Measuring Service Quality and Student Satisfaction in Ahlia University, Kingdom of Bahrain during 2015-16
Zainab Ali Abdulla Ghanem Alhayki1 and Subhadra Ganguli2
1
E-mail:
[email protected]; address: Ahlia University, Department of Management and Marketing, College of Business and Finance, Manama. Kingdom of Bahrain 2
E-mail:
[email protected]; Address: Ahlia University, Department of Accounting and Economics, College of Business and Finance, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
1
Author Bios: Zainab Ali Abdulla Ghanem Alhayki is MBA from Ahlia University and works in the registration department of a private university in the kingdom of Bahrain Subhadra Ganguli is an Associate Professor in the department of Accounting &Economics in the College of Business and Finance in Ahlia University.
2
Measuring Service Quality and Student Satisfaction in Ahlia University, Kingdom of Bahrain during 2015-16 Abstract
Purpose: Measuring student satisfaction is an important task for higher education institutions to plan future strategies of growth. The paper aims to provide clear strategies for management of private universities like Ahlia University in the kingdom of Bahrain to identify the gaps between student experience and perception in the delivered areas of service quality to amend shortfalls and to implement enhancement. Design/methodology/approach: The research is based on quantitative methods using survey data. A SERVQUAL questionnaire was used for collecting qualitative and quantitative data to measure service quality expectation and perceptions in AU. 145 randomly selected respondents of this research were students enrolled in the Bachelor Degree undergraduate program within several colleges in the university during academic year 2015-2016. SERVQUAL gap analysis and regression techniques have been applied to collected data using SPSS software to conclude about the significance of the difference between student expectations and perceptions of the five dimensions of service quality offered by Ahlia University.
Findings: Overall, AU services succeed to meet its student expectations. The only negative gap observed in the analysis was in the tangibility dimension in “Visual appeal of physical facilities” which will be eliminated due to the new campus plans for the university. There are significant differences between the assurance and tangibility expectations based on the age of the students and a significant difference between responsiveness and empathy dimensions based on cumulative GPA. Regression results showed that all the dimensions of SERVQUAL are significant and have positive impact on overall student satisfaction.
Practical implications: The paper has evaluated AU satisfaction dimensions through service quality perceived by the students by utilizing the SERVQUAL instrument as the measurement tool in this research. The results provide areas for improvement from a service quality perspective.
3
Originality/value: SERVQUAL gap analysis has been applied for the first time in the kingdom of Bahrain to explore improvements in service quality of a private university such as Ahlia university.
4
Introduction: Bahrain’s tertiary education sector was dominated by the University of Bahrain (UoB), a public university set up in 1984. Prior to UoB, public institutions of higher learning were set up such as the Teachers College in 1966, Gulf Technical College (renamed later as Bahrain Polytechnic) in 1968, the College of Health Sciences in 1976, the College of Arts, Science and Education and the Arabian Gulf University in 1979 (Madany et al.,1988 :411). Ahlia University (AU) was set up as the first private university in 2001 followed by several others in the following years during 2001-12. (HEC Annual Report, 2012) Table 1: Private institutes in Bahrain with the year of establishment No.
