ACOMPARATIVEANALYSISOFINTERNATIONALEDUCATION SATISFACTION USING SERVQUALUniversity education, the world over, has undergone significant transformationand reform with respect to higher education systems meeting the growing role ofinformation and communication revolution, and the demand for knowledge, whichrepresentthenewchallengesofglobalisation.Thesechallengesareseenasthreats as well as opportunities for higher education systems around the world.The driving force of globalisation is competition and the international educationmarket has become fiercely competitive with different marketing strategies beingimplemented by educational institutions to attract the growing number of studentsseeking higher education. The objective of this paper is to examine the relationshipbetweentheSERVQUALconstructsproposedbyParasuramanetal(1988&1985) and the country of origin and satisfaction among four cohorts of Asianinternational postgraduate students studying in Australian universities. Countryof origin is recognized as an important predictor of satisfaction and choice inthe international education environment. The data used in this study is derivedfrom a mail survey conducted among international postgraduate students fromChina, India, Indonesia and Thailand studying in five universities in Victoria,Australia. An adapted version of the SERVQUAL instrument was used to collectthedataandwasdesignedtomeasurethegapbetweenstudentresponsesonexpectations and perceptions of the university as a study destination on a sevenpoint bi-polar scale. The responses were sought on 36 statements representingaspectsoftheoperationsandservicesoftheuniversityunderdesired(ideal)expectationsofchoiceandpost-choiceperceptions.ScalesweredevelopedtoinvestigatetherelationshipbetweentheSERVQUALconstructsofreliability,responsiveness, assurance, empathy and tangibles and the country of origin andwere shown to be reliable. Using ANOVA and MANOVA techniques, the studyfoundsignificantdifferencesbetweencountryoforiginandtheSERVQUALconstructsanddiscussesstrategicimplicationsandopportunitiesforhighereducational institutions.RodneyArambewela JohnHallINTRODUCTIONUniversityeducation,theworldover,hasundergonesignificanttransformationandreformwithrespecttohighereducationsystemsmeetingthegrowingroleofinformationandcommunicationrevolution,andthedemandforknowledge,whichJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006) 2006 by Institute for International Management and Technology. All Rights Reserved.142A Comparative AnalysisJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)representthenewchallengesofglobalisation(Salmi,2001;Marginson,1998).Thesechallengesareseenasthreatsaswellasopportunitiesforhighereducationsystemsaroundtheworld.Drucker(1997)hasboldlypredictedthedemiseoftraditionaluniversitieswiththegrowthofopenandonlineuniversities.Theextenttowhichthesenewlearninginstitutionswouldimpactoncampusbasedteachingandlearningisyettobeseen.Thischallenge,however,hasproducedsignificantchangesinthewaythathighereducationalinstitutionsoperate.Thesechangesincludetheemergenceofnewtypesofinstitutions, patterns of financing and governance, curriculum reforms,andtechnologicalinnovations(Salmi,2001).Thedrivingforceofglobalisationiscompetitionandtheinternationaleducationmarkethasbecomefiercelycompetitivewithdifferentmarketingstrategiesbeingimplementedbyeducationalinstitutionstoattractthegrowingnumberofstudentsseekinghighereducation.AstudybyInternationalDevelopmentPrograms(IDP)Australiaestimatesthattheglobaldemandforinternationalhighereducationwillgrowfourfoldtoapproximately7.2millionstudents,by2025,representinga5.8%compoundgrowthratebetween2000-2025.Accordingtothisstudy,themajorgrowthwillcomefromtheAsiaPacific,accountingforacompoundgrowthrateof7.8%andover 70% of the world demand. As regional blocks within Asia Pacific,SouthAsiaandEastAsiaareexpectedtorecordthehighestgrowthratesof8.6%and8.4%respectivelyduringthisperiodwithChinaandIndiaemergingastwomajorsourcesofinternationalstudents(see Table 1). It is also predicted that a significant increase in foreignstudentenrolmentsfromnewsourcesoforiginsuchasTurkey,Morocco and Iran will contribute to expand the international educationmarketnotonlyintermsofabsolutenumbersbutalsointermsofstudent diversity. In comparison, the demand from traditional countrieslikeEuropeandtheUSAisexpectedtoslowdownovertheyears(Bohm et al, 