Level of Art Flow among Faculty Students of Design and Applied Arts at Taif University
Abstract
The current study sought to determine the flow level of students at Taif University’s College of Designs and Applied Arts and the disparities in average student grades based on gender, specialization, and academic level. The sample was drawn randomly from Taif University’s College of Designs and Applied Arts and included (51) male and (138) female students majoring in arts, graphic design, interior design, fashion design, and textiles. The flow scale was produced by Al-Ghamdi (2021). Overall, there is an average flow level among the sample members, with no statistically significant gender differences in flow in the first, second, and sixth dimensions, but there are disparities in flow in the third, fourth, and fifth dimensions. Aside from one group (interior design, graphic design) that favored interior design, there were no statistically significant changes in flow related to expertise. According to the data, there were no statistically significant differences in the flow due to the dimensions’ academic level variables (1st–6th). However, there were differences between the sample members in both dimensions (3rd–5th). Anxiety and tension, a lack of clarity of objectives, and dissatisfaction with the results were identified as the main reasons that impede the flow. Enrichment programs and material support were developed to boost student flow at Taif University’s College of Designs and Applied Arts.
1. Introduction
Flow is a high-end sensation that many people encounter. It occurs when a person enters a state of unconsciousness while executing any activity, as he is wholly concentrated on his work, experiencing pleasure and contentment, and deferring personal demands and requirements. The flow comes to the university student, and he feels alone throughout his practice of the activities he undertakes with total concentration, forgetting himself, forgetting the time and place, and being in a state comparable to that of unconsciousness. This condition is related to enjoyment and mental clarity, motivating him to persevere and pursue creativity and mastery regardless of promotion or reward[1–4]. Taylor [5] defined flow in the artistic area as a balance of ability and challenge, focusing on activities with clear objectives and active participation in work under control and responsibility. Thus, creative individuals are compelled to engage in their training.
While university students studying art and design are assigned a set of assignments that demand artistic originality, Ahmed and Al-Borai [6] suggested that the academic quality of university students can be anticipated. Bukhari [7] established that theoretical flow and academic excellence are positively correlated. Additionally, it is suggested that the condition of flow is a significant component in constructing one’s life purpose and contributes to creativity [8–11].
When it comes to designing levels, “flow” refers to the generalized pattern of player movement across the level. Flow refers more to the experience, feel, and fluidity of movement across a level [12–14]. Games with an arcade-style tempo may prioritize a continuous flow that has broad, generous turns and little pauses. The creation of the game’s levels, as well as its maps and objectives, falls within the scope of the “Level Design” part of the process of developing video games [14–17]. The overarching goal of level design is to generate interactive situations or events inside the world of the game, intending to test the player’s skills and keep them interested in the experience. The term “flow” refers to the mental state that occurs when one is so engrossed in an activity that they forget about their surroundings [14,18,19]. Major aspects of flow include, as indicated in the definition, complete absorption in an activity and the experience of pure, uninhibited pleasure [20]. Among the many definitions and descriptions of flow found in the literature (e.g., [14, 18, 21–23], Shin [24] has identified five dimensions of flow experiences in the context of online participants’ learning: enjoyment, telepresence, focused attention, engagement, and time distortion. In other words, when students are in a state of flow, they are fully immersed in the online learning environment mediated by media; they are fully attentive to tasks at hand; they are actively interacting with classmates and instructors; and they have lost all sense of physical time while learning [14, 24–27].
Numerous kinds of research have shown that characteristics such as self-efficacy [14, 28–30] and intrinsic value [31, 32] are predictors of learning flow. Furthermore, learners’ interest and progress in learning may be impacted by how lessons are structured [33, 34]. For this reason, the researchers here included one external environment variable and two learner factors in their research hypothesis. In addition, a literature study shows that being in the zone has a good effect on performance in the classroom. For instance, Kiili [35] developed a multimedia learning model based on the idea that students are more likely to experience learning flow and succeed in class if they are engaged in activities that require less mental resources. Alnamrouti et al. [36], Joo et al. [14], Köprü and Ayas [37], and Marks [38]all found that there is a positive relationship between learner engagement and academic achievement. Overall, it seems that flow, among other factors, may play a significant part in determining academic success.
As a result, it is evident how critical it is to maintain a high flow of students at the College of Designs and Applied Arts, which this study will attempt to validate using the variables of gender, specialty, and academic level.
2. Research Problem
The researcher observed, through her work in the field of art education, that students have varying levels of flow; some take longer to complete artistic careers to the point of losing consciousness of time and place, while others demonstrate evident creativity in their works intending to be creative. At the same time, others complete their job more traditionally to pass the course. According to the study, the same stemmed from individual variances in artistic ability, which resulted in a variable flow level. Thus, the current study’s objective was to ascertain the disparities in the flow level of students enrolled in the College of Designs and Applied Arts at Taif University as a function of specific variables.
- (1)
What is the flow level among students of the College of Designs and Applied Arts at Taif University while performing artistic works according to certain variables?
- (2)
Are there statistically significant differences between the average marks of students on the flow scale due to gender, specialization, and academic level?
