Service quality at the Medicine Faculties of Sana’a University and the University of Science and Technology [Archives:2008/1132/Education]

Dr. Ayid Sharyan and Dr. Ahmed Azzan
The purpose of this study is to investigate the quality of service provided to students of Medicine Faculties at Sana'a University (SU), which has general and parallel/private systems provided by University of Science and Technology (UST). The research instrument is a service quality questionnaire applied in previous studies and has high reliability and validity (Al-Hidabi and Okasha, 2006 & 2007). It is used to determine the strength and shortcomings in the systems prevalent in the two universities. The questionnaire is related to nine qualities (teaching material, teaching-staff, library, employee personnel, admission & registration, students' activities, mental image of the university, recruitment and infrastructure). It was administered to 360 students of Medicine Faculties: (310) at SU and UST (50) respectively. The study used descriptive and inferential statistical analyzes.

Results suggest that the students of SU and UST obtain different services. The students of both the general and parallel/private systems have the same expectations and opinions regarding the service quality offered to them by SU. The level of service quality does not vary according to type of system within the same university. There is a statistical significance (sig. 001) when the whole categories of the questionnaire are taken together; that is to say, UST offers better services. Whereas SU students are satisfied with the mental image of the university (53%) and the teaching staff (44%), the UST students are content with the admission and registration (60%) and the library (49%). Yet, students of both universities do not get enough placement opportunities. Basically, students perceived service quality offered as low and less than expected.

Research problem and questions

The significance of this study lies in its addressing every important matter, that is considered the very basis of the university, in as much as students are the primary consumers of higher education services (Hill, 1995) more than the administration and academic staff. We hope the findings of this research will draw the attention of decision makers to the weaknesses and strengths to improve the services of the university to meet the labor market. This is in congruence with Anderson (1995) and Pariseau and McDaniel (1997), who mention that students' feedback about educational services can be used in quality improvement programs to improve services and establish positive student perceptions. An important sidelight of the study is to obtain an authentic picture of quality services offered by the various Medicine faculties at SU and UST and the perception and satisfaction of the study subjects. This study attempts to answer the following questions:

1. What type of services do the Faculties of Medicine at SU present to students?

2. What type of services do the Faculties of Medicine at UST present to students?

3. What are the differences between the services presented for self-financed students in both universities?

4. What are the weak and strong aspects in the services presented for the students in both universities?

The research methodology is descriptive. A questionnaire from a study by Al-Hidabi and Okasha (2007) was administered to students of Medicine Faculties at SU and UST. The instrument has been tried, improved and used in two studies by the researchers. It has been recommended by the researchers to be used in different Arab universities. Qian (2006) used the SERVQUAL service quality gap model that was developed by Parasuraman et al. (1994) to measure graduate students' perceptions of service quality and satisfaction. Its aim was to collect opinions about the type of services to find out the weak and strong aspects. This instrument tests the quality of the lecturer and the student support systems that are the most influential factors in the provision of quality education (Hill et al.,2003). It included 59 items which were used to measure students' expectations of the level of the following nine quality services:

1. Teaching Material (6 items).

2. Teaching Staff Members (11 items).

3. Library (4 items).

4. Employee Personnel (9 items).

5. Admission & Registration (4 items).

6. Students' activities (4 items).

7. Mental Image of the University (6 items).

8. Recruitment (5 items).

9. Infrastructure (10 items).

The SQ instrument was administered to 360 students which represents a 100% response rate. This high response rate was due to the cooperation of academic staff and students who are friendly and easy to approach. The students were instructed to rate the services qualities of their respective colleges concealing their identity to ensure reliability of their responses.

The majority of service quality researchers have used similar SERVQUAL service quality model that compares differences between consumers' expectations of services and their assessment of the actual performance (Holdford and Reinders, 2001).

The study investigated the expectations of students' perceptions of service quality and their satisfaction about SU and UST services at the Faculties of Medicine. It identified the type of services the Faculties of Medicine at SU and UST present to students. It found no difference between the services presented for self-financed students or regular students at SU. SU students are satisfied with the mental image of the university (55%), teaching staff (44%), admission and registration (43%), library (39%), infrastructure (37%), employee personnel (37%), teaching materials (36%), students' activities (35%), and recruitment (28%). However, the UST students are satisfied with admission and registration (60%), library (49%), teaching staff (47%), infrastructure (46%), employee personnel (46%), teaching materials (44%), students' activities (37%), mental image of the university (36%), and recruitment (33%).

The most significant considerations for SU students comprised the mental image of the university, teaching staff and the least significant were students' activities, and recruitment. The most significant factors for UST students were admission and registration, library, and the least significant were the mental image of the university and recruitment. Students of both universities agreed that placement aspect is not given due attention. However, the results cannot be generalized to the other faculties at SU and UST since the sample (50 students) from US is not as large as in SU.
——
[archive-e:1132-v:15-y:2008-d:2008-02-25-p:education]