Perceived Service Quality and Student Loyalty in an Online University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="2">This paper examines the influence that student perceived quality of service (PSQ) has on continuance intention and willingness to recommend a course in a fully online university. A holistic view of the service provided by the university is taken. It is not only the effect of the teaching which is examined, but also that of the administrative services, the additional services, and the virtual learning environment (user interface). Through a survey completed by 1,870 students and the subsequent analysis using structural equations, we found that each of these services has a significant impact on the students' PSQ, their level of satisfaction, and, as a result, their loyalty and willingness to recommend the university. The study found that the perceived quality of the administrative services can have a comparatively higher impact on student satisfaction than the other services. PSQ is shown to have also a direct impact on student loyalty and recommendations. Moreover, as a whole, non-teaching services have a greater impact on loyalty and willingness to recommend than teaching service.</p><p class="2">The peculiarities of the process of providing educational services in a virtual environment (such as the absence of face-to-face interaction between student and teacher and the lack of conventional tangible elements which act as benchmarks for quality of service) are well-known. The relationship established in the literature between the constructs of service quality, satisfaction, loyalty, and willingness to recommend the service in an offline environment can also be seen in this context.</p><p class="2">The interconnection of factors proves to be more complex and interrelated than has been accounted for as yet in the scholarly literature. The findings of the survey are relevant to system concerns related to quality management and sustainability, both of which are increasingly important in today’s competitive educational postsecondary environment.</p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".