University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The market for branch campuses: UNLV Singapore and the role of the government in defining its market

(USC Thesis Other)

The market for branch campuses: UNLV Singapore and the role of the government in defining its market

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

THE MARKET FOR BRANCH CAMPUSES: UNLV SINGAPORE AND THE ROLE
OF THE GOVERNMENT IN DEFINING ITS MARKET

by

Nadine Singh

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2012

Copyright 2012 Nadine Singh
ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank UNLV Singapore for participating in this study. Thank you
to Dr. Andy Nazarechuk for providing access and the necessary assistance to visit the
UNLV Singapore campus. I would also like to thank the UNLV Singapore staff, faculty,
and students for participating in my study.
Special recognition is owed to my chair, Dr. Mark Power Robison. His constant
support, feedback, and advice were vital throughout this entire process. I would also like
to thank Dr. Michael H. Diamond, and Dr. Guilbert Hentschke for participating on my
committee.
Thank you to my cohort members for their support and encouragement as I
completed my study. In particular, I would like to thank Dr. Elizabeth Jordan and Dr.
Rocke Demark.
Thank you to my former colleagues in the Ed.D. Program Office and Doctoral
Support Center. Thank you to Jessica Gibson for supporting both my educational and
professional development.
This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Alice Singh, and brother, Jimmy
Singh. I could not have completed this journey without your love, support, and
encouragement.
Finally, I would to thank the rest of my family and friends for supporting me
through this process. I could not have done this without all of your help and support.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………..…...ii
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………...iv
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………...........................1
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………..22
CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY………………………………………..47
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS………………………………………………………………62
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………….91
References……………………………………………………………………………...101
Appendixes……………………………………………………………………………..108
A. Interview Participants Data Table……………………………………………...108
B. Informed Consent Form………………………………………………………..109

iv

ABSTRACT
The phenomenon of branch campuses is illustrated through their vast expansion.
The number of branch campuses has doubled in the past four years, and as of 2012 there
are over 200 branch campuses around the world (Lawton & Katsomitros, 2012).
However, despite this growing trend there is a lack of knowledge and understanding on
how these institutions define their markets, how branch campuses market to their
students, and how students are recruited to these campuses. A single case study was
conducted to examine the role the government had on market forces and how their
involvement influenced the marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by the
University of Nevada Las Vegas, Singapore and the market it is seeking to serve. It also
examined the role the government had on how UNLV defined its market since becoming
part of the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT).
The principal finding from the analysis of interviews and document analysis is
how UNLV Singapore defined its market was contingent on the nature and extent of its
collaboration with the Singaporean government and the increased demand for hospitality
programs in Asia. The Singaporean government utilized its partnership with UNLV to
promote educating the workforce to better supply labor for growing sectors of the
economy. Second, the marketing and recruitment strategies UNLV Singapore utilized to
target their markets were initially developed by the leadership team. However, as this
study reveals, UNLV Singapore now utilizes the branding opportunities afforded to the
institution through the merger with SIT and the reputation of being a U.S. institution to
attract the market that the institution is seeking to serve. This case study revealed the
v

dominant role the Singaporean government had in the growth of international higher
education in the region through examining the development and expansion of UNLV
Singapore and their dependence on the government on how they define their markets.

1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Higher Education institutions from around the world are developing international
collaborations, online programs, and branch campuses in response to globalization. The
increased demand for transnational delivery of higher education is due to increasing
demand for higher education (Altbach, Reisberg, & Rumbly, 2009). This phenomenon is
particularly prominent in Asia where state financing and the extent of provisions cannot
satisfy demand. Governments in Asia look to the market to venture into higher education,
thus diversifying education and proliferating education providers (Mok, 2008). This
insertion of the government into the market is in response to growing pressures generated
by globalization and the reframing of education as a service to be regulated under the
General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS). Singapore is an example where the
local tertiary education institutions are unable to meet existing demand, resulting in
considerable demand for international education (Ziguras, 2003). The development of 12
branch campuses in Singapore and goal to attract 150,000 foreign students to Singapore
by 2015 demonstrates the Singaporean government’s commitment to international higher
education (Lee & Gopinathan, 2005). The development and continued expansion of the
University of Nevada Las Vegas, Singapore (UNLV Singapore), is one example that
illustrates the dominant role the Singaporean government plays in policy decisions
related to higher education and its goal of turning the city-state into a regional hub of
international education. A single case study was conducted to determine the factors that
influence how a branch campus defined its market. This case study revealed the dominant
2

role the Singaporean government has in the growth of international higher education in
the region through examining the development and expansion of UNLV Singapore and
their dependence on the government on how they define their markets.
International university collaboration is a developmental key in today’s global
market with the fastest growing area of university international cooperation through the
internet and offshore programs (Chan, 2004). In 2009, there were 162 branch campuses
around the world, 78 of those are run by universities in the United States (McMurtrie,
2009). In 2006, the Observatory of Borderless Education identified 82 branch campuses
worldwide, more than half are U.S. institutions serving students who are not from the
United States. As of December 2011, there were over 200 degree-awarding international
branch campuses in operation worldwide, with 37 more expected to open during the
subsequent two years (Lawton & Katsomitros, 2012). These data illustrate a 150%
increase in the number of branch campuses worldwide from 2006 to 2012. However,
despite this growing phenomenon there is a lack of understanding and knowledge on the
development of off-shore programs in other countries, how students are recruited to these
campuses, and how branch campuses market themselves to students from around the
world. This lack of knowledge on the markets branch campuses serve is an emerging
issue that needs to be addressed as some established branch campuses are facing
enrollment problems and are operating under capacity (Altbach, 2010).
This study examined the marketing and recruitment practices utilized by the
University of Nevada Las Vegas’s branch campus in Singapore. The focus of this study
was on Singapore because of its goal to become a global center for education. Singapore
3

hosts 12 branch campuses (Global Schoolhouse: Singapore Economic Development
Board, 2010). Some of the challenges of developing successful branch campuses include
problems with funding, lackluster enrollment, difficulty attracting good students, poorly
realized staffing and marketing plans, the economic downturn, and issues with navigating
the region’s customs and cultures (Diconsiglio, 2009). How branch campuses define their
market and the recruitment practices and marketing techniques of branch campuses in
Singapore is an emerging area of interest due to the increased development of branch
campuses and the risks associated with off-shore campuses.
Background of the Problem
Globalization is the development of interconnectivity and interdependence in
social life (Tomlinson, 1999). The impact of globalization on education, in particular
tertiary education, has been profound. First, the prevailing neoliberal approach in trade
has influenced policy-making in the area of education (Kezar, 2004). Students are viewed
as human capital and education is viewed as a “product” consumed by students seeking to
learn skills that will give them higher earning power (Kezar, 2004). In this formulation,
education is seen as a service in an economic model where services constitute 63.4% of
the world’s aggregate Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (CIA World Factbook, 2010).
Second, the increased earning power associated with tertiary educational attainment has
driven demand for higher education. Enrollment in higher education throughout the world
increased from 20% in 2001 to 26% of the total population in 2008 (CIA World
Factbook, 2010). Third, due to the increased demand for higher education, more public
and private for-profit institutions are established each year. Adopting market-based
4

strategies, universities are setting up branch campuses to capitalize on the rising demand
for knowledge and skills and are accepting more full-time fee-paying international
students. Thus, Higher Education institutions and education policy are influenced by
market conditions and are adopting market-driven strategies response to globalization
(Kezar 2004; Gopinathan 2007; and Mok 2008).
Education as a Global Trade Service
As state financing and provision alone cannot satisfy the growing demands for
higher education, governments look to the private sector or other non-state sectors to
venture into higher education, thereby diversifying education services and proliferating
education providers (Mok, 2008). This privatization of higher education has become
increasingly prominent, especially since higher education came to be regarded as a
service to be liberalized and regulated by trade rules under the General Agreement on
Trade and Services (GATS) in 1995 (Mok, 2008). The GATS is a multilateral agreement
through which World Trade Organization members commit to voluntary liberalization of
trade in a wide range of goods and services, including education (Ziguras, 2003). The
purpose of GATS is to progressively and systematically promote free trade by removing
many of the existing barriers and to ensure increased transparency of trade regulations.
Education is one of 12 sectors covered by the agreement. Within the education
sector, the GATS identifies several education sub-sectors using the United Nations
Central Product Classifications, including primary, secondary, tertiary, adult, and other
education services. GATS divides the delivery of services into four modes of supply:
consumption abroad, cross-border delivery, commercial presence, and movement of
5

national persons. Consumption abroad is trade in which the consumer travels abroad to
the country where the supplier is located (such as students traveling aboard to live and
study in another country). Cross-border delivery is trade in which the provider and
recipient of a service remain in their own countries through transnational distance
education. Commercial presence describes trade in which a foreign provider delivers
services in the consumers’ country (such as a branch campus). The final mode of supply
is the movement of national persons across borders to deliver services (lecturers traveling
abroad to teach students enrolled in a transnational program). Governments can commit
to each of these modes of supply separately, and those governments that have lodged
schedules of commitment in education generally place restrictions on some forms of
delivery, but not others.
Development of Cross Border Ventures
The impact of globalization on higher education is demonstrated in the increasing
development of cross-border ventures. Cross-border programs can offer non-degree
certificates, pre-collegiate programs, or degrees at the Bachelors, Masters, or Doctoral
levels (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). Cross-border ventures include the
development of branch campuses, study centers, or a merger model, in which an
educational provider purchases a local higher education institution. Partnerships with
local institutions, which include, “twinning,” “franchise,” and “validation” are other
forms of ventures used by higher education institutions in response to the
internationalization of higher education. Twinning is the practice of a foreign institution
collaborating with a provider in another country so students can take courses at both
6

institutions. The provider in the source country provides the degree (Knight, 2006). In a
franchise, the source institution authorizes a provider in another country to deliver its
courses or programs in that country or in others. Validation is a strategy in which the
source institution recognizes instruction delivered by a provider in another country and
awards its credentials for that instruction (Knight, 2006). The increased development of
cross-border opportunities is attributed to gains that institutions accomplish through these
partnerships and campuses. The opportunity to enhance institutional prestige, generate
and diversify revenue, recruit international students, enhance partnerships with
institutions abroad, enhance educational capacity in other countries, further the
institution’s mission, and deepen the internationalization of the home campus are benefits
from developing cross-border programs and campuses. (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu,
2007). Despite the potential downfalls of developing international ventures, including
financial loss, negative publicity, costs in time, energy, and resources, the number of
branch campuses and joint ventures have increased dramatically in the past few years
(Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). There is still a lack of research addressing the
development and tactics utilized by home institutions to create these international
programs and campuses despite the increased development of international
collaborations.
In lieu of the limited research on cross-border ventures, the proliferation of these
international collaborations began in the 1980s and continues today. In the late 1980s and
early 1990s, U.S. institutions developed branch campuses and programs in Japan because
of its financial prosperity and growing college-aged population. However, 26 out of 30
7

branch campuses failed in Japan due to the financial recession, which began in 1991, and
the decline of college-aged students (Ruby, 2010). This failure highlights the need for
research detailing what home institutions need to consider when creating international
programs and campuses, and what practices can be undertaken to prevent the venture
from collapsing. The second half of the 1990s saw the influx of Australian universities
creating branch campuses in South Asia in response to declining state revenues (Reilly,
2008). The current inundation of education cross-border ventures is occurring in the
Persian Gulf region. Due to the increased development of branch campuses and the lack
of literature that focuses on the policies and practices utilized by branch campuses, the
focus of this study was on how branch campuses identify their markets and how those
markets influence their marketing and recruitment strategies. Currently, there is no single
model of a branch campus. The concern of creating off-shore programs is highlighted by
Japan when 26 out of 30 branch campuses failed in the 1980s due to the location, reduced
demand for education, and brand behind the institution (Ruby, 2010). These three factors
influence a branch campus’s ability to meet enrollment targets and determine success or
failure (Ruby, 2010). The opening of branch campuses involves substantially greater
involvement and risk than other cross-border ventures, but is driven by host governments
that wish to enhance the quality of their local education infrastructure (Mazzarol, Soutar,
& Seng, 2003). Additional factors that promote the development of cross-border ventures
and international collaborations include increasing an institution’s traditional
international activities, sending students abroad, recruiting international students to the
home campus, encouraging international faculty exchanges, generating new income, and
8

increasing international visibility (Armstrong, 2007). Partnerships and branch campuses
are also used to recruit international students who cannot or will not come to the home
campus to study (Armstrong, 2007). Despite the benefits and costs of developing an off-
shore program and the existence of these ventures since the 1980s there is limited
research that discuss the practices and purposes of these programs.
Higher Education in Singapore
Singapore is situated off the southern tip of Malay’s peninsula and is an ethnically
diverse country of four million inhabitants (Tan, 2008). The two most important features
of Singapore’s higher education are the dominant state presence in decision-making and
the importance of economic relevance. Singapore has a Ministry of Education that directs
the formulation and implementation of policies related to education. Singapore’s
technological revolution in 1979 spurred its economic growth and increased social
demand for postsecondary education. In 1997, the Ministry of Education created a
strategy in response to this growing demand and set a goal to become an education hub to
attract ten world-class universities to Singapore within ten years. The Ministry met this
goal in 2002 and by 2006 21 percent of Singapore’s population was enrolled in
universities and 41 percent were enrolled in polytechnics. Both with domestic and
international students, these changes demonstrate the Ministry’s focus on educating a
population who can supply labor for the knowledge economy.
Singapore, since its inception as a nation-state, has emphasized the importance of
education as a means to gain competitive advantage as well as a tool for nation building
(Mok, 2003). Singapore’s local tertiary education institutions’ inability to meet existing
9

demand has resulted in considerable demand for international education. In 2002, the
Singapore government, launched the Global Schoolhouse Initiative to increase the
number of both international institutions and students in Singapore. The overall goal was
to increase employment opportunities in Singapore and to gain international stature as an
education hub. In 2003, Singapore Education, a government initiative, was launched by
the Singapore Economic Development Board to further promote educational expansion.
The Global Schoolhouse program has expanded Singapore’s global education market.
The Singapore education industry is estimated to be worth $2.2 trillion (IIE Network:
Singapore: The Global Schoolhouse, 2010). To compete in the international higher
education market the Singapore Economic Development Board and the Education
Services Division of the Singapore Tourism Board have been tasked with the marketing
and promotion of Singapore Education in overseas markets (IIE Network: Singapore: The
Global Schoolhouse, 2010). The increase in the number of international students from
fewer than 50,000 in 2002 to 80,000 in 2006 demonstrates the increased demand for
international higher education in Singapore. These international students primarily hail
from China, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Myanmar (IIE
Network: Singapore: The Global Schoolhouse, 2010). This growth continues, and the
Singaporean government has set a goal to attract 150,000 foreign students to Singapore
by 2015.
The highly selective approach that the Singaporean government adopted in
directing transnational higher education developments demonstrates the extent to which
the country is a market accelerationist state, which operates based on the logic of the
10

market but intervenes to remove inefficiencies (Mok, 2008). The directive role the
government plays in orchestrating the development of international higher education in
the region demonstrates how the government intervenes in markets. The Singaporean
government decides which educational institutions to partner with and what programs can
be launched to fulfill the nation building agenda of making the city-state a regional hub
of higher education (Mok, 2008).
UNLV Singapore’s Program Features
The Singapore Ministry of Education and the University of Nevada Las Vegas
partnered in the Global Schoolhouse Program to form a branch campus in Singapore. In
August 2006, UNLV Singapore, led by Dean Andy Nazarechuk, inaugurated its first
undergraduate cohort and graduated its first cohort in 2009. UNLV Singapore offers two
programs: the Bachelor of Science in Hotel Administration and the Executive Masters in
Hospitality Administration. UNLV Singapore is a commuter campus located at the
National Library Building in Downtown Singapore. UNLV Singapore will grant degrees
from the University of Nevada Las Vegas’s William F. Harrah College of Hotel
Administration.
In March 2010, UNLV Singapore announced a partnership with Singapore
Institute of Technology (SIT) in creating a new institution of higher education. SIT was
established by the Ministry of Education in 2009 to provide industry-focused university
education for polytechnic graduates in partnership with five local polytechnics and
overseas universities to produce graduates for growth sectors of the economy (In
partnership with SIT, 2010). UNLV Singapore will offer its Bachelor of Science in
11

