An identification of and a comparison between trends in clothing and textiles in a selected group of colleges and universities

Graduation date: 1964The purpose of this study was to identify the most recent\ud trends in Clothing and Textiles, to find whether any relationship\ud existed between them, and whether there was difference of emphasis\ud between large and small schools.\ud The information about existing trends in Clothing and Textiles\ud was collected from literature published in Clothing and Textiles\ud Teachers Conference Reports and in Home Economics journals\ud In addition, twenty catalogs from schools offering majors in Clothing\ud and Textiles were analyzed for course content and educational objectives.\ud The schools were divided in large and small categories\ud according to the number of students enrolled as majors in Home\ud Economics.\ud From the literature it was concluded that the following\ud four pairs of opposing trends existed: development of creative\ud abilities, the development of skills; breadth in subject matter,\ud depth in subject matter; family centeredness, subject matter orientation;\ud general education, and professional education.\ud A questionnaire was devised which tested the opposing\ud trends in the four areas of Clothing and Textiles (clothing construction,\ud clothing selection, textiles, and consumer economics).\ud The face-validity was checked by nine faculty members experienced\ud in the area of Clothing and Textiles, and rechecked by three\ud Home Economics department heads and one textiles advisor, before\ud it was finally sent out. The questions in the first part were\ud indirect forced-choice type and referred only to the beginning\ud courses. In Part II, the eight trends were independently listed\ud and each department head was asked to rate her department as to\ud the amount of emphasis given on the issues.\ud The questionnaires were sent to 112 colleges and universities\ud in the United States which offered Clothing and Textiles as a\ud major in their Home Economics program. The chairmen of the\ud departments were asked to participate and to return the completed\ud questionnaires, of which 54 percent were returned,\ud The returned questionnaires were statistically analyzed in the following way: means were determined for the trends for the\ud indirect questions in Part I and for the ranking of trends in Part II\ud in order to determine whether the trends existed and which were\ud considered most important; Pearson r correlations were used\ud to find the relationships between any of the trends in Part I, in\ud Part II, and between Part I and Part II; t-test of mean differences\ud between large and small schools were computed for each trend to\ud find whether the difference was significant; and an analysis of\ud variance was performed to find the significance of variance within\ud the four areas of Clothing and Textiles in each of the trends.\ud Data collected revealed that the mean scores of trends\ud differed and that breadth in subject matter scored highest in\ud both parts of the device. Significant correlations existed between\ud all trends in the indirect questions, and between a few trends in\ud the direct rating scale. The relations of creativity in the latter\ud with breadth, depth, family centeredness and subject matter were\ud the most significant. Correlations existed between some of the\ud trends in both parts of the questionnaire, namely: breadth, family\ud centeredness, between general and family centeredness, and\ud between professional and depth. The opposing trends were in the\ud negative direction. The significant relations of all trends in the\ud beginning courses might be due to the tendency to teach the\ud mastery of skills, breadth in subject matter with subject matter\ud emphasis in the professional curricula.\ud There were no significant differences in the mean scores\ud between large and small schools but significant F ratios were\ud found within the four areas of Clothing and Textiles for each pair\ud of variables for the small schools and between one pair of variables\ud for the large schools.\ud An analysis of the course offerings, course content, and\ud educational objectives were made from the catalog material. This\ud revealed differences between small and large schools in general\ud requirements for graduation and course offerings in Clothing and\ud Textiles. Based on this information it was concluded that the small\ud schools were more concerned with individual development of the\ud students through a wide variety of general education courses, while\ud the larger schools offered more courses within Clothing and Textiles\ud and were more concerned with preparation for a professional\ud career