Evaluating Higher Education Institutions through Agency and Resources-Capabilities Theories. A Model for Measuring the Perceived Quality of Service
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to explain through the agency theory and theory of resources and capacities as is the process of assessment in higher education institutions. The actors that are involved in the decision-making and the use that is giving the resources derived from repeatedly to practices that opportunistic diminishing the value that is given to the evaluation, in addition to the decrease in team work. A model is presented to measure the perception of service quality by students of the Technological Institute of Celaya, as part of the system of quality control, based on the theoretical support of several authors who have developed this topic (SERVQUAL and SERPERF ) an instrument adapted to the student area of the institution called SERQUALITC is generated. The paper presents the areas or departments to assess and the convenient size, the number of items used by size and Likert scale, the validation study instrument is mentioned. Finally, it is presented the model that poses a global vision of quality measurement process including corrective action services that enable continuous improvement.
Downloads
Article Details
1. Proposal of Policy for Free Access Periodics
Authors whom publish in this magazine should agree to the following terms:
a. Authors should keep the copyrights and grant to the magazine the right of the first publication, with the work simultaneously permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 that allows the sharing of the work with recognition of the authorship of the work and initial publication in this magazine.
b. Authors should have authorization for assuming additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this magazine (e.g.: to publish in an institutional repository or as book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this magazine.
c. Authors should have permission and should be stimulated to publish and to distribute its work online (e.g.: in institutional repositories or its personal page) to any point before or during the publishing process, since this can generate productive alterations, as well as increasing the impact and the citation of the published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
Proposal of Policy for Periodic that offer Postponed Free Access
Authors whom publish in this magazine should agree to the following terms:
a. Authors should keep the copyrights and grant to the magazine the right of the first publication, with the work simultaneously permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 [SPECIFY TIME HERE] after the publication, allowing the sharing of the work with recognition of the authorship of the work and initial publication in this magazine.
b. Authors should have authorization for assuming additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this magazine (e.g.: to publish in institutional repository or as book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this magazine.
c. Authors should have permission and should be stimulated to publish and to distribute its work online (e.g.: in institutional repositories or its personal page) to any point before or during the publishing process, since this can generate productive alterations, as well as increasing the impact and the citation of the published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
d. They allow some kind of open dissemination. Authors can disseminate their articles in open access, but with specific conditions imposed by the editor that are related to:
Version of the article that can be deposited in the repository:
Pre-print: before being reviewed by pairs.
Post-print: once reviewed by pairs, which can be:
The version of the author that has been accepted for publication.
The editor's version, that is, the article published in the magazine.
At which point the article can be made accessible in an open manner: before it is published in the magazine, immediately afterwards or if a period of seizure is required, which can range from six months to several years.
Where to leave open: on the author's personal web page, only departmental websites, the repository of the institution, the file of the research funding agency, among others.
References
CANO, T.; ZARATE, C.; LUGO, E. (2015) Validez y Fiabilidad de un Instrumento para medir la Percepción de la Calidad del Servicio por parte de los Estudiantes del Instituto Tecnológico de Celaya. Academia Journal.com
CASANOVA CARDIEL, H.; GÓMEZ, R. R. (1999) Universidad contemporánea. Política y gobierno, 2. México: Centro de Estudios sobre la Universidad-UNAM.
CORRAL, Y. (2009) Validez y confiabilidad de los instrumentos de investigación para la recolección de datos, Revista Ciencias de la Educación. Segunda Etapa. v. 19, n. 33. Universidad de Carabobo.
CRONIN, J.; TAYLOR, S. (1994) SERVPERF vs. SERVQUAL reconciling performance – based and perceptions- minus expectations measurement of service quality, Journal of Marketing, v. 58, January p. 125-131.
DAILY, C.; DALTON, D.; CANNELLA, A. (2003) Corporate governance. AMR, n. 28, p. 371-382.
DÍAZ, D. (2003) Validación de una escala de medida para la determinación de la calidad de servicio en una institución de educación superior. México: Chiclayo.
DUQUE, E.; CHAPARRO, C. (2012) Medición de la percepción de la Calidad del servicio de Educación por parte de los estudiantes de la UPTC Duitama. Revista Criterio Libre, v. 10, n. 16, p. 159-192.
EISENHARDT, K. (1989) Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, n. 14, p. 57-74.
FAMA, E.; JENSEN, M. (1983) Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, n. 26, p. 301-325.
FERNÁNDEZ LAMARRA, N. (2005). La evaluación de la calidad y su acreditación en la educación superior en América Latina y el MERCOSUR. En: J, Mora y N. Fernández. Educación Superior convergencia entre América Latina y Europa, Procesos de evaluación y acreditación de la calidad. Argentina: Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero. p. 95-114.
FRANCO ESPEJEL, G. M. (2003) Validación del SERVQUAL, en una institución pública mexicana. Revista Unidad Profesional Interdisciplinaria de Ingeniería y Ciencias Sociales y Administrativas, v. 33, n. 1, p. 1–4.
PALACIOS, S. G.; GARCÍA, M. V. (2003) El SEUE: un instrumento para conocer la satisfacción de los estudiantes universitarios con su educación. Acción Pedagógica, v. 12, n. 2, p. 16-27.
HAIR, J.; ANDERSON, R.; TATHAM, R.; BLACK, W. (1999) Análisis Multivariante. Madrid: Prentece Hall.
