International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

The Impact of Service Quality on Students’ Satisfaction

Faustina Oduro Twum, Williams Kwasi Peprah
To Link this Article: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i10/7923 DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i10/7923

Received: 04 August 2020, Revised: 11 September 2020, Accepted: 29 September 2020

Published Online: 11 October 2020

In-Text Citation: (Twum, & Peprah, (2020)

To Cite this Article: Twum, F. O., & Peprah, W. K. (2020). The Impact of Service Quality on Students’ Satisfaction.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 10(10), 169-181.

© 2020 The Author(s)

Copyright:
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute,
translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full
attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen
at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, Pg. 169 - 181

http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/IJARBSS JOURNAL HOMEPAGE

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/publication-ethics

169
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

The Impact of Service Quality on Students’

Satisfaction
Faustina Oduro Twum
Ph.D. Student, Valley View University, Ghana, School of Business
Email: [email protected]

Williams Kwasi Peprah, Ph.D. CSSGB, F.cfia

Valley View University, Accra, Ghana, School of Business
Email: [email protected]

Abstract
The development and growth of every economy depend on the contributions of higher education.
Universities are responsible for the generation and dissemination of knowledge in the socio-
economic benefits of a country. Service quality is vital for higher education institutions to remain
competitive and growing. Higher educational institutions have seen the need to place a greater value
on improving their activities to meet students’ perceptions and expectations to ensure
satisfaction. Student satisfaction is vital in determining service quality at higher educational
institutions. To have a competitive edge, higher institutions are required to build a stronger bond
with students by providing the value for service delivery. The main purpose of this study is to assess
student’s satisfaction with services provided at the School of Business, Valley View University. A
cross-sectional adopted questionnaire survey involving 100 students were conducted using the
SERVQUAL Model with five Service Quality dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,
empathy, and assurance. The data were analyzed with SPSS software in generating the mean and
standard deviation and the regression results. The results of the study showed that service quality
and its dimensions of assurance, tangible, and responsiveness provide at the School of Business were
very satisfied, however, Empathy was moderately satisfied. Indicated that students had high
expectations on services provided at the School of Business. It has also confirmed satisfaction can be
100% accounted for by service quality dimensions of Assurance, Tangible, Responsiveness, Reliability
and Empathy. The study recommends that School of Business must attend to student’s needs by
providing individual attention to solving the unique challenges of students.
Keywords: Service Quality, Higher Education, Students’ Satisfaction, Assurance, Tangible,
Responsiveness, Reliability and Empathy.

170
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Introduction
Higher educational institutions are required to play significant role in assessing service quality to
encourage students’ satisfaction. Student satisfaction measures the perception and expectations
of a student relating to a service provided by the School/Faculty and the University at large.
University education is the best platforms for students get a lot of opportunities to develop their
capabilities, career, and unlocking their potentials which means that the educational service
delivery must be of quality.The awareness of quality service delivery in higher education has
increased considerably globally.

From the perspective of the students at Valley View University in Ghana, the study assesses
students’ satisfaction using a tested SERVQUAL model developed by Parasuraman (1988), which has
five dimensions at the School of Busines which consist of tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,
empathy, and assurances. Tangibles are appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and
relevant books. Reliability is about how student’s problems are handled, whether services are
rendered timely without errors, and whether services promised are delivered. Responsiveness
entails readiness or willingness of staff to respond to service needs of students. Assurance consist of
the capability, knowledge and courtesy of staffs that inspires trust and confidence. Empathy is the
care and attention given to individual students based on a particular need.

There have been several studies conducted to assess students’ satisfaction and service quality in
higher institutions over the years ((Yilmaz,& Gurbuz, (2018); Pedro, Mendes, & Lourenço, (2018);
Tijjani, (2019); Weerasinghe, & Fernando, (2018), however, this seems to be the first students
satisfaction research at the School of Business at Valley View University. Therefore, the study has
found a gap in knowledge to fill it.

