MEASURING SATISFACTION WITH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES BASED ON SERVICE QUALITY THEORY

Authors

  • mustika maulida01

    Universitas Muhammadiyah Bogor Raya
    Author

Abstract

The success of an educational institution is no longer measured solely by academic achievement, but also by the quality of non-academic school administrative services. This study aims to measure student satisfaction with school administrative services using the Service Quality (Servqual) theoretical framework. A quantitative descriptive design was used, involving a sample of 100 active students at SMK Muhammadiyah 9 Nanggung selected through proportional stratified random sampling. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire based on a 1–4 Likert scale covering five main dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. The results of the study indicate that the majority of respondents held positive perceptions, with 80% of students expressing satisfaction with the staff’s competence and attention to detail, while 20% expressed dissatisfaction, particularly regarding wait times during peak hours. Overall, the school’s administrative services successfully met students’ expectations. However, management is advised to digitize administrative procedures to improve efficiency.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(1), 31–47.

Cronin, J. J., Jr., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–68.

Grönroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36–44.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2022). Marketing management (16th Global ed.). Pearson.

Lovelock, C., & Wirtz, J. (2021). Services marketing: People, technology, strategy (9th ed.). World Scientific.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50.

Shahsavar, T., & Sudzina, F. (2017). Student satisfaction and service quality in higher education. Journal of Quality Assurance in Education, 25(4), 489–505.

Sultan, P., & Wong, H. Y. (2014). An integrated-process model of service quality, institutional brand and behavioural intentions: The case of a university. Managing Service Quality, 24(5), 487–521.

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

Tjiptono, F. (2019). Service management: Mewujudkan layanan prima (2nd ed.). Andi.

Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2021). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education. UNESCO Publishing.

OECD. (2023). Education at a glance 2023: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing.

World Bank. (2022). The state of global learning poverty: 2022 update. World Bank.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-05

Issue

Section

Articles