Hey guys if you want to learn about mediation plz read this article carefully i hope you will

get it
easy and informative, first of all go to diagram of the paper where authors mentioned variables.

Mediating Model of Hypothesized Effect of Academic & Institutional Services

on Student Satisfaction Influencing Student Achievement and Loyalty
By Shazia Kousar
Ph.D. Scholar Superior University Lahore, Pakistan
Email: shazia.kousar@superior.edu.pk
M. Ilyas
Associate Professor, Superior University Lahore, Pakistan
Email: ilyas58@yahoo.com
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of my study is to propose and test a model on the mediating
mechanism of academic institutional services and student achievement and loyalty across
the wide numbers of HEIs in Lahore.
Design/methodology/approach The quantitative approach under positivism paradigm is
used to fulfillment the objectives of the study. The Self administrative survey approach was
used to collect the data through questionnaire from 400 students of 29 public and private
universities in Lahore. In order to check the validity of construct (convergent and
discriminant validity), services analysis was conducted using PCA technique with varimax
rotation method. Regression analysis has been used to determine the effect of academic
and institutional services on mediating variable (S.S, S.M) and to determine the effect of
mediating variables on student achievement and loyalty.
Findings the results of direct relationship of academic and institutional services on student
achievement and loyalty suggest that all academic and institutional services positively and
significantly affect the student achievement and student loyalty but academic and
administrative services strongly affect the student success and retention. Student
satisfaction and student motivation partially mediates the relationship between academic&
institutional services and success and retention of enrolled students. Moreover, student
satisfaction and motivation capture maximum effect of academic and institutional services.
Research limitations/implications By focusing on antecedents of student satisfaction,
institute can align their organizational structure, processes and procedures to become more
Customer-oriented. Small sample size and self-explicated retention data are the limitations
of this study.

Practical implications It is recommended in this study that the changing nature of the
higher education marketplace encourages college academia and administrators to apply the
customer-oriented principles that are used in profit-making institutions.
Originality/value Mediating Model of Hypothesized Effect of Academic & Institutional
Services on Student Satisfaction Influencing Student Achievement and Loyalty.
Key words student satisfaction, motivation, achievement, loyalty, organization, academic
and institutional services
Introduction:
Higher education institution are increasingly known as services industry, competitive
environment in education industry provide many options to the students that makes the
survival of the institute difficult. Only those institutes will stay alive who give importance to
the expectations and needs of their potential customers, the students, and help them in
realization of their goals. So the services, that can affect the students expectations, needs
and make them successful and loyal with the institute, should be seriously studied. In order
to have competitive edge in the future, private organization must develop effective
behaviors which create a resilient association between institution and student. The higher
education institutions must recognize the expectations and need of their target market, the
students, modify their policies to meet the desired level of satisfaction and achievement, by
providing them the quality of services (Kotler & Fox, 1995). Various methods to evaluate
student Satisfaction have been used in European higher education institutions. One of them
is the improved quality of teaching and learning (Wiers-Jenssen & Stensaker). Restructuring
of the organization also helps to meet the customers expectations and goal (FRASER, 1999).
Addressing the expectation of the students is very important for the higher education
institution because satisfaction is like an election held every day, and the student vote with
their feet, If dissatisfied they walk (sometimes run) to the competitor.
The services which can influence the student satisfaction are: a) campus environment (b)
academic services (Campbell, Medina-Jerez, Erdogan, & Zhang, 2010) student demographic
services (Ilias, Hasan, & Rahman, 2009). Therefore, the student satisfaction and loyalty serve
as competitive advantage for educational institutions, sustainable advantage can be
obtained by providing customers superior quality of services (Kotler & Fox, 1995). In the
literature the term quality of services is broadly debated but still ambiguous and needed to

be studied (Berry, 1995; Dill, 2007; D. Green, Brannigan, Mazelan, & Giles, 1994). According
to (Ten Eyck, Tews, & Ballester, 2009; Witowski, 2008), in academia the student satisfaction
is well researched topic, but still important and sensitive because satisfaction is a dynamic
concepts and needed to be re searched. in the light of data on student satisfaction
universities can formulate the policies which in turn help to produce successful and loyal
students who can enhance their institutions worth in the market, for which each institution
striving. According to (Lazar et al., 2003), services which can effect student satisfaction and
student achievement are important and should be discovered. So with the help of new
measurement tool, new dimension of student satisfaction can be explored. Survey at
institutional level can provide better understanding of student satisfaction and more
important services can be explored.
Therefore, there is dire need to investigate new academic and institutional services which
contribute in the student satisfaction and how student satisfaction mediate the relationship
between academic and institutional services and student achievement and loyalty, which is
the ultimate goal of institution. Satisfaction is important in the success and retention of
enrolled students and , thus the link between satisfaction and retention should be studied
and managed carefully (DeShields Jr, Kara, & Kaynak, 2005). according to (Gurpinar,
Alimoglu, Mamakli, & Aktekin, 2010), student satisfaction is a vibrant determinant of
educational outcome needed to be explored effectively for giving massage to the student
that organization is seriously listening their issues. Student satisfaction is a multifaceted
construct and influenced by variety of characteristics of students as well as institution
(Thomas & Galambos, 2004). So it is important to explore the academic and institutional
services which affect student satisfaction and how student satisfaction plays mediating role
between academic and institutional services and student success.
Therefore, there are two main objective of my study: 1) Study will divide the quality of
services into four academic and institutional services which probably can affect the student
satisfaction and motivation. 2) Study will also examine mediating relationship of student
satisfaction and motivation between academic and institutional services and student
success and loyalty or retention. The sub objective is to propose a model that describes:
1. The mediating mechanism between academic institutional services and student
achievement.

2. The mediating mechanism between academic institutional services and student

loyalty.
Research Questions
Followings are the research questions of my study

1. Whether the academic & institutional services affect student success and loyalty?
2. Whether the academic & institutional services affect student satisfaction and
motivation?
3. Do the student satisfaction and motivation affect the student achievement and
loyalty?
4. Do the student satisfaction and motivation mediate the relationship between
academic & institutional services and student achievement and loyalty
Research Hypothesis
My research hypotheses are
H1: There is positive relationship between teachers related services and student
satisfaction.
H2: There is positive relationship between teachers related services and student
motivation.
H3: There is positive relationship between administrative services and student
satisfaction.
H4: There is positive relationship between administrative services and student
motivation.
H5: There is positive relationship between campus environment and student
satisfaction.
H6: There is positive relationship between campus environment and student
motivation.
H7: There is positive relationship between student services and student satisfaction.
H8: There is positive relationship between student services and student motivation.
H9: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between teacher services and
student achievement.
H10: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between administrative services
and student achievement.

H11: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between campus services and
student achievement.
H12: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between student services and
student achievement.
H13: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between teacher services and
student loyalty.
H14: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between administrative services
and student loyalty.
H15: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between campus services and
student loyalty.
H16: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between student services and
student loyalty.
H17: Academic and institutional services positively related with student
achievement.
H18: Academic and institutional services positively related with student loyalty.
Significance of Study

My study will significantly contribute in literature by proposing and testing a

mediating model of academic institutional services and student achievement and
loyalty.

Fewer study has been investigated the impact of academic services on student
achievement and loyalty, particularly in Pakistan, but ignore the institutional
services. So my study will examine that what services affect the student satisfaction
and motivation and how satisfaction and motivation mediate the effect between
academic institutional services and student achievement and loyalty.

This study also divides the academic and institutional services into four main
constructs and also discusses the reliability and validity issues of these construct.

Our provincial govt. gives slogan Parah Likha Punjab to attract the people. For this
purpose Punjab govt. propose favorable policies toward HEI. As a result the
competition among HEI has been increased. Survival of institution heavily dependent
on its output. So better understanding in these areas, institutions, administrators,
researchers, and policymakers will better understand which services has greatest

impact on student achievement and loyalty. This will also enable researchers and
policymakers to design more effective intervention programs to influence the
services which are highly significant with student achievement and loyalty.