The study is to assess the service quality delivery with respect to students’ satisfaction at the School
of Business as a way of promoting customer care and protecting institutional reputation. It will
specifically provide an opportunity to administrators to continuously improve the quality of service
rendered to students at the School of Business, and supporting the University-wide core values on
passing on a passion for excellence, integrity and service.

For a higher education institution, students are essential stakeholders for universities (Donlagic &
Fazlic (2015). According to Abedi (2018), higher education as a source of political, social, and
economic growth, and the knowledge provided in the process of acquiring a higher education, a
source of national competitiveness. Ei-Hilali et al. (2015) states that universities must demonstrate
achievable support to students by enhancing value in service to influence students’ level of
satisfaction, which is the measure often used to assess educational quality, which addresses a
strategic need (Uysal, 2015). Similarly, Tari and Dick (2016) pointed out that higher institutions will
continue to feel pressured due to demands from students’ expectations on service quality. Several
studies have developed measurement tools to reveal the drivers for student satisfaction at the
undergraduate level (Douglas, McClelland, & Davies, 2015; Mendes, & Lourenço, (2018); Tijjani,
(2019); Weerasinghe, & Fernando, (2018)). Moreover, the measurement of student satisfaction is a
departmental responsibility as a critical factor in knowing the student progress and success.
According to Gunawan and Wahyuni (2018), service is an activity that is intangible and represents
the

171
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

fulfilling needs of a customer. It is a level of excellent output that benefits, and meets a customer’s
expectation. Measuring students’ satisfaction is vital to institution’s performance and continuous
improvement services provided (Hassan 2019). Jabbar et al. (2019), the satisfaction of students
depends greatly on their cultural impact and perception. It explains that every student is different
in terms of cultural background, which largely affects their expectation on satisfaction. Further, it
states that satisfaction is an understanding of a situation before experiencing it. In the absence of
consensus about how satisfaction should be assessed and analyzed from an academic perspective,
the difficulty of student satisfaction is further illustrated. (Cheng et al., 2016). An approach to
evaluate student’s satisfaction is by student survey, which will capture their educational
experiences into an overall satisfaction score (Douglas et al., 2015).
According to Kara et al. (2016), satisfaction is an overall customers’ attitude towers a service
provider, the emotional reaction that anticipates that service received is of higher quality. The
author further states that student satisfaction is related to institutions having knowledgeable and
specialized lectures, who are accessible to students for consultation, and who are will to provide
feedback promptly. Also, student’s satisfaction is achieved when actual experiences meet or exceed
students’ expectation in higher education institutions, where students are considered as primary
customers (Paricio, 2017).
For a service organization like Educational Institutions, it is vital to know how services are perceived
by their students. Student satisfaction is associated to human activities, aimed at satisfying the
customers’ needs and wants through products and services. In the educational environment, the
quality of qualifications is identified with the degree of satisfaction of their students. Al-Sheeb et al.
(2018), showed that student satisfaction examines four educational dimensions such as lecturer’s
expertise, programmes offered, the environment, and classroom facilities. Quality of the higher
education can be referred by the appropriate usage of modern teaching aids, state of the art library
facilities, research facilities, and the quality of curriculum (Islam and Salma, 2016). According to Tsai
et al. (2017), Higher Education Institutions raises the level of student satisfaction by improving
academics such as quality of teaching, variety of courses offered, interaction with faculty out of
class, and knowledge assessment. Annamdevula and Bellamkonda (2016) and Usman and Mokhtar
(2016) indicated that service quality affects students’ loyalty after having a satisfied experience.
Paricio (2018) further states that high students’ satisfaction is creating a collaborative network of
graduates with massive potential of promoting organizational reputation and position in the
competitive market. Murray (2018) states that understanding students’ university experiences is
to statistically test student perception and expectation on service quality to ensure that the
students' needs are addressed thoroughly. A study conducted by Douglas et al. (2015) showed
that students’ satisfaction entailed receiving value for money such as promptness of feedback on
performance, availability of staff to attend to student’s needs, adequate textbook and teaching
materials, the responsiveness of faculty on individual academic needs.
Educational institutions are recognized as ‘service industry’ and has a more significant emphasis on
meeting the expectations and needs of their customers, referred to as students (Afridi, 2016).
Service quality, from the institution’s perspective, means establishing requirements and
specifications to satisfying customers’ needs. Service quality is a concept that has inspired
considerable interest in research (Islam and Himel, 2018). The author further explains that service
quality in the educational institutions are fundamental to excellent achievements. Kandeepan et
al., (2019) defines service quality as the extent, to which a service meets customers’ needs or
expectations. Service quality can

