This study investigates lifecycle-segmented student voices (voice of the customer; VoC) to inform the redesign and governance of an Information Science curriculum. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, we analyzed survey data from prospective (n = 988), current (n = 187), and alumni (n = 121) cohorts and integrated semi-structured interviews via a joint-display logic. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a three-factor satisfaction structure (Structure, Support, Brand) for current students and alumni, with weaker convergent evidence for alumni Support. A single-factor expectations model fit prospective/current cohorts but not alumni, indicating greater heterogeneity among graduates. Findings reveal a clear lifecycle-segmented divergence: prospective and current students prioritize employability-oriented features—authentic assessment, portfolio-building, and work-integrated learning (WIL)—while alumni elevate enduring analytical foundations coupled with agile integration of fast-evolving tools. Work-integrated learning emerges as a cross-segment anchor and high-impact practice. We translate these insights into a VoC Alignment Framework and Playbook that (i) fortifies the analytical core, (ii) innovates at the edge through modular, industry-linked offerings, and (iii) cultivates the learning ecosystem by expanding mentoring, WIL capacity, and frictionless support. Cross-segment contrasts are interpreted at the pattern level because multi-group invariance was not established and the alumni expectations model showed poor global fit. The study positions VoC as a governed information asset for decision intelligence in higher education and offers a replicable pathway for curriculum governance in iSchool/Information Science contexts.
BiggsJTangC (2011) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
4.
BillettS (2009) Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education34(7): 827–843.
5.
BirdNJChuCMOguzF (2015) Internship in LIS education. IFLA Journal41(4): 298–307.
6.
BonniciLJBurnettK (2013) Rhizomes in the iField: What does it mean to be an iSchool?Knowledge Organization40(6): 408–413.
7.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
8.
BroomanSDarwentSPimorA (2015) The student voice in higher education curriculum design: Is there value in listening?Innovations in Education and Teaching International52(6): 663–674.
9.
BurnsEA (2019) Reflective journaling: Innovative dialogue in LIS education. In: IFLA WLIC 2019 – Libraries: Dialogue for Change, Athens. Available at: https://library.ifla.org/id/eprint/2531.
10.
CalmaADickson-DeaneC (2020) The student as customer and quality in higher education. International Journal of Educational Management34(8): 1221–1235.
11.
CarterSYeoACM (2016) Students-as-customers’ satisfaction, predictive retention with marketing implications. International Journal of Educational Management30(5): 635–652.
DegtjarjovaILapiņaIFreidenfeldsD (2018) Student as stakeholder: ‘Voice of customer’ in higher education quality development. Marketing and Management of Innovations2018(2–3): 388–398.
FernsSZegwaardKEPrettiTJ, et al. (2025) Defining and designing work-integrated learning curriculum. Higher Education Research & Development44(2): 371–385.
17.
FreemanSEddySLMcDonoughM, et al. (2014) Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111(23): 8410–8415.
18.
GarrisonDRVaughanND (2008) Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
GaskinSPGriffinAHauserJ, et al. (2010) Voice of the customer. Journal of Clinical Engineering35(3): 116–117.
20.
GriffinAHauserJR (1993) The voice of the customer. Marketing Science12(1): 1–27.
21.
GuilbaultM (2018) Students as customers in higher education: The (controversial) debate needs to end. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services40: 295–298.
22.
HardenRM (2007) Outcome-based education: The future is today. Medical Teacher29(7): 625–629.
JacksonD (2014) Employability skill development in work-integrated learning: Barriers and best practice. Studies in Higher Education40(2): 350–367.
25.
JacksonDCookEJ (2025) Work-integrated learning in the humanities, arts and social sciences: Where to from here?Studies in Higher Education50(9): 2048–2067.
26.
KaramanP (2021) The effect of formative assessment practices on student learning: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education8(4): 801–817.
27.
Khon Kaen University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (2024) Bachelor of Information Science Program Specification (Revised 2024). Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University.
28.
KlaassenRG (2024) Inter- and transdisciplinary learning. In: DarbellayF (eds) Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 284–289. doi:10.4337/9781035317967.ch63.
29.
KolbDA (2015) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
30.
LaurillardD (2012) Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. London: Routledge.
MacnamaraJ (2020) Corporate listening: Unlocking insights from VOC, VOE and VOS for mutual benefits. Corporate Communications: An International Journal25(3): 377–393.
33.
MehraBOlsonHAAhmadS (2011) Integrating diversity across the LIS curriculum: An exploratory study of instructors’ perceptions and practices online. IFLA Journal37(1): 39–51.
34.
MukulEBüyüközkanG (2023) Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of Education 4.0. Technological Forecasting and Social Change194: 122664.
35.
National Research Council (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/9853.
NicolDJMacfarlane-DickD (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education31(2): 199–218.
38.
Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (OPS-MHESI) (2021) Education criteria for performance excellence – EdPEx. [In Thai.] Available at: http://www.edpex.org/p/download-edpex.html.
39.
Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (OPS-MHESI) (2023) Higher education statistics. Available at: https://info.mhesi.go.th/index.php.
40.
PrinceM (2004) Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education93(3): 223–231.
41.
RaoK (2020) Beyond access: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and digital tools for meaningful inclusion. The Blue Dot: 44–48.
42.
SaulnierBMLandryJPLongeneckerHE, et al. (2008) From teaching to learning: Learner-centered teaching and assessment in information systems education. Journal of Information Systems Education19(2): 169–174. Available at: http://jise.org/Volume19/n2/JISEv19n2p169.pdf.
43.
SchreiberJBStageFKKingJ, et al. (2006) Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research99(6): 323–338.
44.
ShahCAndersonTHagenL, et al. (2021) An iSchool approach to data science: Human-centered, socially responsible, and context-driven. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology72(6): 793–796.
45.
ShuFMongeonP (2016) The evolution of iSchool movement (1988–2013): A bibliometric view. Education for Information32(4): 359–373.
46.
ShuteVJ (2008) Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research78(1): 153–189.
47.
SpadyWG (1994) Outcome-based Education: Critical Issues and Answers. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
48.
SunraLAeniNSallyFHSS (2024) A comprehensive exploration of outcome-based education principles and practices. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies50(1): –9.
49.
VlachopoulosDMakriA (2024) A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st century skills, and policy considerations. Studies in Educational Evaluation83: 101425.
50.
WeiMMostafaviISavageR, et al. (2023) Exploring the evolution and characteristics of the iSchool movement in China. College & Research Libraries84(5): 693–709.
