Modified SERVPERF and Normalized SERVQUAL Models in Estimation of Service Quality in Higher Educational Institutes
The purpose of this paper is to propose and empirically substantiate modification of SERVPERF instrument. We demonstrate difference in practical realization of SERVQUAL (Perceptions-Minus-Expectations) and modified SERVPERF Performance-Minus-Expectation.
| Рубрика | Социология и обществознание |
| Вид | статья |
| Язык | английский |
| Дата добавления | 13.11.2020 |
| Размер файла | 285,4 K |
Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже
Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.
Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/
Modified SERVPERF and Normalized SERVQUAL Models in Estimation of Service Quality in Higher Educational Institutes
Mykola Sydorov -
PhD in Mathematics, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Methodology and Methods of Sociological Research, Faculty of Sociology, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine.
Svitlana Salnikova -
PhD in Sociology, Associate Professor, Department of Methodology and Methods of Sociological Research, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine.
Oksana Oliinyk -
PhD in Sociology, Associate Professor, Department of Methodology and Methods of Sociological Research, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine
Annotations
The purpose of this paper is to propose and empirically substantiate modification of SERVPERF instrument. We demonstrate difference in practical realization of SERVQUAL (Perceptions-Minus-Expectations) and modified SERVPERF (Performance-Minus-Expectation) based on qualitative and two quantitative methodological studies carried out at the Faculty of Sociology of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. We used questionnaire adaptation for higher educational institutes (HEI).The sample size of the quantitative studies (10 persons of 2nd year of education, 10 persons of 3nd year of education, 10 persons of 4th year of Bachelor degree program and 5 persons of 2nd year of Master degree program; every 4th student of each year of education) complies with the used statistical test and the sample size requirements for focus groups. To compare the instruments we used nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test implemented in the statistical programming package R. Our finding is that modified SERVPERF is more convenient for students, smaller and more useful for online surveys. So, the difference in mean values of answer's levels is more significant between modified SERVPERF and normalized SERVQUAL than between modified SERVPERF and perceptions in SERVQUAL.
Although the research has limitation - it is reconnaissance one and made as a one of steps for adaptation and validation of models for service quality measuring in Ukrainian HEI based on survey of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv students, however, the results of this methodological study allow other researchers to conduct representative studies using an adapted questionnaire of SERVQUAL at their universities. This result is important for service quality estimation which is needed for universities to monitor and improve the quality of their services and elaborate marketing strategy now.
Key words: HEI, quality of education, sociological research, SERVPERF, SERVQUAL. modification instrument expectations
Сидоров Микола, Сальнікова Світлана, Савельев Юрій, Олійник Оксана. Модифіковані SERVPERF і нормалізовані моделі SERVQUAL в оцінці якості обслуговування у вищому закладі освіти. Мета роботи - запропонувати та емпірично обгрунтувати модифікацію інструменту SERVPERF. Продемонстровано відмінності в практичній реалізації SERVQUAL і модифікованого SERVPERF на основі якісних та двох кількісних методологічних досліджень, проведених на факультеті соціології Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. Застосовано адаптацію анкети для вищих закладів освіти (ВЗО). Для порівняння інструментів використано непараметричний тест рангового підписання Вілкоксоном, реалізований у пакеті статис - тичного програмування R. Висновок полягає в тому, що модифікований SERVPERF є більш зручним для студентів, меншим і кориснішим для онлайн-опитувань. Такий результат важливий для оцінки якості послуг, яка потрібна університетам для моніторингу та покращення якості своїх послуг і розробки маркетингової стратегії.
Ключові слова: вищий заклад освіти, якість освіти, соціологічне дослідження, SERVPERF, SERVQUAL.