Hospitality Administration degree through SIT. This new collaboration will allow
Singaporean students a government subsidy from the Ministry of Education to pursue the
UNLV degree program. To accommodate the increase in students, UNLV is slated to
relocate its branch campus to a larger location in 2013 (Singapore Institute of Technology
Partners Five Overseas Universities to Offer Degree Programs, 2010).
This study examined how UNLV Singapore identified its market and how those
markets influenced their marketing and recruitment strategies. UNLV Singapore is a
degree-granting institution that offers two programs: the Bachelor of Science in Hotel
Administration and the Executive Masters in Hospitality Administration (UNLV
Singapore website, 2010). In addition to the courses, students must complete 1,000
work-related hours and an internship to fulfill the requirements for the Bachelor’s degree.
The student body of UNLV Singapore is recruited worldwide with English as the
language of instruction. UNLV Singapore is a commuter campus and currently with 200
undergraduate students. Two full-time faculty members reside in Singapore while the
remaining faculty members come from the Harrah’s Hotel College in Las Vegas. Due to
the small number of staff, students play a role in recruiting and admissions through a
student ambassador program in which they represent UNLV Singapore at international
recruitment fairs. UNLV Singapore is one way that the University of Nevada Las Vegas
is responding to globalization and the internationalization of higher education.
This study focused on how branch campuses identify their markets and how those
markets influence their recruitment strategies. Marketing, as it relates to higher education,
is the analysis, planning, implementation, and control of carefully formulated programs
12

designed to bring about voluntary exchanges of values with target markets to achieve
institutional objectives (Neustadt, 1994). Through market research, institutions of higher
education are able to define more precisely the services they provide and learn to
communicate more effectively with those audiences interested in their service (Neustadt,
1994). This study also examines the role of the state and the impact the government has
on market forces. Due to the strong role played by the Singaporean government through
its higher education policies, and its focus on economic impact in its decision-making
processes, this study will question the role the government had on how UNLV Singapore
defines its market.
Statement of the Problem
Despite the emergence of branch campuses, there is a lack of knowledge about
how practices utilized by off-shore campuses are developed, which is problematic due to
recent failed international collaborations. George Mason University closed their branch
campus in the Middle East citing mainly monetary issues without graduating a single
student (Lewin, 2009). The failure of branch campuses and the significant amount of time
and resources allocated to these ventures call into question the sustainability of off-shore
campuses (Altbach, 2010). Threats to the sustainability of branch campuses include being
able to attract faculty to branch campuses, the ability to replicate the student body from
the home campus at the branch campus, and the changing conditions of higher education
(Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). With regard to the student body at branch
campuses, Altbach (2010) argues that the pool of available students who will attend these
campuses will become unpredictable as more branch campuses are developed, and there
13

are challenges in replicating the quality of students found at the home institution. Home
campus institutions need to recruit the most qualified and competitive students to
maintain their quality and reputation. To ensure the long-term viability of a branch
campus, universities need to be strategic when developing and structuring their off-shore
locations. In addition to viability, universities seeking to develop branch campuses
abroad need to understand the host country’s role in international higher education and
how that role will influence the markets the branch campus will serve.
Purpose of the Study
To address these concerns, this study examined the role the government had on
market forces and how their involvement influenced the marketing and recruitment
strategies utilized by a branch campus and the market it is seeking to serve. It also
examined the role the government has on how UNLV defined its market since becoming
part of the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT). UNLV Singapore inaugurated its
first cohort of students in 2006 and enrolled 200 undergraduate students in 2011. This
study utilized UNLV Singapore as a case study to examine how branch campuses
identified their markets and how those markets influenced their marketing and
recruitment practices. Various considerations for institutions that have or are developing
branch campuses when recruiting students will be discussed. By thoroughly examining
how UNLV Singapore identified its market, this descriptive case study will enrich the
field and add to knowledge and understanding about branch campuses. Particular
attention was paid to how the marketing and recruitment techniques of the branch campus
were developed and were influenced by the market UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve.
14

The lack of knowledge on the development and motivation behind the practices
utilized by branch campuses and the role the government had on how they defined their
market is one facet of the problem that needed to be examined and was addressed in this
study. This case study provided an analysis of the marketing and recruitment on one
institution’s branch campus to determine how the market they were targeting was
influenced by the market accelerationst state approach utilized by the government. The
role the government had on how UNLV Singapore defined its market and influenced
their recruitment practices was addressed in this study. The following were the
overarching research questions and supplemental questions that the proposed case study
addressed.
Research Questions
This case study attempted to answer the following research questions:
How does an off-shore branch campus, such as UNLV Singapore, identify its
market, and how does the market shape its recruitment strategies?
Sub Questions:
1. How does UNLV Singapore define its market and what factors contributed to
that definition?
2. What marketing and recruitment strategies are currently undertaken at UNLV
Singapore, how were they developed, and in what ways were they shaped by the market
the campus serves?

15

Significance of the Study
Criticisms against the longevity of branch campuses include the inability of the
home campus to replicate its curriculum and student body at the branch campus, and
universities that have established them have not considered the long-term implications.
Altbach (2010) points out that for a branch campus to provide an education equivalent to
the home institution, its student body must largely match that of the home campus in
terms of selectivity and quality. The review of how UNLV Singapore identified its
market and the role the government had on how they defined their market is highly
significant for institutions considering developing a branch campus, understanding the
current practices utilized by branch campuses, and comparing the practices of branch
campuses, such as UNLV Singapore, to the home institution. The goal of this study was
to determine how branch campuses identified their markets and how those markets
influenced their marketing and recruitment practices.
This study contributed to the broader knowledge on branch campuses by
providing a comprehensive description and analysis of one institution’s development of
recruiting and marketing techniques to attract students to a branch campus in Singapore.
This study demonstrated the influence the Singaporean government had on the
development and success of a branch campus through their influence on how the branch
campus defined its market. While this research focused on the University of Nevada Las
Vegas and its branch campus in Singapore, the findings can be utilized by other
institutions that have established a branch campus or interested in developing
international collaborations around the world. These findings enable other researchers to
16

identify how branch campuses determine their markets, the role the government can have
on how they define their market, and the different recruitment and marketing techniques
they use to recruit their students. Specifically, this study enables administrators and
researchers examining the development of branch campuses to understand how the
marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by UNLV Singapore were influenced by the
government’s involvement in defining its markets. This study highlighted the role the
government had on how a branch campus identified its market.
Additionally, these findings are beneficial to administrators who are interested in
developing off-shore campuses. The doubling of branch campuses in the past four years
illustrates the need to understand the practices utilized by these institutions. The purpose
of this study was to understand the markets branch campuses serve and the different
recruitment techniques they use to recruit their students. Administrators at branch
campuses can use this information to examine how they identify their markets and revise
and update current marketing and recruitment strategies. They can also examine the role
the host countries government has on how they define their markets and how those
partnerships may benefit the branch campus’s viability. UNLV can utilize the findings to
evaluate and update their current marketing and recruitment practices at their home and
branch campus to attract and retain their students. In addition to highlighting the
marketing and recruitment strategies of a branch campus, this case study sought to
provide insight to administrators considering developing a branch campus.
The creation of branch campuses is likely to continue in the United Arab Emirates
and key educational hubs such as Hong Kong and Singapore due to their hope of
17

becoming new education hubs (Sidhu, 2009). In addition to focusing on the recruitment
and marketing strategies of a branch campus, this study highlighted how branch
campuses identified their markets and the role the Singaporean government had on they
defined their market. This research provides a comprehensive description of how a
branch campus identified its market and how those markets influenced their marketing
and recruitment practices. Despite the increasing development of branch campuses there
is a lack of knowledge about the practices used by these campuses, how they are
developed, and how they compare to the home institution. The goal of this research was
to provide an in-depth picture of how a branch campus in Singapore identified its market
and how the students they are seeking to serve influenced how they recruit and market to
their students. Through its description and analysis, this study highlighted the nature of
branch campuses by identifying the influence the government had on how a branch
campus defined its markets, which can be utilized by higher education institutions that
have or are interested in developing a branch campus.
Research Design and Methodology
Mok’s definition of a market accelerationist state is used in this study to illustrate
the role the government has on the higher education market in Singapore. Singapore is
representative of Mok’s definition of a market accelerationist state because the
government intervenes in markets to accelerate market forces (Mok, 2005). Singapore is
an example of this phenomenon because the government plays a proactive role in higher
education formation (Mok, 2008). The partnerships that the Ministry of Education has
developed with overseas universities and the role it has taken in making Singapore a
18

major exporter of higher education demonstrates that the government intervenes in these
markets. By utilizing Mok’s definition of a market accelerationist state the researcher was
able to frame the role the Singaporean government had on how UNLV Singapore defined
their markets and affected their marketing and recruitment strategies.
Case study methodology was used to describe how UNLV Singapore identified its
market and how the market influenced their recruitment strategies. The purpose of the
case study approach was to gather comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information
about each case of interest (Patton, 2002). Case study methodology provides an in-depth
description of an individual phenomenon. Observations, interviews, and document
analysis were used to collect the data for this study.
Limitations
The generalizability of these findings is limited as this case study examined the
recruitment and marketing strategies of a branch campus located in Singapore. Since this
study only examined one branch campus, the findings will mainly be applicable to branch
campuses in Singapore, where 7% of branch campuses are located. Another limitation
was the researcher’s lack of time to conduct interviews, which prevented her from
attaining a higher sample size and examining the complete recruiting cycle for a cohort of
students.
The limitations of this study were attributed to the methodology used to attain the
data. A major limitation of case study methodology was the inability to generalize case
studies beyond the study itself (Yin, 2006). The research methods used in this study
including observations, interviews, and document analysis posed limitations. A limitation
19

of conducting observations is the researcher may be seen as intrusive or the participants
may alter their behavior due to the presence of the researcher (Creswell, 2009).
Limitations in interviews are bias responses caused by the researcher’s presence and
interviews provide information in a designated place rather than the natural field setting
(Creswell, 2009). Another related limitation for this study was the interviewer’s inability
to submit her transcripts back to the interviewee for accuracy. Limitations of document
analysis include materials being incomplete and documents being outdated or inaccurate
(Creswell, 2009). Finally, the role of the researcher in qualitative methodology is a
limitation due to the researcher’s preconceptions and unconscious biases.
Delimitations
This study highlighted the marketing techniques and recruitment practices utilized
by UNLV Singapore and how the market they are seeking to serve influenced these
practices. This study was also limited by the units of analysis, which in this study were
individuals who developed, oversee, and implement the marketing and recruitment
practices at UNLV Singapore. Due to this limited sample, the study was limited to
describing the marketing and recruitment practices from the perspective of
administrators, faculty, and students and not from other stakeholders such as government
officials from both the U.S. and Singapore who may also benefit from this study. Finally,
this study was not to be used to determine the success of UNLV Singapore. UNLV
Singapore is an exemplar for the phenomenon of branch campuses being developed
around the world.

20

Definitions
The nomenclature used to describe the internationalization strategies of education
providers is varied and still in flux. Terms such as transnational education, off-shore,
borderless, and cross-border are sometimes used interchangeably or in contradictory
ways within the literature (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). The definitions
highlighted in this section were used throughout this study and in some cases some terms
are interchangeable.
The following definitions contextualized the emergence of the internalization of
higher education and the various ways institutions are developing international programs
and campuses:
Transnational education: All types of higher education study programs, or sets of
course of study, or educational services (including those of distance education) in which
the learners are located in a country different from the one where the awarding institution
is based (The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and
the Council of Europe)
Cross border education: The movement of education across national
jurisdictional or geographic borders (Knight, 2006).
Branch campus: An off-shore operation, run independently or through a joint
venture, awarding students degrees from the home institution (Altbach, 2010).
Provider: Those involved in cross-border education because it encompasses the
broad range of companies and institution types driving the development of international
programs and campuses (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). Provider institutions
21

include non-profit, public, and independent colleges and universities, for-profit
universities, and other types of companies both privately owned and publically traded
such as Laureate Education (Bollag, 2006).
Home or source campuses: Institutions or programs providing education services
to foreign countries.
Host countries: Countries where the international program or branch campus is
established.

22

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The development of branch campuses is one example of how institutions are
internationalizing their campuses. To contextualize the development of branch campuses
one must understand the various factors that contribute to the internationalization of
higher education. Chapter two provides an overview of the factors that influence how an
off-shore campus defines its market. First, the concepts of globalization and
internationalization are reviewed in the context of the state and how they relate to higher
education. Second, the concept of the market accelerationist state is discussed to illustrate
the role the government can have on market forces. Third, the factors that facilitate and
impede the development of cross-border programs are discussed to illustrate the various
factors stakeholders have to consider when creating international programs. This study
focuses on the University of Nevada Las Vegas’s branch campus in Singapore; therefore
the literature will focus on branch campuses. Fourth, the development of branch
campuses in Singapore and an overview of the education system in Singapore are
explored through examining historical and current research. The influx of branch
campuses in Singapore and the education system in Singapore influence the operational
and strategic initiatives of institutions pursuing international education ventures in the
country. The final section of this review focuses on the higher education marketing and
recruitment literature in the United States because there is limited research about the
marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by branch campuses. Studies that focus on
23

the practices used to recruit domestic and international students are examined because the
recruitment and marketing strategies used to target these two groups are distinct.
The focus of this research study is on understanding the markets branch campuses
are seeking to serve and how those markets influence their marketing and recruitment
strategies.
The following literature contextualizes the factors that influence these marketing
and recruiting strategies. This case study provides an analysis of the marketing and
recruitment practices on one institution’s branch campus to determine how these
practices were influenced by the market the institution is seeking to serve.
Globalization and Internationalization of Higher Education Sector
Various definitions are used to define globalization and internationalization when
applied to the higher education context. The following definitions illustrate the factors
influencing the development of cross-border education. Altbach and Knight (2007)
defined globalization “as the economic, political, and societal forces pushing 21
st
century
higher education toward greater international involvement” (p. 290). Altbach and
Knight’s definition illustrates the influence globalization is having on the
internationalization of higher education institutions. Similarly, Hemsley-Brown and
Oplatka (2006) estimated that more than 1.6 million students apply for admission to
tertiary education outside of their home countries, with more than 547,000 studying in the
U.S. The increased demand for higher education is contributing to the internationalization
of higher education.
24

The malleable definitions of the terms “globalization” and “internationalization”
illustrate that higher education researchers are struggling to apply and understand how
these concepts will impact universities and colleges throughout the world. The impact
globalization has on society is not restricted to higher education. Scott (1998) stated that
globalization “is used to refer to the impact of global changes that cannot be easily
fended off by national governments and the growth of hybrid world cultures created by
the mingling of global-brand culture and indigenous traditions” (p. 122). In addition to
creating new hybrid cultures, McBurnie (2000) stated that in higher education “becoming
global” is used as shorthand both for locating operations in various countries and for
increasing the amount and the proportion of international students in universities. Carnoy
and Rhoten (2005) identified five ways that education is impacted by globalization:
financial, labor market, educational, information technology, and information networks.
Countries must raise funds to educate a larger portion of the population, while other
nations are trying to improve their education system without raising their education
budgets. Nation-states must also train their labor force to attract foreign investment. The
World Bank (2002) stated that the knowledge economy is the most important factor in
economic development. Additionally, the competitive global economy pressures national
educational systems to submit to international scrutiny and comparisons. Information
technology offers new opportunities to educate students through on-line and distance
education programs. Finally, information networks connect people from different cultures
together. In response to globalization, higher education institutions utilize tactics such as
branch campuses and partnerships to internationalize their efforts.
25

Internationalization of Higher Education
The internationalization of the higher education sector began in earnest in the
1980s and continued strongly through the 1990s; triggered by a series of “push” factors
originating from countries sending students abroad to study, but facilitated by “pull”
factors inherent from the supplier countries and institutions (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2008).
The “push” factors for students included a lack of available places within home countries,
the absence of courses at home, a desire to learn more about overseas countries, and a
wish to migrate to the supplier country. The most common “pull” factors were knowledge
of the host country, perceived quality of education in a host country, recognition of prior
qualifications, and the recognition of the host country qualifications in the student’s home
country (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2008). The “push” of institutional goals and “pull” of
emerging opportunities promote the internationalization of higher education.
Increased levels of competition within global markets and technology
enhancements promote the internationalization of higher education. Through
internationalization endeavors, a university can increase its influence, visibility, and
market share on the international scene (Chan, 2004). Strategic options for international
education service providers include opening branch campuses, partnering with private
sector groups to provide “corporate university” delivery models, partnering with local
institutions in the host country, and using information and communication technologies
(ICT) based delivery to create virtual universities (Mazzarol, Soutar, & Seng, 2003).
Through these ventures, institutions can pursue and diversify their revenue, enhance their
26

prestige, advance the internationalization of their institutions, improve institutional
quality, and contribute to the development of the local higher education system.
The increased demand for higher education and the benefits that cross border
education provide at the national and institutional level further the internationalization of
higher education. Developed countries pursue their own economic, cultural, and security
interests through international education (Guilar, 2001). The increased demand for higher
education and many countries’ inability to meet the demand for higher education also
fuel the development of cross-border ventures. The increased demand for higher
education is evident through the fact that enrollments in secondary education grew
tenfold from 40 million in 1950 to over 400 million by 2000 (UNESCO, 2007). During
the same time period, enrollment in tertiary level education increased around 14 times
from 6.5 million in 1950 to over 88 million in 2000 (UNESCO, 2007). UNESCO (2007)
noted that at the start of the 21
st
century roughly 4 out of 10 young people living in the 30
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries were
enrolled in universities. Currently, countries such as China, lack the capacity to meet their
own higher education demands (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007).
In addition, the increased number of international students studying abroad and
the revenue generated through internationalization efforts promotes the development of
cross-border education. From 1995-1999, total enrollments of international students
throughout the OECD countries grew by 9%, compared to 5% growth among domestic
student enrollments. The international trade in education services generated $30 billion
revenues in 1999. In 2004, 2.5 million students were studying overseas compared to 1.4
27

million in the early 1990s (UNESCO, 2007). Forecasts suggest that by 2025 there will be
more than 7 million students studying overseas (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2008). The
increasing demand for higher education and the lack of capacity of many countries to
meet their students’ needs fuel cross-border education through studying abroad and
foreign providers entering under-served markets.
Cross border education provides benefits at the national and institutional level and
furthers the internationalization of higher education. At the national level, various forms
of cross-border education provide an attractive set of study options for international and
local students, and the increased access to higher education fosters appropriate skills and
outlooks for graduates who will be operating in an increasingly international workforce.
At the institutional level, internationalization of higher education contributes to the
academic tradition of international scholarship. For the host countries, off-shore
education can fill a niche by offering programs and disciplines not offered by local
institutions (McBurnie, 2000). Due to increasing number of cross-border ventures, higher
education institutions recognize the need to market themselves in a climate of
international competition (Hemsley-Brown & Oplatka, 2006).
In the international education industry, three distinct waves can be identified that
demonstrate the growth of international collaborations and a re-conceptualization of how
institutions are internationalizing their campuses. In the first wave, students traveled to a
host nation to study at a chosen institution. In the second wave, institutions created
collaborations with local institutions or private enterprises to create off-shore programs.
In the third wave, institutions create branch campuses in foreign markets and the
28

developed “on-line” courses through information technology (Mazzarol, Soutar, & Seng,
2003). The categorization of the international education industry into three waves
illustrates the increased demand for higher education and the numerous measures that
higher education institutions are undertaking to internationalize their campuses.
Institutions of higher education throughout the world are creating international
collaborations and off-shore campuses to compete for students and to create new avenues
for research, funding, visibility, and increase educational opportunities (Green, Eckel,
Calderon, & Luu, 2007).
The Competition State
In response to the growing pressures generated by globalization, modern states
have attempted to reinvent themselves by moving beyond the welfare state to become the
competition state (Jordana & Levi-Faur, 2005). The competition state has pursued
marketization to locate economic activities within the national territory that contribute to
national wealth and competition (Cerny, 1997). Governments from across the globe
facing competitive pressures have undertaken regulatory reforms such as privatization of
state-owned industries or publically owned organizations, such as the post office or
universities, to open up new markets to multiple providers (Mok, 2008). To enhance the
efficiency of public policy and management, states have become a generator of markets
by deregulating some areas of the markets and promoting competition in others (Mok,
2008).
The actions of the competition state do not result in the retreat of the state from
the market, but rather a reassertion of the role of the state under changing social and
29

economic circumstances (Lev-Faur, 1998). The regulatory state in Asia has emerged
from a context of a combined strong state and a free market economy (Mok, 2008).
The Market Accelerationist State in Asia
Levi-Faur’s observations regarding the transformation of the welfare state to a
new form of state may be seen in the transformation of several states in Asia after the
economic crisis of 1997 (Mok, 2008). To promote basic national interests through the
creation and enforcement of competition, the developmental states in Asia have taken the
opportunity offered by fundamental economic restructuring processes to transform
themselves into market accelerationist states by proactively shaping market institutions
for the benefit of market creation (Mok, 2005). Market accelerationist states intervene in
markets to accelerate market forces (Mok, 2008). Also, the market accelerationist state
operates according to the logic of the market, while still intervening in markets to remove
inefficiencies (Mok, 2005). The making of the market accelerationist state requires a
restructuring of state functions, shifting the boundary between the public and private
sectors, thereby enlarging the latter, with the government’s role changing from direct
provision to regulation (World Bank, 1994).
The formation of the market accelerationist state in Asia underscores that nation-
states still maintain a considerable amount of control over their domestic policy and
governance instead of being entirely guided and dictated by global trends (Mok, 2008).
Moreover, this activist role in policy has a profound impact on higher education, as
detailed in this study.

