MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138568357 · doi:10.5539/ies.v4n1p182

SERVICE SATISFACTION: THE CASE OF A HIGHER LEARNING INSTITUTION IN MALAYSIA

2011· article· en· W2138568357 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Md. Aminul Islam, Ali Raza Jalali, Ku Halim Ku Ariffin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInstitutionHigher educationAffect (linguistics)Medical educationPerceptionService (business)Quality (philosophy)Perspective (graphical)PersonalitySocial psychologyMarketingSociologyPolitical scienceMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research attempted to find out factors that affect students’ satisfaction in a higher learning Institution. The students were randomly selected from degree, masters and PhD programs to evaluate the level of students’ satisfaction. The primary data source was a questionnaire that was distributed to the students. The researchers collected 165 completed questionnaires out of a total of 190. Four factors were chosen as independent variables namely; gender, race, student status and CGPA. This study showed that the overall services offered by the university was moderate from students’ perspective. This means that the university has enough ability to continue its improvement. This study showed that the academic-related activities are more important than non academic-related such as the availability of financial advice and the level of decoration. The academic activities should not be limited to classroom activities only. It must cover everything that can develop and instill good values, attitude, character and strong personality. Universities world-wide are now competing both nationally and internationally. In order to attain new students and retain current students they should aim to enhance student satisfaction and reduce student dissatisfaction. This only can be achieved if all the services that related to academic life such as implicit services, explicit services and physical services must be delivered to a suitable standard. We also noticed that student status have an important influence on the perception of service quality. This is probably because student expectation increases as they have more contact with the university. Another element that also has influence on the perception of service quality is race and nationality. In relation to this, the academic or non-academic staffs that prepared services directly for the students should be able to identify and understand different levels of student expectations across years of study (from first year to final year) and races.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207