Effect of robust satisficing on college admission decisions during covid-19

ROBUST SATISFICING ON COLLEGE STUDENTS’ DECISION-MAKING 1

Effect of Robust Satisficing on Students Selecting Colleges during Pandemic

Introduction

Covid19 was first detected in Wuhan China in late 2020, leading to the declaration of a pandemic whose effects are likely to be felt for years to come (Appleby et al., 2022). The disease presents with mild to moderate respiratory disease symptoms including difficulty breathing, lingering chest pain, and a stubborn cough that starts within two weeks of getting infected. To prevent the virus from spreading, nations put in place measures such as the use of face coverings, regular hand washing, rubbing of hands using an alcohol-based sanitizer, and maintaining physical distance from others (Appleby et al., 2022). The measures imposed, coupled with the virus’ direct impact, profoundly affected well-being and daily life, increasing anxiety levels, and reducing access to leisure and other forms of socialization (Appleby et al., 2022).

As part of physical distancing requirements, colleges and universities introduced remote learning programs and cancelled crucial learning activities such as learning exchanges, laboratory courses, and field trips (Appleby et al., 2022). Students across the globe had their learning schedules and assessments disrupted, with some of the colleges forced to shut down after they were unable to withstand the effects of the pandemic. The pandemic had a huge impact on financial stability, job prospects, and educational opportunities that will be felt long into the future (Appleby et al., 2022). With the above structural changes, students experienced a dramatic change in campus life. This warrants the need for studies assessing the impact of the pandemic on students’ academic outcomes and overall wellbeing, including mental health and career prospects (Appleby et al., 2022).

This study examines the effects of the pandemic on one aspect of college life – the admission process into college. It pursues two research questions?

i) How did the Covid19 pandemic impact the admission process for college students?

ii) How did robust satisficing play a role during students’ decisions?

The main argument is that robust satisficing plays a crucial role in choosing a college major. The study findings will provide crucial insights on students’ experiences and concerns surrounding college admission during the pandemic, which will be beneficial in informing policies at the institutional level.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. The section immediately following this introduction is a review of literature on the effects of the pandemic on college admission dynamics and the behavioural economics concept of robust satisficing. The third section is an interpretation of existing evidence as provided in the reviewed literature.

Chapter Two: Literature Review

This section reviews literature on the effects of the pandemic on students’ loans demand and college enrolment preferences.

Effects of Covid19 Pandemic on Student Loans

Porto et al. (2021) conducted a study to understand the dynamics of students’ borrowing to finance higher education. Using a sample of 1,298 responses collected from an online survey, the researchers sought to establish whether it was wise to take out a student loan to finance college education and the optimal amount a student should take out as loan. The findings showed that the amount of student loan one takes is influenced by the amount they borrow personally and whether or not their parents were college graduates (Porto et al., 2021). Students with running personal loan facilities and those whose parents were college graduates were more likely to take out larger student loans (Porto et al., 2021). Further, students who had already taken out a student loan were more likely to perceive the decision to obtain loans as wise and were likely to recommend higher loan amounts (Porto et al., 2021).

The study found that contrary to popular belief and expectations, most college students decide whether or not to take out loans based on realistic preferences and not the behavioural economics concept of anchoring (Porto et al., 2021). The researchers define the anchoring effect as the tendency to reach a decision or judgment based on pieces of irrelevant or arbitrary information (Porto et al., 2021). The study established that the participating college students relied on their life experiences when deciding whether to take out a loan and how much to take (Porto et al., 2021). The findings showed that the anchoring was less arbitrary and the decision to take a loan was primarily influenced by the willingness to pay (WTP), which was dependent on certain realistic factors such as the initial loan amount, amount of running personal loan, and satisfaction with the loans taken previously (Porto et al., 2021).

A study by Chien and Blagg (2021) supported the findings by Porto et al. (2021), showing that students’ decisions to take out loans during the Covid19 pandemic were influenced by realistic factors. Data from the National Student Clearinghouse (as cited in Chien and Blagg, 2021) showed that generally, the number of students seeking out loans to finance higher education reduced during theCovid19 pandemic in line with falling enrolments. Demand for undergraduate loans fell by 10 percent, while that of parent PLUS loans fell by 23 percent (Chien & Blagg, 2021). The decline in demand was steeper for first-time undergraduate enrolment, falling by 13.1 percent, and 21 percent among public two-year freshman enrolees (Chien & Blagg, 2021).

The study also found a decline in the loan amounts requested by students, which they attribute to the increased use of virtual learning platforms that made it possible for students to stay at home rather than on-campus (Chien & Blagg, 2021). According to Chien and Blagg (2021), the decline in loan demand could also be attributed to the rise in deferment rates among students who believe that virtual learning may not offer the same benefits as in-person learning In contrast, the demand for loans among postgraduate students increased over the same period by 3.6 percent, in line with rising enrolment rates (Chien & Blagg, 2021). However, the increase in loan demand among postgraduate students was not enough to offset the decrease in demand among undergraduates.

