Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:30:15 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
22 SES 12 C: Trends in Internationalization
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper Crises in Global Higher Education and Adaptive Reflexivity: Comparing Methodological Dilemmas in Conflict-Ridden Myanmar and Ukraine The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R. (China) Presenting Author:Studies in global higher education may often create impression that the field is a relatively stable and predictable environment where access to research sites can be planned, participants can be approached safely, and ethical issues can be managed through standardized procedures. Such an attitude can be partly explained by the fact that crises have become frequent in many higher education systems overwhelmed with a gamut of economic, political and social disruptions (Tight, 2024). The assumptions of stability affect the conceptualization of research in the field and underpin dominant approaches to qualitative research and interpretations of methodological rigour (Guillemin & Gillam, 2004). In the settings affected by existential crises (eg. wars and major political or militarized conflicts), higher education systems are, however, rarely predictable or secure. Universities are often disrupted by violence, displacement, or institutional collapse, rendering research conditions volatile and uncertain (Milton & Barakat, 2016; Oleksiyenko, 2024; Oleksiyenko & Terepyschhyj, 2024). While scholarship in higher education often conceptualizes crisis as an episodic disruption to institutional normalcy (Gigliotti, 2022), research in protracted conflict and non-state contexts suggests a different condition—one in which crisis functions as a persistent structural context shaping how higher education operates and research strategies are implemented. In the conflict-affected environments, higher education research requires methodological flexibility that extends beyond conventional designs (Oleksiyenko, 2024). The proposed study examines how adaptive reflexivity acquires a new methodological stance for conducting qualitative research in crisis-affected contexts. The study draws on insights from higher education fieldwork in Ukraine during the Russian invasion of 2022-2026 and in the Ethnic Higher Education (EHE) areas of Myanmar, managed by Myanmar’s Ethnic Revolutionary Organizations (EROs) after the 2021 military coup. While these two cases show interrelations with concerns to unceasing crisis and insecurity (Oleksiyenko, 2024; Rahmat et al., 2026), they also provide insights into differences of methodological negotiation, which impregnates decisions about access, consent, and data protection with considerable ethical and political implications. The comparative study shows that traditional frameworks of fieldwork and data collection, which are built on assumptions of institutional stability, predictable access, and researcher safety, prove inadequate when higher education systems are in existential crisis. This study examines the interrelation of three methodological dimensions: (1) negotiating ethical trust and participant safety amid compromised physical access; (2) sustaining analytic rigor and data credibility through remote, fragmented, and adaptive research designs; and (3) practicing reflexivity as an ongoing process of balancing positionality, empathy, and emotional resilience. While investigators pinpoint key logistical and ethical constraints in managing these dimensions, the comparative analysis also sheds light on how a critical perspective on integration of knowledge about these constraints can help in questioning whose knowledge is legitimized in higher education research and how crisis contexts reveal the limits of conventional epistemic authority. This study is important in the context of worsening geopolitical conditions in global higher education. When the global discourse overlooks growing political implications for marginalized and vulnerable academic groups affected by military actions, it should be recognized that crisis-related research should be given more attention. Higher education institutions do play a distinctive role in crisis-affected societies, including sustaining professional pathways, supporting leadership and civic capacity, and maintaining longer-term educational futures (Milton & Barakat, 2016). Where higher education institutions themselves are contested, displaced, or excluded from state systems, they also become political sites in which authority, legitimacy, and collective identity are negotiated (Novelli et al., 2017; South & Lall, 2016; Oleksiyenko, 2024). Hence, rethinking of methodological approaches should intensify as well (Rahmat et al., 2026; Wong & Kareng, 2024; Olesiyenko &Tavadze, 2024; Oleksiyenko, Min & Khin, forthcoming). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This presentation compares lessons learned from fieldwork in the conflict-ridden areas of Myanmar and Ukraine. By looking into how researchers and participants redesign their relations during various phases of displacement and relocation, the study aims to understand what it really means for higher education investigators to engage with experiential insights in conflict-affected zones. The reflections on engagement with respondents from the areas affected by military control and surveillance in Myanmar, and by constant air-raids and destruction of civil infrastructure and academic facilities in Ukraine, provide unique accounts of challenges faced by both researchers and participants during the documentation of fieldwork planning and implementation. In Myanmar, the original design sought to include six ethnic higher education contexts across Chin, Kachin, Kayan, Karenni, Ta’ang, and Mon areas, combining in-person and