172
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

be explained as the difference derived from a customer expectation and perceived service.
However, when expectations are greater than performance, then expected quality is less
satisfactory (Parasuraman et al., 1985).

Outstanding service quality gives an organization a competitive advantage which maximizes growth
(Mustaffa, 2019). Similarly, Afthanorhan et al., (2019) points out that if the perceived service quality
gives organization an expected service, where customers recommend the services to others due to
the satisfaction experienced. The School of Business at Valley View University, as service provider
will
be assessed on service quality using the SERVQUAL model. A student’s perception and expectation
on service exceed expected service, there is the possibility of recommending potential students to
enroll in the institution.

Higher education today is highly competitive in that students have many attractive options available
to choose and belong. “… universities are forced to establish and improve their relationships with
new and existing stakeholders…” (Schuller, Chlebovsky, Doubravsky, & Chalupsky, 2014; p.75). As a
university, there should be effective strategies to woo potential students through quality service
delivery. Educational quality service model states that educational process should train students to
possess
of the knowledge, right working attitude, professionalism, environmental adaptability, sense
corporation and competition, mental endurance capabilities and moral cultivation (Peprah 2018).
According to Saleem et al. (2017), service quality is an evaluation of how good a provided service
approves a client/student’s expectation. Further, they indicated that satisfied clients/students are
committed and loyal to the brand. Thus, in higher education, the five SERVQUAL framework is more
applicable in assessing service quality since it has been tested to be the most certain instrument
over
the years. Parasuraman et al. (1988) identified the following dimensions of service quality:
Table 1
Quality Dimensions in Higher Education.
Variables Definition Attributes
(confirmed by Ziethaml et al. (2003)
Tangibles The appearance of It provides a physical representation of the service
physical facilities, that clients/students use to evaluate service quality.
equipment, and It enhances the institution’s image and provides
personnel customer continuity.
Reliability The ability to perform It helps retain customers. It ensures clients/students’
the promised services willingness to re-do business with the organizations.
accurately, and
dependably
Responsiveness Willingness to assist It focuses on attentiveness and promptness in
students and to provide dealing with clients/ students’ requests, questions,
prompt services complaints and problems. It captures the notion of

173
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

flexibility and ability to customize the service to the

customers’ needs.

Assurance Knowledge and courtesy It seeks to ensure that providers courteously deliver
of employees and their service. It is expected to attract the needed trust
ability to convey trust and confidence from their customers.
and confidence
Empathy The ability to convey It is about treating clients as special and unique
trust and confidence to individuals. It connotes a positive impression to
customers clients.
Source: As modified from Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988)
Parasuraman’s SERVQUAL model would be used to measure service quality in the theoretical
framework for this study. This model is relevant assessing service quality in higher education. The
independent value is service quality consisting of five dimensions: tangibles, reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. The dependent variable is students’ satisfaction. Its
equation is Y= a + bx where Y represents the dependent variable, x is representing independent
variable, and b is the unstandardized regression coefficient and the constant.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

SERVICE QUALITY
STUDENTS’
Tangible
SATISFACTION
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance
Empathy

Research Framework

Methodology
The Study used a descriptive-correctional research design. The researchers used a cross-sectional
survey approach in obtaining the data from the respondents. The research paradigm indicated a
correlational effect of service quality on students satisfaction and investigated based on parametric
statistics. The research question one is analyzed from a descriptive perspective based on central
tendency of mean and standard deviation. The question two which is to make prediction is based in
association of statistical trends of linear regression. SPSS version 23 was used in the data analysis.

