Development and Validation of a Cost-Benefit and Satisfaction-Based Instrument for Measuring Higher Education Service Quality
Keywords:
higher education service quality; cost–benefit analysis; student satisfaction; instrument development; perceived value.Abstract
In the context of increasing financial autonomy and growing expectations regarding accountability and return on investment, higher education institutions are increasingly required to demonstrate not only academic quality but also value for money. However, existing higher education service quality models primarily focus on service performance and satisfaction while paying limited attention to students’ cost–benefit evaluations. This study aimed to develop and validate a multidimensional instrument for measuring higher education service quality from a cost–benefit and student satisfaction perspective. A sequential mixed-methods design was employed. The qualitative phase involved literature synthesis, semi-structured interviews, and focus group discussions with 45 students to identify key dimensions of perceived benefits, perceived sacrifices, and satisfaction. The quantitative phase surveyed 703 students from multiple higher education institutions and employed reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for psychometric validation. The final instrument consisted of 50 items across six dimensions: Academic Value, Learning Facilities and Resources, Student Support Services, Developmental and Career Benefits, Institutional Responsiveness and Digital Experience, and Perceived Cost and Academic Strain. The model demonstrated strong reliability and acceptable model fit (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.893–0.966; CFI = 0.906; TLI = 0.901; RMSEA = 0.066). The study contributes theoretically by extending higher education service quality measurement through an integrated cost–benefit and satisfaction framework and practically by proposing a standardized Composite Service Quality Score (CSQS) to support benchmarking, quality assurance, and evidence-based institutional governance.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.25.6.4
References
Abbas, J. (2020). HEISQUAL: A modern approach to measure service quality in higher education institutions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 67, 100933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100933
Abbas, J., & Sagsan, M. (2019). Impact of knowledge management practices on green innovation and corporate sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229, 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.024
Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500610641543
Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: Three instruments compared. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 29(1), 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/01406720500537445
Alemu, A. (2023). Assessing service quality in tertiary education using adapted SERVQUAL scale. Cogent Education, 10(2), 2259733. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2259733
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007). Conceptual model of student satisfaction in higher education. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(5), 571–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360601074315
Amado, M., Guzmán, A., & Juarez, F. (2023). Relationship between perceived value, student experience, and university reputation: Structural equation modeling. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02272-y
Anthony E. Boardman, Greenberg, D. H., Vining, A. R., & Weimer, D. L. (2018). Cost-benefit analysis: Concepts and practice. Cambridge University Press.
Bui, H. T., Bui, Q. T., Nguyen, T. T., Cao, Q. H., Phung, T. V., & Nguyen, H. T. (2022). Assessing the relationship between service quality, satisfaction and loyalty: The Vietnamese higher education experience. Quality Assurance in Education, 31(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-01-2022-0015
Camilleri, M. A. (2024). Metaverse applications in education: a systematic review and a cost-benefit analysis. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 21(2), 245-269. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2023-0017
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2023). Revisiting mixed methods research designs twenty years later. The Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods Research Design, 21-36. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529682663.n6
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: Re-Examination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600304
Del Río-Rama, M. D. L. C., Álvarez-García, J., Mun, N. K., & Durán-Sánchez, A. (2021). Influence of the quality perceived of service of a higher education center on the loyalty of students. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 671407. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.671407
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Garvin, D. A. (1987). Competing on the eight dimensions of quality. Harvard Business Review, 65(6), 101–109.
Hai, N. C. (2021). Factors affecting student satisfaction with higher education service quality in Vietnam. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.339
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293930180102
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational research methods, 1(1), 104-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106
Ho, T. T., Le, V. H., Nguyen, D. T., Nguyen, C. T., & Nguyen, H. T. (2022). Effects of career development learning on students’ perceived employability: A longitudinal study. Higher Education, 86(2), 297-315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00933-6
Iskandar, A. S., Wirawan, H., & Salam, R. (2024). Students’ perceived value in higher education institutions: Investigating the role of antecedents and context. Cogent Business & management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2313789
Jongbloed, B. (2005). Marketisation in higher education, Clark’s triangle and the essential ingredients of markets. Higher Education Quarterly, 57(2), 110–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2273.00238
Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Press.
Lu, J., Yao, J., & Yu, C. (2011). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(3), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003
Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (2001). Image and reputation of higher education institutions in students’ retention decisions. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(6), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005909
O’Neill, M. A., & Palmer, A. (2004). Importance-performance analysis: A useful tool for directing continuous quality improvement in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880410517423
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(88)80016-8
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in nursing & health, 29(5), 489-497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos*, H. A. (2010). Returns on investment in education: a further update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964529042000239140
Quareshi, T. K. (2017). Understanding consumer perception of price-quality-value relationship. International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovation in Technology, 3(1), 913-9.
Supriyanto, A., Burhanuddin, B., Sunarni, S., Rochmawati, R., Ratri, D. K., & Bhayangkara, A. N. (2025). Academic service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty: a study at higher education legal entities in Indonesia. The TQM Journal, 37(5), 1364-1384. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2023-0334
Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00041-0
Teeroovengadum, V., Kamalanabhan, T. J., & Seebaluck, A. K. (2016). Measuring service quality in higher education: Development of a hierarchical model (HESQUAL). Quality Assurance in Education, 24(2), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2014-0028
Tuan, N. M. (2012). Effects of service quality and price fairness on student satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(19). https://ijbss.thebrpi.org/journals/Vol_3_No_19_October_2012/15.pdf
Xia, L., Monroe, K. B., & Cox, J. L. (2004). The price is unfair! A conceptual framework of price fairness perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.1.42733
Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H., & Choi, M. (2016). User acceptance of wearable devices: An extended perspective of perceived value. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 256–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.006
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Huong Tran Thi Thu, Tu Nguyen Thanh, Le Lam
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
All articles published by IJLTER are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No-Derivatives 4.0 International License (CCBY-NC-ND4.0).
