
==== Front
Heliyon
Heliyon
Heliyon
2405-8440
Elsevier

S2405-8440(24)12730-2
10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36699
e36699
Research Article
Student satisfaction: Examining capacity development and environmental factors in higher education institutions
De-Juan-Vigaray María D. mayo@ua.es
a⁎
Ledesma-Chaves Pablo pledesma@us.es
b
González-Gascón Elena elena.gonzalez@umh.es
c
Gil-Cordero Eloy Egcordero@us.es
a
a University of Alicante, Spain
b University of Seville, Spain
c University of Miguel Hernández, Spain
⁎ Corresponding author. mayo@ua.es
24 8 2024
15 9 2024
24 8 2024
10 17 e3669924 8 2023
9 8 2024
20 8 2024
© 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2024

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
The success of universities is heavily dependent upon the efficient management of the learning environment. The students, who are the principal customers of these institutions, are the guarantors of their survival. In this context, students' satisfaction with their education experience is fundamental. To achieve success and maintain competitiveness, universities must identify the key aspects that are important to their students. In the literature, the importance of generic or transversal competence/capacity development in student satisfaction as a motivational factor, using Herzberg's theory has yet to be analysed. This study fills this gap by highlighting its importance. It represents an important advance in the investigation of the hygiene and motivational factors that affect student satisfaction and loyalty. The objective is to analyse the antecedents of the students' satisfaction, including the acquisition of competences, in a post-pandemic and energy-crisis scenario in which the teaching conditions must adapt to the environmental and human factors. The sample is comprised of 548 valid surveys taken from three Spanish public universities. SmartPLS software was used to analyse the results. Based on Herzberg's model, the results show that the acquisition of competences and capacity development, as a motivational factor, together with the teaching methods, the teaching staff involved, the course management and class facilities and infrastructure as hygiene factors are antecedent variables of student satisfaction. The fulfilment of students' expectations is also a predictor of student allegiance to the higher education institution where they study. All stated hypotheses are supported. It should be remembered that if the hygiene factors "work", the most you can hope for is not to let students down, not to lose them. In addition, for them to behave as prescribers and to have a full experience that is subsequently recommended, it is necessary to pay attention to motivational factors.

Keywords

Herzberg's theory
Capacity development
Competences
Motivation factors
Hygiene factors
Teachers
==== Body
pmc1 Introduction

The university environment must be managed efficiently to ensure the success of higher education institutions [1,2]. These institutions, both public and private [3], national and international [1,[4], [5], [6]], have students as their main customers who are also the guarantors of their survival [[7], [8], [9]]. However, these customers are no longer hostage to their nearby universities. Nowadays, the academic range available to students is very wide [10]. Thus, students choose their education by selecting the institutions that suit them best [1,4,11,12] and enrolling in the studies that meet their needs, as well as numerous mobility programmes (e.g.ERASMUS) [13]. They pay for part or all of their education (as in the case of private universities) and expect the highest possible quality [10,14]. This aligns with the fourth Sustainable Development Goal (SDG-4), which emphasizes high-quality education [15]. Other authors are also showing interest in SDGs [15,16], indicating its importance.

In the academic literature, the conceptualisation of the students’ role is very varied, using all kinds of metaphors; they have been referred to as consumers or citizens [13,17,18] and products or customers [14,19,20]. What researchers do agree on is that student satisfaction with their educational experience is fundamental [1,[21], [22], [23]]. Therefore, to ensure their success and competitiveness, higher education institutions must be alert to which aspects are key for the students and do their best to fulfil these expectations [13,21,24]. In this sense, over the last few decades, emphasis has been placed on assessing the value and issues related to student perception and experience in the classroom [10,12,25] as these are aspects in which universities can differentiate themselves by satisfying their customers better. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, additional emphasis has also been placed on satisfaction with courses offered online [1,21,24].

From all the terms mentioned above, some authors disagree with considering students as customers [26,27]. However, we will characterise students as customers and make the following analogy with the business world as this perspective is well supported in the literature and applies to the purpose of our work [1,7,8]. It exists in cases where customers feel really "excited" and attached to the brand, and the experience is satisfactory when loyalty levels are high [10,28]. Therefore, if we transfer this idea to the academic world, we find that the customer's (or student's) positive experience becomes one of the most important factors in terms of the competitive advantage and success of the university or institution [10,25].

In this context, using “Herzberg's two-factor theory” [29,30] as a theoretical framework and the models of [[31], [32], [33]], an updated explanatory model of students' satisfaction is stated as a basis. The aim of this study is to explain the antecedents of student satisfaction in the context of a post-pandemic era [34], energy crisis, sustainable development practices [35] and climate change [36], in which teaching conditions have adapted to environmental factors [24] and where the role of the teacher, along with other factors, could be a determinant in making the student experience the best possible. Furthermore, after more than twenty years of implementation of the European Higher Education Area and considering SDG-4, the acquisition of competences and capacity development by the student body is incorporated into the approach to predict student satisfaction when immersed in the academic experience [37,38]. Knowing the key antecedents, and if they create and influence a good student experience, students are more likely to be loyal and endorse the institution they are pleased with, bringing all those benefits which will boost the institution's reputation [10,28].

In our case, the development of capacities is introduced into the model as a motivational factor according to Herzberg's two-factor theory. This is because students can see these capacities as directly related to the expected outcomes of their academic experience and as part of the teaching-learning process in the higher education environment [39], thus shaping their overall experience as students.

According to DeShields, Kara, and Kaynak [31] teaching methods, course management, university or classroom infrastructure, and finally, teaching staff are directly related to the satisfaction of the student experience outcome. All of these can be considered as hygiene factors since they can, in themselves, cause dissatisfaction, but not satisfaction. For instance, the lack of good infrastructure may cause dissatisfaction; however, its presence in the classroom may not cause satisfaction (e.g. individual tablet chairs versus comfortable desks for a left-handed student). The reason is that students may not perceive it as directly related to their expected outcomes of a university experience or to their academic achievement.

The study is important because, despite numerous publications on the factors influencing student satisfaction [40], few focus on the role played by generic or transversal competences in student satisfaction as a motivational factor, which is essential for managers in higher education when creating strategic objectives [41]. The originality of the work lies in the model presented, as it was developed based on a bibliographic and theoretical analysis of previously published research into hygiene and motivational factors, mainly on Herzberg's theory. Taking this model as a starting point, we have proposed an extended model, which includes loyalty, to enable the analysis of student satisfaction within their educational experience at public universities, in a context of continuous challenges regarding new higher education offerings. The paper begins with the theoretical framework, followed by the methodology (with the presentation of the data, the instrument and the statistical analyses carried out), and finally by the results, conclusions and limitations.

2 Theoretical framework

Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene Factor Theory is a well-known, widespread theory explaining motivation and satisfaction in both work [42] and educational settings [33,[43], [44], [45], [46]]. Specifically, as previously stated, so-called hygiene factors do not cause satisfaction when present (e.g. classrooms with desks and tables and a suitable temperature [47], but produce dissatisfaction when absent or deficient [48]. Motivational factors positively influence satisfaction when they are present, e.g. educational effectiveness [12,33].

Herzberg's theory indicates that “satisfaction” and “dissatisfaction” are not polar opposites of the same continuum, so when hygiene factors do not occur satisfactorily they can lead to dissatisfaction, even if motivational factors are addressed satisfactorily. Hence the importance of attending to and balancing one and the other [33]. Finally, hygiene factors are extrinsic and usually beyond the learner's control. Motivational factors are typically intrinsic, being part of the content of the studies and can be managed by the students [44,45].

In the model presented, as a motivational factor, the development of generic skills (eight in total) is taken into account. As hygiene factors, the teaching methods used, the teaching staff, the course management and the infrastructure are considered.

2.1 Motivational factors according to Herzberg's theory: capacity development (CD)

According to Imbernón, Silva and Guzmán [49], the concept of capacity development integrates knowledge (know-how), attitudes (knowing how to act) and competences (knowing what to do); these are interrelated and are continuously being developed and updated; they are linked to a context, to a given situation, and facilitate the effective resolution of known or new work situations. This is a difficult concept to interpret [50] but it can be taught.

Considering their application to the labour market, there are two types of capacities: specific or technical, which may be applied only in the environment for which they have been developed; and general or transversal capacities, which apply to professional performance [51]. The latter are defined as a set of capacities which can be applied to any professional situation or task, regardless of where they were acquired.

This study focuses on generic or transversal capacities, which affect a wider range of students and are not the sole and exclusive heritage of a particular degree programme [39]. They are common skills in many professions and are necessary in new forms of work [52,53]. These skills are grouped into three categories [54]: personal, systemic and instrumental. For this research, the personal ones include team working ability and being able to participate actively in class. Systemic skills include autonomous learning, and instrumental skills include decision-making, critical thinking, oral communication, written communication and the use of ITC (information technology and communication) tools.

