Average Student Satisfaction Score for the Course

ii) How to calculate average score:

The average satisfaction score for each class is calculated using the following formula:

Average score of each class (Xi)

Cumulative score of each student in the class Number of students in the class

after:

The average score of all 5 classes on satisfaction level is calculated by the formula

∑(X i * Ni)

Average X =

∑Ni

In which, the average X is the average score representing the overall satisfaction level.

of students of all 5 Courses.

Xi: Average score of student satisfaction in a class; Ni: Number of students in each class.

Average student satisfaction score for the course

summarized in the chart below:

Chart 2.1: Average score of student satisfaction with the course

Survey data shows that the level of student satisfaction based on the evaluation criteria for the course is not high. The average score for this criterion is 2.89 points; the highest score belongs to the criterion of the relevance of training content to work with a score of 2.92; the lowest score belongs to the criterion of the level of student interest in the course with an average score of 2.83 points.

2.3.1.2. About class organization

The survey on student satisfaction with the organization of the class is a survey on logistics, satisfaction with presentation tools, teaching equipment, materials provided, time, location and size of the class. The survey results are summarized according to each of the following criteria:

b1. Level of student satisfaction with classroom logistics

Table 2.5: Distribution of interview respondents

according to the level of satisfaction with the logistics of the course

Level

Very funny heart		Satisfied		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	14	56.0	11	44.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	19	54.3	16	45.7	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	0	0.0	28	100.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Transport Management Class onion	0	0.0	48	100.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.23	3	21.4	9	64.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	16	10	109	72.7	25	16.7	0	0	0	0

Maybe you are interested!

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

In contrast to the above sections, the satisfaction rate with the logistics of the class was very high (10% very satisfied, 72.7% satisfied). No student was dissatisfied with the logistics of the class. In particular, if in the above sections, the highest dissatisfaction rate was among students in the operation class, then in this section, students in the operation class had the highest satisfaction rate.

b2. Level of student satisfaction with presentation media

Table 2.6: Distribution of interviewees according to satisfaction level with presentation media

Level

Very funny heart		Satisfied		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	0	24.0	14	56.0	5	20.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	23	65.7	12	34.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	0	0.0	28	100.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Operations Management Class	0	0.0	48	100.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.3	3	21.4	9	64.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	2	1.3	127	84.7	21	14	0	0	0	0

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

The survey results show that the level of satisfaction with the presentation means for the electrical laboratory profession is relatively high (24% very satisfied; 56% satisfied); no student is dissatisfied with the teaching means, up to 86% of the total sample of the 5 professions surveyed rated as satisfied and very satisfied with the presentation means.

b3. Level of satisfaction with learning facilities/models

Table 2.7: Distribution of interview respondents

by level of satisfaction with learning facilities/models

Level

Very funny heart		Satisfied		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	6	24.0	14	56.0	5	20.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	6	17.1	25	71.4	4	11.4	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	0	0.0	4	14.3	24	85.7	0	0.0	0	0.0
Transport Management Class onion	0	0.0	1	2.1	27	56.3	20	41.7	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.3	2	14.3	9	64.3	1	7.1	0	0.0
Total	8	5.3	27	18	90	60	25	16.7	0	0

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

Regarding learning tools/models, in general, up to 60% of the total sample evaluated them at a normal level; especially for electrical testing and electrical construction, students rated their satisfaction with learning tools higher.

b4. Level of satisfaction with training materials

Table 2.8: Distribution of interview respondents according to satisfaction level with training materials

Level

Very funny heart		Comedy heart		Jar often		Not happy heart		Absolutely not. satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	25	100.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	19	54.3	16	45.7	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	1	3.6	15	53.6	12	42.9	0	0.0	0	0.0
Operations Management Class	0	0.0	47	97.9	1	2.1	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.23	3	21.4	9	64.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	28	18.7	84	56.0	38	25.3	0	0	0	0

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

Teaching materials are very important, survey results show that for the electrical laboratory profession, it is the profession that can best meet the needs with 100% of students rating it as very satisfied.

b5. Level of satisfaction with the class location

Table 2.9: Distribution of interviewees according to satisfaction level with class location

Level

Very funny heart		Satisfied		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	11	44.0	14	56.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	22	62.9	13	37.1	0	0.0	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	5	17.9	9	32.1	14	50.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Operations Management Class	0	0.0	23	47.9	15	31.2	10	20.8	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.3	2	14.3	10	71.4	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	18	12.0	70	46.7	52	34.7	10	6.7	0	0

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

Regarding the training location, the electrical testing profession has the best facilities (44% very satisfied, 56% satisfied); followed by electrical measurement and electrical construction. Thus, we can see that the choice of training location generally meets the requirements.

b6. Satisfaction level with class size

Table 2.10: Distribution of interviewees by level of satisfaction with class size

Level

Very funny heart		Comedy heart		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	0	0.0	9	36.0	7	28.0	9	36.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	0	0.0	1	2.9	16	45.7	18	51.4	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	0	0.0	0	0.0	19	67.9	9	32.1	0	0.0
Operations Management Class	0	0.0	1	2.1	2	4.2	34	70.8	11	22.9
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.3	2	14.3	10	71.4	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	2	1.3	13	8.7	54	36.0	70	46.7	11	7.3

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

Regarding the course size, most of the students' comments were not satisfied with the class size; the number of students participating was large (average 45-50 students) compared to the standard number of students per practical class (from 25-35 students). Only the electrical construction profession was rated as satisfactory (14.3% very satisfied, 14.3% satisfied).

b7. Satisfaction level with class timing

Table 2.11: Distribution of interviewees according to satisfaction level with class organization time

Level

Very funny heart		Satisfied		Jar often		Not happy heart		Completely not satisfied
SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%	SL	%
Electrical lab class	0	0.0	11	44.0	14	56.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Grid control layer	1	2.9	7	20.0	25	71.4	2	5.7	0	0.0
Electrical Measurement Class	0	0.0	5	17.9	23	82.1	0	0.0	0	0.0
Operations Management Class	0	0.0	5	10.4	35	72.9	8	16.7	0	0.0
Electrical Construction Class	2	14.3	2	14.3	10	71.4	0	0.0	0	0.0
Total	3	2.0	30	20.0	107	71.3	70	6.7	0	0

Source: Author's compilation from student interview questionnaires conducted in January 2011

In general, the satisfaction rate with the time of the class in the total sample was only 20%. The number of subjects responding at a normal level was 72%. The rate of subjects responding dissatisfied in the total sample was low (6.7%). However, up to 16.7% of the students in the operation management class were dissatisfied with the time of the class. Because the training time is often held during the rainy season (May-July), the class often has to be postponed to serve production.

Overall assessment of satisfaction with classroom organization and logistics

The average score is constructed as follows:

i) Maximum score: 5 points on a scale of 1 to 5; in some other cases, this scale is still used in the following form:

1 point corresponds to -- (very poor score); 2 points corresponds to -

3 points correspond to - + (average score); 4 points correspond to +

5 points corresponds to ++ (perfect score).

ii) How to calculate average score:

The average satisfaction score for each class is calculated using the following formula:

Average score of each class (Xi)

Cumulative score of each student in the class Number of students in the class

The average score of all 5 classes on satisfaction level is calculated by the following formula:

Average X =

∑(X i * Ni)

∑Ni

Source: Author (2010)

In which, the average X is the average score showing the overall satisfaction level of students of all 5 Courses;

Xi: Average score of student satisfaction in a class; Ni: Number of students in each class

Based on students' evaluations, the author synthesizes the average score of students' satisfaction with the class organization as shown in the figure below:

Chart 2.2: Average score assessing satisfaction with classroom organization and logistics

Compared to the satisfaction level in other aspects of the teaching and learning process, the satisfaction level in the classroom organization stage was rated higher by students (3.51 points on a 5-point scale). The strongest points in the classroom organization stage were the quality of materials, logistics preparation, presentation tools and classroom location. In addition, there were some criteria that were rated low, corresponding to an average score of 2.69 to 3.24 for teaching equipment, training time and classroom size.

2.3.1.3. Evaluation of classroom teaching

The evaluation criteria for the course focus on evaluating the activities during the training, including the process of turning the training plan into the “learning” actions of the learners and the “teaching” actions of the instructors, in order to achieve the set objectives of the course.

Comment