Introduction
College students undergo a transition period from adolescence to adulthood, prepare for psychological, social, and economic independence, find self-identity, and experience stresses.(Park, 2022) In various studies of these college students, it has been revealed that the satisfaction of variables such as self-efficacy, depression, learning flow, interpersonal relationships and interactions, and learning emotion is very important for their learning ability, career path, and daily life. (Song, 2021). Against this backdrop, the research results have also been reported that college education has mainly focused on the development of intellectual abilities and academic achievements while their emotional adaptation and satisfaction have been regarded as secondary issues. (Lee, 2022).
In this regard, horticultural activities give physical and psychological stability and bring healing effects through stability stemming from changes in nature. In addition, horticulture makes it possible to express emotions and inherent energy, and to obtain positive rewards by giving nurturing care. (Jang and Han, 2018). In this regard, Chung (2018) found that the horticultural program was effective to promote self-control, provide emotional stability and work as an Internet addiction treatment program to college students, and Lee et al (2021) found that it was effective in reducing mental fatigue, hopelessness and depression of college students due to COVID-19. In addition, gardening of companion plants improves the mental stability and depressed state of college students (Kim, 2019), and Jang et al. (2022) said that it had a positive effect on the improvement of interpersonal relationships among high school students. In this regard, it is known that more than half of MZs are raising plants as ‘companion plants’ or ‘butlers’. (Kim, 2019)
In particular, it is clear that vitalization of horticultural activities centered on college students will greatly contribute to future horticulture, development of the flower industry, expansion of the consumer market, and sustainable agricultural development targeting future generations such as elementary and secondary school students and the M generation (Lee, 2010; Chung, 2022; Huh et al, 2018). However, in the field of horticultural education, healing, and horticultural activities, related research variables are still mainly focusing on adults and the elderly, and as for the student population it is mainly concentrated in infants and elementary and middle school students, and related research on college students has relatively few results. (Jang and Han, 2010; Lim et al, 2017). Therefore, by identifying the actual conditions of horticultural experience, knowledge, and preferences of college students, an important pie group for future horticultural development, this study aims to provide customized horticultural activities or teaching materials and furthermore to provide basic data that could help develop the future horticultural industry and expand consumption. (Lee et al, 2021).
Research Methods
Subject and structure of questionnaire
The researchers carried out a survey via Google form on 73 sophomores at S University to find out the reality of college students’ horticultural activities. At this time, the survey items were initially composed by Lee and two others (2021), and Lee and another (2016) based on the survey items for designing a gardening activity program for college students and adults. Secondary, this study is based on studies (Kang et al, 2017: Chung, 2022) to find out the consumption patterns, knowledge preferences, and gardening experiences of college students and middle school students. After modifying the results of those studies to suit this study, the researchers categorized gardening activity experiences, knowledge and preferences items.(Lee, 2010). The questionnaire completed through the 1st and 2nd process consisted of 27 questions for gardening experience and 15 questions for gardening knowledge and preference, for a total of 41 questions. (Table 1). At this time, the preference items for each horticultural activity among the preference areas were subdivided into a total of 25 items, including 9 items for horticultural cultivation activities, 9 items for horticultural craft activities, and 8 items for horticultural education activities, using the research of Lee (2010). (Table 1).
Reliability of questionnaire items
In Table 1, the reliability of the knowledge items (questions 3-1 to 3-7) surveyed by the Likert scale had a Cronbach’s α value of 0.855. The reliability of the preferred program items (from 4-6-1 to 4-6-26) for each horticultural activity, Cronbach’s α value was .865, utilize was .901, education and learning was .873.
Analysis of questionnaire
The questionnaire was analyzed via the statistical program SPSS 25.0 (IBM Co, Armonk, NY, USA). Average comparisons were made among the horticulture activities, experiences, knowledge, and preferences of the participating students, and in the gardening activity preference, the degree of need for a horticulture activity preference program was investigated in detail and average comparisons were made. In particular, in order to find out the difference in horticultural knowledge between the horticultural experience groups of college students, a t-test was conducted with three questions corresponding to experience and six questions corresponding to knowledge. In addition, in order to select preferred horticultural activity items in relation to college students’ horticultural experience, knowledge, and preference questionnaire, arithmetic factor analysis was conducted by dividing them into horticultural cultivation activities, horticultural crafts (making) activities, and horticultural education activities. Arithmetic factor analysis was made after dividing into component analysis and rotated component matrix.
