The role of social and academic environment on student learning and satisfaction: A case study at Hanoi University

Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Tháng 11/2014

VAI TRÒ CỦA MÔI TRƯỜNG XÃ HỘI VÀ HỌC THUẬT
ĐỐI VỚI HỌC TẬP VÀ SỰ HÀI LÒNG CỦA SINH VIÊN:
MỘT NGHIÊN CỨU ĐIỂN MẪU TẠI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC HÀ NỘI
L
ơng Ng c Minh, Hoàng Gia Th
, Nguy n Th Minh Ti n, Tr n Quang Anh*
Trường Đại học Hà Nội
*

Tác giả liên hệ, e-mail:

Tóm t t: Trong giáo dục ñại học, sinh viên ñược

Abstract: In higher education, students are often

xem là khách hàng chính sử dụng dịch vụ giáo dục

viewed as the main customers who use training
services; therefore research on student satisfaction
model in higher education plays a meaningful and
important role in improving quality of training
services in Vietnam. This study aims to present a
case study of the role of social and academic
environment on student learning and satisfaction at
Hanoi University. A student satisfaction model is

của nhà trường. Nghiên cứu về sự hài lòng của sinh
viên trong môi trường giáo dục ñại học Việt Nam có
ý nghĩa quan trọng trong việc nâng cao chất lượng

dịch vụ giáo dục ñại học của Việt Nam. Bài viết này
trình bày một nghiên cứu ñiển mẫu về vai trò của
môi trường xã hội và học thuật ñối với học tập và sự
hài lòng của sinh viên tại Trường Đại học Hà Nội.
Bài viết ñưa ra một mô hình sự hài lòng của sinh
viên và ñánh giá mô hình này bằng số liệu ñiều tra
khảo sát thực tế tại Trường Đại học Hà Nội. Mô hình
này ñược áp dụng ñể phân tích những nhân tố ảnh
hưởng ñến kết quả học tập và mức ñộ hài lòng của
sinh viên, từ ñó ñưa ra một số kiến nghị nhằm nâng
cao chất lượng dịch vụ ñào tạo của nhà trường.
Thông qua phân tích kết quả khảo sát, bài báo cũng
ñã vẽ nên một bức tranh toàn cảnh về ñánh giá của
sinh viên ñối với các hoạt ñộng của Trường Đại học
Hà Nội, phân tích các ñiểm mạnh, ñiểm yếu trong hệ
thống ñào tạo của nhà trường. Đây là những thông
tin quan trọng giúp nhà trường cải tiến chất lượng
giảng dạy trong thời gian tới.
T

khóa: Sự hài lòng của sinh viên, mô hình

phương trình cấu trúc, hành vi của sinh viên, môi
trường học thuật, môi trường xã hội.

proposed and confirmed based on the survey data
and statistic from Hanoi University students. The
model was applied to identify and analyze factors
which affect the final results as well as graduates’
satisfaction. Practical recommendations are then

submitted to Hanoi University to improve student
satisfaction. A descriptive analysis of experiment
survey results has portrayed an overall picture of
student evaluation of Hanoi University’s activities,
pointing
out
the
strengths,
weaknesses,
opportunities and challenges in the training system
of the university. This is significantly important
information to support the university administrators
in upgrading and improving teaching quality in the
near future.
Keywords:

student

satisfaction,

structural

equation modeling, student behavior, academic
environment.

THE ROLE OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC ENVIRONMENT
ON STUDENT LEARNING AND SATISFACTION:
A CASE STUDY AT HANOI UNIVERSITY
1. Introduction
After a long period of highly centrally-planned

economy, Vietnam has changed to a socialistoriented market economy through a ‘doi moi’
(renewal policy) since the 1980s. The national
educational system has been starting to transform
itself in the new direction where education is to

satisfy not only government organizations'
demands but also other economic components'. In
2005, the Vietnamese Government issued a
resolution on “Innovative, fundamental and
comprehensive reform of the higher education for
the period of 2006-2020" (Resolution No. 05/NQCP dated 02 November, 2005). One of the most
important directions in the higher education
319


Ti u ban 2: Đào t o chuyên ngành b ng ngo i ng

reform plan is a shift from elite education to mass
education. Previously, the number of universities
in Vietnam was small, mainly public universities
with limited training courses. Therefore, attracting
learners or training to meet the needs of the
society has not been paid due attention to in
tertiary education in Vietnam. Currently, the
number of universities in Vietnam has increased;
and the educational programs in each university
are also varied. From 1990-2012 more than 200
new universities were established in Vietnam and
also the number of joint training programs with
foreign University has been rapidly increasing.

The competition among the universities in
improving the quality of education and attracting
students become more evident.
Investigating the role of social and academic
environment on student learning and satisfaction
is an important activity in modern higher
education. The level of student satisfaction as well
as its impact factors is always considered as
important information to the management board
for making decisions. Adee (1997) analyzed the
relationship between customer satisfaction and
perceived quality in higher education, he also
pointed out the importance of this relationship in
higher education environment. Adee proposed a
model in which student satisfaction depends on
the disconfirmation of student expectation when
they use the education service. Also, student
satisfaction has an impact on student’s decision of
re-use of this service after graduation. In his
research, Voss C et al (2005) proposed a customer
satisfaction model, in which activities of human
resource management and production process
have an impact on employee satisfaction and
service quality; at the same time, employee
satisfaction and service quality have positive
impacts on customer satisfaction. The paper
confirmed that this relationship exists in higher
education environment. Helgesen and Nesset
(2007) studied the factors which influence student
loyalty in higher education. This research

proposed a structural model which illustrates the
relationship between service quality, facilities,
320

university image, student satisfaction and student
loyalty. Alves and Raposo (2007) proposed a
student satisfaction model, in which they
emphasized there exists a relationship between
student expectation, university image, student
satisfaction and student loyalty. They also pointed
out that student loyalty has an impact on student
behavior after their graduation, such as promoting
the university or introducing the university to their
friends (words of mouth). One of the problems of
this model is that it draws too many relationships
between model’s components. This leads to the
difficulty of using this model in practice, such as
difficult to give suggestions to the university upon
this model. Lin C-P, Tsai YH (2008) analyzed
data from a private school in Taiwan and
confirmed a student loyalty model, in which
student loyalty is influenced by perceived quality
of teaching services, perceived quality of
administrative services and perceived signal of
retention. This work uses the perceived quality
made by students as the representation of the
quality of that service. This work used a procedure
of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) for data
analysis (Anderson, 1988). In this model focuses
on student loyalty; therefore, the student

satisfaction model is not mentioned in the model.
Until now, the research on the role of social
and academic environment on student learning
and satisfaction in the real environment of
Vietnam's tertiary education is still very limited.
The above satisfaction models can not be applied
directly to the Vietnam higher education
environment because the organizational structure
in Vietnam higher education is different. We need
a student satisfaction model that matches with the
organizational structure of university in Vietnam,
so that the model can be practically used in
Vietnam. This study aims to present a case study
of the role of social and academic environment on
student learning and satisfaction at Hanoi
University.
The major contributions of this paper are threefold. Firstly, it proposes a relevant student
satisfaction model with respective hypotheses.


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Then, thanks to experiment survey data from
Hanoi University students, the model is confirmed
to be appropriate. Secondly, the model was
applied to analyze factors affecting students’
academic results as well as satisfaction of
graduates. This is the basis to submit
recommendations to the University to improve
student satisfaction effectively. Thirdly, the survey

results have portrayed an overall picture about
student evaluation of Hanoi University’s activities,
revealing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
challenges in the training system of Hanoi
University. They are significantly important to
support university administrators in upgrading and
improving teaching quality in the near future.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 presents research design, including
proposed hypotheses and modeling and research
methodology. Section 3 analyzes descriptive
statistics of the factors in the proposed model.
Section 4 discusses the model confirmation
analysis. Section 5 concludes the paper and
discusses the direction for the future work.
2. Research Design
2.1. Hypotheses
Higher education is a service, in which the
university provides education services and
students who are customers take advantages from
these services. In the process of using education
services, students have the direct interaction with
teachers. Thus, the experience with teachers such
as student - teacher interaction and teaching
methodology used in classes result in student
achievements, including knowledge and skill
development. As a result, the following hypothesis
is proposed:
H1: Experience with teacher has a positive
impact on student achievement.

The education programs describe the
knowledge and skill structure that teachers want to
transfer to the students. Students take one of the
education programs at university under the
instruction of teachers. Therefore, the education
program design and structure, as well as lesson

Tháng 11/2014

plans and learning activities will affect student
achievement of knowledge and skill development.
This leads to hypothesis 2:
H2: Education program has a positive impact
on student achievement.
Beside the classroom learning hours, students
must also communicate with administrators in
university to register the course, inquire or consult
the program. Moreover, facilities including
classrooms, learning device is one of the
important elements of the higher education
environment. The facilities help teachers interact
with students more effectively. Therefore,
supportive environment such as facilities,
administration social interaction in campus
environment will affect student achievement,
resulting in hypothesis 3:
H3: Supportive environment has a positive
impact on student achievement.
Customer satisfaction is created during the
customer experience of using the products or

services. In higher education, student satisfaction
is obtained when student feel that they achieve
new knowledge and skill and personal
development during their time in the university.
Hypothesis 4 is presented below:
H4: Student achievement has a positive impact
on student satisfaction.
Customer satisfaction may lead to whether
customer will continue to use this product or
service or not. In higher education environment,
although students are one-time customers, their
satisfaction of education service maybe an
important reason that they continue to promote the
university, introduce to their relatives and friends
to study in the university or establish cooperation
between students and the university after
graduation such as providing job opportunities,
scholarships or research. So, there comes
hypothesis 5:
H5: Student satisfaction has a positive impact
on student behavior of promoting and cooperation
with the university after graduation.
321


Ti u ban 2: Đào t o chuyên ngành b ng ngo i ng

When student feel that they learn a lot during
their study in the university, they probably tend to
promote the university, introduce their relatives

and friends to study in the university or establish
cooperation between student and the university
too. So, hypothesis 6 is made:
H6: Student achievement has a positive impact
on student behavior of promoting and cooperation
with the university after graduation.
The above hypotheses are presented in the
following student satisfaction model in Figure 1:

Figure 1. Student satisfaction model

2.2. Structural Equation Modeling

Figure 2. Structural equation modeling for student satisfaction model
To test these hypotheses, this paper plans to
use the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
approach to analyze how real data fit the proposed
model. SEM is a generally statistical modeling
technique which is widely used in the science of
behavioral research. It can be seen as a
combination of factor analysis, regression and
path analysis. The SEM is considered to work
well with structural theory, which is presented by
the hidden elements (Anderson, 1988). Based on
the model, this paper designs student satisfaction
model with added observed variables in the form
of SEM as shown in Figure 2.
The factors Teacher, Program and Support are
represented by the variables ξ1, ξ2 and ξ3,
respectively. These variables are latent variables,

322

their values and the parameters λ and δ decide the
value of the observed variable X using the
following equation (1).
X = Λx ξ + δ

(1)

The factors Achievement, Satisfaction and
Behavior are represented by the variables η1, η2
and η3. These variables are also latent variables,
their values and the parameters λ and ε make the
value of the observed variable Y using the
equation (2).
Y = Λ yη + ε

(2)

Moreover, the variables ξ1, ξ2 and ξ3 are
exogenous variables, while the variables η1, η2 and
η3 are endogenous variables. The cause-effect
relationship between these exogenous variables


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Tháng 11/2014

and endogenous variables are represented by the

parameters γ and ζ, and the relationships among
endogenous variables are represented by the
parameters β and ζ. These relationships form the
following equation (3).

η = Β η + Γξ + ς

(3)

Given the observed variables X, Y measured
by a survey data, the SEM will find all the
parameters which make the equations (1), (2) and
(3) best fit the survey data.

States. Results of survey supporting administrative
and supervisor teachers are measures to evaluate
their own student participants. The first NSSE was
experimented in 1999 and there are more 1.400
universities and colleagues in Canada and the
United Stated who have accepted to take part in
since NSSE was first run in 2000 (National
Survey of Student Engagement, 2012)

The survey questionnaire list NSSE 2013 has
19 query groups related to experience and
satisfaction of student during training course in
2.3. Student Perceived Experience and university. In each questionnaire group, there are
Satisfaction Survey
about 4 to 10 multiple choice questions. Quantities
Hanoi University has conducted surveys on of answer options for each question are 4 or 7.

graduates from all teaching in English programs. After researching and considering typical features
The questionnaire has been selected from list of of specialized major in Hanoi University, 9
examining queries National Survey of Student question groups which are the most appropriate to
Engagement (NSSE). This is a testing tool to condition and environment of Hanoi University
assess participation level related to academic in are selected, covering 51 single questions.
universities, colleges in Canada and the United Description of questions is shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Groups of questions in the survey questionnaire
Type Description

# of
# of
questions answers

1

Higher Order Learning (HOL)

5

4

2

Reflective and Integrative Learning (RIL)

7

4

3

Program Design and Structure (PDS)

4

4

4

Student Faculty Interaction (SFI)

4

4

5

Effective Teaching Practice (ETP)

5

4

6

Quality of Social Interaction (QSI)

4

7

7

Supportive Environment (SEN)

9

4

8

Knowledge, Skills, Ability, and other characteristics (KSAO)
development

10

4

9

Satisfaction (SAT)

3

4

Total

3. Descriptive Analysis
3.1. Data Collection and Processing

The authors have conducted a survey on
graduate students of 6 main majors which are
instructed in English including Faculty of

51
Information
and
Technology,
Business
Administration,
Tourism
Management,
Accounting, Financial Banking and International
Studies Department in Hanoi University. 439
samples were collected. Quantity of collected
response of each major is presented in Table 2.
323


Ti u ban 2: Đào t o chuyên ngành b ng ngo i ng

Table 2. Number of collected responses of
each major/studies
No Major/ Studies

Number

1

Information and Technology

50

2

Business Administration

67

3

Financial Banking

143

4

Accounting

110

5

Tourism Management

36

6

International Studies

29

7

Unidentified Studies/ Major

Total

in other group, there are only 4 answers. To unify
outcomes of each question group, the research has
normalized value of QST queries from 1 to 7 into
1 to 4, normalization formula is as below:
QSI =

(QSI − 1) + 1

(4)

2

SPSS and LISREL statistical tools are used to
compute the descriptive statistics, variable
correlation and solving the SEM problem.
3.2. Descriptive Statistics

4

439

In Hanoi University, Financial Banking and
Accounting are the most crowded departments. In
contrast, Tourism Management and International
Studies are the least crowded faculties. In 439
collected responses, there are 94 ones which were
conducted by male and 345 ones by female. Also,
this is typical gender ratio in Hanoi University.
All collected responses are imported into Excel
file, where each column is labeled by a question.
Each row contains an answer result of a student.
Each question is notated by group of question and
its order in this group. For example, in Higher
Order Learning (HOL) group, there are 5
questions, whose notation is respectively HOL1,
HOL2, HOL3, HOL4, and HOL5.
Due to answer result of question group, Quality
of Social Interaction (QSI) has 7 values where as

To compute the descriptive statistics of all
factors in our model, the authors replaced the
values of questions in a group by the mean value
of that group. For the case of KSAO, we grouped
the 10 survey questions into smaller group
including: English (ENG), Knowledge (KNL) and
Skill (SKI), as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. The groups of questions in KSAO
Group

Questions in KSAO

English (ENG)

KSAO1, KSAO2

Knowledge
(KNL)

KSAO3, KSAO4, KSAO8,
KSAO9

Skill (SKI)

KSAO5, KSAO6, KSAO7,
KSAO10

This activity can reduce the number of factors
from 51 to 11. The author then assigned the
groups to each factor in the model. The
assignment is shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Assignment of questions to each factor
Teacher
(TCH)

Program (PRG)

Support
(SUP)

SFI, ETP

HOL, RIL, PDS

SEN, QSI

Achievement
(ACH)

Satisfaction Behavior
(SAT)
(BHV)

ENG, KNL, SKI SAT1
SAT2, SAT3
groups assigned to them. The authors calculated
Let the variables TCH, PRG, SUP, ACH, SAT
the descriptive statistics values of TCH, PRG,
and BHV respectively represent for the factors
SUP, ACH, SAT and BHV values. Collected
Teacher, Program, Support, Achievement,
outcomes are shown on Table 5.
Satisfaction and Behavior in our model. These
variables were computed as the mean of the

324


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Tháng 11/2014

Table 5. Descriptive Statistics

Mean

Maximum

Minimum

N

Std. Deviation

TCH

436

1.25

4.00

2.4666

.48576

PRG

438

1.53

4.00

2.6024

.34147

SUP

431

1.42

4.00

2.6997

.42144

ACH

427

1.50

4.00

2.9234

.42064

SAT

415

1

4

3.09

.613

BHV

417

1.00

4.00

3.3729

.64350

Valid N (listwise)

410

As can be seen, in 3 factors Teacher (TCH),

Program (PRG) and Support (SUP), students give
highest rate to Support (SUP) factor – accounting
for 2.70 whereas factor Teacher (TCH) get the
lowest rate which stands for 2.46. As a result,
developing teacher team requires more focus and
attention in the near future.
The descriptive statistics for different majors
are shown in Figure 3. From this Figure, we can

see that teachers in Tourism program are most
highly evaluated. The Business Administration
and International Studies programs get highest
scores while the Finance and Banking program get
lowest score. Students in Business Administration
and Tourism programs think that they acquire the
best knowledge. Students from International
Studies program are the most satisfied with the
program.

Figure 3. Descriptive statistics for different majors
4. Model Confirmation Analysis

4.1. Variables Correlation
SPSS Statistics tool was used to calculate

correlation between TCH, PRG, SUP, ACH, SAT
and BHV values. Collected outcomes are shown
on Table 6.

325

Ti u ban 2: Đào t o chuyên ngành b ng ngo i ng

Table 6. Correlations

Pearson Correlation
TCH

Pearson Correlation
PRG

.218**

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

436

436

431

427

415

417

.558**

1

.417**

.506**

.256**

.215**

.000

.000

.000

.000

436

438

431

427

415

417

.519**

.417**

1

.429**

.310**

.273**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

431

431

431

423

411

413

.391**

.506**

.429**

1

.435**

.437**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

427

427

423

427

415

417

.215**

.256**

.310**

.435**

1

.496**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

415

415

411

415

415

414

.218**

.215**

.273**

.437**

.496**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

N

417

417

413

417

414

Pearson Correlation
BHV

.215**

N

Pearson Correlation
SAT

.391**

.000

Pearson Correlation
ACH

.519**

Sig. (2-tailed)

Pearson Correlation
SUP

.558**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

BHV

SAT

ACH

SUP

PRG

TCH

.000

417

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
factor (0.218), PRG factor (0.215) and SUP factor
As can be seen on Table 6, there are some
(0.273). All correlation value is smaller than 0.4.
typical features: Firstly, ACH factor has big
difference with TCH, PRG, SUP, ACH, SAT and

Therefore, the correlation is the first step to
BHV factors. The correlation has the value of 0.4 state that model shown on Figure 2 is reasonable.
and more. (Correlation with TCH factors is little To be clearer on the affirmative sentence of the
smaller but it is possible to round up 0.39 into 0.4). model, the researcher will use SEM solution in the
Besides, SAT and BHV factor has big difference following sections.
between their correlations (0.496). Consequently,
4.2. Model Confirmation
H1, H2, H3, H4, H5 and H6 assumptions are
We assigned the list of observed variables (X,
initially confirmed.
Y) to the factors in the SEM for student
Secondly, SAT factor does not have direct
satisfaction model as follows: X11=SFI, X12=ETP,
correlations with TCH factor (0.215), PRG factor
X21=HOL, X22=RIL, X23=PDS, X31=SEN,
(0.256) and SUP factor (0.310). Similarly, BHV factor
X32=QSI, Y11=ENG, Y12=KNL, Y13=SKI,
also does not have direct correlations with TCH
Y21=SAT1, Y31=SAT2 and Y32=SAT3. SIMPLIS
326


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

programming language was used to present the
SEM problem in LISREL. The obtained results

Tháng 11/2014

after running SIMPLIS program on LISREL tool

is demonstrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The obtained result of SEM
In this program, the maximum number of
iterations is set up at 250; however, only 35
iterations are used to get the above outcome. This
means that student satisfaction model has quickly
converged to a positive result. Also, it proved that
student satisfaction model and hypothesis
recommended in section 2 are highly accepted.
From the resulted model in Figure 4, it can be
seen that student evaluate relationship between
teachers and students (FSI, 0.33) rather than
training method (ETP, 0.29). In term of program’s
factors HOL, RIL and PDS, student assessments
are quite the same (respectively 0.25, 0.29 and
0.27). Students evaluate facilities, administrative
procedure department (SEN, 0.37) higher than
other social interaction in university (QSI, 0.28). It
is suggested that Hanoi University should pay
more attention and effort to the improvement of
QST in the near future. In terms of behavior,

