Purpose of this research is to determine if the attention to ‘students’ satisfaction’ is a relevant component of the quality of an educational institution and, if that is manifested, what are the students’ needs with higher influence on the quality of such institutions.

Research questions

The study tries to answer two questions: Is, really, students’ satisfaction an important factor of quality in an educational institution? What are the students’ needs that an educational institution of quality must with priority take into account?

Theoretical framework

If the quality of education is today a widely felt need for individuals’ and groups’ development and progress, no education system can be considered of authentic quality, accommodated to the needs of individuals and human groups, if it does not have the necessary resources, processes and outcomes.

Although education is the result of multiple factors and different contexts (the family climate and atmosphere plays an important role), it is clear that the quality of education is mainly obtained in a professional way in educational institutions (schools and other academic institutions). This is why it is of particular interest the consideration of the quality of such institutions.

By considering the integral dimension of education, Gerecht (2010: 34) declares: “In the late 1970s, apart from the cognitive learning, non-cognitive aspects are investigated as valid criteria of the quality of an educational institution. Such research approaches show that the emotional well-being of children and young people at school are an important indicator of the effectiveness of such an institution”.

Miller (2011: 13) declares that the fundamental pillars of a good school are its members’ satisfaction and operating effectiveness or learning success.

Based on a systemic and holistic conception of an educational institution, it is easy to accept that the quality of the entity is determined by multiple aspects or determinants of such quality. This, combined with the evidence that the total or absolute quality is actually an unattainable goal (as representing the highest perfection) that involves constant improvement, leads to the consideration of quality as determined by different components (personnel and from other type), processes and results of the institution. It also requires constant improvement of all components to advance to the highest possible perfection expected from the institution itself.

Identifiers of quality of an educational institution are those components that connected with the attained educational product, with its estimation and with the functioning processes, allow us to assessing the quality achieved by an educational institution. Such identifiers are the following ones:

• The educational product;
• The students’ satisfaction;
• The staff’s satisfaction;
• The impact of the educational product.

Bolman and Deal (2000) offer a definition of what can be understood as a necessity: “A need can be defined as a genetic disposition to prefer some experiences over others. Needs energize and guide behaviour and they vary in strengths at different times”. It must be noted, anyway, the consideration of William Glasser (2000: 32), who declares: “Young people, especially, will not work hard for distant rewards. If they are to put out a lot of effort, they want an immediate payoff”

To define the hierarchy of needs that affect students, it has been taken into account the one offered by Abraham H. Maslow (1954), certainly one with most influence on the study of human needs. Such needs referred to students are the following ones:

• The attention to basic needs (of survival and comfort);
• The feeling of security;
• The acceptance by the group they belong to;
• The esteem received from the group;
• The opportunity to freely developing.

BOLMAN, L.G. y DEAL, T.E. (2000). “People and organizations”. JOSSEY-BASS (Ed.). Educational Leadership. San Fancisco, CA: Editor, pp. 59-69. BRANSON, Ch.M. (2010). Leading Educational Change Wisely. Rotterdam (The Nederlands): Sense Publishers. BRASLAVSKI, C. (2004). Diez Factores para una Educación de Calidad para Todos en el Siglo XXI. Madrid: Fundación Santillana. BROOKER, W., READY, C., FLOOD, P, SCHWEITSER, J. & WISENBAKER, J. (1979). School Social Systems and Student’s Achievements. School Can Make a Difference. New York: Praeger. BURBULES, N.C. (2004). “Ways of thinking about educational quality”. Educational Researcher, 33 (6): 4-9. CHEN, K.M. (2013). “El aprendizaje no cognitivo”. Escuela Española, Nº 4000 (7 de noviembre), pp. 1571. ENKVIST, I. (2010). “El éxito educativo finalndés”. Bordón, 62(3): pp. 49-67 FULLAN, M (2011). “Leading system level change”. O’SULLIVAN, H. y WEST-BURNHAM, J. (Eds.). Leading and Managing Schools. London: SAGE, pp. 16-23. GENTO, S. (2002). Instituciones Educativas para la Calidad Total. Madrid: La Muralla (3d. edition). GERECHT, M. (2010). Schul- und Unterrichtsqualität und Ihre Erzieherischen Wirkungen. Münster: Waxmann. HALLINGER, P. y HECK, R.H. (1998). “Exploring the principals contribution to school effectiveness, 1980-1995”. School Effectiveness and School Impovement, 9 (2): 157-191. KLUGE, N. (2006). Empowerment Teil 1. Münster: LIT. MASLOW, A.H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row. MILLER, R. (2011). Selb-Coaching für Schulleiterinen und Schulleiter. Weinheim: Beltz. MINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓN Y CIENCIA (1994). Centros Educativos y Calidad de Enseñanza. Madrid: Secretaría de Estado de Educación. MURGATROID, S. y MORGAN, G. (2002). La Gestión de Calidad Total en el Centro Docente. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces. OCDE (1991). Escuelas y Calidad de la Enseñanza. Madrid: Paidós-M.E.C. ORDEN, A. de la (1989). “Calidad de la educación”. Bordón, 40 (2): 149-162. OSBORN, H. (1970). The Art of Appreciation. London: Oxford University Press. ROBINSON, K. (2009). The Element. New York: Penguin ROBINSON, K. (2011). Out of Our Minds. Learning to Be Creative. Chichester (West Sussex, UK): Capston. ROBINSON, K. y ARONICA, l. (2015). Creative Schools. New York: Penguin. SAHLBERG, P. (2011). Finish Lesson. What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. SERGIOVANNI, T.J. (2004). What’s in It for Schools?. Abongdon, Oxon: Routledge Falmer. UNESCO (1972). L´Éducation dans le Monde. Politique, Legislation et Administration de l’ Éducation. Paris: Author. WRIGLEY, T. (2006). Another School is Possible. London: Bookmarks.