1Anahita Ghanad,
2Sufean Hussin
Veritas University College (VUC)- KL Campus, No. 14, Jalan Vivekanada,, Off Jalan Tun Sambathan, 50470 Brickfields, Kuala Lumpur
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v5-i6-05Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT:
Education has a critical role in realizing Malaysia's aspirations to be a developed country in the world. Empirical research was completed to evaluate and assess the fundamental aspects of the quality of services and facilities of premier universities (world-ranked) in the Klang Valley, Malaysia, particularly in terms of non-academic aspects, academic aspects, reliability/access, empathy/understanding, reputation, and program issues. This research employed Firdaus Abdullah (2006) Higher Education Performance (HedPerf) instrument because service quality has a substantial influence on student satisfaction. The survey involved 1440 respondents, consisting of university students who were approached randomly at various faculties at two world-ranked public universities and two world-ranked private universities. This research found that university students were extremely satisfied with academic concerns and a university's strong reputation. Students were pleased with the quality of academic courses and programs, as well as the academic staff's positive attitude and work habits. This is the main deciding factor for both domestic and foreign students when selecting a renowned university. Academic supporting services, career counseling services, dean of student services, testing grading system, course content, instruction, university attitudes toward students, offering a diverse range of courses, and class size were the areas of students' needs and satisfaction. Quality of services and facilities is a extremely important factor for internationalization, global competition, and the future sustainability of a university.
KEYWORDS:Higher education, Quality of services and facilities, HedPerf, Open system theory, Socio-technical theory, TQM theory
REFERENCES
1) Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: Three instruments compared.
International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 29(1), 71-89.
2) Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M. M., Ahmad, Z., Ahmad, Z., Shaukat, M. Z., Usman, A., & Ahmed, N. (2010).
a. Does service quality affect students performance? Evidence from institutes of higher learning. African journal of business management, 4(12), 2527-2533.
3) Akleh, A., & Wahab, R. A. (2020). Effectiveness of Course Portfolio in Improving Course Quality at Higher Education. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(3), 39-48.
4) Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 53-66.
5) Appelbaum, S. H. (1997). Socio‐technical systems theory: an intervention strategy for organizational development. Management decision.
6) Arif, S., Ilyas, M., & Hameed, A. (2013). Student satisfaction and impact of leadership in private universities. The TQM Journal.
7) Arokiasamy, A. R. A., & Abdullah, A. G. (2012). Service quality and students’ satisfaction at higher learning institutions: a case study of Malaysian University competitiveness. International Journal of Management and Strategy, 3(5), 1-16.
8) Arora, G. (1986). „Quest for Quality in Education‟. The Education Quarterly, 38(1), 5-8.
9) Asimiran, S., & Hussin, S. (2012). University governance: Trends and models: University of Malaya Press.
10) Asimiran, S. B. (2009). Governance of public universities in Malaysia. Universiti Malaya,
11) Balán, J. (1990). Private universities within the Argentine higher educational system: trends and prospects. Higher education policy, 3(2), 13-17.
12) Cameron, H., & Kirkman, C. (2010). Managing culture shock for first year international students entering Australian universities. Paper presented at the first year in higher education conference, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.
13) Endut, A. S., Abd Majid, F., Ibrahim, A. B., & Ashari, H. (2013). Responsive Outcome Evaluation as an Internal Quality Assurance Mechanism Alternative at IHLs in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 13-21.
14) Gallifa, J., & Batallé, P. (2010). Student perceptions of service quality in a multi‐campus higher education system in Spain. Quality Assurance in Education.
15) George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). 2a IBM SPSS Statistics Processes for PC. In IBM SPSS Statistics 23 Step by Step (pp. 22-39): Routledge.
16) Ghanad, A., Hussin, S., & DeWitt, D. (2020). An Analysis of the Organizational Culture of Premier Universities in Malaysia. MOJEM: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management, 8(2), 32-43.
17) Goedegebuure, L., & Hayden, M. (2007). Overview: Governance in higher education—concepts and issues. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(1), 1-11.
18) Hanaysha, J. R., Abdullah, H. H., & Warokka, A. (2011). Service quality and students’ satisfaction at higher learning institutions: The competing dimensions of Malaysian universities’ competitiveness. The Journal of Southeast Asian Research, 2011, 1-10.
19) Hanh, N. D., Loan, V. Q., & Viet, N. M. (2020). Quality framework of higher education in Vietnam, Malaysia and Nigeria. Higher Education Studies, 10(2), 133-144.
20) Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34.
21) Hasan, H. F. A., Ilias, A., Rahman, R. A., & Razak, M. Z. A. (2008). Service quality and student satisfaction: A case study at private higher education institutions. International Business Research, 1(3), 163-175.
22) Hussin, S., & Wong, S. C. (2011). Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Universities:
Incorporating Autonomy and Empowerment Into a Correlationship: IATED.
23) Idrus, N. (2003). Transforming quality for development. Quality in Higher Education, 9(2), 141-150.
24) Ismail, N. A. (2008). Information technology governance, funding and structure: A case analysis of a public university in Malaysia. Campus-Wide Information Systems.
25) Jimenez, E., & Tan, J.-P. (1987). Selecting the brightest for post secondary education in Colombia:
a. The impact on equity. Economics of Education Review, 6(2), 129-135.