online engagement. However, access conditions shifted repeatedly as security situations evolved. Ultimately, only two regions—Mon and Karenni—could be visited in person. Planned fieldwork in other areas became infeasible due to security risks, travel restrictions, and logistical barriers, necessitating a greater reliance on remote engagement. Meanwhile, in Ukraine, access to universities in eastern regions such as Donetsk, Kherson and Luhansk oblasts became inaccessible after the full-scale invasion of the Russian armed forces in 2022. The security concerns increased all over Ukraine with frequent shelling and drone attacks conducted by the Russian armed forces. Hence, the focus of investigation was primarily moved to the institutions in Kyiv and Lviv, as more protected and safer areas for continued research. The principal investigator had to delegate fieldwork to his collaborators at the Ukrainian institutions, while sustaining online feedback and readjustment of research strategies. The comparative analysis shows how decisions concerning consent, anonymity, recording, and data storage differed in the two contexts, where in-field and online methods were mixed and renegotiation of participation depended on access conditions, trust relationships, and security deliberations. Ethics in practice with regard to situations in which ethical significance emerges through interaction rather than procedural design became a major approach in both countries. Within the post-soviet context of Ukraine where academic research used to be limited and institutional ethics reviews are rudimentary, concerns about the participation and privacy are often a headache of foreign investigators who are supposed to take responsibility on behalf of vulnerable participants. The sharing of knowledge and the search for emotional support often overlapped during escalated security concerns, requiring extra sensitivity to participants’ long-term safety. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Higher education research is expected to be conducted responsibly, rigorously, and ethically under conditions of crisis. This study shows that methodological frameworks developed for stable, state-centred research environments are often ill-equipped for contexts in which access is uncertain, participant safety cannot be taken for granted, and institutional legitimacy is contested. In response, the presenters argue that adaptive reflexivity as a methodological position should be given more regard under conditions of uncertainty. It should be recognized that crisis operates as a structural condition shaping how research is planned, conducted, and interpreted in modern days. Methodological challenges in crisis-affected higher education—such as managing participant risk, navigating uneven data generation, and responding to emotional and relational pressures—do not arise as isolated technical problems. Instead, they are mutually constitutive dimensions of research practice, rendering piecemeal methodological adjustments inadequate and underscoring the need for a coherent reflexive stance. Respectively, adaptive reflexivity should engage retrospective self-reflection or positional disclosure with increasing emphasis on an ongoing, relational, and context-responsive mode of methodological judgement embedded throughout the research process. Its core components—ethical co-construction, relational rigor, contextual validity, and emotional and positional awareness—provide a structured vocabulary for sustaining methodological quality when stability, control, and predictability are limited. Through adaptation, iteration, and recalibration, research in crisis contexts achieves more by reducing over-reliance on linear execution of predefined designs. Importantly, adaptive reflexivity does not lower methodological standards. On the contrary, it demands heightened accountability. Where researchers cannot rely on uniform methods, saturation, or stable access, rigor must be demonstrated through transparent justification of decisions, coherence of analytic reasoning, and careful alignment between claims and the conditions under which data are generated. In this way, adaptive reflexivity reframes rigor, ethics, and validity without diluting them, while making methodological discipline responsive to constraint rather than insulated from it. References Burde, D., Lahmann, H., & Thompson, N. (2019). Education in emergencies: ‘What works’ revisited. Education and Conflict Review, 2, 81–88. Gigliotti, R. A. (2022). Crisis Leadership in Higher Education: Historical Overview, Organizational Considerations, and Implications. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press. Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280. Lwin, T. (2019). Global justice, national education and local realities in Myanmar: A civil society perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(2), 273–284. Milton, S., & Barakat, S. (2016). Higher education as the catalyst of recovery in conflict-affected societies. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 14(3), 403–421. Novelli, M., Lopes Cardozo, M.T A.; Smith, A. (2017). The 4RS Framework: Analyzing Education’s Contribution to Sustainable Peacebuilding with Social Justice in Conflict-Affected Contexts. https://doi.org/10.17609/N8S94K Oleksiyenko, A. V. (2024). Rethinking academic citizenship for collective agency in times of crisis. Higher Education Quarterly, 78(4), e12520. Oleksiyenko, A., Min, T.W., Khin, C.S.S. (forthcoming). Crisis and displacement in global higher education: a Scholarly Reflexive Dialogue (SRD) across contexts, cultures, and times. In Tavadze, G., Gibbs, P., Greenwood, D., & Bengtsen, S.S.E. (eds). Towards the Placeful University: Transformative Places and Spaces in Higher Education. Springer. Oleksiyenko, A. V., & Tavadze, G. (2025). Decolonization of post-Soviet higher education: Critical inquiry through a reflexive scholarly dialogue. Cultural Studies↔ Critical Methodologies, 25(3), 204-215. Oleksiyenko, A., & Terepyshchyi, S. (2024). ‘Hope despite all odds’: academic precarity in embattled Ukraine. Teaching in Higher Education, 29(3), 741-755. Pherali, T. (2019). Education and conflict: Emergence, growth and diversification of the field. Education and Conflict Review, 2, 7–14. Rahmat, R. B., Porta, T., & Thwe Phyo, K. (2026). The role of the higher education educator in times of conflict in Myanmar. Teaching in Higher Education, 31(1), 1–19. Shah, R., & Lopes Cardozo, M. T. A. (2019). Myanmar’s Education System: Historical Roots, the Current Context, and New Opportunities. In M. T. A. Lopes Cardozo & E. J. T. Maber (Eds), Sustainable Peacebuilding and Social Justice in Times of Transition (pp. 65–86). Springer International Publishing South, A., & Lall, M. (2016). Language, Education and the Peace Process in Myanmar. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 38(1), 128–153. Wong, M. S., & Kareng, D. (2024). Creativity in Crisis: Re-envisioning Higher Education in Myanmar’s Spring Revolution. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 33(5), 1095–1103. 22. Research in Higher Education
Paper Brand Architecture in Higher Education – a Corporate Model of Brand Positioning in Times of Internationalization Transilvania University, Romania Presenting Author:Even though less explored lately, the importance of branding strategies in higher education became more relevant in the context of competitiveness in global education market and internationalization. The competitiveness in higher education increased (Binsardi and Ekwulugo, 2003; Hemsley-Brown and Goonawardana, 2007) and the importance of branding in tertiary education grew (Mazzarol and Soutar, 1999), even though there were some opinions that criticized marketing strategies in education (Gibbs, 2002). Nevertheless, the universities images are important not only in students’ choices, but in public attitudes towards the universities (Yavas and Shemwell, 1996), which ensures a competitive advantage (Paramewaran and Glowacka, 1995), attracts students and differentiate the institution from its major competitors (Ivy, 2001), institutional and sector image (Oplatka, 2002). Researchers highlighted that higher education is a complex field for brand identity with strong connections between brand identity, meaning, image, and reputation (Hemsley-Brown et. al., 2016). Each university has a unique profile, set mainly by the organizational culture, and many strategic directions according to the specific of each faculty (Asaad, Melewar, Cohen, and Balmer, 2013). Our perspective stresses that each study programme has its unique profile, as each profession develops its own organizational culture. The approach is supported by the corporate brand identity frameworks (Urde, 2013) and service brand management (de Chernatony and Segal‐Horn, 2003; Skaalsvik and Olsen, 2014), both suitable for higher education area. The various models of branding in management and marketing could fill the theoretical gap related to branding issues in universities. The attempts to address brands in higher education are limited, through qualitative approaches, and present difficulties in defining brand essence (Wæraas and Solbakk, 2009), differences between university and commercial brandings as well as culture, brand concepts, and brand architecture (Chapleo, 2015) or image‐related determinants of brand equity (Mourad, Ennew, and Kortam, 2011). In recent years, education fields worldwide encountered many adjustments to face the increasing and challenging issues in society. Brand development is not only an aspect of identity but means of differentiation in the global market and of strengthening the position in national and international contexts. The internationalization of universities is a milestone in the European Union and the European university alliances are more effective. Nevertheless, the brand corporate model may also emerge in university alliances. Our mixed methodological approach aimed at exploring the embedded perspective of branding in higher education. We addressed the relation between brand (the university) and sub-brands (the faculties) and the perspective of university’ employees and students as potential brand promoters. We assumed that the corporate brand model is appropriate for the branding strategies in universities, therefore the overarching research question explored the branding model emerging in universities. The first aim of our research was to investigate the brand architecture in university. The second aim was to determine the brand patterns of the students as brand promoters. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used In the competitive global market, the public institutions of education apply business administration principles to strengthen their position. The branding strategies are adjusted in higher education, considering the mission of the educational providers. However, it is less clear what is more important in students’ choice: the university, the faculty, the study programme? In order to address these issues, we analysed the brand strategy of one public university from a contextualized perspective: the public image - delivered through the visual elements, the managerial/employees’ perspective – analysed through interviews, and the customer attitude towards the services provided – investigated by questionnaire-based inquiry of students. The brand strategy of Transilvania university was assessed using the analysis of public information (visual identity), combined with interviews with communication officers and heads of faculties and university staff. We organized 5 interviews with faculty leaders. The perspective of beneficiary was investigated using the responses of 189 undergraduate students from different faculties. The data were collected in two waves: first in the previous academic year (2024-2025) and the second in the current academic year (2025-2026). More than a half of participants were prospective teachers (124). The questionnaire-based inquiry was administered on-line with the approval of Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences Board. Measurement instrument Corporate Brand Identity Matrix (CBIM) framework (Urde, 2013) is a combined analytical tool and operational guide used as the basis of a structured case study investigation (Yin, 2012) of the management of one corporate brand in real time. The method offers potential for the generation of models and general theories from empirical data (Perry and Gummesson, 2004). University Brand Personality Scale (UBPS), developed by Rauchsnabel, Krey, Babin and Ivens in 2016, is a framework for measuring the personality characteristics of higher education brands. It uses six personality dimensions to represent the facets of brand identity that are most pertinent to the audience. The UBPS comprises prestige, sincerity, appeal, lively, conscientiousness, and cosmopolitan dimensions. Results suggest that the scale strongly relates to brand love, positive word-of-mouth, and students' intention to support their university as alumni (Rauschnabel et al., 2016). Oregon vocational interest scales. For additional information about the ORVIS scales, see Pozzebon, Visser, Ashton, Lee, & Goldberg (2010). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The findings are in line with previous research that describes the corporate brand model in higher education. Thus, the corporate brand identity framework is promoted at university level and multiple sub-brands for each faculty, aligning with the unified image of the entire university and becoming brand promoters. Multiple data sources were exploited in the case-study, such as positioning, brand strategy, visual identity, codes of conduct and communication. The brand-oriented approach envisages organization’s mission and values (Urde, 2013) and represents a source of differentiation and competitive advantage (Brexendorf and Kernstock, 2007; Burmann et al, 2009). Our study explored students’ perspective related to university brands in a quantitative inquiry. All 3 scales of University Brand Personality Scale - Word-of-mouth, Alumni support, and Brand love - showed wide variation in scores in our sample, indicating various patterns. All 8 scales of Oregon vocational interest scales - Leadership, Organization, Altruism, Creativity, Analysis, Producing, Adventuring, and Erudition - showed wide variation in scores in our sample, proving insights regarding the profiles of students with different vocational interests, enrolled in various specializations. The statistical analysis shows significant correlations between brand or brand sub-scales and sub-scales of the inventory of vocational interests (Brand and Altruism – r=0.18, p<0.5; Brand and Erudition – r=0.17, p<0.5) which, even though there a small, worth further exploration. Corporate Brand Identity Matrix provides the opportunity to explore the core values of brand identity and their relations to the internal and external factors that contribute to brand architecture, such as organizational culture, relationships and personality. The use of CBIM in combination with ULBS offers the dual and complete perspective of the relation between the provider of educational services and primary beneficiary. References Asaad, Y., Melewar, T.C., Cohen, G., & Balmer, J. (2013). Universities and export market orientation: An exploratory study of UK post-92 universities. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31(7), 838–856. Binsardi A, Ekwulugo F. International marketing of British education: Research on the students’ perception and the UK market penetration. Mark Intell Plann 2003; 21:318–27. Brexendorf, T.O. and Kernstock, J. (2007) Corporate behaviour versus brand behaviour: Towards an integrated view? Journal of Brand Management 15(1): 32–40. Burmann, C., Jost-Benz, M. and Riley, N. (2009). Towards an identity-based equity model. Journal of Business Research 62(3): 390–397. Chapleo, C. (2015). Brands in Higher Education: Challenges and Potential Strategies. International Studies of Management & Organization, 45(2), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2015.1006014 de Chernatony L, Segal‐Horn S (2003), "The criteria for successful services brands". European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 7-8 pp. 1095–1118, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560310477681 Gibbs, P. (2002). From the invisible hand to the invisible handshake: marketing higher education. Res Post-Compuls Educ 2002; 7:325–38. Hemsley-Brown, J., & Goonawardana, S. (2007). Brand harmonization in the international higher education market. Journal of Business Research, 60(9), 942–948. Hemsley-Brown, J., Melewar, T.C., Nguyen, B., Wilson, E.J. (2016). Exploring brand identity, meaning, image, and reputation (BIMIR) in higher education: A special section. Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 3019–3022. Mourad M, Ennew C, Kortam W (2011), "Brand equity in higher education". Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 29 No. 4 pp. 403–420, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501111138563 Paramewaran, R. and Glowacka, A.E. (1995). University image: an information processing perspective. J Mark High Educ 1995; 6:41–56. Rauschnabel, F.A, Krey, N., Babin, B.J, Ivens, B.S. (2016). Brand management in higher education: The University Brand Personality Scale. Journal of Business Research 69 (2016) 3077–3086. Perry, C. and Gummesson, E. (2004) Action research in marketing. European Journal of Marketing 38(3/4): 310–320. Skaalsvik H, Olsen B (2014), "Service branding: suggesting an interactive model of service brand development". Kybernetes, Vol. 43 No. 8 pp. 1209–1223, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2013-0274 Urde, M. The corporate brand identity matrix. J Brand Manag 20, 742–761 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2013.12 Wæraas, A., Solbakk, M.N. Defining the essence of a university: lessons from higher education branding. High Educ 57, 449–462 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9155-z Yavas, U. and Shemwell, D.J. (1996). Graphical representation of university image: a correspondence analysis. J Mark High Educ 1996; 7:75–84. Yin, R.K. (2012) Application of Case Study Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 22. Research in Higher Education
Paper Mapping Decision Trees of Study Abroad Intentions: The Interplay Between Maternal Education, Cultural Adaptability, and Career Expectations 1: National Academy for Educational Research, Taiwan; 2: National Academy for Educational Research, Taiwan Presenting Author:Cross-border student mobility has become a defining feature of globalized higher education. In particular, seeking international advanced degree plays an irreplaceable role in fostering deep, reciprocal political and economic understanding, sociocultural exchange, and the long-term sustainability of nations. Nevertheless, both short-term studying abroad and international degree seeking remain a form of mobility that requires substantial mobilization of family capital and financial resources, which result in a gap between students’ intentions to study abroad and their actual participation. This gap is often shaped by the interaction of multiple structural factors. Accordingly, understanding students’ intentions and the determinants underlying them constitutes a core concern for higher education policy aimed at developing appropriate and equitable support for overseas study. This study examines Taiwanese students’ intentions to pursue international advanced degrees and how family capital, institutional and academic variables, and subjective variables jointly shape the classification paths of their study-abroad intentions. We pose the following research questions. First, what are the major motivations and barriers for Taiwanese students to pursue international advanced degrees? How do concerns regarding cultural adaptation, intention to seek domestic employment, and motivations for studying abroad enter the classification paths of study-abroad intentions? Second, how do family capital, institutional type, and major field of study differentiate students with high and low study-abroad intentions? In particular, how does the classification role of maternal education change between the family capital model and the integrated model? Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of capital and field (Bourdieu, 1984, 1986, 1990), this study conceptualizes how family structure and individual decision-making shape students’ intentions to study abroad. Family background, through cultural and economic capital, establishes the volume of resources and the starting position from which students engage in study-abroad decisions. Higher levels of capital facilitate access to international information and attenuate sensitivity to risk. While Bourdieu emphasizes the profound influence of family background on habitus and decision-making, he also argues that class-based habitus can be reshaped through education and changing environments. In Taiwan’s context, disparities in educational resource structures are most salient at the higher education level, particularly along the divides between comprehensive universities and the technical/vocational system, as well as between public and private institutions. These distinct types of institutions represent diverse "academic fields" (Bourdieu, 1984), where varying institutional objectives and systemic capital shape students' orientations toward international mobility. Consequently, this study analyzes students' micro-level decision-making within the constraints of different structural environments, such as specific universities or departments. By doing so, it elucidates how the interplay between expected benefits and perceived costs ultimately determines their intention to pursue study abroad opportunities. This study’s significance is twofold. Theoretically, while prior research relied on paternal status as a single proxy for family capital, maternal influence seems to become increasingly salient due to higher education expansion and the use of overseas study for social differentiation (Netz & Finger, 2016). Qualitative evidence (Perkins, 2020; Simon & Ainsworth, 2012) further indicate the potential impact of mothers as key facilitators of children’s global mobility. Accordingly, this study refines family socioeconomic status by separately examining paternal and maternal influences. From a policy perspective, as the Bologna Process deepens, the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) seeks to dismantle stratified access to mobility. By analyzing family capital and individual motivation, this study addresses EU objectives to ensure equitable participation for underrepresented groups in programs like Erasmus+, which reflect the universal pursuit of social justice. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used We adopted a quantitative survey design. Based on a literature review, expert consultations, and focus group interviews, we developed a survey for Taiwanese College Students". The instrument encompasses background variables, motivations for pursue international advanced degree, perceived potential barriers, and other subjective variables related to study-abroad decision. The questionnaire underwent content validity review by 13 experts in higher education and the sociology of education, followed by a pilot test involving 88 students (senior undergraduates and graduate students). Reliability analysis yielded a Cronbach’s Alpha of .716 for the motivation dimension (Q3-1) and .626 for the barriers dimension (Q3-2). For the latter, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was employed to extract three sub-dimensions, accounting for a cumulative explained variance of 65.55%. Data collection was conducted via an online survey using non-probability sampling, specifically relying on available subjects. As it was not possible to assign a calculable sampling probability to every individual in the population, this study does not aim for population parameter estimation. Instead, it focuses on the analysis of variable relationships and structural patterns within the sample (Babbie, 2021). The survey was administered from December 10, 2025, to January 5, 2026, resulting in 1,403 valid responses. Regarding the analytical strategy, descriptive statistics were first employed to present the distribution of students’ intentions to pursue international advanced degrees, as well as their major motivations and perceived barriers. Subsequently, a Classification and Regression Tree (CRT) model was utilized to identify the classification paths of students with high and low study-abroad intentions (Breiman et al., 1984). The dependent variable was dichotomized into high and low study-abroad intentions. Students who reported that they “had the intention but had not yet begun collecting information” were classified as having low study-abroad intentions, whereas those who reported that they “had made preliminary plans and were collecting information” or “had a clear plan and were preparing accordingly” were classified as having high study-abroad intentions. Two sets of models were developed. The family capital model included paternal education, maternal education, paternal socioeconomic status, and maternal socioeconomic status. The integrated model further incorporated institutional and academic variables as well as subjective variables. The former included institutional type and major field of study, while the latter included concerns regarding cultural adaptation, intention to seek domestic employment, and motivations for studying abroad. The CRT analysis used Gini impurity as the splitting criterion, and cross-validation was employed to examine model stability. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This study compares findings from the family capital model and the integrated model. Due to space limitations, this paper focuses on how family capital, academic fields, and study-abroad decision considerations jointly shape the classification paths of students with high and low study-abroad intentions. In the family capital model, parental educational attainment serves as an important cue for differentiating study-abroad intentions. According to the CRT variable importance analysis, “maternal education” is standardized at 100.0%, ranking as the leading indicator among the family capital variables, while “paternal education” reaches 90.3%. These findings suggest that family educational background has higher relative classificatory power than parental socioeconomic status. When the model incorporates “motivations and concerns,” subjective variables exceed background variables in their standardized importance for decision classification. In this integrated model, “concerns regarding cultural adaptation” is most critical (100.0%), followed by “intention to seek domestic employment” (90.8%).This shift suggests that when cultural maladaptation fears and domestic stability outweigh expected returns, students likely opt against international degrees. Notably, maternal education, which is paramount in the initial model, diminishes, implying that individual perceptual factors and career orientations possess discriminatory power surpassing family origins. Shortly, "adaptation to foreign environments" and "transnational career imaginaries" are the most significant dividing lines in student intentions. Fear of living abroad, coupled with a preference for domestic employment, functions as a critical threshold for pursuing international degrees. Accordingly, the diminishing influence of family background in the integrated model suggests that institutional and governmental interventions—specifically providing information on life adaptation, career planning, and employment facilitation—can help students transcend family constraints. By strengthening links to overseas careers and addressing information asymmetry, policymakers could empower candidates who lack family capital to translate their intentions into substantive actions toward pursuing advanced international degrees. References Babbie, E. R. (2021). The practice of social research (15th ed.). Cengage Learning. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–260). Greenwood Publishing Group. Bourdieu, P. (1990). In other words: Essays toward a reflexive sociology. Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503621558 Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315139470 Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315139470 Netz, N., & Finger, C. (2016). New horizontal inequalities in German higher education? Social selectivity of studying abroad between 1991 and 2012. Sociology of Education, 89(2), 79-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040715627196 Simon, J., & Ainsworth, J. W. (2012). Race and socioeconomic status differences in study abroad participation: The role of habitus, social networks, and cultural capital. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012(1), Article 413896. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/413896 | ||