Examining the Important Values for Students’ Parents Regarding the Educational Services Received by Their Children

Document Type : Multi methods

Authors

1 Department of Education and Psychology, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Finance Science School, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is identification of factors which have significant effects on the perceived value of educational services by students’ parents in Iran educational system. Furthermore, we explore the role these factor play on the evaluation of educational services by parents. The statistical population of this study includes the parents of students of all secondary private schools in Tehran at the year 2021 and 800 parents were selected using random sampling. The research tool is a questionnaire with 62 statements which were identified using interviews by experts. We collected 300 questionnaires after calculating validity and reliability. We used Principal Components Analysis (PCA) in order to extract factors with highest degree of determining power. Using four identified principal components, we run a linear regression for testing the significance of these factors. Our results show that all of four factors i.e. functional, social, emotional and epistemic value have significant impact on the perceived values by parents in Iran educational system.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Abbaspour, A., Karimi Dasgerdi, A., Niknami, M., & Delavar, A. (2024). The Effect of Authentic Leadership Style on the Performance of School Principals. School Administration, 12(1), 61-80.

    Adie, L., Addison, B., & Lingard, B. (2021). Assessment and learning: An in-depth analysis of change in one school’s assessment culture. Oxford Review of Education, 47(3), 404-422

    Atjonen, P. (2014). Teachers’ views of their assessment practice. Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 238-259.

    Beavis, A. (2004). Why parents choose public or private schools. Research Developments, 12(12), 3.

    Burgess, S., Greaves, E., Vignoles, A., & Wilson, D. (2014). What parents Want: School preferences and school choice. Econ. 125, 1262–1289.

    Chen, A. W., & Chen, H. (2021). Pricing of higher education: The case of top-ranked MBA programs. Economics and Business Letters, 10(3), 310-318.

    Cullen J. B., et al, (2003), The Effect of School Choice on Student Outcomes: Evidence from Randomized Lotteries, National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. 10113,

    1. Currin, S., Schroeder, T., & McCardle (2019). What about race? Internalised dominance in the Opt out Florida movement. Whiteness and Education, 4 (2), pp. 199-217.

    Figlio D. N., & Stone J. A., (1997), School Choice and Student Performance: Are Private Schools Really Better?, Institute for Research on Poverty, September 1997, Discussion Paper No. 1141-97.

    Gulicheva, E. (2017). Program-target method of pricing for international educational services. In Program-target method of pricing for international educational services: Gulicheva, Elena.

    Hannaford, W., Erffmeyer, R., & Tomkovick, C. (2005). Assessing the value of an undergraduate marketing technology course: What do educators think? Marketing Education Review, 15(1), 67–76.

    Kelly, Anthony. "The intellectual capital of schools: Analysing government policy statements on school improvement in light of a new theorization." Journal of Education Policy 19.5 (2004): 609-629.

    Kelly, J., & Scafidi, B. (2013). More than scores: An analysis of why and how parents choose private schools. The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.

    Lai, L. S. L., To, W. M., Lung, J. W. Y., & Lai, T. M. (2012). The perceived value of higher education: the voice of Chinese students. High Educ, 63:271–287.

     Lauen D. L., (2009), To Choose or Not To Choose: High School Choice and Graduation in Chicago, Pro Quest Education Journals, September 2009, pg. 179-199.

    LeBlanc, G., & Nguyen, N. (1999). Listening to the customer’s voice: Examining perceived service value among business college students. International Journal of Education Management, 13(4), 187–198.

    Ledden, L., Kalafatis, S. P., & Samouel, P. (2007). The relationship between personal values and perceived value of education. Journal of Business Research, 60(9), 965–97.

    Lovelock, C. H. (1983). Classifying services to gain strategic marketing insights. Journal of Marketing, 47(3), 9–20.

    Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. O’Connor, Daniello, 2019. M. O’Connor, F. Daniello. From implication to naming: Reconceptualizing school–community partnership. Literature using a framework nested in social justice. School Community .pp. 297-316.

    Rabovsky T., (2011), Deconstructing School Choice: Problem Schools or Problem Students? Pro Quest Education Journals, Vol. 71, No. 1, pg. 87-95.

    Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991a). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170.

    Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991b). Consumption values and market choices: Theory and applications. Cincinnati: South Western.

    Simmons, J. M. (1997). Marketing higher education: Applying a consumption value model to college choice. PhD dissertation, Marquette University, Australia.

    Singleton-Jackson, J. A., Jackson, D. L., & Reinhardt, J. (2010). Students as consumers of knowledge: Are they buying what we’re selling? Innovative Higher Education, 35(5), 343–358.

    Stafford, T. S. (1994). Consumption values and the choice of marketing electives: treating students like customers. Journal of Marketing Education, 16(summer), 26–33.

    Teske, P., & Schneider, M. (2001). What research can tell policymakers about school choice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), 609–631.

    Trivitt, J., & Wolf, P. (2011). School choice and the branding of Catholic schools. Education Finance and Policy, 6(2), 202–245.

    Wong, H. M., Kwek, D., & Tan, K. (2020). Changing assessments and the examination culture in Singapore: A review and analysis of Singapore’s assessment policies. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 40(4), 433-457.

    Yan, Z., Li, E., Panadero, M., Yang, L., & Yang, H. Lao. (2021). A systematic review on factors influencing teachers’ intentions and implementations regarding formative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, pp. 1-33.

School Administration
Volume 11, Issue 3
October 2023
Pages 68-80

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 June 2023
  • Revise Date: 18 September 2023
  • Accept Date: 24 September 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics