Introduction

Transnational education (TNE) has become an increasingly important part of universities and governments’ higher education internationalization strategies (Knight, 2016). Among the various types of TNE, dual-degrees are becoming more common and are expected to increase in the future (Obst et al., 2011). Dual-degrees allow students to obtain degrees from both foreign and local universities for a single program. Students typically study for the first half of the program in their home country and the second half in a foreign country (Sutrisno & Pillay, 2013). Dual-degrees provide students with exposure to local and international perspectives on topics within their disciplines while also providing them with the opportunity to benefit from an international living/learning experience. Students have the chance to acquire additional knowledge and skills that would not have been possible through a single degree.

To date, there have been fewer empirical studies on dual-degrees. The majority of the studies have investigated administrative aspects of programs, such as program design and quality assurance (Asgary & Robbert, 2010; Chan, 2012; Kompanets & Väätänen, 2019), or institutional impacts of dual-degrees (Sutrisno & Pillay, 2013). The studies that have investigated student experiences primarily sought to understand the career benefits of dual-degrees (Chan, 2012; Culver et al., 2011, 2012). Recent work on engineering graduate dual-degree students from North American and European universities found that students were motivated mainly by the opportunity to travel and experience a foreign culture as opposed to enhanced career opportunities (Culver et al., 2012). When asked about outcomes, these students believed their experiences provided additional value in relation to personal growth more so than professional or technical knowledge (Culver et al., 2011, 2012). Both currently enrolled students and alumni indicated that they increased their foreign language skills; cross-cultural skills; and general academic skills, such as problem solving, adaptability, and confidence (Culver et al., 2011, 2012). The alumni were unsure if their dual-degrees provided career benefits as employers had very little knowledge of what dual-degrees were (Culver et al., 2012).

While these findings provide insight into students’ motivations and outcomes in relation to dual-degrees, they are specific to engineering graduate students in the North American and European context. Since dual-degrees are growing in all regions of the world (Obst et al., 2011), this study seeks to understand the motivations of students from Indonesia who received government scholarships to participate in dual-degrees and the outcomes associated with their experiences. In particular, it employs several middle-range theories to investigate the motivations and outcomes of Indonesian civil servants and prospective civil servants who received Indonesian, Australian, and Japanese government scholarships to study for graduate dual-degrees domestically in Indonesia and internationally in either Australia or Japan.

Study context

Indonesia is the world’s fourth most populous country and has a sizeable higher education sector with more than 6.3 million students and 4670 higher education institutions in 2018 (Pusdatin, 2019). In response to globalization, it has participated in free trade agreements that have resulted in the liberalization of higher education services, prompting the government to allow partnerships between Indonesian universities and international universities to establish TNE partnerships (Abduh et al., 2018; Susanti, 2011). These partnerships have become a popular internationalization strategy to enhance the quality and applicability of higher education within the country and generally take the form of dual-degrees (Abduh et al., 2018; Sutrisno & Pillay, 2013, 2015). The growth of dual-degrees has intersected with Indonesian and foreign government scholarship programs (Kent, 2018). The Indonesian and foreign governments invest in these scholarships as a method to develop domestic human resource capacity; however, foreign governments are also motivated by their own national interests (Kent, 2018).

The Australian and Japanese governments have a history of providing educational scholarships to Indonesian students to pursue graduate studies abroad. Australia has provided these scholarships primarily through their Australia Awards scholarship program (Australia Awards, 2020), while Japan has employed several scholarship schemes, such as the Monbukagakusho Scholarships, Joint Japan/World Bank Graduate Scholarship Program (World Bank, 2020b) and the Asian Development Bank–Japan Scholarship Program (Asian Development Bank, 2020a). One population these scholarships have targeted are Indonesian civil servants to enhance organizational capacity, support reform, and improve governance within the country (World Bank, 2020a). While these agencies produce reports on program outcomes (Asian Development Bank, 2020b) and empirical studies have investigated the outcomes of the Australia Awards programs specifically on Indonesian civil servants (Chalid, 2014; Nilan, 2005), no distinction has been made between dual-degree recipients and those studying for single degrees in Australia or Japan. Therefore, this study expands current knowledge of dual-degrees as well as government scholarships within the Indonesian context as it focuses on the experiences of civil servants and prospective civil servants who received scholarships to participate in dual-degrees delivered by Indonesian, Japanese and Australian universities.

Theoretical frameworks

To provide insight into participants’ motivations for joining dual-degrees and the outcomes associated with their experiences, this study utilizes several middle-range theories that have been employed to investigate the relationship between educational attainment, knowledge and skill acquisition, socio-economic development, and career outcomes (Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001; Tomlinson, 2008; Waibel et al., 2017).

