臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

This study aims to research on factors affecting the satisfaction of students on the short term course at Haiduong Job Placement Center. The research model was built based on the CEQ (Course Experience Questionnaire) of Australia education adjusted to suit the research conditions of Vietnam.
The research method was a quantitative research through a group discussion with questions in the questionnaire and processed data by SPSS 18.0.
The research results showed that the satisfaction of students on the course at the center was directly affected by four factors including (1) graduate quality and generic skill development, (2) scientific knowledge promotion, (3) learning resources, and (4)objectives and standards. These factors have positive impact on the satisfaction of the students.
The research results also gave useful information for improving the satisfaction level of the students. In other hand, the research pointed out the limitations and
directions for further researches in the same field.

ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Research Motivations 2
1.3 Research purposes 3
1.4 Research Procedures 4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Service 7
2.1.1 The concept of “service” 7
2.1.2 Service characteristics 7
2.1.3 Customer satisfaction on service 9
2.1.4 Perceived quality 10
2.2 Theories of service quality and customer satisfaction with services 10
2.2.1 Service quality five gap model 10
2.2.2 SERVQUAL model 13
2.2.3 The model Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) 14
2.3 Related researches on customer satisfaction with services 17
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 The background of the research unit 20
3.2 Research model 21
3.3 Research hypotheses 22
3.4 Variable measurement 26
3.5 Research Design 30
3.5.1 Qualitative research design 30
3.5.2 Scale selection 30
3.5.3 Questionnaire design 31
3.5.4 Sampling 32
3.6 Data analysis method 33
3.6.1 Descriptive statistics 33
3.6.2 Scale verification 34
3.6.3 Explore factor analysis (EFA) 34
3.6.4 Naming and adjusting the research model 35
3.6.5 Building the regression function 35
3.6.6 Testing the suitability of the research model 35
3.6.7 Testing the research hypotheses 36
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH RESULTS 38
4.1 Descriptive Statistics 38
4.1.1 Sample structure by gender 38
ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Research Motivations 2
1.3 Research purposes 3
1.4 Research Procedures 4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Service 7
2.1.1 The concept of “service” 7
2.1.2 Service characteristics 7
2.1.3 Customer satisfaction on service 9
2.1.4 Perceived quality 10
2.2 Theories of service quality and customer satisfaction with services 10
2.2.1 Service quality five gap model 10
2.2.2 SERVQUAL model 13
2.2.3 The model Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) 14
2.3 Related researches on customer satisfaction with services 17
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 The background of the research unit 20
3.2 Research model 21
3.3 Research hypotheses 22
3.4 Variable measurement 26
3.5 Research Design 30
3.5.1 Qualitative research design 30
3.5.2 Scale selection 30
3.5.3 Questionnaire design 31
3.5.4 Sampling 32
3.6 Data analysis method 33
3.6.1 Descriptive statistics 33
3.6.2 Scale verification 34
3.6.3 Explore factor analysis (EFA) 34
3.6.4 Naming and adjusting the research model 35
3.6.5 Building the regression function 35
3.6.6 Testing the suitability of the research model 35
3.6.7 Testing the research hypotheses 36
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH RESULTS 38
4.1 Descriptive Statistics 38
4.1.1 Sample structure by gender 38
4.1.2 Sample structure by age 39
4.1.3 Sample structure by income 40
4.2 Summary of results from questionnaires 41
4.3 Testing the reliability of research scales 42
4.3.1 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “lecturer team” 43
4.3.2 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “generic skill development” 43
4.3.3 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “graduate quality” 44
4.3.4 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “Objectives and standards” 45
4.3.5 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “learning workload” 45
4.3.6 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “learning resources” 46
4.3.7 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “the attractiveness of scientific knowledge” 47
4.3.8 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “course organization” 47
4.3.9 Testing the reliability of scales for the dependent variable “general satisfaction” 48
4.3.10 Summary of results from scale verification 49
4.4 Explore factor analysis 49
4.4.1 Explore factor analysis with independent variables 50
4.4.2 Explore factor analysis with the dependent variable 52
4.5 Naming new factors and adjusting the research model 53
4.5.1 Naming the factor 1 53
4.5.2 Naming the factor 2 54
4.5.3 Naming the factor 3 54
4.5.4 Naming the factor 4 55
4.5.5 Naming the factor 5 55
4.5.6 Naming the factor 6 56
4.5.7 Adjusting the research model and hypotheses 56
4.6 Correlation analysis 58
4.7 Building the regression function 60
