An Evaluation of Educational Provision Quality at Graduate Level of Rajabhat Universities: Multi-Level Analysis

Abstract

The purposes of this research were 1) to analyze the educational provision quality scores at graduate level of Rajabhat universities by programs and to analyze the guideline for improving no quality programs at graduate level of Rajabhat universities using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and 2) to analyze 2 level variables (micro level and macro level) that affected to the educational provision quality at graduate level of Rajabhat universities using multi-level analysis. The DEA and multi-level analysis collected by questionnaires from 1,608 of 5 groups of stakeholders (administrators, faculty members, students, alumni and employers). The estimated educational provision quality scores of 27 programs ranged from 45.52–100.00%. The numbers of educational provision quality programs were 11, 9, 10, 9 and 7 evaluating from administrators, faculty members, students, alumni and employers. Of those improving no quality programs, they were increased outputs/outcomes; percentage of a student who graduates within period of time, numbers of published of faculty members’ researches, numbers of alumni award, numbers of utilization of faculty members’ researches and value-added of students in order to enhance their performance to increase their quality. The result of multi-level analysis indicated that factors explaining the quality of programs were numbers of university campus, administrator academic leadership and Office of the Higher Education Commission monitoring

Effect of service quality on graduates’ satisfaction

“…In contrast, Latvia Higher Education Department used academic staff, course content, labor market readiness and skills, facilities, library, administrative staff and information system to evaluate the quality of services (Purgailis and Zaksa, 2012). In Rajabhat, universities concluded that both academic and administrative staff affect the educational quality (Tangchitcharoenkhul and Wiratchai, 2012). Other studies used talent development, teaching methods, teaching staff, student employment and social feedback to explore the effect of service quality on students' satisfaction (Liu, 2013).…”

“…Results are supported by Purgailis and Zaksa (2012) who said the quality of course content, academic members, labor market and skills were having more effect on students' perception than facilities, library, administrative staff and information system of higher education institutions in Latvia. Tangchitcharoenkhul and Wiratchai (2012) stated academic staff and administration affect educational quality at the graduate level of Rajabhat universities. Noaman et al (2013) showed that the program has the highest effect, then staff, career opportunity, infrastructure, E-services, library, administration and location, respectively.…”