2002).143Arambewela, HallJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)Table 1: Global Demand for International Higher Education (000)Region200020052010201520202025Growth (%)* Asia 759114117612534359850047.8 East Asia45369810591565231933898.4 South East Asia1481852653564675865.7 South Asia1101913495016768698.6 Central Asia4867881121361615.0 Africa1692192833624645614.9 Sub-Sahara991271682222953715.4 North Africa69921151401681894.1 Middle East1131431822292863274.3 America1461671942252602872.7 Europe5686367198048799632.1 Oceania89101213132.0 World1763231631494165550071555.8 (*RepresentsAnnualCompoundGrowthRate2000-2025)Source:Bohm,Davis,Meares&Pearce(2002),IDPAustralia.Fromaglobalperspective,Australiaisasmallplayerwitharound9%shareoftheinternationalstudentmarketwhereUSAandUKdominatewithnearly80%market.However,thegrowthoftheinternationaleducationmarketforAustraliahasbeensignificantsince1986,theyearinwhichtheFederalGovernmentopenedAustraliaseducationsystemtofull-feepayingoverseasstudents.Forexampleduring1998and1999,theoverallgrowthwasover15%comparedto2%inUSA,2.6% in the UK, 8% in Canada and 8.2% in New Zealand (AEI, 2000).Exportofeducationalservices,therefore,isnotonlyagrowingexportindustryforAustraliabutalsoahighlypotentialsourceofrevenueforthecountryseconomy.ThelatestestimatehasvaluedtheAustralianeducationexportsat$5.7billionperannumrepresentinganincreaseofapproximately18%over2002(Nelson,2004).StudieshaverevealedthatapartfromthepecuniarybenefitstherearenonpecuniarybenefitsflowingfromtheindustryincludingeconomicandsocialimpactsontheAustralianeconomy(ArambewelaandZuhair,2002,Dixonetal(1998),Peter,1997,MacKayandLewis(1995).Anotheraspectofthemarketexpansionisthesignificantgrowthinthepost-graduatesector,thoughtheundergraduateprogramsstilldominate.Currentlyinternationalpostgraduatestudentsaccountfor25%ofallforeignstudentsinhighereducationandthenumbersareexpectedtogrowsignificantlywiththegrowthindemandincountriessuch as China and India (Bohm et al, 2002: AEI, 2000).144A Comparative AnalysisJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006) Driven by the attractiveness of the international education market interms of pecuniary and non pecuniary benefits to the respective institutionsand the country, higher educational institutions, like many other organisationsare concerned with market share, productivity, return on investment andthe quality of services offered to their customers (LeBlanc & Nha, 1997).Servicequality,inthiscontext,isacknowledgedasakeyperformancemeasureforexcellenceineducationandamajorstrategicvariableforuniversities as service providers to increase market share (Donaldson andRunciman, 1995), with enduring effects on the institution and the studentsit serves. Student satisfaction is the barometer of service quality in educationand it has attracted greater attention of the higher educational institutionsin their pursuit of competitive advantage. The challenge for the institutionswould be to understand and to address the key sources of student satisfactionin their service delivery initiatives.By addressing relevant service qualityelements important to international students universities are able to improvestudent satisfaction, a key factor contributing to benefits such as studentretention,positivewordofmouthcommunication,andcompetitiveadvantage (Townley, 2001; McDougall and Levesque, 2000; Guolla, 1999).The objective of this paper is to examine the relationship between theSERVQUAL constructs proposed by Parasuraman et al (1988,1985, 1991,and 1994) and the country of origin and satisfaction among four cohorts ofAsianinternationalpostgraduatestudentsfromChina,India,IndonesiaandThailandstudyinginAustralianuniversities.Countryoforiginisrecognizedasanimportantpredictorofsatisfactionandchoiceintheinternational education environment. The impact of country of origin hasbeen documented in many studies (IDP,1995; Blight, 1995; Duan, 1997;Lawley, 1998).Thestudentgroupsselectedforthisstudyarefromcountriesthatrepresent 61% of all Asian postgraduate students studying in Australia andhave shown a potential for further growth (Bohm et al, 2002, AEI, 2000).ThetheoreticalfoundationisdrawnfromOlivers(1980,1996)expectancy-disconfirmation Paradigm and the SERVQUAL expectations-perceptionsmeasurementapproach(Parasuramanetal,1988,1991and1994),andthepaperanalysestherelativesatisfactionamongdifferentstudent groups. The analysis examines