Study examine the student satisfaction in higher education institutions from more
customer oriented perspective introduce new additional dimension to the
educational planning activities of colleges and universities.
Literature Review
The main aim of this part of my study is to overview the literature about student
satisfaction and identifies the academic & institutional services which can affect the
student satisfaction. In this era of cutthroat competition among higher education
institutions, the universities spend heavy fund on researched indicators of student
satisfaction.
Student satisfaction
Satisfaction is a feeling of contentment; we feel when our need or expectation
satisfied. In education system the satisfaction play major role while defining the
correctness of the system. The students personality grooming, skill development
and course knowledge is related with the level of student satisfaction (spector 2006).
According to (Kotler & Clarke, 2012) satisfaction is ones internal state of feelings
that he experience when his or her expectations are fulfilled. Satisfaction is
dependent on students expectations and perceives performance. It is important to
know the important issues of the students and what are their perceptions regarding
these issues before entering into university (Carey, Cambiano, & De Vore, 2002;
Palacio, Meneses, & Prez, 2002). A proper definition of student satisfaction is not
available in the literature, so the researcher select and modify the customer
satisfaction theory to define the concept of student satisfaction (Hom, 2002). It look
very odd to use the term customers for the student but in current higher education
scenario students behave like a customer and said that they are fee payer so their
issues be heard and solved on priority basis (Williams, 2002).
Student motivation
Motivation is a passion that activates specific human behavior. Ever action of life is
caused by motivation, desire of knowledge motivate the student to enter into the
university. There are two types of motivation 1) intrinsic motivation 2) extrinsic

motivation (W. Green, 2010). Intrinsic motivation means internal happiness,

importance or feelings induce the person to do some actions while extrinsic
motivation means external services force a person to something. Both concept of
motivation are related with education sector. Teachers motivational techniques
increase students participate in educational activities and improve their efforts and
grades. Academic environment charged motivationally those students who have lack
of internal motivation (W. Green, 2010). Therefore, teachers motivate the student to
behave in desired manners. The higher education institutions explain the
relationship between success and motivation in more explicit way. According to
(Treasure & Robert, 2001), student perception regarding motivational climate
strongly affect the student success.
Academic & institutional services and student satisfaction
According to hill (1995), HEI, being services industry, are giving great importance to
the expectations and needs of the students because the students are the primary
customers of the universities and Moreover universities re-engineer their
organizations according to the students needs. Proper systems have been
developed, in order to address the student expectations and needs effectively,
(Elliott & Shin, 2002). (Mamun, 2000) identified some services (library facility,
laboratory facilities and internship assistance) that can influence the student
satisfaction. According to (Haque, Das, & Farjana, 2011) the quality of services
offered by the universities as an independent services can affect the student
satisfaction. The quality of services included quality of teaching, library book
collection and services, campus infrastructure, canteen, sports programs and ICT
facilities.

Services performance and quality is the key determinant of student

satisfaction in the context of higher education institutions. Moreover quality is a

subjective term and has tangible and intangible aspects (Mont & Plepys, 2003; Oliver
& DeSarbo, 1988; Spreng, MacKenzie, & Olshavsky, 1996). The effectiveness of
administration and management facilitate, upgrade the students educational success
and personality grooming (LeBlanc & Nguyen, 1997).
As (Swan, 2001), mentioned three important services like clarity of course design,
student interaction with instructor and active discussion among course participants,
significantly affect the student satisfaction. similarly (Hines, Cruickshank, & Kennedy,

1985) stated that clarity in the behavior of teachers significantly and positively
related to student achievement and satisfaction. According to (Petruzzellis,
D'Uggento, & Romanazzi, 2006), universities should consider students as customers
and should adopt customer centric approach to satisfy them. Study analyses the
impact of some common services such as: lecture halls, laboratories, equipment,
library, dining hall, leisure activities, language course, scholarship, and contact with
teacher, administrative services, counseling etc. on student satisfaction. The
difference between expectation and reality affect student satisfaction. Perceptions
of the students related to university services play important role while determining
the student satisfaction(Sherry, Bhat, Beaver, & Ling, 2004). Theory of persistence
and retention presented by (Tinto, 1982), identify the relationship between student
and institutions. Student goal and institutional commitment, affect retention at
particular institution. Student motivation and academic ability to meet the student
expectation is important in student commitment with institution (DeShields Jr et al.,
2005). Poor class room facilities may influence the student satisfaction. so the
campus environment can influence the student happiness and that can further affect
student satisfaction (Elliott & Shin, 2002). The services which influence the student
satisfaction can be divided into two categories like personal services related to
student and institutional services related to educational experiences. Student
services include age, gender (Brokaw, Kennedy, & Merz, 2004) and institutional
services include teacher style (Dana, Brown, & Dodd, 2001), quality of instruction
(DeBourgh, 2003), feedback from teacher and interaction with class mates (Siegel et
al., 2000) and infrastructural facilities (Helgesen & Nesset, 2007). When student
perceived that their institution providing them standardized quality of learning
environment along with intellectual faculty, appropriate facilities of learning and
infrastructure, their motivation and satisfaction with the organization improved.
Administrative efficiency also play important role to retain and satisfy the students
(Aldridge & Rowley, 2001). According to (Wiers-Jenssen & Stensaker), a student
satisfaction is related with his expectation related to the quality of services provided
by the university, if the student assessment become true he will become satisfied.
Student satisfaction and achievement

There are different internal services which can influence the student achievements,
human satisfaction is one of them (Roos, 2011). Satisfaction analyzes that whether
the goods or services meet the expectation of customer or not. According to smith
2009 satisfaction is based on post experience of consumer, related with product or
service quality. Satisfaction and performance are positively related with one another.
satisfaction affect performance of individuals, motivate them to perform beyond the
limit (Ostroff, 1992). Similarly student experiences with education institution affect
his perceptions and opinions toward education services (teaching, time learning
schedule and education system). According to smith 2007 education institutions are
important organization because it provides quality of services to the student is basic
predictor of student satisfaction. In education institutions the most important thing
is quality of services which create human quality skill. For that reason the education
institutions are important organizations. This research also attempts to find out the
attitude of student satisfaction to update the current perspective situation.
Conceptual Framework
My study has designed four important academic and institutional dimensions to
assess the student satisfaction based on keaveney and young model (1997). This
theory relates the student satisfaction with students expectation regarding services
provided by the university. If the students have good relationship with the faculty
and administrative staff, safe and convenient campus environment and positive
interaction with the fellows, they are more satisfied as compare to those students
who have negative experiences. Therefore, Keaveney and young model establish a
relationship between student college experiences and student satisfaction. It
neglects the impact of these college experiences on the motivation level of student.
It should be incorporated in the model because motivation and satisfaction are two
different concepts. Both affect the outcome of the university. Moreover, it also
neglect that how student satisfaction further mediate the relationship between
academic and institutional services and student achievement and retention.
Therefore, keeping in view all these important relationships my study developed a
mediating model based on Keeveney and youngs model (1997).
Methodology

There are three generally acceptable paradigms in research, constructivism,

positivism and pragmatism. The selection of paradigm provides the guidance to the
researcher about philosophical assumption, selection of tools, instrument,
participant and methods to be used in the study (Cole & Denzine, 2002). The
selection of appropriate approach is based on research problem, if the research
problem is to identify the services that influenced the predictors of outcome or to
test a theory or explanation, then positivism approach is appropriate (Creswell &
Clark, 2007). The objective of my study is to propose and test a model on the
mediating mechanism of academic institutional services and student achievement
and loyalty across the wide numbers of HEIs in Lahore. Thus the quantitative
approach under positivism paradigm is appropriate for the fulfillment of my study
objectives. The Self administrative survey approach was used to collect the data
through questionnaire.
Description of Sampling
In research process the sampling is very important because it select the sample from
the population for investigation (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000). Researcher generalizes
his findings about population on the basis of sample results. Generally there are two
acceptable categories of sampling: probability sampling and non-probability
sampling. In probability sampling, samples are drawn from the population and all
sample units have equal probability of being selected is less prone to biasness, it
enable the researcher to generalize his claims regarding population of their interest.
This type of sampling is appropriate for quantitative research. In non-probability
sampling the probability of a population sample being chosen is unknown. Non
probability sampling is more commonly used in qualitative research because in this
type of research the selection of sample involved the judgment of the researcher (E.
R. Babbie, 1990). This study, keeping in view the general procedure of quantitative
research, will use the probability method of sampling. Probability of sampling can be
done by using its various types. When the list of element composing population is
impossible, random sampling is best to utilize because it deal with the random
selection of individual, so keeping in view this advantage, study will utilize cluster
random sampling technique (Mouton & Babbie, 2001). In cluster random sampling,
cluster are identifies, each individual of the cluster is included in the sample. The