Сидоров Николай, Сальникова Светлана, Савельев Юрий, Олейник Оксана. Модифицированные SERVPERF и нормализованные модели SERVQUAL в оценке качества обслуживания в вузе. Цель работы - подтверждение различий в практической реализации двух подходов SERVQUAL и модифицированного SERVPERF, а также обоснование выбора на основе пилотного исследования студентов вузов. Для этого проводятся два пилотных опроса с использованием SERVQUAL (восприятие-минус-ожидания) и модифицированных подходов SERVPERF (представление-минус-ожидание) среди студентов факультета социологии (по 10 студентов 2-4 годов обучения на бакалаврате и пяти человек 2 курса магистратуры) по адаптированной анкете. Для сравнения средних значений каждого компонента проводился парный t-критерий, а затем - качественное интервью со всеми респондентами об удобстве двух анкет, четкости основных вопросов и т. д. По итогам исследования, модифицированный SERVPERF является более удобным для студентов, и полезнее для онлайн-опросов.
Ключевые слова: высшее учебное заведение, качество образования, социологическое исследование, SERVPERF, SERVQUAL.
Introduction
In the time of competitive relations, one of the components that influence the ranking of service market players is the quality of its provision. One of the approaches to estimate the quality of service is to evaluate the consumer's satisfaction of the quality of services provided, that is much harder than the quality, for example, of goods. The product has certain characteristics and indicators on which its quality is possible to evaluate. With the services, the situation is somewhat more complicated, because the services are immaterial object, and they are much more difficult to measure. An especially vital issue is the assessment of the quality of educational services in HEI, and the research problem is to offer a comparative methodology for research the quality of services in HEI.
Literature review
Since the early 80's of the XX century, scientists have tried to develop service quality indicators and quality models.
Three scientists from the USA, A. Parasuraman, V. Zeithaml and L. Berry proposed conceptualized model of service quality estimation as a difference between consumer's perceived performance and expectation, and was grounded the fundamental difference between a quality of service and a quality of goods (Parasuraman, et al., 1985).
In 1990 the fundamental paper about estimation of service quality by difference between perception and expectation of service (Zeithaml, et al., 1990) was published. RATER - more compact set of dimensions for service quality estimation was proposed in that paper. It consists of 5 dimensions and 22 questions. The methodological part of research was described in that paper too. As soon as quality satisfaction determines difference between perception and expectation
Satisfaction (S) = Perception (P) - Expectation (E) so we have to ask each respondent two sets of similar set of questions with different main questions: first the set for estimation of service level expectation and then the set for estimation of perceived level of service. Thus the core of questionnaire contains 44 questions in base.
For such questions Likert scale from 1 to 7 or from -3 to 3 is used: 1 (-3) means maximum negative evaluation and 7 (+3) - maximum positive evaluation (reversed Likert scale is used too).
Later in 1991 the result of research in different branches was presented in (Parasuraman, et al., 1991) and there was interpretation of a term "tolerance zone" of customer for different dimensions as first -time and recovery service etc.
After that such system of dimensions tried to adapt for quality e stimation for evaluation the quality of education in HEI in particular. Sometimes it was made precisely for original set of questions (dimensions), sometimes the distribution of questions in each of 5 dimensions (total 20 questions), sometimes less - 15 (Fogarty, et al., 2000), 19 (de Oliveira & Ferreira, 2009), sometimes more (Tan & Kek, 2004), (Bonlagic & Fazlic, 2015).
In 1992 the paper was published (Cronin & Taylor, 1992) with criticism of SERVQUAL (RATER) approach, the conceptualization of the concepts of "quality of service", "customer satisfaction" and "intention of buying", as well as the proposed other approach, SERVPERF, to assess the quality of services. This technique, unlike SERVQUAL, does not compute and compare the assessment of the expected and perceived service, but the analysis of the obtained level of service. On the one hand, it reduces the size of the questionnaire by 22 questions (if using the base questionnaire), on the other - does not violate the structure of dimensions that determine the quality of services.
In 1994 there was made a careful comparison of the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF techniques and demonstrates the disadvantages and advantages of the latter by (Cronin & Taylor, 1994).
O. Polyakova and M. Mirza (Polyakova & Mirza, 2015) analyzed 6 different approaches to evaluation of the service quality, including SERVPERF and SERVQUAL.