the relationship between the keyservice quality constructs and student satisfaction scores to establish theimportance of these constructs in explaining students satisfaction.145Arambewela, HallJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)Theanalysisisalsobasedontheservice-recipientparadigmwhichacknowledges the principle that education is a service that is experiencedby students and other stakeholders of educational institutions who formjudgments about service delivery performance in terms of its quality, andconsistency, which are basic properties of a service. It supports the notionthatstudentsastherecipientsorcustomersoftheservicewouldexpecteducational institutions to satisfy their needs (Havarnek and Brodwin, 1998).This paper considers both paradigms to be complementary to each other inexpressing the need for universities to be highly student focused in theirservice delivery.LITERATUREREVIEWInthecurrentcontextofservicesmarketing,customersatisfactionisconsideredasamajoroutcomeofmarketingactivityandservestolinkprocesses, culminating in purchase and consumption with post-purchasephenomena such as attitudinal change, customer retention, repeat purchase,brandloyalty,positiveword-of-mouthcommunication(WOM)andcomplaining behaviour (Harvis et al, 2000; Athiyaman, 2000; Guolla, 1999;Churchill and Suprenant, 1982). A logical extension of the study of servicesmarketing is the evaluation of service quality and its impact on the exchangeof services.The expectancy-disconfirmation model or its variants remain one ofthe most widely discussed and tested approaches in measuring customersatisfaction (Arambewela, 2003; Bolton et al,1999; Spreng et al, 1996;Oliver 1996; Parasuraman et al, 1994 and 1985; Tse et al, 1990; Oliver,1980). The model suggests that customer satisfaction is related to the sizeand direction of disconfirmation, which is defined as the difference betweenanindividualspre-purchase(pre-choice)expectations(orsomeothercomparison standard) and post-purchase (post-choice) performance of theproduct as perceived by the customer (Tse et al, 1990).The measurement of service quality has attracted a significant interestamong marketing practitioners and researches over the past two decades(Furrer,etal,2000).Intheirpioneeringstudyonservicequality,Parasuraman et al (1985) developed the instrument SERVQUAL to measureservicequality.Theconstructofservicequalityisdefinedintermsofperceivedquality-acustomersjudgementabouttheentitysoverallexcellenceorsuperiority-anattitudethatcomesfromacomparisonofexpectations and perceived performance (Llosa et al, 1998).146A Comparative AnalysisJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)Since its introduction, SERVQUAL has been widely acclaimed as amajor contribution to academic and particularly marketing research literature(Furrer et al, 2000). SERVQUAL was originally used to assess customerperceptionsofservicequalityinserviceandretailingorganisations(Parasuramanetal,1988).Itwaspresentedasasyntheticscalewithacorrect level of reliability and validity useful in many service situations.SERVQUALiscomprisedoftwomatchedscalesof22items,eachdescribing expectations for a particular service category and then perceptionsofaparticularserviceprovider(BeardenandNetemeyer,1999).Theexpectations are not viewed as predictions (what is likely to happen), butas desires or wants of consumers (what should happen).Both sets of itemsare operationalised using a 7-point bi-polar scale labelled, Strongly Agree(7) to Strongly Disagree (1). Nearly half of the items are worded negativelywith negative wording indicated by (-). The scale produced scores, for thetotal scale and each factor, ranging between minus 6 and plus 7, where thepositive scores are reflected as perceptions exceeding expectations. Thequality of service is assessed through this SERVQUAL score, called thegap score computed by taking the difference for 1 to 7 scales and thenaveragedoverthenumberofitemseitherinthetotalscaleorforeachsubscale (Bearden and Netemeyer, 1999). According to the authors, theservice quality is then the difference between customers perceptions andexpectations (P-E) and is given by the following equation.= =22) (221l iEi Pi QWhere:Q=PerceivedservicequalityPi = Performance level perceived on attribute i for the delivered service,andEi = Expected performance level on attribute i for the service generally. 