The objective of this study is to determine the quality of service at the School of Business:
Research Question:
1) What is perception of service quality received by the students in terms of:

174
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

a) Tangible
b) Reliability
c) Responsiveness
d) Assurance
e) Empathy
2) Which of the following service quality factors below predict students’ satisfaction:
a) Tangible
b) Reliability
c) Responsiveness
d) Assurance
e) Empathy

Research Hypothesis
1) None of the following service quality factors below predict student’s satisfaction:
a) Tangible
b) Reliability
c) Responsiveness
d) Assurance
e) Empathy

A total students’ body of 445 at the School of Business constituted the population for the study. It
included both males and females at level 200-400 from each of the programmes. All first-year
students are exempted since they were new and are yet to experience the service quality delivery at
the School of Business.
A stratified sampling technique is used to select respondents. The entire population were divided
into three primary strata, comprising three departments: Accounting, Banking and Finance, and
Management Studies (Human Resource Management, Management, Marketing, and Diploma in
Business Studies). The sample were randomly selected from the stipulated number of respondents
in each category. The selected respondents formed a sample for the research. The research uses
simple random sampling technique because it gives each member in the population an equal chance
of being selected. Questionnaires were distributed and retrieved by the researcher.

Primary data was collected and analyzed for the research. An adopted SERVQUAL questionnaire
(Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1988) was used as instrument for data collection where, a five-point
Likert scale was used as scaling technique. Questionnaires were personally administered to 100
respondents and 86 retrieved. The scoring system and the scaled response for verbal interpretation
is shown below:

175
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Table 1.
Scoring System Table
Numeric Scale Numerical Likert Scale Scaled Response
average weight
5 4.6 – 5 Extremely Satisfied
4 3.6 – 4.5 Very Satisfied
3 2.6 – 3.5 Moderately Satisfied
2 1.6 – 2.5 Slightly Satisfied
1 0.6 – 1.5 Not at all Satisfied

Results and Discussion

Below is the demography details of the respondents. A total number of 41 or 47.7% of respondents
were males, while 45 or 52.3% of respondents were females. It shows that the majority of the
respondents were females. Per the programme of study, the total of respondents was 86,
Management Studies comprising (Human Resource Management, Management, Marketing, and
Diploma in Business Administration) had 39.6%; Accounting had 45.3% and Banking and Finance had
15.1%. It means that the highest number of students were from Accounting, and the lowest from
Banking and Finance. The level sequence also indicated that level 200 respondents were 29, level 300
were 21 and level 400 being 36, with a percentage of 33.7, 24.4 and 41.9, respectively.

Table 2:
Distribution of respondents’ demography.

Demography Frequency Percent

Gender
41 47.7
Male
45 52.3
Female
86 100
Totals
Programme of Study
Accounting 34 39.5
Banking and Finance 11 12.8
Management 11 12.8
Human Resource Management 5 5.8
Marketing 11 12.8
Diploma in Business Administration 14 16.3
Totals 86 100

Level
19 22.1
200
300 29 33.7
400 37 43.0
Totals 86 100
176
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

In answering research question one, The mean of student satisfaction and standard deviation shows
the five dimensions of SERVQUAL, tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy as
ranked per students’ satisfaction at the School of Business. Among the dimension of service quality,
Assurance ranked highest (M= 3.8, SD= .6808), followed by Reliability (M= 3.7, SD= .7111), Tangibles
(M= 3.6, SD= .5546), Responsiveness (M= 3.4, SD= .7682), and Empathy scoring the lowest (M= 3.3,
SD= .7166). The students at the School of Business in totality are very satisfied (M=3.6, S.D = 0.456)
with service quality delivered to students with the exception of Empathy which the students
indicated a moderate satisfaction. The moderate satisfaction result on Empathy implies that the
students moderately felt as special and unique individuals at the School of Business based on the
treatment they received from their Lecturers.

