Perception of Quality among TUCN students

First oral presentation of an article, Research Summit organised by UTCN, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 17 June 2010

Perception of "quality" among UTCN students

Legean, Anca, Marina, Loredana

Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 130-105 B-dul Muncii St., 400451, Cluj-Napoca, Romania; Legean_anca@yahoo.com, assolato_y@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT:

This study attempts to examine the differences between the students satisfaction and service quality, and what are the expectations and requirements of an university student. Furthermore, this study is also to examine any relationship between age and students satisfaction and service quality. The proposed research was realised using the questionnaire method, at the TUCN during the second semester of 2010 academic year and it allowed the gathering of the students opinions on how do they measure quality services provided by the University .The analysis of the answers helped us understand what is really important to students, and can lean to develop a better internal educational system. The main objectives and steps that will be followed are addressed briefly below: Thought literature search the importance of quality in higher education. Via personal interviews, team work, research based on personal experience etc, we will try to capture the student emotional side, and reveal what is important to him. Based on the results of the above investigation a structured questionnaire will be developed. Students participating in the research will be asked to evaluate the degree of importance of each need / requirement and at the same time the degree that this need is achieved in the university. The completion of the questionnaire by the participants will be filled by hand or by using electronic mail. The importance number identified through the questionnaires will be inputted in a matrix where were the a level of students satisfaction will be calculated. A full development of the matrix will follow to enable the researchers to identify thought the numerical results the top most important service quality that a university will take to fulfil the majority of the students requirements. The final objective through the in-depth analysis is to propose at university or national level, actions that will be taken to improve the levels of quality and satisfaction mostly of the Technical University. Key words: quality services, higher education, students

Perception of Quality among TUCN students

1. INTRODUCTION

inclination to view service quality in higher education from an organizational perspective. The issue of what constitutes a quality service within higher education is an emotive one. It is important for institutions to look at what their students want and not to collect data based upon what the institution perceives its students find important. HMSO (1994) produced a document suggesting ways in which public sector organizations could improve service to their users users are not only students within higher education but also the contact staff. Lovelock (1994) also support finding out what consumers feel is important, as often this is different from what an organization may perceive. Service quality is made up of three significant dimensions; service processes, interpersonal factors, and physical evidence. Higher education can be termed a pure service, as distinguished by the degree of person-to-person interaction (Solomon et al., 1985). In such settings, customer satisfaction is often established through the quality of personal contacts. In higher education the interaction between students and their influence on each other is a powerful determinant of overall satisfaction. The case for use of quality tools and methodologies is that these tools help people work to improve quality at all levels. In order to adapt higher education, efforts need to be made in creating a positive attitude towards change, an organizational culture focused on progress (Johns, 1998, p.527, extras din Kiernan M.J. 1993 The new strategic architecture: Learning to compete in the twenty-first century). Students are the main key in the educational system, they are a source of inspiration, and development to the universities and to the entire society.

The quality concept

Feigenbaum (1994:84) believes that Quality of education is the key factor in invisible competition between countries since the quality of products and services is determined by the way that managers, teachers, workers, engineers, and economists think, act and make decisions about quality. Much of the published work on service quality aspects of higher education has concentrated on effective course delivery mechanisms, and the quality of courses and teaching (Athiyaman, 1997; Bourner, 1998; Cheng and Tam, 1997; McElwee and Redman, 1993; Palihawadana, 1996; Soutar and McNeil, 1996; Varey, 1993; Yorke, 1992). The mechanisms for measuring service quality of courses and programmes often rely on research instruments (student feedback questionnaires) devised by representatives of the higher education institutions to provide data which address various externally set audit criteria. Furthermore, while it is recognised that undergraduate student views of course/programmes will vary over the four or five years of study according to the units taken, it is largely assumed that the generic elements which make up service quality ( the physical environment, or the availability of academic staff) are perceived in a similar way by students of all years. Institutions should address the issue of quality, not only through the traditional routes of accreditation and course review, student feedback questionnaires on the quality of course delivery and teaching, but also through evaluating what students themselves consider to be elements in service quality. Evidence suggests that listening to and facilitating people to participate in decision making is more likely to assist positive outcomes (Gardner, 1988; Oldfield, 1997; Thurgood, 1990). Currently, there is an 2

