ii

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to examine the influence of lecturers’ human capital i.e. lecturers enthusiasm and rapport towards student satisfaction i.e. teaching- learning and mentoring services at selected Malaysian Polytechnics. Theoretical framework was derived from human capital theory, resource based view and students satisfaction theory. The model of this study was originated from performance model. The respondents comprised of 200 polytechnics students from the five clustered regions all over the country. Data were collected using structured 26 items adapted questionnaires using clustered systematic sampling method. The independent variables were the lecturers’ enthusiasm and rapport while the dependent variables were teaching and mentoring. The dimensions of enthusiasms, rapport, teaching and mentoring were determined using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) techniques. A full fledged Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis using AMOS 4 data fitting program was conducted to determine the inter-relationships among the variables. The analysis found that enthusiasm and rapport were significantly related to teaching-learning and mentoring services. But rapport was indirectly and significantly related to teaching-learning through enthusiasm. Apart from that mentoring was directly and significantly related to teaching-learning. This study provides an insight and further understanding of the impact of enthusiasm and rapport on polytechnic performances in terms of student satisfaction. It also stresses on the importance of lecturer-student relationship in rendering quality educational services. Keywords: lecturers’ human capital, lecturers’ enthusiasm, students-lecturers rapport student satisfaction, organizational performance

iii

خلاصة البحث

هدفت هذه الدراسة إلى اختبار مدى تأثير المهارات الإنسانية الدقيقة وخاصة (الرغبة والميول والعلاقة الحسنة ) منها تجاه اقتناع الطلبة في المعهد المهني الماليزي نحو عملية التعليم والتعلم،

تمد من عدة نظر�ت مثل وخدمة التوجيه التربوي المصاحب. فإن الإطار النظري للدراسة يسنظرية رأس مال الإنسان ، والنظرية المبنية على المصادر، ونظرية اقتناع الطلبة، كما أن نموذج

طالب ٢٠٠هذه الدراسة مأخوذ من نظرية نماذج الأداء. وقد تكونت عينات الدراسة من البلاد. وجمعت يدرسون في النعهد المهني الماليزي حسب خمسة تصنيفات إقليمية في أنحاء

بندا مصمما للاستبانة التي بنيت على منهج تصنيف العينات ٢٦البيا�ت من خلال المنتظمة. وقد اعتبرت ميول المعلم ورغبته واتجاهاته متغيرا مستقبلا، في حين اعتبرت عملية

ت، والعلاقات الحسنة التعلم والتوجيه المصاحب متغيرا تابعا، لذلك فإن أبعاد الميول والرغباوطريقة Principle Component Analysisوالتوجيه المصاحب يمكن تحديدها باستخدام بر�مج

Confirmatory Factor Analysis ومن أجل تحديد العلاقات المتبادلة بين المتغيرات .ن خلال ، وذلك مStructural Equation Modelingاستخدمت الدراسة نموذجا كاملا لبر�مج

ومن خلال التحليل وجد أن هناك صلة مباشرة بين رغبة Amos 4بر�مج قاعدة المطابقة وميول واتجاهات المعلم والعلاقة الجيدة مع الطلاب وعملية التعليم والتعلم وخدمة التوجيه المصاحب. ذلك ميول وعلاقة المعلم الجيدة مع الطلاب لها أثر غير مباشر على عملية التعليم

والتعلم، علاوة على ذلك فإن عملية التوجيه لها تأثير مباشر على عملية التعليم والتعلم. ولذلك فإن هذه الدراسة تبين الفهم العميق عن آثار الميول والعلاقة الحسنة على أداء طلبة

علم المعهد المهني الماليزي وإقناعهم، كما أن هذه الداسة توضح مغزى أهمية العلاقة بين الم والطالب للحصول على الجودة في الخدمة التربوية.

