availability of staff, level three

availability of staff, level three students considered this more important than level one or two students.This may be partly explained by the fact that level three student shave to research and submit a dissertation and are assigned a personal supervisor to guide them in this task. Lack of availability of a personal supervisor may give cause for concern and lead to dissatisfaction, especially if their peers have personal tutors who are seen to be more available. The focus groups confirmed and enhanced much of the information gathered from the questionnaire. The students considered the teaching as much more important than “wobbly tables”. This confirmed the low importance status of the physical facilities and in particular the furnishings and decoration, although there was a limit to their toleration of these aspects. The focus group participants also indicated that when it came to selecting elective modules their choice was influenced according to the tutor who was teaching particular modules. With regard to tutorial classes they commented that if there were too many students in a class they did not receive enough individual attention. They considered classes with more than 20 students in them as too large. The issue of textbook costs and availability raised some interesting comments. Students could pay £40 for a textbook and hardly use it – considered a waste of money. The availability of textbooks was confirmed as “not good”. Staff responsiveness and availability was considered variable, with some staff always available and quick to respond to e-mails, while others were never around and would take weeks to respond to e-mails. This was a major cause of dissatisfaction. A reasonable time to acknowledge e-mails was put at between 24 and 48 hours. This aspect links to the promptness and usefulness of feedback on assessments. Feedback was considered too slow. A reasonable timescale for the returning of coursework was three weeks, but it was recognised as being dependent upon the number of students taking a module. The feedback was considered useless if it concentrated on the work done (which would usually not be repeated) rather than on future work. There were problems “deciphering” some staff handwriting. Some Schools/modules gave no feedback at all. The way timetables were organised also came in for much criticism, as many students had to fit part-time employment around their timetables. With regard to non-teaching contact staff, the helpfulness of office or administration staff and the IT technical staff, although considered to be of low importance,were rated low in satisfaction based on the questionnaire returns. The focus groups did comment on a perceived lack of helpfulness. The office “was always busy” with long queues. Technical staff were considered helpful and the LRC staff “generally helpful”.
Conclusions Based on the results of this comprehensive study of students studying within the Faculty of Business and Law at Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) it is clear that many of the physical aspects of the University services are not important with regards to student satisfaction. This finding supports previous findings by Schneider and Bowen (1995), Banwet and Datta (2003) and Hill et al. (2003) all ofwhom found that the most important aspects of a university’s service offerings were associated the core service, i.e. the lecture, including the attainment of knowledge, class notes and
Measuring student satisfaction
263
materials and classroom delivery. Furthermore, the findings also confirm the research of Price et al. (2003) in that it seems that the University’s physical facilities influence students’ choice. However, once here it is the quality of the teaching and learning experience that is of importance. Fortunately, LJMU has a state-of-the-art Learning Resource Centre equipped with scores of computer stations fitted with the latest software and linked to the Internet. The Faculty of Business and Law also has a new technologically advanced Lecture Theatre and a large IT suite. These aspects of the facilities can be, and indeed are, used to attract students to the Faculty of Business and Law, for example during Open Days. However, once students have enrolled, it is the quality of the teaching and learning that will cause satisfaction or dissatisfaction and they are prepared to tolerate, to a large extent, “wobbly tables” and paint flaking off walls as long as the teaching they receive is at an acceptable level. This may have implications for management responsible for resource allocations to various areas of the University services and infrastructure. Student feedback tends to confirm that they do receive high quality teaching from staff with high levels of expertise in their various academic disciplines. The lecture and tutorial are the core service provided by the university and it is what goes on in these classrooms that determine student satisfaction with the explicit service. They are prepared to tolerate to a large extent deficiencies in the physical aspects of the facilities as long as the teaching they receive is perceived to be at an acceptable level. The focus groups confirmed the findings of Banwett and Datta (2003) that students “vote with their feet” based on their experiences in lectures and are more likely to enrol on an optional module delivered by a teacher perceived as providing good teaching. However, in line with Coles (2002) large classes are likely to cause dissatisfaction. The explicit service is aided (and abetted) by the facilitating goods such as PowerPoint presentation slides, supplementary handout materials and the recommended textbooks. Given the large numbers of students taking most modules there will never be sufficient textbooks available in the LRC to satisfy demand. With regard to quality improvement it may be worthwhile introducing explicit standards of service to various aspects of the University services. These would cover most “moments of truth”. For example, teaching staff would undertake to respond to all student e-mails within 48 hours and aim to provide feedback on coursework assignments within 15 working days. Similar standards could be introduced in the LRC and administration offices and could encompass internal and external service level agreements. Management can also be involved in such service standards by guaranteeing that tutorial classes will not have more than 20 students. It is also the responsibility of management to provide the resources necessary to meet any standards. Universities world-wide are now competing for students both nationally and internationally. In order to recruit and retain students they should aim to enhance student satisfaction and reduce student dissatisfaction. This can only be achieved if all the services that contribute to “academic life” are delivered to a suitable standard. The students are the sole judges of whether or not this has been achieved therefore student satisfaction surveys should be undertaken on a regular basis and a university’s service offering adapted accordingly.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

tính khả dụng của nhân viên, sinh viên ba cấp coi đây là quan trọng hơn cấp một hoặc hai học sinh.Điều này có thể được giải thích một phần bởi một thực tế là cấp ba sinh viên cạo râu để nghiên cứu và gửi một luận án và được chỉ định một giám sát viên cá nhân để hướng dẫn họ trong nhiệm vụ này. Thiếu tính khả dụng của người giám sát cá nhân có thể cung cấp cho nguyên nhân cho mối quan tâm và dẫn đến sự bất mãn, đặc biệt là nếu đồng nghiệp của họ có giáo viên dạy kèm cá nhân, người được xem là có sẵn. Tập trung nhóm confirmed và nâng cao phần lớn thông tin thu thập từ bảng câu hỏi. Các sinh viên xem xét việc giảng dạy nhiều quan trọng hơn "lung lay bảng". Này confirmed tình trạng thấp tầm quan trọng của các cơ sở vật chất và đặc biệt các đồ nội thất và trang trí, mặc dù đã có một giới hạn của toleration của các khía cạnh. Những người tham gia nhóm tập trung cũng chỉ ra rằng khi nó đến việc lựa chọn mô-đun tự của sự lựa chọn là tác theo các giảng viên những người đã giảng dạy mô-đun cụ thể. Đối với các lớp học hướng dẫn họ nhận xét rằng nếu có quá nhiều học sinh trong một lớp học họ đã không nhận được đủ sự quan tâm cá nhân. Họ coi là các lớp học với hơn 20 sinh viên trong đó quá lớn. Vấn đề chi phí sách giáo khoa và tính sẵn sàng nâng lên một số ý kiến thú vị. Học sinh có thể trả tiền £40 cho một sách giáo khoa và hầu như không sử dụng nó-được coi là một sự lãng phí tiền bạc. Sự sẵn có của sách giáo khoa là confirmed là "không tốt". Nhân viên đáp ứng và sẵn có được xem là biến, với một số nhân viên luôn luôn có sẵn và nhanh chóng để đáp ứng với e-mail, trong khi những người khác không bao giờ xung quanh và sẽ mất tuần để đáp ứng với e-mail. Đây là một nguyên nhân chính của sự bất mãn. Một thời gian hợp lý để thừa nhận e-mail được đặt tại giữa 24 đến 48 giờ. Liên kết này khía cạnh promptness và tính hữu dụng của phản hồi về đánh giá. Thông tin phản hồi được coi là quá chậm. Một mặt trăng hợp lý cho trở lại của khóa học là ba tuần, nhưng nó đã được công nhận như là phụ thuộc vào số lượng sinh viên tham gia một mô-đun. Thông tin phản hồi được coi là vô ích nếu nó tập trung vào việc làm (mà sẽ thường không được lặp đi lặp lại) chứ không phải trên các công việc trong tương lai. Có những vấn đề "giải mã" một số nhân viên chữ viết tay. Một số trường học/mô-đun đã không có phản hồi ở tất cả. Cách thời gian biểu được tổ chức cũng đã