meljun cortes mba thesis (jru)

1

SIGNIFICANT FACTORS AFFECTING SATISFACTION AND PARTONAGE OF GRADUATE

SCHOOL STUDENTS TO JOSE RIZAL UNIVERSITY

MELJUN CORTESMELJUN CORTES

Background of the Study

Students’ satisfaction with their total learning experience, once barely considered, has become a central concern for many institutions of higher education world-wide and in many different countries with different higher education systems, institutions are increasingly using the instrument of the feedback survey in order to establish how far their students are satisfied with aspects of their total learning experience, Harvey, (2010).

In such a climate, it is essential for comparisons to be made that transcend national boundaries in order to help us to understand more fully ‘the different properties related to [student satisfaction, Wiers-Jenssen et al., (2009).

2

Such comparisons are undoubtedly interesting academically but they may help in improving aspects of the student learning experience within a wider context. As Guy Neave, (2010, p. 197) has recently reminded us, Europe’s many and varied systems have been in a state of turmoil for the best part of fifteen years’. As a result, comparisons may help in the search for solutions to the many problems confronting European higher education.

In the context of the Bologna Process comparisons between higher education systems across the EU are particularly pertinent at a time of increasing integration and harmonization, although it is a task that has largely been avoided by researchers. Some excellent research has already made international comparison of the satisfaction of students, but this has been primarily between Anglo-Saxon models of higher education. Ford et al., (2009) assess and compare the perceptions of undergraduate students in universities in New Zealand and the USA. 3

Background of the Study (CONT’N)

Mai, (2010) conducts a survey to compare the levels of satisfaction between UK and US business schools students. In contrast, the present study aims at opening debate on student satisfaction in higher education cross-culturally, but specifically across Europe.

With the expansion of the university sector and concerns with quality and the growing ‘consumerism’ of higher education, there has been a significant growth of, and sophistication in, processes designed to collect views from students, Harvey, (2010). Students’ views on all aspects of their higher education experiences are now being widely regarded as essential to the effective monitoring of quality in universities Leckey & Neill,( 2010).

4


Most higher education institutions, around the world, collect some type of feedback from students about their experience of higher education. ‘Feedback’ in this sense refers to the expressed opinions of students about the service they receive as students. According to Harvey (2009), this may include perceptions about the learning and teaching, the learning support facilities such as; libraries, computing facilities, the learning environment; lecture rooms, laboratories, social space and university buildings, support facilities; refectories, student accommodation, health facilities, student services and external aspects of being a student such as; finance, and transport infrastructure. Student views are usually collected in form of ‘satisfaction’ feedback.

5


Student satisfaction is seen as students’ assessment of the services provided by universities and colleges Wiers-Jenssen et al., (2010) and refers to the favorability of a student’s subjective evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences associated with education Oliver & DeSarbo, (2009). Teaching and learning is not something that occurs only in the classroom or under the tutor’s direct supervision and the total student experience is becoming ever more central to the students’ attitudes to the institution Rowley, ( 2008).6


Elliott & Shin, (2010) argue that student satisfaction is being shaped continually by repeated experiences in campus life. Moreover, the campus environment is seemingly a web of interconnected experiences that overlap and influence students’ overall satisfaction. What happens to students in the classroom is not independent of all other experiences relating to campus life. For example, Browne et al. (2008) found that global satisfaction with a university was driven by a student’s assessment of the quality of the course and other curriculum-related factors associated with that university.

Research suggests that customer satisfaction is of strategic importance. Patterson et al. (2009) demonstrate empirically a very strong link between customer satisfactions and repurchase intentions. Babin & Griffin (2009) also found customer satisfaction to be highly correlated with consumers’ future patronage intentions. 7


Theoretical FrameworkThe theory in which this study was based in Lewin’s

Topological and Vector theory. The theory was postulated by Kurt Lewin’s.

Lewin’s basic premise is that every object exists in a “field of forces” that move to change it, define it, or give it a degree of stability and substance. Furthermore, the behavior of an individual at a given moment is the result of existing forces operating simultaneously in his life space. The ideas, expectations, feelings, attitudes, and needs of the individual constitute the external forces, while everything in the physical would include other human beings with which the internal forces interact at a given moment constitute the external forces. Changes in any of the forces are likely to result in the changes of behavior.

8

9

Figure 1Theoretical Framework: Kurt Lewin’s Topological and

Vector Theory of Learning

Significant Factors Affecting Students’ Satisfaction and Patronage of

Graduate School Students to Jose Rizal University

Theoretical Framework (CONT’N)

The Lewin’s Topological and Vector theory of Learning (Assessment) become the foundation of the study because the student as a human being constitutes the internal and external forces. The internal forces which is actually the behavior of the students or satisfaction and patronage of the students’ is shape by the external forces. The external forces as described in the study as the factors affecting the student’s satisfaction and patronage to Jose Rizal University of Graduate School Students.

10

Theoretical Framework (CONT’N)

Conceptual Framework One very useful approach to educational evaluation is known

as the CIPP, or Context, Input, Process, Product approach, developed by Stufflebeam (1983).

Daniel Stufflebeam introduced the CIPP Model in 1966 to guide mandated evaluations of U.S. federally funded projects because these emergent projects could not meet requirements for controlled, variable-manipulating experiments, which then were considered the gold standard for program evaluations. Since then, the model has been widely applied and further developed.

This provides a systematic way of looking at many different aspects of the curriculum development process. There is a risk, however, that it may be directed only by ‘experts’ or ‘outsiders’, and for this reason it is vital to identify ways in which various stakeholders can be meaningfully involved.

11

12

Figure 2: Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) Model

Introduced by Daniel Stufflebeam

The CIPP Model (Context, Input, Process, Product) for evaluation is a comprehensive framework for guiding formative and summative evaluations of programs, projects, personnel, products, institutions, and systems.

The classic C.I.P.P. model was used in this study, presented as follows:

Conceptual Framework (CONT’N)

13

Figure 3: Conceptual Framework Significant Factors Affecting Satisfaction and

Patronage ofGraduate School Students to Jose Rizal University

Conceptual Framework (CONT’N)

Research Paradigm

For further understanding, the researcher formulated a research paradigm which served as Figure 4, that show the interrelationships of specific variables included in this study.

14

Figure 4: Research ParadigmSignificant Factors Affecting Students’ Satisfaction and

Patronage ofGraduate School Students to Jose Rizal University

15

Research Paradigm (CONT’N)

Statement of the Problem

Considering the environmental problems confronting countries all over today, together with the environmental consciousness prevailing among educational institutions, the researcher attempted to determine the significant factors affecting satisfaction and patronage of Graduate School Students to Jose Rizal University, for the SY 2013-2014.

16

Specifically, the researcher aimed to answer the following questions:What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:1.1. Age;1.2. Gender;1.3 Civil Status;1.4 Course;1.5 Distance of JRU from

workplace/homeplace; and1.6 Allowance

17

Statement of the Problem (CONT’N)

2. What is the respondents’ ratings in terms of the four factors of marketing mix (4P’s) which are:

2.1 Product/Service;2.2 Price/Tuition Fee;2.3 Promotion/Patronage; and2.4 Place/Strategic Location?

18


3. What is the level of satisfaction of the respondents/the JRU Graduate School students to Jose Rizal University with respect to:

3.1 Faculty and Instruction;3.2 Student Affairs;3.3 Classrooms and Laboratories;3.4 Library;3.5 Facilities;3.6 Security;3.7 Student Services; and3.8 Overall Rating.19


4. Is the level of satisfaction of the respondents to JRU, independent of their profile?

5. Is there a significant relationship between the level of satisfaction of the respondents to JRU, with the level of patronage of the respondents to J.R.U.?

6. What are the significant factors affecting students’ satisfaction and patronage to Jose Rizal University (JRU)?

20


Hypotheses of the Study

The researcher used the “Null Hypotheses” or “hypotheses of present thinking” (H0), stated as follows: There is no significant relationship between the profile of the

respondents and the level of satisfaction of the respondents to JRU;

There is no significant differences in the respondents’ ratings in terms of the four factors of marketing mix, for their patronage to JRU; and

There is no significant relationship between the level of satisfaction of the respondents to JRU, and the level of patronage of the respondents to JRU.

21

Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study aimed to determine the significant factors affecting satisfaction and patronage of Graduate School Students to Jose Rizal University.

22

Scope: The population of this study are roughly all the students enrolled for the third (3rd) Trimester (Summer of 2013), SY 2012–2013. These are approximately about one hundred and forty–eight (148) Graduate School Students enrolled from the Masters Degree Courses (MBA, MPA, MAED) to the Doctorate Degree Courses (DBA, DPA, E.Ed.) offered at Jose Rizal University. “Stratified random sampling” is utilized. The respondents of the study were determined using “Slovins formula”, which is about one hundred and forty (140) Graduate School Students from the given population.

The study made used of the descriptive evaluation method using a survey–questionnaire to elicit data on factors affecting the satisfaction and patronage of graduate school students to Jose Rizal University.