- (3)
What are the important reasons that hinder the flow of students while performing artistic works?
3. Objectives and Significance of the Study
This study has three main objectives. Firstly, it aimed to identify the flow level of students of the College of Designs and Applied Arts at Taif University according to certain variables. Secondly, it tried to identify the differences between the average marks of students on the flow scale according to certain variables. The third objective of this study is to identify the critical reasons that hinder the flow of students while performing artistic works.
The study is significant due to four main reasons. First of all, the research provides theoretical knowledge that aids in identifying factors that contribute to the theoretical concept’s value in the applied arts. Moreover, the flow has a beneficial effect and significance for students at the College of Designs and Applied Arts, which emphasizes the practical side and requires its presence to engage in work and achieve the highest levels of artistic creativity [39, 40]. Thirdly, the study’s findings can be beneficial to individuals interested in implementing programs to increase the flow of students at the College of Designs and Applied Arts as one of the favorable variables contributing to the growth and advancement of creativity. Lastly, the study unveils the feasibility of generalizing the flow scale to Saudi Arabian schools and universities.
3.1. Theoretical Framework
The term flow was coined in 1975 by a Hungarian scientist, Csikszentmihalyi [41], to study athletes’ and artists’ creativity and the exposure of their motivations for work that needs significant psychological and physical sacrifices. It turns out that they all used the phrase (Flow), which refers to the psychological state in which an individual experiences joy, as well as the term (Go with the flow), which refers to the fact that they live in a state of flow and flow with the water stream [42, 43]. Linguistically, the term “flow” refers to a forceful rush or engrossment; thus, “the water rushed” indicates that it flows strongly.
According to Al-Sadiq [44] and Al-Bahas [45], flow is a passing experience. Jackson and March [46] describe flow as the experimental situation when an individual is completely engaged in performance and a state of balance between personal abilities and required tasks. According to the researcher, flow is when a person is unaware while performing an activity because he is completely absorbed in it, unaffected by external conditions, and experiencing pleasure. It is defined procedurally as the grade earned by pupils on the flow scale employed in this study.
3.2. Flow Components
According to Saad and Ahmed [47], flow is a balance of challenge and skill, complete engrossment, clear objectives, task focus, control, and domination. Ali [48] defined flow as clear aims, immediate reactions toward reaching the goal, and focusing on the current job. Al Sayed [49], Harb et al. [50], and Mansour [51] verified these dimensions. According to the researcher, the flow of this study consists of six dimensions. A balance between the challenge and the artistic skill is required of students, which means that the student performs creative works with focus, attention, and complete engrossment until becoming fully immersed in the performance, accompanied by a sense of happiness, without waiting for external promotion, in addition to completely forgetting time and place.
3.3. The Importance of Flow
Al-Bakr [52] summarized points that assist the individual in achieving flow, including performing work that he enjoys while practicing, mastering its performance, and relating to his previous talents and experiences, as well as performing work that is of a reasonable level of difficulty, slightly exceeds his capabilities, and requires extensive effort during practice. He also emphasized the need of focusing on the current moment in which the action is being performed. Focus is the essence of flow and enables the release of self-power to execute tasks effortlessly. According to the researcher, flow enables development and prosperity, promotes mindful organization, and assists students in reaching their ideal experience.
3.4. Prior Studies
Al-Ghamdi [53] sought to ascertain the flow and detect disparities in students’ average grades. Additionally, the flow scale was applied to a sample of 75 undergraduate art education students who were purposefully chosen. The study used a correlative descriptive technique and discovered gender differences favoring females at the flow level.
Al-Enezi [54] established a relationship between psychological flow and problem-solving in Kuwaiti students to ascertain gender disparities. The psychological flow and problem-solving scales were administered to a convenience sample of 120 male and female students using a comparative correlative descriptive technique. The researchers determined that flow is significantly connected with problem-solving, and there is a significant difference between male and female averages.
Ahmed and Al-Borai [6] used a descriptive approach to determine the level of psychological flow, optimistic thinking, and their link to certain variables. The psychological flow and positive thinking measures were administered to a randomly selected group of 240 female students from King Faisal University and Jeddah. The study revealed a positive association between the parameters of the psychological flow and optimistic thinking among the sample members.
Al-Enezi [55] sought to ascertain the degree of psychological flow experienced by female students at Al-Jouf University. The psychological flow and emotional balance scales were administered to a sample of 479 female students, and the study used a descriptive correlative technique. The findings indicated that female students had a moderate psychological flow and emotional balance and a relationship between achievement and specialty in psychological flow and emotional balance.
Abu Ased [56] measured the psychological flow experienced by Mutah University students and its relationship to psychological resilience. The sample consisted of 830 students, and a flow scale was used to assess them and the development of the psychological resilience scale. The data indicate that females exhibit greater psychological flow and resilience, and there is an association between psychological flow and psychological stability.
It is evident from the studies discussed above that the flow of university students was studied in various ways, including descriptive, analytical, and experimental research, and the scales employed to quantify the quantity of flow in the study samples differed. While the current study is comparable to others in terms of objectives, sample size, and technique, it is distinguished by its focus on Taif University students enrolled in the College of Designs and Applied Arts, and this is the first study in this area.