individual in chosen groups are not significantly different from individuals in unchosen group (Hultsch, MacDonald, Hunter, Maitland, & Dixon, 2002). The results on
the basis of representative sample from population has the ability to generalize
these results to that population (Cresswell, 2003). In this study the students are
randomly selected from private and public universities of Lahore (Pakistan). The unit
of analysis was that student who was enrolled at least one year ago in the
institution. This criterion of minimum one year study experience with the institution
is used to ensure that the student participating in the research has clear
understanding of the academic & institutional services and policies, implemented by
the institution. Lahore is capital city of Punjab and is called the city of knowledge.
There are 38 public and private universities in Punjab and of these 38 universities, 25
are located in Lahore. Among these 29 universities, 18 are private universities and 11
are public universities. This study has divided universities of Lahore into two clusters
on the basis of their ownership.
The sample size was 400 students randomly selected form total population that was
the 29 universities in Lahore. According to (Stevens, 2009), sample size should be
above 300 for reliable results obtained in principle component analysis.
Instrument
The best mean to collect the data from large population is questionnaires (E. Babbie,
2012). In order to satisfy the main objective of the study, data was collected on the
variables of teacher related services, student related services, administrative
services, student demographic services, student motivation, student satisfaction,
student achievement and loyalty.
The questionnaire has been divided into eight sections: A. teacher services, b.
administrative services, c. student demographic services, d. campus environment, e.
student satisfaction, f. student motivation, g. student achievement and student
loyalty or retention. In measuring teacher services variables was adapted from
(Keaveney & Young, 1997; Solinas, Masia, Maida, & Muresu, 2012). While
administrative services are adapted from (Aldridge & Rowley, 2001; LeBlanc &
Nguyen, 1997), studies. Student related services are adapted with modification from
(Ilias et al., 2009). Motivation means to exert high level of efforts in exchange of
institutional and academic efforts. The items of motivation and satisfaction has been

adapted from (Gould-Williams & Davies, 2005). Student achievements and student
loyalty was developed by using several national benchmark instruments as models
(ACT, SSI, and CSEQ). Responses of students on the hypothesized model were
obtained on a five point likert-scale (1=strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree).

Analysis and results:

In this section we will discuss the results and present the analysis of data.
Demographic Profile of Respondent
Respondent
Gender (N=400)
Male
Female
Age (N=400)
15-20
21-24
25+

Frequency

239
161

60
40

111
270
19

28
68
4

13
199
187

3
50
47

250
150

63
37

263
62
73
2

66
16
18
.5

179
205
14
2

45
51
3
1

Mother education (N=400)

Less than metric
Metric
F.A
B.A
M.A

129
74
72
101
24

32
19
18
25
6

Father education (N=400)

Less than metric
Metric
F.A
B.A
M.A

59
65
69
118
89

15
16
17
30
22

Number of sibling (N=400)

1-2
3-4
5-6
7-8
Above 8

83
189
95
22
11

21
47
25
5
3

CGPA (N=400)
1-2
2-3
3-4
Name of institute (N=400)
Private
Public
Name of program(N=400)
Business sciences
Social sciences
Information technology
missing
Years of studying (N=400)
1-2
3-4
5-6
Above 6 year

This table.1 shows that out of 400 respondents, 239 (60%) are male and 161(40%) are
female. Out of 400 respondents 111(28%) are within 15-20years, 270(68%) are within 21-25
and 19(4%) are above 25 years. This shows that most of the respondents are in the age
range of 20-25. Results shows that out of 400, 199(50%) got CGPA in the 2.01 to 3.00 and
187(47%) got 3.01 to 4.00 CGPA while only 13(3%) are in the range of 1.00 to 2.00. out of
400 respondent 250(63%) are enrolled in private universities while 150(37%) are studying in
public sector. Out of 398, 263(66%) are studying in business sciences, 62(16%) are studying
in social sciences department while 73(18%) are studying information technology
department. 179(45%) reported that they are studying in the institute from 1-2 years,
205(51%) reported that they are in the institute from last 3-4 years, while 14(3%) have 5-6
years and only 2(1%) have above 6 years of studying. 398 respondent reported their mother
education, 129(32%) reported that their mother education is less than metric, 74(19%),s
mothers are metric, 70(17%) are F.A, 101(25%) are B.A and 24(6%) are M.A while 2
respondent did not provide information regarding their mother education. 400 respondent
reported their father education, 59(15%) reported that their fathers education is less than
metric, 65(16%), s father are metric, 69(17%) are F.A, 118(30%) are B.A and 89(22%) are
M.A. out of 397, 83(21%) have 1-2 number of brothers and sisters, 189(48%) are 3-4,
95(24%) are 5-6, 20(5%) are 7-8 and 10(3%) are above 8 number of sisters and brothers.
Table. 2 Descriptive statistics
items
Quality of teaching is good

mini

max

mean Std.

400

1.00

5.00

3.41

1.155

399

1.00

5.00

3.46

1.092

399

1.00

5.00

3.52

1.100

400

1.00

5.00

3.38

1.142

400

1.00

5.00

3.34

1.157

400

1.00

5.00

3.07

1.297

400

1.00

5.00

3.24

1.128

400

1.00

5.00

3.32

1.172

Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related to

subject)
Teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the
students
Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to make
his or her module interesting
My curriculum is according to the market needs
Administrative staff is friendly and helpful
Administrative policies are student friendly
Administration provides in time information

Access to administrative authorities is easy

Library facility is available to student
I am satisfied with overall cleanliness
classrooms and study rooms are comfortable
Computer lab and internet facility available to student
Seminars and conferences are held on regular basis
I attend the classes regularly
My relationship with my teacher is good
I come to campus for knowledge seeking
I always keep handbook with me in
I really enjoy studying in this institution
Overall I am satisfied with my institution
I am very motivated in my present institution
My institutions reputation motivate me
I have got merit scholarship

400

1.00

5.00

2.99

1.299

400

1.00

5.00

3.61

1.303

400

1.00

5.00

3.68

1.184

400

1.00

5.00

3.44

1.226

398

1.00

5.00

3.34

1.135

400

1.00

5.00

3.28

1.102

400

1.00

5.00

3.84

1.252

400

1.00

5.00

3.74

1.118

399

1.00

5.00

4.07

1.059

400

1.00

5.00

3.80

1.260

400

1.00

5.00

3.54

1.180

400

1.00

5.00

3.48

1.071

400

1.00

5.00

3.55

.983

400

1.00

5.00

3.47

1.108

400

1.00

5.00

2.94

1.366

400

1.00

5.00

3.48

1.152

400

1.00

5.00

3.78

1.246

400

1.00

5.00

3.54

1.278

400

1.00

5.00

3.51

1.088

400

1.00

5.00

3.68

1.106

My critical thinking and problem solving sense has been

improved
I will complete my degree from this institute
I recommend my friends to take admission in this
university
My institute develop my somatic and mental well being
Sense of belonging and being welcomed by the institution
has been improved
Valid N (list wise)

394

Descriptive Summary
This study was based on 25 items; responses to 25 items vary from one to five on a five
point likert scale. Mean score of the different items ranges from 2.94 to 3.78 and the value
of standard deviation ranges from .983 to 1.366 (see table 2).
Table. 3 Reliability of measurement
construct
Academic Services
Administrative Services

Valid number
398
400

Number of items
5
4

Crobach,s alpha
.797
.784

Campus environment
Student services
Student satisfaction
Student motivation
Student achievement
Student loyalty

