Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

Policy Perception and Implementation Satisfaction as Dual Mediators of Student Retention in Multi-Faith Higher Education: A PLS-SEM Study

Hesti Sadtyadi ORCID
Sekolah Tinggi Agama Buddha Negeri Raden Wijaya Wonogiri ROR
Indonesia
15hestisadtyadi@gmail.com
Santi Paramita ORCID
Sekolah Tinggi Agama Buddha Negeri Raden Wijaya
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study examines the implementation of the Single Tuition Fee policy at a multi-faith religious higher education institution. This study analyzes student perceptions and satisfaction across various dimensions, identifies causal mechanisms among student characteristics, policy perceptions, implementation satisfaction, and study continuation, and examines the implementation challenges faced by the institution.

    Methodology: A mixed-methods sequential explanatory design was employed. Quantitative survey of 159 students (80% response rate) analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Qualitative data collected through focus groups and interviews. Validated questionnaires measured transparency, accessibility, affordability, responsiveness, and the impact of study continuity.

    Main Findings: Results revealed 90% of students would be unable to pursue higher education without the Single Tuition Fee support. Students rated transparency highest (M=4.1), followed by responsiveness (M=3.9), accessibility (M=3.8), study continuity (M=3.7), and affordability (M=3.6). The structural model demonstrated that policy perception strongly influenced implementation satisfaction (β=0.695, p<0.001), which, in turn, significantly affected study continuity (β=0.548, p<0.001). Student characteristics shaped policy perception (β = 0.452, p < 0.001), with full mediation through perceptions and satisfaction.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: First comprehensive evaluation of the Single Tuition Fee policy implementation in religious higher education using PLS-SEM methodology. Reveals that policy success operates through a causal chain in which positive perceptions and high-quality implementation matter as much as financial support itself, advancing understanding of the effectiveness of higher education financing in minority religious institutions.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Policy Perception and Implementation Satisfaction as Dual Mediators of Student Retention in Multi-Faith Higher Education: A PLS-SEM Study”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 115–126, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jee.v7i1.2326.

    More Citation Formats

  • 202
    Abstract views
    128
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. U. Nations, “01-The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2023.pdf.” New York:UN, 2023.
    2. B. P. Statistik, Statistik Pendidikan [Education Statistics], Jakarta, 2024.
    3. P. Lergetporer and L. Woessmann, “Earnings information and public preferences for university tuition: Evidence from representative experiments,” J. Public Econ., vol. 226, p. 104968, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2023.104968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2023.104968
    4. S. Lebouef and J. Dworkin, “Education sciences first-generation college students and family support: A critical review of empirical research literature,” Educ. Sci., vol. 11, no. 6, p. 294, 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11060294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060294
    5. B. Chapman, “Internationally, there has been a student financing revolution towards,” IZA World Labor 2016, vol. 227, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2016, doi: 10.15185/izawol.227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.227
    6. T. Mulyaningsih, R. Miranti, S. Dong, and R. Tanding, “Why are low ‑ income eligible students reluctant to apply for financial aid ? An empirical study from Central Java , Indonesia,” Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 247–261, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s12564-024-09973-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-024-09973-2
    7. Y. Yubilianto, “Return to education and financial value of investment in higher education in Indonesia,” J. Econ. Struct., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40008-020-00193-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-020-00193-6
    8. Indonesia, Peraturan Menteri Agama Republik Indonesia Nomor 30 Tahun 2014, Tentang Biaya Kuliah Tunggal dan Uang Kuliah Tunggal Pada Perguruan Tinggi Keagamaan Negeri di Kementerian Agama [Regulation of the Minister of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia]. Indonesia, 2014.
    9. Indonesia, Keputusan Menteri Agama Nomor 515 Tahun 2020 Tentang Keringanan Uang Kuliah Tunggal Pada Perguruan Tinggi Keagamaan Negeri [Decree of the Minister of Religious Affairs Number 515 of 2020 concerning Single Tuition Fee Relief at State Religious Higher Education]. Indonesia, 2020.
    10. S. Romlah, A. Imron, A. Sunandar, and Z. A. Dami, “A free education policy in Indonesia for equitable access and improvement of the quality of learning,” Cogent Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1–27, 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2245734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2245734
    11. Z. Millatuz, S. Destriana, I. M. Alifudin, and A. Mohamad, “Religious inclusion in Indonesia’s higher education: A national survey on knowledge , attitudes , and practices among undergraduate students,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 2536536, 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2536536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2536536
    12. Z. Sakhiyya and Y. Rahmawati, Overview of Education in Indonesia. Springer, Singapore, 2024. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-8136-3_27-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8136-3_27-1
    13. W. Winardi, “Decentralization of education in Indonesia: A study on education development gaps in the provincial areas,” Int. Educ. Stud., vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 79–93, 2017, doi: 10.5539/ies.v10n7p79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v10n7p79
    14. M. Nurman, “Multiculturalism and prior knowledge as the basis for assessing tolerance in civic education,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1072–1081, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i4.2149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i4.2149
    15. A. R. Welch and E. A. Aziz, “Higher education in Indonesia,” in International Handbook on Education in South East Asia, 2023, pp. 1–30. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-8136-3_41-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8136-3_41-1
    16. I. Fadhil and A. Sabic-El-Rayess, “Providing equity of access to higher education in Indonesia: A Policy Evaluation,” Indones. J. Learn. Adv. Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 57–75, 2021, doi: 10.23917/ijolae.v3i1.10376. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v3i1.10376
    17. C. Logli, “Higher education in Indonesia: Contemporary challenges in governance, access, and quality,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Asia Pacific Higher Education, In: Collin., Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2016, pp. 561–581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48739-1_37
    18. C. Lin, “Examining the effects of financial aid on student persistence in taiwanese higher education,” Int. Educ. Stud., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 36–50, 2016, doi: 10.5539/ies.v9n8p36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n8p36
    19. S. Demirhttps and M. Uşak, “Analyzing the implementation of PLS-SEM in educational technology research: A review of the past 10 years,” SAGE Open, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 1–23, 2025, doi: 10.1177/21582440251345950. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251345950
    20. G. S. Goncxalves, F. A. R. Serra, J. E. Storopoli, I. C. Scafuto, and D. N. Rafael, “Undergraduate student retention activities: Challenges and research agenda,” SAGE Open, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1–21, 2024, doi: 10.1177/21582440241249334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241249334
    21. H. Lin et al., “A review of using multilevel modeling in e-learning research,” Comput. Educ., vol. 198, p. Art. no. 104762, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104762. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104762
    22. A. E. Legate, C. M. Ringle, and J. F. H. Jr., “PLS-SEM: A method demonstration in the R statistical environment,” Hum. Resour. Dev. Q., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 501–529, 2024, doi: 10.1002/hrdq.21517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21517
    23. M. Ikram and H. B. Kenayathulla, “Education quality and student satisfaction nexus using instructional material, support, classroom facilities, equipment and growth: Higher education perspective of Pakistan,” Front. Educ., vol. 8, pp. 1140971, 2023, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1140971. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1140971
    24. J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 6th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2022.
    25. P. H. Rossi, M. W. Lipsey, and G. T. Henry, Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 8th ed. SAGE Publications, 2019, 2019.