First, based on the prior studies on graduate-level dual-degrees (Culver et al., 2011, 2012) and the stated goals of government scholarships (Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade, 2015), we apply Becker’s (2009) human capital theory to analyze the relationship between international dual-degrees and capacity development in Indonesia. Human capital is broadly defined as the knowledge, skills, and health people possess which allow them to be productive, earn money, and contribute to socio-economic development (Becker, 2009). It is most directly associated with societal capacity at the individual level with education being one of the primary means through which human capital is developed (Becker, 2009; Matachi, 2006; United Nations Development Programme [UNDP], 2009). Human capital theory presumes individuals obtain education to enhance their knowledge and skills as well as to increase their success and productivity at work (Becker, 2009). Higher levels of educational attainment make individuals more attractive to employers, which results in an increased likelihood of higher earnings and more opportunities for career advancement (Becker, 2009).

Furthermore, the benefits of education for human capital development are believed to extend beyond the individual to also include improvements in the functioning of organizations, or organizational capacity, and the broader societal context in which organizations and individuals operate, or institutional capacity (Matachi, 2006; UNDP, 2009). The knowledge and skills individuals acquired through education can influence how organizations utilize their human, physical, financial, and intellectual assets as well as the policy decisions that structure the political environment, economic conditions, and societal norms (Matachi, 2006; UNDP, 2009). While literature on dual-degrees has primarily utilized human capital theory to examine the motivations and outcomes of dual-degree programs (Culver et al., 2011, 2012), human capital theory has been challenged on a number of grounds, namely its interpretation of a linear relationship between educational attainment, knowledge and skill enhancement, productivity, and career outcomes (Arrow, 1973; Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001; Collins, 1979; Spence, 1974; Tomlinson, 2008; Weiss, 1995).

Second, as revisions to human capital theory, researchers developed sorting models arguing that education is primarily valuable for the role that earning a degree plays in the signaling of one’s potential productivity to employers as opposed to the actual knowledge and skills learned while in school (Arrow, 1973; Spence, 1974; Weiss, 1995). Sorting models presume students earn degrees as a means to “signal” to employers that they possess competencies that will translate into future productivity (Spence, 1974; Weiss, 1995); whereas, employers use degrees to ‘screen’ potential employees for desired knowledge, skills, and productivity potential (Arrow, 1973; Weiss, 1995). Applied to the motivation and outcomes of earning a dual-degree, individuals may be motivated to earn dual-degrees because they will have career advantages by signaling a higher level of knowledge and skills compared to those with only a single, domestic degree. Likewise, employers may view individuals with dual-degrees as potentially more competent. However, prior studies on international graduate-level dual-degrees show that employers may fail to value the knowledge and skills learned through dual-degrees due to their lack familiarity with them (Culver et al., 2011, 2012). Thus, dual-degree’s potential as signaling and screening devices may be limited.

In addition to sorting models, theories have emerged that further challenge human capital theory’s interpretation of the linear relationship between educational attainment, knowledge and skill acquisition, productivity, and career outcomes. Prominent amongst these is credentialism, which argues that the socio-economic success of educated individuals is not a result of the knowledge and skills learned while in school and subsequent increased productivity but is a result of the role that educational credentials play in granting individuals access to the best positions within occupational hierarchies (Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001; Collins, 1979; Tomlinson, 2008). In other words, the ability of higher education to enhance knowledge and skills and increase productivity is mediated by social and structural arrangements that impact who holds which occupations within society (Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001). As such, credentialism has focused on the role that education plays in the reproduction of societal inequality (Bills, 2003). It interprets higher education as having both a cultural and exclusionary function (Brown, 2001). Higher education serves to boost the social status of individuals through the accumulation of cultural capital, which signals to employers that individuals have desirable social and personal dispositions deemed valuable for certain positions within their companies or organizations (Bills, 2003; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Brown, 2001). Thus, without higher education credentials, individuals are less likely to have career opportunities regardless of the technical knowledge and skills they possess (Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001). In this way, employers utilize educational credentials in an exclusionary manner to restrict who has access to employment opportunities as well as higher ranking, better paid positions (Brown, 2001), and educational credentials become a tool used by educated groups in high status occupations to maintain their positions of power within occupational hierarchies (Bills, 2003; Brown, 2001). However, credentialism’s interpretation of the relationship between higher education and career outcomes has not been applied to dual-degree research.

