Journal List > Korean J Community Nutr > v.18(5) > 1038435

TOOLS
Yang, Yi, Park, Baek, Chung, Jeong, Kim, and Kim: Evaluation of the Quality Attribute and Satisfaction on School Foodservice in 2010
Original Article

Korean Journal of Community Nutrition 2013; 18(5): 491-504.

Published online: 31 October 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2013.18.5.491

Evaluation of the Quality Attribute and Satisfaction on School Foodservice in 2010

Il-Sun Yang, Bo-Sook Yi1, Moon-Kyung Park1, Seung-Hee Baek2, Yoo-Sun Chung3, Jin-Yi Jeong3, Yoon-Ji Kim3, Hye-Young Kim3

Department of Food & Nutrition, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.

1Department of Foodservice Industry, Hanyang Woman's University, Seoul, Korea.

2Department of Food & Nutrition, Shingu University, Kyeonggi, Korea.

3Research Center for Food, Nutrition and Foodservice Management, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.

Corresponding author: Hye-Young Kim, Research Center for Food, Nutrition and Foodservice Management, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749, Korea. Tel: (02) 2123-4276, Fax: (02) 363-3430, tilooc@chol.com

Received 30 August 2013       Revised 17 October 2013       Accepted 28 October 2013

Copyright © 2013 The Korean Society of Community Nutrition

(open-access):

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to analyze the quality attributes, quality factors and customer satisfaction in school foodservice and to provide suggestions for improving school foodservice environments. The survey was distributed to different respondents (5,771 students, 2,045 parents, and 1,981 faculty members) at different types of schools (elementary school, middle school, and high school) on September 2010 in 16 cities and provinces. The data were analyzed using SPSS for descriptive analysis, one-way ANOVA, t-test and multiple linear regression analysis. First, all foodservice quality attributes were significant different by respondents and the faculty had higher scores than parents and students. A comparison of scores by respondents and distribution place demonstrated that classroom of student and parents had a higher score for quality attributes. The overall satisfaction with school foodservice was significant different by respondents and higher for classroom than for dining hall for student and parents. In comparison of annual data, there was decreased overall satisfaction and quality attributes in student and parents. Second, in the regression results, which showed the effects of the foodservice quality attributes on overall satisfaction by respondents and distribution place, improvements of 'food taste', 'pleasant foodservice environment', and 'kindness of employee' would increase satisfaction in most of the respondents. Third, the overall satisfaction with school foodservice was higher for nutrition teachers than dietitians for students and faculty. Therefore, the operators will need to make different efforts based on each customer needs to improve the overall satisfaction on school foodservice.

Keywords: quality attributes, quality factors, customer satisfaction, school foodservice

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1
Comparison of overall satisfaction by respondents and distribution place.
kjcn-18-491-g001
Fig. 2
Comparison of overall satisfaction by respondents.
kjcn-18-491-g002
Fig. 3
Comparison of overall satisfaction by foodservice competent type : dietitians vs nutrition teachers.
kjcn-18-491-g003
Table 1
Comparison of the quality attributes by respondents
kjcn-18-491-i001

1) Mean ± SD

abc: Duncan's multiple comparison, ***: p < 0.001

Table 2
Comparison of the quality attributes by respondents and distribution place
kjcn-18-491-i002

1) Mean ± SD

*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 3
Comparison of the quality factors by respondents
kjcn-18-491-i003

1) Foodservice quality: food taste, proper food temperature, adequate food quantity, menu variety, nutritional foods, food sanitation, quality of food ingredients

2) Mean ± SD

3) Foodservice operation: teacher's guidance on foodservice behavior, entertains suggestions offered to foodservice, providing information on foodservice

4) Foodservice environment: steady distribution, pleasant foodservice environment, kindness of employees

abc: Duncan's multiple comparison

***: p < 0.001

Table 4
Comparison of the quality factors by respondents and distribution place
kjcn-18-491-i004

1) Foodservice quality: food taste, proper food temperature, adequate food quantity, menu variety, nutritional food, food sanitation, quality of food ingredients

2) Mean ± SD

3) Foodservice operation: teacher's guidance on foodservice behavior, entertains suggestions offered to foodservice, providing information on foodservice

4) Foodservice environment: steady distribution, pleasant foodservice environment, kindness of employees

** p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 5
Comparison of overall satisfaction by respondents
kjcn-18-491-i005