DeShields et al., Abuzeid et al., and Reisman et al. (2022) [31,40,55] consider skills development of vital importance for students' subsequent entry into the labour market and educational institutions in the European Union are increasingly adopting this approach [56]. For their part, Sankaran, Sankaran and Bui [33] consider motivational factors as those which are capable of improving the prospects of finding employment and of professional promotion. Today's society requires constant adaptation to meet the challenges of the future, especially as it is becoming increasingly common for people to have to change careers several times during their lifetime [57]. The literature supports the development of skills as an accelerator of some SDGs [15]. In this sense, as we mentioned in the research context, the development of skills could also be capable of achieving SDG- 4 (quality education).

Students are becoming active, autonomous, reflective, cooperative and truly responsible learners who will become the competent professionals of the future [58]. Their generic skills will allow the student body to be better prepared to enter the labour market. Therefore, the following hypothesis is put forward.H1 There is a positive and significant relationship between capacity development and student satisfaction.

2.2 Hygiene factors according to Herzberg's theory: teacher related

2. 2. 1 Teaching staff (TS)

When considering the academic aspect of the teaching staff, the variables taken into account refer to their quality and efficiency [59], e.g. the teacher's attitude towards their students, or the teacher's qualifications. Establishing a positive attitude between teacher and student that fosters students' self-confidence and self-efficacy is one of the main roles of the teacher [60]. Teacher preparation also affects the teaching-learning process, being one of the inputs to student satisfaction [61].

Excellence in education is not imposed or dictated; to ensure quality in teaching it is necessary that teachers are involved in it [62]. The same subject with the same content can be taught by different teachers and this can lead to a wide range of student experiences [60,63]. On the other hand, studies on classroom context suggest that there are important differences in how students interpret the same context or environment (i.e. [60,63]. These differences can be attributed to previous experiences students may have had, differences in their personalities, or the different behaviour of teachers. When students perceive their teachers to have a caring attitude, they make an effort to reach their highest potential [64], which will make them more satisfied with themselves, as well as resulting in a better experience [65].

The emotions conveyed by teachers, such as happiness or enthusiasm, are also positively related to student satisfaction, with students being cognitively engaged, showing curiosity and wanting to delve deeper into the subject [66]. Taking these aspects into account and the previous arguments, the following hypothesis is stated.H2 There is a positive and significant relationship between teaching staff and student satisfaction.

2. 2. 2 Teaching methods (TM)

Teaching methods are directly related to the basic service provided by higher education institutions through their teaching staff: education. This dimension is essential in the configuration of the extent of student satisfaction [32]. The lecturers must communicate to their students the methodology used to teach [67]. If the teaching method is well designed, students will learn the content better and acquire the skills, competences and capacity development more quickly, as they can be more effectively directed through the sequence of activities to be carried out [12,68]. In this sense, Guerra, González and García [68] highlight, among the different methodological alternatives that teachers can use, variables such as: “cooperative learning”, “problem-based learning”, “project-based learning”, “case studies”, and “e-portfolio”, together with an appropriate use of digital tools. In general, teaching methods have undergone important changes due to the intensive incorporation of ICT since the pandemic [24].

Moreover, the use of certain methodologies, such as motivation-based teaching [69], flipped-classrooms [70] versus traditional ones, or even assessment methods [8] influence student satisfaction. The results suggest that teachers’ behaviour in the caring and supportive dimension, considered as part of the teacher methodology, is the dominant factor in predicting student satisfaction [60]. In relation to the above, we have formulated the following hypothesis.H3 There is a positive and significant relationship between teaching methods and student satisfaction.

2. 2. 3 Course management (CM)

We have already found that the teaching staff is an important dimension that formalises student satisfaction, affecting both its managerial and academic dimensions [65]. In addition to their attitude towards students [60], their preparation [61] and the teaching methods they use [12,67], teachers also play a key role in student satisfaction in terms of how they manage their course [37]. Teachers must plan the subjects they teach and deliver the planned activities, both theoretical and practical, and they must perform their management functions effectively.

The organisation of the groups, the instructions for the tasks to be performed and, in general, the organisation of the teaching-learning process are key inputs for a successful student experience [10]. The management of the relationship between teachers and students, the way of welcoming students’ suggestions or the way of supporting them are also part of their experience [71].

Similarly, communication and management between different parts of a course or degree, involving different teachers, also influence satisfaction [72]. As Lilly and Tippins [73] point out, the context that teachers create can contribute to students’ ability to think carefully about the materials and content of the subject in question. In this way, the environment that each teacher creates and the way in which a class is organised takes on its own personality [74]. Taking the above into account, we present the fourth hypothesis.H4 There is a positive and significant relationship between course management and student satisfaction.

2.2.4 Hygiene factors according to Herzberg's theory related to classroom facilities and infrastructures (CI)

Educational facilities refer to all those instruments that are able to be employed to attain educational objectives (e.g. classroom layout, lighting), while infrastructures are explained as all those factors which become the main pillar for the execution of the educational process (e.g. computers, interactive whiteboards and screens, internet connection, sound equipment or projectors) [75].

The literature is not unanimous on how facilities and infrastructure are perceived [8]. Previous studies [76,77] when explaining satisfaction point out facilities as hygiene factors. It is important to note that such hygiene factors appear as "unsatisfactory", i.e. negative perceptions of the facilities offered by universities or institutions could result in dissatisfaction, however, positive perceptions do not automatically engender overall satisfaction [29].

Various aspects of the classroom, such as classroom areas or spaces where students can learn, affect teaching [59] and thus contribute to the perceived quality of the service offered by universities or institutions [12,78]. Classroom context, such as large classrooms with traditional table arrangements vs. smaller classrooms with tables that can be moved as needed, can affect leadership processes, task completion or group work [79]. However, when considering furniture or decoration, both are of marginal importance for student satisfaction [61]. Studies indicate that in some cases students are satisfied with the infrastructure [80,81] while in other cases they are not [61]. This leads to the following hypothesis.H5 There is a positive and significant relationship between facilities and infrastructure and student satisfaction.

2.3 Higher education students’ satisfaction (SS) and loyalty (course recommendation and re-enrollment) (LOY)

University student satisfaction has been extensively studied in the literature [1,12,16,21,24,35,65,67,82]; in addition to the correlation between this satisfaction and loyalty [7,[83], [84], [85]]. Marzo, Pedraja and Rivera [32] set forth a detailed literature review, concluding that there is no consensus on the definition of the service satisfaction concept, thus lacking a generally accepted measurement scale. Student satisfaction is a notion that encompasses different elements [16,32,35]. Giese and Cote [86] define it as a response of variable intensity, summative and affective in nature, which takes place at the moment the service is evaluated. Applying the concept to the education sector [12], state that “student satisfaction” is a cursory frame of mind resulting from the assessment of their participation in the educational service received.

In general, it refers to the level of well-being that students perceive when their academic expectations and needs are met [87]. According to Weerasinghe and Lalitha [88], in the present study, “student satisfaction” is considered an attitude resulting from the evaluation of the educational experience, services and facilities; and it shows the extent to which students meet their expectations [89].

In relation to the consequences of satisfaction, research reveals several factors including loyalty to the institution, student retention, positive word-of-mouth and the possibility of future donations after completion of studies [90]. Both the retention of students, preventing them from going to other competing institutions, and the attraction of new students (national or international) are the current challenge for higher education institutions [7].

Appuhamilage and Torii [7] and Appleton-Knapp and Krentler [7,82,82] propose that “student satisfaction” with their educational experience should be a sought-after result, in addition to academic attainment to gain their resulting loyalty in the future. Rehman et al. [85] emphasise the experiences of the student body during the course, satisfaction and loyalty, pointing out that all these aspects are paramount in the evolution of strategies designed to attract and retain students, who demonstrate it through communication, word of mouth or the intention to re-enroll in the same institution.

Knowing the aspects (both positive and negative) that students report about their university allows the institution to determine the best educational strategies and make the necessary changes where there are areas for improvement [91]. There is no doubt that the survival of universities depends on their ability to finance themselves [7], and part of this financing comes from maintaining or, even more, increasing the number of students enrolled in their centres. Definitively, it comes from the number of satisfied customers to whom they must communicate their "know-how" [19,92] and who, later, should express their satisfaction and give their recommendation. To achieve this goal, in addition to political decisions, it is necessary for students to be satisfied with the education received and, thus, their student experience will be positively transmitted and they will become loyal customers of the institution [7]. Taking into account the above, the last hypothesis of the model is stated below.H6 There is a positive and significant relationship between student satisfaction derived from their experience with the institution and loyalty to it.