Table 3:
Perception of the students’ satisfaction of Service quality
Total
Responsive
Tangibles Reliability Assurance Empathy Service
ness
Quality
N Valid 86 86 86 86 86 86
Mean 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.3 3.6
Standard 0.680
0.5546 0.7111 0.7682 0.7166 0.4546
Deviation 8
Scaled Very Very Very Very Moderately Very
Response Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied

The findings of the study is confirmed by Gong, and Yi, (2018) and Jafarnejadj and Shafie (2013) that
this positive attributes of service quality can maintain students’ satisfaction during their
undergraduate experience and emphasizes that students university experience is an avenue through
which a competitive advantage is gained. According to Elliott and Shin,(2002), it is a focal point for
the university’s quality strategy. The benefits of understanding student’s expectation and providing
satisfaction through knowledge acquisition, problem-solving, courteousness, and giving individual
attention is paramount to institutions receiving some level of students’ loyalty, higher retention and
higher acquisition of new students.
Research question two was addressed with predictors of service quality based on Linear regression
analysis approach to assess the five SERVQUAL dimensions as independent variables to predict
students’ satisfaction as shown in Table 4. After the analysis, the total variance explained by the
model as a whole was 100%, F (0) = 140.693, p < .000. The predictive result indicates that, the
explained variables on Tangibles (6.7%), Reliability (20.3%), Responsiveness (5.5%), Assurance
(58.4%), and Empathy (9.2%). The SERVQUAL model based on the unstandardized beta for this study
is SS = 1.66 +.190 TAN +.339 REL +.153 RESP +.474 ASSU + .212 EMP.

177
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Table 4:
Prediction on students’ satisfaction
R Square B Std. Error Beta T Sig.
Change
Constant 1.666 9.927 .000
Tangibles .067 .190 .0000 .267 27.613 .000
Reliability .203 .339 .1974 .475 8.879 .000
Responsiveness .055 .153 .1121 .278 8.120 .000
Assurance .584 .474 .2739 .764 10.857 .000
Empathy .092 .212 .1500 .360 7.853 .000
R=1.000 R2=1.000 F=0 P=.000
In answering question based related to the null hypothesis statement that there is no significant
relationship between students’ satisfaction and service quality, the study reject the null hypothesis.
The study concluded that base on the service quality dimensions there is a significant relationship
between service quality and students’ satisfaction (F=0, p = 0.00) at p < 0.05.
The implications this study informs that providing quality services in entirety in every perspective is
vital to gain students’ satisfaction, which attracts belongingness even after graduation. The School of
Business should, therefore increase awareness of giving quality services to influence student’s
experience, which will, in turn boost the institutional success. The results of this study using the
SERVQUAL dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy has
established a significant impact on students’ satisfaction at the School of Business.
Conclusion AND Recommendations
This study has clearly shown that student’s perception of service quality provided at the School of
Business is very satisfying. It means that students at the School of Business are very satisfied with
services provided based on the SERVQUAL dimensions. It has also confirmed that satisfaction can be
100% accounted for by service quality dimensions of Assurance, Tangible, Responsiveness, Reliability
and Empathy. The study recommends that School of Business must attend to student’s needs by
providing individual attention to solving the unique challenges of students.

References
Abedi, E. A. (2018), Higher Education Institutions’ Impact on the Socio-Economic Growth of
Ghana. International Journal of Education and Research, 6(9).
Afridi, S. A. (2016). Measurement of service quality gap in the selected private
universities/instates of Peshawar using SERVQUAL model. City University Research
Journal, 6(1), 61-69.
Afthanorhan, A., Awang, Z., Rashid, N., Foziah, H., & Ghazali, P. (2019). Assessing the effects
of service quality in customer satisfaction. Management Science Letters, 9(1), 13-24.
Annamdevula, S., & Bellamkonda, R. S. (2016). The effects of service quality on student
loyalty: The mediating role of student satisfaction. Journal of Modelling in
Management, 11(2), 446–462.
Anwowie, S., Amoako, J., & Abrefa, A. A. (2015). Assessment of Students' Satisfaction of
Service Quality in Takoradi Polytechnic: The Students' Perspective. Journal of

178
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Education and Practice, 6(29), 148-155.