Finally, to contextualize credentialism in relation to dual-degree research, there is a growing body of literature that has investigated the relationship between participation in international education and the accumulation of cultural capital. This work positions international education as an elite, exclusive form of education allowing individuals to accumulate cultural capital and convert it into economic and symbolic capital for the maintenance and enhancement of their economic and social status (Bourdieu, 1986; Findlay et al., 2012; Waters, 2006, 2012; Xiang & Shen, 2009). It also positions mobility within broader socio-historic contexts emphasizing how power relations shape perceptions of one’s international education experience (Prazeres et al., 2017). Consequently, student motivations and outcomes are shaped by geographic imaginaries and the value that they and others place on obtaining an education within a given context, such as in a particular country or at particular institution (Beech, 2014; Kölbel, 2020; Prazeres, et al., 2017; Sin, 2013). The value that is placed on the cultural capital gained then impacts the extent to which it can be converted into economic and symbolic capital and benefit individuals in their future pursuits (Prazeres et al., 2017; Sin, 2013). Thus, participation in international education becomes more than an opportunity for knowledge and skill acquisition that can result in increased productivity and capacity development. It also has broader social implications that may result in the production and reproduction of societal inequalities (Waters, 2012).

Therefore, this study utilizes human capital theory, sorting models, and credentialism to extend past research findings on dual-degrees and to answer the following research questions:

  1. (1)

    What motivates Indonesian civil servants and prospective civil servants to participate in dual-degrees?

  2. (2)

    To what extent are outcomes associated with development at the individual, organizational, and societal levels?

  3. (3)

    Do motivations and outcomes differ based on gender, graduation status, study abroad location, academic discipline, and career stage?

Methods

Research design, data collection, and research participants

The current study employed a survey research design, supported by semi-structured interviews to further explore the findings. Besides gathering information about socio-demographic characteristics of participants, the survey also collected data on their motivations to enroll in a dual-degree, perceived knowledge and skill enhancement, satisfaction with program outcomes and experiences, and future plans related to employment and graduate education. For this current study, data from two scales were used: one scale on the motivations to enroll in a dual-degree (Motivation Scale), which includes items associated with both growth in human and cultural capital, and one scale on perceived knowledge and skill enhancement (Outcomes Scale), which includes items primarily related to growth in human capital (See Table 2). Motivation scale items were adapted from research findings on factors that have been shown to influence student choice to enroll in international education programs (Ahmad & Buchanan, 2017; British Council & DAAD, 2014; Bui & Nguyen, 2014; Dowling-Hetherington, 2020). Moreover, outcomes scale items were adapted from research findings related to knowledge and skills enhancement through international education experiences (British Council & DAAD, 2014; Crossman & Clarke, 2010; Farrugia & Sanger, 2017; Mok et al., 2018).

Survey data were collected from August 2019 to June 2020. Participants were invited primarily via snowballing by contacting Indonesian universities that offer dual-degrees and government agencies administering dual-degree scholarships, emailing individuals who completed or were studying in dual-degree programs, and through an invitation posted on Australian alumni LinkedIn groups. These universities, agencies, and individuals were asked to share the survey among their circles. As the survey was distributed via snowballing, we cannot tell how far it was circulated. A total of 162 participants completed the survey, and their socio-demographic information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Survey participant’s socio-demographic information (N = 162)
Full size table

To gain a more nuanced understanding of the participants’ motivations to pursue a dual-degree and their perceptions of program outcomes, ten semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and March of 2020. Interview participants were invited to participate through the aforementioned survey. Of the ten interview participants, six had graduated and four were current students; six were male and four were female; six had a study abroad location of Japan and four Australia; four studied environmental sciences, three economics, two government and policy, and one education; and ten were employed as civil servants while completing their dual-degrees. The interview protocols were structured to elicit responses on questions related to employment and education history, motivations for graduate study and enrolling in a dual-degree, perceived personal and career benefits, and future employment and education plans (see “Appendix” section for semi-structured interview questions).

Data analysis

Survey data were analyzed in several ways to understand general patterns in participant responses and to understand differences between respondents based on their gender, academic characteristics, and study abroad locations. First, descriptive statistics were calculated for participant responses for all scale items. Next, two exploratory factor analyses using principal components with varimax rotation were conducted: one on the 12 motivation scale items and one on the 13 outcomes scale items (See Table 2). The purpose of these analyses was to reduce the variables for each scale into a smaller set of dimensions that could be utilized to uncover differences between groups of participants (Field, 2014). With the uncovered components, average scores were calculated for each, and a one-way between groups MANOVA was performed to explore differences in motivations and outcomes. Finally, follow-up univariate ANOVAs were performed on independent variables that were statistically significant in the MANOVA to examine differences within groups.

To analyze interview data, we adopted Saldana (2016)'s approach of two cycles of coding. The first cycle consisted of three processes:

  1. (1)

    Attribute coding was undertaken to obtain participant information and context for analysis. The attributes primarily corresponded with the groups utilized in the MANOVA and univariate ANOVAs. Descriptors for each participant were collected on their field of employment, graduation status, graduation or expected graduation date, gender, study abroad location, and academic discipline

  2. (2)

    Structural coding was employed to categorize segments of participant responses related to our research focus, i.e., motivations for enrolling in a dual-degree and perceived outcomes

  3. (3)

    Within the segments of responses coded as motivations and outcomes, we engaged in descriptive coding to identify topics to be used in further analysis

In the second cycle, we conducted pattern coding by further analyzing the content of our descriptive codes to identify major subcategories within the two broader categories of motivations and outcomes. After major subcategories had been identified, they were analyzed in relation to the motivation scale and outcomes scale components, to differences based on interviewee attributes, and to human capital theory, sorting models, and credentialism. The first author initially conducted both cycles of coding, and the second author reviewed the final codes to establish interrater reliability.

Results

Survey findings

Table 2 shows participants’ average item ratings for all motivation and outcomes scale items. Participants were most motivated by the desire to improve foreign language skills. In the majority of cases, this was the desire to learn English as it was the language of instruction in both Australian and Japanese universities offering dual-degrees for the Indonesian students. Participants were also highly motivated by the opportunity to study abroad, improve professional skills for career development, and improve their intercultural competence and understanding. This indicates that participants generally valued the opportunity to engage in professional development while also being able to experience a foreign country and develop cross-cultural knowledge and competencies. Finally, participants we were least likely to be influenced by people in their lives (i.e., friends/colleagues, family, and employer) to enroll in a dual-degree. Although participants needed their employers’ permission to participate in the scholarship program, the low ratings indicate that employer support was not a highly influential factor in participant decision-making.

Moreover, related to outcomes, all scale items had high average ratings; however, participants generally rated the enhancement of soft skills higher than professional/technical expertise. Participants rated their openness to new ideas and new things as being enhanced the most. This was followed by enhanced written and oral communication skills, foreign language skills, ability to adapt to change, and critical and analytical thinking skills. The enhancement of participants’ professional/technical expertise was rated the second lowest amongst all scale items. Though an average of 3.4 is still high on a 4-point Likert-scale, the lower rating may indicate that participants’ perceive the greatest benefits of participation in a dual-degree are in the promotion of soft skills instead of specific technical skills.

Table 2 Average item ratings for all motivation and outcomes scale items
Full size table

The exploratory factor analyses on the motivation and outcomes scales resulted in the retention of several components for each scale (see Table 3). The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measures of sampling adequacy showed that the sample size of 162 was adequate for use with the motivation scale, KMO = 0.792, and the outcomes scale, KMO = 0.891. For both scales, initial analyses were conducted to obtain eigenvalues for each component in the data. Three components were retained for the motivation scale with eigenvalues greater than 1 and combined to explain 57.27% of the variance. While two components for the outcomes scale had eigenvalues greater than 1 and when combined explained 57.71% of the variance. For both scales, all items in each component had factor loadings above the critical value of 0.5 except for one item from the outcomes scale, confidence (trust in your own abilities), which had a factor loading of 0.418 and was subsequently dropped from the analysis. Moreover, components 1 and 2 from the motivation scale had high internal consistency measures (α = 0.78); however, component 3 had a relatively low internal consistency (α = 0.55). The internal consistency measures for components 1 and 2 on the outcomes scale were both high, α = 0.86 and α = 0.84, respectively. Lastly, for the motivation scale, after reviewing the items within each factor, it was determined that the items that cluster on component 1 relate to the enhancement of future academic and career prospects, on component 2 they relate to social networks, and on component 3 they relate to overseas learning experience. For the outcomes scale, the items that cluster on component 1 represent transferable work-related skills and component 2 represent intercultural knowledge and understanding.

Table 3 Factor loadings after varimax rotation for the motivation and outcomes scale items
Full size table

Table 4 shows the results of the multivariate tests for the dependent variables combined motivation scale components and combined outcomes scale components. For the combined motivation scale components dependent variable, using Pillai’s trace, only study abroad location was shown to have a significant effect on participants’ motivations to enroll in a dual-degree [V = 0.100, F(3,130) = 4.820, p = 0.003]. All other independent variables, gender, graduation status, discipline, and career stage were shown not to have a significant effect on participants’ motivations. Similarly, only study abroad location had a significant effect on participants’ perceived outcomes of their dual-degree experience related to knowledge and skill enhancement [V = 0.089, F(2,131) = 6.370, p = 0.002].

Table 4 MANOVA test results with effects of independent variables on combined motivation scale components and combined outcomes scale components
Full size table

The follow-up univariate ANOVA on the effect of study abroad location on the three motivation scale components showed that participants who had a study abroad location of Australia rated the enhancement of future academic and career prospects [F(1,132) = 7.263, p = 0.008], influence of their social networks [F(1,132) = 3.944, p = 0.049], and overseas learning experience [F(1,132) = 9.834, p = 0.002] significantly higher than participants who had study abroad location of Japan (see Table 5). Further, participants with a study abroad location of Australia rated the enhancement of transferable work-related skills [F(1,132) = 10.075, p = 0.002] and intercultural knowledge and understanding [F(1,132) = 10.205, p = 0.002] significantly higher than participants with a study abroad location of Japan.

Table 5 MANOVA test results of between-subjects effects (univariate test results)
Full size table

Interview findings

Motivations

The interviewees’ explanations of why they chose to participate in a dual-degree largely resemble the findings of the survey with interviewees being the most motivated by the chance to study and live abroad; however, their responses also demonstrate how interviewees perceive a foreign education as being of higher quality and having the potential to boost their social status.

The most salient motivation for pursuing a dual-degree was the opportunity to experience living in a foreign country and having cross-cultural experiences. The opportunity provided them with a chance to learn and adapt to another culture and experience personal growth. Interviewees indicated that these opportunities to learn and adapt result from overcoming challenges experienced in everyday life in a foreign country as well as from the experience of studying at two universities in different countries:

Well actually the dual-degree program is my ideal because by taking a dual-degree I can reach many possibilities of gaining new perspectives from two universities in two cultures, especially. I also want to learn and adapt to different culture because my dual-degree program is conducted in two different countries. (Participant 2)

Although several interviewees made a connection between the dual-degree, studying abroad, and personal growth, few participants discussed their motivations in relations to their careers. There was little mention of how the knowledge and skills learned abroad would improve their job performance. When they did discuss their careers, it was in relation to the importance of earning a graduate degree for opening up new career opportunities. However, there was no explicit mention of the importance of studying abroad or earning a foreign degree for career advancement:

The certain reason why I continued my studies was because right now I am a civil servant, a low kind of official in the local government in Indonesia. So, having a further education is a great opportunity for us to have a better career. It’s normal in Indonesia for many officials to continue their studies because when you get a further education our boss and the higher official will appreciate this, and it will open new opportunities for us to get new jobs, to get new career. (Participant 6)

In addition to personal growth and career-related benefits, participants discussed their motivation to participate in relation to cultural capital and the advantages that derive from a learning abroad experience or possessing a degree from abroad. A few interviewees explained that they chose a dual-degree because they did not believe they would benefit from earning only an Indonesian graduate degree. They perceived that an international education was of higher quality than a local one and would benefit them more. Further, one participant viewed possessing a degree from abroad as having the potential to boost his social status. He explained that Indonesia’s status as a developing country influences people to hold those with degrees from abroad in high esteem. Thus, if he is able to obtain a degree from abroad, people are likely to look up to him:

Do you know Indonesia is a developing country and people are really appreciative of students who spend bachelor or masters overseas…It’s a kind of mentality. If I get a degree from overseas, they will look at me different from anyone, anybody around me. (Participant 6)

Outcomes

Like the survey results, most of the interviewees’ responses on the outcomes were related to individual capacity development that enhanced workplace performance, such as the development of soft skills and the acquisition of discipline specific knowledge; however, they also provided insight into the impact on career advancement, perceived negative outcomes, and the benefits other individuals, their organizations, and society may accrue.

When asked about the benefits of a dual-degree, the most frequent response was in relation to improvement in participants’ performance at work. Some graduates provided examples of how they used the knowledge learned abroad in courses to improve their working capacity, while currently enrolled participants were able to identify how they believed their learning abroad experience would be useful in their future work:

…in development studies there are some subjects related to public private partnership for example or how to manage project through project cycle management…Project cycle management was designed by JICA [Japan International Cooperation Agency] and taught in university in Japan. When I am going back to Indonesia, I handle some project of JICA, and I could implement directly about project cycle management…So, I think when I studied in Japan I could absorb many things that are suitable with my daily job in Indonesia. (Participant 5)

In addition to knowledge acquisition, interviewees also discussed how their program promoted the development of soft skills through cross-cultural interactions while studying at a foreign university or in everyday life abroad. Participants cited the importance of interactions with fellow international classmates, professors, and people in communities as being instrumental in their growth. They perceived they were more open-minded, more cognizant of different perspectives, more confident in their own abilities, more adaptable, and had improved critical and analytical thinking skills:

