SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education / 2017 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 4

Evaluating Quality of Students’ Support Services in Open Distance Learning

Asteria NSAMBA
Mpine MAKOE
Pages
91–103
Publication Date
2017-10-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The dimensions will be useful in helping distance education institutions evaluate the quality of their support services from students’ perspective; by so doing monitoring the overall performance of their services.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Evaluating the quality of students’ support services in distance education institutions is vital because by nature Open Distance Learning (ODL) is a high-involvement service industry, with multiple student support service encounters.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Most quality evaluation models tend to view quality from the institutional perspective.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The dimensions will be useful in helping distance education institutions evaluate the quality of their support services from students’ perspective; by so doing monitoring the overall performance of their services.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Open distance learning · student support · quality dimensionality

Abstract

Evaluating the quality of students’ support services in distance education institutions is vital because by nature Open Distance Learning (ODL) is a high-involvement service industry, with multiple student support service encounters. Most quality evaluation models tend to view quality from the institutional perspective. As a result, little is known about the determinants of service quality, which distance education students can use to evaluate the support services provided by their institutions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of support services from the current users of the services. It is through students’ expectations and perceptions of their experiences that we shall understand the quality of the support services needed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand distance students’ perceptions and expectations of the service received. The results of the study indicated that service quality in distance education can be measured by six dimensions namely; tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, delivery, assurance and student participation. Each dimension can be measured by a number of attributes. The dimensions will be useful in helping distance education institutions evaluate the quality of their support services from students’ perspective; by so doing monitoring the overall performance of their services.

🔖

Cite This Article

NSAMBA, A., MAKOE, M. (2017). Evaluating Quality of Students’ Support Services in Open Distance Learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 4, 91–103. https://ajindex.com/articles/139907

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Belawati, T. & Zuhairi, A. (2007). The Practice of a Quality Assurance System in Open and Distance Learning: A Case Study at Universitas Terbuka Indonesia (The Indonesia Open University). The International Review of Research in in Open and Distributed Learning, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 1-15.
  2. Bernath, U., Kleinschmidt, A., Walti, C., Zawacki, O. & Von Ossietzky, C (2003). Challenges for Study Centres in an electronic Age: A Case Study of the Centre for Distance Education at Carl von Ossiertzky University of Oldenburg in Germany. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRDOL), Vol 4, No. 1. Brooks, R. L. (2005). Measuring University Quality. Review of Higher Education, 29, No.1, pp. 1-21.
  3. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 77-101.
  4. Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: Review, Critique, Research Agenda. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp.8-32.
  5. Carman, J. M. (1990). Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality: An Assessment of the SERVQUAL Dimensions. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 33-55.
  6. Chokoe, M. (2015). Students’ and Tutors’ Perceptions of Feedback on Academic Essays in an Open and Distance Learning Context. Open Praxis, Vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 39–56. Commonwealth of Learning (COL). (2001). Quality Assurance in Dedicated ODL Institutions. http://www.col.org/RESOURCES/MICROSITEQA/Pages/ODLinstitutions.aspx (Accessed 22 February, 2013).
  7. Cronin, J.J. & Tayor, S.A.(1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 55-68.
  8. Daweti, M. (2003). Looking at the Design and Control of Learning Opportunities from the Learners’ Perspective. Progressio, Vol. 25, No 1, pp. 1-10.
  9. Fraser, W & Killen, R. (2005). The Perceptions of Students and Lecturers of Some Factors Influencing Academic Performance at two South African Universities. Perspectives in Education, Vol. 23, No. 1. Giorgi, A.P, & Giorgi, B. M (2003). The Descriptive Phenomenological Psychological Method. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley, (Eds.), Qualitative Research in Psychology, pp. 243-273.
  10. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Gronroos, C. (1982) An Applied Service Marketing Theory", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 16, Issue 7, pp. 30-41.
  11. Gronroos, C. (1984). A Service Quality Model and Its Implications. European Journal of Marketing, Vol.18, No. 4, 36-44.
  12. Higher Education Quality Committee. (2010). Audit Rep