Distance Teaching: Subjectivities, perception and User Satisfaction in Light of the Gap Model.
Name: ARTHUR NEIVA NEVES
Publication date: 29/06/2006
Examining board:
Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| JOÃO LUIZ CALMON NOGUEIRA DA GAMA | External Examiner * |
| MARILENE OLIVIER FERREIRA DE OLIVEIRA | Advisor * |
| MÔNICA DE FÁTIMA BIANCO | Internal Examiner * |
Summary: This technical report, configured in dissertation format, had as focus the quality in the rendering of services, inspirited in the Gaps Model praised by Zeithalm, Parasuraman and Berry (1990). One is a quantitative research, complemented by a qualitative approach, whose objective was to evaluate the perceptions and fullfilment of the expectations of the users of the services delivered by the Núcleo de Ensino a Distância (Ne@ad) of the Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, through the regional Centros regionais de Ensino Aberto e a Distância (Cre@ad). The theoretical approach contemplated a brief understanding of the evolution of the rendering of services in the context of the market; the role of technology in the relation of services; the understanding of the education as a service relation, even if differentiated; the distance learning; the perception and satisfaction of the user and the model of gaps considered by Zeithalm, Parasuraman and Berry. For the data collection was used essentially questionnaire applied to users and managers of all 13 Cre@ads. The interview was utilized too for these segments including, in this case, the director and employers of Ne@ad. In general no differences in the expectations of the users were observed. In terms of the specific variables some presented discrepancies. In the final analysis was observed a presence of the gaps between: the expectations of the user and the perception of the management; service delivery and communications with the consumers; and expected service and perceived service. However, making a contextual analysis of the subjectivities of the actors involved in the process, is perceived that the speech differs excessively from the opinions manifested in the questionnaire.