4.7.1 Estimating the model by Enter method 60
4.7.2 Testing the violation of hypotheses of OLS 61
4.7.3 Testing the research hypotheses 66
4.8 The importance of the variables in the model 69
4.9 Testing the differences between research groups 70
4.9.1 Testing the differences between groups of different gender 70
4.9.2 Testing the differences between groups of different age 71
4.9.3 Testing the differences between groups of different income 72
4.10 Detections of the research 73
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76
5.1 Conclusions 76
5.2 Recommendations 77
5.3 Contributions and the importance of the research 79
5.3.1 Contributions of the research 79
5.3.2 The importance of the research 79
ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES viii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Research Motivations 2
1.3 Research purposes 3
1.4 Research Procedures 4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Service 7
2.1.1 The concept of “service” 7
2.1.2 Service characteristics 7
2.1.3 Customer satisfaction on service 9
2.1.4 Perceived quality 10
2.2 Theories of service quality and customer satisfaction with services 10
2.2.1 Service quality five gap model 10
2.2.2 SERVQUAL model 13
2.2.3 The model Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) 14
2.3 Related researches on customer satisfaction with services 17
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 The background of the research unit 20
3.2 Research model 21
3.3 Research hypotheses 22
3.4 Variable measurement 26
3.5 Research Design 30
3.5.1 Qualitative research design 30
3.5.2 Scale selection 30
3.5.3 Questionnaire design 31
3.5.4 Sampling 32
3.6 Data analysis method 33
3.6.1 Descriptive statistics 33
3.6.2 Scale verification 34
3.6.3 Explore factor analysis (EFA) 34
3.6.4 Naming and adjusting the research model 35
3.6.5 Building the regression function 35
3.6.6 Testing the suitability of the research model 35
3.6.7 Testing the research hypotheses 36
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH RESULTS 38
4.1 Descriptive Statistics 38
4.1.1 Sample structure by gender 38
4.1.2 Sample structure by age 39
4.1.3 Sample structure by income 40
4.2 Summary of results from questionnaires 41
4.3 Testing the reliability of research scales 42
4.3.1 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “lecturer team” 43
4.3.2 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “generic skill development” 43
4.3.3 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “graduate quality” 44
4.3.4 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “Objectives and standards” 45
4.3.5 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “learning workload” 45
4.3.6 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “learning resources” 46
4.3.7 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “the attractiveness of scientific knowledge” 47
4.3.8 Testing the reliability of scales for the factor “course organization” 47
4.3.9 Testing the reliability of scales for the dependent variable “general satisfaction” 48
4.3.10 Summary of results from scale verification 49
4.4 Explore factor analysis 49
4.4.1 Explore factor analysis with independent variables 50
4.4.2 Explore factor analysis with the dependent variable 52
4.5 Naming new factors and adjusting the research model 53
4.5.1 Naming the factor 1 53
4.5.2 Naming the factor 2 54
4.5.3 Naming the factor 3 54
4.5.4 Naming the factor 4 55
4.5.5 Naming the factor 5 55
4.5.6 Naming the factor 6 56
4.5.7 Adjusting the research model and hypotheses 56
4.6 Correlation analysis 58
4.7 Building the regression function 60
4.7.1 Estimating the model by Enter method 60
4.7.2 Testing the violation of hypotheses of OLS 61
4.7.3 Testing the research hypotheses 66
4.8 The importance of the variables in the model 69
4.9 Testing the differences between research groups 70
4.9.1 Testing the differences between groups of different gender 70
4.9.2 Testing the differences between groups of different age 71
4.9.3 Testing the differences between groups of different income 72
4.10 Detections of the research 73
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76
5.1 Conclusions 76
5.2 Recommendations 77
5.3 Contributions and the importance of the research 79
5.3.1 Contributions of the research 79
5.3.2 The importance of the research 79
5.4 Limitations of the research 80
5.5 Directions for further researches 80
APPENDIX 1: OUTLINE OF GROUP DISCUSSION 82
APPENDIX 2 QUESIONNAIRE 84
REFERENCES 88

Craig Mclnnis et al. (2000), Development of Course Experience Questionnaire,The University of Melbourne, Australia.
Calvin Smith and Debra Bath (2006), The role of the learning community in the development of discipline knowledge and generic graduate outcomes, Higher Education,51, 259 -286.
Christian Grönroos (1984), A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications, European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36 – 44.
Course Experience Questionnaire (2011), Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ)report, Course Experience Questionnaire, James Cook University, 1-96.
David P, Curtis and John P.Keeves (2000), The Course Experience Questionnaire
Instittutional performance indicator, International Education Journal,1(2), 73 -82.