But I think a good point for a dual-degree or study abroad is the decision when you adapt to different condition, [or] an extreme event, for instance culture shock, and others related to your relationship with foreign students, your teacher in the university in foreign country. Because there are so many differences in culture, and you have so many challenges in communication, and if you are able to solve that, automatically you’ll get a lot of useful experience to support you back at your work place. (Participant 4)

Beyond knowledge and skill enhancement, interviewees also discussed the benefits they received from the chance to network with classmates in Indonesia and abroad as well as to network internationally with professionals in their fields. For most, the networking opportunities resulted in connections that had a direct relationship to their work. For example, two interviewees discussed the opportunity to join conferences and meet local professionals, which for one, resulted in new opportunities for his government agency:

Yes, I joined [sic] in a conference in Tokyo…about investment. I met people not only from government institutions in Japan but also from private sector, so it’s a good chance for me to promote my agency and try to get investor to invest in my region…I spoke with my chief of investment in my home country, and I told to them that there is some opportunity in Japan, and after I get conference, there will be program from [name of organization], it’s a kind of investment organization in Japan that will come to my region and see the opportunity…. (Participant 10)

The final individual benefit that was highlighted by participants was the relationship between earning a dual-degree and career advancement although the relationship is not as straight forward as one might expect. As the interviewees were civil servants with no intentions of changing professions or seeking work outside their current offices, their opportunities for career advancement were limited according to the bureaucratic structures and policies of their workplace. Nearly all interviewees indicated that they believed that earning a dual-degree is likely to result in better opportunities in future, such as new responsibilities or a new role in the office, but as Participant 8 expressed, “it depends on the situation in the office.” There was a sense that the dual-degree, or more specifically a graduate degree, provides some leverage to workers, but to advance one’s career, one must be willing to take on varying responsibilities and demonstrate a high level of competence:

I think that dual-degree or single degree at a reputable university in Indonesia will increase our bargaining position as worker to get a promotion…[but] in my office if we want to take promotion for a worker who have master’s degree, this will be easier to get promotion, but we must move to another island to prove your best performance to a leader, so that you can get a good path for your career as long as you are able to do that. (Participant 4)

Participant 1, a high school English teacher, recognized that the dual-degree would not result in a higher position in her school, as she wanted to remain a teacher; however, she explained that the dual-degree has resulted in a wider scope of influence and acknowledgement of expertise from her peers. After her dual-degree program, she became an administrator of Musyawarah Guru Mata Pelajaran (MGMP), an English teachers’ association in her city, and her career advancement was specific to the types of opportunities available to classroom teachers.

This is a tough question. This is why I told you that prior to the dual-degree I was a teacher, and when I come back, I was still a teacher, so it does not really impact my career … but something about just around my community of English teachers, I’ve become like the source of information. (Participant 1)

Though interviewees primarily discussed benefits associated with their dual-degrees, there were several who shared negative aspects of their life after graduation. Even though interviewees seemed to accept the fact that not much changed career wise after completing their degrees, a couple explicitly discussed how their knowledge and skills were not being put to use, which was different than they had expected prior to graduation:

So far it does not have an impact if you’re talking about the current job and responsibilities…I believe that people try to give me something different because I have graduated from abroad, but this is only related to the personal relationship, not related to actual responsibilities in my position now…so my contribution is almost nothing if we are talking about my [educational] background from public policy. (Participant 9)

Moreover, unlike the interviewees who were motivated by the perception that a foreign degree was of higher quality and would improve one’s social status, one participant complained about how the mentality of perceiving a foreign education as superior resulted in unrealistic expectations placed on her. In fact, studying in Indonesia and Australia helped her realize that the quality of education in Indonesia was equal to that in Australia, and she wished that others would be able to recognize this:

I think the negative side is that people assume that we have more knowledge, which is something that is not true…when I went abroad and I studied there, and I see such a positivity about the quality of Indonesian education you know we always hear about how the Indonesian system of education is not really good, very complicated, we do not produce enough qualified graduates, but because I experienced both universities in Indonesia and Australia…I just think that it’s the same the quality…It is not that we gain more knowledge there in Australia or we gain less knowledge in Indonesia. It is not true. (Participant 1)

Finally, while the majority of interviewees discussed individual outcomes, some also explained how their participation in a dual-degree impacted others, their organizations, and society more broadly. In the case of Participant 10 above, the connections he made in Japan regarding investment opportunities, potentially benefited his agency and his region. Other participants provided examples of how the knowledge they gained abroad has benefited other individuals in their networks and their organizations. For instance, participant 5 took on new responsibilities and became the contact person in his office for work with Japanese organizations. In two other situations, formal mechanisms were in place to allow knowledge sharing with others to occur, which resulted in the subsequent adoption of new organizational practices:

…I also think like that in Australia they have a great supporting system for their students. [In] Indonesia we do not have it, so we can adopt it to our institution like the mental health support and the writing support, the math center, the writing center like that. We do not have it in Indonesia. My office we don’t have it, so we can adopt it, and I have shared it with my colleagues here…and one of the supports that I said, the mental health support, it [has] already been adopted in here. (Participant 7)

Discussion

This study sought to provide insight into how dual-degrees are perceived by Indonesian civil servants and prospective civil servants in terms of motivations and outcomes. Both the survey and interview findings show that participants were highly motivated by the chance to live abroad, improve their foreign language skills, and grow personally. They also both indicate that participants were less likely to be motivated by career benefits. Moreover, the interview findings provide additional insight by uncovering motivations associated with prestige and enhancing one’s social status through overseas study. Related to outcomes, both the survey and interview findings highlight the growth in participants’ soft skills; however, the interview findings reveal that participants also benefited from the knowledge they learned in their courses abroad. Additionally, the interview findings reveal several insights beyond the scope of the survey including how organizational context impacts career advancement opportunities, the benefits of dual-degrees beyond the individual via knowledge sharing and networking, and negative aspects of overseas learning due to unrealistic expectations placed on the returnee. Finally, while the interview findings did not reveal differences based on gender, graduation status, study abroad location, academic discipline, or career stage, the survey results show that there were significant differences in motivations and perceived outcomes between participants who went to Australia and those who went to Japan.

To provide meaningful insight into these findings, the remainder of the discussion will apply the concepts within human capital theory, sorting models, and credentialism to understand how the motivations and outcomes relate to the objectives of government sponsors and to the broader social context in which dual-degrees occurs. Applying a human capital perspective, dual-degrees serve to enhance people’s knowledge and skills as a means to improve productivity and work performance (Becker, 2009). Survey participants indicated that their experience abroad in a dual-degree had the largest impact on soft skill development, such as openness, adaptability, and critical thinking (Chalid, 2014; Culver et al., 2011, 2012). However, at the same time, interviewees were able to identify how the knowledge learned in the classroom was applicable to their work responsibilities. Thus, in terms of individual capacity development, the dual-degrees provided opportunities for participants to development both their technical and non-technical knowledge and skills, which they believed were applicable to their work responsibilities.

Additionally, human capital holds that the knowledge and skills individuals acquire can also have an impact at the organizational and institutional levels. Interviewees identified instances in which their knowledge and skill acquisition as well as their experiences abroad led to opportunities for organizational development. In some cases, the knowledge and skills acquired meant that an individual within the organization was better equipped to handle certain tasks and improve the functioning of the organization. However, the most common theme across the examples was that networks or networking opportunities were in place to allow the growth to occur. Even in situations in which interviewees remained in the same position after completion of their studies, they were able to share their knowledge and influence practices within their organization through networking opportunities. This implies that individuals can have a broader impact if organizations promote practices that encourage knowledge sharing. By doing so, it may be possible to address concerns regarding the inability of returnees to have an impact due to existing organizational structures (Chalid, 2014; Nilan, 2005).

The findings also challenge human capital theory’s presumption of the relationship between education, knowledge and skill enhancement, productivity, and career advancement. Several interviewees indicated that a master’s degree from Indonesia and one from abroad possessed the same value for obtaining a higher position within one’s organization. They believed that a dual-degree did not signal to employers a higher level of competency and skill, and employers did not screen candidates based on whether their graduate degree was domestic or foreign. Moreover, interviewees indicated that as civil servants career advancement is influenced by bureaucratic practices, which may diminish the immediate value of educational qualifications and knowledge and skills learned (Chalid, 2014). All interviewees who had graduated returned to the same jobs they had prior to earning their degrees, making some feel as if newly acquired knowledge and skills were not being utilized. In other words, workplace conditions mediated the extent that knowledge and skills learned can be applied on the job, and the linear relationship between education, productivity, and career outcomes was unclear. Similarly, the findings highlight that the value added of a dual-degree may be career-field specific. The example of the English teacher taking a higher-ranking position in her professional organization highlights how in some career-fields, career advancement will not always come in the form of higher earnings or a higher position within one’s work place, it might manifest itself in other ways, such as being considered as a resource amongst peers.