3.5. Approach to the Study
The study has utilized a descriptive correlational approach in which the researcher is primarily interested in describing relationships among variables, without seeking to establish a causal connection.
3.6. Population under Study
During the academic year 2021, all undergraduate students at the College of Designs and Applied Arts were selected as a population for the study. They were 1,520 in total. Taif University was selected since it houses a variety of departments relevant to the researcher’s field of study.
3.7. The Study’s Sample
The study used random sampling. It comprised 189 male and female students, which represents approximately 13% of the study population, as indicated in Table 1.
| Independent variable | Sections of the independent variable | Number of sample members | Rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 51 | 27 |
| Female | 138 | 73 | |
| Total | 189 | 100 | |
| Specialization | Arts | 120 | 63.5 |
| Interior design | 30 | 15.9 | |
| Graphic design | 18 | 9.5 | |
| Fashion and textile design | 21 | 11.1 | |
| Total | 189 | 100 | |
| Academic level | Lower levels | 96 | 50.8 |
| Higher levels | 93 | 49.2 | |
| Total | 189 | 100 |
Al-Ghamdi’s [53] scale was used to achieve the study’s objectives.
3.8. Scale Validity
3.8.1. Face Validity
The scale was submitted to 3 arbitrators to judge its appropriateness for the application, and the arbitrators agreed that there were no modifications.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Construction Validity (Internal Homogeneity of the Flow Scale)
The internal homogeneity of the flow scale was verified by calculating the value of the Pearson correlation coefficient between the marks of the paragraphs and each of the total degrees of the dimension to which it belongs and the complete degree of the scale. It is shown in Table 2.
| Dimension | Paragraph no. | Text of the paragraphs | Paragraph correlation | Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The dimension to which the paragraph belongs | The overall degree for the scale | |||
| First: Balancing the challenge with the technical skills of the students | 1 | I can face any emergency that occurs while I am carrying out my artwork | 0.230 ∗∗ | 0.048 |
| 2 | I perform my tasks and my artwork regardless of my abilities and skills | 0.508 ∗∗ | 0.375 ∗∗ | |
| 3 | My abilities and skills are commensurate with the work of art | 0.314 ∗∗ | 0.124 | |
| 4 | My skills and abilities allow me to perform challenging artworks | 0.450 ∗∗ | 0.233 ∗∗ | |
| 5 | I try to carry out challenging artworks in any way, even if it is incorrect, to pass the course | 0.516 ∗∗ | 0.393 ∗∗ | |
| 6 | I do challenging artwork | 0.335 ∗∗ | 0.249 ∗∗ | |
| 7 | I distribute my artwork over more than one day because I cannot double my efforts | 0.586 ∗∗ | 0.438 ∗∗ | |
| 8 | My success in performing my artwork is the result of chance and luck | 0.625 ∗∗ | 0.571 ∗∗ | |
| 9 | I move from one artwork to another without completing the first because it requires more effort | 0.493 ∗∗ | 0.479 ∗∗ | |
| 10 | I am concerned that the artworks assigned to me are beyond my abilities and skills | 0.453 ∗∗ | 0.322 ∗∗ | |
| 11 | I carry out my assigned artwork through reliance on my abilities and skills | 0.449 ∗∗ | 0.331 ∗∗ | |
| Second: Paying attention and engrossment in the performance of the artwork | 12 | I get distracted while performing my assigned artwork | 0.539 ∗∗ | 0.424 ∗∗ |
| 13 | I focus on performing the artwork until I finish it | 0.461 ∗∗ | 0.276 ∗∗ | |
| 14 | I perform my artwork, but my colleagues distract me, making me postpone work for another day | 0.531 ∗∗ | 0.447 ∗∗ | |
| 15 | My focus increases the more I am engrossed in the artwork assigned to me | 0.633 ∗∗ | 0.434 ∗∗ | |
| 16 | I feel overwhelmed and tired after completing my assigned artwork | 0.466 ∗∗ | 0.402 ∗∗ | |
| 17 | I can overcome the disrupting elements that distract me while performing artwork | 0.583 ∗∗ | 0.424 ∗∗ | |
| Third: Feeling of enjoyment while performing artwork | 18 | I feel pleasure and enjoyment while performing my assigned artworks | 0.480 ∗∗ | 0.233 ∗∗ |
| 19 | I feel tired and do my best to get my artwork done on time | 0.585 ∗∗ | 0.297 ∗∗ | |
