International Student Satisfaction

Wiers-Jenssen, Stensaker and Grogaard (2002, p. 185) define student satisfaction as

“students’ assessment of the services provided by universities and colleges”, including the quality of teaching and academic services, support facilities, physical infrastructure, and social climate, among other factors. It is a continually changing construct and a dynamic process that requires clear and effective action as a result of student feedback (Elliott & Shin, 2002). Student satisfaction with the college environment is vital as it covers the students’ subjective experience during the college years and perceptions of the value of educational experience (Astin, 1993).

While most universities measure the general satisfaction of their students, few instruments are designed to specifically focus on the international student experience. Those who actively surveyed international students mostly used an in-house survey instrument and found the

feedback to be effective in improving services in the areas of customer service, student advising, programming and outreach and educational training (Perez-Encinas & Ammigan, 2016).

In recent years, however, there has been a growing interest from international educators to gather and utilize international student satisfaction data to influence campus change and strengthen support services for this community. Just like at the national level, where

governments are assessing their quality assurance policies with regards to meeting the needs of international students, host institutions are using student feedback, obtained via benchmarking

instruments, as an indicator of educational quality and a measure for improving services that can lead to student success (Shah & Richardson, 2016). Institutions that admit international students cannot expect these students to adjust to and be successful at their new campus without adequate levels of support, advising, and programming services (Andrade, 2006).

In investigating the relationship between student expectations and student satisfaction, Appleton-Knapp and Krentler (2006) compare student satisfaction with their educational experience to customer satisfaction in the sense that they are both driven by a set of complex personal and institutional factors. The authors found those students with exceeded expectations were more satisfied in their learning environment than those whose experience was not up to par with their expectations. Hence, having a sound understanding of what these factors or

expectations are and how they in turn influence satisfaction is critical for higher education practitioners and administrators to be aware of as they ensure international student success on their respective campuses.

According to a study by Smith et al. (2013) on student support services, the main factors associated with international student attrition were: difficulty in making friends and interacting with domestic students; poor quality of services provided by the international student support and academic services offices; limited housing and on campus food options; and a lack of cultural and social activities, pre-arrival information and resources to adapt to their new campus environment. Based on data gathered from the International Student Barometer (ISB) and their own survey instrument, the authors offer five recommendations for institutions to consider when developing support related to international student experience and success: 1) student health services and support systems that include both physical and mental health care; 2) student living and campus eating places that meet the needs and preferences of students and at the same time

provide a platform for them to engage with local students; 3) professional and culturally- sensitive academic advising services including resources on academic integrity, English Language support, and career services; 4) welcome orientation and in-semester programs that cover information on student rights and responsibilities as well as help with their and their families’ transition and acculturation to a new society; and 5) intercultural competency and sensitivity training to all support staff and faculty who interact with international students.

Zhao and Douglass (2012) used data from the Student Experience in the Research University (SERU) Consortium (Center for Studies in Higher Education, n.d.) to examine the experience of international students compared to US students at 15 major public research US universities. While generally satisfied with their overall academic and social experience, international students were less satisfied in those areas than their US counterparts, and questioned the value of their US education. International students were less satisfied with the quality of instruction and availability of courses in their program of study. They demonstrated a higher level of engagement in collaborative research and creative projects and spent less time working on campus and much more time on academic studies, compared to US students. The study also found that international students responded less favorably towards the climate for diversity on their campus, including respect for and freedom to express personal beliefs.

Wiers-Jenssen, Stensaker and Grogaard (2002) examined the factors leading to student satisfaction for over 12,000 first-year students at Norwegian universities, over three years. Their analysis revealed that the academic and pedagogic quality of teaching were important

determinants of student satisfaction, along with social climate, aesthetic aspects of the physical infrastructure, and the quality of support services. Students indicated their highest level of satisfaction on the social climate on campus, library services, and the academic quality of

teaching. They were less satisfied with the pedagogic quality of teaching and the service level of the administrative staff.

Sahin (2014) investigated the factors that affect students’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction and found the following service quality indicators to be the most significant: teaching quality, management and leadership of the university, campus life, academic services and infrastructure, and physical facilities. The city in which the university was located, the availability of public transportation, and student perceptions about their institution were also important factors that influenced satisfaction.

Butt and Rehman (2010) examined the relationship between student satisfaction and education offerings at higher education institutions and found that teachers’ expertise, quality of courses offered, learning environment, and classroom facilities all enhanced satisfaction.

Teachers’ expertise was the most influential factor among all the variables. Recommendations from the authors included institutional efforts to induct, train, and retain qualified teachers that can promote the quality of education; courses that are designed to meet contemporary and global challenges; and conducive learning environments and classroom facilities and technology that enable interactive and effective communication between students and faculty.

Asare-Nuamah (2017) assessed the factors affecting international student satisfaction in a university setting and found that library services, contact with teachers, class size, course

content, reading materials, and general administrative services were key in enhancing the student experience. The author also offered a strong recommendation for administrators and

policymakers to regularly assess their students’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with university services to effectively meet their needs and in turn increase satisfaction.

Arambewela and Hall (2009) examined the differences in international student perceptions of the level of satisfaction related to education and noneducational services at institutions in Australia. The authors used seven constructs in the study—education, social, technology, economic, accommodation, safety, and prestige and image—as predictors of student satisfaction. Results showed that feedback from lecturers, good access to academic staff, and quality of teaching were perceived to be the most essential educational variables influencing student satisfaction. Counseling services, social activities, close working relationships with other students, and international orientation programs were the most significant variables within the social construct. Work during studies and cost of living were key economic factors and safety was a primary concern to international students and their families. Respondents indicated that a highly ranked international image and the prestige of a university were attractive as it would create better career opportunities for them. They also expected student accommodation

to be made available by universities or by community agencies to comply with their minimum standards of comfort, at reasonable cost. Access to computer labs and the availability of modern facilities was another important expectation.