23

Scope and Limitation(CONT’N)

Limitations: The study was limited to evaluation of the students’ or respondents’ perception of the factors affecting satisfaction and patronage of graduate school students to Jose Rizal University.

The profiles of the respondents were simply considered as information which will represent the status of the respondents in the university. These profiles were merely associated/correlated with the factors affecting the students’ satisfaction to JRU.

24

Scope and Limitation(CONT’N)

Research DesignThis study utilized the “descriptive method” of research.

Descriptive method of research is a method of research which investigate present facts concerning the nature and status of anything, a group of persons, a number of objects, assets or conditions, a class or events, a system of thought or any kind of phenomena which are covered in this research. (Good and Scate, 2011)

Descriptive survey was used in the study so that present information relative to the factors affecting the students’ satisfaction and patronage to Jose Rizal University, graduate school through the use of questionnaire checklist.

The researcher applied “quantitative method of research”, complimentary to the “researcher–made survey–questionnaire”.

25

Locale of the Study The study is conducted in Jose Rizal University, Graduate School.Jose Rizal University was originally founded as the Far Eastern

College School of Accounts, Commerce, and Finance in 1919 as a non stock, non profit, non - sectarian private educational institution. Its founder was the late Vicente Fabella, the first Filipino certified public accountant. The name was subsequently changed to Jose Rizal College in 1992, in honor of the great Filipino Patriot and martyr who tried to awaken his countrymen in his writings to the need for academic self-sufficiency and independence. Then, on October 2, 2000 the Commission on Higher Education, the highest policy-making of tertiary education in the Philippines, by unanimous resolution conferred University status on the college. The University is offering programs such as pre-school, grade school, high school, college, graduate school and law school.

26

Jose Rizal University, as the Philippines’ oldest business educational institution, attempted to meet this demand through the Graduate School’s well-structured academic programs, which does not only develop strong competency analyses, research, management, communication and information technology but also inculcates a strong sense of professionalism, appreciation for hard work, honesty, the importance o individual and team efforts, the centrality of risk-taking in the pursuit of innovation and most importantly, service.

27

Locale of the Study (CONT’N)

These academic programs are Doctor in Business Administration (DBA), Doctor in Public Administration (DPA), Doctor of Education (Ed.D), Master in Business Administration (MBA), Master in Public Administration (MPA), and Master of Arts in Education (MAED). Under the MPA program, the Graduate School has a Diploma Course in Local Governance, and MPA Major in Public Health.

JRU Graduate School is located in the Tower Building, Jose Rizal University, 80 Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong City. Jose Rizal University is accessible through many public transport lines passing directly in front and around the university.

28

Locale of the Study (CONT’N)

Population and SamplingStratified random sampling is utilized. This is a type of

random sampling that includes surveying a selected group of subjects from a larger group of people. Through this useful sampling method, most researchers can sample each subpopulation of the main population separately. This is an effective and easy way to get unbiased results from these populations.

The population of this study are roughly all the students enrolled for the third (3rd) Trimester (Summer of 2013), SY 2012–2013. These are approximately about one hundred and forty–eight (148) Graduate School Students enrolled from the Masters Degree Courses (MBA, MPA, MAED) to the Doctorate Degree Courses (DBA, DPA, E.Ed.) offered at Jose Rizal University.

29

The respondents of the study were determined using “Slovin’s formula”. When it is not possible to study an entire population, a smaller sample is taken using a random sampling technique. Slovin's formula allows a researcher to sample the population with a desired degree of accuracy. It gives the researcher an idea of how large his sample size needs to be to ensure a reasonable accuracy of results.

Slovin's formula is written as: n = N / (1 + Ne^2)n = Number of samplesN = Total populatione = Error tolerance (Margin of Error)

30

Population Sampling (CONT’N)

Master’s Degree No. of Respondents MBA 95MPA 5

MAED 25 Sub

Total125

Doctor’s DegreeDBA 5DPA 7Ed.D 11

Sub Total

23

Grand Total

148

Table 1Distribution of Population Per Degree at the Graduate School

of JRU


32

Master’s Degree No. of Respondents MBA 92MPA 4

MAED 24 Sub

Total120

Doctor’s DegreeDBA 4DPA 6Ed.D 10

Sub Total

20

Grand Total

140

Table 2Distribution of Respondents Per Degree

at the Graduate School of JRU


Using “Slovin’s Formula” to determine the number of respondents: Slovin's formula is written as: n = N / (1 + Ne^2)

= ________148_______ = 140 respondents 1 + (148 x 0.02 x 0.02)

Thank you

33

meljun cortes mba thesis (jru)

Technology