Private Institutions
Year of establishment
1
Ahlia University
2001
2
Gulf University
2001
3
The Kingdom University
2001
4
University College of Bahrain
2001
5
AMA International University- Bahrain
2002
6
Arab Open University
2002
7
New York Institute of Technology
2003
8
RCSI Medical University of Bahrain
2004
9
Delmon University
2004
10
Applied Science University
2004
11
Royal University of Women
2005
12
Talal Abu Ghazaleh University College
2012
(Source: HEC Annual Report 2012) Literature Review: Khanchitpol (2013) investigates the five dimensions of SERVQUAL (reliability, assurance, tangibility, empathy, and responsiveness) in higher education sector of Thailand. The study covered 350 undergraduate students from a private university and concluded that it did not meet the expectations of undergraduate students. The gap analysis between service perceptions and expectations showed that all scores for perceptions were lower than their expectations scores, indicating that improvements in some areas of service should be implemented to enhance service quality. 5
Qi Huang (2009) studied undergraduate student satisfaction in service quality of Xiamen University, China using questionnaires and analyzing the responses on a 7-point Likert scale. He concluded that undergraduate students were satisfied with the quality of services provided by the university. Several studies have used SERVQUAL instrument to measure service quality in education sector. Khanchitpol (2013) mentions, among SERVQUAL dimensions, the least and the most negative gap averages were in tangibility dimension; followed by responsiveness, assurance, empathy and reliability. Abu Hasan, Abd Rahman, and AbdRazak (2008) examined the relationship between SERVQUAL dimensions in private higher education institutions and found that SERVQUAL dimensions and overall service quality had a significant relationship. Student satisfaction and empathy had the strongest relationship followed by assurance, tangibility, responsiveness and reliability. Al-Alak and Alnaser (2012) studied the relationship between SERVQUAL dimensions (tangibility, responsiveness, reliability, assurance and empathy) and overall service quality with undergraduate students’ satisfaction at the University of Jordan. Their result indicates that the assurance and reliability dimensions of service quality were the two most important dimensions related to enhancement. Amelia et al (2011) reported that the quality of service at higher education institute in Indonesia had gaps between expectation and service performance with the highest gap in the reliability and lowest gaps in the assurance dimension. Khodayari and Khodayari (2011) examined the perceptions and expectations of Islamic Azad University in Iran; their findings indicate that there was a gap in student expectations and perceptions of all SERVQUAL dimensions. Mohamad Yusof et al (2012) reported that service quality in higher education between research and non-research universities show that tangibility was most important, while empathy and assurance dimensions were least important. The finding of this research adds and helps administrators and academics allocate their resources accordingly.
6
Figure 1: Framework of the research Reliability Overall Student Satisfaction Level
Responsiveness
Service Quality
Assurance
Empathy
Tangibility
SERVQUAL: Adopted from Soteriou and Zenios (1997), institutions use SERVQUAL questionnaire to measure and manage service quality of consumer expectation and actual service experienced in terms SERVQUAL dimensions which are 1) Reliability indicates performance of the service as promised 2) Responsiveness indicates on-time service and readiness to help students 3) Assurance indicates confidence of staff as well trust by staff. It includes respectfulness, competence, courtesy and honesty 4) Empathy is understanding, individual attention as well student care as demonstrated by staff 5) Tangibility is the physical facility that must exist in the institute. For example: service processes, equipment and the personnel appearance
7
Figure 2: Research Method and Research Variables
Source: Amelia, Hidayanto and Hapsari (2011) Jain and Gupta (2004) stated that the responses of the students regarding their perception and expectations are compared to present the gap as (P-E) e.g. the higher perceived level of service quality will provide higher positive values. SERVQUAL method has been employed for assessing quality of AU services. This model is used to collect and analyze data which is directed towards analyzing students’ opinion about AU quality of service expectations, actual performance of the services and student satisfaction after using various dimensions (reliability, responsiveness assurance, empathy and tangibility). Based on results of the research, by seeking to meet or go beyond expectations of students in service quality, AU will be able to maintain a high image of quality as well as strive for higher goals to beat student expectations in the future. Research Method The research is based on quantitative methods using SERVQUAL data. A SERVQUAL questionnaire was used for collecting data to measure service quality expectation and perceptions of students in different undergraduate programs in AU. Employing the SERVQUAL measurement helps in capturing the service quality expectation and perceptions gap of the students in terms of AU service quality. Data sampling size and population The research is carried out in AU in the Kingdom of Bahrain to explore the gap between student expectations and perception of service quality during academic year 2015-16. AU has a population of 2500 students with 1850 of them in undergraduate programs with student ratio between
females
and
males
being
54%
and
http://www.ahlia.edu.bh/old-about-au/facts-figures/. 2016).
8
46%
respectively.
