International Students’ Experience and the Effect of Satisfaction on Brand Loyalty in Malaysia Public Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework

South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities
Year: 2021 (August), Volume: (2), Issue. (4)
First page: (68) Last page: (80)
Online ISSN: 2582-7065
doi: 10.48165/sajssh.2021.2404

International Students’ Experience and the Effect of Satisfaction on Brand Loyalty in Malaysia Public Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework

Helmie Sheha Che Azemi¹, Abd Rahim Romle²
¹,2School of Government, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia.

Corresponding Author: Helmie Sheha Che Azemi, E-mail: helmiesheha11@gmail.com

Online Published:
8th Aug 2021

Received:
21st May 2021

Accepted:
10th July 2021

How to cite the Article

Azemi, H. S. C., & Romle, A. R. (2021). International Students’ Experience and the Effect of Satisfaction on Brand Loyalty in Malaysia Public Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework. South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(4), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.48165/sajssh.2021.2404 Cite
Azemi, Helmie Sheha Che, and Abd Rahim Romle. “International Students’ Experience and the Effect of Satisfaction on Brand Loyalty in Malaysia Public Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework.” South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, vol. 2, no. 4, 2021, pp. 68–80, http://doi.org/10.48165/sajssh.2021.2404. Cite
1.
Azemi HSC, Romle AR. International Students’ Experience and the Effect of Satisfaction on Brand Loyalty in Malaysia Public Higher Education: A Conceptual Framework. SAJSSH. 2021;2(4):68‑80. DOI: 10.48165/sajssh.2021.2404 Cite
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is images.png
View on Google Scholar

ABSTRACT

Service experience appears to be essential in a variety of academic disciplines. In business management, the service experience is a touchstone that impacts on profit, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. However, service experience has been pretty much ignored in higher education. With the intense competition between institutions, university management needs to create new enthusiasm and strategy for managing students’ experience, especially foreign students. This study proposed a conceptual framework to examine the relationship between students’ experience with brand loyalty, which is mediated by satisfaction. The research design will employ a quantitative approach using a structural equation model to obtain the result.     

KEYWORDS

Students’ experience, satisfaction, brand loyalty, higher education, conceptual

INTRODUCTION

The growing number of international students who migrate for educational purposes is being significantly become attention world-wide. Malaysia is well-known as a key player in international education and the world’s 11th largest exporter of education (Cheng, Mahmood & Yeap, 2013). International students are invaluable in creating a diverse community at the university. The internalization of higher education provides chances and increases the quality of higher education systems in terms of new ideas, human skill development, and economic interests. This has prompted the Ministry of Higher Education to increase the number of international student enrolment up to 150,000 by 2015 and 200,000 by 2020, generating MYR 7.8 billion per year (Ministry of Education, 2013). The increased number of international students has prompted the government to revisit policies and framework related to quality assurance. In many countries, student experience indicators are some of the many mechanisms used to ensure quality. 

However, the massive cut in government spending on public universities in 2007 from 90 percent of allocation to 70 percent have hit them hard to switch to alternative source of income (Abdullah, 2017). The budget for public universities has been reduced from RM 7.57 billion in 2016 to RM6.12 billion in 2017 with total cut off 19.23 percent. The financial pressure has forced all public universities to make a shift in their strategy to diversify initiatives in increasing universities income (Ahmad, Ismail & Siraj, 2018). The reliance on international students’ fee is one of the strategies to secure the income (Sanchez-Serra & Marconi, 2018). Therefore, it is in the focus of public higher education institutions to recruit more international students and retain them for future enrolment. Thus, the interest of exploring the effect of international students’ experience which lead to loyalty in higher education is very important. 