30

The Development of Cross-Border Education
This section discusses the potential benefits and challenges of creating
international collaborations, in particular, the phenomenon of branch campuses.
Transnational higher education dates back to the 1950s when U.S. institutions provided
off-shore education services to serve their students via study abroad programs or U.S.
military personnel (Naidoo, 2009). Currently, online and offshore programs are the
fastest growing areas of university international cooperation (Chan, 2004). To create a
successful collaborative relationship with an international partner, an institution must
have a clear mission and international objectives, institutional support, time, human and
financial resources, and communication (Chan, 2004).
The development of cross-border education and technological advances drives the
internationalization of higher education. UNESCO and OECD define cross border
education as, “…higher education that takes place in situations where the teacher,
student, program, institution/provider, or course materials cross national jurisdictional
borders.” Cross-border education may include higher education by public/private and for-
profit/not for profit providers. It encompasses a wide range of modalities in a continuum
from face-to-face to distance learning (UNESCO & OECD, 2005). Cross-border
education encompasses various types of international collaborations including online
programs, joint collaborations between institutions, and institutions creating branch
campuses. Naidoo (2010) highlighted four rationales for the growth in transnational
higher education. First, the mutual understanding concept discusses how the
internationalization policies for higher education are based on strengthening ties between
31

countries through the creation of networks of political and business elites (Naidoo, 2010).
Under the skilled migration rationale, internationalization is used to attract foreign
students who are encouraged to stay in the source country after graduating to contribute
to its economy (Naidoo, 2010). The revenue generation strategy highlights the market
and trade approach of transnational higher education (Naidoo, 2010). The capacity
development rationale views transnational higher education as a way to meet unmet local
demand for education. The capacity development rationale also views cross-border
ventures as a way to increase the capacity and capability for quality education (Naidoo,
2010). Cross-border education efforts allow institutions to pursue objectives that promote
their prestige, visibility, diversify their revenue streams, and contribute to nation-building
by helping meet the educational needs of other countries. The increased demand for
higher education, the appeal of a foreign education at home, government support, and the
rise of English-language instruction facilitate the creation of cross-border education
(Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007).
The creation of cross-border education ventures through programs and branch
campuses is beneficial both at the national and individual level. McBurnie (2006)
identified potential benefits of off-shore education for the host nation and students. For
the host nation, international collaborations help them meet local student demand for
higher education. For students, they can earn a foreign degree in their home country at a
lower cost than studying abroad, save money on air fares, and have a better opportunity
to achieve employment. Through offshore collaborations between higher education
institutions, the host country’s economy is better able to meet the demand for education
32

and students can earn a foreign degree without incurring the costs of studying abroad.
Transnational education can also assist importer countries with their balance of payments
by reducing the outflow of funds that accompany students who study abroad (McBurnie,
2006). A benefit of international collaborations among higher education institutions for
the local community is the presence of foreign providers, which can create local
employment for academic and managerial staff. Finally, in the case of branch campuses
there is the expansion of local infrastructure, curriculum material, and administrative
systems (McBurnie, 2006). The creation of offshore collaborations can positively impact
the host nation, the community where the program is housed, and students who are
unable to study abroad to attain a foreign degree.
Challenges of Cross Border Education
Despite the attractions of cross-border education endeavors, there are also
potential dangers for importers of international programs. The challenges of cross-border
education are presented to highlight the issues that home institutions need to consider
when developing these ventures and how these issues can impact the practices used by
cross-border ventures. McBurnie (2006) identified some of the dangers such as
transnational education exacerbating socio-economic inequities of student access by
favoring individuals who can afford to pay their fees. There can also be detrimental
effects of the nation-building role of education due to the influence of foreign curriculum
and pedagogy. McBurnie (2006) referred to this phenomenon as “cultural imperialism.”
A major concern of transnational programs is the potential for substandard provision of
education if appropriate quality measures are not in place and enforced (McBurnie,
33

2006). In the United Kingdom and Australia, concern about the quality of cross-border
instruction has led to the development of specific national quality assurance policies for
new or expanded cross-border initiatives (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). Chan
(2004) also identified challenges in the management of international educational
networks. The challenges include the individual culture that permeates education
organizations, the issue of funding, and the maintenance of these collaborations once the
principal initiators are no longer involved with the program.
The above issues highlight the numerous factors higher education institutions and
host countries must consider when creating an offshore program. To contextualize the
factors that influence the marketing and recruitment strategies for an off-shore branch
campus, the benefits and challenges of cross-border education endeavors must be
understood. The following section discusses the phenomenon of branch campuses, a
particular type of cross-border education, which is the focus of the current study.
Branch Campuses
The idea of branch campuses is not novel to higher education institutions;
however, the extent and degree to which these campuses are emerging illustrate the
impact of globalization and internationalization on higher education. According to the
Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, the number of international branch
campuses has increased by 43 percent to a total of 162 between 2006 and 2009 (Becker,
2010). Seventy-eight campuses, equivalent to 48 percent of all current international
branch campuses, are set-up by U.S. institutions (Becker, 2010). Reily (2008) identified
three waves of branch campus formation: 1) U.S. programs in Japan in the late 1980s to
34

early 1990s, 2) Australian development in Southeast Asia in the second half of the 1990s,
and 3) the current boom in the Persian Gulf by various developed countries.
Despite the emergence of branch campuses, there is a lack of consensus by researchers as
to what constitutes a branch campus and there is limited research on this topic. Though a
recognized standard as to what exactly constitutes a legitimate branch campus does not
exist, various researchers have provided their own interpretation. In practice, McBurnie
(2006) noted that branch campuses range from rented shop fronts on the premises of a
partner to traditional bricks and mortar campuses. Reily (2008) defines a “branch
campus” as an institution that: 1) grants Bachelor’s Degrees, 2) was founded by an
institution based in another country, 3) follows that institution’s curriculum, 4) caters
predominately to students in the host country, and 5) does not depend on the faculty of
any academic institutions within the host country. The Observatory on Borderless Higher
Education describes an international branch as an off-shore entity of a higher education
institution operated by the institution or through a joint venture in which the institution is
a partner in the name of the foreign institution (Altbach, 2010). The Observatory also
identified three types of branch campuses by funding source. The first type includes
campuses supported completely by the institution. The second are branch campuses that
are supported externally by a national or regional government or other organizations in
the host county. The third type of campuses use facilities provided by a company or
governments that serve to attract foreign providers to the country. Finally, Verbik and
Merkley (2006) characterized a branch campus as an off-shore operation, run
independently or through a joint venture that awards degrees from the home institution.
35

Though there are various definitions of branch campuses and lack of consensus of what
legitimizes a branch campus, these ventures are growing phenomenon in the
internationalization of higher education. This study focused on UNLV’s campus in
Singapore, which is a branch campus that is supported solely by the institution.
Benefits and Challenges of Branch Campuses
The creation of branch campuses offers benefits to the host country, the original
campus, and students. Benefits at the institutional level include a new source of revenue,
expanded study abroad opportunities, and broadening student perspectives by putting
students into regular contact with overseas colleagues (Reilly, 2008). In addition, branch
campuses benefit the host countries through economic development, improved
scholarship, bases for environmental cooperation, democratic reform, and improved
health care (Guilar, 2001). The opening of branch campuses involves substantially
greater involvement and risk than other forms of international collaborations such as joint
programs due to increased costs and time. However, they are developed by host
governments to enhance the quality of their local education infrastructure (Mazzarol,
Soutar, & Seng, 2003). Despite their potential benefits there are numerous risks
institutions have to consider when creating a branch campus. Reilly (2008) identified
potential risks of branch campuses that include financial failure and tarnishing the
original campus’s international reputation if the education in the overseas campuses is not
equivalent to the main campuses. In his study of an American institution setting up a
branch campus in Senegal, Guilar (2001) identified factors that need to be in place for a
branch campus to be successful. The institution should respond to an educational need
36

identified by the host country, form connections among leaders from both countries, be
an American university with an American education, accreditation, and faculty, involve a
staff of competent and energetic staff personnel, and develop effective and intercultural
cooperation and communication among the staff, faculty, and administrators. For a
branch campus to provide an experience and education equivalent to the original campus,
the student body must largely match that of the original campus in terms of selectivity
and quality (Altbach, 2010). Branch campuses rarely reflect the original campus in terms
of facilities, curriculum, or the experience of studying at the original campus (Altbach,
2010). Despite the benefits of creating a branch campus, there are numerous factors and
considerations that the original campus and host country need to consider for the branch
campus to persist and maintain the quality of the original institution.
Singapore
This study focused on the creation of a branch campus in Singapore. The
increased demand for tertiary education, the revenue generated by the education industry,
and the development of cross-border education ventures contribute to the expansion of
higher education in Singapore. Sixty-five percent of the education establishments in
Singapore commenced operations in 1990 (as cited in World Bank, CERI & OECD,
2007). This section provides an overview of the education system and the development of
branch campuses in Singapore.
Singapore’s education system did not become centralized until the 1940s when
the government devised the Ten-Year Program for universal primary education (Saha &
Ang, 2010). The Ten-Year Program, adopted in 1947, is comprised of principles that still
37

permeate Singapore’s stance on education. The first principle is education should be
aimed at fostering the capacity for self-government and the idea of civic loyalty and
responsibility. Second, education should be equal for all. Lastly, free primary education
should be offered in English, Chinese, Malay, and Tamil (Gwee, 1969). Prior to this
centralization, education in Singapore was provided by missionaries, wealthy individuals,
and clan associations (Mok & Tan, 2004).
The Singaporean government through the Ministry of Education (MOE)
determines and plays a pivotal role in the formulation and implementation of policies
related to education. Singapore’s technical revolution in 1979 spurred the government to
raise the educational level of the population and increase opportunities in higher
education to give its citizens a competitive edge in the market economy. In 1997, the
Ministry of Education developed a new mission statement, “Thinking School, Learning
Nation (TSLN),” which emphasized critical and innovative thinking, engaging students in
active and reflective learning, incorporating information technology in the classroom, and
to nurture independent learning habits (Saha & Ang, 2010). In addition to the new
mission, the Ministry also developed the “Desired Outcomes for Education” in 1997
(Ministry of Education, 2010). A person schooled in the Singapore education system will
have the desired outcomes of becoming a confident and self-directed learner, an active
contributor, and a concerned citizen (Ministry of Education, 2010). Primary to higher
education, institutions are held accountable by key stage outcomes and quality assurance
measures to ensure that these outcomes are met. The need for increasing the skilled work
force, the inability for local tertiary providers to meet existing demand, and the
38

globalization of society are factors that contribute to the creation of branch campuses in
Singapore.
Higher Education in Singapore
At the time of Singapore’s independence in 1965, there were only two universities
in the country. Currently, there are 3 publically funded universities, 1 private university
for adult learners, 5 publically funded polytechnics, 1 publically funded institute of
technical education, 2 private arts colleges, and 12 branch campuses (Ministry of
Education, 2010). However, Singapore’s local tertiary education institutions failed to
meet existing demands that resulted in the considerable need for international education
(Saha & Ang, 2010).
Impact of Globalization on Singapore’s Higher Education Market
Being a small city-state and open economy, Singapore has adapted to the changes
resulting from globalization challenges (Mok, 2006). The impact of globalization on
Singapore is evident through the MOE higher education policies and development. The
whole movement of marketization, corporatization, and diversification of higher
education in Singapore has been launched against a strong state context (Mok, 2006). The
Singapore government is attempting to change people’s mindsets through the reform of
its education system (Mok, 2006). Policy strategies along the line of marketization,
privatization, and a societal-sources-led approach will become more prominent and
popular in shaping future directions and developments of education in Singapore (Mok,
2006).

39

International Higher Education
In 2002, the Singapore government launched the Global Schoolhouse Initiative to
increase the number of international students and institutions in Singapore (Economic
Development Board, 2009). In 2003, Singapore Education, a government initiative, was
launched by the Singapore Economic Development Board to promote educational
expansion and reinvent Singapore as an education hub. The Global Schoolhouse program
has expanded Singapore’s global education market. The Singapore education industry is
estimated to be worth $2.2 trillion (IIE Network: Singapore: The Global Schoolhouse,
2010).
Singapore is home to 12 branch campuses, 7 percent of the total share of branch
campuses in the world (The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2010).
Reasons behind the development of branch campuses in Singapore include the education
system’s bilingual policy, English as the language of instruction, presence of
multinational corporations and international organizations, multicultural atmosphere,
geographic desirability, and world-class education system (Singapore Economic
Development Board, 2010). Currently, more than 80,000 international students from
more than 120 nationalities are studying in Singapore.
The selectiveness of the Singaporean government in inviting overseas partners to
establish branch campuses and the strategic manner in which the government
orchestrated the project to shape the city-state into a major exporter of higher education
in the region illustrate how the Singaporean government intervenes in markets. The
government decides who the partners are and what programs can be launched to fulfill
40

the nation-building agenda of making the Singapore a regional hub of education (Mok,
2008). The highly selective approach that the Singaporean government adopted in
directing transnational higher education developments demonstrates the extent to which
Singapore is a market accelerationist state operating according to the logic of the market,
while still intervening to remove inefficiencies (Mok, 2008).
Overview of Marketing and Recruitment Practices in U.S. Higher Education
To contextualize the influence of globalization on marketing and recruitment
strategies of an off-shore branch campus, an overview of the marketing and recruitment
practices within U.S. higher education is provided for this study. The adoption of
marketing techniques and focus on globalization and internationalization illustrate the
influence that the business sector is having on the re-conceptualization of higher
education. The Observatory on Borderless Education has identified that more than half of
the branch campuses worldwide developed by U.S. institutions are serving students who
are not from the United States (Green, Eckel, Calderon, & Luu, 2007). To contextualize
the marketing and recruitment strategies of an U.S. institution’s branch campus, one must
first understand the marketing and recruitment practices within U.S. higher education.
Due to reduced government support and increased competition for students, education
has changed from being a public service driven by professionals towards a market-driven
service, fueled by purchasers (Chan, 2004). Universities are now “market-oriented”
organizations and have to develop good relationships not only with students, but also
employers and parents because their concerns and needs are regarded as the central
reason for the organization’s existence (Chan, 2004). Higher education institutions are
41

adopting marketing techniques from other sectors due to increased competition for
students and their dependency on student tuition due to reduced federal support.
Higher Education Marketing Strategies
Higher education institutions utilize various marketing techniques and strategies
to recruit prospective students and increase institutional visibility. The use of marketing
techniques within higher education has been prevalent for the past few decades. Kotler
and Fox (1985) defined education marketing as early as 1985 as the analysis, planning,
implementation, and control of carefully formulated programs designed to bring about
voluntary exchanges of values with a target market to achieve organizational objectives.
Maringe and Fosket (2002) identified four broad marketing strategies that university
institutions tend to use: the public relations approach, sales approach, customer
satisfaction approach, and marketing as strategy approach. First, the public relations
approach focuses on building a strong image and institutional reputation (Smith, Scott, &
Lynch, 1995). The sales approach is based on the institutions’ need to increase their
market share (Maringe & Foskett, 2002). The customer satisfaction strategy is associated
with institutions having well-established marketing units or departments (Maringe &
Foskett, 2002). Marketing as strategy defines institutions that have adopted marketing
strategies into their strategic planning (Maringe & Foskett, 2002). In Maringe and
Foskett’s study the public relations approach was the most frequently used marketing
approach by the sampled institutions. Marketing in higher education is not an institutional
priority and typically remains buried within mainstream university activities (Maringe &
Forskett, 2002). They identified three broad principles to inform good marketing
42

