Search results

This paper aims to test and compare the relative efficacy of three measuring instruments of service quality (namely Higher Education PERFormance (HEdPERF), SERVPERF and the moderating scale of HEdPERF‐SERVPERF) within a higher education setting. The objective was to determine which instrument had the superior measuring capability in terms of unidimensionality, reliability, validity and explained variance.

After a pilot test, data were collected from students in two public universities, one private university and three private colleges in Malaysia between January and March 2004, by the “contact person” route. From a total of 560 questionnaires, 381 were usable: a response rate of 68.0 per cent. This sample of nearly 400,000 students in Malaysian tertiary institutions was in line with the generalized scientific guideline for sample size decisions. Data were subjected to regression analysis.

A modified five‐factor structure of HEdPERF is put forward as the most appropriate scale for the higher education sector.

Since this study only examined the respective utilities of each instrument within a single industry, any suggestion that the HEdPERF is generally superior would still be premature. Nonetheless, the current findings do provide some important insights into how these instruments of service quality compare with one another.

The single dominant factor on this study is “access”, which has clear implications for institutions' marketing strategies.

This is believed to be the first study of its kind carried out among consumers of the higher education service.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test a new industry‐specific scale, HEdPERF (Higher Education PERFormance) to capture the authentic determinants of service quality within higher education sector.

The primary goal of this research was to test and compare the relative efficacy of HEdPERF against SERVPERF in order to determine which instrument had the superior measuring capability.

In terms of unidimensionality, reliability, and validity, HEdPERF explained variance within the higher education setting better in comparison to SERVPERF.

Since this study only examined the respective utilities of each instrument within a single industry, in only one national setting, any suggestion that the HEdPERF is generally superior would still be premature.

The current findings do provide some important insights into how the instruments of service quality compare with one another, in a typical higher education context.

An attempt is made in the paper, to develop critical insights into comparative evaluation of service quality measurement instruments.

This study aims to find evidence of the HEdPERF scale use for measuring the perceived service quality from the perspective of students in higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide.

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to find evidence of the scale use in articles published between January 2005 and May 2017, according to databases Emerald, SciELO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Wiley Online Library. The articles were searched on the databases on Jun 17, 2017 and at the end of the selection of articles, were kept 12 distinct documents.

The articles found pointed towards classic SERVQUAL and SERVPERF scales as being well substantiated for measuring perceived service quality. The HEdPERF scale was applied in articles about perceived service quality in HEI in studies in Brazil, China, Croatia, India, Malaysia, Portugal, Sri Lanka and Turkey.

The paper attempts to gather some articles on the measurement of service quality in higher education institutions, by the HEdPERF scale use. This study indicates that SERVPERF scale can also be an appropriate model to measure service quality in HEI context, that is, it is not yet possible to defend a single instrument as a standard for this purpose.

The SERVPERF (for Service Performance) and the HEdPERF (for Higher Education Performance) are two questionnaires for collecting customer/student feedback on service quality that have been tested and used mainly in non‐Chinese contexts. The purpose of this paper is to adapt and initially validate a Chinese translation of these two instruments for application in the context of post‐secondary education in Hong Kong.

Given that a Chinese translation of the two questionnaires concerned has not been tested in this new response‐context, an exploratory approach was adopted by examining the psychometric properties of the SERVPERF scales and the HEdPERF scales via scale alpha, item‐correlation analysis and exploratory factor analysis using valid responses collected from 271 students.

The alpha values of both the SERVPERF scales and the HEdPERF scales are good or acceptable, with the latter better than the former in general. In the present study, the validity of employing the SERVPERF in the targeted response‐context is supported as all the five SERVERF dimensions have been cleanly identified in the exploratory factor analysis. However, only three out of the five HEdPERF dimensions were identified in the present study, and two of the identified dimensions are complex concepts with each of them exhibited as two factors in the exploratory factor analysis, casting doubt on the appropriateness of the direct employment of the HEdPERF in the targeted response‐context for the measurement of service quality.

The students who participated in the present study were pursuing Project Yi Jin, which was a special one‐year post‐secondary programme in Hong Kong.

Taking both reliability and validity issues into consideration, this initial investigation indicates that the SERVPERF may be a more appropriate instrument than the HEdPERF for supporting quality assurance in the context of Hong Kong post‐secondary education, especially when multiple questionnaires will be used for collecting students' feedback on their various experiences at different levels, where it is important for these questionnaires to be, as much as possible, simple and non‐overlapping.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the performance of five alternative measures of service quality in the high education sector – service quality (SERVQUAL), importance‐weighted SERVQUAL, service performance (SERVPERF), importance‐weighted SERVPERF, and higher education performance (HEdPERF).

Data were collected by means of a structured questionnaire containing perception items enhanced from the SERVPERF and HEdPERF scales and expectation items from the SERVQUAL scale, modified to fit into the higher education (HE) sector. The first draft of the questionnaire was subject to a pilot testing through a focus group and an expert evaluation. Data were gathered from a sample of 360 students of a Portuguese University in Lisbon. Scales were compared in terms of unidimensionality, reliability, validity and explained variance.

It can be concluded that SERVPERF and HEdPERF present the best measurement capability, but it is not possible to identify which one is the best.