Vergara-Schmalbach and Maza-Avila (2015) proposed theoretical model of relationship between students' satisfaction and their future behavioral intentions in HEIs. In that research the autors used original 19 items questionnaire design based on students' perception.
Methodology of Research
Research Objectives. The purpose of this paper is to propose and empirically substantiate modification of SERVPERF approach by measuring satisfaction as a difference between expectation for a particular HEI and perceived levels of its service.
The objects of our study are two methods SERVQUAL and SERVPERF for measuring the quality of educational services provided in HEI. As a basis, we have taken the research and the text of the questionnaire by Donlagic and Fazlic (Bonlagic & Fazlic, 2015), which proposes a version of the SERVQUAL questionnaire to assess the quality of services in the field of higher education. Its adaptation (Annex 1) was conducted on the basis of qualitative and quantitative pilot studies of 35 students of the Faculty of Sociology (10 persons of 2nd year of education, 10 persons of 3nd year of education, 10 persons of 4th year of Bachelor degree program and 5 persons of 2nd year of Master degree program; every 4th student of each year of education). The sample size of the quantitative studies complies with the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the sample size requirements for focus groups. In this study, we did not use the weighting system for dimensions and units, since the goal was not to calculate the total index, but to compare two methods in terms of achieving the task of assessing the quality of services and the convenience of practical application in online surveys.
Research Design. As the first step in order to compare the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF techniques students were asked to fill a questionnaire made within SERVQUAL approach in which the service quality control unit consisted of two parts: at the beginning of the questionnaire, formulated in terms of estimating the expected level of services (based on their own experience and perceptions about higher education, evaluate how much your expectations correspond to your expectations of a modern university), in the end - assess perceived services (based on your own experience, evaluate how the allegations in questionnaire correspond to the level of the received at the University of Services).
After that, the same students, in a few hours during the same day, were offered a questionnaire constructed according to the modified SERVPERF approach.
We chose such a small period of time in order to assume that the attitude towards the quality of educational services in the HEI for each student did not change. To ensure the comparability of the methods, we tried to achieve a repeated test (test-retest), so each respondent put a unique mark on the questionnaires paper with their answers by means of which it was possible to identify the pair of first and second methods, but it was impossible to identify the person of the respondent who stored it anonymously.
After conducting an empirical part of the study with students, focus group interviews were conducted to discuss several aspects of the study: perception of questions, their comprehension, convenience, advantages and disadvantages, the possibility of using these techniques in online surveys. One of the most important aspects in online survey is the size of questionnaire and its design. The smaller number of questions means the lower level of item nonresponse. That is why one of question during discussion was the length of questionnaire.
Results of Research
SERVPERF Modification. The SERQUAL method involves measuring the level of expected and perceived service. The result is a difference between these indicators for each of the variables. The final Quality Score is considered as an unweighted or weighted sum of these differences. Thus, the basic questionnaire of the method consists of 44 questions.
The SERVPERF is performance-only measure of the quality of services. The result is a weighed or unweighted sum of responses to the characteristics of the questionnaire. The basic version of such questionnaire has 22 questions.
In our pilot survey we asked the question "Assess, on the basis of your own experience, the level of how the performed services are different from the expected in your university" and suggested to indicate the response on the Likert scale from -3 (significantly worse than expected) to 3 (much better than expected).
We did not simply ask about the level of services performed, but we tried to determine how much this level meets the expectations regarding a specific HEI, which is mainly shaped by the university rating, students' stereotypes and own experiences. In such a way, we received a questionnaire with one block of questions (a total of 26 questions adapted to the quality assurance test for higher education services) and determined how much the service level corresponds to the expectations of service in it.
The other reason is that this modification compares performed service in current HEI not with expected in virtual but exactly with expected in current.
