1. INTRODUCTION:

Recent years has witnessed rapid expansion in the education sector all over the world. Globalization and digitization has created a demand for new and varied disciplines in education. The cost of providing education has gone up manifold due to better teaching methodologies and learning instruments with rising inflation worldwide. The brisk increase in the number of institutions in higher education along with a rise in enrolment has led to intense competition (Isani & Virk, 2005). Students can get information easily and instantly due to advancement in technology and globalization. For those who love to read and study, space may not be of prime importance since acquiring knowledge is material and the physical environment is secondary.

But in reality, having rooms and learning spaces in good conditions is decisive for students to achieve the expected academic results. In other words, the conditions of the institute directly impact the performance of the students. In today’s competitive environment only those institutions excel which are providing quality education along with a constructive environment to their students. These factors not only influence their choice of admission but also satisfy students to affect their decisions to do something for their alma mater in the future.

Extensive research has been carried out studying the factors which can affect the satisfaction and retention of students. Aldridge and Rowley (1998) articulate that according to students’ point of view, good quality education provides better learning opportunities and suggest that the levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction strongly affect the student’s success or failure of learning. Deshields et al (2005) state that higher education institutions are focusing on identifying and satisfying the needs and expectations of their students. Such factors include student academic achievement, faculty performance, classroom environment, learning facilities and institution reputation. Hence, investments in improving and maintaining infrastructure have an essential role to play in retaining interest of students and teachers in learning and promoting their performance, thereby enhancing the educational quality.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

Numerous studies have been conducted to measure the student satisfaction at university level in developed part of the world. Various factors have been identified that can potentially affect the students satisfaction to different education services provided by the universities. Students’ informal contacts with faculty members were consistently related to withdrawal/ persistence decisions (Terenzini and Pascarella, 1980). Retention of student was often considered as an indication of student satisfaction with their university program and, hence, indirectly, the quality of the university education (Druzdzel & Glymour, 1995). Campbell and Campbell (1997) established faculty mentoring programs to be positively correlated with academic performance and lower drop-out rates. Aldridge and Rowley (1998) investigated a group of students in a UK university to measure their satisfaction level. The results revealed that a negative quality model is useful in managing this phenomenon. The model underlined that organizations should seek to respond to incidents that lead to dissatisfaction as they arise as continued perception of poor quality will lead to attrition. Similarly, Napoli and Wortman (1998) assessed that psychological measures i.e., life events during university, self-esteem, social competence, social support, personal conscientiousness, psychological well being and satisfaction with the academic, administrative and social systems of university have impact on university persistence. A study was conducted in German universities using a relationship quality based student loyalty model by Hennig et al (2001) who found that quality of teaching and students’ emotional commitment to their institutions were crucial for students loyalty. Yu and Dean (2001) examined that both positive and negative emotions and cognitive component of satisfaction correlate with student loyalty and that affective component of satisfaction serves as a better predictor than cognitive factor. Palacio et al (2002) conducted a study on Spanish university students; the results revealed that university image influenced the student satisfaction with the university. The results of a study conducted by Mayo et al (2004) illustrated that conflicting family/work demands, financial issues and academic concerns were the factors identified by students as possible reasons for attrition. Aldemir and Gulcan (2004) examined the Turkish students’ satisfaction in higher education. The results of study showed that for some Turkish university students, the quality of instructors, education, textbooks and being female and informed before attending university considered to important factors of satisfaction. For instance Navarro et al (2005) surveyed the Spanish university students for their satisfaction with educational offers made by the universities. The results of the study expressed that the teaching staff, the teaching methods and course administration were key elements to achieving student satisfaction and their subsequent loyalty. Mai (2005) studied the student satisfaction in higher education and its influential factors. It was found that the overall impression of the school, overall impression of the quality of the education, teachers expertise and their interest in their subject, the quality and accessibility of IT facilities and the prospects of the degree furthering students careers were the most influential predictors of the students satisfaction. Similarly Deshields et. al. (2005) used a satisfaction model and Herzberg’s two factor theory to examine the determinants of student satisfaction with education. They found that faculty performance and classes were the key factors which determined the quality of college experience of students which in turn led to satisfaction.

3. INTERACTION WITH STUDENTS:

Students' entry to higher education brings about a series of changes at personal, cognitive, professional, affective and social levels, besides resulting in a series of expectations regarding the chosen undergraduate course. These expectations very often come with anxiety, fear and doubts concerning academic performance and professional training. Therefore, the undergraduate course will be the students' new learning environment, which can positively or negatively affect their growth as academics and their professional future.

Institutional factors affecting students’ retention by Dr Linda K. Lau:

[Reference:"Institutional Factors Affecting Student Retention" by Lau, Linda K https://www.questia.com/library/.../institutional-factors-affecting-student-retention

by LK Lau - ‎2003 - ‎Cited by 574 - ‎Related articles]

Academic institutions have proved to be important for the intellectual and vocational development of students, as they offer the opportunity to share ideas and experiences at theoretical and practical levels, to interact with other students, professors, employees and the community as a whole, and they also encourage students to better understand the process of interaction between undergraduate course and scholars, as well as changes resulting from this interaction. In this sense, one of the results obtained from the interaction between the student and the undergraduate course is related to academic satisfaction.

The first investigations on academic satisfaction were conducted in the 1960s and originated from studies on occupational satisfaction. Academic satisfaction refers to the subjective evaluation of the whole educational experience, and it is defined as a psychological state that results from the confirmation or not of the students' expectations regarding their academic reality.

Academic satisfaction is strongly related to the quality of students' learning, and it is a dynamic process that can be affected by the institution's characteristics within its educational context, and by the way students themselves perceive and understand their learning environment.

In addition, ratings of academic satisfaction include the institutional context as a whole, and consider the quality of the course, the relationship between theory and practice, the quality of teaching, the evaluation system, contact with professors and colleagues, curricular content, management of the university and its facilities and resources. A successful higher education institution is the one that is constantly seeking to improve and develop its ability to meet the needs and expectations of students and professors.

In the context of nursing, it is essential to understand how students experience their undergraduate course, since feelings of suffering and stress can be identified in students who are dissatisfied, which can affect their academic lives, their professional future, their working environment and relationships, as well as people with whom they will interact and the care services they will provide. In this sense, nursing students' satisfaction with their undergraduate program is essential and can serve as an instrument of assessment of institutional effectiveness and success. Also, students need to find ways to achieve professional fulfillment by acquiring new knowledge that brings benefits in the course of their careers.

4. QUESTIONNAIRE:

The conceptual framework of the study and reviewed literature suggest some imperative relationship between different educational offerings and students satisfaction. On the basis of such evidence following hypotheses are developed:

H1: Teachers Expertise is positively related to students’ satisfaction

H2: Courses Offered is positively related to students’ satisfaction

H3: Learning Environment is positively related to students’ satisfaction

H4: Classroom Facilities is positively related to students’ satisfaction

This study examines the relationship between students’ satisfaction and education offerings like teachers’ expertise, courses offered, learning environment and classroom facilities. For this purpose, responses were collected from students of different private and public sector universities in Pakistan; the sample size consisted of 350 students from different levels and disciplines. The sample was divided in to two broad categories that were male and female. A questionnaire used to collect the information from the respondents. This questionnaire developed according to local educational environment on the basis of instruments used by Aldemir and Gulcan (2004), DeShields et al. (2005) and Mai (2005) in their studies. The questionnaire was comprised of six sections. Section 1 consisted of demographic attributes like age, gender, education and discipline etc. Section 2 comprised of questions related to students satisfaction measured on a 5-point Likert scale anchored by “very satisfied” (1) to “very dissatisfied” (5). Sections 3-6 related to teachers expertise, courses offered, learning environment and classroom facilities and respondents were asked to indicate their perception on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly agree” (1) to “strongly disagree” (5). Reliability analysis demonstrated the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for this questionnaire ranging from .82 to .64 for different sections, which considered to be relatively high and internally consistent (Hair et al., 1998). The questionnaires were conveniently distributed among 450 students of different universities in Pakistan, out of which 370 were received and 350 questionnaires completed in all aspects were included in study for analysis. Before the questionnaire was filled by the respondents the purpose of the questionnaire was explained to each of the respondent. Proper instructions were written on the questionnaire and further instructions were given to the respondents in order to fill the questionnaire properly. To do analysis, regression and Independent Sample T-Test were performed and for this purpose SPSS was used.

5. EXAMPLE:

There was a quantitative, exploratory and descriptive study, with cross-sectional design,conducted in the nursing undergraduate course of a public university in southern Brazil. The program has a total course load of 4,055 hours, distributed in compulsory disciplines, practical classes, internships and complementary activities.

The study was conducted with a sample of 170 students enrolled from the 1^st to the 9^th semester, and the following inclusion criteria were adopted: being a student of the nursing undergraduate course and being present in the classroom at the time of data collection. The sample size was defined by a specific mathematical formula, whose objective was to estimate the minimum sample size needed for the development of specific statistical procedures, thus ensuring the reliability of the study. After the application of this formula to the total population of 242 students, a minimum number of 150 participants was found.

Data were collected in the classrooms between February and March of 2013. The instrument was handed out to students, after a previous authorization from professors, and then collected, along with a Free and Informed Consent Form duly signed.

The data collection instrument was the Academic Experience Satisfaction Scale (AESS), which was proposed and validated in a previous study with higher education students. This scale, composed of 35 items, investigated the degree of academic satisfaction of higher education students, and included three aspects: satisfaction with the course, opportunity of development and satisfaction with the institution; these aspects were measured by means of a five-point Likert scale, which was represented by (1) "Totally dissatisfied", (2) "Little satisfied", (3) "Not dissatisfied/not satisfied", (4) "Satisfied" and (5) "Totally satisfied". The instrument also had an initial part with the characterization of subjects and included sociodemographic and academic characteristics.

For data analysis, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17.0 was used, which made the organization process easier through the use of spreadsheets that allowed for a better presentation and interpretation of results.

Data were submitted to three different analyses: descriptive statistics, with the use of means and frequency distribution of constructs and their indicators; analysis of variance (ANOVA) between different groups of respondents, according to sample characteristics, in order to assess possible significant differences between groups of respondents; linear regression analysis, in order to identify which factors have stronger effects on nursing students' perception on satisfaction with the academic experience. In order to perform the ANOVA, the following variables were considered: gender, age, current occupation, aid from the institution, school year/semester, extra-curricular activities, experience in another institution and intention to withdraw from the course.

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Regarding the sociodemographic data (Brazil) of the studied sample, a total of 170 participants was obtained, of which most individuals were female (88.8%), aged 24.9 years in average, with the mean age of 1^st to 4^th semester students being 24.7, and the mean age of 5^th to 9^th semester students being 25.1 years old. Most students were single (77.1%), did not work (73.5%), had their studies funded by their families (66.5%), and carried out leisure activities (75.9%). Students who lived with their parents prevailed (40.6%).

Regarding academic characteristics, the first semester classroom had a higher number of students (18.2%), who reported to have only basic information concerning the nursing undergraduate course before their entry to university (45.3%). Most subjects stated they had chosen nursing as their first option (80%) and had not attended another higher education institution (77.1%).

Besides, most individuals reported carrying out extra-curricular activities (67.6%), were granted a scholarship, a research grant or an extension grant (52.4%), and 58.8% were not granted any aid by the institution. Those who considered they had a suitable place to study were 83.5%; those who had a computer were 94.4%; who had easy access to internet, 97.1%; who had a printer, 72.4%; and who had free access to up-to-date books, 85.3%. Most students did not express, or had not expressed before, their intention to withdraw from the course (65.9%).

As for the results of the assessment of the degree of academic satisfaction of nursing students, the descriptive analysis showed that the aspect "satisfaction with the course" had the highest mean (3.62), which indicated neither satisfaction nor dissatisfaction with their relationship with professors. For the aspect "opportunity of development", the corresponding mean was 3.54, which shows that students were not satisfied neither dissatisfied with personal and professional development provided by the course and the institution. Within this aspect, the question "diversity of extra-curricular activities offered by the institution" obtained the lowest mean (3.35).

7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

This study investigates the determinants of students’ satisfaction in higher education and their influence on level of satisfaction. According to results teachers’ expertise is the most influential factor on the students’ satisfaction, whereas courses offered and learning environment are next important factors and classroom facilities is the least important factor among all the variables. This means that teachers’ expertise, courses offered and learning environment do a good job of enhancing students’ satisfaction in higher education. In the light of above results here are some suggestions and recommendations for the improvement of students’ satisfaction determinants and hence level of satisfaction. Government and institutions should pay special attention to raise the learning opportunities and environment both for male and female students. Efforts should be made to induct, train and retain qualified and expert teachers for promoting the quality education. Courses should be designed to meet the contemporary challenges and needs of the market. Conducive and favourable learning environment should be provided in the universities and classroom facilities should be upgraded by using state of the art technology. Healthy and interactive communication should be established between students and teachers/administration to provide all necessary information to them regarding curriculum, offerings and opportunities.

The limitations of the study conducted in Brazil included its performance with a specific population of a public university in southern Brazil, which did not allow for a generalization of results. The research makes it clear that other studies on nursing students' academic satisfaction are necessary, with special attention to their environment and training.

We highlight the association found between the variable "intention to withdraw from the course" and the aspects "satisfaction with the institution", "satisfaction with the course" and "opportunity of development", which require follow-up actions oriented toward the strengthening of the identification with the profession and the needs of students, who are in a situation in which they question themselves about their professional choice.

The objective of this study conducted in Pakistan was to find out the relationship between students’ satisfaction and various education facilities. Regarding the sociodemographic data of the studied sample, a total of 170 participants was obtained, of which most individuals were female (88.8%), aged 24.9 years in average, with the mean age of 1^st to 4^th semester students being 24.7, and the mean age of 5^th to 9^th semester students being 25.1 years old. Most students were single (77.1%), did not work (73.5%), had their studies funded by their families (66.5%), and carried out leisure activities (75.9%). Students who lived with their parents prevailed (40.6%).

Different paths can be followed in order to promote academic satisfaction, among which, the importance of an undergraduate course being oriented toward nursing students' needs, by respecting and listening to them, by making use of strategies that prepare them to deal with the events of academic and professional life, as well as by offering a broad psychological and pedagogical support, especially to those who expressed some dissatisfaction.

Understanding the meaning of satisfaction and its factors, which can positively or negatively affect satisfaction with the academic trajectory, is important for the relationship between the institution and the quality of the professional-to-be that will enter the work market, since students of today will be the professionals of tomorrow, and subsequently, these students tend to reproduce the experiences lived during the course in their future professional practice.

8. FUTURE SCOPE:

Infrastructural and other facilities made available to the students and faculty impact teaching and learning in profound ways, thereby improving outcomes for both. Unfortunately, state and local policymakers / governing bodies, in general, overlook the impact of improved facilities on faculty retention and learning outcomes of students. While improving facilities comes at a financial cost, the benefits of such investments often surpass the initial fiscal costs.

A good Infrastructure facility always supported the educational enterprise. Research had shown that clean and good air quality, good light, small yet comfortable and safe environment, building age and condition, quality of maintenance, temperature, and colour, could affect student health, safety as well as a sense of self and psychological state. Policymakers should be concerned about the relationship between Infrastructure facilities and student learning and achievement.

Policymakers, educators, and business people are now focused on the need to ensure that students learn 21^st century skills such as teamwork, collaboration, effective communication, and other skills. As noted above, older buildings simply are not conducive to the teaching of 21^st century skills. This is particularly true with the respect to reconfiguring seating arrangements to facilitate various modes of teaching and learning and the use of technology in the classroom as a mode of teaching and learning. Policymakers, thus, should focus greater attention on the impacts of facilities and adopt a long-term cost-benefit perspective on efforts to improve an educational institute’s facilities.

9. REFERENCES:

1. Aldemir, C. and Gulcan, Y. (2004), “Students Satisfaction in Higher Education: A Turkish Case”, Higher Education Management and Policy, 16(2), 109-122.

2. Aldridge, S. and Rowely, J. (1998), “Measuring customer satisfaction in higher education”, Quality Assurance in Education, 6(4), 197-204.

3. Appolinário F. Metodologia da ciência: filosofia e prática da pesquisa. 2.ed. São Paulo (SP): Cengage Learning; 2012. [Links]

4. Amaducci CM, Mota DDFC, Pimenta CAM. Fadiga entre estudantes de graduação em enfermagem. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2010 Dez; 44(4):1052-8. [Links]

5. Araújo MFM, Lima ACS, Alencar AMPG, Araújo TM, Fragoaso LVC, Damasceno MMC. Avaliação da qualidade do sono de estudantes universitários de Fortaleza-CE. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2013 Abr-Jun; 22(2):352-60. [Links]

6. Astin AW. Student Involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. J Coll Student Dev. 1999 Sep-Oct; 40(5):518-29. [Links]

7. Brito AMR, Brito MJM, Silva PAB. Perfil sociodemográfico de discentes de enfermagem de instituições de ensino superior de Belo Horizonte. Esc Anna Nery. 2009 Abr-Jun; 13(2):328-33. [Links]

8. Campbell, T. A., and Campbell, D. E. (1997), “Faculty/student mentor program: effects on performance and retention”, Research in Higher Education, 38(6), 727-742.

9. Chen HC, Farmer S, Barber L, Wayman M. Development and psychometric testing of the Nursing Student Satisfaction Scale. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2012 Nov-Dec; 33(6):369-73. [Links]

10. Chen HS, Lo HS. Development and psychometric testing of the nursing student satisfaction scale for the associate nursing programs. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2012 Aug; 2(3):25-37. [Links]

11. Dennison S, El-Masri MM. Development and psychometric assessment of the undergraduate nursing Student academic satisfaction scale (UNSASS). J Nurs Meas. 2012 May-Aug; 20(2):75-89. [Links]

12. DeShields Jr., O. W., Kara, A. and Kaynak, E. (2005), “Determinants of business student satisfaction and retention in higher education: applying Herzberg’s two factor theory”, International Journal of Educational Management, 19(2), 28-139.

13. Druzdzel, M. J. and Glymour, C. (1995), “Application of the TETRAD II program to the study of student retention in US colleges”, retrieved on October 15, 2009.

14. Fontana RT, Brigo L. Estudar e trabalhar: percepções de técnicos de enfermagem sobre esta escolha. Esc Anna Nery. 2012 Mar; 16(1):128-33. [Links]

15. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. (1998), “Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

16. Hennig-Thurau, T., Langer, M. F., and Hansen, U. (2001), “Modeling and managing student loyalty: An approach based on the concept of relationship quality”, Journal of Service Research, 3(4), 331-344.

17. Hill MM, Hill A. Investigação por questionário. Lisboa (PT): Editora Sílabo; 2012. [Links]

18. Isani, U. A. G., and Virk, M. L. (2005), “Higher education in Pakistan: a historical and futuristic perspective”, Islamabad: National Book Foundation.

19. Jaradeen N, Jaradat R, Safi AB, Tarawneh FA. Students satisfaction with nursing program. Bahrain Med Bull. 2012 Mar; 34(1):1-6. [Links]

20. Kantek F, Kazanci G. An analysis of the satisfaction levels of nursing and midwifery students in a health college in Turkey. Contemp Nurse. 2012 Aug; 42(1):36-44. [Links]

21. Lee CY, White B, Hong YM. Comparison of the clinical practice satisfaction of nursing students in Korea and the USA. Nurs Health Sci. 2009 Mar; 11(1):10-6. [Links]

22. Lima MM, Reibenitz KS, Prado ML, Kloh D. Integralidade como princípio pedagógico na formação do enfermeiro. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2013 Jan-Mar; 22(1):106-13. [Links]

23. Mai, L. (2005), “A Comparative Study between UK and US: The Student Satisfaction in Higher Education and its Influential Factors, Journal of Marketing Management, 21, 859-878.

24. Mayo, D. T., Helms, M. M., and Codjoe, H. M. (2004), “Reasons to remain in college: a comparison of high school and college students”, The International Journal of Educational Management, 18(6), 360-367.

25. Napoli, A. R. and Wortman, P. M. (1998), “Psychological factors related to retention and early departure of two-year community college students”, Research in Higher Education, 39(4), 419-455.

26. Navarro, M. M., Iglesias, P. M. and Torres, R. P. (2005), “A New Management Element for Universities: Satisfaction with the offered courses”, International Journal of Educational Management, 19(6), 505-526.

27. Oliveira BM, Mininel VA, Felli VEA. Qualidade de vida de graduandos de enfermagem. Rev Bras Enferm. 2011 Fev; 64(1):130-5. [Links]

28. Palacio, A. B., Menesses, G. D., and Perez Perez, P. J. (2002), “The configuration of the university image and its relationship with the satisfaction of students”, Journal of Educational Administration, 40(5), 486-505.

29. Satisfaction with academic experience among undergraduate nursing students: Print version ISSN 0104-0707;Texto contexto - enferm. vol.24 no.1 Florianópolis Jan./Mar. 2015;http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-07072015002870013 ; retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0104-07072015000100187&script=sci_arttext#B01

30. Schleich AL, Polydoro SA, Santos AAA. Escala de satisfação com a experiência acadêmica de estudantes do ensino superior. Aval Psicol. 2006 Jun; 5(1):11-20. [Links]

31. Silva VLS, Chiquito NC, Andrade RAPO, Brito MFP, Camelo SHH. Fatores de estresse no último ano do curso de graduação em enfermagem: percepção dos estudantes. Rev enferm UERJ. 2011 Jan-Mar; 19(1):121-6. [Links]

32. Souza AS, Reinert JN. Avaliação de um curso de ensino superior através da satisfação/insatisfação discente. Avaliação: Rev Aval Educ Sup. 2010 Mar; 15(1):159-76. [Links]

33. Tessema MT, Ready K, Yu WC. Factors affecting college students' satisfaction with major curriculum: evidence from nine years of data. Int J Humanit Soc Sci. 2012 Jan; 2(2):34-44. [Links]

34. Terenzini, P. T. and Pascarella, E. T. (1980), “Toward the validation of Tinto’s model of college student attrition: A review of recent studies”, Research in Higher Education (Historical Archive), 12(3), 271-282.

35. Tomaschewski-Barlem JG, Lunardi VL, Barlem ELD, Bordignon SS, Zacarias CC, Lunardi Filho WD. Fragilidades, fortalezas e desafios na formação do enfermeiro. Esc Anna Nery. 2012 Jul; 16(2):347-63. [Links]

36. Tomaschewski-Barlem JG, Lunardi VL, Bordignon SS, Barlem ELD, Lunardi Filho WD, Silveira RS, et al. Option and evasion of a bachelor's degree programme in nursing: evaded students' perception. Rev Gaucha Enferm. 2012 Jun; 33(2):132-8. [Links]

37. Tomaschewski-Barlem JG, Lunardi VL, Ramos AM, Silveira RS, Barlem ELD, Ernandes CM. Manifestações da síndrome de burnout entre estudantes de graduação em enfermagem. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2013 Jul-Set [acesso 2014 Fev02]; 22(3):754-62. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-07072013000300023 [Links]

38. Yildirim Y, Kilic SP, Akyol AD. Relationship between life satisfaction and quality of life in Turkish nursing school students. Nurs Health Sci. 2013 Dec; 15(4):415-22. [Links]

39. Yu, Y. and Dean, A. (2001), “The contribution of emotional satisfaction to consumer loyalty”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(3), 234-250.

Received on 29.04.2019 Modified on 14.05.2019

Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2019; 10(3):918-924.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5828.2019.00151.7