26) Kenway, J., Bigum, C., & Fitzclarence, L. (1993). Marketing education in the postmodern age. Journal of Education Policy, 8(2), 105-122.
27) Khalid, K. M., Yacob, S., & Alhabshi, S. M. (2009). Managing Universities for the Future:
a. University of Malaya, International Institute of Public Policy and Management.
28) Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
29) Latif, L. A., Bahroom, R., & Khalil, M. A. K. M. (2016). Prioritizing services and facilities in a higher education institution: Importance-satisfaction quadrant and gap analyses. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal.
30) Ludeman, R. (2002). The role of student affairs and services in Higher Education: A practical manual for developing, implementing, and assessing student affairs programs and services. Online Submission.
31) Martensen, A., Grønholdt, L., Eskildsen, J. K., & Kristensen, K. (2000). Measuring student oriented quality in higher education: application of the ECSI methodology. Sinergie rapporti di ricerca, 9(18), 371-383.
32) Mohamad Tahar, E. (2008). Expectation and perception of postgraduate students for service quality in UTM. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
33) Muhamad, J., Chan, H., Suhaimi, S., & Suzyrman, S. (2006). Enhancing quality of faculty in private higher education institutions in Malaysia. Higher Education Research Monograph.
34) Newson, J., & Polster, C. (2001). Reclaiming our centre: Towards a robust defence of academic autonomy. Science & Technology Studies, 14(1), 55-75.
35) Owens, R., & Valesky, T. (2007). Behavior in Adaptive Leadership and School Reform. In: Allyn & Bacon Publishers Boston.
36) Patrinos, H. A. (1990). The privatization of higher education in Colombia: Effects on quality and equity. Higher Education, 20(2), 161-173.
37) Rajput, S., Sengar, A. S., & Gupta, S. (2019). Establishing the Relationship Between Service Quality and Student Satisfaction. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Digital Strategies for Organizational Success.
38) Ranking, T. W. U. (2010). Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/
39) RM Hanaysha, J., Hilman Abdullah, H., & Warokka, A. (2011). Service quality and students’ satisfaction at higher learning institutions: The competing dimensions of Malaysian universities’ competitiveness.
40) Roberts, P., & Peters, M. (1999). Globalisation and the crisis in the concept of the modern university [Modified version of this paper appears in the authors book University Futures and the Politics of Reform (1999).]. Australian Universities' Review, The, 42(1), 47-55.
41) Sporn, B. (1999). Adaptive university structures. London/Philadelphia.
42) Tama, K. M. (2019). Organizational culture mapping analysis through Organizational Culture Assessment (OCA). Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, 32(2), 186-195.
43) Tang, S. F., & Hussin, S. (2011). Quality in higher education: A variety of stakeholder perspectives.
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(2), 126.
44) Times, T. S. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/global
45) Uka, A. (2014). STUDENT SATISFACTION AS AN INDICATOR OF QUALITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION. Journal of Educational & Instructional Studies in the World, 4(3).
46) Vroeijenstijn, A. (2003). Towards a quality model for higher education. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance, 1(1), 78-94.
47) Wilkinson, R., & Yussof, I. (2005). Public and private provision of higher education in Malaysia: A comparative analysis. Higher Education, 50(3), 361-386.
48) Woo, K. (2006). Malaysian private higher education: A need to study the different interpretations of quality. Journal for the Advancement of Science and Arts, 1(1), 17-21.
49) Yaumiddin, N. (2011). Service quality in Malaysian higher education: students’ perceptions and expectations. Asian Journal of University Education, 7(1), 1-23.
50) Yeo, R. K. (2008). Brewing service quality in higher education: Characteristics of ingredients that make up the recipe. Quality Assurance in Education.
51) Zammuto, R. F., & Krakower, J. Y. (1991). Quantitative and qualitative studies of organizational culture.
Volume 05 Issue 06 June 2022
There is an Open Access article, distributed under the term of the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Our Services and Policies
Authors should prepare their manuscripts according to the instructions given in the authors' guidelines. Manuscripts which do not conform to the format and style of the Journal may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected.
The Journal reserves the right to make any further formal changes and language corrections necessary in a manuscript accepted for publication so that it conforms to the formatting requirements of the Journal.
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis will publish 12 monthly online issues per year,IJMRA publishes articles as soon as the final copy-edited version is approved. IJMRA publishes articles and review papers of all subjects area.
Open access is a mechanism by which research outputs are distributed online, Hybrid open access journals, contain a mixture of open access articles and closed access articles.
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis initiate a call for research paper for Volume 07 Issue 12 (December 2024).
PUBLICATION DATES:
1) Last Date of Submission : 26 December 2024 .
2) Article published within a week.
3) Submit Article : editor@ijmra.in or Online
Why with us
1 : IJMRA only accepts original and high quality research and technical papers.
2 : Paper will publish immediately in current issue after registration.
3 : Authors can download their full papers at any time with digital certificate.
The Editors reserve the right to reject papers without sending them out for review.
Authors should prepare their manuscripts according to the instructions given in the authors' guidelines. Manuscripts which do not conform to the format and style of the Journal may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected. The Journal reserves the right to make any further formal changes and language corrections necessary in a manuscript accepted for publication so that it conforms to the formatting requirements of the Journal.