practices at higher education institutions. First, how marketing is pursued and developed
has to coincide with the institutional culture. Second, institutions need marketing
strategies that are strategic and long-term and are an integral component of the
institution’s development plans. Finally, faculty and staff throughout the institution need
to be aware of and recognize the role they can have in the marketing process (Maringe &
Foskett, 2002). To increase institutional visibility and attract students, higher education
institutions need to create marketing strategies that coincide with the institution’s
mission, that are strategic in nature, and utilize all the stakeholders within an institution.
Researchers highlighted marketing techniques that institutions and administrators
can utilize to effectively recruit students. Hossler (1999) identified that the ability to
segment prospective student markets and reach them with targeted, personalized
information and recruitment activities are more important than glossy publications and
the interpersonal skills of admissions professionals. In addition, targeted recruitment
activities across university departments can promote student recruitment. An integrated
marketing effort that uses the resources of the public relations staff and the office of
admissions can build a stronger applicant pool (Hossler, 1999). The type of media
institutions use to market themselves should be dependent on the demographic population
they are trying to attract. Print and electronic media provide some of the most effective
methods for reaching prospective older and nontraditional students (Hossler, 1999).
Traditional age prospective students are more likely to respond to such recruitment
activities as direct mail, telemarketing, high school visits, and previews (Hossler, 1999).
The use of print media, radio, and television are tools to reach parents and local
43

community leaders to increase an institution’s visibility (Hossler, 1999). Institutions can
utilize the achievements of alumni, faculty, events sponsored on campus, athletics, or
music programs to broaden the visibility of a college or university (Hossler, 1999). The
above marketing strategies highlight the various measures institutions utilize to recruit
prospective students and increase the visibility on their campuses due to the increased
competition for students and reliance on tuition revenue. The applicability of these
techniques to UNLV Singapore was examined in this study to determine how the market
UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve influenced their marketing and recruitment
strategies.
Recruitment of International Students
Though recruitment of international students is a longstanding custom in
postsecondary education in the United States, techniques used to recruit international
students cannot be transposed to branch campuses. However, techniques used to recruit
international students are distinct from attracting domestic students. To recruit
international students, higher education institutions need to develop marketing techniques
and strategies specific to their needs and interests. Jenkins (1983) noted that recruitment
programs for international students must be individually crafted to adequately reflect the
institution’s characteristics and effectively project an institution’s purposes for enrolling
international students. A misconception among higher education administrators is that
domestic recruitment techniques can be used to attract international students. For
international students with the ability and financial support to study overseas, the
reputation of the supplier country and its educational institutions are major factors
44

influencing selection of a study destination (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2008). To maintain a
competitive position within international markets, institutions need to adopt long-term,
globally strategic missions and initiatives that are supported by well-resourced,
sophisticated market activities. Mazzarol and Soutar (2008) identified that an institution’s
reputation boosted by active branding campaigns will be an important element for any
education institution seeking to participate in an international market. International
marketing requires a significant commitment by senior management and a willingness to
allocate substantial resources to achieve and sustain a competitive position (Mazzarol &
Soutar, 2008). Though institutions have experiences marketing their home institutions
internationally these practices cannot be transposed to branch campuses. The practices
and collaboration utilized in international marketing need to be considered by institutions
developing an off-shore campus. Due to the distinctions between branch campuses and
home institutions, international marketing practices utilized by the home institution
cannot be transposed to the branch campus.
Recruitment Strategies for International Students
To promote the recruitment of international students, higher education institutions
need to value globalization and the internationalization of their campuses at an
institutional, departmental, and individual level. At the institutional level, McBurnie
(2000) argued that to remain central, international activities must significantly advance
the core academic functions of the university. The recruitment of international students
needs to be viewed as promoting the overall mission of an institution for it to be valued
and a priority of an institution. McBurnie (2000) described four measures that institutions
45

can implement to increase the number of international students on their campuses: 1) a
central office for international students, 2) attractive and comprehensive marketing and
information material, 3) a program linking academic and administrative staff with
international students, and 4) providing funding for international students. In addition to
marketing techniques, universities and colleges can work with international, bi-national,
or foreign domestic organizations that offer educational advisory or counseling services
to students seeking to study outside their home country (Jenkins, 1999). At the
departmental level the most desirable way to recruit international students is through
direct participation of faculty and administrative staff (Jenkins, 1983). Collaboration
among the various stakeholders within a department is also needed to promote the
recruitment of international students. Finally, for individuals to be truly effective in
recruiting international students they must not only be knowledgeable about the U.S.
educational system, but also be informed about the educational system of the foreign
country (Jenkins, 1983). In sum, to effectively recruit international students, institutions,
departments, and individuals within an institution need to value and promote the
internalization of their campuses and work collaboratively to recruit and retain their
international student population. Like recruiting international students to U.S.
institutions, to effectively recruit students to branch campuses, institutions, departments,
and individuals need to be knowledgeable about the education systems in foreign
countries and collaborate to meet their enrollment targets.

46

Conclusion
Due to the lack of available research on the marketing and recruitment strategies
of an off-shore campus one must examine various aspects of the literature to determine
the factors that influence these strategies. The literature described the impact that
globalization and internationalization on the development of a competitive state and the
role the state can have on market forces. Additionally, the research confirmed the
increased demand for higher education and how the number of branch campuses has
increased dramatically in the past few years (Becker 2010). Despite the increase in
branch campuses, the literature on the topic is sparse and inconclusive as evidenced by
various definitions applied to branch campuses (Altbach, 2010; McBurnie 2006; Reily
2008; Verbik & Merkley, 2006). The following case study provided a rich description of
how branch campuses identify their markets and how those markets influence their
recruitment and marketing techniques. This case study utilized interviews, observations,
and documents analysis as sources of data to understand the market that branch campuses
serve and the different recruitment and marketing techniques they use to recruit their
students.

47

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Higher Education institutions from around the world are developing international
collaborations, online programs, and branch campuses in response to globalization
(Knight, 2004). The University of Nevada Las Vegas’s creation of a branch campus in
Singapore is one example of an internationalization effort in higher education. Despite
the growing number of branch campuses, currently 1over 200 have been established,
there is a notable lack of knowledge about how these campuses identify their markets and
recruit their students. The purpose of this study is to understand how branch campuses
identify their markets and how those markets influence their marketing and recruitment
strategies. This study analyzed and determined the factors that influenced the market
UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve and the impact it had on their recruitment practices.
The goal was to understand how a branch campus identified its target population and how
that influenced the marketing techniques and recruitment practices of UNLV Singapore.
Chapter two provided an overview of the various factors related to the branch
campus phenomenon and the strategies utilized by these institutions. First, the research
on the impact of globalization on the internationalization of higher education was
discussed because it provided a foundation for why institutions developed international
programs and campuses. Second, the concept of the market accelerationist state is
discussed to illustrate the role the government can have on market forces. Third, the
development of cross-border education was reviewed and, in particular, branch campuses
due to the focus of this study. Fourth, an overview of Singapore’s education system with
48

a focus on the development of branch campuses in the region was provided because
UNLV developed their branch campus in Singapore. Finally, the recruitment and
marketing strategies used to attract domestic and international students to U.S. higher
education was also examined, as this case study sought to understand how the marketing
and recruitment techniques of a branch campus were developed. Mok’s (2005) definition
of a market accelerationist state was used to frame the role the Singaporean government
has on how UNLV Singapore defined its market and the recruitment strategies it utilized.
The market accelerationist state operates according to the logic of the market, but
intervenes in markets to remove inefficiencies (Mok, 2005). Singapore is an example of
this phenomenon because the government plays a proactive role in higher education
formation (Mok, 2008). How UNLV Singapore defined its market is contingent on the
partnerships and collaborations it has established with the Ministry of Education.
Research Questions
The following are the overarching research questions and supplemental questions
addressed in this case study:
How does an off-shore branch campus, such as UNLV Singapore, identify its
market, and how does the market shape its recruitment strategies?
Sub Questions:
1. How does UNLV Singapore define its market and what factors contributed
to that definition?
49

2. What marketing and recruitment strategies are currently undertaken at UNLV
Singapore, how were they developed, and in what ways were they shaped by the market
the campus serves?
Research Design
Case study methodology was used to understand and describe the influence the
Singaporean government had on how UNLV Singapore defined its market. The case
study approach is an evaluative type of study meant to address questions that reveal
findings specific to the context of the study (Patton, 2002). Yin (2006) explained that the
case study method is best applied when research addresses descriptive or explanatory
questions and aims to produce first-hand understanding of people and events. A case
study of UNLV Singapore was utilized to provide rich data describing the marketing and
recruitment strategies utilized by the branch campus and how it identified its market. The
purpose of the case study approach was to gather comprehensive, systematic, and in-
depth information about each case of interest (Patton, 2002). Due to the in-depth
information provided by case studies this design was selected for this study.
The researcher utilized qualitative methods to collect the data. The characteristics
of qualitative research included taking place in the natural setting, and employing
multiple methods of data collection that were inductive, emergent, interpretive, and
holistic (Creswell, 2009). Qualitative methodology is preferred when conducting
exploratory studies because it allows for the identification of unanticipated phenomena
and influences (Maxwell, 1996).
50

Creswell (2009) stated that qualitative methodology allows the researcher to focus
on learning the meaning that the participants have about the issue and provides a holistic
account of the phenomena being studied. Creswell (2009) identified that purposefully
selecting sites or individuals is the first step in qualitative data collection procedures
because these individuals will best help the researcher understand the phenomena under
analysis. The interviews provided the researcher with an in-depth account of how the
marketing and recruitment practices of a branch campus were developed and influenced
by the market UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve. This case study identified the market
UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve and how those markets influenced their recruitment
practices.
The Singapore Ministry of Education and the University of Nevada Las Vegas
partnered in the Global Schoolhouse Program to form a branch campus in Singapore. In
August 2006, UNLV Singapore inaugurated its first undergraduate cohort and graduated
its first cohort in 2009. UNLV Singapore offers two programs: the Bachelor of Science in
Hotel Administration and the Executive Masters in Hospitality Administration. Currently,
200 students are enrolled at UNLV Singapore. UNLV Singapore is a commuter campus
located at the National Library building in Downtown Singapore. UNLV Singapore
grants degrees from the University of Nevada Las Vegas’s William F. Harrah College of
Hotel Administration, headed by Dean Andy Nazarechuk. In March 2010, UNLV
Singapore announced that it joined Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) in creating a
new institution of higher education. UNLV Singapore offered its Bachelor of Science in
Hospitality Administration degree through SIT. This new collaboration allowed
51

Singaporean students a government subsidy from the Ministry of Education to pursue the
UNLV degree program. To accommodate the increase in students, UNLV is slated to
relocate its branch campus to larger location in 2013 (Singapore Institute of Technology
Partners Five Overseas Universities to Offer Degree Programmes, 2010).
The majority of the research was conducted at the University of Nevada Las
Vegas campus in Singapore. UNLV Singapore was selected as the site for this study for
multiple reasons. First, Singapore has 12 international branch campuses, 7% of the total
branch campuses in existence (Lasanowski, 2010). Second, the dominant role the
Singaporean government has in policy decisions related to higher education makes
studying a branch campus in Singapore unique compared to studying branch campuses in
other parts of the world. Third, this study is being conducted as UNLV Singapore
announced plans to join the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) in creating a new
institution of higher education. Last, the involvement of the Singapore Economic
Development Board and the Education Services Division of the Singapore Tourism
Board in the marketing and promotion of education in overseas markets illustrated the
diverse measures used to recruit and attract students to study in Singapore. Utilizing
qualitative case study methodology allowed the researcher to develop a firsthand
perspective on UNLV Singapore’s marketing and recruitment strategies.
To protect the anonymity of the participants and institution pseudonyms were
used in this case study, when appropriate. The following is an overview of how the
researcher collected and analyzed her data.

52

Population and Sample
The participants recruited as the unit of analysis for this case study included
administrators, staff, and students from UNLV Singapore. Data regarding the
development and current marketing and recruitment practices was comprehensive when
gathered from this sample. After collecting data from UNLV Singapore, the researcher
determined how UNLV Singapore identified its market and how those markets
influenced their marketing and recruitment practices.
Administrators from UNLV Singapore were recruited to participate through
interviews to understand how recruitment and marketing strategies for the institution
were developed and implemented. Prior to collecting data the researcher solicited the
participation of Dr. Andy Nazarechuk, Dean of UNLV Singapore. The perspectives of
UNLV Singapore’s admission staff, including students who participate in the Student
Ambassador program were utilized. Finally, the UNLV Singapore staff involved in the
marketing and recruitment for UNLV Singapore’s Bachelors, Masters, and Continuing
Education Programs was sought for data collection. The recruitment and interviews of
administrators and staff who participated during the implementation of the marketing and
recruitment strategies was paramount to understanding how those strategies were
developed, evolved, and implemented.
Instrumentation
The instrument for data collection in qualitative research is the researcher
(Creswell, 2009). For this study, the researcher collected data from three sources:
document analysis, interviews, and observations. These methodological techniques
53

allowed the researcher to understand how the marketing and recruitment strategies were
developed and what practices comprised these strategies.
The first method for data collection was through document analysis to provide an
overview of UNLV Singapore and to triangulate the data. Merriam (1998) wrote that
documents are a “ready-made source of data,” which is readily accessible to the
researcher. Documents were reviewed, including an academic program evaluation report
of UNLV Singapore, UNLV’s Premier Magazine, admissions materials from UNLV
Singapore, and information available on the Singapore Institute of Technology website.
Creswell (2009) explains that document analysis includes public and private documents.
Interviews were the primary qualitative strategy used in this study. Conducting
interviews allow participants to provide historical information, and to allow the
researcher control over the line of questioning (Creswell, 2009). Patton (2002) stated that
the aim of interviews is to gain entry into the perspective of the interviewee. The primary
method for this study consisted of in-person and phone interviews guided by an interview
protocol for UNLV Singapore’s administrators, staff, and students.
Two interview protocols were the primary methods of instrumentation in this
study. The first interview protocol was for administrators and staff involved in the
development and implementation of the marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by
UNLV Singapore. The second interview protocol involved interviewing current students
and alumni of UNLV Singapore. The interview guide approach provides general structure
to the questioning during the interview while also allowing for flexibility in the direction
of the conversation (Patton, 2002). These protocols were submitted to the University of
54

Southern California’s Institutional Review Board for approval. The following are the
interview protocol for the administration and students at UNLV Singapore. The purpose
of the administrative protocol is to uncover how the marketing strategies of UNLV
Singapore were developed and what practices comprised these strategies. Specifically,
the questions uncovered how UNLV Singapore administration defined its market and
how those markets influenced its marketing and recruitment practices
Interview Protocol for Administration
Background Information of the Interviewee:
1. Please describe your role and responsibilities at UNLV Singapore.
2. What role do you play in developing/implementing the marketing and
recruitment practices for UNLV Singapore?
Questions Related to Sub-Question 1:
1. How did UNLV Singapore identify the population it is seeking to serve?
2. How does UNLV Singapore define its market? What factors contributed to
this definition?
3. Does each department (Bachelors/Masters/Continuing Education) target
different markets?
4. In what languages are your marketing and recruitment brochures printed?
How did you identify your target markets?
5. Due to the diverse study student body interested in attending UNLV
Singapore, do you have different marketing techniques/information for
students from other parts of the world?
55

6. Did the cultures of your target markets shape your marketing strategies?
7. Did the large number of branch campuses in Singapore influence the
marketing techniques for UNLV Singapore?
Questions Related to Sub-Question 2:
1. Who was involved in developing the marketing and recruitment strategies
for UNLV Singapore? How were these individuals recruited and selected
to work on developing these marketing and recruitment techniques? Why
were these individuals chosen?
2. Who is in involved in the marketing of UNLV Singapore? Is this a
separate department or affiliated with UNLV?
3. What marketing techniques does UNLV Singapore undertake and how
were they developed?
4. What types of advertising (paper/online) has UNLV Singapore utilized?
5. What types of recruitment strategies does UNLV Singapore currently
utilize? How were they developed?
6. Do the marketing and recruitment strategies vary between departments
(Bachelors, Masters, and Continuing Education?) If yes, what factors
shaped these differences?
7. Does the Ministry of Education play a role/influence in the marketing and
recruitment of UNLV Singapore?

