Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

4.11.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis Basics

Since the measurement model aims to improve the model before the estimation of the hypothesized model, the standardized regression weights for the research indicators were first examined by

conducting the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for each variable. Using factor loading technique, seven of the items was deleted. Items that have loaded more than 0.50 on their underlying construct are kept and items which have loaded less than 0.5 have been deleted. In general, the attained loads are satisfactory and acceptable (Byrne, 2010 and Hair et al., 2010). Therefore, all the indicators in the present study are related to their particular constructs and there is a satisfactory proof of the convergence validity of the model.

A key factor to consider when implementing Structural Equation Modelling is to determine to what extent does a hypothesized data “fit”, or in other words, if the hypothesized data adequately and satisfactory describes the sample data. Ideally, the evaluation of a model fit should be considered from a variety of perspectives, where the evaluation shall consider various criteria that assess model fit. An R Square = 0.319 was attained. Moreover, it was concluded that the seven service quality dimensions suggested in this study are devoted to around 32% of the variation in the dependent variable (Satisfaction). The fitness is in general acceptable and satisfactory. This is supported by the values of the CFI and TLI indices.

4.11.2 CFA for Satisfaction

This scale consists of three items, where none of the items were removed as the standardized regression weight for all indicators is higher than 0.5. Considering the analysis results attained, the factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.82 to 0.86 and were statistically significant. This provides a clear evidence of validity.

93

Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate P-value

Satisfaction_1 <--- Students Satisfaction 0.817 *** Satisfaction_2 <--- Students Satisfaction 0.859 *** Satisfaction_3 <--- Students Satisfaction 0.829 ***

***Significant at level of 0.001; P-value at level of 0.05

In addition, the lowest factor loading was for: Satisfaction_1: I have truly enjoyed attending this university, where the highest factor loading was for: Satisfaction _2: I am satisfied with my decision to attend this university.

4.11.3 CFA for University Image and Reputation

This scale consists of eight items, of which two were removed based on the reliability analysis results. Of the six remaining items, two items were removed due to low factor load, below 0.5. The two removed items are:

• image_reputation_P_6: The tuition I pay is worth the quality of services I am receiving from my university.

• image_reputation_P_4: This University has been recommended to me by alumni or a friend or family.

Table 4.10 CFA Results for University Image and Reputation Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

image_reputation_P_1 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.76 image_reputation_P_2 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.66 image_reputation_P_3 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.58 image_reputation_P_4 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.458 image_reputation_P_5 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.52 image_reputation_P_6 <--- University Image and Reputation 0.435

Based on the attained results, the factor loadings of the remaining observed variables ranged from 0.52 to 0.76 and were statistically significant. This provides good evidence of validity. On the other hand, the highest factor loading was for: image_reputation_P_1: My university has a good reputation.

94 4.11.4 CFA for Quality of Students Services Support

This scale comprises six items. None of these items was removed as the standardized regression weight for all indicators is higher than 0.5. The results showed that the factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.56 to 0.78 and were statistically significant. This provides evidence of validity.

Table 4.11 CFA Results for Quality of Students Services Support Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Studentsupport_P_1 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.57 Studentsupport_P_2 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.61 Studentsupport_P_3 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.78 Studentsupport_P_4 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.73 Studentsupport_P_5 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.71 Studentsupport_P_6 <--- Quality of Students Services Support 0.60

Moreover, the highest factor loading was for: Studentsupport_P_3: Registration and enrolment processes are smooth and clear, where the lowest factor loading was for: Studentsupport_P_1: My university provides helpful career services and advice.

4.11.5 CFA for Quality of Education

This scale comprises three items, and none were removed as the standardized regression weight for all indicators was found to be higher than 0.5. The results for the factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.68 to 0.77 and were statistically significant. This shows a clear evidence of validity.

Table 4.12 CFA Results for Quality of Education

Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

Qualityofteducation_P_1 <--- Quality of Education 0.70 Qualityofteducation_P_2 <--- Quality of Education 0.77 Qualityofteducation_P_3 <--- Quality of Education 0.68

Based on the analysis carried out, the lowest factor loading was for: Qualityofteducation_P_3: The curricula and programs designed by the university are up- to date. Moreover, the highest factor loading was for: Qualityofteducation_P_2: My courses are generally intellectually challenging.

