An educational institution's quest for service quality: customers’ perspective

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the current study is to assess some of the self‐reported factors that students in the study used as choice criteria in making their school selection.Design/methodology/approachThe results of this study were obtained by conducting a series of focus groups involving incoming freshmen at a small liberal arts university located in the south eastern part of the USA. The focus groups were conducted to obtain insight into the factors that led this particular group of freshmen to the school and, second, to determine what areas were not living up to their expectations. The authors later surveyed a large sample (450 students) of the incoming freshman class using a questionnaire that was developed from the input obtained during the focus groups.FindingsAnalysis of gap scores for the student population used in this study indicates that the current group does not consider their university a “quality” institution. Additionally, the importance‐performance grid (I‐P grid) points towards a lack of perceived quality, as only two of the dimensions considered actually fall into the “keep up the good work” quadrant.Research limitations/implicationsThe primary limitation of this study is the scope and size of its sample. Because the study involved a single group of university students from one university, the results cannot be generalized across a university‐wide spectrum. Nonetheless, the study does provide evidence for the development and use of the I‐P grid on those occasions calling for preliminary identification and assessment of student measures of service quality.Originality/valueBy demonstrating the feasibility of the approach taken by the authors, it should be possible for university officials to utilize similar procedures when evaluating the overall satisfaction levels of their students’ educational experience.

Understanding the characteristics of effective professors: the student's perspective

“…Arambewela et al, 2005;Maringe, 2005), their satisfaction should be important to institutions that want to retain existing and recruit new students (Helgesen & Nesset, 2007). Study results indicate that the recruitment of students is several times more expensive than their retention (Joseph et al, 2005).…”

“…Arambewela et al, 2005;Maringe, 2005), their satisfaction should be important to institutions that want to retain existing and recruit new students (Helgesen & Nesset, 2007). Study results indicate that the recruitment of students is several times more expensive than their retention (Joseph et al, 2005).Universities should therefore try to monitor students' levels of satisfaction and decrease sources of dissatisfaction if possible in order to retain students (Douglas et al, 2008). Similarly, Appleton- Knapp & Krentler (2006) suggest that students' satisfaction with their educational experience should be a desired outcome, in addition to learning and knowing what attributes of professors are desired by students, may improve the overall education process (Faranda & Clarke, 2004).…”

Which classroom service encounters make students happy or unhappy?

“…Instead of collecting data based upon what universities believe their students regard as important, institutions should instead focus on what their students really want. Likewise, Joseph et al (2005) pointed to the heavy reliance of service quality in higher education researchers on the input from academic insiders while excluding the input from the students themselves. They feared that conventional approaches would leave "decisions about what constitutes quality of service (e.g.…”

Towards an Identification and Classification of Service Quality Attributes in Higher Education

“…Higher education (HE) is being driven towards commercial competition imposed by economic forces resulting from the development of global education markets [6]. The brisk increase in the number of institutions in higher education has led to an intense competition.…”