MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599635555 · doi:10.1108/ijem-09-2015-0121

Service quality and student/customer satisfaction in the private tertiary education sector in Singapore

2017· article· en· W2599635555 on OpenAlexaff
Susie Khoo, Huong Ha, Sue L. T. McGregor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService qualityHigher educationMarketingOriginalityCustomer satisfactionQuality (philosophy)LoyaltyService (business)Tertiary sector of the economyPsychologyBusinessServices marketingSocial psychologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper focuses on students’ perceptions of the quality of non-academic services received in higher education. While the important role played by expectations and perceptions in students’ evaluations of such services has been discussed in much of the service quality literature, there is insufficient work in the private tertiary educational sector (PTES). Thus, the purpose of this paper is to examine the relationships between service quality, student satisfaction, and behavioural intentions in the PTES, using Singapore as a case study. Design/methodology/approach This study adopted quantitative research to address the research questions. Primary data were collected from 324 valid responses from a survey conducted in two private tertiary educational institutes (PTEIs) in Singapore. Findings The results suggested that perceived service quality is positively correlated to satisfaction; perceived service quality and satisfaction are positively correlated to favourable behavioural intentions; and the relationships among perceived service quality and loyalty and paying more for a service are mediated by satisfaction. Originality/value This study is significant as the results provide better insights for Singaporean administrators in PTEIs, which is an under-researched area. Generally, the results will have far-reaching implications for all stakeholders in the delivery and consumption of education services in PTEIs, within and beyond Singapore.

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)0.004
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations100
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Educational ManagementSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207