Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, Oxstalls Campus, Oxstalls Lane, Gloucester GL2 9HW, UK.
Nurse Educ Today. 2011 Feb;31(2):173-8. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.05.014. Epub 2010 Jul 3.
Higher education institutions (HEIs) and national bodies are increasingly monitoring the satisfaction of their students with their educational experiences. Quantitative satisfaction surveys are often used, where HEI students rate the questionnaire items using Likert scale formats to express their perceived satisfaction. However, the literature shows considerable variations in how satisfaction has been gauged based on students' responses to such questionnaires. It is important to ascertain that methods used to gauge student satisfaction are appropriate. We explored the associations between the method employed in calculating the levels of student satisfaction with their educational experience and the emergent level of satisfaction. We employed data comprising 2650 module satisfaction questionnaires (18 items) from a University in the UK. Five common choices of satisfaction summary measures were tested: three different count summary measures; a sum summary measure; and a ratio summary measure. The 5 measures were correlated, but levels of student satisfaction varied widely according to the summary measure that was used. The behaviour of some satisfaction summary measures suggested that they might lack the ability to discriminate effectively between different levels of student satisfaction. We recommend the use of two summary measures and discuss the implications for research and practice.
高等教育机构(HEIs)和国家机构越来越多地监测学生对其教育体验的满意度。通常使用定量满意度调查,其中 HEI 学生使用李克特量表格式对问卷项目进行评分,以表达他们对满意度的感知。然而,文献表明,基于学生对这些问卷的回答,满意度的衡量方法存在相当大的差异。重要的是要确定用于衡量学生满意度的方法是否合适。我们探讨了计算学生对教育体验满意度水平的方法与满意度水平之间的关联。我们使用了来自英国一所大学的 2650 份模块满意度问卷(18 项)的数据。测试了五种常见的满意度汇总度量标准:三种不同的计数汇总度量标准;总和汇总度量标准;以及比率汇总度量标准。这 5 种度量标准是相关的,但根据使用的汇总度量标准,学生的满意度水平差异很大。一些满意度汇总度量标准的行为表明,它们可能缺乏有效区分不同学生满意度水平的能力。我们建议使用两种汇总度量标准,并讨论对研究和实践的影响。