Higher education service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to validate the higher education service quality (HESQUAL) scale using a confirmatory approach and test an improved structural model that predicts student loyalty from image, perceived value, satisfaction and service quality. In addition to validating the HESQUAL scale using a confirmatory approach, two other main limitations in the extant literature are addressed. Design/methodology/approach The model is tested using data collected from 501 students enrolled in different higher education institutions in Mauritius. A two-stage approach to structural equation modeling is used whereby the measurement model is first tested using confirmatory factor analysis and followed by the assessment of the structural model. Findings Importantly, results indicate that student satisfaction is influenced by technical service quality, image and perceived value, but not by functional service quality. Both dimensions of service quality however are significant predictors of image and perceived value. The study uses a comprehensive measure of service quality and demonstrates that it is worthwhile to consider functional service quality as higher-order model and clearly distinguish between functional and technical quality, as both the technical and functional aspects play an important role in shaping students’ perceptions and behaviors. Originality/value First, in the existing literature, service quality has not been considered as a second-order factor model in structural models of student satisfaction and loyalty, thus lacking either precision or parsimony. Second, the transformative quality aspect of higher education has been largely neglected in previous research testing such predictive models. The model delineates service quality into the functional and transformative (technical) aspects and treats functional service quality as a second-order factor comprising nine sub-dimensions.

Investigating the impacts of core educational quality on the satisfaction and loyalty of parents of secondary school students: The mediating role of transformative quality

“…Using a valid instrument and a conceptual model that fitted well with the data, the results of this research confirm the established relationship between satisfaction and loyalty, which considers satisfaction is the most influential predictor of loyalty (Oliver, 1980;Teeroovengadum et al, 2019). With regard to the impact of service quality, while acknowledging that parents may have different approaches to assessing educational service quality, we still hypothesized that core educational quality could positively influence parents' satisfaction and loyalty.…”

A conceptual model development of the impact of higher education service quality in guaranteeing edu‐tourists' satisfaction and behavioral intentions

“…The concept of quality, which can help organizations to gain competitive advantage and success in the market, has been applied in different service sectors. Service quality in higher education also was of the interest of many researchers by considering its two basic stakeholders: students and industry (Teeroovengadum, Nunkoo, Gronroos, Kamalanabhan, & Seebaluck, 2019). Furthermore, a study by Teeroovengadum, Kamalanabhan, and Seebaluck (2016) defines service quality in the higher education context as "the difference between what a student expects to receive and her/his perceptions of actual delivery."…”

Fostering Sustainable Quality Assurance Practices in Outcome-Based Education: Lessons Learned from ABET Accreditation Process of Computing Programs

“…ElAlfy and Abukari have highlighted that facilities, academic and administrative services are the main pillars of service quality in higher education sector [11]. Teeroovengadum et al have carried out an empirical study with students in Mauritius and found that technical service quality, perceived image, and value influence students' satisfaction [12]. Phuc et al have investigated master program in economic management to identify factors affecting outcome-based education.…”