| 20 | I do my assigned artwork due to fear of failing courses | 0.621 ∗∗ | 0.414 ∗∗ | |
| 21 | I feel like I exerted much effort while doing my artwork, and I got low grades | 0.443 ∗∗ | 0.284 ∗∗ | |
| 22 | I feel satisfied when I get the artwork done | 0.392 ∗∗ | 0.201 ∗∗ | |
| 23 | If I have the opportunity to change my major, I will do so | 0.535 ∗∗ | 0.318 ∗∗ | |
| 24 | I am eagerly waiting to complete my studies. | 0.684 ∗∗ | 0.440 ∗∗ | |
| Fourth: Loss of sense of self, time, and place | 25 | I often forget to eat and do not remember until after I finish doing my assigned artwork | 0.688 ∗∗ | 0.468 ∗∗ |
| 26 | While I am doing artwork, I feel like time flies by without even realizing it | 0.432 ∗∗ | 0.238 ∗∗ | |
| 27 | When I perform my assigned artwork, I lose my sense of things around me | 0.628 ∗∗ | 0.256 ∗∗ | |
| 28 | I am tired, bored, and exhausted from the amount of artwork I have to do | 0.667 ∗∗ | 0.396 ∗∗ | |
| 29 | I get easily distracted while performing artwork | 0.638 ∗∗ | 0.389 ∗∗ | |
| 30 | I continue to perform the artwork until it is completed | 0.475 ∗∗ | 0.442 ∗∗ | |
| Fifth: Feeling has the control and dominance when performing the artwork | 31 | I prefer to participate in easy artwork | 0.608 ∗∗ | 0.395 ∗∗ |
| 32 | I prefer participating in artwork that requires competition and challenge | 0.398 ∗∗ | 0.184 ∗ | |
| 33 | I feel confident in myself to create artwork creatively | 0.281 ∗∗ | 0.183 ∗ | |
| 34 | When a colleague criticizes my artwork, I feel anxious and stressed | 0.609 ∗∗ | 0.522 ∗∗ | |
| 35 | I feel impatient as I perform my assigned artwork | 0.631 ∗∗ | 0.437 ∗∗ | |
| Sixth: Clarity of objectives | 36 | I set my objectives precisely and clearly | 0.839 ∗∗ | 0.407 ∗∗ |
| 37 | The objectives that I set for myself are achievable | 0.776 ∗∗ | 0.337 ∗∗ | |
| 38 | I perform my artwork spontaneously without a specific objective | 0.540 ∗∗ | 0.502 ∗∗ | |
| 39 | I develop a plan to perform my artistic objectives | 0.783 ∗∗ | 0.360 ∗∗ | |
| 40 | I carry out what I plan to achieve my artistic objectives | 0.829 ∗∗ | 0.343 ∗∗ | |
- ∗Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).
As shown in Table 2, all correlation coefficients between paragraphs and the dimension to which they belong are more significant than correlation coefficients between sections and total marks. Additionally, all correlation values are positive and statistically significant at the significance level of (α = 0.05), indicating the paragraphs’ consistency with the dimension to which they belong and the validity of their association with the primary general feature, flow.
4.2. The Stability of Scale
The scale’s stability was determined in two ways: the internal consistency coefficient was determined using Cronbach’s alpha equation, and the corrected split-half coefficient was determined using the Spearman–Brown method for each of the scale’s three dimensions and the total degree, as shown in Table 3.
| Dimension | Number of paragraphs | Stability coefficient | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cronbach’s alpha | Split-half method | |||
| Before correction | After correction | |||
| First | 11 | 0.651 | 0.493 | 0.265 |
| Second | 6 | 0.387 | 0.358 | 0.536 |
| Third | 7 | 0.363 | 0.174 | 0.507 |
| Fourth | 6 | 0.592 | 0.482 | 0.564 |
| Fifth | 5 | 0.286 | 0.360 | 0.543 |
| Sixth | 5 | 0.739 | 0.522 | 0.673 |
| The total degree of the flow scale | 40 | 0.818 | 0.721 | 0.720 |
According to Table 3, Cronbach’s alpha stability coefficients for the six major scale dimensions ranged between 0.286 and 0.739, whereas the adjusted split-half method based on the Spearman–Brown equation ranged between 0.265 and 0.673. The total degree level implies that the scale is stable, and these values were deemed appropriate for the study’s aims.
4.3. Answering the First Question
What is the flow level among students of the College of Designs and Applied Arts at Taif University?
Table 4 summarizes the arithmetic means, standard deviations, relative weight, and degree of consistency of the study sample members’ responses to the flow scale’s paragraphs, which consisted of 40 five-graded sections distributed over six key dimensions.