cho những lời chỉ trích nhiều, như nhiều sinh viên đã phải fit bán thời gian việc làm xung quanh lịch trình của họ. Đối với nhân viên liên lạc phòng không giảng dạy, helpfulness của office hoặc quản lý nhân viên và nhân viên kỹ thuật CNTT, mặc dù được coi là có tầm quan trọng thấp, được đánh giá thấp trong sự hài lòng ngày trở về bảng câu hỏi. Các nhóm tập trung đã nhận xét về sự thiếu nhận thức của helpfulness. Office "là luôn luôn bận rộn" với hàng đợi dài. Cán bộ kỹ thuật được xem là hữu ích và bản nhân viên "thường hữu ích".Kết luận dựa trên các kết quả của này toàn diện học tập của sinh viên học tập trong khoa kinh doanh và luật tại Liverpool John Moores đại học (LJMU) nó là rõ ràng rằng nhiều người trong số những khía cạnh vật lý của các dịch vụ đại học là không quan trọng liên quan đến sự hài lòng của sinh viên. finding này hỗ trợ trước findings bởi Schneider và Bowen (1995), Banwet và Datta (2003) và Hill et al. (2003) tất cả ofwhom tìm thấy rằng những khía cạnh quan trọng nhất của một trường đại học dịch vụ dịch vụ đã kết hợp cốt lõi dịch vụ, tức là các bài giảng, bao gồm cả sự đạt được kiến thức, ghi chú lớp học vàĐo sự hài lòng của sinh viên263materials and classroom delivery. Furthermore, the findings also confirm the research of Price et al. (2003) in that it seems that the University’s physical facilities influence students’ choice. However, once here it is the quality of the teaching and learning experience that is of importance. Fortunately, LJMU has a state-of-the-art Learning Resource Centre equipped with scores of computer stations fitted with the latest software and linked to the Internet. The Faculty of Business and Law also has a new technologically advanced Lecture Theatre and a large IT suite. These aspects of the facilities can be, and indeed are, used to attract students to the Faculty of Business and Law, for example during Open Days. However, once students have enrolled, it is the quality of the teaching and learning that will cause satisfaction or dissatisfaction and they are prepared to tolerate, to a large extent, “wobbly tables” and paint flaking off walls as long as the teaching they receive is at an acceptable level. This may have implications for management responsible for resource allocations to various areas of the University services and infrastructure. Student feedback tends to confirm that they do receive high quality teaching from staff with high levels of expertise in their various academic disciplines. The lecture and tutorial are the core service provided by the university and it is what goes on in these classrooms that determine student satisfaction with the explicit service. They are prepared to tolerate to a large extent deficiencies in the physical aspects of the facilities as long as the teaching they receive is perceived to be at an acceptable level. The focus groups confirmed the findings of Banwett and Datta (2003) that students “vote with their feet” based on their experiences in lectures and are more likely to enrol on an optional module delivered by a teacher perceived as providing good teaching. However, in line with Coles (2002) large classes are likely to cause dissatisfaction. The explicit service is aided (and abetted) by the facilitating goods such as PowerPoint presentation slides, supplementary handout materials and the recommended textbooks. Given the large numbers of students taking most modules there will never be sufficient textbooks available in the LRC to satisfy demand. With regard to quality improvement it may be worthwhile introducing explicit standards of service to various aspects of the University services. These would cover most “moments of truth”. For example, teaching staff would undertake to respond to all student e-mails within 48 hours and aim to provide feedback on coursework assignments within 15 working days. Similar standards could be introduced in the LRC and administration offices and could encompass internal and external service level agreements. Management can also be involved in such service standards by guaranteeing that tutorial classes will not have more than 20 students. It is also the responsibility of management to provide the resources necessary to meet any standards. Universities world-wide are now competing for students both nationally and internationally. In order to recruit and retain students they should aim to enhance student satisfaction and reduce student dissatisfaction. This can only be achieved if all the services that contribute to “academic life” are delivered to a suitable standard. The students are the sole judges of whether or not this has been achieved therefore student satisfaction surveys should be undertaken on a regular basis and a university’s service offering adapted accordingly.