22represent the number of questions used.Parasuraman et al (1988, 1991 and 1994) identified five dimensions ofservice quality. They are tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assuranceandempathy.Tangibilityreferstotheappearanceofphysicalfacilities,equipment, personnel, and communication materials; reliability to the abilityto perform the promised service accurately and dependably; responsiveness147Arambewela, HallJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)to willingness to assist customers and provide prompt service; assuranceto the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to conveytrust and confidence; and empathy to the caring; and individualised attentiongiven to customers. The authors assert that the SERVQUAL dimensionscanbeadaptedtodifferentservicesettings,dependingonthenatureofinquiry. The practical application of the measurement approach has beenidentified as one of the major strengths of SERVQUAL over other measures.The other strengths of SERVQUAL have been identified as:l the reliability and validity of the scale in comparing customers expec-tations and perceptions over time;l the ability to compare own SERVQUAL scores against competitors;l the relative importance of the five dimensions in influencing servicequalityperceptions;l thepotentialuseofmeasureinsegmentingcustomersintoseveralperceivedqualitysegments(eg.High,MediumandLow,andtheability to analyse on the basis of (a) demographic (b) psychographic,and(c)otherprofiles;andl thepracticalimplicationsforcompaniestoimprovetheglobalperception of its service quality (Furrer et al, 2000; Llosa et al, 1998).ThegrowingpopularityoftheSERVQUALinstrumentamongmarketingpractitionersandresearchersisseenbythediversityofitsapplicationinresearchpursuitsrangingfromcompetitoranalysis,segmentation,tocustomerprofilingandcoveringtheservices,andmanufacturingindustries(Furreretal,2000).Themajorapplications,however,wereintheserviceindustry.Table2showstheleadingresearchusingtheSERVQUALinstrument,andtheareasofitsapplication.148A Comparative AnalysisJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)Table 2: Major Applications of SERVQUALAreas of applicationAuthors BankingLassar et al, 2000; Marshall and Smith, 1999; Angur et al, 1999 Brokerage servicesLin and Wei, 1999 Building maintenanceSiu et al, 2001 Higher educationEngellandetal2001and2000;Commetal,2000; HoustonandRees1999;KwanandNg,1999; Hampton, 1993; Davis and Allen, 1990. Information servicesJiang et al, 2000; Van, D. et al, 1999; Kettinger and Lee, 1999 Local authority servicesWisniewski, 2001; McFadyen et al, 2001; Donnelly and Shiu, 1999). Market researchDonnely et al, 2000 Medicalandhealthcare services Dean,1999;Curryetal,1999;Llosaetal,1998; OConnor and Bowers, 1990. Restaurant serviceHeung et al, 2000 RetailingMetha et al, 2000a, 2000b ShippingDurvasula et al, 1999 Travel servicesKayanama and Black, 2000 Despiteitspopularity,SERVQUALiscriticisedonitsoperationalandmeasurementproblems.TheseincludetheuseofP-Edifferencescoreas a measurement of perceived quality as opposed to performance basedmeasure(CroninandTaylor,1994;Carman,1990),thetypeofexpectationseg.desiredoradequate,whichwouldprovidedifferentsatisfactionresponses(SwanandTranwick,1981),thelinkbetweensatisfactionandservicequality(CroninandTaylor,1994;Teas,1993)andthenumberandnatureofthedimensionsbeinginappropriateforsomeserviceindustriessuchasproductservicesandpureservices(Llosa et al, 1998).However, Parasuraman et al, in 1994, responded to these criticisms byintroducing some adjustments to the scale and its operation. On the issueof a performance based measure in preference to the disconfirmation basedmeasure, argued that although the practice of measuring only perceptionstodetermineservicequalityiswidespread,suchapracticedoesnotnecessarily support the superiority of a performance based measure. Thisis because measurements that incorporate customer expectations providericher information and have more diagnostic value. Conceding that there isconfusionwithregardtothecausalrelationshipbetweencustomer149Arambewela, HallJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)satisfaction and service quality, Parasuraman et al (1994), acknowledgethat recent research evidence support the view that service quality is anantecedentofcustomersatisfaction.Further,inregardtothistypeofcomparisonstandardformeasuringservicequality,itisarguedthattheissue of comparison norms and their interpretation still remains unresolvedand is being examined by many researchers.The instrument used in the present study is an adaptation of SERVQUALwith refinements addressing the criticisms in the literature.While the growing interest in student satisfaction research by highereducationalinstitutionshavecontributedpositivelytosatisfactionresearch in services, the work on post-choice satisfaction in internationaleducationandparticularlyoninternationalpostgraduatestudentsislimited.(Arambewela,2003,Townley,2001,Geall,2000)Mostofthepaststudieshavefocusedonundergraduatestudentsorindividualprograms (DETYA 2000, and 1999; Kwan and NG,1999; Tomovick et al,1996; Halstead et al, 1994, and Burke 1986). The research on postgraduatestudents is also narrow in scope confined to specific issues and providingverylittleinsightintocomparativeanalysisofthepost-choicedecisionmakingbehaviourofstudentsfromdifferentcountriesoforigin(Arambewela,2003).Anotherreasonforfocusingontheoverseaspostgraduatestudentsisthecontinuousgrowthinenrolmentofinternationalstudentsintopostgraduateprogramsascomparedtodomesticstudents(Arambewela,2003,AEI,2000).METHODOLOGYThe data used in this study is derived from a mail survey conducted amonginternational postgraduate students from China, India, Indonesia and ThailandstudyinginfiveuniversitiesinVictoria.AnadaptedversionoftheSERVQUAL instrument was used to collect the data and was designed tomeasure the gap between student responses on expectations and perceptionsof the university as a study destination on a seven point bi-polar scale. Theresponses were sought on 36 statements representing aspects of the operationsand services of the university under desired (ideal) expectations of choiceandpost-choiceperceptions.Thedesiredexpectationsareconsideredtohave a better explanatory power than the predictive expectations used bymany researchers (Spreng et al, 1996).The variables associated with thesestatementswereconstructedwithinputfrompreviousstudiesandfocus150A Comparative AnalysisJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)group interviews. The methods adopted to determine the importance of thecountry of origin, were means score analysis, MANOVA andANOVA.The sampling was aimed at reaching every international postgraduatestudent belonging to the four nationality groups in the universities surveyed.The questionnaires were administered through the International offices ofthe respective universities and mailed out to students using their own studentdatabases. Of the 573 useable responses received, the sample for this studywas reduced to an approximate uniform sample size from each country andeach university, employing a systematic random sampling approach, whichproduced 371 respondents. This was to ensure equality of variance acrossthestudentgroupsforthesamevariablesandreliabilityandvalidityofpredictions (Hair et al, 1995).Thevariablesusedintheinstrumentweretestedforinter-itemreliabilityandconsistencyofthequestionnaireusingCronbachalpha.ANOVA is a statistical technique used to determine, on the basis ofonedependentmeasure,whethersamplesarefrompopulationswithequal means (Hair et al. 1995). It is used to assess group differences ona single metric dependent variable. In this study, ANOVA was employedtoestimatethevariancebetweenthedependentvariable,behavioraloutcomeandtheindependentgroupsofvariablesthatmakeupeachoftheMONOVAconstructs.FourANOVAmodelswereusedintheanalysis,asgivenbelow.Model1:Satisfaction=f(Reliability)Model2:Satisfaction=f(Responsiveness).Model3:Satisfaction=f(Assurance)Model4:Satisfaction=f(Empathy)Model5:Satisfaction=f(Tangibles)The models test the differences in satisfaction relating to the specificvariables that make up different SERVQUAL constructs. Table 3 showsthefiveconstructsandtheassociatedvariables.MANOVAMANOVA is used to assess the group differences across multiple metricdependant variables simultaneously. In this case each of the SERVQUALconstructswastestedseparatelywithregardtocountryoforigin.151Arambewela, HallJournal of Services Research, Volume 6,Special Issue (July, 2006)RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONAsshowninTable3below,allSERVQUALvariablesandconstructsshowed very high reliability with co-efficients greater than 0.8. The overallsignificance of the correlation matrix was significant with a p-value of