Quality Service Competition in Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/x062dc55Keywords:
school, education, pesantren, quality service, Muhammadiya, Nadhlatul UlamaAbstract
The idea of rivalry in giving quality instruction administrations has become an outcome and is justifiable. In America, the state politically underpins with the goal that the universe of training dives into the universe of worldwide rivalry. The state finances instructive establishments with the goal that their capacity to vie for increments and the state profits by it. This sort of rivalry has been socially acknowledged, including by Muslims themselves, so that on account of European culture, they will send their youngsters to common training establishments just as strict schools. The objective is that their kids can contend. With regards to the board, instructive organizations are without a doubt coordinated to contend. One key advance taken is to improve the nature of human resource. Rivalry among instructive foundations, then again, has been perceived by specialists, will affect the assorted variety of administration quality. Each foundation must be unique in relation to different establishments. The distinction in administration quality is enthusiastically prescribed with the goal that the opposition as interminable.
Downloads
References
1. Latif, K. F., Latif, I., Farooq Sahibzada, U., & Ullah, M. (2019). In search of quality: measuring higher education service quality (HiEduQual). Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(7-8), 768-791.
2. Nechyba, T. J. (2020). Tiebout sorting and competition. In The Economics of Education (pp. 471-478). Academic Press.
3. De Wit, H. (2020). Internationalization of higher education. Journal of International Students, 10(1), i-iv.
4. Wennström, J. (2019). Marketized education: How regulatory failure undermined the Swedish school system. Journal of Education Policy, 1-27.
5. Carlucci, D., Renna, P., Izzo, C., & Schiuma, G. (2019). Assessing teaching performance in higher education: a framework for continuous improvement. Management Decision.
6. Vaikunthavasan, S., Jebarajakirthy, C., & Shankar, A. (2019). How to make higher education institutions innovative: An application of market orientation practices. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 31(3), 274-302.
7. Tsiligiris, V., & Hill, C. (2019). A prospective model for aligning educational quality and student experience in international higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 1-17.
8. Hamid, F. S., & Nick, Y. I. P. (2019). Comparing service quality in public vs private distance education institutions: Evidence based on Malaysia. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 17-34.
9. Gravelle, H., Liu, D., Propper, C., & Santos, R. (2019). Spatial competition and quality: Evidence from the English family doctor market. Journal of health economics, 68, 102249.
10. Osman, A. R., & Saputra, R. S. (2019). A pragmatic model of student satisfaction: a viewpoint of private higher education. Quality Assurance in Education.
11. Akhmetshin, E. M., Pavlyuk, A. V., Ling, V. V., Mikhailova, M. V., Shichiyakh, R. A., & Kozachek, A.
V. (2019). The use of private start-ups in higher education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education.
12. Plank, D. N., & Davis, T. E. (2020). The economic role of the state in education. In The Economics of Education (pp. 445-454). Academic Press.
13. Berkovich, I., & Wasserman, V. (2019). Exploring narratives of non-faculty professionals in neoliberal higher education: a cultural appropriation perspective on librarians. Studies in Higher Education, 44(6), 1039-1051.
14. D'Angelo, S. (2019). CIPA Wins NASPAA Competition on Data Science in Public Affairs Education. Human Ecology, 47(2), 8-9.
15. Termes, A., Edwards Jr, D. B., & Verger, A. (2020). The Development and Dynamics of Public–Private Partnerships in the Philippines’ Education: A Counterintuitive Case of School Choice, Competition, and Privatization. Educational Policy, 34(1), 91-117.
16. O’Leary, M., & Wood, P. (2019). Reimagining teaching excellence: why collaboration, rather than competition, holds the key to improving teaching and learning in higher education. Educational Review, 71(1), 122-139.
17. Vrielink, R. O., Jansen, E. A., Hans, E. W., & van Hillegersberg, J. (2019). Practices in timetabling in higher education institutions: a systematic review. Annals of operations research, 275(1), 145-160.
18. Sultan, P., & Wong, H. Y. (2019). How service quality affects university brand performance, university brand image and behavioural intention: The mediating effects of satisfaction and trust and moderating roles of gender and study mode. Journal of Brand Management, 26(3), 332-347.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
