The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating

Student Satisfaction in University of Makati

Luke Ivan B. Moro, Bernardo T. Ombrog,

Tessie Tapiador-Sagadraca,
Virgilio B. Tabbu
University of Makati, Makati City

Abstract

This paper evaluated the level of satisfaction of students at the

University of Makati, a university fully funded by the local government
unit of Makati, through the use of importance-performance analysis.
This descriptive-survey study used the Noel- Levitz student satisfaction
inventory as its data collection instrument but with some modification.
Using Likert scale, perceptions of students on the importance of five
subscales and the performance of the university on the same
subscales were measured. The gap between importance and
performance was then determined and expressed as %f from
importance to identify strengths and weaknesses. The five subscales
are staff service, teacher service, facilities and student services,
ICT/enrollment system, and ICT integration in the classroom. The
study chose third year students of programs with licensure
examinations enrolled in the second semester of SY 2018-2019 as
participants of the study. A total of 474 students participated in the
study for a response rate of 93%. Results of the study show that there
are students in the university who are not residents of the city, staying
in a dorm or with relatives, not studying full time, not taking the full
load in a term, and with a general weighted average of “very good”.
Results also show that the university caters to the price-sensitive
segment of the urban market. Furthermore, a gap is serious in
teaching competence and the extent of ICT integration while it is
severe in staff service and online system and some aspects of student
services. The findings highlight the need for the university to invest
more in physical and ICT infrastructure to address the gaps. On the
human capital, the study also shows that the university needs to train
its staff and teachers for better service quality.

Keywords: service quality, student satisfaction, importance-

performance analysis

The dynamism of today’s business environment has compelled

organizations, for-profit, or not- for-profit, not to be complacent. All
organizations now must provide services that meet customer expectations
and engage in continual improvement initiatives to survive. The key to
continual improvement is the ability to listen to the voice of the customer.

26 │Page
From literature, two constructs serve as metrics to evaluate the quality of
service – service quality and consumer satisfaction, or in the case of higher
education institutions, student satisfaction. Weerasinghe, et al. (2017)
defined student satisfaction as a short-term attitude resulting from an
evaluation of students’ educational experience, services and facilities. It can
be deduced from this definition that satisfaction is a result of previous
experiences on a number of purchases or transactions over time. Onditi and
Wechule (2017), citing the 2009 work of Arambewela and Hall, asserted that
student satisfaction could be a major source of competitive advantage as it
could lead to student attraction, retention, and spread of positive word of
mouth from satisfied students. The other construct scholars use to evaluate
the quality of service is service quality which is based on perceived quality.
Zeithaml (1987) and Zammuto et al (1996), as cited in Onditi and Wechuli
(2017), defined perceived quality as the consumer’s judgment about an
entity’s overall experience or superiority. By far, the most popular is the
SERVQUAL model developed by Ziethaml, Parasuraman and Berry in 1985.
The model defines service quality in five dimensions, namely: reliability,
assurance, tangibility, empathy, and responsiveness. Though popular,
scholars criticized its use in the higher education sector as it is too business-
focused whereas the sector is a not-for-profit industry. Other scholars have
since then offered various models for service quality for the higher education
sector. Among the models reviewed by Onditi and Wechule are Cronin and
Taylor’s SERVPERF in 1992, HETQMEX of Ho and Wearn in 1996, Firdaus’
HedPERF in 2006. The various models to measure satisfaction and the lack of
consensus among scholars prompted Onditi and Wechule to raise the
question: is student satisfaction an antecedent to service quality or does
service quality lead to student satisfaction. However, a 1997 study has
asserted that the two constructs are not the same and contended that
service quality is a consequence of student satisfaction (Athiyaman, 1997).
The reviews on the various models yielded this conclusion on student
satisfaction – it is a psychological process affected by many factors in
different settings. That is, no single model can fully capture all aspects of
student satisfaction or service quality.
Yet another approach to measure customer satisfaction is the importance-
performance analysis (IPA) model. First introduced in 1977 by Martilla and
James as a marketing tool, IPA has found wide use in various service
industries including higher education (Silva & Fernandes, 2010; Wong, et al.,
2011; and Ormanović, et al., 2017) as an approach to evaluate customer
satisfaction due to its simplicity. IPA is a graphical tool that measures not
only customer satisfaction on attributes of service but also the importance of
those attributes. The IPA model plots the importance and performance on a
two-dimensional coordinate system where the importance scores are on the
y-axis and the performance on the x-axis.