56

Interview Protocol for Students
Current students and alumni from UNLV Singapore were interviewed to ascertain
their perspective on the admissions process and to determine their role in the marketing
and recruitment practices utilized at UNLV Singapore. The purpose of these questions
was to understand the types of recruitment and marketing practices currently used by
UNLV Singapore and the factors that influenced the development of these practices.
Additional questions will be asked to students who are currently involved with or were
part of the Student Ambassador Program.
Interview Protocol for Students-UNLV Singapore

Question for All Students:

1. How did you learn about UNLV Singapore?
2. How were you recruited to UNLV Singapore?
3. What types of marketing and/or recruitment practices did you observe
when you were applying to UNLV Singapore?
4. What types of marketing and/or recruitment practices did you participate
in when you were applying to UNLV Singapore?
5. How would you describe the admission’s process at UNLV Singapore?
6. What role if any, do students play in the marketing and recruitment
practices utilized by UNLV Singapore?
Question for Students in the Ambassador Program

1. What is the purpose of the Student Ambassador Program?
57

2. What role does the ambassador program play in UNLV Singapore’s
recruitment and admissions practices?
3. Please describe your interactions with the UNLV Singapore staff? Did you
receive any type of training due to your involvement in the ambassador
program? If yes, what type of training?
4. What role do you play within the ambassador program?
5. What types of marketing and recruitment events have you participated in?
What role did you have at these events?
Data Collection
This case study utilized interviews, observations of information session, and
documents as sources of data. Interviews were conducted on the phone and face-to-face
at the University of Nevada Las Vegas, Singapore.
An interview guide approach provided the researcher with prepared questions on
subject areas that addressed the research questions. This approach ensured that all
participants were asked similar questions and allowed the researcher the opportunity to
ask the participant to expand on particular topics. Interview guides allow the researcher
flexibility despite time constraints during an interview (Patton, 2002). While interviews
were the primary method for attaining data in this study, document analysis provided
background information and an overview of UNLV Singapore.
In addition to the interviews, the researcher analyzed documents from UNLV
Singapore’s website for an overview of the institution’s background. Data collection
requires researchers to collect multiple forms of data (Creswell, 2009). The researcher
58

also reviewed documents from the Singapore Economic Development Board, the
Education Services Division of the Singapore Tourism Board, and the Singapore Institute
of Technology websites because of their involvement in promoting international higher
education in Singapore. Observations were conducted through the researcher’s attendance
of information sessions for UNLV Singapore to learn more about the marketing and
recruitment strategies of the institution.
The researcher used snowball sampling to attain participants. Snowball sampling
allows for the attainment of new contacts and interviewees from each person interviewed
(Patton, 2002). This is an approach that is useful for locating information-rich key
informants or critical cases through asking other informants about who can best answer
the questions about a particular topic (Patton, 2002). The researcher applied snowball
sampling since she was already in contact with Dr. Andy Nazarechuk, the Dean of UNLV
Singapore. Also, as stated above, prior to collecting data the researcher had solicited the
participation of Dean Nazarechuk to conduct her study at UNLV Singapore.
The Office of Admissions for UNLV Singapore is comprised of three full-time
staff members. There were additional staff that supported the various functions of
admissions, but these three individuals were responsible for the bulk of the admissions’
processes. In addition to the admission’s staff, the researcher interviewed administrators,
staff, and students who were involved in the development and implementation of the
marketing and recruitment practices for UNLV Singapore. In this case study, the
researcher planned to interview a total of 15 individuals affiliated with UNLV Singapore.
The population and setting for this study were purposefully selected due to the richness of
59

information that can be learned from them on issues of central importance to this study
(Patton, 2002). The researcher allocated 1.5 hours to each interview to allow extra time
for interviews running longer than the 1-hour time frame.
As mentioned, the participants in the study were drawn from administrators, staff,
and students who worked and participated in the marketing or admission’s processes for
UNLV Singapore. The data collected highlighted how UNLV Singapore identified its
market and how that market influenced its recruitment practices. This study highlighted
the marketing and recruitment strategies of a branch campus to address the lack of
research discussing the phenomena of off-shore international ventures of higher
education institutions.
Data Analysis
The interviews for this study were tape recorded and lasted between 45-60
minutes using a semi-structured approach. After the interviews were transcribed, the data
was reviewed and coded using computer software programs to identify themes from
emerging information collected. This is the traditional approach in the social sciences
(Creswell, 2009). Coding is the process of organizing the material into chunks or
segments of text before bringing meaning to information (Creswell, 2009).
Creswell’s model for data analysis in qualitative research will be utilized and is
detailed in Table 3.1

60

TABLE 3.1 Creswell’s Steps for Data Analysis in Qualitative Research (2009)

1. Organize and prepare the data for analysis
2. Read through all the data
3. Begin detailed analysis with a coding process
4. Use the coding process to generate a description of the setting or people as well as
categories or themes for analysis
5. Advance how the description and themes will be represented in the qualitative
narrative
6. Making an interpretation or meaning of the data

The first step in data analysis requires organization and preparation of the data for
analysis. Once transcribing begins, the researcher did a careful reading of the transcripts
to ensure accuracy to the audio recordings.
The second step revolves around arranging the data into segments guided by the
study’s sub questions in a process of open coding (Patton, 2002). The researcher used
computer software to group together data that focused on similar themes and practices.
Each theme was derived from elements of the research question that guided this study.
Validity
Through utilizing Creswell’s model for data analysis, the validity of the data was
preserved. The purposeful sample increased the validity of the data because of the
interviewee’s critical knowledge of the topic and ability to provide useful information to
determine meaningful solutions. Second, the interview protocol was based on the
research question and sub-questions to determine themes directly relevant to the purpose
of the study and minimizing the risk of collecting data not directly relating to the research
question.
61

To ensure reliability the researcher checked her transcripts to make sure that they did
not contain mistakes made during transcription. In addition, the researcher checked and
re-checked the coding system developed for the study to ensure there was not a drift in
the definition of the codes identified by the data (Creswell, 2009).

62

CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
This chapter presents findings utilizing the case study approach to determine how
branch campuses identified their market and how those markets shaped their recruitment
strategies. The data presented in this chapter was drawn from interviews with
administrators, faculty, and students as well as from collected documents that addressed
the research question. The collected data were analyzed and synthesized utilizing the case
study approach to identify themes that highlight how UNLV Singapore defined its market
and those markets shaped their marketing and recruitment strategies (Patton, 2002).
The chapter examines the case study in five parts. First, an overview of the
Ministry of Education is provided, demonstrating the influence the government has in
higher education policy and development, in particular with regard to transnational higher
education. Second, an overview of how UNLV Singapore was developed is provided,
including its history, admissions infrastructure, and departments to demonstrate how it
has evolved since the school’s inception. Third, the first sub-question is addressed
regarding how UNLV defined its market and what factors contributed to that definition.
In this section, the themes that emerged from the data include the government’s influence
on higher education admissions and policies, the impact the merger with the Singapore
Institute of Technology (SIT) had on how UNLV Singapore defined its market, and the
influence of the hospitality market in Asia. Fourth, the second research question
regarding what marketing and recruitment practices are currently undertaken is explored
through themes, including student participation in recruitment practices, utilizing
63

recruitment practices devised by UNLV administration and SIT, dependence on industry
contacts, and brand recognition. The chapter concludes with a summary of the findings.
The Role of the Singaporean Government on Higher Education Policies
Two distinct features define Singapore’s higher education system (Tan, 2006).
First, the nation-state has a dominant presence in decision-making and planning regarding
education policies and development through its Ministry of Education. The Singapore
government was quick to identify potential niches for Singapore within the wider global
economy and marshaled resources within the higher education system toward filling
these niches (Tan, 2006). Second, economic relevance is a major factor in this decision-
making process. The economic impact of the education sector on Singapore’s economy is
substantial. The education industry contributed 3% of the Gross National Product (GDP)
in 2000 (Saha & Ang, 2010). In response to social and economic demand, the Ministry of
Education increased expenditures on tertiary education from an average of about 7%
before 2001 to 9 % since 2001 (Saha & Ang, 2010). In addition, the government has
devoted $6 to $7 billion annually to education, with the bulk going to student subsidies
(Tan, 2006). The increase in expenditures in the tertiary sector is undermined by the
Singapore government’s foresight to prepare workers and the next generation for lifelong
learning and employability (Goh, 1999).
Trasnational Higher Education in Singapore
Since the 1990s, the Singapore government is strategically inviting “world-class”
and “reputable” universities from abroad to set-up campuses in the city-state (Mok,
2006). As a result, the Singapore government has allowed private international
64

universities to grow and develop. These institutions comprise 25% of the total higher
education enrollments in Singapore (Mok, 2006). This model highlights the Singaporean
government’s central role in developing education policy and a strategic framework that
focuses on educating the masses to promote a knowledge economy, while also turning
Singapore into an educational hub.
Singapore is one of the largest markets for transnational higher education in the
world (Garrett, 2005). The Singapore government has engaged in partnerships with
overseas universities to establish more undergraduate education programs to cater to the
increased demand for higher education for both local Singaporeans and other regional
students (Lee & Gopinathan, 2004). There are two major types of transnational
education in Singapore: external distance education programs and foreign university
branch campuses (Ziguras, 2003). Singapore has taken a strategic and focused approach
to its internationalization effort. The Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB)
recruited and partnered with world-renowned universities to establish branch campuses in
Singapore (Mazzarol, Soutar, & Seng, 2003). Attracting “world-class’ institutions to
Singapore underscores the government’s awareness of the importance of education as a
tool for nation-building (Mok, 2003). The development of branch campuses is also part
of the government’s plan to turn Singapore into an exporter of high quality education
(Mok, 2006). The international partnership between the Ministry of Education and
University of Nevada Las Vegas is an example of how Singapore is attaining its goal of
becoming an education hub and how the Singaporean government is creating partnerships
with institutions with niche programs that meet the needs of the local economy.
65

Background of the Institution and Its Internationalization Efforts
The Ministry of Education’s goals of increasing the number of international
students in Singapore and turning the city-state into a regional hub of education is
exemplified by the development and continued growth of UNLV Singapore. The
Singapore Ministry of Education (MOE) and UNLV partnered in the Global Schoolhouse
Program to launch a branch campus in Singapore. UNLV Singapore is self-supporting
program, recognized by the MOE as an Institute of Higher Learning (Nazarechuk, 2009).
UNLV Singapore offers a Bachelor of Science in Hotel Administration and a Masters in
Hospitality Administration. In addition to these two programs, through its Continuing
Education and Training Center (CET), UNLV has partnered with the Workforce
Development Agency (WDA) to offer diplomas in tourism and food & beverage.
Currently, 465 students are enrolled across all programs (Nazarechuk, 2011). The
Singapore campus of UNLV’s College of Hotel Administration opened on August 2
nd
,
2006 (Nazarechuk, 2009). Students come from Singapore, the U.S., Korea, Mexico,
China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia, Japan, India, the Philippines,
Malaysia, and Hong Kong (Nazarechuk, 2009). UNLV Singapore first intake of students
for the undergraduate program consisted of 35 students and 34 students graduated in
2009 (Nazarechuk, 2009).
UNLV Singapore is the University of Nevada Las Vegas’s first and only
international branch campus. The Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB) and
UNLV partnered in 2005 to create the campus, which enrolled its first cohort of students
in August 2006. UNLV Singapore is housed on the 10
th
and 11
th
floor at the Singapore
66

National Library Building and is comprised of 25 full-time staff members from
Administration, Admissions, Information Technology Support, Finance, and the
Continuing Education and Training Centre. Since its inception, UNLV Singapore has
achieved regional and worldwide recognition as demonstrated by their increasing
enrollments. Its partnership with the Singapore Institute of Technology, which was
announced in March 2010, has shifted the market that UNLV Singapore serves from
international students to local polytechnic graduates. The Ministry of Education
developed SIT to provide degree pathways to polytechnic graduates in two year niche
degree programs that have strong links to in-demand industries. Through this partnership
the Ministry is educating its labor force and promoting its knowledge economy, while
reshaping how UNLV defines its market.
Prior to its inception, Dean Nazarechuk, the Dean of UNLV Singapore at the time
of this study, traveled throughout the Pacific Rim to determine the most suitable market
for UNLV to start its first international campus. Factors an institution needs to consider
when developing a branch campus are not restricted to the growth of the industry and
opportunities for students. According to Dean Nazarechuk the home campus needs to
consider multiple factors:
You have to look at the governments, the stability, transparency and business
practices, the quality of educational system, and also those other factors that are
not as tangible as the comfort level for faculty, security, language barriers,
cultural barriers, as all those factors become part of the decision-making process
(Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

67

One of the major factors that influenced UNLV to open its first branch campus in
Singapore was the role of the government in decision-making and planning. Dean
Nazarechuk confirmed this when he said:
That was a major factor because there's policies, there's rules, there's agreements;
everything that needs to be followed in Singapore. Very, very diligently too.
Where in other countries there are no rules and there is a lot of handshakes and
deals we just don't want to get involved with. In Singapore the major language is
English, the transportation system works, the food quality is excellent, the
sanitation, safety, business environment all those things. Singapore is a model
city and is very comfortable for us to open up in Singapore because of not only
because of it's -- the convenience of the city itself, but also because of the ease of
transportation within the region (Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

The influence of the Singaporean government in Higher Education policy and
development is further demonstrated through the merger of UNLV Singapore with the
SIT.
UNLV Singapore’s collaboration with SIT has influenced the market that UNLV
is currently serving and changed how they market and recruit their students. SIT is
responsible for planning, implementing, and managing degree programs between seven
overseas universities in partnership with the five polytechnics in Singapore (SIT, 2010).
The seven overseas universities include Technical University of Munich, University of
Newcastle upon Tyne, University of Manchester, University of Glasgow, Culinary
Institute of America, DigiPen Institute of Technology, and University of Nevada Las
Vegas. The five polytechnics are Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Nanyang Polytechnic, Republic
Polytechnic, Singapore Polytechnic, and Temasek Polytechnic. The total enrollment for
the five polytechnics in 2010 was 76,500 (Ministry of Education, 2011). The primary
mission of the polytechnics is to develop technically trained manpower with relevant
68

knowledge and skills to meet the needs of the Singapore economy (Ministry of
Education, 2011). The SIT Model provides an industry-focused education to
Singaporeans through government-subsidized university places at international tertiary
level institutions.
The idea for SIT was formed in 2005 when the Ministry of Education introduced
the Polytechnic-Foreign Specialised Institutions (Poly-FSI) Initiative. The purpose of the
Poly-FSI was to encourage polytechnics to partner with overseas universities and
offer degree programs in niche areas. The initiative would allow students a more
enriching learning experience while supporting the larger picture of Singapore’s
economic development (SIT Annual Report, 2009-10). In 2007, the Committee on the
Expansion of the University Sector (CEUS) called for an expansion of the Poly-
FSI initiative. The purpose of the expansion was to increase the opportunities for
polytechnic students to obtain industry-relevant and reputable degrees, and to ensure
that polytechnic education remained relevant in terms of Singapore’s economic
development. To this end, the Task Force on Expanding Upgrading Opportunities for
Polytechnic Graduates was formed. The Task Force on Expanding Upgrading
Opportunities for Polytechnic Graduates was comprised of polytechnic principals and
representatives from the MOE, Ministry of Manpower (MOM), and the Economic
Development Board (EDB). In May 2009, Dr. Ng Eng Hen, the Minister for Education
and Second Minister for Defense, announced the establishment of SIT. SIT is a tri-partite
collaboration between the Ministry of Education, polytechnics, and seven overseas
universities that will increase the number of university places for Singaporean students
69

and produce graduates for the growth sectors of the economy (SIT Annual Report, 2009-
10).
In March 2010, UNLV Singapore announced its collaboration with the Singapore
Institute of Technology (SIT). The Ministry of Education established SIT to provide
industry-focused two-year university education for Singapore’s polytechnic graduates to
produce skilled graduates who can contribute to the growth sectors of Singapore’s
economy. The mission of SIT is to provide additional and diverse opportunities for
Singaporeans to obtain higher education for employment in Singapore’s identified growth
sectors of the economy, which include the following: applied sciences and specialized
engineering, digital media, design, hospitality, and the health sciences. To ensure that SIT
programs maintain sustainable enrollment levels, the government provides a 75 percent
fee subsidy to Singaporean students who enroll in any of its programs. SIT began
accepting applications in March 2010 with the plan to serve 500 Singaporean students by
August 2010 (Singapore Institute of Technology Partners with Five Overseas Universities
to Offer Degree Programmes, 2010). SIT expects to create more partnership with
overseas universities and to plans to serve 2,000 Singaporean students in the upcoming
years. SIT demonstrates the government’s desire of fostering and developing a skilled
labor force to meet local economic demands and as a tool for nation-building. The
collaboration with SIT also demonstrates a shift for UNLV Singapore from a market
comprised of international students to local polytechnic graduates. The government’s
desire to create a skilled labor force for growth sectors of the economy has redefined
UNLV Singapore’s market.
70

Interviews
To determine the market that UNLV Singapore seeks to serve, 14 interviews were
conducted with UNLV Singapore administrators, faculty, and students. A table of the
research participants with their titles can found in Appendix A. Dr. Nazarechuk and Dr.
Ng, the Director of Admissions, have worked at and developed the campus since its
inception in 2006. Unlike the decentralization of responsibilities found at US campuses,
the majority of the administrative tasks, logistics of the campus, and policies are
developed and administered by these two individuals. The following individuals were
interviewed: two admissions managers who work with Dr. Ng (Ms. Serene Kng and
Constance Lee), the Manager of Graduate Programs (Ms. Jennifer Weinman), the CET
Industry Liaison (Ms. Noelle Lai), the Chair of Academic Affairs/Faculty Member (Dr.
Nicholas Thomas), and the assistant to Dr. Nazarechuk (Ms. Noryati Durame). In
addition to the administrators and faculty, the interviewer spoke with five students from
rebels three through nine. Each intake of students is called a “Rebel” cohort and assigned
a number based on their intake. Their first intake of students was Rebel 1. Data for this
study was collected in late 2011, at which time the newest cohort on campus was Rebel
12. Students take their entire program of study with their rebel group. The students who
enrolled in UNLV Singapore through the merger with SIT comprised Rebels 9-12. The
following sections provide an overview of the research questions and the themes that
emerged from the data that address the research sub questions.

