Development of Students’ Satisfaction Scale

Main Article Content

Jamshid Ghasemi
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8973-880X

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the factors, features, and variables that might affect EFL students’ satisfaction. Despite the importance of this concept, no validated instrument was found to measure these constructs. To fill the gap, this study developed and validated a scale of EFL students’ satisfaction. A 41-item questionnaire was developed and administered to 305 EFL students (171 females and 134 males). We ran Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze the collected data and test the path model of the study. The reliability and validity of the questionnaires were estimated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The results indicated acceptable goodness of fit indices (Chi-squared=1/779, p < .001, CFI = 0.947, TLI = 0.908, RMSEA= 0.048, SRMR = 0.043, AIC =16650 and BIC =17140). The findings of the study further showed that EFL students’ satisfaction was highly sensitive to some of the subscales of the study and that under certain conditions often as the result of interplay between the components of the scale, the professional perceptions of the participants undergo severe changes. The findings of this study have implications for researchers, as well as language teachers and other practitioners in the field of education and teaching quality.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ghasemi, J. (2025). Development of Students’ Satisfaction Scale. The Journal of Quality in Education, 15(25), 55–78. https://doi.org/10.37870/joqie.v15i25.443
Section
Articles

References

Albarrak, A., Mohammed, R., Abalhassan, M. & Almutairi, N. (2013). Academic satisfaction among traditional and problem based learning medical students. A comparative study. Saudi medical journal. 34. 1179-1188.

Arubayi, D.O. (2009) Home Economics Students’ Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction with Learning Experiences in Clothing and Textiles in Tertiary Institutions, Studies on Home and Community Science, 3:2, 87-90, DOI: 10.1080/09737189.2009.11885281 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09737189.2009.11885281

Broderick, P., Frank, J., Berrena, E., Schussler, D., Kohler, K., Mitra, J., Khan, L., Levitan, J., Mahfouz, J., Shields, L. & Greenberg, M. (2018). Evaluating the Quality of Mindfulness Instruction Delivered in School Settings: Development and Validation of a Teacher Quality Observational Rating Scale. Mindfulness, 10. 10.1007/s12671-018-0944-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-0944-x

Burns, S. & Ludlow, L. (2006). Understanding Student Evaluations of Teaching Quality: The Contributions of Class Attendance. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education. 18. 127-138. 10.1007/s11092-006-9002-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-006-9002-7

Burniske, J., & Meibaum, D. L. (2012). The use of student perceptual data as a measure of teaching effectiveness. Retrieved from the Texas Comprehensive Center website. http://txcc.sedl.org/ resources/briefs/number_8/index.php

Calvo, R. A., Markauskaite, L. & Trigwell, K. (2010). Factors Affecting Students’ Experiences and Satisfaction about Teaching Quality in Engineering, Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 16:2, 139-148 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2010.11464049

Chu. F. (1990). Fuzzy Sets and Systems 37 (1990) 1-11, Southeast University, Nanjing, China DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(90)90058-E

Cleaver, S., Detrich, R., States, J. & Keyworth, R. (2020). Overview of Teacher Professional Development (Inservice). Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/quality-teachers-in-service.

Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (2002). Variation in teacher preparation: How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach?. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(4), 286-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053004002

Djigic, G., Stojiljković, S. & Dosković, M. (2014). Basic Personality Dimensions and Teachers’ Self-efficacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112. 593-602. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1206

Ferguson, R. F., & Danielson, C. (2014). How framework for teaching and Tripod 7Cs evidence distinguish key components of effective teaching. In T. J. Kane, K. A. Kerr, & R. C. Pianta (Eds.), Designing teacher evaluation systems (pp. 98–143). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119210856.ch4

Dunrong, B. & Fan, M. (2009). On Student Evaluation of Teaching and Improvement of the Teaching Quality Assurance System at Higher Education Institutions. Chinese Education & Society. 42. 100-115. 10.2753/CED1061-1932420212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2753/CED1061-1932420212

Duque, L. C. (2014) A framework for analysing higher education performance: students' satisfaction, perceived learning outcomes, and dropout intentions, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25:1-2, 1-21, DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2013.807677 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2013.807677