27 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

Martilla & James’ (1977) model divides the coordinate system into four
quadrants: concentrate here (high importance-low performance), keep up
the good work (high importance-high performance), low priority (low
importance-low performance), and possible overkill (low importance-high
performance). Yet, despite its popularity, the IPA model has encountered
criticisms over the years. Ormanović et al (2017) summed up the issue into
two: (1) the method of dividing the model into quadrants and (2) the
method of measuring importance and performance.

The advent of ICT has expanded the realm by which teaching can be
delivered. In recent years, there has been an onslaught of online courses on
a variety of subjects. There is also a plethora of free instructional blogs and
vlogs that are available online. Not only has ICT allowed learning to take
place beyond classrooms, it also has transformed how learning happens
inside the classroom. Integrating ICT in classroom teaching can have a
tremendous effect on the learning experience. Puentedura proposed a
framework by which teachers can integrate ICT in classroom teaching – the
SAMR model which stands for substitution, augmentation, modification and
redefinition. The first two are referred to as enhancement steps while the
latter two are transformation steps. In the substitution phase, technology
acts as a direct substitute, with no functional change. The next phase,
augmentation, technology still acts as a direct substitute but with functional
improvement. For the two transformation steps, technology allows for the
redesign of a task and its learning outcome in the modification stage while in
the redefinition phase, technology allows for the creation of new tasks that
were previously inconceivable.
Subscribing to the argument that service quality is a consequence of
customer satisfaction, this study was conducted to identify aspects of service
where the university showed strength and weakness.

METHOD
Participants
The participants of the study were third year students of the university (134
males, 311 females, 18 LGBTQI, 11 did not indicate) taking curricular
programs with licensure examination. In terms of residency, 372 or 79% are
residents of the city, 75 or 16% are from Metro Manila and the remaining 15
or 3% are from the provinces. About 12 of the respondents also did not
indicate their residency. From the results on residency, it is understandable

28 │Page
The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

that there were students who are dormers (66 or 14%), staying with
relatives (55 or 12%), and the majority were staying with family (337 or
71%).
Majority of the students, 418 or 88%, are full-time students and taking full
load (408 or 86%) while 38 or 8% are not. Thirty-seven or 8% of the
participants were not taking full class load when the study was conducted in
the second semester of SY 2018-2019.

T able 1. Program Enrolled In

Program Participa Total Percent Percent

nts
Students Share Share to
Enrolled in to Total
the Sample Students
Program Enrolled
Accounting 67 106 14.1 63.2
Physical Wellness 9 35 1.9 25.7
BS Civil Engineering 30 54 6.3 55.6
Radiologic 30 31 6.3 96.8
Technology
Education 58 84 12.2 69.0
Maritime 27 42 5.7 64.3
Nursing 12 12 2.5 100.0
Pharmacy 16 16 3.4 100.0
Psychology 161 163 34.0 92.8
Research Design

The research paper made use of descriptive survey. The instrument

developed for this study was inspired by Student Satisfaction Inventory
developed by Noel-Levitz in 2006. The instrument also followed the layout of
Noel-Levitz. Dimensions of quality that were included in the instrument are
as follows: staff service, 4 statements; teacher service, 7 statements;
facilities and student services, 18; ICT/enrollment system, 4; and ICT
integration in the classroom, 16. The 16 items for ICT integration show the
depth of integration using the SAMR model. Instead of using a 7-point rating
scale, the study used the standard Likert scale but with provision for 0 which
refers to does not apply for importance aspect and is not available or not
used for the satisfaction or performance aspect of the importance-
performance analysis.

