Uzaktan Eğitim Hizmet Kalitesinin, Tatmin, Sadakat ve Olumlu WOM Davranışı Üzerindeki Etkileri: Kavramsallaştırma Ölçek Geliştirme ve Doğrulama

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 32 - 51, 30.04.2023

Caner Özgen Hüseyin Köse

Öz

Bu araştırmanın birinci amacı Uzaktan Eğitim Hizmet Kalitesi (UEHK) Ölçeğinin kavramsal yapısının ortaya konulması, bu yönde bir ölçme aracı geliştirilmesi ve doğrulanmasıdır. Araştırmanın ikinci ana amacı UEHK, tatmin, üniversite sadakati ve olumlu WOM davranışı arasındaki nedensellik ilişkilerini yapısal bir model kapsamında test etmektir. Eskişehir Teknik Üniversitesi (ESTÜ), Spor Bilimleri Fakültesinde okuyan 181 öğrenciye kolayda örnekleme yöntemi ile ulaşılmıştır. UEHK ölçeğinin kavramsal yapısı literatür bağlamında incelenmiş ve önceki araştırmalara dayalı olarak 3 boyutlu (sistem, personel, öğrenme) 22 ifadeli yapı açıklayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ile test edilmiştir. Yapılan analizler neticesinde yeterli faktör yüküne (0,5) ulaşmayan 9 ifade araştırmadan çıkarılmıştır. Toplam 3 boyutlu ve 13 ifadeli yapıya Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ve çeşitli geçerlilik-güvenirlilik analizi uygulanarak UEHK ölçeğinin kavramsal yapısı doğrulanmıştır. Araştırmanın ikinci amacı doğrultusunda UEHK, tatmin, sadakat ve olumlu WOM davranışı arasındaki nedensellik ilişkileri YEM‟in temel metodolojik ilkeleri doğrultusunda iki aşamalı (ölçüm-yapısal) yaklaşım ile analiz edilmiştir. Ölçüm modeli kapsamında araştırma modelinin veriler ile uyumu test edilmiştir. Yapısal model kapsamında araştırmanın öngörülen modeline ilişkin oluşturulan 4 ana hipotez test edilmiştir. Buna göre UEHK‟nin tatmin ve üniversite sadakati üzerinde pozitif yönlü anlamlı etkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bunun yanı sıra üniversite sadakatinin pozitif WOM davranışını etkilediği fakat tatminin bu yapı üzerinde anlamlı etkisi olmadığı görülmüştür. Araştırma sonuçlarının teorik ve pratik çıkarımları detaylı olarak araştırma kapsamında tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uzaktan Eğitim, Hizmet Kalitesi, Üniversite Sadakati, Öğrenci Tatmini, WOM

