{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02001842700393668, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010302370382779128, 'mean_word_length': 5.556836902800659, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Satisfaction with teaching and learning quality among undergraduate pharmacy students in a Nigerian university

In many institutions of higher learning there is an increasing acceptance that student satisfaction with quality of teaching and learning environment is an important component of the overall educational experience. This came from the realization that there is a direct relationship between satisfaction with quality of learning environment and academic achievement. There is also awareness that high quality teaching and learning environment is critical to sustenance of improvement in student academic performance. There are reports that the information from student satisfaction assessment has found the use in designing programs intended to sustain improvement in the quality of teaching as well as learning. High level student satisfaction is reflected when there is positive perception of the quality of how well learning environment support their academic pursuit.


INTRODUCTION
In many institutions of higher learning there is an increasing acceptance that student satisfaction with quality of teaching and learning environment is an important component of the overall educational experience. This came from the realization that there is a direct relationship between satisfaction with quality of learning environment and academic achievement. There is also awareness that high quality teaching and learning environment is critical to sustenance of improvement in student academic performance. 1 There are reports that the information from student satisfaction assessment has found the use in designing programs intended to sustain improvement in the quality of teaching as well as learning. 2 High level student satisfaction is reflected when there is positive perception of the quality of how well learning environment support their academic pursuit. 3 It is generally understood that University administrators have reasonable level of control over physical environment, facilities, staff performance and support services that contribute to satisfaction. While it is acknowledged that absence of basic services can make students unhappy, providing them does not necessarily result in satisfaction. A number of factors has been reported to cause dissatisfaction some of which include favourable learning environment, high work load, length of training, high cost, boredom etc. 4,5 Other factors reported to have significant influence on perception of quality include opportunity for active participation in learning activities, counseling and advisory services, fair assessment and physical facilities etc. [6][7][8][9] In spite of arguments about inherent difficulties, measurement of satisfaction has found application across service industry and education. 10 Satisfaction therefore represents the overall education experience, interactions with staff members and services received in and out of classroom, feedback system facilities, staff competence as well as administrative and social support services. Satisfaction involves multiple components, so availability of proper infrastructure, good services and supportive learning environment may not necessarily improve student perceptions of quality. [11][12][13][14] It is therefore important that initiatives that improve quality and satisfaction should be based on regular assessment of multiple factors. 15 The concept of satisfaction as a measure of quality is widely debated in literature and among the many widely used satisfaction instruments are SERVQUAL/SERVPERF. 16,17 Their five dimensions of service quality have faced criticisms and intense debate in literature as to their applicability across different service industry. The criticisms arose out of valid concerns about how best to analyze scales that measure psychosocial constructs such as satisfaction and service quality. The first challenge is that if summed responses are used, significant information will be lost, if however, individual items are used for the analysis, interpreting results would be rather difficult because of the multiple co-linearity.
In an attempt to address this challenge some researchers proposed a three-dimensional model that is uniquely applicable in educational settings (Educational service quality-ESQ). 18 This tool with its 37 items covers several components including facilities, interpersonal behavior, faculty expertise, faculty communication and administration. In many Nigerian pharmacy school's little attention is given to student satisfaction. Satisfaction with quality of learning will be valuable contribution to overall development of the pharmaceutical education in the country.

Objectives
Objectives of the study was to assess students' level of satisfaction with quality of teaching and learning experiences and its determinants

Setting
The study was carried out among students in their third to fifth year of study in the faculty of pharmacy, university of Maiduguri, Nigeria

Study design
This was a cross sectional survey using educational service quality (ESQ) instrument developed by Holdford and Reiders 2001.

Sample size and sampling
A total of 205 students were involved in the study representing the entire population of students in third to fifth year of study in faculty of pharmacy.

Data collection
The 37-item questionnaire was self-administered during normal classroom interaction and retrieved on completion. The items consist of five-point Likert scale responses ranging from highly satisfied [1] satisfied [2], moderately satisfied [3], dissatisfied [4] and highly dissatisfied [5]. Respondents were requested to select the option that best reflect their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement in the questionnaire.