SERVQUAL Normalization. By SERVQUAL, the resulting components of satisfaction characteristics are the differences between the perceived and the expected level of service. The total result is weighted or unweighted sum of those differences. If this sum is less than 0, the consumer is not satisfied, because the obtained level is less than expected. In the case where the difference is positive - the level of services received is higher than the expected level. Figure 1 is a five-point (boxplot) distribution of response frequencies for each of the questions, which includes the minimum and maximum response values and 3 quartiles. Circles indicate outliers that are considered to be at distances greater than 1.5 interquartile distances from the third and less than 1,5 interquartile distances from the first quartile, respectively. Since each of the SERVQUAL components (sentence - question) is defined in the range from -3 to 3, then the difference as a resultant variable is defined in the range from -6 to 6. To compare with the results of the SERVPERF technique, which features are defined in the range from -3 to 3, we normalize the difference by dividing it by 2. Thus, unlike (Cronin & Taylor, 1992), we will not consider the model "perceived - expected", but the normalized (divided by 2) difference in SERVQUAL (fig. 1) for convenience comparison with SERVPERF (fig. 2), in which the scale range is from -3 to 3.
-3-2-10 1 2 3
Comparing Results and Discussion
Figure 2 shows the boxplots of responses to the SERVPERF questionnaire. Even visually it is easy to see the difference between the two sets of boxplots. In fig. 2, the assessment has a more positive average rate of service than in fig. 1, where the majority is negative.
Due to skewness and nonnormality of distributions we used nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test for the hypothesis of the statistical significance of the differences between the median values of the relevant components, implemented in the statistical programming package R (R Core, 2019). The results are presented in table 1.
Table 1
Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for Modified SERVPERF and Normalized SERVQUAL
|
Question |
P- Value |
Medians of |
||||
|
Expected Level in SERVQUAL |
Perceived Level in SERVQUAL |
Differences between Perceived and Expected in Normalized SERVQUAL |
Modified SERVPERF |
|||
|
1 |
0.003 |
1 |
-2 |
-0.5 |
0 |
|
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
-1 |
-0.5 |
-1 |
|
|
3 |
0.006 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
4 |
0.004 |
2 |
1 |
-0.5 |
1 |
|
|
5 |
0.009 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
6 |
0.027 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
7 |
0.176 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
8 |
0.011 |
3 |
1 |
-0.5 |
0 |
|
|
9 |
0.085 |
2 |
1 |
-0.5 |
0 |
|
|
10 |
0.028 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
11 |
0.149 |
2 |
1 |
-0.25 |
1 |
|
|
12 |
0.004 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
13 |
0.007 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
14 |
0.003 |
3 |
2 |
-0.5 |
2 |
|
|
15 |
0.008 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
16 |
0.004 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
17 |
0.003 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
18 |
0.058 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
19 |
0.004 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
20 |
0.006 |
2 |
2 |
-0.25 |
1 |
|
|
21 |
0.384 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
22 |
0.032 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
23 |
0.064 |
2 |
2.5 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
24 |
0.022 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
25 |
0.078 |
1 |
0 |
-0.5 |
0 |
|
|
26 |
0.003 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
More than half of components (variables) have significant differences between median values of normalized SERVQUAL and modified SERVPERF (corresponded p-values marked bold).
In order to understand why these quite big differences are caused, we analyzed the distribution of the expected levels of educational services (fig. 3 and table 1).
The basic formulation for main question of block of expectation is "Based on your experiences as a pupil in a school and as a student in a university, please think about the kind of HEI that would deliver excellent quality of service. Think about the kind of university in which you would like to study. There is no right or wrong answers - all we are interested in is the number that truly reflects your feelings regarding HEI would deliver excellent quality of service. For each question, please indicate how much you agree with the statement".
Questionnaire's perception block had a main question "Think about the university in which you study. There is no right or wrong answers - all we are interested in is the number that truly reflects your feelings regarding your university deliver quality of service. For each question, please indicate how much you agree with the statement".
All questions (statements) of that 2 blocks have Lickert Scale from -3 (completely disagree) to 3 (fully agree). Table 1 show that more than half of the statements have answers mostly at least 2 in expectation part, which indicates a very high level of anticipation requirements, demanded from HEI. Among the completed questionnaires, there were those in which all values of the expectation block were specified as maximum (fig. 3). It means that there is not a clear unambiguous understanding of what the expected level of service delivery means.