| Dimension | Paragraph no. | Arithmetic average | Standard deviation | Relative weight | Order of the paragraph | The extent of the consistency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First dimension | 1 | 3.73 | 0.915 | 74.60 | 22 | High |
| 2 | 3.83 | 1.165 | 76.51 | 18 | High | |
| 3 | 3.86 | 1.099 | 77.14 | 16 | High | |
| 4 | 3.38 | 1.093 | 67.62 | 28 | Average | |
| 5 | 3.03 | 1.348 | 60.63 | 31 | Average | |
| 6 | 4.02 | 1.034 | 80.32 | 9 | High | |
| 7 | 3.70 | 1.153 | 73.97 | 24 | High | |
| 8 | 2.51 | 1.323 | 50.16 | 40 | Average | |
| 9 | 2.76 | 1.345 | 55.24 | 34 | Average | |
| 10 | 2.97 | 1.250 | 59.37 | 32 | Average | |
| 11 | 4.17 | 0.903 | 83.49 | 4 | High | |
| Second dimension | 12 | 2.67 | 1.185 | 53.33 | 37 | Average |
| 13 | 4.06 | 1.085 | 81.27 | 7 | High | |
| 14 | 2.52 | 1.335 | 50.48 | 39 | Average | |
| 15 | 4.08 | 0.999 | 81.59 | 6 | High | |
| 16 | 3.98 | 1.151 | 79.68 | 11 | High | |
| 17 | 3.60 | 1.050 | 72.06 | 26 | Average | |
| Third dimension | 18 | 3.86 | 1.156 | 77.14 | 17 | High |
| 19 | 4.03 | 1.115 | 80.63 | 8 | High | |
| 20 | 3.51 | 1.299 | 70.16 | 27 | Average | |
| 21 | 3.19 | 1.359 | 63.81 | 29 | Average | |
| 22 | 4.44 | 0.853 | 88.89 | 1 | High | |
| 23 | 2.67 | 1.588 | 53.33 | 38 | Average | |
| 24 | 3.95 | 1.243 | 79.05 | 13 | High | |
| Fourth dimension | 25 | 4.00 | 1.158 | 80.00 | 10 | High |
| 26 | 4.16 | 1.147 | 83.17 | 5 | High | |
| 27 | 3.83 | 1.050 | 76.51 | 19 | High | |
| 28 | 3.67 | 1.158 | 73.33 | 25 | High | |
| 29 | 2.76 | 1.369 | 55.24 | 35 | Average | |
| 30 | 4.21 | 1.044 | 84.13 | 2 | High | |
| Fifth dimension | 31 | 3.73 | 1.090 | 74.60 | 23 | High |
| 32 | 3.76 | 1.154 | 75.24 | 21 | High | |
| 33 | 4.21 | 1.059 | 84.13 | 3 | High | |
| 34 | 2.73 | 1.420 | 54.60 | 36 | Average | |
| 35 | 3.19 | 1.128 | 63.81 | 30 | Average | |
| Sixth dimension | 36 | 3.87 | 1.034 | 77.46 | 15 | High |
| 37 | 3.98 | 0.986 | 79.68 | 12 | High | |
| 38 | 2.86 | 1.210 | 57.14 | 33 | Average | |
| 39 | 3.83 | 1.179 | 76.51 | 20 | High | |
| 40 | 3.90 | 1.006 | 78.10 | 14 | High | |
| Dimensions and total degree | ||||||
| First dimension: It consists of paragraphs 1–11 | 3.45 | 0.50 | 69.00 | 6 | Average | |
| Second dimension: It consists of paragraphs 12–17 | 3.49 | 0.57 | 69.74 | 5 | Average | |
| Third dimension: It consists of paragraphs 18–24 | 3.66 | 0.57 | 73.29 | 3 | Average | |
| Fourth dimension: It consists of paragraphs 25–30 | 3.77 | 0.66 | 75.40 | 1 | High | |
| Fifth dimension: It consists of paragraphs 31–35 | 3.52 | 0.60 | 70.48 | 4 | Average | |
| Sixth dimension: It consists of paragraphs 36–40 | 3.69 | 0.76 | 73.78 | 2 | High | |
| Total degree | 143.21 | 16.382 | 71.60 | Average | ||
The extent of consistency was determined as follows:
- (i)
(1–2.33) with a weak degree
- (ii)
(2.34–3.66) with an average degree
- (iii)
(3.67–5) with a high degree
- (i)
(40–93.33) with a weak degree
- (ii)
(93.33–146.66) with an average degree
- (iii)
(146.67–200) with a high degree
Table 4 shows the total score level for the scale as a whole, and its value indicates an average degree of flow owned by the study sample members.
4.4. Answering the Second Question
Are there statistically significant differences between the mean scores of students on the flow scale due to gender, specialization, and academic level?
Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) test was used to detect differences in response on the six-dimensional flow scale that are attributed to demographic variables, as shown in Table 5.
