Original article | International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 2021, Vol. 12(2) 53-64
Yordanos Yibeltal Yedemie
pp. 53 - 64 | Manu. Number: ijrte.2021.012
Published online: June 29, 2021 | Number of Views: 37 | Number of Download: 328
Globalization and technological developments today affect Turkey as well as all countries of the world. Adapting to such rapid changes require concentrated efforts. In order to adapt to all of the current global changes, the universities are in the first place to evoke change. Quality universities are the converters of the nations in exchange. Therefore, understanding and attempting to improve student satisfaction through provision of quality service is critical to educational institutions. Objectives: The purpose of this study was measuring overhaul quality and its collision on life satisfaction among learners with manifold disabilities in higher institutions of Ethiopia. Methods: The participants were selected by using proportional stratified sampling method. Information was generated through Overhaul Quality Scale from 117 students with disabilities from 3 higher institutions; Woldia, Wollo and Gonder University. Expressive and inferential statistics mainly, percentage, mean, frequency distribution, multiple regression and Analysis of Variance were employed to scrutinize data. Results: The finding shows, the overall mean score of participants for overhaul quality Scale was near to the ground i.e. 2.46 compared to the hypothetical mean score -3 indicating overhaul quality drawbacks. On the other hand, frequency distribution of scores indicated that, while the bulk of participants N=88 (75.3%) rated overhaul quality as low, still one fourth of participants N=29 rated higher. One-way ANOVA results indicated that, a statistically significant overhaul quality mean score difference existed between groups of background variables like location of university, type of disability, GPA and program of study. On the other hand, there was no statistically significant overhaul quality mean score difference between groups of background variables like gender, year of study and field of study. Pearson Correlation Coefficient revealed that, there was a statistically significant correlation between Overall Satisfaction and overhaul quality r = 0.633, n = 233, p = 0.000. Regression analysis revealed that, overhaul quality dimensions explained 47% of the variance in the overall student satisfaction. Analysis of Beta value indicated, responsiveness dimension made the first strongest statistically significant contribution in explaining the criterion. Conclusion: A strong optimistic relationship exist between overhaul quality and Overall Satisfaction indicating an improvement in overhaul quality would lead to student satisfaction ultimately leading to increased motivation and academic achievement. Therefore, Universities should see their students as customers and should work aggressively to improve their overhaul quality so as to boost customer satisfaction and remain competitive by being primary choice of their students.
Keywords: Academic Satisfaction, Collision, Disability, Higher Institutions Learners, Overhaul Quality
|How to Cite this Article?|
APA 6th edition
Chicago 16th edition
AAU (1994). Proposal for The Establishment of University Wide Center for monitoring Instructional Quality and standards. Unpublished, Addis Ababa University.
Abdullah, F. (2006a). Measuring service quality in higher education: HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(1), 31-47.
Abdullah, F. (2006b). The development of HEdPERF: a new measuring instrument of service quality for the higher education sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6), 569-581.
Ahmed and Ishfaq et al., (2010), “Does service quality affect Student's performance? Evidence from Institutes of higher learning”, African Journal of Business Management, 4 (12), 2527-2533.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2009).The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education.The Service Industries Journal, 29(2), 203-218.
Amaral, A. (2007). Higher education and quality assessment: The many rationales for
quality. In Bollaert, L., Brus, S., Curvale, B., Harvey, L., Helle, E., Jensen, H. T.,
Komljenovic, J. Orphanides, A., & Sursock, A. (Eds.), Embedding quality culture in higher education: A selection of papers from the 1st European forum for quality assurance. Brussels: EUA.
Aschoft Kate (2003) Emerging Models of Quality, Relevance and Standards in Ethiopian Higher Education Institutions: The Ethiopian Journal of Education, Volume XXIII, Number 2.
Berry, L.L. (1995). Relationship Marketing of Services--Growing Interest, Emerging Perspectives.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (4), 236-45.
Clewes, D. (2003). A Student-centred Conceptual Model of Service Quality in Higher Education. Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), 69-85.
Cronin, J.J. & Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: reexamination and extension.
DeShields, O., Kara, A. and Kaynak, E. (2005), “Determinants of business student satisfaction and retention in higher education: applying Herzberg’s two-factor theory”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 128-139.
Elizabeth Vaughan & Helen Woodruffe-Burton, (2011),"The disabled student experience: does the SERVQUAL scale measure up?", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 19
Gronroos C. (1984). Defining marketing: a market-oriented approach. European Journal of
Huang, Q. (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. Master’s Thesis Assumption University, Thailand
Kristi Wilson, Elizabeth Getzel and Tracey Brown (2000) Enhancing the post-secondary campus climate for students with disabilities Virginia Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation.
Obiozor, W.E., Onu, V.C. and Ugwoegbu, I. (2010). Academic and Social Challenges Facing Students with Developmental and Learning disabilities in Higher Institutions: Implications to African Colleges and Universities. African Journal of Teacher Education (AJOTE) Vol. 1. No. 1, 126 – 140
Palmer, A. (2011). Principles of services marketing. 6th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A, & Berry, L. L. (1985).A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research.Journal of Retailling.
Seymour, D.T. (1993). Causing Quality in Higher Education.Oryx.Phoneix.AZ. 42.
Thomas, E. H. and Galambos, N. (2004), “What satisfies students? Mining student-opinion data with regression and decision tree analysis”, Research in Higher Education, Vol.
Tirussew, et al., (2014) Assessment of the Situation of Students with Disabilities in the Ethiopian Universities
Williams, J. and Cappuccini-Ansfield, G. (2007), “Fitness for purpose? National and institutional approaches to publicising the student voice”, Quality in Higher Education, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 159-172.
Yared Gebreegziabher (2008) Policy and Provision for Students with Disabilities in Higher Education The Ethiopian Case: unpublished MA Thesis University of Oslo Faculty of Education.
June 2021All Articles