مصطلحات: رأس مال المعلم ، ميول المعلم ، العلاقة الحسنة بين المعلم والطالب، اقتناع الطلبة، الأداء المؤسسي

iv

APPROVAL PAGE

This dissertation of Salomawati binti Ishak has been approved by the following

________________________________________ Che Noraini bt Hashim

Supervisor

_________________________________________ Nik Suryani Nik Abd Rahman

Co-supervisor

________________________________________ Nik Ahmad Hisham Nik Ismail

Co-supervisor

________________________________________ Mohamad Sahari Nordin

Internal Examiner

________________________________________ Daisy Kee Mui Hung

External Examiner

________________________________________ Abdi Omar Shuriye

Chairman

v

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this dissertation is the results of my investigations, except where

otherwise stated. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently

submitted as a whole for any other degrees at IIUM or other institutions

Salomawati Ishak

Signature: ……………………………… Date: …………………………

vi

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA

DECLARATION OF COPYRIGHT AFFIRMATION OF FAIR USE UNPUBLISHED RESEARCH

Copyright © 2011 by Salomawati Ishak. All Rights Reserved

LECTURERS’ ENTHUSIASM, LECTURER-STUDENT RAPPORT AND STUDENT SATISFACTION AT SELECTED MALAYSIAN

POLYTECHNICS

No part of this unpublished research may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the copyright holder except as provided below:

1. Any material contained in or derived this unpublished research may only be

used by others in their writing with due acknowledgement. 2. IIUM or its library will have the right to make and transmit copies (print or

electronic) for institutional and academic purposes.

3. The IIUM library will have the right to make, store in retrieval system and supply copies of this unpublished research if requested by other universities and research libraries.

Affirmed by Salomawati bt Ishak ………………………….. ……………………. Signature Date

vii

Specially dedicated to my beloved husband Associate Professor Dr Nek Kamal

Yeop Yunus, children, son in laws and grandchild (Sumaiyah) for their continuous

support and prayers

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In the name of Allah, the Almighty, the Most Merciful and the Most Gracious, the Lord of the whole universe. If not because of Allah’s help, I could not have completed this PhD research. I thank Allah for granting me excellent health and tranquility of heart. Special gratitude goes to the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education for granting me a PhD scholarship and to UIAM for admitting me to pursue my study here. An appreciation is for the Directors of EPRD and Directors of Polytechnics of the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education for giving me permission to conduct surveys at their respective organizations. I would also like to thank many individuals around me especially my main supervisor Dr Che Noraini Hashim, who is endlessly supportive, encouraging and motivating. Besides that I would like to say a special thank to Professor Dr Mohamad Sahari Nordin, who taught me SEM and painstakingly and patiently guided me through my analysis and discussion of the thesis. Not forgetting my other lecturers, Dr Nik Suryani, Assoc. Professor Dr Nik Ahmad Hisham, Professor Dato Dr Jamil, Professor Dr Rosnani, Professor Dr Hassan Langgulung (Allahyarham), Professor Dr Sidek Baba, Professor Dr Mohamed, Professor Dr Hassan, Dr Hasoubah, Dr Johari and Dr Johdi just to name a few, thank you very much. Other than that, understanding, sympathetic and supportive friends like Sharifah Sariah, Norillah, Wan Mazwati, Noraini, Shahridah and many more that are not mentioned here are nice people I dearly appreciate who have helped me going through this challenging journey. A huge and a very special appreciation for the most important person in my life, my beloved husband, Associate Professor Dr Haji Nek Kamal. Many thanks to my beloved children: Nurfadzilah, Murnihayati, Habibullah, Zainal Mubarik, Abdussalam, Fatimah, Muhammad Amin, Ahmad Solihin, Sufiah Nabihah, Muhammad Hatimi, beloved son in laws Mohammad Shafiq, Mohd Izwan Hanif and sweetheart granddaughter Sumayya who never asked me to stop going. Lastly, a special thanks to my beloved mothers Hjh. Ramlah and Hjh Fatimah for their continuous prayers.

Thank You

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract .................................................................................................................... ii Abstract in Arabic ................................................................................................... iii Approval Page .......................................................................................................... iv Declaration ............................................................................................................... v Declaration of Copyright ......................................................................................... vi Dedication ................................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ........................................................................................................... xiii List of Figures .......................................................................................................... xv List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................... .xviii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Background of the Study ........................................................................ 1

1.2.1 The Importance of Lecturers’ Rapport and Enthusiasm in Teaching and Learning Process ............................................................ 8

1.3 Problem Statement ................................................................................. 9 1.4 Research Objectives ............................................................................... 13 1.5 Research Questions ................................................................................ 15 1.6 Hypotheses ............................................................................................. 16 1.7 Research Significance ............................................................................ 18

1.7.1 Practical Implications ................................................................... 18 1.7.2 Managerial Implications............................................................... 19 1.7.3 Theoretical Implications............................................................... 20 1.7.4 Methodological Implications ....................................................... 20