Perception of Quality among TUCN students The purpose of the present study was to gain information from the inside of the Technical University in Cluj-Napoca, directly from the students, regarding level of their satisfaction provided by the educational activity, environment, their attitude towards the educational process, their expectations concerning the requirements of the student status. This is an informational process, that will help entities to create a bond between teachers/ staff students, to provide a positive educational culture, accomplishing the knowledge transfer at the highest level possible. has more years of studies he understands the benefits of services and quality services.

Part A. Table 1. Degree of Satisfaction

Part A Comp letely dissati sfied Very dissati sfied Mildly dissatisf ied Neither dissatisf ied nor satisfied Mildly satisfied Very satisfi ed Compl etely satisfi ed

Question naire no.1-10

Degree service satisfactio n

4 40%

6 60%

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Out of 10 students, regarding their satisfaction overall The University services, 6 of them declared that they are very satisfied with the quality of the services received, and 4 of them indicated middle satisfaction, which means that there is a need for improving services. Service Quality Dimensions 1. Access to overall services 2. Responsiveness to your needs 3. Communication style and information provision 4. Security of your care 5. Enabling/Empowerment of your development 6. Competence in overall service delivery 7. Reliability of overall service delivery 8. Equity of overall service delivery 9. Tangibles: up-to-date range of physical facilities Part. B. In the table below we have represented students options regarding service quality, using Matrix Diagram: Stage 1: for each question, we have centralised students answers, and determined their service quality agreement, Stage 2: the number of subjects from each variant from (0 -10) was multiplied with the established score (1-7), resulting the total points between Quality Service Characteristics and the Criteria Weighting

The study was carried out by means of the questionnaire method, which allowed the gathering of the data concerning the perception of the students from the Technical University, with respect to the quality educational services. The study was based on a service quality questionnaire, that included tree parts: Part A, in witch the students had to indicate their degree of satisfaction with the overall services provided by the Technical University. Part B, this section of the questionnaire contains 26 statements relating to the quality of service delivery by the Technical University. Part C, final section, they hade to indicate the overall evaluation of the Quality of the services provided by the University, the number of years they have studied. They had to give a mark out of 100 to rate the importance of the following 9 most important services: To support this research, 30 questionnaires were distributed and only 10 were completed and returned. We didnt focus only on one segment of students, we tried to enhance/ to address this type of questionnaire to a variety of students, with 3 years of studies to bachelors. Through this research we tried to reveal an very important expect, that quality has a different degree of importance to each student, and the fact that if he

Perception of Quality among TUCN students Stage 3: the results from stage 2 shown that the total score were between 35-60, which represents strengths of the relationship, So we have classified them in order to established the lowest and the highest level of the importance of the service quality given by the students. We have classified the 26 total scores obtained as follows:
Level of importance unatisfying Less satisfying Satisfying Segments chosen from total scores ontained 36 - 40 41 - 45 46 - 50 Mark

5 4 3 2 1

Very satisfying 51-55 Part B Table 1. The values Completely 56 - 60 obtained after satisfying calculating according to the importance criterion for questions 1-26
Crt. 1 Absolutely Disagree No. Criteria Weighting 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25 The terms and conditions of your right to services are negotiated. Crt. 2 Strongly Disagree Crt.3 Slightly Disagree Crt. 4 Neither Disagree Nor Agree Crt. 5 Slightly Agree Crt. 6 Strongly Agree Crt. 7 Absolutely Agree

Total

Classifi cation

1
0

2
1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0

3
4 5 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 2 1 3

4
2 1 3 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 3 1 1 2 0 1

5
1 1 3 2 3 1 3 1 3 4 4 1 1 6 3 3 5 1 4 3 6 4 4 4 1

6
1 3 1 4 2 2 2 5 4 5 1 2 5 2 4 3 2 3 4 2 1 2 2 3 5

7
0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 40 42 46 47 51 37 45 56 53 57 48 40 53 50 50 55 49 45 52 49 46 47 46 50 48 5 4 3 3 2 5 4 1 2 1 3 5 2 3 3 2 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3