The study further established that demographic factors such as age and race influenced the demand for students’ loans during the pandemic. Students from white communities aged between 18 and 29 were more likely to borrow during the pandemic than those from non-white communities (Chien & Blagg, 2021). Further, students from white neighborhoods took out bigger loans than those from non-white neighborhoods during the pandemic (Chien & Blagg, 2021). The authors attribute this to the fact that white communities registered more college enrolments during the pandemic than non-white communities.

Robust Satisficing as a Model for Effective Decision-Making

Schwartz et al. (2010) attempts to demonstrate how students could use the BE concept of robust satisficing when making decisions surrounding what colleges to join, what majors to pursue, and what amount of students’ loan to take up. The author differentiates robust satisficing from the common decision-making model of utility-maximization. Under the ulitity-maximization framework, the decision-maker arrives at the best possible decision by assigning probabilities and weights to the different alternatives, and then selecting the option that offers the highest score.

To illustrate how a student would apply the concept of utility maximization in selecting the most appropriate college; the author outlines a four-stage process. First, the student identifies all the factors that matter to them about a college, including reputation, size, location, quality of programs, and so on. Once they have identified these factors, they assign weights to each factor based on their subjective importance, such that the most important scores get the maximum score of 1, while the rest get subjective fractional scores. Thirdly, the student evaluates each available college option on the various factors, giving scores of between 1 and 10 for each factor. Finally, they obtain the product of scores and weights for each factor and school, and then select the school that offers the highest score.

Although it leads to a final decision, the model is associated with a lot of guesses and predictions that may be wrong or inaccurate (Schwartz et al., 2010). The author argues that robust satisficing simplifies the decision-making process. Under robust satisficing, the decision-maker would apply the info-gap decision theory, which focuses on adopting the decision that, although may not be the optimal decision, offers an outcome that is good enough (Schwartz et al., 2010). The method eliminates the idea of assigning weights and probabilities to possible outcomes. The student would need to begin by identifying their expected end-result, which is what they expect to gain from a college (Schwartz et al., 2010). They would then need to determine what college would help them realize the identified dream under the widest possible conditions (Schwartz et al., 2010). The foundation of robust satisficing is to identify a set of good enough schools that are indistinguishable. Then, it will not matter which one the student chooses, because it may be impossible to determine the best option in advance (Schwartz et al., 2010). The robustness function has to do with generating a set of preferred college choices that all offer a good enough outcome (Schwartz et al., 2010).

Chapter Three: Presentation of New Evidence using the Concept of Robust Satisficing

The review of literature in the preceding chapter leads to several conclusions in regard to the research questions. The first research question sought to determine how the Covid19 pandemic impacted the admission process for college students. Evidence drawn from the reviewed studies shows that the pandemic led to a shift in both college choices and major selection for first-year college students. More students opted for colleges closer to home, citing cost and safety concerns. This implies that during the pandemic, colleges enrolled more in-state first-year students, and had to deal with cases of other students migrating to campuses within their home states.

In regard to major selection, sources contend that the pandemic resulted in a shift in students’ interests from some traditionally popular courses such as medicine and teaching, firefighting, law-enforcement, and hospitality workers. During the pandemic, most students avoided these courses due to the massive layoffs witnessed and the dangers posed to professionals, opting for courses that offered more safety and flexibility in terms of not limiting one to a specific industry. Further, evidence has shown that the pandemic affected the demand for students’ loans among undergraduate students, which is another vital area in college admissions.

Fewer students were willing to seek out loans as most classes were held online, limiting on-campus expenses associated with in-person learning. Further, a number of students opted to defer their studies until their institutions could resume in-person learning. Thus, the demand for student loans among undergraduate students declined, causing a decline in loan demand among college enrolees generally. The decision of whether to take a loan and what amount to request was influenced by students’ perceptions about their willingness and ability to pay given the restrictions brought about by the pandemic.

Evidence from research question one indicates that the pandemic significantly changed students’ daily life and campus experiences. In response, students had to make some crucial decisions in regard to what courses to take, what colleges to select, and what loan amount to request. The literature indicates that robust satisficing would be a more effective decision-making model compared to utility maximization. In robust satisficing, a student would only need to come up with a set of appropriate and comparable colleges (courses) and then select the one that helps them realize their end-goal based on a wide variety of conditions. In determining the appropriate loan value to request, they could identify their needs and then select the minimum loan amount to serve the identified needs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the study findings indicate that the Covid19 pandemic significantly affected the dynamics of college admission, including selection of majors, college selection, and how much to seek out as loans. The concept of robust satisficing provides an effective decision-making framework that students could adopt when making crucial decisions during college admission.