Online quality assurance system in vocational schools using the website: A user satisfaction perspective

 Introduction. This study was conducted to identify the factors that influence user satisfaction to determine the quality of the website (online system) for quality assurance in vocational education from the user’s point of view and to provide the best recommendations for improving the quality of the vocational school quality assurance online system.

Aim. This study aims to analyse the quality of the vocational school quality assurance website that affects user satisfaction using the WebQual model.

Methodology and research methods. This research used structural equation modelling – partial least square (PLS-SEM) analysis. The purposive sampling technique was chosen to determine the sample of respondents from operators or users of the quality assurance website from 36 vocational schools in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia.

Results. Based on the analysis results, it was found that the service interaction quality factor significantly influenced the e-service quality of the vocational school website for quality assurance, which then directly affected website user satisfaction.

Practical significance. This research has implications for developing vocational school website for quality assurance to optimise the website function. This research also has implications for schools to facilitate performance reporting through quality assurance website.

1. Datareportal. Digital 2020: Indonesia. Datareportal [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2022 Oct 20]. Available from: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-indonesia

2. Fogg B. J., Soohoo C., Danielson D., Marable L., Stanford J., Tauber E. How do people evaluate a website’s credibility?: Results from a large study. In: Conference on Designing for User Experiences. New York; 2003. 105 p. DOI: 10.1145/997078.997097

3. Shia B. C., Chen M., Ramdansyah A. D., Wang S. Measuring customer satisfaction toward localization website by WebQual and Importance Performance Analysis (Case study on AliexPress site in Indonesia). American Journal of Industrial and Business Management. 2016; 6: 117–128.

4. Hidayah N. A., Subiyakto A., Setyaningsih F. Combining Webqual and Importance Performance Analysis for assessing a government website. In: 7th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management; Jakarta, Indonesia. Vol. 7. New Jersey: IEEE; 2019. p. 1–6.

5. Niazi M. G., Kamran M. K. A. Evaluating Iranian state university websites using WebQEM. The Electronic Library. 2016; 34: 1031–1050.

6. Dean D., Grierson S. Re-envisioning reading and writing through combined-text picture books. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 2010; 48 (6): 456–458.

7. Napitupulu D. Analysis of factors affecting website quality based on Webqual approach (Study Case: XYZ University). Advanced Science Engineering Information Technology. 2017; 7 (3): 792–798.

8. Pamungkas R. A., Alfarishi E., Aditiarna E., Muklhisin A., Aziza R. F. A. Analisis Kualitas Website SMK Negeri 2 Sragen dengan Metode Webqual 4.0 dan IPA. Jurnal TEKNOKOMPAK. 2019; 13 (1): 12–17. (In Indonesian)

9. Huang Z., Benyoucef M. Usability and credibility of e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly. 2014; 31 (4): 584–595.

10. Lederman R., Fan H., Smith S., Chang S. Who can you trust? Credibility assessment in online health forums. Health Policy and Technology. 2014: 3 (1): 13–25. DOI: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.11.003

11. Barnes S., Vidgen R. Measuring web site quality improvements: A case study of the forum on strategic management. Industrial Management & Data Systems. 2003; 103 (5): 297–309.

12. Arifin S. R., Eko N., Hantono B. S. Analisis Kualitas Layanan Website Universitas Hasanuddin dengan Metode Webqual 4.0 Modifikasi. TEKNOMATIKA. 2015; 8 (1): 81–92. (In Indonesian)

13. Subiyakto A., Ahlan A. R., Kartiwi M., Putra S. J., Durachman Y. The user satisfaction perspectives of the information system projects. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. 2016; 4 (1): 215–223.

14. Priambodo B. 11 Masalah Pengumpulan Rapor Mutu. LPMPJATIM [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2022 Oct 25]. Available from: https://lpmpjatim.kemdikbud.go.id/site/detailpost/11-masalah-pengumpulan-rapor-mutu (In Indonesian)

15. Hadi S., Wijaya W. M., Suharyadi A., Hassan A., Zaki C. N. F. M. The determinant factors on user satisfaction in assessing the quality of online education management information system. In: The 9th International Conference on Education Research, and Innovation; Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Paris: Atlantis Press; 2022. p. 110–119.

16. Keshavarz H., Norouzi Y. Measuring a model on credibility evaluation of scientific websites: Exploring relationships and priorities. New Review of Academic Librarianship. 2022; 28 (3): 321–345.

17. UNESCO. Focusing resources on effective school health: A fresh start to enhancing the quality and equity of education. World Education Forum 2000, Final Report. Paris: UNESCO; 2001. 27 p.

18. Nguyen J. D., Hogue C. R. Assessing quality control: Evaluating the quality audit. Statistical Journal of the IAOS. 2017; 33 (2): 423–428.

19. Schomaker R. Accreditation and quality assurance in the Egyptian higher education system. Quality Assurance in Education. 2015; 23 (2): 149–165.

20. Ayeni A. J., Ibukun W. O. A conceptual model for school-based management operation and quality assurance in Nigerian secondary schools. Journal of Education and Learning. 2013; 2 (2). DOI: 10.5539/jel.v2n2p36

21. Ibrahim Y., Arshad R., Salleh D. Stakeholder perceptions of secondary education quality in Sokoto State, Nigeria. Quality Assurance in Education. 2017; 25 (2): 248–267

22. Wijaya W. M. Strategic information system planning: Information systems required in vocational school models. In: The 6th International Conference on Educational, Management, Administration and Leadership; Bandung, Indonesia. Paris: Atlantis Press; 2016. p. 67–71.

23. Purwanto A., Asbari M., Santoso T. I. Education management research data analysis: Comparison of results between LISREL, TETRAD, GSCA, AMOS, SMARTPLS, WARPPLS, and SPSS for Small Samples. Nidhomul Haq: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam. 2021; 6 (2): 382–399.

24. Hair J. F., Sarstedt M., Hopkins L., Kuppelwieser G. V. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). European Business Review. 2014; 26 (2): 106–121.

25. Hair J. F., Black W. C., Babin B., Anderson R. E. Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Education; 2010. 800 p.

26. Henseler J., Ringle C. M., Sarstedt M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 2014; 43 (1): 115–135.

27. Sarstedt M., Ringle C. M., Hair J. F. Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In: Homburg Ch., Klarmann M., Vomberg A. (Eds.). Handbook of market research. Springer; 2017. p. 1–40. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1

28. Chin W. W. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research. 1998; 295 (2): 295–336.

29. Lemke F., Clark M., Wilson H. Customer experience quality: An exploration in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 2011; 39 (6): 846–869.

30. Ranjan K. R., Sugathan P., Rossmann A. A narrative review and meta-analysis of service interaction quality: New research directions and implications. Journal of Services Marketing. 2015; 29 (1): 3–14.

31. Pearson A., Tadisina S., Griffin C. The role of e-service quality and information quality in creating perceived value: Antecedents to web site loyalty. Information Systems Management. 2012; 29 (3): 201–215.

32. Zameer H., Tara A., Kausar U., Mohsin A. Impact of service quality, corporate image and customer satisfaction towards customers’ perceived value in the banking sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Bank Marketing. 2015; 33 (4): 442–456.

33. Parasuraman A., Zeithaml V. A., Malhotra A. ESQUAL: A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research. 2005; 7 (3): 213–233.

34. Carlson J., O’Cass A. Exploring the relationships between e-service quality, satisfaction, attitudes and behaviours in content-driven e-service web sites. Journal of Services Marketing. 2010; 24 (2): 112–127.

35. Tsao W. C., Hsieh M. T., Lin T. M. Y. Intensifying online loyalty! The power of website quality and the perceived value of consumer/seller relationship. Industrial Management & Data Systems. 2016; 116 (9): 1987–2010.

36. Blut M., Chowdhry N., Mittal V., Brock C. E-service quality: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Retailing. 2015; 91 (4): 679–700.

37. Holloway B. B., Wang S., Parish J. T. The role of cumulative online purchasing experience in service recovery management. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing. 2005; 19 (3): 54–66.

38. Rita P., Oliveira T., Farisa A. The impact of e-service quality and customer satisfaction on customer behavior in online shopping. Heliyon. 2019; 5 (10): e02690.

39. Rasheed F. A., Abadi M. F. Impact of service quality, trust and perceived value on customer loyalty in Malaysia services industries. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 164: 298–304.