Francisco Cano and A.B.G Berben (2009), University students` achievement goals and approach to learning in mathematics, Bristish Journal of Education Psychology, 79, 131 -153.
Garson GD (2002), Guide to Writing Empiricel Pappers, Theses, and Dissertations, New York: Marcel Dekker.
Gerbing WD and Anderson JC (1988), An udate paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessments, Journal of Marketing Research,25(2), 186 -192.
Hair et al. (1998), Mutivariate data analysis, 5th ed, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,Prentical – Hall.
Hair et al. (2006), Mutilvariate Data Analysis 6th ed, Upper Saddle River NJ,Prentice –Hall.
Hans NE Bysstrom (2004), Teaching evaluations at the introductory finance course at Lund University: A comparison of the Course Experience Questionnaire an a traditional evaluation approach, Lund University, Sweden.
Hishamuddin Fitri Abu Hasan et al. (2008), Service quality and satisfaction: A case study at Private higher education institutions, International business research, 1(3),163–175.
Hoang Trong and Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc (2008), Analysis of research data with SPSS – Vol 1, Hong Duc Publisher, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.
Hoang Trong and Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc (2008), Analysis of research data with SPSS – Vol 2, Hong Duc Publisher, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.
Jan F.H Nijhuis et al. (2005), Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies, Learning Environments Research, 8, 67 -93.
Junaida Ismail et al. (2011), The perpormence of Academic Libraries: A case study at research university (Rus) in Malaysia, Global of human Social Sciene, 4(8), 19-23
Kano el al (1984), Attractive qulity and must be quality, Hinshitsu, 14, 39 - 48.
Kotler and Armstrong (2004), Principles of Marketing (Vietnamese translation version), Statistics Publisher, Vietnam.
MacCallum et al. (1999), Sample size in factor analysis, Psychological Methods, 4,84 -99.
Nifarta Peingurta Andrew (2010), Applicability of Student Course Experience
Questionnaire (SCEQ) in an African context: The case of Nigernian Universities,Literacy Information and Comouter Education Journal, 1(3), 143 -150.
Nina Clemson (2009), 2009 Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ)* results,
http://www.csu.edu.au/division/plandev/survey/ceq/index.htm.
Nunally and Bernstein (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3th ed, Mc Graw – Hill,New York.
Nguyen Dinh Phan et al. (2005), curriculum "Quality management in organizations”, Labor and Social Publisher, Vietnam.
Nguyen Dinh Tho et al. (2007), Survey of student satisfactions with the Master
training quality at the Ho Chi Minh University of Economics, Ho Chi Minh university of economics, Vietnam.
Nguyen Dinh Tho (2011), The scientific method in business research, Labour –Social Publisher, Vietnam.
Nguyen Quang Dong (2003), Econometric lecture, Statistics Publisher, Hanoi,Vietnam.
Nguyen Thi Phuong Tram (2008), Master thesis, E-banking quality: Compare the SERVQUAL and Gronroos model, Ho Chi Minh unversity of economics, Vietnam.
Patrick Griffin et alt (2003), The development of an Course Experience
Questionnaire, Quality in Higher Education, 6(3), 259 -266.
Parasuraman, A. V. A. Zeithaml, &; L.L.Berry (1985): A conceptual Model of Service
Quality and its Implications for Future Research, Jounal of Marketing,49, 41-50.
Parasuraman A., Zeithaml V. &; Berry L., (1988), Servqual: A Multiple-Item
Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality, Journal of Retailing,64(1), 22 – 37.
Pham Duc Ky (2007), Research on the Impact of Mobile Communications Service Quality for Customer Loyalty in Ho Chi Minh, Master’s thesis, HCMC
University of Technology, Vietnam.
Ramsden (1991), A performance indicator of tearching quality in higher education:The Course Experience Questionnaire, Studies in Higher Education, 16(2), 129 -151.
Syed Saad Andaleeb and Patience L Simmonds (1998), Explaining user satisfaction with academy libraries : strategic implications, College and research Libraries.
Sri. R Chandra Shekhar el al (2011), Enhancing the quanlity of engineering education instittutions (EEIs) through analysis, International quality conference, 5, 769-779.
Svenson (2002), A triadic network approach to service quality, Journal of Service Marketing, 16(2), 158 -177.
Wilson, K. L., Lizzio, A. and Ramsden, P. (1997). The development, validation and application of the Course Experience Questionnaire’, Studies in Higher Education,22 (1), 33-53.
Zeithaml, V.A., and Bitner, M.J (2000), Services Marketing; integranting customer focus across the Firm, 2nd ed, Mc Graw Hill. New York.