Study choice is not a one-time event, rather it is an ongoing process. Adolescents are usually involved in a study choice process before they enter higher education. However, this choice is often not final because once in the first year, students experience the programme in real-life, which allows them to make a well-informed and more definitive decision to continue or to switch to another programme (Prins, 1998). So, after enrolment, the study choice process continues. Despite the extensive research on study decisions before enrolment in higher education, detailed insights into how freshmen make their definitive decision remains an under-researched area.

Building on theories of identity formation, which underline that study choices are part of a lifelong search for who you are and who you want to become (Bosma & Kunnen, 2001; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2006a, 2006b, 2007; Van Esbroeck et al. 2005), this research focuses on the study choice process of first-year students. Study choice processes can characterized by orientation, exploration, and commitment (Germeijs & Verschueren, 2006). Orientation involves the awareness of the necessity to make a choice and the motivation to engage with it, while exploration includes self-exploration as well as broad and in-depth exploration of the environment. Commitment refers to selecting the most suitable option. This choice may change through further exploration, a process known as reconsideration of commitment (Crocetti et al., 2008). These decisional tasks are dynamic and can occur in different sequences (Van Esbroeck et al., 2005). In line with Tinto's theory on dropout (1993), we assume in this study that choices are formed as a result of an interaction between student-related and school-related factors, which leads to academic and social integration and a choice or decision to stay or leave. Empirical evidence (Robbins et al., 2005) demonstrates that motivation and self-efficacy also influence decision-making. Consistent with Tinto, Prins (1997) identified school-related factors that play a role. Additionally, the quality of the pre-enrollment study choice has an impact (Meens, 2018). This leads us to a theoretical model with the study choice process as the dependent variable and quality of study choice before enrollment, school-related and student-related factors as the independent variables.  

Our central research question is: what characterizes the study choice process of first-year students, and how are pre-enrollment study choice, student-related factors, and school-related factors associated with this process. In January 2023, we collected our data by means of questionnaires that were administered to 300 first-year students from five bachelor's programs at a Dutch university of applied sciences. Data will be used to explore our research question and to test our theoretical model by applying Structural Equation Modeling. Data-analysis is halfway at the moment of submission of this paper. During the paper presentation, we will share the results of our data -analysis, i.e. how our data fit our theoretical model and what the scientific implications and implications for practice are.

All instruments used are valid and reliable instruments. The study choice process was indexed by 5 subscales from the Shortened Study Choice Task Inventory (SSCTI) (Germeijs & Verschueren, 2006; Demulder, 2019), comprising 30 items in total on a 5-point Likert scale. The subscales measure decisional tasks in the choice process: (1) orientation, i.e. (2) self-exploration (3) exploration in-depth (4) broad exploration (5) commitment. In our sample, all subscales displayed satisfactory reliability (Cronbach's α 0.75 - 0.84). Pre-enrolment study choice, i.e. exploration and motivation before enrolment was indexed by respectively the subscale Broad Exploration from the SSCTI and the motivation (perceived fit) scale from the Annual Dutch Monitor Policy Measures in Higher Education (ADMPMHE, ResearchNed, 2020). In our sample, these scales displayed satisfactory reliability, with Cronbach's α of 0.86 and 0.75 respectively. School-related factors were measured with a questionnaire developed by (Prins (1998). We distinguished between the subscales curriculum factors, guidance factors and study feasibility factors. In our sample, the reliability of the curriculum subscale was satisfactory (0.77) whereas the reliability of the guidance subscale was fairly low but acceptable: Cronbach's α of 0.66. We elimated the study feasibility subscale, which consisted of two items and revealed a very low Cronbach's α (0.26). Student-related factors. (1) Motivation (perceived fit) in the first year was indexed by the motivation scale from the ADMPMHE (ResearchNed, 2020). In our sample, this scale displayed good reliability (Cronbach's α of 0.89). (2) Self-efficacy was indexed by the General Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (GASE, Vanzyl et al., 2022). Cronbach’s α in our sample was below the threshold of satisfactory (0.69). Despite this, we retained the subscale given its adequate reliability of 0.74 – 0.78 in the initial validation study (Vanzyl et al., 2022). (3) Academic Integration and (4) social integration were indexed by the scale used in the German National Education Panel Study (NEPS, Reschet et al., 2021). In our sample Cronbach’s α were 0.76 and 0.81 respectively. We inspected descriptive statistics and graphs to identify violations of assumptions (i.e., normality, linearity) for each variable. Missing data were estimated using full information maximum likelihood. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to validate the measurement models of the latent constructs. This process allows us to assess whether the items adequately corresponded to the intended latent variables and whether the measurement models demonstrated a good fit with the data. After the CFA, a SEM will be performed in R (Lavaan).

Our research results show that first-year students are continuing their study decision-process after enrollment. We will use our data to further develop our theoretical model into a data-informed model that will enable us to come to a better understanding on how the various tasks in students’ decision-making process are influenced by student-related and school-related factors. Furthermore, we will elaborate on the practical implications of our research: now that we know that first-year students are in a decision-making process and in addition, how school-related and student-related factors play a role, in what way can bachelor programmes in higher professional education support students in making a well-informed choice on if and how to continue their studies?

Bosma, H. A., & Kunnen, E. S. (2001). Determinants and mechanisms in ego identity development: A review and synthesis. Developmental review, 21(1), 39-66. Crocetti, E. ; Rubini, M. ; Meeus, W. Capturing the dynamics of identity formation in various ethnic groups: Development and validation of a three-dimensional model. Journal of adolescence, 2008, 31.2: 207-222. Germeijs, V., & Verschueren, K., (2006) High School Students’ Career Decision-Making Process: Development and Validation of the Study Choice Task Inventory. Journal of career assessment, Vol. 14 No. 4, ; 449–471 Meens, E. E., Bakx, A. W., Klimstra, T. A., & Denissen, J. J. (2018). The association of identity and motivation with students' academic achievement in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 64, 54-70. Prins, J. B. A. (1997). Studieuitval in het wetenschappelijk onderwijs: Studentkenmerken en opleidingskenmerken als verklaring voor studieuitval. Nijmegen University Press Broek, A. van den, Termorshuizen, T., Cuppen, J. & Warps, J. (2021), Monitor beleidsmaatregelen hoger onderwijs 2020-2021. Nijmegen: ResearchNed. Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 130(2), 261. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Second Edition. University of Chicago Press. Van Esbroeck, R., Tibos, K., & Zaman, M. (2005). A dynamic model of career choice development. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 5, 5–18. Van Zyl, L. E., Klibert, J., Shankland, R., See-To, E. W., & Rothmann, S. (2022). The general academic self-efficacy scale: psychometric properties, longitudinal invariance, and criterion validity. Journal of psychoeducational assessment, 40(6), 777-789.