The Relationship between the Reorganization of Higher Education Institutions' Operations in Poland During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Student Loyalty

Characteristics of Respondents		N	%↕
Gender	F	1892	66.8
	M	940	33.2
	Total	2832	100.0
Study Mode	Full-time	2053	72.5
	Part-time	779	27.5
	Total	2832	100.0
Type of Degree Program	Engineer	319	11.3
	Bachelor’s	1645	58.1
	Master's / Int. Master's	888	30.6
	Total	2832	100.0
Year of Study	1st	946	33.4
	2nd	702	24.8
	3rd	482	17.0
	4th (or 1st Master's)	453	16.0
	5th (or 2nd Master's)	249	8.8
	Total	2832	100.0

1 Legend:

1 N – Number; %↕– Percentage within a column; %↔– Percentage within a row

1 F – Female; M – Male

Table 2.

Aspects of the functioning, organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aspects of the functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic	Overall Mean	Aspects of the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic	Overall Mean
F1. General impression/perception of the university	3.87	O1. Quality of online classes	3.86
F2. Career prospects post-graduation	3.67	O2. Satisfaction with online classes	3.71
F3. Reorganization of classes to online formats	3.92	O3. Atmosphere during online classes	3.89
F4. Access to library/reading rooms	3.42	O4. Practical usefulness of knowledge gained online	3.54
F5. Efficiency of student services by university administration (dean’s offices, student services offices, etc.)	3.65	O5. Assimilation of knowledge during online classes	3.31
F6. Attitude of administrative staff towards students	3.67	O6. Functionality of the online class platform	4.00
F7. Digitalization of student services (e-campus, online services, student accounts, etc.)	3.81	O7. Technical support from the university	3.50
F8. Transparency of the study process (e.g., conditions for choosing specializations)	3.70	O8. Training/materials for handling the online class platform	3.68
F9. Organization of the recruitment process (for undergraduate and graduate programs)	3.90	O9. Instructors' ability to manage the online class platform	3.85
F10. Availability of infrastructure for students to conduct their own research (e.g., for thesis work)	3.40	O10. Efficiency/organization of conducting online classes by instructors	3.94
F11. Offers of internships/professional placements/student placements	3.17	O11. Method of knowledge transmission during online classes	3.76
F12. Job offers/assistance from the university in finding employment	3.01	O12. Criteria for passing online classes	3.94
F13. Offers of study abroad (Erasmus+, exchange programs with other universities, etc.)	3.52	O13. Materials for online classes	4.12
F14. Offers from student academic societies (SAS)	3.54	O14. Instructors' attitude towards students	4.04
F15. Offers of training, courses, webinars	3.66	O15. Clarity of instructions from instructors during online classes	3.95
F16. System for regulating tuition payments (rules, amounts, etc.)	3.72	O16. Responsiveness of instructors	4.01
F17. Scholarship system	3.47	O17. Interactions with instructors	3.90
		O18. Opportunity to participate in online consultations	4.17
		O19. Offers of open lectures	3.48
		O20. Participation of business practitioners in online classes	3.23

1 F – variable relating to the functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 O – variable relating to the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

Table 3.

EFA results for variables relating to the functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Component	Overall Mean	Factor loading	Primary Variables
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	.701	1. General impression/perception of the university
		.677	3. Reorganization of classes to online formats
		.775	5. Efficiency of student services by university administration (dean’s offices, student services offices, etc.)
		.755	6. Attitude of administrative staff towards students
		.777	7. Digitalization of student services (e-campus, online services, student accounts, etc.)
		.666	8. Transparency of the study process (e.g., conditions for choosing specializations)
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	.783	11. Offers of internships/professional placements/student placements
		.797	12. Job offers/assistance from the university in finding employment
		.751	13. Offers of study abroad (Erasmus+, exchange programs with other universities, etc.)
		.789	14. Offers from student academic societies (SAS)
		.725	15. Offers of training, courses, webinars

1 FC – component relating to the functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 KMO = .939; Bartlett's test of sphericity = 27667.684

Table 4.