In (Metters, et al., 2006) in part "Definitions of Service Quality" presented description of "what constitutes quality service" and made some typology: Ideal, Should Expectation, Will Expectation (High Expectations), Minimally Acceptable, Will Expectation (Low Expectations), Worst Possible.
When we ask questions to respondents it is difficult to explain, describing what type of expected quality of service we would like to receive from the respondent. This is one of the main causes of the problem of interpreting responses which complicates the analysis of the difference between the expected (fig. 3) and the received (fig. 4) level of service. The same conclusion we got from the analysis of focus group interviews with students after the empirical part of the study.
A slightly different situation can be observed in the case of SERVPERF approach. Here the respondent does not need to assess the expected level of service first (26 questions of modified core of questionnaire), and then performed (another 26 questions). According to the results of the discussion after both SERVQUAL and SERVPERF surveys, the most discomfort for students was at the stage of evaluation of the expected level of services. This is both due to the ambiguous understanding of the questions of the first part of the SERVQUAL questionnaire, and to the fact that for comparison (to assess the quality of the services perceived), students had to return to their answers at the beginning of the questionnaire, and often change them. Already this does not mean that SERVQUAL is the most comfortable at least during data gathering and later for interpretation. Since a large proportion of surveys are now conducted with online technologies, the compactness of the questionnaire is an extremely significant argument for reducing the percentage of item non-responses. In addition, an absolute majority of students supported the SERVEPERF methodology both in terms of the compactness of the questionnaire and the clarity of the questions.
If to analyze the results of modified SERVPERF and the normalized SERVQUAL, the statistical difference between the medians of the corresponding answers will be significantly less for SERVQUAL perceived - SERVPERF than for SERVPERF - differences between the perceived and the expected services in normalized SERVQUAL (table 2).
As we can see from Table 2, in the case of checking the hypothesis about the statistical significance of the median differences between the perceived service level of SERVQUAL and the correspond median values of SERVPERF, it is not significant for most of the signs: in 16 out of 26 cases. When comparing medians of normalized SERVQUAL's level of service quality and SERVPERF we received 9 out of 26. In the table 2, we highlighted the bold ones that were the variables where the difference between the medians was significantly different, which leads to different conclusions from the two-sided paired Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Table 2
Two-Sided Paired Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, P-Value
|
Hypothesis of Median Equality of Normalized SERVQUAL (Normalized Difference of Perceived-Expected) and SERVPERF |
Hypothesis of Median Equality of Perceived Service in Normalized SERVQUAL and SERVPERF |
||
|
1 |
0.461 |
0.017 |
|
|
2 |
1 |
0.798 |
|
|
3 |
0.006 |
0.131 |
|
|
4 |
0.004 |
0.672 |
|
|
5 |
0.009 |
0.028 |
|
|
6 |
0.027 |
0.245 |
|
|
7 |
0.176 |
0.341 |
|
|
8 |
0.011 |
0.352 |
|
|
9 |
0.085 |
0.078 |
|
|
10 |
0.028 |
0.007 |
|
|
11 |
0.149 |
0.134 |
|
|
12 |
0.004 |
0.075 |
|
|
13 |
0.007 |
0.13 |
|
|
14 |
0.003 |
0.036 |
|
|
15 |
0.008 |
0.007 |
|
|
16 |
0.004 |
0.25 |
|
|
17 |
0.003 |
0.07 |
|
|
18 |
0.058 |
0.642 |
|
|
19 |
0.004 |
0.036 |
|
|
20 |
0.006 |
0.1 |
|
|
21 |
0.384 |
0.102 |
|
|
22 |
0.032 |
0.016 |
|
|
23 |
0.064 |
0.027 |
|
|
24 |
0.022 |
0.015 |
|
|
25 |
0.078 |
0.798 |
|
|
26 |
0.003 |
0.017 |
Conclusion
This paper is the first study in Ukraine that attempted to research the students' satisfaction of services' quality in HEI by modified perceived service quality models. Service quality estimation is needed for universities to monitor and improve the quality of their services and elaborate marketing strategy. It also could facilitate accreditation. The easiest way is to do it by online survey of students as consumers.
