Student Satisfaction Model

Based on the results obtained in this investigation, Table 4.11 summarizes the factors affecting satisfaction in order of importance. In addition, the table reports the standardized and the

unstandardized regression weight of each of the dimensions considered in this study. It could be noted that the University Image and Reputation has the highest weight, with a considerable gap with respect to the other dimensions. Interaction with Faculty comes in the second place regarding weighting vs Students Satisfaction, followed by Quality of Education, Students Social Life on Campus, Quality of Students Services Support and Interaction with Administrative Staff. Finally, Campus Physical Facilities comes with a weighting of -0.03, highlighting the negligible importance given by the students for this factor.

105

Table 4.20 Regression Weights of different Independents

Dependent Independent Standardized

Regression Weight

Unstandardized Regression Weight Students

Satisfaction University Image and Reputation 0.50 0.56 Students

Satisfaction Interaction with Faculty 0.15 0.18

Students

Satisfaction Quality of Education 0.13 0.15

Students

Satisfaction Students Social Life on Campus 0.12 0.14 Students

Satisfaction

Quality of Students Services

Support 0.10 0.12

Students Satisfaction

Interaction with Administrative

Staff 0.08 0.07

Students

Satisfaction Campus Physical Facilities -0.03 -0.03

Using the unstandardized regression weights of each of the dimensions considered and their

corresponding P values, the model equation of Students Satisfaction and the service quality model are developed as follows. 𝐒𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 = (0.56 × 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐼𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) + (0.18 × 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑦) + (0.15 × 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) + (0.14 × 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡) + (0.12 × 𝑆𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑆𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝐶𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑢𝑠) + ( 0.07 × 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝐴𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓) − (0.03 × 𝐶𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑢𝑠 𝑃ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠) + 𝑒44

106

Figure 4.4 Final Service Quality Model 4.13 Summary

After presenting the research design, methodology and approach to be adopted in this investigation in Chapter 3, the actual full implementation of the developed service quality assessment model

conceptual framework in the Lebanese International University case study is presented in this chapter and the results are analysed and discussed. Data collected from the different questionnaire forms completed by students is prepared, coded and analysed, using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 and SPSS AMOS. To aid results assessment and data analysis, various approaches were implemented in this chapter including descriptive statistical analysis, one-way

107

analysis of variances (ANOVA), Levene’s Test, regression analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Model (SEM).

First, the profile and demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in detail,

considering gender, age, marital status, dependents support and nationality. Considering a balanced distribution between males and females and a representation of a wide range of students age and status, it was found that the population sample selected provides a very good representation of the whole university students, aligning perfectly with the enrolment data from the administration office. Furthermore, all LIU campuses are covered in the selected sample, but with different distribution and contribution of each campus.

A Cronbach Alpha technique was used to measure the internal consistency and reliability. The

Cronbach’s alpha (α) was calculated for each of the service quality dimensions along with satisfaction, and the results confirmed the homogeneity of the proposed scales.

Regarding the students’ feedback and answers concerning their satisfaction of studying at LIU, an acceptable percentage ranging between 70% and 77% of the students confirmed their satisfaction, stating that they enjoy attending classes at LIU. Then, each of the service quality dimensions proposed in this study is investigated considering both performance and importance perspectives. In terms of LIU image and reputation, a large percentage of students confirmed that LIU has a good image and that it is a student-focused university with good partnership with international universities. In addition, the results show that LIU provides a friendly environment and perfect conditions to make friends. Moreover, the interaction between students and faculty was ranked high in terms of importance by more than 80% of the students, in addition to interaction with administration staff which was also highly regarded by students. Another factor which was reported as a priority and of high importance by students is having up to date and well-organized curricula across various LIU majors and faculties. In terms of student support services, two services stand out based on the results of the investigation: career services and advice along with flexible payment plans and financial assistance. This reflects the problematic economic situation in Lebanon as well as the competitive job market.

However, the most problematic section in the study as reported by students was the Campus Physical Facilities. A major problem was highlighted in terms of the students’ accommodation and dorms, as the majority of the students think that these facilities are unsecure, uncomfortable and unaffordable. On the other hand, students gave the highest importance to other facilities including open campus areas and gardens and good cafeteria food.

108

After this analysis, a comparison of the different demographic variables against the seven dimensions of service quality is carried out and presented. As the calculated P-values are greater than 0.05, it was concluded that differences in age, gender, marital status, enrolment period, funding source and student status have no significant impact on the perceived service quality by students. On the other hand, there was a significant mean difference between Campuses along 6 of the 7 service quality dimensions, where Akkar Campus ranks first in 4 out of 6 dimensions.

Furthermore, the Importance-Performance matrix was developed to identify areas where the university needs to prioritize and should allocate more resources. The critical quadrant ‘Concentrate here’ has the attribute related to offering comfortable accommodation (dorms), highlighting that the university needs to act on this matter. Also, a multitude of attributes fall near the ‘Concentrate here’ quadrant suggesting that the university need to act on these services as soon as possible. These services include good internet services, offering affordable accommodation, modern sports facilities, safe

accommodation and parking areas for students.

As a summary, the case study results support all the hypothesis made at the start of the investigation, including the insignificance claim made in Hypothesis H1, dealing with Campus Physical Facilities. In this regard, it was highlighted that the independent variable Campus Physical Facilities has a negative non- significant relation with students’ satisfaction. This could be explained in a Lebanese context considering the current economy situation in Lebanon and the associated problems, the students previous experiences with their high schools and academic institutions and the acceptable facilities status at LIU. Therefore, such facilities are in general not considered a priority for the majority of the students, taking into account the overall cultural and social perspectives.

Finally, the unstandardized regression weights of each of the selected dimensions were used to derive the model of Students Satisfaction. It shall be highlighted that the University Image and Reputation has the highest weighting.

109