Fouskakis, D., Petrakos, D. & Vavouras, I. (2015). A Bayesian hierarchical model for comparative evaluation of teaching quality indicators in higher education, Journal of Applied Statistics, DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2015.1054793 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2015.1054793

Gaertner, H., & Brunner, M. (2018). Once good teaching, always good teaching? The differential stability of student perceptions of teaching quality. Educ Asse Eval Acc 30, 159–182 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9277-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9277-5

Ghasemi, J. (2022). Development and validation of an EFL teacher teaching quality scale. International Journal of Quality in Education, 7 (1), 1-23. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ijqe/issue/73703/1214976

Grace, G. G., Massay, L. & Udoka, S. J. (1998). Total quality systems: using a multidisciplinary preparation course for teaching quality improvement. Comput. Ind. Eng. 35, 1–2 (Oct., 1998), 249–253. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(98)00076-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(98)00076-X

Guolla, M. (1999). Assessing the Teaching Quality to Student Satisfaction Relationship: Applied Customer Satisfaction Research in the Classroom, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7:3, 87-97, DOI: 10.1080/10696679.1999.11501843 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.1999.11501843

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structureanalysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural EquatModeling, 6, 1e55 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Johnson, N. & Chen, J. (2006). Medical student evaluation of teaching quality between obstetrics and gynecology residents and faculty as clinical preceptors in ambulatory gynecology. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 195. 1479-83. 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.05.038. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.05.038

Kilgour, J. M., Grundy, L. & Monrouxe, L.V. (2016). A Rapid Review of the Factors Affecting Healthcare Students' Satisfaction with Small Group, Active Learning Methods, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 28:1, 15-25, DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2015.1107484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2015.1107484

Kim, H., Lee, S. & Yuan, J. (2012). Assessing College Students' Satisfaction with University Foodservice. Journal of Foodservice Business Research. 15. 39-48. 10.1080/15378020.2011.624048. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2011.624048

Martínez-Caro, E. & Bolarín, F. (2011). Factors affecting students’ satisfaction in engineering disciplines: traditional vs. blended approaches. European Journal of Engineering Education. 36. 473-483. 10.1080/03043797.2011.619647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2011.619647

MET Project. (2012). Asking students about teaching: student perception surveys and their implementation. Seattle: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610

Ren, W. (2009). Reinforcement on Teachers’ Morality Construction --- An Eternal Subject in Educational Development. Asian Culture and History, 1. 10.5539/achv1n2p180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ach.v1n2p180

Roman, I. (2014). Qualitative Methods for Determining Students’ Satisfaction with Teaching Quality. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 149 (2014) 825 – 830 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.320

Smimou, K. & Dahl, D. (2011). On the Relationship Between Students’ Perceptions of Teaching Quality, Methods of Assessment, and Satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business. 87. 10.1080/08832323.2010.550339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2010.550339

Spooren, P., Mortelmans, D. & Denekens, J. (2007). Student evaluation of teaching quality in higher education: development of an instrument based on 10 Likert‐scales, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32:6, 667-679, DOI: 10.1080/02602930601117191 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930601117191

Üstünlüoğlu, E. (2016). Teaching quality matters in higher education: a case study from Turkey and Slovakia, Teachers and Teaching

Webster, R. J., Chan, W. S., Prosser, M. T., & Watkins, D. (2009). Undergraduates’ learning experience and learning process: Quantitative evidence from the East. Higher Education, 58(3), 375–386. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9200-6

Xiao, J. & Wilkins, S. (2015). The effects of lecturer commitment on student perceptions of teaching quality and student satisfaction in Chinese higher education, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37:1, 98-110, DOI: 10.1080/1360080X.2014.992092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2014.992092

Yin, H., Wang, W. & Han, J. (2015). Chinese undergraduates’ perceptions of teaching quality and the effects on approaches to studying and course satisfaction. Higher Education. 71. 39-57. 10.1007/s10734-015-9887-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9887-5

Zineldin, M., Akdag, H. & Vasicheva, V. (2011). Assessing quality in higher education: new criteria for evaluating students’ satisfaction, Quality in Higher Education, 17:2, 231-243 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2011.582796