3 Methodology

This section details the methodology followed in this research. It presents the sample, the instrument with the scales used to measure the variables of the model, the method used, and the statistical analyses carried out, both to check the reliability of the measuring instrument and to contrast the formulated hypotheses.

3.1 Sample and data collection

The participating students were enrolled in three Spanish public universities (University of Alicante, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, and the University of Seville) during the first semester of academic year 2022–2023. Students participated voluntarily in the online questionnaire (see Appendix) and were informed of the purposes of the study. In all subjects, participants completed the questionnaire at the end of term, just before the final assessment tests. This ensured that the course content had been taught, and continuous assessment had been conducted by the teaching staff. The students were studying subjects related to social sciences, more specifically in the second and third years of marketing, business administration and management, economics, law, and double degrees in law and business administration. These students were invited to participate during teaching hours, constituting a total sample of 550 students. After analysing the responses obtained, only the surveys with all questions answered were considered valid and two questionnaires were rejected due to data not being correctly entered into the platform. Therefore, the sample consists of 548 valid surveys out of a total of 550: 72.8 % are between 18 and 20 years old, 26.1 % are between 21 and 23, and 1.1 % are over 23 years old; 41 % of whom are men and 59 % are women.

Non-probability convenience sampling was chosen, where the selection of elements of the population is not based on uniform probability, but is at the discretion of the researcher [93]. It is commonly employed in fields such as social sciences and business, due to the diversity in potential respondent characteristics, which requires the establishment of research guidelines [94]. The convenience of the non-probabilistic method in our case is based on the need to balance participation among students of different subjects and ages, so that the results can have a more adequate generalisation. The questionnaires were distributed online through the Qualtrix XM programme between the 21st and November 28, 2022.

In the classroom, the teachers, verbally, explained the purpose of the study and the participants were assured of its compliance with ethics (confidentiality, anonymity, consent, etc.). The QR code for the questionnaire was projected in the classroom, allowing students to access it and choose whether to complete the questionnaire on their laptops or mobile phones. Before starting the questions, they encountered a header that thoroughly explained all the project details again, including the objectives of the study, duration, the anonymity of the responses, as well as the voluntary nature of the participation. In addition, the contact details of the main researcher were also provided in case the participants had any queries. The students were required to read this information and give their explicit consent for participation by continuing the process and completing the questionnaire.

3.2 Method

The research design methodology used was quantitative with a survey, followed by a qualitative approach to further reinforce the findings. The software Smart-PLS 4 was used in the data processing of this research [95], to ensure in advance the reliability and validity of the measurement scales and the structural model [96]. However, this research recognises the inherent complexity of human behaviour [28] and seeks to examine, furthermore, considering the balanced and distinct associations among variables using PLS-SEM examination, the asymmetrical and nonlinear relationships inherent to human behaviour [97]. Therefore, The Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) approach was employed to supplement the data gathered at the collective level, and to consider causal complexity in the analysis of student behaviour [98].

In addition, the symmetric approach used in data analysis may be insufficient to explain the complexity of human behaviour [28]. Therefore, a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fs/QCA) was performed to evaluate the proposed approaches in this study. The fs/QCA method is a valuable tool for finding all possible relationships that lead to the causally established result [99], and has been used successfully in a variety of research areas.

The fs/QCA analysis system will determine which sets of antecedents establish the expected end result, which is ultimately student loyalty, through logical inference. To do this, all factors entered into the model are considered and the possible combinations that can lead to student loyalty are observed. Fig. 1 below shows the proposed model for consideration.Fig. 1 Proposed model.

Fig. 1

3.3 Measurement of the questionnaire variables

Scales from the literature were used for the study. All the scales used are made up of several 7-point Likert-type additive items: (1) "Very strongly disagree"; (2) "Strongly disagree"; (3) "Somewhat disagree"; (4) "Undecided"; (5) "Somewhat agree"; (6) "Strongly agree" and (7) "Very strongly agree". To measure the capabilities development variable, a scale was used that considers eight transversal capabilities that take into account the requirements most demanded by companies [100]. These capabilities are grouped into three categories (instrumental, personal and systemic) according to Martínez-Clares and González-Morga [101], following the recommendations of the Tuning model of the Spanish National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation ([102,103]. Thus, capacity development considers four instrumental items of the "decision-making" type: three personal items, including "problem analysis with critical reasoning", and one systemic item – "autonomous learning".

To measure the variables Teaching Methods; Course Management, Teaching Staff and Satisfaction, scales based on the questionnaire of [32] were used. Specifically, the Teaching Methods scale consists of five items including, for example, "I found the teaching methods appropriate". The Course Management scale, with three items, such as "I found the organisation of the course to be appropriate". The teaching staff scale, with three items, of the type "The teacher's attitude towards the students was good". As for the infrastructure scale, we used the scale proposed by Ref. [104] with four items of the type: "Classroom furniture facilitates learning".

There are precedents in the literature, in a pedagogical context [31,32], that use a single item to measure the student satisfaction variable. Even when using Herzberg's theory as a theoretical model [33], satisfaction as the sole dependent variable is considered. So, student satisfaction is measured by the item "I am satisfied with the course". Following Marzo et al. [32] student loyalty is measured through two items that capture their subsequent intention to recommend their experience to future students ("I will recommend this course") or even to repeat it ("I will enroll again in similar courses"). Finally, the questionnaire was developed using back-translation. Firstly, it was translated into Spanish by two experts, and then back into English to avoid any risk of jeopardising content validity.

3.4 Data analysis

The PLS statistical method was applied to assess and confirm the reliability of the measurement indicators and the structural model [105]. SmartPLS 4 software was utilised for data analysis [95] employing a bootstrap technique with 5000 samples to evaluate the significance of the parameters. Additionally, the fs/QCA methodology was used to supplement the outcomes of the symmetrical approach, examining cases and fully capturing the intricacies of entrepreneurial behaviour [106].

4 Results

4.1 PLS-SEM

To analyse the data, we used the variance-based structural equation technique known as partial least squares (PLS-SEM). To evaluate explanatory models with PLS-SEM, we follow a two-step process [107]. First, an evaluation of the measurement model is performed and, subsequently, an evaluation of the structural model is conducted.

To determine the significance of the indices, we use a bootstrap procedure [108], which is a resampling method. This method enables us to assess the significance of the path coefficients, as well as the weights and loadings of the indicators linked to each underlying variable.

It is crucial that the measurement model demonstrates adequate reliability and validity (see Table 1).Table 1 Scales and measurement model.

Table 1Construct/Dimension/Indicator	Cronbach's	Composite	Average Variance	
Alpha	reliability	Extrated (AVE)	
M	Teaching Methods	0.869	0.905	0.657	
CM	Course Management	0.816	0.890	0.729	
TS	Teaching Staff	0.863	0.917	0.786	
CD	Capability Development/
Competences	0.909	0.927	0.614	
CI	Classroom facilities/
infrastructure	0.890	0.811	0.519	
LOY	Loyalty
(Recommend course and re-enroll)	0.833	0.922	0.856	

Some of the most suitable measures for evaluating internal consistency reliability include ρA, Jöreskog's rho, and Cronbach's alpha [107]. In the initial phases of research, reliability values below 0.7 are generally deemed acceptable, whereas in more advanced research, higher values such as 0.8 or 0.9, which surpass standard norms, are preferred. The average variance extracted (AVE) serves as an indicator of unidimensionality [109]. Lastly, the heterotrait-monotrait criterion (HTMT) offers evidence of discriminant validity [110] (see Table 2, Table 3).Table 2 Correlation matrix.

Table 2	CD	CM	CI	LOY	TM	TS	SS	
CD	1.000							
CM	0.599	1.000						
CI	0.372	0.296	1.000					
LOY	0.624	0.640	0.276	1.000				
TM	0.659	0.828	0.325	0.704	1.000			
TS	0.522	0.753	0.309	0.565	0.729	1.000		
SS	0.645	0.694	0.347	0.755	0.730	0.631	1.000	
CD: Capability Development; CM: Course Management; CI: Classroom infrastructure; LOY: Loyalty; TM: Teaching methods; TS: Teaching Staff; SS: Student Satisfaction.

Table 3 Discriminant validity.

Table 3Heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT) - Matrix	
	CD	CM	CI	LOY	TM	TS	SS	
CD								
CM	0.680							
CI	0.464	0.399						
LOY	0.707	0.756	0.357					
TM	0.731	0.778	0.419	0.817				
TS	0.580	0.787	0.404	0.655	0.839			
SS	0.666	0.757	0.413	0.821	0.779	0.679		
Fornell-Larcker criterion	
CD	0.784							
CM	0.599	0.854						
CI	0.372	0.296	0.721					
LOY	0.624	0.640	0.276	0.925				
TM	0.659	0.828	0.325	0.704	0.811			
TS	0.522	0.753	0.309	0.565	0.729	0.887		
SS	0.645	0.694	0.347	0.755	0.730	0.631	1.000	
CD: Capability Development); CM: Course Management; CI: Classroom infrastructure; LOY: Loyalty; TM: Teaching methods; TS: Teaching Staff; SS: Student Satisfaction.