(Source:
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡
Response rate = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑄𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑖𝑟 ≥ 30% 145
R = 150≈97 % 97% ≥ 30% which is the required Response Rate
Research Instruments and Techniques A questionnaire has been designed according to the research problem aiming to measure service quality of AU in the Kingdom of Bahrain in terms of SERVQUAL method. The questionnaire has been divided into 2 sections; the first section contains demographic characteristics of the undergraduate students, such as age, gender, yearS of education and cumulative GPA. In the second section, the SERVQUAL scale was employed to evaluate undergraduate students’ expectation and the performance of service quality in the university in 21 items representing the 5 quality service dimensions namely tangibility (5 items), reliability (5 items), responsiveness (3 items), assurance (4 items) and empathy (4 items). A 5-point Likert-type scale was utilized, ranging from strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), undecided (3), agree (4) and strongly agree (5) to access perceptions of undergraduate students and another 5-point Likert type scale was utilized, ranging from totally not expected (1), not expected (2), moderately expected (3), expected (4) and highly expected (5) to access expectations of undergraduate students in service quality of higher education institutions in Bahrain. Gap result is calculated by subtracting expectation (E) score from the perception (P) score of each item (P-E=Q) under each of the five SERVQUAL dimensions. When the gap turned out to be a positive score (P-E=Q>0), it indicated that perception of service was more than what was expected, but if the score showed a negative gap (P-E=Q [Accessed 9th September 2016]. Kayakumar G.S. David Sam, and I. Narsis (2011). ‘ Physical and Core Services Quality: State Bank of India’, SCMS Journal of Indian Management, pp. 90. Khaleel (2005). ‘Total Quality Management: Proposed Model for higher education reform and renewal Fifth Educational Conference - the quality of university education’, 1, pp. 23-42.
Khanchitpol Yousapronpaiboon (2013). "SERVQUAL: Measuring higher education service quality in Thailand".
Khodayari, F., &Khodayari, B. (2011).Service quality in higher education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 1(9), 38-46. Lai, Kee-hung and Cheng, Sdwin, T.C. (2005). ‘Effects of Quality Management and Marketing on Organizational Performance’, Journal of Business Research, 57, pp. 446-456. Mittal,V. and Kamakura,W. (2001). ‘Satisfaction, repurchase intent and repurchase behavior: Investigating the Moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics’, Journal of Marketing Research, 2001, pp. 131–142.
MOE. (2016). Ministry of education Kingdom of Bahrain . [online]. Available at: < http://moe.edu.gov.bh/hec> [Accessed 9th September 2016]. 35
Mohamad Yusof, A.R., Hassan, Z., Abdul Rah man, S., &Ghouri, A. M. (2012). Educational service quality at public higher educational institutions: A proposed framework and importance of the sub – dimensions. International Journal of Economics Business and Management Studies, 1(2), 36-49. Navarro,M., M., Iglesisas M. P. &Torees P.R. (2005). ‘A new management of universities: satisfaction with offered courses’. International Journal of Educational Management,19 (6), pp. 510. Nejati M. &Nejati M. (2008).‘Service Quality at University of Tehran Central Library'. Library Management, 29(6/7), pp. 571-582. Nejati M., Nejati M. &BayatNejad F. (2007). ‘Quality Enhancement in Medical Education’, Lex ET Scientia International Journal, (14), pp. 212-219. O'Neill, M. A., & Palmer, A. (2004). ‘Importance-performance analysis: a useful tool for directing continuous quality improvement in higher education’. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(1), pp. 39-52.
Pakdil, F., &Aydln, O. (2007). Expectations and perceptions in airline services: an analysis using weighted SERVQUAL scores. Journal of Air Transport Management, 13, 229-237.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring customer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 6(41), 12-40. Qi Huang (2009). ‘The relationship between service quality and student satisfaction in higher education sector: A case study on the undergraduate sector of Xiamen University of China’. Thesis report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of: Masters of Business Administration, Assumption University, Thailand, 16-21, 30, pp. 38-60.
36
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1985), “A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research". Journal of Marketing, Vol.49 No.4, pp.41-50. Perisau S. E., & McDaniel, J. R. (1996).‘Assessing service quality in schools of business'. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 14(3), pp. 204-218. Sarmi, Abdulla &Zayed, Kashef (2006). ‘The Degree of Students Satisfaction of the Faculty of Education at Sultan Qaboos University of Academic Advising and their Expectations’, Journal of the Faculty of Education, University of the 21st year of UAE. (23), pp. 59-88.