Assan, S., Shamsudin, M. F., Hasim, M. A., Mustapha, I., Jaafar, J., Adruthdin, K. F., & Ahmad, R. (2019).
Mediating effect of corporate image and students’ satisfaction on the relationship between
service quality and students’ loyalty in TVET HLIs. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 24,
93-105.
Aye, A. C., & Soe, K. N. N. (2020). The Mediating Role of Perceived Value on the Relationship
between Service Quality and Loyalty: The Private Banking Case in Myanmar. TNI
Journal of Business Administration and Languages, 8(1), 88-100.
Al-Sheeb, B., Hamouda, A. M., & Abdella, G. M. (2018). Investigation Determinants of
Students Satisfaction in the First Year of College in a Public University in the State of
Qatar. Education Research International, 2018.
Donlagic, S., & Fazlic, S. (2015). Quality assessment in higher education using the
SERVQUALQ mode. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues,
20(1), 39-57.
Cheng, M., Taylor, J., Williams, J., & Tong, K. (2016). Student satisfaction and perceptions of
quality: testing the linkages for PhD students. Higher Education Research &
Development, 35(6), 1153-1166.
Douglas, J. A., Douglas, A., McClelland, R. J., & Davies, J. (2015). Understanding student
satisfaction and dissatisfaction: an interpretive study in the UK higher education
context. Studies in Higher Education, 40(2), 329–349.
El-Hilali, N., Al-Jaber, S., & Hussein, L. (2015). Students’ satisfaction and achievement and
absorption capacity in higher education. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences,
177, 420-427.
Gong, T., & Yi, Y. (2018). The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction, loyalty, and happiness
in five Asian countries. Psychology & Marketing, 35(6), 427-442.
Gargoum, A. S. (2019). Determinants of Student Satisfaction in Higher Education: A Case of
the UAE University. International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and
Management (IJCRMM), 10(4), 15-24.
Gunawan, A., & Wahyuni, S. F. (2018). “The Effect of Marketing Mix, Service Quality,
Islamic Values and Istitutional Image on Students’ Satisfaction and Loyalty.” Expert
Journal of Marketing, 6(2), 95-105.
Hassan, S., Shamsudin, M. F., Hasim, M. A., Mustapha, I., Jaafar, J., Adruthdin, K. F., &
Ahmad, R. (2019). Mediating effect of corporate image and students’ satisfaction on the
relationship between service quality and students’ loyalty in TVET HLIs. Asian
Academy of Management Journal, 24, 93-105.
Islam, S., & Himel, S. H. (2018). Services Quality and Students’ Satisfaction: A Study on the
Public Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) of Bangladesh. Journal of Business,
39(2).
Jabbar, M. N., Hashmi, M. A., & Ashraf, M. (2019). Comparison between Public and Private
Secondary Schools Regarding Service Quality Management and Its Effect on Students’
Satisfaction in Pakistan. Bulletin of Education and Research, 41(2), 27-40.
Jafarnejadj, A., & Shafie, H. (2013). Service Quality and Customer Perceived value in Software
Companies of Iran. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,
3(12), 529-540.

