Nutr Res Pract.  2013 Feb;7(1):66-71.

Comparison of students' foodservice satisfaction between Korea and US

• Jeong E
• Chun Y
• Joo N
• Yoon JY

Abstract

This study analyzes important factors of foodservice in school through comparison of students' satisfaction of using foodservice in Korea and US in order to meet students' expectations. The survey was composed of 4 categories including menu, service, hygiene, and facility and it was carried out in both countries to evaluate satisfaction. First, comparison of satisfaction between two countries was made using t-test. Secondly, multiple regression was performed to identify factors affecting satisfaction. As a result Korean students were more satisfied than American students in all aspects. However, regardless of nationality, the top three factors affecting the students' satisfaction were the same. The predictors were food taste (Korean 0.375 and American 0.350), menu variety (Korean 0.305 and American 0.278), and service line (Korean 0.226 and American 0.192). Despite the similarity of the predicators, it can be concluded that the difference in satisfaction level between the two nationscan be explained by the approaches to create comfortable and acceptable changes in schools' foodservice. Korea has been increasing the foodservice quality based on their objectives to provide students comfortable and positive environment when eating nutritious meals. However, US have made their main objectives on making changes to decrease youth obesity. Foodservice improvements according to continuous evaluations and surveys are necessary in order to increase students' satisfaction.

Keyword

School foodservice; satisfaction; Korea; US

MeSH Terms

Adolescent
Eating
Ethnic Groups
Humans
Hygiene
Korea
Meals
Obesity

Reference

1. Meyer MK. Top predictors of middle/junior high school students' satisfaction with school foodservice and nutrition programs. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000. 100:100–103.

2. Lee KH, Park ES. School food service satisfaction and menu preferences of high school students: focused on Iksan, Cheonbuk. Korean J Community Nutr. 2010. 15:108–123.

3. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [Internet]. School Food Service: A Plan for Safe and Delicious School Lunch. 2009. cited 2008 November 28. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology;Available from: http://www.mest.go.kr/main.do.

4. 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. 16:83–99.

5. Baxter SD, Thompson WO. Fourth-grade children's consumption of fruit and vegetable items available as part of school lunches is closely related to preferences. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2002. 34:166–171.

6. 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. 18:579–585.

7. Morcos SH, Spears MC. The national school lunch program: factors influencing participation. Sch Food Serv Res Rev. 1992. 16:11–22.

8. Oh YM, Kim MH, Sung CJ. 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. 12:358–368.

9. Park EK, Yang YH, Choi BK. Customers' dissatisfaction and complaint behaviors by service failure factors: focused on passengers using domestic airlines services. J Korea Serv Manage Soc. 2010. 11:47–65.

10. Smith ER. Factors affecting participation in the national school lunch and school breakfast programs. Sch Food Serv Res Rev. 1992. 16:91–100.

11. Garrett PW, Vaden AG. Influence of student selected menus on participation, plate waste, and student attitudes. Sch Food Serv Res Rev. 1978. 2:28–33.

12. Fogleman L, Dutcher J, McProud L, Nelken I, Lins A. High school students' attitudes toward and participation in, the national school lunch program. Sch Food Serv Res Rev. 1992. 16:36–42.

13. Marples CA, Spillman DM. Factors affecting students' participation in the Cincinnati public schools lunch program. Adolescence. 1995. 30:745–754.

14. Chang HS, Park HJ. A study of elementary students' satisfaction in school food service and their dietary behaviors in Gunsan city. J Korean Living Sci Assoc. 2009. 18:477–489.

15. 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. 14:13–22.

16. Yang IS, Park MK. Identifying the quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction of school foodservice by city and province: students, parents, and faculty. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2008. 14:302–318.

17. Briefel RR, Crepinsek MK, Cabili C, Wilson A, Gleason PM. School food environments and practices affect dietary behaviors of US public school children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009. 109:S91–S107.

18. Finkelstein DM, Hill EL, Whitaker RC. School food environments and policies in US public schools. Pediatrics. 2008. 122:e251–e259.

19. Perry CL, Bishop DB, Taylor GL, Davis M, Story M, Gray C, Bishop SC, Mays RA, Lytle LA, Harnack L. A randomized school trial of environmental strategies to encourage fruit and vegetable consumption among children. Health Educ Behav. 2004. 31:65–76.

20. Turner L, Chaloupka FJ. Slow progress in changing the school food environment: nationally representative results from public and private elementary schools. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012. 112:1380–1389.

21. Hutchinson JC, Brown NE, Gilmore SA. High school student perceptions associated with their participation in the national school lunch program. J Child Nutr Manag. 1998. 22:87–94.

22. Meyer MK, Conklin MT. Variables affecting high school students' perceptions of school foodservice. J Am Diet Assoc. 1998. 98:1424–1431.

23. Yun GH. Satisfaction survey of elementary students' school meals [master's thesis]. 2007. Cheongju: Cheongju University.

24. Verma R, Thompson GM. Basing service management on customer determinants: the importance of hot pizza. Cornell Hotel Restaur Adm Q. 1996. 37:18–23.

25. 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. 2005. 11:95–104.

26. Kim SH, Lee KA, Yu CH, Song YS, Kim WK, Yoon HR, Kim JH, Lee JS, Kim MK. Comparisons of student satisfaction with the school food service programs in middle and high schools by food service management types. Korean J Nutr. 2003. 36:211–222.

27. Yi BS, Yang IS, Park MK. Annual analysis on quality attributes and customer satisfaction in school foodservice. Korean J Nutr. 2009. 42:770–783.

28. Harper JM, Mackin SD, Sjogren DO, Jansen GR. Alternate lunch patterns in high schools. II. Student and foodstaff reactions. J Am Diet Assoc. 1980. 77:282–288.

29. Lee YE. An analysis on the satisfaction with the quality of school foodservice in Chungbuk province. Korean J Food Cult. 2008. 23:105–114.

30. Yoon JH. Comparison of school food service administration system (Korea vs. U.S.A). 2003. In : Korean Society of Community Nutrition Conference; 2003 May 3; Seoul, Korea. Seoul: Korean Society of Community Nutrition;55–66.

31. Gordon AR, Cohen R, Crepinsek MK, Fox MK, Hall J, Zeidman E. The third School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study: background and study design. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009. 109:S20–S30.

32. National School Lunch Program: Participation and Lunches Served. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service [Internet]. 2008. 05. cited 2008 June 18. Alexandria: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service;Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/slsummar.htm.

33. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service [Internet]. School Breakfast Program: Participation and Breakfasts Served. 2008. 05. cited 2008 June 18. Alexandria: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service;Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/sbsummar.htm.

34. Song SI, Song SM. Contracting out foodservice operation: an analysis of the determinants of institutions. Korea J Tourism Hosp Res. 2005. 19:49–64.

35. Sheridan M. Delivering efficiencies: improving customer satisfaction while trimming costs helps contractors retain clients. Restaur Inst. 2004. 114:56–57.

36. Mayers D, Hirschhorn S. Market Profile: Foodservice Industry. 2000. 06. cited 2005 March 3. New York: Kalorama Information, LLC;Available from: http://www.MarketReseach.com.

37. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [Internet]. cited 2009 September 9. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology;Available from: http://www.mest.go.kr/.