In our modification of SERVPERF we measure students' satisfaction of HEI as difference between expected and perceived levels of service in a chosen HEI.
In this study, we used nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test for the hypothesis of the statistical significance of the differences between the median values of the relevant components. Comparing the results, the medians of modified SERVPERF characteristics are closer to the SERVQUAL level of received service than to the normalized SERVQUAL difference. In addition, SERVQUAL requires more survey time and more questions, which is a negative factor, especially when conducting online surveys. So, modified SERVPERF is more convenient for students, smaller and more useful for online surveys.
In the future, we plan as further adaptation of the SERVPERF questionnaire, so as validation it and develop this methodology for assessing educational services of HEI in Ukraine. Although the results of this methodological study allow other researchers to conduct representative studies using an adapted questionnaire of SERVQUAL at their universities.
Knowledge of the differences in practical realization of two approaches of SERVQUAL and modified SERVPERF is necessary for online surveys of students from different universities in order to compare the quality of educational services provided in them, as well as to determine the relationship between the quality of educational services and international and national ranking positions of universities.
References
1. Cronin, J. J. J. & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Joumal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252296
2. Cronin, J. J. J. & Taylor, S. A. (1994). SERVPERF Versus SERVQUAL: Reconciling Performance-Based and Perceptions-Minus-Expectations Measurement of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, 58, 125-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800110
3. de Oliveira, O. J. & Ferreira, E. C. (2009). Adaptation and application of the SERVQUAL scale in higher education. Orlando, Florida, USA, POMS 20th Annual Conference.
4. Bonlagic, S. & Fazlic, S. (2015). Quality assessment in higher education using the SERVQUAL model. Management, 20(1), 39-57.
5. Fogarty, G., Catts, R. & Forlin, C. (2000). Identifying shortcomings in the measurement of service quality. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 4(1), 425-447.
6. Metters, R. D., King-Metters, K. H., Pullman, M. & Walton, S. (2006). Chapter 10. Service Quality. Successful Service Operations Management. 2nd Revised ed. Independence: Thomson South-Western, 178-212.
7. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L. & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Understanding Customer Expectations of Service. Sloan Management Review, 32(3), 39-48.
8. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. The Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 002224298504900403
9. Polyakova, O. & Mirza, M. (2015). Perceived service quality models: Are they still relevant? The Marketing Review, 15(1), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1362/146934715x14267608178721
10. R Core, T. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved 20/01/2019 from https://www.R-project.org/
11. Tan, K. C. & Kek, S. W. (2004). Service Quality in Higher Education Using an Enhanced SERVQUAL Approach. Quality in Higher Education, 10(1), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1353832242000195032
12. Vergara-Schmalbach, J. C. & Maza-Avila, F. J. (2015). Relationship among Students' Perceptions, Satisfaction and Future Behavioral Intentions at Universities in Cartagena, Colombia. The New Educational Review, 41(3), 133-145. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2015.4L3.11
13. Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A. & Berry, L. L. (1990). Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. Simon and Schuster.