1.8 Definition of Terms ................................................................................ 22 1.8.1Competitive Advantage ................................................................. 22 1.8.2 Resource Based Theory ............................................................... 22 1.8.3 Marketing Concept ....................................................................... 22 1.8.4 Intangible capital .......................................................................... 22 1.8.5 Human Capital ............................................................................. 23 1.8.6 Human Capital Theory ................................................................. 23 1.8.7 Physical Capital ............................................................................ 23 1.8.8 Financial Capital .......................................................................... 23 1.8.9 Mentoring ..................................................................................... 23 1.8.10 Lecturers’ Enthusiasm in Teaching and Learning Process ........ 24 1.8.11 Lecturers’ Rapport ..................................................................... 24 1.8.12 Student Satisfaction Theory ....................................................... 24 1.8.13 Student Satisfaction in Teaching and Learning Process ............ 24 1.8.14 Student Satisfaction in Mentoring Services ............................... 25 1.8.15 Service Encounter ...................................................................... 25 1.8.16 Organizational Performance....................................................... 25

1.9 Organization of the Thesis ..................................................................... 25 1.10 Summary .............................................................................................. 26

x

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................... 28 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 27 2.2 An Overview of Student Satisfaction in Teaching and Learning in Malaysian Polytechnics ................................................................................ 27 2.3 An Overview of Student Satisfaction in Mentoring in Malaysian Polytechnics ................................................................................................. 28 2.4 An Overview of Human Capital in Educational Organizations ............. 29

2.4.1 Human Capital in Nation Building .............................................. 32 2.4.2 Human Capital in Malaysian Polytechnics .................................. 33

2.5 Theoretical Framework and Major Theories. ......................................... 34 2.5.1 Human Capital Theory (HCT) ..................................................... 34 2.5.2 Resource Based View (RBV) ...................................................... 36 2.5.3 The Student Satisfaction Theory .................................................. 37 2.5.4 Human Capital, Competitive Advantage (RBV) and Student Satisfaction ............................................................................................ 38

2.6 Literature Review ................................................................................... 41 2.6.1 Organizational Performance in Terms of Student Satisfaction .. 42 2.6.2 Performance Measurement and Human Performance.................. 43 2.6.3 Educational Institutions’ Performance ......................................... 44

2.7 Student Satisfaction Dimensions ............................................................ 45 2.7.1 Student Satisfaction in Mentoring ................................................ 52

2.7.1.1 Opportunity to Meet Outside Lecture Hours ........................ 55 2.7.1.2 High Quality Mentoring Sessions ........................................ 56

2.7.2 Student Satisfaction in Teaching and Learning ........................... 56 2.7.2.1 Teaching Ability ................................................................... 56 2.7.2.2 Consistency of Teaching Quality ......................................... 59 2.7.2.3 Tutorials Conducted ............................................................. 60

2.8 Lecturers’ Human Capital Dimensions .................................................. 61 2.8.1 Lecturers’ Enthusiasm .................................................................. 66

2.8.1.1 Openness to Suggestions ...................................................... 68 2.8.1.2 Listening to Students’ Opinion............................................. 68

2.8.2 Lecturers’ Rapport ....................................................................... 70 2.8.2.1 Incorporation of Islamic Perspective .................................... 71 2.8.2.2 Treating Students with Respect ............................................ 72 2.8.2.3 Giving Constructive Comments. .......................................... 73

2.9 Human Capital and Organizational Performances ................................. 74 2.9.2 Previous Performance Models ................................................... 78 2.9.3 Model of Present Study .............................................................. 83

2.10 Summary .............................................................................................. 84

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................... 86

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 86 3.2 Research Design ..................................................................................... 86 3.3 Sampling Methods ................................................................................. 86

3.3.1 Setting and Sampling Frame ...................................................... 87 3.3.2 Sample Size ................................................................................ 90

3.4 Data Collection Procedure ..................................................................... 90 3.5 Instrumentation ................................................................................... 91

xi

3.5.1 The Independent Variables (Exogenous Variables) .................... 93 3.5.2 The Dependent Variable (Endogenous Variable) ....................... 95

3.6 Pilot Study .............................................................................................. 97 3.6.1 Principle Component Analysis (Independent Variable) ............. 98

3.6.1.1 The PCA Results For Independent Variable (LHC) ........... 99 3.6.2 Principle Component Analysis (Dependent Variables) ............. 100