Results and Discussion
Descriptive statistical analysis of gardening experience, knowledge, and preference
Gardening experience
Based on Chung (2022)’s research, the experience of gardening activities was analyzed by dividing questions into ‘whether or not respondents are growing plants’ and ‘whether or not they have purchased flowers for personal use rather than as gifts’. Table 2 shows the response results of 60% of the students who are ‘growing plants’ with 7 questions excluding the Likert scale item 1-1-8 among the 8 questions 1-1-1 to 8 in Table 1. 68.9% of the students responded ‘yes’ to whether or not to purchase plants directly, and 33.3% of the students purchased plants via the ‘Internet’. As for the number of plants grown, ‘2 to 3 plants’ accounted for the most at 48.9%, and the plants grown the most were ‘leaf plants (foliage plants)’ at 53.3%, and the plants they wanted to grow more were flowers at 60.6%. What they wanted to learn more about plants was ‘Understanding plant management methods (33.3%)’, ‘Managing sick or dying plants (26.7%)’, and ‘Interior through plants (20.0%)’. Regarding flowers, ‘How to properly store flowers received as a gift’ (35.6%), followed by ‘Packing flowers and giving them as a gift’ (24.4%) (Table 2).
In addition, plant-related social media experience scale value, which is another Likert scale item, was 3.178, indicating that the importance of plant-related social media was high for college students. Therefore, the need for innovative classes based on various plant-related YouTube, Instagram, and blogs, such as Table 3, was also found. (Jang et al, 2022) (Tables 2, 3).
As a result of the above, college students, in particular, were exposed to social media a lot, and their preference for leafy plants as companion plants was very high. In addition, the preference for foliage led to a high preference for basic plant management methods or plant interior (hereinafter referred as “planterior”), and it was found that class contents or activities for this were necessary. This can be supported by a study (Kim, 2022) that the lifestyle of the MZ generation affects the development of planters and vitalization of related markets, especially in terms of the flower industry. However, flowers are still mostly recognized as a gift for congratulations and condolences by college students, so it was thought that a number of classes should include expanding awareness for them to realize flowers as a living plant, how to store flowers, and flower decoration for gifts (Moon et al, 2010).
Table 4 includes 4 questions excluding 1-2-3 and 1-2-6, which are Likert scale items, among the 6 items corresponding to 1-2-1-6 in Table 1, and 40% is the result of those who a re not growing plants’. As for the reason for not growing plants, “I am not sure if I can grow them well” was overwhelmingly high at 45.5%, and “I am not interested in growing plants” at 27.3%, indicating that college students need many opportunities to experience gardening. When asked what conditions would be met to grow plants, 35.7% said ‘I would grow them if I had room for them in my mind’ and 28.6% answered ‘ I would grow them if I had the time to spare’. Regarding the experience of feeling difficulty growing plants, 67.9% said ‘yes’, and 67.9% said ‘watering’ as the reason (Table 4).
In addition, among the two questions on the Likert scale, the scale of the question about whether or not to have a mind to grow plants in the future and whether or not to take a plant-related class were 3.608 and 3.677, respectively, indicating a positive response to the plant class.
Table 5 is 6 questions corresponding to 2-1-1 to 7 in Table 1, which is the response result of 32.9% of the total, ‘if you have experience in purchasing flowers for personal use, not for gifts’. The biggest reason for purchasing flowers was ‘beauty and design of flowers’ with 66.7%, and ‘flowers’ as the type of flower purchased was overwhelmingly high with 83.3%. As for flowers, 45.8% said ‘I buy them 2–3 times a year’, and 41.7% said ‘I buy flowers less than once a year’, indicating that even if they personally purchased flowers, the purchase frequency was low. Unlike general plants, 91.7% of students purchased flowers from flower shops, and 54.2% of the students purchased flowers at the price range between 10,000 and 20,000 won. (Table 5). As a result of the above, it was found that classes such as gardening treatment, plant education, and watering are more necessary for elementary and middle school students as well as college students, where busy daily life is a barrier to plant growth. (Kwack and Jang, 2021; Chung, 2018). Lee et al. (2021) said that horticultural therapy was effective for college student depression under COVID-19 pandemic situation. In addition, it was necessary to develop various flower varieties according to the flower consumption propensity of the MZ generation who prefer ‘beautiful flowers’ and more research will be needed on consumer perception of flower preference.(Park, et al, 2020).
