Quality indicators in higher education ‐ comparing Hong Kong and China’s students

Abstract

There is growing concern in college management about the quality of education in tertiary institutions. For related studies, people normally encounter the problems of developing measurement indicators and identifying components of quality education. Some people use SERVQUAL, a technique making use of the gap between customers’ expectations and perceived experience as indicators of service quality, to measure quality of services offered by professionals such as physicians. Hampton applied the technique to identify and measure the significance of different components of quality education, by using the questionnaire designed by Betz, Klingensmith and Menne. Hampton’s findings sound reasonable but seem to be too simplified and confined to the characteristics of students in the USA. The expectations and perceptions of the students are often shaped and influenced by their cultural orientation and environments. Hong Kong students who are more pragmatic and instrumental may value less the significance of campus life on quality education but put more stress on assessment. This study is designed to apply the modified SERVQUAL skill to examine Hampton’s findings with reference to the students in a different social and cultural context. It is hoped that a list of quality indicators can be identified against which the performance of the higher educational institutes can be measured.

Training Impact on Employee’S Job Performance: A Self Evaluation

“…The main purpose of the survey was to collect information on the incidence and perceptions of training among multi-racial workers ( Cuthbert, 1996;Ka-shing Woo,1998;Kwan and Ng, 1999;Schmidt 1998;Smith and Wilson, 2002;Strickland, Simons, Harris, Robertson, Harford and Edwards, 2001;Tamkin, 2005;Velde and Cooper, 2000). The survey questionnaire measure the participant perceptions of the actual service and impact received after the training programs.…”

The Linkage between Human Element of Service Delivery and Customer Satisfaction in Private Institutions of Higher Learning

“…Human Element of the provision of the service Owlia & Aspenwall (1996), Soutar & McNeil (1996), Pariseau (1997), LeBlanc & Nguyen (1997), Kwan & Ng (1999), Oldfield & Baron (2000), Waugh (2002), Sureshchandar et al. (2002) Source: adapted and modified from Sureshchandar et al (2001Sureshchandar et al ( , 2002 October 2014, Vol.…”

“…(Martensen, Gronholdt, Eskildsen & Kristensen 2000 p. 372) To date, very limited amount of empirical research that exists that is in relation with human elements of service delivery in institutes of higher education mainly in Malaysia. Most of the work published on human elements of service delivery in institutes of higher education has concentrated on the provision of courses effective mechanisms, and the quality of courses and teaching (Soutar & Mc Neil 1996, Kwan & Ng 1999, Ford, Joseph & Joseph 1999. The research literature on human elements of service delivery in higher education institutions has identified numerous models by several researchers.…”

An integrated multiple criteria decision making approach for resource allocation in higher education

“…The subjects measured were the performance of universities (Johnes, 1996;Sarrico et al, 1997;Adcroft and Willis, 2005;Emrouznejad and Thanassoulis, 2005), departments (Sarrico and Dyson, 2000;Al-Turki and Duffuaa, 2003), staff members (Badri and Abdulla, 2004), and students (Stinebrickner and Stinebrickner, 2004). Besides, some researchers incorporated quality into the performance measurement (Kwan and Ng, 1999;Pounder, 1999;Cullen et al, 2003). Comparatively, resource allocation (Watts, 1996;Clarke, 1997;Gillie, 1999;Alho and Salo, 2000;Caballero et al, 2001;Ntshoe, 2003), budgeting (Borgia and Coyner, 1996;McClatchey, 1998;Schmidtlein, 1999;DePillis and DePillis, 2001;Hübner and Rau, 2002;Menash and Werner, 2003), and scheduling (Johnson, 2001; Thompson, 2005) have attracted less attention.…”

“…Some quantitative methods like the statistical models (Alho and Salo, 2000;Hübner and Rau, 2002;Mensah and Werner, 2003;Stinebrickner and Stinebrickner, 2004), data envelopment analysis (DEA) (Sarrico et al, 1997;Sarrico and Dyson, 2000;Emrouznejad and Thanassoulis, 2005), multiple regression analysis (Johnes, 1996;Gillie, 1999), stepwise regression analysis (Kwan and Ng, 1999), and differential equations (DePillis and DePillis, 2001) can be applied to aid decision making in higher education. These methods, however, are not suitable for problems with multiple objectives.…”