398
399
400
400
400
400

4
4
2
2
2
4

.756
.769
.781
.665
.881
.864

Table 3 represents the estimated value of cronbachs alpha to examine the reliability and
internal consistency of the measure. For the present sample value of cronbachs alpha vary
from .491 to .797 which indicate that each multi item construct possess high reliability. The
higher value of cronbachs alpha for academic services and administrative services (.797 and
.784), campus environment (.756), and student services (.769), student satisfaction (.781),
student motivation (.665), student loyalty (.864) and student achievement (.881) shows that
each construct is internally consistent. The higher the cronbachs alpha value of a construct,
the higher the reliability is of measuring the same construct.
Correlation
Correlation analysis has been used to confirm mutual association among the items of each
construct. The result shows that the value of correlation coefficients for all the item s of
each construct are positively significantly correlated with each other varying from .309 to
.791 for academic services and administrative services, .429 to .537, for campus
environment .334 to .580 and for student services .495 to .543, for student satisfaction .643,
for student motivation .502, for student motivation .502, for student achievement .267and
for student locality is .290 to .400.
Correlation matrix for academic services
Items

Quality of teaching is good

.719** .522** .415**

.357**

.481** .434**

.418**

.309**

Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related to subject)

Teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the students

.358**

Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to make his

or her module interesting

.406**

My curriculum is according to the market needs

Correlation matrix for administrative services

Items

Administrative staff is friendly and helpful

.537** .428** .515**

1

Administrative policies are student friendly

.520** .438**
1

Administration provides in time information

.429**
1

Access to administrative authorities is easy

Correlation matrix for campus environment

Items

Library facility is available to student

.580** .470** .387**

1

I am satisfied with overall cleanliness

.447** .392**
1

classrooms and study rooms are comfortable

.334**
1

Computer lab and internet facility available to student

Correlation matrix for student services

Items

I attend the classes regularly

.543** .491** .361**

My relationship with my teacher is good

I come to campus for knowledge seeking

.479** .389**
1

.495**

I always keep handbook with me in

Correlation matrix for student satisfaction

Items

Overall I am satisfied with my institution

.447**
1

classrooms and study rooms are comfortable

Correlation matrix for student motivation

Items

I am very motivated in my present institution

.502**
1

My institutions reputation motivate me

Correlation matrix for student achievement

Items

I have got merit scholarship

.267**
1

My critical thinking and problem solving sense has been improved

Correlation matrix for student loyalty

Items

I will complete my degree from this institute

.295** .320**

I recommend my friends to take admission in this university

My institute develop my somatic and mental well being

Services Analysis

.400**
1

In order to check the validity of construct (convergent and discriminant validity), services
analysis was conducted using PCA technique with varimax rotation method. The results of
PCA are given in table4, 5 & 6 respectively.
Table. 4 KMO and Bartletts test
construct

No. of items

Bartletts test of Bartletts test of

sphericity
sphericity
Sig.

5
4

KMO
Measurement
of
sample
adequacy
.786
.769

Academic services(T.F)
Administrative
services(A.F)
Campus services (C.F)
Student services(S.F)
Student satisfaction(S.S)
Student motivation(S.M)
Student achievement(S.A)
Student loyalty(S.L)

635.220
437.073

.000
.000

4
4
2
2
2
4

.759
.760
.650
.500
.800
.713

374.983
412.572
212.197
115.381
29.350
244.186

.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000

The KMO measure of sampling adequacy indicates the suitability of employing services
analysis. The value of KMO varies between 0 to 1. If the KMO value is 0 then application of
services analysis become inappropriate. If the value of KMO is 1, then services analysis
become appropriate. 0.5 value of KMO is poor, 0.6 value is acceptable and value closer to 1
is more desirable (Hinton, Brownlow, & McMurray, 2004). The results suggest (table 6) that
the value of KMO for each construct is above recommended acceptable level of 0.6. For T.F,
the value of KMO is .786, KMO=.769 for A.F and KMO=.759 for C.F, .760 for S.F, .650 for S.S,
.800 for S.A, .713 for S.L. So the results shows services analysis is appropriate in the case of
present data.
Bartlett test is used to check that the relationship between the items of a construct is
significant. Generally, p-value confirms the significance of the relationship among variables.
Table 6 reflects that the p- value of Bartletts test in the case of all construct is significant at
less than 0.000 which provide evidence against null hypothesis of no correlation. It means
the items in the construct are highly correlated. So we can continue with services analysis.
Table. 5 Eigenvalues and total variance explained
construct

components

Initial eigenvalues
Total
%

of

variance Cumulative % of

Academic services
Administrative
services
Campus services
Student services
Student satisfaction
Student motivation
Student achievement
Student loyalty

1
1

2.788
2.435

explained
70.912
69.882

1
1
1
1
1
1

2.314
2.385
1.647
1.502
1.267
2.058

76.846
72.629
82.158
75.097
73.339
61.461

variance explained
70.912
69.882
76.846
72.629
82.158
75.097
73.339
61.461

That component of a construct will be considered as principle component whose eigenvalue

is greater than 1 and that will be used for further analysis. Table 7 shows that T.F consist on
5 items and explain 70.912 % variance, A.F consists on 4 items and explain 69.882 %
variance and C.F consists of 4 item and explained 76.846 % variance, S.F consist on 4 items
and explain 72.629 % variance, S.S consists on 2 items and explain 82.158 % variance and
S.M consists of 2 item and explained 75.097 % variance, S.A consist on 2 items and explain
73.339 % variance and S.L consists on 4 items and explain 61.461 % variance. The results
satisfy the criteria of construct validity including both discriminant validity (loading of at
least 0.40, no cross loading above 0.40) and convergent validity (eigenvalue of at least 1,
loading of at least 0.40for items that load on posit construct, it proof that data is reliable.
Table. 6 Component matrixes
items
Academic services
Quality of teaching is good

components
TF1
.831

Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related to subject)

.841

Teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the students

.769

Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to make his or her module .684
interesting
My curriculum is according to the market needs

.684

Administrative services
Administrative staff is friendly and helpful

AF
.799

Administrative policies are student friendly

.805

Administration provides in time information

.757

Access to administrative authorities is easy

.759

Campus services

CF

Library facility is available to student

.817

I am satisfied with overall cleanliness

.809

classrooms and study rooms are comfortable

.737

Computer lab and internet facility available to student

.669

Student services

SF

I attend the classes regularly

.782

My relationship with my teacher is good

.785

I come to campus for knowledge seeking

.804

I always keep handbook with me in

.715

Student satisfaction

S.S

I really enjoy studying in this institution

.906

Overall I am satisfied with my institution

.906

Student motivation

S.M

I am very motivated in my present institution

.867

My institutions reputation motivate me

.867

Student achievement

S.A

I have got merit scholarship

.796

My critical thinking and problem solving sense has been improved

.796

Student loyalty

S.L

I will complete my degree from this institute

.712

I recommend my friends to take admission in this university

.679

My institute develop my somatic and mental well being

.738

Sense of belonging and being welcomed by the institution has been improved

.738

Regression Analysis
Regression analysis has been used to determine the effect of academic and institutional
services on mediating variable (S.S, S.M) and to determine the effect of mediating variables
on student achievement and loyalty. In the figure the result shows significant positive
relationship of academic and institutional services S.S (=.508, p value< 0.000 and =.490, p
value<.000, = .342 p value<.000, = .468, p value<.000). Similarly result shows significant
positive relationship of academic and institutional services S.M (=.504, p value, 0.000 and
= .426, p value<.000, = .406 p value<.000, = .485, p value<.000). While there is
significant positive relationship of mediating variable S.S on S.A and S.L (= .424, p

value<0.00 and = .526 p value< 0.01). Similarly there is significant positive relationship of
mediating variables S.M on S.A and S.L (= .458, p value<0.00 and = .552 p value< 0.00).
The results show that S.S and S.M capture maximum effect of teacher related services and
administrative services as compare to campus environment and student services. Similarly
S.L captures maximum effect of S.S and S.M. The effect of academic and institutional
services on mediating variables (student satisfaction and student motivation) and the effect
of mediating variables on student achievement and loyalty are shown in figure.

hy guys i would like to suggest you firstly read this diagram here at left side are independent
variables, academic factors, administrative factors etc and in center are our mediating variables ,
while at right side are dependent variableness now please go above and read the hypothesis and
then read explanation of thesis variabels resutls.