The service, physical facilities, 0 equipment, staff, and communication materials are accessible to you. Information, advice and support on 0 potential funding sources are made available to you Staff provide prompt and timely service 0 to you. Your complaints are constructively 0 handled. The University is willing to defend and 0 fight for your individual rights. A flexible service is provided to meet your 0 individual needs. Staff are polite and courteous with you. 0 Staff are willing to listen to your 0 individual point of view. Staff communicate in a language that 0 you understand. Complete and accurate information is 0 provided to you in good time. Staff reassure you in terms of your personal 0 anxieties, concerns and problems. Staff are sympathetic to your individual 0 needs, while respecting your privacy Staff respect your confidences and feelings. 0 You feel safe under the care of the staff. 0 Accurate and secure student records are 0 maintained. The university environment 0 enables you to take responsibility for your persona development. Specific opportunities and support for 0 you to attain your personal goals are provided. The required level of service is delivered, 0 with clearly stated terms and conditions. The required number of staff have the 0 ability to do the job. The full range of services is delivered to 0 meet your changing needs Staff deliver the appropriate service as 0 promised. A dependable service which does not 0 vary over time is provided. The behaviour of staff makes you feel 0 that you can trust them and have confidence in them. An equitable service is delivered to 0

Perception of Quality among TUCN students

individual students, as well as groups of students. A full range of up-to-date physical facilities and equipment are provided Total satisfaction

26.

3 3 /26= 0,115%

0 8/26= 0,307%

1 38/26= 1,461%

1 47/26= 1,807%

1 73/26= 2,807%

4 74/26= 2,846%

0 16/26 0,615%

39 1263/26= 48,57

In the table below the students questioned marked out of one 100 the service quality dimensions that we believed have a greater importance to them. The results shown a rate of 56,34% of the students satisfaction regarding the quality services delivered by the Technical University. Part C Table 1. Evaluation of the Quality Services
Students Access to Evaluation overall of the services Quality Services Questionn aire no.1 Questionn aire no.2 Questionn aire no.3 Questionn aire no.4 Questionn aire no.5 Questionn aire no.6 Questionn aire no.7 Questionn aire no.8 Questionn aire no.9 Questionn aire no.10 Result 50 50 80 90 90 90 20 30 50 90 64% Responsive ness to your needs Communi Security cation of your style and care informati on provision 90 60 90 90 90 80 25 40 30 90 68,49% 80 30 80 90 80 100 5 40 20 80 60,49% Enabling/Em powerment of your development Competence in overall service delivery Reliability of overall service delivery Equity of overall service delivery 90 50 90 80 90 90 20 30 20 80 63,99% Tangibles: up-to-date range or physical facilities 70 30 95 80 100 80 15 20 10 80 57,99% No. of years in the UTCN/tot almark 4/76,77 4/42,22 5/83,88 5/84,44 4/90 4/88,88 6/18,33 6/33,33 6/28,88 3/83,88 ~ 4,7 ani

80 40 80 80 100 100 15 30 30 85 63,94%

80 40 95 80 90 90 20 40 20 80 63,49%

80 40 95 80 90 80 10 40 60 90 66,49%

70 40 50 90 80 90 5 30 20 80 55,49%

3.

REULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

As can be seen In the Part A of the questionnaires Table1 Degree of Satisfaction, 40% of the students questioned, have indicated a degree of satisfaction mildly satisfied, and the other 60%, declared to be very satisfied with the overall services provided by the University. In B part - Assessment to Service Quality Delivery, as it can be seen in the table, the results shown that they agree with the following 2 statements, the fact that staff is polite and courteous to them, and speaks in a language that they can understand. At the other end, students arent satisfied with the handling of the following provided services. They dont believe that the terms and conditions of their rights to services are negotiated, the University is not willing to 5

Perception of Quality among TUCN students defend and fight for their individual rights, staff doesnt reassure them in terms of their personal concerns and problems. In the final section- part C - where were evaluated the dimensions of quality services delivered by the university, more than 50% of the students are satisfied with them, most of them giving good marks even those they are attending different years of studying in the university.