Moreover, related to credentialism and the cultural function of education (Brown, 2001; Collins, 1979), the findings demonstrate how dual-degrees may provide a mechanism for the accumulation of cultural capital due to the societal value placed on international education (Findlay et al., 2012; Waters, 2006, 2012; Xiang & Shen, 2009). While Indonesia became an upper-middle income country in July 2020, a significant portion of the population is still unable to afford an overseas education. Thus, an overseas education is exclusive, and the knowledge and skills learned abroad are considered to be highly valued. Because of this, there was evidence that participants were motivated by this belief that the cultural capital acquired can be exchanged for symbolic capital and prestige resulting in a higher social status and additional advantages in the future (Findlay et al., 2012; Waters, 2006, 2012; Xiang & Shen, 2009). However, while some considered this as a positive, one interviewee identified it as a source of frustration because her colleagues failed to recognize the value of the local education system. Through the dual-degree experience, she believed the quality of learning in Indonesia was similar to Australia, and she learned to appreciate the value of the local education system and tried to spread this appreciation to her colleagues. Thus, instead of utilizing the cultural capital she accumulated exclusively for her advantage, she was actively dismantling the prestige associated with overseas learning.

Furthermore, the significant differences found between participants with study abroad locations in Australia and Japan highlight the relationship between the value of accumulated cultural capital and the location of the international education experience. In this case, participants may be biased and perceive that studying abroad in Australia provides greater personal and career benefits compared to studying in Japan. The global system of higher education is hierarchical with western countries holding the highest-ranking positions (Marginson, 2008). Studies have shown that internationally mobile students are influenced by geographic imaginaries and value degrees from certain countries more than others (Beech, 2014). For example, Sin (2013) found that Malaysian students highly valued degrees from the UK, US, and Australia more than degrees from Japan and other countries. The value students place on their educational experience may be influenced by global rankings and the perceived quality of foreign education systems (Bui & Nguyen, 2014; Marginson & van der Wende, 2007), marketing campaigns (Baas, 2007), or peer experiences (Beech, 2015). Therefore, while survey respondents and interviewees perceived studying abroad in Japan positively, it was not perceived as being as valuable or as beneficial as the experiences of the participants with a study abroad location of Australia.

Limitations

Considering the methods chosen to generate the data, the study has some limitations. First, owing to the snowball sampling used in the study, it was not possible to establish the generalizability of the study. However, considering the paucity of knowledge regarding graduate dual-degrees in Indonesia, the study has opened the discussion of this topic in academic circles. Second, as the survey and interviews relied on the study participants’ self-assessment, triangulation of the findings could not be done. For instance, ascertaining the actual improvement of technical and non-technical knowledge or skills claimed by some dual-degree graduates ideally required objective measurements. Third, our study focused only on civil servants and prospective civil servants earning graduate-level dual-degrees. As dual-degrees target many student populations in Indonesia, this study was unable to provide insight into how their motivations and outcomes may differ from other student populations. Future studies should aim to rectify these limitations and add non-government sponsored dual-degree students and graduates to provide a fuller understanding of the experience and outcomes of dual-degree programs in the Indonesian context.

Conclusion

In this study, we investigated Indonesian civil servants and prospective civil servants who received government scholarships to study for graduate dual-degrees domestically in Indonesia and internationally in either Australia or Japan. We found that participants were highly motivated by the opportunity to study abroad and experience a foreign culture more so than the desire to accrue career benefits. We also found that participants rated their development of soft skills higher than the development of professional and technical expertise; however, participants also indicated that the knowledge they learned abroad was applicable to their work responsibilities. In terms of career advancement, our findings found no clear connection between dual-degrees and career advancement within the workplace, yet, our findings highlight the need to consider organizational context and career-field when analyzing the impact on career advancement.

Where our study clearly diverged from past studies on dual-degrees is in relation to cultural capital accumulation and organizational growth. Based on Indonesia’s social, political, and economic context, there was evidence of how an international education allows for the accumulation of cultural capital which has the potential to be converted into symbolic capital and enhance a person’s status in society. Further, studying abroad in a western country as opposed to an Asian country resulted in differences in motivations and outcomes possibly indicating a preference for western countries. Dual-degree program managers might want to engage with students prior to going abroad, while abroad, and upon return to help them recognize the opportunities and value associated with their abroad experience regardless of their study abroad destination. Additional investigations should be undertaken with different study abroad destinations, e.g., European countries or other Asian countries, to verify if there is a preference for western countries. Finally, our findings included some evidence that organizations could benefit from individuals’ experiences in dual-degrees primarily via knowledge sharing. As such, dual-degree program managers may seek to provide networking opportunities for students not only with fellow participants, as is usually the case, but also with professional colleagues while aboard and upon return to their workplace. Future studies should further investigate the role that formal and informal knowledge sharing, or lack thereof, have on the likelihood of organizational capacity development.