71

The Research Questions
Both the document analysis and the interview protocol were used to answer the
following research questions:
Research Question:
1. How does an off-shore branch campus, such as UNLV Singapore, identify its
market, and how does the market shape its recruitment strategies?
Research Sub Questions:
1. How does UNLV Singapore define its market and what factors contributed to
that definition?
2. What marketing and recruitment strategies are currently undertaken at UNLV
Singapore, how were they developed, and in what ways were they shaped by the
market the campus serves?
The remainder of this chapter focuses on the findings of the interviews and is
organized by themes around the research sub questions. The first three themes that
emerged from the interviews describe the factors that determine how UNLV Singapore
defines its market. Three themes emerged from the data about how the marketing and
recruitment strategies were developed and how those practices are shaped by the market
UNLV Singapore is seeking to serve.
Factors that Define how UNLV Singapore Defines its Market
The influence the Singaporean government has on developing and implementing
education policies and economic relevancy played significant roles in shaping how
UNLV Singapore defined its market. Singapore is representative of Mok’s definition of a
72

market accelerationist state because the government plays a proactive role in higher
education formation (Mok, 2008). UNLV Singapore is an outcome of Singapore’s market
accelerationist approach to higher education because the Ministry of Education initiates
the partnerships with overseas institutions and what programs are launched to promote
the nation-building agenda of making Singapore a regional hub of education. The
influence of the Singaporean government is demonstrated by the control it has on how
UNLV Singapore defines its market. The factors that determine how UNLV defines its
market are the Singaporean Government, the merger with the SIT, and the increased
demand for hospitality programs in Asia. UNLV Singapore utilizes government
partnerships and collaborations, such as the partnership with SIT, to define their market.
Influence of the Government on how the Market is Defined
The influence of the Singaporean government and the role it played in shaping
how UNLV Singapore defined its market was a prevalent theme that emerged during the
interviews with the administrators. The growth of international higher education
programs in Singapore is attributed to the increased demand for higher education and the
government’s want to promote the global competencies of its citizens (Mok, 2006).
Transnational higher education in Singapore is delivered through off-shore branch
campuses, twinning arrangements, and international distance education (Mok, 2006). The
development of the Committee on the Expansion of the University Sector (CEUS) and
the Economic Development Board (EDB) illustrate how the Ministry of Education
controls higher education policy and markets to tertiary institutions. The influence of the
government and its role in institutional branding was best summed up by Dr. Ng, the
73

Director of Admissions, when she said, “When you’re part of the government-- anybody
that works with the government is valid. So somehow or other your value is just so much
higher because you are working with the local government.” (Personal Communication,
November 23, 2010). Through their affiliation with the Economic Development Board,
UNLV Singapore became an Institute of Higher Learning (IHL). Dr. Ng highlighted the
benefits of being an IHL when she said:
When you are categorized as an Institute of Higher Learning you are naturally on
the high level. It means that you are on the same classification as the local
universities. So that is the highest classifications we can have in Singapore and
being an IHL we benefit because we have our so called green lane with the ISA,
which is the immigration authority. When we apply for international students the
students can get their visas with our application and can work part-time (Personal
Communication, November 23, 2010).

UNLV Singapore’s ability to recruit international students was enhanced through their
IHL distinction, and served to define a large portion of their market were overseas
students, particularly with regard to recruiting students from Korea. UNLV Singapore not
only utilized the government to determine their market, but also utilized the government
in the recruitment practices. Dr. Ng noted that, “The Singapore government they play a
big role because they want to bring in international students. So we rely on them and
when they go off to the region to do the [education] fairs we make sure we follow”
(Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).
The role the government plays in shaping on how UNLV Singapore defined its
market was not restricted to the undergraduate program. The Singapore government also
shaped the market that the Masters Program and Continuing Education and Training
Center (CET) serve. The Manager of the Masters Program stated that the Professional
74

Conversion Program for Hospitality Managers [PCPHM] was designed to allow
Singaporeans already in the field of hospitality to return to school to earn their Master’s
degree. Jennifer Weinman stated that:
So what they [the government] decided to do was offer a substantial scholarship
for professionals who met the requirements of the masters program to enroll in
our masters. They would fund them approximately 80 percent of their course fees,
but in addition to just the study the student would have to intern full time at a
hotel property in Singapore (Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).

Through this scholarship effort initiated by the government, the Master’s program
attained three students out of a total of 19 students. Noelle Lai, the CET Industry Liaison,
illustrated the government’s influence on their market when she stated, “Singaporeans
and permanent residents comprise the market for the Workforce Skills Qualifications
[WSQ] diploma programs. The government decides the population that the CET Center is
seeking to serve” (Personal Communication, November 24
th
, 2010). The government not
only determined who enrolled in the diploma programs run by the CET Center, but also
determined how many students enroll through the funding it provides. Noelle confirmed
that, “the number [intake] is dependent on government funding. If we don’t have that
many, uh, funded training places, then we cannot bring in because the government
wouldn’t extend subsidies to them” (Personal Communication, November 24
th
, 2010).
Through government initiatives to develop Singapore as an education hub and desire to
educate its citizenry to meet economic demands, the Singaporean government had
influenced how UNLV determines and attracts its market.

75

Influence of the Singapore Institute of Technology Collaboration
Through its collaboration with the SIT, UNLV Singapore has redefined its market
because of the economic benefits of being part of a government-funded institution and
SIT’s new recruitment policies and practices. The merger with SIT has changed how
UNLV Singapore defined its market, who it marketed to, how it marketed itself, and who
it admitted to the institution.
The merger with the Singapore Institute of Technology had changed the entering
student undergraduate population from predominantly international students to
predominantly local polytechnic graduates. The influence the merger with SIT had on
UNLV’s market is made clearest by Dr. Nazarechuk, who stated:
My market used to be international, now it’s Singapore. Our initial marketing
strategy and agreement was we were supposed to be 80 percent international and
20 percent Singaporean. Today [due to agreement with SIT] our percentages are
the complete opposite. We are now scheduled for 80 percent Singaporean and 20
percent international (Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

SIT is a tri-partite collaboration between the Ministry of Education, polytechnics, and
seven overseas universities that will increase the number of university places for
Singaporean students and produce graduates for the growth sectors of the economy (SIT
Annual Report, 2009-10). One of the purposes of SIT is to provide an industry-focused
university education in partnership with local polytechnics and renowned overseas
universities to produce highly desired graduates for growth sectors of the economy (SIT
Annual Report, 2009-10). Dr. Ng, the Director of Admissions, illustrated how the
Singaporean government is retaining local students to meet the demands of the growing
hospitality market when she stated:
76

The whole initiative was to retain talent so the students, you know, if you give
them enough programs then they will not leave. They stay with you. It works out
well. So in fact right now we have about close to 99 percent of polytechnic
students (Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).

UNLV Singapore changed its marketing emphasis from international students to local
polytechnic graduates because of the government subsidies SIT students received from
the local government. The merger with SIT greatly reduced the cost local students had to
pay to attend UNLV Singapore. The impact the merger with SIT had on tuition cost for
local students and enrollment numbers for UNLV was illustrated by Dr. Ng when she
statesed, “Being private our fees are really exorbitant, but with SIT the fees just went
down like 70 percent cheaper… with the government subsidies it [the number of
students] almost quadrupled” (Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).
The merger with SIT not only changed how UNLV defined its market, but also
transformed the marketing and recruitment practices utilized by the institution. Prior to
the merger with SIT, UNLV Singapore recruited through education affairs and utilized
practices that Dr. Nazarechuk and Dr. Ng developed (Dr. Nazarechuk, Personal
Communication, November 22, 2010). Through the merger with SIT, the majority of
recruitment is done by or with conjunction with SIT and SIT determines who is admitted
to UNLV Singapore. The impact of the merger with SIT on the recruitment process was
highlighted by Dr. Ng when she stated that:
When SIT got incorporated in 2009, yeah 2009, and when we signed an
agreement with them, we changed our entire so called recruitment process. We
don’t recruit anymore. SIT recruits. The main initiative for them [MOE] to come
up with this whole set up was they [government] wanted to create a progression
for the polytechnic graduates. They [SIT] are the ones that admit the students and
when they come here they do our program then we admit them into our system so
77

we only admit the those that we know that are--SIT approved (Personal
Communication, November 23, 2010).

SIT handles the application process and collects tuition fees from the students. The
Ministry of Education established SIT to help polytechnic graduates obtain degrees from
renowned overseas institution that meet the growth sectors of the economy. Through their
incorporation with a government-funded institution, UNLV had changed its marketing to
the students and the region. Dr. Nazarechuk illustrated how UNLV has changed their
marketing strategies since their merger with SIT when he stated:
Currently, because of our new partnership with SIT, we do joint marketing with
them. So SIT because they are an official government institution in Singapore
they have unfetter access to all the polytechnics so every – we – they are range for
informational session that each of the polytechnics and then we actively
participate by presenting information or attending or answering questions and
giving out our free stuff to those students that are there. So with that said I have
pulled back a lot of my local marketing because there’s no need for me to do
individual global marketing for the under graduate program (Dr. Nazarechuk,
Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

Through the government’s access to the polytechnic institutions and the marketing and
recruitment that the government is doing to promote SIT, UNLV has reduced its local
marketing strategies. However, despite the economic benefits of merging with SIT, which
include utilizing SIT marketing techniques, and the increased number of students
applying and being accepted to the institution, UNLV Singapore will continue to market
itself to reinforce the UNLV brand, both locally and internationally. Dr. Nazarechuk
reinforced sentiment when he stated, “…we [Dr. Nazarechuk and Dr. Ng] are continuing
to revise our regional marketing plan because we want to expand regionally” (Personal
Communication, November 22, 2010). The increasing tourism and hospitality market in
78

Asia has also influenced how UNLV Singapore defined its market, who it markets to, and
how it decides to expand its programs.
Hospitality Market Demands
The expansion of the tourism and the hospitality market in Asia has affected how
UNLV Singapore defines its market and how it decided to expand their programs. UNLV
Singapore is a degree-granting institution that offers two programs: the Bachelor of
Science in Hotel Administration and the Executive Masters in Hospitality Administration
(UNLV Singapore website, 2010). The niche programs that UNLV Singapore provides
are a contributing factor in how the school identifies its market and how it decides to
expand their markets.
The expansion of the tourism market in Asia is a contributing factor to the
growing demand for hospitality programs in the region. The expansion of the hospitality
market in Asia is demonstrated when Dean Nazarechuk stated that “The Asian market in
the last ten years has been the place of growing tourism and other hospitality
developments” (Personal Communication, November 22, 2010). Due to the specificity of
the programs they provide, the market that UNLV Singapore is catering to is limited. The
niche market that UNLV Singapore serves has contributed to how it defines its market.
When asked who UNLV Singapore’s primary market is Dean Nazarechuk replied, “Our
market is very easy. We provide education to those people that want to manage in the
hospitality industry, so that's a pretty broad market” (Personal Communication,
November 22, 2010). The increase in demand for individuals with hospitality degrees to
79

meet the needs of this growing sector of the economy has contributed to how UNLV
Singapore defines its market.
The increase in tourism in Asia and the recognition by the Singaporean
government that this is growing sector of its economy has contributed to increased
demand for hospitality programs in the country. UNLV Singapore recognizes that
increasing the number of hospitality programs in the country validates the significance of
this industry to the Singaporean people and increases the number of individuals interested
in pursuing degrees in this area. To spur the expansion of hospitality degree programs
and increase the quality of the students coming out of these programs UNLV welcomes
and collaborates with other hospitality programs. Dean Nazarechuk stated that:
We actually welcome other hospitality programs that come to Singapore because
when you have a cluster of hospitality programs then that indicates to the
population that hospitality education is a valuable expanding area so then that
gives people choices so and we support and we work closely with all the
hospitality programs in Singapore to, to enhance their programs because if we
help enhance their programs then the students coming to us are even better
(Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

How UNLV Singapore defines its market is influenced by the expansion of tourism and
the increased demand for individuals with hospitality degrees in Asia.
The expansion of tourism throughout Asia including Singapore also affected how
UNLV Singapore decided to expand to meet the needs of this growing sector of the
economy. Through its merger with the SIT, the number of undergraduate students who
attend UNLV Singapore increased dramatically. The expansion of programs has not been
restricted to undergraduates. The Masters program has also expanded and a program was
developed in Macau to meet the needs of the growing hospitality market in Asia. Jennifer
80

Weinman, the Manager of Graduate Programs, discussed the need to develop a new
program in Macau when she stated that:
When UNLV Singapore was initially started being in south East Asia it was
thought it would service the greater Asian region. But it in fact it's really looked
like it's – we are really only servicing south east Asia so for the Macau market the
idea there is we may be able to target some of the north east Asian market
particularly those in Macau because we do have a number of alums there
obviously with the gaming industry there. But then in general those who may be
interested could also come from say Hong Kong and maybe China (Personal
Communication, November 23, 2010).

The increasing tourism market in Asia, particularly Macau, was the basis for developing
the Masters program in Macau to attract individuals in Northeast Asia who are unable to
travel to Singapore to attain their Master’s degree. The expansion of the tourism market
throughout Asia and the increased demand for hospitality programs to provide to meet
the needs of this growth sector of the economy has influenced how UNLV defines its
market.
How the Market UNLV Singapore Serves Shapes Marketing and Recruitment
Strategies
The partnerships and collaborations afforded to UNLV Singapore by the
Singaporean government have reshaped the marketing and recruitment strategies
currently undertaken at the institution. In 2006, when UNLV Singapore inaugurated the
first undergraduate rebel, the leadership team at UNLV Singapore identified the market
the campus served and determined the marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by
the campus. The findings from this study show that the marketing and recruitment
strategies utilized by UNLV Singapore in its inception were developed and implemented
81

by the leadership team who utilized existing brand recognition through the home
institution and the association with the Ministry of Education. Currently, UNLV
Singapore utilizes marketing and recruitment opportunities afforded to the institution
though their merger with the SIT and Workforce Development Agency. The findings
from this research question illustrate that UNLV played a greater role in defining its
marketing and recruitment strategies when the campus was founded, but the MOE now
has greater control and influence over these practices with the SIT merger.
The Role of the Leadership team
Though UNLV Singapore is a branch campus of the University of Nevada Las
Vegas, it is a self-supporting program that utilizes its own policies and procedures that
are autonomous to those utilized by the home campus (Nazarechuk, 2011). Due to the
ability to self- sustain its programs; UNLV Singapore does not receive funding from the
main campus. The leadership team at UNLV Singapore created the institution’s
marketing and recruiting practices determined who would implement them, and is able to
change them if they are not helping to recruit the market UNLV Singapore is seeking to
serve.
Prior to the merger with the SIT, UNLV Singapore utilized marketing and
recruitment practices that were developed by Dean Nazarechuk and Dr. Ng, the Director
of Admissions. The key role Dean Nazarechuk played in developing the marketing and
recruitment practices of UNLV Singapore is evident when he stated:
I am directly responsible for the marketing and recruitment practices and all other
policies and procedures and operations of the UNLV Singapore campus so when I
was assigned from the main campus and I came to Singapore and was responsible
82

for the development of not only the campus, but the marketing programs and all
other practices of the campus (Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

The autonomy provided to the leadership team is not restricted to Dean Nazarechuk.
Jennifer Weinman, the Manger of the Graduate Programs, confirmed that each
department is responsible for their own marketing practices when she stated that, “All the
marketing is kind of delegated to individual departments so it really falls upon me to
promote the Masters program (Personal Communication, November 23, 2010). The self-
directed nature of the leadership team extends to the collaboration with SIT. As of 2009,
the SIT handles the application process and markets UNLV to local polytechnic students.
To promote the program to international students Dean Nazarechuk and Dr. Ng devised a
strategy. Dr. Ng stated that:
Because SIT doesn’t really promote international students, so we proposed to
them and said why don’t we do this we market to our own international students
and encourage the international students to apply to us? We have our own
application process so right now we are doing that. So the international students
are communicating with us. So when we receive all of the so called transcripts
and we evaluate them and we recommend for SIT (Personal Communication,
November 23
rd
, 2010).

To retain their international student population, the leadership team at UNLV
Singapore devised their own admissions processes for international students. In addition
to the autonomy of the leadership team to develop and implement their marketing and
recruitment strategies, UNLV Singapore utilizes the brand recognition it receives from
being affiliated with the MOE and being a US institution to market and recruit students to
its branch campus.

83

Brand Recognition
UNLV Singapore utilizes its association with the Ministry of Education and the
preexisting reputation of the home campus in the United States to market and attract
students to UNLV Singapore. Mazzarol and Soutar (2008) argued that an institution’s
reputation boosted by active branding campaigns is an important element for any
institution seeking to participate in an international market. Tactics UNLV Singapore
uses to promote the UNLV brand include attending educational conferences, meeting
with industry contacts, using student ambassadors, and highlighting that they are a US
institution supported by the MOE through its collaboration with the Singapore Institute of
Technology. UNLV Singapore utilizes branding campaigns as marketing and recruitment
strategies to promote the institution’s reputation.
UNLV Singapore utilizes its status as an US institution to market and boost the
standing of the branch campus. Dean Nazarechuk illustrated how the market UNLV
Singapore is seeking to serve influenced how they branded and designed their program
when he stated:
One of the things that we have learned is that when people are seeking a "U.S.
degree," that is what they want. So it is to our advantage to provide as close as
we can to the same thing that we offer at the main campus. Even in the early days
there was some discussion about what kind of logo we would use, and we
discussed that and finally at the end we decided to use our UNLV logo and brand.
That is want so they want so that’s what we -- that's what we offer-- an “America”
environment as close as we can (Dean Nazarechuk, Personal Communication,
November 22, 2010).

UNLV Singapore utilizes the reputation of the home campus in Las Vegas and that they
offer a U.S. degree and experience to promote their reputation and to attract students to
their program. In addition to using their status as a U.S. institution, UNLV also utilizes
84

branding campaigns to highlight itself as a successful U.S. international overseas hotel
school. Dr. Nicholas Thomas, the Chair for Academic Affairs, confirms this sentiment
when he said that:
UNLV Singapore, though, has the advantage of being the first international hotel
campus and no other major hotel school in the U.S, which is where most of them are
based have been able to, on their own, establish a hotel school overseas (Personal
Communications, November 22, 2010). Furthermore, UNLV Singapore promotes their
brand through the leadership team, industry contacts, students, and education fairs.
UNLV Singapore utilizes multiple strategies to promote the markets it is seeking
to serve. Their strategies include leveraging their leadership team and industry contacts,
student exposure, as well as education conferences and fairs to promote the UNLV brand.
Dean Nazarechuk described the role he has in promoting the UNLB band when he stated:
Well the other marketing is myself. As the Dean of the program I make it a point
of speaking at as many industry related conferences as possible because when I
speak in front of a conference of general managers, hotel managers especially in
this region they -- I get my shot to tell that I’m from UNLV and they have to ask
what's that and then I have to -- I can explain what we're doing and then even in
the industry UNLV is relatively known to certain companies (Dean Nazarechuk,
Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

Through his industry contacts, Dean Nazarechuk is promoting the UNLV Singapore
brand in Asia and increasing the school’s exposure. Dean Nazarechuk’s contribution in
promoting the school throughout Asia is recognized by the students. Justin Ong, a current
student, stated during our interview that, “One thing I do know is that the school does
well is Dr. Andy is out there to push the school name to build the [UNLV] brand name in
Asia” (Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).
85

UNLV Singapore also utilizes their students to promote the institution’s exposure
through the Student Ambassador Program and word of mouth. All students at UNLV
Singapore are eligible to participate in the Student Ambassador Program. The program
allows one to two students to accompany a staff member to an education fair to discuss
their experiences at UNLV Singapore. The education fairs are either held locally or in
countries throughout Asia. The role students play in marketing UNLV Singapore is
summarized by Justin when he stated:
I guess we’ll have to say that marketing-wise, students play the biggest role
because they are the product of this school. There are a lot of things that this
school actually gets us involved in, in regards to marketing the school because as
I mentioned word of mouth and as well as [the student] ambassadorship
[program] are ways students go out and promote the school (Personal
Communication, November 23
rd
, 2010).