EFA results for variables relating to the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Component	Overall Mean	Factor loading	Primary Variables
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	.605	7. Technical support from the university
		.626	9. Instructors' ability to manage the online class platform
		.614	10. Efficiency/organization of conducting online classes by instructors
		.633	13. Materials for online classes
		.739	14. Instructors' attitude towards students
		.676	15. Clarity of instructions from instructors during online classes
		.759	16. Responsiveness of instructors
		.708	17. Interactions with instructors
		.747	18. Opportunity to participate in online consultations
		.672	19. Offers of open lectures
		.602	20. Participation of business practitioners in online classes
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	.770	1. Quality of online classes
		.843	2. Satisfaction with online classes
		.735	3. Atmosphere during online classes
		.800	4. Practical usefulness of knowledge gained online
		.842	5. Assimilation of knowledge during online classes
		.728	11. Method of knowledge transmission during online classes

1 OC – component relating to the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 KMO = .969; Bartlett's test of sphericity = 47758.662

Table 5.

Comparison of university functioning components during the COVID-19 pandemic between selected respondent groups.

Component	Overall Mean	Gender F \| M	test-t
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	3.83²> 3.65¹	5.241***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	3.43²> 3.29¹	3.975***
Component	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	3.73¹< 3.86²	-3.571***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	3.36¹< 3.45²	-2.441**
Component	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	3.65¹< 3.75²< 3.85³	8.114***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	3.39¹ ≈ 3.39¹ ≈ 3.37¹	.183
Component	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	3.87²> 3.66¹ ≈ 3.64¹< 3.97²> 3.60¹	18.940***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	3.49²> 3.33¹ ≈ 3.29¹< 3.45²> 3.20¹	9.088***
Component	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.77	3.21¹< 3.80²< 4.27³	480.341***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.38	2.92¹< 3.36²< 3.86³	326.185***

1 Legend:

1 FC – component of functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 Gender: F – female; M – male

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor's; MA – Master’s

1 Year of Study: 1 – first year of first-degree studies; 2 – second year of first-degree studies; 3 – third year of first-degree studies; 4 – first year of second-degree studies; 5 – first year of second-degree studies

1 NPS – Net Promotor Score; D – Detractors; PS – Passively satisfied; P – Promoters

1 ^{1, 2, 3}– group membership – the higher the value, the higher the average in the group

1 Statistical significance (p-value):

1 ***p≤0.001

1 *p≤0.01

1 p≤0.05

Table 6.

Comparison of university functioning components during the COVID-19 pandemic between female and male groups.

Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.83	3.79¹< 3.94²	-3.565***	3.65	3.63¹ ≈ 3.70¹	-1.113
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.43	3.38¹< 3.54²	-3.591***	3.29	3.31¹ ≈ 3.24¹	.968
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.83	3.70¹< 3.81² ≈ 3.90²	4.983**	3.65	3.58¹ ≈ 3.63¹ ≈ 3.74¹	1.881
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.43	3.41¹ ≈ 3.44¹ ≈ 3.42¹	.152	3.29	3.37¹ ≈ 3.29¹ ≈ 3.24¹	.898
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.83	3.92²> 3.75¹ ≈ 3.69¹< 4.01²> 3.65¹	11.444***	3.65	3.77²> 3.49¹ ≈ 3.54¹< 3.89²> 3.46¹	7.951***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.43	3.54² ≈ 3.40²> 3.27¹< 3.51²> 3.25¹	7.967***	3.29	3.38² ≈ 3.20² ≈ 3.31² ≈ 3.34²> 3.07¹	2.697*
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	3.83	3.28¹< 3.82²< 4.32³	333.317***	3.65	3.10¹< 3.77²< 4.16³	146.266***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	3.43	2.95¹< 3.37²< 3.92³	241.478***	3.29	2.87¹< 3.35²< 3.72³	85.028***

1 Legend:

1 FC – component of functioning of universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor's; MA – Master’s

1 NPS – Net Promotor Score; D – Detractors; PS – Passively satisfied; P – Promoters

1 ^{1, 2, 3} – group membership – the higher the value, the higher the average in the group

1 Statistical significance (p-value):

1 ***p≤0.001,

1 *p≤0.01,

1 p≤0.05

Table 7.

