Journal of Fashion Business (패션비즈니스)

The Korean Society of Fashion Business (한국패션비즈니스학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Students' Online Fashion Studio Class Experience and Factors Affecting Their Class Satisfaction

  • Lee, Jungmin (Dept. of Fashion Industry, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, MiYoung (Dept. of Fashion Design & Textiles, Inha University)
  • Received : 2020.11.24
  • Accepted : 2020.12.28
  • Published : 2020.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study explored students' online fashion studio class experiences, and investigated the factors affecting their class satisfaction. An online survey of college students who were enrolled in online studio classes within apparel and fashion-related departments during the spring of 2020 was conducted in June 2020. Responses from a total of 213 participants were included in the final data. Respondents rated lecture clips as the most useful, followed by teacher demonstration and feedback, PowerPoint (PPT) supplements, and Q&As. Frequently mentioned areas of improvement were online platform stability and video quality. Many respondents also stated that more streamlined teacher-student communication channels, immediate and meticulous teacher feedback, the adoption of course contents developed specifically for an online environment, and provisions for equipment usage would be desirable. Student satisfaction of an online fashion design studio class was significantly affected by teaching presence, social presence, online learning system stability, perceived usefulness of teacher's demonstration, and affective response toward COVID-19. Students satisfaction of an online garment construction studio class was significantly affected by teaching and social presence, online learning system stability, and perceived usefulness of teacher's demonstration. Based on these findings, we recommend developing teaching contents and methods that allow students to feel included in class and establish an online system with various functions to enhance the sense of social connection that can enable two-way communication.

