Öğrenci İşlerinde Hizmet Kalitesi Algısı: Kurumsal Bir Deneyim

Üniversite eğitimini destekleyen hizmetlerin (öğrenci işleri birimi gibi) kalitesi tüm dünyada son dönemlerde tartışılmaya başlanmıştır ve bu tartışmaların önemli bir nedeni, söz konusu hizmetlere ilişkin kalite algısının; öğrencilerin tatminleri ile ilişkili olmasıdır. Dolayısıyla, çalışmanın amacı H.Ü. öğrencilerinin Öğrenci İşleri Daire Başkanlığı'na (ÖİDB) ilişkin olarak genel tatmin düzeylerinin ölçülmesi, bunun yanı sıra öğrencilerin hizmet kalite boyutlarına yönelik algılarını değerlendirmesi, sınıflara göre ve ziyaret sıklıklarına göre öğrencilerin ÖİDB'na ilişkin kalite algılarının ne yönde farklılaştığının saptanması ve bu algılar ile öğrencinin ÖİDB'na ilişkin genel tatmin düzeyi arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Bulunan sonuçlara göre, H.Ü. öğrencilerinin ÖİDB'na ilişkin genel tatmin düzeyleri oldukça düşüktür. Bunun yanı sıra, öğrenciler ÖİDB'na ilişkin olarak SERVQUAL boyutlarından Güvenilirlik boyutunu en kaliteli, Cevap Verebilme boyutunu da en kalitesiz boyut olarak algılamaktadırlar. Bir öğrencinin okuduğu sınıf düzeyi arttıkça, ÖİDB'na ilişkin kalite algıları düşmekte, ziyaret sıklığı azaldıkça kalite algıları artmaktadır. Son olarak, algılanan hizmet kalite boyutlarının tümünün öğrencilerin söz konusu birime ilişkin genel tatmin düzeylerini etkilediği bulunmuştur

The Service Quality Perception in Student Affairs: A Single Institutional Experience

The quality perception of the services that support university education (like the student affairs unit) involves a significant discussion when these services are related to the behaviors of the students regarding satisfaction. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to measure the overall satisfaction of H.U. students regarding the Student Affairs Office Directorate (SAOD). It will also evaluate the perception of students regarding the service quality, and to observe the direction in which the quality perception of the students regarding Student Affairs Office Directorate (SAOD) varies. It will be noted how it depends on class levels and visit frequencies and the relation between these perceptions and general satisfaction level of the students regarding the SAOD via the SERVQUAL scale. According to the results, the satisfaction level of H.U. students regarding the SAOD is significantly low. Besides, the students perceive the Reliability dimension among the SERVQUAL dimensions as the highest quality and the Responsiveness dimension as the lowest quality dimension. As the class level of the student goes up, the quality perception of the SAOD goes down and as the number of visits decreases, the quality perception increases. Finally, it is determined that the entirety of the service quality dimensions affects the overall satisfaction level of students regarding the related unit

PDF

___

Christensen. A. & Philbrick, D. (1993). Business and universities: Similar challenges, similar solutions. Journal of Education for Business, 68, 6-9.
Cronin, Jr, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. The journal of marketing, 55-68.
Cuthbert, P. F. (1996). Managing service quality in HE: Is SERVQUAL the answer? Part 2. Managing Service Quality, 6(3), 31-35.
Delene, L., & Bunda, M. (1991). The assessment of service quality in higher education. Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. HE 024 725)
Edwards, J. (1993). Student service quality assurance: A model that works. Community Services CATALYST, 23, 9-12.
Ekinci, E., & Burgaz, B. (2007). The expectation and satisfaction levels of students at hacettepe university with respect to academic services. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 120-134.
Ford, J. B., Joseph, M., & Joseph, B. (1999). Importance-performance analysis as a strategic tool for service marketers: The case of service quality perceptions of business students in New Zealand and the USA. The Journal of Services Marketing, 13(2), 171-186.
Grønhaug, K., & Gilly, M. C. (1991). A transaction cost approach to consumer dissatisfaction and complaint actions∗. Journal of Economic Psychology,12(1), 165-183.
Hossler, D., & Bean, J. (1990). The strategic management of college enrollments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Abouchedid, K. & Nasser, R. (2002). Assuring quality service in higher education: Registration and advising attitudes in a private university in Lebanon. Quality Assurance in Education, 10(4), 198-206.
LeBlanc, G., & Nguyen, N. (1997). Searching for excellence in business education: an exploratory study of customer impressions of service quality. International Journal of Educational Management, 11(2), 72-79.
Mahiah., S., Suhaimi., S., & Ibrahim., A. (2006). Measuring the level of customer satisfaction among employees of human Resource Division. Advances in Global Business Research, 3(1).
O'Neill, M. A., & Palmer, A. (2004). Importance-performance analysis: A useful tool for directing continuous quality improvement in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(1), 39-52.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L. & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988), SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L. & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991), Refinement and Reassessment of the SERVQUAL Scale.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1985), A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications
for Future Research, Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1994), Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: implications for further research, Journal of Marketing, 58, 111-124.
Pate, W. S. (1990). Modeling consumer satisfaction, determinants of satisfaction, and post-purchase actions among consumers of undergraduate higher education. Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.