Comparison of components related to the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic between selected groups of respondents.

Component	Overall Mean	Gender F \| M	test-t
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	3.882 > 3.741	4.343***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	3.762 > 3.511	5.888***
Component	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	3.771 < 4.012	-7.158***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	3.571 < 3.952	-8.525***
Component	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	3.681 < 3.822 < 3.923	10.953***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	3.481 < 3.662 ≈ 3.772	9.440***
Component	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	3.962 > 3.721 ≈ 3.681 < 3.992 > 3.701	20.937***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	3.843 > 3.582 > 3.431 < 3.903 > 3.421	23.129***
Component	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.84	3.301 < 3.862 < 4.333	501.817***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.68	3.021 < 3.722 < 4.263	415.620***

1 Legend:

1 OC – component of organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic Gender: F – female; M – male

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor's; MA – Master’s

1 NPS – Net Promotor Score; D – Detractors; PS – Passively satisfied; P – Promoters

1 ^{1, 2, 3} – group membership – the higher the value, the higher the average in the group

1 Statistical significance (p-value):

1 ***p≤0.001,

1 *p≤0.01,

1 p≤0.05

Table 8.

Comparison of components related to the organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic between groups of male and female respondents.

Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t	Overall Mean	Study Mode FT \| PT	test-t
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.88	3.80¹< 4.10²	-7.568***	3.74	3.71¹< 3.82¹	-1.746*
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.76	3.65¹< 4.06²	-7.993***	3.51	3.43¹< 3.72¹	-3.536***
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA	Overall Mean	Type of Degree Program E \| BA \| MA	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.88	3.73¹< 3.86² ≈ 3.96²	6.938***	3.74	3.61 ≈ 3.74 ≈ 3.81	2.650
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.76	3.52¹ ≈ 3.75² ≈ 3.85²	7.288***	3.51	3.43 ≈ 3.49 ≈ 3.60	1.376
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA	Overall Mean	Year of Study 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 \| 5	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.88	4.01²> 3.78¹ ≈ 3.70¹< 4.05²> 3.74¹	14.851***	3.74	3.87²> 3.61¹ ≈ 3.63¹< 3.89²> 3.57¹	6.288***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.76	3.92²> 3.66² ≈ 3.50¹< 3.98²> 3.51¹	17.178***	3.51	3.66²> 3.43¹ ≈ 3.29¹< 3.73²> 3.18¹	6.498***
Component	Female			Male
Component	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA	Overall Mean	NPS D \| PS \| P	ANOVA
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	3.88	3.34¹< 3.87²< 4.38³	362.310***	3.74	3.24¹< 3.84²< 4.22³	140.352***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	3.76	3.13¹< 3.77²< 4.31³	268.304***	3.51	2.84¹< 3.63²< 4.15³	143.110***

1 Legend:

1 OC – component of organization and delivery of online classes at universities during the COVID-19 pandemic

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor’s; MA – Master’s

1 NPS – Net Promotor Score; D – Detractors; PS – Passively satisfied; P – Promoters

1 ^{1, 2, 3} – group membership – the higher the value, the higher the average in the group

1 Statistical significance (p-value):

1 ***p≤0.001,

1 *p≤0.01,

1 p≤0.05

Table 9.

Assessment of the likelihood of university students recommending their institution to friends or acquaintances.