179
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Kandeepan, V., Vivek, R., & Seevaratnam, T. (2019). Impact of Organizational Citizenship
Behaviour on Service Quality in Banking Sector, Vavuniya District. Management, 7(2),
1-13.
Kara, A. M., Tanui, E., & Kalai, J. M. (2016). Educational service quality and students’
satisfaction in public universities in Kenya. International Journal of Education and
Social Science, 3(10).
Mashenene, R. G. (2019). Effect of Service Quality on Students’ Satisfaction in Tanzania
Higher Education.
Mestrovic, D. (2017). Service quality, students’ satisfaction and behavioural intentions in stem
and IC higher education institutions. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems:
INDECS, 15(1), 66-77.
Murray, J. A. (2018). Improving Student Satisfaction at a Caribbean University using a
Customer Focused Strategy. (Doctoral Thesis). Edinburgh Napier University.
Mustaffa, W. S. W., Rahman, R. A., & Ab Wahid, H. (2019). Evaluating service quality at
Malaysian public universities: Perspective of international students by world
geographical regions. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and
Social Sciences, 9(1), 856-867.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., & Berry, L. (1988). SERVQUAL: a multiple item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 6(1), 12-36.
Paricio, J. (2017). Students as customers: a paradigm shift in higher education. Debats. Journal
of Culture, Power and Society. 131(3). 137-149.
Pedro, E., Mendes, L., & Lourenço, L. (2018). Perceived Service Quality and Student's
Satisfaction in Higher Education: The Influence of Teaching Methods. International
Journal for Quality Research, 12(1).
Peprah, W. K. (2018). International students’ satisfaction of ISO 9001 certified education: A
basis for a preventive and corrective program. In Abstract Proceedings International
Scholars Conference 6(1), 195-195.
Pina, V., Torres, L., & Bachiller, P. (2014). Service quality in utility industries: the European
telecommunications sector. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal,
24(1), 2-22.
Saleem, M., & Ch, H. (2017). Identification of Gaps in Service Quality in Higher Education.
Bulletin of Education and Research, 39(2), 171-182.
Saleem, S., Moosa, K., Imam, A., & Khan, A. R. (2017). Service quality and student
satisfaction: the moderating role of university culture, reputation and price in education
sector of pakistan. Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 10(1), 237-258.
Schuller, D., Chlebovsky, V., Doubravsky, K., & Chalupsky, V. (2014). The Conceptual
Scheme for Managing University Stakeholders’ Satisfaction. Acta Universitatis
Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 62(4), 719–727.
Subrahmanyam, A. (2017). Relationship between service quality, satisfaction, motivation and
loyalty. Quality Assurance in Education.
Sulaiman, S., Asri, M. D. A. A., Azmi, A., & Khamis, M. N. F. (2020). Customer
satisfaction and service quality of spa in Penang. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences
and Humanities, 4, 115-124.

180
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 10, No. 10, 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS

Tijjani, D. (2019). Service quality analysis of private universities libraries in Malaysia in the era of
transformative marketing. International Journal for Quality Research, 13(2), 269-284.
Tsai, K. C., Huang, P. B., & Yang, C. C. (2017). The Evaluation of Service Quality for Higher
Education in Taiwan by Using Importance-Satisfaction Model. In Theory and Practice
of Quality and Reliability Engineering in Asia Industry, 99-107. Springer, Singapore.
Usman, U., & Mokhtar, S. S. M. (2016). Analysis of service quality, university image and student
satisfaction on student loyalty in higher education in Nigeria. International Business
Management, 10(12), 2490–2502.
Uysal, F. (2015). Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in graduate education:
Application of a satisfaction benchmarking approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 191, 1034-1037.
Weerasinghe, I. M. S., & Dedunu, H. (2017). University Staff, Image and Students' Satisfaction
in Selected Regional Universities in Sri Lanka. IOSR Journal of Business and
Management (IOSR-JBM), 19(5), 34-37.
Weerasinghe, I. M. S., & Fernando, R. L. S. (2018). Critical factors affecting students’ satisfaction with
higher education in Sri Lanka. Quality Assurance in Education.
Weerasinghe, I. S., & Fernando, R. L. (2017). Students' satisfaction in higher education.
American Journal of Educational Research, 5(5), 533-539.
Yilmaz, V., Ari, E., & Gurbuz, H. (2018). Investigating the relationship between service quality
dimensions, customer satisfaction and loyalty in Turkish banking sector. International Journal
of Bank Marketing.
Zeithaml, V. A., & Bitner, M. J. (2003). Services Marketing: Integrating customer focus across
the firm. (3 ed.). New York: Mcgraw-Hill.

181