Table 6 is 5 questions corresponding to 2-2-1 to 5 in Table 1, and is the response result of cases where 67.1% of the total flowers have not been purchased for personal use, not for gifts. This is a very high figure compared to 32.9%, which is the percentage of purchases for personal use, and it is possible to know the flower consumption pattern of college students in Korea. However, 80.4% of students who did not purchase flowers for personal use also had the experience of purchasing flowers for gifts, indicating that college students’ flower consumption was mainly for gifts. Also, the reason for not purchasing flowers for personal use was ‘I don’t want to buy flowers’ at 37.3%, and ‘I don’t know how to store flowers’ at 23.5%. In addition, there are responses like ‘because the price is expensive’ (19.6%) and ‘because I have many experiences of discarding flowers’ (15.7%). In relation to this, concerning the question what condition should be met to buy flowers, 41.2% said that if they know how to keep flowers for a long time’, they will buy and more than half of the respondents (52.1%) were very happy when they received flowers as a gift but felt difficult to store, etc. (45.2%) (Table 6). Therefore, in order to increase the consumption and utilization of flowers by college students, education on flower culture, cut flower conservation methods, and dried flowers should be especially taught. In addition, based on the results that plant cultivation and breeding activities were the main topics through quantitative and qualitative meta-analysis of horticultural treatment programs by Lim et a l.(2017), practical programs such as flower storage and cut flower life extension were also thought to be important (Moon et al, 2010) (Table 6).
Horticulture knowledge and preferences
Table 7 is the result of analyzing the response contents of interest in planterior among knowledge of gardening activities with 2 questions excluding 3-1 to 7, which are Likert scale items, among the 9 questions corresponding to 3-1 to 9 in Table 1. As for the planterior, 66.6% of the students said they were ‘interested’ in planterior, and the best part of the planterior was ‘beauty of the space’, which was overwhelmingly high at 78.%, which matched the meaning of the planterior (Ahn and Chung, 2021). Planterior is a compound word of plant and interior, which means to aesthetically decorate an indoor space with plants, so there was a high need to include related activities in classes and activities (Kim, 2019).
In addition, the scales corresponding to the understanding of plant types and names, plant care methods, reproduction methods, and selection of plant types suitable for the living environment with 7 questions on the Likert scale were 2.706, 2.092, 2.24, and 2.290, respectively, indicating a low degree of understanding which means that horticultural education for college students needs to be further activated. In addition, the scale values for understanding the type or name of flowers, how to keep flowers for a long time, and understanding of flower combinations that fit beautifully or beautifully placed flowers were also low at 2.464, 2.567, and 2,624, respectively, indicating a high need for related programs.
In Table 8, among the 4-1 to 5 items in Table 1, horticultural preference responses were analyzed with 4 items excluding 4-3, which is a Likert scale item. Preferred plant types were flowering plants at 44.0%, foliage plants at 39.6%, and succulents at 15.1%. Regarding the content they want to learn from gardening classes or activities, 56.2% of ‘design class such as flower decoration or planterier using flowers’, 42.5% of ‘garden or kitchen gardening activities’, and 43.8% said they like to have classes learning how to take care of plants well and cultivate them. (Table 8).
In addition, the scale value of interest in fine dust removal plants, which is a Likert scale item, was relatively high at 3.886, which was thought to be because its function was recently known in various ways (Ahn and Chung, 2021). Therefore, foliage and succulents are very necessary in Z generation horticultural activities, including college students, and related flower utilization products and programs should be also developed.(Jang and Han, 2018; Lee, 2021) (Table 8). Yoon (2008) studied the high preference for foliage and succulents in a college student flower preference survey, and Jang (2022) et al. thought that the MZ generation has a high propensity for conspicuous consumption on social media, and consumption of small luxury products such as accessories and items for environmental decoration is high, so it was considered necessary to develop small luxury products related to flowers. This is different from the gardening preference in previous studies, and it was possible to know actual situations of the MZ generation concerning horticulture.
Analysis of horticultural activity experiences and knowledge gap between groups
The horticultural activity experience of college students was classified into groups with and without experiences of growing plants, groups with and without purchasing flowers, and groups with and without interest in planterior. For each group, T-test was carried out to compare these groups and see any significant differences between groups concerning six different general knowledge areas; knowledge of plant types and names, understanding of differences in care methods according to plant types, understanding of plant reproduction methods, understanding of plants suitable for residential environments, knowledge of types and names of flowers and knowledge of plants that remove fine dust. The results showed that the plant growing experience group had a significantly different understanding of plant reproduction methods (p < 0.042), understanding plants suitable for living environments (p < 0.029), and fine dust removal plant knowledge (p < 0.001) than the group without experience growing plants. The flower purchasing experience group showed a significant difference in flower type and name knowledge (p < .038) compared to the group without. In addition, the group with interest in planterior showed knowledge of plant types and names (p < .001), understanding of differences in care methods according to plant types (p < .005), understanding of plants suitable for residential environments (p < .001), and the types and name knowledge of flowers (p < .001) and the fine dust removal plant knowledge (p < .001) showed a significant difference compared to the group without. (Table 9). In particular, ‘whether experienced with growing plants’ had a greater impact on knowledge of various horticultural activities and latest knowledge such as ‘understanding of fine dust plants’, while whether or not there is interest in planterior is a variable that greatly affects the overall knowledge of gardening activities. (Table 9). This is a major result for base expansion in related generations and was considered as a differentiation from other studies (Tables 9, 10).
