Internationalization has become one of the important agendas for countries, higher education institutions, and university students due to global systems which transformed higher education into a more cooperative as well as competitive context.  This research investigates the perceptions, expectations, and push-pull factors of higher education students about studying abroad. 

Internationalization in universities is performed in various forms, such as branch campuses and joint degree programs, yet student mobility is the most well-known form (Van Damme, 2001). Despite the discussions on the inclusiveness of physical mobility (De Wit & Jones, 2018; Van Mol & Perez-Encinas, 2022); according to OECD (2021) data, international student mobility has been expanding quite steadily in the last 20 years. In 2019, 6.1 million higher education students worldwide went to study in another country, more than double the number of mobility that took place in 2007. In other words, the number of international students in higher education increased by an average of 5.5% per year between 1998 and 2019. Parallel to these developments, there is an increasing demand by higher education students in Türkiye to study abroad.

The push-pull theory was chosen as the conceptual framework for this study which was adapted from migration theories (Li & Bray, 2007; Lee 2014, McMahon 1992) and became important and frequently used to analyze international student mobility (Almeida, 2020). In the relevant literature, push factors are associated with negative conditions in the student's home country, while pull factors are related to positive aspects in the country of destination (Altbach 1998).

There are various studies in the literature that analyze student mobility using the push-pull theory. Most studies in the literature (Chen, 2017; Eder, Smith & Pitts, 2010; Gbollie & Gong, 2019; Kondakcı, 2011; Kondakci et al., 2016; Lee & Stewart, 2022; Maringe & Carter, 2007; Özoğlu et.al., 2015; Wen & Hu, 2019) were carried out with incoming international students. Yet, relatively fewer studies (e.g. Nghia, 2019) used the framework of the push-pull theory to analyze the perceptions of outgoing students. In addition, as stated by Lee and Stewart (2022), studies using push-pull theories were conducted mostly with degree-seeking students performing long-term mobility rather than exchange students’ experience in short-term mobility. 

In other words, more studies are needed to be conducted with outgoing and also short-term mobility students. Moreover, there is especially a lack of studies investigating the opinions and perceptions of possible future outgoing students. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the perceptions of first-year bachelor’s degree students about studying abroad and their opinions on participating in international student mobility. The study uses the push-pull theory as a conceptual framework to understand possible push factors related to Türkiye and possible pull factors of other countries.

This qualitative exploratory study is conducted with 12 university first-year students. Phenomenology is the research method used in this study to explore the socially constructed perceptions and experiences of a homogeneous group of participants about a phenomenon (Creswell, 2013; Patton, 2002). Before starting the study, ethical approval was obtained from the relevant commission of the university where the study was conducted. The study's data were collected in October 2022 at a state university in Ankara with a purposive sampling method from first-year bachelor’s degree students. The main research question of the study is “What are the perceptions and expectations of Turkish students about studying abroad as well as the possible push and pull factors?”. To answer this research question, the authors formed interview questions using the existing literature. Also, an expert on internationalization in higher education was consulted while forming the questions. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the participants. Interviews lasted 20-30 minutes and were recorded with the permission of the participants. Then, the data were kept anonymous by giving a number to each student during the analysis. Open coding and constant comparison methods were used to analyze the data. In addition to demographic questions, there were interview questions such as the meaning of studying abroad at the university for them, how much they are aware of the possibilities of studying abroad, their plans to study and/or live abroad, the countries they will prefer to study abroad, and their views on virtual mobility. In addition, students were asked about the academic, economic, political, and socio-cultural benefits and difficulties of a possible study abroad. The sample consists of eight female and four male students (n = 12). While five of the participants graduated from private high schools, seven of them graduated from public schools. The participants defined themselves as middle-upper (n=1), middle (n=8), lower-middle (n=1), and lower (n=1) socio-economically. When the participants were asked about their foreign language skills, the majority of the students (n=10) stated that they were working on learning a language besides English. Five students had the experience of studying abroad, while the rest had never been abroad before. In addition, two of those who went abroad were abroad for education and travel, while three people visited different countries for travel purposes.

The results were categorized under four themes as the participants’ general knowledge and perceptions about having experience abroad, the push and pull factors of studying abroad, and lastly, possible reservations and challenges they would encounter while studying abroad. Regarding the first theme, most participants have an interest in short-term and/or long-term mobility for academic and educational purposes. All students asserted that physical mobility is their first choice for education abroad compared to a virtual one. The second theme revealed the push factors associated with negative views of studying in Türkiye. The students have the impression that studying abroad would bring many opportunities and benefits for the students’ economic, social, and cultural capital that they could not have reached if they had studied in Türkiye, such as better employment opportunities, being exposed to a foreign language, personal development etc. The third theme is related to the pull factors that are shaped by the country that students want to visit. These factors are experiencing new social and cultural contexts, job and scholarship opportunities in the host countries, and the positive contributions of studying abroad to students’ careers. The last theme is about possible challenges and was analyzed using academic (e.g. differences in educational systems, language barriers), economic (e.g., lack of savings or fluctuating exchange rates), political (e.g., visa), and socio-cultural (e.g., facing racism, discrimination or bullying, and struggles in cultural adaptation) typology developed by Knight (1999). Overall results showed that Turkish first-year students have plans to study abroad during their university education; however, they have some hesitations due to the stereotypical problems of international students. Moreover, the host countries' pull factors are more prevalent than push factors related to the home country, i.e., Türkiye.

Almeida, J. (2020). Understanding student mobility in Europe: An interdisciplinary approach (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315098265 Altbach, P. G. (1998). The university as center and periphery. Comparative higher education: Knowledge, the university and development. Ed. Philip G. Altbach. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Center, The University of Hong Kong. 49-65. Chen, J. M. (2016). Three levels of push-pull dynamics among Chinese international students’ decision to study abroad in the Canadian context. Journal of International Students, 7(1), 113-135. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage. de Wit, H., & Jones, E. (2018). Inclusive internationalization: Improving access and equity. International Higher Education, 94, 16-18. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2018.0.10561 Kondakci, Y. (2011). Student mobility reviewed: Attraction and satisfaction of international students in Turkey. High Education 62, 573–592 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9406-2 Kondakci, Y., Caliskan, O., Bulut-Sahin, B., Yilik, M. A., & Demir, C. E. (2016). Regional internationalization in higher education between Turkey and the Balkans. Bilig, 78, 287–303 Lee, K., & Stewart, W. H. (2022). Destination, experience, social network, and institution: Exploring four academic exchange pull factor dimensions at a university in the Republic of Korea. Journal of International Students, 12(4). Li, M. & Bray, M. (2007). Cross-border flow of students for higher education: push-pull factors and motivations of mainland Chinese students in Hong Kong and Macau. Higher Education, 53: 791-818. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push‐pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210418403 McMahon, M. E. (1992). Higher education in a world market: An historical look at the global context of international study. Higher Education 24: 465-482. Nghia, T. L. H. (2019). Motivations for studying abroad and immigration intentions: The case of Vietnamese students. Journal of International Students, 9, 758–776. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v0i0.731 OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2021). See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes, https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/EAG2021_Annex3_ChapterB.pdf. Özoğlu, M., Gür, B. S., & Coşkun, İ. (2012). Küresel eğilimler ışığında Türkiye’de uluslararası öğrenciler. Ankara: SETA. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage. Van Mol, C. & Perez-Encinas, A. (2022) Inclusive internationalization: do different (social) groups of students need different internationalization activities?, Studies in Higher Education, 47:12, 2523-2538, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2022.2083102 Van Damme, D. (2001). Quality issues in the internationalization of higher education. Higher Education, 41, 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017598422297