95 4.11.6 CFA for Campus Physical Facilities

This scale consists of fifteen items. Of the fifteen items, five items were removed due to the reported low factor load which is below 0.5. The five items are:

• facilities_P_7: My University offers comfortable accommodation (dorms).

• facilities_P_8: My University offers accommodation (dorms) at an affordable price. • facilities_P_9: My university accommodation (dorms) is safe.

• facilities_P_14: My University offers parking areas for students. • facilities_P_15: I feel safe anywhere on campus.

Table 4.13 CFA Results for Campus Physical Facilities

Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

facilities_P_1 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.62 facilities_P_2 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.67 facilities_P_3 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.59 facilities_P_4 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.70 facilities_P_5 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.59 facilities_P_6 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.64 facilities_P_7 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.268 facilities_P_8 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.363 facilities_P_9 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.403 facilities_P_10 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.63 facilities_P_11 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.58 facilities_P_12 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.57 facilities_P_13 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.51 facilities_P_14 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.08 facilities_P_15 <--- Campus Physical Facilities 0.117

As presented in the results attained, the factor loadings of the remaining observed variables ranged from 0.51 to 0.70 and were statistically significant. This provides a good evidence of validity. On the other hand, the highest factor loading was for: facilities_P_4: My university library provides access to a wide number of academic journals and books.

96 4.11.7 CFA for Students Social Life on Campus

This scale consists of three items and none of them was omitted. Based on the attained results, the factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.48 to 0.87 and were statistically significant. This provides a good evidence of validity.

Table 4.14 CFA Results for Students Social Life on Campus Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

social_life_P_1 <--- Students Social Life on Campus 0.69 social_life_P_2 <--- Students Social Life on Campus 0.87 social_life_P_3 <--- Students Social Life on Campus 0.48

Moreover, the lowest factor loading was for: social_life_P_3: It is easy to make friends on campus, where the highest factor loading was for: social_life_P_2: Student life on campus is dynamic.

4.11.8 CFA for Interaction with Faculty

This scale comprised of five items, none were removed as the standardized regression weight for all indicators is higher than 0.5. The factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.65 to 0.78 and were statistically significant. This provides evidence of validity.

Table 4.15 CFA Results for Interaction with Faculty

Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

interactionwithfaculty_P_1 <--- Interaction with Faculty 0.70 interactionwithfaculty_P_2 <--- Interaction with Faculty 0.75 interactionwithfaculty_P_3 <--- Interaction with Faculty 0.78 interactionwithfaculty_P_4 <--- Interaction with Faculty 0.75 interactionwithfaculty_P_5 <--- Interaction with Faculty 0.65

In terms of factor loadings, the lowest factor loading was for: interactionwithfaculty_P_5: Academic advisors are interested in my progress. On the other hand, the highest factor loading was for:

interactionwithfaculty_P_3: Lecturers are efficient in providing feedback on my performance and progress.

97 4.11.9 CFA for Interaction with Administrative Staff

This scale includes five items. None of these five items was removed as the standardized regression weight for all indicators is higher than 0.5.

Table 4.16 CFA Results for Interaction with Administrative Staff Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

Estimate

interaction_P_1 <--- Interaction with Administrative Staff 0.77 interaction_P_2 <--- Interaction with Administrative Staff 0.80 interaction_P_3 <--- Interaction with Administrative Staff 0.83 interaction_P_4 <--- Interaction with Administrative Staff 0.69 interaction_P_5 <--- Interaction with Administrative Staff 0.71

Considering the attained results, the factor loadings of the observed variables ranged from 0.69 to 0.77 and were statistically significant. Therefore, there is a clear evidence of validity in this case. In

addition, the lowest factor loading was for: interaction_P_4: Staff keeps students informed about when services will be performed, where the highest factor loading was for: interaction_P_3: Administration staff responds quickly to my request for assistance.