3.6.2.1 The PCA Results for Dependent Variable (Student Satisfaction) ................................................................................... 100

3.6.3 Summary of the Reliability of the Items ........................................... 101 3.6.3.1 Discussion ................................................................................ 101

3.7 Analytical Procedure .............................................................................. 102 3.8 Reasons For Using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) ..................... 105

3.7.1 The Units of Analysis of the Study ............................................ 106 3.7.2 Modeling Procedure ................................................................... 106 3.7.3 Model Evaluation ....................................................................... 107 3.7.4 The Goodness of Fit of the Model ............................................. 108 3.7.5 Expected Results ........................................................................ 110 3.7.6 Model Specification ................................................................... 111 3.7.7 Assumption in Structural Equation Model ................................. 111

3.8 Summary ............................................................................................. 111 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ............................................................................. 113

4.1Introduction ............................................................................................. 113 4.1.1 The Alternative Models Suggested ........................................... 114 4.1.2 Competing Model I ................................................................... 115 4.1.3 Competing Model II .................................................................. 115

4.2 Descriptive Analysis .............................................................................. 116 4.2.1 Data Screening and Descriptive Summary of the Respondents 116 4.2.2 Respondents’ Data Distributions and Reliability Estimates ..... 119

4.3 Factorial Validity of the Measurement Models ..................................... 122 4.3.1 Factors of Independent Variable - Lecturers’ Human Capital (LHC) .................................................................................................... 122

4.3.1.1 The Results for LHC Factors.............................................. 123 4.3.1.2 The Revised Two-Factor Measurement Model of LHC .... 124

4.3.2 Factors of Dependent Variable - Student Satisfaction (SS) ............. 129 4.3.2.1 The Results for SS Factors ................................................. 130 4.3.2.2 The Revised Two-Factor Measurement Model of SS ........ 131

4.4 Validity of The Full Fledged Interrelationships Among Latent Variables Model Section 3: Validity of The Full Fledged Interrelationships Among Latent Variables Model ................................................................................ 135

4.4.1 Model Specification ................................................................... 135 4.4.2 Validating the Structural Equation Modeling From The Hypothesized and Competing Models .................................................. 136 4.4.3 Hypothesized Model - Variables Interrelationships ................... 137 4.4.4 Competing Model 1 - Variables Interrelationships .................... 138 4.4.5 Competing Model 2 - Variables Interrelationships .................... 138

4.5 Results of Full Fledged SEM ................................................................. 139 4.5.1 The Hypothesized Model – Result of Full Fledged SEM ......... 139

xii

4.5.2 Competing Model I - Result of Full Fledged SEM ................... 143 4.5.3 Competing Model 2 - Result of Full Fledged SEM .................. 143

4.6 Hypothesis Testing ................................................................................. 146 4.6.1 Hypothesis 1 .............................................................................. 146 4.6.2 Hypothesis 2 .............................................................................. 148 4.6.3 Hypothesis 3 .............................................................................. 149

4.7 Summary ................................................................................................ 150 CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 151

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 151 5.2 Discussions ............................................................................................. 152

5.2.1 The Research Questions ........................................................... 152 5.3 The Direct and Indirect Effect Of Lecturers’ Good Rapport With Students (Rapport) on Student Satisfaction (SSM and SSTL) ................................ 156 5.4 The Direct Effect Of Lecturers’ Enthusiasm In Teaching (ENTHUS) on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM) ................................ 156 5.5 Implications of the Study ....................................................................... 157

5.5.1 Theoretical Implications........................................................... 157 5.5.1.1 The Nature of LHC and Student Satisfaction ...................... 157

5.5.2 Methodological Implications ................................................... 159 5.5.3 Implications to the Educational Context .................................. 159

5.6 Limitations of the Study ......................................................................... 162 5.7 Recommendations for future research ................................................... 165 5.8 Summary ................................................................................................ 167

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................. 169 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 181

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

2.1 Summary of the Underpinning Theories 44

2.2 Various Terms Used for Organizational Performance 42

2.3 Summary of Related Previous Studies of Student Learning Satisfaction (Dependent Variables)

49

2.4 Summary of Related Previous Studies on Mentoring 53

2.5 Summary of Related Previous Studies of Lecturers’ Human Capital Dimensions (Independent Variable)

63

3.1 Setting and Sampling Frame of Respondents for the Study

88

3.2 Cluster Sampling of the Malaysian Polytechnics. 89

3.3 The Breakdown of Lecturers’ Human Capital Items According to Factors Measured (Initial PCA)

94

3.4 The Breakdown of Student Learning Satisfaction Items According to Factors Measured

96

3.5 Summary of the Reliability of the Items 101

4.1 The Respondents’ (students) Demographic Factors 118

4.2 Distributions and Reliability Estimates for the Independent Variable, Lecturers Human Capital (LHC) Items (13) for Malaysian Polytechnic (N=200)