    26. G. C. Edwards, Implementing Public Policy. Congressional Quarterly Press, 1980.
    27. A. H. Fullerton, “Michael HILL & Peter HUPE , Implementing Public Policy (4th ed),” International Review of Public Policy, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 2–5, 2025, doi: 10.4000/14ge9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/14ge9
    28. P. Sabatier, Theories of the Policy Process, Second Edition, 2nd ed. New York: Westview Press, 2007. doi: 10.4324/9780367274689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367274689
    29. A. Nguyen, L. Tran, and B.-H. Duong, “Higher education policy and management in the post-pandemic era,” Policy Futur. Educ., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 330–334, 2023, doi: 10.1177/14782103231158171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103231158171
    30. L. Lo Presti, G. Maggiore, V. Marino, and R. Resciniti, “Inclusion and social justice in sustainable higher education: An integrated perspective through the lens of public engagement,” J. Manag. Gov., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 771–809, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10997-023-09672-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-023-09672-x
    31. M. Stacey, Julian Wood, R. Amazan, and S. Baker, “Teaching social justice education: The nature, role and future of discomfort,” Crit. Stud. Educ., vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 449–462, 2025, doi: 10.1080/17508487.2025.2551221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2025.2551221
    32. A. R. Alvarado, T. Stewart-Ambo, and S. Hurtado, “High school and college choice factors associated with high-achieving low-income students’ college degree completion,” Educ. Sci., vol. 10, no. 6, p. Art. no. 153, 2020, doi: 10.3390/educsci10060153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10060153
    33. Q. J. C. Martínez‑Hernández and J. Peña‑Martínez, “Mapping the integration of theory of planned behavior and self ‑ determination theory in education: A scoping review on teachers’ behavioral intentions,” Educ. Sci., vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 1529, 2025, doi: 10.3390/educsci15111529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111529
    34. J. Hair and A. Alamer, “Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example,” Res. Methods Appl. Linguist., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 100027, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027.
    35. J. F. Hair, J. J. Risher, M. Sarstedt;, and M. C. Ringle, “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM,” Eur. Bus. Rev., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 2–24, 2019, doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
    36. J. Hair and A. Alamer, “Research methods in applied linguistics partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example,” vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 100027, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
    37. G. Dash and J. Paul, “CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., vol. 173, pp. 121092, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121092
    38. J. F. Hair, G. T. M. Hult, and C. M. Ringle, A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Inc, 2017.
    39. H. Sadtyadi, “Efektivitas kebijakan UKT STABN raden wijaya dalam mendukung pemerataan pendidikan tinggi pada masyarakat buddha [The effectiveness of the ukt policy of stabn raden wijaya in supporting the equal distribution of higher education in buddhist communities],” Wonogiri, 2025.
    40. J. D. Smith, D. H. Li, and M. R. Rafferty, “The implementation research logic model: A method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects,” Implement. Sci., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 84, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01041-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01041-8
    41. M. Sethy and S. R. Mahapatro, “NEP 2020 and Indian higher education: Pathways to holistic, flexible, and global transformation,” J. Int. Educ. Pract., vol. 08, no. 01, pp. 79–90, 2025, doi: 10.30564/jiep.v8i1.11607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/jiep.v8i1.11607
    42. E. Ebiati, “Pengembangan Instrumen Tes Diagnostik dengan Certainty Of Response Index Untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 112–116, 2021, doi: 10.37251/jee.v2i3.220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v2i3.220
    43. R. Cavagnoud and P. Ames, “Persistence, retention, and interruption in higher education among Peruvian scholarship students in a context of emergency remote learning,” Educ. Policy Anal. Arch., vol. 32, no. 48, pp. 48, 2024, doi: 10.14507/epaa.32.8476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.32.8476
    44. P. Herd, H. Hoynes, J. Michener, and D. Moynihan, “Introduction: Administrative burden as a mechanism of inequality in policy implementation,” RSF Russell Sage Found. J. Soc. Sci., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1–30, 2023, doi: 10.7758/RSF.2023.9.4.01. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2023.9.4.01
    45. A. Durnová, “Making interpretive policy analysis critical and societally relevant: Emotions, ethnography and language,” Policy Polit., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 43–58, 2022, doi: 10.1332/030557321X16129850569011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16129850569011