Factor analysis for selecting contents in horticultural class activities
Related to the questionnaire on horticultural experience, knowledge, preferences of college students, in order to select desired class programs and activity items in horticulture class, a total of 26 variables are proposed after dividing items according to horticultural cultivation activities, horticultural craft (making) activities, and horticultural education activities based on Lee’s (2010) research on elementary school teachers. Among them, arithmetic factor analysis was conducted to extract the variable set factors (Table 11). As a result, among the 26 factors, 6 factors were extracted as variables with an eigenvalue of 1.00 or higher (Table 11). At this time, the maximum eigenvalue of each factor ranged from 11.421 to 1.221, and the cumulative ratio of 6 factors explaining the total 26 variables was 86.231, which was a very high value. Among the six factors, the first factor type, the planterior activity, showed a remarkably high eigenvalue, indicating that college students recognized it as an appropriate horticultural class activity. Fig. 1 shows the result of the factor analysis discriminant. As a result of factor analysis of urban agriculture class topics for teachers, the outcome is comparable to the result that various flower decoration activities showed the highest eigenvalue (Lee, 2010) and it was also found that ‘Planterior activity’ is a suitable factor for college students. Next, ‘gardening and kitchen garden activities’, ‘cooking and experience activities’, ‘craft activities’, ‘flower gardening activities’, and ‘experience education activities’ were identified as having high eigenvalues of teaching factors for gardening activities in order (Table 11).
The factors classified into six concept groups through principal component analysis (Table 11) were analyzed for rotation factors using the orthogonal rotation method. (Table 12). A total of 26 variables were largely classified into 6 types. The first type with the highest value was the planterior activity (flower market center tour, aromatherapy, planterior shop tour, topiary making, hydroponics of foliage plants, terrarium, indoor gardening). The second type is gardening and gardening activities (growing campus garden, gardening, kitchen gardening, growing herbs, growing vegetables) and the third is cooking and hands-on activities (making salad, weekend farm experience, knowing plant names, bibimbap with sprouts and vegetables). The fourth is craft activity (flower arrangement, making herb flower decoration, herbal tea brewing) and the fifth is flower care activity (growing succulent plants, flowering plants, foliage plants care). The sixth type is experiential education activity (environmental education and hands-on experience, career education and experience, botanical garden, visit to the palaces) (Table 12). Through this, especially as the first factor, as a planterior activity, flower market center tour, aromatherapy, planterior shop tour, topiary making, and foliage hydroponic cultivation. terrariums, indoor gardening, etc. had the importance of being used more diversely (Table 12). In this regard, it was considered that recent planteror programs based on various communities, social media, and related books preferred by the Z generation and students should be further studied. (Jang and Han, 2018). In addition, it was considered that the second type, which are gardening and kitchen gardening activities with sustainable functions and forms should be actively utilized in consideration of the living environment and lifestyle of college students (Chung, 2018; Huh et al, 2018) (Table 12).