120

4.3 Distributions and Reliability Estimates for the Student Satisfaction (SSM and SSTL) items (13) for Malaysian Polytechnic Students (N=200)

121

4.4 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of the Standardized Factor Loadings, Standard Error, Critical Ratio and Squared Multiple Correlations for a Two-Factor Model of the LHC

127

4.5 Standardized Residual Covariance’s For The Items of The Final Analyses of Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling For All Sample (N=200)

128

xiv

4.6 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of The Standardized Factor Loadings, Standard Error, Critical Ratio and Squared Multiple Correlations For A Two-Factor Model of the Student Satisfaction (SSTL And SSM)

133

4.7 Standardized Residual Covariance For The Items of The Final Analyses of Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling For All Students’ Sample N=200

134

4.8 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of the Standardized Factor Loadings, Critical Ratio, Measurement Error Variances, Direct and Indirect Effects and Residuals For The Structural Model of Human Capital Impact on Organizational Performance (Hypothesized Model )

142

4.9 Comparison of the Goodness of Fit Indices 145

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 Theoretical Model of Educators’ Professional Characteristics

4

1.2 The influence of environments on student satisfaction

7

1.3 Part of Theoretical Framework of Total Performance Excellence Model.

8

1.4 The Hypothesized Model of Student Satisfaction 17

1.5 Theoretical Framework of the Present Study 21

2.1 A Theoretical Framework of Total Performance Excellence Model

79

2.2 A Further Developed Theoretical Framework of Total Performance Excellence Model by Mokhtar et al (2003).

80

2.3 Bontis’s Models of Organizational Performance. 82

2.4 Bontis’s Models Of Organizational Performance (Diamond And Simplistic Specification).

83

2.5 Present Study Model of Performance Being Developed From Previous Performance Models

84

3.1 Initial Theoretical framework of the Human Capital Impact On Organizational Performance (in terms of student satisfaction)

103

3.2 A Flow Chart of Statistical Procedures Employed in This Study

104

4.1 The Initially Hypothesized Factors of Lecturers’ Human Capital (LHC)

123

4.2 The Revised Two-Factor Model of Lecturers’ Human Capital (LHC)

125

4.3 The Initially Hypothesized Model of Underlying Factors of Student Satisfaction (SS)

130

4.4 The Revised Two-Factor Model of Student Satisfaction 131

xvi

4.5 Finally Hypothesized Model of Lecturer’ Human Capital (RAPPORT and ENTHUS) Impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM).

137

4.6 Competing Structural Model I of LHC (ENTHUS and RAPPORT) Impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM)

138

4.7 Competing structural model 2 of LHC (ENTHUS and RAPPORT) impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM)

139

4.8 Hypothesized Model of Lecturers’ Human Capital (RAPPORT and ENTHUS) Impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM)

140

4.9 Competing Model 1 of Human Capital (RAPPORT and ENTHUS) Impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL And SSM)

143

4.10 Competing Model 2 of human capital (RAPPORT and ENTHUS) Impact on Student Satisfaction (SSTL and SSM)

144

xvii

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

AGFI Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index AMOS Analysis of Moments Structures CC Customer Capital CD Compact Disc CD- ROM Compact Disc Read Only Memory CEO Chief Executive Officer CFA Confirmatory Factor Analysis CFI Comparative fit index EF Employee Focus ENTHUS Lecturers’ enthusiasm in teaching EPRD Educational Planning and Research Division HC Human Capital HCT Human Capital Theory HE Higher Education ICT Information Communication Technology IFI Incremental Fit Index IIUM International Islamic University Malaysia IPTA Institusi Pengajian Tinggi Awam ISO International Organization for Standardization KMO Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin LHC Lecturers’ Human Capital MSA Measure of Sampling Adequacy MLE Maximum Likelihood Estimation MMHEP Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education Polytechnics MP Malaysian Polytechnics NBPTS National Board for Professional Teaching Standard OP Organizational Performance PCA Principle Component Analysis POLIMAS Politeknik Sulta Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah PPD Politeknik Port Dickson PSAS Politeknik Sultan Azlan Shah PSIS Politeknik Sultan Idris Shah PUO Politeknik Ungku Omar PVE Percentage of variance explained RAPPORT Lecturers’ good rapport with students RBV Resource Base View RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation RMK-9 Ninth Malaysia Plan ROA Return on Asset ROS Return on Sale SC Structural Capital SEM Structural Equation Modeling SETE Student Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