4.2 Measurement model

The results indicate that the measurement model meets all standard criteria. Initially, it is evident that all individual items meet the reliability standard, as their standardised loadings exceed 0.7 [111]. Secondly, the model meets the requirement for construct reliability, as all consistent measurements exceed the threshold of 0.8 [110]. Moreover, the average variance extracted (AVE) values surpass 0.5, indicating that these latent variables achieve convergent validity. Additionally, Table 3 demonstrates that all variables satisfy the criterion for discriminant validity, as evidenced by the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).

4.3 Structural model

Employing bootstrapping with 5000 resamples provides standard errors and statistical insights to evaluate the significance of path coefficients [112]. The findings are presented in Table 4, revealing the outcomes and significance of the examined direct effects. Notably, all six hypothesised relationships demonstrate statistical significance.Table 4 Hypothesis testing.

Table 4	Hypotheses	β	t-value	p-value	Confidence Intervals	Supported	
2.5 % 97.5 %	
Satisfaction R2 = 0.605	
H1	Capability Development - Satisfaction	0.246	4.836	0.000***	0.147	0.347	Yes	
H2
	Course Management - Satisfaction	0.178	2.736	0.006**	0.049	0.303	Yes	
H3
	Classroom Infrast.- Satisfaction	0.064	2.149	0.032**	0.008	0.125	Yes	
H4
	Teaching Methods - Satisfaction	0.311	4.310	0.000***	0.172	0.454	Yes	
H5
	Teaching Staff - Satisfaction	0.122	4.587	0.009**	0.029	0.213	Yes	
Loyalty R2 = 0.570	
H6	Satisfaction - Loyalty	0.755	28.929	0.000***	0.701	0.803	Yes	
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, ns: not significant (based on t(4999), two-tailed test).

4.4 Fs/QCA

By using the fs/QCA methodology, all potential methods to accomplish the intended goal (in this case, loyalty involving course recommendation or re-enrollment in similar courses) can be identified. This allows a better understanding of the characteristics that lead to student loyalty, as well as the combinations of antecedents that can similarly and independently be developed by educational institutions to achieve it, compared to the symmetric technique used, PLS-SEM [113]. This research uses both techniques in a complementary manner to achieve more generalisable results.

The fs/QCA methodology operates on complexity and configuration theory. Given the inherently intricate and non-linear relationships among variables, modifications can produce a diverse array of outcomes [114]. Thus, educational institutions can achieve similar outcomes in terms of student loyalty by implementing different unique combinations of factors. Configuration theory provides a comprehensive and simultaneous comprehension of the patterns responsible for creating these conditions [115].

Important concepts within fs/QCA involve causal asymmetry and equifinality. Causal asymmetry implies that the factors or combination of factors explaining the presence of an outcome may differ from those causing the outcome [116]. In other words, the cause of an outcome may differ from what justifies or explains it. Thus, causal asymmetry implies that the relationship between conditions and outcomes is neither linear nor unidirectional, but rather complex and multifaceted. On the other hand, equifinality means that multiple combinations of antecedent factors can be equally effective in achieving a desired goal [117].

To start the calibration process in fs/QCA, it is necessary to transform the data from the original 7-point Likert scale to a format suitable for calibration. This process involves the following steps: 1) calculating the mean of each variable based on student responses and their respective factor loadings; 2) calibrating the resulting data according to the percentile of the mean score for each variable [118]. Calibration results vary according to the type of calibration and the cut-off points selected. In accordance with the recommendation by Ref. [113], we have adopted cut-off thresholds of 6.4 and 2. To mitigate issues related to condition membership, a small constant value of 0.001 has been added to the causal condition values [116]. The necessary conditions analysis states that an antecedent whose consistency exceeds 0.9 can be considered as such [116]. In this study, TM (Consistency = 0.9382), CM (Consistency = 0.9615), TS (Consistency = 0.9609) and SS (Consistency = 0.9342) meet these criteria and will be treated as such during the truth table analysis [113]. Table 5 presents the analysis of the necessary conditions.Table 5 Analysis of necessary conditions.

Table 5Outcome variable: LOY	Outcome variable: ∼LOY	
Loyalty	Negation of Loyalty	
(LOY)	(∼LOY)	
Conditions tested	Consistency	Coverage	Conditions tested	Consistency	Coverage	
TM	0.9382	0.9333	TM	0.8392	0.1921	
∼TM	0.1879	0.8355	∼TM	0.7088	0.7253	
CM	0.9615	0.9112	CM	0.9767	0.1911	
∼CM	0.1465	0.8378	∼CM	0.5931	0.7803	
TS	0.9609	0.9016	TS	0.8622	0.1861	
∼TS	0.1326	0.8071	∼TS	0.5444	0.7622	
CD	0.8692	0.9499	CD	0.7860	0.1976	
∼CD	0.2658	0.8437	∼CD	0.8008	0.5849	
CI	0.8127	0.9237	CI	0.8347	0.2183	
∼CI	0.3122	0.8914	∼CI	0.7085	0.4655	
SS	0.9342	0.9484	SS	0.7704	0.1800	
∼SS	0.1923	0.7845	∼SS	0.7794	0.7316	

Table 6 shows the three proposed solutions that explain the presence of Loyalty (LOY). It can be observed that Course Management is present in all of them, which demonstrates its relevance in the analysis. Each of the solutions exceeds the minimum necessary consistency, which is 0.75 [119], all of them even exceeding 0.9 as well as the global solution (0.9393). Regarding the occurrence of LOY, the three available options account for 91.83 % of the cases, surpassing the recommended threshold of 80 % [99]. The approach utilised involves assessing both the presence of a condition and its absence. In academic literature, the absence of a condition is considered its negation, with these terms often used interchangeably [113]. In our study, absence refers to a condition that is not pertinent to the proposed solution. Following the recommendations of the literature, only those solutions whose unique coverage exceeded 0.1 were considered [113]. Solution 1 shows a unique coverage of 0.1905, very high for research related to fsQCA, which reveals the importance of this combination of variables for the study performed.Table 6 Truth table.

Table 6Solutions LOY	1	2	3	
TM	●		●	
CM	Image 1	Image 1	Image 1	
TS	●	●		
CD		●	●	
CI		●	Image 2	
SS		Image 2	●	
Consistency	0.9404	0.9426	0.9705	
Raw coverage	0.9123	0.1697	0.2897	
Unique coverage	0.1905	0.0216	0.0396	
Overall solution consistency	0.9393			
Overall solution coverage	0.9183			
Note. Black (“●“) and hollow circles (“Image 2”) show the presence and absence of a condition, respectively. Moreover, large and small circles show core and peripheral conditions, respectively. Blank cells show a “do not care” situation.

5 Discussion

In general, the results obtained allow us to achieve the proposed objectives with a high level of statistical significance. Considering the present work, we will analyse each of the constructs and their interpretation with respect to previous research. Regarding Capacity Development, the results indicate that it is the construct with the highest level of influence (t-value 4.836). This fact coincides with previous research such as that of [55], which indicates the importance of capacity development for the creation of research networks and the implementation of specific skills for their development within and outside the academic world, a fact also corroborated by the studies of [52] regarding the relationship between this construct and the development of transversal competences and their contribution to mental, cognitive and creative activities, associated in their analysis with the implementation of digital knowledge.

In the present research it is also evaluated from a dual point of view: symmetrical and non-symmetrical. This makes it easier to interpret the results and how they interact with the rest of the variables, facilitating future research as previous investigations have on occasion highlighted the difficulty of interpreting this concept [50]. The presence of Capacity Development as solutions to improve skills seeks to create an enriching environment that intentionally uses forms of learning and interactions among those involved to foster the corresponding skills, a fact that concurs with previous work by Ref. [15]. The results obtained imply a different perspective on capacity development, as they position it as a precursor to satisfaction, thus implying a direct outcome of educational objectives. The development of student capacities has a significant impact on their satisfaction with the course itself, which could also project into their future work. Therefore, the educational process in student capacity development directly affects satisfaction and not just personal capacities, thus potentially influencing skill development and future career prospects.

Course management also appears as a significant factor in the research into satisfaction with the course. The relevance comes in this case from its combinatorial value, which allows us to distinguish to a better extent the true value of the construct, although in the results of the symmetrical research they show a low value with respect to the others (t-value 2.736). The solutions offered in the research reveal Course Management by teachers as the only construct present in all of them, besides being a core factor, and its need for inclusion in satisfaction studies as recent literature reviews indicate [10]. Its importance coincides with studies such as that of [67] and the need for its analysis to accurately determine the process of student satisfaction. Previous studies have suggested that elements of coherent and equitable management through the management of their complaints and satisfaction of their expectations could determine correct management [12]. Other authors have included course management in the concept of effectiveness, although they suggest a differentiated analysis given its importance [1], such as the one carried out in the present research. The presence in all the solutions indicates that students consider the faculty to play an important role in their satisfaction, as [37] emphasizes, claiming a high degree of excellence in course management.

Related to excellence, the Teaching Staff construct appears as significant and the second most important in terms of its value (t-value 4.587). The relevance given by the result coincides with previous research such as that of [59], where they emphasise the need to increase competences with respect to the quality of teaching. However, the research presented covers, with respect to this variable, both aspects of competences and of coordination and attitude, as occurs in the study by Ref. [60], highlighting the assessment made by the students in both senses. Therefore, the study concludes that even though the teacher may not always perceive the appreciation of their effort, the research demonstrates that students are very aware of it and reflect it in their satisfaction. Hence, it would be advisable to enhance measures of student perception, as well as the grading systems for teaching activities. Striking a balance between these aspects can further improve student satisfaction, with a direct impact on that of the teacher.

This valuation is also observed with respect to Teaching Methods (t-value 4.310), reaching a level of importance similar to that of Teaching Staff (t-value 4.587), and where it appears in the solutions associated above all with Course Management. This fact has been highlighted in studies that have decomposed the variable into different items such as that of [67], indicating the importance with respect to student satisfaction in general. This variable has acquired an important presence in recent studies, especially due to the variations that teaching systems have undergone as a result of the pandemic [24], although the need for its presence in successive satisfaction studies is generally emphasised [21]. University professors must be aware that connecting with their students improves their satisfaction, so promoting values such as enthusiasm or the transmission of happiness enhances this aspect. Therefore, the research process should focus on the values that foster this connection, which can then be introduced into programmes aimed at improving university teaching. Programmes for teaching excellence should directly link to student satisfaction, creating a climate of synergy between the faculty and students which is fostered by the University.

Despite being significant, the variable Classroom Infrastructures presents a lower relevance (t-value 2.149). However, different studies have shown that in the case of learning spaces for university students they have an important impact on teaching [59], although satisfaction is measured in a different way. The results in other studies such as [61], clearly reveal how university students placed the environmental elements related to Classroom Infrastructures as the least valued, something that conflicts with the conclusions of [81]. In relation to uncertain results, the present study can offer a solution regarding the relational value of the variable Classroom Infrastructures, where we can indicate that its lack of valuation by students can be compensated with elements such as good course management, teaching staff or teaching methods. In this way, the Herzberg hygiene factor can be compensated by the rest of the hygiene factors. The results indicate that despite universities dedicating significant resources to improving their classroom infrastructure, students are drawn to other more personal aspects. This fact could, in certain cases, explain certain levels of failure in universities with ample resources, if they do not balance physical elements with human ones. Although this is a factor whose results have not been consistently shown in previous research, it appears that student satisfaction does not directly stem from physical elements but rather from human ones.

The relationship between the variables Satisfaction and Loyalty within the university environment has been the subject of numerous investigations. In the case of the present research, the results provide a very high power of the relationship (t-value 28.929), establishing an unequivocal relationship. This result coincides with other analyses conducted in higher education, such as those of [7,[83], [84], [85]].

In fact, some research has evaluated the relationship inversely, with loyalty having an impact on satisfaction [120], which gives us an idea of the interchangeability between the two concepts within the field of education. Despite the direct relationship between both concepts, student loyalty does not necessarily depend directly on satisfaction with the solutions offered, and it may even be compensated by other factors according to the research findings. This fact is relevant to the design of future models, as this variable does not have to be exclusively positioned as a determinant, but rather balance with other antecedents can lead to the same outcome. Therefore, student satisfaction programmes aimed at loyalty assessments should expand their parameters to establish the elements that determine loyalty to university studies more effectively. In this study, antecedents associated with teaching staff behaviour, such as Teaching Staff, Teaching Methods, or Course Management, may serve as alternatives to direct student satisfaction. Hence, it is advisable to analyse other combinations of variables.

Implications

From an academic perspective, this work presents important implications that can be developed in future works, contributing in a significant way to the theoretical and practical development of the research field. This research represents an important advance in the investigation of the hygiene and motivational factors that affect satisfaction and loyalty, since it implements a symmetrical and non-symmetrical methodology, allowing a better interpretation of the combined value of the variables, their relative importance, as well as the contribution made to each of the solutions, which will allow in future works a more accurate construction of models adapted to different environments.

Furthermore, this study successfully applies a dual symmetric and non-symmetric PLS-SEM and fs/QCA methodology to identify the relationship between constructs. Thus, it is to be hoped that this research has opened avenues for other researchers to carry out this type of behavioural study with larger sample sizes applying similar systems, allowing a closer approximation to the reality between the interconnectedness of constructs. Considering Herzberg's theoretical framework applied to higher education, the contribution of including the development of generic competencies (eight in total) as a motivational factor makes it possible to assess the importance of these competencies, which, despite being included transversally in all the degrees, are not always systematically evaluated or assigned due importance, despite being fundamental for incorporation into the labour market.

From a practical point of view for university management, the results of the study provide valuable strategic information for academics and university administrators on the factors that affect student loyalty.

In terms of motivational factors, skill acquisition is one of the constructs that has the greatest influence (t = 4.836) on student satisfaction and is considered of vital importance for their incorporation into the labour market. It could be considered by academic institutions as one of the pillars to achieve the success of their graduates, as well as their satisfaction, loyalty and word-of-mouth.

As for the hygiene factors considered in this study, the course management factor implies an important role on the part of the faculty in the student's perception, which indicates the need to achieve a high degree of excellence in the process, giving an important weight to the preparation of the faculty, as well as to the role of the universities in their preparation. Those universities that have initiated teaching improvement processes for their teaching staff should be aware that the results will have a direct impact on student satisfaction, so their promotion and development should be essential. According to the results, to achieve student loyalty, university administrators should focus on the initial planning and programmed activities, and ensure that these are fulfilled, as well as on the development of the teacher's functions and the organisation of the course in general, with these activities serving as a pivot with the rest. In fact, students continue to value in their loyalty a more conservative view of teaching development, based on teaching methods, course management and faculty, although it is true that it is possible to achieve this degree of loyalty by relying on other constructs.

Limitations and futures lines of research

The present research is not without some limitations. Regarding the size and distribution of the sample, it would be advisable for future research to extend the investigation to a broader spectrum of students, as well as degrees, trying to find significant differences in order to obtain more generalisable results. With respect to the variables used, although it is true that the methodology employed provides an important relational capacity among them, in the future other variables could be introduced to complement the model, trying to obtain new useful relationships or causes of student loyalty. Regarding future research directions, we believe that, firstly, the current work focuses on students’ experience in the context of public universities. It would be advisable for future research to apply the analysed model to explain the differences between public and private universities, establishing comparison parameters and common lines of educational development. Secondly, the consolidation of the parameters analysed in this model will enable future research to expand the model with other antecedents adapted to the university context, allowing for a better collection of elements applicable to satisfaction and loyalty. Thirdly, successive models may benefit from the inclusion of a greater number of motivational factors, allowing for a better balance regarding student satisfaction with hygiene factors. In relation to this, within the complexity of human behaviour analysis, it would be advisable to conduct a reverse analysis of those factors that produce dissatisfaction and lack of loyalty, as they could be subsequently added to create a more comprehensive model. Other future lines of research include focusing attention on motivational factors, specifically studying whether any additional transversal competences and capacity development can be added to the eight considered [32]. Along the same lines, focusing on transversal competences and capacity development, it would be interesting to investigate if they are grouped in any way and which ones, or which combination, exert a greater influence on student satisfaction.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This research was conducted according to the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration and was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Miguel Hernández de Elche (Spain) with approval number: 2022/183431, reference: DEE.EGG.01.22 dated November 21, 2022 and the data is stored and preserved accordingly. Participants gave their informed consent complying with the ethical directives of the University Miguel Hernández of Elche (Spain) for a multi-university project.

For consent

All participants were informed that consent to participate in the study and publish their data would be assumed on completion and submission of the study questionnaire.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

Data availability statement

The dataset used and analysed during the present study is available, properly anonymised, from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

María D. De-Juan-Vigaray: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Pablo Ledesma-Chaves: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Elena González-Gascón: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Eloy Gil-Cordero: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: María D. De-Juan-Vigaray reports financial support was provided by University of Alicante. Redes-i3ce de Calidad, Innovación e Investigación en Docencia Universitaria, Vicerrectorado de Calidad e Innovación Educativa. Proyecto Redes Docencia Ge-Redes 37002e001 Universidad de Alicante (Spain).

Other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix Questionnaire

TEACHING METHODS	
(V1)	The duration and distribution of the topics were correct.	
(V2)	I found the level to be adequate, taking into account my previous preparation.	
(V3)	I found the teaching methods appropriate	
(V4)	The bibliography, documentation, etc. provided has been adequate.	
(V5)	I found the proportion between theory and practice to be adequate.	
COURSE ADMINISTRATION	
(V6)	Initial planning and programmed activities have been fulfilled.	
(V7)	The teacher has fulfilled his/her duties effectively.	
(V8)	I found the organisation of the course to be adequate	
TEACHING STAFF	
(V9)	The teacher's attitude towards the students was good.	
(V10)	The teacher's preparation was good.	
(V11)	Coordination between teachers (if any) has been good.	
CAPACITIES DEVELOPMENT/COMPETENCES	
(V12)	The course has increased my ability to work in a team.	
(V13)	The course has increased my ability to learn independently.	
(V14)	The subject has increased my ability to make decisions by applying knowledge in practice.	
(V15)	The subject has increased my ability to analyse problems with critical reasoning, without prejudices, with precision and rigour.	
(V16)	The course has increased my oral communication skills.	
(V17)	The course has increased my written communication skills.	
(V18)	The subject has encouraged active participation in class.	
(V19)	The course has increased my ability to use computer tools.	
CLASSROOM INFRAESTRUCTURES	
(V20)	The design of the classroom provides adequate space for classroom work.	
(V21)	Classroom furnishings facilitate learning.	
(V22)	Classroom technology equipment is adequate.	
(V23)	Classroom environmental conditions are adequate.	
SATISFACTION	
(V24)	I am satisfied with the course	
LOYALTY	
(V25)	I am going to recommend this subject	
(V26)	I will re-enrol in similar subjects.	
Gender: M, F.

Age: 18-20:___; 21-23:____ ; +23

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.
==== Refs
References

1 Tran Q.H. Nguyen T.M. Determinants in student satisfaction with online learning: a survey study of second-year students at private universities in HCMC Int. J. TESOL Educ 2 1 2022 63 80 10.54855/ijte22215
2 Zineldin M. Akdag C.H. Vasicheva V. Assessing quality in higher education: new criteria for evaluating students' satisfaction Qual. High Educ. 17 2 2011 231 243 10.1080/13538322.2011.582796
3 Mintz B. Neoliberalism and the crisis in higher education: the cost of ideology Am. J. Econ. Sociol. 80 1 2021 79 112 10.1111/ajes.12370
4 Mai L.A. Comparative study between UK and US: the student satisfaction in higher education and its influential factors J. Market. Manag. 21 2005 859 878 10.1362/026725705774538471
5 Tsarenko Y. Mavondo F.T. Gabbot M. International and local student satisfaction: resources and capabilities perspective J. Market. High Educ. 14 1 2004 41 60 10.1300/J050v14n01_03
6 Zhu D. Kim P.B. Poulston J. Hosp J. An examination of university student workers' motivations: a New Zealand hospitality industry case study Tour. Educ 32 4 2020 206 219 10.1080/10963758.2019.1687311
7 Appuhamilage K.S.M. Torii H. High. Educ. Eval. Dev., The impact of loyalty on the student satisfaction in higher education: A structural equation modelling analysis 13 2 2019 82 96 10.1108/HEED-01-2019-0003
8 Dinh H.-V.T. Nguyen Q.A.T. Phan M.-H.T. Pham K.T. Nguyen T. Nguyen H.T. Vietnamese students' satisfaction toward higher education service: the relationship between education service quality and educational outcomes Eur. J. Educ. Res. 10 3 2021 1397 1410 10.12973/eu-jer.10.3.1397
9 Farrell A.M. Souchon A.L. Durden G.R. Service encounter conceptualisation: employees' service behaviours and customers' service quality perceptions J. Market. Manag. 17 2001 577 593 10.1362/026725701323366944
10 Motta V.F. Galina S.V.R. Experiential learning in entrepreneurship education: a systematic literature review Teach. Teach. Educ. 121 2023 103919 10.1016/j.tate.2022.103919
11 Abbott A. Silles M. Determinants of international student migration World Econ. 39 5 2015 621 635 10.1111/twec.12319
12 Elliott K.M. Healy M.A. Key factors influencing student satisfaction related to recruitment and retention J. Market. High Educ. 10 4 2008 1 11 10.1300/J050v10n04_01
13 Vauterin J.J. Linnanen L. Marttila E. Issues of delivering quality customer service in a higher education environment Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci 3 2 2011 181 198 10.1108/17566691111146087
14 Halbesleben J.R.B. Becker J.A.H. Buckley M.R. Considering the labor contributions of students: an alternative to the student-as-customer metaphor J. Educ. Bus. 78 5 2003 255 257 10.1080/08832320309598610
15 Scheihing K.W. Fraser C.M. Vargas C.R. Kukurić N. Lictevout E. A review of current capacity development practice for fostering groundwater sustainability Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 2022 10.1016/j.gsd.2022.100823
16 Pedro E. Alves H. Leitão J. Sustainable development practices in public higher education: a new conceptual framework for nurturing student satisfaction and reinforcing attractiveness to international students Sustain. Dev. 2023 1 18 10.1002/sd.2798
17 Hartman D.E. Schmidt S.L. Understanding student/alumni satisfaction from a consumer's perspective: the effects of institutional performance and program outcomes Res. High. Educ. 36 2 1995 197 217 10.1007/BF02207788
18 Hill F.M. Managing service quality in higher education: the role of student as primary consumer Qual. Assur. Educ. 3 1 1995 10 21 10.1108/09684889510093497
19 Bailey J.J. Students as clients in a professional/client relationship J. Manag. Educ. 24 3 2000 353 365 10.1177/105256290002400306
20 Calma A. Dickson-Deane C. The student as customer and quality in higher education Int. J. Educ. Manag. 34 8 2020 1221 1235 10.1108/IJEM-03-2019-0093
21 Chang V. Liu M. Xu Q.A. Xiong C. Factors affecting student satisfaction in e-learning Int. J. Bus. Syst. Res. 16 4 2022 401 422 10.1504/IJBSR.2022.123926
22 Douglas J. McClelland R. Davies J. The development of a conceptual model of student satisfaction with their experience in higher education Qual. Assur. Educ. 16 1 2008 19 35 10.1108/09684880810848396
23 Suhre C.J.M. Jansen E.P.W.A. Harskamp E.G. Impact of degree program satisfaction on the persistence of college students High Educ. 54 2 2007 207 226 10.1007/s10734-005-2376-5
24 Yekefallah L. Namdar P. Panahi R. Dehghankar L. Factors related to students' satisfaction with holding e-learning during the Covid-19 pandemic based on the dimensions of e-learning Heliyon 7 7 2021 e07628 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07628
25 Izquierdo A. Jiménez A.I. Zarco González I. Martínez M.P. Drivers of e-services' consumer experience: the case of online universities Rev. Tecnol. Cienc. Educ 9 2018 11 33 https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6247300
26 Paredes M.R. Students are not customers: reframing student's role in higher education through value Co-creation and service-dominant logic Improving the Evaluation of Scholarly Work 2022 10.1007/978-3-031-17662-3_3
27 Svensson G. Wood G. Are university students really customers? When illusion may lead to delusion for all!" Int. J. Educ. Manag. 21 1 2007 17 28 10.1108/09513540710716795
28 Douglas E.J. Shepherd D.A. Prentice C. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis for a finer-grained understanding of entrepreneurship J. Bus. Ventur. 35 1 2020 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.105970
29 Herzberg F. Mausner B. Snyderman B.B. The Motivation to Work 1967
30 Sachau D.A. Resurrecting the motivation-hygienetheory: Herzberg and the positive psychology movement Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 6 4 2007 377 393 10.1177/153448430730754
31 DeShields O.W. Kara A. Kaynak E. Determinants of business student satisfaction and retention in higher education: applying Herzberg's two‐factor theory Int. J. Educ. Manag. 19 2 2005 128 139 10.1108/09513540510582426
32 Marzo M. Pedraja M. Rivera P.A. New management element for universities: satisfaction with the offered courses Int. J. Educ. Manag. 19 6 2005 505 526 10.1108/09513540510617454
33 Sankaran S. Sankaran K. Bui T. Student satisfaction with R vs. Excel in data mining and business analytics: a herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory perspective Decis. Sci. J. Innovat. Educ. 21 2023 68 82 10.1111/dsji.12285
34 Altbach P.G. de Wit H. University World News, Post Pandemic Outlook for HE Is Bleakest for the Poorest vol. 4 2020
35 Pedro E. Leitão J. Alves H. Students' satisfaction and empowerment of a sustainable university campus Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023 10.1007/s10668-023-03903-9
36 Kirby P. Webb R. Conceptualising uncertainty and the role of the teacher for a politics of climate change within and beyond the institution of the school Educ. Rev. 75 1 2023 134 152 10.1080/00131911.2021.1933392
37 Geier M.T. Students' expectations and students' satisfaction: the mediating role of excellent teacher behaviors Teach. Psychol. 48 1 2021 9 17 10.1177/00986283209599
38 Gibson A. High J. Measuring business student satisfaction: a review and summary of the major predictors Educ. Policy Manag 32 3 2010 251 259 10.1080/13600801003743349
39 Gargallo-López B. Pérez-Pérez C. Garcia-Garcia F.J. Giménez Beut J.A. Portillo Poblador N. Educación X.X.1 The skill of learning to learn at university. Proposal for a theoretical model 23 1 2020 19 44 10.5944/educXX1.23367
40 Abuzeid R. Al Haliq S. Mobrad A. Al Najjar A. Bangasan R. Students' satisfaction with simulated skills in simulation labs unit Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ. 11 4 2022 2070 2077 10.1016/j.ecns.2009.05.009
41 Camilleri M.A. Evaluating service quality and performance of higher education institutions: a systematic review and a post-COVID-19 outlook Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci 13 2 2021 268 281 10.1108/IJQSS-03-2020-0034
42 Ravesangar K. Fauzi M.A. The influence of extrinsic motivating factors on employees' work performance at banking sectors in Malaysia: the mediating effect of psychological ownership Int. J. Bus. Soc. 23 2 2022 1147 1168 10.33736/ijbs.4862.2022
43 Barker M.R. MYP coordinators: differences in job satisfaction levels based on the number of IB programmes J. Res. Int. Educ. 21 1 2022 62 72 10.1177/14752409221089589
44 Marasia S. Jones B. Parker J.M. Faculty satisfaction with online teaching: a comprehensive study with American faculty Stud. High Educ. 47 3 2022 513 525 10.1080/03075079.2020.1767050
45 Nassar M. Heinze A. Jasimuddin S.M. Procter C. Does students' satisfaction matter to faculty job satisfaction in higher education? J. Market. High Educ. 2022 10.1080/08841241.2022.2149665
46 Yean T.F. Johari J. Yahya K.K. Chin T.L. SAGE Open Determinants of job dissatisfaction and its impact on the counterproductive work behavior of University Staff 12 3 2022 10.1177/21582440221123289
47 Castellucci H.I. Arezes P.M. Viviani C.A. Mismatch between classroom furniture and anthropometric measures in Chilean schools Appl. Ergon. 41 2010 563 568 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.12.001 20031115
48 Sampedro S. The University of Alicante removes the air conditioning after spending 4.2 million on the electricity bill (“La Universidad de Alicante quita el aire acondicionado tras gastarse 4,2 millones en la factura de la luz”, El Español de Alicante, 10 octubre 2022 https://www.elespanol.com/alicante/20221010/universidad-alicante-quita-acondicionado-gastarse-millones-factura/709679080_0.html 2022
49 Imbernón F. Silva P. Guzmán C. Comunicar, Competencias en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje virtual y semipresencial 36 2011 107 114 10.3916/C36-2011-03-01
50 Salajegheh M. Sandars J. Norouzi A. Mirzazadeh A. Gandomkar R. Psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to evaluate organizational capacity development for faculty development programs J. Educ. Health Promot. 2020 9 10.4103/jehp.jehp_292_20 32154304
51 Sá M. Serpa S. Educ. Sci. Transversal competences: their importance and learning processes by higher education students MDPI AG 8 3 2018 126 10.3390/educsci8030126
52 Liubarets V. Bakhmat N. Kurylo L. Spitsyna A. Biriukova O. High J. Formation of transversal competences of future economists in the conditions of digital space Educ. Theor. Pract. 22 14 2022 67 80 Retrieved from http://publicaciones.umh.es/scholarly-journals/formation-transversal-competences-future/docview/2737163559/se-2
53 Parker J. Competencies for interdisciplinarity in higher education Int. J. Sustain. High Educ. 11 4 2010 325 338 10.1108/14676371011077559
54 Martínez-Clares P. González-Morga N. Educación X.X.I. Las competencias transversales en la universidad: propiedades psicométricas de un cuestionario 22 1 2018 262 10.5944/educxx1.15662
55 Reisman E. Radel M. Clark S. Buck H. Grad school in the rear view: prioritizing career skills, mentorship, and equity in the interdisciplinary environmental PhD J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 12 4 2022 890 897 10.1007/s13412-022-00790-w 35971417
56 Salajan F.D. Roumell E.A. Two decades of E-learning policy evolution at EU level Eur. J. Educ. 51 2016 391 407 10.1111/ejed.12144
57 Säfström C.A. Liveable life, educational theory and the imperative of constant change Eur. Educ. Res. J. 17 5 2018 621 630 10.1177/1474904118784480
58 González-Gascón E. De-Juan-Vigaray M.D. Encouraging undergraduate marketing students to reflect on critical thinking and the digital gender divide Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ 11 3 2021 933 952 10.3390/ejihpe11030069
59 Wiranto R. Slameto S. Alumni satisfaction in terms of classroom infrastructure, lecturer professionalism, and curriculum Heliyon 7 6 2021 e06679 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06679
60 Davidovitch N. Yavich R. Educ Probl Classroom climate and student self efficacy in e-learning 21st Century 80 2 2022 304 323 10.33225/pec/22.80.304
61 Douglas J. Douglas A. Barnes B. Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university Qual. Assur. Educ. 14 3 2006 251 267 10.1108/09684880610678568
62 Kolster R. Diffusional effects of excellence education on the institution as a whole Eur. J. High Educ. 11 1 2021 82 96 10.1080/21568235.2020.1850311
63 Marova R. Grolnick W. Origins and pawns in the classroom: self-report and projective techniques assessments of individual differences in children's perceptions J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50 1986 550 558 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.550
64 Lumpkin A. Caring teachers: the key to student learning Kappa Delta Pi Rec. 43 4 2007 158 160 10.1080/00228958.2007.10516474
65 Hai N.C. Factors affecting student satisfaction with higher education service quality in Vietnam Eur. J. Educ. Res. 11 1 2022 339 351 10.12973/EU-JER.11.1.339
66 Bradbury L.U. Wilson R.E. Questioning the prevailing narrative about elementary science teachers: an analysis of the experiences of science teacher enthusiasts Sci. Educ. 104 2020 421 445 10.1002/sce.21574
67 Elliott K.M. Shin D. Student satisfaction: an alternative approach to assessing this important concept J. High Educ. Pol. Manag. 24 2 2002 197 209 10.1080/1360080022000013518
68 Guerra S. González N. García R. Comunicar, Utilización de las TIC por el profesorado universitario como recurso didáctico 35 2010 141 148 10.3916/C35-2010-03-07
69 Zhang D. Zhang J. Cao M. Zhu Y. Yang G. Testing the effectiveness of motivation-based teaching in Nursing English course: a quasi-experimental study Nurse Educ. Today 2023 122 10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105723
70 Paul A. Leung D. Salas R.M.E. Cruz T.E. Abras C. Saylor D. …Strowd R.E. Med. Educ. Online, Comparative effectiveness study of flipped classroom versus online-only instruction of clinical reasoning for medical students 28 1 2023 10.1080/10872981.2022.2142358
71 Yusoff M. McLeay F. Woodruffe-Burton H. Dimensions driving business student satisfaction in higher education Qual. Assur. Educ. 23 1 2015 86 104 10.1108/QAE-08-2013-0035
72 Zineldin M. Akdag H.C. Belal M. Total relationship management (TRM) and 5 QS model as new management techniques: a comparative study for a knowledge-intensive sector Int. Bus. Manag. 4 1 2012 1 17 10.3968/j.ibm.1923842820120401.1115
73 Lilly B. Tippins M.J. Enhancing student motivation in marketing classes: using student management groups J. Market. Educ. 24 3 2002 253 264 10.1177/0273475302238048
74 Sowl S. Amrein-Beardsley A. Collins C. Teaching program evaluation: how blending theory and practice enhance student-evaluator competencies in an education policy graduate program Eval. Progr. Plann. 94 2022 102139 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102139
75 Azis S.L. Review on decentralization of education in the era of regional autonomy in Indonesia Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 6 10 2017
76 Navarro M.M. Iglesias M.P. Torres P.R. A new management element for universities: satisfaction with the offered courses Int. J. Educ. Manag. 19 6 2005 505 526 10.1108/09513540510617454
77 Thomas E.H. Galambos N. What satisfies students? Mining student-opinion data with regression and decision tree analysis Res. High. Educ. 45 2004 251 269 10.1023/B:RIHE.0000019589.79439.6e
78 Nguyen N.A. Tran H.N. Tran C.V.L. Tran V.C. Laos students perceptions towards quality education service in a selected higher education institution in Central Vietnam Int. J. Educ. Sci 6 3 2020 25 37 10.33301/2013.15.03.05
79 Lilly S. McAlister A.M. Fick S.J. Chiu J.L. Una comparación de los apoyos verbales de los maestros de primaria para los estudiantes en contextos de aula generales e inclusivos durante una unidad de ciencias, ingeniería e informática alineada con NGSS Cienc. Educ 2023 1 31 10.1002/sce.21788
80 LeBlanc G. Nguyen N. Searching for excellence in business education: an exploratory study of customer impressions of service quality Int. J. Educ. Manag. 11 2 1997 72 79 10.1108/09513549710163961
81 Sohail M.S. Shaikh N.M. Int J. Quest for excellence in business education: a study of student impressions of service quality 18 1 2004 58 65 10.1108/09513540410512163
82 Appleton‐Knapp S.L. Krentler K.A. Mark J. Educ., Measuring student expectations and their effects on satisfaction: the importance of managing student expectations 28 3 2006 254 264 10.1177/0273475306293359
83 Latif K.F. Bunce L. Ahmad M.S. How can universities improve student loyalty? The roles of university social responsibility, service quality, and “customer” satisfaction and trust Int. J. Educ. Manag. 35 4 2021 815 829 10.1108/IJEM-11-2020-0524
84 Paul R. Pradhan S. Achieving student satisfaction and student loyalty in higher education: a focus on service value dimensions Serv. Market. Q. 40 3 2019 245 268 10.1080/15332969.2019.1630177
85 Rehman M.A. Woyo E. Akahome J.E. Sohail M.D. The influence of course experience, satisfaction, and loyalty on students' word-of-mouth and re-enrolment intentions J. Market. High Educ. 32 2 2022 259 277 10.1080/08841241.2020.1852469
86 Giese J.L. Cote J.A. Academy of marketing science review, defining customer satisfaction 00 1 2000 1 34
87 Mireles-Vázquez M.G. García-García J.A. Satisfacción estudiantil en universitarios: una revisión sistemática de la literatura Rev. Educ. 46 2 2022 10.15517/revedu.v46i2.47621
88 Weerasinghe S. Lalitha F. Students' satisfaction in higher education literature review Am. J. Educ. Res. 5 5 2017 533 539 10.12691/education-5-5-9
89 Borishade T.T. Ogunnaike O.O. Salau O. Motilewa B.D. Dirisu J.I. Assessing the relationship among service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty: the NIGERIAN higher education experience Heliyon 7 7 2021 e07590 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07590
90 Mavondo F.T. Zaman M. Abubakar B. Student satisfaction with tertiary institution and recommending it to prospective students ANZMAC (Aust & New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference) 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Centry: Facing the Challenge. Gold Coast 2000 Griffith University Qld Australia 787 792
91 Cadena-Badilla M. Mejías-Acosta A. Vega-Robles A. Vásquez-Quiroga J. La satisfacción estudiantil universitaria: análisis estratégico a partir del análisis de factores Ind. Data 18 1 2015 9 18 10.15381/idata.v18i1.12062
92 Mateo A. Mateo A. Recapturing „marketing‟ from the „marketisation‟ of higher education discourse European Scientific Journal, ESJ 11 10 2015 21 36 https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/5898
93 Maldonado López B. Ledesma Chaves P. Gil Cordero E. Visual thinking and cooperative learning in higher education: how does its implementation affect marketing and management disciplines after COVID-19? Int. J. Manag. Educ. 21 2 2023 10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100797
94 Liao H. Shi Y. Liu X. Shen N. Deng Q. A non-probabilistic model of carbon footprints in remanufacture under multiple uncertainties J. Clean. Prod. 211 9–10 2019 1127 1140 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.218
95 Ringle C.M. Wende S. Becker J.M. SmartPLS4 Oststeinbek 2022 SmartPLS GmbH
96 Hair J.F. Sarstedt M. Ringle C.M. Mena J.A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research J. Acad. Market. Sci. 40 3 2012 414 433 10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6
97 Misangyi V.F. Greckhamer T. Furnari S. Fiss P.C. Crilly D. Aguilera R. Embracing causal complexity: the emergence of a neo- configurational perspective J. Manag. 43 1 2017 255 282 10.1177/0149206316679252
98 Rippa P. Ferruzzi G. Holienka M. Capaldo G. Coduras A. What drives university engineering students to become entrepreneurs? Finding different recipes using a configuration approach J. Small Bus. Manag. 2020 1 31 10.1080/00472778.2020.1790291
99 Kusa R. Duda J. Suder M. How to sustain company growth in times of crisis: the mitigating role of entrepreneurial management J. Bus. Res. 142 2022 377 386 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.081
100 González-Morga N. Martínez-Clares P. Rev. Currículum Form. Prof. Relevancia de las competencias transversales en el desarrollo profesional del futuro graduado Profesorado 24 2 2020 388 413 10.30827/profesorado.v24i2.15041
101 Martínez-Clares P. González-Morga N. El dominio de competencias transversales en Educación Superior en diferentes contextos formativos Educ. Pesqui. 2019 45 10.1590/S1678-4634201945188436
102 ANECA, National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation White Paper for Bachelor's Degrees 2005 ANECA [Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad Universitaria y Acreditación (2005). Libro blanco para los títulos de grado]. Madrid
103 ANECA National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (2007). Executive Report 2007 Informe ejecutivo. El profesional flexible en la Sociedad del Conocimiento] Madrid The Flexible Professional in the Knowledge Society. [Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad Universitaria y Acreditación (2007)
104 De Juan Vigaray M.D. González-Gascón E. Mendoza N. EDULEARN, International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, the Classroom Environment in Marketing Education: a Scale 2010 https://library.iated.org/view/GONZALEZGASCON2010THE1
105 Hulland J. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies Strat. Manag. J. 20 2 1999 195 204 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<195::AID-SMJ13>3.0.CO 2-7
106 Rihoux B. Lobe B. The Sage Handbook of Case-Based Methods, the Case for Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Adding Leverage for Thick Cross-Case Comparison 2009 222 242
107 Henseler J. Hubona G. Ray P.A. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 116 1 2016 2 20 10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
108 Chin W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling Modern methods for business research 1998 295 336
109 Fornell C. Larcker D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics J. Mark. Res 18 3 1981 382 388 10.2307/3150980
110 Hair J.F. Risher J.J. Sarstedt M. Ringle C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM Eur. Bus. Rev. 31 1 2019 2 24 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
111 Abbasi A.Z. Rather R.A. Hooi Ting D. Nisar S. Hussain K. Khwaja M.G. Shamim A. Exploring tourism-generated social media communication, brand equity, satisfaction, and loyalty: a PLS-SEM-based multi-sequential approach J. Vacat. Mark. 0 0 2022 10.1177/13567667221118651
112 Henseler J. Partial least squares path modeling: quo vadis? Qual Quant 52 1 2018 1 8 10.1007/s11135-018-0689-6
113 Pappas I.O. Woodside A.G. Int J. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA): guidelines for research practice in information systems and marketing Inf. Manag. 58 2021 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310
114 Woodside A.G. Nagy G. Megehee C.M. Applying complexity theory: a primer for identifying and modeling firm anomalies J. Innov. Knowl. 3 1 2018 9 25 10.1016/j.jik.2017.07.001
115 El Sawy O.A. Malhotra A. Park Y. Pavlou P.A. Research commentary ---Seeking the configurations of digital ecodynamics: it takes three to tango Inf. Syst. Res. 21 4 2010 835 848 10.1287/isre.1100.0326
116 Fiss P.C. Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research Acad. Manag. J. 54 2 2011 393 420 10.5465/amj.2011.60263120
117 Woodside A.G. Embrace•perform•model: complexity theory, contrarian case analysis, and multiple realities J. Bus. Res. 67 12 2014 2495 2503 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.07.006
118 Ragin C.C. The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, Measurement versus Calibration: A Set‐theoretic Approach 2008
119 Rihoux B. Ragin C.C. Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques (Applied Social Research Methods Series vol. 51 2008 SAGE publications 10.4135/9781452226569
120 Kaushal V. Ali N. University reputation, brand attachment and brand personality as antecedents of student loyalty: a study in higher education context Corp Reputation Rev 23 2020 254 266 10.1057/s41299-019-00084-y
