Teaching Quality and Students’ Satisfaction as a Focus of

Higher Education Sustainability

Arif Prastiawan, Iqwan Mauludin, Achmad Supriyanto, Rochmawati

Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia

arif.prastiawan.2301328@students.um.ac.id,
iqwan.mauludin.2301328@students.um.ac.id, a.supriyanto.fip@um.ac.id,
rochmawati.fip@um.ac.id

Abstract. Universities need to improve the quality of teaching to meet student satisfaction, in
addition to organizational focus or organizational performance-oriented evaluation. Attention
needs to be paid to students in the teaching process because students are the first consumers at
the college service level. This article aims to provide a systematic literature review of student
satisfaction in the learning process in higher education that outlines the cutting-edge research
that still exists, clarifies key research trends, and suggests further research directions in the
field.

Keywords. students’ satisfaction, higher education, teaching quality

1. Introduction
The universities make learning a focal point of excellence to compete with other colleges. In
improving the quality of teaching, universities try to find methods to improve the quality of
the learning process. Times Higher Education (THE) as one of the ranking websites of
universities in the world in collecting data for the basis of ranking displays indicators
assessing the quality of teaching and learning in universities. The quality of teaching and
learning in higher education is important because the teaching and learning process is at the
heart of college life. The results of research conducted by Patfield revealed that the quality of
teachers is an urgent issue and a strategic issue in higher education [1]. The level of student
satisfaction can be used as a measure of the quality of teaching and learning in higher
education. This statement is supported by the results of research which states that the level of
student satisfaction is influenced by the interaction between educators and students in the
learning process to create collaborative learning [2]. Collaborative learning certainly cannot
be separated from the quality of teachers, the creation of collaborative learning must be
supported by the quality of teachers, where teachers deliver or guide students to be active in
the learning process. The statement is in line with Cebrin's opinion that the university is a
learning organization skilled in the process of change, that develops personal mastery among
individuals, encourages team learning and shared vision, and can rethink existing worldviews,
mental models, and practices to create innovative actions [3].
Lecturers in universities are role models for students, the quality of teachers is one of the
benchmarks for the progress of higher education. The better the quality of teachers, the better
the quality of the university. This is evidenced by the results of research which shows that the
quality of lecturers is one of the most important factors in the implementation of quality
education and the importance of the role of lecturers is the main determinant of student
perceptions of the quality of service in higher education [4]. Ironically, in 2024, news will be
published about lecturers' complaints with additional assignments that have an impact on the
quality of learning in universities [5]. Based on data from the Teaching and Learning Process
(PBM) of State University of Malang, there are 159 lecturers who get PBM scores below
number 3. This illustrates that students' perceptions of the quality of the learning process are
fairly low. Student perception of satisfaction is one of the key factors of college development.
When students perceive satisfaction, it has an impact on the sustainability of higher education
because students will share these feelings of satisfaction with others. This statement is
supported by the results of research which states that a positive perception of service quality
can lead to student satisfaction [4].
This systematic literature review (SLR) reveals about the main services of the college. The
main consumers of universities are students, the role of universities in providing services must
be provided in an ideal or standardized manner. The problem of the main service of higher
education, namely services in the teaching and learning process, is a fundamental problem and
continues to be repeated. Today's universities are challenged in the process of service to the
community. Students who are generally generation Z are smart and integrated with
information and technology. The current speed of information is a challenge for universities in
providing teaching and learning process services. This is in line with the results of research
conducted by Pawirosumarto which explained that the better the perception of system quality,
information quality, and service quality, the more user satisfaction will increase [6]. Literature
study research aims to describe student satisfaction obtained from service perceptions of the
teaching and learning process in universities. The sustainability of higher education cannot be
separated from the existence of students as the main consumers. Large universities can be
ensured that service to students gets a good perception. So that students have an influence on
higher education, beyond other factors. State universities in Indonesia are currently competing
to become Legal Entity State Universities (PTNBH), students have an important role in the
sustainability of PTNBH because PTNBH mostly relies on income from students for
operational funds.

