Whether Socioeconomic Status Matters in Accessing Residential College: Role of RC in Addressing Academic Achievement Gaps to Ensure Sustainable Education
1. Introduction
Securing fair access for individuals seeking top-notch education to improve their learning and job prospects is a fundamental goal of the global development strategies [1,2]. In 2015, the United Nations introduced 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to address critical global social, environmental, and economic issues [3,4]. The fourth SDG intends to guarantee inclusive and fair access to high-quality education while fostering lifelong learning opportunities for everyone [5]. Tertiary education has played a crucial role in driving national economic growth, not just through teaching and research but also via societal engagement, governance policies, and collaborative initiatives among universities [6,7]. However, persistent challenges hinder international efforts to ensure sustainable education [8], with disparities in socioeconomic status (SES) stemming from individuals’ family backgrounds posing a notable obstacle [9].
Theoretical and empirical evidence underscores the significant influence of SES on students’ educational opportunities and academic performance [10,11,12]. Students from less affluent SES backgrounds often face pronounced setbacks, delays, and disparities [12]. Conversely, those with higher SES backgrounds typically enjoy enhanced access to educational resources and opportunities, including a broader choice of schools, homeschooling support, and academic counseling [9,11]. Unfortunately, students from lower SES backgrounds often lack crucial educational resources, hindering their school attendance and academic achievement [12]. Despite these disparities, the right to access quality education should be universal and not confined to specific societal groups, cohorts, or classes [13].
There is widespread consensus that education stands as one of the most potent tools for dismantling social barriers and fostering a more equitable national economic development [14]. A well-functioning education system, spanning from primary schools to universities, plays a pivotal role in preventing discrimination or privilege [9]. In particular, higher education contributes significantly to enhancing social mobility by enabling students from underprivileged backgrounds to enter professional fields and build meaningful careers [15]. While tertiary education enrolments are rapidly increasing in many nations, indicating a more socially inclusive character, it is essential to recognize that the role of education in promoting social mobility varies across countries, evolves over time, and depends on specific circumstances [16].
Residential colleges (RCs) boast a rich history, closely tied to esteemed institutions, such as Cambridge, Oxford, Yale, and Harvard [17,18]. Functioning as distinctive living and learning communities within tertiary institutions, RCs have played a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of higher education [18,19,20]. The character and reforms of RCs have undergone continual evolution. By establishing seamless learning communities, RCs strive to cultivate a supportive and inclusive learning environment, enabling students to engage in academic pursuits, personal development, and meaningful social interactions [19,20,21]. Recognized as high-impact learning institutions, RCs significantly contribute to students’ academic success and overall development in numerous countries [22].
However, a crucial question arises: Does the transformation of RCs enhance access for students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, promoting inclusive and quality education? Can this educational model be deemed ‘sustainable’ in alignment with the attainment of SDGs? This query remains unanswered, and the subsequent section elucidates the research questions formulated for this study.
Research Gap, Scope: Objectives and Questions
Numerous studies have extensively explored the efficacy of RCs, with theoretical and empirical investigations [19,21,22,23]. Their findings underscore that RCs play a positive role in enhancing school engagement, academic achievement, and personal growth. Additionally, a wealth of research consistently establishes SES as a significant predictor of academic success [9,10,24,25,26,27]. The prevailing consensus strongly indicates a positive correlation between SES and academic performance [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
Moreover, parallel research has delved into the role of educational institutions and systems in addressing SES disparities. For instance, a study drawing on data from the 2015 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) across seven east Asian countries reveals that the use of information and communications technology (ICT) does not act as a mediator in the relationship between SES and academic performance [30]. Another study conducted in Bangladesh, as highlighted by Alam and Forhad [31], combines qualitative and quantitative analyses to reveal that engineering education does not resolve the influence of SES on academic and professional advancement. Nonetheless, insights from Downey and Condorn [24] emphasize that schools have the potential to counteract the constraints imposed by socioeconomic inequality by ensuring the effective teaching of academic and other essential learning skills.
