Investigating the Influence of Professor Characteristics on Student Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

Abstract

This research uses the Kano model of satisfaction to investigate professor characteristics that create student satisfaction as well as those attributes that can cause their dissatisfaction. Kano questionnaires were handed out to 104 undergraduate students at a university in the Southwest and to 147 undergraduate students at a university in the Midwest of the USA. The two resulting Kano maps show the same delighting attributes while other satisfaction attributes are also similar.The findings reveal the importance of the personality of professors and the characteristics of professors which: a) are desired by students, b) are not desired by students, c) impact student satisfaction the most, d) impact satisfaction the least. The results also demonstrate how professors and universities can focus attention on those attributes most likely to influence satisfaction. No attributes of professors are classified as basic or taken for granted factors by students, while three attributes are excitement factors that have the potential to delight students. The findings illustrate that there is a set of multiple attributes that professors need to possess for satisfying studentprofessor classroom service encounters. Student populations appear to show strong similarities in their preferences for characteristics of professors that lead to satisfaction and dissatisfaction outcomes. 3 Investigating the Influence of Professor Characteristics on Student Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction: A Comparative StudyIncreasingly, higher education is being regarded as a service industry and universities are beginning to focus more on meeting or even exceeding the needs of their students (Davis & Swanson 2001;DeShields, Kara, & Kaynak, 2005). As a consequence, the evaluation of students' satisfaction becomes all the more important to institutions that want to retain current and recruit new students (Helgesen & Nesset, 2007). Research indicates that the recruitment of students is several times more expensive than their retention (Joseph, Yakhou, & Stone, 2005) and so student retention becomes an important management task for universities which gives rise to increasing emphasis on student satisfaction with the learning experience (Lala and Priluck, 2011).. In this regard, Arambewela, Hall, and Zuhair (2006) regard student satisfaction as a key strategic variable in maintaining a competitive position, with long-term benefits arising from student loyalty, positive word-of-mouth and image of the higher education institution.Consequently, increasing levels of student satisfaction and decreasing sources of dissatisfaction would be beneficial to universities (Douglas, McClelland, & Davies, 2008). Finally, Appleton- Knapp and Krentler (2006) suggest that students' satisfaction with their educational experiences should be a desired outcome in addition to learning and knowing.Although higher education institutions are beginning to see themselves as part of the service industry, there is a debate on whether students are customers (Desai, Damewood, & R...

Revitalizing the Live Lecture Class With Instructor-Created Videos

“…Adds spice to the lecture class experience, but is not the main course. Students are delighted by variety during the lecture class (Gruber et al, 2012). Instructor-created videos are a good source of variety.…”

Creating Students Loyalty Model in Private Higher Education

“…As partners in higher education, the students hope to have a satisfying experience in the classroom with a valuable learning experience. So that the management in the classroom into something valuable for students, thus, faculty characteristics tend to be the main determinant of student satisfaction in higher education [38].…”

“…Student loyalty variable adopted from [10], [14], [16], [21], [51], [52]. The image of the college adopted from [53], adopted from the student satisfaction [38], [51] and the Trust adopted from [18].…”

Exploring the personal and professional factors associatedwith student evaluations of tenure-track faculty

“…For example, past research on traditional SETs has identified biases based on gender [3][4][5][6][7][8], race [6,9], attractiveness [10], and age [7,11,12]. Many have also criticized traditional SETs as invalid measures of teaching quality and student learning [3,7,[12][13][14][15][16][17] and warned university administrators against using them for hiring and promotion decisions [18]. In light of these issues, there have been intensifying claims that SETs harm both students and faculty [19] and public calls to stop relying on them for evaluating teaching [20,21].…”