A large number of studies have been undertaken to examine their satisfaction towards universities (Padlee & Reimers, 2015). Hence, it is imperative for institutions to improve greater students’ experience and expectations (Macionis, Walters & Kwok, 2018). Existing studies has reported that international students’ experience in Malaysian public universities’ services still inadequate (Tan, Sharill & Naing, 2016). Although the study of service experience has been abundantly emphasized in several settings such as tourism (Manhas & Tukamushaba, 2015; Zatori, Smith & Puczko, 2018) e-commerce (Bilgihan & Kandampully, 2016; McLean & Wilson, 2016) telecommunication (Amoako, Dzogbenuku & Doe, 2016). However, the extant literatures do not highlight the role of service experience on higher education especially in Malaysia (Abdullah, Wasiuzzaman & Musa, 2015; Singh, Schapper & Jack, 2014). According to the statistics, there is a significant drop of enrolment in 2018 and 2019 (Ministry of Higher Education, 2019). Therefore, this study is imperative to investigate further on international students’ experience in Malaysian public universities to fully understand on their intention of loyalty and provide a better experience in ensuring them having positive brand image of Malaysian Higher Educations.  

Malaysia as Destination for International Students

The Malaysian government has made huge investments in the establishment of higher education. Currently, there are 20 public HEIs and 437 private HEIs with the average enrolment 100,000 of international students every year (Ministry of Higher Education, 2018). Top exporter countries are from the Asia, Middle East and Africa.  In addition to being a famous tourist destination, Malaysia has earned a positive reputation among students as well. One of the reasons that many people choose to pursue their education in Malaysia is based on certain factors. According to Halic, Greenberg, and Paulus (2009), language is the most influential element in student learning and confidence, especially for students who are not native to English language. As in Malaysia, English language is widely spoken as it is a second language of the country. Secondly, Malaysia living cost is low as compared to its neighbour, Singapore simultaneously gaining advantage to attract international students especially from another developing countries.

The country is made up of a diverse mix of cultures and ethnicities, tolerant and safe. The variety of cuisines, ranging from Malaysian, Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern to Western are easily found. The crime rate in Malaysia is relatively low and consider safe for foreigners (Tang, 2011). In order to guarantee that Malaysian universities maintain a high level of excellence, the Malaysian Qualification Agency (MQA) sets rules and oversees quality assurance methods, as well as the certification of national higher education institutions. Malaysia was able to provide global universities with outstanding education programmes at a cheaper cost (Grapragasem, Krishnan & Mansor, 2014). 

LITERATURE REVIEW

Brand Loyalty in Higher Education

Traditionally, brand loyalty refers to a favourable attitude and behaviour toward a brand, as well as potential repeat purchases. A committed consumer exhibits specific behaviours, such as exhibiting enjoyment in the brand and committing to splurge on the brand they like the most (Gustafsson & Johnson, 2002). While it is not restricted to the purchase attitude-behavior, they also offer referrals to other customers (Haenlein & Libai, 2017), giving positive feedback (Stein & Bowen, 2003) and recommending the brand through word of mouth (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006).  Dick and Basu (1994) define loyalty as customer relative attitude and repeat patronage towards certain brands. While Oliver (1999) classifies loyalty into four stages such as cognitive, affective, conative and action. This explains that customers’ loyalty in the beginning start from the awareness of the brand and later after few consumptions or engagement with the services, customers’ attitude develops into liking the brand. With the positive attitude towards the brand, customers’ behavioural intention lead to actual behaviour of loyalty. 

Although loyalty has received much attention in academic study, it has not been defined well due to ambiguity in term definitions (Annamdevula & Bellamkonda, 2016). Hennig-Thurau, Langer and Hansen (2001) assert that loyalty in higher education is similar like customer loyalty in business and marketing. Hence, brand loyalty is crucial to getting results in higher education. Someone who feels an emotional attachment to the institution is much more likely to make an admission, commitment, donate or make a referral. Brown and Mazzarol (2009) demonstrate that loyal students are willing to re-enrol at the same higher education institutions despite of applying different institutions. Besides, they will recommend the universities to another prospective students based on their experience with services provided. 

Service Experience 

Number of studies have been made to define and conceptualize customer experience, however no consensus about the construct and definition (Jain, Aagia & Bagdare, 2017; Verma & Misra, 2021). Gupta and Vajic (1999) define service experience as a feeling or opinion after the interaction on the specific services delivered. Helkkula (2011) categorizes service experience into three characterisations including phenomenological service experience, process-based service experience and outcome-based experience. Phenomenological experience can be referred as interactions between people such as lecturers or administration staff and place like library, classrooms or cafeteria (Chong & Ahmed, 2014). Process-based characterisation reflect on the transformation or phases of service delivery process from providers to customers (Toivonen, Tuominen & Brax, 2007). While outcome-based refer to the service experience that interconnected with other variables or attributes to various outcomes (Helkkula, 2011). Students must be thought of as customer which their expectations as the same level like any other customers across other service industries. A student’s first experience with higher educational institutions is very important because, it will affect their engagement with learning and overall services provided by universities. Otherwise, if the institutions fail to deliver the promises of better experience both learning and services, the entire view of overall satisfaction will be jeopardized. 

Many scholars have acknowledged that experience is one of the crucial focus of managerial, but the measurement of service experience is still inadequate (Klaus & Maklan, 2013). It is well that the most prominent instrument of SERVQUAL creates favourable purchasing intentions, willingness to pay more and recommendation. Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) assert that SERVQUAL is to measure customers’ overall expectation and assessment of the services received. SERVQUAL measures five dimensions; reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy and responsiveness. However, according to Maklan and Klaus (2011), SERVQUAL has been challenged conceptually, methodologically and validity of its dimensions. Buttle (1996) argue that SERVQUAL is based on a disconfirmation paradigm which it is not emphasize on attitudinal paradigm. Moreover, it only focus on customers’ evaluative perceptions rather focus customers’ experiential of services (Cronin & Taylor, 1994). Therefore, Klaus and Maklan (2013) suggest that customer experience need to be assess with new assessment; Customer Experience Quality scale (EXQ). The dimensions of the scale include Product Experience, Outcome Focus, Moment of the Truth and Peace of Mind. Roy (2018) utilizes the scale in his study to measure customer experience for hedonic and utilitarian services in a longitudinal study. The empirical finding shows that the stronger effect of EXQ on consumer attitudes for hedonic services with major hypotheses supported.  

Service Experience in Higher Education

The measurement of student experience in higher education always focusses on learning (Douglas, McClelland & Davies, 2008; Sehrawat & Roy, 2021). Thus, they suggest that an integrated model of student experience in learning and various services provided by the higher education institutions. Several studies on  international student experience (Ammigan & Jones, 2018; Huong, Koo, Arambewela & Zutshi, 2017; Macionis, Walters & Kwok, 2018; Menzies & Baron, 2013). For example, Menzies and Baron (2013) use qualitative method to analyse the international students’ experience in higher education institutions. They found that the university support is much more important to help them adjusting their life in foreign place. Moreover, social supports such friends is giving them more experience in their learning and daily activities. In the study of Terrazas-Carillo, Hong & Pace (2014) support that social experience has given a meaning to students who are attached to the new place and their intention to stay. The recent study of Ammigan and Jones (2018) integrate the experience of international students into four; prior to arrival, learning, living and university supports. The findings show that all four variables are significant to the overall international students’ experience with their respective higher education institutions. 

In some countries such as Unites States and Canada, National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) is used to analyse students’ engagement and experience (Klemenčič & Chirikov, 2015). Some other instruments are Student Experience in the Research University (SERU), National Student Survey (NSS), Dutch National Student Survey (NSE) and International Student Barometer Survey (ISB) (Klemenčič & Chirikov, 2015). The use of student survey was initiated to provide the institutions with more valid and reliable information about students’ experience with educational services (Kuh, 2009). Pop, Băcilă & Slevas-Stanciu (2018) recommend that measuring student experience can be adopted from HedPERF scale by Firdaus (2018) which all items are related to educational service quality. 

Student Satisfaction

Satisfaction has always been in the centre of research for decades. It is terms of marketing research that connote satisfied customer will have tendency to have positive thinking towards brand. The attitude change and purchase intention are related to level of satisfaction (Oliver, 1980). Giese and Cote (2000) conceptualized satisfaction as an affective response on certain products and services within specific time of consumption. Satisfaction is defined as consumers’ evaluative judgements based on both cognitive and affective as an emotional response on the expectation and the outcome of services. 