Academic factors

Administrative factors

Student
satisfaction
Student
achievement

Student loyalty

Campus environment

Student
motivation
Student factors

Mediating Analysis In Case Of Teacher Qualification and Experience

If the direct effect of independent variable on mediating variable, of mediating variable on
dependent variable and of independent variable on a dependent variable are significant
here we are seeing direct effect of independent variables on
then mediation can be tested.
dependent variables dicsion making about mediation exist or not
please
write my
noticce
on mediation
Table. 7 Direct effects of academic and
institutional
services
on student
achievement and loyalty
Independent variable

Dependent variable
Student achievement
.385*
(8.29)
.455*
(10.18)
.326*
(6.87)
.280*
(5.81)

T.F1
A.F
C.F
S.F

Student loyalty
.752*
(22.72)
.545*
(12.91)
.608*
(15.25)
.630*
(16.08)

Note. * Represent significance at less than 0.000 values in parenthesis represents t-ratios.

Table 7 shows that academic and administrative services contribute comparatively more in
student achievement while campus environment and student services contribute
comparatively more in student loyalty.
I have employed multiple regression analysis to test the mediation proposed by mediating
variables between independent variable and dependent variables. The table 8 represents
the result of multiple regression analysis where each mediating variable was entered as an
independent
variable along with academic and institutional services.
Here in the following table T.F as independent and student achievement dependent , and student satisfaction , mediating variable as independent and student achievement as dependent
variable, and same for student motivation from here we will conclude full mediation or partial mediation exist,,,so plz for detail read notice from my blog . saeedmeo.blogspot.com with the
hname of mediation
Table. 8 Multiple regression analysis for mediation
Independent variable
T.F
Student satisfaction
Student motivation

Adjusted R2
F. statistics
Ad. F
Student satisfaction

Dependent variable
Student achievement
.228*
.207*
(4.42)
(4.07)
.308*
(5.96)
.381*
(7.78)

Dependent variable
Student loyalty
.629*
.616*
(17.7)
(17.89)
.253*
(7.15)
.288*
(8.27)

.214
55.528*
.325*
(6.56)
.265*

.595
292.974*
.378*
(8.37)
.342*

.230
60.194*
.317*
(6.79)

.610
311.930*
.377*
(8.83)

(5.36)
Student motivation

Adjusted R2
F. statistics
Cam.F
Student satisfaction

.322*
(6.900)
.256
69.809*
.204*
(4.32)
.355*
(7.47)

Student motivation

Adjusted R2
F. statistics
Stu. F
Student satisfaction

.288
81.727*
.168**
(3.49).001

.388*
(9.039)
.382
123.743*
.486*
(12.61)
.357
(9.192)

.388*
(8.041)
.213
54.763
.104*
(2.04)
.375*
(7.33)

Student motivation

Adjusted R2
F. statistics

(7.56)

.228
59.721
.077*
(2.51)

.360*
(8.980)
.480
183.148
.491*
(11.79)
.298*
(7.15)

.420*
(8.24)
.184
46.020*

.209
53.692*

.414
141.169*
.463*
(11.64)

.476
180.085
.474*
(11.22)

.317*
(7.47)
.462
171.164*

.468
175.058*

Note. * Represent significance at less than 0.000 values in parenthesis represents t-ratios.

Results in table 8 show that S.S and S.M partially mediates between academic services and
student achievement. Its mediating role is similar between T.F and S.A (S.S =.308, sig,
<.000) and between T.F and S.L (S.S =.255, sig, <.000) similarly S.M mediate between T.F
and S.A (S.M, =.381, sig, <.000) and between T.F and S.L (S.M, =.288, sig, <.000).
Moreover, S.S and S.M partially mediates between administrative services and student
achievement and loyalty. Its mediating role is similar between A.F and S.A (S.S =.265, sig,
<.000) and between A.F and S.L (S.S =.342, sig, <.000) similarly S.M mediate between A.F
and S.A (S.M, =.322, sig, <.000) and between A.F and S.L (S.M, =.388, sig, <.000). S.S and
S.M partially mediates between campus environment and student achievement and loyalty.
Its mediating role is similar between C.F and S.A (S.S =.355, sig, <.000) and between C.F
and S.L (S.S =.357, sig, <.000) similarly S.M mediate between C.F and S.A (S.M, =.388, sig,
<.000) and between C.F and S.L (S.M, =.360, sig, <.000). Moreover, S.S and S.M partially
mediates between student services and student achievement and loyalty. Its mediating role
is similar between S.F an0 d S.A (S.S, =.375, sig, <.000) and between S.F and S.L (S.S =.298,

sig, <.000) similarly S.M mediate between S.F and S.A (S.M, =.420, sig, <.000) and between
S.F and S.L (S.M, =.317, sig, <.000)
Table. 9 Multiple regression analysis to find effect of individual academic and institutional services
Independent variable

1
S.S
.05
Quality of teaching is good
(.088)
Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related .373*
(6.26)
to subject)

2
S.M
.160
(2.74)
.221*
(3.665)

3
S.A
.074
(1.22)
.277*
(4.426)

4
S.L
.330*
(7.49)
.232*
(5.115)

Teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the -.010

(-.214)
students

.56
(1.144)

.000
(-.009)

.209*
(5.694)

Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to .137*

(3.13)
make his or her module interesting

.147*
(3.19)

.062
(1.28)

.231*
(5.19)

.205*
(4.761)

.191*
(4.203)

.195*
(4.661)

My curriculum is according to the market needs

.223*
(5.169)

Adjusted R2
.268
.277
F.statistics
33.636*
31.196*
Multiple regression analysis to find effect of individual Administrative services
.215*
.193*
Administrative staff is friendly and helpful
(5.03)
(4.31)
.040
.052*
Administrative policies are student friendly
(.801)
(1.01)
.246*
.072*
Administration provides in time information
(5.48)
(1.52)
.014
.117
Access to administrative authorities is easy
(.341)
(2.75)

.182
18.781*

.316
37.760*

.184*
(4.21)
-.029*
(-.573)
.224*
(4.86)
.93
(2.25)

.298*
(7.28)
.049
(1.035)
.073*
(3.69)
.129**
(3.32)

Adjusted R2
.261
.185
F.statistics
26.777*
23.669*
Multiple regression analysis to find effect of individual Campus services
.180*
.177*
Library facility is available to student
(3.85)
(3.89)

.223
29.687*

.323
48.411*

.129**
(2.75)
-.043
(-.847)
.119**
(2.64)

.292*
(7.42)

I am satisfied with overall cleanliness

.022
(.427)

.125
(2.523)

classrooms and study rooms are comfortable

.036
(.797)

.011
(.256)

Computer lab and internet facility available to .128

(2.76)
student

.115
(2.54)

Adjusted R2

.169

.122

.160
(3.44)
.118

.123*
(2.85)
.085**
(2.23)
.135
(3.46)

.384

F.statistics

14.805*

21.134*

14.247*

62.472*

Multiple regression analysis to find effect of individual student services

.038*
.046*
I attend the classes regularly
(2.86)
(2.06)
.183*
.262*
My relationship with my teacher is good
(3.74)
(5.41)
.175*
.143*
I come to campus for knowledge seeking
(3.32)
(2.75)
.217*
.198*
I always keep handbook with me in
(5.32)
(4.915)

.098*
(2.03)
.167*
(3.08)
-.014
(-.23)
.055
(1.22)

.210*
(5.38)
.237*
(5.41)
.156*
(3.33)
.092*
(2.52)

Adjusted R2

.247

.265

.081

.399

F.statistics

33.346*

36.926*

9.794*

66.705*

Table 9 shows the multiple regression analysis to find out the effect of individual academic
and institutional services, this study include 5 items in academic services, 4 item in
administrative services , 4 item in campus environment and 4 items in student services. The
first item of T.F is quality of teaching is good. The response to this item varies from 1to 5
with the mean score 3.41 and standard error is 1.155. This item is highly loaded (services
loading= .831) in principle component academic services as shown in table 6. However
when this item included in the multiple regression analysis along with other items, it
produce surprising results. Despite of high services loading and significant effect of
extracted academic services on all mediating variable, this item does not affect significantly
any mediating variable. Although it has significant affect on dependent variable the student
loyalty, (=.330, sig, <.000).
Another item of T.F, teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the students also gave
similar results as discussed above. The response to this item varies from 1 to 5 with the
mean score 3.52 and standard error is 1.100. This item is highly loaded ( services loading=
.769) in principle component academic services as shown in table 6. However when this
item included in the multiple regression analysis along with other items, it produce
surprising results. Despite of high services loading and significant effect of extracted
academic services on all mediating variable, this item does not affect significantly any
mediating variable. Although it has significant effect on dependent variable the student
loyalty (=.209, sig, <.000). However other item included in T.F significantly affect the
mediating variable as well as dependent variables.

