How do management students perceive the quality of education in public institutions?

Abstract

Purpose

Keeping in mind the urgent need to deliver quality education in higher education institutes, the current paper seeks to measure the quality perception of management students in India.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on an exploratory study a modified version of SERVQUAL was employed as the research instrument. Data were collected from young students between the ages of 21‐25 years.

Findings

The research instrument, EduQUAL, comprising 28 items tested well for both reliability and validity. Five dimensions of the scale, namely learning outcomes, responsiveness, physical facilities, personality development and academics, were identified. The results obtained pointed at the negative quality gaps in all the five dimensions of EduQUAL. The highest negative gap was visible in the physical facilities dimension and lowest negative score in case of academics dimension. There were significant differences between perceptions and expectations of students with respect to all the five dimensions of the scale (p<0.001).

Research limitations/implications

The study was confined to three public educational institutes so the generalizations for the entire nation have to be used cautiously. Therefore, the researchers are encouraged to extend this research to private and foreign universities as well.

Practical implications

The current study provides valuable insights into the quality of higher education perceived by students in India.

Originality/value

The study points out the seriousness required of the policy makers in ensuring the quality of higher education rather than being concerned with only quantitative increase of higher education institutes. It seeks to draw the attention of the administration towards areas of performance where improvements are required or more resources need to be diverted.

Citation

Narang, R. (2012), "How do management students perceive the quality of education in public institutions?", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 357-371. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881211263993