Figure 1. Large figure example magement and quality engineering MA (TUCN) course Prof. Dr. Wekenmann (TQM).

CONCLUSIONS Interest in the quality of university education has grown considerably over the last decade. Higher education institutions are increasingly placing greater emphasis on meeting students expectations and needs. As universities become more student orientated, student perceptions of higher educational facilities and services are becoming more important. This research shows how students perceive higher-education services and which quality dimensions they consider important in their evaluation. The study applies a holistic conception of service quality, considering not only the core service (the learning process) but mostly the auxiliary administrative and backup services as well. The results of this study show that providing quality services in the University does appear to have a positive impact on the students satisfaction, creates a better study environment, that makes him fell safe and confident. It also gave them an opportunity to reflect on its importance in their academic experience. From their responses it is clear that academic staff can make improvements in the social area, reassure them in terms of their personal concerns and problems, respect and support and help them to develop. This study reveals the need to implement appropriate evaluation processes of the level of service quality delivered has now become a key issue. The need to design questionnaires that are fit for purpose and approaches that

Perception of Quality among TUCN students optimise response rates are seen to be significant factors relating to the continuos way of seeking excellence. Students felt that the TUCN should carry out promises on time and staff should show sincere interest in solving their problems and queries. In terms of reliability, students also noted the importance of services being performed correctly the first time.
6. HMSO (1994), Asking Your Users: How to Improve Services through Consulting Your Consumers, HMSO, London. Kiernan, M., J., "The New Strategic Architecture: Learning to Compete in the Twenty-first Century", Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 7 pp.7-21, 1991. Lovelock, C (1994), Product Plus: How Product Plus Service Equals Competitive Advantage, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY., . McElwee, G., Redman, T., "Upward appraisal in practice: an illustrative example using the Qualed model", Education and Training, Vol. 35 No.2, pp.27-31, 1993. Oldfield, B.M., "Student perceptions of elements of the higher education experience", Academy of Marketing Conference, Manchester,1997. Oakland, J.S., Total Quality Management, 2nd ed, Heinemann Professional Publications, Oxford, 1993 . Palihawadana, D.,"Modelling student evaluation in marketing education", Proceedings of the 1996 Annual Marketing Education Group Conference, 1996. Palmer, A., Principles of Service Marketing, McGrawHill, London, 1994. Solomon, M.R., Supernant, C.F., Czeipel, J.A., Gutman, E.G., Arole theory perceptive on dyadic interactions: the service ecounter, Journal of M arketing, Vol. 49, pp 99111, 1985. Soutar, G., McNeill, M., Measuring service quality in a tertiary institution, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol.34 No. 1, pp 72- 82, 1996. Thurgood, J. (1990), Active Listening A Social Work Perspective, NSPCC, Longman Group, Harlow. Varey, R., The course for higher education, Managing Service Quality, pp. 9- 45. Yorke, M., Quality in higher ecucation: a aconceptualisation and some observation on the implementation of a sectoral quality system, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 16 No. 2, 1992. [SECTION BREAK CONTINUOUS INSERTED HERE]

7.

8.

9.

10.

11. 12.

REFERENCES
1. Athiyaman, A., Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions: the case of university education, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp.52140. Bourner, T.,More knowledge, new knowledge: the impact on education and training, Education and Training, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp 11-14 Cheng, Y., C., Tam, W., M., Multi-models of quality in education, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 22-32. Feingenbaum, A., V., Quality Education and Americas competitiveness, Quality Progress, Vol. 27 No. 9, pp. 8384, 1994. Gardner, R. (1988), "In care and involved", Community Care, Vol. 31 No.3,

13. 14.

2.

15.

3.

16. 17. 18.

4.

5.