Among 4 items of administrative services only one services, access to administrative

authorities is easy, do not significantly affect the mediating variable and dependent variable
except student loyalty. The response to this item varies from 1 to 5 with the mean score
2.99 and standard error is 1.299. This item is highly loaded (services loading= .759) in
principle component academic services as shown in table 6. However when this item
included in the multiple regression analysis along with other items, it produce surprising
results. Despite of high services loading and significant effect of extracted administrative
services on all mediating variable, this item does not affect significantly any mediating
variable. Although it has significant effect on dependent variable the student loyalty
(=.129, sig, <.001). The item library facility is available to the student have more significant
effect on mediating and dependent variable as compare to the other items included in
campus environment services. Moreover, all items included in student services are
significantly affect the mediating and dependent variables
Table.10 Simple regression analysis to find effect of individual academic services
Independent variable

Adjusted R2

1
S.S
.365*
(7.83)
.131

2
S.M
.331*
(8.26)
.144

3
S.A
.260*
(6.29)
.088

4
S.L
.591*
(18.59)
.465

F. Statistic

61.27*

68.15*

40.53*

345.76*

Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related .424*

(10.44)
to subject)

.361*
(8.56)

.330*
(7.71)

.584*
(16.46)

Adjusted R2

.213

.154

.128

.405

F. Statistic

109.02*

73.29*

59.36*

270.96*

Teacher has the ability to attract and stimulate the .244*

(5.55)
students

.252*
(5.78)

.176*
(3.92)

.501*
(13.12)

Adjusted R2

.70

.75

.035

.301

F. Statistic

30.85*

33.43*

15.43*

172.13*

Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to .337*

(8.33)
make his or her module interesting

.351*
(8.71)

.199*
(4.65)

.415*
(10.72)

Adjusted R2

.146

.158

.049

.223

F. Statistic

69.35*

75.93*

21.60*

114.91*

My curriculum is according to the market needs

.371*

.355*

.301*

.372*

Quality of teaching is good

Adjusted R

(9.48)
.182

(8.99)
.167

(7.40)
.119

(9.49)
.183

F. Statistic

89.78*

80.79*

54.73*

90.03*

Administrative staff is friendly and helpful

Adjusted R2

.335*
(9.63)
.187

.306*
(8.61)
.155

.305*
(8.59)
.154

.415*
(12.70)
.288

F. Statistic

92.785*

74.144*

73.813*

161.361*

Administrative policies are student friendly

Adjusted R2

.312*
(7.50)
.122

.269*
(6.36)
.90

.252*
(5.93)
.079

.337*
(8.20)
.143

F. Statistic

56.223*

40.443*

35.142*

67.239*

Administration provides in time information

Adjusted R2

.312*
(7.50)
.122

.269*
(6.36)
.090

.252*
(5.93)
.079

.337*
(8.20)
.143

F. Statistic

56.223*

40.443*

35.143*

57.624*

Access to administrative authorities is easy

Adjusted R2

.374*
(9.73)
.190

.245*
(5.97)
.080

.340*
(8.69)
.157

.299*
(7.41)
.120

F. Statistic

94.552*

35.752*

75.428*

54.943*

Library facility is available to student

Adjusted R2

.256*
(7.05)
.109

.290*
(8.16)
.141

.214*
(5.79)
.075

.441*
(13.99)
.329

F. Statistic

49.66*

57.12*

33.55*

195.93*

I am satisfied with overall cleanliness

Adjusted R2

.207*
(5.05)
.058

.291*
(7.32)
.116

.156*
(3.74)
.032

.404*
(10.84)
.227

F. Statistic

25.54*

53.52*

14.01*

117.60*

classrooms and study rooms are comfortable

Adjusted R2

.177*
(4.44)
.045

.192*
(4.82)
.053

.219*
(5.56)
.070

.330*
(8.76)
.160

F. Statistic

19.73*

23.27*

30.91*

76.79*

Computer lab and internet facility available to .230*

(5.40)
student

.249*
(5.87)

.243*
(5.73)

.345*
(8.48)

Adjusted R2

.066

.078

.074

.152

F. Statistic

29.17*

34.47*

32.77*

71.83*

I attend the classes regularly

Adjusted R2

.204*
(5.26)
.063

.214*
(5.54)
.069

.194*
(5.00)
.057

.423*
(12.44)
.279

F. Statistic

27.68*

30.72*

25.02*

154.72*

Adjusted R2

.334*
(8.03)
.137

.386*
(9.53)
.184

.245*
(5.69)
.073

.475*
(12.49)
.281

F. Statistic

64.567

90.929

32.375

155.995

I come to campus for knowledge seeking

Adjusted R2

.373*
(8.56)
.154

.365*
(8.35)
.147

.169**
(3.43)
.026

.451*
(10.81)
.226

F. Statistic

73.35

69.64

117.73

116.91

I always keep handbook with me in

Adjusted R2

.339*
(9.42)
.182

.331*
(9.14)
.171

.143*
(3.65)
.030

.314*
(8.58)
.155

F. Statistic

88.81

83.53

13.29

73.69

My relationship with my teacher is good

Table 10 shows the results of simple regression analysis where mediating variables (i.e.
student satisfaction and student motivation) and dependent variable (student achievement
and student loyalty) have been regressed on each of 17 items of academic and institutional
services. The result shows that each of 17 items of academic and institutional services
significantly predict mediating and dependent variable.
Table. 11 summary of result of hypotheses
Hypotheses
H1

H2

H3

H4

H5

H6

H7

Results

There is positive relationship between teachers related services and student Supported
satisfaction.

(Figure 1)

There is positive relationship between teachers related services and student Supported
motivation.

(Figure 1)

There is positive relationship between administrative services and student Supported

satisfaction.

(Figure 1)

There is positive relationship between administrative services and student Supported

motivation.

(Figure 1)

There is positive relationship between campus environment and student Supported

satisfaction.

(Figure 1)

There is positive relationship between campus environment and student Supported

motivation.
There is positive relationship between student services and student satisfaction.

(Figure 1)
Supported
(Figure 1)

H8

H9

H10

H11

H12

H13

H14

H15

H16

There is positive relationship between student services and student motivation.

Supported
(Figure 1)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between teacher services and Supported
student achievement.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between administrative services and Supported
student achievement.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between campus services and Supported
student achievement.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between student services and Supported
student achievement.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between teacher services and Supported
student loyalty.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between administrative services and Supported
student loyalty.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between campus services and Supported
student loyalty.

(Table 8)

Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between student services and Supported
student loyalty.

H17

Academic and institutional services positively related with student achievement.

H18

Academic and institutional services positively related with student loyalty.

Discussion of results:
Study found that there is direct positive relationship between T.F, S.S and Student
achievement and loyalty. It has been also examined that student satisfaction partially and
significantly mediate between academic services and student achievement and loyalty.
Therefore, student satisfaction strongly mediates between T.F and Student achievement.
Similarly there is positive and significant relationship between T.F, S.M and Student
achievement and loyalty. It has been also examined that student motivation partially and