29 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

Statistical Treatment

Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistical tools such as

frequency, weighted mean and standard deviation. Difference between the
computed weighted mean for importance and performance was determined
and the difference or gap was expressed as a percent of importance mean.

Results

As can be seen from Table 2, 32% and another 20% of the respondents had
a GWA of between
1.51 to 2.00, which corresponds to an adjectival grade of “very good”.

Table 2. GWA of Respondents in Previous Semester

Grade Frequency Perce
nt
1.00-1.25 1 3.0
4
1.26-1.50 7 15.2
2
1.51-1.75 9 19.8
4
1.76-2.00 153 32.3
2.01-2.25 6 13.7
5
2.26-2.50 3 6.8
2
2.51-2.75 2 5.7
7
2.76-3.00 3 0.6

On reasons for choosing to enroll in the university, the participants were

allowed to give multiple responses to a maximum of five, Table 3 shows that
the primary reason is the affordability of tuition fees. Other reasons cited, in
descending order, are: program offering, good quality of teaching, finished
senior high in the university, and accessibility to public transportation. The
sixth cited reason is proximity to residence.

Table 3. Reasons for Enrolling in the University

Reaso f %
n
1. Program/course I like is offered 26 11.12
3 %
2. Affordable tuition fee 39 16.70
5 %
3. Competent faculty 65 2.75
%
21 8.96
2 %

30 │Page
The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

4. Good quality of teaching

5. Limited choice/s 40 1.69
%
6. Choice of parents 75 3.17
%
7. Accessible to public transportation 19 8.33
7 %
8. Nearness to residence 16 7.15
9 %
9. Tools for digital arts is good 22 0.93
%
10. Brother/sister/relatives also went 66 2.79
here %
11. Finished my senior high here also 20 8.50
1 %
12. Avail benefit as Makati resident 16 6.81
1 %
13. Polite staff 14 0.59
%
14. Comfortable classrooms 14 6.17
6 %
15. Excellent staff service 24 1.01
%
16. Pleasant campus environment 91 3.85
%
17. Good performance in licensure 84 3.55
examination %
18. Good facilities 13 5.79
7 %
19. Others 3 0.13
%

This study was conducted to determine the satisfaction of students on the

quality of tertiary education the university provides on its clientele on five
dimensions using the importance- performance model. As can be seen in Fig.
1, the use of mean and median to divide the coordinate-system into four
quadrants shows that the university is meeting the expectation of students
and need not address gaps with urgency as most items clustered in the
fourth quadrant – possible overkill. The two IPA matrix also shows little
difference, suggesting that the data is normally distributed.

31 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

Fig. 1. IPA Matrix

A different picture emerges though when the % gaps from importance are
plotted (Fig. 2). The figure shows that the university is not meeting the
expectations of the students. These gaps were clustered into three: 10%
and below labeled as acceptable gaps, above 10 but less than 20% labeled
as serious gaps, and above 20% labeled as severe gaps.

32 │Page
Fig. 2. Gap Chart
Taken by itself, satisfaction scores show that the university is able to provide
services to the satisfaction of the students. However, when taken against
importance scores, the resulting gap and percent gap varies in degree.
Table 4 shows that the participants find the faculty members’ command of
the English language, and their use of social media to get in touch with
students to be meeting their expectations. The participants also find the
classroom temperature and chair to be comfortable and conducive for
learning. The %gap though suggests that these measures are a weak
strength.
Table 4. Aspects of Student Satisfaction with Acceptable Gaps
Importance Performance Gap from
Measures Importance
M SD M SD Gap %
8. Teacher has a good
command
of the English language. 4.4 0.72 4.0 0.7 0.43 9.5
8 5 5 %
12. Classroom
temperature is
conducive for learning. 4.6 0.62 4.1 0.8 0.47 10.0
5 9 9 %
13. Classroom chair is
comfortable. 4.7 0.59 4.2 0.8 0.45 9.5
1 6 3 %
36. Teacher uses social
media to
communicate with 4.4 0.82 3.9 0.8 0.42 9.5
students. 1 9 7 %
44. Teacher gives
students

33 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati
assignment that requires
the use
of internet. 4.2 0.92 3.9 0.9 0.28 6.7
3 5 1 %

Table 5 shows serious gaps in satisfaction on the quality of teaching,

classroom amenities specifically DLP and illumination, student services
specifically related to diversity, and the depth of integration of ICT in the
classroom. The aspect of teaching where students are most dissatisfied are
on a teacher’s mastery of the subject and the ability to explain the lesson –
an indication that competence of a teacher is still the most important. The
advent of ICT has made this expectation even more acute as students expect
teachers to make use of modern technologies that will make learning more
interesting and enriched. Following the SAMR model, students expect
teachers to use ICT to augment learning, want teachers to communicate
with them, provide them with learning resources and use technology to
enhance their lecture.

Students consider diversity to be an important matter. Allowing students to

wear clothes that match their sexual orientation, and the chance to practice
their faith while in the campus, and making the campus PWD-friendly are
some aspects of student services that the university needs to improve.

Table 5. Aspects of Student Satisfaction with Serious Gaps

Gap from
Importance Performance
Measures Importance
Mea SD Mea SD Gap %
n n
5. Teacher uses proper
language
when teaching. 4.66 0.59 4.07 0.71 0.59 12.7
%
6. Teacher treats
students with
respect as any adults
should be
treated. 4.68 0.61 3.95 0.80 0.73 15.6
%
7. Teacher has mastery
of the
subject he/she is 4.73 0.59 3.86 0.84 0.86 18.2
teaching. %
9. Teacher has clear,
audible
voice. 4.64 0.62 3.90 0.81 0.74 15.9
%
10. Teacher can explain
the
lesson well. 4.73 0.57 3.85 0.84 0.88 18.5
%

34 │Page
11. Teachers use
teaching
strategies that allow
students to
be active participants in
the
learning process. 4.68 0.57 3.87 0.81 0.81 17.3
%
15. Classroom has a
functioning
DLP. 4.48 0.85 3.76 1.04 0.71 15.9
%
16. Classroom is well-
illuminated. 4.61 0.59 4.04 0.83 0.58 12.5
%
22. Food choices in the
canteen
allow me to practice and
adhere
to my religious belief. 4.23 1.11 3.51 1.14 0.72 17.0
%
25. Student
organizations for co-
curricular activities are 4.46 0.78 3.78 1.01 0.68 15.3
aplenty. %
26. The campus has a
vibrant co-
curricular activities 4.47 0.73 3.78 0.96 0.69 15.4
calendar. %
29. The campus has
facilities
that make it PWD- 4.65 0.74 3.80 1.14 0.85 18.3
friendly. %
34. Teacher use email
and/or
SMS to communicate
with
students. 4.56 0.68 3.95 0.92 0.61 13.3
%
35. Teacher makes use
of
learning management
system
(LMS) like edmodo to
upload
lectures. 4.56 0.68 3.95 0.92 0.61 13.3
%
37. Teacher administers
MCQ
quiz or exams through 4.23 0.86 3.62 1.02 0.61 14.4
LMS. %
38. Teacher audio/video
record
lectures and upload it to 4.07 1.11 3.31 1.29 0.75 18.5
LMS. %
40. Teacher enhance
lecture with
videos to illustrate a
point
related to the lecture. 4.52 0.75 3.89 1.00 0.63 14.0

35 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati
%
41. Teacher provide links
to
digital sources as helpful
references. 4.55 0.77 3.79 0.98 0.76 16.7
%
42. Teacher makes use 4.16 0.95 3.39 1.09 0.77 18.5
of LMS %
43. Teacher provides
links to helpful open
source learning
resources that improve
quality
of work of students. 4.5 0.70 3.7 0.99 0.82 18.0
7 5 %
46. Teacher give
students tasks
that require them to use
content
authoring software like
Adobe Captivate, Udutu,
and
Easygenerator, etc. 3.6 1.42 2.9 1.98 0.70 19.4
1 1 %
47. Teacher use LMS to
assess
progress of students 4.1 1.01 3.3 1.12 0.74 17.9
learning. 3 9 %
48. Teacher use LMS to
encourage group 4.1 1.02 3.3 1.14 0.78 18.9
discussions. 3 5 %

Education is a service, an experience. Lovelock & Wirtz (2011) has likened

service to that of a flower, one missing petal can ruin its beauty. The same
with services – one aspect of service can ruin the entire experience of the
customer. Thus, students’ experience inside the classroom must be
complemented with excellent services from administrative personnel and
efficient processes. Results of the study show however that the university
shows severe gaps in staff service as all four items are in this cluster.
Discontentment can also be inferred in facilities specifically on chair for left-
handed students, the library – its collection and its array of services, student
services that are related to diversity, ICT facilities including the online
enrollment system. Students view internet speed to be very important and
consider the visual appeal and ease of navigating the online enrollment
system to be essential ingredients for excellent educational services.
Likewise, results also seem to indicate that students expect teaching
services to be uninterrupted as indicated by the inclusion of three items on
ICT integration under this cluster.

36 │Page
The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

Table 6. Aspects of Students Satisfaction with Severe Gaps

Gap from
Importance Performance
Measures Importance
Mea SD Mea SD Gap %
n n
1. Staff is courteous. 4.52 0.67 3.50 0.93 1.02 22.6
%
2. Staff is helpful. 4.60 0.65 3.59 0.92 1.00 21.8
3. When I have some %
queries, staff is able
to answer my 4.58 0.70 3.54 0.96 1.04
questions correctly. 22.7
%
4. Staff attends to my
concerns 4.53 0.69 3.44 0.93 1.09 24.1
with promptness. %
14. Classroom has a
chair for 3.82 1.48 2.33 1.66 1.49 39.0
left-handed students. %
17. The library has a
good 4.61 0.73 3.15 1.14 1.47 31.8
collection of learning %
resources.
18. Silence in the library
is 4.70 1.98 3.36 1.18 1.34 28.6
strictly observed. %
19. Study area
without the
restrictive rule of 4.42 0.95 3.27 1.19 1.15 26.1
the library is %
available.
20. Campus has a place
where 4.56 0.82 3.12 1.33 1.44 31.7
students can converge %
and relax.
21. Canteen is clean and
comfortable. 4.65 0.68 3.41 1.09 1.24 26.7
%
23. Food handlers
practice food safety
practices to avoid 4.67 0.66 3.36 1.04 1.31 28.0
contaminating the food. %

37 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

24. Campus has an area

where
non-Catholic students
can
practice their faith. 4.3 1.0 3.36 1.39 0.98 22.6
3 8 %
27. The campus has
gender-
neutral restrooms. 3.9 1.3 3.10 1.67 0.87 22.0
8 8 %
28. The campus allows
LGBTQI
students to wear
uniforms
aligned with their sexual
identification. 3.4 1.6 2.74 1.66 0.76 21.6
9 2 %
30. The campus has an
internet
connection that is fast
and
reliable. 4.5 1.0 2.45 1.39 2.07 45.9
2 0 %
31. Online enrollment
system is
easy to navigate. 4.6 0.6 3.12 1.22 1.57 33.4
9 6 %
32. Online enrollment
system is
visually appealing. 4.5 0.7 3.43 1.10 1.15 25.1
9 0 %
33. The online
enrollment
system provides all the
information a student
needs to
be enrolled. 4.7 0.5 3.71 1.07 1.05 22.0
5 5 %
39. Teacher use LMS to
deliver
lessons in case he/she
fails to
meet class. 4.2 0.9 3.37 1.27 0.89 20.9
6 6 %
45. Teacher use video
conferencing. 3.4 1.5 2.60 1.53 0.86 24.9
6 0 %
49. Teacher use Massive
Open
Online Courses or
MOOCs to
deliver lecture. 3.8 1.2 2.97 1.32 0.92 23.7
9 5 %

38 │Page
The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

DISCUSSION

Results of this study are consistent with criticisms against the IPA model –
the grid it produces using mean scores for importance and performance can
mislead management into believing it is meeting customer expectations as
the division of the coordinate system into four quadrants involves
arbitrariness. Other researchers have proposed alternatives to address the
limitations of the IPA model (Ramirez-Hurtado, 2017). This study made use
of gap chart to identify strengths and weaknesses that the management can
address.

As a higher education institution, the university caters to price-sensitive

segment of the urban market. As urban dwellers, students of the university
are exposed to amenities of modern living one can expect to be present in a
highly cosmopolitan city like Makati. It is not surprising then that next to
price, students consider physical facilities as the second biggest reason for
enrolling in the university. It can be inferred then that students expect
quality but affordable education and facilities are an important ingredient in
their definition of quality. Results show that the university is marginally
meeting expectations on the classroom environment and on the use of ICT
in the teaching and learning process. This can be attributed to the urban
background of students.

The core service of the university is teaching. The erformance of the

university on this aspect also suffers from serious gaps. Interestingly, the
results can be interpreted that the students consider good quality of higher
education includes not only excellent teaching but also satisfying co-
curricular activities. Good teaching, based on the results, can be described
as having mastery of the subject matter, good interpersonal skills, and being
able to use ICT for better teaching- learning.

39 │Page
 The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

REFERENCES

Athiyaman, A. (1997). Linking student satisfaction and service quality

perceptions: the case of university education. European Journal of
Marketing, 31(7), pp 528-540. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569710176655
Jude, L., Kajura, M.A., & Birevu, M.P. (2014). The Use of Importance-
Performance Analysis in Evaluating Japan's E-government Services.
International Journal of e-Education, e-
Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 4(2). April 2014
Lovelock, C., & Wirtz, J. (2011). Services marketing: People, technology,
strategy, 7th ed.
Pearson
Martilla, J.A., & James J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis.
Journal of Marketing, Jan 1977, pp.77-79. Retrieved
fromumnaw.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Importance-
performance-analysis-Martilla-James-1977.pdf
Mourkani, G.S., & Shohoodi, M. (2013). Quality Assurance in Higher
Education: Combining
Internal Evaluation and Importance-Performance Analysis Models.
Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 15(5):643-651.
Napitupulu, D., Rahim, R., Abdullah, D., Setiawan, M.I., Abdillah, L.A.,
Ahmar, A.S., Simarmata, J., Hidayat, R., Nurdiyanto, H., & Pranolo,
A. (2018). Analysis of Student Satisfaction Toward Quality of
Service Facility. Joint Workshop of KO2PI 2017 &
ICMSTEA 2016
Onditi, E.O., & Wechuli, T.W. (2017). Service Quality and Student Satisfaction
in Higher
Education Institutions: A Review of Literature. International Journal
of Scientific and Research Publications, 7(7), July 2017
Ormanovic, S., Ciric, A., Talovic, M., Alic, H., Jeleskovic, E., & Causevic, D.
(2017).
Importance-performance analysis: Different approaches. Acta
Knesiologica 11, pp. 58-
66. Retrieved from http://actakinesiologica.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/Ormanovic-2017- Supp2-9.pdf
Ramirez-Hurtado, J. (2017). The use of importance-performance
analysis to measure the satisfaction of travel agency
franchisees. Revista de Administracão de Empresas. Retrieved
from http://doi.org/10.1590/s0034-759020170105
Silva, F,. & Fernandes, P. (2010). Using importance-performance
analysis in evaluating institutions of higher education: a case
study. 2010 International Conference on

40 │Page
The Use of Importance-Performance Analysis in Evaluating Student Satisfaction in
University of Makati

Education and Management Technology.

Retrieved from
http://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/153404648.
pdf
Weerasinghe, IM.S., Lalitha, R., & Fernando, S. (2017). Students' Satisfaction
in Higher
Education Literature Review. American Journal of Educational
Research, 2017, 5(5) 533-539. Retrieved from h
ttp://pubs.sciepub.com/education/5/5/9
Wong, M.S., Hideki, N., & George, P. (2011). The use of importance-
performance analysis (IPA) in evaluating Japan's e-government
services. Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Electronic Commerce Research 6(2), p. 17-30.
http://doi:10.4067/S071818762011000200003

41 │Page