Home⇛QCU The Lamp: Journal of Education⇛vol. 2 no. 1 (2024)

Evaluation Of Student Support Services As A Basis For Quality Improvement In A University Setting: Case Of Quezon City University

Merly P. Dela Cruz | Aura Rose L. Cueva | Rachel L. Jungco | Sheryl P. Mostajo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Student satisfaction has become an important tool for assessing the quality of services and support provided by higher education institutions in the changing educational environment. Abstract This study examines the student satisfaction on services at Quezon City University (QCU) using inputs of four administrative offices such as Admissions & Registrar, Finance & Scholarship, Guidance & Counseling and Office of Student Affairs (OSA). By employing a comprehensive student satisfaction survey, the research uncovers the elements impacting satisfaction, pinpoints areas for actionable improvement, and recommends strategic interventions to enhance service quality. The methodology uses a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative measures (e.g., weighted mean calculations, Net Promoter Scores, or NPS) with qualitative feedback. Data were collected from students across different academic years, which facilitates comparative analysis that may be able to identify patterns of temporal changes in satisfaction. Analysis outlines strengths and challenges to service delivery Students did say they appreciated current initiatives, but also identified responsiveness, communication and staff approachability as areas for growth. Data-driven student-centered approaches, timely proactive communication followed by continuous feedback mechanisms implementation is essential. These involve ensuring people and services are more accessible digitally, that processes are not overly bureaucratic and that staff are trained in student engagement. Addressing these insights empowers QCU to better meet the diverse needs of its students, create a nurturing academic environment, and enhance its overall commitment to excellence. This research underscores the power of data-driven strategies to revolutionize the student experience, creating a more responsive and enriching experience at the university.



References:

  1. Abante, S. A., Cruz, R. R., Guevarra, D. F., Larada, M. I., Macale, M. J., Roque, M. W., Salonga, L. C., & Cabrera, S. W. (2021). A comparative analysis on the challenges of online learning modality and modular learning modality: A basis for training program. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 4(1), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijma/v4-i4-17
  2. Ali, M., Amir, H., & Ahmed, M. (2021). The role of university switching costs, perceived service quality, perceived university image and student satisfaction in shaping student loyalty. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 34(1), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2021.1975184
  3. Alhamad, N. A. M., Elnahaiesi, N. M. F. B., & Baadhem, N. A. M. S. (2024). The effect of perceived quality, student life social identification on student satisfaction with moderator role of organizational identification. Deleted Journal, 2(4), 1075–1086. https://doi.org/10.47392/irjaeh.2024.0149
  4. Altun, T., & Akyildiz, S. (2017). Investigating student teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) levels based on some variables. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(5), 467–485.
  5. Ammade, S., Mahmud, M., Jabu, B., & Tahmir, S. (2020). TPACK model based instruction in teaching writing: An analysis on TPACK literacy. International Journal of Language Education, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v4i2.12441
  6. Baldwin, G., & Johnson, A. (2019). The role of student feedback in service improvement: A case study of student satisfaction surveys in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(2), 306–319. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/herd2019.XXXX
  7. Bernard, P. (2020). Online experimentation during COVID-19 secondary school closures: Teaching methods and student perceptions. Journal of Chemical Education. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00748
  8. Bueno, D. C. (n.d.). Enhancing graduate school experience: A comprehensive evaluation of student satisfaction with services and facilities. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED630176
  9. Cahapay, M. B. (2020). Rethinking education in the new normal post-COVID-19 era: A curriculum studies perspective. Aquademia, 4(2), ep20018. https://doi.org/10.29333/aquademia/8315
  10. Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–190. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=googlescholar&id=GALE|A265869622
  11. Chai, C.-S., Koh, J. H.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 31–51.
  12. Chandra, T., Hafni, L., Chandra, S., Purwati, A. A., & Chandra, J. (2019). The influence of service quality, university image on student satisfaction and student loyalty. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(5), 1533–1549. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-07-2018-0212
  13. Cubos, B. A. C. (2018). Training teacher: Analysis of training in platforms through the TPACK model [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.
  14. Cullinane, C., & Montacute, R. (2020). COVID-19 and social mobility impact brief #1: School shutdown.
  15. Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3
  16. Fish, W. W., & Gill, P. B. (2019). Perceptions of online instruction. Online Submission, 8(1).
  17. Formplus Blog. (2020, January 23). Descriptive research designs: Types, examples & methods. https://www.formpl.us/blog/descriptive-research
  18. Gunduz, M., Naji, K. K., & Maki, O. (2023). Evaluating the performance of campus facility management through structural equation modeling based on key performance indicators. Journal of Management in Engineering, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.1061/jmenea.meeng-5641
  19. Gregory, S., Scutter, S., Jacka, L., McDonald, M., Farley, H., & Newman, C. (2019). Barriers and enablers to the use of virtual worlds in higher education: An exploration of educator perceptions, attitudes, and experiences. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 3–12.
  20. Hanaysha, J. R., Shriedeh, F. B., & In’airat, M. (2023). Impact of classroom environment, teacher competency, information and communication technology resources, and university facilities on student engagement and academic performance. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 3(2), 100188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2023.100188
  21. Hill, J. E., & Uribe-Florez, L. (2020). Understanding secondary school teachers’ TPACK and technology implementation in mathematics classrooms. International Journal of Technology in Education, 3(1), 1–13.
  22. Hoyt, J. E. (2021). Student connections: The critical role of student affairs and academic support services in retention efforts. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 25(3), 480–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025121991502

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic