Psychometric Properties of the Quality of Undergraduate Learning Experiences in Malaysian Universities
Main Article Content
Abstract
Malaysian higher educational institutions are bracing to compete at the international level with the institutions that produce evidence of quality teaching and learning and positive students’ experiences. In this matter, students’ engagement in learning activities has been heralded as a quality indicator of the higher educational institutions’ performance as well as undergraduate students’ learning. However, there is a need to examine the level of undergraduate learning engagement based on the principles of good educational practices and a need to provide empirical evidence of the extent to which higher educational institutions in Malaysia support undergraduates’ learning and growth. For this purpose, the current study proposes a framework for quality teaching and learning in Malaysia by developing a measurement instrument to measure the quality of undergraduates’ learning experiences (QULEX) in Malaysian higher education. The current study evaluated the reliability and factor structure of the QULEX using a sample of 1,892 Malaysian undergraduate students. QULEX consists of 12 factors with 47 items to measure the quality of undergraduates’ learning experiences. The factor structure of the QULEX was examined by employing exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The findings showed that items loadings, composite reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the variables provide robust empirical evidence to support the implementation of QULEX in the Malaysian academic context. The findings from this study will inform policymakers and practitioners upon student feedback concerning the variables that will derive teaching and learning excellence.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Ang, M. C. (2015). Graduate employability awareness: A gendered perspective. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 192–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.083
Ashikin, N., Yusof, M., & Hasliah, S. (2013). Analytical hierarchy process in multiple decisions making for higher education in Malaysia. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 81, 389–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.448
Awang-Hashim, R., Kaur, A., & Noman, M. (2015). The interplay of socio psychological factors on school engagement among early adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 45, 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.10.001
Ayub, U., Yazdani, N., & Kanwal, F. (2020). Students’ learning behaviours and their perception about quality of learning experience: The mediating role of psychological safety. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 42(3), 398–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1848797
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Duriez, B., Lens, W., Matos, L., Mouratidis, A., Ryan, R. M., Sheldon, K. M., Soenens, B., Van Petegem, S., & Verstuyf, J. (2014). Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation and Emotion, 39(2), 216–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1
Cheng, Y., & Tam, W. (1997). Multi-models of quality in education. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684889710156558
Cheong, K., Hill, C., Fernandez-Chung, R., & Leong, Y. (2015). Employing the ‘unemployable’: Employer perceptions of Malaysian graduates. Studies In Higher Education, 41(12), 2253–2270. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1034260
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.
Chickering, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chin, N., Khoo, S., & Low, W. (2012). Self-determination and goal orientation in track and field. Journal of Human Kinetics, 33, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10078-012-0054-0
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gunn, A. (2018). The UK Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF): The development of a new transparency tool. In R. Curaj, & R. Pricopie (Eds), European higher education area: The impact of past and future policies (pp. 505–526). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77407-731
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: International version. Pearson Education.
Hair, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Kember, D., & Leung, D. (2009). Development of a questionnaire for assessing students’ perceptions of the teaching and learning environment and its use in quality assurance. Learning Environments Research, 12(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-008-9050-7
Kline, R. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Publications.
Kuh, G. D. (2003). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties. National Survey of Student Engagement, Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning. Retrieved 25 June 2009, from http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/conceptual_framework_2003.pdf
Lalić, B. (2017). How quality of higher education should be measured by university rankings? IEDC-Bled School of Management. https://www.iedc.si/docs/default-source/Publications/how-quality-of-higher-education-should-be-measured-byuniversity-rankings.pdf?sfvrsn=0
Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation. Psychology Press.
Lien, L. A. (2002). The role of social integration in students’ psychosocial development [PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University]. http://eserv.uum.edu.my/dissertations-theses/role-social-integration-students-psychosocial/docview/305537088/se2?accountid=42599
Liversage, L., Naudé, L., & Botha, A. (2018). Vectors of identity development during the first year: black first-generation students’ reflections. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(1), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1359159
Long, T., Logan, J., & Waugh, M. (2016). Students’ perceptions of the value of using videos as a pre-class learning experience in the flipped classroom. TechTrends, 60(3), 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0045-4
Martin, L. (2000). The relationship of college experiences to psychosocial outcomes in students. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 292–301.
Matsudaira, J. (2016). Defining and measuring institutional quality in higher education. In M. L. Matchett, & T. Rudin (Eds.), Quality in the undergraduate experience: What is it? How is it measured? Who decides? (pp. 57–80). National Academies Press.
McCormick, A. C., & Kinzie, J. (2014). Refocusing the quality discourse: The United States national survey of student engagement. In A. H. Coates (Ed.), Engaging university students (pp. 13–29). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-63-7_2
MOHE. (2012). The National Higher Education Strategic Plan: Beyond 2020. Retrieved from https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/malaysia_national_higher_education_action_plan_2011-2015.pdf
MOHE. (2016). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015–2025 (Higher Education). Retreived from https://www.um.edu.my/docs/um-magazine/4-executive-summary-pppm-2015-2025.pdf
Smith, T. & Renk, K. (2007). Predictors of academic-related stress in college students: An examination of coping, social support, parenting style and anxiety. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators Journal, 44(3), 405–431. https://doi.org/10.2202/1949-6605.1829
Syed S. A., & Awang-Hashim, R. (2011). The roles of social support in promoting adolescents’ classroom cognitive engagement through academic self efficacy. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 8, 49–69. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli.8.2011.7626
Syed S. A., & Awang-Hashim, R. (2017). Gender differences in the perception of social support and cognitive engagement. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(3), 426–439
Ting, S. T., & Ying, C. Y. (2012). Business graduates’ competencies in the eyes of employers: An exploratory study in Malaysia. World Review of Business Research, 2(2), 176–190.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Yaacob, A., Awang-Hashim, R., Valdez, N. P., & Yusof, N. (2019). Illuminating diversity practices in Malaysian higher education institutions. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 34, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.21315/apjee2019.34.1
Yaakub, M. H., & Mohamed, Z. A. (2019). Measuring the performance of private higher education institutions in Malaysia. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(3), 425–443. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-10-2018-0208
Zainal Abidin, S., Bahari, S. A., Ibrahim, A., Ghazali, A. E. M., Ahmad, M. A., Mujir, M. S., Delgado, M. V. B., Zbiec, M., Garrido, J., Ortega, J. J., Gómez, M. V. G., Ratnasingam, J., Hashim, R., Zakaria, S., & Amin, N. M. (2021). Analysing the Malaysian Higher Education training offer for furniture design and woodworking industry 4.0 as an input towards joint curriculum validation protocol. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 36(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.21315/apjee2021.36.1.1