(Table 8)
Supported
(Table 7)
Supported
(Table 7)

significantly mediate between academic services and student achievement and loyalty.
Student motivation strongly mediates between T.F and Student achievement as expected
(Gurpinar et al., 2010; Haque et al., 2011; Wiers-Jenssen & Stensaker) Study also examined
the effect of individual (5) items of academic services on student achievement and student
loyalty. Among these 5 items of academic services, teacher concepts clarity (=.373, =.221,
=.277, =.232, sig, <.000) and curriculum (=.223, =.205, =.191, =.195, sig, <.000) has
played significant role in determining the S.S, S.M, S.A and S.L.
Study also found that there is direct positive relationship between A.F, S.S and Student
achievement and loyalty. It examined that student satisfaction partially and significantly
mediates between administrative services and student achievement and loyalty. Student
satisfaction strongly mediates between A.F and Student loyalty (=.373 sig<.000). Similarly
there is direct positive relationship between A.F, S.M and Student achievement and loyalty.
It has been also examined that student motivation partially and significantly mediate
between administrative services and student achievement and loyalty. Student motivation
strongly mediate between A.F and Student loyalty (=.388 sig<.000) as expected (DeShields
Jr et al., 2005). Study also examined the effect of individual (4) items of administrative
services on student achievement and student loyalty. Among these 4 items of administrative
services, administrative staff is friendly and helpful (=.215, =.193, =.184, =.298, sig, <.000)
and administration provides in time information (=.246, =.072, =.224, =.073, sig, <.000) has
played significant role in determining the S.S, S.M, S.A and S.L.
Moreover, there is direct positive relationship between C.F, S.S and Student achievement
and loyalty. It examined that student satisfaction partially and significantly mediates
between campus environment and student achievement and loyalty. Student satisfaction
strongly mediates between C.F and Student loyalty (=.357 sig<.000). Similarly there is
direct positive relationship between C.F, S.M and Student achievement and loyalty. It has
been also examined that student motivation partially and significantly mediate between
campus environment and student achievement and loyalty. Student motivation strongly
mediate between C.F and Student achievement (=.388 sig<.000) as expected (Mont &
Plepys, 2003; Oliver & DeSarbo, 1988; Spreng et al., 1996). Study also examined the effect of
individual (4) items of campus environment on S.S, S.M and on student achievement and
student loyalty. Among these 4 items of campus services, Library facility is available to student

(=.180, =.177, =.129, =.292, sig, <.000 and .001) has played significant role in
determining the S.S, S.M, S.A and S.L.
Study also found that there is direct positive relationship between S.F, S.S and Student
achievement and loyalty. It has been also examined that student satisfaction partially and
significantly mediate between student services and student achievement and loyalty.
Student satisfaction strongly mediates between S.F and Student achievement (=.375
sig<.000). Similarly there is direct positive relationship between S.F, S.M and Student
achievement and loyalty. It has been also examined that student motivation partially and
significantly mediate between student services and student achievement and loyalty.
Student motivation strongly mediate between S.F and Student achievement ((=.474
sig<.000) as expected (Ilias et al., 2009). Study also examined the effect of individual (4)
items of student services on S.S, S.M and on student achievement and student loyalty.
Among these 4 items of student services, my relationship with my teacher is good (=.183,
=.262, =.167, =.237, sig, <.000) has played significant role in determining the S.S, S.M,
S.A and S.L.
Conclusion:
There are several encouraging results emerged from this empirical study. First is that
student satisfaction although connected with four (T.F, A.F, C.F, S.F) important academic
and institutional services positively but academic services have strong significant and
positive relationship with student satisfaction. Along with positive word of mouth,
institutions also concerned with its outcome. Student satisfaction partially mediates the
relationship between academic& institutional services and success and retention of enrolled
students. Secondly, another important mediating variable, student motivation has been
identified. It, significantly and partially mediates between academic and institutional
services and student achievement and loyalty. Moreover, student motivation highly
significantly related with student loyalty, for which institution striving. Student motivation is
connected with four identified academic and institutional services but strongly effected by
academic and student services. Third, the results of direct relationship of academic and
institutional services on student achievement and loyalty suggest that all academic and
institutional services positively and significantly affect the student achievement and student

loyalty but academic and administrative services strongly affect the student success and
retention.
Suggestion for future research
This is the first time a research on student motivation and satisfaction has been conducted
in Lahore region, the number of respondents was approximately 400 students. A lot of
information was gathered from the respondents with respect to their opinions on services
which can affect student satisfaction and motivation. This research was more specific on
students satisfaction and motivation and their mediating role between academic and
institutional services and student success and loyalty. It is the first research to be conducted
in Lahore region, and in order to have more information on this topic it is best, that this
research should be continued and thus a further research should be conducted on students
level of motivation and level of satisfaction in Pakistan.

References:
Aldridge, Sue, & Rowley, Jennifer. (2001). Conducting a withdrawal survey. Quality in Higher
Education, 7(1), 55-63.
Babbie, Earl. (2012). The practice of social research: CengageBrain. com.
Babbie, Earl R. (1990). Survey research methods (Vol. 2): Wadsworth Publishing Company Belmont,
CA.
Berry, Leonard L. (1995). Relationship marketing of servicesgrowing interest, emerging
perspectives. Journal of the Academy of marketing science, 23(4), 236-245.
Brokaw, AJ, Kennedy, WA, & Merz, TE. (2004). Explaining student satisfaction. Journal of Business
Education, 5, 10-20.
Campbell, Todd, Medina-Jerez, William, Erdogan, Ibrahim, & Zhang, Danhui. (2010). Exploring
science teachers attitudes and knowledge about environmental education in three
international teaching communities. International Journal of Environmental & Science
Education, 5(1), 3-29.
Carey, Karen, Cambiano, Rene L, & De Vore, Jack B. (2002). Student to faculty satisfaction at a
Midwestern university in the United States. Paper presented at the The 25th HERSDA Annual
Conference.
Cole, James S, & Denzine, Gypsy M. (2002). Comparing the academic engagement of American
Indian and white college students. Journal of American Indian Education, 41(1), 19-34.
Cresswell, John W. (2003). Research design. Qualitative and Quantitative approaches.
Creswell, John W, & Clark, Vicki L Plano. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research:
Wiley Online Library.
Dana, Susan W, Brown, F William, & Dodd, Nancy G. (2001). Student perception of teaching
effectiveness: A preliminary study of the effects of professors' transformational and
contingent reward leadership behaviors. Journal of Business Education, 2, 53-70.
DeBourgh, Gregory A. (2003). Predictors of student satisfaction in distance-delivered graduate
nursing courses: what matters most? Journal of Professional Nursing, 19(3), 149-163.
DeShields Jr, Oscar W, Kara, Ali, & Kaynak, Erdener. (2005). Determinants of business student
satisfaction and retention in higher education: applying Herzberg's two-services theory.
International Journal of Educational Management, 19(2), 128-139.
Dill, David D. (2007). Will market competition assure academic quality? An analysis of the UK and US
experience Quality assurance in higher education (pp. 47-72): Springer.
Elliott, Kevin M, & Shin, Dooyoung. (2002). Student satisfaction: An alternative approach to assessing
this important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2), 197-209.
Fraenkel, Jack. R, & Wallen, Norman E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education:
McGraw-Hill.
FRASER, SIMON. (1999). Globalization and education: a critical view of post-secondary education for
the millennium. Simon Fraser University.
Gould-Williams, Julian, & Davies, Fiona. (2005). Using social exchange theory to predict the effects of
HRM practice on employee outcomes: An analysis of public sector workers. Public
Management Review, 7(1), 1-24.
Green, Diana, Brannigan, Chris, Mazelan, Patti, & Giles, Lesley. (1994). Measuring student
satisfaction: A method of improving the quality of the students experience. The student
experience, 100-107.
Green, Wendy. (2010). The UQ teaching fellowship scheme: supporting emerging leaders in teaching
and learning. Creating Excellence in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Ezine: Our
Teachers, our Stories(2).
Gurpinar, Erol, Alimoglu, Mustafa Kemal, Mamakli, Sumer, & Aktekin, Mehmet. (2010). Can learning
style predict student satisfaction with different instruction methods and academic
achievement in medical education? Advances in Physiology Education, 34(4), 192-196.