Keywords

References

  1. Alsadoon, E. (2018). The impact of social presence on learners' satisfaction in mobile learning. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 17(1), 226-233.
  2. Baek, S. (2003). A study on the possibility of applying blended learning to design education - Focused on the survey of learners' satisfaction -. Archives of Design Research, 16(4), 443-452.
  3. Bangert, A. (2008). The influence of social presence and teaching presence on the quality of online critical inquiry. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 20(1), 34-61. doi:10.1007/BF03033431
  4. Cobb, S. C. (2009). Social presence and online learning: A current view from a research perspective. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(3), 241-254.
  5. Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (2nd ed.). London: Routledge/Taylor and Francis.
  6. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23. doi:10.1080/08923640109527071
  7. Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Reseaching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
  8. Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2
  9. Heo, G. (2008). A study on the structural equation model for students' satisfaction in the blended leaning environment. Korean Society for Internet Information, 10(1), 135-143.
  10. Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-101. doi:10.1177/002224298204600314
  11. Jang, D.-H., & Cho, S.-K. (2017). Is the mid-point of a Likert-type scale necessary?: Comparison between the scales with or without the mid-point. Survey Research, 18(4), 1-24. doi:10.20997/SR.18.4.1
  12. Jang, J., & Kim, H. (2009). E-learning system using learner created contents based on social network. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 9(6), 17-24. doi:10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.6.017
  13. Joo, Y., Ha, Y., Kim, E., & You, J. (2010). The structural relationship among teaching presence, cognitive presence, social presence, and learning outcome in cyber university. Journal of The Korean Association of Information Education, 14(2), 175-188.
  14. Joo, Y.-J., Kim, E.-K., & Park, S.-Y. (2009). The structural relationship among cognitive presence, flow and learning outcome in corporate cyber education. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 15(3), 21-38.
  15. Jung, D. B. (2004). A study on the effect of design education on the operating of the long distance education: Focused on the multimedia department of Seoul Digital University. Archives of Design Research, 17(4), 279-288.
  16. Kang, M., Lee, J., Hahn. J., & Lee, J. (2010). Investigating the relationships among perceived tutor's roles, social presence and learning outcomes in online discussion. The Journal of Lifelong Education and HRD, 6(4), 159-183.
  17. Kang, M., Park, I., & Lee, S. (2009). A study on the instructional effects of revision, reuse, and interactive media application in e-learning content of cyber universities. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 15(1), 1-22.
  18. Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of Distance Education. London: Routledge.
  19. Kim, J. S. (2007). An explorative study on the determinants of e-learning performance and its pedagogical implication. The Journal of Yeolin Education, 15(3), 101-125.
  20. Kim, J. S. (2009). The Structural relationship between presence and the effectiveness of e-Learning in the corporate setting (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
  21. Kim, M. (2011). Web-based e-learning system supporting an effective self-directed learning environment. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 11(9), 524-535. doi:10.5392/JKCA.2011.11.9.524
  22. Kim, Y. R. (2020, October 12). 대학 원격수업, 학생 48.1% "대학 준비 부족했다" [University distance learning, 48.1% of students "lack of college preparation"]. 한국교육신문 [Korea Education Newspaper]. Retrieved October 30, 2020, from https://www.hangyo.com
  23. Ku, Y., Ahn, J., & Noh, G.-Y. (2020). Relationships between particulate matter risk perception, information seeking and preventive behaviors: An application of extended risk information seeking and processing model. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 34(1), 5-28.
  24. Kwon, S. (2011). Examining the relationships among teaching presence, learning approaches, learners' perception of satisfaction and effectiveness in online learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology, 27(3), 535-560. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.27.3.535
  25. Kwon, Y. J., & Rhew, S. (2018). Teaching a fashion design studio course in distance education: A case study. Journal of the Korean Society of Costume, 68(5), 107-127. doi:10.7233/jksc.2018.68.5.107
  26. Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2013). Instructor presence in online course and student satisfaction. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(1), Article 13. doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070113
  27. Lee, H. J., & Kim, T. H. (2008). Influence of e-Learning contents type on learning outcome. Journal of Lifelong Learning Society, 4(1), 75-94. doi:10.26857/JLLS.2008.05.4.1.75
  28. Lim, H.-J., & Park, H.-W. (2005). Avatar application for fashion cyber education. Journal of Fashion Business, 9(4), 1-15.
  29. Ministry of Education. (2018). 일반대학의 원격수업 운영기준 [Operating standards for distance learning course at universities]. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from https://www.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/view.do?boardID=337&boardSeq=75423&lev=0&m=0201
  30. Oh, M. (2020). The effect of self-regulation learning, teaching presence, and academic achievement in the K-MOOC setting. Journal of Lifelong Learning Society, 16(2), 191-212. doi:10.26857/JLLS.2020.5.16.2.191
  31. Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 418-430. doi:10.1086/209358
  32. Palmer, S. R., & Holt, D. M. (2009). Examining student satisfaction with wholly online learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(2), 101-113. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00294.x
  33. Park, E. J. (2020). "등록금 깎아 달라"...대학 온라인 강의에 대한 불만 속출 ["Lower the tuition"...Complaints about online lectures at universities]. KBS News. Retrieved September 7, 2020, from http://news.kbs.co.kr
  34. Reio Jr., T. G., & Crim, S. J. (2013). Social presence and student satisfaction as predictors of online enrollment intent. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(2), 122-133. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.775801
  35. Ryu, J. (2007). Critical factors of learner satisfaction in e-learning for corporation. Journal of Corporate Education and Talent Research, 9(1), 121-142.
  36. Sheridan, K., & Kelly, M. A. (2010). The indicators of instructor presence that are important to students in online courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), 767-779.
  37. Seo, C., & Lee, S. (2009). An empirical study on the factors affecting e-learning learners satisfaction. The Journal of Information Systems, 18(3), 1-25. doi:10.5859/KAIS.2009.18.3.001
  38. UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 impact on education. Retrieved September 1, 2020, from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
  39. VanVoorhis, C. W., & Morgan, B. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3(2), 43-50. doi:10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043
  40. Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2007). An argument for clarity: What are learning management systems, what are they not, and what should they become? TechTrends, 51(2), 28-34. doi:10.1007/s11528-007-0023-y