Occurrence of recommendation	Total N (%)	Gender N(%)		Study Mode N(%)		Type of Degree Program N(%)			Year of Study N(%)
Occurrence of recommendation	Total N (%)	F	M	FT	PT	E	BA	MA	1	2	3	4	5
none	95 (3.4)	57 (3.0)	38 (4.0)	54 (2.6)	41 (5.3)	8 (2.5)	48 (2.9)	39 (4.5)	15 (1.6)	19 (2.7)	33 (6.8)	14 (3.1)	14 (5.6)
2	72 (2.5)	50 (2.6)	22 (2.3)	44 (2.1)	28 (3.6)	6 (1.9)	41 (2.5)	25 (2.9)	16 (1.7)	16 (2.3)	16 (3.3)	13 (2.9)	11 (4.4)
3	109 (3.8)	71 (3.8)	38 (4.0)	80 (3.9)	29 (3.7)	13 (4.1)	52 (3.2)	44 (5.1)	25 (2.6)	34 (4.8)	15 (3.1)	16 (3.5)	19 (7.6)
4	133 (4.7)	86 (4.5)	47 (5.0)	106 (5.2)	27 (3.5)	13 (4.1)	82 (5.0)	38 (4.4)	38 (4.0)	37 (5.3)	28 (5.8)	20 (4.4)	10 (4.0)
5	208 (7.3)	138 (7.3)	70 (7.4)	159 (7.7)	49 (6.3)	31 (9.7)	118 (7.2)	59 (6.8)	59 (6.2)	48 (6.8)	47 (9.8)	32 (7.1)	22 (8.8)
6	292 (10.3)	180 (9.5)	112 (11.9)	218 (10.6)	74 (9.5)	33 (10.3)	180 (10.9)	79 (9.1)	87 (9.2)	88 (12.5)	54 (11.2)	40 (8.8)	23 (9.2)
7	438 (15.5)	291 (15.4)	147 (15.6)	333 (16.2)	105 (13.5)	54 (16.9)	290 (17.6)	94 (10.8)	147 (15.5)	118 (16.8)	88 (18.3)	63 (13.9)	22 (8.8)
8	551 (19.5)	363 (19.2)	188 (20.0)	412 (20.1)	139 (17.8)	65 (20.4)	320 (19.5)	166 (19.1)	189 (20.0)	134 (19.1)	94 (19.5)	92 (20.3)	42 (16.9)
9	424 (15.0)	299 (15.8)	125 (13.3)	324 (15.8)	100 (12.8)	51 (16.0)	250 (15.2)	123 (14.2)	170 (18.0)	108 (15.4)	51 (10.6)	58 (12.8)	37 (14.9)
one hundred percent	510 (18.0)	357 (18.9)	153 (16.3)	323 (15.7)	187 (24.0)	45 (14.1)	264 (16.0)	201 (23.2)	200 (21.1)	100 (14.2)	56 (11.6)	105 (23.2)	49 (19.7)
Total	2832 (100.0)	1892 (100.0)	940 (100.0)	2053 (100.0)	779 (100.0)	319 (100.0)	1645 (100.0)	868 (100.0)	946 (100.0)	702 (100.0)	482 (100.0)	453 (100.0)	249 (100.0)
Level of loyalty	Total N (%)	Gender N(%)		Study Mode N(%)		Type of Degree Program N(%)			Year of Study N(%)
Level of loyalty	Total N (%)	F	M	FT	PT	E	BA	MA	1	2	3	4	5
Detractors	909 (32.1)	582 (30.8)	327 (34.8)	661 (32.2)	248 (31.8)	104 (32.6)	521 (31.7)	284 (32.7)	240 (25.4)	242 (34.5)	193 (40.0)	135 (29.8)	99 (39.8)
Passively satisfied	989 (34.9)	654 (34.6)	335 (35.6)	745 (36.3)	244 (31.3)	119 (37.3)	610 (37.1)	260 (30.0)	336 (35.5)	252 (35.9)	182 (37.8)	155 (34.2)	64 (25.7)
Promoters	934 (33.0)	656 (34.7)	278 (29.6)	647 (31.5)	287 (36.8)	96 (30.1)	514 (31.2)	324 (37.3)	370 (39.1)	208 (29.6)	107 (22.2)	163 (36.0)	86 (34.5)
Total	2832 (100.0)	1892 (100.0)	940 (100.0)	2053 (100.0)	779 (100.0)	319 (100.0)	1645 (100.0)	868 (100.0)	946 (100.0)	702 (100.0)	482 (100.0)	453 (100.0)	249 (100.0)
NPS	25 (0.9)	74 (3.9)	-49 (-5.2)	-14 (-0.7)	39 (5.0)	-8 (-2.5)	-7 (-0.4)	40 (4.6)	130 (13.7)	-34 (-4.8)	-86 (-17.8)	28 (6.2)	-13 (-5.2)