2. Method
A literature search was carried out for a decade from 2014 to 2024 regarding the quality of
learning and teaching activities on student satisfaction in higher education. Based on PRISMA
guidelines, 1000 reference papers were found in the literature search. After filtering duplicate
files there were still 983 reference papers. Non-journal data was then deleted and there were
still 534 articles that met the criteria. After that, filtering outside the field of education quality
management in higher education resulted in 458 articles that met the criteria.
 Figure 1. Research Article Selection Process

After that, a screening process was carried out by removing those that were not about
student satisfaction as the focus of higher education sustainability, 20 articles were found that
met the criteria. Based on reference sources that fall into categories and are related to the topic
according to the author to be used as primary data.

3. Results
We start with the type of article publication chosen, it can be seen in Figure 2 that 80 percent
or a total of 16 articles have been published in international journals. While 20 percent or a
total of 4 articles have been published in international proceedings. The analysis for the years
of publication is summarized in Figure 3.
 Proceedings
20%

Proceedings
Journal

Journal
80%

Figure 2. Publication Type

2 2

1 1 1 1

0 0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Figure 3. Publication Date

The 20 articles selected, lecturer competence is the factor that has the most influence on
student satisfaction. In addition, the commitment of lecturers, the image of the institution, and
the curriculum have a role in perceiving student satisfaction. The level of student satisfaction
is influenced by communication between students and lecturers. The commitment of lecturers
in the learning process in which there is communication is expected to provide excellent
service to students.
Table 1. Identified Student Satisfaction Factors
Factors Papers
Lecturer Competence [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18],
[19], [20], [21], [22], [23]

Lecturer Commitment [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]

Curriculum [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]

Campus Facilities [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18],
[19], [20], [21], [22], [23]

Institution Image [15], [16], [22], [23]

4. Discussion

The results of the study prove that lecturers’ competency has a significant positive effect on
students’ satisfaction. The results of this study were supported by Hilda, examining 200
Tarbiyah Faculty students at Malang Muhammadiyah University and IAIN Padangsidimpuan
[24]. The results of her research proved that lecturers’ pedagogic competence has a positive
and significant effect on student satisfaction. There was no difference in the level of
satisfaction between male and female students. In addition, the research of Hilda concluded
that:1) Lecturers’ competency does not directly affect students’ satisfaction, 2) Lecturers’
competency and quality of learning processes have a significant positive effect on students’
satisfaction, 3) Lecturers’ competency has not direct effect on students’ satisfaction [24]. The
results of the study proved that lecturers’ competency has a significant positive effect on
Students’ Satisfaction through Perceived Teaching Quality. The results of their study
concluded that students’ perceptions of quality (including quality of learning) had an effect on
students’ satisfaction [25]. Technical quality perceived and functional quality perceived had
an effect on students’ satisfaction through perceived value. The result of this study proves that
lecturers’ competency has a significant positive direct effect on perceived teaching quality.
The results of this study were supported by Long, C. S., Ibrahim, Z. and Kowang. T. O.,
conducting research on 260 students at private universities in Malaysia. They examined the
lecturers’ competency associated with students’ satisfaction. There are 14 lecturers’
competencies which were studied, including: competency ‘knowledge of subject, clarity of
presentation, interaction with student, learning creativity, clarifying learning outcome, class
activity, and lecture note that affected students’ satisfaction. Of the 14 lecturers’
competencies, 1 competency which contributes the most significant effect to students’
satisfaction is the lecturers’ knowledge of subject [26]. The results of his research concluded
that lecturers’ competency had a positive effect on students’ performance.
5. Conclusion

We can conclude that: 1) Lecturers’ competency including: pedagogic, personal, social and
professional competencies is perceived by students to be high, although it will be better if the
leaders and staffs of the university would listen more to student aspirations and follow up on
them. Teaching quality is perceived to be high, this means that lecturers have skills to design,
implement and assess learning well. Nevertheless there are still values below the average,
namely the ability of lecturers in designing learning media. Therefore, it is expected that
lecturers will continue studying design and applying digital-based learning media in learning.

