An Analysis of Cross-Cultural Differences in Perceptual Modality Preferences of Fashion Design and Merchandising Students from South Korea,Swaziland,and the United States
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2005
An Analysis of Cross-Cultural Differences in Perceptual Modality Preferences of Fashion Design and Merchandising Students from South Korea,Swaziland,and the United States
The purpose of this study was to examine perceptual modality preferences of students from South Korea, Swaziland, and the United States who were enrolled in fashion design and merchandising classes. For each individual learning style, there are seven perceptual modality elements: Print, Interactive, Visual, Haptic, Kinesthetic, Olfactory, and Aural. Perceptual modality preferences are the preferred means by which information is obtained through the senses. Research indicates that perceptual modality preferences are influenced by cultural differences in family socialization, language, educational experiences, traditions, values, and beliefs. Students from South Korea (n = 151), Swaziland (n = 116) and the United States (n = 184) completed the Perceptual Modality Preferences Survey (PMPS). The PMPS measured students' perceived strengths and weaknesses for the seven perceptual modalities. ANOVA revealed that Korean, Swazi, and U.S. students differed significantly in six of the seven perceptual modality preferences: Print, Interactive, Visual, Haptic, Kinesthetic, and Olfactory but not Aural. Swazi students indicated the strongest preference for the Print modality. Korean and U.S. students shared common preferences for Interactive, Visual, and Kinesthetic modalities. Results of this study support the need for educators to recognize cultural differences in learning styles.
Bailey, S. (2002). Student approaches to learning in fashion design: A phenomenographic study. Education, 7, 81-95.
2.
Banks, J. A. (2005). Approaches to multicultural curriculum reform. In J. A. Banks & C. A. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives (4th edition), p. 225-246. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
3.
Barbe, W., & Milone, M. (1981, February). What we know about modality strengths. Educational Leadership, 378-380.
4.
Boateng, F. (1983). African traditional education: A method of disseminating cultural values. Journal of Black Studies, 13(3), 321-336.
5.
Booth, M. G. (1997, November). Western schooling and traditional society in Swaziland. Comparative Education, (33)3, 433-451.
6.
Carbo, M. (1980). An analysis of the relationship between the modality preferences of kindergarteners and selected reading treatments as they affect the learning of a basic sight-work vocabulary. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 1389A.
7.
Cherry, C. (1981). The measurement of adult learning styles: Perceptual modality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
8.
Dunn, R. (1990, January). Bias over substance: A critical analysis of Kavale and Forness' report on modality-based instruction. Exceptional Children, 352-356.
9.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1979). Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they … can they … be matched? Educational Leadership, 36, 238-244.
10.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1992). Teaching elementary students through their individual learning styles. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
11.
Dunn, R., Gremake, J., Jalali, F., Zenhausen, R., Quinn, P., & Spiridakis, J. (1990). Cross-cultural differences in learning styles of elementary age students from four ethnic backgrounds. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 18(2), 68-93.
12.
Galbraith, M., & James, W. (1984). Assessment of dominant perceptual learning styles of older adults. Educational Gerontology, 10, 449-457.
13.
Generation Y challenges retailers. (2000, December). USA Today Magazine, 129(2667), pp. 9-10.
14.
Gilley, D., & French, R. (1976, April). Personal learning styles; exploring the individual's sensory input process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
15.
Guild, P., & Garger, S. (1985). Marching to different drummers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
16.
Han, S., & Ahn, C. (1994). Collectivism and individualism in Korea. In G.. Yoon & S. Choi (Eds), Psychology of Korean People (pp. 301-316). Donga Publication Co: Seoul.
17.
Hansen, J. (1995). Student cognitive styles in post-secondary technology programs. Journal of Technology Education, 6(2), 19-33.
18.
Hong, E., & Suh, B. (1995). An analysis of change in Korean-American and Korean students' learning styles. Psychological Reports, 76, 691-699.
19.
Jackson, B.W., & Halvino, E. (1988). A model for teaching to diversity. Unpublished manuscript presented at faculty and teaching assistant development workshop, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
20.
Khoza, L. S. (2003). The effects of culture and training on learning styles and performance of spatial tasks of U.S. and Swazi university students enrolled in apparel design courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
21.
Love, B. (2003). Multicultural Life Experience InventoryAmherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
22.
Lowenfeld, V. (1945). Tests for visual and haptical aptitudes. The American Journal of Psychology, 58(1), 100-111.
23.
Marchesani, L. S., & Adams, M. (1992, Winter). Dynamics of diversity in the teaching-learning process: A faculty development model for analysis and action. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 52, 9-20.
24.
Morey, A. T., & Kitano, M. K. (1997). Multicultural course transformation in higher education: A broader truthBoston: Allyn and Bacon.
25.
Park, C. C. (1997a). Learning style preferences of Asian American (Chinese, Filipino, Korean, and Vietnamese) students in secondary schools. Equity & Excellence in Education, 30(2), 68-77.
26.
Park, C. C. (1997b). Learning style preferences of Korean, Mexican, Armenian-American and Anglo students in secondary schools. National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) Bulletin, 81(585), 103-111.
27.
Park, C. C. (2000). Learning style preferences of Southeast Asian students. Urban Education, 35(3), 245-268.
28.
Read, M. (1987). Children of their fathersProspect Heights: Waveland Press, Inc.
29.
Reid, J. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL, 2(1), 87-111.
30.
Sorby, S., & Baartmans, B. (1996). A course for the development of 3-D spatial visualization skills. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 60(1), 13-20.
31.
Stanley, C., Porter, M., Simpson, N., & Ouellett, M. (2003). A case study of the teaching experiences of African American faculty at two predominantly white research universities. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 14(1), 151-178.
32.
Suh, B., & Price, G. E. (1993). The learning styles of gifted adolescents in Korea. In R. Milgram, R. Dunn, & G. Price (Eds.) Teaching and counseling gifted and talented adolescents; an international learning styles perspective (pp. 175-185). Westport, CT: Praeger.
33.
Weiss, M. J. (2003). To be about to be. American Demographics, 25(7), pp. 28-36.
34.
Witkin, H., Moore, C., Goodenough, D., & Cox, P. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Education Research, 47 (1), 1-64.
35.
Workman, J. (2000, November 8-11). Perceptual modality preferences of clothing and textiles students. Paper presented at the 2000 meeting of the International Textile and Apparel Association. Abstract retrieved November 2002, from http://www.itaaonline.org/index2.html.