Kaynakça

• Abdallah, I. (2007). Evaluating effectiveness of e-blackboard system using TAM framework: A structural analysis approach. AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal), 15(3), 279- 287.
• Abushamleh, H., ve Qusef, A. (2021). Students’ Satisfaction and Service Quality in Distance Education During COVID-19 Pandemic in Jordan. In 2021 Innovation and New Trends in Engineering, Science and Technology Education Conference (IETSEC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
• Al-Busaidi, K. A., ve Al-Shihi, H. (2012). Key factors to instructors‟ satisfaction of learning management systems in blended learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 24(1), 18-39.
• Allen, J., ve Davis, D. (1991). Searching for excellence in marketing education: the relationship between service quality and three outcome variables. Journal of Marketing Education, 13(1), 47-55.
• Barnes, B. J., ve Randall, J. (2012). Doctoral student satisfaction: An examination of disciplinary, enrollment, and institutional differences. Research in Higher Education, 53, 47-75.
• Bayraktaroglu, G., ve Atrek, B. (2010). Testing the Superiority and Dimensionality of SERVQLAL vs. SERVPERF in Higher Education. Quality Management Journal, 17(1), 47-59.
• Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
• Bemowski, K. (1991), “Restoring the pillars of higher education”, Quality Progress, October, pp. 37‐42.
• Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.
• Chiu, C. M., ve Wang, E. T. (2008). Understanding Web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information ve management, 45(3), 194- 201.
• Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free-if you understand it. Winter Park Public Library History and Archive Collection, 4.
• Cook, M. J. (1997). A Student's perspective of service quality in education. Total Quality Management, 8(2-3), 120-125.
• Dandis, A. O., Jarrad, A. A., Joudeh, J. M., Mukattash, I. L., ve Hassouneh, A. G. (2022). The effect of multidimensional service quality on word of mouth in university on-campus healthcare centers. The TQM Journal, 34(4), 701-727.
• DiDomenico, E., ve Bonnici, J. (1996). Assessing service quality within the educational environment. Education, 116(3), 353-360.
• Dursun, T., OskaybaĢ, K., ve Gökmen, C. (2013). The quality of service of the distance education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 1133-1151.
• Elliot, K. M., ve Healy, M. A. (2001). Key Factors Influencing Students Satisfaction Related to Recruitment and Retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10(4), 1- 12.
• ErdoğmuĢ, Ġ., ve Ergun, S. (2016). Understanding university brand loyalty: the mediating role of attitudes towards the department and university. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 141-150.
• Gök, B., ve Gökçen, H. (2021). Distance Education Service Quality in Turkey. Journal of Education in Black Sea Region, 6(2), 29-43.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., ve Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis,7.
• Hamid, F. S. ve Nick, Y. I. P. (2019). Comparing service quality in public vs private distance education institutions: evidence based on Malaysia. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 17-34.
• Harvey, L., Green, D. ve Burrows, A. (1993). Assessing quality in higher education: A transbinary research project. Assessment ve Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(2), 143-148.
• Hassanzadeh, A., Kanaani, F., ve Elahi, S. (2012). A model for measuring e-learning systems success in universities. Expert systems with Applications, 39(12), 10959-10966.
• Hill, F. M. (1995). Managing service quality in higher education: the role of the student as primary consumer. Quality assurance in education.
• Holdford, D., ve Reinders, T. P. (2001). Development of an instrument to assess student perceptions of the quality of pharmaceutical education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 65(2), 125-131.
• Janda, S. (2016). Segmenting students based on study abroad motivations, attitudes, and preferences. Journal of International Education in Business.
• Jain, R., Sangeeta, S., ve Gautam, S. (2013). Developing a scale to measure students‟ perception of service quality in the Indian context. The TQM Journal.
• Kanuka, H., ve Anderson, T. (2007). Ethical issues in qualitative e-learning research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 6(2), 20-39.
• Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing insights from A to Z: 80 concepts every manager needs to know. John Wiley ve Sons.
• Leblanc, G., ve Nguyen, N. (1997). Searching for excellence in business education: an exploratory study of customer impressions of service quality. International Journal of Educational Management.
• La Rotta, D., Usuga, O. C., ve Clavijo, V. (2020). Perceived service quality factors in online higher education. Learning Environments Research, 23(2), 251-267.
• Lee, M. C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users‟ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers ve Education, 54(2), 506-516.
• Lee, Y., Driscoll, M. P., ve Nelson, D. W. (2004). The past, present, and future of research in distance education: Results of a content analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 225-241.
• Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students‟ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers&Education, 51(2), 864-873.
• Mahapatra, S. S., ve Khan, M. S. (2007). A framework for analysing quality in education settings. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32(2), 205-217.
• Marcos, A. M. B. D. F., ve Coelho, A. F. D. M. (2022). Service quality, customer satisfaction and customer value: Holistic determinants of loyalty and word-of-mouth in services. The TQM Journal, 34(5), 957-978.
• Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users‟ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 359-374.
• Ramírez-Hurtado, J. M., Hernández-Díaz, A. G., López-Sánchez, A. D. ve Pérez-León, V. E. (2021). Measuring online teaching service quality in higher education in the COVID19 environment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5), 2403.
• Rehman, M. A., Woyo, E., Akahome, J. E., ve Sohail, M. D. (2022). The influence of course experience, satisfaction, and loyalty on students‟ word-of-mouth and re-enrolment intentions. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 32(2), 259-277.
• Owlia, M. S., ve Aspinwall, E. M. (1996). A framework for the dimensions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education.
• Schlesinger, W., Cervera-Taulet, A., ve Wymer, W. (2021). The influence of university brand image, satisfaction, and university identification on alumni WOM intentions. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 1-19.
• Shank, M. D., Walker, M., ve Hayes, T. (1996). Understanding professional service expectations: do we know what our students expect in a quality education? Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 13(1), 71-89.
• Simpson, P. M., ve Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Student evaluations of teaching: An exploratory study of the faculty response. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(3), 199-213.
• Srikanthan, G., ve Dalrymple, J. (2003). Developing alternative perspectives for quality in higher education. International Journal of Educational Management.
• Soutar, G., ve McNeil, M. (1996). Measuring service quality in a tertiary institution. Journal of Educational Administration.
• Tetteh, G. A. (2016). Effects of business school student‟s study time on the learning process. Journal of International Education in Business.
• Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., ve Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41– 50.
• Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., ve Berry, L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality, 64(1), 12-40.
• Pinar, M., Trapp, P., Girard, T., ve Boyt, T. E. (2014). University brand equity: An empirical investigation of its dimensions. International Journal of Educational Management.
• Wang, Y. S., ve Liao, Y. W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Government İnformation Quarterly, 25(4), 717-733.
• Wang, W. T., ve Wang, C. C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers&Education, 53(3), 761-774.