Conclusion
This study is designed to analyze the reality of horticultural activities of college students by identifying their horticultural experience, knowledge, and preference. First, college students who grow plants frequently ‘purchase plants on the Internet’ and have a high frequency of growing ‘foliage plants’. In addition, it showed a strong need for accurate understanding about plant management’ and learning how to prevent pests and diseases of plants’. Regarding flowers, there was a high need to include question items like ‘how to store the flowers received as a gift’ and ‘packing the flowers as a gift’. Park et al. (2020) found that high consumption of flowers for congratulations and condolences is a characteristic of flower consumption patterns in Korea. Therefore, education to improve awareness of plant consumption was needed in the future according to the study. In addition, more than half of students have social media experiences related to plants, which emphasizes the need to develop novel class contents and social media contents based on related YouTube, Instagram, and blogs (Jang et al, 2022). In addition, as for those students who did not grow plants, their main reason was stated that ‘I am not sure if I can grow plants well’ and ‘I have no interest in growing plants’, implying that they need easier and interesting plant-growing activities more. The recent MZ generation studies (Kim, 2019; Lee et al, 2021), similar to this study results, show that it is urgent to verify plant materials and program effectiveness, and to use plant-related apps and social media. In addition, students who do not grow plants mostly responded that ‘I will grow them if I have the mental capacity’ (35.7%) and ‘I will grow them if I have spare time’ (28.6%), indicating a high need for horticultural therapy education and consideration of activity time. Chung (2018) and Kim (2019) found that horticultural therapy and cultivation of companion plants were effective for college students’ game addiction and emotional stability, while Chung (2021) found that elementary school students’ home gardening activities helped them get interested in plants and obtain emotional stability. In addition, the frequency of flower purchase of students who had experience in purchasing plants for personal use was fewer than ‘2 to 3 times a year’, and about half of the students who had experience in purchasing flowers only for gifts, not for personal use, had 80.4% of the purchase experiences indicating that in addition to flower consumption for gift, we need to educate students to help them consume flowers for various reasons in every day life. In addition, the reason why they do not personally purchase flowers is because they do not know how to store flowers and they often end up with discarding flowers. Thus, it is needed to help them to learn how to preserve flowers, such as the cut flower preservation method and dried flowers. Moon et al. (2010) reported that the flower consumption pattern in Korea is centered on congratulatory and condolatory occasions while Yoo (2019) reported that it is necessary to come up with plans to spread various flower culture and expand consumer preference-based consumption.
Second, the result of analyzing the knowledge and preference of gardening activities among college students, more than half of the students responded to questions such as plant types and names, reproduction methods, and living environment for plants, choosing that ‘I don’t know very much’, indicating a strong need to activate horticultural education. 46.6% of students were ‘interested’ in “planterior” that adds beauty to space. Since most students (78%) recognized it, it is necessary to reflect planterior contents in learning. Kim (2019) said that since the outbreak of COVID-19, the MZ generation are highly likely to recognize the meaning of ‘companion plant’ and ‘plant butler’. Preference for gardening activities was high in flowering plants, foliage plants, and succulents, and there is a high interest in fine dust removal plants. In addition, as for the activities they want to learn, ‘design including flower decoration using flowers or planterior’ and ‘gardening or kitchen gardening activities’ showed a high preference.
Third, as a result of analyzing the difference in knowledge between the horticultural activity experience groups, the plant experience had a greater impact on various horticultural activity knowledge and the latest knowledge such as understanding of fine dust plants. The presence or absence of interest in planterior was found to be a variable that had a significant impact on the overall knowledge of gardening activities, and was considered as a major content for future increase in horticultural knowledge and expansion of the horticultural population base. (Lee et al, 2021; Ahn and Chung, 2021).
Fourth, as a result of an arithmetic factor analysis to identify the horticultural class program for college students, six factors were derived with a high cumulative ratio of 86.231, and among these factors, ‘planterior’ activity showed a remarkably high eigenvalue. In addition, as a result of rotation factor analysis for the six factors, ‘planterior activity’ had the highest value, and the factor load was highest in the order of flower market center tour, planterior shop tour, foliage hydroponic cultivation, terrarium, and indoor gardening activities. The factor with the second highest value was ‘gardening and kitchen gardening’, and the factor load was highest in the order of school campus gardening, kitchen gardening, house gardening, herb growing, and vegetable growing. Therefore, sustainable horticultural education programs considering the lifestyle and living environment of future college students as well as those above should be further developed. In this regard, Yoo (2019) emphasized that plant sales promotion marketing, etc., must be spread based on consumer basic data as a factor in flower product purchasing behavior for consumers in their 20s to 40s. In addition, Huh et al. (2018) said that for sustainable agricultural development, a number of horticultural education, including analysis of modern people’s agricultural consumption patterns and environmental issues, should be provided. In the future, the results of this study will be utilized, differently from other related studies as basic data for sustainable and realistic horticultural education and activity contents targeting not only college students but also the M generation and closer generations. In addition, this study results can be used as basic data for the field of flower and garden industry, plant material development, plant marketing, cuttage of flowers and planterior related materials and design development for the Z generation and the general public, and for the construction of public data such as plant related apps, file data, and open APIs centered on MZ generation, etc. (Yoon, 2009; Jang et al, 2008).
PDF Links
PubReader
ePub Link
Full text via DOI
Download Citation