QQA.(2016). National Authority for Qualifications & Quality Assurance of Education and Training. [online]. Available at: < http://www.qqa.edu.bh/En/QaaetUnits/SRU/Pages/DHR.aspx > [Accessed 14th October 2016].
Ramseook-Munhurrun, P., Naidoo, P., &Nundlall, P. (2010).A proposed model for measuring service quality in secondary education. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2 (3), 335-351. Venetis V. A. and Ghauri P.N. (2004). ‘Service Quality and Customer Retention: Building Longterm Relationships’, European Journal of Marketing, 38:11/12, pp. 1577-1598.
Zarei, A., Arab, M., Froushani, A., Rashidian, A., &Tabatabaei, S. (2012). Service quality of private hospitals: The Iranian patients’ perspective Health Services Research, 12(31)
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1990).Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. New York, the Free Press. Zeithaml, V.A., and Bitner, M.J., (2000). „Service Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm‟, New York, NY, McGraw Hill.
37
Appendix QUESTIONNNAIRE
This survey pursuing MBA dissertation and prepared by Zainab Alhayki, Master student at AhliaUniversity(AU).Kindly take few minutes to tick the right answer. Your responses will be treated with strict confidentiality.
This survey is concerned about evaluating the student
satisfactioninAU.The Purpose of this research isto determine and correct the gap between desired level and actual level of service provided by the university .The questionnaire consists of 3 parts . For each of the items below, please indicate your perception of AU service. Please do not omit any feature. PART I. PERSONAL DEATIALS: 1) Gender o Male o Female 2) How old are you? o 18 o 19 o 20 o 21-More 3) Year of Education o Second Year o Third Year o Fourth Year o Fifth year and above 4) Average of GPA o Below 2.00 38
o 2.00-2.50 o 2.51-3.00 o 3.01-3-50 o 3.51-4.00
PARTII. Expected Service Quality
This section evaluates your expectations of the provided service quality before visiting AU.
NO
Dimensions and Items
Scale
Reliability
Highly Expect Moderat Not expect ed ely expect ed expected ed 5
1 2 3 4 5
Providing student service as promised Sincere interest of personnel in solving problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first time. Providing services at appointed time. Informing when services will be performed Responsiveness
1 2 3
Staff gives prompt service to students. Staff always help students. Staff respond promptly to queries. Assurance
1 2 3 4
Students trust staffs. Students feel safe while receiving services. Staffs are courteous with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer students. Empathy
1 2 3 4
Given individual attention. Dealt with in a caring fashion. Staff keep students’ interest at heart. Understanding specific needs of students. 39
4
3
2
Totall y not expect ed 1
Tangibility 1 2 3 4 5
Modern and up to date equipment. Visual appeal of physical facilities. Neat and well-dressed staffs. Visual appeal of materials. Convenient operating hours.
PART III. Current Service Quality In this section, the question is repeated from PART II, but with evaluating the actual service received after being a student in AU. NO
1 2 3 4 5
Dimensions and Items
Scale
Reliability
Strong ly agree 5
Providing student service as promised Sincere interest of personnel in solving problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first time. Providing services at appointed time. Informing when services will be performed Responsiveness
1 2 3
Staff gives prompt service to students. Staff always help students. Staff respond promptly to queries. Assurance
1 2
Students trust staffs. Students feel safe while receiving services. 40
Agree
Undecid ed
Disagr ee
3
2
4
Strong ly disagr ee 1
3 4
Staffs are courteous with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer students. Empathy
1 2 3 4
Given individual attention. Dealt with in a caring fashion. Staff keep students’ interest at heart. Understanding specific needs of students. Tangibility
1 2 3 4 5
Modern and up to date equipment. Visual appeal of physical facilities. Neat and well-dressed staffs. Visual appeal of materials. Convenient operating hours.
Thank you!