Insufficient research has delved into the SES dynamics related to students’ access to and participation in RCs, particularly within the context of how tertiary institutions contribute to the SDGs [6]. This study endeavors to bridge this gap in our understanding, focusing on China as the case study. Having identified this knowledge gap and the study’s scope, the research objectives and questions are outlined. The primary aim is to explore whether RCs in China contribute to leveling socioeconomic disparities or whether a privileged SES background dictates access to RC education. The specific objectives include, first, mapping the socioeconomic diversity of RC students; second, investigating how RCs mitigate academic performance gaps among different SES groups; and third, discerning the impact of RCs on sustainable education. The ensuing questions aim to address these objectives:
RQ1. Does SES matter in accessing RC?
RQ2. Does RC mitigate academic achievement discrepancies between different SES groups?
RQ3. Does RC play a significant role in supporting sustainable education?
The subsequent section comprises the literature review, followed by an elucidation and justification of the research methodology. The concluding section will summarize the findings and lead to a discussion.
3. Methodology
This study employs a quantitative methodology. First, the research context is presented, providing support for the rationale behind the chosen research methodology. This is followed by an explanation of the population and sampling. Subsequently, the outlined instrument is introduced, and this is followed by an explanation of the methods employed for data collection and data analysis.
3.1. Context of the Study
This section elucidates the research context and subsequently provides support for the rationale behind the chosen research methodology. In China, the government’s policy of compulsory education and the expansion of the school system have greatly raised the literacy levels of millions of people in recent decades. However, persistent disparities in access to educational resources persist in urban and rural areas, across different regions, and social class divisions continue to impede the pursuit of educational equity [46]. Studies illustrated that SES has remained a crucial factor influencing educational equality since China’s economic reforms and global integration, and this influence persists despite the increased enrolment in schools [15,47].
Throughout compulsory and secondary education, families from advantaged SES backgrounds often leverage social resources to enroll their children in schools equipped with better teaching facilities, granting them access to superior faculty resources and a conducive learning environment [46]. Conversely, families from disadvantaged SES back-grounds lack the economic and social means to provide additional support beyond their children’s personal efforts. These circumstances contribute to academic disadvantages for students from underprivileged SES backgrounds, particularly when they progress to tertiary education [46].
In the realm of tertiary education, China boasts the world’s largest system, with tertiary gross enrolment increasing from 30% in 2012 to 57.8% in 2021 [48]. This expansion has significantly widened access to college education for individuals from economically challenged backgrounds [49]. However, the substantial growth in tertiary education has not consistently translated into more equitable access to elite universities and education of equivalent quality [50,51]. In response to this challenge, RCs have developed as a novel strategy to reform higher education in China. In the Chinese context, RCs represent a unique student affairs management system designed to cultivate well-rounded and innovative talents through a synthesis of liberal and professional education [51,52]. The initiative of RC reforms can be traced back to 2005 when several top first-class central public universities in China, including Fudan University and Xi’an Jiao-tong University, implemented this system [53]. The Chinese government implemented a set of regulations concerning RCs in 2012, raising their growth from an institutional effort to a national-level education policy.
As a result, an increasing number of universities have adopted this system, rising from 5 to 97 by 2020 [53]. Significantly, this expansion encompasses a broader spectrum of university categories, encompassing both large, medium, and small-sized universities, as well as public and private institutions, among others. The evolution of RCs in China reflects a shift from elite to mass education, emphasizing a commitment to delivering equitable and high-quality education to students from diverse backgrounds. However, the degree to which this system genuinely promotes educational equality and quality within the Chinese context necessitates further investigation, rendering this study highly pertinent.
3.2. Target Population, Sampling, and Sample Size
Informed by the fieldwork, the institution of interest in this study consisted of 77 universities, which initiated the implementation of RCs in 2018 or earlier. This decision was guided by the typical duration of 4–5 years required for completing undergraduate education in China, ensuring the availability of comprehensive academic performance records for all participants.
The stratified random sampling method was employed to ensure the creation of a representative sample from the target 77 universities, which were categorized based on their geographical locations. There were 12 universities in the central district, 14 in the western district, and 51 in the eastern district. To achieve triangulation, respondents from each district’s universities were sampled, maintaining an approximate ratio of 1:1:4 for each region to account for the significant difference in the total number of universities. This resulted in selection of one sample university from both the central and western districts and four from the eastern district.