1 Legend:

1 Gender: F – female; M – male

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor's; MA – Master’s

1 NPS –Net Promoter Score

Table 10.

Correlation between the level of student loyalty and components related to the functioning, organization, and delivery of online classes at the university during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Component						Level of loyalty (NPS)
Component						Overall		F		M
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university						.514***		.523***		.497***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development						.433***		.451***		.411***
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education						.522***		.538***		.507***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education						.472***		.469***		.460***
Component	Overall
Component	F	M	E	BA	MA	1	2	3	4	5
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	.553***	.505***	.505***	.509***	.522***	.520***	.478***	.502***	.503***	.549***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	.485***	.355***	.355***	.444***	.443***	.449***	.426***	.400***	.383***	.459***
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	.564***	.479***	.479***	.506***	.561***	.517***	.464***	.497***	.506***	.622***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	.509***	.431***	.431***	.461***	.503***	.454***	.399***	.475***	.464***	.611***
Component	Female
Component	F	M	E	BA	MA	1	2	3	4	5
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	.495***	.588***	.469***	.503***	.565***	.528***	.466***	.492***	.518***	.601***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	.429***	.500***	.311***	.463***	.472***	.468***	.458***	.376***	.407***	.473***
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	.512***	.610***	.472***	.507***	.599***	.520***	.450***	.496***	.530***	.694***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	.443***	.531***	.386***	.445***	.526***	.426***	.371***	.497***	.447***	.648***
Component	Male
Component	F	M	E	BA	MA	1	2	3	4	5
FC1. Administrative and organizational efficiency of the university	.499***	.474***	.542***	.519***	.412***	.496***	.515***	.517***	.468***	.394***
FC2. Offer of professional and academic development	.371***	.445***	.404***	.401***	.369***	.393***	.377***	.454***	.335***	.414***
OC1. Technical and didactic support in remote education	.496***	.458***	.474***	.503***	.457***	.498***	.498***	.505***	.445***	.413***
OC2. Atmosphere and practical value of online education	.493***	.451***	.481***	.495***	.440***	.501***	.460***	.429***	.479***	.517***

1 Legend:

1 Statistical significance (p-value):

1 ***p≤0.001,

1 *p≤0.01,

1 p≤0.05

1 Gender: F – female; M – male

1 Study Mode: FT – Full-time; PT – Part-time

1 Type of Degree Program: E – Eng.; BA – Bachelor's; MA – Master’s

1 NPS –Net Promoter Score

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/minib-2024-0022 | Journal eISSN: 2353-8414 | Journal ISSN: 2353-8503

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English, Polish

Page range: 65 - 91

Submitted on: Nov 6, 2024

Accepted on: Dec 10, 2024

Published on: Dec 30, 2024

Published by: ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

higher education institutions' (HEIs),

online learning,

COVID-19 pandemic,

Net Promoter Score (NPS),

online education barriers,

students’ loyalty

JEL:

M31

Related subjects:

Business and economics,

Business management,

Marketing, sales, customer relations,

Management, organization, corporate governance,

Business development, change management, cooperation,

Key competences in scholarly research

© 2024 Bogdan Sojkin, Paweł Bartkowiak, Szymon Michalak, published by ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 54 (2024): Issue 4 (December 2024)