xviii

SS Student Satisfaction SSM Student Satisfaction in Mentoring SSRM Student Satisfaction and Retention Model SSTL Student Satisfaction in Teaching and Learning TLI Tucker-Lewis Index TPEM Total Performances Excellence Model TQM Total Quality Management VRIN Valuable, Rare, In-imitable, Non-substitutable. WOM Word of Mouth

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides a general overview of the study. It consists of background of the

study, previous satisfaction models, problem statement, research objectives, research

questions, hypotheses, research significance, limitation, and delimitation of the study

followed by definition of terms and concept. Organization of the study is outlined and

finally the summary of this chapter is presented.

1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Human capital (HC) theory claims that human capital enhances performance (Becker,

1964). Human capital factors have been recognized as essential attributes of high

organizational performance. Human capital as intangible capital is even claimed to

have a greater influence on performance than tangible capital (Sofian, Mike, &

Richard, 2005). In the case of higher education (HE) institutions, lecturers’ HC or

better known as Lecturers’ Human Capital (LHC) plays an important role in

improving the HE organizations’ output. Resource based theory states that the special

qualities of an organization’s employees (LHC in this case) may help the firm to

outperform others (Barney, 1991) in its endeavor to attract customers. The LHC in

this study is in terms of the Malaysian Polytechnic lecturers’ desired characteristics

viewed from their students’ perspective.

2

Although teaching quality is difficult to define and its function is difficult to

measure, students’ experience on the service encounter can be measured through their

perception. Surprisingly, previous study found that students’ experience have more

negative encounters with teachers’ quality. Voss (2009) in his qualitative study on

students’ experience on the quality of their teachers’ behavior found that students

experienced 10 negative encounters and only one positive encounter regarding

teachers’ enthusiasm. When it comes to teachers’ rapport, in his study also, it was

found that the students experience 64 negative encounters and only 32 positive

encounters. This indicated that, the dimensions of enthusiasm and rapport was given

little attention by the service provider despite the fact that they are important qualities

expected by the students as customers.

In addition, students’ perspective is crucial in evaluating lecturers’

characteristics or uniqueness because students are considered as customers in HE

organizations (Tam, 2001; Amendola & Vitale, 2004). Besides, customer satisfaction

has been applied to higher education issues in various studies (Amyx & Brystow,

1999; Bristow, 1998; Zafiropoulos et al., 2005).

Other than that, previous studies had also shown that students’ perceptions of

education service quality is being significantly impacted by the qualities and

behaviors of lecturers (Oldfield & Baron, 2000; Pieters, Botschen, & Thelen, 1998).

Thereby, other studies highlighted the importance of human interaction between the

provider and the receiver in determining the satisfactory level of delivered service

(Chebat & Kollias, 2000). Furthermore, Bitner and Hubert (1994) claimed that the

nature of interpersonal interaction between the customer and the contact employee

often affects service satisfaction.

3

Therefore, the lecturer-student relationship must be enhanced because in the

HE context, the demand for LHC is expected to be high. Lecturers are responsible to

develop students to become professionals later on upon their graduation. Lecturers are

directly involved with the students learning activities as they are the front liners in

educational organizations. For this reason, they are expected to render excellent

services especially in teaching services to their students in order to give teaching and

learning satisfaction to them. As such, they themselves must be of high quality human

capital. In this scenario, lecturers’ quality in terms of their human capital (LHC)

appears to be relevant and is a potentially important variable for predicting student

satisfaction at HE institutions.

Thus, good teaching qualities of a lecturer, which comprises seven desired

characteristics, namely 1) subject knowledge, 2) teaching expertise, 3) updating

knowledge, 4) commitment, 5) lecturer student relationship, 6) self development,

and 7) remuneration (Krishnaveni & Anita, 2007) as in Figure 1.1 had been

examined. In this present study, the centre of attention is the lecturer-student

relationship with special focus on lecturers’ enthusiasm in teaching and rapport with

students in the endeavor to examine their impact on student teaching and learning

satisfaction.

