Comparative study of interior design programs in South Korea and the United States

by Soeun Lee, M.A. Washington State University May 2005 Chair: Nancy Blossom This thesis explores the ways in which to compare interior design programs between separate national educational systems, through a study of South Korea and the United States. Primarily, it addresses three different methods for making comparisons between such programs. The first attempted method was the qualitative comparison of published curricula in each country. The limitations of the first method were discovered as follows: institutions are different, housed in different units, years of study in the major are different, and the accreditations mechanisms are different. The second attempted method was to develop an instrument for a quantitative survey of professors in each country. The survey questionnaire was designed carefully, but then rejected due to complexity, biases of participants, inappropriate sample power, and length of time involved in this type of research. The last

[1]  J. Crisp,et al.  The Delphi method? , 1997, Nursing research.

[2]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[3]  David H. Gustafson,et al.  Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes , 1976 .

[4]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Group Techniques for Program Planning , 1975 .

[5]  Craig Birdsong.  Perceptions of Professionalism: Interior Design Practitioners Working for the Top 100 Firms , 2001 .

[6]  D. Dillman.  Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method, 2nd ed. , 2007 .

[7]  Youngsoon Park,et al.  Meaning and Preference of Interior Color Palettes among Four Cultures , 2002 .

[8]  D. Dillman.  Mail and internet surveys , 1999 .

[9]  Margaret E. Gredler,et al.  Teaching Evaluation through Modeling: Using the Delphi Technique to Assess Problems in Academic Programs , 2004 .

[10]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[11]  G Lepschy,et al.  What is the Standard , 2002 .

[12]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[13]  B. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1966 .

[14]  Jib Fowles,et al.  Handbook of Futures Research , 1978 .

[15]  Denise A. Guerin,et al.  The Relationship between Learning Styles and Visualization Skills among Interior Design Students , 2000 .