Managing service quality in HE: is SERVQUAL the answer? Part 2

Explains the need for a valid and reliable instrument for course managers to evaluate their product through customer feedback as part of the system of quality assurance. Examines the justification for viewing higher education as a service provision with the student body as the customer. Provides a short review of the existing tools for measuring student experience along with the rationale for testing a modified version of the SERVQUAL instrument. The instrument was completed by volunteers from three undergraduate degrees (n = 134) in class time just before the Christmas vacation. Analysis of the results revealed higher average perception scores than expectation scores on every dimension except tangibles. However, analysis also revealed rather lower reliability coefficients than achieved by Parasuraman or later replication studies. Factor analysis did not support the original five SERVQUAL dimensions in line with other replication studies. Considers the reasons for the low reliability score and the different factor structure. In particular, proposes the modified instrument’s lack of focus on a specific aspect of the complex service experience as a possible source of error. Recommends that the elements of service quality should be revisited and a higher education specific instrument for course managers should be constructed.

[1]  K. Arrow.  Higher education as a filter , 1973 .

[2]  R. Teas,et al.  Expectations, Performance Evaluation, and Consumers’ Perceptions of Quality , 1993 .

[3]  Tom Redman,et al.  Upward Appraisal in Practice: An Illustrative Example Using the Qualed Model , 1993 .

[4]  N. Entwistle,et al.  Understanding Student Learning , 1983 .

[5]  Gary R. Pike,et al.  The relationship between perceived learning and satisfaction with college: An alternative view , 1993 .

[6]  G. Gibbs.  How Can Promoting Excellent Teachers Promote Excellent Teaching , 1995 .

[7]  R. Teas,et al.  Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service Quality: An Assessment of a Reassessment , 1994 .

[8]  G. Pike.  The “magic” of mean gain , 1993 .

[9]  N. Entwistle,et al.  Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments , 1990 .

[10]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research , 1985 .

[11]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. , 1991 .

[12]  Leyland Pitt,et al.  SERVQUAL as a Measuring Instrument for Service Provider Gaps in Business Schools , 1992 .

[13]  PREFERRED CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT AND APPROACH TO LEARNING , 1988 .

[14]  Peter Jackson,et al.  Public sector economics , 1978 .

[15]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications , 1994 .

[16]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. , 1988 .

[17]  P. Ramsden.  A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire , 1991 .

[18]  M. Atkins.  Assessment Issues in Higher Education. , 1993 .

[19]  Kirk R. Karwan,et al.  Prioritizing the Dimensions of Service Quality , 1994 .