References
[1] S. Patfield, J. Gore, E. Prieto, L. Fray, and K. Sincock, “Towards quality teaching in higher
education: pedagogy-focused academic development for enhancing practice,” Int. J. Acad. Dev.,
pp. 1–16, doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2022.2103561.
[2] X. Wang, A. B. Hassan, H. Shwu Pyng, H. Ye, and A. A. Aminuddin, “The impact of perceived
quality of online interaction on satisfaction of international student interactions in higher
education,” Cogent Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 2293454, Dec. 2024, doi:
10.1080/2331186X.2023.2293454.
[3] G. Cebrián, M. Grace, and D. Humphris, “Organisational learning towards sustainability in
higher education,” Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 285–306, Jan. 2013,
doi: 10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2012-0043.
[4] R. Voss and T. Gruber, “The desired teaching qualities of lecturers in higher education: a means
end analysis,” Qual. Assur. Educ., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 217–242, Jan. 2006, doi:
10.1108/09684880610678540.
[5] H. Izzuddin, “Keluhan Dosen UM Malang: Terbebani Tugas Tambahan Tanpa Bayaran hingga
Cuti Hamil Terpaksa Mengajar, Mahasiswa Ikut Rugi,” Mojok.co. Accessed: Feb. 19, 2024.
[Online]. Available: https://mojok.co/liputan/kampus/keluhan-dosen-um-malang-kerja-ekstra-
tanpa-bayaran/
[6] S. Pawirosumarto, “PENGARUH KUALITAS SISTEM, KUALITAS INFORMASI, DAN
KUALITAS LAYANAN TERHADAP KEPUASAN PENGGUNA SISTEM E-LEARNING,”
MIX J. Ilm. Manaj., vol. 6, no. 3, 2016, Accessed: Feb. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://publikasi.mercubuana.ac.id/index.php/Jurnal_Mix/article/view/1280
[7] P.-Y. Chen and B. M. Cuong, “An evaluation of student satisfaction of the joint master
programs at Foreign Trade University in Vietnam,” J. Int. Econ. Manag., vol. 20, no. 2, Art. no.
2, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.38203/jiem.020.2.0012.
[8] H. Khiat, “An analysis of the relationship between learning satisfaction and academic
achievement of non-traditional learners in Singapore,” Int. J. Res. Stud. Educ., vol. 3, Jan. 2014,
doi: 10.5861/ijrse.2013.559.
[9] L. Y. Quiachon and M. Paulino, “Analysis of Service Quality Dimensions: Towards a Student
Satisfaction Model in the ‘New Normal,’” East Asian J. Multidiscip. Res., vol. 2, no. 7, pp.
2749–2758, 2023.
[10] Y. R. Daud, M. R. bin M. Amin, and J. bin A. Karim, “Antecedents of Student Loyalty in Open
and Distance Learning Institutions: An Empirical Analysis,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn.,
vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 18–40, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4590.
[11] S. Khardi, Z. Zoztafia, and S. D. Irama, “Building Strategic Feasibility of Higher Education
through Quality Assurance,” Tarbawi J. Keilmuan Manaj. Pendidik., vol. 6, no. 01, Art. no. 01,
May 2020, doi: 10.32678/tarbawi.v6i01.2426.
[12] R. I. Alnawasreh, M. Y. M. Nor, and A. Suliman, “FACTORS AFFECTING MALAYSIAN
INTERNATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTSâ€TM PERFORMANCE: THE
MODERATING EFFECT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP,” Humanit. Soc. Sci.
Rev., vol. 7, no. 5, Art. no. 5, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.18510/hssr.2019.75165.
[13] A. Mastoi, L. XinHai, and W. Saengkrod, “Higher Education Service Quality Based on
Students’ Satisfaction in Pakistan,” Eur. Sci. J. ESJ, vol. 15, Apr. 2019, doi:
10.19044/esj.2019.v15n11p32.
[14] Petra Christian University, Surabaya, Indonesia, Z. J. H. Tarigan, I. N. Sutapa, J. Mochta, and
W. Suprapto, “Measuring Teachers’ Competency in Determining Students’ Satisfaction through
Electronic Internet Survey Method,” Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 236–240, 2019,
doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.3.1206.
[15] H. S. Lukman, A. Setiani, and N. Muhassanah, “Structural Equation Modelling of Teaching
Quality on Students’ Satisfaction,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1657, no. 1, p. 012083, Oct. 2020,
doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1657/1/012083.
[16] A. Nastasić, K. Banjević, and D. Gardašević, “Student Satisfaction as a Performance Indicator
of Higher Education Institution,” Mednar. Inov. Posl. J. Innov. Bus. Manag., vol. 11, no. 2, pp.
67–76, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.32015/JIBM/2019-11-2-8.
[17] “Teaching Quality and Students Satisfaction: The Intermediatory Role of Relationship between
Lecturers and Students of the Higher Learning Institutes | Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences,” Aug. 2020, Accessed: Mar. 18, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/5854
[18] S. Sopiah and E. M. Sangadji, “The Effect of Lecturer Commitment on Student Academic
Achievement toward Student Satisfaction through Perceived Teaching Quality,” J. Ilmu
Pendidik., vol. 25, no. 2, Art. no. 2, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.17977/um048v25i2p50-57.
[19] Sopiah Suwarni, Achmad Moerdiono, Ita Prihatining, and E.M. Sangadji ., “The Effect of
Lecturers’ Competency on Students’ Satisfaction through Perceived Teaching Quality,” KnE
Soc. Sci., vol. 4, no. 9, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.18502/kss.v4i9.7311.
[20] J. Xiao and S. Wilkins, “The effects of lecturer commitment on student perceptions of teaching
quality and student satisfaction in Chinese higher education,” J. High. Educ. Policy Manag.,
vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 98–110, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1080/1360080X.2014.992092.
[21] H. A. Mesta, “The Impact of Satisfaction on Loyalty in Higher Education : The Mediating Role
of University’s Brand Image,” presented at the 2nd Padang International Conference on
Education, Economics, Business and Accounting (PICEEBA-2 2018), Atlantis Press, Apr. 2019,
pp. 279–284. doi: 10.2991/piceeba2-18.2019.37.
[22] P. D. Dali, Y. Daud, and M. S. O. Fauzee, “The Relationship between Teachers’ Quality in
Teaching and Learning with Students’ Satisfaction,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., vol. 7, no.
7, p. Pages 604-618, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i7/3125.
[23] S. Sopiah, I. P. Wilujeng, A. Murdiono, and E. M. Sangadji, “The Role of Perceived Teaching
Quality as Mediator Variable That Affects Student Satisfaction,” presented at the International
Conference on Learning Innovation 2019 (ICLI 2019), Atlantis Press, Jul. 2020, pp. 37–48. doi:
10.2991/assehr.k.200711.008.
[24] L. Hilda, “The Effect Of Pedagogic Competences Toward Students’ Satisfaction,” Int. J. Sci.
Res. Manag. IJSRM, vol. 6, no. 08, Art. no. 08, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.18535/ijsrm/v6i8.el06.
[25] H. S. Akareem and S. S. Hossain, “Determinants of education quality: what makes students’
perception different?,” Open Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 52–67, Jan. 2016, doi:
10.1080/23265507.2016.1155167.
[26] C. S. Long and T. O. Kowang, “The Effect of Leaders’ Emotional Intelligence on Employees’
Organization Commitment in Malaysia,” Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci., Jan. 2015, doi:
10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n1p377.