Appendices
Annex 1. Adapted Questionnaire of SERVQUAL. Original was Taken from (Bonlagic & Fazlic, 2015), Adapted, Modified and Translated
|
Factor |
№ |
Question |
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
Tangibles |
1 |
There are enough modern equipment on the faculty (university) to provide the educational process |
|
|
2 |
The buildings and premises of the universities are in good condition for study |
||
|
3 |
Faculty staff have a neat and decent appearance |
||
|
4 |
Training materials (curricula, training courses, etc.) are available and relevant |
||
|
Reliability |
5 |
Classes are scheduled and on time |
|
|
6 |
The dean's office is open at certain times and is accessible to students |
||
|
7 |
Auxiliary staff of the faculty (methodologists, laboratory assistants, etc.) supports and provides assistance to students |
||
|
8 |
Teachers have accurate records of the student's marks in the relevant courses |
||
|
9 |
Criteria for assessing student knowledge are honest and transparent |
||
|
10 |
Students are timely informed about the procedure and schedule of examinations, additional events and seminars, etc |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
Responsive- |
11 |
Students are familiar with the procedure for timely and prompt resolution of disputed issues |
|
|
ness |
12 |
Teachers are making efforts to ensure the best interests of students |
|
|
13 |
Teachers pay enough attention to students and help solve their problems |
||
|
Assurance |
14 |
Teachers have the necessary knowledge and skills to teach courses |
|
|
15 |
Teachers have sufficient communicative and pedagogical skills |
||
|
16 |
Educational programs are properly described, the content and learning outcomes are clear and clearly defined. Information about educational programs is accessible and understandable for students |
||
|
17 |
The quality of teaching in the educational program is high |
||
|
18 |
Teachers and staff of the faculty help to increase the confidence of students in themselves |
||
|
19 |
The reputation and the status of the university (faculty) among employers are high |
||
|
20 |
Teachers provide competent answers to students' questions |
||
|
Empathy |
21 |
Teachers have an understanding of the needs of students, paying particular attention to people with disabilities |
|
|
22 |
Teachers are friendly to the students |
||
|
23 |
Teachers treat all students equally and with due respect (equal rights for men and women, national minorities, foreign students, etc) |
||
|
24 |
Students can get a teacher's consultation by appointment at a fixed time or in absentia through the Internet (e-mail, distance education system, etc) |
||
|
25 |
Student feedback is taken into account by the faculty and faculty management to improve the educational process |
||
|
26 |
Faculty members are polite, friendly and professional in communicating with students |
Размещено на Allbest.ru
Подобные документы
What’s a hippie? What’s the difference between an old hippie and a new hippie? Once a hippie, always a hippie? These and similar questions are the source of much debate today.
реферат [384,2 K], добавлен 03.02.2004Сущность концепции ServQual в анализе качества услуг. Назначение и задача метода комплексной оценки товарной системы. Форма опросного листа для оценки качества обслуживания по методам SERVQUAL и МКОТС, анализ результатов анкетирования потребителей.
курсовая работа [135,4 K], добавлен 22.08.2016Определение нужд потребителя. Оценка качества продукта. Корректирование работы компании по улучшению производимой продукции. Исследование дерева потребительских ожиданий. Рассмотрение основных возможностей методов SERVQUAL, CSI, Mystery Shopping.
реферат [216,8 K], добавлен 04.02.2016Considerable role of the employees of the service providing company. Human resource policies. Three strategies that can hire the right employees. Main steps in measure internal service quality. Example of the service profit chain into the enterprise.
презентация [338,7 K], добавлен 18.01.2015The methodology multiple models and switching for real–time estimation of center of gravity (CG) position and rollover prevention in automotive vehicles. Algorithm to determine the vehicle parameters. The efficacy estimation switched controller scheme.
статья [238,6 K], добавлен 28.05.2012The need for Colvir's functional modules to avoid the costs of training and to facilitate modification and interaction of system components. Description and practical use of Citrix server and CyberPlat - integrated universal banking online payments.
доклад [505,3 K], добавлен 05.09.2011Advertising is a kind of activity made in its result which purpose is realization of marketing problems of the industrial, service enterprises and public organizations by distribution of the information paid by them. Advertising on television, in a press.
реферат [13,7 K], добавлен 14.06.2012The modern picture of quality of goods. Role of goods in satisfaction of necessities on the basis of theory of Maslou. The conception of the society of consumption. The separate service of technical control, independent of production of Henry Ford.
реферат [205,3 K], добавлен 23.10.2010Ecology as the scientific study of the relation of living organisms to each other and their surroundings. Overuse of pesticides. Climate change. Urban development. Scale rise in the average temperature of the Earth's climate. Genetically modified foods.
презентация [3,3 M], добавлен 17.03.2017Steps of education in the USA: a four-year high school and eight-year elementary school. Separation of the higher education: liberal arts and professional. Difference in the American system of school education from the systems in other countries.
презентация [2,2 M], добавлен 08.06.2010