Haque, HMJ, Das, D, & Farjana, R. (2011). Satisfaction of Student Services in Tertiary Level:
Perspective Bangladesh. European Journal of Social Science, 19(2).
Helgesen, yvind, & Nesset, Erik. (2007). What accounts for students' loyalty? Some field study
evidence. International Journal of Educational Management, 21(2), 126-143.
Hines, Constance V, Cruickshank, Donald R, & Kennedy, John J. (1985). Teacher clarity and its
relationship to student achievement and satisfaction. American educational research
journal, 22(1), 87-99.
Hinton, Perry, Brownlow, Charlotte, & McMurray, Isabella. (2004). SPSS explained: Routledge.
Hom, Williard. (2002). Applying customer satisfaction theory to community college planning of
student services. IJournal, Sacramento, 2.
Hultsch, David F, MacDonald, Stuart WS, Hunter, Michael A, Maitland, Scott B, & Dixon, Roger A.
(2002). Sampling and generalisability in developmental research: Comparison of random and
convenience samples of older adults. International Journal of Behavioral Development,
26(4), 345-359.
Ilias, Azleen Ilias, Hasan, Hishamuddin Fitri Abu, & Rahman, Rahida Abd. (2009). Student Satisfaction
and Service Quality: Any Differences in Demographic Servicess? International Business
Research, 1(4), P131.
Keaveney, Susan M, & Young, Clifford E. (1997). The student satisfaction and retention model
(SSRM). University of Colorado, Denver, CO, working paper.
Kotler, Philip, & Clarke, Roberta N. (2012). Marketing for health care organizations: New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, 1987.
Kotler, Philip, & Fox, Karen FA. (1995). Strategic marketing for educational institutions.
Lazar, Mariana, Weinstein, David M, Tsuruda, Jay S, Hasan, Khader M, Arfanakis, Konstantinos,
Meyerand, M Elizabeth, . . . Field, Aaron. (2003). White matter tractography using diffusion
tensor deflection. Human brain mapping, 18(4), 306-321.
LeBlanc, Gaston, & Nguyen, Nha. (1997). Searching for excellence in business education: an
exploratory study of customer impressions of service quality. International Journal of
Educational Management, 11(2), 72-79.
LS, Tabachnick BG Fidell. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York Harper Collins College
Publishers.
Mamun, Muhammad Z. (2000). Total quality management of the non-government universities in
Bangladesh. Paper presented at the Management of Innovation and Technology, 2000.
ICMIT 2000. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on.
Mont, Oksana, & Plepys, Andrius. (2003). Customer satisfaction: review of literature and application
to the product-service systems. International Institute for Industrial Environmental
Economics, Lund University, Lund.
Mouton, Johann, & Babbie, Earl. (2001). The practice of social research. Cape Town: Wadsworth
Publishing Company.
Oliver, Richard L, & DeSarbo, Wayne S. (1988). Response determinants in satisfaction judgments.
Journal of consumer research, 495-507.
Ostroff, Cheri. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An
organizational level analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 77(6), 963.
Palacio, Asuncin Beerli, Meneses, Gonzalo Daz, & Prez, Pedro J Prez. (2002). The configuration of
the university image and its relationship with the satisfaction of students. Journal of
Educational Administration, 40(5), 486-505.
Petruzzellis, Luca, D'Uggento, Angela Maria, & Romanazzi, Salvatore. (2006). Student satisfaction and
quality of service in Italian universities. Managing Service Quality, 16(4), 349-364.
Roos, Inger. (2011). The motivation and satisfaction of the students towards MBA at Karlstad
University.

Sherry, Carol, Bhat, Ravi, Beaver, Bob, & Ling, Anthony. (2004). Students as customers: The
expectations and perceptions of local and international students. Paper presented at the
HERDSA Conference.
Siegel, Richard M, Frederiksen, John K, Zacharias, David A, Chan, Francis Ka-Ming, Johnson, Michele,
Lynch, David, . . . Lenardo, Michael J. (2000). Fas preassociation required for apoptosis
signaling and dominant inhibition by pathogenic mutations. Science, 288(5475), 2354-2357.
Solinas, Giuliana, Masia, Maria Dolores, Maida, Giorgio, & Muresu, Elena. (2012). What Really Affects
Student Satisfaction? An Assessment of Quality through a University-Wide Student Survey.
Creative Education, 3(1), 37-40.
Spreng, Richard A, MacKenzie, Scott B, & Olshavsky, Richard W. (1996). A reexamination of the
determinants of consumer satisfaction. The Journal of Marketing, 15-32.
Stevens, James. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Taylor & Francis US.
Swan, Karen. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design servicess affecting student satisfaction and
perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance education, 22(2), 306-331.
Ten Eyck, Raymond P, Tews, Matthew, & Ballester, John M. (2009). Improved medical student
satisfaction and test performance with a simulation-based emergency medicine curriculum:
a randomized controlled trial. Annals of emergency medicine, 54(5), 684-691.
Thomas, Emily H, & Galambos, Nora. (2004). What satisfies students? Mining student-opinion data
with regression and decision tree analysis. Research in Higher Education, 45(3), 251-269.
Tinto, Vincent. (1982). Limits of theory and practice in student attrition. The journal of higher
education, 687-700.
Treasure, Darren C, & Robert, Glyn C. (2001). Students' perceptions of the motivational climate,
achievement beliefs, and satisfaction in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise
and Sport, 72(2), 165-175.
Wiers-Jenssen, J, & Stensaker, B Grgaard. JB (2002). Student satisfaction towards and empirical
deconstruction of the concept. Quality in Higher Education, 21(8), 183-196.
Williams, James. (2002). The student satisfaction approach: student feedback and its potential role in
quality assessment and enhancement. Paper presented at the 24th EAIR Forum.
Witowski, Lisa L. (2008). The Relationship Between Instructional Delivery Methods and Student
Learning Preferences: What Contributes to Student Satisfaction in an Online Learning
Environment? : ProQuest.
DeShields Jr, Oscar W, Kara, Ali, & Kaynak, Erdener. (2005). Determinants of business student
satisfaction and retention in higher education: applying Herzberg's two-services theory.
International Journal of Educational Management, 19(2), 128-139.
Gurpinar, Erol, Alimoglu, Mustafa Kemal, Mamakli, Sumer, & Aktekin, Mehmet. (2010). Can learning
style predict student satisfaction with different instruction methods and academic
achievement in medical education? Advances in Physiology Education, 34(4), 192-196.
Haque, HMJ, Das, D, & Farjana, R. (2011). Satisfaction of Student Services in Tertiary Level:
Perspective Bangladesh. European Journal of Social Science, 19(2).
Hinton, Perry, Brownlow, Charlotte, & McMurray, Isabella. (2004). SPSS explained: Routledge.
Ilias, Azleen Ilias, Hasan, Hishamuddin Fitri Abu, & Rahman, Rahida Abd. (2009). Student Satisfaction
and Service Quality: Any Differences in Demographic Servicess? International Business
Research, 1(4), P131.
Mont, Oksana, & Plepys, Andrius. (2003). Customer satisfaction: review of literature and application
to the product-service systems. International Institute for Industrial Environmental
Economics, Lund University, Lund.
Oliver, Richard L, & DeSarbo, Wayne S. (1988). Response determinants in satisfaction judgments.
Journal of consumer research, 495-507.
Spreng, Richard A, MacKenzie, Scott B, & Olshavsky, Richard W. (1996). A reexamination of the
determinants of consumer satisfaction. The Journal of Marketing, 15-32.

STUDENT SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE

BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR STUDENTS SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE
Name Of The Student: (Optional )
Name of program in which you enrolled:
Gender

Age

o Male

o 15-20

Semester:

o Female

o 20-24

GPA:

25+

Name of institution: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------At time of enrollment, I select institute by choice:----------------------------------------------------------Years of studying:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My previous academic percentage: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------My current grade level: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Father education: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mother education: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Father occupation: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------No. of sister and brother: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement using the scale
provided.
1 = strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = strongly disagree
Academic Services
Quality of teaching is good
Teacher is very clear in his or her concept (related to subject)
Teacher use appropriate teaching methodologies to make his or her
module interesting
My curriculum is according to the market needs
Faculty is usually available after class and during office hours.
Administrative Services
Administrative staff is friendly and helpful
Administrative policies are student friendly
Administration provides in time information

Access to administrative authorities is easy

Campus Environment Services
Library facility is available to student
I am satisfied with overall cleanliness
Computer lab and internet facility available to student
Seminars and conferences are held on regular basis
Student Related Services
I attend the classes regularly
My relationship with my teacher is good
I come to campus for knowledge seeking
I always keep handbook with me in the class
Student Satisfaction
I really enjoy studying in this institution
Overall I am satisfied with my institution
Student Motivation
I am very motivated in my present institution
My institutions reputation motivate me
Student Achievement
I have got merit scholarship
My critical thinking and problem solving sense has been improved
Student Loyalty
I will complete my degree from this institute
I recommend my friends to take admission in this university
My institute develop my somatic and mental well being
Sense of belonging and being welcomed by the institution has been
improved