The western, central, and eastern sample universities contributed 112, 739, and 3600 RC students, respectively, leading to a total population size of 4451. According to the Re-search Advisor [54], the required sample size for 4451 RC students at a 95% confidence level and a 3.5% margin of error is 667. This method reduces the margin of error for sampling and increases the required confidence interval to obtain a larger and representative sample size. Then, a proportional stratified selection strategy was employed to choose the actual study sample from each sample institution. This led to selection of 17 RC students from the western university, 111 from the central university, and 539 from the eastern university (Table 1). This sampling strategy converts a segmented or separated target population into a homogeneous population, guaranteeing that each segment has an equal probability of being chosen, thus enhancing the representativeness of the sample [55].
3.3. Instrumentation
The questionnaire employed in this study draws upon instruments validated in previous research [41,56]. It comprises three sections aligned with the research framework. The initial section encompasses personal profiles, capturing seven factors, including gender, ethnicity, family district, schooling year, major, name, and matric number. Consistent with established literature on the economics of education, academic achievement is assessed using the cumulative grade point average (CGPA) on a 4.0 scale [8]. To ensure data accuracy, the respondents’ names and matric numbers are identified, facilitating the collection of secondary data on precise CGPA from academic records at the sample universities. The second section delves into SES background, incorporating three dimensions with five indicators each (parents’ education level, occupation, and family monthly income). The third section evaluates RCs across four dimensions—residence hall environment, faculty interaction, peer communication, and engagement in co-curricular activities—further divided into seven factors. Simultaneously, the third section of the questionnaire utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale.
A pilot study was conducted at another university, which was not part of the sample institutions. The questionnaire’s reliability was tested using the internal consistency coefficient Alpha (α) during the pilot study. Once the pilot study was completed, certain changes were made to the instruments to improve their face and content validity. These changes were made in response to feedback from education professionals, RC faculty members, and some student viewpoints.
Additionally, the structural validity of the scales was verified using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). As presented in Table 2, all constructs in this analysis had α values exceeding 0.70. If α values are greater than 0.70, the instrument is deemed to be reliable [57]. Therefore, reliability was established in this research, and the CFA showed good data fit for the scale (χ2 = 338.283, df = 329, p = 0.350, RMSEA = 0.007; CFI = 0.999; TLI = 0.998) [58]. Moreover, the seven components had AVE values greater than 0.5, and the composite reliability (CR) values were greater than 0.7. All factors were remarkably correlated (p Table 2). The constructs of this scale differed greatly from each other. Hence, the validity of the data in this study was clearly demonstrated.
3.4. Data Collection
To ensure objectivity and minimize personal subjectivity in this study, a systematic approach was employed for data collection. Initially, the primary data were systematically gathered through an online survey conducted over a 3-month period. Afterward, according to the respondents’ name and matric number, the participants’ academic performance data, specifically CGPA, were acquired from the academic offices of each sampled institution to ensure data accuracy. Prior to initiating the collection of data, explicit permission and support were obtained from the universities comprising the sample. More importantly, participants were explicitly notified that their data would be utilized exclusively for the purposes of this study, with an assurance of confidentiality. Furthermore, participants’ involvement was voluntary, and they retained the option to withdraw at any point without facing repercussions. Questionnaires were distributed to RC students with the assistance of the administrative faculty from the sample institutions to enhance the response rate and acquire the secondary data on academic achievement.
3.5. Data Analysis
The data analysis encompasses both descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSSAU. Initially, the descriptive analysis aims to evaluate the SES diversity of RC respondents by referencing the population ratio at various SES levels across the nation. Furthermore, a grouped linear regression analysis is undertaken to investigate the impact of RC on the relationship between SES and academic performance. Initially, potential control variables, such as gender, ethnicity, family district, and school year, will undergo testing. Through the control of these variables, the study seeks to effectively isolate the academic performance factors attributable to RC.