In higher education, there are many studies have applied satisfaction in their models and framework as indicator of students’ loyalty (Aritonang & Lerbin, 2014; Shclesinger, Cervera & Perez-Cabañero, 2017; James & Casidy, 2016; Pedro, Pereira & Carrasqueira, 2017). Some studies are focusing on academic performance (Braun & Zolfagharian, 2016; Martirosyan, Saxon & Wanjohi, 2014; Negricea, Edu & Avram, 2014), online learning (Rios, Elliot & Mandernach, 2018; Gray & Diloreto, 2016; Horvat, Dobrota, Krsmanovic & Cudanov, 2015) and overall educational services (Khoo, Ha & McGregor, 2017; Saleem, Moosa, Imam & Khan, 2017; Yusoff, McLeay & Woodruffe-Burton, 2015). 

However, the concept of satisfaction in higher education seems to different from business and marketing perspective (Mark, 2013; Munteanu, Ceobanu, Bobalca & Anton, 2010). The relevance of putting student as customer has stirring up a great deal of controversy in the academia. Budd (2017) assert that there is a great discussion in the academic literature on the conceptions of student as customer. Adding to the explanation by Koris, Örtenblad, Kerem and Ojala (2014) argue that existing literatures do not clearly interpreting the concept. They found that students want to be recognize as customer in different categories of experience which are involve educational and auxiliary services. While Mark (2013) explains that students are not expecting to get easy courses and high grades but their expectation to improve for better life and employment. Their concern is mainly on the expectation of educational support and services which provided by institutions for long-term process or period of studies. Munteanu et al (2010) claim that students are the primary stakeholder in higher education because of their greater involvement in the overall services provided by university. Hence, student satisfaction is an important indicator in measuring the quality of teaching and learning experience for the whole process of educational outcome.  

HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT

Service Experience and Satisfaction

Experience would result in higher expectation that affecting satisfaction (Rajaratnam, Munikrishnan, Sharif and Nair (2014). There is evidence show that greater service experience leads to satisfied customer. Ali, Kim and Jeon (2018) state that customer who had pleasure with the service is genuinely having good experience and extended the joy to another customer. In their study, they found that physical environment, interaction with customers and interaction with staffs have positive impact on customer satisfaction (Ali, Kim & Jeon, 2018). In higher education context, Ammigan and Jones (2018) use four dimensions of service experience from International Student Barometer (IBS) such as arrival experience, learning experience, living experience and support service experience as the antecedent of satisfaction in 96 higher education institutions in Australia, United Kingdom and United States of America. The result shows that the four dimensions of experiences positively associated with overall students’ satisfaction. Thus, we hypothesized the relationship as below;

H1: Service Experience has significant relationship with satisfaction

Service Experience and Brand Loyalty

Building an exceptional customer experience into a brand is important to strengthen their emotion to organization. Poor customer experience can be bad and making customer to switch to another option. Manhas and Tukamushaba (2015) emphasize that customer experience is a critical factor in the evaluation of service performance. Cardinale, Nguyen and Melewar (2016) find significant of the positive overall experience on the brand make customer attach to the place they visited which result in the frequent repeated visit has contributed to customer loyalty in the winery tourism. In the recent study by Nobar and Rostamzadeh (2018) find that brand loyalty is significantly influenced by customer service in the hotel industry. Pop, Băcilă and Slevas-Stanciu (2018) empirically tested their model in Romanian Public University and found different result which influence students’ loyalty towards university. They have used the overall service experience dimensions such as professional expertise, teaching competences, personal qualities, administrative service, courses content, library experience, accommodation experience, eating space experience, medical services experience, physical space, campus facilities and career prospects to test the hypotheses. However, the result is varied and they explain that the experience level is depend on the aspect of the academic and non-academic and the programme they enrolled in. Therefore, we summarize that;

H2: Service experience has significant relationship with brand loyalty

Satisfaction and Brand Loyalty

Satisfaction and brand loyalty are majorly agreed by some scholars as marketing goals for many business organizations (Bowen & McCain, 2015; Elsäßer & Wirtz, 2017; Kim, Vogt & Knutson, 2015). Traditionally, many researches have found significant relationship between customer satisfaction and brand loyalty (Al-Msallam, 2015; Han, Nguyen, Song, Chua, Lee & Kim, 2018; Liang, Lai, Hsu, Chiu & Hsieh, 2018; Pererira, Salgueiro & Rita, 2016; Rather & Sharma, 2016). Hussein (2018) investigate the mediation effect of satisfaction between brand experience and brand loyalty in two type of dining restaurants; local and international. The finding shows that satisfaction is fully mediated the relationships while brand origin does not moderate both relationship between brand experience and satisfaction. While Hence, the hypothesis as below;

H3: Satisfaction has significant relationship with brand loyalty

The research framework representing all the proposed relationships are shown in Figure 1.


Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for this study

CONCLUSION

The study of service experience has been long recognized as major goal in enhancing customer satisfaction and loyalty in marketing (Ali, Kim, Li & Jeon, 2018; Dagger & O’Brien, 2010; Fernandes & Cruz, 2016). Although it has been explored in higher education, but the measurement of service experience is still lacking (Nixon, Scullion & Hearn, 2016). Hence, this study is intended to analyse the effect of service experience on brand loyalty in higher education. In the previous studies have confirmed that customer satisfaction is pre-requisite to develop customer loyalty (Fraering & Minor, 2013; Jiang & Zhang, 2016; Kasiri, Cheng, Sambasivan & Sidin, 2017). Hence, this model predicts the relationship of three variables; service experience, satisfaction and brand loyalty. 

Delivering an exceptional customer experience is vital for institutions to gain student loyalty.  In realizing the benefits, there is a need for developing sustainable model of relationship with students and their attention to the need for exceptional, relationship-building experiences. With the intense competition also, higher education institution should be committed in supporting international students through academic and non-academic area. Thus, the university management also need to enhance by developing new concepts to understand students’ need in order to enhance their experience. When expectations meet they will feel more satisfied. The satisfied students are the major source of branding for the universities, they will use positive word of mouth power as they will be satisfied. This satisfaction will create a sense of loyalty and repeated course registration by the graduates. These graduates will not only consumer services again and again but will refer to other friends and family circle and increase the enrolment in university program. 

REFERENCES

Abdullah, A. H., Wasiuzzaman, S., & Musa, R. (2015). University quality and emotional attachment of undergraduate students in a private higher education in Malaysia: The mediating role of total experience. International Journal of Social Economics42(7), 644-665.

Abdullah, D. (2017). Public universities and budget cuts in Malaysia. International Higher Education, (91), 15-17.

Ahmad, N. N. N., Siraj, S. A., & Ismail, S. (2019). Revenue diversification in public higher learning institutions: an exploratory Malaysian study. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education.

Ali, F., Kim, W. G., Li, J., & Jeon, H. M. (2018). Make it delightful: Customers’ experience, satisfaction and loyalty in Malaysian theme parks. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management7, 1-11.

Al-Msallam, S. (2015). Customer satisfaction and brand loyalty in the hotel industry. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research4.

Ammigan, R., & Jones, E. (2018). Improving the student experience: Learning from a comparative study of international student satisfaction. Journal of Studies in International Education22(4), 283-301.

Amoako, G. K., Dzogbenuku, R. K., & Doe, J. K. (2016). How Service Experience Leads to Brand Loyalty: Perspective from the Telecom Sector in Ghana. IUP Journal of Brand Management13(2), 33.

Annamdevula, S., & Bellamkonda, R. S. (2016). The effects of service quality on student loyalty: the mediating role of student satisfaction. Journal of Modelling in Management11(2), 446-462.

Arambewela, R., & Hall, J. (2009). An empirical model of international student satisfaction. Asia Pacific journal of marketing and logistics21(4), 555-569.

Aritonang, R., & Lerbin, R. (2014). Student loyalty modeling. Market-Tržište26(1), 77-91.

Bilgihan, A., Kandampully, J., & Zhang, T. (2016). Towards a unified customer experience in online shopping environments: Antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences8(1), 102-119.

Borraz-Mora, J., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Melguizo-Garde, M. (2017, June). The influence of competences in business higher education: a student’s approach. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Higher Education Advances (pp. 826-834). Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València.

Bowen, J. T., & McCain, S. L. C. (2015). Transitioning loyalty programs: A commentary on “the relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction”. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management27(3), 415-430.

Braun, J., & Zolfagharian, M. (2016). Student participation in academic advising: Propensity, behavior, attribution and satisfaction. Research in Higher Education57(8), 968-989.

Brevetti, M., & Ford, D. (2017). Debates on the international student experience: schools as a morally formative culture. Journal for Multicultural Education11(3), 189-193.

Brown, R. M., & Mazzarol, T. W. (2009). The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and loyalty within higher education. Higher education58(1), 81-95.

Budd, R. (2017). Undergraduate orientations towards higher education in Germany and England: problematizing the notion of ‘student as customer’. Higher Education73(1), 23-37.

Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda. European Journal of marketing.

Cardinale, S., Nguyen, B., & Melewar, T. C. (2016). Place-based brand experience, place attachment and loyalty. Marketing Intelligence & Planning.

Cheng, M. Y., Mahmood, A., & Yeap, P. F. (2013). Malaysia as a regional education hub: a demand-side analysis. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management35(5), 523-536.

Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of marketing research43(3), 345-354.

Cronin Jr, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1994). SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling performance-based and perceptions-minus-expectations measurement of service quality. Journal of marketing58(1), 125-131.

Dagger, T. S., & O’Brien, T. K. (2010). Does experience matter? Differences in relationship benefits, satisfaction, trust, commitment and loyalty for novice and experienced service users. European Journal of Marketing44(9/10), 1528-1552.

Dick, A. S., & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the academy of marketing science22(2), 99-113.

Douglas, J., McClelland, R., & Davies, J. (2008). The development of a conceptual model of student satisfaction with their experience in higher education. Quality assurance in education16(1), 19-35.

Elsäßer, M., & Wirtz, B. W. (2017). Rational and emotional factors of customer satisfaction and brand loyalty in a business-to-business setting. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing32(1), 138-152. 

Fernandes, T., & Cruz, M. (2016). Dimensions and outcomes of experience quality in tourism: The case of Port wine cellars. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services31, 371-379.

Fraering, M., & S. Minor, M. (2013). Beyond loyalty: customer satisfaction, loyalty, and fortitude. Journal of Services Marketing27(4), 334-344.

Giese, J. L., & Cote, J. A. (2000). Defining consumer satisfaction. Academy of marketing science review1(1), 1-22.

Grapragasem, S., Krishnan, A., & Mansor, A. N. (2014). Current Trends in Malaysian Higher Education and the Effect on Education Policy and Practice: An Overview. International Journal of Higher Education3(1), 85-93.

Gray, J. A. & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation11(1), n1.

Gupta, S. & Vajic, M. (1999), “The contextual and dialectical nature of experiences”, in Fitzsimmons, J. and Fitzsimmons, M. (Eds), New Service Development, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 33‐51.

Gustafsson, A. & Johnson, M. D. (2002). Measuring and managing the satisfaction–loyalty–performance links at Volvo. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing10(3), 249-258.

Haenlein, M. & Libai, B. (2017). Seeding, referral, and recommendation: Creating profitable word-of-mouth programs. California Management Review59(2), 68-91.

Halic, O., Greenberg, K., & Paulus, T. (2009). Language and academic identity: A study of the experiences of non-native English speaking international students. International Education38(2), 5.

Helkkula, A. (2011). Characterising the concept of service experience. Journal of Service Management22(3), 367-389.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Langer, M. F., & Hansen, U. (2001). Modeling and managing student loyalty: An approach based on the concept of relationship quality. Journal of service research3(4), 331-344.

Horvat, A., Dobrota, M., Krsmanovic, M., & Cudanov, M. (2015). Student perception of Moodle learning management system: a satisfaction and significance analysis. Interactive Learning Environments23(4), 515-527.

Huong, L., Koo, F. K., Arambewela, R., & Zutshi, A. (2017). Voices of dissent: unpacking Vietnamese international student experience. International journal of educational management31(3), 280-292.

Hussein, A. S. (2018). Effects of brand experience on brand loyalty in Indonesian casual dining restaurant: Roles of customer satisfaction and brand of origin. Tourism and hospitality management24(1), 119-132.

Jain, R., Aagja, J., & Bagdare, S. (2017). Customer experience–a review and research agenda. Journal of Service Theory and Practice27(3), 642-662.

James, L. T., & Casidy, R. (2018). Authentic assessment in business education: its effects on student satisfaction and promoting behaviour. Studies in higher education43(3), 401-415.

Jiang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2016). An investigation of service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in China’s airline market. Journal of air transport management57, 80-88.

Kasiri, L. A., Cheng, K. T. G., Sambasivan, M., & Sidin, S. M. (2017). Integration of standardization and customization: Impact on service quality, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services35, 91-97.

Khoo, S., Ha, H., & McGregor, S. L. (2017). Service quality and student/customer satisfaction in the private tertiary education sector in Singapore. International Journal of Educational Management31(4), 430-444.

Kim, J. H. (2018). The impact of memorable tourism experiences on loyalty behaviors: The mediating effects of destination image and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research57(7), 856-870.

Kim, M., Vogt, C. A., & Knutson, B. J. (2015). Relationships among customer satisfaction, delight, and loyalty in the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research39(2), 170-197.

Klaus, P. P., & Maklan, S. (2013). Towards a better measure of customer experience. International Journal of Market Research55(2), 227-246.

Klemenčič, M., & Chirikov, I. (2015). How do we know how students experience higher education? On the use of student surveys. In The European Higher Education Area (pp. 361-379). Springer, Cham.

Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New directions for institutional research2009(141), 5-20.

Macionis, N., Walters, G., & Kwok, E. (2018). International tertiary student experience in Australia: A Singaporean perspective. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education.

Maklan, S., & Klaus, P. (2011). Customer experience: are we measuring the right things?. International Journal of Market Research53(6), 771-772.

Manhas, P. S., & Tukamushaba, E. K. (2015). Understanding service experience and its impact on brand image in hospitality sector. International Journal of Hospitality Management45, 77-87.

Mark, E. (2013). Student satisfaction and the customer focus in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management35(1), 2-10.

Martirosyan, N. M., Saxon, D. P., & Wanjohi, R. (2014). Student satisfaction and academic performance in Armenian higher education. American International Journal of Contemporary Research4(2), 1-5.

McLean, G., & Wilson, A. (2016). Evolving the online customer experience… is there a role for online customer support? Computers in Human Behavior60, 602-610.

Menzies, J. L., & Baron, R. (2014). International postgraduate student transition experiences: The importance of student societies and friends. Innovations in Education and Teaching International51(1), 84-94.

Ministry of Education (2013). Operational Framework for International Student Managament. Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.my/en/muat-turun/penerbitan-dan-jurnal/buletin/1180-operational-framework-for-international-student-management/file

Ministry of Higher Education (2011). Macro-Higher Education Institutions. Retrieved from https://www.mohe.gov.my/en/downloads/statistics/stat-2018/224-statistik-pt-2018-03-bab-1-makro-institusi-pendidikan-tinggi/file

Ministry of Higher Education (2018). Macro-Higher Education Institutions. Retrieved from https://www.mohe.gov.my/en/downloads/statistics/stat-2018/224-statistik-pt-2018-03-bab-1-makro-institusi-pendidikan-tinggi/file

Munteanu, C., Ceobanu, C., Bobâlcă, C., & Anton, O. (2010). An analysis of customer satisfaction in a higher education context. International Journal of Public Sector Management23(2), 124-140.

Negricea, C. I., Edu, T., & Avram, E. M. (2014). Establishing influence of specific academic quality on student satisfaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences116, 4430-4435.

Nixon, E., Scullion, R., & Hearn, R. (2018). Her majesty the student: marketised higher education and the narcissistic (dis) satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education43(6), 927-943.

Nobar, H. B. K., & Rostamzadeh, R. (2018). The impact of customer satisfaction, customer experience and customer loyalty on brand power: empirical evidence from hotel industry. Journal of Business Economics and Management19(2), 417-430.

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of marketing research17(4), 460-469.

Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of marketing63(4_suppl1), 33-44.

Padlee, S. F., & Reimers, V. (2015). International student satisfaction with, and behavioural intentions towards, universities in Victoria. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education25(1), 70-84.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. 198864(1), 12-40.

Pedro, I. M., Pereira, L. N., & Carrasqueira, H. B. (2018). Determinants for the commitment relationship maintenance between the alumni and the alma mater. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education28(1), 128-152.

Pereira, H. G., Salgueiro, M.D.F., & Rita, P. (2016). Online purchase determinants of loyalty: The mediating effect of satisfaction in tourism. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services30, 279-291.

Pop, C. M., Băcilă, M. F., & Slevaș-Stanciu, C. D. (2018). Students’ Total Experience within a Romanian Public University. Marketing–from Information to Decision Journal1(1), 29-40.

Rajaratnam, S. D., Munikrishnan, U. T., Sharif, S. P., & Nair, V. (2014). Service quality and previous experience as a moderator in determining tourists’ satisfaction with rural tourism destinations in Malaysia: A partial least squares approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences144, 203-211.

Rather, R., & Sharma, J. (2016). Brand loyalty with hospitality brands: The role of customer brand identification, brand satisfaction and brand commitment. Pacific Business Review International1(3).

Rios, T., Elliott, M., & Mandernach, B. J. (2018). Efficient Instructional Strategies for Maximizing Online Student Satisfaction. Journal of Educators Online15(3), n3.

Roy, S. (2018). Effects of customer experience across service types, customer types and time. Journal of Services Marketing.

Saleem, S., Moosa, K., Imam, A., & Ahmed Khan, R. (2017). Service quality and student satisfaction: the moderating role of university culture, reputation and price in education sector of pakistan. Iranian Journal of Management Studies10(1), 237-258.

Sanchez-Serra, D., & Marconi, G. (2018). Increasing international students’ tuition fees: the two sides of the coin. International Higher Education, (92), 13-14.

Schlesinger, W., Cervera, A., & Pérez-Cabañero, C. (2017). Sticking with your university: the importance of satisfaction, trust, image, and shared values. Studies in Higher Education42(12), 2178-2194.

Sehrawat, M., & Roy, M. M. (2021). Expected roles and functions of the school management committee: an investigation for effective functioning. South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities2(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.48165/sajssh.2021.2107

Singh, J. K. N., Schapper, J., & Jack, G. (2014). The importance of place for international students’ choice of university: A case study at a Malaysian university. Journal of Studies in International Education18(5), 463-474.

Smith, R. A., & Khawaja, N. G. (2011). A review of the acculturation experiences of international students. International Journal of intercultural relations35(6), 699-713.

Stein, M. M., & Bowen, M. (2003). Building a customer satisfaction system: Effective listening when the customer speaks. Journal of Organizational Excellence22(3), 23-34. 

Tan, A., Shahrill, M., & Naing, L. (2016). Enhancing international students’ experience. Advanced Science Letters22(5-6), 1205-1208.

Tang, C. F. (2011). An exploration of dynamic relationship between tourist arrivals, inflation, unemployment and crime rates in Malaysia. International Journal of Social Economics.

Terrazas-Carrillo, E. C., Hong, J. Y., & Pace, T. M. (2014). Adjusting to new places: International student adjustment and place attachment. Journal of College Student Development55(7), 693-706.

Toivonen, M., Tuominen, T., & Brax, S. (2007). Innovation process interlinked with the process of service delivery: a management challenge in KIBS. Economies et sociétés41(3), 355.

Verma, A., & Misra, P. K. (2021). Shopping Mall, Consumption Culture And Different Age Group: Review Of Literature In A Sociological Comparative Framework. South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities2(1), 01–15. https://doi.org/10.48165/sajssh.2021.2101

Yusoff, M., McLeay, F., & Woodruffe-Burton, H. (2015). Dimensions driving business student satisfaction in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education23(1), 86-104.

Zatori, A., Smith, M. K., & Puczko, L. (2018). Experience-involvement, memorability and authenticity: The service provider’s effect on tourist experience. Tourism Management67, 111-126.