| Source of variance | Dimension | Sum of squares | Degrees of freedom | Mean square | F percentage | Level of significance | Significance of differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | First | 8.123 | 1 | 8.123 | 0.281 | 0.596 | Not significant |
| Second | 10.498 | 1 | 10.498 | 1.027 | 0.312 | Not significant | |
| Third | 330.012 | 1 | 330.012 | 23.529 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Fourth | 343.390 | 1 | 343.390 | 23.838 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Fifth | 137.607 | 1 | 137.607 | 17.789 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Sixth | 8.924 | 1 | 8.924 | 0.655 | 0.419 | Not significant | |
| Total degree | 2,655.396 | 1 | 2,655.396 | 10.791 | 0.001 | Significant | |
| Specialty | First | 361.408 | 3 | 120.469 | 4.173 | 0.007 | Significant |
| Second | 282.643 | 3 | 94.214 | 9.213 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Third | 172.739 | 3 | 57.580 | 4.105 | 0.008 | Significant | |
| Fourth | 121.847 | 3 | 40.616 | 2.819 | 0.060 | Not significant | |
| Fifth | 156.796 | 3 | 52.265 | 6.757 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Sixth | 222.727 | 3 | 74.242 | 5.448 | 0.001 | Significant | |
| Total degree | 4,119.600 | 3 | 1,373.200 | 5.581 | 0.001 | Significant | |
| Academic level | First | 7.098 | 1 | 7.098 | 0.246 | 0.621 | Not significant |
| Second | 4.699 | 1 | 4.699 | 0.460 | 0.499 | Not significant | |
| Third | 180.121 | 1 | 180.121 | 12.842 | 0.000 | Significant | |
| Fourth | 41.716 | 1 | 41.716 | 2.896 | 0.091 | Not significant | |
| Fifth | 56.957 | 1 | 56.957 | 7.363 | 0.007 | Significant | |
| Sixth | 3.465 | 1 | 3.465 | 0.254 | 0.615 | Not significant | |
| Total degree | 923.996 | 1 | 923.996 | 3.755 | 0.054 | Not significant | |
| Fault | First | 5,282.799 | 183 | 28.868 | |||
| Second | 1,871.444 | 183 | 10.226 | ||||
| Third | 2,566.764 | 183 | 14.026 | ||||
| Fourth | 2,636.195 | 183 | 14.405 | ||||
| Fifth | 1,415.603 | 183 | 7.736 | ||||
| Sixth | 2,493.820 | 183 | 13.627 | ||||
| Total degree | 45,030.947 | 183 | 246.071 | ||||
| Total integer | First | 5,660.571 | 188 | ||||
| Second | 2,161.810 | 188 | |||||
| Third | 2,976.952 | 188 | |||||
| Fourth | 2,990.571 | 188 | |||||
| Fifth | 1,688.571 | 188 | |||||
| Sixth | 2,716.667 | 188 | |||||
| Total degree | 50,454.952 | 188 |
The impact of demographic variables on the dimensions of the flow scale and its total degree are detailed as follows.
4.5. The Effect of the Gender Variable on the Flow Level
Table 5 indicates no statistically significant differences in the flow of the study sample in the dimensions (first, second, and sixth) due to the gender variable. The aforesaid is indicated through the values of the F test and its statistical significance. If the total statistical significance values are more significant than 0.05, there are no statistical differences. The study sample members of different genders have the same flow level in these dimensions.
However, there are differences between the sample members in the dimensions (third, fourth, and fifth) due to the gender variable, and this is evident through the significance level, whose value is less than 0.05 for these dimensions; the study sample members have a different level of flow due to their gender and to know for which group of these differences are the arithmetic averages compared, as Table 6 indicates.
| Dimension | Gender | Number | Arithmetic average | Standard deviation | Average of standard error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third | Male | 51 | 27.12 | 3.856 | 0.540 |
| Female | 138 | 25.11 | 3.900 | 0.332 | |
| Fourth | Male | 51 | 24.41 | 3.683 | 0.516 |
| Female | 138 | 21.96 | 3.904 | 0.332 | |
| Fifth | Male | 51 | 18.59 | 3.119 | 0.437 |
| Female | 138 | 17.26 | 2.880 | 0.245 | |
| Total degree | Male | 51 | 147.24 | 18.842 | 2.638 |
| Female | 138 | 141.72 | 15.180 | 1.292 |
As shown in Table 6, the arithmetic means of males at the three dimensions (third, fourth, and fifth) and the total degree was more significant than the arithmetic means of females, indicating that males have a higher level of flow than females at these dimensions and the total degree in general. This finding contrasts with the study results of [54] and the study of [56].
4.6. The Effect of the Specialization Variable on the Flow Degree
Table 6 indicates that there are no statistically significant differences in the flow of the study sample in the fourth dimension due to the variable of specialization, as demonstrated by the value of the test (F), which is (2.087) with a statistical significance of (0.104); the study sample members have the same flow degree in this dimension regardless of their specialization. This conclusion is consistent with the investigation findings of Ahmed and Al-Borai [6].
However, there are differences between the sample members in the dimensions (first, second, third, fifth, and sixth) attributable to the variable of specialization, as indicated by the significance level for these dimensions being less than (0.05). The study sample members exhibit varying degrees of flow due to their specialization, and to ascertain which group these differences favor, dimensional comparisons using Scheff were conducted.
As indicated in Table 7, there are differences in dimensions according to the variable of specialization. These distinctions are as follows.