Subsequently, linear regression on SES grouped data will be employed to scrutinize the statistical correlation between RC and SES. This approach objectively assesses the impact of RC on education equality and quality from a statistical standpoint. By facilitating the differentiation of between-group effects, this method strengthens the robustness of causal claims [59]. Additionally, the study will explore the resultant impacts of RC on sustainable education, extending the preceding analyses. An overview of the statistical methods is summarized in Table 3.
5. Concluding Remarks
This section discusses the implications, followed by an exploration of limitations and suggestions for future research with reference to this subject. Finally, the conclusion is explained.
5.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications
The findings from this study lead to significant implications for both theoretical and practical considerations in the realm of education. Initially, the study extends its theoretical reach to encompass broader educational theories, including the student involvement theory [71] and engagement theory [72]. By investigating the effects of residential colleges, this research sheds light on the influence of this educational model on supporting the involvement and engagement of students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds in school learning. This expansion underscores the interconnectedness of various educational constructs and emphasizes the multifaceted nature of RCs’ influence on students’ academic experiences.
Moreover, educational inequality remains a critical global challenge, spanning issues such as disparities in access to schooling, dropout rates, and notably, variations in learning outcomes, each carrying unique consequences [73]. Although RCs in China admit students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, the enrolment disparities persist, with SES remaining a crucial indicator for accessing educational institutions, including RCs [10,15]. However, it is noteworthy that RCs can serve as a valuable tool for enhancing academic achievement among students from both advantaged and disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds [19,20,21,22], aligning with the specific objectives of sustainable education. Consequently, this study contributes to a deeper theoretical understanding of the interplay between social inequality and educational disparities, advancing discussions on educational equity and social justice.
Nevertheless, it is critical to recognize that the RC system cannot adequately address the broader cultural and structural variables influencing education results, including those linked with family situations and external pressures. Combining measures such as financial aid, resource allocation, and curriculum enhancements with the RC system may be required to properly address the complex issue of equity in the education system. In addition, the development of RCs should consider the role and influence of local contexts. Exploring localized RC models is crucial to maximizing how they can influence the role of SES in accessing education resources and producing the desired outcomes. This research provides practical suggestions on how to overcome the challenges associated with the role of RCs in sustainable education. It is recommended that further studies explore additional scenarios in this field, as outlined below.
5.2. Limitations and Future Directions
While this study offers valuable insights, it is essential to recognize and address the various limitations. Future research efforts aimed at overcoming these limitations will contribute to a deeper understanding of the intricate dynamics involved in fostering sustainable educational equity within the framework of RCs.
Initially, this study is constrained to the context of China, potentially limiting the applicability of its findings to other education systems with distinct cultural, social, and economic contexts. To achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the influence of RCs on educational equity, future research endeavors could extend the investigation to diverse countries. Furthermore, academic performance is an important indicator for assessing educational quality and equity among nations [74]. Academic achievement is influenced by a number of elements, including intrinsic factors, such as personal traits, and extrinsic factors, such as teachers, family, and school-related issues [75]. This study does not take into account a number of relevant characteristics, such as study habits, personal motivation, and parental engagement [76,77], which could influence the research outcomes. Future studies could include a greater range of variables, resulting in more thorough and meaningful research findings. Moreover, this study adopted a quantitative method, wherein participants attending RCs were selected. This approach may introduce biases, which, to some extent, influence the objectivity and scientific rigor of the findings. Therefore, future research should consider employing equally important research designs, including experimental methodologies or qualitative methods, which may yield more comprehensive findings.
In conclusion, the role of residential colleges in China and what they mean for the UN’s SDGs are crucial. The reality is that students’ socioeconomic status in RCs has created an unequal learning environment, in that there is a lot of varied access to the education system and the resources it has. This situation has posed further obstacles to sustainable development in education, which is a prerequisite for national economic development. Having said that, residential colleges can contribute to improving education quality by narrowing, or ideally, removing academic discrepancies among students from a range of SES backgrounds. Consequently, it remains very challenging to ensure that equal access to quality education for all students is attained, regardless of socioeconomic status, and there is a need for sufficient training to address the challenges related to education inequality.