    46. S. Abu-Bader and T. V. Jones, “Structural equation modeling: Principles, assumptions, and practical application using,” Int. J. Quant. Qual. Res. Methods, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 12–31, 2025, doi: 10.37745/ijqqrm.13/vol13n11231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37745/ijqqrm.13/vol13n11231
    47. J. C. Moullin, K. S. Dickson, N. A. Stadnick, B. Albers, P. Nilsen, S. Broder-Fingert, B. Mukasa, and G. A. Aarons, “Ten recommendations for using implementation frameworks in research and practice,” Implement. Sci. Commun., vol. 1, no. 42, pp. 1–12, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s43058-020-00023-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00023-7
    48. F. Magno and C. M. Ringle, “A brief review of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) use in quality management studies,” TQM J., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1242–1251, 2025, doi: 10.1108/TQM-06-2022-0197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-06-2022-0197
    49. J. Benitez, J. Henseler, C. Ana, and F. Schuberth, “How to perform and report an impactful analysis using partial least squares: Guidelines for confirmatory and explanatory IS research,” Inf. Manag., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 103168, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.im.2019.05.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.05.003
    50. T. Tanti, W. Utami, D. Deliza, and M. Jahanifar, “Investigation in vocation high school for attitude and motivation students in learning physics subject,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 479-490, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452
    51. A. Arjad and F. Farid, “The relationship of interest to learning outcomes in the history subject in senior high school,” J. Eval. Educ, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 42–49, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jee.v5i1.836. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v5i1.836
    52. A. Chang and G. A. Brewer, “Street-Level bureaucracy in public administration: A systematic literature review,” Public Manag. Rev., vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 2191–2211, 2022, doi: 10.1080/14719037.2022.2065517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2065517
    53. J. Tompsett and C. Knoester, “Family socioeconomic status and college attendance: A consideration of individual-level and school-level pathways,” PLoS One, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1–22, 2023, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284188
    54. S. Goldrick-Rab, R. Kelchen, D. N. Harris, and J. Benson, “Reducing income inequality in educational attainment: Experimental evidence on the impact of financial aid on college completion,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 121, no. 6, pp. 1762–1817, 2016, doi: 10.1086/685442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/685442
    55. J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, pp. 115–135, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
    56. J. Yang, S. Islem, and T. C. McNamee, “Rural students’ Sense of belonging : The influence of academic campus climate,” New Dir. High. Educ., vol. 2025, no. 209, pp. 47–56, 2025, doi: 10.1002/he.20526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20526
    57. V. Brinia, P. Selimi, A. Dimos, and A. Kondea, “Education sciences the impact of communication on the effectiveness of educational organizations,” Educ. Sci., vol. 12, no. 3, p. Article 170, 2022, doi: 10.3390/educsci12030170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030170
    58. F. Sager and A. Gofen, “The polity of implementation: Organizational and institutional arrangements in policy implementation,” Governance, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 347–364, 2022, doi: 10.1111/gove.12677. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12677
    59. Z. J. A. Belmonte et al., “Heliyon How important is the tuition fee during the COVID-19 pandemic in a developing country ? Evaluation of filipinos ’ preferences on public university attributes using conjoint analysis,” Heliyon, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 1–7, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11205
    60. R. Minor, “How tuition fees affected student enrollment at higher education institutions : the aftermath of a German quasi ‑ experiment,” J. Labour Mark. Res., vol. 57, no. 28, pp. 1–19, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12651-023-00354-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12651-023-00354-7
    61. S. Khelifi, “Meeting at the ’Wiggle Room’: Conceptualizing a fit between higher education and policy Implementation,” J. High. Educ. Policy Leadersh. Stud., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 59–74, 2025, doi: 10.61882/johepal.6.3.59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61882/johepal.6.3.59
    62. I. Mukherjee, M. K. Coban, and A. S. Bali, “Policy capacities and effective policy design: A review,” Policy Sci., vol. 54, pp. 243–268, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11077-021-09420-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-021-09420-8