| Dimension | Groups of comparison | Differences average | Standard error | Level of significance | Nature of significance | In favor of | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group (A) | Group (B) | ||||||
| First | Arts | Interior | −2.30 | 1.059 | 0.197 | Not significant | — |
| Graphics | 1.73 | 1.311 | 0.627 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −3.17 | 1.227 | 0.087 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphics | 4.03 | 1.546 | 0.082 | Not significant | — | |
| Fashion and textile | −0.87 | 1.476 | 0.950 | Not significant | — | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | −4.90 ∗ | 1.666 | 0.037 | Significant | Fashion and textile | |
| Second | Arts | Interior | −2.35 ∗ | 0.622 | 0.003 | Significant | Interior |
| Graphics | 1.62 | 0.771 | 0.225 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −2.26 ∗ | 0.721 | 0.022 | Significant | Fashion and textile | ||
| Interior | Graphic | 3.97 ∗ | 0.909 | 0.000 | Significant | Interior | |
| Fashion and textile | 0.09 | 0.868 | 0.930 | Not significant | — | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | −3.88 ∗ | 0.979 | 0.002 | Significant | Fashion and textile | |
| Third | Arts | Interior | 0.12 | 0.754 | 0.999 | Not significant | — |
| Graphics | −0.48 | 0.934 | 0.968 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −0.90 | 0.874 | 0.785 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphics | −0.60 | 1.102 | 0.961 | Not significant | — | |
| Fashion and textile | −1.03 | 1.051 | 0.812 | Not significant | — | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | −0.43 | 1.187 | 0.988 | Not significant | — | |
| Fourth | Arts | Interior | −0.42 | 0.735 | 0.953 | Not significant | — |
| Graphics | −0.02 | 0.911 | 0.960 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −0.67 | 0.852 | 0.893 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphic | 0.40 | 1.074 | 0.987 | Not significant | — | |
| Fashion and textile | −0.24 | 1.025 | 0.997 | Not significant | — | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | −0.64 | 1.157 | 0.958 | Not significant | — | |
| Fifth | Arts | Interior | −1.90 ∗ | 0.555 | 0.010 | Significant | Interior |
| Graphics | −0.27 | 0.688 | 0.985 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | 0.97 | 0.643 | 0.518 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphics | 1.63 | 0.811 | 0.259 | Not significant | — | |
| Fashion and textile | 2.87 ∗ | 0.774 | 0.004 | Significant | Interior | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | 1.24 | 0.874 | 0.572 | Not significant | — | |
| Sixth | Arts | Interior | −1.23 | 0.627 | 0.286 | Not significant | — |
| Graphics | 2.67 ∗ | 0.777 | 0.009 | Significant | Arts | ||
| Fashion and textile | 1.53 | 0.727 | 0.221 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphic | 3.90 ∗ | 0.916 | 0.001 | Significant | Interior | |
| Fashion and textile | 2.76 ∗ | 0.874 | 0.021 | Significant | Interior | ||
| Graphics | Fashion and textile | −1.14 | 0.987 | 0.720 | Not significant | — | |
| The total degree of flow scale | Arts | Interior | −8.08 | 3.012 | 0.070 | Not significant | — |
| Graphics | 5.26 | 3.730 | 0.576 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −4.50 | 3.490 | 0.645 | Not significant | — | ||
| Interior | Graphics | 13.33 ∗ | 4.399 | 0.030 | Significant | Interior | |
| Fashion and textile | 3.57 | 4.198 | 0.867 | Not significant | — | ||
| Fashion and textile | −9.76 | 4.740 | 0.240 | Not significant | — | ||
- Based on the means reported in Table 7, the error term is mean square (error) = 217.738. ∗The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
4.7. Balancing the Challenge with Technical Skills
The data reveal no statistically significant differences in flow degree due to specialization for the first dimension, except when comparing the specializations of (graphics, fashion, and textile) to the specialty of fashion and textile design.
4.8. Focusing Attention and Immersion in Performing the Artwork
There are no statistically significant differences in the second dimension between the comparison groups except for the group (arts and interior) in favor of interior design, the group (arts, fashion, and textile) in favor of fashion and textile design, the group (interior and graphics) in favor of interior design, and the group (graphics, fashion, and textile) in favor of fashion and textile design.
4.9. The Feeling of Enjoyment and Loss of Self-Awareness, Time, and Place
The comparison reveals no statistically significant differences in the third and fourth dimensions due to the specialty variable.
4.10. The Feeling of Control in Performing Artwork
The comparison reveals no variations in the fifth dimension due to the variable of specialties. All students experience the same level of control while creating artwork, except for my two groups: arts and interior and interior, fashion, and textile, which lean toward interior design.
4.11. Clarity of Objectives
The comparison reveals no variation in the sixth dimension due to the specialty variable. All students, except for the following groups, have an equivalent degree of clarity on their objectives: arts and graphics for arts, interior and graphics for interior design, and interior, fashion, and textiles for interior design. In terms of the total degree of specialization on the flow scale, the data indicate no changes in flow between the comparison groups due to the variable of specialization. Each student has a similar degree of flow, except for one group (interior and graphics) that is more inclined toward interior design.
4.12. The Effect of the Academic Level Variable on the Flow Degree
The preceding table indicates that there are no statistically significant differences in the flow of the study sample in the dimensions (first, second, fourth, and sixth) associated with academic level, and the values of the F test indicate that members of the study sample, regardless of their educational level, have the same degree of flow in these four dimensions. This conclusion is similar to the findings of Al-Ghamdi [53] and Ahmed and Al-Borai [6].