HOUSE, E. R. (2000). Evaluación, ética y poder. España: Morata, p. 15-62.
IBARRA COLADO, E. (2003) Prólogo. En: Porter, Luis. La universidad de papel. Ensayo sobre la educación superior en México. México, UNAM/CIICH. p. 7-30.
IBARRA COLADO, E. (2009) Impacto de la evaluación en la Educación Superior Mexicana: valoración y debates. Revista de la Educación Superior, v. XXXVIII, n. 149, enero-marzo. p. 173-182. México.
JIMÉNEZ GONZÁLEZ, A.; TERRIQUEZ CARRILLO, B.; ROBLES ZEPEDA, F. J. (2011) Evaluación de la satisfacción académica de los estudiantes de la Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit. Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit.
LATAPÍ SARRE, P. (2008) Una buena educación. Reflexiones sobre la calidad. México: Universidad de Colima. p. 17-32.
LÓPEZ ZÁRATE, R. (2003) Formas de gobierno y gobernabilidad institucional. Análisis comparativo de seis instituciones de educación superior. México: ANUIES. Cap. 3.
MARTÍNEZ RIZO, F. (2010) Usos y abusos de la evaluación educativa. Este País, n. 232. México.
MEJÍAS, A.; ALEXANDER, A. (2005) Modelo para medir la calidad del servicio en los estudios universitarios de posgrado. Revista Universidad, Ciencia y Tecnología, v. 10, n. 34, p. 81-85
OLDFIELD, B. M.; BARON, S. (2000) Student perceptions of sevice quality in a UK university business and management faculty. Quality Assurance in education, v. 5, n. 1, p. 85–95.
OSPINA, R. (2008) Calidad de la educación desde la convergencia de criterios de modelos de evaluación de la educación superior 1996 – 2006. Tesis doctoral no publicada, Tunja: Universidad pedagógica y tecnológica de Colombia, departamento de Ciencias de la Educación.
PARASURAMAN, A.; ZEITHAML,V.; BERRY, L. (1988) Servqual: A Multiple – Ítem Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Servicie Quality, Journal of Retailing, v. 64, n. 1, spring, p. 12-40.
PENG, M. (2012) Global Strategy. Cincinnati: Thomson South-Western.
PEÑA, D. (1997) La mejora de la calidad en la educación: reflexiones y experiencias. Madrid: Getafe.
PÉREZ, C. (2004) Técnicas de análisis multivariante de Datos. Prentice Hall.
PRUGSAMATZ, S.; HEANEY, J. G.; ALPERT, F. (2007) Measuring and investigating pretrial multi–expectations of service quality within the higher education context. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, v. 17, n. 1, p. 17–47.
REYES SÁNCHEZ, O.; REYES PAZOS, M. (2009) Calidad del servicio educativo: Caso de la escuela de artes de la UABC. X Congreso Nacional de Investigación Educativa, México, p. 1–10.
SALINAS GUTIÉRREZ, A.; MORALES LOZANO, J. A.; MARTÍNEZ CAMBLOR, P. (2008) Satisfacción del estudiante y calidad Universitaria: un análisis explicatorio en la Unidad Académica Multidisciplinaria Agronomía y Ciencias de la Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, México. Revista de Enseñanza Universitaria, v. 31, n. 4, p. 39-55.
SANDER, B. (1989) Gestión y administración de los sistemas educacionales: problemas y tendencias. Perspectivas, v. XIX, n. 2. UNESCO, París.
TORO, D. (2006) En enfoque estratégico de la responsabilidad social corporativa: revisión de la literatura académica. Intangible Capital, v. 2, n. 14, p. 338-358. Universidad Politécnica de Catalunya. Departamento de Organización de empresas.
URIEL; ALDAS (2005) Análisis Multivariente Aplicado. Madrid: Editorial Thomson.
VALENZUELA, R. (2010) Hugo, Los Sistemas de Calidad en las Instituciones Educativas. Tendencias Actuales. Revista Digital la Educación, Organización de los Estados Americanos. Santiago de Chile.
VARELA PETITO, GONZALO (2008) La educación superior en México. Planeación, evaluación y entorno. Argentina. Ed. Miño y Dávila. Capítulo III, p. 75-116.
VARGAS HERNÁNDEZ, J. G.; GUERRA GARCÍA, E.; BOJÓRQUEZ GUTIÉRREZ, A.; BOJÓRQUEZ GUTIÉRREZ, F. (2014) Gestión estratégica de organizaciones. Argentina: Ediciones Insumisos Latinoamericanos.
VERGARA, JUAN CARLOS S. (2010) Análisis de la calidad en el servicio y satisfacción de los estudiantes de Ciencias Económicas de la Universidad de Cartagena mediante un modelo de ecuaciones estructurales. Revista electrónica de investigación educativa.
VILLASEÑOR GARCÍA, G. (2003) La evaluación de la educación superior: su función social. Reencuentro, n. 36, p. 20-29. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=34003603
WERNERFELT, B. (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, n. 5, p. 171-180.
YEO, R. K. (2009) Service quality ideals in a competitive tertiary environment. International Journal of Education Research, v. 48, n. 1, p. 62–76.
ZAJAC, E.; WESTPHAL, J. (1996) Director reputation, CEO-board power, and the dynamics of board interlocks. ASQ, n. 41, p. 507-529.