Since the study only examined the measurement capabilities of the five instruments at a single faculty, the collection of more data in other institutions is required in order to provide more general results.

The current results do make available some important insights into how the five alternative instruments of service quality in an HE context compare with one another.

The paper attempts to develop insights into comparative evaluations of five measuring instruments of service quality in an HE setting.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of Malaysian public universities’ service quality on international student satisfaction, institutional image and loyalty.

A total number of 400 questionnaires were distributed to international students, selected using convenience sampling technique, at three public Malaysian university campuses in Kuala Lumpur. Of this, 241 were deemed fit for analysis (60 per cent response rate). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling was used to analyze the collected data, assess the model and test hypotheses.

The findings show that all the five dimensions of higher education service quality influence student satisfaction which in turn influences institutional image, and together, they influence student loyalty.

There are a number of limitations associated with this study. First, the findings of the study are based on data from international students at only three Malaysian public university campuses. Second, this study focuses on a relatively small sample of international students. Besides, this study uses HEdPERF to assess higher education service quality which might exclude some factors that may influence international student satisfaction. On the other hand, it highlights a number of implications for the management of Malaysian universities.

This study validates the HEdPERF scale in the context of Malaysian public universities with regard to the perceptions of international students. Furthermore, this study extends the HEdPERF scale and examines its effects on student satisfaction, institutional image and loyalty.

The purpose of this paper is to promote and analytically verify an advanced assessment design to evaluate service quality (SQ) especially in postgraduate higher education.

This research adopts a quantitative approach through a survey method. A structured questionnaire was designed as a means for collecting data. Data were collected from 182 postgraduate students in an Egyptian higher education university. Data were examined by exploratory factor analysis to pinpoint the main irregularities explained by the extracted factors. Then, confirmatory factor analysis was carried out to filter the ratios and empirically test the assessment efficiency of the developed model.

The final model consists of 33 items loaded into eight dimensions for measuring performance-based SQ of the postgraduate higher education. The results are satisfactory in terms of unidimensionality, trustworthiness, and validity tests.

Although the empirical results are significant, a comparative study can identify relative strengths and weaknesses of this model.

For improving postgraduate higher education institutions’ quality, this paper highlights some dimensions and attributes that should be considered.

The literature proposes that there is an opportunity to handle SQ from the point of view of postgraduate students covering different contexts to further build a more comprehensive structure specifically for postgraduate higher education SQ. This paper deals with this research gap with analytical confirmation within the context of postgraduate programs in an Egyptian university.

Service quality has been widely recognized as the core value of any higher education institution (HEIs), especially in the context of higher education reform in Vietnam. The paper aims to assess the student’s perceived service quality using SERVPERF scale and to find the relations between perceived service quality, satisfaction and loyalty in one public university in Vietnam.

The self-structured questionnaire using SERVPERF scale was administered to 350 students currently attending full-time courses at the university. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to certify the elementary factors. The regression models were applied to determine the relationship between service quality, student satisfaction and student loyalty.

The findings revealed the significant relationships between student perceived service quality with satisfaction and loyalty. However, this relationship is mediated by student satisfaction.

The study is limited to public university education service and examined the perspective of student as “primary customer”; therefore, generalizing the results to other service industries and other role of student as stakeholder or citizen should be used with caution.

The SERVPERF scale could be delivered regularly to get the student’s perception on the HEIs performance. The results should be taken for purpose of continuing quality improvement to enhance the satisfaction and loyalty, particularly in the context of highly competitive environment and university autonomous in Vietnam.

This is believed to be the first study in Vietnam with sufficient evidence to support the concept that service quality positively related to students’ satisfaction and loyalty and satisfaction as mediating factor.

This paper aims to develop and empirically test the performance‐based higher education service quality model.

The study develops 67‐item instrument for measuring performance‐based service quality with a particular focus on the higher education sector. Scale reliability is confirmed using the Cronbach's alpha. The principle component analysis followed by a Varimax method is used to extract the factor loadings.

The results are satisfactory in terms of factor analysis, reliability and validity tests. Based on the overall loaded items, the eight dimensions are named. They are dependability, effectiveness, capability, efficiency, competencies, assurance, unusual situation management, and semester and syllabus.

Although the empirical results are significant, a comparative study can identify relative strengths of this model.

This study underlines some critical dimensions and related attributes on which the higher institutions should concentrate their efforts to improve quality.

This study is worth doing because it takes samples from international students studying at Japanese universities. This study also attempts to develop a comprehensive approach for scale development in measuring service quality for higher education institutes.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the critical research issues in terms of service quality in higher education.

The paper critically examines a number of leading studies in satisfaction, service quality, and higher education.

The paper finds five critical research agenda in the field of service quality in higher education sector.

The paper shows the research gaps of service quality in higher education through a review of literature. Future research should empirically address those gaps.

The growth of service quality literature started with commercial enterprises. Later, it is expanded in the management and marketing of higher education sector. Measuring and modeling service quality in higher education is new. The paper shows the nature and future directions of service quality research in higher education.

The research issues developed for this paper are relevant to antecedents, dimensions and consequences of service quality in the context of higher education.