students tend to be ready for promoting Hanoi
University (SAT2, 0.61) rather than implementing
cooperation with University Administrates (SAT3,
0.46). Possibly, when students graduate, they have
not had the ideas in their mind how they will
incorporate with university in the near future yet.
Besides, students assess English level, major

knowledge and skills that they achieved are quite
equivalent. The statistics represent for respectively
0.32, 0.39 and 0.38. It has shown that outcome
result of Hanoi University student is very good.
According to relationships in Figure 4,
Achievement has a big influence on Satisfaction
(0.4835). In other words, two factors have large
correlation. Therefore, effect of Satisfaction and
Achievement elements on Behavior are quite
similar (0.3658 and 0.3266 respectively). The
main structural equation is as follow:

Achievement = 0.3152 ∗ Teacher + 0.3226 ∗ Program + 0.0977 ∗ Support

According to equation (5), contributions of
Teacher and Program to Achievement of students
are about approximately (for example, for
Achievement are 0.3152 and 0.3226). Besides,
they are significantly higher than contribution of
Support (0.09774). In other words, to increase
level of satisfaction of student efficiently, it is

(5)

necessary to invest in improving teacher
qualifications and program quality. In practice, the
cost of program development is much lower than
the cost of human resource development; therefore,
the investment on academic program is the most
efficient.

327


Ti u ban 2: Đào t o chuyên ngành b ng ngo i ng

5. Conclusion
In this study, the researcher has reviewed the
literature related to customer satisfaction model in
higher education. Based on typical features of
Hanoi University, hypotheses and student
satisfaction model were proposed. Also, the SEM
method has been implemented to confirm the
student satisfaction modeling and the hypotheses.
Experiment data including 439 samples was
collected by a survey of specialized major
students at Hanoi University in 2013-2014.
Analyzed outcomes have shown that student
satisfaction model and the recommended
hypotheses are totally accepted.
This model makes a significant contribution to
Hanoi University in explaining and clarifying the
factors that have big influence on student’s results
as well as their satisfaction to university.
According to the model, contributions of teacher
team and program quality to study outcome and
student’s satisfaction are quite equivalent and
remarkable higher than contribution of supporting
manipulation. In other words, to increase level of
satisfaction of student efficiently, it is essential to

invest in improving teacher qualifications and
program quality.
In additions, in terms of statistics, model has
shown strength, weakness in current field of
Hanoi University. Interactions between teacher
and student are evaluated more importantly than
teaching methodology of teachers. Social
interactions in university have not assessed as well
as facilities or administrative procedures
department. Students evaluate that they achieved
English qualification, specialized knowledge and
soft skills equally. It means that graduated Hanoi

328

University students are comprehensive, suitable
with standard output of program and meet social
demands.
A limitation of this paper is that the experiment
data is mainly collected from survey data of
students at Hanoi University. In the future, the
authors will expand this research to the data of the
other universities in the higher education system
in Vietnam.
REFERENCES
1. Anderson JC and Gerbing DW (1988). ‘Structural
equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach’ Psychological
Bulletin. Vol 103, No 3. pp. 411~423.
2. Adee. A. (1997). ‘Linking student satisfaction and

service quality perceptions: the case of university
education’. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 31, no
7, pp. 528~540
3. Alves H, Raposo MR (2007), Conceptual Model of
Total
Student Satisfaction in Higher Education
Quality Management 2007(18), pp. 571-588.

，

，

，

4. Helgesen O, Nesset E
(2007), Images,
Satisfaction and Antecedents: Drivers of Student
Loyalty? A Case Study of a Norwegian University
Corporate Reputation Review 2007, 10,
College
pp. 38-59.

，

，

5. Lin C-P, Tsai YH (2008), Modeling Educational
Quality and Student Loyalty: A Quantitative Approach
Based Quality and Quantity 2008 (42), pp. 397-415.

，

，

6. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2012).
Promoting Student Learning and Institutional
Improvement: Lessons from NSSE at 13. Bloomington,
IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary
Research.
7. Voss C et al, (2005) ‘Managerial choice and
performance in service management - a comparison of
private sector organizations with further education
colleges’, Journal of Operations Management 23(2),
179~195.

，