4

Figure 1.1: Theoretical model of educators’ professional characteristics Source: Krishnaveni and Anita (2007)

Furthermore, the main goal of an organization is to satisfy its customers’ need

in order to retain their loyalty and thus maintain organizational performance.

Therefore, customer satisfaction is a vital part of the output and performance of an

organization (Mokhtar, Noreha, Fazli, Mohd Ashari, & Khairul Anuar, 2003). Hence,

student satisfaction is considered as part of the organizational performance in the HE

setting. Attention needs to be given to the quality of service rendered to the students in

order to satisfy them. Their perception regarding quality of lectures offered would

affect their satisfaction. Behaviors and attitudes of lecturers should be the primary

determinant of students’ perceptions of service quality in higher education. Knowing

more about student expectations and perceptions may enable lecturers to adapt their

attitudes and behavior to their students’ underlying expectations, which should

positively influence students’ perceived service quality and their satisfaction levels

(Harnash-Glezer & Meyer 1991; Hill, 2003; Voss, 2009). Therefore, a close

Skills Subject knowledge Teaching prowess Updating knowledge

Collegiality Commitment Teacher-Students Relationship

Concern for Self Self Development Remuneration

Ethical Code of Conduct

Professional Characteristics of an Educator

5

relationship between lecturers and students is important so as to gain rapport between

them and finally win their hearts to remain and stay loyal to the institutions.

Besides, education has long become a commodity, it is being commercialized

everywhere, and it is widely recognized as belonging to the service industry. Service

quality can lead to excellence in business education (LeBlanc & Nguyen, 1997).

Higher Education institutions are mushrooming in Malaysia and most of them

promote their products vigorously using the main mass media of the country, such as

television programs during prime time slots. They also advertise their products in

leading newspapers as well as employing huge and eye-catching bill boards in big

cities and along highways. With these strategies, they easily catch the attention of

millions of viewers in a very short time. As such, the Malaysian Polytechnics need to

do something to attract and retain students from the market by competing with their

competitors for survival.

However, many educational institutions are just beginning to realize that they

are part of the service industry and they are doing so reluctantly, often as a result of an

enrollment crisis (Wallace, 1999). Many are still not aware of the determinants of

student retention in these educational institutions and so are not prepared to change to

continuous quality improvement initiatives. Low (2000) noted that the key element in

attracting and retaining students was the provision of quality service to students on

campus. Failure to attract and satisfy students would negatively impact student

enrolment and retention at the polytechnics in particular and the educational

institutions as a whole.

Many people agree that lecturer-student relationship in the Malaysian

Polytechnics has been taken for granted due to time constraints caused by tight

schedules and heavy workloads of lecturers. Weekly minimum 16 hours of teaching,

6

preparing for teaching programs, correcting students’ assignments and guiding

students’ projects, assessing students’ academic progress, conducting non-teaching co-

curricular activities, carrying out research activities, attending courses and training,

presenting papers for seminars, writing journals and books, giving consultations to

societies, organizing programs at department and polytechnic levels, preparing and

organizing ISO documentations for auditing, collaborating with firms, and many more

other tasks for the sake of upgrading the quality of LHC, have forced the lecturers as

service providers to overlook their core business of maintaining enthusiasm and good

rapport with their clients and hence satisfying their needs.

Undoubtedly, HC factors of lecturers or their quality dimensions of behavior

and their interrelationships with their students are very crucial in determining the

success of HE students which include their satisfaction on education services that they

experience while in campus (Krishnaveni & Anita, 2007). It has also been stressed

that the lecturer-student relationship is one of the most crucial quality dimensions of

lecturers’ characteristics in discerning their student satisfaction. However, previous

studies only examined the underlying dimensions of the desired characteristics of

LHC and did not test its impact on student satisfaction in HE organizations.

Another study conducted in a non-educational setting by Pieters et al., (1998)

insisted that behavior of service employees is important in determining the customer

satisfaction while in an educational setting, similarly, the importance of lecturers’

behavior in ensuring student satisfaction was also identified by Oldfield and Baron

(2000). It was claimed that LHC has a significant impact on student perceptions of

service quality. It is therefore believed that, behavior of service provider is of utmost

importance because they have the highest contact with the customers, where human

interaction occurs during the service encounter. Furthermore, the nature of