41
Reliability and Validity test 1-Expected Reliability Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's
Standardized
N
Alpha
Items
Items
.848
.847
5
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Sincere interest Providing service
Providing
service
as
promised Sincere personnel
interest in
Carrying out of of
the Providing
personnel in services right services as solving
at
the
Informing at when
first appointed
services will
promised
problems.
time
time
be performed
1.000
.541
.599
.579
.437
1.000
.476
.501
.326
.476
1.000
.769
.483
.501
.769
1.000
.546
of
solving .541
problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first .599 time Providing services at appointed time
.579
42
Informing services
when will
be .437
.326
.483
.546
1.000
Scale
Corrected
Squared
Cronbach's
Multiple
Alpha if Item
performed Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Variance
Providing
service
as
promised Sincere personnel
interest in
if Item-Total
Item Deleted Item Deleted
Correlation
Correlation
Deleted
15.05
9.560
.673
.468
.812
10.478
.559
.348
.841
8.925
.742
.630
.792
9.071
.772
.653
.785
10.100
.544
.323
.847
of
solving 15.03
problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first 15.14 time Providing services at appointed time Informing services
15.11
when will
be 15.06
performed
2-Expected Responsiveness Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .812 .812 3
of
43
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Staff give prompt service to students. Staff give prompt 1.000 service to students. Staff always to help .553 students. Staff respond promptly .687 to queries.
Staff always Staff respond to help promptly to students. queries. .553
.687
1.000
.533
.533
1.000
Item-Total Statistics Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Staff give prompt 7.78 service to students. Staff always to help 7.65 students. Staff respond promptly 7.88 to queries.
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
2.965
.707
.520
.695
3.271
.591
.350
.814
3.049
.692
.506
.712
3. Expected Assurance Reliability Statistics
44
Cronbach's Alpha .777
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized N Items Items .781 4
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Professors Students feel Staffs are have the safe while courteous knowledge to Students trust receiving with answer staffs. services. students. students. 1.000 .528 .616 .394
Students trust staffs. Students feel safe while .528 receiving services. Staffs are courteous .616 with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer .394 students.
1.000
.657
.221
.657
1.000
.410
.221
.410
1.000
Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted 11.61 5.100
Students trust staffs. Students feel safe while 11.67 receiving services. Staffs are courteous 11.63 with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer 11.48 students.
Corrected Item-Total Correlation .651
Squared Multiple Correlation .434
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .692
4.931
.578
.464
.725
4.513
.732
.563
.640
5.598
.395
.211
.818
45
4. Expected Empathy Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .876
.876
of
4
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix
Given individual attention. Dealt with in a caring fashion. Staff keep students’ interest at heart. Understanding specific needs of students.
Given individual attention.
Staff keep Dealt with in students’ a caring interest at fashion. heart.
Understandin g specific needs of students.
1.000
.652
.688
.526
.652
1.000
.648
.605
.688
.648
1.000
.708
.526
.605
.708
1.000
Item-Total Statistics Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Given individual 11.22 attention. Dealt with in a caring 11.50 fashion. Staff keep students’ 11.44 interest at heart.
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
7.326
.709
.547
.850
7.099
.727
.535
.843
6.623
.798
.650
.814
46
Understanding specific 11.21 needs of students.
7.003
.699
.538
.854
5. Expected Tangibility Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .544 .746 5
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Modern and up to date equipment. Modern and up to date 1.000 equipment. Visual appeal of .565 physical facilities. Neat and well-dressed .490 staffs. Visual appeal of .647 materials. Convenient operating .443 hours.
Visual appeal Neat and Convenient of physical well-dressed Visual appeal operating facilities. staffs. of materials. hours. .565
.490
.647
.443
1.000
.082
.425
.282
.082
1.000
.268
.296
.425
.268
1.000
.501
.282
.296
.501
1.000
Item-Total Statistics
47
Modern and up to date equipment. Visual appeal of physical facilities. Neat and well-dressed staffs. Visual appeal of materials. Convenient operating hours.
Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
15.22
23.395
.505
.533
.431
15.13
25.156
.332
.327
.495
14.59
11.771
.264
.109
.480
15.05
24.268
.558
.489
.439
14.99
23.833
.483
.303
.443
Reliability and Validity test 1-Actual Reliability Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .840 .845 5
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Sincere Carrying out interest of of the Providing Informing Providing personnel in services right services at when service as solving at the first appointed services will promised problems. time. time. be performed
48
Providing service as promised Sincere interest of personnel in solving problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first time. Providing services at appointed time. Informing when services will be performed
1.000
.688
.565
.578
.444
.688
1.000
.541
.460
.416
.565
.541
1.000
.509
.453
.578
.460
.509
1.000
.566
.444
.416
.453
.566
1.000
Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
13.56
12.859
.717
.579
.793
13.63
12.749
.648
.513
.807
13.68
12.135
.641
.419
.809
13.76
12.268
.664
.471
.802
13.81
12.208
.578
.369
.829
Item-Total Statistics
Providing service as promised Sincere interest of personnel in solving problems. Carrying out of the services right at the first time. Providing services at appointed time. Informing when services will be performed
2. Actual Responsiveness 49
Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .749 .753 3
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Staff give prompt Staff always Staff respond service to to help promptly to students. students. queries. Staff give prompt 1.000 service to students. Staff always to help .453 students. Staff respond promptly .520 to queries.
.453
.520
1.000
.537
.537
1.000
Item-Total Statistics Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Staff give prompt 7.23 service to students. Staff always to help 7.18 students. Staff respond promptly 7.20 to queries.
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
3.431
.552
.313
.694
2.829
.569
.330
.684
3.147
.620
.385
.617
50
3.Actual Assurance Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .773 .776 4
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Professors Students feel Staffs are have the safe while courteous knowledge to Students trust receiving with answer staffs services. students. students. Students trust staffs Students feel safe while receiving services. Staffs are courteous with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer students.
1.000
.710
.423
.429
.710
1.000
.442
.438
.423
.442
1.000
.343
.429
.438
.343
1.000
Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted 10.90 6.227
Students trust staffs Students feel safe while 10.85 receiving services.
6.393
51
Corrected Item-Total Correlation .664
Squared Multiple Correlation .531
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .670
.684
.543
.663
Staffs are courteous 10.89 with students. Professors have the knowledge to answer 10.79 students.
7.349
.486
.239
.762
6.655
.489
.240
.770
4.Actual Empathy Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .848 .848 4
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix
Given individual attention. Dealt with in a caring fashion. Staff keep students’ interest at heart. Understanding specific needs of students.
Given individual attention.
Staff keep Dealt with in students’ a caring interest at fashion. heart.
Understandin g specific needs of students.
1.000
.670
.525
.562
.670
1.000
.533
.610
.525
.533
1.000
.600
.562
.610
.600
1.000
Item-Total Statistics
52
Given individual attention. Dealt with in a caring fashion. Staff keep students’ interest at heart. Understanding specific needs of students.
Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
10.66
7.211
.691
.503
.805
10.68
6.913
.717
.538
.793
10.69
7.257
.640
.424
.827
10.65
7.341
.698
.493
.802
5.Actual Tangibility Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Standardized N Alpha Items Items .383 .605 5
of
Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Modern and Visual appeal Neat and Convenient up to date of physical well-dressed Visual appeal operating equipment. facilities staffs. of materials. hours. Modern and up to date 1.000 equipment. Visual appeal of .120 physical facilities
.120
.348
.470
.103
1.000
.113
.347
.092
53
Neat and well-dressed .348 staffs. Visual appeal of .470 materials. Convenient operating .103 hours.
.113
1.000
.405
.284
.347
.405
1.000
.283
.092
.284
.283
1.000
Scale Corrected Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation
Squared Multiple Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted
15.23
19.621
.306
.258
.289
14.86
8.430
.161
.026
.348
14.74
20.108
.332
.231
.292
15.07
19.634
.374
.319
.271
14.92
21.160
.221
.122
.341
Item-Total Statistics
Modern and up to date equipment. Visual appeal of physical facilities Neat and well-dressed staffs. Visual appeal of materials. Convenient operating hours.
54
55