1) Mean ± SD

abc: Duncan's multiple comparison, ***: p < 0.001

Table 6
Comparison of annual quality attributes by respondents
kjcn-18-491-i006

1) Mean ± SD

*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 7
Comparison of annual quality factors by respondents
kjcn-18-491-i007

1) Mean ± SD

**: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 8
The effect of quality attributes on students' overall satisfaction in school foodservice
kjcn-18-491-i008

Independent variable: Quality attributes, Dependent variable: Overall satisfaction

β1: Unstandardized coefficient β / β2: Standardized coefficient β

*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 9
The effect of quality factors on overall satisfaction in school foodservice by distribution place
kjcn-18-491-i009

Independent variable: Quality attributes, Dependent variable: Overall satisfaction

β1: Unstandardized coefficient β / β2: Standardized coefficient β

*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Table 10
Comparison of quality attributes by foodservice competent type: dietitians vs. nutrition teachers
kjcn-18-491-i010

1) Mean ± SD

abc: Duncan's multiple comparison

**: p < 0.01, ***: p < 0.001

Notes

This research was supported by a Ministry of Education and Science Technology.

References

1. Choo YJ, Ryu SH, Yoon JH. Dietitian's job satisfaction and perception of foodservice quality in elementary schools. Korean J Nutr. 2006; 39(2):192–200.
2. Jang HR, Kim HYL. Survey on the satisfaction degree for school lunch program of elementary school students in Yongin. Korean J Food Nutr. 2005a; 18(2):155–160.
3. Jang MR, Kim JY. Comparison of importance and performance to the school lunch service according of male and female middle school students in the Gangwon province. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2005b; 11(1):95–104.
4. Kim KA, Kim SJ, Jung LH, Jeon ER. Degree of satisfaction on the school foodservice among the middle school students in Gwangju and Chonnam area. Korean J Soc Food Cookery Sci. 2002; 18(6):579–585.
5. Yi BS. Comparative analysis of the quality attributes affecting students' satisfaction on school lunch service of middle school by year. Korean J Community Nutr. 2012; 17(4):479–493.
6. Lee HS, Jang MH. Survey of students satisfaction with school food-service programs in Gangwon province. Korean J Food Nutr. 2005; 18(3):175–191.
7. Lee KH, Park ES. School foodservice satisfaction and menu preferences of high school students: Focused on Iksan, Cheonbuk. Korean J Community Nutr. 2010; 15(1):108–123.
8. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Survey on satisfaction with school foodservice. 2009. p. 6–8.
9. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. School meals hygiene guidelines. 2010. p. 27–41.
10. Mo SJ, Suh JS, Lyu ES. The evaluation of the perception of students and employees for foodservice characteristics of in high schools in the Busan area. Korean J Food Cookery Sci. 2005; 21(2):250–262.
11. Oh YM, Kim MH, Chung JS. The study of satisfaction, meal preference and improvement on school lunch program of middle school boys and girls in Jeonju. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2006; 12(4):358–368.
12. Parasuraman A, Zeothmal VA, Berry LL. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J Retailing. 1985; 64(1):12–40.
13. Park MK, Yang IS, Yi BS, Kim YS. Analysis of the quality attributes and the customer satisfaction in school foodservice by school type and distribution place. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2010; 16(2):83–99.
14. Park KJ, Jang MR. Survey on satisfaction of fifth and sixth grade students from elementary school foodservice in Won-ju. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2008; 14(1):13–22.
15. Song HJ, Moon HK. Comparing school lunch program served at dining room with program at classroom for sanitation and contentment at one middle school. Korean J Community Nutr. 2010; 15(3):369–378.
16. Teas RK. Expectation, performance evaluation, and consumers' perception of quality. J Market. 1993; 57(4):18–34.
17. Yang IS, Park MK. Identifying the quality attributes affecting customers satisfaction of school foodservice by city and province: student, parents, and faculty. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2008; 14(3):302–318.
18. Yang IS, Yi BS, Cha JA, Han KS, Chae IS, Lee JM. Foodservice in institution. Paju: Kyomunsa;2010. p. 39–40.
19. Yi BS, Yang IS, Park MK. Annual analysis on quality attributes and customer satisfaction in school foodservice. Korean J Nutr. 2009; 42(8):770–783.
20. Yoon J, Choo YJ, Chung SJ, Ryu SH. Satisfaction of elementary students earing school lunch; Association with level of involvement in school lunch service. Korean J Community Nutr. 2005; 10(5):668–676.
TOOLS
Similar articles