A recurring theme throughout the student interviews was the importance of students in
marketing the school to prospective students and furthering the exposure of UNLV
Singapore through the ambassador program, internships, and word of mouth.
Despite the increase in enrollment though the merger with SIT, students and staff
still attend education conferences and fairs to promote the UNLV Singapore brand. Dr.
Nicholas Thomas, the Chair for Faculty Affairs, sums up the purpose for UNLV
Singapore to attend education conferences when he stated, “We go to education
conferences purely for the purposes of marketing the school to the international student
body” (Personal Communications, November 22, 2010). The focus of the SIT is to
provide a pathway for local polytechnic graduates to attain degrees in growth sectors of
the economy. UNLV Singapore no longer needs to attend education fairs to attract
students because of their collaboration with SIT. However, they continue to attend these
86

fairs because of the importance of promoting and maintaining the UNLV brand. Dr. Ng
highlights the importance of exposing the brand when she stated:
We don’t need to but we still want to do it [promote at education fairs] just for the
exposure so that the brand is – can be sustained in that we still do want to promote
the brand. The objective for UNLV to come here is to promote the brand. So
even with SIT to front us we don’t want to lose our brand so we are still UNLV so
we want to try our best to go out and also because we still want our international
students. We want the diversity there so we will still want to continue to promote
(Dr. Ng, Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).

UNLV Singapore utilizes its association with the Ministry of Education, its status as an
U.S. institution, industry contacts, students, and education fairs to foster and promote the
UNLV Singapore brand to market to the constituencies that the institution is seeking to
serve.
Government Support
UNLV Singapore’s affiliation with the Singaporean government through the
merger with SIT at the undergraduate level, the Professional Conversion Program for
Hospitality Managers (PCPHM) at the Masters level, and the connection with the
Workforce Development Agency (WDA) for Continuing Education and Training (CET)
programs has changed UNLV’s marketing and recruiting strategies. The importance of
government support to validate UNLV Singapore programs is confirmed when Dean
Nazarechuk stated:
We are on their [Ministry of Education] web site. That’s all we need from them.
That we are recognized as an official institute of higher education and Singapore
specialized program and that acknowledgement from the Singaporean government
is very important (Dean Nazarechuk, Personal Communication, November 22,
2010).

87

The affiliation with the Ministry of Education validates the UNLV Singapore campus and
provides them with marketing and recruitment strategies provided to them by the
Singaporean government. The merger with the SIT facilitated by the Ministry of
Education has changed the market that UNLV Singapore is serving at the undergraduate
level from international students to polytechnic students and changed the marketing and
recruitment strategies utilized by the institution. Dean Nazarechuk highlighted the
changes in how UNLV Singapore markets their undergraduate program when he stated:
SIT is well funded and I will piggy back on their marketing strategies for the
global market because as long as I have 500 people apply and they’re accepting
180 there’s no need for me to push more than other than just brand recognition
and information to the market (Personal Communication, November 22, 2010).

Through their collaboration with SIT, UNLV Singapore can utilize SIT’s marketing and
recruit practices to attract students to their undergraduate program.
Government supported programs at the Masters and Continuing Education level
have also influenced the marketing and recruitment practices utilized by UNLV
Singapore by utilizing marketing procedures provided to the institution by the Workforce
Development Agency (WDA). The Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA)
was formed to lead and drive workforce development in Singapore. Its mission is to
enhance the employability and competitiveness of the workforce. The Professional
Conversion Program for Hospitality Managers (PCPHM) was developed by the WDA to
increase the number of individuals in the hospitality market with a Master’s degree. The
impact the collaboration with the WDA had on how UNLV Singapore’s marketing of its
Master’s program is highlighted when Jennifer Weinman stated:

88

When the [PCPHM] program was rolled out they [government] did a lot of
marketing for us [UNLV]. We were the only PCPHM program. So they did large-
scale ads in major papers like Strait Times advertising as well as on their own
government web sites. And then they gave us a grant to do marketing for the
program, which we utilized from time to time to take out ads in the paper
(Personal Communication, November 23, 2010).

Dean Nazarechuk also acknowledges the impact the affiliation with the WDA has on
UNLV Singapore’s marketing and recruitment strategies when he stated:
We are actively connected with work force development agency. The
government actively promotes UNLV for their citizens who they fund to come to
this program, so that’s another way again I’m not spending any much money on
advertising. It’s all coming from the governments, so they are the ones that are
promoting the program with UNLV (Personal Communication, November 22,
2010).

Through the affiliation with the Ministry of Education and Workforce Development
Agency, UNLV Singapore is able to utilize the marketing and recruitment strategies
afforded to them by the government, which reduces the amount of money they allocate to
marketing and recruitment practices, and validates the institution’s reputation because
they are endorsed by the Singaporean government.
Conclusion
This chapter examined the case study in four parts. An overview of the Ministry
of Education was provided to illustrate the influence the Singaporean government had on
higher education policy and development, with a focus on transnational education.
Second, a description was provided of how UNLV Singapore was developed. In
particular, this section focused on the collaboration between UNLV Singapore and the
SIT because of the influence this merger had on how UNLV Singapore defines its market
and recruitment of students. Next, the first research question was explored, which
89

focused on how a branch campus identified its market and shaped its recruitment
strategies. The findings from this study showed that how UNLV Singapore defined its
market is shaped by the Singaporean Government, the collaboration with the SIT, and
increased demand for hospitality programs in Asia. The second research question focused
on the marketing and recruitment strategies undertaken at UNLV Singapore and how they
were developed. This question was explored through the themes of the changing role of
the leadership team and the marketing and recruitment strategies afforded to the
institution though their government partnerships and collaborations. This case study
illustrated the central role that the Singaporean government plays in determining how
UNLV defined its market and the recruitment strategies it utilizes. Through their
participation in the Global Schoolhouse program and collaboration with the SIT and
Workforce Development Agency, UNLV Singapore defined its market on the basis of
their government partnerships. The merger with SIT, which increases the number of
university places for Singaporean polytechnic students, demonstrates how the
Singaporean government influenced UNLV Singapore’s market. A final factor that
determined how UNLV Singapore defined its market was increased demand for
hospitality programs due to the increasing tourism market in Asia. Through its
association with the Ministry of Education and the government-sponsored marketing
opportunities, UNLV Singapore is able to focus on marketing and recruitment strategies
that promote the institution’s brand. Through its collaboration and adaptability to the
Ministry of Education, UNLV Singapore is growing, however, the malleability of how

90

the market is defined and its dependence on government support calls into question the
sustainability of the campus once government support ceases.

91

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
In response to globalization, Higher Education institutions from around the world
are developing international collaborations, online programs, and branch campuses. The
growing phenomenon of branch campuses is exemplified by their vast expansion and
development. The number of branch campuses has doubled in the past four years, and as
of 2012 there are over 200 branch campuses around the world (Lawton & Katsomitros,
2012). However, despite this growing trend there is a lack of knowledge and
understanding on how these institutions define their markets, how branch campuses
market to their students, and how students are recruited to these campuses. This lack of
knowledge on the markets branch campuses serve is an issue that needs to be addressed
as some established branch campuses are facing enrollment problems and are operating
under capacity (Altbach, 2010).
The literature in this study provided an overview of the various concepts that
influence how an offshore branch campus defines its market. First, research that
illustrated the impact of globalization on higher education was discussed. Second, the
concept of the market accelerationist state was discussed to illustrate the role the
government can have on market forces. Third, literature on the internationalization of
higher education provided an understanding for why higher education institutions are
developing international programs and campuses. Fourth, the development of cross-
border education was reviewed, in particularly branch campuses, due to the focus of this
study. Fifth, an overview of Singapore’s education system with a focus on transnational
92

higher education was provided because UNLV developed their branch campus in
Singapore. Finally, studies that focus on the recruitment and marketing strategies used to
attract domestic and international students to U.S. higher education institutions were also
examined. This case study sought to understand how an offshore branch campus defined
its markets and how its marketing and recruitment strategies were shaped by the markets
the institution serves.
The findings from this study confirmed that the Singaporean government actively
directs the development of the higher education market. With Singapore’s signing GATS
and the rapid growth of transnational higher education, the government is committed to
position the city-state as a regional hub of higher education (Lee & Gopinathan 2005).
Singapore is representative of Mok’s definition of a market accelerationist state, which
intervenes in markets to accelerate market forces (Mok, 2005). The market accelerationist
state operates according to the logic of the market, but intervenes in markets to remove
inefficiencies (Mok, 2005). Singapore is an example of this phenomenon because the
government plays a proactive role in higher education formation (Mok, 2008). The
partnerships the Singaporean government has initiated with overseas universities and the
role it has taken in making Singapore a major exporter of higher education demonstrates
that the government intervenes in these markets. The Ministry of Education decides who
the partners are and what programs can be launched to fulfill the nation-building agenda
of making the city-state a regional hub of education. This highlights the Singapore
government’s central role in developing educational policy that focuses on educating the
93

masses to meet the needs of the local economy, fostering a knowledge economy, and
becoming a regional hub for higher education.
Singapore’s market accelerationist model has influenced how UNLV Singapore
defined its market and the recruitment strategies it utilized. UNLV Singapore is
representative of many other branch campuses with respect to the benefits and resources
it has received from the Ministry of Education. Through their participation in the Global
Schoolhouse program and collaboration with SIT and Workforce Development Agency,
UNLV Singapore defined its market on the basis of their government partnerships. A
major finding from this study was the influence that these partnerships had on how
UNLV Singapore defined their market and affected their marketing and recruitment
strategies.
The purpose of this study was to examine how UNLV defined its market and how
that market shaped their marketing and recruitment strategies. First, this study examined
how UNLV Singapore defined its market and what factors contributed to these
definitions. Second, this study examined the marketing and recruitment strategies
undertaken at UNLV Singapore, and how they were developed and shaped by the market
the campus serves.
The data was obtained through interviews and document analysis. The researcher
interviewed various administrators and students as outlined in Appendix A. The
researcher also examined several internal institutional documents, reports, and other
publically available materials, such as the Ministry of Education’s website, the
institution’s website, and newsletter.
94

UNLV Singapore is an outcome of Singapore’s market accelerationist approach to
higher education. The SIT and the University of Nevada Las Vegas partnered in the
Global Schoolhouse program to form a branch campus in Singapore. The effect of the
Singaporean government on the success and sustainability of UNLV Singapore is clear in
the influence government partnerships have had on how UNLV Singapore defined its
market. UNLV Singapore’s success in increasing the size of the undergraduate program
is based on their partnership with the SIT. SIT is an example of how the Ministry of
Education utilizes its partnerships to support the nation-state’s goal of educating the
masses and creating a more skilled labor force to meet the demands of the local economy.
For UNLV Singapore, the partnership with SIT guarantees a steady enrollment,
government funds and subsidies, and sustainability. Moreover, UNLV Singapore’s
success and longevity is contingent on the collaborations and partnerships it has
developed with the Singaporean government, primarily through its partnership with SIT.
Recommendations
The selectiveness of the Singaporean government in terms of inviting overseas
partners to set up their branch campuses and the directive role the government plays in
orchestrating such projects illustrates how the governments intervene in markets. In
Singapore this manifests itself in deciding who the partners are and what programs can be
launched to fulfill the nation-building agenda of making the city-state a regional hub for
higher education (Mok, 2008). This case study illustrated the central role that the
Singaporean government played in determining how UNLV Singapore defined its market
and shaped the recruitment strategies it utilized. The major shift in how UNLV Singapore
95

defined its market as a result of the collaboration with SIT illustrates the impact the
government has on a branch campus.
This study examined how one institution defined its market, and how the markets
the institution sought to serve shaped their marketing and recruitment strategies. The
study also outlined the influence that government can have on how a higher education
institution defines its market through the market accelerationist approach (Mok, 2008).
Findings in this study suggest that government partnerships and collaborations influence
how an international branch campus defines its market and shapes the recruitment
strategies it utilizes to target the markets the institution is seeking to serve.
Additionally, this study highlights the variability and reactionary agility required
to develop and sustain an international branch campus. UNLV Singapore faced
challenges related to their malleable market definition, their rapid expansion, and
government influence on their policies and procedures. This study highlighted the nature
of a branch campus and how it defined its market, which can be utilized by higher
education institutions that have or are interested in developing a branch campus.
There are several implications that practitioners, policymakers, and researchers
can utilize from the findings from this study. This study can also be utilized by
administrators to determine what factors they need to consider when determining who
their market is, and the role that the government in the host country may have in defining
the market the institution serves. Policy makers and practitioners can use Mok’s
definition of a market accelerationist state to determine their own government
involvement in market forces, including weighing the pros and cons of this involvement
96

on their current economic infrastructure. Factors that policymakers and practitioners need
to look out for include the government’s current involvement in controlling market
forces, and its ability to intervene and develop policies and collaborations that promote
the market. Policymakers and practitioners can also use Singapore as a benchmark to
determine their own government’s involvement in market forces pertaining to higher
education development and to determine if they are able to or want to replicate the
Singapore model in their own countries.
This case study provides researchers with an in-depth study of the influence
government can have on market forces and development of higher education institutions.
First, researchers can examine the varying roles that governments have on controlling
market forces and the correlation between government control and higher education
development and expansion. Second, researchers can examine the different levels of
government involvement on higher education development to determine the benefits and
costs of these collaborations on both the host country and branch campus. This study
highlights the affect that the Ministry of Education had on how UNLV Singapore defines
its market and the strategies they utilized to attract the markets they are seeking to serve.
This study also illustrates the variability of policies and procedures utilized by
branch campuses. Findings from this study provide practitioners with a detailed analysis
of the challenges that surround cross-border ventures. Challenges that surround cross-
border ventures include financial loss, tarnishing the reputation of the host country and
home campus, negative publicity, and cost in time, energy, and resources. This study
highlights the ability of one branch campus to develop government collaborations and
97

partnerships to secure a market that will negate many challenges that branch campuses
without these collaborations will face.
Policymakers can utilize findings from this study to develop quality assurance
measures to ensure that the host country, branch campus, and students benefit from these
collaborations and endeavors. Quality assurance measures include that the curriculum,
quality of instructors, and facilities are comparable to the home institution. In the case of
the host country, the Singaporean government is forming collaborations with overseas
institutions that have programs that meet the needs of the growth sectors of the economy
and is providing pathways for polytechnic students to attain a bachelor’s degree.
Finally, this study highlights the numerous nomenclatures to describe the impact
of globalization on the internationalization of higher education. Practitioners can utilize
the definitions in this study to understand the concepts and terminology they need to
understand and utilize to internationalize their institutions. Policymakers can use this
study when writing education policies and reforms that affect institutions considering
embarking on developing ventures abroad. Researchers can utilize definitions and
concepts to better understand how globalization is affecting and being applied to higher
education.
Future Research
As a result of the findings of this study, future research is warranted in several
areas to understand the impact of globalization on the internationalization of higher
education and the phenomenon of branch campuses. First, a longitudinal study of branch
campuses needs to be conducted to determine how each of them defines their markets and
98

their ability to succeed among growing competition. Longitudinal studies could also
compare branch campus across markets to determine the factors that contribute to the
success or failure of these ventures. A longitudinal study of branch campuses would
provide data that could be used by institutions interested in developing international
branches, including factors to consider when identifying their market.
A second area of future research should focus on regions where branch campuses
are concentrated to determine the role the government plays on how they define their
markets. As branch campuses continue to flourish in particular regions, additional
research needs to determine the policies and infrastructure that exist in the host countries.
In addition, studies that include interviews with the country’s government, particularly
the Ministry of Education, need to be conducted to better understand the role the
government plays in the development of international education. The opening of branch
campuses involves substantially greater risk and involvement then other cross-border
ventures, but is driven by host governments that want to enhance the quality of their local
education infrastructure and meet the country’s demand for higher education (Mazzarol,
Soutar, & Seng, 2003). This study demonstrates the influence the host country’s
government can have on the higher education market and on how a branch campus
defined its market.
A third area of future research should compare the practices used by the home
institution and branch campus and the implications these differences have on how each
institution identifies their markets. As Altbach (2010) noted, branch campuses rarely
reflect the original campus in terms of curriculum, facilities, and experience of the home
99

campus. Observations from this study also highlight how the decision-making processes
utilized by a branch campus differ greatly from practices use by the home campus. An in-
depth study of the different policies and procedures utilized by the home institution and
branch campuses would be a resource for administrators interested in internationalizing
their institutions.
Finally, a fourth area of future research should examine the institutions that have
succeeded and failed in developing and sustaining their internationalization efforts to
determine factors that need to be in place and considered before an institution embarks on
a cross-border venture. Failed international collaborations, such as George Mason’s
University branch campus closure in the Middle East, call into question the sustainability
of off-shore campuses. Additional research on the sustainability of these ventures and the
infrastructure that needs to be in place for these campuses to sustain themselves is
imperative for both institutions that have or are considering developing an international
branch campus.
Conclusion
This case study illustrated the central role that the Singaporean government played
in determining how UNLV Singapore defined its market and the recruitment strategies it
utilized. The influence that the government had on how UNLV Singapore defined its
market can be attributed to the market accelerationist approach utilized in the country.
The Singapore government actively directs the development of the higher education
market in the city-state (Mok, 2008). The success of UNLV Singapore is based on their
organizational agility and government partnerships with the SIT and Workforce
100

Development Agency. Prior to the incorporation with SIT, the leadership team at UNLV
Singapore played a greater role in defining its market. The ramifications of the merger
with SIT and the aftermath it will have on the institution’s market will not be known for
years to come. However, the major shift the collaboration with SIT had on how UNLV
Singapore defined its market illustrates the malleability surrounding the developments
and policies utilized at branch campuses. The findings from this study reveal that how
UNLV Singapore defined its market was contingent on the nature and extent of its
collaboration with the Singaporean government and the increased demand for hospitality
programs in Asia. The Singaporean government utilized its partnership with UNLV to
promote educating the workforce to better supply labor for growing sectors of the
economy. Second, the marketing and recruitment strategies UNLV Singapore utilized to
target their markets were initially developed by the leadership team. However, as this
study reveals, UNLV Singapore now utilizes the branding opportunities afforded to the
institution through the merger with SIT and the reputation of being a U.S. institution to
attract the market that the institution is seeking to serve.
In conclusion, UNLV Singapore is a successful branch campus due to its
partnership with the Singaporean government. It remains to be seen how UNLV
Singapore will fair in the future as to how they define their market and the ways in which
the marketing and recruitment strategies they utilize are dependent on their government
partnerships.