Data analysis
The data were coded and entered into SPSS 20 for descriptive and inferential statistics. Analysis was done using descriptive statistics and one way ANOVA with post Hoc test. Factor analysis was done using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. Keiser-Meyer-Olkin test of sampling adequacy was 0.646 and Bartlett's test of sphericity <0.001 which both indicated that sample size was adequate and also suitable for factor analysis. Items with factor loadings less than 0.4 were suppressed. P≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS
Majority of respondents were males accounting for about two third (61%) of student population. The mean age was 24.4±2.8 years indicating that most of the students were relatively young ( Figure 1).
Distribution of respondents according to year of study showed that a third of students (32.2%, 33.2% , 34.6%) were almost evenly spread across the third to fifth year of their program ( Figure 2).
The overall satisfaction with faculty facilities averaged 44.5%. It was observed that third year students were more likely to be satisfied with facilities compared to students in higher levels of study (Table 1).   Satisfaction score with interpersonal relationships was low (42%) and there was no significant difference based on level of study (Table 2). There appeared to be declining level of satisfaction with perception of faculty expertise with increasing years of study. Satisfaction level was significantly higher with third year students compared to higher levels of study as shown in the Table 3.
Satisfaction with communication was less than average, and third year students satisfaction appeared to be higher compared to higher level students (Table 4).
Overall satisfaction level of this domain was less than average and appeared to decline with years of study. There was significant difference in satisfaction level between third year students and higher levels of study ( Table 5).
The level of satisfaction level for this domain was less than average and there is no significant difference between years of study.   F=factor loading (Principal component analysis with varimax rotation). F=factor loading (Principal component analysis with varimax rotation).

DISCUSSION
Satisfaction with quality of teaching and learning is an important component of overall educational experience. The facilities and support services provided for students by the institution are aimed at enhancing their quality of learning. The results of this study showed low to moderate level of satisfaction across all the domains evaluated similar to some previous studies. [19][20][21] This result is in contrast to high level satisfaction earlier reported, where it was added that there is a strong relationship between satisfaction and academic performance. 2 Students with high level satisfaction were reported to have higher grades compared to those with low level of satisfaction. Pharmacy education is intensive with high work load, long hours of study and long duration of training, so organization of teaching and learning environment has the potential to influence satisfaction. The intellectual, physical, socioeconomic and psychological demands of training place enormous responsibilities on students, so teaching and learning environment should be as supportive as possible if satisfaction and positive academic outcomes is to be achieved.
While there was low level satisfaction with physical facilities; significant differences exist in between thirdand fifth-year students with the latter expressing more dissatisfaction. Physical infrastructure has been reported to influence student satisfaction and the low level of satisfaction observed in this study is similar to several studies. 10,19,23,24 There appear to be steady decline in the level of satisfaction as student's progress in their academic programs. This observation is consistent with studies which reported that older students tend to be less satisfied compared to fresh students. Students at higher levels of study have greater demands and expectations and are more likely to be dissatisfied with low quality facilities. [25][26][27] In addition older students' expectations and perceptions have evolved through experiences and therefore more likely to express their views on satisfaction; though this view was disputed. 28,29 Satisfaction with academic and administrative interpersonal relationships was also low. Students expect cordial, friendly, and approachable relationship with faculty staff, so where such relationship is strained, ineffective or difficult, dissatisfaction is highly probable. Some studies noted that out of classroom interaction with staff can have positive influence on academic outcomes and increase levels of satisfaction. [30][31][32] There appear to be no significant differences between the various levels of study with regards to staff student interactions. Majority of fifth year students have low satisfaction with faculty expertise compared with third-and fourth-year students. This observation was consistent across other domains where higher-level students expressed lower satisfaction due to poor quality learning experience. 33 The probable reason here may be related to ineffectiveness of teaching methods and absence of student feedback which often leads to frustration and dissatisfaction.
In the aspect of communication and administration, satisfaction was low to moderate similar to previous studies. 34,35 Open channels of communication within the faculty that allows staff to show interest and willingness to help support students' academic should be encouraged effort. It is also important that information from such interaction provides valuable feedback on student performance and how best to respond to their challenges in a timely way. It could also be related to deficiencies in availability of services and/or challenges with quality-ofservice delivery. Modern day administration must lay emphasis on understanding the unique needs and problems of students, develop relevant and effective communication as well as support systems that deliver services timely. Where these elements are either missing