Students’ Involvement in University Administration:

The Role of students’ Satisfaction Survey.

By: Paul Kwadwo Addo

Solomon Panford

SEMINAR FOR SENIOR MEMBERS IN REGISTRAR’S OFFICES

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

• Introduction• Objectives• Methodology• Results• Conclusions• Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

• According to Howard (2010), surveys of citizens’ satisfaction with public services have become popular in recent decades.

• There is a growing emphasis on ensuring that public services reflect the needs and preferences of citizens, rather than internal priorities of administration.

INTRODUCTION

• Service charters which are used in modern strategic management of public in institutions are also becoming popular.

• Torres (2006) postulate that, the basic concept of the service charter deals with drawing up a quality-assurance strategy that offers a type of consumer guarantee in order to make providers more responsible to consumers through consultations and more accountable to government and the community through performance monitoring.

INTRODUCTION

• Quality is a University acknowledged factor in its service delivery. It is also something that everybody pays attention to in any transaction of goods and services.

• the Quality Assurance and Planning Units and the University Relations Office embarked upon this survey to get inputs from students as a major stakeholders with regards to the level of satisfaction, they have derived from attending this university.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this survey are to:• Get feedback from students as major stakeholders

with regards to Quality Assurance for improvement,• Enable the University Relation Office to identify

potential threats with regards to student satisfaction and develop appropriate strategies to re-brand the university,

• Ensure that students are involved in the quality assurance process,

• Make appropriate recommendation(s) based on the finding(s) for management.

METHODOLOGY

Sample and Sampling Techniques• 200 final year students from eight departments

from the College of Science.• Twenty five (25) students were selected from

each department. • Out of the 200 questionnaires administered,

178 were returned.

METHODOLOGY

Survey Design and Instruments• The Survey Instrument was a questionnaire.• Most of the items of the questionnaire were

close-ended to give the final year students the opportunity to answer it with ease

METHODOLOGY

Validation and Reliability of Instruments• The questionnaire was content validated by an

experienced researcher (Registrar) and colleagues.

• Their suggestions were incorporated into the final questionnaire.

• To ensure reliability of the questionnaire, the test-retest technique was used.

METHODOLOGY

Analysis of Data• The data was analyzed by the Information

Communication Technology (ICT) department of KNUST. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 16) software was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Findings from the survey are presented as follows:• Gender

The gender of the respondents is presented below:

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Gender:

Gender of Respondents.

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Male 117 65.7 65.7 65.7

Female 61 34.3 34.3 100.0

Total 178 100.0 100.0

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Students involvement in Governance:

Service delivery All the time

(%)

Some

time (%)

In some cases

(%)

Never at all

(%)students attended to properly at College/Department offices

24.2(43) 48.9(87) 21.9(39) 5.1(9)

Students always received the information they want

24.2(43) 37.1(66) 32.0(57) 4.5(8)

College/Department decisions/policies communicated to students on time.

13.5(24) 44.9(80) 30.9(55) 8.4(15)

Concerns about policies and decisions addressed properly.

5.1(9) 32.0(57) 41.6(74) 18.5(33)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Rating of the officers at the various offices of the College/Department :

Attributes Excellent

(%)

Very Good

(%)

Good (%) Needs

improvement

(%)

Professionalism 10.1(18) 42.7(76) 30.3(54) 15.2(27)

Responsiveness 3.9(7) 30.9(55) 41.6(74) 21.3(38)

Reliability 5.1(9) 23.6(42) 51.7(92) 16.9(30)

Empathy 5.6(10) 23.6(42) 42.7(76) 24.2(43)

Resourcefulness 8.4(15) 28.1(50) 36..5(65) 23.6(42)

Duty consciousness 10.1(18) 29.8(53) 41.6(74) 15.7(28)

Friendliness

12.4(22) 36.5(65) 32.0(57) 17.4(31)

Time-

consciousness

5.6(10) 22.5(40) 41.0(73) 29.2(52)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Satisfaction from Teaching and Learning process:Attribute}

Very

satisfied

(%)

Satisfied (%) Not satisfied

(%)

Undecided (%)

Knowledge received.18.0(32) 59.6(106) 18.0(32) 4.5(8)

The type of tuition that made students decide to offer their programme

12.9(23) 55.1(98) 24.2(43) 6.2(11)

Adequate lecturers for all courses 14.0(25) 48.9(87) 34.3(61) 2.2(4)

The teaching materials that were made available for learning

4.5(8) 37.6(67) 51.7(92) 6.2(11)

Learning environment (lecture rooms and facilities) 10.1(18) 34.3(61) 51.7(92) 3.9(7)

The mode of delivery of your lectures(Teaching methods) 8.4((15) 60.1(107) 26.4(47) 4.5(8)

Materials that were given to you (lecture notes) 8.4(15) 50.6(90) 25.3(45) 5.1(9)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Rating of Lecturers in the various courses :

Attribute Excellent (%)Very Good (%)

Good (%)Needs improvement (%)

Professionalism 19.7(35) 58.4(104) 14.6(26) 6.2(11)

Reliability 15.7(28) 51.1(91) 28.1(50) 3.4(6)

Confidence 28.1(50) 44.4(79) 23.0(41) 2.2(4)

Empathy 9.6(17) 38.2(68) 41.6(74) 7.9(14)

Resourcefulness 20.2(36) 40.4(72) 29.2(52) 7.3(13)

Duty

consciousness

20.8(37) 42.7(76) 31.5(56) 3.9(7)

Trustworthy 21.9(39) 42.1(75) 29.8(53) 3.9(7)

Time

Consciousness

14.6(26) 46.1(82) 30.9(55) 6.7(12)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Join KNUST Alumni:

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Yes 161 90.4 90.4 90.4

No 13 7.3 7.3 97.8

Answer Not

Provided4 2.2 2.2 100.0

Total 178 100.0 100.0

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Recommend KNUST To Prospective Applicants:

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Yes 168 94.4 94.4 94.4

No 6 3.4 3.4 97.8

Answer Not

Provided4 2.2 2.2 100.0

CONCLUSION

From the analysis of results, it could be concluded that• Students were informed about major decisions

taken at the department or college level by their class representatives, but they are not happy about the way they are involved in the day to day management of the department/college.

CONCLUSION

• Students were attended to properly and anytime they visited the college/department offices .Again, they always received the information they want at the college/department. However, they have a perception that, their concerns and misgivings about policies and decisions are not addressed properly and on time.

CONCLUSION

• Officers at the various departments are rated very high on their professionalism and Friendliness. However, there is the need for improvement with regards to Time-consciousness and Empathy.

CONCLUSION

• Students were satisfied with the knowledge they have received as well as the mode of delivery of lecturers. They were also satisfied with the type of tuition that made them to decide to offer that programme. However, they were not satisfied with the teaching materials that were made available for learning as well as learning environment (lecture room and facilities).

CONCLUSION

• Lecturers were rated very high on Professionalism. Also, they were rated high on their Confidence and Reliability. However, there is the need for improvement with regards to Fairness.

CONCLUSION

• There is the need for improvement in all the facilities and services the University provide (Library, ICT, Sports, Medical Care, accommodation for Residential students (Hall of Residence), private accommodation for non-Residential students and campus safety and security

• Students are prepared to join the Alumni Association and are also ready to recommend KNUST to potential applicants.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• It is recommended that, Students Satisfaction Survey should be instituted as part of quality Assurance measures in higher education management. This would enable management at both the College and the main Administration to appreciate students’ concerns and integrate them in planning.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• It is also recommended that, Public Relation courses should be organized on regular basis for all staff. This would enable them to give better and improved services to students and other clients of the University since the University is going to face competition from private Universities very soon.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Also, courses should be regularly organized for Lecturers and other Administrative staff in Assessment, Pedagogy, Counselling among others to ensure that, there is improvement in teaching and learning.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Again, there is the need for improvement in all the facilities and services the University provide (Library, ICT, Sports, Medical Care, accommodation for Residential students (Hall of Residence), private accommodation for non-Residential students and campus safety and security. This would enable our students to get value for money as part of quality assurance measure in modern University administration.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Lastly, workshops/seminar should be organized for class representatives in the discharge of their work. This would ensure that, they properly inform their fellow students about outcomes of meetings they attend.

THANK YOU