101

REFERENCES
About The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, Retrieved March 25
th
, 2010
from http://www.obhe.ac.uk/about_us/about_the_observatory

Altbach. P. G. (2010). Why branch campuses may be unsustainable. International Higher
Education 58, 2-3.

Altbach, P.G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L.E (2009). Trends in global higher education:
Tracking an academic revolution. Executive Summary. A report prepared for the
UNESCO 2009 World Conference on Higher Education, 1-22.

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007) The internationalization of higher education:
Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education 11(3-4),
290-305.

Armstrong, L. (2007). Competing in the global higher education marketplace:
Outsourcing, twinning, and franchising. New Directions for Higher
Education,140, 131-138.

Becker, R. (2010). International branch campuses: Trends and directions. International
Higher Education, 3-4.

Bollag, B. (2006). America’s hot new export. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved March 25
th
, 2010, http: http://chronicle.com/section/Home/5

Carnoy, M., & Rhoten, D. (2002). What does globalization mean for educational change?
A comparative approach. Comparative Education Review 461, 1-9.

Chan, W. Y. (2004). International cooperation in higher education: Theory and practice.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 32-55. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1028315303254429

Cerny, P. (1997). Paradoxes of the competition state: The dynamics of political
globalization. Governments and Opposition 32 (2), 251-74.

Crewell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dee, P. (2010). “The Asia-Pacific Education Market and Modes of Supply.” In
Globalisation and Tertiary Education in the Asia-Pacific: The changing nature of
a dynamic market, eds. C. Findlay and W.G. Tierney. Singapore: World
Scientific.

102

Diconsiglio, J. (2009). A New Landscape: Opportunities and pitfalls for universities
expanding in the Persian Gulf. Currents. Nov/Dec 2009.

Foderaro, L. NYU Abu Dhabi Scours Globe for Top Students. The New York
Times. Retrieved June 22
nd
, 2010 at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/education/21nyu.html?ref=education

Garrett, R. (2005, Spring). The rise and fall of transnational higher education in
Singapore. International Higher Education 39. 9-10.

Gawdat, B. (1999). Education in the Gulf Monarchies: Retrospect and Prospect.
International Review of Education 45 (2), 127-136.

Global Schoolhouse: Singapore Economic Development Board. Retrieved March 1,
2010 From
http://www.sedb.com/edb/sg/en_uk/index/industry_sectors/education/global_scho
olhouse.html

Goh, C.T. (1999). “Making globalization work with social accountability,: paper
presented at the Commonwealth Business Forum, Ministry of Information and the
Arts, Singapore, 11 November.

Green, M. F., Eckel, P. D., Calderon, L., & Luu, D. T. (2007). Venturing abroad:
Delivering U.S. degrees through overseas branch campus and programs
Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Guilar, J. D. (2001). Founding an American University Campus in West Africa: Success
Factors and Challenges for Suffolk University’s Dakar Campus. International
Education, 31, 24-37.

Gwee, Y. H. (1969). Education and the multi-racial society. In Modern Singapore, J. B.
Ooi and H. D. Chiang (eds.), pp. 208-215. University of Singapore Press,
Singapore.

Hemsley-Brown & Oplatka, I. (2006). Universities in a competitive global marketplace:
A systematic review of the literature on higher education marketing. Internal
Journal of Public Sector Management 1 (4), 316-338.

Hossler, D. (1999). Effective admissions recruitment. New Directions for Higher
Education, 27(4), 15-30.

Institute of International Education. Who we are. Retrieved March 28
th
, 2010 at:
http://www.iie.org/en/Who-We-Are

103

Jenkins, H. M., & And Others. (1983). Educating students from other nations. American
colleges and universities in international educational exchange.

Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D. (2005). Preface: The making of a new regulatory order.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 598, 1-6.

Kezar, A. (2004). Obtaining integrity? Reviewing and examining the charter between
higher education and society. The Review of Higher Education 27, 429-459.

Knight, J.,& deWit, H. (1995). Strategies for internationalisation of higher education:
Historical and conceptual perspectives. In H. deWit (Ed.), Strategies
for internationalisation of higher education (pp. 5-32). Amsterdam: European
Association for International Education Publications.

Kotler, P. (1985). Strategic marketing for educational institutions. N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales.
Journal of Studies in International Education 8(5), 5-31.

Knight, J. (2006). Crossborder education: An analytical framework for program and
provider mobility. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of theory
and research XXI, pp. 345-395. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Knight, J. (2007). Cross-border tertiary education: An introduction. In Cross-border
Tertiary Education: A Way Towards Capacity Development, OECD and World
Bank (eds.) OECD: Paris.

Lasanowski, V. (2010). International branch campuses: Motivations, opportunities &
challenges. (PowerPoint slides). Retrieved from
http://www.obhe.ac.uk/resources/conference_presentationsLewin, T. (2009).

Lee, H.H. & Gopinathan, S. (2004) “Education reforms in Hong Kong and Singapore,”
Newsletter of Center for International and Development Education, University of
California, Los Angeles, CA.

Levi-Faur, D. (1998). The competition state as a neo-mercantalist state: Understanding
the restructuring of national and global telecommunications. Journal of Socio-
Economics 27 (6), 655-86.

George Mason University, Among First With an Emirates Branch, Is Pulling Out, The
New York Times, Retrieved June 10, 2010 from
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/education/01campus.html?_r=4

104

McBurnie, G. (2006). "Leveraged footprints", "dark clouds" and "bleeding millions":
Perspectives on Australian universities' offshore campuses. Perspectives in
Education, 24(4), 57-68. Retrieved from
http://journals.sabinet.co.za/pie/index.html

McBurnie, G. (2000). Pursuing internationalization as a means to advance the academic
mission of the university: An Australian case study. Higher Education in Europe,
25(1), 63-73.

McMurtrie, B. (2009, September 2). Rapid growth occurs in establishment of
international branch campuses. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved
from http://chronicle.com/article/Rapid-Growth-Occurs-in-Esta/48275/

Maringe, F & Foskett, N. (2002). Marketing University Education: The Southern African
Experience. Higher Education Review, 34(3), 35-51.

Mazzarol, T. W., & Soutar, G. N. (2008). Australian educational institutions international
markets: A correspondence analysis. International Journal of Educational
Management, 22(3), 229-238. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513540810861865

Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G. N., & Seng, M. S. Y. (2003). The third wave: Future trends in
international education. International Journal of Educational Management, 17(2-
3), 90-99.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in
education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Mills, A. (2010, April 11). NYU populates a liberal-arts outpost in the Middle East. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved
From http://chronicle.com/article/NYU-Populates-a-Liberal-Arts/65018

Ministry of Education Singapore. 2010. “Desired outcomes of Education.” Accessed
December 22: http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/desired-outcomes/

Mok, Ka-ho & Tan, J. (2004). Globalization and marketization in education: A
comparative study of Hong Kong and Singapore. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Mok, Ka Ho (2005a) ‘Riding over socialism and global capitalism: changing education
governance and social policy paradigms in Post–Mao China’, Comparative
Education 41(2): 217–42.

Mok, Ka Ho (2005b) ‘Fostering entrepreneurship: changing role of government and
higher education governance in Hong Kong’, Research Policy 34: 537–54.
105

Mok, Ka Ho. (2006) Education Reform and Education Policy in East Asia, London:
Routledge.

Mok, Ka Ho. (2008). Varieties of regulatory regimes in Asia: The liberalization of the
higher education market and changing governance in Hong Kong, Singapore and
Malaysia. The Pacific Review, 21(2), 147–170.

Naidoo, V. (2010). Transnational Higher Education: Why it happens and who benefits? .
International Higher Education 58, 6-7.

Neustadt, M.S. 1994. Is marketing good for higher education? Journal of College
Admission 142, 17-22.

Observatory on Borderless Higher Education. (January, 2012). International Branch
Campuses: Data and Developments. United Kingdom: William Lawton & Alex
Katsomitros.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.),
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Reilly, B. (2008). Digital encounters: Using information technology in an overseas
branch campus. History Teacher, 41(4), 531-541. Retrieved from
http://www.historycooperative.org/htindex.html

Ruby, A. (2010, March 21). Thinking about a branch campus? Think twice. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved May 31, 2010 from
http://chronicle.com/article/Thinking-About-a-Branch/64741/

Scott, P. Globalisation and higher education: Challenges for the 21st century.

Sidhu, R. (2009). Running to stay still in the knowledge economy. Journal of
Education Policy, 24(3), 237-253.

Singapore: The Global Schoolhouse, 2010, Retrieved October 14, 2010 from
http://www.iienetwork.org/page/116259/

Smith, D., Scott, P. and Lynch, J. (1995). The Role of Marketing in the University and
College Sector, Centre for Policy Studies in Education, University of Leeds.

Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational
Research 78(2), 330-363.

106

Tan, J. (2006). Singapore. 159-186. In Higher Education in South-East
Asia. Asia-Pacific Programme of Educational Innovation for Development,
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Bangkok:
UNESCO Bangkok, 2006.

Tan, J. (2008). Managing diversity: The Singapore experience. In National Institute of
Education, Singapore G. Wan (ed.), The Education of Diverse Student
Populations: A Global Perspective. 159

Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

UNESCO/Council of Europe (2002). Code of good practice in the provision of
transnational education. Retrieved March 25
th
, 2010 at:
www.cepes.ro/hed/recogn/groups/transnat/code.htm

UNESCO/OECD (2005). Guidelines for quality provision in cross-border education.
Retrieved March 26
th
, 2010 at: www.oecd.org/dataoecd/27/51/35779480.pdf

UNESCO. (2007). Global Education Digest 2007: Comparing Education Statistics
Across the World, Retrieved March 25
th
, 2010 at:
http://www.uis.unesco.org/template/pdf/ged/2007/EN_web2.pdf

UNLV: About UNLV. Retrieved October 14, 2010 from http://www.unlv.edu/about/

UNLV: Hotel Harrah College: About Us. Retrieved October 14, 2010 from
http://hotel.unlv.edu/about/

UNLV William F. Harrah College of Hotel Administration. Retrieved October 14, 2010
from http://www.unlv.edu/about/history/collegehistories/hotel.html

UNLV William F. Harrah College of Hotel Administration - APacCHRIE 2009 a
Resounding Success. Retrieved October 14, 2010 from
http://www.unlv.edu.sg/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=114&Ite
mid=41

Verbik, L., & Merkley, C. (2006). The international branch campus-Models and trends.
London: Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.

Weisbrod, B.A., Ballou, J.P., & Asch, E.D. (2008). Mission and money: understanding
the University. New York: Cambridge University Press. World Bank. (2002).
Constructing knowledge societies: new challenges for tertiary education.
Washington D.C.: World Bank.

107

Yin, R. K. (2006). Case study methods. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli. & P. B. Elmore,
(Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research. (pp. 111-
122). New York: Routledge.

Ziguras, C. (2003). The impact of GATS on transnational tertiary education: comparing
experiences of New Zeland, Australia, Singapore, and Malaysia,” The Australian
Educational Researcher, Vol, 30, No. 3, pp.89-109.

108

APPENDIX A
INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS DATA TABLE
Position Title Name (Pseudonym)-Date Interviewed
Dean, UNLV Singapore Dr. Andy Nazarechuk-November 22, 2010
Director of Admissions Dr. Clare Ng-November 23, 2010
Manager of Graduate Programs Mrs. Jennifer Weinman-November 23,
2010
Assistant Admissions Manager Ms. Serene Kng-November 23, 2010
Admissions Manager Ms. Constance Lee-November 23, 2010
Chair of Academic Affairs Dr. Nicholas Thomas-November 22, 2010
CET Industry Liaison Noelle Lai-November 24, 2010
Personal Assistant to Dean Noryati Durame-November 24, 2010
Alumni Felina, Rebel 3-November 24, 2010
Student Justin, Rebel 7-November 23, 2010
Student Cara, Rebel 8-November 24, 2010
Student Pratnush, Rebel 8-November 22, 2010
Student Ksenia, Rebel 9-November 24, 2010
Student Priya, Rebel 7-November 24, 2010

109

APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
Dear [Name],
My name is Nadine Singh, and I am a doctoral student in the Rossier School of
Education at the University of Southern California (USC.) I am conducting a research
study as part of my dissertation, focusing on how the University of Nevada, Las Vegas
(UNLV)-Singapore identified and defined their markets and how those markets
influenced their marketing and recruitment practices. You have been identified as
someone who is involved with UNLV Singapore, and as someone who might be ideal for
the study. Participation would require one interview of up to 1.5 hours.
Participation in this study is entirely voluntary. Your identity as a participant will
remain confidential at all times during and after the study and all interviews will take
place in a private office at the UNLV Singapore campus. Your relationship with will not
be affected whether or not you participate in this study.
If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at (818)519-
0356 or via e-mail at nadinesi@usc.edu
Thank you for your participation,
Nadine Singh
University of Southern California

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The phenomenon of branch campuses is illustrated through their vast expansion. The number of branch campuses has doubled in the past four years, and as of 2012 there are over 200 branch campuses around the world (Lawton & Katsomitros, 2012). However, despite this growing trend there is a lack of knowledge and understanding on how these institutions define their markets, how branch campuses market to their students, and how students are recruited to these campuses. A single case study was conducted to examine the role the government had on market forces and how their involvement influenced the marketing and recruitment strategies utilized by the University of Nevada Las Vegas, Singapore and the market it is seeking to serve. It also examined the role the government had on how UNLV defined its market since becoming part of the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT). ❧ The principal finding from the analysis of interviews and document analysis is how UNLV Singapore defined its market was contingent on the nature and extent of its collaboration with the Singaporean government and the increased demand for hospitality programs in Asia. The Singaporean government utilized its partnership with UNLV to promote educating the workforce to better supply labor for growing sectors of the economy. Second, the marketing and recruitment strategies UNLV Singapore utilized to target their markets were initially developed by the leadership team. However, as this study reveals, UNLV Singapore now utilizes the branding opportunities afforded to the institution through the merger with SIT and the reputation of being a U.S. institution to attract the market that the institution is seeking to serve. This case study revealed the dominant role the Singaporean government had in the growth of international higher education in the region through examining the development and expansion of UNLV Singapore and their dependence on the government on how they define their markets.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Increasing international student application and enrollment to a branch campus

PDF

Establishing and marketing an international branch campus: a case study of Savannah College of Art and Design Hong Kong

PDF

Cross-cultural training of expatriate faculty teaching in international branch campuses

PDF

Recruiting faculty abroad: examining factors that induced American faculty to work at branch campuses in Qatar's Education City

PDF

Examining the market entry strategies of a university's international expansion into a developing country

PDF

The internationalization of higher education in an era of globalization: a case study of a national research university in an emerging municipality in southwest China

PDF

The conceptualization and development of a global community college: a case study examining the perspective and roles of Pasadena City College leadership and management

PDF

The role of international research collaboration in enhancing global presence of an institution

PDF

Understanding the globalization of K-12 schooling through the lens of a multinational education company: a case study of Fairmont Education Group

PDF

Undergraduates in the developing world: study abroad program management in sub-Saharan Africa

PDF

Globalization, internationalization and the faculty: culture and perception of full-time faculty at a research university

PDF

Creating and implementing an offshore graduate program: a case study of leadership and development of the global executive MBA program

PDF

An institution's global engagement and its connection with the surrounding community: a case study

PDF

Selection of partners for international joint degree programs

PDF

Technology, policy, and school change: the role of intermediary organizations

PDF

The local politics of education governance: power and influence among school boards, superintendents, and teachers' unions

PDF

Achieving faculty diversity at University of California medical schools while maintaining compliance with proposition 209

PDF

Measuring and assessing globalization in higher education: the creation of a scale of global engagement

PDF

Third culture kids and college support: a case study

PDF

The efficacy of regional accreditation compared to direct public regulation of post-seconadary institutions in the United States

Asset Metadata

Creator Singh, Nadine May (author)

Core Title The market for branch campuses: UNLV Singapore and the role of the government in defining its market

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 07/26/2012

Defense Date 07/26/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag branch campuses,Globalization,international education,Markets,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Robison, Mark Power (committee chair), Diamond, Michael A. (committee member), Hentschke, Guilbert C. (committee member)

Creator Email nadinesi@usc.edu,nadinesi28@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-68639

Unique identifier UC11289160

Identifier usctheses-c3-68639 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-SinghNadin-1023.pdf

Dmrecord 68639

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Singh, Nadine May

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA