1. 1 What Matters Most! An Exploratory Analysis of Student Satisfaction Finian O’Driscoll Shannon College of Hotel Management ~ THRIC 2011, Athlone IT

2. 2 Purpose of the Study  It forms part of an ongoing quality assurance process which was initiated five years ago.  To activate a student feedback database for the purpose of in-depth statistical analyses  Theoretically explore the concept of ‘student satisfaction’ in light of educational service delivery & standards  Uncover salient ‘factors’ re: service satisfaction  Find out what we are doing well (and not so well)  Fill a gap in student satisfaction research from Irish & Hospitality Management perspectives

3. 3  Why Focus on Quality? “a quality culture should permeate throughout each institution and underpin the range of activities provided for students e.g., teaching, learning, research, library, computer services, health and leisure facilities, etc. ( HEA 2004: 19)  Why Focus on Student Feedback? The need “to put in place systematic student feedback processes covering the quality of both the teaching and learning environment and other support services provided for students” (HEA, 2009).

4. 4 Students & Educational Services Educational services play a central role in students’ lives (Gruber, Fub, Voss and Glaser-Zikuda, 2010) A satisfied student population is a highly sought after competitive advantage for higher education institutions, lending itself to desirable outcomes such as positive word of mouth communication, retention and student loyalty.. (Thomas and Galambos, 2004)

5. 5 Utility of Student Feedback  Richardson (2005) suggests that feedback can provide diagnostic evidence for all stakeholders associated with the Institution.  The collection and evaluation of student feedback contributes to educational quality management (Rowley, 2003).  Student feedback serves as an internal guide for educational improvement and externally as a source of information to other stakeholders (Harvey, 2003).  Richardson (2005) highlights the utility of taking a ‘holistic’ institutional perspective to student satisfaction in that the student’s ‘total experience’ is appraised.

6. 6 Student Satisfaction: A Multidimensional Construct  The extant literature indicates that student satisfaction is a multidimensional construct influenced by a variety of contextual factors Selected Studies 1.Wiers-Jenssen et al., (2002); 2.Navarro et al., (2005); 3.Gruber et al., (2010) 4.Tsinidou et al., (2010)

7. 7 1. The Navarro Study: North American students ( n=369)  Teaching quality,  Administration of the programme,  Support from teaching staff and  College infrastructures explained most of the variance in student satisfaction.  Strong correlation between the level of student satisfaction and loyalty/intention to stay at the college. 2. The Wiers-Jenssen Study: Norwegian students (n=10,000)  Teaching,  Physical facilities and  Administrative staff services were strong predictors  Emphasised ‘social climate’ as an important factor for student well- being

8. 8 3. The Gruber Study: German students ( n=544)  Teaching,  School placements,  College facilities,  Lecturer support and  College reputation as important explanatory factors 4. The Tsinidou Study: Greek students ( n=300)  Curriculum structure,  Administrative services,  Academic staff support and  Institutional facilities

9. 9 Research Questions?  What are the dimensions of student satisfaction among a cohort of hospitality management students?  Which factor or factors contribute most to explaining and predicting student satisfaction?  Are there differences in both the levels of and factors which, predict student satisfaction based on Gender and Nationality?  Anything missing from the picture?

10. 10 Course Satisfaction Survey  Database of Year 1 students was selected for analyses in line with suggestions proposed by recent reports given that “a positive first-year student experience is crucial to achieving the goals of higher education” (National Strategy for Higher Education, 2010 :56)  Survey instrument with 26 items designed to measure satisfaction levels across a range of areas such as college facilities, teaching quality, course content, welfare support services and academic support.  Purposive-convenience sampling approach (Sample n = 263)  Questionnaire completed during lectures for immediate collection.  All items were measured on a five point Likert scale (1 = very dissatisfied to 5 = very satisfied).

11. 11 Year 1 Student Composition  No significant differences in group Gender/Nationality composition based on Х 2 test  Avoids confounding analytical and inferential conclusions

12. 12 Data Pre-check for Multivariate Analyses  Present study within acceptable parameters for multivariate analysis  Exploratory Factor Analysis: A technique that explores the structure of the interrelationships among a large set of observable measures and creates a set of highly correlated variables known as factors.  Multiple Regression: A multivariate technique that explores the relationship between several independent/predictor variables and a dependent variable. Source: (Hair et al., 2006)

13. 13 Factor Analysis Solution Facilities Academic Support Welfare Support Feedback Placement Comm

14. 14 How Satisfied are the Students? What are the relationships between factors?  Students are generally satisfied with the services offered  Academic Quality rated highest – Placement factor rated lowest  Academic, Welfare & Feedback services most correlated to student satisfaction  Personal & Academic Communication services are important to students

15. 15 Any Differences in Satisfaction Between Groups? - No significant differences in satisfaction across factors based on gender. - Males marginally more satisfied. -Significant differences across factors - Non-EU less satisfied overall - EU less satisfied with pre-placement factor

16. 16 Regression Analyses  A series of Multiple Regression (MR) equations were generated to determine the relative explanatory power of the satisfaction factors on overall satisfaction  MR x Gender (2)  MR x Nationality (2)  A final Hierarchical MR of satisfaction factors controlling for gender & nationality (1)

17. 17 Male StudentsFemale Students EU StudentsNon-EU Students

18. 18 Final Model of Satisfaction Determinants What are those other factors?

19. 19 Study Findings  Student Satisfaction = Multidimensional Construct - Six Factors extracted!  Current study supports previous international research. 1. Quality of Academic Support, Student/Welfare Support and adequate college-student communications were the most important determinants in this study 2. No Gender Differences but Females place significant importance on welfare/personal support services over male peers. Males marginally more satisfied overall. 3. Non-EU students less satisfied than EU peers. Why? 4. EU students less satisfied with ‘Pre-Placement Support’ factor than Non-EU group. Why? 5. The six factors explain approx 50% of students’ satisfaction. What of the other 50%??

20. 20  Efficacy of student feedback is acknowledged  Multivariate techniques capture what mostly matters - but not what matters most  Concomitant and/or Follow-up qualitative research required: Mixed Methods. Amend/Adjust/Expand and survey  Research Design scalable to all classes within the institution – Longitudinal research potential  Regular collection and analysis of student feedback important to attain educational service quality excellence  Institution to reflect, act upon and communicate to students Conclusions & Future Research