However, there are differences between sample members in two dimensions (third and fifth) that are attributable to the academic level variable, as evidenced by the significance level for these dimensions being less than (0.05); members of the study sample exhibit varying degrees of flow as a result of their academic level. To determine which group these differences pertain to, Table 8 compares the arithmetic averages of various dimensions.
| Dimension | Academic level | Number | Arithmetic average | Standard deviation | Average of standard error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third | Low levels | 132 | 25.95 | 4.453 | 0.388 |
| High levels | 57 | 24.95 | 2.46 | 0.326 | |
| Fifth | Low levels | 132 | 17.86 | 3.008 | 0.262 |
| High levels | 57 | 17.05 | 2.918 | 0.387 |
As shown in Table 8, the arithmetic mean of students at the lowest levels (first, second, third, and fourth) at the level of the two dimensions (fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth) was more significant than the arithmetic means of students at the highest levels. It indicates that the flow degree of students at lower levels is greater than the flow degree of students at higher levels on these two dimensions.
4.13. Answering the Third Question
What are the most important reasons that impede the flow of students while performing artistic works?
The arithmetic mean was utilized for the paragraphs with the lowest value, and if the paragraphs with an average smaller than 3.67 are examined, they indicate a moderate degree of use, as indicated by Table 9.
| Paragraph no. | Text of the paragraph | Main idea |
|---|---|---|
| q8 | My success in performing my artwork is fortuitous, the result of luck | Chance and luck |
| q14 | I do my artwork, but my colleagues are distracting me, making me put off work for a day | Distraction and the effect of comrades |
| q12 | I get distracted quickly while performing my assigned artwork | Distraction |
| q23 | If I have the opportunity to change my major, I will do so | Dissatisfaction with the major |
| q34 | When a colleague criticizes my artwork, I feel anxious and stressed | The effect of comrades, anxiety, and stress |
| q29 | I get easily distracted while performing artwork | Distraction |
| q9 | Move from one artwork to another without completing the first because it requires more effort | Fatigue |
| q38 | I perform my artwork spontaneously without a specific goal | Lack of target |
| q10 | I am concerned that the artworks assigned to me are beyond my abilities and skills | Anxiety and lack of self-confidence |
| q5 | I try to accomplish challenging artworks in any way, even if it is incorrect, to pass the course | Anxiety |
| q35 | I feel impatient as I perform my assigned artwork | Impatience |
| q21 | I feel like I put in much effort while doing my artwork and got low degrees | Dissatisfaction with the findings |
| q4 | My skills and abilities allow me to perform challenging artworks | Trust |
| q20 | I do my assigned artwork for fear of failing courses | Fear |
| q17 | I can isolate the stimuli that distract me while I am doing artwork | Distraction |
After reviewing the major themes and grouping them according to their frequency of repetition between these paragraphs, the breakdown in flow is summarized as a distraction and lack of attention, the influence of comrades, anxiety, and tension, a lack of clear goals, and dissatisfaction with the findings.
5. Conclusion, Limitations, Suggestions, and Implications
According to the researcher’s findings, the reasons for the low student flow can be attributed to various factors. It includes those related to the course and its professor and factors related to the student himself, such as lack of enthusiasm, patience, and confidence in his ability to complete the assigned artwork. It is a failure to design a schedule corresponding with the duties allotted to him and a failure to establish an acceptable location and environment to perform his artwork.
Like all studies, this study was not free from limitations. The first limitation is related to the objective of the study. It means that this study only considered the flow level of students of the College of Designs and Applied Arts according to certain variables. The second limitation goes with participants. Only the students of the College of Designs and Applied Arts at Taif University participated in this study. Insufficient time was another limitation. This study was conducted in the second semester of the academic year 2021. Lastly, this study was conducted in the city of Taif, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Future researchers are recommended to use a flow scale to assess the flow level in an art education course with a sample of school students. Moreover, they are suggested to conduct a comparative study of art education teachers using the research’s proper factors. Moreover, it is recommended to conduct similar studies in other geographical contexts with more participants.
The study recommends increasing the number of students enrolled at Taif University’s College of Designs and Applied Arts by giving material and spiritual assistance and developing enrichment programs. Furthermore, it recommends enabling high-flow pupils to develop their artistic creativity through reasonable possibilities.
Flow, as a whole, is associated with a lot of positive outcomes. It has been linked to an increase in happiness, as well as higher levels of intrinsic motivation, more creativity, and improved emotional control, among other beneficial impacts. In addition, the flow may speed up the process of learning and the advancement of skills. Because flow occurs after we have mastered a skill, people who persistently sought out new challenges to discover flow experience a growth in their capabilities as well as an increase in their self-assurance. Moreover, the flow may increase your productivity by a factor of two. According to the findings of recent studies, the typical professional only spends 5% of their working day in a “flow state.” Productivity would double if the circumstances were such that an increase in flow experience to 15% could be achieved. Additionally, the flow has the potential to result in enhanced performance. Researchers have determined that one of the primary advantages of flow is that it can improve human performance in all aspects of human labor and creativity. This is one of the most significant benefits of flow. When you use flow, you obtain better outcomes in a shorter amount of time.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.
Open Research
Data Availability
The data used to support this study are included in the manuscript.
