional
Total
14
Results (7)
Skills and potential
Ethnicity
Gen SE
Indigenous
Immigrant
neighb.
Immigrant
Europe
Immigrant
TMA
Type SE
Techn SE
on schedule
569
89.6%
222
60.5%
Prof
SE
/
/
Tot.
delayed
66
10.4%
145
39.5%
/
/
211
21.1%
on schedule
45
60.8%
4
12.9%
2
100%
51
47.7%
delayed
29
39.2%
27
87.1%
0
0%
56
52.3%
on schedule
86
81.1%
10
28.6%
1
33.3%
97
67.4%
delayed
20
18.9%
25
71.4%
2
66.7%
47
32.6%
on schedule
83
61%
28
29.8%
13
40.6%
124
47.3%
53
39%
66
70.2%
19
59.4%
138
52.7%
15
46.9%
1
33.3%
88
61.5%
17
53.1%
2
66.7%
55
38.5%
791
78.9%
Delayed school career
54.9% of immigrant students
entered HE at the usual time
↕
79% of indigenous students
delayed
Immigrant
Rest
on schedule 72
66.7%
delayed
36
33.3%
15
Results (8)
Skills and potential
 Cognitive skills
 Cognitive tests beginning SE: TMA-students scored lower on
 Verbal
 Numerical
 Spatial

Language (HE):
 Dutch as first language:
 another first language:
36 % success rate
22 % success rate
16
Results (9)
Skills and potential
 Learning skills and attitudes

Start SE:




No difference in motivation or interest in learning tasks
Less effort for learning
Less positive attitude to homework
HE:





Underestimate importance of effort
Spend less time on studies
Attend classes less
Prepared to undertake self-assessment
Lack of appropriate test strategies
17
Recommendations (1)
 Language





First language development often at lower level
(cf. limited economic and cultural capital)
Priority attention
Standards at every level of education
Special projects:Tandem project; remedial language courses
(ATHOS)
credits
 Cognitive skills

Flexible learning paths in SE and HE
18
Recommendations (2)
 Learning skills and attitudes



To improve attitudes to homework and effort
Different educational and organisational approach in HE
Information and training in current test strategies
19
Results: Process of choice
 Unique importance
 TMA-students
 Gather less information
 Fewer activities to support their choice
 More doubts in environment
 Positive view of own SE results
 Reject advice of others


Reasons for choice more material and extrincic
Less satisfied with choices - more doubts – less
identifciation with chosen option
20
Recommendations:
Process of choice (1)
 Raising awareness of study choices in third grade
 Broad exploration of study and career options
 Realistic assessment of students’ own profile
 Creation of a study choice file
21
Recommendations:
Process of choice (2)
 Importance of role models
 Use a buddy system

HE students
 Involvement of parents and social environment



Recognise importance of reality testing
Accept professional support
Learn about HE system
 Role of civil society (parents’ evenings)
22
Results:
Academic and social integration
 No significant differences regarding well-being and relations with
teaching staff.
 TMA students identified more strongly with ‘own’ ethnic
background
 Positive relationship with other groups
 Subjective ethnic identity and study success:
 Belgians = 35%
 TMA = 21%
23
Recommendations:
Academic and social integration
 Offere extra curricular career choice activities
 Strenghtening cross cultural group activities
 SE: within class activities
 HE: BRUTUS project
24
General conclusion
 A large number of mutually intertwined factors account
for lower success rate
 ‘Static’ factors (social background) are related to
remediable factors (skills, attitudes, process of choice…)
 Interventions may bring about changes
25
Concluding comments
TMA-students are
 Ambitious




they aim high
stay longer in HE
are prepared to continue
Persistent


Remain longer in SE and HO
Intend to continue the chosen HE educational program even after
failure
26